City of El Centro Housing Element

Transcription

1 Housing Element Adopted September 3, 2013 Community Development Department 1275 W. Main Street El Centro, CA 92243

2

3 Housing Element City Council Benjamin James Solomon III, Mayor Cheryl Viegas-Walker, Mayor Pro-Tem Jason Jackson, Council Member Sedalia Sanders, Council Member Efrain Silva, Council Member Planning Commission Harold M. Walk, Jr., Chairman David H. West, Commissioner Darian Dax Chell, Commissioner Evelia Jimenez, Commissioner Sergio A. Lopez, Commissioner Ron N. Merideth, Commissioner Marcela Miranda, Commissioner City Staff Norma M. Villicaña, AICP, Director Michael Coyne, Assistant Planner Consultants Veronica Tam, AICP, Principal Rick Brady, AICP, Senior Planner

4

5

6

7

8

9 Table of Contents 1.1. Legislative Requirements Relationship with Other General Plan Elements Public Participation Community Profile Demographic Profile Economic Profile Household Characteristics Housing Problems Special Needs Housing Stock Characteristics Housing Cost and Affordability Affordable Housing Housing Constraints Market Constraints Governmental Constraints Public Policy Constraints Utility and Public Service Constraints Environmental Constraints Housing Resources Residential Development Potential Financial Resources Administrative Resources Opportunities for Energy Conservation Housing Plan Goals and Policies Housing Programs Summary of Quantified Objectives Appendix A: Outreach Efforts... A-1 A.1. Joint Study Session and Outreach List... A-1 A.2. Public Service Provider Interviews... A-3 A.3. Draft Housing Element Public Meeting... A-4 Appendix B: Review of Past Accomplishments... B-1 Appendix C: Sites Inventory... C Housing Element Page i

10 List of Tables Table 1: Population Trends El Centro and Neighboring Cities ( )... 5 Table 2: Population by Age Trends ( )... 6 Table 3: Population by Race and Ethnicity (2010)... 7 Table 4: Employment by Industry Type ( )... 7 Table 5: Employment by Commuting Patterns ( )... 8 Table 6: Household Income ( )... 9 Table 7: Median Household Income Trends ( ) Table 8: Households by Income Categories ( ) Table 9: Household Trends ( ) Table 10: Average Persons-Per-Household Trends ( ) Table 11: Household Size Trends ( ) Table 12: Tenure ( ) Table 13: Housing Type by Tenure (2011) Table 14: Housing Assistance Needs of Lower Income Households ( ) Table 15: Overcrowded Units by Tenure (2011) Table 16: Special Needs Groups ( ) Table 17: Senior Population Trends (65+) ( ) Table 18: Senior Household Trends (65+) ( ) Table 19: Disabilities Tallied ( ) Table 20: Household Type and Presence of Children 18 Years Old and Under (2010) Table 21: Households by Poverty Level ( ) Table 22: Farm workers ( ) Table 23: Homeless Resources Table 24: Housing Unit Growth ( ) Table 25: Housing Age Table 26: Changes in Median Home Sale Prices ( ) Table 27: Median and Average Rents by Number of Bedrooms ( ) Table 28: Affordable Housing Costs by Household Size and Tenure (2013) Table 29: Assisted Housing In El Centro (2012) Table 30: Market Value of At-Risk Housing Units Table 31: Rental Subsidies Required Table 32: Estimated New Construction Costs Table 33: Disposition of Home Loans (2011) Table 34: Land Use Designations that Allow Residential Uses Table 35: Zoning Districts that Allow Residential Uses Table 36: Residential Development Standards by Zoning District Table 37: Off-Street Residential Parking Requirements Table 38: Provision for a Variety of Housing Types Table 39: Circulation Element Roadway Standards Table 40: Permit Processing Fees Table 41: Development Impact Fees Table 42: Development Fees for a Typical Unit Table 43: Residential Sites Inventory (Summary) Table 44: Adequacy of Sites to Accommodate the RHNA Table 45: Housing Element RHNA Analysis Table 46: Vacant Parcels Omitted from Housing Element RHNA Analysis Table 47: Quantified Objectives Page ii Housing Element

11 List of Figures Figure 1: Senior Households by Tenure ( ) Figure 2: Distribution of Housing Units ( ) Figure 3: Vacant Units by Housing Type ( ) Figure 4: Median Home Sales Prices (2012) Figure 5: Income Needed to Afford Housing Compared With Wages Figure 6: Shared Parking in the Downtown Commercial (CD) Zone Housing Element Page iii

12

13 1. Introduction 1.1. Legislative Requirements The Housing Element is one of seven elements required to be included in the City s General Plan. State law identifies the subjects that must be addressed in a Housing Element. These guidelines are identified in Article 10.6 of the State of California Government Code (Sections et seq.). State law specifies that the Housing Element must assess housing needs and evaluate the current housing market in the City and then identify programs that will meet housing needs. The housing market evaluation includes a review of housing stock characteristics as well as housing cost, household incomes, special need households, availability of land and infrastructure and various other factors. Also included in this evaluation is the community s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) which provides an estimate of the number of housing units that should be provided in the community to meet its share of new households in the region. In addition to this information, the Housing Element document must evaluate and review its past housing programs and consider this review in planning future housing strategies. The City s previous Housing Element was adopted in Until recently, Housing Elements have been required to be updated every five years, unless otherwise extended by State law. Senate Bill 375, enacted in 2008, established an eight-year cycle for housing element updates. The statutory planning period for this Housing Element begins on October 15, 2013 and extends through October 15, However, the RHNA period begins January 1, 2014, and extends through October 31, The Housing Element is subject to review by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for compliance with applicable State laws. A critical component of HCD s review of the Housing Element is the local jurisdiction s ability in accommodating its RHNA through land use planning efforts. Compliance with this requirement is measured by the jurisdiction s ability in providing adequate land with adequate density and appropriate development standards to accommodate the RHNA. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), as the regional planning agency, is responsible for allocating the RHNA to individual jurisdictions within the region. For the Housing Element update for the, SCAG has assigned a RHNA of 1,924 units, in the following income distribution: Very Low Income: 487 units Low Income: 300 units Moderate Income: 297 units Above Moderate Income: 840 units Housing Element Page 1

14 1.2. Relationship with Other General Plan Elements The current General Plan for the was adopted in 2004 and has seven elements in addition to this Housing Element: 1) Land Use; 2) Economic Development; 3) Circulation; 4) Public Facilities; 5) Conservation/Open Space; 6) Safety; and 7) Noise. Each of these components addresses subject matter required for one or more of the mandatory general plan elements. Some components also address subject matter which the City is permitted, but not required, to address. As required by State law, internal consistency is required among the various elements of the General Plan, including the Housing Element. This Housing Element is consistent with the General Plan and subsequent amendments to the 2004 Plan. State law also requires that the Conservation Element (AB 162, enacted 2009) and Safety Element (SB 1241, enacted 2012) include an analysis and policies regarding flood hazard and management information upon revisions to the Housing Element. Although these revisions are not related to Housing Element law, the City will ensure compliance with this requirement by reviewing its Conservation and Safety Elements Public Participation The offers ample opportunities for the public to comment on housingrelated issues and on the Draft Housing Element. A list of agencies and organizations contacted to participate in the planning process and detailed summary of comments is contained in Appendix A. A. Study Session On January 29, 2013, the City conducted a joint study session with the Planning Commission and City Council to discuss the Housing Element update process and solicit stakeholder and public comments on housing issues and needs. Notices of the meeting were published in English and Spanish in the Imperial Valley Press. The notices were also posted on City website and flyers were made available at public counters. In addition, special invitations were sent to housing developers, advocates, community stakeholders, and agencies that serve the housing and supportive service needs of lower and moderate income persons, as well as those with special housing needs. Agencies and organizations invited to attend the study session are listed in Appendix A. The meeting was attended by 18 members of the public and representatives of the development community and non-profit organizations. B. Telephone Interviews A number of developers and service providers that are active in El Centro but did not attend the study session were contacted by phone to discuss El Centro s housing issues and needs. The list of organizations interviewed and a summary of each conversation is included in Appendix A. Page Housing Element

15 C. Draft Housing Element Review The City conducted a public meeting before the Planning Commission on May 14, 2013 and City Council on June 4, 2013 to review to the draft Housing Element. To solicit input from supportive service and housing providers, the City sent special notices of the public meeting to housing developers and professionals, as well as agencies that serve or represent the interest of lower and moderate income households and persons with special housing needs. The City also advertised the availability of the Housing Element for public review in English and Spanish in the Imperial Valley Press and in Spanish in the Adelante Valle, a Spanish language newspaper. The Housing Element outreach list is presented in Appendix A. D. Adoption Hearings For the adoption of the Housing Element, the City conducted public hearings before the Planning Commission (August 13, 2013) and City Council (September 3, 02013).. Notices for these hearings were published in the Imperial Valley Press and posted on City website. E. Summary of Public Comments and City Responses Overall, there is a concern about how the City will finance affordable housing projects after the State s dissolution of the City s Redevelopment Agency. Housing for lower income households (including extremely low income households), seniors, large households, and persons with disabilities are among some of the key issues raised during the public participation process of this Housing Element update. The Housing Element addresses these needs through a variety of programs targeted to conserve the existing affordable housing stock (Program 11), facilitate construction of new affordable housing (Program 3), and coordinate with and fund social service agencies, including organizations that support extremely low income seniors and persons with disabilities (Program 9) Housing Element Page 3

16

17 2. Community Profile The purpose of this section is to summarize and analyze the existing housing conditions in the. This section contains an analysis of population trends, employment trends, household trends and special needs groups within the City Demographic Profile When evaluating housing needs, analysis of demographic variables such as population, employment, and households is essential in order to assess the present and future housing needs of a city or county. This section presents data gathered from the following sources: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), California Employment Development Department, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), Imperial Valley Housing Authority (IVHA), DataQuick, and Craigslist.org. A. Population Trends Between 1990 and 2000, the population in El Centro increased by 6,451 residents (or 20.6 percent), from 31,384 to 37,835 residents, for an average annual growth rate of 2.1 percent. As shown in Table 1, over the subsequent decade, from 2000 to 2010, the population increased by an additional 4,763 persons (or 12.6 percent) for an average annual growth rate of approximately 1.3 percent. Although El Centro is the largest City in Imperial County and the seat of County Government, the City s growth rate was substantially smaller than the County s growth rate between 1990 and 2010 (35.7 percent versus 59.7 percent). The City s growth rate was also substantially lower than many of the County s incorporated cities. Table 1: Population Trends El Centro and Neighboring Cities ( ) City Change ( ) # of Persons % of Total El Centro 31,384 37,835 42,598 11, % Calexico 18,633 27,109 38,572 19, % Brawley 18,923 22,052 24,953 6, % Imperial 4,113 7,560 14,758 10, % Holtville 4,820 5,612 5,939 1, % Westmorland 1,380 2,131 2, % Imperial County 109, , ,528 65, % Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Housing Element Page 5

18 B. Age Trends As shown in Table 2, over the last ten years, the has experienced an increase in the number of persons in almost every age group. The most significant growth occurred in the middle age and older adult age groups (ages 50+), where the City s oldest residents (those ages 85 and older) had the largest proportional increase (89.6 percent). Despite this growth, El Centro residents ages 17 and under continue to represent the largest proportional share of the City s population, with residents 6-13 years (12.8 percent) and under 5 years of age (9.5 percent) being the largest. This age structure reflects a familyoriented community. As of 2010, the median age in the City was 29.9 years of age, which is essentially unchanged since Table 2: Population by Age Trends ( ) Age Group # of Persons % of Total # of Persons % of Total Under 5 Years 3, % 4, % 6-13 Years 6, % 5, % Years 2, % 3, % Years 1, % 2, % Years 1, % 2, % Years 2, % 2, % Years 2, % 2, % Years 2, % 2, % Years 2, % 2, % Years 2, % 2, % Years 1, % 2, % Years 1, % 2, % Years 1, % 1, % Years 1, % 1, % Years 1, % 1, % Years % % Years % % 85+ Years % % Median Age Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, C. Race/Ethnicity According to the 2010 Census, the racial/ethnic composition of City residents was very similar to that of County residents. As shown in Table 3, approximately 81.6 percent of the City s population categorized themselves as Hispanic (of any race) with the remaining population identifying themselves as non-hispanic (of one or more races): White (13.5 percent), Black or African American (2.0 percent), American Indian/Alaska Native (0.2 percent), Asian (1.8 percent), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (less than 0.1 percent), and Other Race or multiple race individuals (0.8 percent). Page Housing Element

19 Table 3: Population by Race and Ethnicity (2010) Category Imperial County # of Persons % of Total # of Persons % of Total Not Hispanic or Latino 7, % 34, % White 5, % 23, % Black or African American % 5, % American Indian/Alaska Native % 1, % Asian % 2, % Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 19 <0.1% 87 <0.1% Other Races or 2+ Races % 1, % Hispanic or Latino (any race) 34, % 140, % Total 42, % 174, % Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Economic Profile A. Employment According to the American Community Survey (ACS), the City s labor force in 2011 consisted of 18,975 people and the unemployment rate was 18.7 percent. The occupational category employing the most El Centro residents was management, business, science, and arts, which employed 26.1 percent of the City s workforce (see Table 4). In terms of total employment, the second largest occupational category in El Centro was service. Table 4: Employment by Industry Type ( ) Occupational Category % of Employed Persons Management, Business, Science, and Arts Occupations 26.1% Service Occupations 25.8% Sales and Office Occupations 24.5% Natural Resources, Construction, and Maintenance Occupations 10.7% Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations 12.8% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey (ACS), As shown in Table 5, between 2007 and 2011, most of the City s labor force lived fairly near their place of employment. The mean travel time to work was 17.7 minutes; approximately 52.5 percent of commuters in the City traveled less than 15 minutes each way to work and 27.6 percent commuted less than 10 minutes Housing Element Page 7

20 Table 5: Employment by Commuting Patterns ( ) Commute to Work % of Employed Persons Less than 10 minutes 27.6% 10 to 14 minutes 24.9% 15 to 19 minutes 17.0% 20 to 24 minutes 9.4% 25 to 29 minutes 5.5% 30 to 34 minutes 7.1% 35 to 44 minutes 1.3% 45 to 59 minutes 2.2% 60 or more minutes 5.0% Mean travel time to work (minutes) 17.7 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey (ACS), According to the ACS, only four persons (or less than one percent of employed persons in the City) were classified as military personnel. However, Naval Air Facility (NAF) El Centro is a military airport located just outside city limits, approximately six miles northwest of the City. The facility was initially commissioned on May 1, 1946, as a Naval Air Station. Prior to that, the base was a Marine Corps Air Station. For the first 35 years of its existence, the mission of NAF El Centro was devoted to aeronautical escape system testing, evaluation, and design. Over time, the facility has developed into an integral part of Naval Aviation Training. Today, NAF El Centro provides realistic training to active and reserve military units. Squadrons visit the installation and its associated ranges to practice gunnery, bombing, carrier landings and air combat. The installation provides employment for more than 1,300 area residents and contributes over $115.5 million to the local economy each year. In addition to employing local residents, each month, seven to twelve squadrons, totaling 150 to 1,600 military transient personnel, train at NAF El Centro. These military personnel come from Navy, Marine Corps, Army, and Air Force installations throughout the United States. Foreign military services also send personnel to train at NAF El Centro. Many of these training deployments extend over 30 days, and the military personnel are dependent on many local businesses and services during their long training deployments. The City, along with various regional organizations and surrounding municipalities, are currently involved in a campaign to have the Navy s F35C Joint Strike Fighter squadron based at NAF El Centro. NAF El Centro is one of two facilities up for consideration to house the squadron, the other being Naval Air Station Lemoore in Central California. Should NAF El Centro be chosen as the home base for this squadron, up to 600 additional on-base jobs could be created. A corresponding increase in off-base jobs is expected as well. Page Housing Element

21 B. Household Income In 1989, a significant percentage of households in the City (32.1 percent) had annual incomes less than $25,000 per year. In that same year, households with annual incomes over $75,000 accounted for 15.5 percent of total households. Between 1989 and 2011, the City s households became increasingly stratified economically. There were noticeable increases in the overall number and proportion of households with lower (less than $25,000) and higher incomes ($75,000 and greater), while the proportion of households earning middle incomes ($25,000 to $74,999) decreased. As illustrated in Table 6, as of 2011, the proportion of households in the with incomes less than $25,000 per year comprised 37.1 percent of all households; this was slightly above the County average of 34.1 percent. Approximately 36.5 percent of households had incomes between $25,000 and $74,999 per year, while households with incomes greater than $75,000 per year represented 26.4 percent of total households. Although this distribution of household income roughly mirrored the countywide distribution, the income profile of El Centro s households differed significantly from households throughout the State. The ACS reported that 19.8 percent of California households had incomes below $25,000 (compared to 37.1 percent in El Centro) and 28.8 percent of statewide households had incomes over $100,000 (compared to 16.2 percent in El Centro). Table 6: Household Income ( ) Income Ranges # of # of # of % of Total % of Total Households Households Households % of Total Less Than $10, % 1, % 1, % $10,000-$14,999 1, % 1, % 1, % $15,000-$24, % 1, % 2, % $25,000-$34,999 1, % 1, % 1, % $35,000-$49,999 1, % 1, % 1, % $50,000-$74,999 1, % 2, % 1, % $75,000-$99,999 1, % % 1, % $100, % % 2, % Total 9, % 11, % 13, % Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, In 2011, Imperial County s median income was $39,402; the median income within the City of El Centro was only slightly lower than the County median (see Table 7). The City s median income declined 7.8 percent between 2000 and Housing Element Page 9

22 Table 7: Median Household Income Trends ( ) Year Median Income $ Change % Change Annual % Change 2000 $41, $38,297 -$3, % -0.8% Imperial County 2000 $38, $39,402 $ % 0.2% Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000; American Community Survey (ACS), For planning and funding purposes, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) categorizes households into five income groups based on the County Area Median Income (AMI): Extremely Low Income up to 30 percent of AMI Very Low Income 31 to 50 percent of AMI Low Income 51 to 80 percent of AMI Moderate Income 81 to 120 percent of AMI Above Moderate Income greater than 120 percent of AMI Combined, extremely low, very low, and low income households are often referred to as lower income households. The 2010 Census does not contain information on household income. However, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) tabulated household income data by using the ACS. As shown in Table 8, between 2005 and 2009, approximately 40 percent of the City s households earned lower incomes, while approximately 60 percent had moderate or above moderate earned incomes. Table 8: Households by Income Categories ( ) Income Group Imperial # of Households % of Total County % Extremely Low (30% or less) 1, % 12.1% Very Low (31 to 50%) 1, % 13.8% Low (51 to 80%) 1, % 16.1% Moderate (81 to 100%) 1, % 15.4% Above Moderate (over 100%) 5, % 42.6% Total 13, % 100.0% Source: SCAG, Page Housing Element

23 2.3. Household Characteristics A household is defined as all persons occupying a housing unit. Families are a subset of households, and include all persons living together who are related by blood, marriage, or adoption. Single households include persons living alone in housing units, but do not include persons in group quarters such as convalescent homes or dormitories. Other households are unrelated people living together, such as roommates. Household characteristics play an important role in defining community needs. Household type, income and tenure can help to identify special needs populations as well as other factors that affect the housing needs of a community. A. Household Type and Size Household types and sizes can change even in periods of static population growth as adult children leave home, married couples divorce, or with the general aging of the population. The number of households in Imperial County has been increasing at a stable rate since Between 1990 and 2000, the number of households in the County increased by 20.0 percent to 39,384 units. During the same period, the number of households in the City increased by only 12.4 percent. According to data gathered from the Census (see Table 9), between 2000 and 2010, the City of El Centro increased by 1,669 households (or 14.6 percent), bringing the total number of households in the City to 13,108. El Centro s growth rate, though steady, continued to be well below the growth rate of the County overall. As of 2010, an estimated 49,126 households resided in the County; an increase of nearly 25 percent since Table 9: Household Trends ( ) Year # of Households # Change % Change Annual % Change , ,439 1, % 1.2% ,108 1, % 1.5% Imperial County , ,384 6, % 2.0% ,126 9, % 2.5% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Household size is a significant factor in housing demand. Often, household size can be used to predict the unit size that a household will select. For example, small households (one and two persons per household) traditionally can find suitable housing in units with up to two bedrooms while large households (five or more persons per household) can usually find suitable housing in units with three to four bedrooms. During the previous decade, El Centro households became smaller, while County households remained relatively unchanged (see Table 10) Housing Element Page 11

24 Table 10: Average Persons-Per-Household Trends ( ) Year County Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Households with two and three persons increased the most within the County between 2000 and Within the City, two-person households increased more proportionally than households of any other size (see Table 11). Meanwhile, the proportion of large households, those comprised of five or more persons, increased in both the County and City. Table 11: Household Size Trends ( ) Household Size # of Households % of Total # of Households % of Total 1-Person 2, % 2, % 2-Person 2, % 3, % 3-Person 2, % 2, % 4-Person 2, % 2, % 5-Person 1, % 1, % 6+ Person 1, % 1, % Imperial County 1-Person 6, % 8, % 2-Person 9, % 11, % 3-Person 6, % 8, % 4-Person 7, % 8, % 5-Person 5, % 6, % 6+ Person 4, % 5, % Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, B. Housing Tenure Housing tenure refers to whether a unit is owned or rented. Tenure is an important market characteristic because it is directly related to housing types and turnover rates. The tenure distribution of a community s housing stock can be an indicator of several aspects of the housing market, including the affordability of units, household stability and residential mobility among others. In most communities, tenure distribution generally correlates with household income, composition and age of the householder. Households in the continue to be equally split in terms of tenure, with about one-half of the City s households owning their homes and about one-half renting their homes. By comparison, the County has a much higher proportion of owner-households (see Table 12). Page Housing Element

25 Table 12: Tenure ( ) Household Size El Centro County # of Households % of Total # of Households % of Total 2000 Owners 5, % 22, % Renters 5, % 16, % 2010 Owners 6, % 49, % Renters 6, % 21, % Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, As shown in Table 13, a significant portion (86.5 percent) of the owner-households resided in single-family detached residences, compared to 28.5 percent of renter-households residing in single-family residences. Table 13: Housing Type by Tenure (2011) Units in Structure Total Units Owner- Occupied Owner- Occupied % Renter- Occupied Renter - Occupied % 1, Detached 7,494 5, % 1, % 1, Attached % % % % 3 or 4 1, % 1, % 5 to % 10 to % 20 or More 1, % 1, % Mobile Home 1, % % Boat, RV, Van, etc % 0 -- Total 13,092 6, % 6, % Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey (ACS), Housing Problems While the SCAG data presented on page 10 estimates the number of households that fall within each income level, it does not provide any detail on the specific housing needs and problems faced by these households. The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) developed by the Census Bureau for HUD, however, provides detailed information on housing needs by income level for different types of households in El Centro. Detailed CHAS data based on the ACS data is displayed in Table 14. Housing problems considered by CHAS include: Units with physical defects (lacking complete kitchen or bathroom); Overcrowded conditions (housing units with more than one person per room); Housing cost burden, including utilities, exceeding 30 percent of gross income; or Housing Element Page 13

26 Severe housing cost burden, including utilities, exceeding 50 percent of gross income. Most lower and moderate income households cope with housing cost issues either by assuming a cost burden, or by occupying a smaller-than-needed or substandard unit. Specifically, according to HUD, 71 percent of all of the City s lower income households were experiencing one or more housing problems (e.g. cost burden, overcrowding, or substandard housing condition) between 2006 and The types of housing problems experienced by El Centro households vary according to household income, type, and tenure. Some highlights include: In general, renter-households had a higher level of housing problems (60 percent) compared to owner-households (41 percent). Large renter-families had the highest level of housing problems regardless of income level (76 percent). Approximately 85 percent of extremely low income (households earning less than 30 percent of the AMI) and 78 percent of very low income households (households earning between 31 and 50 percent of the AMI) had housing problems. Over one-half (52 percent) of extremely low income elderly renter- and ownerhouseholds experience a severe housing cost burden (i.e. spent more than 50 percent of their income on housing). 1 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data based on ACS. Page Housing Element

27 Table 14: Housing Assistance Needs of Lower Income Households ( ) Household by Type, Renters Owners Income, Small Large Total Large and Housing Problem Elderly Elderly Families Families Renters Families Extremely Low Income (0-30% AMI) With Any Housing Problem Total Owners Total Households 475 1, , ,210 88% 82% 100% 87% 76% 100% 77% 85% Cost Burden >30% 89% 76% 64% 82% 76% 100% 74% 81% Cost Burden > 50% 52% 49% 43% 55% 52% 100% 50% 54% Very Low Income (31-50% AMI) , ,375 With Any Housing Problem 79% 75% 100% 81% 63% 100% 67% 78% Cost Burden >30% 79% 75% 65% 76% 63% 100% 67% 74% Cost Burden > 50% 8% 23% 24% 21% 46% 100% 55% 28% Low Income (51-80% AMI) , ,320 2,475 With Any Housing Problem 42% 35% 83% 49% 28% 84% 53% 51% Cost Burden >30% 42% 26% 17% 29% 24% 74% 50% 40% Cost Burden > 50% 3% 0% 0% 0% 13% 58% 31% 17% Moderate & Above Income (>80% AMI) 130 1, , ,035 6,270 With Any Housing Problem 15% 26% 44% 25% 17% 35% 31% 29% Cost Burden >30% 15% 9% 0% 8% 15% 25% 28% 21% Cost Burden > 50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 5% 3% Total Households 1,270 3, ,985 1,630 1,110 6,345 13,330 With Any Housing Problem 72% 52% 76% 60% 31% 50% 41% 51% Cost Burden >30% 72% 42% 29% 49% 29% 41% 39% 44% Cost Burden > 50% 23% 17% 10% 20% 14% 20% 17% 19% Note: Data presented in this table are based on special tabulations from the American Community Survey (ACS) data. Due to the small sample size, the margins are errors can be significant. Interpretations of these data should focus on the proportion of households in need of assistance rather than on precise numbers. Source: HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), Housing Element Page 15

28 A. Cost Burden (Overpayment) Housing cost burden, also known as overpayment, is defined as a housing cost that exceeds 30 percent of a household s gross income. A severe cost burden is a housing cost that exceeds 50 percent of a household s gross income. 2 Housing cost burden is particularly problematic for low and moderate income households in that it leaves little resources for a household to pay for other living expenses. The ACS calculated the percentage of income expended on housing costs for both renters and owners over a three-period of and the estimates are considered an average for that time period. This three-year survey period includes the beginning of the foreclosure crises and rising unemployment. While rents may not have increased during this period, the ability to pay decreased as people were losing their jobs. The estimates discussed below may, therefore, reflect an increase from previous years estimates. Between 2006 and 2008, a total of 5,864 or 44 percent, of all households in the City of El Centro paid in excess of 30 percent of their income for shelter (see Table 14 above). Cost burden varies by tenure. About 39 percent of the City s owner-households overpaid for housing, while 49 percent of renter-households overpaid for housing. The cost burden situation is particularly critical for those households with the lowest annual incomes. Of extremely low income households, 81 percent overpaid for housing. About 74 percent of very low income households also experienced a housing cost burden. Severe housing cost burden is of even greater concern, particularly when those affected are lower income households. Approximately 420 owner-households are considered to be in the extremely low income category and one-half (50 percent) of these households experienced a severe housing cost burden between 2006 and Similarly, of all renter-households within the City, 1,730 are considered to be in the extremely low income category and a majority of these households (55 percent) spend more than one-half of their net household income on housing. As indicated in Table 14 as household income increases, cost burden generally decreases. B. Overcrowding An overcrowded unit is defined by the Census as having more than one person or more per room, excluding kitchens and bathrooms. A severely overcrowded unit has 1.5 or more persons per room. Generally, a room is defined as a living room, dining room, bedroom, or finished recreation room. According to the ACS, approximately 11 percent of all households in the City are considered to be overcrowded (see Table 15). Overcrowding was much more likely to affect renter-households (17 percent) than owner-households (four percent). Severe overcrowding was also more prevalent among renter households than owner households (seven percent versus two percent). 2 A household spending more than 30 percent of its gross household income on housing is considered cost-burdened both by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Page Housing Element

29 Table 15: Overcrowded Units by Tenure (2011) Persons per Room Owner Renter Total Overcrowded # % # % # % 0.50 or less 3, % 2, % 6, % 0.51 to , % 3, % 5, % 1.01 to % % % 1.51 to % % % 2.01 or more 0 0.0% % % Total 6,489 6,603 13,092 % Overcrowded by Tenure 4.3% 17.2% 10.8% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000; American Community Survey (ACS), Special Needs As noted in Government Code Section 65583(a)(6), within the overall housing needs assessments there are segments of the population that have or require special housing. Generally, these are people who have lower incomes and less access to housing choices when compared to moderate and above moderate income households. Segments of the population that often have special housing needs include seniors, persons with disabilities, large households, single parents, people living in poverty, farm workers, and homeless individuals and families, and military personnel. These groups are summarized in Table 16. Table 16: Special Needs Groups ( ) Special Needs Group # of Persons % of Total # of # of or % Owner % Renter Households Owners Renters Households or Population Households with Seniors 3, % Senior Headed Households 2,657 1, % 1, % 20.3% Seniors Living Alone 1, % % 8.2% Persons with Disabilities** 5, % Large Households 2,913 1, % 1, % 22.2% Single Parent Households 2, % Female Headed Households w/ Children 1, % People Living in Poverty* 10, % Farm Workers* % Homeless*** % Military* 4 <0.1% * = 2010 Census data not available. Estimate is from the ACS. ** = 2010 Census data not available. Estimate is from the ACS. *** = 2010 Census data not available. Estimate is from the HUD Point-in-Time Estimate of Homelessness, Sources: Bureau of the Census, 2010; American Community Survey (ACS), and Housing Element Page 17

30 A. Seniors Seniors, defined as persons over the age of 65 years, often age in-place, living in housing that is too expensive for their fixed incomes or that structurally does not accommodate specific needs for assistance. Even though senior citizens may have difficulty living in their own home, they often do not have the options or mobility afforded other segments of the population. In 1990, there were 2,661 seniors in El Centro, representing 8.5 percent of the total population (see Table 17). Between 1990 and 2000, the senior population increased at a rate of 3.3 percent annually; this pace slowed slightly to 2.9 percent between 2000 and As of 2010, the senior population was estimated at 4,556 persons, representing approximately 9.3 percent of the total population. Table 17: Senior Population Trends (65+) ( ) Year # of Persons # Change % Change Annual % Change , , % 3.3% ,556 1, % 2.9% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Between 2000 and 2010, the number of senior-headed households in the City increased by 24.9 percent (see Table 18). In 2010, senior-headed households comprised approximately 20.3 percent of all households within the City. Since 1990, the proportion of senior households who owned their homes has steadily declined, while the proportion of senior households who rented their homes has increased (Figure 1). Nevertheless, as of 2010, senior households who owned their homes (59.2 percent) continued to outnumber their renter counterparts by a large margin (40.8 percent). Table 18: Senior Household Trends (65+) ( ) Year # of Households # Change % Change Annual % Change , , % 2.5% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Page Housing Element

31 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% Figure 1: Senior Households by Tenure ( ) 0.0% Owner 72.5% 62.6% 59.2% Renter 27.5% 37.4% 40.8% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, As documented in Table 14, elderly households in the City (particularly those that rented their homes) were especially likely to experience a housing problem. Specifically, of all elderly renter households, 72 percent reported experiencing a housing problem. Among elderly owner households, 31 percent reported experiencing a housing problem. Resources The special needs of seniors can be met through a range of services, including congregate care, rent subsides, shared housing, and housing rehabilitation assistance. For the frail or disabled elderly, housing can be modified with features that help ensure continued independent living arrangements. There are currently six senior housing developments in the City: Green Gable Apartments 19 units Regency Park Apartment 106 units Cedar Homes Apartments 19 units Boatwright Apartments 19 units El Centro Senior Villas 72 units Seniors residents in the City can benefit from various services offered at the El Centro Adult Center managed by the City s Parks and Recreation Department. Services offered at the Center include: computer and sewing courses, bingo, movie screenings, a senior nutritional program, and adult and senior exercise days. Additionally, several local and regional programs provide housing and social services to assist the elderly in the City. These organizations include the Area Agency on Aging, Imperial County Work Training Center, United Way, and Catholic Charities Housing Element Page 19

32 Eleven licensed residential care facilities provide assisted living, nursing care, and general services to seniors in El Centro. These facilities have a combined capacity of 214 beds. As required by the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, the City s Zoning Ordinance treats state-licensed residential care facilities serving six or fewer individuals the same as any other residential use. Furthermore, larger residential care facilities that serve seven or more clients are allowed by-right in the RR, R1, R2, and R3 zones. B. Persons with Disabilities (Including Developmental Disabilities) Three types of disabled persons are considered as having special housing needs: physically impaired, mentally disabled, and developmentally disabled. Each type is unique and requires specific attention in terms of access to housing, employment, social services, medical services, and accessibility of housing. The 2010 Census did not collect information on disability. According to ACS data, approximately 12 percent of El Centro residents had a disability. The ACS also tallied the number of disabilities by type for residents with one or more disabilities (see Table 19). Among the disabilities tallied, ambulatory (60.3 percent) and cognitive (39.1 percent) difficulties were the most prevalent. However, the types of disabilities experienced varied depending on the age of the disabled person. Specifically, cognitive disabilities were the most common disability affecting disabled person ages five to 17, afflicting 58.3 percent of the disabled persons in this age group. Meanwhile, ambulatory difficulties were the most likely to affect older disabled persons. The most obvious housing need for persons with disabilities is housing that is adapted to their needs. Most older single-family homes are inaccessible to people with mobility and sensory limitations. Housing may not be adaptable to widened doorways and hallways, access ramps, larger bathrooms, lowered countertops, and other features necessary for accessibility. Location of housing is also an important factor for many persons with disabilities, as they often rely upon public transportation to travel to necessary services and shops. Table 19: Disabilities Tallied ( ) Disability Type % of Disabilities Tallied Age 5 to 17 Age 18 to 64 Age 65+ Total With a hearing difficulty 0.0% 24.2% 33.9% 26.7% With a vision difficulty 25.4% 19.6% 20.8% 20.6% With a cognitive difficulty 58.3% 47.9% 26.6% 39.1% With an ambulatory difficulty 35.4% 55.9% 69.2% 60.3% With a self-care difficulty 32.9% 20.5% 20.5% 21.4% With an independent living difficulty 36.7% 36.4% 33.7% Total Disabled Persons 398 2,396 2,286 5,080 Notes: 1. A person can have multiple disabilities. 2. This table does not include persons under the age of 5 with a disability. Source: Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey (ACS), Page Housing Element

33 Persons with Developmental Disabilities A recent change in State law requires that the Housing Element discuss the housing needs of persons with developmental disabilities. As defined by the Section 4512 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, developmental disability means a disability that originates before an individual attains age 18 years, continues, or can be expected to continue, indefinitely, and constitutes a substantial disability for that individual. As defined by the Director of Developmental Services, in consultation with the Superintendent of Public Instruction, this term shall include mental retardation, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and autism. This term shall also include disabling conditions found to be closely related to mental retardation or to require treatment similar to that required for individuals with mental retardation, but shall not include other handicapping conditions that are solely physical in nature. This term shall also reflect the individual s need for a combination and sequence of special, interdisciplinary, or generic services, individualized supports, or other forms of assistance that are of lifelong or extended duration and are individually planned and coordinated. The Census does not record developmental disabilities. According to the U.S. Administration on Developmental Disabilities, an accepted estimate of the percentage of the population that can be defined as developmentally disabled is 1.5 percent. This generally equates to 640 persons in the with developmental disabilities, based on the 2010 Census population. However, according to the State s Department of Developmental Services, as of November 2012, approximately 39 El Centro residents with developmental disabilities were being assisted at the San Diego Regional Center for the Developmentally Disabled branch office located in the City of Imperial. Most of these individuals were residing in a private home with their parent of guardian and 13 of these persons with developmental disabilities were under the age of 18. Many developmentally disabled persons can live and work independently within a conventional housing environment. More severely disabled individuals require a group living environment where supervision is provided. The most severely affected individuals may require an institutional environment where medical attention and physical therapy are provided. Because developmental disabilities exist before adulthood, the first issue in supportive housing for the developmentally disabled is the transition from the person s living situation as a child to an appropriate level of independence as an adult. Resources Various non-profit groups provide supportive services to the special needs population in El Centro, including persons with disabilities. The Imperial Valley Independent Living Center offers various social services to City residents with the goal of empowering people with disabilities. Among other organizations, ARC of Imperial Valley offers dial-a-ride paratransit services to City residents and links them to additional health, employment, and residential services. According to the State Department of Social Services, eleven licensed residential care facilities, with a total capacity of 214 beds, are located within El Centro. These facilities have the capability to accommodate and serve persons with disabilities. The Zoning Ordinance treats residential care facilities in accordance with the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act Housing Element Page 21

34 State and federal legislation mandate that a percentage of units in new or substantially rehabilitated multi-family apartment complexes be made accessible to individuals with limited physical mobility. The City s Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program offers low interest loans to lower income owner-occupants for home improvements, including accessibility-related improvements (see Program 12). C. Large Households For the purposes of this section, large households are defined as households consisting of five or more persons. Generally, the needs of large families are not targeted in the housing market, especially in the multi-family market. According to the 2000 Census, 23 percent (or 2,637 households) of the City s households were large households (see Table 11). By 2010, the number of large households in the City had increased to 2,913 households (or 22 percent of all households, see Table 16). Generally, two-bedroom units are considered to be the most common housing unit type in the housing market; however, large households typically require dwelling units with three or more bedrooms in order to avoid overcrowding. According to ACS data, the majority of owneroccupied housing in the City had three or more bedrooms (85.1 percent or 5,529 households). The proportion of renter-occupied housing with three or more bedrooms was significantly less (at just 26.4 percent or 1,742 households). Although housing options for large renter-households in the City are numerically sufficient to meet the needs of the 1,548 large renter-households documented in the 2010 Census, lower income large renterhouseholds may have difficulty finding adequately sized and affordable housing in El Centro. Large households are often more susceptible to housing problems, like overcrowding and cost burden (overpayment). According to CHAS data, 67.1 percent of large renterhouseholds and 28.8 percent of large owner-households had lower incomes (see Table 14). CHAS also found that all (100.0 percent) of the City s extremely low and very low income large households experienced at least one housing problem between 2006 and Resources In order to address the problem of overcrowding in large family households, the City has included, as part of this housing element, programs to increase opportunities for the development of suitably sized housing for these households. Large households can benefit from a variety of programs and services offered by different organizations in the City. Providers such as the Center for Family Solutions, House of Hope, and Neighborhood House shelter can aid households in need of emergency shelter and other services. Additional organizations that offer support services such as assistance with utilities, food, and housing referrals include the Imperial County Family Resource Center, Catholic Charities, Imperial Valley Food Bank, Imperial Valley Housing Authority, and the Salvation Army. Furthermore, room additions to alleviate overcrowded living conditions are eligible improvements under the City s Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program (see Program 12). Page Housing Element

35 D. Single-Parent/Female-Headed Households Single-parent households, particularly female-headed families with children, often require special consideration and assistance because of their greater need for affordable housing and accessible day care, health care, and other supportive services. Female-headed families with children are a particularly vulnerable group because they must balance the needs of their children with work responsibilities, often while earning limited incomes. The 2010 Census found that there were approximately 2,051 single-parent households with children under 18 years of age in the. As shown in Table 20, of these households, 1,634 households (or 79.7 percent) were headed by a female single-parent (12.5 percent of all households in the City). Table 20: Household Type and Presence of Children 18 Years Old and Under (2010) Household Type # of Households % of Total Single-Parent Households 3, % With Children Under 18 Years Old 2, % With No Children 1, % Female Householder, No Spouse Present 2, % Female Householder With Children 1, % Female Householder With No Children 1, % Non-Family Households 2, % Total Households 13,108 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Resources Various organizations located within El Centro offer family and youth services. The Imperial Valley Food Bank also supports the City s families through its food distribution and emergency assistance programs. Womanhaven, Inc. offers shelter and a range of services to victims of domestic violence and their children, including counseling, education, advocacy, legal services, support groups, clothing, and case management. The agency also offers children and youth education and violence prevention programs to foster better life choices for the City s young residents. Additional organizations offering programs and services beneficial to single-parent households include the Center for Family Solutions, Imperial County Family Resource Center, Catholic Charities, Imperial Valley Food Bank, Neighborhood House, and the Salvation Army. The City coordinates with and funds social service providers that serve El Centro s population, including single-parent households (see Program 9) Housing Element Page 23

36 E. Residents Living Below the Poverty Level In the, an estimated 2,392 families (or 23.4 percent of all families) were living below the poverty level between 2007 and Poverty thresholds vary depending on the size of the family and the age of family members, therefore, no specific income threshold can be specified. Approximately, 54.2 percent (1,296 families) of the family households living below the poverty level were female-headed households. Of the femaleheaded households living below the poverty level, 90.5 percent (1,173) of households had children under 18 years of age (see Table 21). Table 21: Households by Poverty Level ( ) Family Households # of Households % of Total Total Families With Income In 2011 Below Poverty Level 2, % Total Families With Children Under 18 Year Of Age With Incomes In 2011 Below Poverty Level 2, % Total Family Households 10,221 Female-Householder In 2011 Below Poverty Level 1, % Female-Headed Households With Children Under 18 Years Of Age In 2011 Below Poverty Level 1, % Total Female-Headed Households 2,769 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey (ACS), Resources Households within the City living below the poverty level can benefit from programs and services offering assistance with utility bills, food supplies, and various other social services. Organizations in the City offering these services include the Imperial County Family Resource Center, Catholic Charities, Imperial County Social Services, Imperial Valley Food Bank, Neighborhood House, and the Salvation Army. In addition to providing essential support services, the Center for Family Solutions and House of Hope provide emergency shelter to residents. The City promotes the maintenance and expansion of the Housing Choice Voucher program, which provides an important source of rental assistance for individuals and households living in poverty (see Program 10). Individuals living in poverty can also benefit from small units such as studios and single room occupancy units (SROs). F. Farm Workers Estimating farm workers and those households associated with farm work within the State is extremely difficult. Generally, the farm worker population contains two segments of farm workers: permanent and migratory (seasonal) farm workers. The permanent population consists of farm workers who have settled in the region and maintain local residence and who are employed most of the year. The migratory farm worker population consists of those farm workers who typically migrate to the region during seasonal periods in search of farm labor employment and from the region during the off-season. Traditional sources of population estimates, including the Census, have tended to significantly underestimate Page Housing Element

37 farm worker population based upon subsequent farm worker data and conflicts with existing data. Moreover, different employment estimation techniques result in diverse estimates of local agricultural employment. According to ACS data, shown in Table 22, 6.3 percent of the City s labor force was employed in the farming, fishing and forestry industries. The proportion of El Centro s labor force employed in agriculture is lower than for the County (9.6 percent). Table 22: Farm workers ( ) Imperial County Industry % of Total % of Total % of Total # # # Employment Employment Employment Farming, Fishing and Forestry 1, % % 5, % Total Labor Force 14,862 18,219 69,690 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000; American Community Survey (ACS), Resources The City has a number of apartment complexes suitable for those in need of temporary housing, such as seasonal farm workers (see Table 29). Furthermore, the City amended the Zoning Ordinance in April 2013 to allow farm worker housing for six or fewer laborers in accordance with the California Employee Housing Act. Furthermore, the City will study options for the establishment of a farmland mitigation fee (Program 5). Property owners seeking to convert active agricultural land to an urban use could be required to pay a fee to mitigate the conversion of farm land to non-farm use. One of the potential uses of the mitigation fees could be to provide farm worker housing and related supportive social services. G. Homeless Persons The, with the assistance and participation of its local service providers, maintains a continuum of care for the homeless population and to those facing the possibility of homelessness. The continuum of care begins with the assessment of the homeless individual or family; then refers to appropriate housing where supportive services are provided to prepare them for independent living. The goal of a comprehensive homeless service system is to ensure that homeless individuals and families move from homelessness to self-sufficiency, permanent housing, and independent living. Due to their transient nature, it is difficult to count the number of homeless in any one area. It should also be noted that there are generally two types of homeless - the permanent homeless, who are the transient and most visible homeless population, and the temporary homeless, who are homeless usually due to eviction and may stay with friends, family, at a shelter or motel until they can find a permanent residence. The Point-in-Time Estimate of Homelessness conducted on January 25, 2013 counted 92 homeless persons in the City. Of these homeless, 17 were unsheltered. Factors contributing Housing Element Page 25

38 to homelessness include the general lack of housing affordable to lower income persons, increases in the number of persons whose incomes fall below the poverty level, reductions in public subsidies to the poor, alcohol and substance abuse, domestic violence, and the deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill. Homeless people, victims of abuse, and other individuals often have housing needs that are not being met by the traditional housing stock. These people require temporary housing and assistance at little or no cost to the recipient. Resources The City amended the Zoning Ordinance in 2010 to allow emergency shelters by-right and with a ministerial permit process in the R3, CG, and CH zones and in April 2013 to allow transitional and supportive housing by-right in all zones that allow residential uses, pursuant to State law. Additionally, as documented in Table 23, a number of organizations located within El Centro offer emergency shelter, transitional housing and supportive services to the region s homeless or those at risk of becoming homeless. Table 23: Homeless Resources Organization Catholic Charities Employment Development Department House of Hope Imperial County Health Department Imperial County Social Services Imperial Valley Behavioral Health Services Imperial Valley Food Bank I.V. Independent Living Center (Empowering People with Disabilities) Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program Salvation Army Sure Helpline Veteran Services Volunteers of America Womanhaven (d.b.a. Center for Family Solutions) Source:, Services Supportive Services Supportive Services Emergency Shelter, Supportive Services Supportive Services Supportive Services Supportive Services Supportive Services Supportive Services Supportive Services Supportive Services Supportive Services Supportive Services Supportive Services, Transitional Housing Emergency Shelter, Supportive Services, Transitional Housing H. Military Households The military population s influence on the demand for housing takes two forms: (1) existing military households trying to find housing; and (2) former military households trying to remain in the community. Often, the housing needs of military personnel are affected by lower incomes and an uncertain length of residency. While the ACS documented only four persons in the City employed in the Armed Forces, a far greater number of military personnel may actually be present in the City at any Page Housing Element

39 given time. Naval Air Facility (NAF) El Centro is located about five miles from the City and base personnel there may not be included in the City s ACS employment estimates. Furthermore, the City is currently one of two facilities in contention for becoming the home base for the Navy s F35C Joint Strike Fighter squadron. Should NAF El Centro be chosen as the home base for this squadron, up to 600 additional on base jobs could be created. Resources Most special needs of military families are provided through on-base supportive programs and services. NAF El Centro has established Community Support Programs (CSP), a regional team responsible for policy development, resourcing and oversight of quality of life programs for active-duty military, reservists, military retirees and their families. CSP provides housing, morale/welfare/recreation, and family programs and services for military personnel and their families Housing Stock Characteristics The Census defines a housing unit as any of the following: a house, an apartment, a mobile home or trailer, a group of homes, or a single room intended for use as separate living quarters. Separate living quarters are those in which the occupants live separately from any other individuals in the building, and which have direct access from outside the building or through a common hall. This section discusses various housing characteristics and trends that affect housing needs in El Centro. Important characteristics include housing growth, type, vacancy, and age and condition. A. Housing Unit Growth The has experienced substantial growth in its housing stock over the last 20 years. The 2010 Census estimated that a total of 14,476 dwelling units were located within the City. Between 2000 and 2010, the number of housing units in the City increased by 18.0 percent (see Table 24). During this time period, housing growth rates in most neighboring jurisdictions were similar to, or greater than, El Centro s. The cities of Imperial and Calexico experienced the greatest growth rates, at 99.2 percent and 52.5 percent, respectively. Countywide housing unit growth was 27.5 percent during the last decade Housing Element Page 27

40 B. Housing Type Table 24: Housing Unit Growth ( ) Jurisdiction % Change Brawley 6,124 7,038 8, % 17.0% Calexico 4,832 6,983 10, % 52.5% Calipatria , % 16.6% El Centro 10,180 12,263 14, % 18.0% Holtville 1,477 1,617 1, % 19.8% Imperial 1,372 2,385 4, % 99.2% Imperial County 36,559 43,981 56, % 27.5% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, A certain level of housing diversity is an important factor in ensuring adequate housing opportunities for El Centro residents. A diverse housing stock helps ensure that all households, regardless of their income, age group, and/or household size, have the opportunity to find housing that is best suited to their needs. According to the ACS, approximately 7,870 single-family residences were located within the City, an increase of 12.5 percent since 2000 (see Figure 2). The City s housing stock also includes 5,191 multi-family units; since 2000 the number of multi-family buildings containing 20 or more units increased by 65.8 percent. Meanwhile, the number of mobile homes, boats, RV s, vans, etc. in the City decreased by 9.1 percent. Figure 2: Distribution of Housing Units ( ) 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 - Single-Family 2 to 4 Units 5 to 19 Units 20+ Units Mobile home, boat, RV, van, etc ,021 1,060 1,472 1,420 1, ,870 1,549 1,288 2,354 1,195 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000; American Community Survey (ACS), Page Housing Element

41 C. Housing Vacancy Vacancy rates are important indicators of the supply and cost of housing. Vacancy trends in housing are analyzed using a vacancy rate which establishes the relationship between housing supply and demand. For example, if the demand for housing is greater than the available supply, then the vacancy rate is low and the price of housing will most likely increase. Additionally, the vacancy rate indicates whether or not the City has an adequate housing supply to provide choice and mobility. General industry standards indicate that vacancy rates of five to six percent for rental housing and one to two percent of ownership housing is sufficient to provide choice and mobility. In 2000, the Census reported a vacancy rate of 6.7 percent for the. Between 2007 and 2011, the ACS estimated the vacancy rate for El Centro to be 9.9 percent. Of the vacant units in the City in 2011, 24.7 percent were available for rent and 11.4 percent were available for purchase. The increase in overall vacancy rate is a reflection of the depressed housing market between 2008 and 2012 when mortgage financing was tightened by lenders and unemployment resulted in some families sharing housing arrangements to save on costs. Figure 3: Vacant Units by Housing Type ( ) 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% For Sale Only For Rent Rented or Sold, Not Occupied Seasonal, Recreation, or Occasional Use For Migrant Workers Other % 35.3% 5.1% 36.4% 1.5% 13.1% % 24.7% 14.1% 13.0% 0.0% 36.9% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000; American Community Survey (ACS), D. Housing Age and Condition Housing age can be an important indicator of housing condition within a community. Like any other tangible asset, housing is subject to gradual physical or technological deterioration over time. If not properly and regularly maintained, housing can deteriorate and discourage reinvestment, depress neighboring property values, and eventually impact the quality of life in a neighborhood. Many federal and state programs also use the age of housing as one factor in determining housing rehabilitation needs Housing Element Page 29

42 Generally, housing older than 30 years of age will require minor repairs and modernization improvements. Housing units over 50 years of age are more likely to require major rehabilitation such as roofing, plumbing, and electrical system repairs. Error! Reference source not found. shows that 56.4 percent of the housing units in El Centro were built prior to 1980, meaning that more than onehalf of the City s housing stock is over 30 years old. Many of these older units could potentially require minor repairs. Units older than 40 years of age comprised about 34.6 percent of the housing stock. These units may require moderate to substantial repairs. Approximately 21.7 percent of the housing stock is over 50 years of age and may require substantial repairs. Table 25: Housing Age Year Structure Percent Number Built of Total 1939 or earlier % , % , % , % , % , % , % Built 2005 or later 1, % Total 14, % Source: U.S. Bureau of Census, American Community Survey (ACS), Housing age is only a general indicator. It does not take into account private actions by property owners to maintain and upgrade their properties. According to a Housing Conditions Survey conducted by the City in 2008, the condition of housing units is generally good as about 69.1 percent of all housing units in the City were in sound condition and not in need of any repairs. Approximately 24.4 percent of units were in need of minor repairs and an additional 5.7 percent were in need of moderate repairs. Only 0.6 percent of the units surveyed needed substantial repair, and less than one percent of housing units are dilapidated. Housing conditions in the City have not changed significantly since this survey was conducted. The survey also identified specific areas where poor housing conditions predominate, with greater than 66 percent of the units in need of some rehabilitation. These areas were located in the central and western central portions of the City, where housing in need of rehabilitation was found to have the highest densities. The areas and their corresponding rehabilitation needs include: Area bounded by Main Street on the north, 4 th Street on the east, Heil Avenue on the south, and 8 th Street on the west (73.1 percent rehabilitation). Area bounded by Treshill Road on the north, La Brucherie on the east, Imperial Avenue on the south, and the City Limits on the west (71.9 percent rehabilitation). This Block Group also contains an area of housing west of Imperial Avenue and north of Bradshaw Road at the north end of the City. Area bounded by Commercial Avenue on the north, the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks on the east, Ross Avenue on the south, and 4 th Street on the west (71.7 percent rehabilitation). Area bounded by Main Street on the north, 8 th Street on the east, Heil and Hamilton Avenues on the south, and Imperial Avenue on the west (66.3 percent rehabilitation). Additional areas of the City were identified where slightly less, 50 to 60 percent, of the housing units require some form of rehabilitation. These include: Page Housing Element

43 Area bounded by Adams Avenue on the north, 4 th Street on the east, Main Street on the south, and 8 th Street on the west (57.8 percent rehabilitation). Area bounded by the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks on the north, 1 st Street on the east, Imperial Avenue on the south, and the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks on the west (52.8 percent rehabilitation). Area bounded by Imperial Avenue on the north, Dogwood Road on the east, Ross Avenue on the south, and the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks on the west (51.0 percent rehabilitation) Housing Cost and Affordability One of the major barriers to housing availability is the cost of housing. In order to provide housing to all economic levels in the community, a wide variety of housing opportunities at various prices should be made available. A. Ownership Housing As shown in Table 26, the median home price in El Centro increased slightly, by 3.3 percent, from $120,000 in 2010 to $124,000 in During this same time period, changes to median home prices in most neighboring jurisdictions were minimal, except for Calipatria, which had a significant increase in median price. The largest increase occurred in the City of Imperial (6.7 percent) while the only jurisdiction to experience a decrease in home prices was the City of Calexico (0.7 percent). The County s median home price increased 4.8 percent between 2010 and Between 2011 and 2012, home prices in the region were generally stagnant, exhibiting only small increases and decreases, except for Calipatria. Table 26: Changes in Median Home Sale Prices ( ) Jurisdiction Percent Change in Median Sale Price Median Median Median # Sold # Sold Price Price Price Brawley $122, $125, $123, % 1.60% Calexico $136, $135, $137, % 1.48% Calipatria $46, $72, $60, % % El Centro $120, $123, $123, % -0.40% Holtville $95, $95, $95, % 0.00% Imperial $150, $160, $159, % -0.31% Imperial County $125,000 1,774 $131,000 1,616 $130, % -0.76% Source: DQnews, Figure 4 compares median home prices in El Centro with home prices in neighboring jurisdictions during November The median price for a home in the City was similar to those in neighboring jurisdictions and only slightly below median prices Countywide Housing Element Page 31

44 Figure 4: Median Home Sales Prices (2012) $180,000 $160,000 I $140,000 $120,000 Imperial County: $130,000 $100,000 $80,000 $60,000 $40,000 $20,000 $123,000 $137,000 $60,000 $123,000 $95,000 $159,000 $0 Brawley Calexico Calipatria El Centro Holtville Imperial Source: DQnews, B. Rental Housing According to a survey of rental listings on the median rent in the City of El Centro was $850 (see Table 27). Market rents in the City averaged approximately $867, and ranged from $350 for a one-bedroom to $1,850 for a five-bedroom unit. Table 27: Median and Average Rents by Number of Bedrooms ( ) # of Bedrooms # Listed Median Rent Average Rent Rent Range 0 2 $500 $500 $450 to $ $550 $566 $350 to $ $863 $841 $600 to $1, $1,050 $986 $725 to $1, $1,450 $1,317 $850 to $1, $1,775 $1,775 $1,700 to $1,850 Total 93 $850 $867 $350 to $1,850 Source: Craigslist.org, December 14, 2012 to January 28, C. Housing Affordability by Income Housing affordability can be inferred by comparing the cost of renting or owning a home in the City with the maximum affordable housing costs for households at different income levels. Taken together, this information can generally show who can afford what size and type of housing and indicate the type of households most likely to experience overcrowding and overpayment. Page Housing Element

45 Housing affordability is an important indicator of quality of life in El Centro. If residents pay too much for housing they will not have sufficient income for other necessities such as health care. Households that spend a substantial portion of their income on housing may also be at risk of becoming homeless in the event of unexpected circumstances such as illness or loss of employment. State law requires that the City facilitate provision of housing opportunities that are affordable to all economic segments of the community. The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) conducts annual household income surveys nationwide to determine a household s eligibility for federal housing assistance. Based on this survey, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) developed income limits that can be used to determine the maximum price that could be affordable to households in the upper range of their respective income category. Households in the lower end of each category can afford less by comparison than those at the upper end. Based on these income limits for Imperial County and current real estate prices documented in Table 26, homeownership in El Centro is within the reach of low to moderate income households, with the exception of single-person low income households. Housing options for extremely low and very low income households are virtually non-existent unless public assistance is involved. As shown in Table 28, moderate and median income households can generally afford the market rents for apartments in El Centro. Low income households in El Centro may be able to rent housing in the City depending on household size; however, competition for appropriately sized rental homes may lead to a housing cost burden or overcrowding. To afford the median-priced home of $123,000 in 2012, a household income of approximately $31,000 would be needed; significantly less than that of the median-income for a four-person household in Imperial County of $57,900 (see Table 28). Renting an average apartment, at $867 per month, would require an annual income of approximately $42,000, an amount within reach of a median-income four person household in the County. Higher income occupations in the City could easily afford to purchase or rent housing based on these estimates, however, lower wage occupations would still struggle to find affordable housing in the City. The median income required to afford an average apartment was 31 percent higher than the median income required to afford an average home in There are a couple of possible explanations for why rental housing was relatively more expensive than ownership housing in El Centro. The discrepancy could reflect tight credit markets and high downpayment requirements that may have forced otherwise income-qualified households out of the ownership market. This, in turn, could have created higher demand for rental properties with associated rental price increases. Furthermore, a general shortage of rental housing options, especially apartment housing, may explain higher relative housing costs when compared to ownership housing Housing Element Page 33

46 Table 28: Affordable Housing Costs by Household Size and Tenure (2013) Estimated Affordable Costs Utility Allowance, (All Costs) Household Taxes & Insurance Annual Income Affordable Rent Affordable Home Price Rental Ownership Costs Costs Renters Owners Extremely Low Income (0-30% AMI) 1-Person $12,150 $304 $304 $85 $125 $219 $27,463 2-Person $13,900 $348 $348 $103 $139 $245 $32,350 3-Person $15,650 $391 $391 $127 $159 $264 $35,841 4-Person $17,350 $434 $434 $166 $190 $268 $36,539 5-Person $18,750 $469 $469 $202 $218 $267 $36,539 Very Low Income (31-50% AMI) 1-Person $20,300 $508 $508 $85 $125 $423 $65,398 2-Person $23,200 $580 $580 $103 $139 $477 $75,639 3-Person $26,100 $653 $653 $127 $159 $526 $84,483 4-Person $28,950 $724 $724 $166 $190 $558 $90,534 5-Person $31,300 $783 $783 $202 $218 $581 $94,956 Low Income (51-80% AMI) 1-Person $32,450 $811 $811 $85 $125 $726 $121,953 2-Person $37,050 $926 $926 $103 $139 $823 $140,106 3-Person $41,700 $1,043 $1,043 $127 $159 $916 $157,096 4-Person $46,300 $1,158 $1,158 $166 $190 $992 $171,293 5-Person $50,050 $1,251 $1,251 $202 $218 $1,049 $182,231 Median Income (80-100% AMI) 1-Person $40,550 $1,014 $1,183 $85 $125 $929 $191,114 2-Person $46,300 $1,158 $1,350 $103 $139 $1,055 $219,081 3-Person $52,100 $1,303 $1,520 $127 $159 $1,176 $245,923 4-Person $57,900 $1,448 $1,689 $166 $190 $1,282 $270,205 5-Person $62,550 $1,564 $1,824 $202 $218 $1,362 $288,940 Moderate Income ( % AMI) 1-Person $48,650 $1,216 $1,419 $85 $125 $1,131 $235,101 2-Person $55,600 $1,390 $1,622 $103 $139 $1,287 $269,584 3-Person $62,550 $1,564 $1,824 $127 $159 $1,437 $302,671 4-Person $69,500 $1,738 $2,027 $166 $190 $1,572 $333,199 5-Person $75,050 $1,876 $2,189 $202 $218 $1,674 $356,821 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development, 2013 Income limits; and Veronica Tam and Associates Assumptions: 2013 HCD income limits; 30% gross household income as affordable housing cost; 20% of monthly affordable cost for taxes and insurance; 10% downpayment; and 4.0% interest rate for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage loan. Utilities based on Imperial Valley Housing Authority Utility Allowance, 2012 assuming use of electric services. Page Housing Element

47 Figure 5: Income Needed to Afford Housing Compared With Wages Assumptions: 2013 HCD income limits; 30% gross household income as affordable housing cost; 20% of monthly affordable cost for taxes and insurance; 10% downpayment; and 5.5% interest rate for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage loan. Utilities based on Imperial Valley Housing Authority Utility Allowance, Sources: 1. Average salary data obtained from the State Employment Development Department, Veronica Tam and Associates, Affordable Housing State law requires the City to identify, analyze, and propose programs to preserve existing multi-family rental units that are currently restricted to lower income housing use and that will become unrestricted and possibly be lost as lower income housing (i.e., units at risk or at-risk units ). State law requires the following: An inventory of restricted lower income housing projects in the City and their potential for conversion; An analysis of the costs of preserving and/or replacing the units at risk and a comparison of these costs; An analysis of the organizational and financial resources available for preserving and/or replacing the units at risk ; and Programs for preserving the at-risk units. The following discussion satisfies the first three requirements of State law listed above pertaining to the potential conversion of assisted housing units into market rate housing for the ten year period between October 15, 2013 and October 15, The Housing Plan section includes a program for preserving the at-risk units, which meets the final requirement of State law Housing Element Page 35

48 A. Inventory of At-Risk Rental Housing Units Table 29 includes the inventory of assisted housing developments within the City of El Centro as of February The inventory includes 915 assisted units in 22 deed-restricted affordable housing developments. Most of the properties and units are owned by the Imperial Valley Housing Authority. Table 29: Assisted Housing In El Centro (2012) Location Development Ownership Type # Assisted Units Expiration Date Non At-Risk Fairfield Homes Hope, Holt, Heil & 1 st IVHA 50 Perpetuity Green Gables Park Avenue IVHA 19 Perpetuity Imperialwood Homes Holt & Heil IVHA 32 Perpetuity Turnkey Units 680 Brighton IVHA 6 Perpetuity Turnkey Units 580 Brighton IVHA 6 Perpetuity Turnkey Units Commercial & Brighton IVHA 7 Perpetuity Turnkey Units Barbara Worth Drive IVHA 9 Perpetuity El Centro Homes 300 Block of Holt & 400 Block of Hamilton IVHA 21 Perpetuity Casa de Anza 1690 W. Adams IVHA 36 Perpetuity Tierra del Sol 1720 W. Adams IVHA 40 Perpetuity El Centro Family Homes 6 th & Adams IVHA 8 Perpetuity Cedar Homes Senior 650 Adams IVHA 20 Perpetuity Boatwright Homes Senior 590 Holt Ave IVHA 20 Perpetuity Valley Apartments I, II, III & IV 970 Waterman Court IVHA 105 Perpetuity Casa de Pajas 402 Adams IVHA 3 Perpetuity El Centro Senior Villas 515 Park Avenue LIHTC Countryside Apartments 1751 Adams Avenue LIHTC Plaza Senior Apartments 1755 W. Main Street LIHTC Imperial Gardens Family Apartments 1798 W. Main Street LIHTC Las Brisas Apartments 2001 N. 8 th St LIHTC El Centro Senior Villas II 579 Park Ave LIHTC Total Non At-Risk Units 873 At-Risk Euclid Villas 1735 S Euclid Ave Profit Motivated 42 June 28, 2013 Section 8 Total At-Risk Units 42 Total Housing Stock Within the 915 Source: 1. HUD, Imperial Valley Housing Authority (IVHA), Page Housing Element

49 B. Preservation of At-Risk Housing Units State Housing Element law requires the analysis of government-subsidized housing that may change from low-income housing to market-rate housing during the next ten years. Thus, this at-risk housing analysis covers the period from October 15, 2013 through October 15, This section evaluates affordable housing in El Centro that may be at-risk of converting to market rates and the estimated costs to preserve or replace the at-risk units. Within the at-risk housing analysis period, one of the City s affordable housing projects is considered at low risk of being converted to market rate because the owners have continued to renew their HUD Section 8 contracts. While the HUD renewal process is periodic, the approval is fairly automatic. Though unlikely, it is possible 42 of the City s affordable housing units could convert to market-rate at some point in the planning period. Preservation Options Depending on the circumstances of the at-risk projects, different options may be used to preserve or replace the units. Preservation options typically include: 1) transfer of units to non-profit ownership; and 2) purchase of affordability covenants. In terms of replacement, the most direct option is the development of new assisted multi-family housing units. The following discussion highlights ways that the City s at-risk project could be preserved as affordable housing. All of the presented alternatives are costly and beyond the ability of the to manage without large amounts of subsidy from federal and/or State resources. These options are described below. Transfer of Ownership One preservation option is to transfer the ownership of the at-risk units to a nonprofit organization or purchase similar units by a nonprofit organization. This option is applicable to the Euclid Villas Apartments, as it is a for-profit housing project. By transferring property ownership to a non-profit organization, low income restrictions can be secure and the project would become potentially eligible for a greater range of governmental assistance. The cost of transferring ownership depends on a number of factors, including the market conditions at the time, occupancy rate, and physical conditions of the building and units. The estimated market value for the for-profit units at risk is provided in Table 30. Current market value for the at-risk units is estimated on the basis of the units potential annual income, and operating and maintenance expenses. As indicated, the estimated market value of El Centro s current stock of at-risk affordable housing is $3.9 million. This estimate is provided for the purpose of comparison and understanding the magnitude of costs involved and does not represent the precise market value of this project. The actual market value at time of sale would depend on market and property conditions, leaseout/turnover rates, among other factors Housing Element Page 37

50 Table 30: Market Value of At-Risk Housing Units Unit Information Total Two-Bedroom Units 14 Three-Bedroom Units 28 Annual Operating Cost $204,750 Gross Annual Income $517,742 Net Annual Income $312,992 Market Value $3,912,405 Market value for at-risk units is estimated with the following assumptions: 1. Average market rent based on Fair Market Rents (FY 2013) established by HUD (Two-bedroom unit = $822, and Threebedroom unit = $1,211). 2. Average size is assumed to be: 850 square feet for a two-bedroom apartment, and 1,200 square feet for a three-bedroom apartment. 3. Annual income is calculated on a vacancy rate = 5%. 4. Annual operating expenses per square foot = $ Market value = Annual net project income*multiplication factor. 6. Multiplication factor for a building in good condition is Rental Assistance Tenant-based rent subsidies could be used to preserve the affordability of housing. Prior to the State s dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency in 2012 the City could have used housing set-aside funds to provide direct rent subsidies to very low income households, similar to Housing Choice Vouchers. This option is applicable to all 42 units subsidized with Section 8. The level of the subsidy required to preserve the at-risk units is estimated to equal the Fair Market Rent (FMR) for a unit minus the housing cost affordable by a very low income household. Table 31 estimates the rent subsidies required to preserve the affordability of the 42 at-risk units. Based on the estimates and assumptions shown in this table, approximately $17,871 in rent subsidies would be required monthly (or $214,500 annually). Assuming a 20-year affordability, the total subsidy is about $4.3 million. Table 31: Rental Subsidies Required Unit Size Total Units Fair Market Rent 1 Household Size Very Low Income (50% AMI) 2 Affordable Cost Utilities 3 Monthly Per Unit Subsidy Total Monthly Subsidy 2-br 28 $822 3 $26,100 $448 $374 $10,461 3-br 14 $1,211 4 $28,950 $682 $529 $7,410 Total 42 $17,871 Notes: 1. Final FY 2013 Fair Market Rent (FMR) is determined by HUD. 2. Imperial County 2013 Area Median Household Income (AMI) limits set by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). 3. Affordable cost = 30% of household income minus utility allowance. Page Housing Element

51 Purchase of Affordability Covenants Another option to preserve the affordability of at-risk projects is to provide an incentive package to the owners to maintain the projects as affordable housing. Incentives could include writing down the interest rate on the remaining loan balance, and/or supplementing the subsidy amount received to market levels. To purchase the affordability covenant on these projects, an incentive package should include interest subsidies at or below what the property owners can obtain in the open market. To enhance the attractiveness of the incentive package, the interest subsidies may need to be combined with rent subsidies that supplement the HUD fair market rent levels. Replacement Option The construction of new lower income housing units is a means of replacing the at-risk units should they be converted to market rate. The cost of developing new housing depends on a variety of factors such as density, size of units, location and related land costs, and type of construction. Euclid Villas is comprised of two- and three-bedroom family apartment units. Assuming an average development cost of $158,000 per unit for multi-family rental housing, replacement of the 42 at-risk units at Euclid Villas would require approximately $6.64 million, excluding land costs, which vary depending upon location. Table 32: Estimated New Construction Costs (A) (B) (C) (D) Estimated Estimated Estimated Unit Size Average Gross Gross Total Units Unit Size Building Building (sq. ft.) Size Costs 2-BR ,280 $1,736,270 3-BR 28 1,200 40,320 $4,902,408 Total 42 54,600 $6,638,678 Average Per Unit Cost: $158, (C) = (A) x (B) x 1.20 (i.e. 20% inflation to account for hallways and other common areas). (D) = (C) x $97.27 (per square foot construction costs) x 1.25 (i.e. 25% factor to account for parking and landscaping costs). Cost Comparison The cost to build new housing to replace the 42 at-risk units is high, with an estimated total cost of more than $6.64 million. This cost estimate is substantially higher than the cost associated with transfer of ownership ($3.9 million) and providing rent subsidies similar to Housing Choice Vouchers for 20 years ($4.3 million). Resources for Preservation of At-Risk Units A variety of potential funding sources are available for the acquisition, replacement, or rent subsidies; however, due to the high costs of developing and preserving at-risk housing relative to the amount of available local funds, multi-layering of local and non-local sources may be required. A more thorough description of resources for the preservation of at-risk units is presented in Section 4, Housing Resources. The City will continue to monitor the 42 at-risk units located in Euclid Villas and should a notice of intent to convert to market rate Housing Element Page 39

52 be filed, work with potential purchasers to preserve the units, and ensure that tenants were properly notified of their rights under California law (see Program 11). Page Housing Element

53 3. Housing Constraints Although El Centro strives to ensure the provision of adequate and affordable housing to meet the needs of the community, many factors can constrain the development, maintenance and improvement of housing. These include market mechanisms, government regulations, and physical as well as environmental constraints. This section addresses these potential constraints that affect the supply and cost of housing in El Centro Market Constraints Several local and regional constraints hinder the ability to accommodate El Centro s demand for affordable housing. The cost of land and development costs can make it expensive for developers to build housing. Historically, these constraints have resulted in housing that is often unaffordable to lower, and often moderate, income households, or may render some potential residential projects economically infeasible for developers. Subsidies are often necessary to bridge the gap between market rate and affordable housing costs by lower income households. In fact, most affordable housing developments in El Centro today often require multiple subsidy sources in order to make a project financially feasible. The recent market downturn has depressed housing prices to a point that most moderate income and even some low income households can afford homeownership in the City. However, limited availability of mortgage financing is an issue. Furthermore, as the economy recovers and home prices increase in response, an affordability gap may once again affect moderate income households. A. Land Costs Land costs vary significantly in the City depending on zoning, location of the property, and proximity to services. As of 2009, when the Housing Element was adopted, the cost of subdivided and residentially-zoned land served by infrastructure cost approximately $200,000 per acre. No undeveloped residential properties were listed for sale in January 2013 and therefore an updated comp-based estimate of land costs is not possible; however, given prevailing market conditions over the past few years, it can be assumed that land costs have moderated slightly since Although restricted financing for construction and home purchases have reduced demand for new residential construction in recent years, the cost of raw, developable land still comprises a significant portion of overall housing costs. For this reason, developers often seek City approval for the largest number of single-family lots or multi-family units allowed on a given parcel. This allows the developer to distribute the costs for new infrastructure improvements (e.g., streets, sewer lines, water lines, drainage, etc.) over a larger number of units to be sold or rented Housing Element Page 41

54 B. Construction Costs Construction cost is determined primarily by the cost of labor and materials. The relative importance of each is a function of the complexity of the construction job and the desired quality of the finished product. As a result, builders are under constant pressure to complete a job for as low a price as possible while still providing a quality product. This pressure has led (and is still leading) to an emphasis on labor-saving materials and construction techniques. The price paid for material and labor at any one time will reflect short-term considerations of supply and demand. Between 2003 and 2008, residential construction costs rose in response to an extremely active housing market. Since 2008, construction costs have moderated due to the housing industry downturn. Future costs are difficult to predict given the cyclical fluctuations in demand and supply that in large part are created by fluctuations in the state and national economies. Such policies unilaterally impact construction in a region and therefore do not deter housing construction in any specific community. For the average home, the cost of labor is generally two to three times the cost of materials and therefore represents a substantial component of the total cost of construction. Most relatively small residential construction jobs in Imperial County are performed with nonunion contractors; as a result, labor costs are responsive to changes in the residential market. The relative ease by which a skilled tradesperson can get a contractor s license further moderates the pressures that force labor costs to rise. Construction costs in El Centro are about the same as in other parts of Imperial County. For standard housing construction, costs may average $106 to $122 per square foot for single family residences depending on the level of amenities provided, and $96 to $124 per square foot for multifamily residential structure, depending on construction type and excluding parking. 3 A reduction in amenities and quality of building materials (above a minimum acceptability for health, safety, and adequate performance) could result in lower sale prices. Economy building techniques may reduce costs. In addition, prefabricated, factory-built housing may provide for lower priced housing by reducing construction and labor costs. Another factor related to construction costs is the number of units built at one time. As the number of units is increased, construction costs over the entire development are generally reduced based on economies of scale. This reduction in costs is of particular benefit when density bonuses are used for the provision of affordable housing. C. Home Financing The availability of financing can affect a person s ability to purchase or improve a home. Under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), lending institutions are required to disclose information on the disposition of loan applications by the income, gender and race of the applicants. This applies to all loan applications for home purchases, improvements and refinancing, whether financed at market rate or with federal government assistance. 3 accessed January 16, Page Housing Element

55 Locally assisted mortgages (such as first-time homebuyer programs) are not subject to HMDA reporting. Table 33 summarizes the disposition of loan applications submitted to financial institutions for home purchase, refinance and home improvement loans within El Centro in Included is information on loan applications that were approved and originated 5, approved but not accepted by the applicant, denied, withdrawn by the applicant or closed for incomplete information. Table 33: Disposition of Home Loans (2011) Home Purchase Home Government Refinances Improvement Disposition Conventional Backed # of # of # of # of % % % Appl n Appl n Appl n Appl n % Approved, Originated % 99 61% % 8 24% Approved, Not Accepted 33 6% 9 6% 25 5% 2 6% Denied 40 8% 28 17% % 23 68% Withdrawn 61 12% 21 13% 67 12% 1 3% Incomplete 6 1% 5 3% 32 6% 0 0% Total % % % % Appl n = Applications Source: HMDA data, Home Purchase Loans In 2011, a total of 508 households applied for government backed loans (e.g. FHA, VA) in El Centro. The overall loan approval rate was 78 percent and eight percent of applicants were denied. Only 162 households applied for conventional home purchase loans and 67 percent of these applications were approved while 17 percent were denied. To be eligible for government-backed loans, residents must meet the established income standards and the price of the home is capped according to the specific funding program regulations. For calendar year 2013, the FHA home price limit for Imperial County is $325,000, well above the median home price in El Centro. FHA loans typically require a lower downpayment and people with less than stellar credit history may still qualify. Therefore, use of FHA in El Centro is popular when lending in the conventional market has tightened. Refinance Loans The conversion of introductory low-interest rate loans prevalent until about 2007 into high interest rates and subsequent changes in the housing market overall led El Centro residents 4 HMDA data for 2012 is not yet available. 5 An originated loan is one that is approved by the financial institution and accepted by the loan applicant Housing Element Page 43

56 to file 537 refinance loan applications in More than half of the applications (48 percent) of the refinance loans were denied. Home Improvement Loans Only 34 El Centro residents applied for home improvement loans in Of these applicants, only 30 percent were approved and 68 percent were denied. The large proportion of home improvement loan denials may be explained by the nature of these loans. These loans are usually second loans and therefore, many households may have already carried a high debt-to-income ratio to qualify for additional financing. This pattern is also similar to the experience of residents living in other parts of California. Foreclosures Between 2000 and 2005, with low interest rates, creative financing (e.g., zero down, interest only, adjustable loans), and predatory lending practices (e.g. aggressive marketing, hidden fees, negative amortization), many households purchased homes that were beyond their financial means. Under the false assumptions that refinancing to lower interest rates would always be an option and home prices would continue to rise at double-digit rates, many households were (and still are) unprepared for the hikes in interest rates, expiration of short-term fixed rates, and decline in sales prices that set off in Suddenly faced with significantly inflated mortgage payments, and mortgage loans that are larger than the worth of the homes, many had to resort to foreclosing their homes. While foreclosures remain an issue, the situation has improved dramatically in recent years. In Imperial County, only 196 Notices of Default (NODs) and 132 Trustees Deeds (foreclosures) were recorded in the third quarter of 2012, compared to 360 NODs and 264 foreclosure filed during the same period in the previous year (for a 45.6 percent and 43.6 decrease, respectively). 6 In January 2013, 153 residential properties in El Centro were listed as foreclosures for sale accessed January 16, accessed January 16, Page Housing Element

57 3.2. Governmental Constraints Housing affordability is affected by factors in both the private and public sectors. Actions by the City can have an impact on the price and availability of housing in El Centro. Land use controls, site improvement requirements, building codes, fees, and other local programs intended to improve the overall quality of housing may serve as a constraint to housing development. These governmental constraints can limit the operations of the public, private, and nonprofit sectors, making it difficult to meet the demand for affordable housing and limiting supply in a region. A. Land Use Controls Local land use policies and regulations impact the price and availability of housing, including affordable housing. The following discussion of land use controls demonstrates that El Centro encourages the provision of residential land uses at various densities to facilitate the provision of housing for all economic segments of the community. General Plan Land Use Designations The El Centro General Plan, currently in effect, was adopted in 2004 and has been amended periodically. The General Plan Land Use Element establishes policies to designate the general distribution and intensity of residential, commercial, industrial, and community facilities uses of the land in the City. As summarized in Table 34, the Land Use Element accommodates a wide range of housing types in the following land use designations. Table 34: Land Use Designations that Allow Residential Uses Land Use Element Designation Max. Density/ FAR Summary of Allowable Residential Uses Single-family detached dwelling units, rural-oriented Rural Residential 2 du/ac residences, mobile and modular homes, and accessory dwelling units. Low Density Residential 6 du/ac Single-family detached dwellings units, mobile and modular homes, and accessory dwelling units. Medium Density Residential 12 du/ac Single-family detached and attached dwelling units, mobile home parks, duplexes, and multi-family dwelling units, such as townhomes and condominiums. Variety of multi-family dwelling units such as garden style units, apartments, condominiums, and High-Medium Density Residential 25 du/ac townhouses. Mobile home parks, mobile and modular homes, and accessory dwelling units may also be allowed. Tourist Commercial 1.0:1 FAR Multi-family and mixed-use residential. Downtown Commercial 3.0:1 FAR Multi-family and mixed-use residential. Source: General Plan Land Use Element, Housing Element Page 45

58 Single-Family Neighborhood Overlay The Land Use Element and Zoning Ordinance include an overlay to recognize and preserve the historical character of El Centro s older residential neighborhoods that were developed in the early 1920s. As infill development occurs, the character of these neighborhoods has the potential to change as older, smaller bungalows are replaced with larger, modern homes or multi-family housing. The overlay will help facilitate the preservation of unique examples of single-family architecture that contribute to the City s heritage. In the event that an older single-family unit within the overlay needs to be replaced, such as in the event of a fire, owners are encouraged but not required to reconstruct in a similar style and scale as the original home. Urban Development Program The General Plan incorporates an Urban Development Program, which was adopted to direct and control growth in the City and sphere of influence (SOI). The goal of the program is to create a community that is compact and pedestrian and transit-oriented development, avoids removing more agricultural land from production than necessary, and can meet the public service and infrastructure needs of existing and future residents. Development tiers are established for the SOI and implementation of the program will ensure that a variety of growth locations are available and timed to maintain reasonable housing costs and promote economic development. Development Tier 1 includes land within and adjacent to the existing City limits. All sites identified to accommodate the RHNA and listed in the Residential Sites Inventory (Appendix C) of this Housing Element are located within this tier. In most cases, new development within Tier 1 can be served by gravity sewer lines to existing trunk sewers. Generally, water lines and reservoirs are also adequate to serve new development; however, payment of proportional impact fees to improve the facilities to accommodate the ultimate buildout capacity of the tier will be required. Fire, police, schools, parks, library, medical, roads, and other facilities and services are also in proximity to these areas. Limited improvements to existing facilities and/or new facilities may be needed to accommodate anticipated growth. Subdivisions and other development in this area are expected to follow standard zoning, subdivision, and environmental review procedures. Specific Plans The General Plan anticipates and encourages the use of specific plans when designing new projects, especially those that will include large areas of land. For example, future development proposed within Urban Development Program Tiers II/III may benefit most from the specific planning process. The specific plan process allows for a more comprehensive planning process for the target area and can be a mechanism to allow for flexibility in the design and location of future land uses. The City approved the Las Aldeas Specific Plan in July 2009 consisting of 2,641 dwelling units on 683 acres of vacant land. Page Housing Element

59 Airport Land Use Plan Due to the close proximity of the Imperial County Airport, land use options are limited in a portion of northern El Centro. The Imperial County Airport Land Use Commission is responsible for maintaining an Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP), which includes a set of land use compatibility criteria for lands surrounding the Imperial County Airport. Portions of northern El Centro are located within the D zone, representing negligible risk from airport activity, whereas other areas are in the approach and departure zones (B1/B2) and are subjected to risk and noise exposure. In addition, there is a private airstrip, Douthitt Strip Airport, located at the easternmost end of Olive Avenue, which has the potential to impact surrounding land uses. Although there is only one municipal airport and one small private airstrip with limited potential to affect residential land uses in El Centro, the applicable ALUP has potential to constrain residential development. A constraint is most likely if General Plan land uses or any future residential development is deemed incompatible with the ALUP or if the ALUP precludes a significant portion of the community being used for residential development. No incompatibility has been identified with existing General Plan land uses and none is anticipated in the future because the City s Zoning Ordinance includes a Residential Airport Zone (RAP) that regulates development consistent with the ALUP. Furthermore, the Residential Sites Inventory (Appendix C) does not include any parcels within the RAP zone. The ALUP is not considered a significant constraint in El Centro. B. Residential Development Standards The City s Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 29 of the El Centro Municipal Code) regulates the type, location, density and scale of residential development for areas of the City. Zoning regulations are designed to protect and promote the health, safety and general welfare of residents as well as implement the policies of the General Plan. Table 35 below provides a summary of the range of residential land uses and associated densities and Floor-Area-Ratio (FAR) allowed in the City pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance. New residential construction and alterations to existing structures and sites must conform to the development standards summarized in Table Housing Element Page 47

60 Table 35: Zoning Districts that Allow Residential Uses Zoning Category Max. Density/FAR Notes Residential Airport (RAP) 1 du/ac Allows for the development of residential uses within areas designated as "extended approach/departure zone" under the Imperial County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan where risk factors have been identified resulting in the need for restricting density. A conditional use permit (CUP) is required for residential development in this zone. Rural Residential (RR) 2 du/ac Provides for large lot rural residential uses and is intended to implement the Rural Residential general plan land use designation. Low Density (R1) 6 du/ac Provides for the development of a single-family home (or mobile home on a permanent foundation) and the protection of these dwellings from incompatible uses. Intended to implement the Low Density Residential general plan land use designation. Medium Density (R2) 12 du/ac Permits the development of medium density, single-family, duplex, or multi-family dwellings and is intended to implement the Medium Density Residential general plan land use designation. High-Medium Density (R3) 25 du/ac Permits the development of medium high density apartment and condominium dwellings and is intended to implement the High Medium Density Residential general plan land use designation. Tourist Commercial (CT) 1:1 FAR Allows multi-family and mixed-use residential by CUP and is intended to implement the Tourist Commercial general plan land use designation. Downtown Commercial (CD) 3:1 FAR Allows multi-family and mixed-use residential and is intended to implement the Downtown Commercial general plan land use designation. Source: Municipal Code, Page Housing Element

61 Table 36: Residential Development Standards by Zoning District Standard RAP RR R1 R2 R3 CT CD Min. Lot Size: Single-family 1 acre 1 ½ acre 7,200 sf 3,600 sf 3,600 sf N/A N/A Multi-family N/A N/A N/A 7,200 sf 7,200 sf 7,200 sf None Max. Lot Coverage 35% 25% 50% 50% 60% 60% None Min. Lot Width 150 ft 100 ft ft ft ft ft None Min. Lot Depth 200 ft ft ft ft ft ft None Max. Building Height 2 35 ft 35 ft 35 ft 35 ft 45 ft 65 ft 65 ft Open Space 3 2 units on a lot 400 sf 400 sf 400 sf 400 sf 400 sf None None >2 units on a lot 150 sf 150 sf 150 sf 150 sf 150 sf 4 None None Setbacks: Front 60 ft 40 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft None Rear ft ft ft 5-50 ft 5-50 ft 5-25 ft 0-25 ft Side 30 ft 20 ft 5-15 ft 5-15 ft 5-15 ft 5-15 ft 0-10 ft Source: El Centro Municipal Code, Notes: 1 Density of one du/acre is required per the General Plan; however, densities consistent with the R1 zone may be allowed as a cluster development, subject to CUP and so long as the average densities within the designated extended approach/departure areas do not exceed one du/acre. 2 A CUP may be granted to authorize additional exceptions to height limits in any zone. 3 When a private open space area greater than ninety-six (96) square feet with a minimum width of eight (8) feet is provided for each dwelling unit, the total common open space requirements may be reduced by twenty-five (25) percent. 4 A minimum of 50 square feet of private of private open space required contiguous to each dwelling unit. 5 The top end of setback range applies to lots abutting a freeway. Maximum density in the CT and CD zones is regulated by cumulative application of the development standards, including maximum height, lot coverage, FAR, parking, and setbacks. The City has not had much market interest in recent years to develop multi-family or mixed-use projects in these zones due to the depressed housing market; however, development application history prior to the market downturn demonstrates that at least 19 units per acre can be accommodated in these zones. In 2008, the City approved a CUP to allow a two-story, 16-unit apartment complex on a 0.85-acre site in the CT zone. The project would have yielded 18.8 units per acre; however, the developer elected not to move forward with the project. Multi-family and mixed-use projects proposed in the CD zone can accommodate significantly greater density than 19 units per acre. In April 2013, the City amended the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance to increase the FAR from 2.0:1 to 3.0:1 allowed for shared parking in the CD zone. Furthermore, buildings can be up to 65 feet in height and the zone does not have maximum lot coverage or minimum open space requirements. Development within the CD zone must comply with the Downtown El Centro Design Standards. The Design Standards incorporates recommendations from a study conducted under a Project SHAPE grant. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations to foster a cohesive pattern of development that support pedestrian activity and transit-oriented development in the downtown area. As such, the Design Housing Element Page 49

62 Standards incorporate smart growth principles and serve to encourage and facilitate, not constrain, transit-oriented development. The maximum height of residential buildings in the RAP, RR, R1 and R2 zones is 35 feet, which is sufficient to accommodate two-story buildings. Maximum lot coverage ranges from 25 percent in the RR zone to 50 percent in the R1 and R2 zones. Up to 45 feet (or 3 stories) and 60 percent lot coverage is allowed within the R3 zone. Open space requirements apply within all residential zones. At least 400 square feet of common open space is required per unit when two units are proposed on a lot and 150 square feet per unit is required when more than two units are proposed. In the R3 zone, a minimum of 50 square feet of private of private open space required contiguous to each dwelling unit. The Zoning Ordinance allows a 25 percent reduction in total common open space when a development provides more than 96 square feet of private open space per unit with a minimum width of eight feet. A 48-unit apartment complex built in 2009 in the R3 zone achieved 21.8 units per acre without a variance or the allowable 25 percent open space reduction. This recent project demonstrates that at least 87 percent of the maximum allowable density in the R3 zone is realistic and the cumulative application of development standards does not constrain multifamily development. The developer did not seek to yield more units on the project site. Moderate land costs in the Imperial Valley allow developers to emphasize project design, unit size variation, and amenities that enhance market competitiveness. Maximizing unit yield is not a developer s primary concern when land cost pressure is low. Density Bonus Ordinance Density bonuses, together with the incentives and/or concessions, result in a lower average cost of land per dwelling unit thereby making the provision of affordable housing more feasible. In accordance with SB 1818 (enacted in 2005) and SB 435 (enacted 2006), developers of qualifying affordable housing and senior housing projects are entitled to a density bonus of up to 35 percent over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the applicable zoning district. Developers of qualifying projects are also entitled to at least one concession or incentive and may utilize the following parking ratios (inclusive of handicap and guest parking): Page 50 Zero to one bedrooms: one onsite parking space. Two to three bedrooms: two onsite parking spaces. Four and more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces. El Centro s Zoning Ordinance includes density bonus provisions that are consistent with existing State law. The City will continue to work with developers on a case-by-case basis to provide regulatory concessions and incentives to assist them with the development of affordable and senior housing. Working alongside developers on a case-by-case basis is the most effective method of providing technical assistance as each individual project can be analyzed to determine which concessions and incentives would be the most beneficial to the project s feasibility. Regulatory concessions and incentives could include, but are not limited to, reduced minimum lot sizes, lot dimensions, setbacks, distance between Housing Element

63 buildings, usable open space, increased maximum lot coverage and building heights, impact fee deferral, and waived development standards as necessary to make the housing units economically feasible. Parking Requirements Parking requirements for different types of residential uses in El Centro are summarized in Table 37. The requirements for multi-family apartment developments are reasonably adjusted for unit size and the requirements for multi-family or mixed use developments in the CD zone and senior apartments are lower than ratios available to affordable housing developers pursuant to State density bonus law. Table 37: Off-Street Residential Parking Requirements Use Parking Spaces Required Single-family 2.0 / du Duplex 2.0 / du Multi-family Studio 1.0 / du / du (guest) 1 BR 1.5 / du / du (guest) 2 BR 2.0 / du / du (guest) 3+ BR 2.0 / du / br over 3, plus 0.25 / du (guest) In CD Zone 1.0 / du Condos or Townhomes 2.0 / du / du (guest) Second Dwelling Unit 1.0 / du Senior Apartments 1.0 / du / du (guest) Source: Zoning Ordinance, In an effort to encourage and facilitate development, including mixed-use and multi-family residential development in the downtown area, the City amended the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance in April 2013 to relax parking requirements. Specifically, the City provided a shared parking option within the CD zone. Areas where shared parking is allowed are depicted in Figure Housing Element Page 51

64 Figure 6: Shared Parking in the Downtown Commercial (CD) Zone C. Provisions for a Variety of Housing Types State Housing Element law specifies that jurisdictions identify adequate sites to be made available through appropriate zoning and development standards to encourage the development of various types of housing for all economic segments of the population. This includes single-family housing, multi-family housing, mobile homes, farm employee housing, emergency shelters, transitional and supportive housing, among others. Table 38 summarizes the various housing types permitted and conditionally permitted under the City s Zoning Ordinance. Page Housing Element

65 Table 38: Provision for a Variety of Housing Types Housing Type RAP RR R1 R2 R3 CT CD CG & CH Single-Family P P P P P X X X Manufactured Housing P P P P P X X X Mobile Home Park C C C C C X X X Second Dwelling Unit P P P P P X X X Duplex X X X P P X X X Multi-Family X X X P P C P X Mixed-Use X X X X X C P X Group Dwellings X X X X P X X X Single Room Occupancy (SRO) X X X X X C C X Residential Care Facility, Small P P P P P C P X Residential Care Facility, Large X P P P P C P X Transitional Housing P P P P P C P X Supportive Housing P P P P P C P X Emergency Shelter X X X X P X X P Farm Employee Housing (Incidental to Ag Use) X P X X X X X X Source: El Centro Zoning Ordinance, Notes: P = Permitted (ministerial review); CUP = Conditional Use Permit (discretionary review); and X = Not Permitted. Single-Family The term dwelling, single-family is defined in the Zoning Ordinance as a detached building or mobile home designed primarily for the use of a single family and no portion of which is to be rented separately. Single-family units are permitted by-right in all residential zones. Manufactured Housing The El Centro Zoning Ordinance includes manufactured home as defined in the California Health and Safety Code in the following definition of mobile home: A structure designed as a permanent dwelling unit to be used with or without a permanent foundation, and which is in excess of eight feet in width or in excess of 40 feet in length. A mobile home that was constructed after September 15, 1971, and was issued an insignia of approval by the state department of housing and community development or a mobile home that has been certified under the National Mobile home Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C et seq.), and located on a permanent foundation is permitted in all residential zones on lots where no other mobile home on a permanent foundation, single-family dwelling or multi-family dwellings are located, regardless of the lot size and the number of dwelling units otherwise permitted by the Zoning Ordinance Housing Element Page 53

66 Mobile Home Parks Mobile home parks include an area or tract of land where two (2) or more mobile home lots are rented or leased or held out for rent or lease to accommodate mobile homes for human habitation. Mobile home parks are permitted in all residential zones with approval of a CUP. Second Dwelling Units A second dwelling unit is defined in the Zoning Ordinance as a separate residential unit containing sleeping quarters, kitchen and bathroom facilities independent of the main dwelling on the site. The definition also references California Government Code section Government Code section requires local jurisdictions to adopt ordinances that establish the conditions under which second dwelling units are permitted. A jurisdiction cannot adopt an ordinance that precludes the development of second units unless findings are made acknowledging that allowing second units may limit the housing opportunities of the region and result in adverse impacts on public health, safety and welfare. The ordinance must facilitate ministerial review and approval (i.e. second units otherwise compliant with local zoning standards can be approved without conditions or a public hearing). The City allows second dwelling units in all residential zones, subject to ministerial Site Plan Review. Projects that meet the following criteria will be approved, per State law and Section of the El Centro Zoning Ordinance: The unit is not intended for sale and may be rented. The lot is zoned for single-family or multi-family use. The lot contains an existing single-family dwelling. The second unit is either attached to the existing dwelling and located within the living area of the existing dwelling or detached from the existing dwelling and located on the same lot as the existing dwelling. The increased floor area of an attached second unit shall not exceed 30 percent of the existing living area. The total area of floor space for a detached second unit shall not exceed 1,200 square feet. Requirements relating to height, setback, lot coverage, architectural review, site plan review, fees, charges, and other zoning requirements generally applicable to residential construction in the zone in which the property is located. Local building code requirements which apply to detached dwellings, as appropriate. Approval by the local health officer where a private sewage disposal system is being used, if required. Page Housing Element

67 Duplexes Duplexes are a multi-family dwelling in which two (2) dwelling units are attached and located together on a lot or building site. Duplex buildings are allowed by-right in the R2 and R3 zones, subject to ministerial Site Plan Review. Multi-Family El Centro s Zoning Ordinance defines dwelling, multiple-family as a building or buildings designed and used for occupancy by two (2) or more families, all living independently of each other and having separate kitchen and toilet facilities for each family. Multi-family dwellings are allowed by-right in the R2, R3, and CD zones, subject to ministerial Site Plan Review. Multi-family dwellings are also allowed in the CT zone with approval of a CUP by the Planning Commission. Mixed-Use Mixed-use buildings and developments are allowed by-right in the CD district, subject to ministerial Site Plan Review, and with approval of a CUP by the Planning Commission in the CT zone. A mixed-use building is defined by the City as a structure or project with both residential and pedestrian-oriented commercial uses (including retail, restaurants, offices, services and similar uses deemed compatible with residential uses). The commercial use or uses are typically located on the ground floor of the structure with the residential dwellings predominantly located on the second or higher floors. The Zoning Ordinance draws a distinction between mixed-use buildings and mixed-use developments. A mixeduse development is defined as a project with both residential and non-residential uses located on the same lot or site. With this type of development, there is no requirement that the residential and the non-residential uses be located in the same building. Group Dwellings The City allows group dwellings by-right in the R3 zone, subject to ministerial Site Plan Review. Per the Zoning Ordinance definition, this use includes apartment hotels, boarding, rooming or lodging houses consisting mainly of living units without individual kitchens which are rented on a weekly basis or longer. Also includes student dormitories and retirement homes providing congregate dining facilities. Group dwellings can provide a valuable form of affordable private housing for seniors, persons with disabilities, and lower income households, including extremely low income households, and can serve as an entry point into the housing market for formerly homeless people. Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Buildings The City revised the Zoning Ordinance in April 2013 to define SRO buildings and allow the use with approval of a CUP by the Planning Commission in the CT and CD zones. The Zoning Ordinance defines SRO buildings as a building providing single-room units for one or more persons with or without shared kitchen and bath facilities, including efficiency units per Health and Safety Code Section Like group dwellings, SROs can be Housing Element Page 55

68 another source of affordable housing for lower-income households, including extremely low income households. Residential Care Facilities The defines residential care facility to include various types of facilities operated by licensed staff that provide twenty-four (24) hour non-medical supportive and custodial care for children, adults, and the elderly who need general assistance for everyday living. The facilities are licensed by the state department of social services and are not considered to be health facilities. The facilities are referred to by a variety of terms, including: group homes, family care homes, foster family homes, small family homes, special needs housing, adult residential facilities, social rehabilitation facilities, residential board and care facilities, assisted living facilities, residential care facilities for the chronically ill, and residential care facilities for the elderly. See California Health and Safety Code 1502(a). The Zoning Ordinance distinguishes between small and large residential care facilities. The Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act provides that state-licensed residential care facilities serving six or fewer individuals must be treated no differently than any other residential use. Consistent with State law, the City allows small residential care facilities that serve six or fewer clients in all residential zones, subject to the same development standards and permit processing requirements as other types of housing in the same zone. In April 2013, the City amended the Zoning Ordinance to clarify that residential care facilities are also allowed by-right and subject to ministerial review in the CD zone and with approval of a CUP by the Planning Commission in the CT zone, the same as multi-family residential developments in these zones. The planning process for development of this Housing Element identified potential constraints related to the City s regulation of residential care facilities that serve seven or more clients. Prior to April 2013, the City distinguished between large residential care facilities (i.e., those that serve between seven and 14 clients) and institutional residential care facilities (i.e., those that serve more than 14 clients). Institutional residential care facilities were regulated more stringently than large residential care facilities. In April 2013, the City amended the Zoning Ordinance to eliminate the institutional residential care facility use and the 14-person maximum client limit for large residential care facilities. As a result, large residential care facilities serving seven or more clients are now allowed by-right in the RR, R1, R2, and R3 zones. Large residential care facilities are also allowed by-right in the CD zone and with a CUP in the CT zone. The April 2013 Zoning Ordinance amendments also reduced the minimum spacing requirement from 600 feet to 300 feet. The Community Development Director may review applications as a nondiscretionary permit under the administrative site plan review procedure; however, property owners within 100 feet of a proposed large residential care facility must be noticed and an administrative hearing is required upon request by an applicant or member of the public. An exemption to the spacing requirement may be approved by the City if the existing Page Housing Element

69 facility is at capacity or the applicant demonstrates that a need exists for a unique or particular service not currently provided by the existing large residential care facility. Transitional and Supportive Housing In April 2013, the City amended the Zoning Ordinance to clarify provisions for transitional and supportive housing consistent with SB 2 (enacted 2008). Transitional and supportive housing are allowed by-right in all residential zones and the City has not adopted any special or unique development standards, findings, or other criteria for either use. Transitional housing is defined as Buildings configured as rental housing developments, but operated under program requirements that call for the termination of assistance and recirculation of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at some predetermined future point in time, which shall be no less than six months. Transitional housing that is provided in single-family, duplex, manufactured housing, multi-family, mixed-use units, or group dwellings shall be permitted, conditionally permitted or prohibited in the same manner as the other single-family, duplex, manufactured housing, multi-family, mixed-use units, or group dwellings under this Chapter. See California Health and Safety Code (h) and 50801(i). Supportive housing is defined as housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community. Target population per this section means persons, including persons with disabilities, and families who are homeless, as that term is defined by Section of Title 42 of the United States Code, or who are homeless youth, as that term is defined by paragraph (2) of subdivision (e) of Section of the Government Code. Supportive housing that is provided in single-family, duplex, manufactured housing, multi-family, mixed-use units, or group dwellings shall be permitted, conditionally permitted or prohibited in the same manner as the other single-family, duplex, manufactured housing, multi-family, mixed-use units, or group dwellings under this Chapter. See California Health and Safety Code (b). Emergency Shelters State law requires that local jurisdictions identify a zone or zones where emergency shelters are allowed with a non-discretionary (i.e., ministerial) review. The Zoning Ordinance defines emergency shelter as a housing facility that provides temporary overnight shelter for persons with no permanent housing with minimal support services in which residency is limited to six (6) months or less and is not related to the person's ability to pay. Such facilities may offer services to meet basic needs such as food, clothing, and limited medical care. See California Health and Safety Code 50801(e). Emergency shelters are allowed by right in the R3, CG, and CH zones, subject to ministerial building permit review. The City has not adopted unique development standards or criteria for this use. The City has more than 30 acres of vacant land within the R3 zone that could Housing Element Page 57

70 accommodate at least one year-round emergency shelter for at least 17 homeless individuals (identified unsheltered homeless population in El Centro as of January 2013). Additional vacant parcels are located in the CG and CH zones. The R3, CG, and CH zones are located primarily along the City s transportation corridors and/or are located closest to public transportation and services. Farm Employee Housing Although the General Plan does not include an agriculture land use designation, commercial agricultural operations are allowed by-right within the RR, rural residential zone. The City amended the Zoning Ordinance in April 2013 to define farm employee housing as Housing that is incidental or accessory to a permitted agricultural use and provides accommodations for six or fewer employees within a single-family structure. See Section of the California Health and Safety Code. Farm employee housing that is incidental to an agricultural use is allowed by-right within the RR zone, consistent with the California Employee Housing Act. D. Site Improvements, Exactions and Development Fees Site Improvements The City requires on- and off-site improvements for all new residential subdivisions, including single-family, multi-family, and mixed-use developments. Typical off-site improvements include curb/gutter and drainage facilities, sidewalks, paved streets, landscaping, and water/sewer service. On-site improvements could include necessary extensions of utilities from the street to serve each individual unit, driveways, front yard landscaping, and perimeter fencing. These minimal improvements are necessary to promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the public. The costs of improvements are the responsibility of developers and are applied uniformly to all projects within the City. Table 39 summarizes roadway width standards contained in the General Plan Circulation Element. The Circulation Element grants flexibility to reduce the overall right-of-way width by using narrower shoulders, travel lanes, and/or parking strips for new streets through areas with right-of-way constraints. Table 39: Circulation Element Roadway Standards Roadway Type Right-of-Way Curb-to-Curb Principal/Prime Arterial Secondary/Minor 4-lane Arterial Major 4-lane Collector Secondary 2-lane Arterial Residential Street Secondary Arterial Confined Right-of-Way Source: El Centro General Plan Circulation Element, Page Housing Element

71 Development Fees and Exactions In addition to improvements and dedications of land for public purposes, housing developers are subject to variety of fees and exactions to cover the cost of processing permits and providing necessary services and facilities. In general, these fees can be a constraint on housing development and compromise project feasibility because the additional cost borne by developers contributes to overall increased housing unit cost. However, the fees are necessary to maintain adequate planning services and other public services and facilities in the City. For new residential projects, developers in El Centro may be required to pay one or more of the following fees depending on the location, type, and size of the project: Planning, Building, and Environmental Fees: The charges developers standard plan check fees, fees for processing applications, building permits, subdivision maps, environmental initial study, variance, conditional use permit, or other permits to pay for the cost of processing applications and conducting inspections for specific projects. This does not include additional fees paid by the developer for project-specific environmental impact reports. City Impact Fees: The City charges impact fees to finance new or expanded infrastructure and public facilities required to serve residents. The fee must have a reasonable relationship to the infrastructure costs and represent the marginal cost of improvements required to serve residents of the new residential projects. The City charges fees to offset impacts to parks, libraries, police, fire, sewer, streets, and general government facilities. School Impact Fees: Impact fees are collected by school districts as allowed by State law to finance the construction and expansion of schools to accommodate student enrollment. The does not set these fees and does not have discretion to waive, reduce, or defer these fees. Table 40: Permit Processing Fees Type Amount Planning Permits Variance $867 Conditional Use Permit $2,210 General Plan Amendment $2,564 Zone Change $2,074 Site Plan Review $620 Specific Plan $4,148 Development Agreement $1,806 Administrative Committee Review $428 Subdivisions Lot Line Adjustment $315 Parcel Map (<5 lots) $1,121 Subdivision Map (5+ lots) $2,793 Environmental Initial Study $474 Negative Declaration $830 Environmental Impact Report (Review) $3,927 Sources:, User Fee Schedule, A summary of the City s permit processing and development impact fee schedules are included in Table 40 and Table Housing Element Page 59

72 Page 60 Table 41: Development Impact Fees Type Single- Family Mobile Home Multi-Family City Impact Fees Parks $1,288 $1,037 $921 Library $714 $575 $510 Police $377 $303 $269 General Government $932 $750 $666 Fire $621 $500 $444 Streets 1 $283 - $383 $267 $160 - $240 Sewer 2 $9,174 - $9,674 Water 3 $8,149 - $10,694 School Impact Fees El Centro Elementary School District $3.69/sf McCabe Union School District $2.22/sf Meadows Union School District $1.82/sf Central Union High School District $0.66/sf Sources:, Impact Fee Schedule, 2006; Water and Sewer Connection Application, 2009; El Centro Elementary School District, 2013; McCabe Union School District, 2013; Meadows Union School District, 2013; and Central Union High School District, Notes: 1 Streets fees for single-family and multi-family vary by number of bedrooms. A flat fee is assessed for mobile homes and duplexes. 2 Sewer connection fees vary by size (4 or 6 ). 3 Water service fees vary by line size (3/4 to 6 ). Table 42 provides a fee worksheet for two prototypical housing projects based on applications processed in the City. Altogether, developer fees for a prototypical singlefamily dwelling total $23,952. Fees for a prototypical multi-family project are somewhat lower on a per-unit basis at $19,745. Table 42: Development Fees for a Typical Unit Fee Type Single-Family Multi-Family Permit Processing Fees $4,534 $1,389 Impact Fees $17,616 $18,356 Total estimated fees per unit $23,952 $19,745 Typical estimated cost of development per unit $292,524 $236,328 Estimated proportion of fee cost to overall development cost per unit 8.2% 8.4% Sources:, Notes: Single-family prototype is a 2,200 square-foot home with 400 square-foot attached garage. Multi-family prototype is based on the pro-forma for the Las Brisas apartment complex with 72 units in five two-story buildings and one community building. The average unit size is 970 square feet with a range of 734 square feet for one-bedroom to 1,350 square feet for a three-bedroom. Planning and permitting fees are charged on an at-cost basis to cover staff services and administrative expenses for processing development applications. Development impact fees are required to provide essential services and infrastructure to serve new residents. Impact fees are governed by State law to demonstrate a nexus between development and Housing Element

73 potential impacts. State law also requires the proportionality test to ensure the pro rata share of costs to provide services and infrastructure by individual developments is reasonable. The City recognizes that planning/permitting and development fees add to the cost of residential development. To mitigate the impact of permitting and impact fees on the cost of residential development, the City will consider deferment or waiver of fees on a case-bycase basis (see Program 3). E. Development Permit Procedures The City reviews all applications for development to ensure the construction of projects that contribute in a positive manner to the community and improve quality of life. This section describes the permitting requirements, procedures, and timeframes for Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits (CUP), and Subdivisions. Given the housing growth experienced by the City prior to the economic downturn in 2008, the City s permit processing procedures do not appear to unduly constrain the development of housing. Site Plan Review Site Plan Review applies to all projects involving two or more dwelling units on the same lot, second dwelling units, and developments that require a CUP or rezone. Site Plan Review does not apply to individual single-family dwellings proposed on existing legal lots. The purpose of Site Plan Review is to: Provide a process for the reviewing official or body to verify a proposed project's compliance with Zoning Ordinance development, design, and use standards; Assure land owners, business owners and developers that proposed uses, structures, and site improvements comply with the Zoning Ordinance provisions before preparation of plans for building permits; and Provide a means of streamlining the development review process through administrative review of development proposals. The Community Development Director has authority to complete Site Plan Review for second dwelling units, duplexes, apartments, mixed use (in the CD zone), group dwellings, residential care facilities, transitional housing, supportive housing, and emergency shelters, if proposed on an existing legal lot and the project application does not involve another type of discretionary approval (e.g., CUP, variance, or rezone). The Community Development Director s Site Plan Review is ministerial and no noticing or public hearing is required. 8 The Planning Commission conducts Site Plan Review concurrently with review of discretionary CUP, variance, or subdivision applications. Projects that are subject to 8 The Community Development Director may review applications as a nondiscretionary permit under the administrative site plan review procedure; however, property owners within 100 feet of a proposed large residential care facility must be noticed and an administrative hearing is required upon request by an applicant or member of the public Housing Element Page 61

74 Planning Commission Site Plan Review include mobile home parks in residential zones, multi-family and mixed-use in the CD zone, single-room occupancy (SROs) in the CT and CD zones, and residential care facilities, supportive housing, and transitional housing in the CT zone. The City Council conducts Site Plan Review concurrently with discretionary applications that involve a rezone or general plan amendment. Conditional Use Permits Land uses that require a CUP generally have a unique and distinct impact on the area in which they are located or are capable of impacts to adjacent properties unless given special review and conditions. The Planning Commission reviews and decides CUP applications for multi-family and mixed use in the CT zone, senior apartments (which typically request density increase, parking reductions, and other flexibilities in development standards), and retirement homes. CUP approval by the City Council is required to approve maximum building height modifications, density bonuses, mobile home parks, planned unit developments, and clustered single-family development within the RAP zone. The requirement for a CUP for senior citizen apartment projects allows for the implementation of the density bonus program and for a further reduction in required parking on a case-bycase basis. The Planning Commission or City Council must make the following findings prior to approval of a CUP: Page 62 The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Ordinance; Said use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the general plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located; The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features are required in order to adjust said use to those existing or permitted future uses on land in the neighborhood; and The site for the proposed use relates properly to streets and highways which are designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated or to be generated by the proposed use. The findings apply uniformly to all uses that require a CUP and conditions of approval must be deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. Lot Line Adjustments The City allows for ministerial lot line adjustments to facilitate the development of multifamily and mixed-use buildings across property lines, so long as the adjustment does not lead to an increase in the number of legal lots. The Community Development Director has authority to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the lot line adjustment within 15 days of receipt of a complete application. A lot line adjustment will be approved upon Housing Element

75 determination that the adjustment plat meets the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and complies with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Subdivisions The subdivision of land into multiple lots pursuant to the California Subdivision Map Act requires discretionary approval by the City. The Planning Commission can review and approve or recommend denial of tentative maps of four or fewer parcels. The Planning Commission also recommends approval, conditional approval, or denial of tentative maps of five or more parcels. The City Council has final authority to approve, conditionally approve, or deny all tentative maps of five or more lots or parcels; and to approve, conditionally approve or deny any tentative map of four or fewer parcels for which the Planning Commission recommended denial or an appeal has been made. The reviewing and approving body must deny approval of a tentative map if it makes any of the following findings: That the proposed map is not consistent with the General Plan and applicable specific plans; That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with the General Plan and applicable specific plans; That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development; That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development; That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems; and That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; provided, however, the city council may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. Permit Processing Time Frames Permit processing time frames vary depending on the type, location and environmental review requirements of the proposed development. Ministerial Site Plan Review and land use applications that are Categorically Exempt from CEQA typically take between one and four months to process. Projects that require only a Negative Declaration can typically be processed in a six month time frame. Large subdivisions may require a longer processing time frame due to the information required and public comments received and projects requiring an environmental Impact Report (EIR) typically take at least a year to process. These time frames are estimates; actual processing time may vary due to the volume of Housing Element Page 63

76 applications, the type and number of changes made to the project by the applicant to address impacts, and the size and complexity of the projects. F. Building Codes The adopted the 2010 edition of the following California Building Standards Codes, which is a compilation of specialty codes: Building Code, Residential Code, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code, Plumbing Code, Energy Code, Historical Building Code, Existing Building Code, and Green Building Standards Code. The City also adopted the 2010 edition of the Uniform Administration Code and Uniform Housing Code. These codes establish minimum standards for residential construction and are structured to be the minimum necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, while not unduly constraining the development of housing. The codes are determined by the International Conference of Building Officials and the state. Some of the codes have been adopted with minor administrative amendments; no local amendment to the code has either been initiated or approved that directly impacts housing standards or processes. Code enforcement is conducted by the Code Enforcement Division of the Community Development Department and is based upon systematic enforcement in areas of concern and on a complaint basis throughout the City. The Code Enforcement Division works with property owners and renters to assist in meeting state health and safety codes. If a violation relates to residential rehabilitation, the inspector refers the property owner to the Economic Development Department for potential housing rehabilitation aid. G. Housing for People with Disabilities Persons with disabilities have a number of specific housing needs, including those related to design and location. Design needs generally include the removal of architectural barriers that limit the accessibility of dwelling units and construction of wheelchair ramps, railings, etc. Location needs include accessibility to public transportation, commercial services, healthcare, and supportive services. Some persons with disabilities need group housing opportunities, especially those who are lower income or homeless. California statutes require that the Housing Element include an analysis of the Zoning Ordinance, permitting procedures, development standards, building codes, and permit processing fees to identify potential constraints for housing for persons with disabilities. The following discussion addresses these issues and determines that no specific City policy or regulation serves to impede the access that persons with disabilities have to housing that suits their specific needs. Zoning and Land Use The Lanterman Development Disabilities Service Act (Sections 5115 and 5116) of the California Welfare and Institutions Code declares that mentally and physically disabled persons are entitled to live in normal residential surroundings. The use of property for the care of six or fewer people with disabilities is a residential use for the purposes of zoning. As discussed earlier in this Chapter, State-authorized or certified residential care facility, Page Housing Element

77 family care home, foster home, or group home serving six or fewer people with disabilities or dependent and neglected children on a 24-hour-a-day basis is considered a residential use that is permitted in all zones that allow residential uses, subject to the same application process and development standards as other types of housing in the same zones. The planning process for development of this Housing Element identified potential constraints related to the City s regulation of residential care facilities that serve seven or more clients. Prior to April 2013, the City distinguished between large residential care facilities (i.e., those that serve between seven and 14 clients) and institutional residential care facilities (i.e., those that serve more than 14 clients). Institutional residential care facilities were regulated more stringently than large residential care facilities. In April 2013, the City amended the Zoning Ordinance to eliminate the institutional residential care facility use and the 14 person maximum client limit for large residential care facilities. As a result, large residential care facilities serving seven or more clients are now allowed by-right in the RR, R1, R2, and R3 zones. Large residential care facilities are also allowed by-right in the CD zone and with a CUP in the CT zone. The April 2013 Zoning Ordinance amendments also reduced the minimum spacing requirement from 600 feet to 300 feet. In addition to residential care facilities, the City encourages and facilitates group dwellings and supportive housing. Group dwellings are permitted in the R3 zone and supportive housing is permitted in all zones that allow residential uses. Group dwellings and supportive housing can be important sources of affordable housing for persons with disabilities. Building Codes The City enforces Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations that regulates the access and adaptability of buildings to accommodate people with disabilities. Government Code Section requires that ten percent of the total dwelling units in multi-family buildings without elevators consisting of three or more rental units or four or more condominium units be subject to the following building standards for people with disabilities: The primary entry to the dwelling unit shall be on an accessible route unless exempted by site impracticality tests. At least one powder room or bathroom shall be located on the primary entry level served by an accessible route. All rooms or spaces located on the primary entry level shall be served by an accessible route. Rooms and spaces located on the primary entry level and subject to this chapter may include but are not limited to kitchens, powder rooms, bathrooms or hallways. Common use areas shall be accessible. In common tenant parking is provided, accessible parking spaces are required. No unique Building Code restrictions are in place that would constrain the development of housing for people with disabilities. Compliance with provisions of the City s Municipal Code, California Code of Regulations, California Building Standards Code, and federal Housing Element Page 65

78 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is assessed and enforced by the Building & Safety Division of the Community Development as part of the building permit submittal. Definition of Family Local governments may restrict access to housing for households failing to qualify as a family by the definition specified in the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically, a restrictive definition of family that could be interpreted to limit the number of or differentiates between related and unrelated individuals living together may illegally limit the development and siting of group homes for people with disabilities, but not for housing families that are similarly sized or situated. Another potentially restrictive definition could limit use of residential land uses for facilities that serve special needs populations, including people with disabilities. The City defines family as two or more individuals related by birth, marriage, adoption or convenience who occupy the same dwelling unit. A family also includes the residents of residential care facilities and group homes for people with disabilities. A family does not include larger institutional group living situations such as dormitories, fraternities, sororities, monasteries or nunneries, nor does it include such commercial group living arrangements as boardinghouses, lodging houses and farm labor camps. The City s definition does not constrain or limit housing opportunities for the disabled because this definition explicitly includes residential care facilities and group homes for people with disabilities. Boarding or Rooming Houses While developing the draft Housing Element, the City determined its boarding or rooming house regulations could be interpreted and applied in a manner that could limit housing opportunities for persons with disabilities. In April 2013, the City removed the following definition of boarding, lodging or rooming house from the Zoning Ordinance: A building containing a single dwelling and not more than five (5) guest rooms, where lodging is provided with or without meals for compensation. Reasonable Accommodations Both the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act direct local governments to make reasonable accommodations (i.e., modifications or exceptions) in their zoning laws and other land use regulations to allow disabled persons an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. For example, it may be a reasonable accommodation to waive a setback requirement so that elevated ramping can be constructed to provide access to a dwelling unit for a resident who has mobility impairments. Whether a particular modification is reasonable depends on the circumstances and must be decided on a case-by-case basis. Reasonable accommodation refers to flexibility in standards and policies to accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities. The City s Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance grants the City s Administrative Committee administrative, but discretionary authority to Page Housing Element

79 hear and decide applications for reasonable accommodation as provided by the federal Fair Housing Amendments Act and California s Fair Employment and Housing Act to allow reasonable remedy from zoning standards for individuals with physical or mental impairment. A request for reasonable accommodation may include a modification or exception to the rules, standards, and practices for the siting, development, and use of housing or housing-related facilities that would eliminate regulatory barriers and provide a person with a disability equal opportunity to housing of their choice. The Ordinance directs the Administrative Committee to approve the accommodation if it is necessary to make housing available to an individual in accordance with the fair housing acts, unless the Committee can present evidence that doing so would either create an undue financial or administrative burden or result in a fundamental alteration of the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance defines fundamental alteration as an alteration so far reaching that it would change the essential scheme of the Zoning Ordinance. The fee for Administrative Committee review of reasonable accommodation applications is $428. Since adoption of the Ordinance in 2008, the City has not had any inquiries or processed any requests for a reasonable accommodation. Although City staff has not received any indication from residents or potential applicants that either the discretionary review process or the fee constrain housing opportunities for persons with disabilities, the City will revise the Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance to establish a ministerial review process (see Program 6). The City will also study and review options for reducing or eliminating the application fee. Conclusion The City has analyzed its Zoning Ordinance and development procedures to ensure that it is providing flexibility in, and not constraining the development of, housing for persons with disabilities. As part of this review, the City identified a potential constraint related to the existing discretionary review process and fee for reasonable accommodation applications. The City will amend the Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance to mitigate these potential constraints (see Program 6) Public Policy Constraints State and Federal requirements may act as a barrier to the development or rehabilitation of housing, and affordable housing in particular. A. State Prevailing Wage Requirements The State Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) expanded the kinds of projects that require the payment of prevailing wages. Labor Code Section 1720, which applies prevailing wage rates to public works of over $1,000, now defines public works to mean construction, alteration, installation, demolition, or repair work done under contract and paid for in whole or in part out of public funds. For example, public transfer of an asset for less than fair market value, such as a land write-down, would now be construed to be paid for, in part, out of public funds and trigger prevailing wage requirements Housing Element Page 67

80 While the cost differential in prevailing and standard wages varies based on the skill level of the occupation, prevailing wages tend to add to the overall cost of development. In the case of affordable housing projects, prevailing wage requirements could effectively reduce the number of affordable units that can be achieved with public subsidies. The following types of projects are exempt from the prevailing wage requirement: Residential projects financed through issuance of bonds that receive an allocation through the State; and Single-family projects financed through issuance of qualified mortgage revenue bonds or mortgage credit certificates. B. Environmental Protection State law (California Environmental Quality Act, California Endangered Species Act) and federal law (National Environmental Protection Act, Federal Endangered Species Act) regulations require environmental review of proposed discretionary projects (e.g., subdivision maps, use permits, etc.). Costs resulting from the environmental review process are also added to the cost of housing and are passed on to the consumer to the extent that the market can bear. These costs include fees charged by local government and private consultants needed to complete the environmental analysis, costs to mitigate impacts, and costs from delays caused by the mandated public review periods. However, the presence of these regulations helps preserve the environment and ensure environmental safety to El Centro residents Utility and Public Service Constraints The provision of utilities such as water and sewer as well as public services including police, fire, and schools is costly to local governments and special districts providing municipal services. New development must pay for much of these costs thereby increasing the overall cost of housing. This section provides an overview of potential utility and public service constraints in El Centro. A. Water Supply The City Public Works Department receives and distributes potable water from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID). The IID has senior water rights to the Colorado River water and ranks urban supply higher than the agricultural supply. The City s 2010 Urban Water Management Plan reviewed the overall supply and demand of water for the City of El Centro determined that there is no foreseeable water shortage in the for the next 25 years. The uses Colorado River water that can supply the City with sufficient water to meet all projected demand. The water demand projected in the Urban Water Management Plan included development pursuant to the City s General Plan and there is adequate water supply and filtration capacity to accommodate 1,924 new residential dwellings during the RHNA period. The City charges a water Page Housing Element

81 capacity fee that goes toward improvement/expansion of potable water filtration and distribution facilities maintained by the Public Works Department. Senate Bill 1087 (enacted 2006) requires that water providers develop written policies that grant priority to proposed development that includes housing affordable to lower-income households. The legislation also prohibits water providers from denying or conditioning the approval of development that includes housing affordable to lower income households, unless specific written findings are made. Although the City relies on the IID for its water supply, the Public Works Department is responsible for providing local service to existing and new development. Therefore, the City is responsible for complying with Senate Bill 1087 requirements should supply rationing or limited filtration capacity occur. To ensure compliance, the City will develop and establish a formal procedure to grant water priority to developments with units affordable to lower-income households pursuant to Government Code Section (see Program 8). B. Wastewater Treatment The City owns and operates a wastewater collection system and treatment facility that receives wastewater from the entire city and a few entities outside of the City Limits. The facility underwent a significant upgrade in the mid-1990s, increasing its capacity to eight million gallons per day (mgd). The City s Public Works Department is planning large wastewater capital improvements over the next five fiscal years. These improvements will both increase the capacity of the collection and treatment systems to support the City's growth and to repair, replace, and improve existing facilities to continue to reliably serve existing customers. A portion of the City s wastewater connection and monthly service fees is allocated to a Wastewater Capacity Fee Fund, which is used to finance capital projects associated with growth anticipated in the 2008 Wastewater Master Plan and Capital Improvements Plan. These plans were developed and are implemented based on General Plan Land Uses and in conjunction with the Urban Development Program. Implementation of these plans and programs will ensure that adequate wastewater collection and treatment facilities are in place to serve existing and planned growth, including the City s RHNA of 1,924 units. The City charges a sewer capacity fee to offset the cost of improving and expanding wastewater collection and treatment facilities. Senate Bill 1087 described above also mandates priority wastewater collection and treatment service to housing developments providing units affordable to lower income households. The City is responsible for complying with Senate Bill 1087 requirements should limited wastewater treatment capacity force a moratorium on new development or rationing new sewer connections. To ensure compliance, the City will develop and establish a formal procedure to grant wastewater service priority to developments with units affordable to lower-income households pursuant to Government Code Section (see Program 8) Housing Element Page 69

82 C. Urban Development Program El Centro has adopted an Urban Development Program to facilitate residential, industrial, and business growth in areas where public services are available and to provide a variety of growth locations so that an adequate supply of developable land will maintain reasonable housing costs and promote economic development. Specific geographic areas (referred to as Development Tiers ) have been delineated for new development based on existing or planned public facilities, existing land use, and transportation corridors or other physical barriers: Development Tier I - Current Urban Service Area: Includes land within and adjacent to the present City limits. In most cases, new development within this area can be served by gravity sewer lines to existing trunk sewers. Generally, water lines and reservoirs are also adequate to serve new development; however, easements and financial contributions to improve the ultimate sewer and water systems may be required. Fire, police, schools, parks, library, medical, roads, and other City services are also in proximity to these areas, though service capacities are likely to be limited and improvements to existing facilities and/or new facilities may be needed to adequately accommodate new development. Subdivisions of land and commercial or industrial development within this area would generally follow standard zoning, subdivision, and environmental review procedures and would not require a Community Facilities Study. Development Tier II - Planned Urban Service Area: Includes land both within and adjacent to the City limits, but differs from Development Tier I in that public infrastructure to serve new development is more limited. Essential required improvements may include sewer and water pump stations, water storage reservoirs, and sewer trunk lines or force mains. New schools, parks, roadway improvements, and fire stations may also be required to adequately serve development of Development Tier II areas. As with Development Tier I areas, additional service capacity for police, library, medical, and other City services may also be needed to accommodate new development. Preparation of a Community Facilities Study may be required for development projects within Development Tier II areas. Development Tier III - Future Urban Service Area: Encompasses unincorporated lands that are not anticipated to be developed for at least ten years. All of the parcels included in the Residential Sites Inventory (Appendix C) are located within Development Tier I - Current Urban Service Area. The Urban Development Program is designed and implemented to encourage and facilitate the orderly and efficient provision of utilities and public services concurrent with anticipated growth and is therefore not considered a constraint on residential development. Page Housing Element

83 3.5. Environmental Constraints A community s environmental setting affects the feasibility and cost of developing housing. Environmental issues range from the conservation of biological resources to the suitability of land for development due to potential exposure to environmental hazards. This section summarizes potential biological and seismic constraints on residential development in El Centro. None of the properties identified in the residential sites inventory (Table C-1 in Appendix C) are known to be constrained by steep slopes, floodplains, or hazardous materials. A. Biological Resources The irrigation and drainage canals network within some portions of the City provides habitat for saline adapted plant species. Populations of a number of fish species live in the canals. The mosquito fish has been introduced by the Imperial County Health Department for mosquito control, and species of Tilapia have been introduced to control aquatic weeds. The canal system has created an aquatic habitat within a naturally arid environment and provides opportunities for people to fish and observe wild species in a unique manmade natural environment. Although the City must assess development proposals for potential impacts to significant natural resources and habitat pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the canal system right-of-way is well defined and related biological resources will not be a significant constraint on residential development within the RHNA period. B. Seismic Hazards The Imperial Valley is one of the most tectonically active regions in the United States. Branches of the San Andreas Fault form the eastern boundary of the basin (Salton Trough) and the western edge is defined by the San Jacinto-Coyote Creek and the Elsinore-Laguna Salada Faults. More small to moderate earthquakes have occurred in the area than along any other section of the San Andreas Fault System. Since the City is generally flat, landslides are not considered a major hazard. However, bluff failure and mudslides may occur along slopes and embankments of the rivers and canals. Standard engineering practices, including soils investigation and compaction techniques, are sufficient to mitigate most seismic hazards in the City. Seismic hazards should not be a significant constraint to the development of housing in El Centro Housing Element Page 71

84

85 4. Housing Resources This section of the Housing Element addresses the resources available to the City in implementing the goals, policies, and programs contained in this Housing Element, specifically regarding the potential for future residential development. Resources covered in this section include potential development sites, financial resources, and administrative resources Residential Development Potential A. Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) State Housing Element law requires that a local jurisdiction accommodate a share of the region s projected housing needs for the planning period. This share, called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), is important because State law mandates that a jurisdiction provide sufficient land to accommodate a variety of housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community. Compliance with this requirement is measured by the jurisdiction s ability in providing adequate land with adequate density and appropriate development standards to accommodate the RHNA. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), as the regional planning agency, is responsible for allocating the RHNA to individual jurisdictions within the region. SCAG assigned a RHNA of 1,924 units to the for the RHNA period 9, in the following income distribution: Extremely Low/Very Low Income: units Low Income: 300 units Moderate Income: 297 units Above Moderate Income: 840 units The City must ensure the availability of residential sites at adequate densities and appropriate development standards to accommodate these units by income category. 9 The Housing Element planning period covers from October 15, 2013 through October 15, However, the RHNA planning period does not commence until January 1, 2014 and extends through October 31, Therefore, residential units permitted prior to January 1, 2014, although fall within the Housing Element planning period, will not receive RHNA credits for this Housing Element. 10 The City has a RHNA allocation of 487 very low income units (inclusive of extremely low income units). Pursuant to AB 2634, the City must project the number of extremely low income housing needs based on Census income distribution or assume 50 percent of the very low income units as extremely low. According to SCAG (using CHAS data developed by HUD), the City had 3,471 households with incomes at or below 50 percent AMI (1,610 extremely low and 1,861 very low income) as shown in Table 8. Therefore the City s RHNA of 487 very low income units may be split into 226 extremely low (46.4 percent) and 261 very low income units (53.6 percent). However, for purposes of identifying adequate sites for the RHNA, State law does not mandate the separate accounting for the extremely low income category Housing Element Page 73

86 B. Future Residential Development Potential The has adequate land capacity to meet the needs of all income groups through the RHNA period. The following Table 43 is a summary of the detailed parcel data included in Appendix C, Sites Inventory. Figures C-1 through C-5 in Appendix C depict the location of each parcel contained in Table C-1. Table 43: Residential Sites Inventory (Summary) Summary by Affordability Level and Land Use / Zoning Average Density Factor Parcel Count Acreage Average Parcel Size (acres) Realistic Capacity Status Lower Income (by Default) High-Medium Density Residential / R dua Vacant Tourist Commercial / CT 19.0 dua * Vacant Low Income Sub-total Vacant Moderate Income High-Medium Density Residential / R dua Vacant Tourist Commercial / CT 19.0 dua * Vacant Downtown Commercial / CD 19.0 dua * Vacant Medium Density Residential / R2 8.0 dua Vacant Moderate Income Sub-Total Vacant Above Moderate Income Low Density Residential / R1 3.5 dua Vacant Rural Residential / RR 1.0 dua Vacant Above Moderate Income Sub-Total Vacant Total ,163 Vacant Note: (*) indicates mixed-use zones for which the realistic capacity is 50 percent of the calculated capacity of each parcel using the applicable density factor. The 50 percent reduction is necessary to account for the possibility that approximately half of these parcels could be developed with non-residential uses during the RHNA period and represents a conservative estimate of anticipated development trends. Realistic Capacity Assumptions For purposes of calculating the realistic capacity of sites in Appendix C, Residential Sites Inventory, the following density factors were used to determine the realistic capacity of sites identified to meet the City s RHNA: High-Medium Density Residential/R3 (maximum 25.0 units per acre): A density factor of 19.0 units per acre represents the realistic capacity of development within this land use designation/zone. This factor is only 76 percent of the maximum allowable density and is consistent with recent development applications. In 2009, a 48-unit market rate apartment complex achieved 21.8 units per acre on a 2.2-acre R3. Las Brisas, a 72-unit affordable housing development constructed in 2012 on a 4.0- acre R3 lot achieved 18.0 units per acre. The affordable housing developer did not seek a density bonus and neither applicant sought waiver or modification of any development standard. Page Housing Element

87 Downtown Commercial/CD (maximum density set by FAR): In April 2013, the City increased the maximum FAR from 1.5 to 3.0 and allowed for shared parking in the CD zone. Although the City has not received any applications for development of multi-family residential in the CD zone, a density factor of 19.0 units per acre is reasonable given that a multi-family project approved in the CT zone achieved 18.8 units per acre despite being subject to much lower maximum FAR (1.0:1). Tourist Commercial/CT (maximum density set by FAR): A density factor of 19.0 units per acre is reasonable given the City s 2008 approval of a CUP to allow a twostory, 16-unit apartment complex on a 0.85-acre CT parcel. This project achieved nearly 19.0 units per acre despite the relatively small parcel size. Medium Density Residential/R2 (maximum 12.0 units per acre): A density factor of 8.0 units per acre represents 67 percent of the maximum allowable density and is consistent with historic development patterns. Low Density Residential/R1 (maximum 6.0 units per acre): A density factor of 3.5 units per acre represents 58 percent of the maximum allowable density and is consistent with historic development patterns. Rural Residential/RR (maximum 2.0 units per acre): A density factor of 1.0 unit per acre represents 50 percent of the maximum allowable density and is consistent with historic development patterns. Affordability, Suitability, and Availability Analysis This subsection describes the assumptions applied to each parcel in Appendix C, Residential Sites Inventory, to determine affordability level and establish the suitability and availability for development within the RHNA period. Lower Income Zone districts in El Centro that allow at least 20 dwelling units per acre are considered sufficient to accommodate housing that is affordable to lower income households by default per Government Code Section (c)(3)(B). The City s R3 zone district allows up to 25 units per acre and therefore meets this default affordability density threshold. The City s CT mixed-use district also meets this default affordability density threshold because at least 20 units per acre are achievable given the maximum allowable FAR of 1.0:1 and development history. The City identified 48 R3 or CT parcels covering 60.4 acres that are vacant and available for development in the planning period. These parcels can accommodate at least 801 lower income units assuming a density factor of 19.0 units per acre. Each site is larger than 0.60 acre and the average parcel size is 1.3 acres. Moderate Income Another 45.5 acres on 88 parcels in the R3, R2, CD, and CT zones are vacant and available to accommodate at least 421 moderate income units within the RHNA period. The average size of these parcels is 0.50 acre. Based on the real estate market data presented in Section 2.7 of this Housing Element, it is reasonable to assume that new multi-family construction on relatively smaller R3, R2, CD, and CT sites will be offered at market prices that are affordable to moderate income households Housing Element Page 75

88 Above Moderate Income El Centro s remaining RHNA for above moderate income households will be accommodated on acres consisting of 120 parcels zoned for lower density residential (R1 and RR). These sites are suitable to accommodate at least 941 single-family units. New construction on these sites is assumed to produce units that are affordable to above moderate income households. Public Services and Infrastructure Availability All sites identified in Appendix C are located within Tier I of the Urban Development Program. As discussed in details in Section 3.4.C of this Housing Element, Tier I is the Current Urban Service Area and no significant public service or infrastructure constraints have been identified. Adequacy of Sites to Meet the City s RHNA Table 44 summarizes the City s accommodation of the RHNA for all income groups during the RHNA period. After accounting for the realistic capacity of vacant sites, the City has identified surplus capacity of at least 239 units for the RHNA period, including a minimum surplus of 14 lower income units, 124 moderate income units, and 101 above moderate income units. Table 44: Adequacy of Sites to Accommodate the RHNA Sites Income Level RHNA Inventory Capacity Surplus Very Low (<50% AMI) 487 Low (51 to 80% AMI) Moderate (81 to 120% AMI) Above Moderate (>120% AMI) Total 1,924 2, C. RHNA for Previous Housing Element ( ) AB 1233 amended the State Housing Element law to promote the effective and timely implementation of local housing elements. Specifically, the law states that if a jurisdiction fails to provide adequate sites in the prior planning period, within one year of the new cycle, the jurisdiction must rezone/upzone adequate sites to accommodate the shortfall. This law affects the s Housing Element, requiring the City to address its deficit in sites for the previous housing element cycle ( ). In the Housing Element, the RHNA assigned to El Centro was 2,908 units, in the following income distribution: Page Housing Element

89 Extremely Low/Very Low Income: 720 units Low Income: 483 units Moderate Income: 467 units Above Moderate Income: 1,238 units Table 45 summarizes the City s Housing Element RHNA analysis, which identified a shortfall capacity of 259 lower income units. Table 45: Housing Element RHNA Analysis Built Jan. Approved Income Group RHNA Apr. Projects 2008 Vacant Land Surplus / (Deficit) Extremely Low Income (77) Very Low Income (68) Low Income (114) Moderate Income Above Moderate Income 1, ,965 1,552 Total 2, ,221 3,332 2,924 To address the 259-unit lower income shortfall, City staff identified a 13.5-acre R2 (Medium Density Residential) to rezone to R3 (High Density Residential) at a minimum density of 20 units per acre. Rezoning to R3 and applying a density factor of 20 units per acre, the site could accommodate 269 lower income units and provide a 10-unit surplus for the lower income RHNA category. However, the property owner opted not to pursue the rezone. RHNA Penalty Analysis Because the City did not rezone the 13.5-acre parcel a RHNA penalty would apply to the RHNA cycle if the City cannot demonstrate that other sites have been available to accommodate the lower income shortfall during the prior planning period. The following analysis demonstrates that the City s sites inventory was and remains adequate to accommodate the lower income RHNA through 2014 (the end of the prior Housing Element cycle) despite not pursuing the rezoning as originally proposed. As part of this Housing Element update, the City conducted an exhaustive, parcel-by-parcel investigation of sites to determine whether the Housing Element omitted any vacant parcels. The investigation identified 18 acres on 11 vacant High-Medium Density / R3 parcels that were not included in the prior inventory and adequate sites analysis (Table 46). Of these vacant parcels, seven are larger than one acre in size and four contiguous parcels held by the same owner total more than one acre. The 11 vacant parcels have a realistic capacity to accommodate at least 283 units assuming a density factor of 16 units per acre Housing Element Page 77

90 Table 46: Vacant Parcels Omitted from Housing Element RHNA Analysis APN Parcel Realistic Land Use Zoning Size Capacity Designation District (Acres) Notes High-Medium Density Privately-owned R Residential vacant parcel High-Medium Density Privately-owned R Residential vacant parcel High-Medium Density Privately-owned R Residential vacant parcel High-Medium Density Privately-owned R Residential vacant parcel High-Medium Density Privately-owned R Residential vacant parcel High-Medium Density R Privately-owned Residential High-Medium Density Residential R High-Medium Density 0.53 R Residential Total vacant parcel Privately-owned vacant parcel Contiguous vacant parcels with the same private owner Because the R3 sites allow up to 25 units per acre, the vacant sites are considered sufficient to accommodate housing that is affordable to lower income households by default per Government Code Section (c)(3)(B). The sites identified in Table 46 are suitable for development of lower income housing because they are larger than one acre in size and currently served by infrastructure and public services. Given the default affordability threshold, large parcel size, and realistic capacity to accommodate at least 283 units, the 11 vacant R3 parcels give the City a surplus capacity of 24 lower income units through Therefore, no rezoning was necessary to accommodate the City s previous RHNA and the Housing Element is not subject to a RHNA penalty pursuant AB Financial Resources The State s dissolution of the El Centro s redevelopment agency in 2012 eliminated the City s primary source of affordable housing funding. Other funding resources available for affordable housing development are highly limited. These other financial resources include private contributions (including foundations or trusts), semi-public agencies and federal and state agencies. Listed below are some typical sources of funds used for affordable housing: State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development loan and grant programs California Housing Finance Agency financial assistance programs Federal/State Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) Page Housing Element

91 Rural Housing Administration (Farmers Home Administration or FHA) Programs U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Programs The is an entitlement jurisdiction under the HUD Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. For FY 2012, the City received an allocation of approximately $470,000 for a range of housing and community development activities. Specifically, the City has used CDBG funds to address lead-based paint and asbestos hazard abatements, as well as to assist in off-site improvements for affordable housing projects Administrative Resources The City collaborates with various agencies, developers, and organizations to provide affordable housing and supportive services for lower and moderate income households and households with special needs. Key agencies, developers, and organizations include: Imperial Valley Housing Authority: The Housing Authority administers the Housing Choice Voucher program in the Imperial Valley, including El Centro. The Housing Authority also owns and operates public housing located throughout the County, with units for seniors, farm workers, and the disabled in El Centro. Imperial County Regional Task Force on Homelessness: The Task Force serves as the lead agency for Imperial County homeless issues. The City will continue to participate in activities and outreach conducted by the Task Force. California Coalition for Rural Housing: The California Coalition for Rural Housing (CCRH) is a statewide nonprofit organization that works to ensure affordable housing opportunities for low-income households in California. CCRH supports the production and preservation of decent, safe, and low-cost housing for rural and lowincome Californians. Supporters include nonprofit housing agencies, lending institutions, community advocacy organizations, consumer members, and local government officials. The Coalition advocates for housing at all levels of government before legislative and regulatory bodies. It also provides technical and organizational assistance to community groups and nonprofit agencies and educates the public on housing issues. Affordable Housing Developers: The City collaborates with a number of affordable housing developers and service providers to accommodate the housing needs of El Centro residents. The following are some of the housing developers and service providers active in southern California; several are included in the State s list of entities with the legal and managerial capacity to acquire and manage at-risk projects: AMG, Affirmed Housing Group, Bridge Housing, Jamboree Housing, and Chelsea Investment Group. Supportive Services: Various non-profit groups that provide supportive services to the special needs population in El Centro. Some of the key groups operating in Imperial Valley include the Center for Family Solutions, Imperial County Family Resource Center, Campesinos Unidos, Catholic Charities, Independent Living Center, Neighborhood House, and Veteran Services Housing Element Page 79

92 4.4. Opportunities for Energy Conservation Two basic and interrelated approaches to creating energy conservation opportunities in residences are conservation and development: Conservation: Conservation can be accomplished by reducing the use of energyconsuming items, or by physically modifying existing structures and land uses. The California Energy Commission first adopted energy conservation standards for new construction in These standards, contained in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code, contain specifications relating to insulation, glazing, heating and cooling systems, water heaters, swimming pool heaters, and several other items. Development: Solar energy is a viable alternate energy source for the City of El Centro. Two basic types of solar systems exist: active and passive. In passive solar systems, the structure itself is designed to collect the sun s energy, then store and circulate the resulting heat similar to a greenhouse. Active solar systems typically collect and store energy in panels attached to the exterior of a house. This type of system utilizes mechanical fans or pumps to circulate the warm/cool air, while heated water can flow directly into a home s hot water system. Additional conservation opportunities are found in new construction. Residential construction techniques for conservation and sustainability have been gaining in popularity and acceptance in recent years. The most widely recognized certifying agency with respect to such construction is LEED, the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building System. The intent of LEED is to encourage widespread implementation of development practices that further the concept of sustainability and environmental friendliness in the built environment. The City strictly enforces Title 24 Energy Requirements. In addition, the local energy company, the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), offers incentives to homeowners with rebates to buy energy efficient air conditioners, appliances and thermostats. IID also coordinates a Low Income Solar Rooftop Program offered by the Citizens Energy Corporation. Using proceeds from their partnership on the Sunrise Powerlink transmission line, Citizens Energy, a nonprofit corporation, works to install solar rooftop systems for low income residents in Imperial Valley. Also, air pollution control measures from the Imperial Air Pollution Control District require new construction and development to include energy conservation measures (Imperial County Air Pollution Control District rule 310). Page Housing Element

93 5. Housing Plan This section of the Housing Element contains the goals, policies, and programs the City of El Centro intends to implement to meet its quantified objectives and address a number of important housing-related issues through the planning period. The Housing Plan considers accomplishments under the Housing Element (see Appendix B) and builds upon the identified City s housing needs, constraints on residential development, and resources available to address El Centro s existing and future housing needs. To make adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the City and consistent with statutory requirements, the Housing Plan aims to: Conserve, preserve, and improve the condition of the existing affordable housing stock [Government Code Section 65583(c)(4 & 6)]; Assist in the development of housing for extremely low, very low, low, and moderate income households [Government Code Section 65583(c)(2)]; Identify adequate sites to encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels [Government Code Section 65583(c)(1)]; Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing [Government Code Section 65583(c)(3)]; and Promote housing opportunities for all persons [Government Code Section 65583(c)(5)]. 5.1 Goals and Policies Goals are statements of community desires, which are broad in both purpose and aim, but are designed specifically to establish direction. Policies provide specific standards and/or end statements for achieving a goal. Essentially, goals represent desired outcomes the City seeks to achieve through the implementation of policies. The goals and policies that guide the City s housing programs and activities are as follows: A. Housing Diversity and Opportunities The diversity of housing opportunities in El Centro distinguishes the City from many other California communities. Continuing to provide a balanced inventory of housing in terms of unit type, tenure, cost, and style will allow the City to fulfill a variety of housing needs. GOAL 1.0: Adequate housing to meet the existing and future needs of El Centro residents. Policy 1.1: Maintain land use controls and development standards that can accommodate a variety of housing opportunities, including single Housing Element Page 81

94 family homes, townhomes, apartments, condominiums, mixed-use development, second dwelling units, and mobile homes to fulfill regional housing needs. Policy 1.2: Policy 1.3: Policy 1.4: Policy 1.5: Policy 1.6: Policy 1.7: Policy 1.8: Policy 1.9: Policy 1.10: Policy 1.11: Policy 1.12: Policy 1.13: Facilitate the development of affordable housing by offering development incentives on a case-by-case basis. Encourage the development of residential units intended to meet the needs of extremely low income households, seniors, persons with disabilities (including persons with developmental disabilities), farm workers, and those in need of temporary shelter. Work with developers to identify and, when feasible, remove or reduce governmental constraints on affordable housing development. Encourage the development of new housing units in close proximity to public transportation and community services, including mixeduse development in the Downtown Commercial (CD) and Tourist Commercial (CT) zones. Identify and pursue State and federal programs and funding to facilitate development of housing that is suitable for extremely low income households, including farm workers. Support the provision of housing services in meeting the housing needs of El Centro residents, including extremely low income households, the homeless and near-homeless, farm workers, and persons with disabilities. Encourage the development of affordable home ownership housing for first-time homebuyers. Pursue state and federal funding sources to provide favorable home purchase options to lower and moderate income households. Support the clustering of development where appropriate. Process permits concurrently as a means of streamlining development review. Support efforts of non-profits, private developers, and the Imperial Valley Housing Authority to expand the City s supply of affordable housing. Encourage developers that propose to subdivide more than 10 acres to set aside a portion of the land for Medium to High Density Residential uses. Page Housing Element

95 Policy 1.14: Encourage developers of multi-family rental housing to include units with three or more bedrooms to accommodate the needs of large households. B. Maintenance, Preservation, and Conservation of Housing The majority of El Centro s housing stock is in good condition. However, some older singlefamily neighborhoods and multi-family structures show evidence of deferred maintenance and deterioration. As the City's housing stock continues to age, on-going maintenance is vital to prevent further deterioration. Other housing conservation needs of the City include existing affordable housing stock and rental units at risk of converting to market-rents or condominiums, and the Housing Choice Voucher Program. GOAL 2.0: Maintenance and enhancement of the quality of residential neighborhoods and living environments. Policy 2.1: Policy 2.2: Policy 2.3: Policy 2.4: Policy 2.5: Policy 2.6: Policy 2.7: Policy 2.8: Policy 2.9: Improve the overall quality and conditions of existing housing in El Centro. Advocate and facilitate the conservation and rehabilitation of substandard residential properties by homeowners. As funds allow, continue to offer rehabilitation and home improvement assistance to lower income homeowners. Work to preserve restricted lower income housing in the City that is at risk of converting to market rate use. Review condominium conversions on a case-by-case basis to minimize or mitigate impacts on displaced households. Preserve important examples of El Centro s architectural history through continued implementation of the Single-family Neighborhood Overlay. Continue to support Imperial Valley Housing Authority efforts to preserve and expand rental assistance programs for extremely low income households, including the Housing Choice Voucher Program. Discourage smoking in homes that are occupied by children, the elderly, and others with health issues to enhance living environment quality. Continue to use the General Plan and Municipal Code to ensure the compatibility of residential areas with surrounding non-residential uses Housing Element Page 83

96 Policy 2.10: Policy 2.11: Policy 2.12: Avoid displacement of residents in carrying out City programs, whenever possible, or provide relocation assistance subject to available funds. Conduct a Housing Conditions Survey during the planning period, subject to available funds. Preserve and maintain existing and future neighborhoods through continued enforcement of City codes. C. Equal Opportunity Promotion of equal housing opportunities for all existing and future El Centro residents is necessary to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all socioeconomic segments of the community. GOAL 3.0: Equal opportunity for all residents to reside in housing of their choice. Policy 3.1: Policy 3.2: Policy 3.3: Policy 3.4: Prohibit discrimination in the sale, rental, or financing of housing based on race, color, ancestry, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, disability/medical condition, familial status, marital status, source of income, or any other arbitrary factor. Accommodate persons with disabilities (including persons with developmental disabilities) who seek reasonable waiver or modification of land use controls and/or development standards pursuant to procedures and criteria set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. Encourage the provision of designs that support aging in place (such as universal design) in new development. Continue to support and participate with a fair housing service provider that can receive and investigate fair housing allegations, monitor compliance with fair housing laws, and refer possible violations to enforcing agencies. D. Energy Conservation in Housing Development Conserving energy is not only good for the environment, it can help reduce household costs and enable households to allocate more disposable income to housing costs, which can reduce the incidence of housing problems such as cost burden and overcrowding. GOAL 4.0: Housing that maximizes opportunities for energy conservation. Policy 4.1: Promote passive energy conservation measures through site planning and landscaping techniques. Page Housing Element

97 Policy 4.2: Encourage developers to exceed minimum Title 24 energy conservation requirements. Policy 4.3: Policy 4.4: Educate the public regarding simple energy conservation measures that can be implemented in the home. Encourage weatherization improvements, roofing repairs, window replacement, and appliance upgrades to conserve energy. 5.2 Housing Programs Programs identify specific actions the City will undertake toward putting each goal and policy into action. Each program relates to one or more goals and policies and may overlap the various issue areas. El Centro offers a variety of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community. This section of the Housing Plan addresses the issues identified in the previous sections of the Element and provides a strategy to achieve the City s housing goals. The housing programs designed to implement the City s strategy are discussed in detail below. A. Facilitate the Provision of a Variety of Housing Types, Densities, and Opportunities A key element in satisfying the housing needs of all segments of the community is the provision for a variety of housing types and densities for renters and owners. This is an important function of both the General Plan and zoning. Program 1: Land Use Controls and Development Capacity Planning and regulatory actions to achieve adequate housing sites are implemented through the General Plan Land Use Element and Zoning Ordinance. These regulatory documents provide for a variety of residential types, ranging from lower-density single-family homes to higher-density apartments, condominiums, and mixed-use development. El Centro s residential sites inventory consists of over 400 acres of developable land with the capacity to yield at least 2,163 new units by year As noted in Section 4 and Appendix C, these sites are adequate to meet the City's share of regional housing needs for the RHNA period. Responsible Agency: Financing: Community Development Department Department budget Objectives: Maintain and monitor the residential sites inventory to ensure adequate sites remain to accommodate the RHNA throughout the RHNA period. Provide sites inventory information to interested developers Housing Element Page 85

98 Timeframe: Annual monitoring and reporting throughout the planning period. Program 2: Monitor Residential Capacity (No Net Loss) City staff will monitor the consumption of residential acreage to ensure an adequate inventory is available to meet the City s RHNA obligations. To ensure sufficient residential capacity is maintained to accommodate the RHNA, the City will develop and implement a formal ongoing (project-by-project) evaluation procedure pursuant to Government Code Section The City s development application tracking software will notify staff when an application has been submitted for development of a property included in the residential sites inventory (Appendix C). Should an approval of development result in a reduction of capacity below the residential capacity needed to accommodate the remaining need for lower income households, the City will identify and, if necessary, rezone sufficient sites to accommodate the shortfall and ensure no net loss in capacity to accommodate the RHNA. Responsible Agency: Community Development Department; Economic Development Department Financing: Department budget Objectives: Develop and implement a formal evaluation procedure pursuant to Government Code Section by January Timeframe: Annual monitoring and reporting throughout the planning period. Program 3: Facilitate Affordable and Special Needs Housing Production Developers of affordable and special needs housing face a number of hurdles, including financing, development codes and standards, and in some cases, public opposition. Dissolution of the City s Redevelopment Agency by the State in 2012 eliminated the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund (LMIHF), formerly the City s primary mechanism for providing direct funding support of affordable housing development. Continuing reductions in federal funding of HUD programs (e.g., CDBG) will constrain the City s ability to offer committed funding assistance to affordable and special needs housing even further. The City can encourage and facilitate affordable and special needs housing through financial assistance, removal of regulatory constraints, and administrative support. With limited funding, the City will rely on the following non-funding-related actions to encourage affordable and special needs housing production (including housing for extremely low income households and the developmentally disabled) during the planning period: Collaborate with Affordable and Special Needs Housing Developers: Affordable housing developers work to develop, conserve and promote rental and ownership affordable housing. Particularly in relation to senior citizen housing and housing for persons with disabilities (including persons with developmental disabilities), the affordable housing developer is often, but not always, a local organization interested in developing affordable housing. The affordable housing developer is often involved with what is called "assisted housing", Page Housing Element

99 where some type of government assistance (such as Section 8 or Tax Credits) is provided to the individual household to keep rents affordable. An affordable or special needs housing developer can help meet the goals for additional housing by implementing or assisting with the implementation of programs described in this Element. The City will continue to collaborate with affordable and special needs housing developers to identify potential sites, write letters of support to help secure governmental and private-sector funding, and offer technical assistance related to the application of City incentive programs (e.g., density bonus). Regulatory Concessions and Incentives: The City will continue to work with developers on a case-by-case basis to provide regulatory concessions and incentives to assist them with the development of affordable and senior housing. In a relatively small city like El Centro, this is the most effective method of assisting developers, as each individual project can be analyzed to determine which concessions and incentives would be the most beneficial to the project s feasibility. Regulatory concessions and incentives could include, but are not limited to, density bonuses, parking reductions, fee reductions or deferral, expedited permit processing, and modified or waived development standards. Responsible Agency: Financing: Community Development Department Department budget Objectives: Maintain contact information for affordable housing developers special needs service providers for the purposes of soliciting their involvement in development projects in El Centro. Participate with affordable and special needs housing developers to review available federal and State financing subsidies and apply as feasible on an annual basis. Assist and support developers of housing for lower income households, especially housing for extremely low income households and the disabled (including the developmentally disabled), with site identification, supporting applications, conducting preapplication meetings, assisting with design and site requirements, and providing regulatory incentives and concessions. Collaborate with developers of affordable housing over the planning period to facilitate the construction of 100 affordable units over the planning period (five extremely low income, 25 very low income, 30 low income, and 40 moderate income units). Timeframe: Update list and contact information for affordable and special needs housing developers annually thereafter. Provide ongoing participation and assistance to interested housing developers. Annual monitoring and reporting throughout the planning period Housing Element Page 87

100 Program 4: First-Time Homebuyer Program This First Time Homebuyer Program was established to offer downpayment assistance to lower and moderate income first-time homebuyer residents of El Centro to purchase an existing or qualifying new home in the City. Eligible participants must be able to qualify for a permanent 30 year, fixed interest loan, contribute at least two percent to the downpayment, and attend an eight hour Homeownership Education Workshop. Eligible properties must be owner-occupied or vacant at the time of the purchase. Responsible Agency: Financing: Economic Development Department CalHFA Objectives: Continue to pursue CalHFA and other available funding programs to deliver the First Time Homebuyer Program. Assist three low income and seven moderate income first-time homebuyers annually during the planning period. Timeframe: Ongoing implementation and annual monitoring and reporting throughout the planning period. Program 5: Farmland Mitigation Fee The City will study options for the establishment of a farmland mitigation fee. Property owners seeking to convert active agricultural land to an urban use could be required to pay a fee to mitigate the conversion of farm land to non-farm use. Mitigation fees could be used to purchase and improve farm lands for continued agricultural production, the provision of research activities or ancillary uses necessary for the continued production of agriculture, and farm worker housing and related supportive social services. Responsible Agency: Financing: Community Development Department Department budget Objectives: Study farmland mitigation fund options and present to the Planning Commission and City Council for initial consideration. Timeframe: Within one year of adoption of the Housing Element. B. Removal of Constraints State law requires the Housing Element to address, and where appropriate and legally possible, remove constraints affecting the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing. During the prior Housing Element planning period the City updated the Zoning Ordinance to: Establish a reasonable accommodation procedure; Adopt a density bonus ordinance that complies with current State law; Page Housing Element

101 Allow shared parking to facilitate development (including mixed-use and residential development) within the Downtown Commercial (CD) zone; Accommodate residential care facilities, farm employee housing, single room occupancy (SRO) buildings, transitional housing, supportive housing, and emergency shelters consistent with State law. The City will continue to monitor its development process, zoning regulations, and infrastructure capacity to identify and remove constraints to the development of housing. Program 6: Reasonable Accommodation Both the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act direct local governments to make reasonable accommodations (i.e., modifications or exceptions) in their zoning laws and other land use regulations to allow disabled persons an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. The City adopted a Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance in 2008; however, the discretionary review and $428 application fee may constrain housing opportunities for persons with disabilities. The City will revise the Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance to establish a ministerial review process and reduce or eliminate the application fee. Responsible Agency: Financing: Community Development Department Department budget Objectives: Modify the Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance to establish a ministerial review procedure. Reduce or eliminate the $428 application fee. Timeframe: Within one year of adoption of the Housing Element. Program 7: Monitor Changes in Federal and State Housing, Planning, and Zoning Laws State law requires that Housing Elements address, and where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing. While the Housing Element update did not identify any significant governmental constraints to the development or maintenance of housing in El Centro, the City will continue to monitor its development process and zoning regulations to identify and remove constraints to the development of housing. The City will also continue to monitor federal and State legislation that could impact housing and comment on, support, or oppose proposed changes or additions to existing legislation, as well as support new legislation when appropriate. Special attention will be given by the City in the minimizing of governmental constraints to the development, improvement, and maintenance of housing. Responsible Agency: Financing: Community Development Department Department budget Housing Element Page 89

102 Objectives: Monitor State and federal legislation as well as City development process and zoning regulations to identify and remove housing constraints. Timeframe: Ongoing. Program 8: Water and Sewer Service Priority for Affordable Housing Senate Bill 1087 (enacted 2006) requires that water and sewer providers develop written policies that grant priority to proposed development that includes housing affordable to lower-income households. The legislation also prohibits water providers from denying or conditioning the approval of development that includes housing affordable to lower income households, unless specific written findings are made. The City will develop and establish a formal procedure to grant water and sewer priority to developments with units affordable to lower-income households pursuant to Government Code Section Responsible Agency: Financing: Public Works Department Department budget Objectives: Develop and establish a formal procedure to grant water and sewer priority to developments with units affordable to lowerincome households within one year of adoption of the Housing Element. Timeframe: Ongoing. C. Provide Supportive Housing Assistance for Special Needs Population Where there is a need for affordable housing, often there is also a need for supportive services for lower income households, including extremely low income households. The City assists service providers in meeting the immediate needs of persons with special needs, including the homeless, near-homeless, and extremely low income households. Immediate need includes the provision of food, temporary shelter, health care, and other social services. The following programs intend to address the overall need for affordable housing and supportive services in El Centro. Program 9: Coordination with Social Service Agencies A variety of social services agencies provide housing and supportive services to special needs groups in El Centro. Several of these social service agencies receive CDBG funds from the City to help administer these programs. The City determines its CDBG allocations to social service agencies annually based upon applications received, whether the agency provides a priority need in the City s five-year Consolidated Plan, and if the agency meets Federal HUD regulations. In a typical program year, funding is allocated to nonprofits that serve the following needs of lower income individuals and households (i.e., those earning up to 80 percent AMI): food distribution, housing assistance, services and programs for the elderly and youth, before and after school care programs, services for the disabled (including the Page Housing Element

103 developmentally disabled), primary health care services, and fair housing advocacy and counseling. Similar to the Housing Element update, the Consolidated Plan involves comprehensive outreach, citizen participation workshops, and assessment of community needs to develop a road map for programs and activities to be pursued in the ensuing five years. The variety of social service agencies that may be awarded CDBG are guided by priority needs articulated in the Consolidated Plan. All CDBG-contracted and funded programs (emergency housing/shelter, food distribution, primary health care services to the indigent or noninsured, senior case-management services and home-delivered meals, and before-and-after school youth programs for lower income families) address and assist the needs of lower income and special needs persons and households of our community. Responsible Agency: Financing: Economic Development Department CDBG Objectives: Continue to evaluate on an annual basis allocation of CDBG funds to social service agencies to benefit El Centro residents. Timeframe: Annual monitoring and reporting throughout the planning period. D. Maintain and Conserve the Existing and Future Housing Stock Market rents in El Centro are at a level which significantly limits the supply of housing affordable to very low income households. Rental subsidies are necessary to prevent many of the City's very low income residents from spending upwards of 30 percent of their incomes on housing costs, and over-extending themselves financially. In addition to rent subsidies, actions to conserve the 42 at-risk units at the Euclid Villas apartments will be necessary to maintain affordability. Furthermore, although the majority of the City s housing stock is in good condition, the City seeks the continued maintenance and improvement of housing during the planning period. Program 10: Rental Assistance The Housing Choice Voucher rental assistance program extends rental subsidies to extremely low and very low income families and elderly (i.e., those earning up to 50 percent AMI) who spend more than 30 percent of their income on rent. The subsidy represents the difference between the excess of 30 percent of their monthly income and the actual rent. The Imperial Valley Housing Authority (IVHA) administers the Federal Housing Choice Voucher Program in the. According to the IVHA, 938 El Centro resident households received voucher assistance as of March 2013, with approximately 800 applicants on the waiting list. Responsible Agency: Financing: Imperial Valley Housing Authority U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Objectives: Continue to contract with the IVHA to administer the Housing Choice Vouchers Program and assist an average of Housing Element Page 91

104 Timeframe: approximately 900 extremely low and very low income households annually during the planning period. Promote the Housing Choice Vouchers program on City website. Encourage landlords to accept Housing Choice Vouchers. Support the IVHA s applications for additional voucher allocations and efforts to maintain and expand voucher use in the City. Ongoing implementation and annual monitoring throughout the planning period. Program 11: Conservation of Existing and Future Affordable Units In order to meet the housing needs of all economic groups in El Centro, the City must guard against the loss of housing units available to lower income households. As of April 2013, the City s affordable housing inventory consisted of 915 units, of which 42 units were at risk of converting to market rate rents (see Table 29). The inventory includes 915 assisted units in 22 deed-restricted affordable housing developments. Page 92 Responsible Agency: Financing: Economic Development Department; Imperial Valley Housing Authority. Section 8 vouchers; other funding sources as available Objectives: Monitor the status of the 42 at-risk units at Euclid Villas. The City will work with property owners, interest groups and the State and federal governments to implement the following actions on an ongoing basis to conserve its affordable housing stock: Monitor Units at Risk: Maintain contact with providers and owners to monitor the status of existing and future affordable units, including the 42 at-risk units at Euclid Villas since they may lose their subsidies due to discontinuation of the Section 8 program at the federal level or opting out by the property owner. Work with Potential Purchasers: Where feasible, provide technical assistance to public and non-profit agencies interested in purchasing and/or managing units at risk. Tenant Education: The California legislature extended the noticing requirement of at-risk units opting out of low income use restrictions to one year. Should a property owner pursue conversion of the units to market rate, the City will ensure that tenants were properly noticed and informed of their rights and that they are eligible to receive Section 8 vouchers that would enable them to stay in their units. Assist Tenants of Existing Rent Restricted Units to Obtain Section 8 Voucher Assistance: Tenants of housing units Housing Element

105 with expired Section 8 contracts are eligible to receive special Section 8 vouchers that can be used only at the same property. The City will assist tenants of "at-risk" units to obtain these Section 8 vouchers through the Imperial Valley Housing Authority. Timeframe: Ongoing implementation and annual monitoring and reporting throughout the planning period. Within 60 days of notice of intent to convert at-risk units to market rate rents, the City will work with potential purchasers using HCD s current list of Qualified Entities ( hpd/hrc/tech/presrv/), educate tenants of their rights, and assist tenants to obtain rental assistance in accordance with this program. Program 12: Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program The City offers a low interest rate loan to lower income owner-occupants to rehabilitate their single family dwelling. Eligible improvements include, but are not limited to, kitchen cabinetry, roofing, air conditioning, windows/doors, plumbing, electrical, insulation/weather proofing, paint, floor covering, additions to alleviate overcrowding, and total reconstruction (in certain circumstances). Loans amortized at a three percent interest rate are secured with a deed of trust for a maximum term of 15 years. The program also offers deferred loans at zero percent interest, subject to review every 36 months (non-seniors) or 84 months (seniors). The loan-to-value ratio of the property must not exceed 100 percent. Responsible Agency: Financing: Economic Development Department CDBG, HOME, and CalHOME Objectives: Assist two low-income homeowners and one very low-income homeowner annually. Timeframe: Program 13: Code Enforcement Annual allocation of federal funds and annual monitoring and reporting throughout the planning period. Code Enforcement officers respond to complaints related to substandard housing, property maintenance, overgrown vegetation, trash and debris, illegal conversions, improper occupancy and other nuisance and zoning complaints. Code enforcement staff will to inform owner-occupants about the City s Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program (see Program 11). Responsible Agency: Financing: Community Development Department CDBG and Department budget Objectives: Continue to implement the applicable sections of the El Centro Municipal Code. Inform eligible owners about the City s Home Improvement Loan Program Housing Element Page 93

106 Timeframe: Ongoing implementation and annual monitoring and reporting throughout the planning period. E. Equal Housing Opportunity Promoting equal housing opportunities for all persons is an important City goal. The following program is intended to help ensure El Centro residents have equal opportunity to obtain and maintain decent and safe housing regardless of race, religion, sex, family size, marital status, sexual orientation, ancestry, national origin, color, age, disability/medical conditions, and source of income. Program 14: Fair Housing Services The City currently contracts with the Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board (IFHMB) to provide fair housing services and landlord/tenant counseling to City residents. Typically, fair housing services include the investigation and resolution of housing discrimination complaints, discrimination auditing/testing, and education and outreach including the dissemination of fair housing information such as written material, workshops, and seminars. Landlord/tenant counseling services involves informing landlords and tenants of their rights and responsibilities under the California Civil Code and mediating conflicts between tenants and landlords. The City monitors and attempts to minimize discriminatory housing practices with the assistance of the IFHMB that is annually funded by the City s CDBG. The City advertises the availability of fair housing services by posting IFHMB posters and provides IFHMB informational flyers at public counters at City Hall and the Economic Development Department offices. The City s website also provides a link to IFHMB resources. Furthermore, the City accommodates IFHMB meetings and workshops at Council Chambers and distributes information at tabling events and includes articles about fair housing in a biannual newsletter and period newspaper advertisements published in English and Spanish. Responsible Agency: Financing: Economic Development Department; Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board CDBG Objectives: Continue to contract with a fair housing service provider to provide fair housing services. Maintain the link on the City website providing information about fair housing services. Time Frame: Annual allocation of funds to fair housing service provider. Annual monitoring and reporting throughout the planning period. Page Housing Element

107 5.3 Summary of Quantified Objectives Table 47 summarizes the City s objectives in housing production, rehabilitation, and conservation/preservation based on the level of financial and administrative resources anticipated during the Housing Element planning period. Program objectives are not cumulative as some overlap between programs can be expected given limited funding. Table 47: Quantified Objectives Extremely Objective Category Low Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate Total RHNA ,924 New Construction Rehabilitation Conservation/Preservation Housing Element Page 95

108

109 Appendix A: Outreach Efforts A.1. Joint Study Session and Outreach List In addition to municipal, regional, and state agencies, including school districts and utilities, the following organizations and agencies were sent invitation to attend the Joint Planning Commission/City Council Study Session held on January 28, 2013: Area Agency on Aging Heart and Hand Assisted Living Safe Haven Home Care Casa Elite Casa de Anza California United Homecare Workers Dayout Plaza Senior Apartments Golden Joy Residential Care ARC of the Imperial Valley Able Disabled Advocacy Canizalez Associates American Association of People with Disabilities Tony Rouhotas, ADA Compliance Advocate El Centro Blind Center Imperial County Continuum of Care Imperial County Department of Social Services Imperial County Work Training Center Womanhaven Catholic Charities Elli s Homeless Unlimited Imperial Valley Food Bank New Creations God s Gang United Way of Imperial County El Centro Regional Task Force on Homelessness Employment Development Department Imperial County Department of Mental Health Habitat for Humanity Court Appointed Special Advocates of Imperial County Imperial County Workforce Development Office Chelsea Investment Corporation Turning Point Men s Home Salvation Army IV Ministries American Red Cross Imperial Valley United Farm Workers of America California Coalition for Rural Housing Western Center on Law & Poverty Community Catalysts of California Center for Race, Poverty, and the Environment Institute of Socio Economic Development USDA Rural Development Home Loans Campesinos Unidos Administration California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation The Institute for Socio-Economic Justice USDA Rural Development Coachella Valley Housing Coalition Imperial Valley Housing Authority BIA/SC Desert Chapter Building Industry Institute National Association of Home Builders Center for Housing Policy I.C. Building & Construction Trades Council California BIA California Housing Council California Home Building Foundation GMAC Development Company Town Center Village LLC DR Horton AMG & Associates TWG General Contractors Victoria Place, LLC Pacific West Development, L.P. Pioneer Manufactured Homes McMillan Homes Slocum Investments, LLC Housing Element Page A-1

110 Table A-1 summarizes comments received from the public during the Study Session and provides a response to indicate how/if the Housing Element addresses the issue. Table A-1: Study Session Comments and Responses Comment Response The City Manager explained that the City recently completed the meet and confer process with the California Department of Finance and commented that future City funding for affordable housing will be highly constrained. Lack of funding was a recurring concern reiterated by several Study Session participants. Participants asked how the City can facilitate affordable housing following the State s dissolution of the City s Redevelopment Agency. County of Imperial Public Health Department representative advocated a smoke free housing policy per recent State law. The County has received complaints from tenants about smoking in apartment buildings and offered the City technical assistance in drafting a smoke free policy. A Study Session participant asked if the quality of healthcare is factored into the HCD review process and whether the City gets points for having healthcare facilities. Study Session participants requested an overview of the public participation process and wanted to know how the public was notified for the study session and how many opportunities the public have to review/comment prior to adoption of the Housing Element. The City s Economic Development Director commented that the existing wait list for affordable units exceeds 800 residents. Quantified objectives for affordable housing construction contained in Table 47 reflect severe local funding constraints caused by the State s dissolution of the City s Redevelopment Agency in February Program 3 outlines actions the City can take to encourage and facilitate affordable housing development without direct financial contribution. Policy 2.8 discourages smoking in homes occupied by children, seniors, or others with health issues. The City s Housing Element consultant explained that healthcare facilities are not part of the Housing Element or HCD s review. The City s Housing Element consultant outlined the public participation program for the Housing Element update, encouraged participants to forward additional comments and questions to the City, and invited attendance at future public meetings. Program 3 contains actions and objectives for the construction of new affordable housing during the planning period. Program 9 outlines the City s commitment to support IVHA s efforts to administer, preserve, and expand the Housing Choice Voucher rental assistance program in El Centro. A Study Session participant requested clarification of SROs units and whether there are other housing types that are suitable for extremely low income households. After closure of the session, a member of the public commented that USDA Rural Development and Rental Assistance programs can facilitate extremely low income housing. The City s Housing Element consultant described SRO units and explained that emergency shelters, transitional housing, supportive housing, and some types of farm worker housing are other housing types that can accommodate extremely low income households. Policy 1.9 encourages the identification and pursuit of funding sources that can facilitate the development of farm worker housing and extremely low income households. Page A Housing Element

111 A.2. Public Service Provider Interviews More than a dozen service providers were contacted via telephone to solicit input regarding housing and supportive service needs in El Centro for the Housing Element update. Key issues identified by the five organizations that responded include: Moderate increases in the number of clientele seeking services. Increased need for funding to provide services and expand programs. Increased need for senior assistance, including: accessibility to safe/affordable housing and general financial support. Increased need for independent living opportunities services for persons with disabilities. The Housing Element addresses these needs through a variety of programs targeted to conserve the existing and expand the future affordable housing stock (Programs 3 and 9) and coordinate with and fund social service agencies, including organizations that support persons with disabilities and seniors (Program 8). Agency: ARC Imperial Valley Contact: Maria Cristobal ARC provides employment, transportation, and residential services to mentally and physically challenged residents of Imperial County. The City allocates funding to the organization to provide Dial a Ride services to its residents. Maria stated that the paratransit services they offer in El Centro have seen moderate increases in the number of clientele seeking services and that the program has proven to be effective in also linking clientele to the services offered by other organization. She revealed that the organization plans on expanding the programs it offers and that cooperating with the City would be effective as it has been successful in the past and present. Agency: Congregate Meals, Catholic Charities Contact: Laurie Edwards Catholic Charities provides a variety of services to El Centro residents, among which their Senior Food Distribution and House of Hope programs receive CDBG funding from the City to operate. The organization has received CDBG funding from the City off and on since 2004 and the amount of funding they have received during those years has continually diminished. Laurie stated that during the last few years the number of clientele they have served has fluctuated and that the majority of clientele served are very low income The Senior Food Distribution program currently serves 54 residents and maintains a lengthy waiting list, constricted primarily by the amount of funding available to the organization. In addition to serving El Centro residents, the organization operates throughout the entire Imperial Valley region, which makes it use of limited funding even more difficult to disperse effectively into programs, given increased needs. She stressed the importance of funding and suggested that the City could help by providing further support to the Housing Element Page A-3

112 organization. Given the depleting amount of funding the organization has received over the last few years, they have had a constant need to find new ways to find money and support for their programs. In the process of helping their clientele, Laurie has noticed that improvements are needed in terms of access to affordable homes in safe areas for seniors, as it is often a difficult process for them to navigate. Agency: Elder Law & Advocacy Contact: Lourdes Ramirez Through its Senior Legal Services program, the agency is able to provide counsel to senior residents dealing with a wide range of issues. Lourdes revealed that over the last few years there has been a moderate increase in the number of clientele seeking advice over housing related issues. Overall, the demand for the services is high as the agency is already close to fulfilling its FY goal of serving 275 clients. Agency: Imperial County Area Agency on Aging Contact: Sherry Leon Over the last few years the agency has continued to serve a growing demand of senior residents who do not want to incur debt. In helping their clientele, Sherry revealed that the agency regularly receives requests for assistance with paying utilities and other basic bills. She explained the issue as a constant dilemma for seniors with such little income who, for example, receive a social security check and are faced with the decision to pay for food or utilities. It is a significant issue that needs to be addressed; however, the agency often cannot help as they do not have enough funding to cover all of the requests they receive. Agency: San Diego Regional Center Contact: Bles Waldo The San Diego Regional Center (SDRC) serves both San Diego and Imperial Counties. Bles said that the center is generally able to provide for prospective clientele as long as they meet the SDRC s requirements, and most often before the age of 18. This clientele age group has long been one of the SDRC s most served. She revealed that within the clientele they serve, there is a growing population seeking accessibility to independent living. When it comes to housing, the center helps its clientele with accommodations as much as possible; however, it s extremely difficult to find the right place for them. There simply are not enough options fit to serve their clientele and the growing demand. A.3. Draft Housing Element Public Meetings The City conducted a public meeting before the Planning Commission on May 14, 2013 to review to the draft Housing Element. Five members of the public attended the meeting and a representative of California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc. offered comment (Table A-2). The City conducted a second public meeting before the City Council on June 4, 2013 to review to the draft Housing Element. More than a dozen members of the public attended the meeting; however, no member of the public offered comment. Page A Housing Element

113 Table A-2: Summary of Public Comments and Housing Element Response Comment Themes Housing Element Response Is Craigslist a reliable source for rental market data in El Centro? Were any other data sources consulted? How often was the information checked? The Draft Housing Element's sites analysis relies on a density factor of 19.0 units per acre to demonstrate adequate capacity to accommodate the lower income RHNA. The Draft Housing Element references two multifamily projects that achieved near or above 19.0 units per acre. One project achieved 21.8 units per acre and the other achieved 18.0 units per acre. Are there any other examples that can demonstrate 19.0 units per acre is a feasible density factor? This is related to the previous comment. Approximately 22 percent of the City's households are large households (defined as households with five or more occupants). Is 19.0 units per acre achievable if a developer provides units that are large enough to accommodate large lower income renter households? How many SROs will need to be included to achieve 19.0 units per acre? How are the needs of large renter households be addressed? Craigslist and the Imperial Valley Free Press (IVFP) are the only sources of on-line rental housing market data available to El Centro residents. In April 2013, the IVFP had an average of 20 rental housing listings, less than half of which were located in El Centro. Craigslist included 93 unduplicated listings within El Centro during the six week period starting December 14, 2012 and ending January 28, A current or prospective resident would most likely check Craigslist to find housing because it provides the largest number of rental listings in one location. The two projects are the only recent examples that demonstrate that zoing and development standards do not constrain the ability of developers to achieve 19.0 units per acre in the R3 zone. Neither project requested or needed a density bonus, waiver, or modification of any development standard. SROs are regulated as commercial development and therefore are not subject to residential land use controls, including density. However, the City acknowledges that a development with smaller units will achieve greater density than a development with larger units (all other things being equal). If a development proposal includes larger dwelling units that would result in a density less than 19.0 units per acre on a R3 or CT site, and the property was relied upon in Table C-1 to demonstrate capacity to accommodate the lower income RHNA, the City will identify and, if necessary, rezone sufficient sites to accommodate the shortfall and ensure no net loss in capacity to accommodate the RHNA (see Program 2). As noted on pg. 22 of the Draft Housing Element, according to the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey data, more than 7,000 units in El Centro contained three or more bedrooms; the minimum size considered appropriate to avoid overcrowding for large households. However, a significant majority of these units are owner-occupied and only 1,742 of these large units were renter-occupied. According to the 2010 Census, the City was home to 1,548 large renter-households. In response to this public comment, the Draft Housing Element has been revised to acknowledge that although the 1,742 rental housing units with three or more bedrooms are numerically sufficient to meet the needs of the City's 1,548 large renter-households, lower income large renter-households may have difficulty finding adequately sized and affordable housing in El Centro. The Draft Housing Element was also revised to include a new policy encouraging the development of rental housing units with three or more bedrooms to address the needs of large renter households (see Policy 1.14) Housing Element Page A-5

114

115 Appendix B: Review of Past Accomplishments Government Code Section 65588(a) requires each jurisdiction to review its housing element as frequently as appropriate to evaluate: The appropriateness of the housing goals, objectives, and policies in contributing to the attainment of the state housing goal; The effectiveness of the housing element in attainment of the community s housing goals and objectives; and The progress of the city, county or city and county in implementation of the housing element. This section documents the City s achievements under the Housing Element with respect to the actions and objectives contained therein. This section describes the relative success of the City s efforts to implement the 2008 programs, and contains recommendations for program retention, revision, deletion or addition to address current and projected needs and state requirements for the planning period. Table B-1 compares quantified objectives and accomplishments during the (through end of 2012); however, new construction objectives are reported for the RHNA cycle, which started in Table B-2 lists these housing programs and provides a summary of accomplishments during the prior period. Table B-1: Objectives and Accomplishments New Construction Rehabilitation Conservation Income ( ) ( ) ( ) Category Objective Accomplishment Objective Accomplishment Objective Accomplishment Extremely Low Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate 1, Total 3, Housing Element Page B-1

116 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs Objective 1: Housing Availability and Production 1 Utilize the City s Updated General Plan and Zoning ordinance to provide adequate, suitable sites for the construction of new housing, reflecting a variety of housing types and densities. The City will make the land inventory available to the public at City Hall and will also post the inventory on the City s website. In addition, this will include an inventory of existing affordable housing units in the City, including density bonus units and other publicly assisted units. The City will publish the availability of the updated inventory at least annually. 2 Continue to use zoning and other land use controls to ensure the compatibility of residential areas with surrounding commercial and other non-residential uses. 3 The City will use programs, such as the HOME and CDBG Programs for the reconstruction and/or rehabilitation of lower income, including extremely low income owner/renter occupied housing units in El Centro. The City will take all action necessary to expedite processing and approvals for such programs. Accomplishments The Housing Element, which includes the City s inventory of vacant land and affordable housing, was available to the public at City Hall and on the City s website during the planning period. Continued Appropriateness: This program is retained, but modified for the Housing Element (see Program 1). The City implemented the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance to ensure the compatibility of residential areas with surrounding commercial and other non-residential uses. Continued Appropriateness: Ensuring land use compatibility between residential and non-residential uses is an important priority for the City. However, this program is not included in the Housing Element as a separate housing program. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding land use compatibility. As of April 2013, the Economic Development Department completed two reconstruction projects for two very low income families. It also completed five rehabilitation projects under the very low income category and eight rehabilitation projects for families at the low income category. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element as a separate program; however, primary program elements are included in the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program (see Program 12). The Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program will use a portion of available CDBG funds to assist lower income homeowners reconstruct or rehabilitate their dwellings. Page B Housing Element

117 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs 4 Continue to utilize environmental and other development review procedures to ensure that all new residential developments are provided with adequate public and private facilities and services. The City shall continue to work cooperatively with school districts in monitoring housing, population, and school enrollment trends to plan for future school facility needs. Documentation that adequate services and facilities are or will be provided shall be a condition for their approval. 5 Housing data will be continuously posted on the City s web site and available in hard copy on request. Accomplishments The City utilized environmental and other development review procedures to ensure that new residential developments were provided with adequate public and private facilities and services. The City worked cooperatively with school districts to plan for future school facility needs. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included the Housing Element. Primary program elements are included in the Urban Development Program contained in the General Plan Land Use Element. The City s Building Division posts monthly construction data reports on the City s website, which are also available in hard copy. The reports include residential and non-residential construction data. Continued Appropriateness: This program reflects routine functions of City Building Division staff and is therefore not included in the Housing Element as a separate housing program. 6 Continue to update elements of the General Plan, as needed. The City updated the General Plan Circulation Element in The City Zoning Ordinance permits clustered development in R-1 and R-2 zones of the City. Clustered housing development in R-1 and R-2 zones is subject to conditional use permits in order to evaluate each project individually and to preserve the low density residential character of adjacent neighborhoods. Clustered development is allowable by right in the R-3 zone. The Planning & Zoning Department will provide project developers with the pertinent information during pre-application meetings to encourage the development of clustered housing. Where appropriate, conditional use permit applications will also be expedited to further encourage clustered development. Continued Appropriateness: Features of this program reflect routine functions of City staff, the Planning Commission, and City Council. The program is not included in the Housing Element as a separate housing program. Since 2008, the City has not received any applications for clustered development. Continued Appropriateness: Promoting clustered housing development remains an important priority for the City. However, this program is not included in the Housing Element as a separate housing program. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding clustered housing development Housing Element Page B-3

118 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs 8 To encourage the development of affordable housing through density bonuses, the City will provide public announcements, at least once a year, in the local newspaper informing developers and the general public of the availability and benefits of residential density bonuses. Brochures will also be made available for distribution to developers seeking information. The City processes density bonus applications through a conditional use permit procedure. Conditional use permit processing fees for density bonus projects will be waived and the application expedited to further encourage their use. The existing City Zoning Ordinance regarding density bonuses is not in conformance with state law. The City will adopt an ordinance that is in compliance with Government Code Section To encourage the development of affordable housing for low and moderate income households, the City will offer financial incentives to properties that consolidate multiple (2 or more) adjoining small lots into larger more developable, more marketable parcels. Subject to funding availability, and with participation of the El Centro Redevelopment Agency, the City will offer below interest rate loans for construction financing and/or permanent financing. Funding participation levels will be evaluated on a project-by-project basis, and will be dependent on the level and extent of affordability offered. 10 The City will actively work with interested developers to identify sources of funding for the construction of new affordable multi-family housing targeting the needs of large family households in El Centro. Funding to be pursued includes tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds; HCD s Multi- Family Housing Program; and tax credits. The City shall also assist the process by providing letters of support for funding applications during the application process to increase the chances of a project receiving a funding award. Page B-4 Accomplishments The City revised the Zoning Ordinance during the planning period to update the density bonus provisions consistent with State law. The City has not processed any applications for density bonus projects since Continued Appropriateness: The City s density bonus ordinance is now compliant with State law and therefore this program is not included in the Housing Element; however, the regulatory incentives and concessions available to developers through the density bonus ordinance are included in an overall program to facilitate and encourage affordable housing development (see Program 3). The City has not developed lot consolidation criteria or incentives. The State s elimination of the City s Redevelopment Agency in February 2012 removed the primary funding mechanism for incentives anticipated under this program. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element. The Las Brisas project (formerly known as the El Centro Family Apartment project) was completed in September Las Brisas provides 72 affordable units, including 27 units with three or more bedrooms that can accommodate a five-person large family household without overcrowding. This project was financed with different public funding sources including HOME, LIHTC, MHP, and Redevelopment Set-Aside funds. The project was completed in September Continued Appropriateness: This program is administrative in nature and not included in the Housing Element as a separate program; however, the primary program components are in an overall program to Housing Element

119 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs 11 To accommodate the remaining RHNA of 259 low-income units, the City shall rezone Assessor s Parcel Number , acres, as show in Table of the element from R-2 to R-3 at a minimum density of 20 units per acre. Pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section of the Government Code, the City shall ensure that owneroccupied and multi-family residential housing development allowed by right, without a conditional use permit, planned unit development permit, or other discretionary review or approval that would constitute a project for the purposes of Division 13 of the Public Resources Code. Create an opportunity for a minimum of 259 units of rental housing for lower income households. Objective 2: Housing Conservation and Improvement 1 The El Centro Redevelopment agency administers a Home Improvement Program to provide financial assistance in the form of low interest and deferred payment loans for the rehabilitation of residences owned and/or occupied by lower income households. The City promotes the program and provides detailed information on its website. Additionally, the City does an annual mailing of a program brochure as an insert to the water bill, provides brochures at all City tabling events and details the program in its quarterly newsletter. The program objective is the rehabilitation of 10 units per year, or 90 units through the balance of the Housing Element. Accomplishments facilitate and encourage affordable housing development (see Program 3). The property owner chose not to pursue a rezone of the acre parcel. Instead the City identified 18 acres on 11 vacant High-Medium Density / R3 parcels that were not included in the prior Housing Element s inventory and adequate sites analysis. These parcels have capacity to accommodate at least 283 units assuming a density factor of 16 units per acre. Because the R3 sites allow up to 25 units per acre, the vacant sites are considered sufficient to accommodate housing that is affordable to lower income households by default per Government Code Section (c)(3)(B). Given the default affordability status and realistic capacity of these vacant sites, the City had (and still has) a surplus capacity of at least 24 lower income units through Continued Appropriateness: This program is not continued in the Housing Element. As of April 2013, the Economic Development Department completed two reconstruction projects for two very low income families. The department also completed five rehabilitation projects under the very low income category and eight rehabilitation projects for families at the low income category. Continued Appropriateness: This program is retained, but modified for the Housing Element (see Program 12). The Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program will use a portion of available CDBG funds to assist lower income homeowners reconstruct or rehabilitate their dwellings. 2 Condominium Conversions may have a negative impact on the supply of rental housing, and the potential of displacing families from the converted units may present special problems for the elderly, handicapped, or lower income households. The Planning and Zoning Department shall review condominium conversions on a case-by-case basis to minimize or The City did not receive any applications to convert rental apartments into residential condominiums; however, the City approved the conversion of a 46-unit motel (operating similar to a SRO) and a three-unit apartment building into office condominiums Housing Element Page B-5

120 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs mitigate impacts on displaced households and monitor condo conversions, housing demolitions, conversions of reserved housing units, and closure of mobile home parks, and recommend specific actions to the City Council to avoid economic dislocations to affected households. The staff will recommend written notification to all residents when dislocation is likely in effect to minimize dislocations and to act as a resource to assist those dislocated from their homes to find permanent accommodations. 3 Allow for the construction of bedroom additions with financial assistance from the City s residential rehabilitation program, when needed to eliminate overcrowding and to address the needs of large family households. The City will engage in a public noticing campaign consisting of publishing at least annually the availability of funds for bedroom additions as well as for other eligible activities. The campaign will also involve the provision of ongoing program progress (and remaining funds availability), to be posted in City Hall and be kept up to date. 4 Continue to monitor housing conditions throughout the City, while periodically (i.e. every 5 years) conducting formal housing condition surveys. Accomplishments Continued Appropriateness: Rental housing is an important source of affordable housing in the City. However, this is not included in the Housing Element as a separate housing program. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding condominium conversion. The City did not receive any applications for bedroom additions during the planning period. A bedroom can be added if the Economic Development Department determines that overcrowding exists in the course of working with an applicant for the Home Improvement Loan program. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included the Housing Element as a separate program; however, primary program elements are included in the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program (see Program 12). The Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program will use a portion of available CDBG funds to assist lower income homeowners rehabilitate their dwellings and add bedrooms to alleviate overcrowding. The City hired a consultant to complete a thorough survey of residential property conditions. The consultant completed the housing condition survey in January 2008 and the findings are summarized in the Housing Element. Although this program established a five-year time frame for periodic updates to the 2008 survey, limited funding in large part due to the State s elimination of the City s Redevelopment Agency in 2012 made implementation of this program infeasible. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not continued in the Housing Element. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to update the 2008 housing conditions survey during the planning period, subject to available funds. Page B Housing Element

121 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs 5 If necessary, cause the removal and replacement of substandard units, which cannot be rehabilitated, through enforcement of applicable provisions of the Uniform Housing and Revenue and Tax Codes. Replacement of 5 dilapidated units per year or 25 units over the new 5- year planning period. 6 Continue and expand proactive code enforcement efforts, where possible, and explore new methods of eliminating unsightly property conditions in residential areas as necessary, the City will continue to administer the complaint based system in a timely and efficient manner. 7 Continue to provide information and technical assistance to local property owners regarding housing maintenance. The City provides information on the program in its quarterly newsletter and at various City tabling events. 8 Avoid displacement of residents in carrying out CDBG funded activities, whenever possible, or otherwise provide appropriate relocation assistance. Accomplishments The City did not remove or replace any substandard units during the planning period. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not continued in the Housing Element. Substandard units that fall under any particular housing or building code violation are handled through the City s Code Enforcement division. The City hired a full-time Code Enforcement Officer in 2009 to proactively identify poor housing conditions work toward the improvement thereof. Continued Appropriateness: Features of this program reflect routine functions of City Code Enforcement staff. The program is not included in the Housing Element as a separate housing program. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding code enforcement. The Economic Development Department promoted the City s Housing Improvement Program, which encourages housing improvements. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element as a separate housing program. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding housing maintenance education. No residents were displaced as a result of CDBG-funded activities during the planning period. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not continued in the Housing Element. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding displacement of residents when carrying out City programs Housing Element Page B-7

122 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs 9 Continue to utilize the City s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance to prevent the encroachment of incompatible uses into established residential areas. 10 The City s Director of Economic Development will annually report to the City Council during annual budget and 5-year mid-progress reports of RDA Plans on the availability of Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund, and projects, which have been funded. 11 The City has adopted a Residential Anti-displacement and relocation Assistance Plan under Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of The plan seeks to minimize disruption and displacement of targeted lower income households affected by dwelling unit demolitions or conversions under publicly financed redevelopment or other programs. In addition, the City adopted policies on impacted-tenant rights for residential conversions to apartments or cooperatives, and land use policies to avoid patterns of development, which concentrates displacement impacts on certain neighborhoods. Accomplishments The City implemented the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance to help prevent the encroachment of incompatible uses into established residential areas. Continued Appropriateness: Ensuring land use compatibility between residential and non-residential uses is an important priority for the City. However, this program is not included in the Housing Element as a separate program. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding land use compatibility and encroachment of incompatible land uses. The City s Director of Economic Development reported to the City Council during annual budget and 5-year mid-progress reports of RDA Plans on the availability of Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund (LMIHF), and funded projects up until August The State eliminated the City s Redevelopment Agency in February Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element due to dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency. No residents were displaced as a result of City-funded redevelopment activities or other publicly financed programs during the planning period. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not continued in the Housing Element. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding displacement of residents when carrying out City programs. Consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the project, the City will take the following actions to minimize the effects of displacement: Page B Housing Element

123 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs Staged rehabilitation of dwelling units so that residents can be relocated within a project; Temporary relocation facilities; Establish relocation assistance centers; and Develop displacement watch systems to review development trends and identify displacement problems and solutions. Objective 3: Opportunities for Energy Conservation 1 Utilize the development review process to incorporate energy conservation techniques into the siting and design of proposed residences. 2 Continue to require that all new residential development complies with the energy conservation requirements of Title 24 of the California Administrative Code, and encourage developers through a revised Subdivision Ordinance to employ additional energy conservation measures in an effort to exceed the minimum required standards, including but not limited to the specific example below. Sustainable site development; Water savings; Energy efficiency; Material selection; and Indoor environmental quality. Accomplishments The City enforces Title 24 energy efficiency provisions contained in the California Building Standards Code. Continued Appropriateness: Energy conservation is an important City goal; however, this program is not continued in the Housing Element as a separate program. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding the promotion of siting and design techniques that conserve energy. The City enforces Title 24 energy efficiency provisions contained in the California Building Standards Code. The Subdivision Ordinance was updated in 2008; however, the focus of the update was to modify retention basin standards. Continued Appropriateness: Energy conservation is an important City goal; however, this program is not continued in the Housing Element as a separate program. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding the promotion of energy conservation in new subdivisions Housing Element Page B-9

124 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs 3 Continue to allow energy conservation measures as improvements eligible for assistance under the City s Home Improvement program. The City promotes the program and provides detailed information on its website. Additionally, the City does an annual mailing of a program brochure as an insert to the water bill, provides brochures at all City tabling events and details the program in its quarterly newsletter. Program staff keeps in close contact with local banks to ensure their participation in the program. 4 Assist in distributing information to the public regarding free home energy audits and other programs of the Imperial Irrigation District (IID). Objective 4: Equal Housing Opportunity 1 Provide outreach material on state and federal fair housing laws and direct complaints of housing discrimination to appropriate enforcement agencies (i.e. State Department of Fair Employment and Housing and Inland Fair Housing Mediation Board). The City will provide detailed information on its website and in its quarterly newsletter, including contact phone numbers and addresses. Page B-10 Accomplishments Energy conservation measures continue to be eligible improvements under the City s Home Improvement Program. The Economic Development Department promotes the Housing Improvement Program on the City website, at tabling events, in newsletters, and in annual utility bill brochure inserts. Local banks are not involved as they are not part of the financing of a project. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included the Housing Element as a separate program; however, primary program elements are included in the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program (see Program 12). The Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program will use a portion of available CDBG funds to assist lower income homeowners rehabilitate their dwellings. Energy conservation measures will continue to be eligible improvements. The City s Building Division has placed a flyer from the IID at the public counter about business incentives for their New Construction Energy Efficiency Program. Continued Appropriateness: Energy conservation is an important City goal; however, this program is not continued in the Housing Element as a separate program. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding public education of energy conservation measures such as energy audits. Since 2007 the has contracted with the Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board (IFHMB) to conduct the necessary community outreach as it relates to fair housing laws and discrimination. The City provides fair housing information on its website. During the planning period, outreach material was primarily provided by the IFHMB. The City also distributes information at tabling events and includes articles about fair housing in a bi-annual newsletter. The IFHMB has its own outreach efforts they provide, such as public service announcements, distribution of brochures at various sites within El Centro, fair housing community events, Housing Element

125 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs 2 Continue to allow the removal of architectural barriers with funding from the City s residential rehabilitation program in order to provide barrier-free housing for handicapped or disabled persons. 3 Specify procedures as part of the updated Zoning Ordinance to provide reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities that allow for administrative approval of handicapped accessible features. 4 Enforce the handicapped accessibility of Federal fair housing laws that apply to all new multi-family residential projects containing four (4) or more units. Accomplishments newsletter articles, and other activities. From 2008 to 2012, IFHMB forwarded nine discrimination complaints to appropriate enforcement agencies. Continued Appropriateness: This program is retained, but modified for the Housing Element (see Program 14). The City funded two housing rehabilitation projects that included accommodations for persons with disabilities during the planning period. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element as a separate program; however, primary program elements are included in the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program (see Program 12). Barrier-free housing improvements will continue to be eligible improvements. The City amended the Zoning Ordinance during the planning period to establish an administrative, but discretionary procedure for the review/approval of reasonable accommodation requests. The application fee is $428. Continued Appropriateness: This program has been modified for the Housing Element to establish a ministerial review procedure and reduce or eliminate the application fee (see Program 6). The City s Building and Safety Division enforced the handicapped accessibility of Federal fair housing laws that apply to all new multi-family residential projects containing four (4) or more units as part of plan check review for compliance with the California Building Standards Code. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element. Implementation of this program is a routine function of Building and Safety Division during project review for compliance with the California Building Standards Code Housing Element Page B-11

126 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs 5 Process and approve requests for the establishment of residential care facilities, in accordance with Section of the Health and Safety Code, as a means of providing long-term transitional housing for extremely low income and very low income persons. 6 Pursuant to SB2, the Zoning Ordinance will be amended to identify that emergency shelters will be permitted by right in the R3, High Density Residential District. In accordance with SB2 requirements, the City shall also revise the Zoning Ordinance to ensure that transitional and supportive housing shall be treated as other proposed residential uses and subject only to those restrictions applicable to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone and the same type of structure. 7 The City shall establish streamlined permit processing procedures to expedite the development of homeless shelters as developments come under the consideration of the City by expediting the permitting process for homeless shelters. Accomplishments The City did not have an opportunity to process/approve requests for the establishment of residential care facilities during the planning period. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element. The City s Zoning Ordinance is compliant with the Lanterman Act provisions for residential care facilities. The City will continue to implement the Zoning Ordinance as routine function of municipal government. The City amended the Zoning Ordinance during the planning period to allow emergency shelters, transitional housing, and supportive housing consistent with SB 2. Continued Appropriateness: This program has been implemented and is not included in the Housing Element. The City s Zoning Ordinance is compliant with SB2 provisions for emergency shelters, transitional housing, and supportive housing. The City will continue to implement the Zoning Ordinance as routine function of municipal government. The City amended the Zoning Ordinance during the planning period to allow emergency shelters by-right and subject to ministerial review consistent with SB 2. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element. Emergency shelters are permitted by-right and applications will be reviewed with the same ministerial plan check review process that applies to all other projects that require ministerial permits. Page B Housing Element

127 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs 8 The City will continue to support efforts of IVHA to target farm workers for housing improvement programs similar to those offered by FmHA. Support will be in the form of expediting application and permit processing and letters of support, where applicable. To achieve, where possible, results similar to the Tierra Del Sol Project. In addition, progress reports by the Community Development Director, identifying and addressing farm worker housing conditions shall be provided to the City Council on an annual basis. Objective 5: Removing Constraints 1 Periodically reexamine the Zoning Ordinance (i.e., every 5 years) for possible amendments to reduce housing construction costs without sacrificing basic health and safety considerations. 2 Periodically review (i.e., every 2 years) the performance of local lending institutions with regard to the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) and the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). 3 Periodically survey (i.e., every 5 years) other cities in the Imperial County area to ensure that El Centro s fees are reasonable. Accomplishments The City did not have an opportunity to support IVHA or assist developers with the provision of farm worker housing during the planning period. In April 2013, the City amended the Zoning Ordinance to specify that farm worker housing serving six or fewer employees is an accessory use within a single-family dwelling within residential districts that allow agriculture uses. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not continued in the Housing Element as a separate program. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding the importance of housing that is affordable to farm employees. The City re-examined the Zoning Ordinance as part of the Housing Element Update process. In April 2013, the City amended the Zoning Ordinance to remove identified constraints related to the provision of transitional/supportive housing, farm worker housing, large residential care facilities, room and board limitations, and SRO units. Continued Appropriateness: This program is retained, but modified for the Housing Element (see Program 7). The Economic Development Department analyzes lending institution performance during the periodic update to the City s Analysis of Impediments (AI). Continued Appropriateness: Periodic review of local lending institution performance is a routine function of the City during the AI update process. This program is not included in the as a separate program. City staff did not conduct a survey of fees charged in other cities; however, given the State s elimination of the City s Redevelopment Agency (and associated revenue) and based on the analysis contained in this Housing Element update, the City s fees are reasonable and necessary. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element Housing Element Page B-13

128 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs 4 Continue the program to allocate funds to defray the cost of land and/or required off-site improvements for low income and extremely low income housing projects. 5 The City shall encourage concurrent processing of entitlements allowing various analyses and staff reports to be done at the same time, to facilitate faster overall processing times. Department staff will notify applicants early in development process of this policy and place public notice of the City s policy on the web site. 6 LAFCO will not entertain annexation applications unless they indicate that the affected agencies have the capability to provide services and a Plan for Services is provided that describes how such services and improvements will be financed. Therefore, the City will pursue annexation when a development proposal includes financial assistance for extending such services. Page B-14 The City will work with LAFCO to expand its city limits to include acreage pre-zoned in accordance with the needs for Low Density, Medium Density, and High Density as needed to satisfy the RHNA, contained in Table To reach this goal, the City will require residential development proposals of more than 10 acres that are subject to annexation to set aside at least 10% of the land for High Density multifamily residential development and an additional 15% for Medium Density residential development, thus ensuring the availability of additional Accomplishments The City did not have an opportunity to allocate funds to defray the cost of land and/or off-site improvements for lower income projects during the planning period. Continued Appropriateness: Due to the State s elimination of the City s Redevelopment Agency in 2012, this program is not included in the Housing Element. The City will evaluate assistance for future affordable housing developments on a case-by-case basis to determine if other sources of financial assistance are available (see Program 3). The City encouraged concurrent processing of entitlements by allowing various analyses and staff reports to be done at the same time. This facilitated faster overall processing times during the planning period. Continued Appropriateness: Expeditious permit processing is an important City goal; however, this program is not continued in the Housing Element as a separate program. Instead, a policy is included in the Housing Element to affirm the City s position regarding concurrent permit processing as a means of streamlining development review. This program was only partially-implemented during the planning period. The City continued to process annexation requests; however, given the poor state of the economy, overall interest in annexation for residential construction has been limited and the City has not required that development proposals of more than 10 acres set aside a portion of the land for medium to high density housing. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element. Processing annexation requests is a routine function of City staff, the Planning Commission, City Council, and LAFCO. Annexations are guided by established LAFCO procedures and the City s General Plan (specifically the Urban Development Program of the Land Use Element). However, the City has included a policy to encourage applicants for development of land over 10 acres to set aside a portion of the land for medium to high density housing Housing Element

129 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs dwelling units for lower and moderate income households. The City will create an action plan and timeline for requesting annexation approval from LAFCO, which will attract developers and encourage new construction. The City will cooperate with the project proponent by granting consultation meetings and by working with the proponent in providing City services to the site. 7 The Zoning Code shall be revised so that the definition of Group Homes clearly permits the treatment of group homes and residential care facilities for six or fewer residents in the same manner as other single family uses. (Revisions shall be done to text portions of the Code in addition to Table , including sections (a)(5) and (c)(3)(and (4) small and large day care homes). Objective 6: Housing Affordability 1 Explore the possibility that local lending institutions participate in the creation of a loan pool for the construction, rehabilitation and/or purchase of housing affordable to low and moderate income households, as a means for them to fulfill their obligations under the Federal Community Reinvestment Act. The City will also provide low interest loans to housing projects in need of rehabilitation in exchange of affordability controls. Accomplishments The City revised the Zoning Ordinance during the planning period to allow small residential care facilities serving six or fewer clients consistent with the Lanterman Act. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element. The City s Zoning Ordinance is compliant with the Lanterman Act provisions for residential care facilities. The City will continue to implement the Zoning Ordinance as routine function of municipal government. The Economic Development Department did not have an opportunity to reach out to local lending institutions during the planning period. As of April 2013, the Economic Development Department completed two reconstruction projects for two very low income families. The department also completed five rehabilitation projects under the very low income category and eight rehabilitation projects for families at the low income category. 2 Continue to defer development fees for all proposed housing units affordable to lower income households. The City will also continue its efforts to actively notify property owners that the construction of second Continued Appropriateness: This program is not retained in the Housing Element as a separate program; however, program elements are included in two programs. Given the State s elimination of the City s Redevelopment Agency, outreach to local lending institutions will be included as part of an overall program to facilitate affordable housing development. The provision of low interest loans for rehabilitation is included in the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program (see Program 12). The City did not receive any requests for fee deferment or applications for second dwelling units during the planning period Housing Element Page B-15

130 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs Accomplishments units continues to be a viable opportunity to provide second units. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element; however, the promotion of second dwelling unit construction is included as a policy and fee deferment is one concession or incentive included in an overall program to facilitate and encourage affordable housing development (see Program 3). 3 The City will update the Zoning Ordinance to allow, where appropriate, the use of innovative land use techniques and construction methods, such as clustering of units, density transfers, and zero lot line lines to The General Plan Land Use Element allows developers to propose innovative land use techniques (such as clustering of units, density transfers, and zero lot lines) as part of a Specific Plan or Planned Unit minimize housing development costs and to maximize development Development. opportunities. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Inform private developers of the below market interest rate mortgage programs operated by the California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) and direct interested homebuyers to CalHFA. During each funding cycle, the Agency will execute a city-wide direct mailing to all residents of the City, advertising the City s programs. 5 Support the efforts of non-profit organizations, private developers, and the Imperial Valley Housing Authority (IVHA) to obtain State and/or Federal funds for the construction of affordable housing for lower income households. The City will be open to waiving fees where applicable, expediting applications and permit processes, and providing letters of support for funding applications; the City will also consider utilizing Code Enforcement staff and El Centro Redevelopment staff to help write and to review project applications Housing Element. The City did not implement this program during the planning period. Private developers who specialize in affordable housing construction are well-aware of available funding sources. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element. The City did not have the opportunity to work with IVHA to complete affordable housing projects during the planning period; however, a positive working relationship between the two agencies has existed for many years. The City has supported the efforts of entities interested in providing affordable housing in El Centro by providing letters of support and, in some cases, preparing and/or submitting the grant application to the funding source. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element; however, support of efforts by non-profits, private developers, and IVHA to expand the City s supply of affordable housing is included as a policy. Furthermore, fee waiver/deferral, expedited permit processing, and letters of support for funding applications are included in an overall program to facilitate and encourage affordable housing development (see Program 3). Page B Housing Element

131 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs 6 The City shall annually apply or support development and rehabilitation applications for State and Federal funding for affordable housing, including the following funding sources: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG): The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) administers the federal CDBG program for non-entitlement cities and counties. As an entitlement City, El Centro will participate in CDBG annual funding programs. The City received $665,626 in CDBG funds in HOME: Under the HOME program, HUD will award funds to localities on the basis of a formula that takes into account the tightness of the local housing market, inadequate housing, poverty, and housing production costs. HOME funding is provided to jurisdictions to assist either rental housing or homeownership through acquisition, construction, reconstruction, and/or rehabilitation of affordable housing. Also possible is tenant-based rental assistance, property acquisition, site improvements, and other expenses related to the provision of affordable housing and for projects that serve a group identified as having special needs related to housing. The local jurisdiction must make matching contributions to affordable housing under HOME. Section 514/516 Farm labor Housing: Section 514 provides loans and Section 516 provides grants to developers for farm labor and migrant farm labor housing. The is eligible for Section 514/Section 516 funding. Section 523 Mutual Self-Help Housing Program: Technical assistance and site grants are provided to homeowners who complete at least 65 percent of the work to build his or her own home through sweat equity. Once accepted into the Self Help program, each individual enrollee generally applies for a Single-Family Housing Direct Loan (Section 502). This program has been used in El Centro Accomplishments In 2004 the became an entitlement city and during this first year the City received approximately $800,000 a year. However, throughout the years the City s allocation has been reduced substantially. In 2012, the City received $472,973 in CDBG funds. It is anticipated that our annual CDBG allocation will experience a 10% reduction every year. HOME funding is established on an annual basis and cannot be predicted reliably. The City is a non-entitlement community under the HOME program and must submit a grant application to the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and compete with other eligible agencies for funding. The City is not eligible to apply for the Section 523 housing program as it is only available for rural areas and the city is not considered rural. Continued Appropriateness: This program is not included in the Housing Element as it is limited to a list of funding sources. Applying for or supporting funding applications is included as part of an overall program to facilitate affordable housing development (see Program 3) Housing Element Page B-17

132 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs to provide many affordable homeownership opportunities for lower income households. Proposition 1C Funds: The Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006 approved $2.85 billion in bonds to provide funding for a variety of housing programs. HCD administers these programs, which provide funding for the construction, rehabilitation and reservation of affordable rental and owner-occupied housing, homeless facilities, and funding for down payment assistance to low and moderate income first-time homebuyers. 7 The City offers assistance to first-time homebuyers through a silent second mortgage to secure financing toward the purchase of a singlefamily home in El Centro. Applicants must be low income, defined as having an income that does not exceed 80 percent of the area median income, adjusted for household size. Qualified properties must be structurally sound single-family detached units located within City Limits. Purchase Price of the home cannot exceed $100,000. The buyer must be able to qualify for a 30-year fixed rate FHA/CHFA loan from an approved federal or state program and have a two-percent down payment. A loan from the City can then be requested to provide for a minimum amount required for the balance of the down payment of up to 18% of the sales price or a maximum loan amount of $50,000. Provide first-time homebuyer assistance to single-family detached units within the City limits, assisting a minimum of five low income units annually. Objective 7: Preserving Affordable Housing 1 Section 8 rent subsidies are available to very low income households (earning up to 50 percent of the County s Median Family Income) to reduce housing payments to not more than 30 percent of their income. This program is administered through the Imperial Valley Housing Authority. The City shall actively partner with the Imperial Valley Housing Authority to monitor the status of existing vouchers and work to secure additional Section 8 rental assistance to benefit lower income households. Page B-18 Accomplishments The purchase price of a home under this program cannot exceed the FHA limits. Therefore, the $100,000 amount is no longer accurate. Also, the maximum loan amount is currently $20,000. Since 2008, the City made 65 loans to families whose income limits were below the 120% AMI. Continued Appropriateness: This program is retained, but modified for the Housing Element (see Program 4). The IVHA counted 938 El Centro households receiving Housing Choice Vouchers as of March Of these, 596 were elderly households and 374 were disabled. The IVHA estimates that approximately 800 of the 1,364 households on its waiting list are El Centro residents. Continued Appropriateness: This program is retained for the Housing Element, but renamed Rental Assistance to eliminate reference to Section 8 (see Program 10) Housing Element

133 Table B-2: Review of Past Program Accomplishments Objective and Associated Programs 2 Preservation of the identified 146 lower income rental units that are at risk of converting to market rate housing within the next 10 years; as other units are identified, the City will also actively engage property owners to take advantage of deferred loan programs for rehabilitation, mortgage refinancing, and acquisition to keep units affordable for a long term (typically 50 years). The City will seek a partnership with the Imperial Valley Housing Authority to put in place a strategy enabling the City to move quickly to preserve units upon becoming aware of the need. The City will provide owners information regarding their opt-out requirements and 12 month tenant noticing. Accomplishments No affordable housing development has converted to market-rate since Continued Appropriateness: This program is retained, but modified for the Housing Element (see Program 12) Housing Element Page B-19

134

135 Appendix C: Sites Inventory Table C-1 presents a detailed list of parcels used in Chapter 4, Housing Resources, to demonstrate that the City has adequate capacity to accommodate the RHNA. Figures C-1 through C-5 provide the geographic location of the parcels within El Centro. Figure C-1: Vacant Parcel Map Quadrant Key Housing Element Page C-1

136 Figure C-2: Vacant Parcel Map Quadrant 1 Page C Housing Element

137 Figure C-3: Vacant Parcel Map Quadrant Housing Element Page C-3

138 Figure C-4: Vacant Parcel Map Quadrant 3 Page C Housing Element

139 Figure C-5: Vacant Parcel Map Quadrant Housing Element Page C-5

140 Table C-1: Residential Sites Inventory Assessor Parcel Site # Number (APN) Lower Income Sites Page C-6 Parcel Size (Acres) Land Use Designation / Zone District High-Medium Density Residential / R High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R High-Medium 4 Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R High-Medium 7 Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 Density Factor (du/ac) Site Size (Acres) Capacity (Round Down) Ownership / Reason for Selection Status Very large parcel owned by the. Vacant Two large contiguous parcels with the same private owner. Vacant Large privately-owned parcel. Vacant Two contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Vacant Large privately-owned parcel. Vacant Large privately-owned parcel. Vacant Two contiguous parcels with consolidation potential. One is privately-owned and the other is owned by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID). Vacant Large privately-owned parcel. Vacant Large privately-owned parcel. Vacant Four contiguous parcels with the same private owner. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Housing Element

141 Table C-1: Residential Sites Inventory Site # Assessor Parcel Number (APN) Parcel Size (Acres) Land Use Designation / Zone District High-Medium Density Residential / R Tourist Commercial / CT Tourist Commercial / CT Density Factor (du/ac) Site Size (Acres) (125)* (58)* Capacity (Round Down) Ownership / Reason for Selection Status Three contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Four contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Three of the parcels have one owner. Eight contiguous parcels with consolidation potential. The owns APNs & Three private owners hold the other six parcels Tourist Commercial / CT (36)* Large privately-owned parcel. Vacant Tourist Commercial / Two large contiguous parcels held by the same private (24)* CT owner. Vacant Tourist Commercial / Two contiguous privately-owned parcels with (20)* CT consolidation potential. Vacant Tourist Commercial / Three contiguous parcels held by the same private (19)* CT owner Vacant Tourist Commercial / Two contiguous privately-owned parcels with (19)* CT consolidation potential. Vacant Tourist Commercial / CT (10)* Large privately-owned parcel. Vacant Tourist Commercial / CT (8)* Two contiguous parcels held by the same private owner. Vacant Tourist Commercial / CT (7)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Tourist Commercial / CT (7)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Lower Income Sites Sub-total Housing Element Page C-7 Vacant Vacant Vacant

142 Table C-1: Residential Sites Inventory Site # Assessor Parcel Number (APN) Parcel Size (Acres) Land Use Designation / Zone District Moderate Income Sites High-Medium 25 Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R High-Medium 27 Density Residential / R High-Medium 28 Density Residential / R High-Medium 29 Density Residential / R High-Medium 30 Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R High-Medium 32 Density Residential / R High-Medium 33 Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 Density Factor (du/ac) Site Size (Acres) Capacity (Round Down) Ownership / Reason for Selection Status Two contiguous parcels held by the same private owner. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Two contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Two contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Two contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Two contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Vacant Vacant Vacant Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Two contiguous parcels held by the same private owner. Vacant Two contiguous parcels held by the same private owner. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Page C Housing Element

143 Table C-1: Residential Sites Inventory Site # Assessor Parcel Number (APN) Parcel Size (Acres) Land Use Designation / Zone District High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 Density Factor (du/ac) Site Size (Acres) Capacity (Round Down) Ownership / Reason for Selection Status Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Owned by the. Vacant Housing Element Page C-9

144 Table C-1: Residential Sites Inventory Site # Page C-10 Assessor Parcel Number (APN) Parcel Size (Acres) Land Use Designation / Zone District High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 High-Medium Density Residential / R3 Tourist Commercial / CT Tourist Commercial / CT Tourist Commercial / CT Tourist Commercial / CT Downtown Commercial / CD Downtown Commercial / CD Downtown Commercial / CD Downtown Commercial / CD Density Factor (du/ac) Site Size (Acres) Capacity (Round Down) Ownership / Reason for Selection Status Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Owned by the. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant (2)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant (1)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant (1)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant (1)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant (4)* Three contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Vacant (3)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant (3) * Privately-owned parcel. Vacant (3)* Two contiguous parcels held by the same private owner. Vacant Housing Element

145 Table C-1: Residential Sites Inventory Site # Assessor Parcel Number (APN) Parcel Size (Acres) Land Use Designation / Zone District Downtown Commercial / CD Downtown Commercial / CD Downtown Commercial / CD Downtown Commercial / CD Downtown Commercial / CD Downtown Commercial / CD Density Factor (du/ac) Site Size (Acres) Capacity (Round Down) Ownership / Reason for Selection Status (2)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant (1)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant (1)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant (1)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant (1)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant (1)* Owned by the. Vacant Downtown Commercial / CD (3)* Three contiguous parcels with the same private owner. Vacant Downtown Commercial / CD (1)* Owned by the. Vacant Downtown Commercial / CD (1)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Downtown Commercial / CD (1)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Downtown Commercial / CD (0)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Downtown Commercial / CD (0)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Downtown Commercial / CD (0)* Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Three contiguous privately-owned parcels with Residential / R2 consolidation potential Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Three contiguous parcels with the same private owner. Vacant Medium Density Three contiguous privately-owned parcels with Vacant Housing Element Page C-11

146 Table C-1: Residential Sites Inventory Site # Assessor Parcel Number (APN) Parcel Size (Acres) Land Use Designation / Zone District Density Factor (du/ac) Site Size (Acres) Capacity (Round Down) Ownership / Reason for Selection Status Residential / R2 consolidation potential. Two parcels held by the same owner Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Medium Density Residential / R Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Moderate Income Sites Sub-total Above Moderate Income Sites Page C-12 Low Density Residential / R contiguous parcels with consolidation potential. Two parcels owned by the (APNs & ). Another seven parcels held by one owner. Vacant Housing Element

147 Table C-1: Residential Sites Inventory Site # Parcel Assessor Parcel Number (APN) Size (Acres) Land Use Designation / Zone District Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R1 Density Factor (du/ac) Site Size (Acres) Capacity (Round Down) Ownership / Reason for Selection Status Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Two contiguous parcels held by the same private owner. Vacant Two contiguous parcels held by the same private owner. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Four contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential Housing Element Page C-13 Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. 16 parcels are held by one owner. Another 5 parcels are held by another single owner. Vacant

148 Table C-1: Residential Sites Inventory Site # 105 Page C-14 Parcel Assessor Parcel Number (APN) Size (Acres) Land Use Designation / Zone District Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R1 Density Factor (du/ac) Site Size (Acres) Capacity (Round Down) Ownership / Reason for Selection Status Three contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Two parcels held by one owner. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Five contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Two contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Vacant Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Seven contiguous parcels with the same private owner. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Two contiguous parcels with the same private owner. Vacant Housing Element

149 Table C-1: Residential Sites Inventory Site # 113 Parcel Assessor Parcel Number (APN) Size (Acres) Land Use Designation / Zone District Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R Low Density Residential / R1 Density Factor (du/ac) Site Size (Acres) Capacity (Round Down) Ownership / Reason for Selection Status Six contiguous parcels owned by the. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Two contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. APN owned by the. Five contiguous privately-owned parcels. Two separate owners hold four of the parcels. Three contiguous privately-owned parcels. Two parcels held by one owner. Vacant Vacant Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Two contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Two contiguous parcels with the same private owner. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Housing Element Page C-15

150 Table C-1: Residential Sites Inventory Site # Assessor Parcel Number (APN) Parcel Size (Acres) Land Use Designation / Zone District Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R1 Low Density Residential / R1 Density Factor (du/ac) Site Size (Acres) Rural Residential / RR Rural Residential / RR Above Moderate Income Site Sub-total Capacity (Round Down) Ownership / Reason for Selection Status Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Privately-owned parcel. Vacant Three contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Two contiguous privately-owned parcels with consolidation potential. Sites Inventory Total ,163 *Indicates Mixed-Use and therefore 50 percent of the calculated capacity is assumed for the purposes of demonstrating adequacy to accommodate the RHNA. Note: None of the sites identified in this table are known to be constrained by environmental factors. El Centro s topography is generally flat and devoid of steep slopes that could limit development capacity. The sites are not located within the 100-year floodplain and are not known to be contaminated with hazardous materials. Vacant Vacant Page C Housing Element

151 Housing Element Implementation Program HOUSING ELEMENT E l C e n t r o G e n e r a l P l a n The text of the Housing Element contains the implementation programs necessary to comply with State law. Please refer to the Housing Element for a discussion of implementation programs. A-6