HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1984 0919 CC REG ITEM 10G rMOORPARK �
799 MOORPARK AVENUE CITY COUNCIL
Y.O.BOX 7O1.MOORPARK.CA93021 -.0-,/ LETA YANCY•SUTTON
o /- MAYOR
(805) 529-6864 9or�Q J ALBERT PRIETO
MAYOR PRO TEM
ROBERT BEAULIEU
CLINT HARPER,Pn. O.
JERRY STRAUGHAN
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Niall Fri z, Director of Community Development
DATE: September 19, 1984
SUBJECT: REGIONAL HOUSING ALLOCATION MODEL (RHAM)
PROPOSED ACTION:
Concur with the County and request the Southern California Association
Governments (SCAG) to amend the RHAM projections for Moorpark.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
In 1983 SCAG adopted the housing allocation model. This program is
pursuant to State requirements. Attached for your information is a
summary of the program and model.
This year SCAG is revising the RHAM. In reviewing the proposed changes,
both County and City staffs concluded that the amount of development
assigned to the City of Moorpark was inconsistent with development
activity, presently being experienced. Accordingly, County Planning has
reviewed two options. These would be to revise the RHAM forecast based
on the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) based on the 208 Plan.
The present AQMP forecast does not reflect developments approved by
the County prior to incorporation. At this time, it cannot be
said whether or not 208 Plan forecast is wholly appropriate; however,
it is far more realistic.
County Planning staff is recommding that the RHAM allocation be revised
to be consistent with the 208 Plan. City staff concurs with this
recommendation. However, the County projection of 7,975 dwelling units
by 1990 was based on incomplete data. City staff recommends that this
number be revised to the 208 Plan 1990 projection of 8,029 dwelling
units. County Planning staff has indicated agreement with this revision.
One final matter is the percentage requirement for new housing for
the different income groups. This assignment was based by SCAG on
1980 census data. Different and more accurate information may be
obtained by the City through the development of a Housing Element.
SCAG staff has indicated that the income group distribution percentage
may be adjusted if warranted by this information in the future.
The Honorable City Council Page 2
September 19, 1984
SUGGESTED MOTION:
Concur with a revision to the RHAM allocations to be consistent with
the 208 Plan housing unit projections and authorize the City Manager
to inform SCAG.
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY
Planning Division
rount!j
vEntura Manager
August 21, 1984
Niall Fritz, Planning Director
City of Moorpark
P.O. Box 701
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Niall:
Subject: 1983 Regional Housing Allocation Model (RHAM) Prepared by Southern
California Association of Governments (SCAG)
As you are aware, the SCAG Executive Committee adopted revised Regional Housing
Allocation Model (RHAM) tables for the City of Moorpark and for the
unincorporated portion of Ventura County on July 7, 1984 (see attached) . The
revision to the tables caused the 90-day review period to be moved back
approximately one month, so that the City and the County will need to submit
their official responses by October 3, 1984.
he purpose of this letter is to request that your City Council review further
revisions to the tables which the County Planning Division is proposing. These
revisions would involve shifts in allocations between the City of Moorpark and
the unincorporated area. As you know, SCAG only approves such
interjurisdictional shifts when both jurisdictions are in agreement.
The Planning Division's request for revisions is based primarily on assumptions
which were made by SCAG in preparing the RHAM tables. For both the 1983
estimates and the 1988 forecasts given in the RHAM tables, SCAG first determined
how many dwelling units and households were located within the current
incorporated area for Moorpark in 1980. Then they made a linear interpolation
for the years 1983 and 1988, using the rate of growth SCAG had projected for
Census Tract 76 (the census tract in which Moorpark is located). These
interpolations assume that Moorpark's share of dwelling units and population
within the census tract will increase at the same rate as the share for the
unincorporated portion.
The County Planning Division disagrees with this assumption on the grounds that
nearly all growth in this census tract will occur within the city, due to
implementation of the County Guidelines for Orderly Development and the County
General Plan. Both of these policy documents allow urban development to occur
only within incorporated cities. The Planning Division reviewed the RHAM
allocations to determine whether adjustments could be made which would correct
for the assumption made by SCAG.
T'T/4c1tMEM r nI "
800 South Victoria Avenue, Ventura,CA 93009
SOUTMERkEEtUS[R4testAaCW6450ICLv RMENMENTS PAGE 1 CF 3
HAM TABLE FCR: MOORPARK 5 DATA CURRENT AS OF: 05/07/84
CLNTY: VENTURA REPORT WRITTEN: 06/15/84
saz=zsaasaasssssasassassa ssa =as=aar_=a==ss___-saas�____ss=s=a=zssszaa z:ssszazsssss:sz s:zsss�zs:szssassz�zaasa rs a:
RhAM SUMMARY TABLE
ART I CURRENT NEEDS AND GENERAL INFCRMATION (01/01/83)
3 -73
(1) TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS
(2) TOTAL IOUSING UNITS S L
(3) UNCCCUPIED UNITS (LINE 2 - LINE 1)
VERY LOTW CTAL—LOW VERY L W— OWNER LOW S-- REENTERS---- ^•
VERY LOY LCW
(4) HOUSEHOLDS IN NEED (LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS PAYING 325 203 122 63 59 140 63
OVER 30X OF INCOME FOR MCUSI?G. FROM 1980 CENSUS)
n_snsszzzzzzasas aassasas.szasassas zssasssssassas zss===ns=a s=s=s s=-= :asxsszn====payyaassssas====saszss ssfapsEaapszaaszsssszzas sass
ART II FUTURE NEEDS (01/01/83 TC 01/01/88) -TOTAL (6%Y56Ti} (50X♦-8JR)y (80Xi-i2tI5 (OVER Mil
(1) 1968 HOUSEHOLDS (PER SCAG-E2) 4.584
(2) 1983 HOUSEHOLDS 2 7U}
/;yob
(3) 5-YEAR GROWTH IN HOUSEHOLDS (LINE 1 - LINE 2)
(4) 1988 MARKET VACANCY GOAL (FRCM APPENDIX TABLE I) 207
(Di 1983.MARKET VACANCIES 20
(6) VACANCY SURPLUS OR DEFICIT (LINE 4 - LINE 5) IB7
(7) 1983-8811 EXPECTEDUU UNITTSSELLCST pFROMLSTOC�Kp E c p1� g S3U90Y �ug� �// G L6
(8) 70TAVll5``IHttjSyi�TION. FttOENSClpPpPpEN01I%LMTIBLgTEM[IEiRA(LINNIk�SA9pikaiiii1) ( 100'OOX) ( 16.ISx) ( 1a.8 ( 25. ( 39.
rrrr
(9) MOUSEMCLDSC�ITHGANf�N)AIM.E[t�CCMESNOVERCOf26.�i2S(�20IEUF REDIAN 63S
FOR JURISDICTION)• BUT BELOW $28.90) NEEDED TO PURCHASE
MEDIAN-PRICED HOME AT 1414.300.
OWNER X RENTER S S.F. S M.F. X
(10) TENURE AND BUILDING TYPE SPLITS OF 1988 HOUSING STOCK 73.45 26.55 78.69 21.31
(11) FARMWORKER HOUSEHOLDS EELLIGIBLE FCR ASSISTANCE 102
(FROM APPENDIX TABLE II)
TOTE: FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. PLEASE SEE FOOTNOTES. DEFINITIONS. AND METMCCOLGGY EXPLANATIONS.
1
•
}
SOUTHER EGIbrSALFHGUSIRGCaCCEQ7IG1. iM NMENTS PAGE I CF 3
/HAM TABLE FCR: UNINCORPORATED DATA CURRENT AS OF: 05/07/04
:CUN7Y: VENTLRA REPORT WRITTEN: 06/15/84
:z==sass::---- z=ss=-- '=s=a sszzss:zvnszzs=za==za=saazssaz- ---=.3a a=—c sa=::z==z:a:aa=
SHAM SUMMARY TABLE
.ART I CURRENT NEEDS AND GENERAL IRFCRMAT)ON (01/01/83)
LG,L7L _ . .
� 6.3"(1) TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS EY '
(2) TOTAL HOUSING UNITS .288.40�11
(3) UNOCCUPIED UNITS (LINE 2 - 1:7 LIKE 1) 3C pE1�
EEE ((LL `` ee �c+1l�� EE aa`` 55 pp yy VERY LOYCTAL LOW .VERY L$YNERS—LOW VERY LOY TERS LCM
(•) OVEpE30XQOFIiNCOME FORWhCU51S.G.EFHOMSl98UDCEN�U�)G 3.191 2,034 1.157 707 426 1.327 731
.__======s== =s======z= rs=s====a====a=:==z:z::z=z:s:::::=:ssss=a=x:==z= z =:==a a==:sa=a==sa=::::asa::
'ART II FUTURE NEEDS (01/01/83 TC 01/01/88) TOTAL VERY LOW LOW MODERATE UPPER ('
(0X-50X) (50X4-80X) (802+-120X) (OVER 120X)
(1) 1988 HOUSEHOLDS (PER SLAG-82) 39.111 t
i
(2) 1983 HOUSEHOLDS
/Z.fr39-- I.,(3) 5-YEAR GROWTH IN HOUSEHOLDS (LINE 1 - LINE 2) i�-rG••@-
(4) 1988 MARKET VACANCY GOAL (FROM APPENDIX TABLE I) 1.290
(5) 1983 MARKET VACANCIES 1.059
(6) VACANCY SURPLUS OR DEFICIT (LINE • - LINE 5) 231
(7) 1963-86 EXPECTED UNITS LCST FROM STOCK f; y5
1 z ZI% Z'OL9 • Z,6051 S, t9;
(B) UTVOIDUMCTYOT VpOpSxPaND % TANLo iG lSESA34iI B) (10t.00X/ ( 168BQ3 ( 23OQt ( 19stt3 ( 4O 2934
(91 SPECIAL INCOME GROUP NEEC FOR HIGH COST AREAS (NUMBER OF 6.962
HOUSEHOLDS WITH ANNUAL INCOMES OVER 525.504 (120X OF MEDIAN
FOR JURISDICTION). BUT BELOW $33.941 NEEDED TO PURCHASE i
MEDIAN-PRICED HOME AT iSS.000.
OWNER X RENTER X S.R. X M.F. X
(10) TENURE AND BUILDING TYPE SPLITS OF 1988 HOUSING STOCK 64.89 35.11 77.73 22.27 i
(II) FARMWORKER HOUSEHOLDS ELIGIBLE FOR ASSISTANCE 1.314
(FROM APPENDIX TABLE II) (
NOTE: FCR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. FLEASE SEE FOOTNOTES. DEFINITIONS. AND METHCCOLOGY EXPLANATIONS.
II . INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, SUMMARY
The Regional Housing Allocation Model (RHAM) has been produced in 1975,
1977, and 1981, each time responding to different needs and requirements of
our members and the various federal and state agencies . The current needs
and "Fair Share" portion of the 1977 model was updated as a part of SCAG
Regional Housing Element in 1978. This model RHAM-83, meets both federal
and state regulations and requirements, while maintaining local discretion
and autonomy on important housing policy issues, (see RHAM policy issues
memo--Appendix 5) affecting our region .
What is an allocation Model?
The RHAM meets several basic objectives . These are:
(a) A uniform data base, which allows direct comparison
of housing needs between the various jurisdictions
which comprise the SCAG region.
(b) A method of measuring current and future housing
needs, that allows the finite local political
entities to account for housing needs which
transcend local political boundaries and form a
housing market.
(c) A snapshot of housing needs, distributed among the
jurisdictions, at a point-in-time, which considers
market and nonmarket based factors (e.g., market
demand, employment opportunities, vacant land,
etc.) .
(d) A method to reduce the impaction of lower income
households among the jurisdictions .
Additionally, the Executive Committee recently added the following
objective:
"SCAG shall affirmatively promote equal housing choices and oppor-
tunities for all households regardless of race, religion, ethnicity,
sex, age, marital status or household composition ."
Specifically, in the formulation of this model several other data require-
ments were considered:
o The Housing Assistance Plan (HAP) requirements of the federal
Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) .
o The Housing Element Requirements of the state planning law
(Government Code - Section 65584a) .
2
ATThk h tF�T „Z`
The RHAM Methodology and the Data Resolution Process and Criteria explain
how the various state requirements were taken into account. (Appendix 1
and 3)
The Process
As mentioned, SCAG has had previous experience in the formulation of
allocation models. This model is the result of those previous modeling
efforts and the policy directives of a subcommittee of elected officials
and housing technicians, serving on the RHAM Subcommittee of the Community
and Economic Development committee (CEHD) . This group directed staff in
model formulation, policy analysis of model factors and in the development
of a data resolution process .
The committee members were:
Councilwoman Pauline Garcia, City of Colton
Councilwoman Barbara Hein, Chair, City of Rancho Palos Verde
Councilman Gilbert Hodges, Westminster
Supervisor David L. McKenna, San Bernardino County
Councilwoman Nell Mirels, Rolling Hills Estates
Councilwoman Pat Russell , City of Los Angeles
Mayor Robert Wagner, City of Lakewood
Others attending were:
Professor Bill Baer, U.S.C.
Deborah Barmack, San Bernardino Co. Supervisor's Office
George Pallas, City of Los Angeles, Legislative Analyst
Greg Salvato, Wm. Lawrence Co.--BIA
Carla Walecka, Wm. Lawrence Co.--BIA, U.S.C.
The committee met from June 1982 until March 1983. All of their recom-
mendations were forwarded to the CEHD committee and finally to the
Executive committee.
FK:wp6
3
III . SUMMARY OF RHAM METHODOLOGY EXPLANATION
A more technical explanation of the methodology is found in Appendix 1. An
important part of understanding the 1983 RHAM is found in the assumptions
and working definitions that have been used in developing the housing
allocation model . The following presents these factors and the reasons for
the assumptions and definitions that have been developed. This review will
cover the following components of the model :
(1) Current Needs
(2) Future Households and Needs
(3) Vacancy Rate Goal
(4) Housing Loss Data
(5) Avoiding Further Impaction
(6) Linkage of RHAM with Federal Housing Assistance Plans
(7) Special Income Category
(8) Farmworker Needs
(9) Tenure and Building Type Splits
Current Needs
Current needs have always been expressed in the SCAG Housing Allocation
Models as the number of low and very low income households (i .e., those
under 80 percent of county median income) who pay in excess of a certain
standard for housing consumption . In earlier models the condition of
residential units was also considered as a component of current need and
data for each jurisdiction appeared under the category "suitable for reha-
bilitation ." This was possible because the 1970 census provided data on
the condition of residential units . Such is not the case with the 1980
census, and consequently, we have deleted this component from the current
need definition .
Local jurisdictions participating in the Community Development Block Grant
Program will be required to submit estimates of units suitable for rehabil-
itation as a part of their Housing Assistance Plans . These plans comprise
a section of the Block Grant Application . SCAG has provided technical
assistance to some local governments on methods to estimate units suitable
for rehabilitation .
RHAM 1983 defines current need as all households that are low or very low
income who pay 30 percent or more of their gross income for housing . The
previous model (1981 RHAM update) used the standard of 25 percent of
income. However, federal and state agencies have recently adopted the 30
percent standard for assisted housing programs and SCAG has also adjusted
the standard in the model to assure consistency with the other levels of
government. In determining eligibility levels, HUD uses a sliding scale of
income levels based on household size. This model takes into account this
sliding scale to more accurately count households in need .
4
Future Households and Needs
This data component is derived directly from the SCAG-82 growth forecast.
The year 2000 forecast already adopted by SCAG was at the county and
regional statistical area level . This forecast has been further disaggre-
gated to the jurisdiction level . Because these forecasts are done in five
year increments beginning with 1980, the ending year, 1988 has been
interpolated from the 1985-1990 interval .
Because this data item is perhaps the most critical of all factors utilized
in the production of the RHAM to generate future housing needs, consid-
erable thought and discussion was devoted to the issue of whether to use
SCAG-82 data or data on forecast housing need as supplied by the California
State Department of Housing and Community Development. The decision by the
Executive Committee to use SCAG-82 data rather than State DHCD supplied
data rests on these considerations:
(a) SCAG has developed a highly integrated planning
process covering all major functional planning areas.
The key to the integration of these functional
planning areas, i .e., transportation, housing, air
quality, etc., is their common data base, the SCAG-82
Growth Forecast Policy. Introduction of another data
base would destroy this integration resulting in a
planning process which is not comprehensive or
coordinated with other plans .
(b) SCAG-82 has been developed with the involvement of
local elected officials, technical staff of local
governments and private sector agencies and special
interest organizations, e.g., Sierra Club, League of
BIA Women Voters . Given this broad cross-section of
participation in the process, most concerns of major
import were reviewed and considered in SCAG-82. It is
a technical synthesis of local analysis and observa-
tions regarding growth dynamics in the region .
However, given the total growth needs supplied to SCAG by the state, this
RHAM model remains consistent with the statewide need based on SCAG-82.
Vacancy Rate Goal
The updated 1981 RHAM assumed that a five percent vacancy standard should
be applied to all jurisdictions in the region without exception . RHAM-83
attempts to refine the approach to handling vacancies by replacing the
original assumption with the proposal that each jurisdiction have unique
target vacancy rates . Such rates will be determined by the average
"turnover" rates, in end jurisdiction by tenure, for a given two-month
period .
The model also incorporates the policy assumption that ideal vacancy rates
can be achieved within seven years .
5
Housing Loss Data
Component of housing need is created by removals from the stock . Such data
has been incorporated in the RHAM to insure that the needs statement is
complete.
An improvement has been made in the quality of the loss data. In the 1981
RHAM update an estimating technique was employed to determine individual
jurisdiction losses, based on regional averages of loss . For newer cities
this method, exaggerated the phenomenon. The 1983 RHAM uses actual loss
data from each of the jurisdictions for the most recent three year period,
as a basis for estimating future residential losses. This loss data allows
for an increased degree of accuracy in projecting future housing losses in
each jurisdiction in the region.
Avoiding Further Impaction
This factor strives to balance the distribution of future households in the
region, so that jurisdictions which are currently impacted by substantial
numbers of low income households, will not be further impacted by future
low income household growth. In previous models this factor was called
"fair-share." The current model quantifies future expected growth, and
then adjusts the expected local income distribution of that growth to
lessen the impaction of lower income households on jurisdictions with a
disproportionate share of such households.
Low income impaction is defined, as any jurisdictions' percentage of lower
income households which is higher than the regional percentage of low
income households. The current regional percentage 'of such households is
about 40 percent. Consequently, jurisdictions which have more than forty
percent low income households are impacted . Conversely, this adjustment
shifts more low income growth to higher income jurisdictions, than the
current local share of such households.
Linkage of RHAM with Federal Housing Assistance Plans
The 1983 RHAM will include, as one of several appendices, a single table
which will provide the quantification of impaction by jurisdiction, by
income category. In the appendix table III, line 6, the line labeled
"Revised Local Distribution to Avoid Impaction," can be used by jurisdic-
tions as an estimate of "Households Expected to Reside" for Housing
Assistance Plan (H.A.P.) purposes . (Use only the very low and low income
categories .) Also, note that this is a five year projection, whereas the
H.A.P. is usually a three year projection .
Special Income Category
As most governmental assistance programs are geared to the low and moderate
income categories, and because many of our members report housing needs
beyond these categories, a special tabulation was done to quantify the
needs of this higher income group. As there were no national or state
standards SCAG could use to delineate this group, the following assumption
was made:
r
- Define the income necessary to purchase the median
priced house in that community (based on the
prevailing mortgage market terms, as of the census) .
If that income was higher than 121% of the median
income, (the limitation on most affordable housing
programs) state what that income is, and how many
households were in that group. This does not mean
that all of these households were in fact in need, as
some of them purchased their homes many years prior,
and are paying historical rates . However, many of
these households may not be able to purchase their own
home today, or may not be homeowners at all . This
information item is only listed for higher cost areas .
This additional information may prove to be of value to local jurisdictions
in preparing housing programs and plans, to be a part of the housing
element.
Farmworker Needs
Because of the extensive amount of agricultural activity in the state, the
Housing Element Law includes the housing needs of farmworkers as one of the
seven factors which must be considered in determining needs. In the RHAM
we have estimated such needs based on the local jurisdiction's percentage
of the county's total in the fishing, farmworker, and forestry category in
the 1980 census.
This distribution uses data supplied by the State Department of Housing and
Community Development which estimates farmworker needs by counties .
However, because the data received from the state was only at the county
level, and was not cross-correlated to housing payments, farmworker needs
by overpayment category are implicitly included in Part I of the Current
Needs Section . However, SCAG presents this data for informational
purposes, to comply with the statutes .
Tenure and Building Type Splits
As a refinement of the model , and as required by the statutes, the future
(1988) housing stock for each jurisdiction is broken down further by
owner/renter and single-family/ multi-family categories . The model will
express such needs as percentages and local jurisdictions are encouraged to
use these as guides in developing specific housing plans and programs .
CR/wp6
7