Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAG RPTS 1985 0711 PC REGMOORPARK ALBERT PRIETO STEVEN KUENY Mayor City Manager JAMES D. WEAK CHERYL J. KANE Mayor Pro Tem City Attorney THOMAS C. FERGUSON NIALL FRITZ Councilmember o Director of DANNY A. WOOLARD Community Councilmember Development LETA YANCY - SUTTON R. DENNIS DELZEIT Councilmember City Engineer DORIS D. BANKUS JOHN V. GILLESPIE City Clerk Chief of Police JOHN C. GEDNEY A G E N D A City Treasurer PLANNING COMMISSION Thursday, July 11, 1985 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES June 13, 185 (continued from June 27,1985) 5. POBLIC COMMENTS 6. DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO. PD -1010 (Palmer) Continued to July 25, 1985. 7. DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO. DP -324 (F.E.Financial Ltd.) Continued from June 27, 1985. The applicant is requesting approval to construct an office and light industrial facility which would encompass 9,332 square feet. Proposed project is located approximately 450 feet north of Los Angeles Avenue and east of Goldman Avenue. 8. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. TR -3525- & RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. RPD -941 (Warmington Homes)continued from June 27, 1985. Request approval of a 28.9 acre subdivision containing 87 single family lots and companion Residential Planned Development. Located adjacent and south of Williams Ranch Road (Peach Hill Rd.) and west and adjacent of Peach Hill Road. 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529.6864 AGENDA - The Planning Commission p. 2 - July 11, 1985 9. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. TR -3019 & RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. RPD -1021 (Warmington Homes) continued from June 27, 1985 Request approval of 39.5 acre subdivision containing 130 single family lots and a companion Residential Planned Development. Located adjacent and south of Williams Ranch Road (Peach Hill Rd.), and adjacent and east of the Southern California Edison Co.'s transmission line corridor. 10. HOUSING ELEMENT - (Programs) 11. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 4069 /4037- &RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. RPD -1044 (Carlsberg Corporation). Review of subsequent use of the Final Environmental Impact Report for TR -2964 as the Environmental Document for the subject projects. Request approval of 16.84 acre single family subdivision containing 66 lots and a companion Residential Planned Development. Subdivision to create one additio..al parcel. Site location is Southeast and adjacent to intersection of Moorpark Road and Peach Hill Road. Northwest corner of Moorpark Road and Peach Hill Road. 12. COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURAL THEME - continued from June 27, 1985. Continued discussion of an interm policy. 13. COMMISSION POLICY - continued from June 27, 1985 Consideration of policy for confirming Commission actions. 14. INFORMATIONAL Minor Modification - PD -876 -1 (Carol Kundin) TR -3998 (Urban West Communities) 15. COMMISSION COMMENTS 16. STAFF COMMENTS 17. ADJOURNMENT MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES 3140 Red Hill Avenue , Suite 200 Costa Mesa , California 92626 - (714) 641-8042 / M-E-II-O R A N D U M o f thli°d/ /914 July 2, 1985 TO: Diane Eaton; Planning Associ FROM: Sylvia Holstein , Consultant SUBJECT: Housing Element Preparation Pursuant to the request from the Planning Commissioners, at the workshop held on Thursday , June 20, 1985 , is the chart informa- tion used in the presentation. The charts include Income & Housing Affordability; Comparison of the Regional Housing Alloca- tion Model (RHAM) for both current and future housing needs; and, in response to a question regarding the current ethnic composition of the City of Moorpark, a chart of school population by race. It is here noted that there is no other information , short of a mid-decade special census for determining ethnic composition within the City. There *ere also questions about median income for the City, with much speculation that it has increased substantially since the Census was conducted in 1980. A survey was conducted of the residential developers, a copy of which is attached, and a median income developed from the data collected. The new median income . which was extrapolated is $35 ,000 for the homes which have been sold since 1980 and represents 30% of the total households now residing in the City. The citywide median is now estimated to be 29,600. It is anticipated that the draft Housing Element will be available for the next meeting of the Planning Commission. The draft will be submitted to staff for their review by the end of the week of July 8th . If you have any questions, please contact me as soon as possible. • • CITY OF MOORPARK INCOME & HOUSING AFFORDABILITY DESIGNATED MAXIMUM MAXIMUM INCOME ANNUAL AFFORDABLE AFFORDABLE CATEGORY INCOME* UNIT** MONTHLY RENT Very Low $11, 184 $ 27.., 211 $ 280 (50n of Median) Low 17, 895 43 ,440 447 (80% of Median) Median 22 , 368 54 , 325 559 Moderate 26, 842 65 ,209 671 (120% of Median) • *1980 U .S. Census **30 Year Fixed Rate of 12% Michael Brandman Associates July 1985 REGIONAL HOUSING ALLOCATION MODEL (RHAM)* Comparison CURRENT - HOUSING - - SIMI THOUSAND NEEDS MOORPARK CAMARILLO VALLEY OAKS Total Households - 3, 177 14 ,927 23, 619 30, 613 Total Housing Units 3, 314 14 ,729 • 24 , 503 32,493 Unoccupied Units 137 802 884 1,880 HOUSEHOLDS IN NEED* 325 1, 389 2 ,449 2 , 996 *Lower income households paying over 30% of income for housing, 1980 U. S . Census Michael "Hrandman Associates July 1985 REGIONAL HOUSING ALLOCATION MODEL (RHAM)* Comparison FUTURE HOUSING VERY - NEEDS TOTAL LOW LOW MODERATE UPPER MOORPARK - 3, 057 494 575 708 1, 200 (i00. O%) ( 16 . 15%) (18. 82%) (25 .76%) ( 39 . 27%) Owner 73 .45o/Renter 26 . 550 • Camarillo 2 , 550 392 476 538 1, 144 (100 . 0%) (15 . 37%) (18. 67%) (21. 09%) (44 . 87%) Owner 74 . 77%/Renter 25. 23% Simi Valley 4 , 658 597 675 1 ,040 2 , 346 (100 . 0%) (12. 81%) (14 . 50%) (22 . 32%) (50. 37%) Owner 80.46%/Renter 19.54% Thousand Oaks 4 , 500 637 712 674 2 ,277 (100. 0%) (14 . 16%) (15 . 82%) (19.41%) (50. 60%) Owner 68 . 64%/Renter 31 . 36% *Prepared by Southern California Association • of Governments Michael Brandman Associates July 1985 • • SCHOOL POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNIC ORIGIN SCHOOL: PEACH HILL NUMBER PERCENT HISPANIC 11==21 259 0.34 WHITE le°n 495 0.65 OTHER M 6 0.01 TOTAL 760 SCHOOL.POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNIC ORIGIN SCHOOL: FLORY NUMBER PERCENT HISPANIC r=i223 224 0.37 WHITE =I 361 0.60 OTHER © 21 0.03 TOTAL 606 SCHOOL POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNIC ORIGIN SCHOOL: PONDEXTER NUMBER PERCENT HISPANIC OZ'H 203 0.36 WHITE ® 347 0.61 OTHER 9 21 0.04 TOTAL 571 SCHOOL POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNIC ORIGIN SCHOOL: MOORPARK H.S. - NUMBER PERCENT HISPANIC Raga 250 0.39 WHITE 369 0.58 OTHER n 20 0.03 • . • TOTAL 639 SCHOOL POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNIC ORIGIN SCHOOL: MOORPK COMM US. NUMBER PERCENT HISPANIC 14 0.45 WHITE 17 0.55 OTHER 0 0.00 TOTAL 31 r SCHOOL POPULATION BY RACE AND ETHNIC ORIGIN SCHOOL: ALL SCHOOLS NUMBER PERCENT HISPANIC 0S26511521110 950 0.36 WHITE ® 1589 0.61 OTHER - 85 0.03 TOTAL 2624 CITY OF MOORPARK CURRENT HOME'.BUS'LDERS SURVEY HOUSING UNITS QUALIFYING DEVELOPER BUILT SINCE 1980 PRICE RANGE ANNUAL INCOME Pacifica Homes 7' contact : Linda 309 $136 ,500-184 , 950 $50 , 000 • MCb—o—r--o:I'll, Homes contact . Tony Trayan[i 251 $100, 000-116 , 000 $40, 000* $130 , 000-150, 000 Griffin Homes contact : Elaine Freeman 400 $ 85 , 000-140 , 000 $30 , 000* Warmington Homes N/A N/A N/A (no development) Regal Homes contact : Linda 120 $ 59 , 900-89 , 900 $27 , 000- 30 , 000 Urban West contact : 705 $133 , 000-190, 000 $52 , 000 U . S . Condo contact : Halli 210 $ 79 , 900-129, 000 $40, 000 E * qualifying annual income after applying government bond to the developer for housing assistance SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS PAGE I OF 3 REGIONAL HOUSING ALLOCATION MODEL RHAM TABLE FOR, MOORPARK • 5 DATA CURRENT AS OP, 05/07/84 COUNTY, VENTURA ' - - REPORT WRITTEN, 11/28/84 RHAM SUMMARY TABLE. PART I CURRENT NEEDS AND GENERAL INFORMATION (01/01/B3) ( I) TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 3, 177 ' (2) TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 3.314 (3) UNOCCUPIED UNITS (LINE 2 - LINE 1) 137 ..• . 4 TOTAL OWNERS RENTERS VERY LOW LBW • VERY LOW LOW VERY LOW LOW (4) HOUSEHOLDS IN NEED (LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS PAYING 326 203 122 63 59 140 63 OVER 30% OF INCOME FOR HOUSING, FROM 1000 CENSUS) PART II FUTURE NEEDS (01/01/133 TO 01/01/8B) TOTAL VERY LOW LOW MODERATE UPPER (0%-50%) (50%t-80%) (60%•-120%) (OVER 120%) ( 1) 1988 HOUSEHOLDS (PER SCAG-82) 5,987 (2) 1083 HOUSEHOLDS 3, 177 (3) 5-YEAR GROWTH IN HOUSEHOLDS (LINE I - LINE 2) 2.810 (4) 1988 MARKET VACANCY GOAL (FROM APPENDIX TABLE I) 247 ' (5) 1983 MARKET VACANCIES 27 (6) VACANCY SURPLUS OR DEFICIT (LINE 4 - LINE 5) • 247 (7) ' 1983-80 EXPECTED UNITS LOST FROM STOCK 0 (B) FUTURE HOUSING UNIT NEEDS, FOR ALL INCOME GROUPS, ADJUSTED 3,057 494 575 786 1 ,200 TO AVOID IMPACTION, FROM APPENDIX TABLE III (LINES 3+6t7=8) (100.00%) ( 16. 15%) ( 18.82%) ( 25.76%) ( 39.27%) (9) SPECIAL INCOME GROUP NEED FOR HIGH COST AREAS (NUMBER OF 639 HOUSEHOLDS WITH ANNUAL INCOMES OVER $26,442 ( 120% OF MEDIAN FOR JURISDICTION), BUT BELOW $28,901 NEEDED TO PURCHASE MEDIAN-PRICED HOME AT $04,300. • OWNERI% RENTER % S.F. % M.P. % ( 10) TENURE AND BUILDING TYPE SPLITS OF 1908 HOUSING STOCK 73.45 26.56 78.69 21 .31 ( II) FARMWORKER HOUSEHOLDS ELIGIBLE FOR ASSISTANCE 102 (FROM APPENDIX TABLE II) '• NOTE. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, PLEASE SEE FOOTNOTES. DEFINITIONS. AND METHODOLOGY EXPLANATIONS. • • SUUIMCNN LAL,rVnn,n V .._..,• REGIONAL HOUSING ALLOCATION MODEL AHAM TABLE FOR, MOORPARK 6 DATA CURRENT AS OF, 05/07/B COUNTY, VENTURA REPORT WRIT1 ENf II/20/U APPENDIX TABLE I VACANCIES AND VACANCY RATES PART I , 1908 MARKET VACANCIES OWNERS RENTERS TOTAL ( I) TOTAL 1980 HOUSEHOLDS (1980 CENSUS) 1 ,632 832 2,264 ( 72. 1%) ( 27,0%) (100.0%) (2) UNITS MOVED-INTO PREVIOUS YEAR (1-79 TO 3-80) 479 _ 299 770 (3) ANNUAL MOVE-IN RATE (LINE 2 / LINE 1) 20.35 47.31 34.36 (4) "IDEAL" MOBILITY RATE (MULTIPLY LINE 3 BY 2/15 (. 13333) 3.91 6.31 4.58 TO ALLOW FOR MOBILITY) (5) 1003 HOUSEHOLDS (FROM RHAM SUMMARY TABLE, PART II , LINE I) 3,435 1 , 149 5,987 (6) IDEAL VACANCY GOAL (LINE 5 I (100 - LINE 4)) 134 72 274 (ENTER TOTAL ON RHAM SUMMARY TABLE. PART II. LINE 4) PART II ' 1903 MARKET VACANCIES , ( 1 ) 1903 HOUSING STOCK 1 ,711 644 3.202 (2) 1983 MARKET VACANCY RATE .41 3.00 0.04 (3) 1903 MARKET VACANCIES (LINE I X LINE 2) ') ?0 27 ENTER TOTAL ON RHAM SUMMARY TABLE, PART II , LINE 6 NOTE, FOR THE YEAR 1980, THE TOTAL HOUSING UNITS COMPUTED FROM THE RHAM MAY DIFFER FROM THOSE COMPUTED FROM THE SCAG-82 GROWTH FORECAST. DUE TO THE INCLUSION IN THE SCAG-02 TOTALS OF UNITS THAT ARE VACANT, BUT NOT FOR SALE OR RENT. ACCORDING TO THE CENSUS OF POPULATION AND HOUSING. 32 UNITS WERE LISTED AS VACANT, NOT AVAILABLE FOR SALE OR RENT IN 1900. THIS MODEL ASSUMES THAT VACANT AND UNAVAILABLE UNITS WILL REMAIN AS PART OF THE HOUSING STOCK. BUT NEED NOT BE PART OF FUTURE HOUSING NEEDS. • n. - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS PAGE 3 OF 3 REGIONAL HOUSING ALLOCATION MODEL RHAM TABLE FOR( MOORPARK 5 DATA CURRENT AS OF( 05/07/84 COUNTY, VENTURA REPORT WRITTENI 11/28/84 APPENDIX TABLE II - FARMWORKER HOUSING NEEDS TOTAL VERY LOW LOW ( I) FARM, FISHING. FORESTRY WORKERS, 1080 CENSUS COUNTY TOTAL 14,257 (2) FARM, FISHING, FORESTRY WORKERS, 1900 CENSUS JURISDICTION TOTAL 259 (31 JURISDICTION PERCENTAGE OF COUNTY TOTAL (LINE I / LINE 2) 1 .82 (4) ESTIMATED FARMWORKER HOUSEHOLDS IN COUNTY (FROM EDO) 6265 (5) ESTIMATED FARMWORKER HOUSEHOLDS IN JURISDICTION 114 (MULTIPLY LINE 3 BY LINE 4) (61 PERCENTAGE OF LOW AND VERY LOW INCOME FARMWORKER HOUSEHOLDS 00.00 65.00 35.00 (7) TOTAL FARMWORKER HOUSEHOLDS ELIGIBLE FOR ASSISTANCE 102 82 40 (MULTIPLY LINE 5 BY LINE 6 AND ENTER TOTAL ON RHAM SUMMARY TABLE, PART 11 , LINE 1I) APPENDIX TABLE III IMPACTION AVOIDANCE FACTOR VERY LOW LOW MODERATE UPPER TOTAL (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (I) TOTAL FUTURE HOUSING NEEDS (FROM RHAM SUMMARY TABLE, LINE B, TOTAL) 2,385 (2) REGIONAL INCOME DISTRIBUTION (FROM 1900 CENSUS) 396 561 451 975 2,385 ( 16.7%) ( 23.5%) ( 18.9%1 ( 40.0%) (100.0%) (3) LOCAL INCOME DISTRIBUTION (FROM 1980 CENSUS) 3111 411 668 924 2,3114 ( 16.0%) ( 17.2%) ( 20.0%) ( 38.7%) (100.0%) (4) AVOIDANCE OF IMPACTION (100% EFFORT) (LINE 2 - LINE 3) 17 150 -217 51 I (5) MULTIPLY BV .25 (POLICY ADOPTED -- 4 36 -54 • 13 0 REASONABLE EFFORT TO AVOID IMPACTION • (6) REVISED LOCAL DISTRIBUTION TO AVOID IMPACTION 365 449 614 936 2,384 (LINE 5 • LINE 3) (ENTER ON RHAM SUMMARY TABLE, LINE 8) ( 16.2%) ( 10.0%) ( 25.6%) ( 39.3%) (100,0%) f , PROGRAMS TO DEVELOP HOUSING The purpose of the Housing Programs section is to describe, with specificity, those actions and programs which the City of Moorpark shall undertake to continue the maintenance; improvement and- development of housing for all residents of the City. The described programs are to serve as a guide to implementation, evaluation and notice of completion of the City's primary goal of meeting identified housing needs. The program information also reflects the City of Moorpark's "good faith and diligent effort to provide housing pursuant to Government Code Section 65583 (c)". This section describes proposed and existing housing programs as follows: 1. A statement of the program, including the implementation actions required. 2. The responsible agency or department charged with implementation. 3. The actual or potential funding source. 4. Quantified objectives, when possible. 5. The schedule for completion. The programs included herein focus upon housing maintenance, improvement and development. The programs address issues of affordability, condition, quantity and accessibility of housing within the City of Moorpark. The City shall pursue all state and federal funding which enhances its ability to encourage housing development; shall use its regulatory powers to encourage the continued maintenance of housing; and shall continue programs designed to improve existing housing units. Current data indicates a need to assist low- and very low-income households with housing programs. These_households are able to pay maximum monthly housing costs ranging from $280.00 to $447.00, and hence are severely limited in housing choice. It is unlikely that private industry can build affordable housing for such families. And, the City cannot provide subsidies in required amounts to provide housing for households within this category. However, the City of Moorpark shall assist in all ways possible to minimize the costs of development to the private market as incentive to providing the required housing. The City is currently participating in the Small Cities Competitive process ( for Community Development Block Grant funds to develop affordable housing for low-income families. If the City's petition is successful (decision pending July 25, 1985) 65 single family homes will be constructed under the FMHA 502 loan program, employing the mutual self-help method. This venture will represent the first of its kind in Ventura County, although similar efforts have been undertaken in other rural parts of the State, under the leadership of the People's Self-Help Housing Corporation headquartered in San Luis Obispo. It is not just the private sector costs which constrain the production of . housing for low-income families. There are fewer federal and state programs available to provide subsidies for such families. The Section 8 New Construction program has been eliminated and no new program has been adopted in its place. And, the City of Moorpark does not have sufficient financial resources to provide such subsidies independently of federal and state assistance. In spite of these obvious limitations, the City shall pursue those programs which allow the maximum range of funding sources to produce the projected 1,069 units required for very low and low-income families during the timeframe covered by this housing element. 2. VII. HOUSING PROGRAMS Introduction The Housing Element is required to document the need to develop housing and the programs to be adopted to assure such housing will be developed. Pursuant to the California Government Code, Article 10.6, Section 65583, the Housing element must include: "...an identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs and a statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, and scheduled programs for the development of housing ..." Current projections for the City of Moorpark reflect an increase to the population which requires the addition of 3,057 units to the existing housing stock by July of 1989. Moorpark, like its neighboring Southern Ventura County communities, absorbs the overflow of Los Angeles County's sprawling urbanization. Moorpark, and eventually the entire County, can expect to see steady increased development demands, especially in areas contiguous to Los Angeles County. Sites Suitable for Housing Although Moorpark is a developing city, most land space is already committed to development. Hence, little remains for new housing development in significant quantities for low and moderate income families. The City is currently addressing a downtown-specific development plan, however, in which sites will be reviewed for the potential construction of needed housing. City policies regarding housing patterns -- reflected in zoning designations, general plan considerations and development standards -- can affect the type of housing produced and the character of the residential community. Acknowledging this, the City of Moorpark shall monitor such policies to assure that a range of housing is developed. It is the intent of the City to make all efforts to assure that housing choices reflect the diversity of the residential population. Thus, • housing types must accomodate citizens from all economic levels. 3. The City of Moorpark further desires to continue the orderly and consistent growth which has characterized this community. While some areas may change ( their current configuration through increased density, it is not the intent of the City to allow such development unless it is in keeping with the integrity of the community. It is also of importance to assure that the development does not overburden the City with increased service demand levels which the City may not be able to meet satisfactorily. If development should begin to occur which destroys the integrity of the neighborhood or, if development should occur at a faster rate than City services can be provided, such development shall be curtailed. Goals The housing goals adopted for the City of Moorpark include: . Adequate provision of decent, safe housing for all Moorpark residents without regard to race, age, sex, marital status, ethnic background or other arbitrary considerations. . Adequate provision of housing allowing maximum choice by type, tenure and location, with particular attention to the provision of housing for the elderly, low and moderate income families, handicapped and other households identified as having special housing needs. • . Encouraging growth within the City through the identification of suitable parcels for residential development, changes in land use patterns and conscientious recycling of property to the highest and best use. . Developing a balanced residential community which is accessible to employment, transportation, shopping, medical services, governmental agencies and any other services needed for a well-rounded community. 4. 1.0 HOUSING PRODUCTION Goal It is the goal of the City of Moorpark to assure that housing production maintains the integrity of its residential community and also meets its existing and projected housing needs. Policies • Annually review land use and zoning designations to assure' compatibility with current development patterns. ▪ Develop internal system to monitor changes in the character of residential neighborhoods and a method by which to adapt to such changes. • Develop tracking system to identify vacant and/or underutilized parcels suitable for development of a variety of housing types. • Promote the development of well designed, lower-income housing units with plans and programs developed and supported by the City Council and Planning Commission. • Encourage manufactured housing production as in-fill housing and as a proscribed method of reducing the cost of construction. ▪ Allow mixed residential and commercial uses (upper units) where compatible. . Require residential developers to consider the City's adopted housing policies and programs and reference same within development proposals. . Balance employment opportunities with the provision of housing by balancing housing costs with income levels. 5. Programs, Priorities and Implementation 1.1 Program: Review General Plan Land Use Element and zoning Map annually to identify any inconsistencies in the two documents. Review land use and zoning designations with the purpose of increasing densities in areas where appropriate. Coordination Responsibility: Planning Department Funding: City Funds Objective: Revise densities to encourage development at highest and best use so as to meet City's housing goal of 3,057 units. Implementation: Immediate and ongoing 1.2 Program: Feasibility study of downtown to evaluate potential of mixed residential/commercial development, specifically reviewing designated zoning and available sites for housing development. When efficient, re-zone sites or areas to encourage greater production of housing to meet expressed housing needs. Coordination Responsibility: Community Development Director Funding: General Funds for Staff Time Objective: Maximum utilization of limited available space to meet projected housing needs. Implementation: Immediate and ongoing 1.3 Program: Explore possibility of adopting redevelopment agency and specific project areas which maximize use of increment funding for low and moderate income housing production. Coordination Responsibility: City Manager Funding: General Funds Objective: 200 units Implementation: Pending Results of Redevelopment Feasibility Study 6. 1.4 Program: Encourage in-fill housing in a variety of types and locations through identification of vacant and/or underutilized parcels and promote development of such parcels. Coordination Responsibility: Community Development Director Funding: City Funds Objective: 100 units Implementation: Immediate and ongoing 1.5 Program: The City shall maximize its use of state and federal assistance to develop affordable housing for lower-income families. Coordination Responsibility: Community Development Department Staff Financing: Grant Funding Objective: 200 units by 1989 Implementation: Immediate and Ongoing 1.6 Program: The City shall explore the feasibility of land banking sufficient parcels to offer an attractive package to residential developers, with negotiated reimbursement to the City upon completion. Coordination Responsibility: City Manager and Comunity Development Director Funding: General Funds for Staff Time Objective: 200 Implementation: Immediate 1.7 Program: Offer density bonuses to developers proposing construction of purchase and rental housing for low and moderate income households. Maximum density allowances would be increased by a formula predetermined by the City. Coordination Responsibility: Community Development Director Funding: General Funds for Staff Time Objectives: 300 Implementation: Continuing • 7. . 1.8 Program: Encourage use of manufactured housing to cut production costs. Coordination Responsibility: Planning Department Funding: City funds for staff time Objective: 50 Units Implementation: Continuing 1.9 Program: Study bonding authority legislation and consider merits for the development of rental and ownership housing. Coordination Responsibility: City Manager, City Attorney, Community Development Director Funding: City Funds for staff time Objective: Yet to be determined Implementation: Immediate consideration 1.10 Program: Analyze relationship of available public facilities and services to sites suitable for residential development. Designate development sites, in which affordable housing is located, as priority areas to receive capital improvements. Coordination Responsibility: Public Works Department and Planning Department Funding: General Fund for Staff Time Objective: Undetermined Implementation: Immediate • 1.11 Program: Review site development-standards, and critically evaluate design and development criteria which could add substantially to the cost of basic shelter. Coordination Responsibility: Planning Department Funding: General Funds for Staff Time Objective: Yet to be Determined Implementation: Immediate 8. . 1.12 Program: Adopt a "fast track" permit processing system for application to developments which include housing affordable to low and moderate income households. Coordination Responsibility: Planning Department Funding: General Funds for Staff Time Objective: Unknown Implementation: Immediate 1.13 Program: Develop an Employment Element of the General Plan which would include analysis of employment trends, commuter patterns, and wage stratification relative to housing costs in an effort to balance employment and housing needs. Coordination Responsibility: City staff in conjunction with the County of Ventura Planning Department and the Southern California Association of Governments Funding: City, County and SCAG for staff time Objective: Promote balanced employment and housing opportunities Implementation: Immediate and ongoing 9. 2.0 IMPROVEMENT OF HOUSING ( The State of California housing law requires jurisdictions to address, within , the housing element, the need to improve housing and to identify programs adopted to assure such need is met. Since funds for new construction of assisted housing has become almost non-existent, it gets more critical to preserve the existing housing stock. Physical improvements can assure the continued availability of units over a longer period of time. A survey of 800 dwelling units was conducted in Moorpark, to determine the general condition of the housing stock for purposes of this housing element. Housing units built after 1975 were not included because a cursory drive through such neighborhoods revealed such housing to be new and well maintained. Less than 3% (89 units) were found to require rehabilitation or -replacement. However, it is important to note that while the majority (600 units, or 24%) were found to be in fair to good condition, a commitment to careful monitoring of these units is in order to protect against gradual deterioration. • Another aspect of housing impovement which must be considered is 1/4 affordability. The 1980 U.S. Census revealed a considerable number of households within the City of Moorpark as overpaying for housing needs. Significantly, 5,308 households, or 38% of the total households, were reported as paying more than 25% of income for housing. A total of 3,321 households, or 25% of all households, were paying more than 35% of income for housing. Persons paying more than 25% of income for housing are identified as needing assistance. The City of Moorpark has, and/or plans several programs to improve the availability of rental and purchase housing to low-income residents. These programs include a pending application for Community Development Block Grant funds to construct 65 single family homes under the FMHA 502 loan program; and participation in the Section 8 Existing Housing Program administered by the Ventura County Area Housing Autority. 10. Goals • Meet the needs of current residents of the City of Moorpark by upgrading affordable, low and moderate income units through improvement of existing housing units and promoting greater housing affordability. Policies . Continue use of federal and state subsidy programs to the fullest extent possible. . Continue rehabilitation of units suitable for improvement. . Consider converting and upgrading deteriorating commercial units for housing where appropriate. Programs, Priorities, Implementation 2.1 Program: Continue to use all federal and state funding sources for rental subsidy, such as Section 8 Existing Program, which currently provides 86 units of affordable rental housing to Moorpark families. Actively pursue other funding sources or for other rental programs. Request legislators to consider need for funding for rental housing programs in annual budgets. Coordination Responsibility: Ventura Area County Housing.Authority Funding: none Objective: Increase rental subsidies Implementation: Immediate and ongoing I1. 2.2 Program: Explore and employ all rehabilitation financing alternatives, including rehabilitation of substandard rental units through programs such as those offered by California Housing Finance Agency; programs to assist rehabilitation of owner-occupied housing; and the use of code enforcement where appropriate. Coordination Responsibility: Planning Department and Building and Safety Department Funding: Staff Time Objective:Preserve and/or upgrade 100 units Implementation: Established and Ongoing 2.3 Program: Periodic review by City Council and the Planning Commission of residential areas requiring capital improvements. They should be scheduled for funding allocation at earliest date to encourage private sector residential development. Coordination Responsibility: Planning staff, City Manager, Public Works Director Funding: City funds for staff time and CDBG funds for improvements Objective: Neighborhood Improvement Implementation: Continuing and Ongoing 2.4 Program: Carefully evaluate housing units under consideration for demolition, to determine rehabilitation potential and .avoid unnecessary reductions to the housing stock. Coordination Responsibility: Building and Safety Department and Planning Department Funding: Limited Objective: 50 Units Implementation: Immediate 2.5 Program: Develop housing replacement plan to replace units removed from housing stock through demolition on a one-to-one basis, and to minimize the period during which any lot may remain vacant. 12. Coordination Responsibility: Planning and Building & Safety Departments Funding: Limited Objectve: 50 Units Implementation: Immediate 2.6 Program: Establish limitations on number of condominium conversions, in order to minimize losses to the rental market. Coordination Responsibility: Planning Department in Response to Planning Commission Policy • Funding: Limited Objective: . Preserve Existing Rental Housing Stock Implementation: 13. . • 3.0 MAINTENANCE OF HOUSING The need to maintain existing housing and identify programs to assure housing maintenance, is an integral component of the housing element. The City of Moorpark recognizes that there are many residents whose housing needs are currently being met but who may need assistance in maintaining the unit. The City seeks to promote the continued maintenance at the same time that housing is produced and improved. Residents will thus be assured of a range of housing which is decent, safe and affordable. • In today's market fewer and fewer households are able to purchase a home. • A recent nationwide study indicates that fewer than 15% of the population could afford to buy their existing home. These households must rely exclusively on a scarce rental market with inflated rents caused by the demand for rental housing. Two considerations are at work in Moorpark which warrant development of a greater supply of rental housing: a youthful population lacking the income-generating potential to afford home purchase; and the high average cost of housing -- existing home resale average is $95,000, and new homes average $136,400. An adequate supply of affordable rental housing will be an important consideration during the effective period of this housing element. Fixed income residents will face great difficulty in meeting their housing needs at affordable rates in the future. If costs continue to escalate at present rates, with no containment, signficantly greater numbers of persons will require a housing subsidy. Some costs are controllable, but rental and mortgage payments are generally beyond individual control. The quality of the neighborhood is affected by choices in location and housing type available to residents. The neighborhood quality is affected when housing discrimination, based upon age, sex, race, ethnic background or other arbitrary considerations exists. The segregation of the community because of economic considerations is also a negative influence to the neighborhood. All reasonable efforts must be taken to assure that the City is not burdened by such practices. 14. The quality of the neighborhoods in which we live is an important consideration. We reasonably expect green areas, separation of residential and other uses and easy access to transportation and community services.We want it to be livable and pleasant, free from crime, traffic noise and pollution, eyesores like junk cars and deteriorated housing, industrial noise and odors. It is through planning and monitoring of the quality of the neighborhood that such nuisances are minimized and expections for quality community life are met. The City of Moorpark is involved in assuring the continued maintenance and quality of its neighborhoods. Currently, the City is involved in the following activities: code enforcement; fair housing counseling; and, capital improvement projects to upgrade neighborhoods designed to assist homeowners in improving their neighborhood environment. Goal Assure the quality, safety and habitability of housing within the City of Moorpark. Assure the continued high quality and integrity of its residential neighborhoods. Policies . Continued monitoring and enforcement of code standards in residential neighborhoods. . Continued provision of City services designed to maintain the quality of the housing stock and the neighborhoods. . Continued programs to prevent housing deterioration and replacement of housing stock beyond repair. 15. Programs, Priorities and Implementation 3.1 Program: Continued code enforcement by appropriate City department. Coordination Responsibility: Fire Department Funding: City Funds Objective: Continue Quality of Neighborhoods Implementation: Continuing 3.2 Program: Provide informational brochures to residents regarding home improvement programs offered by the City. Increase community awareness of self-help and rehabilitation programs through outreach. Encourage community pride through neighborhood associations. Coordination Responsibility: Community Development Department Funding: CDBG funds Objectives: Improved Community Awareness Implementation: Continuing 3.3 Program: Promote equal opportunity in housing by avoiding economic segregation, and discrimination based upon age, sex, race, ethnic background and other arbitrary factors. Coordination Responsibility: City Manager and Community Development Director • Funding: City funds for staff time Objective: Equal housing opportunity Implementation: Continuing 16. 3.4 Program: Instruct planning staff to become familiar with and to direct residents to housing counseling programs such as those offered by the Commission on Human Concerns. Coordination Responsibility: Planning Staff Funding: City Funds Objective: Equal housing opportunity Implementation: Continuing • • V.