HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2007 0117 CC REG ITEM 10NIT 10• N.
W I
_'
L �
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable City Council
FROM: Steven Kueny, City Manager
Prepared By: David A. Bobardt, Planning Manager w'
DATE: January 10, 2007 (CC Meeting of 1/17/2007)
SUBJECT: Consider the Draft 2006 -2014 Regional Housing Needs Assessment
BACKGROUND
On December 20, 2006, staff presented a report at a special City Council meeting on
the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). A copy of the report is attached.
The City Council received and filed the report, acknowledging staff's continued work
with the other jurisdictions in the Ventura County Council of Governments (VCOG) to
seek a distribution of the RHNA for Ventura County among the cities and county in a
manner that made more sense than the distribution initially proposed by the Southern
California Association of Governments (SCAG).
DISCUSSION
The City- County Planning Association, comprised of Planning Directors and senior level
planning staff from Ventura County jurisdictions, had been working together to create a
formula for a more appropriate distribution of the Ventura County RHNA. Preliminary
options were presented to the VCOG Board on December 14, 2006. At the direction of
the VCOG Board, the City - County Planning Association refined four different formulas
for distributing the RHNA a meeting on January 4, 2007. The first three formulas were
based on varying the relative weighting of 2006 housing units, 2006 jobs, vacant land,
and General Plan capacity within each jurisdiction to distribute the RHNA. The fourth
formula was based fifty percent on the relative amount of 2006 -2014 housing growth
and fifty percent on the relative General Plan capacity, both as estimated by each
jurisdiction. As the formulas varied on the weighting of demand factors (housing units,
jobs) and supply factors (vacant land, General Plan capacity), the City- County Planning
Association could not achieve consensus on a single formula to recommend to the
VCOG Board.
SACommunity Development\COUNCIUMisc Reports \070117 RHNA.doc 00013's
Honorable City Council
January 17, 2007
Page 2
The City Manager's Group met on January 8, 2007 to consider this matter and the four
options developed by the planners. The group developed a new option which was
based on a combination of the first four options with adjustments made in the spirit of
compromise. On January 9, 2007, the VCOG Board unanimously endorsed the City
Manager's Group option. The options are shown in the following table.
Jurisdiction
Draft 2006-
2014 RHNA
Option 1*
( 30 %, 50 %,
20%,0%)
Option 2*
(25%,25%,
10%,40%)
Option 3*
(15%,15%,
40%,30%)
Option 4 **
City
Manager's/
Option
Camarillo
4853
2951
2598
2977
3019
3664
Fillmore
608
628
1017
1332
1487
1019
Moorpark
939
1044
1314
1359
1847
1650
Ojai
383
728
579
1006
314
450
Oxnard
7345
4919
6343
5935
8495
7564
Port Hueneme
516
621
475
316
208
198
Ventura
3422
4721
5120
4814
5114
4327
Santa Paula
1856
1546
1931
2897
2074
2299
Simi Valley
5086
3619
3388
3208
2921
3735
Thousand Oaks
1072
4583
3341
2709
1559
2100
County 1
2401 1
3120
2375
1929 1
1443
1475
TOTAL 1
28481 1
28481
28481
28481 1
28481
28481
* Percentages refer to (in order) relative weighting of 2006 housing units, 2006 jobs, vacant land, and
General Plan housing unit capacity
* *Based 50% on City growth forecasts and 50% on General Plan capacity as reported by each jurisdiction
For SCAG to accept the VCOG's endorsed distribution and lock in the maximum RHNA
for the Ventura County subregion at 28,481 housing units, VCOG must accept
delegation of the SCAG's authority to consider appeals by the member jurisdictions by
January 31, 2007. On January 9, 2007, the VCOG Board agreed to accept this
delegation; the terms of the delegation agreement are being finalized.
The numbers shown in the table reflect the RHNA targets for housing for all income
levels. A distribution by income endorsed by a SCAG committee for consideration by
the SCAG Regional Council is estimated by City staff to allocate the 1,650 housing unit
target for Moorpark as follows:
■ 367 units affordable to very low income households (less than 50% of county
median household income)
■ 297 units affordable to low income households (between 50% and 80% of county
median household income)
■ 341 units affordable to median income households (between 80% and 120% of
county median household income)
■ 645 units affordable to high income households (greater than 120% of county
median household income).
000136
Honorable City Council
January 17, 2007
Page 3
The City's Housing Element would have to be updated by June 30, 2008 to reflect the
new RHNA targets, which will be finalized by SCAG in June 2007. A preliminary review
by City staff of projects in process and under construction show that substantial
additional local efforts will be needed to achieve the draft housing targets for very low
income, low income and moderate income households. Current State housing law does
not require the targets to be achieved, only that it is the intent that cities and counties
should undertake all necessary actions to encourage, promote, and facilitate the
development of housing to accommodate the entire regional housing need.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file.
Attachment: December 20, 2006 Staff Report
000137
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable City Council
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Directo
Prepared By: David A. Bobardt, Planning Manag
DATE: December 19, 2006 (CC Meeting of 1212012006)
SUBJECT: Consider Draft 2006 -2014 Regional Housing Needs Assessment
BACKGROUND
State General Plan law (Government Code §65300 et seq.) requires each City and
County to have a General Plan composed of seven (7) mandatory elements: Land Use,
Circulation, Housing, Noise, Conservation, Open Space, and Safety. These elements,
along with any optional elements adopted by the local agency, form the constitution for
future development within each jurisdiction. While State law allows each local agency
to establish its own goals and policies for most elements, it has established the
availability of housing for every Californian as a statewide goal, and has directed that
each local agency bear responsibility to meet this goal through the Housing Element.
The State Department of Housing and Community Development has the responsibility
for determining existing and projected housing needs for each region in the state for a
given planning period. The regional Council of Governments (SCAG for the six - county
Southern California region) is then responsible for distributing the housing need among
jurisdictions. This distribution is known as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment
(RHNA). Each local agency must then prepare a Housing Element to demonstrate how
that housing need can be achieved, and the Housing Element must be certified by a
certain deadline for the agency's General Plan to be valid.
DISCUSSION
The current planning period for the SCAG region is 2006 to 2014; the deadline for
SCAG to finalize the RHNA distribution for this period is June 2007, and the deadline for
each agency to update the local Housing Element is June 2008. SCAG has taken the
regional housing need of 733,329 housing units and prepared a preliminary draft
distribution among jurisdictions. Of the total units, 28,481 housing units (3.88 %) have
been distributed to the Ventura County subregion. The following table shows the
preliminary distribution among the ten Cities and County for the 2006 -2014 planning
CC ATTACHMENT 6001%,38
\Wlor_pri_sery \City Share \Community Development \COUNCILWIisc Reports \061220 RHNA.doc
Honorable City Council
December 20, 2006
Page 2
period, compared to the previous 1998 -2005 planning period, as well as the City and
County staff estimates for development during* the 2006 -2014 planning period.
Jurisdiction
1998 -2005
RHNA
% of
County-
wide Total
Draft
RHNA
2006 -2014
% of
County-
wide Total
2006 -2014
City Dev.
Estimates
% of
County-
wide Total
Camarillo
1800
9.1%
4853
17.0%
3150
13.6%
Fillmore
808
4.1%
608
2.1%
1081
Moorpark
1255
6.4%
939
3.3%
1615
Ojai
209
1.1%
383
1.3%
144
A
Oxnard
3298
16.7%
7345
25.8%
7000
Port Hueneme
254
1.3%
516
1.8%
177
0.8%
Ventura
1950
9.9%
3422
12.0%
3600
15.5%
Santa Paula
1393
7.1%
1856
6.5%
1200
5.2%
Simi Valley
2767
14.0%
5086
17.90%
2417
10.4%
Thousand Oaks
4322
21.9%
1072
3.8%
1400
6.0%
County
1678
8.5%
2401
8.4%
1400
6.0%
TOTAL
19734
100.0%
28481
100.0%
23184
100.0%
Community Development staff from several cities in Ventura County have expressed
concern that the draft RHNA distribution bears no relation to what is likely to occur
within the jurisdiction, based on either expected development, natural constraints, and
development policy. As noted in the table, estimated development falls short of the
RHNA for the Ventura County as a whole, although some cities are expecting to meet
the preliminary draft RHNA targets. SCAG staff has made it clear that the RHNA
number for Ventura County as a whole would not be adjusted, though they would
consider one appeal from each jurisdiction, based on limited factors specified in the
Government Code (i.e. availability of land, jobs /housing balance, lack of sewer or water
service, lands protected under State or Federal programs, County agricultural
preservation policies for unincorporated areas, agreements between Counties and
Cities to direct growth to Cities, high housing costs, farmworker housing needs, market
demand for housing, and RTP growth distribution), and may redistribute the RHNA
among the Ventura County jurisdictions.
One option allowed by SCAG is for each subregion to take over the responsibility for
distribution of the RHNA. If Ventura County Cities and the County opt for this approach,
distribution of the 28,481 housing units, as well as consideration of appeals, would be
handled by VCOG instead of SCAG. The benefit of this approach, if Cities and the
County can agree on RHNA distribution, is the provision of certainty in the process; the
RHNA would not be redistributed to any local agency by SCAG based on appeals from
other jurisdictions. The Ventura Council of Governments (VCOG) has been considering
this option. Staff from the ten Cities and Ventura County have also been working
together to try to develop a formula based on a number of different factors including
General Plan capacity, jobs /housing balance, recent growth trends, vacant land,
projected employment growth. Agreement among staff on the most equitable formula
() 001
Honorable City Council
December 20, 2006
Page 3
has not yet been achieved. A meeting with staff and the VCOG Board is scheduled for
early January 2007 to try to resolve the differences.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Direct staff as deemed appropriate.
0001.40