HomeMy WebLinkAbout29-Planning
C~TY'OF SAN ..RNg.bINO - REQUEST ,Q. COUNCIL ACTION
From:
Brad L. Kilger
Director of Planning
Subject:
SCAG Regional Housing Needs
Assessment
Dept: Planning
o.m: February 20, 1989
Mayor and Council Meeting of
March 20, 1989, 2:00 p.m.
Synopsil of Previous Council ection:
9/19/88: Council directed the Mayor to forward a letter to the
Southern California Associated Governments (SCAG)
requesting a revision in the City's sphere of the
Regional Housing Needs Assessment.
Recommended motion:
That the report from the Director. of Planning regarding the SCAG
Regional Ho~sing Needs Assessment be received and filed and that
staff be directed to pursue reduction of the number of housing
units that the City should provide with the State Department of
Housing and Community Development.
Ignature
rad L. Ki1ger
Contect person: Brad L. Ki1aer Phone: 384-5057
Supporting data attached: Staff Report, Letter from SCAGWerd: City-wide
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
n/a
Source: (Acct. No.1
(Acct. DescriDtionl
Finance:
Council Notes:
A.........rI... 1....._ ~I_ 4 q
. . 0
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO -
o
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
Subject: SCAG Regional Housing Needs Assessment
Mayor and Council Meeting of March 20, 1989
(On September 28, 1988 and October 21, 1988 the City submitted
letters to SCAG requesting a revision to the Regional Housing
Needs Assessment (RHNA) based on our inability to meet the
projected need as defineg by SCAG.) On November 17, 1988
Planning staff attended the RHNA Subcommittee and Community
Economicn Human Development (CEHD) Committee meetings held
by SCAG. The RHNA Subcommittee recommended denial of the
city's. est because they felt that we had sufficient
available land to meet the projected need~ The CEHD Commit-
tee accepted that recommendation and denied the City's
request for a revision.
(As noted in the letter received from Jim Minuto of SCAG dated
December 19, 1988, SCAG will support the city's request to
State Housing and Community Development to re uce the number
of housinq unito that the city should provide~u Although tho
City had valid reasons for requesting revisio~ to our share
of the projected need, these factors could not be considered
by SCAG.
(The elements of the General Plan, in particular the Housing
and Land Use Elements, are being prepared with consideration
given to the factors outlined in the City'S letter to SCAG
dated September 28, 1988 including environmental, infra-
structure and feasibility concerns. The Housing Element will
include a discussion of why the City feels it cannot meet the
SCAG projections based on these considerations.
mkf2/21/89
M&CCAGENDA:SCAGRHNA
o
o
/oUTIEAn CRUFOAnl1
RIIOCIRTIOII OF ~AnIlEIT/
SOO /Outh CoII__1th Avenue. .illIte 1000 .1.01 AngeleI. Call1'omla . 90005 .213/385-1000
December 19, 1988
Hon. Evlyn Wilcox, Mayor
City of San 8ernardino
300 North "0" Street
San 8ernardino, CA 92418-0001
SU8JECT: REVISIONS TO THE REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT (RHNA)
Dear Mayor Wilcox:
Enclosed is a copy of the final recommendations pertaining to local
government requests to revise the RHNA. The SCAG Executive Committee'
approved these changes at its December IS, 1988 meeting.
The recommendations are based upon the review of local revision requests
conducted by the RHNA Subcommittee of the Community, Economic and Human
Development (CEHD) Committee.
-
We wish to thank all the local government officials who have cooperated
with us in the revision process. While we feel that equitable adjustments
have been made through the local-regional data interchange, we realize that
State law and pOlicy has inhibited our reaching agreement on a number of
important issues related to anticipated growth, land use density and income
group distribution.
Now that the regional planning phase is over, we intend to be more involved
with helping local governments in using these allocations and to work for
improvements in the law itself.
Again, thanks for your help and cooperation. For. any questions related to
the enclosure, please call Joe Carreras or myself at (213) 385-1000.
Sincerely
JIM MI TO
Mana r, Housing Program
- ~> ..,
\ i"; \_,
to
., 1
,
I
,
.- --'
. _ L..
JM:JC:bam
Enclosure
I{\c! 1"1 '''oq
~.. \.. . I.J....-.::.
,-,
, '~f
2306/2156
..,;;~-. ~". .:~:.,.."...~';, Li
.'
o
o
M E M 0 RAN DUM
December 15, 1988
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Executive Committee
Community, Economic and Human Development Committee
PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
At the RHNA Subcommittee. meetin9 on November 3, 1988, the members
reconsidered the 1en9th of time communities should have to address existing
vacant unit need and reviewed proposed local revisions to the Regional
Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) by 18 Jurisdictions. It recallended the
following actions which were, in turn, recomlended by the CEHD ta.littee at
its November 17, 1988 meeting:
o Approval of a 10 year rather than a 5 year basis for achieving the
ideal existing housing vacant unit need in cases where a cOMlUnity has
less than the ideal number of vacant units. This will allow a 50%
reduction in this component of housing need. The future vacant unit
need associated with growth would not be affected.
The RHNA Subcommittee felt that asking communities to build additional
units to. house expected households with an ideal vacancy rate, while also
requiring communities to go back to the existing housing stock and, in
those cases where the vacancy rate is lower than the ideal, de..nd that
that vacancy rate be corrected in five years, is burdensome. This is
particularly true in the "built out" urban area where the housing IIIllrket
has been "tight" for 10 years or more and existing vacant unit need is, in
a number of cases, higher than anticipated household growth. Also, in
densely developed cities. with a high proportion of multifamily units
(predominately "affordable" housing), current policy forces them to become
even more densely developed and "impacted" with low cost units if for no
other reason than to meet ideal vacancy levels. .
,
The change is intended to establish a more realistic timeframe for meeting
the ideal vacancy goal for the existing housing stock and to equalize extra
vacancy goals between single and multifamily type localities. It would be
applied to all Jurisdictions submitting a local revision request, wh.i1e an
advisory would be sent to all other communities recommending that they
incorporate this change In their revised local housing needs assessment.
o
o
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
December 15. 1988
Page 2
The CEHD Committee, at its November 17. 1988 meeting also recommended
approval of the following adjustments to the RHNA which were recommended to
it by t~e RHNA Subcommittee at its November 3, and 17, 1988 meetings,
1. Unincor orated: Approved the requested demolition
ad ustment and increase n household growth for the southeast
unincorporated area and new cities by 8,397 households. This revision
will be further broken down to separate the new city growth estimates.
from the county unincorporated area forecast. The change is based on
more recent data provided by the county. The new data enables the
unincorporated area to be treated as if it were a city rather than as
a residual after all city adjustments are made. This change redistri-
buted growth in the south county subregion.
An advisory will be sent to all communities in the subregion notifying
them of the change in growth distribution. and the adjustment will be
implemented for localities from the area that have subMitted local
revision requests based in whole or in part on the growth distribution
method (e.g., Costa Mesa, Irvine, Newport 8each and San Clemente).
Approved a housing vacancy need adjustment based on the additional
growth and new goal for addressing existing vacancy need by 1994.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
19.726
28,123
EX.
VAC.
771
386
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
592
844
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
235
105
* ORIGINAL
* REVISED
21,325
29,458
* Includes new cities (minus 2,741 units for Mission Viejo and 2,526 for Dana
Point)
2. Costa Mesa: Evaluated the city request for a reduction of future.
housing unit need from 5,155 to 2,020 and use of substitute local
vacancy data. Approved a reduction of future housing need from 5,155
to 3,963 based on a redistribution of growth in southeast Orange
County. Denied substitute local vacancy data since it would eliminate
comparability across the region. Approved a change in the existing
housing vacancy need goal for 1994.
2272
o
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
December 15. 1988
Page 3
o
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOT AL
HH
GROWTH
EX.
VAC.
593
297
ORIGINAL
REVISED
5.155
4.332
3.467
3,963
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
156
124
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
75
75
3. Irvine: Approved local revision request to reduce total future
housing unit neea from 14.337 to 13.188 and denied change in ideal
vacancy level. Change is based on the redistribution of 9rowth in
southeast Orange County. Denied substitute ideal vacancy level since
it would eliminate comparability across the region. but approved new
vacant unit need levels based on the drop in household growth and a
new goal for addressing existing vacant unit need by 1994.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
. ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
14,337
13,188
HH
GROWTH
13,642
12,673
EX.
VAC.
307
154
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
386
359
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
2
2
4. Newport Beach: Partial approval of local revision request. Evaluated
the city request to reduce future housing unit need from 2.849 to
1.583 and to reduce affordable housing need to no more than 240 units.
Approved a 2.349 unit future need based on the redistribution of
growth in southeast Orange County and further reduced it to 2.062
units as a result of an assessment of annexations that influenced
original estimates. Denied change in income distribution of future
need since neither error nor avoidance of impaction were issues.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
2.535
EX.
VAC.
-136
-136
ORIGINAL
REVISED
2.849
2,062
1,774
2272
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
84
59
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
365
365
o
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
December 15. 1988
Page 4
o
\
5. San Clemente: Evaluated the city request to reduce future housing
need from 4.227 to 3,000 units. Approved a 3,237 unit future growth
based on the redistribution of growth in southeast Orange County and
denied. any further reduction due to the existence of available sites.
Approved a new goal for addressing existing vacant unit need by 1994.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
3,712
EX.
VAC.
360
180
ORIGINAL
REVISED
4,227
3,237
2.927
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
120
95
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
35
35
6. Ventura County Unincorporated: Approved request to reduce anticipated
household growth from 3.109 to 2,576. This change is based on the
same method used in adjusting the growth in the Orange County
Unincorporated area. An advisory will be sent to all jurisdictions in
the Simi/Thousand Oaks subregion notifying them of the change and its
redistributiona1 impact.
Approved an adjustment to vacant unit needs based on the lower level
of growth and new pOlicy on addressing existing vacant unit need by
1994.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
3,573
HH
GROWTH
EX.
VAC.
297
149
3,109
2.878
2,576
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
79
65
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
88
88
7. Moarpark: Evaluated the city request to reduce future need from 3.318
to 1,003 units. Approved a reduced housing unit need of 2.743 based
on a 1984-86 550/year growth trend. eliminating the "bulge" of 1.530
units in 1987 that resulted from a local ordinance and not trend.
2272
o
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
December 15. 1988
Page 5
TOTAL
ORIGINAL
REVISED
3.318
2.743
o
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
HH
GROWTH
3,311
EX.
VAC.
-83
-83
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
85
71
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
5
5
8. Santa Paula: Approved local revision request to reduce future need
from 729 to 620 units based on the County AQMP limit of 124
units/year. Other proposed constraints were not deemed to be
sufficient. Approved an adjustment in the 1994 existing housing
vacant unit goal.
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
729
620
2,750
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
HH
GROWTH
516
487
EX.
VAC.
161
81
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
16
15
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
37
37
9. Commerce: Approved local revision request to eliminate household
growth and vacancy adjustment and increase replacement housing need
from 73 to 86 units. Revision is based on severe environmental
constraints and local demolition data.
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
319
86
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
HH
GROWTH
169
o
EX.
VAC.
72
o
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
5
o
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
73
86
10. E1 Segundo: Evaluated the local revision request to reduce future
housing need from 1,196 to 715. The change was not approved since the
City indicated that it had the capacity to grow to the projected level
by 1994. City concerns about the rate of growth. given economic and
2272
o
o
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
December IS, 1988
Page 6
regulatory constraints, pertains more to 1994-2010 growth. Approved
an adjustment in the 1994 existing housing vacant unit goal.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
844
844
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
30
30
EX.
VAC.
169
85
ORIGINAL
REVISED
1,196
1,112
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
153
153
11. Hermosa Beach: Approved the local revision request to reduce future
housing need from 947 to 513 units. The change is based on an error
in the application of the growth distribution methodology. Approved a
change In the 1994 existing housing vacant unit goal.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
947
513
HH
GROWTH
485
161
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
17
6
EX.
VAC.
196
98
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
248
248
12. Hidden Hills: Because state housing law does not provide for change
in future need Income distribution except to avoid impaction or to
correct a factual error, the RHNA Subcommittee rejected a request for
a second postponement, then denied the local revision to eliminate
very low, low and. moderate income future need, reallocating it to
upper incOMe need, and eliminating existing overpayment need.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
42
42
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
1
1
EX.
VAC.
1
1
ORIGINAL
REVISED
46
46
2272
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
2
2
o
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
December 15, 1988
Page 7
o
13. La Canada-Flintridqe: Because state housing law does not provide for
changing future need income categories except to avoid impaction or to
correct for a factual error, the RHNA Subcommittee rejected a request
for a second postponement, then denied the local revision to reduce
very low and low and moderate income housing need from 104 to 29, and
reallocate it to upper income need. Approved a new goal for
addressing existing vacant unit need by 1994.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
323
266
HH
GROWTH
198
198
EX.
VAC.
112
56
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
4
4
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
8
8
14. Pico Rivera: Approved the local revision request to reduce future
need from 1,266 to 595. The request to reduce lower income housing
need was withdrawn. The basis for the change was the lack of
available sites as 50 of the 96 vacant acres were found to be on
school sites that are not available for housing development, nor are
anticipated to be available by 1994 due to increased school
enro 11 ment s .
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
914
370
EX.
VAC.
228
114
ORIGINAL
REVISED
1,266
595
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
23
9
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
102
102
15. Redondo Beach: Approved the local revision request to reduce future
household growth as a result of an assessment of annexations that
influenced the original estimate. Denied requested vacancy adjustment
reduction, but approved a change to the 1994 existing housing vacant
unit goal.
2272
-
o
Memorandum to The E~ecutive Committee
December 15, 1988
Page 8
~~~-
~
"'wI!
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
3,803
3,030
HH
GROWTH
EX.
VAC.
427
214
2,365
1,825
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
88
68
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
923
923
16. San Marino: Approved the local revision request to reduce future need
from 60 to 18 units due to land unavailability. Approved a new
existing housing vacant unit goal per new RHNA Policy.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
60
18
HH
GROWTH
EX.
VAC.
2
2
56
14
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
o
o
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
2
2
17. Signal Hill: Approved local reV1Slon request to reduce future
household growth from 708 to 354 because of limited site availability
due to oil production, slopes and soil conditions. Approved a change
in the 1994 existing housing vacant unit goal.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
805
419
HH
GROWTH
708
354
EX.
VAC. ~
38
19
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
27
14
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
32
32
18. West Hollywood: Evaluated the proposed vacancy adjustment from 879 to
559 units due to unavailability of sites, lack of recycling potential,
local regulations on demolitions, infrastructure and other
constraints. Rent control has increased unit demand and artificially
increased existing housing vacant unit need. Rent control was not
deemed to be a basis for establishing a lower ideal vacancy level.
2272
o
Memorandum to The Executi~e Committee
December 15, 1988
Page 9
o
However, due to the new policy on addressing existing housing vacancy
goals by 1994, the total housing need was adjusted from 1,102 to 668
uni.ts.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
206
206
EX.
VAC.
870
435
ORIGINAL
REVISED
1,102
668
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
10
10
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
17
17
19. Buena Park: E~a1uated requested revision of future need for the 6-1/2
year 1988-1994 periOd from I,B55 to 913 units. Partly approved the
reduction based on lack of enough available sites and recent recycling
rates. Adjusted existing vacancy need by 1994 per new RHNA policy.
19B9-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
1,522
1,061
HH
GROWTH
1,004
756
EX.
VAC.
409
205
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
31
22
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
78
78
20. Huntington Beach: Evaluated requested reduction of future need from
6,786 to 3,203 units based on environmental constraints and site
unavailability. Denied this revision because land not now zoned
residential was potentially available. Adjusted existing vacancy need
by 1994 per new RHNAPo1icy.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
EX.
VAC.
ORIGINAL
REVISED
6,7B6
6,22B
5,360
5,360
1,117
559
2Z72
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
171
171
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
138
138
o
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
December 15, 1988
Page 10
o
21. Los Alamitos: Evaluated requested revision to reduce future need from
443 to 300 units. Denied the revision because adequate sites are
av~ilable. Adjusted 1994 existing vacancy goal per new RHNA POlicy.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
443
399
HH
GROWTH
266
266
EX.
VAC.
88
44
22.
Placentia:
no bas is
Pol1cy.
Requested reduction of demolition adjustment denied since
provided. Adjusted 1994 existing vacancy goal per new RHNA
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
9
9.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
1,672
1,618
HH
GROWTH
1,501
1,501
EX.
VAC.
109
55
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
44
44
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
80
80
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
18
18
23. Tustin: Evaluated requested revision of existing need, vacancy
ad]ustment, demolition adjustment, and household growth. Approved in
part household growth reduction based upon change in Orange County
unincorporated forecast for Southwest Orange subregion. Denied other
revisions, but adjusted 1994 existing ~acancy goal per new RHNA
POl1cy. .
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
2,866
2,085
HH
GROWTH
2,314
1,751
EX.
VAC.
393
197
2272
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
92
70
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
67
67
o
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
December 15. 1988
Page 11
o
24. Westminster: Evaluated requested reduction of household growth from
975 to 377 and vacancy adjustment from 467 to 80. Denied household
growth reduction request due to availability of sites and vacancy
reduction since approval would lead to lack of conformity regionwide.
Adjusted 1994 existing vacancy goal per new RHNA Policy.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
975
975
EX.
VAC.
437
219
ORIGINAL
REVISED
1,524
1,306
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
30
30
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
82
82
25. Banning: Approved requested increase in future need based upon market
demand, approved projects, and building trends. To be offset by
advisory reduction on Riverside County unincorporated.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
333
3.383
EX.
VAC.
o
o
ORIGINAL
REVISED
948
3,515
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
25
97
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
35
35
26. Moreno Valley: Approved requested increase in future need based upon
market deaand and building trends. To be offset by advisory reduction
in Riverside County unincorporated.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL'
HH
GROWTH
17.410
EX.
VAC.
-107
ORIGINAL
REVISED
17.741
2272
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
424
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
15
c
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
December 15, 1988
Page 12
o
27. Perris: Approved requested increase in future need based upon market
deMand, approved projects, and building trends. To be offset by
advisory reduction in Riverside County Unincorporated. Also adjusted
1994 existing vacancy goal per new RHNA Policy.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
1,839
EX.
VAC.
12
6
ORIGINAL
REVISED
1,945
7,509
7,228
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
62
243
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
32
32
28. Red1andS: Because State Housing Law does not permit revisions based
on local growth control ordinances, the committee denied the requested
reduction of future need from 3,981 to 2,000 units. .
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
HH
GROWTH
EX.
VAC.
TOTAL
o
ORIGINAL
REVISED
~>
<>
<>
<>
<>
<>
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
<>
<>
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
<>
<>
29. Cit~ of San Bernardino: Because adequate potential sites are
ava 1ab1e, the requested reduction of future need from 8,021 to 5,553
~ units was denied. The physical and fiscal constraints to this level
~ ~ of development, however, are valid bases:for revisions to the local
housing element and SCAG will support the jurisdiction in seeking
approval of this revision from the State HCD.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
EX.
VAC.
ORIGINAL
REVISED
<>
<>
<>
<>
<>
<>
2272
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
<>
<>
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
<>
<>
o
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
December IS, 1988
Page 13
o
30. Ojai: Approval of requested reduction of future need based upon
Ventura AQMP limit. Adjustment of 1994 existing vacancy goal per new
RHN.A Policy.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
243
133
HH
GROWTH
193
112
EX.
VAC.
36
18
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
5
3
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
8
8
31. Arcadia: Reduce nousehold growth to 500 based on sites availability
and recycling potential. Adjust 1994 existing vacancy goal per new
RHNA Policy.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
1,067
805
HH
GROWTH
642
500
EX.
VAC.
234
117
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
20
16
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
172
172
32. 8aldwin Park: Approval of requested reduction of future need from
1,228 to 627 units based upon lack of available sites. Adjusted 1994
existing vacancy goal per new RHNA poliCy.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
1,228
627
HH
GROWTH
938
358
EX.
VAC.
14
7
2272
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
25
10
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
252
252
.
o
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
December 15, 1988
Page 14
o
33. Covina: Approval of requested reduction of future need based on lack
of sufficient suitaole sites. Revised total based upon city's
proposed acceleration of recycling and rezoning of part of
no~-residentia1 vacant land. Adjusted 1994 existing vacancy goal per
new RHNA pOlicy. Denied change in demolition adjustment.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
1,403
743
EX.
VAC.
236
118
ORIGINAL
REVISED
1,744
976
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
43
23
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
92
92
34. Industry: Because sites are available and no constraints beyond local
zoning appear, requested elimination of future need was denied.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
EX.
VAC.
ORIGINAL
REVISED
<>
<>
<>
<>
<>
<>
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
<>
<>
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
<>
<>
35. Manhattan Beach: Approval of reduction in future need based upon
correction to growth forecast methodology. Adjusted 1994 vacancy goal
per new RHNA Policy. Denied change in income distribution of future
need per State Housing Law.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
981
645
EX.
VAC.
4
2
ORIGINAL
REVISED
1,435
1,088
2272
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
27
18
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
423
423
.
o
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
December IS, 1988
Page 15
o
36. Monterey Park: Partial approval of requested reduction of future need
from 1,423 to 500 units based on unavailability of sites due to
hillside land and built-up character ofc1ty. A reduction to 900
unfts was approved due to development trends. Adjusted 1994 vacancy
goal per new RHNA POlicy.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
824
483
EX.
VAC.
345
173
ORIGINAL
REVISED
1,423
900.
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
24
14
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
230
230
37. Pomona: Approval of requested revision of future need based upon lack
of sufficient.available sites.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
EX.
VAC.
-132
-132
ORIGINAL
REVISED
2,736
2,097
2,593
1,972
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
79
60
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
197
197
38. Rancho Palos Verdes: Approved reduction in future need for 886 to 502
units. City requested reduction to 413 units based on site avail-
ability and other constraints. Error in DOF base data is basis for
this revision. Adjusted 1994 existing, vacancy goal per new RHNA
Policy. Denied existing need change as not consistent with RHNA
methodology.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
TOTAL
HH
GROWTH
748
430
EX.
VAC.
115
58
ORIGINAL
REVISED
886
502
2272
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
19
II
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
3
3
o
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
Decelber 15, 1988
Page 16
39.
o
Ro11inq Hills Estates: Approved requested reduction in future need
form 208 to 3D units based on limited available sites due to
topography, and lack of infrastructure. Denied requested revision in
inCome distribution per State Housing Law. Adjusted 1994 existing
vacancy goal per new RHNA Policy.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
208
30
HH
GROWTH
192
22
EX.
VAC.
9
5
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
4
o
DEMOLITION
ADJUSTMENT
3
3
40. West Covina: Approved requested reduction in future need household
growth from 1,619 to 941 units based on Change in growth forecast
methodology. Denied existing need reduction per State Housing Law.
Adjusted 1994 existing vacancy goal per new RHNA Policy.
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
ORIGINAL
REVISED
TOTAL
1,988
HH
GROWTH
1,619
941
EX.
VAC.
280
140
1,150
ADDITIONAL
VACANCY
45
26
DEMOLITION
. ADJUSTMENT
43
43
Finally, the CEHD approved the RHNA Subcommittee's recommendation that
the 1994 existing .vacancy goal changes, also be made in those
Jurisdictions whose. revision requests were heard earlier. The
resultant approved revisions would be as follows:
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
HH EX. ADDITIONAL DEMOLITION
TOTAL GROWTH VAC. VACANCY ADJUSTMENT
Brea
-ORIGINAL 1,673 1,372 147 43 112
REVISED 1,600 1,372 74 43 112
2272
l
o
,""'\
V
I
,
,
Memorandum to The Executive Committee
Decelber 15. 1988
Page 17
1989-1994 FUTURE NEED
HH EX. ADDITIONAL DEMOLITION
TOTAL GROWTH VAC. VACANCY ADJUSTMENT
Fu 11 erton
ORIGINAL 1,756 1,011 639 33 73
REVISED 1,437 1,011 320 33 73
Beverl~ Hills 1.157 470 389 18 280
ORI INAL
REVISED 835 470 195 18 152
Burliank
ORIGINAL 3.798 2.175 82 74 1.467
REVISED 2,970 2.175 41 74 680
Glendale
ORIGINAL 7.108 4.048 977 152 1.932
REVISED 5.601 4.048 489 152 912
La Habra Heiqhts
ORIGINAL 119 93 19 2 5
REVISED 110 93 10 2 5
JC/bam
2272