Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFirst Annual Affordable Housing Strategy - (Low and Very Low ,. 7-4 Council/Agency Meeting Held: Deferre ontinued El Approved ❑ Conditionally Approved El Denied ity Clerk's Signa re 4 Council Meeting Date: April 3, 1995 Department ID Number: unknown REQUEST FOR COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR/CHAIRMAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS. SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Administrator/Executive Directo l 61�'- PREPARED BY: RAY SILVER, Assistant City Administrator SUBJECT: Affordable Housing Strategy (Low and Very Low Income) Statement of issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action,Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachment(s Statement of Issue: ' A strategy is needed to guide the expenditure of monies fort a development of laord�ableAkx housing. Attached is the proposed first annual Affordable Housing Strategy. Staff envisions --r, this document as the implementation tool for all affordable housing in the City, one tha-Mill, present both staff and affordable housing developers with criteria for evaluating potert���l :2::!e,— x projects and presenting those projects to the Council. 'C' Funding Source: (A)l-• �4C, , No known budgetary impact from the adoption of the strategy, though the document al guide the expenditure of the following affordable housing funds: Redevelopment Hoy sings Set Aside; Community Development Block Grant (CDBG); and HOME Investment Partnership funds Recommended Action: Approve the First Annual Affordable Housing Strategy. Direct staff to return on an annual basis (at a minimum) with a strategy for Council approval. Alternative Action(s): 1. Direct staff to make specific changes to the strategy. 2. Do not approve the strategy as it is currently drafted. .,. {: .. ... .. .; .: �.,..,...:�.r ;.....;fir:..... r�., ac;0{rr• ;fir ,,F`+..• u`/•'S•r � :: In Attendance: Dave Sullivan,Dave Garofalo,Victor Leipzig,Ray Silver,Jim Lamb, Melanie Fallon,Greg Brown,Dan Bruening 1) Affordable Housing Strategy-Dan Bruening distributed the 2nd draft version of the Affordable Housing Strategy. Melanie Fallon-and Dan will-coordinate comments to rewrite portions of the document's introduction. Staff will incorporate recommended changes to develop a more concise description of the document and housing programs. During discussion of the HOME Investment Partnership Program, Council Member Garofalo stated his concern to revitalizing the Oakview Area with affordable housing. He believes Oakview is a Redevelopment Project Area issue. The proposed rating sheet point system will be used to evaluate approval or denial of initial requests for financial assistance of affordable housing projects. If approval is recommended, staff designed an additional document "Project Description and Application,"to obtain detailed information from a prospective developer applicant. In addition, a new category will be added at the end of the rating sheet to include "City Cost Per Unit." The point system below is to be reflective on the new rating sheet: Loan of less than $25,000/unit = 10 points Grant of less than $25,000/unit = 7 points Loan of less than $50,000/unit = 5 points Grant of less than $50,000/unit = 2 points Also,it was noted that a "Screening Process" section for comments be incorporated into the rating sheet. Z) Proposed HOME Project -Greg Brown gave a brief overview of the proposed 10- unit project at 17361 & 17371 Koledo Lane. In terms of the proposed deferred loan, Council Member Garofalo will not support the project without a reduction of the principal borrowed on at least an annual basis as payback to the city. An estimated amount of $7,500 was calculated and suggested. Staff speculated that while a payback of some kind may occur,the city will only be able to realize this by putting more money upfront into the project. Mayor Leipzig believes this project accomplishes two things: (1) An improvement in the community's housing quality, and (2) It keeps the units affordable. It is his.believe that affordable housing should be secondary to improving housing quality, and therefore, he suggested Orange County Community Housing Corporation (OCCHC), the non-profit property owner, seek higher rents.' Staff responded that rental fees are determined by HOME regulations. Greg will research with Alan Baldwin of OCCHC the feasibility,of agreeing upon a minimal annual payback to the city. Further, Council Committee Members were reminded by staff of the significance of Council approving the "commitment" of funds before the deadline of April 13. 1 . f 3) Surplus School Sites Melanie Fallon distributed a draft version of the language proposed by Community Development staff to be established as Surplus School Sites Reuse Policies into the city's General Plan. In the past, staff has experienced problems with looking at only 9 vacant sites of.the total 19 existing vacant sites. Therefore, the new proposed policy creates a school site master plan that addresses the long-term needs of the.-school districts and the city residents. Melanie advised Council Committee Members that the General Plan Advisory Committee Will meet on April 5 to review and support staffs position on this.issue. Concurrently, city staff is distributing the proposed policies for review by the school district superintendents and the district school board members. Subsequent-meetings with all parties will be scheduled over the next few weeks. Historically,the school districts have experienced difficulty taking individual sites through the city's process for development. Through these upcoming meetings, staff wants to improve communications with the school districts. It was noted that.Wayne Wedin, consultant representing the Ocean View District, has reviewed the proposed policies, and.is extremely pleased at staffs. effort. Mayor.Leipzig and Councilman. Sullivan support keeping open space to the greatest extent possible,and advised staff to keep the applicable language strict. The next Economic Development Committee meeting is .scheduled for Friday, March 24, 1995,at 10:00 AM, Fourth Floor Center Conference Room. xc: Mayor and City Council Department Heads (g\m;nutes\1s) 2 First Annual City of Huntington Beach AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY (Acquisition ♦ Rehabilitation ♦ Construction) .5.. 5:::'•:::}:::y2' .'•� 5`:'t:3itt:::°£��' <-}l r '}4 3•,vryif:;•;:p:?.:rf::::f::i}`.tr .. - i+C;::}�:{•ffi i••••: ..•:;:,{;i: Sfytii ' n>Q .f Wr}}rini'':+ffiiiy:;;•i::.v: ;«'Y$ ', Sii• .. .;a� `t:;wr:•: :: ;?r,,;...wa: �>g>: �'g;s3ffSf�,.tiss' }k. S3 - ,.,...GQ�iiiSStti, �... «$S .SSSS�iit' ,i$SSS'S«.SSS$SSSittt'!S'S , •%j;�,::' i\\+'•+>1�::::i::i:::.:.�.ry:: f:i:... ` «i, •• .. 'F.•Y i�:«r Sf$fi ,,;;•;,,tii:tt.' ..... .:ok::}.:i::::`i: ,SS S� .i;i�A�-,3,u,' f.t•.S'•5.:t:#5;�:�5.; '�},';.`•.5.;'r'�',..St:ti.. :,<ssss,' ' S,, ,�€•:::.i:.�::�:>•: I s;i'ssi3:�r�',"s,ss's%?i ''•f..•.«.•:r ' 'errs,,,« ::}iix;;•x•..}' ,�xfir: '3 N,.�r«'�,5�«Srf ,«...•.:l.:.v,..::il':' ,,,S;S,«.',r'«,«"`itttt'«'S'r$S,r .::.. ' .a:.::..::ys.�^:••.,.•.,.,t.t,;i.i. rN::$%�,y'r�r%'s.%os s% #;^.��:�%#'s> %%z:#.>•s?s. 's::ssi'ti;5�,;,NNH£:is�#i#>sisi «c� :E:. :ss;; ' . «:,•'si;'t35'if's.'s^:sSiM #s'##:f isssss<^'t«:«:t,-:=sss %^�ss'ss.>%%£'sssx s �s„r�s$sss'i ,ss ssr'.�'f>i :tt5+;'�LS�'.«'.f'`r•`,J',S+'•`',«CMS}£�,�.,Sf,•,SS:f'l�`,'^Fr,f',`«`,vr,5 S, February 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. I AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCOME GUIDELINES..................................................................... 2 HOUSINGNEEDS.......................................................................................................................... 3 HOUSING SURVEY STATISTICS................................................................................................. 4 HOUSINGSURVEY...................................................................................................................... 5 HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS &POLICIES................................................................................ 6 AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGIES ..................................................................................... .7 HOUSINGPROGRAMS..................................................................................................................................... 9 LOANS ISSUED IN FY 1994/95 TO DATE................................................................................... 10 CDBG REHABILITATION PROGRAM......................................................................................... 11 MOBILE HOME PARKS IN HUNTINGTON BEACH................................................................... ff MOBILE HOME PARK PROGRAMS ........................................................................................... 13 HUNTINGTON BEACH HOME PROGRAM................................................................................ 14 HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM.................................................................... 15 HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT SET ASIDE........................................................... 16 REDEVELOPMENT SET ASIDE FUNDS..................................................................................... 17 AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS COMPLETED.................................................... ............ 18 AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION, WITH RANKINGS OF APPROVED & PROPOSED PROJECTS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT RATING SHEET- 1995..................................................... 20 PROPOSEDPROJECTS RATING.................................................................................................. 22 AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATIONS REPLACEMENT HOUSING REQUIREMENT.............................................................................. 24 PRODUCTION HOUSING REQUIREMENT................................................................................ 25 • INTRODUCTION Huntington Beach is a diverse community with households of varied socioeconomic, racial and cultural backgrounds. Providing adequate and affordable housing opportunities for its diverse resident population is both a concern and an obligation of the City. This Housing Strategy is intended to provide direction in responding to the housing needs of all economic segments of the community. Affordable Housing efforts occur in two Departments: the Economic Development and the Community Development Departments. The Community Development Department has the responsibility of preparing the City's housing policies and implementation programs through the state-mandated Housing Element. They also review all proposed housing developments and recommends specific conditions to developers to provide affordable housing units in the City. The Department is also preparing an affordable housing ordinance which will outline the specific requirements for housing developments. The Economic Development Department is responsible for the acquisition, construction, and rehabilitation of housing within the City, 'using set aside Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME funding. The Affordable Housing Strategy should be considered an annual report which is reviewed and provides the Council with direction for funding affordable housing projects at budget time. This report compares adopted housing goals with the state requirements and redevelopment obligations of the City. The report will provide staff and council with a tool which will enable project comparison and lead to effective and objective decisions. The City has a number of documents which direct affordable housing decisions. The Housing Element, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) and Redevelopment Compliance Report. The City's adopted Housing Element has been certified as in compliance with State Housing Element Law. This report summarizes the City's affordable housing efforts by funding source and offers recommendations and strategies for projects in 1995. 1 AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCOME GUIDELINES Shows the Increase in the Median Income in Orange County for the Last 5 Years TYPICAL FAMILY SIZE 4 :.:..: .:.: VERY LOW LOW LOWER MEDIAN ' MODERATE YEAR INCOME IlVCOME INCOME* INCOME** INCOME 50% 120% Median 1990 24,550 39,280 35,7009,100 58,920 19.91 26100 41760 38,000 52 200 56,400 26,350 42,1.G0 38,600 52,700 63,240 . . 1993 28,250 45,200. 39,700 56,500: 67,800 1994 29,400 47,04.0 39,900 5;8,800 70,560 1995 29,550 47,280 40,200 59,100; 70,920 1. CALIFORNIA MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME IS $46,600 FOR 1995 * National Median Income ** Orange County Median Income *** Source: U. S. Dept. Of Housing&Urban Development 2 ��O REQUEST FOR ,OUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENI .AGENCY ACTION MEETING DATE: April 3, 1995 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: unknown Analysis: With the exception of the city's housing element, CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) and redevelopment housing plans, there has been no single policy document that defines city council preferences for affordable housing (for households with incomes from 0 to 80% of median income) policies and programs. As proposed, the annual housing strategy is intended to provide direction for staff, and ultimately the City Council, in evaluating proposals for funding assistance. The strategy will also serve as: • an annual report, which is reviewed and debated in a public forum • a policy document that compares adopted housing goals with state requirements and redevelopment obligations of the city • an evaluation tool for comparison of both proposed and approved affordable housing projects The strategy covers the following housing programs, policies and activities: • Housing Needs • Housing Survey • Housing Element Goals and Affordable Housing Strategies • Housing Programs - CDBG rehabilitation loan program - HOME program - Redevelopment housing set aside funds • Rankings of Approved and Proposed Projects • Affordable Housing Obligations (due to redevelopment activities) Staff is prepared to discuss the strategy in more detail and respond to any questions and concerns from Council. Environmental Status: Exempt. HSGSTRG.DOC -2- 03/22/95 2:16 PM REQUEST FOROOUNCIL/REDEVELOPMEN ENCY ACTION MEETING DATE: April 3, 1995 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: unknown Attachment(s): 1. First Annual Affordable Housing Strategy 2. Economic Development Committee Minutes--February 24& March 10, 1995 MTU:RS:DB:GB:db:gb City Clerk's Page Number HSGSTRG.DOC -3- 03/22/95 2:31 PM Council/Agency Meeting Held: V/3V91 Deferre ontinued -:&� gr ❑Approved ❑ Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied 47 Citi-Clerk's Signif6re Council Meeting Date: April 3, 1995 Department ID Number: unknown .REQUEST FOR COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR/CHAIRMAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS_ SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Administrator/Executive Directo l PREPARED BY: RAY SILVER, Assistant City Administrator SUBJECT: Affordable Housing Strategy (Low and Very Low Income) Statement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action,Analysis,Environmental status,Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: A strategy is needed to guide the expenditure of monies for the development of affordable housing. Attached is the proposed first annual Affordable Housing Strategy. Staff envisions this document as the implementation tool for all affordable housing in the City, one thaEWill� present both staff and affordable housing developers with criteria for evaluating poten�t~al projects and presenting those projects to the Council. Funding Source: No known budgetary impact from the adoption of the strategy, though the document will guide the expenditure of the following affordable housing funds: Redevelopment Hd 'rsinj� Set Aside; Community Development Block Grant (CDBG); and HOME Investment Partnership funds Recommended Action: Approve the First Annual Affordable Housing Strategy. Direct staff to return on an annual basis (at a minimum) with a strategy for Council approval. Alternative Action(s): 1. Direct staff to make specific changes to the strategy. 2. Do not approve the strategy as it is currently drafted. i REQUEST FOR CqUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AENCY ACTION MEETING DATE: April 3, 1995 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: unknown Analysis: With the exception of the city's housing element, CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) and redevelopment housing plans, there has been no single policy document that defines city council preferences for affordable housing (for households with incomes from 0 to 80% of median income) policies and programs. As proposed, the annual housing strategy is intended to provide direction for staff, and ultimately the City Council, in evaluating proposals for funding assistance. The strategy will also serve as: • an annual report, which is reviewed and debated in a public forum • a policy document that compares adopted housing goals with state requirements and redevelopment obligations of the city • an evaluation tool for comparison of both proposed and approved affordable housing projects The strategy covers the following housing programs, policies and activities: • Housing Needs • Housing Survey • Housing Element Goals and Affordable Housing Strategies • Housing Programs - CDBG rehabilitation loan program - HOME program - Redevelopment housing set aside funds • Rankings of Approved and Proposed Projects • Affordable Housing Obligations (due to redevelopment activities) Staff is prepared to discuss the strategy in more detail and respond to any questions and concerns from Council. Environmental Status: Exempt. HSGSTRG.DOC -2- 03/22/95 2:16 PM REQUEST FOR RUNCILIREDEVELOPMENT IRENCY ACTION MEETING DATE: April 3, 1995 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: unknown Attachment(s): 1. First Annual Affordable Housing Strategy 2. Economic Development Committee Minutes--February 24 & March 10, 1995 MTU:RS:DB:GB:db:gb City Clerk's Page Number HSGSTRG.DOC -3- 03/22/95 2:31 PM ................................ .v.�:.. r "4:: J:•}}}:yw:x•.}:K::;(:}};:?;v v,..:\•:}:•}}}:::•}:ay:::r:a}•.;v}•q:::::::•y:::{<4•vv: .........vv........:......... x::•:::::.; ..� y+?..r:?. :•rw.:�:••}'x .4:}:,{{:w:v:b;.}:{>..;.;?.:.... � ...:.�:::.. .}v;:.}•.:?.j...v.�.�„v {n ........ r....v,.. :,y.;{;r}., ?;.......:::. .: .. .}nn. ::k4:+ri•: :::::?i':,4,:'y':ti :.y:, +,:.^•.?.`:$:: ::% : %i::`•'>': :'r';%::::>}': r ';� ??}• .}•,y',.2' .:„ta,y., .:s.;3,:ti3:::;�;r•;c:.:: %''.:x. a, }:.{,>.}•., �• f/.;•r t• ,;5:. :f•. .? t,£:}.{::;.,.t.:•+'•sc ,;?..?;:.o,.�va.,? .; 5,.<,+f.�::::.{dl'•v`.;4�t:i {sti;n::•:;•`.c?•'.::4;:•}}:•};kr•`•4}nq:• : :•{nt:•: ,?ce;•:�:t+a rn 4•�.:..nfi.�••.a•{?;. S}t� t ').•r. ...C... >::;: rx�.•3} � :.,� 9•r s } n'..a:.�a .Y.�t•. ./:<;:•rii'Of:;•::::?{•;:•;{?•:.. ?�fr.....�:::.+ •:? !fir'•:'.?tn�v .?� ..J.. n•Y.v ?.v 3�'sy�}Y:}:.;:?,:,}.,..::::v:::s+:n:w:w::v:{•}n`:'•' ..ii ......... :n 4.y;.flf{•$>,,f•...y::Ew.'. 5.:::•:a}'t}i:•.v}..}•l.'.!}}r•::..: ���,'�:� :,,a...::.:•.�::?...:::::a:.,•::::n.., .,fi,.",C : ,{•: :Ek:•'•�}•:p:•;•• ..} :•a.rr ;:vv.}.,•{..S'•~;`:f: :.ir•.-'S�'`...c�?•:a} ..3%}.� a... ...•r�Ar`•%%::r�i'r''r''.'•i:.:;8i.,: y4y.•.a::�:o•{:.<a:::KS?,kYt:}srwr'�.x;<•:: •::LS''.4y'r: ,C:�.v}Y.a:;•:}:•":?•};:•:^}:•.�n?..iii?}iir'K'y'Ni{:<•:$'•}:::: w 4:}�{:;r7.i:;:� :i;}::: :.n�. r '1.-.::... ,rY• :'•':•':•:?4.5.�<%.:Y.•<.:y,.�.;:,al?>4>,>3;r>l,. ?ar,.:4`•r•.•+;x;•.:.y;?.<:a::::::r:%1•};a':),..tyiv+"yu".:.,. �?}:..cir���yr�',•?�'<.:;<::t;:s;<::i}};:Sr}:•.•::�:•'i.,irs% ,'ef;< ?'\.}:{%:.•:::?ra/.4f?•};:}:?�:•:as; .;.}.••G}�} .,a. ..`v.•!!,;:9• •}:t:r •:?:.Y,r?:!r iL�:::b:??on,.;..?s::' ••�{•y. :•n:i+f�.}: i:•}nS.n:. ;?ax..:::::::::.�„:•::::•.a..i.,�•.•.,3i}n...a::::•..}.:...:..:. }: ,s .a::::..,:t?T?.::•:L.,t}n•:d5:,,..::•::::::r.trF�r.:::t;�i•:..�/.6n.R4::?naf.•..:fW,.r. In Attendance: Dave Sullivan,.Dave Garofalo,Victor Leipzig,Ray Silver, Stephen Kohler, Mike Adams,Greg Brown,Dan Bruening 1) Affordable Housing Strategy - Mike Adams distributed a draft Affordable Housing Strategy document for review by Committee Members, and he, Dan Bruening, and Greg Brown gave a two-hour presentation on its content._The following items are noteworthy points of distinction: Housing Survey - Early results of the city's single-family residential survey conducted, show the area north of Heil, west of Springdale, and east of Bolsa Chica as the focused area of future revitalization. The benefits of concentrating rehabilitation funds in one area, as opposed to piecemeal rehabilitations throughout the city, were explained. Positive statistics were expressed of the Oakview Enhancement Project related to the overall reduced numbers in Police and Fire calls,as well as the secondary social benefits to the community. Housing Element - Within the city's adopted Housing Element, goals and policies are identified for numerous programs and a variety of tasks. While many of these programs have already been implemented, the Housing Strategy will attempt to place those programs into perspective, and offers 13 affordable housing activities for future consideration and implementation. Housing Programs - Council member Garofalo asked.staff if the city had an incentive program for commercial owners. He was specifically addressing the successful storefront improvement program completed in Westminster. Ray Silver responded that two years ago, a similar proposal was presented to our City Council, however, it was not favorably supported. Mobile Home Park Programs - The city has exhausted its financial resources for inspections that require bringing Parks into compliance with current codes. Therefore, the inspection process was given back to the state. Ray Silver stated that the decision remains -- how much money do you put into a mobile home before improvements exceed its value? Mike Adams identified Cabrillo Park to be the city's biggest offender of codes because it is owned by the state and exempt of regulations. The city is looking at ways to make mobile homes more affordable, and Council member Sullivan asked if since the Human Resources Board (HRB) chair agrees staff can -make additional recommendations to the HRB, can this procedure be followed for the Citizens Advisory Board,and can staff place more emphasis with CAB for funds to implement housing? Home Program - Greg Brown described this federally funded program and identified targeted areas to be Main-Pier and Oakview project areas. The program funds are available for housing rehabilitation, acquisition of housing or vacant land, new construction, rental assistance and first time home buyer assistance programs. 1 Staff recommends the HOME funds be used for (1) Facilitating the acquisition of multi- family housing projects for rehab; (2) Develop partnerships with CHDO's and other nonprofit housing developers, and to (3) Provide gap financing for nonprofit housing partners with secured partial financing commitments from conventional lenders. Redevelopment Set Aside Funds - The City's/Redevelopment Agency's existing shortfall of housing unit credits was briefly discussed. Council member Garofalo asked for clarification of credits earned within and outside the project areas. He also asked if staff previously researched the benefits of amending the existing Main-Pier Project Area boundary to include the Pacific Trailer Park. Affordable Housing Project Rating Sheet - A point system was created in the form of a rating sheet to evaluate the requests for financial assistance for affordable housing projects. Council Members would like to see the following items included on the rating sheet: (1) Higher points available for development inside-project areas, (2) Include a "unique feature" category to distinguish projects, (3) A project quality category to include For Profit/Non Profit developers, and (4) A staff recommendation line available for comments. Council member Garofalo asked staff to include the following language under Project Cost Analysis "Cost Per Unit;Subsidy Per Unit;and Payback to the Agency/City." Using the proposed point system, Mike Adams noted I potential projects outlined on page 22 of the document. The final version of the Affordable Housing Strategy will be recommended to the City Council for formal adoption after committee deliberations are complete. Z) Proposed Home Project -The Orange County Community Housing Corporation is purchasing the properties at 17361.. and 17371 Koledo Lane (5 .units each), to rehabilitate and make them affordable to very-low income households for no less-that 59 years. The city's cost for the rehabilitation is $518,000; $250,000 secured from other sources,and $268,000 as the city's obligation. The city currently has HOME funds available until April 19, 1995, from Year 1994. This project is proposed to be allocated from these available funds. The loan will be structured as a deferred loan, and rents will be paid to OCCHC, fully secured by real estate. The city will receive 10 very-low income housing credits for the Housing Element. An Affordable Housing Agreement and Recorded Covenant will assure us that the units remain affordable,and will require annual monitoring. 2 Mayor Leipzig mentioned his focus to be statutory obligations as 1 st to redevelopment, 2nd to housing quality in Oakview, not affordability. If rents have to be increased, so be it. Dan Bruening mentioned the secondary benefit assurance with the CCR's in place. If the city rehabs these properties, the nonprofit owner will have a voice on the Homeowner Association Board to enforce CCR's to include ongoing maintenance, landscape,fencing,etc.,on surrounding units. Council member Garofalo is resistant to investing this kind of money without one-half of the rent going back to the city. It was determined that this'Item will be brought back to the EDC for further discussion. The next Economic Development Committee meeting is scheduled for Friday, March 107 1995, at 10:00 AM, Fourth Floor Center Conference Room. La Salle Partners have been invited back to give an update presentation on the Mall. xc: Mayor and City Council Department Heads (g\minutes\Is) 3 HOUSING NEEDS In order for the City's Housing Element to become certified by the State, the City must identify quantitative objectives based on a regional allocation formula. State law requires jurisdictions to provide for their share of regional housing needs. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has determined the 1989-1994 needs for the City of Huntington Beach, and has estimated the number of households which the City will be expected to accommodate during this period. These needs were forecast by the 1988 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), which considered on a regional and local level: market demand for housing, employment opportunities, availability of suitable sites for public facilities, commuting patterns, type and tenure of housing needs, and housing needs of farm workers. According to the 1988 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) forecast, housing to accommodate 6,228 households would need to be added to .the City's June 30, 1989 total households by July 1994 to fulfill the City's share of regional housing needs. Based on the distribution of regional income, this total was further divided among four income groups to identify the types of households to be provided for as follows: Very Low(0-50%) 984 (15.8%) Low(50-80%) 1,264 (20.3%) Moderate(80-1201/o) 1,370 (22.00%) Upper(Over 120%) 2,610 (41.9%) Total Households 6,228 (1000/6) County Median Income* $59,100 *Note: The chart on the previous page shows how the.Orange County median income has increased over the past five years. In addition to the requirements of the Housing Element, the City has accumulated obligations for affordable housing on numerous Redevelopment Projects. These obligations have been identified in the Redevelopment Housing Compliance Report. 3 HOUSING SURVEY STATISTICS AS OF JANUARY 26, 1995 i'•'•ti"z^z� t�ii�:"i'�'ii.?iit\: • •:::iy,x,zv'tititi. '�'i7 iizi\,:M1y:y,�,v�•7 :i.;•:,: 'z'•4k'ii'i� '�>^$i:�iii'iiiiiy-'^•,Y•••��i•'•�tii�:^„ '-•Yi'z�zz^�ii 4v�yv.•4;.:vv:v::iiia,vv,.�.�iY„�ii tt}i�v v \3)`?. Y ti z3^ \\\\} ��i',Yr �i�� �w 7 w� �t��y�� '. �^ t x \+� ..r `�`•y `\'7� z: 18,644 Good* 5,905 Fair* 589 Poor* :, '+t'ty,"v\•"v+:t+•:-•+•:t•-vv+++.L••:+'vvi++i'::vi4: •.v\:."i•v't:, vtvv'xt•i:v:;xAix;'Av:•Y}:i'{i'i+:.�tivtvii•tt•.+.'t+•:iv'ti'•: Aii:iittt+v+;;v,t,t'+t'•.v;•:i{+•r:';v �Z\� • '�zzzzzzzzzzz^>•':z�zz�ez:�,'••`•� '• �>.< '{:: >wz'}'#•}zz\<;z:'a"z \�\�zzzz;';zz:;;zz::>.zzzz;zz'zzizz.^y}>:,:z,':Yy:::,,;w::'�:w:z,�:'^.�.z:;z::z>.�:kz;z^z�a^.t„•zzzzz^':zz;"a:' •4 ,,t\ti\ . 'r i\v �;Y': 'YM1;,.- \2 Y:,, \\, \ 3+ k, •,.,,: ` z:Z Y �:. 2.7,. \.i."i:z2 �Y..�^yz�zzzzz^,�^z,yzz\��. �: i. �:��.z�,z;:.,•., �\ �\�zz zz�,;;z„z,._,_..^.,,:,zz,.:�##'>.zzz;s}<iiiz�i,:�."?:zi,��:,zz^^:.`#?z#�:>•;, ��zzz,.•„�z,z,'wwz?zzzz;�zz<;tz^tz.;t'• •'3.t�`':� zi� ` ;fit :z�.'�zzzz#tz�?>. z::: �?�':zzzz:?>z;#z;z;�;:•>:;};;:;zz,�zzx?zt>.zzzzzz:�.:t##zza��zz^,�:�'#z�zz: zzzz�:��•:z'>.�ztttzti�t::,zz�z##:'zz�z zzzzz .:z:::�:.,,,,,,,,,,:>..,,,..:z,��,,,:t:::,zrz:..z•.:..:_ � :�:�.`,z,:..,..,::,.,z, .\:,::z�: „ •::.z,,,,,,,•:�.:,,.::..,:^,^^:•.:•.,,,::..:•.:.::.::.:;�,..,•.,z„:z,:.::.,,,,,�z-.,,,,,,::z„•.z„z�.,,,,:,,:, w.�.........�......... 3.........s..---.....�...................................~w .........'sY..Y:.yYY:•YYYY:•:.......................----......................................................................�. *10 to 14 Points Good *15 to 21 Points Fair *22 to 30 Points Poor .................... ......... ... ... ....... .... .... _ _ ..... ..... ...... ..... _.... MEDIAN SAFES PRICE . . SALES VOLUME . ZIPCODE. Jan `95 %Change from `94 Jan `95 %Change from `94 92646 $220,000 2.3% 42 .-22.2% ................... ............ ......_.............._.............. ....__................_........... ................. ....... ......... ...................................... ..........-.._............... ._.. .... 647::::< ;:;:; $178,000 -1.7% 19 -32.1% 92648;;:: ...... $264,000 -6.4% 34 -5.6% 9264 .. -.. ._ $234,000 0.0% 35 -27.1% Source: Orange County Register _ 4 HOUSING SURVEY A third method of determining the City's housing needs can be through a housing quality survey. In 1993, City staff began a drive by survey of single family neighborhoods to attempt to identify the condition of the City's stock. This survey rates the condition of housing as good, fair, or poor based on a number of exterior conditions. The results of this survey have been mapped and clearly identify neighborhoods in need of enhancement. The survey was conducted using a drive-by technique (windshield), the survey assesses the exterior condition of single family homes. To date, staff has surveyed approximately 60% of the single family stock. Items rated on survey include roof, driveway, paint or stucco, landscaping and fencing. Point values were assigned depending on the condition of the property. Upon completion of the single family residential survey, staff will begin a survey of multi-family housing. There are many additional ways to determine the housing needs of a community. These include vacancy rental rates and rent costs, residential resale activity, jobs/housing balance studies and employment rates. The City Council should consider all these sources of information in determining the annual affordable housing obligations. _ 5 HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS & POLICIES The City's Housing Element adopted in 1989 prioritizes five local housing concerns. The five areas of concern are: 1. Accessibility • Provide housing opportunities,for various types of households • Provide housing for persons with special needs 2. Adequate Provision • Provide incentives and assistance for a variety of housing types for different income households 3. Adequate Sites • Designate additional residential areas 4. Preserving Housing and Neighborhoods • Encourage maintenance.and repair of deteriorated housing 5. Preserving Affordability • Place assured affordability covenants on affordable housing units Note: These goals and policies have directed how the City implemented the housing program over the past six years. The adopted Housing Element identifies numerous programs and a variety of tasks. Many of these programs have been implemented. The housing strategy will attempt to place those programs in perspective and prioritize future affordable housing activities for implementation. _ 6 AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGIES Through the implementation of the City's adopted Housing Element,a number of activities have occurred. The City appointed an Affordable Housing Committee to review policies and make recommendations on new ordinances. An Affordable Housing Ordinance was directed and approved by the Planning Commission and has been reviewed by the City Council,but has yet to be adopted. The City of Huntington Beach needs to comply with the regulations of State Redevelopment Law. A number of residential units were removed to accommodate new redevelopment projects,those units need to be replaced. In addition the Redevelopment Agency assumed the affordable housing obligation of the new redevelopment projects. The Affordable Housing Strategy should balance the redevelopment housing obligations with housing needs identified in the housing survey in an attempt to achieve the goals of the Housing Element. Recommendations (Not in order of priority) 1. Adopt ordinance which encourages and accommodates the production of affordable housing units. 2. Approve affordable housing development agreements with major development companies. 3. Prepare affordable housing monitoring programs,including covenants. 4. Conclude City's housing condition survey for multifamily units. 5. Modify zoning regulations to allow for more affordable housing opportunities. 6. Coordinate and contract with private and public organizations to conduct the ministerial functions of the City's Housing Program. 7. Develop specific projects and programs for special needs residents. 8. Prioritize affordable housing projects which target families of low and very low income. 9. Establish new source of affordable housing funds through the loan program income,projects profits, in-lieu development fees and program loan interest payments. 10. Exclude financial assistance for new development projects with inclusionary affordable housing requirements. 11. Prioritize the preservation of at-risk existing affordable units to assume long term affordability. 12. Renegotiate the application of affordable housing covenants on projects previously subsidized. 13. Developers within the project areas are to provide affordable housing on site. Strate�v 1. Adopt City's affordable housing ordinance. 7 I I LOWAND VERYLOW HOUSING PROGRAMS Currently, there are three main funding sources for affordable housing in Huntington Beach: 1. Redevelopment Set Aside - 20% of tax increment from redevelopment project area is required to be used for affordable housing. This funding source is the least restrictive of the three sources. Income range is from 120% of median income and below. 2. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) - a yearly allocation funded by the federal government. These funds are more restrictive than redevelopment set -aside. CDBG requires that 70% of all funds expended must benefit persons of 80% median income or less.- 3. HOME Funds - is another federally funded program. These funds can only be used for affordable housing. This funding has the most restrictions. Program regulations require that 90% of all HOME funds be used to assist households below 60% of median income. The remaining 10% can be used to assist households with incomes of up to 80% of median income. 9 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM HOUSING RELATED PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS .....ivi{•nti"M1; l*,.., ..;..:'4. •..i; .i... ±.i�; .....;..i _. (Proposed) REHAB.LOANS .'. .;.. :.:: ..,.:: .::.<:: _.. ..::. ,000 Single Family $117,862 $225,949 $209,829 $18,000 $96,310 Mobile Home $146,240 $113,009 $202,349 $234,460 $78,041 Multi family $70,612 $218,831 $165,636 $25,000 $0 REHAB:GRANTS Single Family $0 $0 $2,000 $0 $0 Mobile Home $0 $0 $2,000 $2,000 $0 Multi Family $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 HOUSING:SERV.ICES -.. . ... .. . Orange County Fair Housing $34,779 $37,000 $36,500 $35,000 $35.000 $35,000 HOUSING COOPERATIVE _. AGREEMENTS Habitat for Humanity $163,000 Orange Housing Development Corporation $35,000 SP.EC.I.AL HO..USING:. PROJECTS Down Payment Assistance $157,098 "iii•:ii,�:•:iiv.4iiitiii+'ii'ii{ii{ii,''i{•i\t'i{{.i+.+'+' '+"+.{:':":" 'Yi\iii•:i+':"+"'' zzzziiz,z, ,\;,,,.„z „z4�i i,.zzzz „ zz ` ;}z`zz^< :i.,,,,i• , z a•: :�z,, k,,,,.;,,. "t:c:•:::t:5:::•:::::•rx;:•:::w:•rr; Ci! �• 1�':.....,(� 10 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT HOUSING PROGRAMS Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)has been in existence since 1974. The CDBG program has been the major Federal Urban Development assistance program. This program has received numerous awards of excellence i from the Department of HUD. Re lug_ations 1. All housing must be for low/moderate income persons. 2. 71%of all CDBG funding must be for persons of 80%or below of median income. 3. Improvements permitted are to complete health, safety, structural and energy saving repairs and for enhancement items to improve neighborhoods. Recommendations (Not in order of priority) The following are different types of rehabilitation packages: 1. Deferred Loans,one time interest loan of 5%for those property owners that are below 50%of median income, repayable when property is sold or title transfer. 2. Amortized 3%loan for a maximum of 15 years for those whose income is greater than 50%but less than 80%of median income. 3. Amortized 6%loan for a maximum of 15 years for those whose income is greater than 80%but less than 100% of median income. 4. Amortized 8%loan for a maximum of 15 years for those whose income is greater than 100%but less than 120% of median.income. 5. The persons whose income is greater than 80%of median would only be eligible for loans to repair health and safety deficiencies. 6. Amortized 6%loan for a maximum of 15 years in conjunction with a deferred loan of equal amount to improve multi-family units with a requirement of a covenant for keeping them affordable for 10 years. 7. Place covenants on existing housing for long-term affordability through acquisition and rehab. Strategies (Not in order of priority) 1. Target rehab efforts in zip code area 92647(north central portion of the city). 2. Target mobile home residents with minor repair grants for handyman services. 3. Offer special services in areas adjacent to other assisted and affordable housing projects. 4. Provide grants for handicap modifications up to$2,000 per household to make necessary handicapped-oriented - changes. 11 MOBILE HOME PARKS IN HUNTINGTON BEACH PARK ADDRESS SPACES OCCUPIED 1194 1. Beachview Mobile Home Park 17261 Gothard 82 82 2. Brookfield Manor 9850 Garfield 139 139 3. Cabrillo 21752 PCH 45 45 4. Del Mar Mobile Home Estates 19251 Brookhurst 142 141 5. Driftwood 21462 PCH 157 140 6. Huntington By the Sea 21851 Newland 306 286 7. Huntington Harbour Mobile Estates 16400 Saybrook 130 128 8. Huntington Mobile Estates 7652 Garfield 105 .105 9. Huntington Shorecliffs 20701 Beach 304 304 10. Los Amigos Mobile Park 18601 Newland 145 145 11. Mariners Point 19350 Ward 98 97 12. Ocean View Estates 7051 Ellis 44 44 13. Pacific Trailer Park 80 Huntington 260 259 14. Rancho Del Rey 16222 Monterey 379 379 15. Rancho Huntington 19361 Brookhurst 193 193 16. Sea Aire Mobile Estates 6301 Warner 230 229 17. Sea Breeze Mobile Estates 5200 Heil 65 63 18. Skandia Mobile Country 16444 Bolsa Chica 167 167 19. Villa Huntington 7850 Slater 125 125 TOTAL SPACES 3,116 3,071 12 MOBILE HOME PARK PROGRAMS The City of Huntington Beach has over 3,000 mobile homes providing the community with a substantial amount of affordable housing. State law mandates that each of these homes and parks be inspected and brought into compliance with current codes. These regulations provide the City with an opportunity to assist the home owner and park owner with necessary repairs in exchange for affordable housing covenants. Recommendations (Not in order of priority) 1. Offer below interest market rate loans for park owners to repair the deficiencies that are found during the park inspection. 2. Offer grants to residences of parks up to a maximum $1,200 grant to do the required repairs as found during park inspection. 3.. Offer the same rehab loan program that is offered to owners of single family homes (SFD). Note: The City has given the inspection process back to the state. 13 Huntington Beach HOME Program t k•.:k:::::•.:::.:....::.:...:.:�:.:t:..,•::.t:t:•.t.:•:.tk:{ .. .,.k....t....:::.:::....:.:::...,.. .,.k,,...,,.t............ .. ktt,.:::. :{t•::.::...:,.,tt fit::,.:...:t............:.......::tt.....:....tY:......... ..Y........ .::.:..:.:.: ........}.,}.{}.},:.,::.,.::..:.:::....::..::..:�.:...{.:{:..:::t,:,.:.,.:.:.....,..:::::,.:.,.::::::.�.,.::::: ......•:::.:•..:..:.k:....,.::.::.k kkk ::;{k•:;k;.:{{;kk:•.•::.;{;.>:{;{.}r}:.:;;.:;;;.:{;;..;kY :;k{;.}:.}::{;}:::::YYk:Y>:i:}:>kk}.kY::::Y}Y::�'xYY:.: :o::,.:�,{tt�t:t:•.:YkYYYY.r:>.:,..,.::::::.tt: :Y'tkYYkk'{k:•{t tkkk: }..:}}:::;,: ..}:"::���:#> ,..::�.:::•:::._:.�:.,.:.�,,:�..•:.x::.;... .{kkk�k�:kk::;,•'::�}.�.::;::k>:��:<?::{vkky{:t;:: : ... .. ...., .:...............tt....t..t.......::.... ..:.:.:......tt.:.t..::�.:.:..t....t.:....:.. .::.:. t k{....ttt,t...:..,•,.:.:,..,.:.:�.:::::.::.::•.:{.:.:.::�•.t•.t•.:�.t•:••:•.:•.,:•.tt•.:•.�.t,:{.}..t...,......:,:.:,..}}}f}. +::}r.t,;.t:::..:;:{,• ::}::k•:.::{•::•.:..::•:: .::a.t•.:•.kt:•.-:•.:•:#•::.::.: ••.{##•.�kY•:.v,v .:,;t„�.,.::.:..: .::{:Y•::.::Y•::{•.::•.:•.:.:•.uc.:::•.::•:•:.:�.:•:.:::t,,,:::�:t.:::..::.:.{.{::}:•:::::::••:•: •:::...:•:•:•:}:: ................::..tt:....c.:..:•:::;.:;•:{.::.:.::.�:t..:kkk�:.::t:•::.::::.t.. .::..{,.tt•.t•.t•.tt•.�:Ykkkkkk k�:::.:.::.�:.,.:.,.:.:Y'.•';YYY.:.. ....{•:•.:::::•::•::tt::•.,•.:{::•.�:.:•:.:t•:. ..:.:.::•::::::.}}.}. :..:.:.: k,,::;{.::•}:.t;•:{:•.t•.:::�..,.....�........:...t,..t.........t,.:�.{{•:{{.kk{.:::•.::•.:t•.:t•.t•..•.t•::.,,t,.::::.,.:::::::.::..:..:.::::::•.:{YC•:;{{Y•:�:•.,:•:.:::-::•:.tt•.::�.t•.�::::.:::tt•}:k::{.:;kk.;::_YY}:.;::.}}}•}t :.......k�::kY:..,•.::t.:.::t:.::tkt::.:::..:.:{.}>::....... t...tt.......:....{t:: :::....t....,t.,...,.t.,,.:::.::�:.:�::.: :::•.�:.t.::.:•:.�.tc.:::,•.�.tt..�::::. $ 881,000.00 $ 584,000.00 $ 543,000.00 $ 583,000.00 Project Costs 17372 Keelson Lane $ 225,000.00 7812 Barton Drive $ 320,000.00 17382 Keelson Lane $ 247,900.00 $ 97,100.00 17361-71 Koledo Lane* $ 428,500.00 $ 89,500.00 .........,::. .................... :..::.}.:. ��7s".oy:':}.•':Y: # �r '• �KfOl -'SV'. V T. 10%Administration $ 88,100.00 $ 58,400.00 $ 54,300.00 $ 58,300.00 :::➢n;�trfFak' '><»Ii< 8'1 'OQ 8<' t00 ...::..:.: Tt��'Atirn ::.�:.: ...... :.: . . n......:::.v.�.xw:.vw.x.._:.v..:: :.:w::::..:.v:.v.::,vv.�:::n,:, {{{;;•:itv:x:x;;L:{•:{{;;•:�}}:•}\C{•:4:v}:{{;is{::. :Y}kkfkk} :ivY�:: ::vkkk>:kkkk: :##•'.:}:kY':kkkkkvikkkk:;::kYYk::v::.:;'{:.::•}x{:::.::::::{•:{4it{{:•ii:Y' v. ;v,}}}::;m:^::.tv:.};.;.y}xx;::::,•.;;.}:,•.}},}:;v'^;;vk'S? ;:ki� :k.:. i::kkkv.tv.tii::'.•kkk:i:kkkc k. •{;'t}:kkYYYYk::;:`:kk5 �s y ti::k%v1.�4�.' :::.}•::::::::::•. ;::; }:::i}}}ri}:;}{..;}:}}`::'<::i;;;v:Ss;Y:.:i}:J .v._v:::.:x...•w:::.:Yy:::.,.;.}:•:•}}}}}: .....::..:.:::.. .....::•:;: •...............}:>:t:}:..................t,.. .:::.'.':.`!R::`:::;<:'it:�: ;:%;;..... :'::'t%'::$:r:.: t:;:;:;: i ;:y?M1;:;:;:j#`:::<....... :i:+Y 3:............. ... . * Not Approved by Council as of 3/21/95_ Note: A minimum of 15% of funds in a given year must be awarded to special housing nonprofits known as Community Housing Devleopment Organizations("CHDOS") 14 HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM The National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 ("NAHA') established the HOME Program as a means of expanding and preserving affordable housing for low and very low income households. Eligible categories of programs include: housing rehabilitation, acquisition, new construction, rental assistance and first-time home buyer assistance programs. Huntington Beach receives a formula allocation, the amount of which is determined much like the City's CDBG entitlement. Regulations 1. A minimum of 15% of HOME funds must be awarded to special housing nonprofits known as Community Housing Development Organizations ("CHDOs"). 2. In order for a nonprofit to be recognized as a CHDO, it must conform to an extremely rigid set of guidelines governing bylaws and articles of incorporation, and make-up of the governing board (a third of who must be low income). The CHDO must have a history of serving the community. 3. The City has established a quality working relationship with two housing nonprofits in Orange County that qualify as CHDO's: Orange County Community Housing Corporation (OCCHQ, based in Santa Ana, and Shelter for the Homeless, which is based in Westminster. Beginning with the expenditure of Fiscal Year 1993 HOME funds, a 25% matching fund requirement goes into effect. The match must come from non-federal sources.. Redevelopment housing funds'that have.been committed to certain other affordable housing projects will be used for the match requirement. Recommendations (Not in order of priority) Staff recommends that HOME funds be used in the following manner: 1. Facilitate the acquisition of multi--family housing projects in need of rehabilitation. 2. Develop partnerships with CHDO's and other nonprofit housing developers. Secure partial financing commitments from conventional lenders. 3. Provide gap financing for nonprofit housing partners with secured partial financing commitments from conventional lenders. Strategies (Not in order of priority) 1. Target the Oakview and Main Pier Redevelopment Project Areas. 2. Offer deferred payment loans for 30 years with repayment of the principal equal to CPI. 15 HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT SET-A-SIDE � kxx: �l, :•:fix.• x zx:; k. `�:'�,:•• :x, �, }� ''k�.,•�a , sz ��: ' '•+', � {kx�{' •��zxxxxlkk�.3'•'kzk+,+ �� }wx, }i x�x x„��#tia, ' z � 'k;x';} xtt „�.;}�:''� i• ti}`�' k{'s+�#\#��#� �`;� �S, •`�'x�xx'k� � �`� , x,k;kx kxzxz,�,,x � � ;;,��' xxk i>� � .: i� ?••?z :��z x„�`.;�,z• . ,.?\��....�••�.•',x•� }} i `t�ixxar �` x k 'kx•k�' �"�i'; , , ..,,tiz�, �} k\ (� '�., ze +,'k�;} ?�?z�, i`,.`,i�`h.� kid, � :x z`�#', . � ,,', 4�'• z,� v z 'z�" c z x; `zz�x#i•x }'.�# �a ��; x,x:�'..,��i,:::��.�...,:',.::.x.�.:�. :� ,.:>;�.:....+n��',,,,,fix.'•::..,:k , � x:�# ,��xi„a,,,. ,::`�':.�.��„��,,: �k , ....�,..,���:'.�. .�,:..:..,. , .,, INCOME Tax Increment $ 871,076.00 $ 891,415.00 $ 914,291.00 Interest Income Five Points Senior Villas $ 9,500.00 $ 38,000.00 $ 38,000.00 Loan Interest Income In Lieu Fee Affordable Housing $ 50,000.00 Fees Collected Return of Mora Kai Pledge $ 385,563.00 $ 385,563.00 .....:...:.....:••.}v;;:•:•;:::••:.:..:,.{:.,....i„ii;{{i;.:;ix v'.;:;,';;;; ..•;{..:{;;:.;;,a•i•i;t. :..::..}..ii:......::;;.::..; :{{:..:{••{•,.:.:;{:.:;:;............ ......:..:... .:..{{. k,k; , �: :#k;,}xkk•..;: :.,h;�..,; ��iiC:`:<i::' .,\,\kkkkkkkkkti+tx,. x;kx\`kxk,."kx'•: ••, :::;:`:•. "+kkkkkk.'• .\• . Expenses Operating Expenses $ 123,677.00 $ 129,861.00 $ 136,354.00 Administrative Costs $ 60,699.00 $ 63,734.00 $ 66,921.00 Legal Services $ 20,100.00 $ 30,100.00 $ 30,100.00 Administrative Costs $ 3,790.00 $ 7,790.00 $ 7,790.00 �t xxxxzzx'kzxk,k' ./� �t \.x�x,,,+.:. .. :•:. .''< ' .1!k •V:ixix•y.;•xxk:2' •.:,x„,+,,,,C,7f► 'kiiY: ,�y{ ,{yes ,xn �Y`k, .,,\•::.,,,,,•:.�� :+� �� Y ix.. .k:.:tikxkkkkk}.k���:' Projects Mora Kai (Pledge) $ 385,563.00 $ 385,563.00 $ 385,563.00 Five Points $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 725 Utica $ 450,000.00 Pacific Park Villas $ 300,000.00 $ 450,000.00 Brisas Del Mar $ 243,717.00 ERAF $ 139,142.00 M.C.C. $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000.00 Emerald Cove $ 80,000.00 $ 80,000.00 $ 80,000.00 Thins Block West $ 825,000.00 12..14 ': :.,• ,„\.:..' :t< '{.' �Xk :+' x .,.:::.:.uv.,w::w:::v.,.v.,v.�::.:::}::.{..,..,..;.,::•:.�::::v}:.,-.w.::•..::::•:::::•:{kk?:.,v,..n:�v.,f.;;xi•:iiti....:..:v:m:::.v.Ui;.:.....,kxk,\���n.T:::;;.:;{::k,,..x,+...,,,...,,.:.:v.n4,.,:..,,::k,kva:,,v..nx#::,...\,.,.v.{{.:{,+ ""' , ,;ti,,,{,'is•.}";i;{•:;i;+:;;'-:;'8:,\;;;K;;{'ti";.tiff ti'v:;+,;';;•;•:i;,,;',:v;i'' .,k,\22't""• kkkk:, ,,\\ ' \, ;x`i\x�+kv xxk{#'#{i,i#{:,xk:'k„:ti;'i; .`k`xii� ,-.,. . ,:,xzxk:iz::':':'>.\•c:���.�``??\�??i:-., x+� z xx��'k�,.,.. �, ,w•, } . :ii.`��„•..,, �,,:.,.,�.: ,«x4,,,,, „`.;z,,,:�;�;,',„ •.�kx x: ��,.. ` \•�.fix;x'x iz' „��,�x?xx?�`t�;xx�xiis�i��\xi�z x,,,}„,}},z•..,��x•.�z �,�,•;.}:..#>,:�,,,..�•• >+,z;.,,.:,::,,x z �: :k••., a i, � ,•.a.. kx�,��x x>.:•:� '�x,:#?z,\kkz:,k,w?\,,k4�.z,�..�;.}ak.�w,w,xxx�z;�,k .k::x\i\t,x;,}kk;k:;k.}tk;{kk +"'k`k;:kk.:}.,k:,:;,. , +x•;•;.,•,�} \ "•\�;tk ::, k, :,'�'\,, }, >,,,,,:';•\.,},\ •.kk,4'k 4 \ \hi„+., ..,xxkx:,,k,:>?„<. ::{}�k�>,xzk:+:kwxk, ,..,.;a�.�kz ••k�; x, � ;xkz'�Z �� k�.'..:�< #:?k„~:`•�,`,�xz�;:,,?„ ?tiz�?#}>#:x>.}.a::. �;? .,,,x�} ,}}.�}�•,w#z~� � w.,'�`# .' :•:,xx�x.:xk�ti•:?xxk??'i� , ���?•;. .� . . ,n .�. .,�..,>.`�4'• ��,>z'z ?-: : { ;zxk;\\.., „...}•�,��,•'.#,•�.,a�:, �,is' i . ..v.:kkkkxkzkekk kkkkk;, x ?: >. .. \ g• ` ;fix.{kkwz>._h :33 3 '>ok.•x,w};, :�:';�•:�iY�,��iw#t'�i� r'+..,,,,,,x„•:.,,,,,,,,,�{,.t z`���, •. :� •.r�.��zQ.�I�R■�Q:k�:•: •;#k3,�.�V���1�i ��.� •'#k .,\.�;,;..��,y}{{;::�? . 16 t *REDEVELOPMENT SET ASIDE FUSS, Redevelopment law requires redevelopment agencies to reserve twenty percent of the tax increment collected annually for the ;`_lirpose of affordable housing. For some years redevelopment agencies have been required to provide fifteen percent of the -..,its in a completed project area as"affordable". Recently,legislation was approved and incorporated into the Health and Safety Code that requires redevelopment agencies to provide a plan through which these housing obligations can be achieved. This plan is to be updated every five years in conjunction with the jurisdiction's housing element. Regulations 1. 30%of all new housing or rehabilitation housing units developed by the redevelopment agency must'be available at affordable housing costs to low and moderate income households, 50%of which must be available at affordable housing cost to very low income households. 2. 15%of all new or rehabilitation housing units developed within a project area by entities or persons other than the Agency,must be available at.affordable cost to low and moderate income households,40%of which must be available at affordable housing cost to very low income households. 3.. Units rehabilitated, developed or constructed in compliance with the Housing Requirements must remain affordable to each respective income level for the longest feasible time. 4. The agency is to adopt a housing compliance plan for each project area to ensure compliance with the implementation plan requirement every 5 years. S The housing compliance plan is to be submitted to the state of California Department of Housing and Community Development. Recommendations (Not in order of priority) 1. Comply with state law by providing all necessary replacement housing units within the required four years of the units' removal and assuring 15%production units requirements every ten years. 2. Rehabilitate and covenant existing units city wide to maintain affordability and to receive the most affordable units for the monies expended. 3. Focus efforts and expenditure of funds on the provision of housing for low and very low income households on a city wide basis or within project areas when economically feasible. Strategies (Not in order of priority) 1. Provide replacement and production housing inside project area. 2. Rehab units outside project area only if cost of provision of units is at least 1/3 of comparable units provided inside project area. 3. Provide production units outside project area only if cost is 1/2 or less of comparable units within project area. 4. Match housing type/income to job generation. 17 AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS COMPLETED PROJECT NAME TYPE . .. UNITS.. .:: .: Koledo Lane Project: 16 Multifamily Buildings 80 Amberleaf 19 Multifamily Buildings 76 Multifamily City Wide 121 Single Family Rehab City Wide 559 Mobile Home Rehab City Wide 107 Huntington Was 5 Points Senior housing 48 Emerald Cove Senior Housing 164 Sea View Multifamily 25 17372 Keelson Multifamily 4 Breakers Multifamily 68 Utica Ave Multifamily 36 313 11 th Multifamily 9 Brisas Del Mar Multifamily 44 7812 Barton Multifamily 4 17382 Keelson Multifamily 4 18 Affordable Housing Implementation, with Rankings of Approved and Proposed Projects ............... ....... . . ..................... . ... ..G; :.[v tY . [............. [[[.[[[[N,. :lttK(<K(<t 2M<R(«<(tNtt<(((((([(((KtKfft(t<NKtt<[t<HtQ(ttYt}tKKKtYY<YYY(((l, �•• . . . . . . . . . . . .......... 19 Special Projects Division Plb ableI ' P 'ed Mq Sheet 1995 Initial requests for financial assistance for affordable housing projects will be evaluated on the following point system: �rxcls Proiect Location Priority areas will be established annually by the City Council; the point system in this section may change accordingly Redevelopment project area 20 HUD enhancement area 10 Area demand on city services Low,medium,or high 5 City housing survey area rated"Poor" 5 Proiect Profile(Acquisition of Existing Projects) Bldg.conforms to all applicable building codes 5 Zoned for residential use 5 Zoning compatible with surrounding uses 5 Adequate open space 5 Meets required parking 5 Household Income Served Number of units&%of project reserved 10 for low or very low income persons 100%of units for very low= 10 pts. 50%of units for low=5 pts. 20 Rating Sheet,coat. Number of units and%of project reserved for 10 special needs groups(e.g. seniors) 100%of units for special needs= 10 pts. 50%of units for special needs=5 pts. Number of units and%of project reserved for 5 large families(3+bedrooms) 50%of units(3+bedrooms)=5 pts. Developer Profile Nonprofit housing developer 10 For-profit developer 5 Lone-Term Affordability Controls Length of Affordability* 30+ 10 20-30 years 7 15-20 years 5 5-15 years 3 City Cost for Project Loan of Less than$25,000 per unit 10 Grant of Less than$25,000 per unit 7 Loan of Less than$50,000 per unit 5 Grant of Less than$50,000 per unit 2 TOTAL POSSIBLE POINTS: 140 * Dependent upon the source of funds; the full 25 points will be awarded for projects with thirty or more years of affordability. Note: •Additional consideration will be given to projects based on average unit size,cost,overall density of the project,as well as the cost of rehabilitation and other related expenses M minimum of 50 points is required for any project to merit further consideration 21 PROPOSED PROJECTS RATING .............. T CDB SET COUNCIVAGENC COM EN7S < >': '. RATING` P CTS COS .... G . HOME Y M ROJ.E.. <:> :. ... .. ....... AS ON ax.'I 1 17361 Koledo $ 335.000 $ 335,000 Verbal Commitment OCCHC 93 FUNDS 115 In Escrow 2 17371 Koledo $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Verbal Commitment 123,500 93 FUNDS 115 176,500 94 FUNDS 3 Mora Kai $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Loan Agreement Bond Closing Mar.30,1995 70 4 Yorldown-Lake $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Purchase Agreement Proposed Senior Project 100 5 611 6th Street $ 575,000 $ 300,000 $ 275,000 $ - ? County HOME Funds Withdrew 40 6 Habitat for Humanity $ 163,000 $ 163,000 To Pay for City Owned Land Negotiation 80 7 Orange Hsg.Dev.Corp. $ 30,000 $ 30,000 No Project CAB No Ratin 8 Hunt.Harbor Owners $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Direction from council to proceed First Step of Process No Rating 137 500. ::;:::;..:. : :.>:.>:..::::.:::> �Y..r .r........ ....... r ......... �...r........r.,,.,.,,., ..r....... O 22 .-Affordable Housing Obligations �r . .......... ......... MINE � . . v x \ . %. . . . . \ k3 ...................... . .% .....�� 23 . Replacement Housing Requirement Replacement Removed Requirement .................... ................................................... ........................................................... Mam.Pier....:: ::. ..: :... .:. ... : . : ..::.. Demonstration Block 18 14 Main Promenade 33 33 Main-Pier II 18 18 Pierside/Piercolony 27 24 Third Block West 19 19 Town Square 5 3 Waterfront 104 92 Bayshore 1 1 Hiintm gton Center .:>:: :; Huntington Center Area 1 1 fl1kV1W..... Zizakus 6 5 Talbert=Beach: :.:; :::. .... .;:.>::; Seaview-formerly"Collins/Zweibel" 3 2 ............... Yo:rkfown.Lake. . . 0 0 +Outside Project Areas Ocean View Estates/Mushroom Farm 1 1 _ Total: 236 213 ... ts: ::roduced'fo >< .....:::>::»::>::: ni. P ............................................................................................. ............................................................................................... Replacement Housing 263 - _ Surplus: 50 24 Production Housing Requirement Affordable Units Affordable Units Affordable Units PROJECT UNITS Required Provided Deficit 15%of~ueed ain"=P a :::.:::.:.:::..:.::<: »::.;<:::::>:::::::>:::: :: ::.:;::...... :>: >:<>::::>::>::::>::>:> :::. :..:.;::.::. :M 1 r....... Huntington Pier Colony/1990 130 20 0 20 Town Square/1989 89 14 0 14 Huntington Bay Shore/1988 159 24 0 24 Villas Del Mar/1988 64 10 0 10 Huntington Breakers/1986(Bond) (co—nta ex0e 19") 342 52 68 -16 Subtotals: 784 120 68 52 flk1/. W. ....: Ash Street Projects/1985-89 20 3 0 3 Cypress Avenue 3 1 0 1 Elm Street Projects/1985 30 5 0 5 Koledo Lane/1984 16 3 0 3 Subtotals: 69 12 0 12 Talbert.Beach.... Windward Cove1986 96 15 0 15 Capewoods/1985 55 9 0 9 Emerald Cove/1986(Agency)-eo units are counted towda replacement requirement 164 50 74 -24 Pacific Park Villas/1994(project in propren,38 units completed) 88 14 25 -11 r Subtotal: 403 88 99 .11 YorkEown f ake Huntington Classics/1990-94 81 13 0 13 Subtotal: 81 13 0 13 TOTAL: 1,337 233 167 66 25 RCA ROUTING SHEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: Economic Development SUBJECT: Affordable Housing Stragety COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Aril 3, 1995 RCA ATTACHMENTS STATUS Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Not Applicable Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable) (Signed in full by the City Attorney) Not Applicable Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc. (Appoved as to form by City Attorney) Not Applicable Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Not Applicable Financial Impact Statement (Unbudget, over $5,000) Not Applicable Bonds (If applicable) Not Applicable Staff Report (If applicable) Not Applicable Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Attached Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Not Applicable ........ _ ........ ......... ........ - ..... ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ......... . .... ........ ......... ... . .... ..... . ... ..... .... .......... ._. __ ....... EXPLANATION FOR MISSING ATTACHMENTS ......... .. .... ..... .. ....... RREEWED RDED: FV D . .... ... ..... .... .... ....... Administrative Staff Assistant City Administrator Initial City Administrator Initial City Clerk ... ........ .... ......... ... .... ........ ........ ........ ..... .. .. ........ ......... ....... ..... EXPLANATION FOR RETURN OF ITEM. ... ... .. SpaceOnly)