HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Res 3186 1982-07-26
.
RESOLUTION NO. ~~
A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING A
REVISED HOUSING ELEMENT TO THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY RESOLVE:
\ WHEREAS,
I WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS,
California Government Code Section 65302(c) requires a Housing
Element of all City general plans; and
the City of Seal Beach presently has a Housing Element to the
General Plan adopted in 1974; and
a revised Housing Element was prepared in compliance with State
guidelines; and
the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach held a public
hearing as required by law on the Housing Element on July 7, 1982;
and
WHEREAS, by Resolution #1264, the Planning Commission unanimously approved
and recommended to City Council adoption of the revised Housing
Element; and
WHEREAS, on July 26, 1982, the City Council held a public hearing on the
draft revised Housing Element to the City's General Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby adopt the
revised Housing Element to the General Plan attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
I
PASSED, APPRVED AND ADOPTED b the City Cou cil
at a meeting thereof held 0 he tl
1982 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmember(
NOES: Councilmember(s)
ABSENT: Councilmember(s)
~hQ....-~ L D .......J.....-t _... ~
Mayor
I
-
I
I
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
County of Orange
~ I am a citizen of the United States and a
. resident of the County aforesaid; I am over
the age of eighteen years, and not a party to
or Interested in the above-entitled matter. I
am the principal clerk of the printer of the
....................................................
.....dl.u..~.
a newspaper of general clr I ion, printed
and published ....~...........
in the City of .......0.<<....~
County of Orange. and which news-
paper has been adjudged a newspaper
of general circulation by the Superior
Court of the County of Orange, State of
Callforn ia, under the date Of.,Q"" 19"1..
Case Number J:~$..;thatthenotice,
of which the annexed is a printed copy (set
in type not 'smaller than nonpareil), has
been published in each regular and entire
issue of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the following dates,
to-wit: r<1uhI ..,/
~1'1';~"t~ .{;!jjLr:,/..................
I certify (or declare,) under penalty of
perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct .
Dated at..~....~...
California. this. ./Il'!..day Of~ 19 J:<.
........# 'g~rtf!;&;J.....
Free COp," of this blink form m.y be ..cured from:
CALIFORNIA NEWSPAPER SERVICE
BUREAU, INC.
Legal Advertising Clearing House
120 West Second St_, Los Angeles, Calif. 90012
Telephone: (213) 625-2541
PleiN r,quest GENERAL Proo' of Publlcltlon
when orde"nq thl' form
, Rasolution Number
This space Is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp
Proof of Publication of
..........................................................
.....Jde~..~.~.~..
NOTICE OF
: PUBLIC HEARING
,
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN
IhllIIe Cdy Cooncd of lt10 C11y
of Seal Beach Will conduct .
;publlC hoanng on Mondoy, July
l!8, 1982 01 700 pm .n CIIy
CooIlC1I Chambers, ,211 - 8th
S1root, SooJ Beach. 10 con&Idor
lie fOVI8Od draft HouSing EIo-
rnonltotho Clly's Gonond Pion
A NogoIIvo OocIoraItOn hoe
boon propllIOd 011 IIlIO P<<lloct
and capt88 01 the draft Element
81'8 on file In the three City lib-
ran.. and In the office of the
CIty Clork, CIIy HolI, 211 - 8th
_ SooJ Beach, CahfomlO
(Planning CommISSion ResoJu.
lion Number 1264)
DATED THIS 8th Doy of July.
1982
,
JOANNE M YEO.
CdyClork
CIIy of SooJ Beach
July 14, 1982
Published In the Seal Beach
Journai
~
city of
EAL BEACH
I
Ie
DOnSING ELEMENT
comprehensive general plan
I:?HIIJ~ .16. ~. 5/~
...
RESClLUTIClN 10. ~/RI:,
A RESOLUTION OF lHE SEAL lEACH Cln COUNCIL ADOPTING A
REYISED HOUSING ELEMENT 10 tHE CIn's GENERAL PLAN
.
. l
lHE CIn COIItCIL OF tHE Cln OF SEAL lEACH DOES HEREBY IESClLYE:
IIIEREAS. Celtfomia &ove~t Code Section 65302(c) requires I Housing
El.-nt of III City general pllnu Ind
IIIEREAS. the City of SIll Beach presentl, has I Housing Element to the
lieneral Plln adopted in 11174i and
IIIEREAS. a revised Housing El....t WiS' prepared in CClqllilnce with State
guidelinesi Ind
WHEREAS. the Pllnning Commission of the City of Sell Belch held a public
hearing IS required by law on the Housing Element on July 7. l!l82i
Ind
WHEREAS. by Resolution 11264, the Pllnning Commission unlnillOusly Ipproved
Ind recommended to City Council adoption of the revised Housing
Elementi Ind
WHEREAS, on July 26. 11182. the City Council held I public hearing on the .
drift revised Housing Element to the City's Generll Plln.
I
NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED thlt the City Council does hereby Idopt the
revised Housing Element to the &eneral Plln IttaChed hereto and .de I part
hereof.
PASSED. APPRYED AID ADOPTED b the City c:o..u of the Ci~y of, Sell Belch
It I IIHting thereof held on he r", day ~ ,. . f, .
1982 by the following vote. . '/ i )
AYES: COuncl1l11111ber() ~ _ ' . ~ t "to< I il,'
,
.
NOES:
Counc i l~.ler( s)
. A IUI
~
ABSENT: Councl1~er(s)
I
...yor
.
Resolution Number
.
HOUSll'C ELE:ME~T
SEAl. BEACH COMPRI:llr.l\S1\'I: CEl\ERAL PLA~
Ij
DRAFT
prepared for
City of Seal Beach Flann~nb Department
.
Prepared b)
BCL AssociateS, Inc.
I
June, 1982
.
.' .. , . ... .,
. . . .....
Resolution Number
CONTENTS
Section
PaRe
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Authorization
1.2 Purpose and Content
1.3 Setting
1
1
1
2
2.0 COMMUNITY PROFILE
2.1 Population Characteristics
6
6
6
8
8
10
10
16
11
11
13
13
14
16
16
2.1.1 Growth
2.1.2 Household Size
2.1. 3 Age
2.1.4 Ethnicity
2.1. 5 Households with Special Needs
2.1.6 Income
2.2 Housing Characteristics
2.2.1 Types
2.2.2 Size and Overcrowding
2.2.3 Tenure
2.2.4 Cost
2.2.5 Vacancy Rate
2.2.6 Removal Rate
3.0 HOUSING NEEDS
3.1 Adequate Supply
3.2 Housing Maintenance
3.3 Housing Assistance Needs
3.4 Fair Share Allocation
18
18
19
19
21
4.0 CONSTRAINTS
4.1 Physical Constraints
4.2 Market Constraints
4.3 Governmental Constraints
4.3.1 Land Use Controls
4.3.2 Building Codes
4.3.3 Permit Processing
4.3.4 Service and Facility Infrastructure
4.3.5 Article 34 Referendum
4.3.6 Utilization of State and Federal Assistance
Programs
23
23
23
24
24
25
25
25
26
26
.
~-
.
I
.
.
I
.
Section
Resolution Number
Pag~
27
27
2~
2f!,
28
29
30
30
30
32
32
33
34
34
34
35
35
35
37
5.0 MOUSING PROGRAM
5.1 Goals
5.2 Action Plan
5.2.1 Preserving Mousing and Neighborhoods
5.2.1.1 policies
5.2.1.2 Actions
5.2.2 preserving Affordability
5.2.2.1 policies
5.2.2.2 Actions
5.2.3 Standards and plans for Adequate Sites
5.2.3.1 policies
5.2.3.2 Actions
5.2.4 Accessibilit~
5.2.4.1 policies
5.2.4.2 Actions
5.2.5 Adequate provision
5.2.~.1 policies
5.2.5.2 Actions
5.3 priorities
41
6.0 REV1E\< A}oil UPDATE
42
7.0 COMPREHE~SI~E PL~~~l~(,
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
I 4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
.
...
nGt:RES
Regional Location
Planning Areas
populat~on Distribution
Age CharacteristiCS
Housing Distribution
Tenure
3
5
7
9
1:
16
TABLES
population Growth 6
Average Household Size 8
Age CharacteristiCS B
Median Mousehold Income _ 1976 11
Household Income _ 1976 11
PersonS per Room 13
Tenure 14
Vacancy Rate 1 <-
Existing and projected Residential Acreage 18
Survey of Mousing Conditions 19
Mousing Assistance Needs 20
Mousing Assistance Needs of Female-Meaded Households 20
~ ~. ...
. ,..
.-
Resolution Number
TABLES (continued)
13
14
15
Letter
A
Housing Assistance Need of All Minority Households
Distribution of Projected New Construction Needs by
Houshold Income
Housing Action Plan 1982-87
APPENDICES
Potential Funding Mechanisms for Housing Actions
'-
Page
20
22
38
43
.
I
.
I
.
,
.
I
I.
I
.
Resolution Number
~
INTRODUCTIO~
1.1 Authorization
In 1967, the California Legislature made it mandatory for eac~
county and general law city in the State to include a housing element aG
part of thefr adopted general plans. This legislation, Section 65302(c)
of the California Government Code, vas subsequently expanded to encom-
pass charter law cities, Which includes the City of Seal Beach. In
compliance with tbis statutory mandate, the City adopted a houS1ng
element to the Seal Beach General plan in December, 1974.
In requiring the preparation of a housing element, Srction
65302(c) of the Government Code indicates that the element sh3l1 consist
of "standards and plans for the improvement of housing and for the
provision of adequate sites for housing." This element shall also "make
adequate provision for the housing needs of all segments of the com-
munity." This legisl~ion further states that housing elements shall be
prepared in accordance with guidelines promulgated by the State Depart-
ment of Housing and Community Development.
The Department of Housing and Community Development initially
promulgated guidelines for the preparation of housing elements in 1977.
However, these guidelines were subsequently revised and in 1980 became
statutory requirements with the enactment of AB 2853. This legislation
also clearly indicates that tbe guidelines are advisory in nsture.
The Housing Element Guidelines, as contained in Title 25 of
the California Administrative Code, require tbat housing elements in-
clude 1) an evaluation of the local housing problem including an analy-
sis of the capacity of the existing housing supply to provide all
economic segments of the community with decent housing, and 2) a housin~
program consisting of a comprehensive problem-solving strategy adopted
by the local governing body which both establishes local housing plans,
policies and priorities aimed at alleviating unmet need and remedying
the housing problem, and sets forth the course of action which the
locality is undertaking and intends to undertake to effectuate these
loals, policies and priorities. Given this legislative background, the
Rousing Element of the Seal Beach General Plan has been prepared in .
compliance with Section 65302(c) of the Government Code and the Housing
Element Guidelines.
1.2 Purpose and Content
The Housing Element of the Seal Beach Genersl Plan is sn
officisl policy statement of the City regarding the type and smount of
housing to be provided in the community. In setting forth local housing
- - . .... , . . .. . .. .
.-."
. or . .
Resolution Number
policy, this element reflects exi-ting conditions and constraints aq
well as opportunities for improving and expanding the housing supply.
This element addreases four specific aspects of housing in th.. City .,f
Seal Beach: 1) quantity or supply, 2) quality or condition, 3) afCro,d-
ability, and 4) accessibility.
As is characteristic of all general plan elements, the housing
element is comprehensive, long-range and general in nature. The housing
element is comprehensive in that it considers all geographic parts of
the city, a full range of housing types and lifestyles, and the needs of
all economic segments of the community. The element is long-range since
it addresses both immediate concerns and projected housing needs over an
extended period of time (i.e., five to 20 years into the future). The
element is also general in that it discusses policies and programs
rather than specific aites and projects.
The housing element is intended to aerve as a guide for local
decision-making bodies when dealing with housing related issues. The
policies contained in this element will be applied by local deLis1on-
makers when evaluating specific projects. This document is intended to
be a dynamic, action-oriented planning tool. As such, it will be
periodically reviewed and updated as necessary in order to respond to
changing conditions within the community.
The housing element is divided into five major sections. The
first section of the element is a community prof11e which discusse~ both
population and housin~tharacteristics. Having documented existing
conditions in the community, housing needs are assessed and identif1ed
in the second section of the element. The need for expanding the over-
all supply of housing while maintaining the quality of exist1ng housing
is discussed. The housing assistance needs of low and moderate income
households are identified in this section and the relevancy of the
regional Fair Share Allocation Plan is addressed. This section is
followed by a discussion of the physical, market and governmental con-
straints to eliminating or reducing identified housing needs.
The fourth section of the element embodies the City's program
for addressing local housing needs. Goals, policies and priorities wh1ch
give direction to the local housing program and express the desires and
aspirations of the community are contained in this section. These gen-
eral statements, in turn, have been translated into specific actions that
have been or will be taken to address local housing needs. These actions
have been programmed in order to facilitate implementation and progress
evaluation. The final section discusses the need to periodically review
and update the element and the procedures for doing so.
1.3 Setting
The City of Seal Beach is located in the northwest corner of
Orange County as shown in Figure 1. The City is bordered on the north
by the City of Los Alamitos and unincorporated territory i.n the Countv
of Orange, on the east by the Cities of Garden Grove, Westminster and
Huntington Beach, on the south by the City of Huntington Beach and the
-2-
e
I
.1
I
.'
.
Resolution Number
"'-.
~Qnfa' t1llrbGro CountY
Vr.n(ura CoUlltY
.
N
~
.
L1l!1 Angell" Countg
Foint'Concepflon
,e
I
.
FlJciftc 0%17
~C1Vf?-b 1
. ~ONAv VOCAl1ON
!IAn DiRgo
.
Milw
r1 I I
o '0 'J6 ~O
.,.
Resolution Number
Pacific Ocean, and on the west by the City of Long Beach (Fi~ure 2).
The City is approximately 11.4 squdre miles in area, of which neArly 8
square miles comprises the U. S. Naval Weapons Station at Seal Bcad,.
The community is over 97 percent developed, excluding th~ ~Tea
lying within the boundary of the Naval Weapons Station. Having been
incorporated in 1915, the City was largely built out by the 1960's.
Aside from the wetlands and adjoining open space lands within the con-
fines of the Naval Weapons Station, the only sizable tracts of vacant
land remaining in the City are thE' Hellman and Rockwell properties lying
across Seal Beach Boulevard from the Weapons Station.
The Federal Bureau of the Census has divided the City into a
series of census tracts. These census tracts have been used as basic
planning areas in the preparation of this element. population and
housing characteristics have been discussed by census tract. The geo-
graphic boundaries of these planning areas and the common neighborhood
name associated with each are shown in Figure 2.
....
-4-
.
I
.
I
.1
I.
I
I.
Resolution Number
l
~
2
rZOe7fJMOOrz.
1100.00
./ 1::- _o! {,llY ot'lMJAIClmitb';
.' i 1.---------------'
---r- CountY orOron,9Q 0- (,O~ f~~ YN1( i
CO~ \ 1100.01 _0_0_".". 1,00.,'1-':
p~ wfff?( . 4{)~ fwy ~r f'wy i
, .
. I
'. W\glJ~ i !:..
\ 'NOM ;! it
i -. 99f:l 0!1 ~ il"-
W~in+rJlvd. " . t).~. N~VAv i~
",/" W~M70N0 01'AlION ~~
",. ,u
",. .
. MNl-l NA \
~I~ ~
I
.
I
.
I
.
I
.
I
.
I
995.01-- .
//(,i(Y~ntrn9~~~~" -" _oJ
.
'" . .
Pa('~lc Coo1}tw,y
-
~
N
('HU or
Loong 1JllQch . ",.
'"
".
.
I
I
'.
;F1-&U(lV ~
· PVANNIN&' Af2b/>.C!J
Resolution Number
~
e
COMMUNITY PR(,I'II.E
2.1
Population Characteristics
2.1.1
Growth
According to the 1980 federal census, the population of the
City of Seal Beach is 25,975. This figure represents a decrease of
6.5 percent from the 27,671 persons counted in s special census con-
ducted in the City in 1976. This decrease in population represents a
rev,rsal of the high rate of population growth experienced by Seal
Beach, as well as a majority of the cities in Orange County, during the
two decades following World War 11. As shown in Table 1, the population
growth rate peaked during the 1960's, with a net decline in population
being experienced over the past five years. This reversal of a pre-
viously existing growth trend is interpreted more as a stabilization of
the total population thsn as a trend toward continuing decline.
I
tARLE 1
Population Growth
.!!!!. Population Populstion Change Percent Change
1950 3,553
1960 6,994 3,441 49 .
1970 24,441 17,447 71
1976 27,67~ 3,230 12
1980 25,975 -1,696 .- -6.5
SOURCE: U. S. Census; 1976 Special Census.
* Includes 1,000 military personnel aboard ship at Naval Weapons Station.
The current situation, which mirrors similar population
trends in many communities across the nation, is attributable to several
factors, including: 1) decreasing household size, 2) diminishing land
resources available for expansion of the housing stock, and 3) a shift
in residential construction from single family to smaller, multiple
family units.
Projections for the total population increase within the City I
of Seal Beach to the year 1985 have been presented in the Land Use
Element of the General Plan, which was adopted in 1973. This figure was
arrived at by multiplying the number of residential units that could be
constructed on available land by the average household aize for the
City. The total population in the year 1985 is not expected to exceed
30,080 persons, nor is it expected to decrease below the current 1980
census figure of 25,975. The current distribution of population by
census tract is shown in Figure 3.
.
-6-
ie
I
..
.. .'
N .'
1014 --;-
?JOb I ?A?1 \ 1\00.01
.
o?Je
466 I 1.4-
1100.01'>
1::. ... -.,
. ----I
l -----
---- .
L_ ~1~B !
. 11~7- I ~.?J 1100.11-1 I
."
-.-.-" i
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
I
.
I
.
\
.
\
.
\
.
I
.
I
.
I
.
I
,
I
.
995. Or !
--.-'
.---
---------
/_.
/ oft" ~clud~ group .~~r1~ or
/. Noval Weopooo coral Ion .
.
'\ 6f17-f>
\ 66011 1.!>
.
\
.
,
995.0~
Resolution Number
'e
.
/
.
/
.
/' 61~1
I !JOOO I l.fJ
,
.
/
.
/
.
// 1-e1-0
. 96~ I 1.9
~.91~
.& ,~I 1.~
n, I
~1
~.. IN/A
. tgeO CenwfJ, t91&~peLlal tal""fJ
fJaInu. and,..1 ~r.h planning Dev(
Resolution Number
2.1.2
Household Size
~
A total of 25,975 persons reside in the City's 14,13~ dwelling
units, an average of 1.8 persons per household. Household size, ex- .
pressed as the average number of persons per dwelling unit, has de-
creased from 2.75 in 1960 to 1.8 in 1980 (Table 2). The declining
household size is attributed to the growing number of single person
households, childless couples, children who have grown and left home and
a low birth rate.
TABLE 2
!!!!.
Average Household Size
Average Household Size for Occupied Unit
1960
1970
1976
1980
2.75 persons per dwelling unit
2.07 persons per dwellinp, unit
1.99 persons per dwelling unit
1.84 persons per dwelling unit
I
SOURCE:
U.S. Census, 1976 Special Census and Seal Beach Planning
Department.
Average household sizes are highest in the ~~rina Hill, Col-
lege Park East and College Park West census tracts (995.04, 1,100.12 and
1,100.07) where the majority of the housing units are detached sin~le
family dwellings (Figure 3). Conversely, the lowest household sizes are
found in the Leisure World and Rossmoor tracts (995.03 and 1,100.08)
where smaller units occupied by senior citizens predominate. The City's e
average household size is lower than that of Orange County as a whole
and illustrates a continuing national trend toward smaller households,
as well as the influence of Seal Beach's senior citizen population on
local demographics.
2. 1. 3 Age
The 1976 special census provides the most current data on the
age distribution of the local population. The median age and percent
ages of the population under 18 and over 65 years of age are shown for
each census tract in Figure 4. In terms of the age of its populat10n,
Table 3 reveals that Seal Beach has become an older, more stable com-
munity over the past two decades. This can be attributed to a decline
in the influx of new large families, the maturation of the families that
settled in Seal Beach during the peak growth period of the 1960's, and a I
simultaneous increase in local housing opportunities for the elderly
(e.g., development of Leisure World).
TABLE 3
!!!!.
Age Characteristic~
% 18 Years and Under % 65 Years and Over
Median Al>:e
1960
1970
1976
31%
20%
18%
7%
38%
33%
NA
50
45
el
SOURCE: U. S. Census, 1976 Special Census.
-8-
!J9
,.-m;
"oo.oe
'r-.
i. _a!
i._ 1.-.-.-.-.-.-......-.
!J\ i
.;,. ~61 r 1\00. rr i
..---_#1"
I
.
I
.
I
.
,
.
,
.
,
.
I
,
,
.
\
.
\
.
,
.
,
.
I
.
,
.
I
.
I
.
Q9!7.0'Y ,
Resolution Number
'.
.
N
."
I
.
I
.
'l4--!--
!l9\ 't (1100.01
I
"
\
.
\
.
\
.
\
.
,
99~.O!J
117
o I~
N/A
NIp.. I N/A
(.
."
./
./
// ~1
!J~I4-
/'
/'
".
.'lJ1
I 11-1 f?
I~Wf?b A-
· ~ oo..~OOCf.J
Ci\ff'otOI~ :
MedionAge 46
'. D/O Under t6 -1e I !Jb
% Over EO I
.
~_._._._._._._._._.J
.
./
/
fJouru: 1'1b ~pWol WE/Uti
Resolution Number
A comparison of the rel 'tively high roD' 1n age of 4S in Senl
Beach with the Orange County medi .n age of 28, illustrate~ an important
and unique characteristic of the local population. The median age of
the population in the Leisure World and Rossmoor censuS tracts (995.03
and 1,100.08) skews the Citywide median upward. Housing in the Leisure
World tract is limited to senior citizens, and the resulting median age
of 73 years is the highest in Seal Reach. The second highest median age
of 59 is found in the Rossmoor tract where condominium units cater to
adult housing needs. The remainder of the City's neighborhoods have
median ages between 29 And 31 years, whh.h are closer to the average for
Orange County.
.'
2.1.4
Ethnicity
Seal Beach is a predominantly white community as indicated by
the ethnic breakdown of the population contained in the 1980 census.
Caucasians constituted nearly 95 percent of the total population.
Persons of Spanish/Hispanic origin represent the largest minority gr~up
in the community, comprising 3 percent of the total population, while
Asians and Pacific Islanders account for 2 percent and Blacks less than
1 percent of the population.
2.1. 5
Households with Special Needs
I
The 1976 special census provides information on the numher of
disabled persons in the City by type of disability. One or more persons
with some type of handicap reside in 1,271 households, or 9 percent of
all of the households in Seal Beach. While the needs of certain handi-
capped individuals (blind, deaf or experiencing nervous disabilitie6)
may be met without special housing accommodations, persons with non-
ambulatory handicaps who require wheel chairs often need speclally
designed, barrier free housing. The vast majority (73 percent) of
the handicapped households in the City of Seal Beach reside in the
Lelsure World community.
.
2.1.6
Income
Community wealth in Seal Beach as measured by median household
income is measurably less than that for Orange County as a whole (Table 4).
This is primarily due to the relatively large number of elderly, low
income households residing in the City. Annual average incomes derived
from the 1976 special census data illustrate the effect that the large
population of retired persons in Seal Beach has on Citywide income
statistics. The average income Citywide in 1976 was 513,355, while the
average for the Leisure World community was a substantially lower I
$6,928. ^ lower average income is a common characteristic of senior
citizen households which often consist of single persons on fixed retire- ,
ment incomes. The annual average income for the remainder of the City,
excluding Leisure World, was $19,409 or 45 percent higher than the
Citywide figure. A detailed breakdown of households by income range is
presented in Table 5. .
.
-10-
Resolution Number
.
TAIILE 4
:e
Median Household Income - 1976
Seal Beach
Orange County
$10,000
16,800
SOURCE:
1976 Special Census and State of California Department of Hous-
ing and Community Development
TABLE 5
Household Income - 1976
Number of
Annual Income Households
Percent of
Households Respondlnh
lotal
926 9.4
1.533 16
1,635 17
1,507 16
857 8.8
996 10
899 9
1,146 12
166 1.8
9,665 100
4,102
13,767
II
$0 - 2,999
$3,000 - 4,999
$5,000 - 7,9Q9
$8,000 - 11 ,999
$12,000 14,999
$15,000 - 19,999
$20,000 - 24,999
$25,000 - 49,999
$50,000 or more
'.
Total responding
Information not
avallable
SOURCE: 1976 Special Census
2.2 Housin~ Characteristics
2.2.1 Types
I
Between 1970 and 1976 the City's housing stock inrreased
nearly 17 percent, to 13,767 units. The breakdown of units by type for
each census tract in the City is presented in Figure 5. Seal Beach
exhibits a marked segregation of single family from multifamily units
I
throughout the City vith the exception of the Old Town census tract
(995.05). This area vas subdivided in the early 1900's into 25 foot
vide lots served by streets in the front and alleys in the rear. The
Old Town neighborhood is characterized by a residential mix of single
family housing, duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes as well as larger
complexes including the 550 unit Oakwood Apartments.
I.
The Surfside neighborhood (995.06), also subdivided in the
early 1900's, was divided into 8mall beach cottage sized lots. In 1968
this area was annexed to the City as an established private residential
community. Recycling of properties has resulted in the replacement of
many small beach cottages with custom, three-8tory 8ingle family
residences.
....
-11-
~41 0
W4 0
noo.oe .
~_.
--I
I .
i._ 1_---------------,
",' 11~1-111~~ ;
_____",_ 0 0 1100.1~ ;
I
.
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
.
.
I
r
!
Resolution Number
.
N i
I
1-
~b 1 ?JD6-,
o 0 \ 1100.01
.
I-
I
.
\
\~
\ b419TO
.
\
.
,
995.0?J
1
.;'
.;'
I'
/~11100e
~~ lCJ1
;,""
I;"
";,";'961 1%1
o 0
:ABu~ ~
· HOU€7INEr VJm"~IMoN
arg10j0lfI :
binslel1Jmily
All Owelling~
Mul(Jple family
Mobile Homt~
I
",1&1 I ~1
,.~ '91
I
.
N/A NtA
N/A N/A
.
,
.
I
.
I
.
I
.
I
.
I
.
~6. O~ I
/------------------1
;,"
;,'
6ou1'C&: 1916 ~P"iDI CeIl'Ju~
.
'.
I
.
I
.
Resolution Number
The Harina Hill (995.05) and College Park East (1100.12) and
West (1100.07) census tracts each contain uniform single family subdivi-
sions utilizing 5,000 square foot lots. Marina Hill was subdivided in
the 1950's while the College Park neighborhoods were developed in the
mid 1960's.
The Leisure World (995.03) and R09smoor (1100.08) tracts both
contain exclusively multifamily residential units. Leisure World was
built in the early 1960's and is a planned residential retirement com-
munity for persons 52 years of age and older. The four condominium
complexes within the Rossmoor census tract also primarily cater to an
older, adult population. Housing within the Seal Beach Navnl W~ap'\ns
Station (995.02) consists of single family homes and enlisted person-
nel's group quarters.
2.2.2
Size and Overcrowding
Housing which provides a reasonable amount of privacy for lts
occupants should contain at least as many rooms as there are pcrson~ in
the household. Bathrooms, porches, halls, balconies, foyers and half
rooms are not considered in determinin~ the ratio of persons to roon..
As defined by the State Department of Housing and Community Development,
overcrowding e~ists when a dwelling unit is inhabited by more than 1.01
persons per room.
As shown in Table 6 there has been a minor decrease in th~
number of persons per room in the City between 1970 and 1976. This
change was caused by both an increase in average unit size and a de-
crease in average household size.
TABLE 6
Per sons
per Room
Average No. of
Rooms/DwellinR Unit
No. of
Persons/Room
No. of
Persons/DwellinR Unit
1970
1976
2.07
1.99
3.7
4.4
0.6
0.5
SOURCE: 1970 Census, 1976 Special Census
Although this data indicates that overcrowding is not a sl~nl-
ficant problem Citywide, it does not exclude the posslbility that over-
crowded units do exist within Seal Beach.
2.2.3
Tenure
Housing tenure describes the mix of owner and renter occupied
units within the City's housing stock. The 1976 special census reveals
tbat approximately 77 percent of the occupied units in Seal Beach are
owner occupied and 23 percent are renter oceupied (Table 7). Comparison
with the 1970 census figures on tenure reveals a shift toward renter
occupied housing. Two factors that may be responsible for this shift
-13-
Resolution Number
are: 1) the high cost of homes m,lking ownership increasingly diffiault
to achieve, and 2) speculatic~, i.e., purchase of property by investors
for income purposes. The distribution of housing units by tenure is
shown in Figure 6.
The shift in tenure toward rental units is not considered to
be a pervasive, continuing trend. The nature of the existing housing
stock and the types of housing recently constructed point to stability
- of the owner/renter balance in Seal Besch. The bulk of the local resi-
dential development activity during the past five years has involved the
construction of condominium units or the recycling of older, predomi-
nantly rental units to single family custom homes. The latter trend has
been particularly evident in the Surfside community. The on~ remaining
large tract of land planned for residential construction in Seal Beach
is the Hellman property, and nearly all of the 1,000 residential units
proposed on this property are planned for owner occupancy.
TABLE 7
Tenure
% Owner Occupied
% Renter Occupied
1970
1976
81
77
19
23
SOURCE: 1970 Census,-i976 Special Census
2.2.4 Cost
The skyrocketing cost of housing is a national dilemma. The
average price of homes in southern California, however, has risen at a
faster rate than the national average since 1974.* The spiralling cost
of housing in southern California has been attributable to a variety of
factors including diminishing land resources (particularly in urban
areas), increasing land and construction costs and increasing finance
costs (i.e.. interest rates).
The range of costs for housing in Seal Beach is also influ-
enced by relative proximity to the ocean. Custom beach front single
family homes in the Old Town and Surfside neighborhoods cost as much as
$1,000.000.** Multiple units inland in the Rossmoor census tract range
in price from $130,000 to $180,000, while multiples in Old Town cost from
$160,000 to $385,000. The prices of sinGle family homes in the Karina
Hill, College Park East and College Park West subdivisions range from
$150,000 to $285,000. Within the Leisure World planned community prices
range from $28.000 for a 640 square foot, one bedroom unit to $138,000
for a newer, two bedroom unit.
* Real Estate Research Council of Southern California.
** Cost figures are based on actual selling prices as documented by
local real estate agencies.
-14-
e
I
.
I
el
Resolution Number
995.0?J
14
11
1100.06
~. --! .
. 1.---------------,
1_- 91 i
.
?J nOO.1'Y I
I
.
I
.
I
.
I
.
,
.
I
.
I
.
,
.
\
.
\
.
,
.
I
.
I
.
I
.
I
.
I
.
99f:l.01- I
to.
..
N
94- -
b
0-
1
.
1
o
I-
.
1
.
, 1100.01
".
.
-.-.-"
f.
-
,
-
,
-
\
.
\
.
I
99
1
I
.
.~
.~
/'14
I 11
"
. -
~
.""/.~.4-
6
NA
NA
. .
fE1U~6
-(~U~
Cijg 1'altil~ :
10 Owner Ocwpied
~o ~r Occupied
.
____J
~_._._._._._._.
.
.~
"
11
1!J
eOIJI'U: '91& !!lpl(.ial Can'.1U~
...
I
Resolution Number
Thp cost of rental hOUSlllg in Seal Ileach is also a function
of relative proximity to the ocear. Based on rental units being adver-
tised during ~~rch, 1982, average rental rates range from 5300 to $~OO
per month for a one bedroom apartment unit, 5600 to 5700 for a twO
bedroom, and 5800 to 51,000 per month for a three bedroom apartment or a
detached single family home. The lower and upper ends of these ranges
are representative of rental housing costs at inland versus coastal
locations, respectively.
.
2.2.5
Vacancy Rate
The residential vacancy rate, a translation of the number of
unoccupied housing units on the market, is a good indicator of the
balance between housing supply and demand in a community. When the
demand for housing exceeds the available supply, the vacancy rate will
be low. Concomltantly, a low vacancy rate drives the cost of housing
upward to the disadvantage of prospective buyers or renters.
In a healthy housing market the vacancy rate would be between
5 and 8 percent. These vacant units should be distributed across a I
variety of housing types, sizes, price ranges and locations withln the
City. This allows adequate selection opportunities for households
seeklng new residences.
A Vacancy Rate Survey conducted by the Federal Home Loan Bank
between April and July of 1981, reveals that 1.9 percent of all of the
housing units in Seal Beach were vacant during that period (Table 8).
ThlS is well below the minimum desirable rate of 5 percent. A si~i~arly
low vacancy rate (1.8 percent) for Orange County shows that relief from .
the market constraints associated with thlS condition cannot be found in
the regional housing marketplace.
TABLE 8
Vacancv Rate
% Total Units % Sln~le Family
% Multi-family
Seal Beach
Orange County
1.9
L8
1.0
1.2
2.4
2.6
SOURCE: Federal Home Loan Bank
2.2.6 Removal Rate
The number of housing units removed from the housin~ stock as I
the result of demolition, condemnation, or physical relocation is
usually expressed as a percentage of the total number of dwelling units.
In Seal Beach the annual housing removal rate has averaged 0.06 percent,
or about 9 units each year, since 1976.* This is an extremely low rate,
especially when compared to the estimated annual removal-rate of 0.7
percent for the State of California.
* 1976 Special Census data updated with local building permit records.
.
.
....
-16-
Ie
~
I
!e
I
,e
Resolution Number
The housing removal ratL is a function of such coml'le>. faltorh
as: housing age, degree of maint nance, functional obsolescpnLe, lnno
values, rehabilitation cost versus replacement cost, and demand. TII,
low rate in Seal Beach is a reflection of the fact that the bulk of th~
housing in the City is relatively new and, as Buch, is in generall) ~uod
condition. N~ large Beale redevelopment requiring the removal of suh-
atantial numbers of residential units has occurred in Seal Beach. The
random recycling of properties has principally occurred in the Old Town
(995.05) and Surfside (995.06) neighborhoods.
Host of the units removed in Seal Beach are demolishpd spe-
cifically to provide space for a new unit. Removal then is nei t her a
negative element or a problem, except to the extent that th~ demolishro
unit may have been available to a lower income range househnld than its
replacement. Housing quality is nearly always improved.
,""
-17-
I
Total
'Acres
656
639
161
el
Resolution Number
gj
HOUSING NEEDS
While the majority of Seal Beach residents are adequately
housed and the local housing stock is in generally good condition, there
are existing and incipient problems that must be addressed. There are
also housing needs, both current and projected, that must be considered
by the City in its housing plans. These needs and/or problems include:
1) the provision of an adequate supply of housins, 2) housing mainte-
nance, 3) housing affordability, and 4) the City's role in meeting
regional housing needs. Each of these subjects are discussed below.
3.1 Adequate Supply
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
periodically prepares housing need estimates for all cities in southern
California. According to SCAG, 336 additional housing units will need
to be constructed within the City by 1986 in order to accomm~date popula-
tion growth due to: 1) the formation of new households, 2) the immigra-
tion of population to Orange County as a whole, and 3) the redistribution
of population within the County based on factors discussed later ~n this
section. In addition to these units, 514 units would need to be con-
structed in order to achieve a 5 percent vscancy rate and 340 replace-
ment dwellings will be needed for un1ts that are expected to be removed
from the housing stock by 1986. Therefore, a total of 1.190 residential
units will need to be constructed within the City by 1986. Th1s trans-
lates intO a minimum of 238 housing starts per year over the next five-
year period. By contrast, nearly 350 residential units have heen r.'n-
structed within the City over the past five years, or 70 units per year.
While the above estimates indicate the need for a dramatic
upturn in local housing construction, the City has allocated sufficient
land to accommodate the projected housing need. The Land Use Element of
the Seal Beach General Plan envisions 112 additional acres of resluentlol
development in the City by 1985 (Table 9). This increase is expect~d to
result from 1) residential infilling or the development of currently
vacant land in the City, and 2) the recycling of presently developed
properties to higher density residential uses. Based on the maximum
allowable densities, this additional residential acreage can accommodate
the estimated need for 1,190 new units by 1986.
TABLE 9
Existing
Residential
Category
and Projected
Existing
Acres
Residential Acreage
Add 1t ional
Proposed Acres
Low
Medium
High
602
599
143
54
40
18
SOURCE: Land Use Element, Seal Beach General Plan
-18-
e
I
e
i
}.
I
,
,
I
.
I
'.
Resolution Number
Although sufficient acr' I!;l.' is Dvailahl e to meet pr,) i (.ct t'd
housing needs, this does not impl that the necessary units will bE' c",,-
structed. Financial and other constraint!!;. which are discu~sE'd in
Section 4.0, ma)' continue to impede housinll development. If In""r r j-
cient housing is constructed. then demand will continue to outwei~h
supply, the local vacancy rate may decrease even further. and housing
cost will continue to spiral upward.
-3.2 Housing Maintenance
According to housing condition estimates contained in thE'
City's current (1979-82) Community Development BIC'ck Grant arrli,atlon,
there are 599 aubstandard units in the City. Of these, 453 arc ,nn-
sidered suitable for rehabilitation while the other 146 are in net'd C'r
replacement (Table 10). Based on field observations, the majority of
the substandard units in the City are concentrated in the Old lo~n and
Surfside neighborhoods. i.e., Census Tracts 995.05 and 995.06. nspect1\.d....
TABLE 10
Surve" of HousinR Conditions
.
Enst ing Suitable for
Tenure Su!)!)lv Substandsrd Rehabilitation
Owner 10,155 161 88
Renter 3__ 423 438 365
Total Units 13.578 599 451
SOURCE: Housing Assistance Plan, Seal Beach Community D(,"E'lop-
ment Block Grant Application, 1979-82 program years.
One aspect of the data presented in Table 10 that is of p&r-
ticular importance, is the number of rental units suitable for reha-
bilitation. Of the 453 units suitable for rehabilitation, 365 or 8]
percent of these units are renter occupied. While the City has in-
itiated a rehabilitation loan program for owner occupied residence~
through the County of Orange, a similar program for the rehabilitation
of rental units has not yet been offered.
3.3 HousinR Assistance Needs
Information contained in the City's current Housing Assis-
tance Plan (HAP) indicates that an estimated 1,731 lower incnme hC'us~-
holds residing in the City need housing assistance. These households,
whose incomes are less than 80 percent of the Countywide medIan income
adjusted for household size, are expending more than 25 percent of
their monthly income for housing. This leaves a disproportionate share
of their income available to purchase other necessil ies such as food,
.edicine and transportation. Middle and upper income households may,
and often do, expend more than 25 percent of their incomes for housing
without experiencing hardships. However, this limitation on housing
expenditures is critical to lower income households because of the very
-19-
Resolution Number TAI!I.E 11
HousinR Assistance Needs .
Status of Households
ReQuirinR Assistance Owner Renter 10tal % of 1'otal
Elderly and handicapped 415 168 583 34
Small family 257 826 1,083 62
Large famUy (5 of more
penons) ..i? 20 65 4
Total 717 1 ,014 1,731 100
limited and sometimes fixed natur~ of their incomes. A breakdown of
existing hOusing assistance needs is preSented in Table 11.
SOURCE: HOusing Assistance Plan, Seal Beach Community Develop_
ment Block Grant Application, 1979-82 program years.
Over 60 percent of the housing assistance need in the City is
associated with small families and 34 percent of that need is for female I
headed households. Less than 5 percent of the households needing as-
Sistance are minority households. Over one-third of the households
requiring assistance are elderly or handicapped and nearly 45 percent of
these households are female headed. Nearly 40 percent of all the house-
holds needing assistance in the City are female headed. The estimated
hOUSing assistance needs for fem.lle hended and minorit)' houselwlJs dre
presented in Tables 1~.and 13, respectively.
TABLE 12
Housin Assistance Needs of Female Headed Households .
Status of Households
RequirinR Assistance Owner Renter Total ~I of Total
Elderly and handicapped 155 99 254 38
Small family 55 316 371 56
Large family ~ -2 ~ ~
Total 248 417 665 100
SOURCE: Housing Assistance Plan, Seal Beach Community Develop-
ment Block Grant Application, 1979-82 program years.
TABLE 13
Housin Assistance Needs of All Minorit Households
Status of Households
RequirinR Assistance Owner Renter Total % of Total
Elderly and handicapped 8 10 18 21
Small family 27 34 61 73
Large family ..l ...l 5 -..!
Total 38 46 84 100
I
SOURCE: Housing Assistance Plan, Seal Beach Community Develop-
Ment Block Grant Application, 1979-82 program years.
.
-20-
Resolution Number
\.
3.4 Fair Share Allocstion
In its Housint Element Guidelines, the State has clearly
indicated that the community to be served by the local housing eJ~m~nt
shall include "a fair share of those market area households who would
live within the local jurisdiction where a variety and choice of houslng
appropriate to their needs is available." Fair share allocations for
all cities in the Los Angeles metropolitan area are determined by SCAr..
The development of a Retional Housing Allocation Model (RH~~) by SCAG
was first begun in 1974. .The flrst model was distributed to local
governments early in 1975 followed by subsequent revisions in Decenb~r,
1975. The moJel underwent maJor revisions 1n 1973, and updating as
recently as 1981.
I
The RHAM has two primary purposes: I) identificatinn of
housing needs, and 2) allocation of "fair share" of need to every
community. The identification of need refers to the nu~ber of hOU.1n~
units necessary to house every household at an affordable price and to
replace all dilapidated housin~ units. Housing units are clnssi[l~d
by value or rental categories. The "fair share" allocation refers to
the number of add1 tional households in each income category "'h,, should
have housing opportunities available in a particulsr communitv. lh~
model strives to obtain an equitable distribution of low and moderate
income housing throughout the region..
I.
Four maJor criteria are used in determining the "fair share"
of each comnunity:
I. Employment pro~imity (the avnilability and typ~ of johs within a
community and its market area).
2. Ability to provide public services and facillties in support of
housing (measured primarily by assessed value-per-capita and sales-
tax-per-capita).
3. Subregional income distribution (the percentage distrihutlon of
income categories in the urban and nonurban areas of the SCAr.
region) .
4. Expected growth in the community (per SCAG's proJections to 1986
of population and employment increases).
I
Besides being used in the housing element to identify need, the RH,\~l
figures are used to comply with federal requirements for local Housln~
Assistance Plans (HAP's) in conjunction with applicatlons for block
grants under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974.
Ie
* As defined by the State Department of Housing and Community Develop-
ment, a low income household is defined as having an annual income
equal to or less than 80 percent of the County's median household
income. Moderate income equals 80 to 120 percent of the County's
median household income. While these thresholds vary with household
size, the current (1982) median income for a family of four in Orange
County is established at $29,900.
-21-
Resolution Number At present, Seal Beach Js considered a "zero fair Share"
community. This means that Seal beach ia currently providing for its
"fair share" of the lover income households in the SCAG region. lIow- a
ever, as indicated in Section 3.1, SCAG has projected a need for 1.190...,
additional housing units in the City by 1986 based on regional growth
forecasts. A portion of this demand viII be for housing affordable to
lover income households. A breakdown of this projected need by income
category, based on the current regional income distribution, is shown in
Table 14.
.
....
TABLE 14
Distribution of Pr01ected
New Construction Needs by Household Income
Addltional Units
Needed by 1986
Income Cateaory (No.l% of Total)
Very low (less than 50% of
County median)
Low (50 to 80% of County
median)
Moderate (80 to 120~ of
County median)
High (over 120% of County
median)
272123
-z
-"?71.-
\IP"7
;z.t; 0_
.::-;-; 1 \,}
f~~ If >L
~IJ
162/14
280/23
476/40
Total
I . I 90 1100
SOURCE:
SOuthern California Association of Governments
-22-
I
~ 1 It
r
e
I
e
.
<I
'.
I
.
Resolution Number
LD
CONSTRAINT~
The ability of the private and public sectors to provide ade-
quate housing to ~eet the needs of all economic se~ments of the comMunlt~
is constrained by various interrelated factors. For ease of discussi~n.
these factors have been divided into three categories: 1) physical con-
atraints, 2) market constraints, and 3) governmental constraints. The
extent to which these constraints are affectin~ the supply and afford-
ability of housing in the City of Seal Beach is discussed be10~.
4.1 physical Constraints
A major constraint to the development of new housing within
the City of Seal Beach is the lack of available undeveloped land.
Excluding the area within the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, over 97
percent of the City is developed. ~Ioreover, the Naval Weapons Station,
which comprises 8 of the City's 11.4 square miles of land, is insppro-
priate for other than limited military housing construction due to
safety and security considerations and the environmental constraintR
posed by the National Wildlife Refuge contained within its boundaries.
The largest remaining parcel of vacant land in the City is the Hellman
property for which a specific plan has been adopted outlining the phased
development of 1,000 residentlal units.
4.2
Msrket Constraints
One of the major obstacles to providlng housing to meet the
needs of all economic segments of the community is the nature of the
housing market itself. The rate at which housing costs are accelerating
has become a serious national problem. This problem is magnified in
California as a whole, and particularly in communities such as Seal
Beach where the desirability of living near the coastline further
inflates costs. The individual components of housing cost that affect
the final sales or rental price of a dwelling unit include the price of
raw land and improvements, land holding cost, construction cost and
financing.
The price of raw land and any necessary improvements is the
principal component of total land cost. The diminishing supply of land
available for residential construction has driven land and, concoml-
tantly, housing costs upward in Seal Beach. .breover, land holdlng
costs incurred during development have also added to the ultimate price
of a new home. The two factors which most influence Isnd holding cost
are the interest rates on acquisition and development loans, and govern-
ment processing times for construction perm~ts.
Similar to land costs, construction costs have also been
escalating rapidly in recent years. The price of materials and wsges
have at times inflated even faster than the Consumer Price Index. As a
result, delays in develop~ent can add a ~ajor expense to housing cost.
....
-23-
esolution Number
The final, but probabl} most significant, component of overall
hOUsing COst is the COst of finanring. This Cost is passed on to hous_
ing consumers by developers and landlords. The cost of financing 15 on.e
of the major Constraints to the construction of housing affordable to
low and moderate income hOuseholds. In order to bring monthly mortgage
payments to Within an affordable range or to qualify for creative fi-
nancins techniques it may be necessary to pay a sizable down payment on
· home. For first t~me home buyers, prOcuring the required down payment
is often difficult, particulsrly if they have low or moderate incomes.
Since there are no apparent trends toward a decline in land, construc_
tion or financing costs, it is unlikely that any reduction in the COSt
of housiDg will be realized in the near future without government inter_
vention or assistance.
A market constraint that is particularly affecting the
affordability of hOUSing in Seal BeaCh is the residential vacancy rate.
As preViously mentioned, 1.9 percent of the housing stock within the City
is vacant, which is well below the minimum desirable rate of 5 percent.
BaSically, the demand for hOUSing in the community exceeds the available I
SUpply, which inflates both rental and ownership hOUSing prices. The
effect of the low vacancy rate on rental housing costs has b~en further
aggraVated by 1) a Significant decline in rental hOUSing starts, 2) the
recycling of older rental units to new owner OCcupied dwellings, and 3) the
ConverSion of rental units to condominiums. During the past five years,
350 apartments have been ConVerted to condominiums in the City. In
response to this regional trend, the City has enacted an ordInance regu_
lating the Conversion of apartments to condominium ownership.
4.3
Land Use Controls
Governmental COnstraInts
4.3.1
.
...
The Land Use Element of the Seal Beach General Plan sets forth
the City's policies for guiding local development. These POlicies,
tOgether with eXisting zoning, establish the amount and distribution of
land to be allocated for various uses throughout the CIty.
Residential development in the City of Seal Beach is permitted
under the folloWing land use categories in accordance With the Land Use
ElemeDt of the General Plan:
Gross Total Percent of
Land Use Minimum Lot Area Allowable Acreage Total City
CateRor'>! Per Unit Density DesiRnated AcreaRe
Low density 5,000 sq.ft. 8/acre 656 9
Medium density 1,875-2,500 sq.ft. 17-23/acre 639 9
High densi ty 960-1,350 sq.ft. 32-45/acre 161 -l.
Total 1,456 20
PerCEont of
Total City
Acrra e
mnu
MUit
61,
-24-
.
Resolution Number
Ie
Housing supply and cost are greatly affected by the amount of
land designated for residential u~e and the density at which development
is permitted. In Seal Beach, 20 percent of the City's land area is
designated for residential land use. However, this figure is skewed
downward by the very large land area devoted to military use, i.e.,
5,000 acres or nearly 70 percent of the City's total land area. Of the
total aonmilitary land in Seal Beach, approximately 64 percent is
designated for residential use.
As indicated in Section 3.1 of this element, the acrea~e that
has been allocated for residential use is sufficient to accom~~date
local housing needs through 1986. Thereafter, the land avallahle for
residential development will represent a serious constraint to houslng
production.
4.3.2
Building Codes
I
In addition to land use controls, local building codes also
affect the cost of housing. Seal Beach has adopted the Uniform Buildlng
Code which establishes minimum construction standards. These minimum
standards csnnot be revised to be less stringent without sacrificing
basic safety considerations and amenities. No major reductions in
construction costs are anticipated through revisions to local building
codes. However, working within the framework of the existing codes, the
City will continue to-implement planning and development techniques that
lower costs and facilitate ne... construction to the extent possible.
e
4.3.3
Permit Processing
I
The processing time needed to obtain development permits and
required approvals is often cited as a prime contributor to the high
cost of housing. Additional time may be necessary for environmental or
Coastal Commission review depending on the location and nature of a
project. Unnecessary delays will sdd to the cost of construction by
increasing land holding costs, interest payments and inflation. Al-
though these review processes may take a substantial amount of time the~
are necessary to integrate a new development into the local urban enVl-
ronment. In response to State la..., California cities have been working
to improve the efficiency of permit and review processes by providing
one stop processing, thereby eliminating duplication of effort. The
passsge of Assembly Blll 884, which took effect on January I, 1978, has
also helped to reduce government delsys by: I) limiting processing time
in most cases to one year, and 2) eliminating some "red tape" by re-
quiring agencies to specify the information required to complete an
acceptable application. To a certain extent, however, these efforts ma~
be thwarted by elimination of staff positions due to Propositions 4 and
13 cutbacks.
4.3.4
Service and Facilitv Infrastructure
.
Before a development permit is granted, it muat be establlshed
that public service and facility systems are adequate to accommodate any
increased demand generated by a proposed project. Information provided
by the service and utility companies serving the City of Seal Beach
-25-
Resolution Number
indicates that the preaent infrastructure ia senerally sufficient to ~
accommodate planned levels of srovth. Thus, the capscity of ~ervice and
facility infraatructure is not considered to be an obstacle to the
proviaion of additional houains in Saal Beach.
.
4.3.5
Article 34 Referendum
In 1950, the voters of California added Article 34 to the
State Conltitution which requires that low-rent housinS projectl "de-
veloped, constructed, or acquired in any manner" by any public asency
receive voter approval prior to their development. As such, Article 34
pOles en obltacle to any community desirins to become directly involved
in providing housins for lower income households.
..
The State Supreme Court determined in 1976 that Article 34
applied to all California HousinS Finance Asency (CHFA) programs. A
lawsuit, CHFA v Patitucci, was filed by the agency to clarify the ap-
plicability of Article 34. A unanimous decision handed down by the
court on September 18, 1978, limits the applicability of Article 34
referenda to those projects which are over 50 percent financed or sub-
sidized by the government. A project that is privately developed, pays
local taxes, and il 50 percent or more nonsubsidized does not require a
referendum. The Patitucci decision thus partially removed an impediment
to the production of low and moderate income housing, especially in
communities where referendum authority cannot be expected. ~present,
the City of Seal Beach does not have Article 34 referendum authority.
I
4.3.6
Utilization of State and Federal Assistance ProKrams
The dearee to which the City of Seal Beach may participate in ~
State and Federal housina programs is constrained by the nature of those ...,
programs, eligibility requirements and funding limitations. The high
cost of housina in the City is a deterrent to the use of certain pro-
grams, e.g., Section 8 Existing and Moderate Rehabilitation, CHFA Direct
Lending, etc., by private developers/property owners. This is due to
the relatively low housinS costs (purchase price or rent) permitted
under these proar.... Local population and housing characteristics,
e.g., lack of phyeical bliaht, and households below poverty level, limit
the City'a ability to participate in some proarams. In addition, recent
reductions in funding levele aleo represent an impediment to the utili-
zation of thele prosrams.
I
.
-26-
Resolution Number
(e
~
HOUSING PI{OGI{AM
This section of the element sets forth the City's program for
addressing the previously identified needs recognizing the constraints
that limit the City in its ability to affect local housing needs. The
housing program presented hereln will not eliminate all existin~ h~using
needs in the City of Seal Beach. It would be unreallstic to e~p~ct S~al
Beach or any other city in the State to accomplish such a goal in a
relatively ahort period of time (i.e., five years) with the limited
resources available. However, this program does represent a continUln&.
meaningful effort on the part of the City of Seal Beach to expand the
availability of housing while improving the quality and maintaining the
affordability thereof.
I
5.1 Goals
e
The proper basis for any plan of action is a well-integrated
set of goals. Such policy statements provide guidance to local deci-
sion~makers in dealing with housing-related issues and express the
desires and aspirations of the community. The Seal Beach City Council
adopted a series of formal housing goals in 1974 which are consistent
with State housing policies. These goals, which give direction to the
City's housing program, are as follows:
/
~1. To endeavor to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all
economic segments of the communlty.
2. To assure that all housing in the City meets the minimum require-
ments for a standard dwelling unit as set forth in the applicable
provisions of the City's building and housing codes.
3. To promote the conservation and rehabilitation of older neighborhoods.
4. To improve residential enVlronments through the provision of ade-
quate public facilitles end services including streets and parks as
well as water, sewer and drainage systems.
I
5.
To aid all citizens of the City, wherever possible, in securing
decent, safe and adequate housing in neighborhoods which are char-
acterized by good environments.
6. To provide an environment which is safe, healthful and aestheti-
cally pleasing and which tends to strengthen indlvidual and famlly
life.
7. To preserve and enhance viable residential neighborhoods and
strengthen neighborhood identity.
.
8.
To provide the impetus for orderly development of adequate, safe
and sanitary accommodations for all citizens of the City.
-27-
Resolution Number
: 9. To provide assistance to tho'e in need of securing or malnLaining
adequate housing.
5.2 Action Plan
In order to progress toward the attainment of established
goals, the City has committed itself to specific policies and actions.
While the goals are general statements that reveal community values or
ideals, the policies presented herein are more specific and action-
oriented. These policies have, in turn, been used to translate the
goals into specific, time-oriented actions.
The policies and supporting actions have been organized around
five major issue areas identified by the State Department of Housing and
Community Development. The actions to be undertaken by the City have
been programmed to facilitate implementation and evaluate progress. The
anticipated impact, responsible agency, potential funding and schedule
for each action is discussed. The area of impact, i.e., Citywide or
certain census tracts, has also been identified.
The anticipated accomplishments have been quantifi~rl where
possible. These estimates w~re generated on the basis that 3 percent of
the C1ty'S housing needs would be met per year, or 15 percent ovpr the
five-year life of this plan. This is the same approach that is utilized
in establishing the City's annual and three-year housing as~istance
goals under the Federal Community Development Block Grant program.
5.2.1
Preserving Housin~ and Nei~hborhoods
5.2.1.1
Policies
In order to preserve housing and neighborhoods, the City of
Seal Beach shall:
Encourage the maintenance and rehabilitation of existing owner-
occupied and rental housing where feasible.
Take action to promote the removal and replacement of those sub-
standard units which cannot be rehab1litated.
Upgrade or improve community facilities and municipal services in
keeping with community needs.
Sustain a high standard of maintenance for all publicly owned
property.
Investigate and pursue programs and funding sources available to
assist in the improvement of residential property.
Prevent the encroachment of incompatibl~ uses into established
residential areas.
-28-
.
I
.
I
.
~
.
I
.
I
.
Resolution Number
5.2.1.2 Actions
1. Action: Continue to publici~e and make available low inl~resl
rehabilitation loans for owner-occupied residences.
Anticipated Impact: Rehabilitation of deteriorated housing in till
City and reduction in the number of owner-occupied units requiring
rehabilitation. Provision of decent housing for lower incnme
homeowners. The program goal is the rehabilitation of three' unlt~
per year, or 15 units over the next five years.
Impact Area: Citywide, with emphasis on Census Tract 995.05.
Responsible AKencies: Orange County EMA, Seal Beach Planning
Department.
Financing: CDBC funds.
Schedule: 1982-87.
2.
Action: Explore the establishment of a low interest rehabilitatlon
loan program for rental units, contingent upon prngram details
being resulved by HUD and the County of Orange.
Anticipated Impact: Rehabilitation of deteriorated housing in the
City and reduction in the number of substandard rental units. The
program goal, upon successful implementstion of such a prugram,
would be the rehabilitation of 11 units per year.
Impact Area: Citywide, with emphasis on Census Tract 995.05.
Responsible ARencies: Orange County EMA and Seal Beach Planning
Department.
Flnancing:
Schedule:
CDBC funds.
1963-87.
3.
Action: Investigate the feasibility of initiating a grant and/or
deferred pa)~ent loan program for the rehabilitation of residences
owned by lower income households, particularly the elderly.
Anticipated Impact: Provision of finsncial assistance to lower
income households to perform minor repairs/rehabilitation. ThlS
program would be intended to serve those households that cannot
afford the rehabilitation loans currently offered by the City.
Impact Area: Citywide, with emphasis on Census Tract 995.05.
Responsible ARencies: Orange County EMA and Seal Beach Planning
Department.
Financing:
Schedule:
CDBC funds.
1983.
4.
Action: Monitor housing conditions throughout the City in order to
expand existing rehabilitation efforts as necessary.
Anticipated Impact: Prevention of housing deterioration in well-
maintained neighborhoods. City will respond to changing housing
conditions as necessary through CDBC programs.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible Agencies: Seal Beach Plann~ng Department.
Financing: Department budget.
Schedula: Ongoing.
~.
-29-
5.
.
I
.
I
.
Resolution Number
Action: Utilize the City's {~neral Plan and zoning ordinanle to
prevent the encroachment of incompatible uses into establlshed
residential areas.
Anticipated Impact: Citywide.
Responsible Aaencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: Department budget.
Schedule: Ongoing.
6. Action: Review all changes in planned land uses to determine the
cumulative impact on community facilities and municipal services.
Anticipated Impact: Provision of adequate levels of community
facilities and services in all residential areas of the City.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible Agencies: Various City departments.
Financing: Department budgets.
Schedule: Ongoing.
5.2.2 Preserving Affordability
5.2.2.1
Policies
In order to preser~e the affordability of housing, the City of
Seal Beach shall:
Encourage the continued affordability of rental units rehabilitated
with public funds.
Promote and where possible require the continued affordability of
all residential units produced ~ith participation by the City ~r
its authorized agents.
Discourage the conversion of existing apartment units to condo-
miniums where such conversion will diminish the supply of low and
moderate income housing.
Investigate and pursue programs and funding sources designed to
maintain and/or improve the affordability of existing housing units
to low and moderate income households.
5.2.2.2
Ac t ions
1.
Action: t~intain the affordability of any rental units rehabili-
tated with financial assistance from the City.
Anticipated Impact: Maintenance of continued affordability of
rental units rehabilitated with financial assistance from the City.
The implementation of this measure is dependent upon the prepara-
tion of a rental rehabilitation agreement that is acceptable to
HUD, the County of Orange and local property owners.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible Agencies: Orange County EMA, Seal Beach Planning
Department.
Financing:
Schedule:
CDBG funds and department budgets.
1983-87.
-30-
.
I
I.
I
:.
2.
Resolution Number
Action: Continue to preserv. affordable housing opportunities at
the Seal Beach Trailer Park.
Anticipated Impact: Provision of affordable housing for low and
moderate income persons through the continuing efforts of the S"al
Beach Redevelopment Agency. The participation agreement executed
by the developer and the Agency reserves 120 of the mobile home
spaces in this reconstructed park for low and moderate income
households for a period of 66 years. Rent increases are controlled
for 66 years by a formula tied to ectual costs and the consumer
price index, and any rent increases must be approved by the Red~-
velopment Agency before becoming effective.
Impact Area: Census Tract 99S.0S.
Responsible ARencies: Seal Beach Redevelopment Agency snd Planning
Depart_nt.
Financing:
Schedule:
Redevelopment tax increments.
Ongoing.
3.
Action: Maintain the affordability of any low and moderate income
housing units developed with participation by the City or its
authorized agents.
Anticipated Impact: Maintenance of the continued affordability of
any low and moderate income housing units developed with particips-
tion by the City through the use of resale controls or other appro-
priate techniques.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible Agencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: CDBG funds, department budget.
Schedule: Ongoing (appropriate measures will be applied on a
project by project basis).
4. Action: Continue enforcement of the City's Condominium Conversion
Ordinance.
Anticipated Impact: Preservation of affordable rental units and
provision of financial and other assistance for households diS-
placed by condominium conversion activity.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible Agencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: Department budget.
Schedule: Ongoing.
5.
Action: Continue and expand the availability of rental assistance
for local residents.
Anticipated Impact: .eduction in hOUSing assistance needs by
continuing to contract with the Orange County Housing Authority to
administer the Section 8 Housing Assistance Program. Based on
3 percent of the need being met per year, the program goal is for
30 households to be assisted per year. This level of assistance in-
cludes both elderly households and low ~nd moderate income families.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible Aaencies: Orange County Housing Authority.
Financing: Section 8 (Existing) Housing Assistance Program.
Schedule: Ongoing.
-31-
Resolution Number
6.
Action: Require the replace..ent of all low and moderate in~ome
housing units removed in the local coastal zone or the payment of a
fee (for housing replenishment purposes) in lieu thereof.
Anticipated Impact: Retention of affordable housing opportunities
for low and moderate income households. This action is being
undertaken as a means of implementing the provisions of SB 626
(Mello) which Y8S enacted in 1981. Initially, procedures will have
to be established for the operation of this program.
Impact Area: Citywide, with emphasis on Census Tracts 995.04 and
995.05.
Responsible ARencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
FinancinR: Department budget and developer contributions.
Schedule: 1982-87.
5.2.3
Standards and Plans for Adequate Sites
5.2.3.1
Policies
In order to ensure the provision of adequate, suitable sites
for the construction of housing, the City of Seal Beach shall:
Use the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the zoning ordi-
nance to ensure the availability of adequate sites for a variety of
housing types.
Ensure the compatibility of residential areas with surrounding uses
through the separation of incompatible uses, construction of ade-
quate buffers and other land use controls.
Encourage the infilling of vacant residential land.
Encourage the recycling of underutilized residential land, where
such recycling is consistent with established land use plans.
Ensure that all residential areas are provided with adequate public
facilities and services.
Ensure that adequate, freely accessible open space is provided
within reasonable distance of all community residents.
Encourage the expansion of local employment opportunities for
community residents.
Direct the construction of low and moderate income housing to sites
which are:
located with convenient access to schools, parks, public trans-
~ortation, shop~inR facilities and ~lo~ent opportunities,
adequately served by public utilities,
adequately provided with police and fire protection services.
compatible with surrounding existing and planned land uses,
- minimally impacted by noise, flooding or other environmental
constraints,
- outside areas of concentrated lower income households.
-32-
- '.' -......
. .
e
I
e
I
,..
."
e'
.
.
/
I
I.
r
.
Resolution Number
5.2.3.2 Actions
1.
2.
Action: Utilize the City's General Plan and zoning ordlnnnre tn
provide adequate, suitable sites for new housinR construction.
Anticipated Impact: Provision of adequate sites for the construc-
tion of up to 1,190 new residential units over the next five yedrs.
Impact Area: Citywide, with emphasis on Census Tract 995.04.
Responsible Agencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: Department budget.
Schedule: Ongoing.
.
I
Action: Use zoning and other land use controls to ensur~ the co~-
patibility of residential areas with surrounding uses.
Anticipated Impact: Creation and maintenance of desirable ll~ing
areas, physically separated or otherwise protected from incompati-
ble uses.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible Agencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: Department budget.
Schedule: Ongoing.
3.
Action: Utilize environmental and other development review prp-
cedures to ensure that all new residential developments are pro-
vided with adequate public facilities and services.
Anticipated Impact: Assurance that all new residential develop-
ments are provided with adequate public facilities and services.
Impact Area: Cit~'ide.
Responsible Agencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: Department budget.
Schedule: Ongoing.
4. Action: Create and maintain an inventory of vacant and under-
utilized sites suitable for housing purposes.
Anticipated Impact: Dissemination of information to private
developers to facilitate housing production.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible Agencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: CDBG funds and department budget.
Schedule: 1983-87.
5.
Action: Direct low and moderate income bousing construction to
sites that conform with establisbed siting criteria.
Anticipated lmpact: Construction of low and moderate income hous-
ing on sites best suited for such purposes.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible Agencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: CDBG funds and department budget.
Schedule: Ongoing.
-33-
Resolution Number
').2.4
Accessibility
5.2.4.1
Policies
In order to assure accessibility to decent housing for all
persons, the City of Seal Beach shall:
Promote fair housing practices throughout the community.
Encourage the development of housing which meets the special needs
of handicapped and elderly households.
Promote the provision of housing to meet the needs of families of
all sizes.
Encourage the provision of rental units for families with children.
5.2.4.2
Actions
1.
.
Action: Continue to utilize the services of the Orange County Fair
Housing Council.
Anticipated Impact: Investigation of all complaints of housing
discrimination in the City and the provision of counselin~ in
landlord-tenant disputes, special assistance for Hispanic and
female-headed households, and other housing services.
Impact Area: Citywide.
ResponSible Agencies: Orange County Fair Housing Council and Seal
Beach Planning Department.
Financing: Orange County CDBC..
Schedule: Ongoing.
2. Action: Actively pursue and facilitate the construction of new
housing for elderly and handicapped households.
Anticipated Impact: Construction of approximately 100 units of
new, affordable housing for senior citizens and handicapped persons.
Impact Area: Census Tract 995.04.
Responsible Agencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: Section 202, Section 8 New Construction, CDBG, CHFA
Direct Lending, developer contributions.
Schedule: 1983-87.
3.
Action: Investigate the feasibility of expanding the City's rehabil1-
tation loan program to include the removal of architectural barriers
in residences occupied by handicapped persons.
Anticipated Impact: Removal of architectural barriers, thereby
improving accessibility to housing for handicapped persons.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible Agencies: Seal Beach Planning Department and Orange
County EMA.
Financing:
Schedule:
CDBG funds and department budgets.
1983.
-34-
. - ~ ".-.
. .. .. . - . - ~ .
-
.
I
.
1
.
i.
I
t.
r>
.
4.
Resolution Number
Action: Continue to utilizE the housing information and referral
services offered by the Ora~,e County Housing Authority for pcrson~
seeking affordable rental and purchase housing.
Anticipated Impact: Provision of housing referral and other
assistance to low and moderate income households seeking affordable
housing.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible A~encies: Seal Beach Planning Department and Orange
County Housing Authority.
Financing: Department budgets.
Schedule: Ongoing.
5.2.5
Adequate Provision
5.2.5.1
Policies
In order to ensure the adequate provision of housing for all
economic segments of the community, the City of Seal Beach shall:
Protect and expand housing opportunities for households needlng
assistance including senior citizens, low and moderate income
families and handicapped persons.
Encourage the use of innovative land use techniques and construc-
tlon methods to minimize housing costs without compromising basic
health, safety and aesthetic considerations.
Provide incentives for and other~ise encourage the private develop-
ment of new affordable housing for low and moderate income households.
Investigate and pursue programs and funding sources designed to
expand housing opportunlties for lo~ and moderate income house-
holds, including the elderly and handicapped.
Facilitate the construction of low and moderate income housing to
the extent possible.
_ Periodically reexamine local building and zoning codes for possible
amendments to reduce construction costs without sacrificing basic
health and safety considerations.
5.2.5.2 Actions
1.
Action: Establish and implement procedures for the provision of
density bonuses or other incentives for housing developments incor-
porating low and moderate income units.
Anticipated Impact: Expansion of affordable housing supply through
provision of density bonuses or other incentives. This action is
being initiated in response to Section 65915 et seq. of the Cali-
fornia Government Code. This legislat~on was enacted through the
passage of AB 1151 in 1979, and requires that either a density
bonus or at least two other incentives be granted for any project
-35-
Resolution Number
consisting of five or more units in which at least 25 percent of
the units will be available to low and moderate income households.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible ARencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: Department budget.
Schedule: 1982.
.
2.
Action: Coordinate planning efforts with the Depsrtment of Defense
for the construction of additional military housing in the City.
Anticipated Impact: Provision of adequate affordable housing for
military personnel and their families relocating to the Los Angeles
metropolitan area as a result of increased activlty at the Long
Beach Naval Complex. The Department of the Navy is considering the
construction of approximately 200 units of family housing at the
Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station. The construction of these units
would avoid further aggravation of the existing affordable housing
shortage in the area.
Impact Area: Census Tract 995.02.
Responsible ARencies: Department of the Navy and Seal Beach
Planning Department.
Financing: Department budgets.
Schedule: 1982-84.
I
3.
Action: Continue to encourage the use of innovative land use
techniques and construction methods (including manufactured or
factory built housing) to minimize housing costs.
Anticipated Impact: Reduction in housing costs through innovative
planning and construction techniques without compromising baslc
health, safety and aesthetic considerations.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible ARencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: Department budget.
Schedule: Ongoing.
.\
4.
Action: Assist private developers, both profit and nonproflt.
in securing funding for the construction of affordable housing
through the Section 8 New Construction, CHFA Direct Lending, Orange
County Mortgage Revenue Bond and other relevant programs.
Anticipated Impact: Expansion of affordable housing opportunities
for low and moderate income households.
Impact Area: Citywide.
ResponSible ARencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: CDBC funds and department budget.
Schedule: 1982-87.
1
5.
Action: Continue to utilize rental assistance funds to subsidize
mobile home space rentals.
Anticipated Impact: Reduction in the number of low and moderate
income households needing assistance in the City.
Impact Area: Census Tract 995.05. '.
Responsible ARencies: Seal Beach Planning Department and Orange
County Housing Authority.
Financing: CDBG funds.
Schedule: Ongoing.
.'
...
-36-
"
~ ... . - - . - 1 - .
. , .
I.
I
..
r
.
6.
Resolution Number
Action: Subsidize the cost ~f land and off-site improvements in
order to facilitate the cons'ru~tion of low and moderate lntom~
housing.
Anticipated Impact: Production of affordable housing fOT lo~ anu
moderate income households.
Impact Area: Citywide.
Responsible ARencies: Sesl Beach Planning Department.
Financing: CDBG funds and redevelopment tax increments.
Schedule: 1982-87.
7.
Action: Ensure the construction of additlonal low and moderate
income housing units through the implementation of the Hellman
SpecifiC Plan.
Anticipated Impact: Phased construction of st least 100 unit~ of
affordable housing for low and moderate income households. In-
creased hu.e ownership opportunities for low and moderate income
households through the construction of affordable purchase houslng.
Housing for senior citizens as well as both small and large faml-
lies will be provided within the specific plan area.
Impact Area: Census Tract 995.04.
Responsible ARencies: Seal Beach Planning Department.
Financing: Department budget (potential funding sources for hous-
ing construction were addressed under prior actions).
Schedule: 1983-87.
.
The City's current (1982-87) housing action plan is summarized
in Table 15. As seen in thlS table, the action plan could result in the
rehabilltation of up to 59 additional dwelling units and the provision
of rental assistance to 150 addltional households by 1987. Furthermore,
at least 1,200 ne~ houSlng units could be constructed in the Clty over
the next five years. These unlts would include both market-rate and
affordable housing, and provide for a range of household types (i.e.,
elderly/handicapped, small families and large families).
5.3 Priorities
As previously indicated, the ability of the City of $eal Beach
to affect local housing needs is limited by the resources ava11anle for
this purpose. These resources include land, enabling legislation.
political leverage or housing expertise, and funding. Local government~
in particular are constrained by the availability of funding for houslng-
related activities.
In order that available resources are used most effectively,
thereby maximizing the benefits derived therefrom, a prioritization of
local housing needs is essential as a guide in distributing those re-
sources. Therefore, where conflicts may arise in the implementation of
the housing program set forth herein, the City shall allocate its
limited resources on the basis of the following priorities:
Priority 1 __ Expansion of the local housing supply in terms of both
aarket-rate and affordable housing.
Priority 2 __ Maintenance and improvement of the existing housing stock.
Priority 3 __ Preservation of existing affordable housing opportunitles.
-37-
Resolution Number
~
:.1
~I ~
il .-;
.;EI_ ::: ~I
~J ': ~ ...1
~I~HI
! :5<
...
._ w
w." w
~w.
eww
=.~
o~
~~~
ow'"
. 0
e.c
iB:
":
;:
..
..
o
1
.c
.lI
'"
,
..
..
'"
-
~
.
~
-
~
u
.
...
o
,g
"
o
ii
il
e
~
>
~
w
.
to
~
..
c
'"
..
co
'"
>0
w
~
'"
w
. .
:s ~
. .
",w
~
>0.
w"
e .
Oco
8..
.
w~
...
e .
. .
~-
C'
"..
<>
."..
':~
.
it:
o;:.J
i,-
. w
, .
.
. ~
.~
...
- ,
U
~ ;::
:.Jc.:
..
,
...
..
'"
"
..
co
'"
>0
w
-
'"
w
. .
;H
",w
~
>.
w"
e,!!
8..
e
w-
"'.
. .
. .
~-
0"
'"
I
~
..
o
"
..
e
.
o
- .
.
e 'J
o .
~ .
w...
- -
~ !II
_ W
- ~
-
......
. .
.c-
to ..
~ 0
.
B
. ,
- "
w w
e ~
80
~
o
-~
...
..
!;
.
co
'"
>0
w
-
'"
w
. .
~!
~
>0.
w..
e w
r~.
.
.-
"'.
. .
c .
~-
C"
.
o
.
-
.
r.
.c
t
w
.
c
.
~
;
D-
.
W
."..
.0
."
-"..
u:
w
-..
"'oJ
....
00
...
~ "..
....
>0'"
w
;-'''
- -
.
.
..
..
,
to
.
I
. .
w .
~ ~
-..
~ c
... ~
r. ..
i.
~ Z
~-.
o w
c: ~"
o W to
-= l~
~ :.:
.. ~
-...
.5~1
~~
to w ..
w~ .
u::
:: ":: If
. e ~
to . to
~ :;, ~
"'eo
o ~
.~ 0
.....~
-;;
w
e
w
~
~
o
w ,;
e r.
i~
. ~
~..
-
"'.
. .
w 0
.~
to e
to 0
~~
ow
-.
...w
.~
"'~
~
'"
. .
N.c
f
~
o
..
8
..
110
...
o
...
..
e
.
..
~
.
...
w
co
w
.
I
w
~
.
..
,!!
..
e
~
e
e
.
..
..
>-
w
..
'"
.
."
1
w
-
"
1!
.
..
.
to
>0
." "
e .
. .
.
r ~
. .
o.
-.
..
~ .
1.
o .
. w
~
1'.2
~~
. W
.
jig
-
...
0"
..w
~-
e~
:I:;:
"
.c
. w
..~
!
~
5
"
e
~
ll.
e
o
..
w
to
..
1
...
w
e
.
..
~
"
...
,!!
w
to
..
...
.
...
w
e
I
..
~
.
..
.!I
..
e
..
.
w
.
.
..
.
o
..
e
-
e
e
.
~
..
>0
w
.
..
e
..
.
..
.
.
...
to
...
>0
w
U
..
.
c
~
.
.
>
'"
..
::::
~
w
o
w
..
e
C
II.:.
w
1;:
. '"
..
e..
. e
~-
..
...
.. 8
~.c
to ~
ej
3.c
..
to-
.. to
_ e
..
~w
w.
.. to
..
o
. ~
.....
, '.
~
..
I
...
..
'"
-
:3
~
w
-
I 7
! ~
~ >
c "
~ to
.
..
to."
"e
e .
.
.c .
. to
~
to-
.~
o u
.
1~
" >-
.. ..
~
~ .
- 0
. I
>> 0
.!.
> e
to 0
..
::
-
~
...
.
...
~
o
~
~
c
e
~
'.
..
to
.
to
~
..
w
.
.
00'"
.;
..
e
to
.
..
~
.
...
.!I.
w
. ..
"'..
I!i'8
"''''
>0
w
;:;
w
. e
~~
~
>0.
w..
e .
S~
e
to~
".
. .
. .
.-
0"
to
...
1
::
'"
.5
i\.-
s
.
.
w
w
e
l::
o .
.;w
> to
w "
'B
..~
..
~
.
-:;;:
w~
. .
~ .
~ .
~>o
ow
~;:;
..
~=
_w
--
... .
.
'21
ow
~.
~ w
.-
-
e~
-'"
:\2
. to
- "
I..
..
~
. e
- .
. ....
~
. ~
> w
l! .
I!~
,8
~ "'
. .
to ~
12
c .
--
,o.
>
~ ~
'Z.::
.....
...
o
...
..
'"
..
"
..
.s
;.
8
..
.5
?
~
w
w .
~ :.:
~ j
~
. w
... .
.!I .
.. w
. to ~
U 11&I .,
.. ... ..
fU .!
..
.
..
.
w
"
.
..
!E.
w
C
..
.
w
=
..
~
"
.
-
.
e
.
-
o.
>0
..
~
'"
"
.
.
.
.
-
>0
w
I.
.;
)
>
w
)
>
w
-
.
.
.
o
..
..
.5
.
o
o
.c
.
w
.
.0
o-
w
~ .
0'"
~
>0.
..-
~..
- "
- .
"'...
.
...~
..w
o~
~'"
~
..c
..
e-
-.
..
n
~o.
. 0
,,-
to
>
. ..
......
~
o
~...
.. .
~.
-o.
~
...~
. to
.,,-
~~
o.
~ "
~..
.
.c
to .
> .
';;1
.
to-
" .
.. to
UI
. w
N.
..
W
J
.
C
"
..
~
o
~
.
-::
w
W
:
:;
...
i
u
.
~
"
..
)
,
...
c
"
!
.
.
~
-
=
.
~
.r.
"
..:
..
.
u
~
;;
::c
>
!'
5
6
..
"
c
..
-::
-
w
~
.
~
~
c.
"
.
...
,
..
,
2
e
C
~ .
c .
=
= IS:
E~
u=
~
o e
~ c
:;;
~
to ..
H
-c
~~
8 I
-
e
.-
.. .
"
~ -...
r::. -
=-.... 0:
~ C ::
... :I :.::
.
e ~ ~
-~-:
w .
- - .
e.-
0; - "':I
c: E';
r: =
~-
.. ~.=
- j; :
..
c "
~...
.--
~ 0
1':'ii~
l ~ ;:
t~.!!
o 1..~
.... '11-
..t~i
,,_ C::I
... e ;110 ....
" .. = '"
.c..-.
. . .
. .
.
I
.
I
I
CC
'"
.
I
.
1
.'
t.
I
..
I
~.
II
.,
.r.
~
~I
.::\
II
~
~
"
,i..
~I
-I
:,
~
.!!
.;--:'
_ - :.d
: ;. ...,
- "
.: 0::-;'1
Z :: ,1
:f <I
..I
~:; ~\
_ 0;. ~
= ... ...
~ :;':;
':: ~":\
- 11-:'
. =':1
:i 3~1
~
..
~
_
c
~
.
_
..
.
Do
&
_
. .
i;l,:
Q'
u'"
i
i
_
~
..
!
"
c
-
c
c
..
..
,
>
..
~
,
]E
_ ..
.. -
w..
_:0
~\
z- ..
.. ..
of .:
.. ,
~
. w
0-
z-
. ~
. ..
. .
.0
_ >
:'i~
_ . ..
_.. c
. .
.0'"
>--
05.:
o ..
.
o 0
~--
..
c
-
o
"
5
.
_
.
..
..
.i
_
c
I
_
..
.
&
..
=
".
c .
- ..
.-
....
o
= ..
..
...-
.....
c
. .-
....0
:;,J~I
. .. _
;l.': '"'
=.: f"
~...c..
~..E~
.
>
..
.:
:: ~
.. ..
.
.-
. -
- ..
:0
..
0."
ii ~ >.
_ ~ w
08::-::
o .
. .c
. ...
. . .
uC
~ ~ lID
.. C
o .-
. .. .
o .
~ii
0_'"
UO~
.1 ~
..,.u
N
..
~
..
.
..
...
.i
u
o
I
..
..
..
Do
&
..
o
~
E
_
..
..
Do
.
Q
"
o
;;
..
0:
..
::
-
>
..
_
...
o
o
-
.
-
.
o
..
...
..
..
~
~
:I
~
u ,..
=....5~
..;-: &
. ..
" . w
e ~ ~ ~
~ = E 0
o Do'
lj.2~
. ..
I ~ t ~
-...."'''
c.. ..
. c: .. 0
.. II 0 "':I
... e
1....-
., . : ~
.=c.......
. 0 _
.......e.
_ ... c:
-:~~:
...0...."
... ..
wa.~i
...c ..
.0 tot 0
_,..0101
..;
;I
,
N
..
~
.
..
ll.
..
.i
..
o
I
..
..
..
Do
&
..
. 0
n
.. _
z ..
..
. Do
'5&
...
o 0
-
.. 0
o 0
p
.....
..
.. ...
c...
.. ~
"u
..
'"
."
".
..
~
'"
'"
N
..c-
.. ..
- -
:J~
. _
u-
..."
0"
...
-
.. ..
o
,,-
o
- .
o ..
o 0
o .
--
Do& !'
.. -
-. .
.0'
.5..!
... 0
.. . ..
S! ! !;
u..-
.,-
Do-
~&i!
..
o
o
..
~
.
..
;.
."
.i
_
o
Ii
..
..
.
c.
u
'"
_
o
Ii
_
..
..
Do
.!l
..
=
o
o
..
0:
...
_
...
>
..
u
!. !.
c~
= ~
_ _
.0.
c.!! ~
. _ 0
. , u
. .
.. ..
. u 0
...-
.. 0 ..
.. 0 .
gUj
~ '8..
."':
o .. E
...-
. 0
h-;
_00
-- _
o
8n
- .
_ ..
.. -
~ > 0
Resolution Number
~
..
,
"
..
...
_
o
.
.
..
..
.
Do
&
_
. .
c"
..-
'" !
.....
_
o
.
.
_
..
.
Do
o!i
..
o
-
o
o
..
-
o.
..
u
..
:3
>
..
::
..
.
..
;;
~
,,-
.z-
.
.....
. ..
" 0
.-
..
..
o
--
o
.
.. 0
.. 0
Do-
0_
_ u
: ,.
..-
.. ~
.. 0
.u
-
.....
. 0 0
c.-
.
...
00
..,_..c
If
-
o
8
c
..
'"
u
..
o
~
".
o 0
- ..
r-
.o.
o
.....
_
...-
_u
o
. '-
o ... 0
u _ ~
u .. _
" . ..
c:': .,
.. _ ..
... ':lI '="
';)<=
or
=
or
..
..
1
"'= ~..,
..=~
..
.!:.::
,
~ ~
. .
o.c
.
.
--
.-
.....
o 0
~ .
..
.
. N
N_
:~
-.
.....
· iI
50
...
.. -
. . ..
.!1~
_ . .
o. ..
8..
u "
o ..
.. Do
"'...
~
..
.
-,
..
~
.
_
o
, ~
Do.
o ..
- ..
. "
.. 0
.-
..
. ..
.. ..
_
i;l~
'" .
U E
..
o
.
.
_
..
..
Do
.!i
"
o
C
o
..
-
..
...
_
.>
,
~
>
..
.::
.
, ~
. ..
.. -
o .
..."
ti
--
>
. c 0
u _ 0
- -
. . _
, _ -
- 0 .
-....
0- u
--"
l~g
. .. "
--
..of
N__
- "
.....
-==J
...0
o " .
....I
o "
. . 0
....-
~
..
,
~
..
~
_
~
..
1
...
..
o
.
.
..
..
..
Do
o!i
_
o
.
.
_
..
c-
d
"
o
o
.
..
-
..
~
...
:1
'"
'"
..
..
g
.s;
, =
. .
0-
.c::
0:,,';
. -
. .
" E
o ..
--
c.
u .
_ -
. c
....c ..
. ,,-
." !Jo.
i .. .,
_.c-
1"'=
..c"
o .
.._ Do
..-..
: ~ c:
.5:.
.-
0_
o .
....lJ=
-
"
..
~
..
_
u
..
_
~
..
.
_
,
.
..
~
..,
"
~
::
5
..
-
,
~
o!
I
o
""
I
.
_
,
..
or
-
~
,"
~
::
=
..
.
_
5
"
o
~
.!
..
-.;
..
..
..
.
-
.,
..
o
.
"
-
.;
~
..
B
.
Resolution Number
1\
.1.1
...
e
~
e
;, ~
5
,;
.
o.
.
" -
e ~
~..
. ~
U:
..
.
.. .
a
a .
, ..
. .
..~
. .
. .
'r C
"
~\
"'
"
~
~I
",
.'
.'
:.:
"
~I
:=1
~I
-<
-I
~
~I
,H
- - :.I,
'; i ~I
. -\
~ ;. I'
Z = 1I
,!C
...'
;::; ~I
~ ; :1
= ;':,
- -
.. ... .=1
~ :1
~ ~~:
~
...
,
-,
...
..
..,
.~
..~
1~
... 0
.
..
a~
Il.
.. ~ a
~ - 0
-: .....
......
'>> :I ::I
"......
~
~
..
;
o ~
- ..
..
e
1:
.
~
..
.
"
..
a
a
~
~l
- -
- =
- ..
~
=....
'0
,
. ....
,,..
:..
=-"":1
~ :
>
~
::
-
;-;
,,,"
"
....
,
,
,
!
.
:: ~
~ 0
.. "
i~
,.
> .
= " .
_0"
. 0
- .
= c ...
~ .
. .c
e... ..
. .
I . 0
. @ .
. -
. -
-..
a.
-::
~
;;
~
1
..
~
.
t
· Ii
i! II
C ~
o
. ..
~\ : i
a
,,-
. .
~ . .
_ a a
;. = ~
II ';I""
" e .
o a.
,
. a ~
"'-0
...
a
-
1.
a
c
..
.
..
1
...
..
a
.
..
~
.
a.
6
..
a
i
..
..
2
i
..
a
a
e
.
..
.
.J
1
>
.
::
~\
",
~
~
~
~ a
..
,"0
0-
- .
, .
".:::
1"
. .
-
e.o
. .
_ .
.. .
o
-.
.
~
. .
e.
. .
c.::::1 .
.,.0
.. ::I 0
N'O.
~..
"
- . 0
..., ~
CI..
. .
o a
.. 0
...
~
o
,
~l
-
..
'l!
.
.!!.
~
.
.,
e
.
.
""
..;
~ . ... '.. :.
...
a
-
o
I
..
.
...
1
...
..
a
I
.
~
.
a.
.
"
..
a
i
.
~
.
...
.
"
"
a
-
e
e
.
-
...
~
.
""
.;
~
::
'-
~
o
..
.-
e .
~ -
, .
e
'>> :.
.'0
0-
.
., .
e ~
. .
__v
o ..
~ ~
!~,.
._e
o-~
~...
t:;
. . 0
. ~
.....~
5 I ~
:",,:
N ..
.. .
. ~ >
. .
Cle.
. .
.
. 0 ..
N....
:
-
I.
8
..
.
'"
...
o
...
..
e
I
..
~
.
...
o!
.
e
.
e
.
..
.
...
o!
..
e
-
e
e
.
-
..
..
::
U
.
>
>
,
. >
"" '"; ~
~
u ,.....
.: J =
.. -:....
- ~
....
1.;~
....
.
-::;~=VI
... ~ " 101
e' e
" ~ 1.
I ....
000
.......-
~ ..
~ ..... ,.
c: 'II ... "
'II...-~
0-
:1:"1
_u......
_o_w
~ ~ e
.. a. u .
CI -...
>-~
'l,I': ..
.... ::I "
....:1> 0."
~
..
.
...
...
~
w
e
I
.
..
..
a.
o!
..
:.i~
00'0
Ej
..
e
I
..
~
..
...
o!
..
e
-
e
e
~
~
..
:;
.;
>
,
..
'0
~
..
o
.
e
.
.
e
-
e .
- .
. .
w-
e .
~d
I a
~
... .
a 0
. 9
.-
w-
. .
.-
.. ..
yo
.
w
..8.
..
.5
t
w
e
I
w
~
l
.!
w
. .
'" ..
"'0
" 0
U'"
.
e
I
..
~
.
a.
o!
"
e
-
a
e
.
-
..
..
.
:;
.
~
::
"
.5
.
o
H
w
.-
I.
o
. .
ow
- .
-
. ..
.g-
.. ..
. ...
......
i ·
_0
> w
.! a
o
w_
II::
.. ~
-..
"..
.
a
. 0
"'.
If
-
o
'"
a
Q
..
is
U
..
w
a
~
c3
~
..
,
...
..
~
.
"
a
.
~
"
. ,
C ~
,~.a
u=-
..J ..
.. ..
. a
..;iJ ~
""
"'~ ..
.
a . a.
o co
- -.
... c = c
u I) ,. ::I
.J::.!J::
,
~ ~
c .
=;:
..
-..
. .
:a........
... c
~ .1
e - ..
=.... "'"
Q oJ -:
... e ..
. ~ Jl
. .-
,,-
"
.. e -
c: ~ e
w
a
.
I
w
..
..
a.
o!
...
c
.
o
ii
-
..
>
w
.
U
~
.'
>
.
.
;;
>
w
-
-
:D
-
.
..
.
.
.l!
.. .
:-:
. "
. a
. =
.:3
~
. ..
. a
-
. .
N ~
::!
-
w ~
0-
.
0"
.
..
. ..
i;
-0
wU
e
~ .
-"
e
.
. ~
_c
,"
. 0
- -
, .
. 0
U
o
0'0
.
. a.
w...
. .
.. .
--
::t
. .
..a
--
..
1':
.. .
'0
.-
i ·
..-
~ 0
..
~
N W
..
, .
-
.-
.
.1'
.
I
.'
.e
I
..
.
I'
.
Resolution Number
rn
REVIEW AND UPIl'\ll
In order to msintain the Housing Element as a viable, WOTkin~
,document it must be reviewed and updated periodically. Period1~ reVle~
will allow the City to evaluate the pro~Tes~ made toward the attainMent
of established housing goals. lt will also provide the City with an
opportunity to adjust pro~rams to respond to changing need- and/or
fiscal conditions within the community. The Housing Action Plan, ~hlCh
is contained in Section 5.2, has been structured so as to facilitate
performance evaluation.
The Housing Element will be updated as need dictates. but no
less than once every five years. Be~inning with the 1980 Census, the
federal census ~ill be conducted every five years. Therefore, the con-
munity prof11e and housing problem analysis contained in th1S element
will be updated at hve year intervals corresponding with the release
of federal census data.
ln addition to this periodic updating, the City will annuall)
review and evaluate the effectiveness of its housing programs in accon-
plishing established ~als and policies. This review ~ill he conducted
in conjunction ~ith tHe preparation of the City's annual CoMmunity De-
velopment Block Grant application and specifically the Housing Assi~tan~e
Plan component thereof. Opportun1ties for local residents to parl1-
Clpate 1n the per10dic revie~ and updalin~ of the Housin~ Element
will continue to be provided throu..h advertued meet1ngs and/or heaTings
before the HOUS1n& and Community De\eloprnent Act (HCDAl Cllizen Par-
tic1pation Commlttee and the Clt}' Council.
-41-
Resolution Number
V
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING e
The California Government Code requires internal consistency
among the various elements of a general plan. Section 65300.5 of the
Government Code states that the general plan and the parts and elements
thereof shall comprise an integrated and internally consistent and com-
patible statement of policies. This updated and revised Housing Element
is consistent with the other adopted elements of the Seal Beach General
Plan. In particular, the land use allocations contained in the Land Use
Element are supportive of the policies and actions set forth herein and
will provide adequate sites to accommodate projected new housing con-
struction. Additionally, the Circulation Element addresses the pro-
vision of streets and highways to adequately serve all existing and
future residential development in the City.
The Housing Element has also recently taken on added compre-
hensive planning importance with the passage of SB 626. This legisla-
tion, which was enacted in 1981, stipulates that no local coastal
program shall be required to include housing policies and pro~rams.
Instead, this legislation reaffirms the role of the housing element in
addressing housing needs on a citywide basis which may include, at local
discretion, the expansion of affordable housing opportunities in the
local coastal zone. Consistent with this intent of State law the gen-
eral <as distinguished from site specific) actions described in this
Element, including the provision of incentives for the construction of
affordable housing, will be uniformly implemented on a Citywide basis.
I-
,
-
-
I
el
-42-
.... ,w." t
. . ... ..
. . . . ,-,
Resolution Number
FEDERAL PROGRAMS
.
~
Section 8 Existing
..
Under this program the federal government assists lower income hous~-
holds so that they expend no more than 25 percent of their monthly
income on decent, sanitary housing. Rental assistance payments that
constitute the difference between 25 percent of the household's monthly
income and the fair market rent for the unit under contract are made
monthly to the property owner by local housing agencies. In order to be
eligible for such assistance a household's annual income must not exceed
80 percent of the median family income for the Standard ~Ietropolitan
Statistical Area (StlSA) in which it resides. In order for a rental unit
to qualify it must rent within fair market rents (FHR's) established by
the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation
Under this program housing assistance payment (HAP) contracts can be
executed between local governments and participating property owners for
units that have undergone moderate rehabilitation. Contracts can be
executed for a five-year term, renewable for up to 15 years. Landlord~
are required to make a minimum investment of $2,000 per unit for upgrad-
ing in structures containing 12 or fewer units, or $1,000 per unit in
structures having more than 12 units. Contract rents may be approved up
to 120 percent of the fair market rents for th~ Section 8 Existing
Program.
I
The Moderate Rehabilitation program, like other Section B prograns, has
no predesigned financing mechanism for owners. The local government
would be expected to market the program to private lenders, as well as
to owners. However, a city could provide financing through its Com-
munity Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, if it so desired. In this
manner a city could "piggy-back" long-term Section B Moderate Rehabili-
tation HAP contracts with CDBG-funded rehabilitation loans.
.
Section 8 New Construction
This program is designed to develop new affordable housing for the
elderly, the handicapped or lower income families. Sponsors of assisted
housing under this program may be individuals, profit or nonprofit
organizations or public housing agencies. Proposals are submitted
directly to HUD by interested sponsors. When s proposal is accepted by
HUD a rental assistance contract is executed between HUD and the owner
under which MUD agrees to make payments equivalent to the difference
between 25 percent of an eligible household's monthly income and the
fair market rent for the unit under contract. Such payments can be made
for a specified term of up to 20 years, or up to 40 years for projects
assisted by a loan or loan guarantee from a state or local agency. The
Section 8 New Cnnstruction program does not provide construction financ-
ing, but the rental assistance contract can be pledged aa aecurity for
financing.
,I
e:
-43-
. ....." ,
. ,. ~ -
. .
.
I
I.
I
.
Resolution Number
Section 202
This program provides for long-term direct loans from HUD to prival~
nonprofit aponaors to finance rental or cooperative housing fnrilities
for elderly and handicapped personq. Households of one or more per&ons,
the head of which ia at least 62 years old or is handicapped, are
eligible tenants. In tandem with construction financing, tenants may
receive rental aasistance from a national set-aside of Section 8 funds.
Section 106(b) - Seed Money Loans
Section 106(b) provides for interest-free seed money loans to nonproflt
aponsors to cover 80 percent of the preconstruct ion expenses in plannin~
low and moderate-income housing projects. At present the loans are
being made only in connection with Section 202 loans for hDusin~ fDr the
elderly and handicapped. The seed money is repaid from the permanent
mortgage loan proceeds.
Eligible expenses include organization costs, legal, consultant, arrhi-
tectural, preliminary site engineering, application, and constructl0n
loan fees and site options.
Community Development Block Grant
Through the Co~~unity Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, HUD pro-
vides grants and loans to local governments for funding a wide range of
community development activities. ~o local match is required.
A city can help to facilitate the construction of low and moderate
income housing through the use of its Community Development BIDck Grant.
For example, CDBG funds can be used to upgrade public works such aq
sewers needed to serve new residential construction. These funds cDuld
also be used for: 1) acquisltion and disposition of real prop~rty, 2)
public facilities and improvements, 3) slum clearance activities, 4)
public services, 5) interim assistance, 6) payment of non-federal share
of a grant-in-aid program, 7) relocation, 8) removal of architertural
barriers to the physically handicapped, and 9) privately-owned utilities.
CDBG assistance may be used for the following rehabilitation and pre-
servation activities: 1) rehabilitation of public residential struc-
tures, 2) modernization of public housing, 3) rehabilitation of private
properties, 4) temporary relocation assistance, 5) code enforcement, and
6) historic preservation.
Except in limited circumstances, Community Development Block Grants ma)
not be used for new construction of housing.
-44-
Resolution Number
STAlE PROGRAMS
SB 99 - Redevelopment Construction Loans
Ch~pter 8 of the California Community Redevelopment Law, Red~velopment
Construction Loans, was promulgated by passa~e of SB 99 in 197> and
authorizes redevelopment ageneies to issue revenue bonds to finance
residential construction in redevelopment project areas and elsewhere
via long-term, low-interest loans through qualified mortgage lenders.
. Alternatively, the agency may purchase insured loans made by qualified
lenders. The proeeeds from the issuance of bonds are used to finance or
purchase mortgages and write down the interest rates thereon. The
mortgage payments made by property owners, in turn, retire the bonds.
Loans made under SB 99 must be insured
.
SB 418 (t~rks), an urgency statute of 1980. expanded the types of pro-
jects to which SB 99 revenue bond financing can be applied. If a rede-
velopment agency determines that a commercial neighborhood service
center is an integral part of a residential neighborhood, they they can
issue bonds to procure financing for commercial and mixed use (commer-
cial/residential) construction. The rehabilitation of structures. i.e.,
repairs and improvements to a substandard residence in order to meet
local codes, is also allowed. Income level limitations on future occu-
pants and other specific criteria must be met.
I
California Housin~ Financina Aaency (CHFA) - Direct Lending
-.
Under this program CHFA provides mortgage loans to profit-oriented
developers, nonprof1t sponsors and loeal housing agencies for the con-
struetion or rehabilitation of housing developments containing five or .
more units. The agency lends directly to the sponsor through its loan
underwriting process. A project usually receives a loan from the agency
accompanied by a commitment of rental assistance for all or a portion of
the units. The rental assistance allocations are made by HUD under the
Section 8 program but are administered by CHFA. The agency sells long-
term tax exempt bonds to provide up to 40-year mortgage financing.
California Housina Finance Al1;ency - lIome Ownership and Home lmprovement
Loan (HOHI) Program
Under this program local governments designate areas that are in need of
reabilitation and request CHFA financing for the purchase and/or reha-
bilitation of housing by low and moderate income persons therein. Local
lenders, in turn, purchase commitments from CHFA to originate and
service loans in the designated areas. Loans are made by private I'
lenders to owner occupants and, in some circumstances, to nonoccupant
investors. These below market rate loans are insured and may be used
for: 1) rehabilitation only, 2) purchase only, 3) purchase with reha-
bilitation, and 4) refinancing with rehabilitation. In order to qualify
for a loan under this program a household's annual income must not
exeeed 120 percent of the eounty median income.
el
-4>-
-... r.'
-. - . ~ .., .,
. .
.
I
I.
I
'.
Resolution Number
AS 333 - Rental Housing Construct '."n Incentive Fund
A Rental Housing Construction Inc. ntive Fund was established via the
passage of AS 333 in October, 1979. Under this program the Stnte De-
partment of Housing and Community Development may make cash grants to
CHFA or local governments to pay for all or a portion of the developm~nt
costs associated with the construction of rental housing. In exchange
for such assistance a regulatory agreement would be executed with the
property owner restricting a portion of the units for occupancy by lower
income persons. The agreement would be in effect for 40 years.
As defined in the State Health and Safety Code, "development costs"
means the aggregate of all costs incurred in connection with the con-
struction of a rental housing development including 1) the cost of land
acquisition, whether by purchase or lease; 2) the cost of construction;
3) the cost of associated architectural, legal and accounting fees; and
4) the cost of related off-site improvements such as sewers, utilities
and streets. These costs may be defrayed as they are incurred or an
annuity trust fund may be established to reduce monthly debt service
payments over the life of the regulatory agreement. In this respect the
program could operate similarly to the Federal Section B program. In
order to be eligible for assistance a rental housing development mURt
contain at least five units and not less than 30 percent of the units
shall be reserved for lower income households.
Homeownership Assistance
The Homeownership Assistance Program, authorized by Health and Safety
Code Section 50775 et seq., is a $7.5 million demonstration program
under which the Department of Housing and Community Development may
provide up to 49 percent of the purchase price of a dwelling unit to an
eligible household, provided that HCD's assistance is not used to reduce
downpayment costs below 3 percent. The balance of financing for pur-
chase comes from private or other public lending institutions.
Eligible households include:
1. Renters who otherwise would be displaced by condominium or coopera-
tive conversion.
2. Hobile home park residents who wish to purchase their mobile home
park space if their park is to be converted to a condominium or
cooperative.
3.
Households who wish to purchase mobile homes that will be placed on
permanent foundations.
4. Cooperatives or nonprofit corporations who wish to develop or
purchase mobile home parks.
Households may only receive assistance once under this program and
.ssistance may not be granted to those households who have owned real
property in the last three years. Only households whose incomes are no
areater than the area median are eliaible. However, in the case of a
-46-
Resolution Number
nonprofit corporation or cooperati:e corporation, assistance may also go
to those of moderate income. Not less than 50 percent of the funds
appropriated to this program are to be used to assist households with
incomes of 80 percent of the median or below.
Upon sale of a dwellin~ unit or share in a stock cooperative purchased
with assistance under the Homeowner Assistance Program, the State is to
share in any profit realized from sale in an amount equivalent to its
initial investment in the property. Adjustments to this profit amount
are made for any improvements made by the household. Funds received
from repayment are deposited into a revolving Homeownership Assistance
Fund, and are used to help additional households.
Deferred Payment Rehabilitation Loans
Established by the passage of SB 966 (Marks), Chapter BB4 of 197B, and
authorized in Health and Safety Code Section 50660, the Deferred-Payment
Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program was designed to assist cities and
counties with the rehabilitation of housing for low and moderate income
households. With the passage of AS 333 (Hughes), Chapter 1043 of 1979,
and SB 229 (Roberti), Chapter 1042 of 1979 (in September. 1979), the
program was expanded to include local public entities other th~n cities
and counties and nonprofit corporations that operate housing rehabili-
tation programs with federal rehabilitation funds. Loans are made to
public entities and nonprofit corporations that will, in turn, lend the
funds to eligible property o~~ers in the form of 3 percent interest,
deferred-pa)~ent loans.
In order for a local public entity or nonprofit corporation to be eli-
gible for loan funds from this program, it must have an operating reha-
bilitation program. Acceptable rehabilitation programs are outlined in
the program regulations.
Generally, eligible borrowers are low or moderate-income owner-occupants
of one to four-unit properties and nonowner-occupants of rental properties.
Loans are made to borrowers at 3 percent interest and must be repaid at
the end of five years or upon the sale or transfer of the property,
whichever comes first. Loans may be extended for additional five-year
periods if owner-occupants are unable to repay the loans or, in the case
of rental properties, if low-income tenants continue to benefit. There
is no five-year repayment requirement on loans made to elderly owner-
occupants. Local public entities/nonprofits repay the State at 3 per-
cent interest upon collection from property owners.
.,.
-47-
- - ... .,. ,
- . - 1 - .
.
I
el
I
e'
.
I
.
I
!.
Resolution Number
LOCAL PROGRAlIS
Harks-Foran Residential Rehabilit.Jtion Act
The tJarks-Foran Act authorizes cities, counties, housing authorities and
redevelopment agencies to issue tax-exempt revenue bonds to finance
residential rehabilitation. Under t~rks-Foran, loans are made in areas
designated for residential rehabilitation through a formal public hear-
ing process. The community must make a commitment to enforce rehabili-
tation standards on 95 percent of the structures in the rehabilitation
area and to provide the public improvements necessary to support
rehabilitation.
Marks-Foran rehabilitation loans can be made for terms much longer than
conventional loans (up to 40 years), bringing the cost within the reach
of moderate-incODe residents. The loans may be made in any amount up to
a maximum of $35,000 per unit. or 95 percent of the anticipated after
rehabilitation value of the property.
.~rks-Foran loans are made through qualified lenders and must be in-
sured. Loans and insurance may be by private mortgage insurers RS well
as FHA, the California Housing Finance Agency, or a local agency using
Community Development Block Grant funds.
S3 170 (Marks), 1979. expanded the activities eligible for financing
u der the Marks-Foran Residential Rehabilitation Act to include the
construction of new infill housing for low and moderate-income persons
where it has been included in the adopted rehabilitation program plan,
and acquisition of real property for rehabilitation, or property which
has recently been rehabilitated. No ~re than 35 percent of the aggre-
gate principal amount of all loans made in a rehabilitation area can be
used for these purposes.
AB 1151 - Density Bonuses and Other Incentives
This legislation, which was enacted 1n October, 1979, added Chapter 4.3
to the California Government Code requiring local governments to offer
either density bonuses or other incentives to developers, who agree to
set aside 25 percent of the total units in a housing development for low
and moderate income persons. If a density bonus is granted, it must be
at least 25 percent above the present allowable zoning. In lieu of a
density bonus, a local government must provide at least two other incen-
tives, limited only by the creativity of local officials. Incentives
suggested in the legislation include 1) exemption from park dedication
requirements and the payment of fees in lieu thereof; 2) City construc-
tion of public improvements appurtenant to the proposed housing develop-
ment; 3) local write-down of land costs; and 4) exemption from any
provision of local ordinances which may cause an indirect increase in
the cost of the units to be developed.
If the local government offers a direct financial contribution to a
housing development through subsidization of infrastructure, land, or
construction costs, steps must be taken to assure the availability of
the low and moderate income units for 30 years.
-48-
Resolution Number '
Redevelopment - Tsx Increment Fin",'cinll
Csl Hornia CoDDllunity Redevelopment Lsw sl10ws redevelopment all' ,Icies to
utilize the incremental incresses in tsx revenues lIeneTsted h, , pro'cct
t[l pay for project-relsted activit ies. Under this techniqul', "no,,'n a.
tax increment finsncing, a redevelopment agency may borrow mon,v or sell
bonds to finance improv_ents in a redevelopment project area .ond Tepay
these debts utilizin& the incrementsl increases in tax revenUCh gen-
ented by new or iIllprlJlfed developllll!nt occurring after the adopt ion rf
the redevelopment plan for the area. State law generally alll""s th..
local community to determine the manner 1n vbicb these tax increments
will be used. However, the law 5pec~fically requires that 20 p~rcent of
the tax increments generated by redevelopment projects initiated after
Jsnuary 1, 1977. be devoted to the provision of housing for lo~ and
moderate income persons. Such h[lusing can be provided w~thin the rede-
velopment project area Dr elsewhere in the city.
-49-
,.. ,
.1
I
-'
I
--
t'
I
,t
I
,I
RESOLUTION NO. ",::;3 if::;
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SEAL BEACH ADOPTING A HOUSING ELEMENT TO THE
GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH.
The City Council of the City of Seal Beach does hereby resolve:
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65302(c) requires a Housing
Element of all city general plans; and
WHEREAS, the City of Seal Beach does not presently have a Housing Element
to the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach adopted a set
of goals for inclusion within a Housing Element on November 6; 1974; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach invited citizen
participation in a study session to consider a draft Housing Element on
November 20, 1974; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach held a public
hearing as required by law on the Housing Element on December 4, 1974; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach adopted said
Housing Element by Resolution No. 877 and recommended that the City Council
adopt said Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, on December 23, 1974, the City Council held a public hearing on
the proposed Housing Element to solicit additional public comment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Seal Beach
does hereby adopt the Housing Element to the General Plan attached hereto and
made a part hereof.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the CjFY of Seal Beach
at a meeting thereof held on the c5?3A.A. day of ~"7>P~"~ ,1974, by
the fo 11 owi ng vote:' "
AYES: councilmen~a,.oJ__A.'" ,~.I'--?'(;'l~:~ ~N)
NOES, ""'OCi1~~
ABSENT: Councilmen
p ) ~ r/ fJC/ !
J} ,rt/o-?-. ./ . . .It,...Q..,
Mayor . I
ATTEST:
L.'( 1
"( "1 A- >-. 'LIP' tA
Ci ty Cl'erk I L.