HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Res 2386 1974-12-23
Resolu,tion..Number __
.0
. .
.
,
, "
.
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. ~;r;r~
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, Ca1ffornia 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
III the proposed Housing Element to solicit additional public comment,
L _, 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 City of Seal Beach
a t a meet i ng thereof he 1 d on the O?~~ day of q:;JL:.,,,",,, 'A L ,1974, by
the following vote:' 0
AYES: c~unCi1men~k/iAl;i1u../~~~~:~~N)
NOES: counCilmen~
ABSENT: councilmen~
~~.~~
Resolution Number
T ABl.E OF CCH-1TE!iTS
,Paqe
I
Section One: Introduction
1
Purpose Statement
Conceptual Frame~rork
Section Two: Housing Goals
2
Section Three: Housing Obstacles
.~
~
Econo~;cally Related Obstacles
Social Conditions
Subsidized Hous'ing
Zoning and Building Violations
Section Four: Survey of Existing Social and Housing
Conditions
6
1
Population Analysis
Housing Analysis
Section Five: SUll1TIary of Social and Ilousing Conditions 27
Section Six: Implementation 28
Section Seven: Conclusion
1
. '
I
1
1
tlumber
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
___:-r".........._ -- ---
Resolution Number
LIST Or: TABLES
Estimated Population Gro~/th in the City of Seal Beach
Age and Sex Distribution for Seal Beach, 1970
Number of Persons in Unit by Owner and Rental
Occupied Unit, City of Seal Beach. 1970
Population in Seal Beach Enrolled in School by
Age. 1970
Population 25 Years and Over by Years of School
Completed, City of Seal Beach, 1970
Employment Characteristics, City of Seal Beach, 1970
Occupation of Those Employed. City of Seal Beach, 1970
Distribution of Income amonq Families and Unrelated
Individuals, City of Seal Beach, 1970
Type of Income by Family and Unrelated Individuals,
City of Seal Beach, 1970
Count of r:ami1ies bel0\1 Poverty Level by Type of
Income, Ci ty of Seal Beach, 1970
COr:1parison of Gross Rents Affordable and Existing
Rental Units, City of Seal Beach, 1970
Paqc
6
8
10
11
12
12
13
14
15
16
17
Ilousing Units by District, City of Seal Beach, 1970 lU
Housing Stock by Type and Number of Units in Structure,
City of Seal Beach. 1970 19
Total Ilousing Units by Tenure, City of Seal [leach, 1970 14
1.01 or Hore Persons per Room, City of Seal Beach, 1970 20
Persons per Room by Tenure, City of Seal Beach. 1970 20
Year Structure Built, by Tenure, City of Seal Beach, 1970 21
Year Bead of Household Moved into Unit, by Tenure for
Seal Beach, 1970
Average ilumber of Rooms per Unit by Planning District,
City of Seal Beach
Units lacking some or all of Plumbing Facilities,
City of Seal Beach, 1970
~ ...-;:.
21
22
22
I
I
I
Numbel'
21
22
23
24
1
2
Resolution Number
.'
LIST OF fM5LES (Cont' d)
Pa~e
Units 1ackin!] Kitchen Facilities, City of Seal
Beach, 1970
Mean Values/Rents by Planning District, City of
Seal Beach, 1970
Housing U.nits by Value for Seal !leach, 1970
Housing Rents for City of Seal Beach, 1970
23
24
25
26
FIGURES
Seal Beach Population Gr0\1th, 1967-1985
Seal Beach Age-Sex ?yramid
7
9
, .
,-~
Resolution Number
SECTIOIl OflE
IIITRODUCTIOII
I p..!!"pose Stater.Jen~
The Housing Element is to be regarded as a prel iminary report as it serves
a threefold purpose:
1. development of housing related goals.
2. collection and analysis of data; and
3. preliminary discussion of impl~~entation policies.
The implementation section of this report provides the general direction
that the City intends to follOl~: The second phase of the Housing Element, to
be published at a later date, "/ill treat the implem~"tation section in a much
more detailed manner.
1
1
Conceptual Framework
Specifically, the Housing Element provides a comprehensive analysis of
housing and related conditions within the City and. based upon these, recolllmcndations
are made that are in line with the goals of this Ele<nent. Regardinu the hou~ing
supply, analysis includes the various types and conditions of all units, as well
as their financial composition. These are considered from the perspective of
whether they present existing or potential deficiencies. Fortunately, the vast
majority of the hou.sing stock presents no problems in this regard.
.lust as the analysis of dwelling units in the City is essential, so too 1s
the investigation of social characteristics that constitute the population. At
issue in this respect are not only the basic social statistics that define a
population, but I~hat they mean from the perspective of housing, Therefore, of
major interest in this Element are income and f'inancial characteristics of the
population, and ,mat factors are of influence on them.
Based upon the analysis of the housing and social characteristics of the
City, reco~endations are made for the alleviation of any present or anticipated
deficiencies. Those presented in this initial Housing Element are not intended
to be inflexible or exhaustive. They represent a foundation on ~Ihich thE! City
can build a comprehensive program. Further reconnendations lrill be made at a
later date. In this respect, this initial Housing Element will be nost effective
as it provides a frame of reference for all existing housing and related activities
as well as future decisions in this area.
Further. this Element represents one of the many rational steps the City
of Seal Beach must take in its efforts to remain a city with quality housing.
1
. .. - "\.".. - .
-....,.
,
I
I
1
Resolution Number -
SEcnOfI THO
----
HOUS HIG GO{ILS
1. To endeavor to make.adequate provision for the housing needs of all
economic seflments of the cOl!1r.1unity.
2. To assure that all housing in the City meets the minimum requirements
for a standard dl~ellin9 unit as set forth in the applicable provisions of the
City's building and housjng codes.
3. To promote too conservation and rehabil itation of older neighborhoods,
4. To improve residential environments through the provision of adequate
public facilities and services including streets and parks as ~/ell as water,
sewer, and drainage systems.
5. To aid all citizens of the City, I~hcrever possible, in securing decent,
safe, and adequate housing in neighborhoods which are characterized by good
environments.
6. To provide an environment which is safe, healthful, and aesthetically
pleasing and which tends to strengthen individual and family life.
7, To preserve and enhance viable residential neighborhoods and stl'engthen
neighborhood identity,
8. To provide the impetus for orderly development of adequate, safe, and
sanitary accor,nnodatiol1s for all citizens of the City.
9. To provide assistance to those in need of securing or maintaining
adequate housing.
2
___-.--- .u__
. ,
'.'
1
I
I
Resolution Number
.'
gfrIOtl~.f
HOUSING OBSTACLES
At tirles there are certain factors that <lct tC'l impede. the implementation .
of measures designed to meet .the needs of the hO'Jsing market, The City of Seal
Beach experiences obstacles that are similar ir. lIature to other cities, and
especially with other beach cities. follO\~in:J is a discussion of the major
obstacles that deter th~ implementation of the City's housing goals,
Economically Related Obstacles
Supply Limitations, The desirabil ity of Seal lJeach as a place to 1 ive
will continue to result in a heavy demand on the hOllsing supply, At present
the r.itv is virtuall'l de'/eloped, haviny only about 120 acres of residentially
zOlled land vacant. This factor alone is an imfJetus to inflateJ <lasts.
Further, the City ~Ias made modifications regarding residential gl'ollth
policies. In order to retain the inteqrit.v of existinr, residential
- neighbOl'hoods, and add to the character they display, in some instar.ces lOll
to medium densities ~lOuld be necessary, Of particular concern is the
Coastal District and it has been detennined that the high densities once
proposed are not in the best interests of the cOlTU11unity: This feeling is
apparellt in the Land Use Element.
Land l.alues. Due to the high degree of demand for housill~l units
l'/ithin the City, mentioned above, land values may be expected t<:> increase
at an inflated rate, Typical of most beach cor.1l11Unities, this phenor.lenon
is especially evident in the Coastal District of the City. In r.1any cases
it is not economically feasible to retain a single-family structul'e,
Because of this factor, the private rehabilitation of housing units in the
Coastal District usually results in the development of mu1tiple-fal'lily
structures.
Building Costs. Building costs reflect not only the effects of a
presently inflational'y econor.lY in the I~ay of increased labor costs, hut
also higher inflation rates regarding building materials. Building material
costs in the housing industry hale increased approximately 30 per cent in
the preceding three years. Increased building costs, of course, have a
di!'ect and dramatic effect on the ability of far.lilies of most econor.lic
segments to settle in the area, These increased costs may be considered a
barrier to the settlement of 10\"1 and modei'ate i,lcome families in the City,
Financial 1m acts. High intel'est rates have been a key factor influer.cing
the recent dec..;ne ln ousing production and sales, as l'/ell as the increased
cost of homebuilding. The rate, volume anrJ type of nel-/ construction and
resa 1 es depends heavily upon the ava i I abil ity of mortgag'i credi t and preva il i ng
interest rates. This is emphasized by the fact that for each percentage
point rise in the interest rate on a thirty-year mortgage, there is a
tl'/e1ve per cent rise in rlOnthly payments on prindpal and interest,
3
.- "'
, ,-
1
1
I
Resolution Number
Property Tal<es. In its py'eseni; Stdtus the property tax greb.tly
increases hous i n!) costs both fOI" I'enters and homeowners. Those affected
most severely are households with limited and -101'/ incomes. Additionally,
the property tax may di scoUl'age home il1lprove;nent since many homeowners feel
that improvements'to existing structures will result in u higher tax bill
which, in fact, penalizes th2m for upgrdding their property. The property
tax of the Ci ty of Seal Beach is presently at 51. 35 pel' $100 assessed
valuation. Other taxes account for ahout $9.00 per $100 assessed valuation.
~Jhil e the property tax has gene dOl"/') s 1 i ght1 y over the years, the assessed
val uation of land in the City has increased by about 30 per cent over the
last five years.
Social Conditio~s
The purchase and maintenance of housing units can not always be
performed due to the limited funds available to some families,
The City is fortunate that the vast amount of its housing stock is
relatively nel'l. H0I1ever, there appears to be a dE'ficiency of units available
to those in low income brackets. This obstacle is of particular concern to
the City since about 40 pel' cent of its population is compY'ised of persons
aged 65 years and older; and these persons account for about 70 per cent
of all those with incomes below poverty level.
Subsidized Housing
As the costs of land, housing development and maintenance continue to
increase, the likelihood of providing homes through conventional means
becomes increasingly less feasible, lndications point to the inability of
the private sector to construct conventional tract homes even in the moderate
price range within the near future. Despite the technological innovatior,s
that have occurred in the past and will continue, homem'mership by the -lower
and nloderate economic segments of the City's residents will be most difficult.
Illustrating this point, the City's median valued home is $36,OaO.
Based upon the above, if the City is to effectively implement the
policies of this Element, it should seek assistance from other agencies in
securing funds. A source available to the City is the Orange County Housing
Authority which invites cities in the County to participate in its progrUlns.
Zoning and Building Violations
Infractions of these codes lead to the emergence of substandard units
and blighted neighborhoods, Faulty plumbing, wiring, and construction often
lead to prematurely deteriorated housing units. Density and other zoning
violations may be blamed for neighborhood conditions that are held to be
either unsafe or unhealthy. While the newer constructed districts of the
City have been constructed according to City standards, the older areas, such
4
.- ....._ 4"___ _ _
. . . ~ 'I
I
I
1
Resolution Number
. ,
as the Coastal District, show examples of development that occurred in the
1920s '1nd 1930s when standards were less stringent than today's. In sone
instances building has occurred \'/ithollt City approva.l or building pemits,
5
_.......- ......---..- .~ ... - - --~-~... . -.. ...-
,~
I
Resolution Number
S[CT JOII FOU:{
--- .
SURVEY OF EXISTIfIG SOCIAL AND 1I0USI!IG CONDiTlOIIS
The intent of this section of the E1C!r.lent is to investigate in df,tailed
fashion the various characteristics of the residents of the City as \'/ell as its
hous i ng stock. Based upon l.hi s ana ly~ is certa i 11 conditions ~,i11 emerge that
merit furtlll~r consideration in the form of pro(JraCls designed to el ir.linate these
conditions and their effects.
Population Analysis
Population Size, Rate of GrOl.,th, and Projection. As shown in Table
One beloll the offlcial population estir.1ate of the Clty \1aS 27,401 persons as
of 1972, [lased upon the preceding seven yea"$ it has increased hyabout
7,500 persons since 1965 with an average annui\l rate of growth of 6,5 per
cent, As indicated in the Land Use Element future grOl./th rates ~/i11 be
considerably lower with a c.umulative gr0\1th rate bet~leen 1974 and 1985
of 9.77 per cent. Population at this future date is expected to be
30,080 persons. (Refer to Figure One)
Tab1 e One: Estimated Population GrOl.,th i'!. the City 2f. ~ ~b.
Incrementa 1 Annual Rate %
Date Total Increase Increase
---
Jan. 1 , 1967 19,800
1 ,lan, 1, 1968 20,880 1,080 5.45
Jan, 1, 1969 22,210 1,330 6.37
Jan. 1, 1970 24,210 2,000 9.00
Jan, 1, 1971 25,150 940 3.813
1972 27,401 2,251 8.21
1985 30,080 2,679 9.77 (cumulative)
I
Net Increase 1967 - 1972 = 7601
Ave. Annual Rate of Increase 1967-1972 = 6.58 pei' cent
Source:
Phase One: Inventories and Basic Studies: Seal Beach
Land Use Element, City of Seal Beach Planning Department
6
'\ \ ~ t
Resolution Number
..
1 '.
l
~. _0 '" '" N W W
U1 Q) ~ .". .... 0 W
. . . . . . .
. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
i
I
I ...
I ~
I \0
; -C"l
i ....
I
I ~
\0
'"
co
~
\0
'"
\0
1 ~
1..':>
.... " ..,
CJ ..... 0
--l -a
-< c:
r-
0 :.>
"T1 --l
~ .....
"" Vl. 0
.... ~ ::0:: "T1
~ "- .....
r- :;-, '"
:;0 c::
eo S? 7J
~ ..,
~ =1
", n ~
....
N . 3! m
~
~ <:>
o.c c...
C"l ",
~ .... n
lD I --l
.... ~ ~.
.." \0 ;;a
co
c..,
~
\0
...,
L""\
~
'D
....
1 co
~
'"
co
c
--,
\0
OJ
N
~
1.."
("~
'"
Resolution Number
I
Population COI1'~osit'ion. In terns of age nearly b/o-fifths 'of th~
City's populat-jon is 65 years old or' ov[!r, according to the 1970 census.
l\bout 6,000 (If the 9,200 pe;'sons 65 and over were females as indicated'in
Table TI'IO below, The same table $h01'l5 that approximately one-fifth of the
City's population is bet~leen 25 and 44 yedrs of age. The cOl.lposition of
the City's population also reveals that more than 55 per cent is fcr'lale. .
These statistics are graphically portrayed in the Sea"1 Beach A!Je-Sex Pyramid
(Figul"e T~IO) I"/hich indicates that females are highly predominant in the
65 to 74 age interval.
Tab 1 e n.ro
AGE MID SEX DISTRIIJUTlor~ FOR SEAL BEACIl - 1970
fule Hale Per Cent Fer.m 1 e Per Cent Total Per Cent.
Under 5 619 5,8 577 4.2 1196 4.9
5 to 9 720 6.7 679 4.9 1399 5.7
10 to 14 667 6.2 643 4.7 1310 5,4
15 to 19 544. 5.1 546 4.0 1090 4.5
20 to 24 741 6.9 715 5.2 1456 6.0
25 to 34 1371 12.8 1279 9.3 2650 10.8
35 to 44 1091 10.2 1001 7.3 2092 8,6
45 to 54 966 9.0 952 6,9 1918 7.8
55 to 64 780 7.3 1291 9.4 2071 U.5
65 to 74 1603 15.0 3336 24.3 4939 20.2
75 and over 1592 14.9 2728 19.8 4320 17,]
Total 10694 " 100.0 13747 100.0 24441 100.0
1 (43.8) (56.2 )
(Percentages rounded)
Source: Phase One: Inventories and Basic Studies: Seal Beach Land Use
Element
1
8
._------... ...---- - ...~ - -... -
- ~,
,
,,- ',.'
~-'I
1-
I
i
1
I
r
I
. ~CJ)
(.)111
mJ;-o
O)r
l"IH-:rJ
>< ii1
ru f)
....r!_-..
.'\'~ .!..
~-'J
!.~
;"2
~ .
-- ,
o
,.
~ '.:
--
"::2
~
'=-
f-
m.
Resolution Number
c ~ l\) \,..) {~. \,.,., 0' "
'( "-" \.J\ \.n \.)\ \.H \..n \.r. v,
i1-
l) I I I I I I _I
'1
1.11 't ~ 'i- f; ~G ~ ~ '8 .
t-t--!-t--t--t--I-:-"'-!-\
I ,.- -....- 7
I - ,....
, ~ -
I 3 ~
I.!-' I-' IV
t "" ..... w
co --oJ
I -..J :\.l I_oJ
I OJ
1 1.11
1
1
I
.."hi- ....
6
....
o
o
"
1-'
'0
t...
c'
....~
...
<:>
....
'0
-~\
o
'0)
tl)
/1' ,':<.
':,........- --..............,----...-.......-..
,I ,,/ ,.~
-" (.J \
-:....1
.~
.:...J
-,"
'11
\..,
I,
;':."1
.....,
:0
l'~
111
",
-'
....:;
.
.
I
I
11-' I I
I ~ I:.'i I
'-' f.!:.J':"~- '1"
o .
:.) r~
.....) ,~:.
"":'.1 J-~
_.J
I-J
.
..... i'J
... (~
\".J )-..1
'"
N
I
I
I
J
I
I
I
I.. ~-.
I
I
I
I
'"
I~,
r\.i
. ::"'1
".J
~
=
:z:.
r
HI
......1"-..
-'-'-1-'-
~......v
"i1
rn
--,
:...:~
~
r""
111
""
I . ~jJ,
L"'l--" ;---:"'--1'__00':----1 --.-.j oo_._.!___ ~ ---)
c..: J _I :,) \ .; ~ . \J~ (:-,. .... J
:' \'.1'1 \':1 'J\ '-it \.'\ \ II \h \"'1'
1.1.
.,
"
~J\
I
. . ~. , \., (, \" c.r~ ") r:
I' I. I. " I. 1- '';
, ,-
._ ___ - or_~
,
!
i
I
I
."
.....-
'"
c:
;;c
IT!
-i
a
I
I
1
Resolution Number
Racinl C!i:'!l'osition. Of tile 24.4,11 persons reported in the 'l!i7U' Cellsus,
24,128 lIere c-Iassified (IS "~lIr!te" extraction. This ilf.10unt includ,ed 391
persons of Spanish-American descent. 13 persons ~Iel'e classified as "1JIack,"
In addition, 28 ~lCre reporCiod as Indian and 232 persons ~'/ere classified as
"other" (includes Japanese, Chinese, Filipino, Halva.1ian, and Korean).
. Population Distribution. \"Jithin the City approxir.1ately 36 per cont
of the population is sltuatcd in Leisure World. The planning districts
of College Park Cast and West (including Rossmoor Center) ilccount for
approximately 25 per cer,t of the total. l~hi1e the Surfside Colony and
.',Iarina Hill" districts account for t"ro per cent .,I\(! 14 per cent,
respectively. Finally, about 23 per cent of the population resides in
the Coastal District. (percentages rotmded)
Household Size. Ccnlparcd to nrost cities in Orange County. Seal Deach
has II relatively 10~1 numbel' of persons per household. Approximately 78
per cent of the total household population are living in housing units
with tllO persons or less. The r.lean fllluber of persons pel' household is
about 2.1 for the City. Thc vast majority of these sr.1illler size households
are I'esiding in owncr-occupied un'1ts. These figures are sho~m in Table
Three below. /lOTE: Figures are relatively low due to the influence of
Leisure World residents.
Jab1e Three.
llUl,lDER OF PERSOIIS III UI/IT BY OIiNER AI/O REI/TER OCCUPIED UNITS
CITY OF SEAL BEACH, 1970
110. Person/Unit Total % Owner ! Renter %
-
1 4235 36.8 3405 36.3 830 39.0
2 4689 40.7 3907 41.6 782 ::16.8
3 901 ,7.8 626 6.7 275 12.9
4 921 8.0 765 8.2 156 7.3
5 512 4.4 464 4.9 48 2.3
6 180 1.6 157 1.7 23 1.1
7 67 .6 55 .6 12 .6
8 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0
9 ---.i .0 ---.i .0 ---2. .0
- - -
Total 11.509 9,383 2,126
Mean 110. Persons/Household = 2.1 2.1 2.0
(percentages rounded)
Source: Census Service Facility, SAT IV-19. for Seal Bear.h, County of Orange
10
-
,
Resolution Number
1
Education Characteristics. Table Four incl iCiltes that nearly 20 per
cent iiT"fhe City's population is enrolled in school. Nearly 60 per cent
of the school age population is bet~/een 5 and 15 years old. Almost 27 per
cent of persons enrolled in school are of college age,
Of the City's population 25 years of age and over (Table Five) about .
85 per cent have at least some high school education, and about 40 per cent
have college education. Of those with college educations a greater
percentage are male (46 per c~nt of all ~ales) than females (33 per cent),
The median school years completed for persons 25 and over was 12.6 years,
Table Four
POPULATION Ul SEAL BEACH
ENROLLED III SCHOOL BY AGE - 1970
Age Number Cumulative Per Cent Cumulative
3-4 189 3.8
5-6 430 619 8.6 12.4
7-13 1961 2580 39.2 51.6
14-15 598 3178 12.0 63.6
16-17 487 3665 9.7 73~3
18-1 9 219 3884 4.4 77 .7
I 20-21 214 4098 4.3 82.0
22-24 450 4548 9.0 91.0
25-34 453 SOOl' 9.1 100.1
(percentages rounded) . .
Source: Census Service Facil ity: SAT-IV-1St for Seal Beach, County of OrangE
I
11
._.__~_._ _4_ ... . .__
'.-
;".
I
Resoluti~n N~er
Table Five
POPlJLATIor: 25 YEARS AND OVER BY YEARS OF SCHOOL C0I1PLETEll
CITY OF SEAL BEACH, 1970
Erp1o~ment Characteristics. As indicated in Table Six below, of the persons
over tle age of lG years ln the City, approximately 40 per cent, or 7,900
persons, .are considered to:be in the labor force as of the 1S70 census.
About 64 per cent of those in the labor force are males. Unemployed persons
was estimated at 4.6 per cent of the total I~rk force, of which about 60
per cent were males.
Table Seven (next page) 1 ists the type of ernp_loyment held by those
employed. About 30 per cent of the labor force were professionals, 16 per
cent clerical, and about 13.per cent served in a managerial capacity.
Table Six
EMPLOYI.1ENT CHARACTERISTICS - CITY OF SEAL BEACH - 1970
Total Population
16 and over In labor force % Unefllployed %
r~ale 8546 5014 63.68 211 58.93
Female 11672 2859 36.31 147 41.06
-- -
Total 20218 7873 100.0 353 100,0
Per cent of Population over 16 in Labor Force: 38.94
Per cent of Labor Force Un~p1oyed: 4.6
(percentages rounded)
I
Source:
1970 Census of Population: General Social and Econor:lic Characteristics:
Calif, V. 1, P. 6; Table 104: Employment Characteristics for Places
of 10,OUO - 50,000
12
"
.....__._ _.._ ._0- __.,
. '
Resolution Number
-fab1e Seven
OCCUPATION OF THOSE Et-1PLOYED
CITY OF SEAL BEACH, 1970
I Occupation !lumber Percentage
Professional, Technical 2266 30.46
Managers, Administrators 1048 14,08
Sales lJorkers 754 10,13
Clerical, Kindred 1291 17,13
Craftsmen, Foremen, Kindred 573 7,70
Operatives 542 7,28
Laborers, Farm Managers 116 1.55
Service Horkers 759 10,20
Other 90 1.20
Tota 1 -7439 100,00
(percentages rounded)
1
1
Source: 1970 Census of Population, General Social t. Economic Characteristics,
California, V-l, P-6; Table 105: Employment Characteristics for
places of 10,000 to 50,000
13
. .
Resolution Number
I
Incor.1e Charilcteristics. Distribution, According to- Table Ei9ht <lnt!
the 1970 censu~, trle medlan incololc cframilies in Seal Beach \-/as $10,197.
The median incor.le fer unrelated individuals \1aS $3,761 per year, The
median income for far.1il ies 1'lilS below the figure for the County of Orange,
which vias $12,245. ,'s shol"ln below, over 40 pCl' cent of the fa;~ilies in
the City had incomes of over $12,000; however, over 60 per cent of the
unrelated individuals had incor.les of less than $5,000 per year. This 10\-1
rate is in part due to the influx of retired persons to the City,
Table Eight
DISTRIBUTION OF HICOlIE 1\110flG FAflILIES MlO UNHELATED
IIJDIV IDUflLS III SE/IL [lEACH - 1970
Unrelated
Fami 1y Individuals
Income Total Per Cent Totals Per Cent Total Per Cent
Undel' $1,000 65 1.0 480 9.0 545 4.5
1,000 - 1,999 90 1.3 753 14.2 848 7,0
2,000 - 2,999 217 3.2 843 . 15.8 1060 8,7
3,000 - 3,999 440 6.5 775 14.5 1215 10.0
4,000 - 4,999 541 8.0 555 10.4 1096 9,0
5,000 - 5,999 590 8.7 407 7.6 997 8,2
6,000 - 6,999 4_G8 6,9 275 5.1 743 6,1
7,()00 - 7,999 314 4.6 314 5.9 628 5.2
8,000 - 8,999 353 5,2 231 4.3 584 4.8
9,000 - 9,999 262 3,9 133 2.5 395 3.3
10,000 -11,999 551 8.1 186 3.5 737 6.1
1 12,000 -14;999 817 12.0 185 3,5 1002 8,3
15,OOC -24,999 1659 24,4 150 2.8 18G!) 14.9
25,000 -49,999 379 5,6 41 .8 420 3,5
50,000 and over 43 ,6 10 .2 53 _ .4
Totals 6789 100.0 5343 100.0 12132.- 100,0
Median Income 10197 3761
Mean Income 11197 5109
(percentages rounded)
Source: Phase One: Inventories & Basic Studies: 'Seal Beach Land Use Element
I
14
"
I
1
I
Resolution Number
"
me of Income, In the City, as of 1970, therc were about 13,000
family mcmbers and 9.000 unrelat~d individuals recelvlng inCOf.leS, Table
Nine indicates the source of ir.cor.,e for these I,ersons, In both the far.lily
and unrelated individuals categorie~, the most notm'/orthy type of incor.lf!
~/as derived through Social Security, it being 2!l per cent and 34 per ccnt
in the respective categories, again, the influcnce of Leisure Horld and other retired
rcsidents being dramatic'.
TilLle !line
TYPE OF INCOt-'![ OY FAt.m Y Aim UIUlELATEO INDIVIDUALS
CITY OF SEAL lJEACiI, 1970
Type of Income
Wage/Salary
Persons in Far.lily
Unrelated Individuals
"
"
"
"
4070
31.7
2001
22.2
Non-Farm, Self
E:~p 1 oyed 681 5,3 155 1.7
Farm. Self Employed 21 ,2 5 .1
Sociill Security 3215 25.0 3055 -33,9
Public Assistance 160 1.2 149 1.7
A'll Other 4704 36,6 3658 40.5
Total 12851 100.0 9023 100,0
(percentages rou nded )
Source: Census Service Facil ity; SAT-IV-10, for Seal !leach, County of Orange
15
..-"'-- -. -.-. -
",
, '
......,
1
1
1
-I
Resolution Number
Fal:lil ies and Un/'elated lndividua 1 s be1o~1 Poverty Level, The 1970
censuS'COntainsdata on the nui:1lJ(!r-iifli(.U?;chiiTtis and unrelated individuc:ls
who have incomes l~p.lo~1 the poverty level. Tile level itself is a l'/eighted
. avm'age that takes into aCCO:l:1t a nur.lher of factors. The poverty level
established for unrelate9 individuals \I~$ 51,8'10 per year; for 1:11 families
it \'/aS S3,410 per year. tIn tllz City, in 19"/0 there ~/el'e 229 families (575
. faml1y mel:1bers) and 1,093 unrelated inuividuals \'iho had incer:1es of less
thCin these poverty levels, There Has a total, therefore of over 1 650
persons (6.1.:0 pel' cent of population) con~il:ered to be 1 lving in po~erty,
The mean family income of all those \~ith incones less than poverty
level in the City was $1,613 per year, Unrelated individuals' mean inco~e
was $1,011 per year.
As shown in Table Ten, below, of those families I~ith incomes of less
than poverty level, Social Security accounted for the r.1ajority of cases,
suggesti n9 that 11ithin the City there are a number of retired farllil ies on
.fixed incomes that a:-e considerably beloll the poverty level, This "/Ollld
appear to be the case, si nce about 70 per cent of those famil ics be1o~'
the poy!!rty level have no children, It should be noted that in looking
at the table below, the poverty level for famil ies with tl'lO persons and a
head of household over 65 years of age is 52,215 per year,
Table Ten
COUln OF FAlHUES BELOH POVERTY LEVEL BY TYPE OF INCOI'lE
CITY OF SEAL BEACH. 1970
Incor.1e
NUl'1ber
Hean Income
Percentage
Earnings
Social Security
80
139
36.5
63.5
1,238
1,431
Public Assistance *
229
100,0
* Data possibly suppressed
+Soul'ce: Census Service Facil i ty: SAT -IV-12, for Seal Beach, County of Orange
16
.
I
1
I
Resolution Number
Compilri son of flents Ilffor'dab 1 e ,.<l!)d Ex; sti ~I] Ranta 1 Units. 111 ustra ted
in Table Eleven, belo~/, there were 2,126 occupled rental units at the tir,lC
of the 1970 census, Based 011 the invc~tigations of various agencies, it is
generally assumed that no more than 25 pel' cen t of one I s income shou1 d be
spent on housing, I'lith this in mind, th2re I'/el'e about 550 households paying
morc rent than the 25 per cent suggested.
As may be expected, unit deficiencies exist in the lOI'/er incor.1e bracl':ets.
It l'/ould appear that those l'/ith lotler incomEs, as delineated belo~/, trou1d be
eligible for rental .subsidy, so that such a disportionate amount of their
income I~uld be spent on shelter,
Table Eleven
C0I1PARISOli OF GROSS AFFORDABLE WITS AND EXISTING REUTAL UNITS
C ITV OF SEAL BEACII, 1970
Total Under $4(J>1" $40 - 59" $60 - 791'
Renter Households 2126 407 123 118
Renta 1 Units 2126 -0- 16 77
-
Renta 1 Deficiency - 407 - 107 - 41
Tota 1 Dafi ci ency 555
* Ar.lOunts represent 25% of income directed to rent.
Statistical discrepancy bet\-Jeen rental units available by price range
on Table (;leven and Table Twentv-Four. Coth tables used 1970 Census
information as primary source. .
Source: California Statewide lIousing Elemtmt, Phase II, Table Appendix V-B
17
" .
... .~,
I
1
I
....-....-... -
Resolution Number
. ,
Iiousing AIIJ lysis
Ill/mllcl' of Units, Oistri!J~i()n, Tvpe. According to thc 1970 census,
and as shown below inlable i~'larv(!, therc arc about 12,000 housing units
in the City, including occupied and vacant units. Also shol';n belo\~ is
the housing stock by ea~h of thl! six districts of the City,
Table Twelve
-,
1i0USING urms BY DISTRICT, CITY OF SEAL BEACH, 1970
District
~'!.LUnits
191
1227
520
5958
943
Perccntage
Surfsidc
1.61
10.38
4,40
50,41
7.98
25,12
---.
College Park East *
College Park West **
Lei sure War 1 d
l'tari na Hi 11
Coastal District
2969
Total
11808 ***
100.00
*
Not fully developed at tir.m of census
**
Includes Rossmoor Center
***
Statistical discrepancy; actual count of units = 11,334
(percentages rounded)
Source: 1970 Census of Housing and Population, Table Two: Characteristics
of Housing Units by lllocks'
As indicated in Table Thirteen (next page) over one-half of the housing
stock in the City is located in structures containing 10 or more units.
Almost one-third of the City's stock is in units containing one structure
only, and only about 10 pel' cent of the dl./elling units are in structures
beb/een bID and nine units. About 150 units ~Iere designated as mobile homes,
The predominant type of housing unit in Leisure Horld complex is one
in a structure of more than tcn units
18
,...,-0
, '
, .
Resolution Number
Tah1e Thirtee!1
-..- -
IlOUSING STOCK BY TYPE ArID NUfUJEH OF LHHTS IN STP.UCTURE
CITY OF SEAL [JErICH, 1970
I ~ !lumber Percen tage
1 * 3889 32.9
2 - 4 656 5.5
.
5 - 9 713 6,0
10 + 6080 51.4
Mobile Homes 147 1.3
Not Reported 349 2.9
Total 11834 100.0
* College Park East not fully developed at tir.le of census
(percentages rounded)
Source: Phase One: Inventories and Basic Studies: Seal Beach Land Use Element
I
Olmer and Renter Occupancy. llear1y four-fifths of the housing units
in the Clty ~Jere in owner occupancy at the time of the 1970 census. Of the
remaining dwellings, 18 per cent were in renter occupancy, See Table Fourteen
belol~.
Table Fourteen
TOTAL HOUSING UNITS BY TENURE, CITY OF SEAL BEACH, 1970
Tenure
I'lumber
PercentagE!.
O~mer Occupied
Renter Occupied
Total Occupied
(percentages rounded)
Source: Phase One: Inventories and Basic Studies: Se~.1 Ileach Land Use Element
9386
81.44
..l!!:~
100,00
2138
11,524
Vacancy. Of the 11,824 d~le11ing units in the City, 310 ~Iere vacant as
of the 1970 census. The units 11ere dispersed throughout the City.
I
,
19
. - ,
, '
,
Resolution Number
, .
. .
I
OvercrOl':ding, As indicated in Table Fifteen, there \.,ere at lcnst 124
housing units in the City with 1.01 or more persons per roor.l. Census
processi ng errors occurt'ed with th<:.> informa ti on collected from Surfsi de
Colony and College Park l'lest, Thc Coastal Oistr"ict experienced the highest
degl"ee of overcro~,ding with 'lbout GO per cent of the total. Tablc Sixteen
illustrates overcrol~ded 'condition!; by temll'e. NOTE: "Roor.l" includes
rooms other than kitchen, bathr"cOP1, patios, etc.
Tallie Fifteen
1,01 UR r~ORE PERSOllS PER ROOfI, CITY OF SEAL BEACH, 1970
District Number Percentage
-
Surfs ide (*) (*)
College Park East 11 8,87
College Park \Jest 6 (*) 4,83 (*)
Leisure Uorld 11 0,87
Mari nd Iii 11 26 20,96
Coastal Distl"ict 74 59.67
Total 124 100,OU
1 (percentage5 rounded)
(*) Denotes census processing error
Source: 1970 Census of ~Iousing and Population: Table 1: Characteristics
of Housing Units for Places of 2500 Inhahitants or !Iorc; Table 2:
Characteristics of HOllsing Units and Population hy Blocks
Table Sixteen
PERSONS PEP. ROOM BY TENURE
CITY OF SEAL BEACIl, 1970
Tenure Total 5 01" Less .51 - .75 ,76 - 1.00
--
OI'mer 9386 6329 2393 596
Renter 2138 1217 559 306
Total 11524 - 7546 2952 902
% of Total lOG. 00 65.48 25.61 7.82
(percentages rounded)
1. 01 - 1. 50
50
38
88
0.76
1 ,51 01" t.io!1!
18
18
36
0,31
I
Source: 1970 Census of Housing: Housing Characteristics for State, Cities,
and Counties: California, V, 1, P. 6, Table 19: Utilization
Characteristics for places of 10,000 - 50,000
.2U
-.-.. - '. .....
- .
I
1
I
Resolution Number
- ,
,
. .
Structural Characteristic.s. Year Structure Built. The City's housing
stockl"S-reliltively neVI, tilUs--Cxpla ining the 10\'1 number of deteriorated
units (discussed later). Referring to Table Seventeen, it r.1aY be seen
that close to 80 per clmt of the total <1I.;e]]ing units VI!!!"e built after
1960, and ollly 3.5 per cent vlere huilt l;efore 1940. In this table, vacancy
;'ias also COT.1puted by year structure \"IdS built. .
T~,b1e Seven~
YEAR SmUCTlJflE IlUILT, BY TEIIURE
CITY OF SEI'.L UEACIl, 19iO
All O~mer Henter
Year Total " Vacant " Occupied " Occupied .. Occupied 51
" " " "
69-70 637 5.4 26 8.4 611 5.3 508 5,4 103 4.8
65-68 1910 16.2 52 16.0 18GO 16.2 1645 17.5 215 10.1
60-6~, 6762 57.2 144 46,4 6613 57.5 6099 65.0 519 24,4
50-59 1404 11,9 46 14.9 1358 11.8 740 7.9 610 29,1
40-49 698 5,9 33 10.6 665 5.8 216 2.3 449 21.1
39/Ear, 409. 2:i. 12 3,9 397 3.4 175 1,9 222 10,4
* *
Total '11820 100.9 310 100.0 11509 '1(lO.O 9383 100,0 2126 100.0
(percentages rounded)
* Statistical discrepancy
Source: Census Service Facility; S^T-H-22, for Seal Beach, County of Orange
Phase One: Inventories and Basic Studies: Secl1 Ileach Land Use
Elel~ent
Year 1.loved into Unit. The buik of the City's household population
moved into their unit betl'/een 1960 and 1964, This, of course, corl'esponds
to the predor.1inant period in which housing units were constructed (about
57 per cent of dl-Ielling units durin9 1960-64). However, these statistics
also ir.lp1y that the residents \"Iho r.lOved into the City at that time continue
to live in the salae unit, Refer to Table Eighteen
1
I
Resolution Number
Source: Phase One: Inventor"it~s ilnd Basic S tudi es: Seal neach Li.r.d Use
El er.1ent
Average Humber of Rooms. As illustrated in Table Ilineteen be1o;'I, the
City has an average of 3.7 rOOMS par d\~el1illf! unit, This fi~llre is
relatively loti due to the large "'~r.tbtlr of vnits within tho LC~SUI'C l-Ior1d
complex, uhich has emphasized the developliien1; of "efficiency" units,
I!k.!.e.J"1 i nettlen,
AVEP/IGE NUNUEfI. OF ROONS PER UIlIT, IlY PLAN/IlliG DISTRICT
CITY OF SEAL BEACH, 1970
Citywide Coll. Park Coil. Park
Average Sllrfside East I'Jest
Leisure I-Iarina
World Hill
---
Coastal
Di stl'ict
3.7 (*) 7.31 6.70 (*)
3.3 6.1
4.6
(*) Census processing error
Statistical discrepancy: Citywide average number of rooms from Census = 3.7;
Cit~tide average number of rocmlS computed by planning districts ~ 4.41.
Source: 1970 Census of Housing and Population: T-l-Characteristics for
Places of 2500 Inhabitants or 'lore; T-2 Chnracteristics uf
Housing Units and Population by 11locks
Standard and Sub-standard Housing Units. As mentioned earlier the City
is generally free from Itidesprea:l blighted conditions due to the relatively
late period of construction of C:welling units. Deterioration of housing units,
therefore, is not a major factor; there are, however, areas of concern that
are described in terms of kitchE:n plumbing facilities in the 1970 census, as
well as exterior deterioration determined through a staff survey.
Incidents of housing unit!: "lith some or all of the plumbing facilities
missing llere reported in the census. as illustrated in Table Twenty. About
6 per cent of the total units were owner-occupied, and as indicated, about 55
per cent of the units with some or all of plumbing facilities missing ~ere
located in Leisure World. The Coastal District accounted for almut 40 per cent,
There is a discrepancy bet"leen census information and staff reports ',Ihich
indicate that while it is possible for the Coastal District to contain the
belotl number of units. there arc no known instances of units lacking some or
all of the plumbing facilities in Leisure lIorld and College Park East and West.
Table Tl1enty
UllITS LACKIf/G SO~IE OR ALL OF PLUl-lBHlG FACILITIES
CITY OF SEAL llEAClI, 1970
CQll. Park Coll. Park Leisllre l1arina Coastal
Total Surfside East \lest I'Jorld Hill Oistrist.
-- --
116 (*) 1 3 (*) 6!i 1 43
I (*) Denotes census processing error
22
_. _._ ...~___.4 .
I
1
I
Resolution Number
Source: 1970 cenSU$ of f1ousir,q "lid Population: Table One: Chilracteristic.s
of Housin9 Units and Pcp:;latiun for Places of 2,500 Inhabitants or
rlore; Table Two: Char'ilcteristics of Housing Units and Population
by Blocks. Seal Beach Plannin[l Or>partment.
Of the 116 units lacki (,g sone! or a 11 p~ umbi ng facil i ti es, about 55 per
cent lack hot watei' only, while! the remainil'!} 45 per cent lacked other
plumbing facilities.
(Kitchen Facilities), As indicatl'd in Table Twenty-One, a total uf
43 d~/elling units do not have cOPlpletc kitchen facilities. One other unit
shares kitchen faci 1 ities with another household.
lable Twenty-One
UllITS LACKWG KITCHEN FACI LITIES, CITY OF SEAL BEACH, 1970
Type
110 complete facility
Used by another household
COI,lP 1 ete facil it i es
lIur.lber
PErcentage
43
1
.36
11785
...19., ,6J
100.00
11829
(percentage rounded)
Source: 1970 Census of Housing: Housing Characteristics for State, Cities
and Counties: California, V-l, P-6, Table 18; Occupancy, Plumbing,
and Structural Characteristics for Places of 10,000 - 50,000
(Oeteriorated Housing). There ~/ere only very 1 imited instances of
deteriorated housing units in the City (fror.l the exterior). About 15 parcels
were considered to be in such a condition and of these, all but one (in
Surfside Colony) I~ere in the Coastal District.
There may be some confusion as to the relatively 101'/ number of deteriorated
units; hOl'/ever, it r.lust be remembered that old units in need of paint or
other facade treatment do not constitute deteriorated units, but are viewed
as standard units in need of relatively minor and limited repair,
(Vacant Parcels). Excluding the Nava1-.Weapons Station, there are
approximately 120 acres available for housing construction as of 1972,
Of this total, about 15 per cent of the acreage is located in the Coastal
District, The remaining acreage is located in and behind the r1arina Hill
District (60 per cent) and the area surrounding the Rossmoor Center.
23
I
1
I
Resolution Number
. ,
Financial Charactcristic~. Value/RE!ut Distribution, Jlccording to the
1970 census figures, 1:10I"e than 90 pet" cent of thc OI"/ner-occupied housing
I.tas valued at $25,000 or more, HO;levCl', t~bles were tabulated for only
2,886 of the 9,3!l6 OI'mer-occupicd units, Thel"cfore, the value pattern
indicated in thl! census may not tnlly reflect the actual pattern in the
City,
The median valued owner-occl.picd housing unit in 1970 I.tas $34,700.
Relative to rent levels in the City, about 36 per cent of the dl/e11ing
units in the City 11ere rented for 5150 a month or more. lIo~;ever, about
one-fifth of the rental housing stock in Seal Beach was renting for $100
or less at the time of the 1970 census,
The median rent per month was $13fl.
For value/rent distribution, refer to Tables Twenty-Three and TI-;enty-
Four, Listed belol'l are the r.lean values and I'cnts offour of the six districts of
the City, Again, due to census processing errors. so,"e areas were not
tabulated.
Table TI.jentv-TI.to
__u
l.lEAN VAUlES/HElnS, r,Y PLAIHHlIG DISTRICT
CITY OF SE^L OEACH, 1970
Coll. Park
East
Co 11. Pa rf.: Lei sure
\-lest. (r.cosmoor) Horld
t1arina
II ill
Coastal
District
r.lean Value
39,690
36,840
237
111,800
120
33,900
227
33,500
I'lean Rent
1/11
Source: 1970 Census of Housing and Population: Table Two: Characteristics
of lIousing Units by Blocks
24
r""1
"
.... ~...
I
1
1
Resolution Number
", I . .
Tab 1 !:_:.r\~,"n tl:.Thr~2.
HOLJSIrIG UIUTS BY Vf,LUE FUR SEll!. BEACII, 1970
Vallie Intervals Numbp.r Per Cent Cur.1Uliltiv(!
--
Less than $5,000 6 .,
$5,000 to 9,999 14
$10,000 to 14,000 22
$15,000 to 19,999 64 2.2 3,7
$20,000 to 24,999 145 5.0 (l.7
$25,000 to 34,999 1232 42.7 51.4
$35,000 to 49,999 1245 43.1 94.5
$50,000 and over 158 5.5 100.0
Total Units
Value Tabulated 2886
Total O\.mers
Occupied Units 9386
(percentages rou~ded)
SOllrce: Phase One: Inventories and l:asic Studies: Seal Beach Land Use Ele:ncnt
,
25
.____.._ - .0- .__.... ___.
"1
I
I
I
Tab'le T'.lenty-f our
Resolution Number
HOUSING RENTS FOP. CITY OF SEAL BEACH, 1970
Rent Intervals Number reI' Cent
--
Less than $40 14 .7
$40 - 59 26 1.2
$Gll - 79 145 6.9
S80 - 99 246 11.8
$100 - 119 356 17.0
. '
$120 - 149 552 26.4
$150 - 199 458 21.9
$200 - 299 269 12.9
$300 plus 24 1.1
Total Units
Rent Tabulated 2090
Total Renter
Occupied Units 2138
(Percentages rounded)
. ,
Cur.lU1ativc
1.9
8.8
20.6
37.6
64.0
85.9
98,8
99.9
Source: Phase One: Inventories and Basic: Seal Beach Land Use Element
26
" ".,:'
I
1
I
Resolution Number
, .
, ,
:ieCT!O!i FIVe
-----
SUI.lI-1AIlV OF EXISTlIlG SOCIAL AND 1I0USIlIG COl:OIT!l)lj~,
The City of Seal Beach is in a fortunate pcsition in terr.1S of its housing
stock, Hith the exception of two areas, it IWS principally developed after
1960, suggesting that the stock has not sllffer~d the problems of 11idespread
deterioration. Of the two other areilS, the Coastal District and Surfside,
redevelopment has occurred at a rapid rate, thrreby precluding the detel'ioration
of housing units. Therp. are a fel'l detcriorilting units, but these are scattered
throughout the Coastal District and not thvught to constitute a major obstacle
to the City's goal of providing quality housing.
Regarding the indicators of substandard housing units delineated by the
1970 census (overcrowding, plumbing and kitchen facilities), again the City \1aS
fortunate.'due to the limited occurrence of these factors, About one per cent
of the d\Jelling units of the l:ity suffered from SOlile form of overcro~/ding,
'while about the sar.le amount suffered from rlumbing deficiencies, This amount,
hOlJever, is in doubt, based on er:1pirica1 evidence contrary to the 1970 cellSUS
information. Hhile there \';ere a feN units lacking complete kitchen facilities,
the total \1aS so sr.lall as to not constitute a housing problem.
Hhi1e the Leisure IJor1d complex has a substantial effect on the social
char'acteristics of the City, the housin!J stock also feels the effects of it,
Fifty per cent of the City's housing stock is in structures containing ten or
more units, and the size of each unit i~ considerably less than surrounding
areas, at 3.7 rooms per unit, due to the proliferation of "efficiency" units in
the Leisure Uorld complex.
Relative to social characteristics, about 40 per cent of the City's
population is 65 years or over, and the average number of persons per unit is
2.1, il comparatively low figure. Of those earning incomes, almost 30 per cent
do so throug h Soci a 1 Securi ty.
Of particular concern in this Element, hO~/ever, is the number of far:lilies
and individuals who cannot afford to pay for their shelter. It was mentioned
in the text that there were about 1,650 persons below the poverty level and,
of these, 63 per cent received their income through Social Security; ir:1p1ying
a lal'ge number of famil ies on fixed incomes. Correlated with the above
figures, about 550 households (comprised of either families or unrelated
individuals) are paying rents in excess of 25 per cent of their gross inCOlqe,
an amount that is considered to be:the Maximum acceptable per cent of inco;,]e,
The above t',.1O groups of statistics illustrate the Inost pressing deficiency
in the City's housing stock, Jf the City is to accomplish the goal of providing
housing for all economic segments of the City that is within their means, it
will be necessary to assist a small proportion of the City's pClpulation. Obviously
such a program is beyond the City's means; hO~/ever, there are county and federal
pro !Trams which the City !:lay participate in and these will be discussed in the
i!:lp1ementation section.
27
.--.--.--....--..-- . ~_..
"
'.
I
1
1
Resolution Number
.
.
S[CTiOli S~X
If.1PLH1EIlT^T fOIl
The miljor purpose of this E1cr.lcnt is to estahl ish methods to assist those
in need of securing I)r maintainin!} adequate hOl!sing. This situation must be
viewed froPl both the short-rangc c:nd lOllg-tcrr.1 perspectives. It I/ould be
proposed that the short-term objectives be considered at this tine and that an
additional plan be developed to help resolve the long-terr:! housing nceds of the
community,
The housing stock I"/ithin the City is in !:iood condition in alr.lOst all cases.
The tl'lO r.lajor factors \/hich account for this are (1) most of the housing
stod is relatively new, and (2) in the older portions of the City, private
redevelopment has occurred due to economic pl'essure. In the Coastal District
there are a fel~ subst"ndard dl'/ellings wilich, if it is feasible. should be
rehabilitated. -
As of 1970 there "/ere approximately 1,650 persons 11ith very 1 il:Jited i ncor.lC
\"/ho were considered t.o he belol" the poverty level. In conjunction \lith the
above, ahout 550 households paid rents in excess of 25 per cent of their incoPle.
Since a need fer extensive nCl1 10\'/ cost housing is not evident is Seal Beach,
construction of low cost units is not viewed as a practical nor desirable means
of imrroving the existing state of housing,
Hhilc understanding the social implications of the housing needs in the City
of Seal Beach, it is important to recognize that both the short and long ran!Je
perspectives of ar.leliorating the;i] can be accomr1ished through the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974. Long term perspectives may be rrovided through
Title I provisions of this Act. The implications of the Act on Seal [leach are
rresently being investigated.
Title I of that ^ct basically inp1ies that if a city can demonstrate a
housing related need and propose realistic means to rectify those undesired
conditions, it is thereby entitled to Federal money. Title I reroits the
improver.lent of both private and public lands, l1S well as the provision of
certain social services if deemed necessary or desirable.
The aoplication procedure of the Act establ ishes a frar.le of reference for
areas meriting concentrated efforts, as it consists of four major parts. The
first, being the SUll1l'lary Plan, identifies the housing needs of the city in very
general terms, and provides a comprehensive strategy for the completion of short
and long terr,] objectives. The Sur'~'mry Plan enlists various activities to be
undertaken to meet the needs, toge'cher ~/ith estimates of costs i nvo 1 ved as \./e 11
as the general locations of expected activity. The third and most important
part of the application pl'ocedure is the Housing Assistance Plan, ,'/hich surve~ls
conditions of hou~ing stocl:, quantifies the needs of those Hith 101'/ incomes,
specifics 11 yearly ar.lOunt of units and persons to be assisted, and provides
a more specific location of proposed housing. This section is considered the
essential phase of the assistance program, The fourth section consists of
various certifications of intent and simnar items that insure the City's
interest. in the program as well as;active publ ic participation.
28
--.or- ... ... .. -- -- -
,
1
1
1
Resolution Number
~ r ,.
,
", '.' , ,a; .
.
. .'
Through t.his procedure the City ~ppear; to be in a very gooi! posHion.to
receive substilntial amounts of nltilley over the lIext few yean, SCl that it may
continue to aid its residents in an even more ml:aningful way.
While Title I is designed to meet the longer term objectives of the City's
housing progrilln, the shorter term ouj<'lctives could be attained through
participation in a rental subsidy p!"o!1r';;.m. There has been a demonstl'ated need'
in this area, as illustrated '1n the t~xt. It is presently beyond the City's
means to independently sponsor such 1\ program; however, through a joint powers
agreement l'Iith the Orange County HOllsing Auth::lI'ity this objective could be Plet.
. TI1c Authority acts as a .processing house" in that it provides assistance
on a countYI'Iide basis' to those far.1ilies unable to acquire housing units within
their means. Simply put, the Authority leases existing privately OIined dl'/elling
units and rents them to eligible families at an affordable rate.
The Authority is active in a number of housing programs in addition to
rental subsidies; hOt/ever, given the nature of the housing problem as it exists
in Seal Beach a I'ental subsidy program 1",Quld appear to suffice.
Such a program is a most important consideration fl'Om the perspective of
the City's pro!Jlel'l of a rather large population of elderly residents \.110 are
either be10H the poverty level or paying more than they Clln afford on housing
expenses. Presently. more detailed data on these conditions is being collected
and will appf:i1l' in the! second pllilse of this Element.
Both the Title I of the Houliing and Comunity Development Act and tile
rental subsidy program will be looked at very closely in tire near future.
Throllgh them are provided the means to make significant st.~!,s tOl"fcIrd the
llccomp1ishf.1ent of the goals that llre specified at the be!i1nning of this docUf.lent.
These progl'ams offer Shol't and longer tel'lll methods of approaChing the probler.i
of housing in the City and must be viel"ied as an integrated program ''1l1en housing
is considered.
29
"
-- -.,.
"
1
1
1
.. ~-ro-~--
~ , .
.. .
Resolution Number
.
-
.
.
,
.'
. ~ I 'J
~ECTHHl SEVEli
CONCLUSIOil
This clocument is designe~ to serve RS a pl'elin:;nary data base of information
regarding the housing and othel' related condit"io:1s of the City of Seal lJeach,
It also sel'ves as a point of foundati:ln regarci~ng attempts to meet the housing
needs of residents.
Further, it estab1 ishes a fralilellork that rermits much more extensive and
detailed \'lOrk on this suLject that Nl11 follol'/ in 1975 and future years,
30
,
-.--,