HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 92-399 - Amending the General Plan of the COR by Adopting a revised Housing Element t
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING AMENDING
THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF REDDING BY ADOPTING A REVISED
HOUSING ELEMENT.
WHEREAS, following the required public hearings therefor, the Planning Commission of
the City of Redding has recommended to the City Council that the Housing Element of the City's General
Plan be amended by adopting a revised Housing Element; and
i
WHEREAS, following the required notices in accordance with law, the City Council has
held a public hearing on said recommendations and has carefully considered the evidence at said hearing;
and
WHEREAS, it is believed that the revised Housing Element is in compliance with State
Housing Element Law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Redding as
follows:
1. The City Council has reviewed and approved the Negative Declaration on the plan,
finding that there was no significant impact on the environment.
2. The City Council does hereby delete the existing Housing Element of the General
Plan of the City of Redding and adopt the revised Housing Element, as shown in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was introduced and read at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Redding on the 15th day of September 1992, and was duly
adopted at said meeting by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Anderson, Dahl, Kehoe and Moss
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Arness
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
C "Jop
Mayof,
ATTEST:
CONNIE STROHMXAYER, City erk
FORM APPROVED:
RANDALL A. HAYK, dhs Attorney N
CITY OF REDDING
HOUSING ELEMENT
OF THE
GENERAL PLAN
1992 - 1997
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A. Legislative Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
B. Consistency with Other Elements of the General Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
C. Community Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
II. COMMUNITY PROFILE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
A. Historic and Current Population Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
B. Income and Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
i C. Historic and Current Employment Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
D. Historic and Current Housing Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
E. Type, Age and Characteristics of Housing Stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
F. Condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
G. Vacancy Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
H. Low-Income Assisted Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
I. Affordable Housing Units Eligible to
Convert to Open Market During 1992 - 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
III. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
A. Housing Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
1. Homeownership/Housing Costs/Ability to Pay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2. Rentals/Ability to Pay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3. Overcrowding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4. Special Housing Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
a. Elderly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
b. Handicapped . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
c. Large Families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
d. Female-Headed Households . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
e. Minorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
f. Farm Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
g. Persons or Families in Need of Emergency Shelter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
B. Assessment of Future Housing Needs Based upon Regional Share Figures . . . . . 33
C. Land Inventory & Site Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
D. Infrastructure Status and Limiting Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
TABLE OF CONTENTS, Continued
CHAPTER PAGE
IV. GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS TO MAINTENANCE, IMPROVEMENT,
AND DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
A. Land Use Controls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
1. City of Redding's General Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
2. Zoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3. Building Code Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4. On- and Off-Site Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5. Site Development Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 I1
f
B. Fees and Exactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
C. Processing and Permit Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
I
V. NONGOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS TO MAINTENANCE,
IMPROVEMENT, AND DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
A. Price of Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
B. Cost of Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
C. Availability of Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
VI. ENERGY CONSERVATION OPPORTUNITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
VII. GOALS AND POLICIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
VIII. FIVE-YEAR ACTION PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A. Review of Previous City Housing Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
B. Appropriateness of Goals, Policies, and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
C. Implementation Programs and Quantified Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
XI. APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
i
I�
I'
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
1 City of Redding Population Growth 1950-1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2 Population Forecast to Year 2040 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3 Non-Agricultural Employment by Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4 Dwelling Unit Construction by Type, 1980-1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5 Growth in Housing Authority Programs, 1979-1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6 Current and Anticipated Area and Specific Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
J
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
1 Inventory of Low-Income Rental Units in City of Redding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2 1991 California vs. Redding Housing Prices and Median Incomes . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3 California HCD Population Projection Figures for Redding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
4 Basic Construction Needs for Redding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5 Schedule of Area Plans Update and Consolidation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
6 Summary of Development Fees for Single-Family Residential Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
7 Summary of Development Fees for a Typical Duplex and Fourplex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
8 Cost of Development, Single-Family Detached . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
9 Housing Accomplishments, 1985-1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
10 Summary of Projected Housing Activities, 1992-1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
,i
LIST OF FIGURES & TABLES IN THE APPENDIX
FIGURE PAGE
7 - 10 Location Maps of Vacant Land Classified for Medium and
High Density Residential development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 - 91
TABLE PAGE
Al Inventory of all Land Classifications Within Sphere of Influence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
A2 Inventory of Vacant Residential Land Within City Limits - July 1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
I. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Housing Element of the Redding General Plan is to identify and
analyze the City's housing needs; to establish reasonable housing goals and objectives
based on those needs; and to develop a program of action, which, over the stated
planning period, will advance the City towards achieving the established goals and
objectives.
A. Legislative Authority
The State Legislature has determined that the availability of housing is of vital
importance to the well being of the State's populace and has mandated the
preparation of community housing elements as part of local general plans
(Government Code Sections 65302(c) and 65580 et seq.). Under current law,
the code specifies, in brief, that the Housing Element shall contain:
1 . An assessment of local housing needs and an inventory of resources and
constraints relevant to the meeting of these needs;
2. A statement of the community's goals, quantified objectives, and
policies relative to the maintenance, improvement, and development of
housing; and,
3. A program which sets forth a five-year schedule of actions the local
government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the
policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the Housing Element.
Current State Housing Element Law, as contained in Article 10.6 of the State
Government Code, mandates that a community's housing element be updated
as needed, or at no less than five-year increments.
As a result of recent legislation, the Housing Element must now contain several
new sections including an analysis of the area's assisted housing developments
which are eligible to convert to non-low-income use in the next ten years. The
sections must be included in the Housing Element by July 1, 1992. The current
update of the Housing Element was undertaken to comply with that
requirement, as well as to update to the extent possible, the statistics
contained in the Element utilizing available 1990 Census data.
B. Consistency With Other Elements of the General Plan
By law (Government Code 65300.5), the goals and policies of the Housing
Element must be consistent with other Elements of the General Plan. The
current Elements of the Redding General Plan (Land Use, Housing, Recreation,
Open Space & Conservation, Circulation, Noise, Safety, Seismic, and Scenic
Route) are internally consistent regarding stated goals and policies. Internal
consistency between Elements will be monitored and maintained as part of the
review process at such time any of the various individual Elements are updated
or otherwise revised. The goals, policies, and objectives of this update to the
Housing Element are reflective of the goals and policies contained in the other
Elements of the Redding General Plan.
i
1
C. Community Participation
Community input was solicited at several stages during the drafting of the
Housing Element Revision. During the fall of 1991 , a series of public forums
were scheduled to invite public input on a variety of community issues. One
of the meetings was specifically targeted to community housing needs. A wide
range of community housing and supportive service providers attended and
gave testimony regarding local housing needs. These organizations included
the Senior Legal Center, the Development Disabilities Board, Far Northern
Regional Center, the Shasta County Housing Authority, the Shasta County
Community Action Agency, Positive Parenting, Inc. (advocates for single parent
households), People of Progress,the Shasta Housing Development Corporation,
Northern Valley Catholic Social Services, Independent Living Skills Transition,
Inc., Southeast Asian Christian Ministry, Legal Services of Northern California,
Golden Umbrella, Stillwater Learning Center, Shasta County Mental Health
Advisory Board, the Sierra Club, and The Salvation Army. Information received
at that meeting and through subsequent discussions with these service
providers form the basis of the special needs group's statements of housing
needs expressed in this document and contributed to the formulation of the
City's housing objectives for the upcoming planning period.
The housing goals, policies, and quantified objectives expressed in the Element
are the product of both the oral and written testimony received at the public
forum meeting, additional information provided by local housing advocates,
statistical analysis conducted by City staff regarding comparative need, and a
projection of what realistically can be expected to be achieved over the five-
year planning period, given the constraints of funding and staffing.
The availability of the draft Element was announced in the local newspaper
during February 1992. In addition, the draft was circulated in the community
and comments solicited regarding its content. A second draft was formulated
utilizing information received during the review period both from the public and
from HCD during their first review. Following a second HCD review, a third
draft was made available for public review and comment during August 1992.
Public participation is also encouraged during a series of public hearings. A
I! public hearing was held by the Redding Planning Commission on the draft in
February 1992. A second Planning Commission public hearing is scheduled for
late August 1992. Subsequent to Planning Commission action and recommend-
ations to City Council, further public hearings will be held at the City Council
level. Once the public hearings and related reviews are completed, the City
Council will formally adopt the Element.
2
I
II. COMMUNITY PROFILE
A. Historic and Current Population Profile
The 1970 Census established the Redding population at 16,659. The 1980
Census recorded 41 ,995 persons, an annual average population growth rate of p
over 15 percent. The 1990 Census reported a population of 66,462 (or 26,105
households), an increase of over 58 percent since 1980. In the period since
the 1980 Census, the California Department of Finance has developed annual
population estimates for California counties and cities. The most recent
Department of Finance population estimate for the City of Redding is 69,971
as of January 1991 (or 27,335 households). This figure implies an average
growth rate of 6 percent each year since 1980. Figure 1 shows Redding's
population for the period 1950 - 1991 .
Figure 1
P TIO GRO H
Ci o °Redding, 1950 - 1991
80,0
MWO
IM412
60,000 .. . ... ....... . . . .................... ...... ..
501000 .. .. ......:... . . ... ....*—........ . ..... . ..:.. :.
{1,9
0,000 ..........:.. .. ... :.. . . . =
30,000 ..........:.. . .. ... .. :.. . . .. I:
20,000 ..........:.. . ..... .. .... i�� --
14250
10 000 ;.
MWINNNA
0 I.
1 1960 97 1980 9 1991
ou
srce: U.S. • DW
i
3
i
A study conducted in April 1991 by The Economic Sciences Corporation
projected the population of Redding to the year 2011 . The projection included
numerous factors which could effect the population growth, such as, fertility,
mortality, in-migration, annexations, etc. Assuming all factors remain
predictable, Redding's population is projected to nearly double (to 138,197) by
the year 2011, or an anticipated annual growth rate of 9.75 percent for the next
ten years. Figure 2 illustrates the conclusions of this study.
Figure 2
City of Redding
Population Forecast to Year 2040
Persons
2so,000
200,000
1301000 -
100,000 -
50,000
30,000100,00050,000
0
1940 1950 1930 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
Somm Ec ma&Scioaow Corp. (4/91)
B. Income and Ethnicity
Current income figures provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development through the State Department of Housing and Community Develop-
ment, indicated that as of April 1991 the median household income in the City
of Redding was $31,400 for a family of four. In comparison, the statewide
median income for a family of four as of June 1991 was $49,105.
4
An area's population is further broken down by income levels. The standard
terminology used for these various income levels is very low-, low-, moderate-,
and above moderate-income. These terms are used to describe relative income
ranges tied to the median income of all households within a given community.
Thus, "very-low income" means below 50 percent of the median income; "low-
income," between 51 and 80 percent; and "moderate-income," between 81
and 120 percent (for Federal programs, between 81 and 95 percent of median).
"Above moderate-income" is generally 121 percent and above (Federal
programs, 96 percent and above). The term "lower income," includes both
"low-income" and "very-low income"; or all households that do not exceed 80
percent of median household income.
The 1980 Census indicated that approximately 23 percent of Redding's
households were in the very-low income category, 9.5 percent in the low-
income category, and 30 percent in the moderate-income category. Income
statistics from the 1990 Census are not yet available. In October 1991 , the
State Department of Housing and Community Development published
household income projections for Redding based upon 1980 income data
relative to the actual county median income adjusted by family size. According
to these figures, in Redding as of January 1, 1991, 6,014 households (22% of
all households) were very-low income, 5,193 households (19%) were low-
income, 5,467 (20%) were moderate-income, and 10,661 (39%) were above
moderate-income.
1990 Census figures indicate that minorities constitute 10 percent Redding's
population. Of these minorities, 4 percent were of Hispanic descent, 3 percent
were Asian, 2 percent were American Indian, and 1 percent were Black.
There exists a higher proportion of lower-income families among these minority
groups than in the population at large. In 1980, 58 percent of minority
households had incomes at or below 80 percent of the median income. Among
the general population in 1980, only 32 percent of households were considered
lower income. Minority families along with all lower income households of the
community face common problems and hardships in regard to meeting their
housing needs.
C. Historic and Current Employment Trends
The unemployment rate for the Shasta County Labor Market Statistical Area
which includes the City of Redding, is on the rise. In 1988 and 1989, the
area's annual average unemployment rate was 9%. Today, the actual average
unemployment rate for the first ten months of 1991 is up to 10.8%. According
to the State Employment Development Department in Redding, it is likely that
the annual average will reach 12°% by the close of the year. In comparison, the
State unemployment rate was 5.3°x6 in 1988, 5.1% in 1989, and 5.6% in
1990. The State Employment Development Department lists the State's actual
average unemployment rate for the first seven months of 1991 as 7.5%.
5
i
Figure 3
NONAGRICULTURAL EUPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY
Shasta County, 1975 and 1990
1975 1990
Ooaaamt, ao.raoat.
Rte � RletS/Lod
Tram✓ !% 166>�11fta
Traw
t7eaataat. t�win
Fodd it ices 7%
a%
Trade.
Rena
tax
Secvlou Trade,
Tall Retail
Trade. ti%
WWAG
Ill
Coaah'aat asFinance Trade,
Y
is ax Pfaaooe bAWale
316 1416 lax ax
Figure 3 illustrates the percentage of the area's population engaged in
nonagricultural wage and salary employment by industry group for 1975 and
1990. The figures were derived from data collected by the State Employment
Development Department through December 1990. Redding's current
employment opportunities are the greatest in the lower-paying industries; that is
service industries associated with tourism and business services, and the
wholesale and retail trade industry. In addition to paying lower overall wages,
service and/or retail industries typically have a higher percentage of persons
working part-time or seasonally than do other types of industries.
The availability of permanent, secure employment paying a decent wage is a
critical factor in the ability of an area's population to secure housing.
Conversely, an area's ability to attract new industry and increased job
opportunities for its residents is directly related to the ready availability of
decent, affordable housing in the community.
6
D. Historic and Current Housing Profile
In 1980, the Census recorded 17,932 housing units in Redding. According to
the 1990 Census, in April 1990 there were 27,238 housing units within the City
of Redding. The State Department of Finance has estimated the total number of
dwelling units within the City of Redding as of January 1991 to be 28,285, an
increase of 57 percent in available housing units over the past 11 years.
The increase in the number of available housing units is a result of two activities:
annexations and new construction. It is estimated that approximately 850 units
have been added to the City's housing stock through annexation since 1980.
New construction is responsible for 92 percent of the overall increase in available
housing stock. Redding has experienced a decade of steady activity in the
construction industry. According to figures compiled by the City of Redding
Building Department, 10,176 new housing units have been constructed from
January 1980 through December 1991. Of the total units constructed, 6,875
(67.5 percent) were single family homes, 3,155 (31 percent) were multi-family
units, and 146 (1 .4 percent) were mobile homes. Figure 4 illustrates the number
of units constructed by type between 1980 - 1991.
Figure 4
DWELLING UNIT CONSTRUCTION, By Type
City of Redding, 1980 - 1991
#of unity
1400-
1200 ........................................................ ........
1000 ........................................................ ........
800 .................................................. .... ........
800 ................................. ... .... ... .... .. ..
400 ................. .. ... .... ... .... . ..
800 ...
0
80 81 88 83 84 88 88 87 88 89 90 91
®Single Phmily Units ®Multi-Phmily Units ■Mobi1e Hosnas
Scum-DuAdloo Dept
7
1 E. Type, Age and Characteristics of Housing Stock
As reported in the 1980 Census, Redding has 10,904 housing units which were
i built prior to 1970. These 20+ year old structures comprise 40 percent of
Redding's housing stock, followed by 30+ year old structures (25 percent of
Redding's dwelling units), and 40+ year old housing structures (about 12
percent of available housing in Redding). Overall, 60 percent of Redding's
available housing stock is less than 20 years old.
There exists a correlation between the age of a community's housing stock and
the relative condition of that housing stock. The 1990 Census figures for this
category are not available. In 1980, Redding had approximately 35 percent of
its housing stock classified as substandard. Approximately 93 percent of these
units were considered suitable for rehabilitation. The remainder, due primarily
to the extreme condition of disrepair, were determined unsuitable for rehabilita-
tion. Typically, dwelling units over 20 years of age are the most likely to need
both moderate and major rehabilitation work to elevate them to a "standard"
condition. It is unlikely that units constructed in the past 20 years would
require other than minimum level rehabilitation.
F. Condition
I
The City's Housing Assistance Plan (HAP) for 1989 through 1991 estimated
the number of substandard units in the City in 1988 to be 5,184 (approximately
21 % of the housing stock). The estimate is based upon information from the
1976 Survey of Housing Conditions in the City of Redding performed by the
U.S. Census Bureau, the 1980 Census, as well as housing conditions
information provided by City Housing Department staff. The most recent
California Statewide Housing Update published by the State Department of
Housing and Community Development in October 1990 also estimates that as
of 1988, 21% of the City's housing stock was substandard.
Current City rehabilitation programs are available Citywide and staff monitors
conditions present in all neighborhoods on a regular basis. Of all occupied sub-
standard units, it is estimated that 51 % are occupied by lower-income
households.
Housing units are considered substandard if they meet the following definition:
'I Those buildings which exhibit one or more critical structural, plumbing, and/or
electrical deficiency or a combination of intermediate defects in sufficient
number or extent to require considerable repair or rebuilding. Units are also
considered substandard if they do not provide safe and adequate shelter or
endanger the health, safety, or well-being of the occupants.
Substandard housing units are further classified into those that are suitable for
rehabilitation and those which are not suitable for rehabilitation. The following
definition of "suitable for rehabilitation" is used: Those buildings which exhibit
one or more of the deficiencies listed under the above definition of substandard,
all of which can be repaired in conformity with current codes and ordinances
for a sum not to exceed the value of the building. Buildings are considered "not
suitable for rehabilitation" when the cost of the needed repairs would exceed
the value of the structure. As property values escalate, some buildings
previously determined "unsuitable for rehabilitation"become"suitable for rehab-
ilitation." This crossover is estimated to include approximately 30% of the
previously unsuitable for rehabilitation housing stock reported in the 1976
survey.
8
_ I
In the past 15 years, 1 ,1 12 substandard units have been rehabilitated utilizing
City programs. It is estimated that approximately 180 units per year are
privately rehabilitated or 2,700 units since 1976. These 180 annual private
rehabilitations are accounted for by private owners completing actions such as
replacing a leaking roof, repairing aging plumbing, or replacing broken windows.
All of these conditions, prior to repair, would classify a unit in violation of HUD
Section 8 Housing Quality Standards. Landlords participating on the Section
8 rent subsidy program or desiring to participate are required to bring units up
to a basic standard of condition. Typically, unless an owner is participating on
the Rental Rehabilitation Program, the rehabilitation is completed at the owner's
expense and therefor counted under "substandard units rehabilitated privately."
Roughly 2,600 units (9.5% of the current housing stock) remain in a
substandard condition which could be alleviated by rehabilitation.
Of the 523 substandard units reported in 1976 as not suitable for rehabilitation,
it is estimated that 272 have been demolished and approximately 191 have
been included in rehabilitation activities. As described above, as housing prices
increase, it becomes financially feasible to rehab these buildings rather than tear
down. Approximately 60 of these substandard units remain standing in 1991
(less than .2% of the existing housing stock).
G. Vacancy Rates
According to the 1990 Census, Redding's vacancy rate for all types of dwelling
units available for sale or rent is 2.1 percent. The vacancy rate for all types
of owner-occupied dwelling units was reported to be approximately 1.5
percent, for rental units alone the reported vacancy rate was approximately 3
percent.
This level of vacancy is generally indicative of an under-built market. Vacancy
rates, as an indicator of market conditions, typically run a fine line between an
over-built market(typically considered above 7 percent vacancy) and an under-
built market (generally anything under 3 percent). In a healthy market, there
should be some number of vacant units in all sizes, locations, and price ranges.
Typically, in the type of market present in Redding, the choice of units available
would be fairly limited for households seeking new residences. In order to fully
analyze the effect of vacancies upon a specific housing market, it is necessary i
to delve deeper into vacancy by type, location, price range, and size of unit.
There could exist a surplus of units at one level and a scarcity at another which
when averaged together indicate a vacancy rate indicative of neither. There is
no information currently available which compares variation in the vacancy rate
based on price of unit or size of unit in the Redding area.
Based upon information gathered from its clients in their search for rental
housing in the Redding area, the Redding Housing Authority has indicated that
the local rental market is extremely tight for all unit sizes in an affordable price
range. Further, affordable three+ bedroom units are virtually nonexistent for
lower-income families. Approximately 24 percent of the households currently
on the Housing Authority waiting list qualify by family size for units of this size.
According to City of Redding Building Department records, of the 577 multi-
family units built during the 20 month period May 1990 through December
1991, only 12 percent (69) were constructed with 3+ bedrooms. Larger, low-
income families have little or no choice of suitable units.
9
H. Low-Income Assisted Housing
As of January 1992, 2,937 very low-income households within the City of
Redding were receiving government assisted housing subsidies administered
through the Redding Housing Authority. These subsidies, as illustrated by
Figure 5, are in four program categories: (1) State Aftercare Subsidies; (2) HUD
Section 8 Vouchers; (3) HUD Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Subsidies; and
(4) HUD Section 8 Existing Certificates.
Assisted units are scattered throughout the City with the highest concentration
in neighborhoods with lower priced multi-unit complexes available. Another
419 site-specific HUD rental subsidies are available for use at seven multifamily
rental complexes in Redding which utilized HUD 202, 231 , or 236 financing
j assistance. These complexes are Redding Pilgrim House, Butte House,
Cottonwood House, Downtown Plaza Apartments, Heritage Plaza, Redding
Gardens, and Kutras Gardens. Of the available subsidies, 89 are reserved for
seniors, 12 for disabled individuals, 48 for either seniors or disabled, and 270
for families.
i
'I
GROWTH IN HOUSING AUTHORITY PROGRAMS
1979 - 1991
#f Units
1000
0 Units under contract/n 1991- 997
800 ............................................................... .......
600 ........................................................ State
® Vouchers
® MR
400 ------------------------------- -- - - -- - - -- -
® Existing
200
0 '79'80 '81 '82'83'84'86'88'87'88'89'90 '91
Source: Redding Housing Authority
Figure 5
The Redding Housing Authority reports that over 2,138 families are currently
on it's waiting list for subsidized housing. HUD requires that subsidies be
awarded based upon a priority system. The criteria used to determine the
current top priority for assistance are: homeless; paying in excess of 50% of
10
i •
the family's income towards rent and utilities; living in a substandard unit;
victims of domestic violence, or forced to move due to natural disaster or
government action. In addition, priority within this group is given to City of
Redding residents and veterans. The Redding Housing Authority estimates that
the average wait on the list for a very-low income family that meets top priority
criteria and is a City of Redding resident is typically two to four years. For
very-low income families that do not meet top priority criteria the wait can be
as long as three to five years.
As discussed in the previous section on income, approximately 22 percent
(6,014 households) in Redding are considered very-low income and potentially
eligible for subsidized housing assistance. These figures indicate a huge chasm
between the assistance available and the number of households likely to need
assistance.
I. Affordable Housing Units Eligible to Convert to Open Market During 1992 -
2002
Recent changes to the State Government Code require that a community's
Housing Element contain analysis and program efforts for preserving assisted
housing developments in the community which are eligible to convert to non-
low-income use during the next ten-year period. The purpose of the analysis
is to identify actions the jurisdiction can take to preserve at-risk units, to
adequately plan for preventing or minimizing tenant displacement, and to
preserve the local affordable housing stock.
i
The ten-year period which is covered by this analysis is July 1992 through June
2002. To make the analysis useful to the five-year housing element updates,
the inventory is divided into two five-year groups, coinciding with the planning
periods of the Housing Element.
I
State law requires that the inventory include all multifamily rental units which
are assisted under any of the programs listed below and which are eligible to
change to non-low-income housing uses due to termination of a subsidy
contract, mortgage prepayment, or expiring use restrictions within ten years of
the statuatory adoption "due-date" of the housing element amendment. For
this amendment, the statuatory adoption "due-date" is July 1992. The
affected programs are:
1. HUD Programs:
- Section 8 Lower-Income Rental Assistance project-based programs:
- New Construction"
- Substantial or Moderate Rehabilitation
- Property Disposition"
- Loan Management Set-Aside
- Section 101 Rent Supplements•
- Section 213 Cooperative Housing Insurance"
- Section 221(d)(3) Below-Market-Interest-Rate
Mortgage Insurance Program
- Section 236 Interest Reduction Payment Program
- Section 202 Direct Loans for Elderly or Handicapped
- Community Development Block Grant Program•
11
2. FmHA Section 515 Rural Rental Housing Loans*
3. State and local multi-family revenue bond programs*
4. Redevelopment programs*
! 5. Local in-lieu fee programs or inclusionary programs*
6. Developments which obtained a density bonus and direct government
assistance pursuant to Government Code Section 65916.
All categories marked with an asterisk (*) do not have units in the community
which are considered at-risk during the subject ten-year period.
Table 1 illustrates the projects which contain affordable units in the community
which are considered at risk in the City of Redding during the subject ten-year
period.
TABLE 1
INVENTORY OF LOW-INCOME.RENTAL UNITS>IN.THE CITY OF REDDING
SUBJECT TO TERMINATION OF FEDERAL MORTGAGE AND/OR
RENT SUBSIDIES BY JULY'2002
July 199Z,-Juno 1997
TYPE OF, TOTAL#� EARLIEST DATE
PROJECT NAME ..:PROGRAMUNITS OF TERMINATION
Moderate Rehabilitation Section 8 48 (18 elderly) 3/31/97
Increment 1 (All subsidized)
Redding Gardens Cooperative 221(d)(3) 120 Subsidies: 11/03/98
301 South Street (48 subsidized) Mortgage: 01/17/14
Redding Section 8
Downtown Plaza Apartments 238(J)(1) 90 Eligible LIHPRHA
1075 Trinity Street (No subsidies) Property
Redding Mortgage: 12/19/91
JuIY 1997-Juno 2002
TYPE OF! TOTAL,� EARLIEST DATE
PROJECT'NAMEPROGRAM UNITS .::.OF TERMINATION .
Moderate Rehabilitation Section 8 80 12/31/97
Increment 2 (All subsidized)
Moderate Rehabilitation Section 8 51 9/30/98
Increment 3 (All subsidized)
Moderate Rehabilitation Section 8 20 (5 elderly) 8/30/99
Increment 4 (All subsidized)
Moderate Rehabilitation Section 8 48 (18 elderly) 9/30/00
Increment 5 (All subsidized)
Kutras Gardens 231 Elderly 84 (all elderly) Subsidies: 07/05/97
540 South Street Section 8 (40 subsidized)
Redding Mortgage: 08/30/17
The listed at-risk units are subject to a variety of different regulatory
requirements which determine the actual likelihood of loss of the
affordable units. These are discussed in detail in the following narrative.
12
July 1992 - June 1997
During the first five-year period three separate programs are involved: the
Moderate Rehabilitation Program with Section 8 project based subsidies, the
Section 221 (d)(3) Market Rate Interest Program with Section 8 project-based
subsidies, and the Section 236 Program with mortgage-based subsidies.
The first allocation of 48 Section 8 rental subsidies under the Moderate Rehabil-
itation Program is scheduled for expiration of benefits on March 31 , 1997.
These subsidies carry an original term of 15 years which is now drawing to a
close. Five (5) of the original subsidies have already been converted to the non-
project-based variety due to default by the owner on the Moderate Rehabilita-
tion contract. Seven (7) of the remaining 43 are attached to single-family
homes currently used as rental units and the remaining 36 are attached to a
variety of multifamily units. The majority of the units under this program are
older and while they continue to meet minimum housing standards required on
the Section 8 program, many are in need of additional rehabilitation work. It
is impossible to predict whether or not federal extensions will be offered in
1997 for these subsidies. In the past, as other program allocations came to an
end, HUD has replaced the lost subsidies with new ones. This may be the case
in 1997.
If no further extensions are available from HUD, the Redding Housing Authority
is has identified several options which would mitigate the loss to the
community of these affordable units. These include negotiating with the owner
for sustained affordability of the units in exchange for rehabilitation assistance,
offering non-project-based subsidies as available to the affected families for use
elsewhere, and replacement of the converted units through development of
new affordable units.
Section 221(d)(3) and Section 236 projects are subject to the provisions of the
Low-Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act (Title VI
of the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990) - LIHPRHA. The objective of
LIHPRHA is the extension of low-income use restrictions while offering owners
alternative means of realizing a reasonable return on their investment. These
alternatives involve either continuing ownership with additional federal incen-
tives, or selling the property, with a first-right-of-refusal process for interested
nonprofit and public entities. A prepayment option releasing use restrictions is
available only if criteria establishing no need in the community for the low-
income housing can be met; or if the provisions for one of the above
alternatives do not work out. In order to be considered for LIHPRHA options,
an owner of an eligible project must file a "Notice of Intent" to initiate the
federal application process. As of May 26, 1992, no eligible project owners in
Redding have filed a Notice of Intent to change or terminate any project's
affordability controls.
According to State Housing and Community Development staff, Redding
Gardens Cooperative is not likely to be eligible for mortgage prepayment under
LIHPRHA due to its cooperative ownership structure. The primary risk for these
units is the potential loss of 48 project-based subsidies in late 1996. In the
past, this project has received subsidy renewals every five (5) years. This
could occur again in 1996. Subsidy renewal is dependent upon many
13
•
unpredictable factors including the condition of the federal budget in 1996, the
political climate in 1996 for continued extension of this type of program, and
the desires of the residents of the project in 1996. If loss of the subsidies is
unavoidable, this project represents a unique situation. Because of the
cooperative ownership structure, replacement of the lost subsidies with non-
project-based Section 8 subsidies would not be possible. All residents of the
cooperative are co-owners of the complex and as such might agree to draw on
the existing equity in the complex to "self-subsidize" those residents that need
it. An arrangement such as this would be similar to a "reverse mortgage"
agreement.
The Downtown Plaza Apartments project became eligible in December 1991 to
file a Notice of Intent to change or terminate the project's affordability controls
under LIHPRHA. Currently, the project's Section 236 financing has 20 more
years remaining under the original terms. Without owner action, these
affordability controls will remain in place. It is difficult to predict what will
happen in the future. If the owner decides to exercise his/her prerogative under
LIHPRHA and initiate the reevaluation process, a Notice of Intent would need
to be filed. At that time, if a new satisfactory arrangement could not be made
between the current owner and the Federal government, then the property
would be offered to entities which have indicated an interest in acquiring and
sustaining affordable housing projects in the Redding area if any become
available. To date, four separate entities have expressed interest under this
first-right-of-refusal option. These include the Redding Housing Authority, the
Shasta Housing Development Corporation, as well as two housing development
organizations from outside the area. In order to assure continued affordability
of the units, acquisition by any of these entities would very likely require
continued rental assistance by HUD or a deep subsidy from federal, state, or
local sources applied towards the acquisition costs. The availability of funds
for this purpose is not known at this time.
The City, through the Redding Housing Authority, will monitor the status of the
Downtown Plaza Apartments project and other at risk projects over the next
five years. If an owner initiates the reevaluation process, the City will request
HUD to notify the City of any pending change in status. The RHA will advise
the tenants of the particular project of all possible options available to them in
the case of loss of affordability controls.
Five-Year Summary:
- Potential loss of 96 subsidies, of which 18 are designated for the elderly.
- Potential loss of 174 affordable multi-family units.
July 1997 - June 2002
During the second five-year period there are two different programs which are
involved: the Moderate Rehabilitation Program with Section 8 project-based
subsidies; and the Section 231 Elderly Program.
14
The second five-year period will see the possible loss of the balance of
Moderate Rehabilitation Section 8 subsidies in the community. Increments 2-5
totaling 179 subsidies all expire during this period. As was discussed for the
first increment during the previous five-year period, it is possible that HUD may
extend these subsidies as it has in the past for other programs. If this does not
happen, the Redding Housing Authority has identified the following mitigating
measures: offering non-project-based subsidies, as available, to the affected
families to be used in a location of their choice; negotiating continued
affordability with the owners in exchange for other non-subsidy program
assistance such as rehabilitation; attempting to acquire the units or aiding a
non-profit housing entity to acquire the units in return for continued
affordability; and replacement of the units through support of new affordable
housing development. The affected units are typically older and many are in
need of rehabilitation work. Of the 179 subsidies, four (4) have already been
replaced with non-project-based subsidies due to default by the owners of the
Moderate Rehabilitation contract requirements. Of the remaining 175 subsidies,
30 are attached to single-family homes being used as rental units and 145 are
connected to a variety of multi-family structures.
The Kutras Gardens project consists of 84 affordable units occupied by elderly
low-income households and financed through the Section 231 program. This
project also has 40 Section 8 project-based subsidies. The terms of the Section
231 program locks the project into low-income use restrictions for the full
mortgage term and therefore this project does not have a mortgage prepayment
option. The existing mortgage runs through 2017. The risk on this project is
the loss of the Section 8 subsidies which expire on July 5, 1997. In the past,
the subsidies have been renewed every five (5) years. Technically, the
project's owner could opt not to petition for HUD renewal of the subsidies in
July 1992, however, due to the Section 231 affordability requirements this is
not very probable. In 1997 though, the subsidies reach their expiration date.
As stated above for other projects with expiring Section 8 subsidies, future
Federal appropriations for HUD may be sufficient to extend these subsidies
once again. If that does not happen, options for preserving the affordability of
these units for the very-low income elderly households residing there include
replacing the expiring subsidies with non-project-based subsidies, negotiating
with the owner for continued affordability in exchange for rehabilitation funds,
and development of comparable affordable units.
Five-Year Summary:
- Potential loss of 215 subsidies, of which 63 are designated for the elderly.
- Potential loss of 145 affordable multi-family units, 23 of which are elderly
units.
Cost Analysis of Preserving Versus Replacing At-Risk Units
According to Section 65583(a)(8)(B) of Housing Element Law, the cost of
producing new rental housing comparable in size and rent levels to replace the
"at risk" units and the cost of preserving all of the units for each five year
period, must be included in the Housing Element.
15
General development costs for multifamily projects are discussed in detail in
Sections V &VI. Based upon an average construction cost for multifamily units
of $55 per square foot, an average land cost of $8,000 per unit, and average
per unit development fees of $6,600, each 900 square foot multifamily unit
would cost approximately $64,100 to replace. The estimated cost to replace
the 174 "at risk" units during the first five-year period is $11,153,400. To
replace the 145 "at risk" units during the second five-year period would cost
approximately $9,294,500.
As stated previously, many of the units at risk over the ten-year period are
older and in need of rehabilitation work. Recent appreciation experienced in
the local housing market has greatly increased the value of these older units.
Projected acquisition costs must include the cost of any rehabilitation work
necessary to bring the units up to a standard level. Basic acquisition cost for
units of comparable age and condition would be approximately $70,000 to
$90,000 for a duplex, $90,000 to $140,000 for a triplex, etc. The
rehabilitation staff with the City's Housing Division, drawing from seven years
of experience with the Rental Rehabilitation Program estimates that the average
per unit rehabilitation cost for units of comparable size, age, and condition is
approximately $12,000. Using an average acquisition cost of $30,000 per
multifamily unit and an average rehabilitation cost of $12,000 per unit, the cost
of acquiring and preserving the 174 "at risk" units during the first five year
period is approximately $7,308,000, and approximately $6,090,000 for the
145 "at risk" units during the second five-year period.
The cost of keeping the rents at an affordable level for units which have been
either acquired or newly constructed is dependent upon the type of financing
used to purchase or construct the units. Market-rate financing would require
a much larger monthly revenue stream to cover the higher cost of the financing.
It is likely that revenues from affordable rents would not be sufficient to cover
the cost of debt service on the units. A substantial part of either construction
or acquisition cost would need to be underwritten by some form of deep
subsidy. A full proforma on each individual project would be necessary to
arrive at more than a broad estimate of costs involved. The following rent
subsidy cost estimate is based upon the difference between the maximum
affordable rent that a very-low income family likely to occupy a particular sized
unit could pay and the current average market rate rent for a similar unit.
During the first five year period, the 174 "at risk" units are comprised of
approximately 20 studio units, 114 1-bedroom units, 35 2-bedroom units, and
5 3-bedroom units. Using the formula as described above,the estimated annual
subsidy necessary to keep the units affordable to very-low income households
is $413,400. During the second five year period, the 145 "at risk" units are
comprised of approximately 33 1-bedroom units, 68 2-bedroom units, 43 3-
bedroom units, and 1 4-bedroom unit. The estimated annual subsidy cost
necessary to keep them affordable for very-low income households is
$617,040.
16
Resources for Preservation
As stated previously, four separate entities have expressed interest in being
notified under the first right of refusal option if affordable housing projects
become available in the Redding area. These include the Redding Housing
Authority, the Shasta Housing Development Corporation, as well as two
housing development organizations from outside the area. In addition, the
newly formed Redding Housing Development Corporation, as well as Northern
Valley Catholic Social Services(local non-profit housing service providers) have
the ability to acquire and manage assisted housing projects. In order to assure
continued affordability of the units, acquisition by any of these entities would
very likely require continued rental assistance by HUD or a deep subsidy from
Federal, state, or local sources applied towards the acquisition costs.
It is unlikely that sufficient local funding sources will be available to fully
subsidize acquisition, rehabilitation, or development of new affordable units to
replace those at risk of being lost over the upcoming ten year period. Over the
past five years, the City of Redding has received approximately $450,000 a
year in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from HUD,
(Programs 5.4 & 5.5). CDBG funds for FY 92 - 93 and 93 - 94 have already
been committed to specific projects and would be unavailable for use
elsewhere. Over the remaining eight years, assuming the City continues to
receive funding at its current level, the City might receive approximately
$3,600,000 in additional CDBG funds. These funds are allocated through a
highly competitive process and have historically been utilized for a variety of
community projects, including housing.
The Redding Redevelopment Agency generated approximately $436,000 in its
Low/Moderate Income Housing Fund (Program 2.8) during FY 90-91 . This fund
is utilized locally in a variety of ways to improve the housing opportunities for
the area's lower-income households. FY 92 - 93 LMIHF funds have been
committed and would be unavailable for use elsewhere. Over the remaining
nine years, approximately $7 million will be available for this purpose.
The Redding Housing Authority administers approximately 937 rental subsidies
for which it receives administrative fees. During FY 90 - 91, the RHA received
approximately $424,000 in administrative fees. These fees are utilized by the
Housing Authority to cover the cost of administering the Section 8 rental
assistance program in the community and are not available for use elsewhere.
Over the next 10 years, it is anticipated that approximately $4.2 million will be
received through this source.
Several new construction programs funded through the state and federal
government are currently available for affordable housing projects. These offer
money at reduced interest rates or on a grant basis in exchange for affordability
of units. In addition, various mortgage bond programs and Federal tax credits
might be accessed to enhance a project's affordability. These programs are
discussed in Section IX, Programs 2.4, 2.5, 2.9, and 4.1. Another avenue for
reducing the cost of development is the use of the local Density Bonus Program
(Program 2.1).
In summary, creative projects, whether acquisition or new development, which
combine a variety,of local, State, Federal and private dollars have a greater
j likelihood of success in the current housing market. The City is committed to
working towards enhanced housing affordability for the community's lower
income households, and, as it has in the past, will utilize its housing funds such
as the redevelopment low-income housing set-aside, its Community
Development Block Grant, as well as HOME funds towards that end.
I
sI
18
0
III. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
State housing element law requires that a community analyze both its existing housing
needs, as well as its projected housing needs for the required planning period. Such
existing and projected needs analysis must include consideration of the locality's share
of the regional housing need as provided by the local Council of Government or, in
Redding's case, as provided by the State Department of Housing and Community
Development.
In order to meet required State housing element conditions and create a useable,
accurate, planning document, this section relies to a large extent upon expert
community resources, particularly in the determination of housing need among the
required special needs groups.
This chapter includes an analysis of current local housing market characteristics for
both renters and homeowners; an analysis of the special housing needs of the area's
population, particularly for the following identified groups: the elderly, the
handicapped, large families, families headed by a single-female parent, minorities, and
the homeless; and concludes with an analysis of the projected housing needs of the
Redding area utilizing our regional housing share figures as provided by HCD,.and
current vacant land inventory.
A. Housing Characteristics
1. Homeownership/Housing Costs/Ability to Pay
In 1990, the Census reported that 53.5 percent of all households in
Redding resided in housing units that they owned. Based on 1991
household figures, this translates into 14,624 owner-occupied
households. Census data from 1980 showed that approximately 17%
of all homeowners surveyed were overpaying for housing. Among the
lower-income homeowners(18% of all homeowners), 39.2% were over-
paying for housing. Using 1991 household population figures, this
would translate to approximately 2,486 homeowners currently over-
paying, out of which approximately 1 ,031 are lower income. A
commonly accepted definition of "affordable" as it relates to housing
costs is when a household pays no more than 30 percent of its gross
monthly income for housing expenses. For a homeowner, these
expenses are principal and interest payments for mortgages, as well as
utilities, property taxes, and homeowner's insurance. For a renter,
housing expenses include the basic monthly rent plus utility costs.
Housing payments totaling more than 30 percent of the household's
income constitutes "overpaying."
In Redding, as throughout the country, the dream of homeownership is
an integral part of American life. It continues to be a goal for many
citizens and historically, has been used as an indicator of status and
prosperity. Today, in 1991, the reality of homeownership is beyond the
reach of a growing segment of the area's residents. Redding's citizens,
while enjoying a substantially lower-priced real estate market than the
rest of the State, are finding that the lower wages of the area and the
accelerated rate of appreciation in both new and existing homes in the
area has closed the market to all but those in the higher income
categories.
19
According to information provided by the Shasta County Board of
Realtors, the current median price of a single-family home in the City of
Redding is $110,000 (an increase of 85.8 percent over the 1980
median of $59,200).
The area's median income, $31 ,400, generally indicates an ability to
purchase a home with a maximum purchase price three (3) times as
great or $94,200. Current interest rates hover around 9 percent on a
30-year fixed rate mortgage. Indications are that these relatively low
interest rates will remain steady or possibly drop slightly over the next
several years. In Redding, the minimum annual income necessary to
purchase a median priced home ($110,000), assuming a 10 percent
cash downpayment, would be approximately $33,000(105 percent over
median). Most homes in this price range are resale units. New single-
family detached homes currently being built within the City of Redding
start at $120,000.
Homeownership opportunities for households below median-income are
very limited. In addition to generally being unable to support the level
of monthly mortgage payment required, lower-income households have
a difficult time accumulating the amount necessary for the required
down payment and closing costs.
I
Table 2 compares Redding's 1991 median home cost and median
income with various other communities in the State. It also indicates the
level of income necessary to purchase each home.
TABLE 2
1991 California Housing Prices and Median Incomes
VS.
Redding Housing Prices and Median Incomes
1991 1991 % of Median
Median Income Median Price' Required
to Purchase
Redding $ 31,400 $110,000 116% ($36,700)
California $ 49,105 $199,000 135% ($66,300)
Selected Regions
Central Valley (Fresno Co.) $ 33,400 $120,000 120% ($40,000)
Los Angeles $ 42,000 $222,000 176% ($74,000)
Sacramento $ 39,700 $136,000 114% ($45,300)
S. F. Bay Area (S.F. Co.) $ 49,900 $255,000 170% ($85,000)
San Diego $ 41,300 $181,000 146% ($60,300)
•Based on closed escrow sales of single-family, detached homes.
Source: The Kiplinger California Letter, 12/4/91; Shasta County Board of Realtors;
California State Department of HCD.
20
2. Rentals/Ability to Pay
According to the 1990 Census, 46.5 percent of all occupied housing
was classified as renter-occupied. Using 1991 household figures, this
means approximately 12,711 households rent rather than own their
principal residence.
Median-renter income in 1980 was 55 percent of the median income of
owner-occupied households ($10,919 vs. $19,678) and 75 percent of
the overall area median income. As stated previously, income
information from the 1990 Census is not yet available. The 1980
Census reported that approximately 41 % of all renter households were
overpaying for housing. However, among the lower-income renter
households, approximately 74% were overpaying. Lower-income
renters make up approximately 47% of all renter households. Using
1991 household figures this means there are approximately 5,974 low-
income renter households, out of which 4,421 (74%) are overpaying for
housing.
Rental prices in Redding have steadily increased over the past ten years.
The 1990 Census reported the median rent paid in Redding to be $373.
According to a survey conducted by the Redding Housing Authority in
June 1991 of advertised and available rental units, rent figures ranged
from an average of $370 for one bedroom apartments to an average of
$650 for 3 bedroom houses. Median rent for all sizes and types of
rental units surveyed was approximately $500. It is felt that this is a
more accurate representation of current median rent for the community.
Low-income and very low-income households have considerable
difficulty in locating affordable housing. Large families at these income
levels face the almost impossible task of locating an appropriately sized
unit which is also affordable. Even median-income families can afford
only the least expensive three-bedroom units. The average priced three-
bedroom single-family home is not affordable to the majority of
households.
3. Overcrowding
According to the 1990 Census, approximately 4.5 percent of the
general population are living in overcrowded conditions. Using 1991
household figures, this translates to approximately 1 ,230 overcrowded
households. An overcrowded household is one in which more than 1 .01
persons occupies each room of a dwelling unit. The Census further
documents that of the overcrowded households, 82.5 percent (10 15
households) are renters and 17.5 percent (215 households) are
homeowners. Although no statistics exist which compares this general
view of overcrowding with overcrowded conditions among lower-income
families, it is generally assumed that most overcrowding occurs because
of a household's inability to afford larger living quarters.
Based upon the scarcity of larger (3+ bedrooms) rental units within the
City of Redding, it is likely that some larger families are forced to accept
smaller units than what would be the ideal for the family size.
21
According to the Southeast Asian Christian Ministry (a nonprofit
organization which provides a variety of services, including housing
assistance, to the area's Asian community) many of their clients live in
severely overcrowded conditions due to a lack of affordable larger rental
units in the City. The Redding Housing Authority reports that a majority
of the families on the 4+ bedroom waiting list for subsidies end up
renting smaller units due to scarcity of appropriately sized units.
4. Special Housing Needs
'I Some population subgroups, such as the elderly and handicapped, large
families, female-headed households, farm workers, and the homeless
have special housing needs which may not be addressed by the
conventional housing market. As required by State guidelines, the
shelter needs of these special groups are discussed in this section.
a. Elderly
According to the 1990 Census, 23.5 percent of Redding's
households are headed by persons 65 years of age and older.
Approximately 71.6% are homeowners and 28.3% are renters.
Updated by 1991 household estimates, this means in Redding
over 6,423 households contain at least one member who is 65+
years of age and of these, over 6,150 households are headed by
a person 65+ years of age. Of households headed by an elderly
person, 4,403 are homeowners and 1,740 are renters.
The 1980 Census revealed that the income levels of these elderly
households was critically low, especially for elderly people living
alone. Over 16.9 percent of the single-elderly households were
at or below poverty level in 1980, compared to 10.1 percent of
households in the general population. Due to the dispropor-
tionate number of poverty level households within the elderly
population, affordability of housing tops the list of critical
housing needs for this group.
Another housing crisis which faces many elderly households is
the deterioration of their existing shelter. Homes purchased
when incomes were in a higher bracket are now unable to be
maintained with a smaller retirement income. Many single-elderly
householders find themselves facing the loss of their home due
to a financial inability to maintain it.
Elderly households also have a special need for housing
accessible to public transportation, community medical facilities,
retail centers, and possibly with greater than normal security.
This group on the whole is less mobile than the general
population and accessibility of the above listed facilities and
services is crucial to their ability to reside in any particular
location.
22
i
Several housing complexes located in Redding were developed
specifically for the elderly population. One complex, Pilgrim
House with 49 units, reserves all of its units for very low-income
seniors or handicapped persons, due to requirements of its long-
term financing, (the HUD 202 program). Another, River Oaks
Retirement Center, is obligated to keep 20 percent of its 100
units available to lower-income seniors. This is a condition
imposed by the terms of the financing source for the project
(Multi-Unit Rental Housing Revenue Bonds issued by the Redding
Housing Authority).
b. Handicapped
The special housing needs of the handicapped/disabled
population of the area are concentrated in two areas: (1)
availability of affordable units; and (2) accessibility within the
housing unit based on individual disabilities. Far Northern
Regional Developmental Disabilities Center and the Independent
Living Center of Northern California, two non-profit agencies in
the Redding area that work exclusively with the disabled
population, agree that these are the two most pervasive housing
problems facing the area's handicapped population.
It has been difficult to find accurate data which represent the
total handicapped population in Redding with special housing
needs. Most agencies which serve this population specialize in
a particular type of disability or age group and simply do not
have the capacity to collect overall population data. Information
gathered by the Census is specifically on work-related and public
transportation disabilities among the general population. In
1980, 4.4 percent of the general population 16 years of age or
older had either a work-related disability, public transportation
disability, or both. No information is provided which indicates
how many of this population are homeowners, renters, or at
which income level. It is likely that the overall number of
disabled individuals in the general population is much greater.
Local service providers for the disabled population estimate that
as many as 10-17 percent of the general population (6,997-
11 ,895 persons) may be disabled to the point of needing
modification to their housing arrangement.
All handicapped individuals do not have special housing needs.
However, it is generally accepted that many individuals with a
disabling physical handicap require some degree of modification
to their housing unit based upon the limitations of their individual
handicap. Individuals with mental or developmental handicaps,
such as the mentally retarded or persons with behavior related
problems, would generally benefit by availability of supportive
housing. For example, many of this population find that group
living quarters, or clustered housing is a desirable arrangement.
23
These types of housing styles provide a greater level of
independence than do institutional facilities, but still maintain a
certain degree of supervisional caretaking.
In 1984, Title 24 of the State Uniform Building Code mandated
that all multi-family residential construction projects containing
in excess of 5 units under construction after September 15,
1985 would conform to specific disabled
adaptability/accessibility regulations. Unfortunately, the actual
increase in the number of handicapped-accessible units available
on the current rental market has been small. For the 20-month
period, May 1990 through December 1991 , approximately 456
units were constructed which fell under Title 24 regulations. Of
these constructed units, approximately 23 are considered
handicapped accessible, with the remainder (433 units) contain-
ing features which make them more readily adaptable for tenants
with physical disabilities, if the landlord so chooses. In 1992's
tight rental market, little if any actual incentives exist to
encourage a landlord to cover the extra expense of converting
these "adaptable" units to "accessible" units.
It is anticipated that by mid 1992, Federal regulations regarding
handicapped accessibility of multi-unit buildings will supplant the
State regulations used presently. Generally, the Federal
regulations will require all units meeting threshold criteria be built
as accessible to the handicapped, not simply adaptable.
The housing needs of developmentally disabled persons,
including the mentally retarded, are typically not addressed by
Title 24 regulations. The needs of this disabled group tend to be
for a variety of supportive housing arrangements. Some of this
population have a need for housing which provides a semi-
sheltered,semi-independent living state, such as clustered group
housing or other group-living quarters; others are capable of
living independently if affordable units are available.
Group-home living quarters for a variety of specific disabled
clientele groups have traditionally been found intermixed within
residential neighborhoods. Larger single-family homes are
purchased or leased by the supporting agency and house a small
group of handicapped clients along with support personnel. The
availability of these larger (4-5 bedroom) homes is diminishing,
as well as becoming cost prohibitive to purchase and/or lease.
By local zoning ordinance, residents are limited to six or fewer in
number per facility if located within standard single-family zoned
neighborhoods. In addition, the general public continues to voice
its displeasure at housing these group homes within residential
neighborhoods. Although the latter problem is unlikely to
diminish, regardless of public education efforts and/or familiarity
with the client groups, the problems of affordability and
availability are worthy of further civic attention.
24
A fact that compounds the housing problems of the disabled
population is that many fall into several of the special needs
categories. Many of Redding's disabled are also elderly and/or
single individuals. Many of these households require units with
a second bedroom for live-in attendant care. The larger units are
correspondingly more expensive to rent, making housing costs
excessively expensive for fixed-income households.
Standard move-in costs for rental units in this area include first
and last month's rent and a substantial security deposit. These
amounts are prohibitive to a lower-income household, even if an
affordable unit is located.
i
C. Large Families
The housing needs of large families, which HUD defines as those
consisting of five or more members, have been touched upon in
the previous section on overcrowding. There exists in Redding
a shortage of large (4+ bedrooms) rental units suitable- for
housing a "large" family. The current rent figures for the few
units of this size make them unaffordable to lower-income
families. According to the 1990 Census, large families make up
8.5 percent of the total households in the City. Approximately
52.7% are renter households and 47.3% are homeowners.
Translated into 1991 figures, 2,323 households citywide are
considered large (5+) by HUD standards, 1,224 are renters and
1,099 are homeowners.
Ethnicity clearly impacts the probability of being a large family.
Although 1990 Census figures are not yet available, in 1980
15.8 percent of all Asian families in 1980 were considered large;
15 percent of all Black families; 14.2 percent of Hispanic
families; 13.8 percent of American Indian families; and 7.7
percent of White families. Over the past ten years, there has
been a large increase (+886°x6) in the number of Asian families
residing in the area. Of these, large families tend to be the norm.
The Redding Housing Authority reports that Asian families make
up over 10.5 percent of all families waiting for 3+ bedroom
subsidies and 30.1 percent of the families on its 4+ bedroom
waiting list.
d. Female-Headed Households
According to the 1990 Census, 30.6 percent of all households
in Redding are headed by a female. Of these households, 30.2
percent have minor children in the household. The Redding
Housing Authority reports that more than 79 percent of the
households currently on the waiting list for subsidies are headed
by females. The income calculations from the 1990 Census are
not yet available, but in 1980 the mean family income of female-
headed households with minor children present was reported to
25
i
e
be 65 percent less than all families in general. For female-headed
households without children present (typically elderly women),
the income figure is 30 percent less than all families in general.
i Of the 8,364 female-headed households residing in Redding in
1991 , it is estimated that 80 percent are overpaying for housing.
These statistics represent an accurate picture of what has been
called the "feminization" of poverty. According to the housing
report, "Grasping at the Dream, California Housing: Who can
Afford the Price?" prepared by the California State Senate Office
of Research in June 1990, several expert sources stated that
female-headed families are disproportionately affected by the
current housing crisis and are possibly the group with the most
extensive housing needs. Nationwide, two-thirds (66 percent) of
all low-income renter families with children are composed of a
female single parent and her children.
in addition to affordability issues, much of this group has an
added burden of locating units which are suitable for raising
children. Features such as an adequate number of bedrooms,
play yards, fencing, and a physically safe neighborhood, are
critical issues to the well being of a family. Most new rental
housing is being built with 2 or less bedrooms. According to
City Building Department records, of the 577 new multi-family
units which have been constructed during the 20-month period
May 1990 through December 1991, 88 percent (508) had 2
bedrooms or less. Existing rental units in an affordable price
range are typically located in older, less desirable neighborhoods.
Programs such as Family Self-Sufficiency,and affordable housing
new construction efforts will help address this group's need for
decent, affordable larger units, as well as provide access to
supportive services,such as child care,which are vital to families
with children. New HUD programs such as Family Self-
Sufficiency and the Homeless Demonstration Program (Programs
5.9 & 5.6) have the ability to provide opportunities for lower-
income families to pull themselves out of the poverty cycle
through a network of education,job-training, mental and physical
health services, and alcohol and substance abuse counseling.
e. Minorities
The breakdown of Redding's population by ethnic group is
presented in an earlier section of this document, "Income and
Ethnicity." The housing needs of these groups are, for the most
part, identical to those of non-minorities in Redding. All low-and
moderate-income persons, regardless of ethnicity, face the major
problem of housing affordability and secondly, the issue of
housing availability. Other than the correlation between
minorities and size of family, which was discussed previously in
the section on large families, housing problems existing solely
because of race do not appear to be an issue in the community.
26
f. Farm Workers
Redding is located at the northern end of the Sacramento Valley,
which is above the major agricultural areas of California. In
1990, agricultural employment comprised only 2 percent of the
total wage and salary employment in the entire County. This
category of employment, in addition to containing traditional
farm work, includes those individuals employed in the forestry
industry. Individuals employed in the forestry industry typically
have permanent housing they return to on a daily basis or are
housed by the company at the various job sites, the majority of
which are located in the mountainous areas outside of the
County. The primary types of traditional farm work in Shasta
County are jobs related to strawberry plant processing, potato
harvesting and apiary work.
According to the State Employment Development Department's
Agricultural Specialist for Shasta County, within the planning
area of the City of Redding there are no agricultural operations
which use temporary, seasonal farm workers. The Region 2
Office of Migrant Child Education also reports that they do not
perceive a need for specific housing for farm workers in the
immediate Redding area. Both of these service providers stated
that the vast majority of farm workers residing in this area are
permanent, not migratory, residents. According to both sources,
EDD and Migrant Education, many of the families employed in
farm work.are of Hispanic or Southeast Asian heritage. Because
these ethnicities tend to have larger families, the difficulties
described in Sections 1115c "Large Families" and IIIA3
"Overcrowding" would apply. These problems would be
compounded with any communication difficulties related to non-
English speaking households. In order to mitigate this last
difficulty on City sponsored programs, the Redding Housing
Authority has access to translators for many of the commonly
spoken Southeast Asian dialects, as well as Spanish, if needed.
It appears that except for those problems noted above, the
housing needs of households employed in agriculture do not
differ from other households of comparable income employed
elsewhere in this area.
g. Persons or Families in Need of Emergency Shelter
Recent amendments to housing element law (Article 10.6 of the
Government Code) require local governments to plan for the
provision of shelters and transitional housing for homeless
persons and families. In addition, all localities must designate
sites suitable to accommodate facilities capable of meeting the
identified need.
27
The following discussion attempts to identify those in the
'I population who are currently in need of emergency shelter, and
!I project an estimate of the number of persons and families who
are considered to be in the "at risk" category. This last group
would be individuals and families whose current housing situation
is so fragile that the likelihood of their requiring emergency
I
shelter in the immediate future is high.
The 1990 Census is the first national effort taken to enumerate
the homeless population. Based upon preliminary figures from
the 1990 Census, the homeless population count in Redding as
of April 1990 was 584 (.8 percent of the general population).
According to the State in it's draft Comprehensive Housing
Affordability Strategy (CHAS), crude estimates of Statewide
homelessness on any given day range from one-half to one
percent of the general population.
This report relies upon estimates provided by the primary
providers of current services to Redding's homeless and at risk
populations. Among these service providers are the City and
County Housing Authorities, County Social Services Department,
County Mental Health Department, County Youth Services,
Social Security Administration, as well as several non-profit
community-based organizations: People of Progress, Northern
!, Valley Catholic Social Services, Good News Rescue
Mission/House of Hope, Shasta Housing Development
Corporation, and the Salvation Army.
It is difficult to accurately document the extent of the homeless
condition in the area. Service providers generally are working
with specialized segments of the total homeless/at risk
population. Overlap among clients occurs frequently as many of
this population have multiple unmet needs.
Homelessness, by its very definition, implies an absence of basic
necessities. Lack of shelter typically goes hand in hand with lack
of adequate food, clothing, transportation, and steady income.
In addition to the portion of the whole which might be double or
triple counted, there also remains a portion of the whole which
is more likely not to be counted at all. Those individuals who
choose to separate themselves from organized society's efforts
to help them remain uncounted.
II It is even more difficult to tally the "at risk" portion of the
population. These people represent a potentially huge addition
to the overall homeless population. On the verge of homeless-
ness, many of these "at risk" people are in a constant state of
flux between the two designations. The largest element of the
at risk population is made up of lower-income families, tenuously
employed or relying on public assistance who are currently over-
paying for housing. A slight over-balancing in any area of their
lives can push them into homelessness.
28
I
Little community-wide data is available to accurately tally the
various categories of homeless persons. Single men, at one time
considered to be the primary component of the homeless
population, today comprise only one element of the homeless
population. Several local service providers feel that homeless
families make up between 75-90 percent of the homeless
population in the area. It is possible that the relative scarcity of
programs offering supportive services to single homeless persons
may influence these statistics, as data is generally kept for those
served only. Statistics for the seasonal shelter operated by the
Salvation Army, which serves singles as well as family groups,
show a predominance of single males (76% of all participants)
over any other group.
Three local providers, the Housing Authorities of the City of
Redding and Shasta County and the Shasta County Social
Services Department operate programs which deal almost
exclusively with homeless families.
The City of Redding Housing Authority reports that during the
12-month period ending September 1 , 1991, 52 homeless
families were assisted with Section 8 rental assistance.
The Shasta County Social Services Department had applications
for assistance from approximately 2,964 unduplicated families
from July 1, 1990 through June 30, 1991. Social Services is
able to assist homeless families through two programs. The first
provides monetary assistance for shelter (up to 16 days) at local
motels. The second provides monetary assistance to help with
the move-in costs associated with securing permanent housing.
Eligible costs are utility and security deposits, as well as the last
month's rent, if required. Both of these programs are available
one time in any 24-month period for each eligible family
Statewide. The average grant per family covering both programs
is $1,480.
Several local non-profit agencies also assist the homeless
population with vouchers for lodging at local motels. Motel
vouchers for emergency shelter are available from People of
Progress and the Salvation Army. Both of these agencies serve
both homeless singles and families; however, they report the
majority of their clientele is made up of families. The amount of
assistance these two agencies can provide is limited. During the
12-month period ending September 30, 1991 , the Salvation
Army assisted the area's homeless with a total of 2,966 motel
voucher nights. People of Progress reports providing 4,967
motel shelter nights during a 90-day period ending September
30, 1991. Of these vouchers, 1,384 went to assist homeless
adolescent mothers and their children through a cooperative
agreement with another local nonprofit agency, Northern Valley
Catholic Social Service.
29
Year round emergency shelter is available for single men through
the Good News Rescue Mission. This primarily evangelical
organization operates a 36-bed homeless shelter. In exchange
for attendance at a religious service, homeless men receive
meals, shower, and a bed.
The only secular emergency shelter currently available in the
community is the Armory Shelter, which is open during the
winter months. This facility (open typically from December -
April each year) provides food, baths, and beds for up to 125
men, women and children per night. During the period from
December 1, 1990 through April 3, 1991, the Armory Shelter
provided 7,296 lodging spaces(an average of 63 per night). The
majority of users of this shelter are single men (approximately
74%). Homeless families comprise approximately 18% of the
shelter clients, with single women making up less than 5% of the
clientele.
Various private and governmental agencies provide limited
emergency shelter to specialized client groups apart from the
above-mentioned facilities. Shasta County Community Mental
Health Services is able to temporarily house up to sixteen client
households each night, utilizing motel rent vouchers. The Shasta
County Women's Refuge operates a 24-bed emergency facility
available to abused women and children for up to a one-month
stay.
In January 1991, "Pine Place," a 10-bed facility for homeless,
single teenage mothers, opened in Redding. Administered by
Northern Valley Catholic Social Service, this facility acts as both
an emergency shelter and transitional facility for the target
population group. Two transitional facilities, providing an
` additional 20 units, have also opened during the past six months.
Both of these facilities provide shelter and other supportive
services to homeless families. Shasta Housing Development
Corporation, which owns and administers the latter two facilities,
reports 87 families are currently on the waiting list for available
units. Although the facilities have only recently begun operation,
May '91 and July '91 respectively, it is anticipated that 60
families annually will be assisted with an average stay of four -
six months per family.
Recent Federal and State funding for both emergency and
transitional shelters has opened up the possibilities for innovative
service providers interested in creating similar opportunities for
other client groups.
30
New transitional and emergency housing facilities must comply
with current development standards and zoning requirements.
Generally, transitional facilities would be allowed in all multi-
family residential districts pursuant to adopted development
standards and dependent upon the type of facility proposed; i.e.
mobilehome park, apartments, boarding house, etc. Emergency
shelters would be allowed in commercial districts upon issuance
of a use-permit for the project. The project review process
ensures that common standards are applied to all projects.
Conditions imposed during the process would be standardized,
objective, and no more restrictive than those for similar projects,
such as hotels, apartments, or boarding houses in commercial
areas. During FY 92 -93, the City's Zoning Ordinance will be
reviewed and revised to specify both transitional housing and
emergency shelter facilities for the homeless under the
appropriate categories (Program 5.5).
The availability of vacant multi-family sites and vacant
commercial sites is depicted in Tables A1-A2 in the Appendix. k
Commercial property often is the most expensive land
classification within a community; however, there is commercial
land that suffers from poor exposure or a less than desirable
location and would be correspondingly less valuable. The market
value is determined on a dollar per square foot basis
representative of the attractiveness of the property's location for
business trade. Land in the more popular commercial core areas
would very likely be too expensive for a homeless project. In
Redding, less expensive commercial sites are available along the
Highway 273 corridor and in the Lake Boulevard area which are
adjacent to both medical and social services for the homeless.
Under the City's Zoning Ordinance, apartments can be developed
in commercial areas with reduced yard requirements and at
densities up to 21 units per acre.
Current City zoning and land use ordinances do not pose an
unreasonable constraint on the development of homeless
facilities. Development of new homeless facilities in Redding
suffers primarily from lack of sufficient funding for projects and
the relative inexperience of local non-profit developers of this
type of housing.
In the past, existing structures have primarily been utilized for
both emergency and transitional facilities. Often, acquisition and
rehabilitation of under-utilized or economically obsolete
structures, such as older motels, single-room occupancy hotels,
or older apartment buildings, is more financially feasible than
new construction. Several of Redding's older motel complexes
have been considered for modification to transitional facilities.
One motel facility was purchased and rehabilitated for this
purpose during the past year. Two older apartment buildings
31
have also been purchased and are being utilized as transitional
housing. The emergency facilities which are currently available
in Redding also utilize existing structures, the National Guard
Armory and an older commercial building.
It is important to note that the long-term success of any program
for the homeless lies at least in part with its ability to address the
proximate problem the majority of homeless face of insufficient,
stable income to secure permanent housing. Transitional housing
projects must address a wide range of social, personal, and
economic problems which act as barriers for many homeless
persons. These problems often include lack of job skills, lack of
money management skills, substance abuse, lack of reliable child
care, lack of transportation, insufficient mental and physical
health care, and other personal problems.
Long-range alleviation of homelessness also relies upon the
availability of affordable housing in the community and.
availability of jobs which pay adequate wages. Without units
;i available at an affordable price, many families who have
struggled for months to overcome personal and economic
problems will find themselves once again back on the streets.
For lower-income "at risk" households, excessive housing costs
often act as the agent which pushes them into homelessness.
Without employment opportunities, it is difficult if not impossible
to sustain stable living arrangements, even when that housing is
considered affordable.
Based upon testimony received during recent public meetings
held to discuss community housing needs and staff research with
the area's homeless service providers, there exists a need for the
following:
i
Homeless transitional housing facilities able to house a
minimum of 70 more families.
Direct financial assistance with the costs related to
securing permanent housing such as security and other
required deposits.
A year-round emergency shelter of 50 - 80 beds able to
serve singles and families, as well as disabled adults.
- Greater availability of affordable housing in the
community.
32
B. Assessment of Future Housing Needs Based Upon Regional Share Figures
The State Department of Housing and Community Development has projected that by
July 1997, Redding's population will consist of 34,433 households. Table 3 illustrates
these households broken down by income group. HCD has further estimated the new
housing units that must be built to adequately house Redding's future population. In order
to bring these figures current, the number of actual residential units that have been
constructed in Redding since January 1, 1991 (HCD calculations are based on existing
housing units and population figures as of January 1. 1991) have been subtracted from
the projected need figures in Table 4.
As discussed in Section IV C, City building officials project that the private
construction pace of approximately 1,200 new units per year will continue
through the five-year planning period. The past year's lower numbers reflect
the overall instability of the national and state economic situation. As the
economy recovers, it is likely that private residential development will
experience a resurgence.
I
Historically, most private market single-family units have been constructed in
the mid to upper price ranges. Privately built multi-family units are usually
constructed as for-profit ventures and the rents are structured with a laissez-
faire approach. In a tight rental market such as Redding's, lower-priced units j
become non-existent as competition for available units increases.
The construction of units affordable to the community's lower-income
households will most likely come about through public-private partnerships. In
the past, affordable projects have only come to fruition through the creative use
of non-traditional private and public financing. Federal, State, and local sources
of financing for affordable projects will be highly sought after during the
upcoming planning period.
The City will pursue the provision of affordable housing for lower-income
residents through a multi-faceted strategy which includes continued
rehabilitation of the existing housing stock, provision of direct rental housing
subsidies, operation of supportive housing programs which train families to be
economically self-sufficient, preservation of existing affordable housing units,
as well as facilitating the construction of new, affordable units. Efforts to
facilitate new construction of affordable units are discussed in detail in Section
IX, Programs 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 2.5, 2.8, 2.9, 2.1 1, 2.12, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 4.1, and
5.5. As can be readily seen from the tables, the projected need over the next
five years is far greater than the currently identified sources of financing for
affordable projects. In order to increase the availability of affordable housing,
and maximize the likelihood that the Housing Element goal of 950 new
affordable units over the planning period is reached, the City will inform the
local development community, including both non-profit and for profit
developers, regarding existing program requirements and benefits; apply for
new funding such as HOME, which can be used for new construction; increase
the availability of land zoned for higher density housing projects; and undertake
development of affordable multifamily housing through the Redding Housing
Development Corporation (Program 2.11).
33
TABLE 3
II California State Department of Housing and Community Development
i
POPULATION PROJECTION FIGURES FOR REDDING
II
January 1, 1991 to July 1, 1997
Number of Number of
Households Households Growth by
i
January 1, 1991 % July 1, 1997 % Income Group
INCOME GROUP
Very low 6,014 22% 7,575 22% +1,561
Other lower 5,193 19% 6,542 19% +1,349
Moderate 5,467 20% 6,887 20% +1,420
Above moderate 10,667 39% 13,429 39% +2,768
TOTAL: 27,335 100% 34,433 100% +7,098
Source: California State Department of Housing & Community Development
34
TABLE 4
California State Department of Housing & Community Development
BASIC CONSTRUCTION NEEDS FOR REDDING
January 1, 1991 to July 1, 1997
BY COMPONENTS: (') Housing Units
Household Increase 7,098
1991 Vacancy Need 740
1997 Vacancy Need 439
Replacement Need 1991-1997 422
TOTAL PROJECTED NEED: 8,699
(•) Basic Construction Needs were calculated using the following: A
homeownership percentage of 53.5; a vacant not-for-sale-or-rent percentage of
2; and an annual removal rate of .002.
Above
Very Low Low Moderate Moderate Total
BY INCOME GROUP: Income Income Income Income Units
Need as of January, 1991 1,914 1,652 1,740 3,393 8,699
Constructed January 1991
through December 1991 0 0 250 422 672
Units Needed from January
1992 to July 1997 1,914 1,652 1,490 2,971 8,027
Units Needed Per Year 348 300 271 540 1,459
Source: California State Department of Housing and Community Development Regional
Housing Needs Plan for Shasta County, October 1991.
35
G
C. Land Inventory & Site Availability
The availability of sufficient vacant land suitable to be developed for residential
purposes is a critical factor in any residential project feasibility analysis. During
the summer of 1991, Department of Planning and Community Development
staff Table Al identifies the total gross acreage of all land within the City of
Redding Sphere of Influence and the gross acreage within each category which
is undeveloped. Table A2 further identifies residential land within the City limits
by density category,the amount of undeveloped land within each category, and
the potential number of additional units which could be developed. Figures 7-
10 in the Appendix identify the general location of vacant land within the City
classified as appropriate for medium-to high-density housing projects. Higher-
density land is widely considered to be more adaptable to affordable-housing
projects because of a variety of factors. The most common assumption is that
it has a relatively less expensive per-acre cost which could pass down to future
residents as correspondingly lower-housing costs. In Redding, as in other
communities in the State, land classified for multi-family development is
generally appraised by multiplying a "per-unit" cost with the number of units
that can be developed on the parcel. Density is only one of many variables
utilized when determining "per-unit" cost. According to information provided
by two local MAI appraisers, other factors which influence "per-unit" cost are
size of the parcel, location, topography, and availability of infrastructure. For
example, if per-unit cost is $5,000, an acre of land zoned for 9 units per acre
would be valued at $45,000. That same parcel zoned at 18 units per acre
would appraise at approximately $90,000. In a recent study of three privately
developed, unassisted multi-family projects consisting of a total of 276 units
built in Redding within the past two years, land costs were similar for all
densities with comparable locations.
Projects built at higher densities can, however, realize overall project cost
savings due to factors other than land cost. The cost of construction on a
multi-family project can be lowered on a per-unit basis in higher-density projects
because of a greater sharing of building elements such as exterior walls and
mechanical systems. Project infrastructure costs such as required street
improvements, etc. might be lower also on higher density projects.
According to a recent report, "The Cost of Affordable Housing," commissioned
by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, a major
factor in the affordability of multifamily housing development is the scale of the
project. Projects of 200+ units are considered optimal to minimize the per unit
cost. It is unclear whether this "scale" factor would be enhanced due to higher
density.
Land density, while not the most important factor in the affordability formula,
has an acknowleged effect on overall project affordability for the above
reasons.
As required by State Housing Element Law, a community's Housing Element
must demonstrate availability of land, sufficient to accommodate the number
of new units necessary to house the population anticipated over the next five-
year period. Discussed in detail in Section IIIB, HCD is projecting an increase
of approximately 7,098 new households in Redding by July 1, 1997.
36
',i
Approximately 2,910 of these households will be in the lower-income groups
for which higher-density housing is seen as most likely to be affordable. Tables
3-4 in the previous section show a need for a minimum of 3,566 new units
over the next five years to adequately house this population group. This figure
takes into consideration a vacancy factor and a replacement factor for
deteriorated existing housing needing replacement over the five-year period.
Utilizing a zoning density of 18 units per acre, a minimum of 198 acres of land
would be required to develop this number of potentially affordable new units.
As can be seen by the vacant residential land inventory (Table A2), currently
there are approximately 40 acres of appropriately zoned land available to be
developed at 18+ units per acre. A deficit of 158 acres remains.
The City will, through a variety of actions, increase the amount of higher
density land within its boundaries which is available for development at 18
units per acre or higher. The land to be considered for upzoning generally
consists of the parcels identified on Figures 7-10 in the Appendix. The
properties identified on the location maps (Figures 7-10) are currently classified
for multi-family residential development. These properties within the City limits
have adequate infrastructure and all utility services available to them. As can,
be seen from the location maps, higher density land uses are generally
concentrated in the core areas of the City or along major arterials. All sites
have access to public transportation and retail amenities. The terrain is
generally level to slightly sloping allowing for development of the maximum
number of units. Consideration will be given to increasing the density of
parcels which meet General Plan land use classification parameters for 24 units
per acre (as contained in the Land Use Element of the General Plan) to that
density.
These actions will occur early within the five-year planning period to allow
sufficient time for the subsequent development to occur within the target five-
year period. The actions which the City will undertake include the following:
1. Updating and consolidation of all existing Area Plans within the City, as
defined in the Land Use Element.
The City and its Sphere of Influence is currently divided into planning
units called Area Plans (See Figure 6). With this action, the City will
evaluate existing land use and zoning within the entire City over a ten-
year period. As part of each Area Plan update the City will upzone
existing multi-family designated vacant land, as well as identify and
recommend redevelopment of underutilized land appropriate for high
density residential use. Area Plans containing vacant land within the
existing City limits with the greatest potential for development of
affordable housing will be evaluated early in the action program. During
the first three years of this process, calculations of acreage to be
upzoned is not dependent upon annexation activity.
Land to be upzoned will be those vacant parcels designated as multi-
family parcels,which have utility services available or in close proximity,
are in close proximity to major arterials, have urban transit services
available, are in close proximity to retail and commercial centers, and
whose natural terrain would allow full development of the parcel.
37
Disbursement of the upzoned land throughout the City will also be a
consideration. The following is a schedule for the Area Plan Update
Program and the anticipated amount of higher density acreage to be
added.
TABLE 5
SCHEDULE OF AREA PLANS UPDATE AND CONSOLIDATION
AREA PLAN INCREASE IN 18+ UNITS/ACRE FISCAL YEAR
LAND
I,
Westside Area Plan 5 acres 1 991/92
Upper Stillwater Area Plan 20 acres 1992/93
Middle Stillwater Area Plan 50 acres 1992/93
Upper Churn Creek Area Plan 50 acres 1992/93
i
Middle Churn Creek Area Plan 50 acres 1993/94
Expansion of Texas Springs 0 acres 1993/94
Buckeye Area Plan 20 acres 1994/95
Enterprise Area Plan 50 acres 1994/95
Cascade Area Plan 5 acres 1995/98
Quartz Hill Road Area Plan 20 acres 1995/98
i
Downtown Redding Area Plan 5 acres 1998/97
Churn Creek Bottom Area Plan 0 acres 2000/01
Redding Municipal Airport Specific
Plan 5 acres 2000/01
i TOTAL ANTICIPATED
ACREAGE AT 18+ U/A: 280 ACRES
Time Frame: 175 acres by July 1, 1994; and an additional 105 acres by July
1, 2002.
38
I
• • .
FIGURE 6
CURRENT & ANTICIPATED AREA AND SPECIFIC PLANS
W
0 1.0 20 3.0
.5 L5 25
MILES '
• UPPER S1ILLWATER
AREA PLAN ;
�• •
•��■■■■■■•■■••■•a•■y •memo
•
r■ •
■
• ■■••■■■.•■■•■ )M■iso
• ••
• QUARTZ HILI RD. j i
AREA PLAN •• BUCK
/; AREA N
• PPER CHURN a j
• S AREA ..
ei
• •♦ • •• •
• MIDDLE
date CHURN �•
— CREEK Ii MIDDLE WATER •
• • �j= AREA i AREA '
•�i•Zi ii.i=iM■m• �■•••■■•■• PLAN
•• i
•
•
• •• •• I •
WEST60
SIDE '•
• • •
AREA PLAN .4s. �� ; •' •�.....
r•i�• •• ••••.�j•� •� • •■mp■•■•
• •�••• AREAage
•• •
■
1 _ •
• •• • •■ REDDING •
• •■ r •• ■
AL
• •• •■ A�iPORT •
mt....... • •• SPECIRC •
■• a •• • •
TaAS •• PLAN
• •
:; CASCADE! •
AREA :; AREA PLAN �••�
•. REEK a
a .
we
gp
. • P
• • • •
••••••• ••�•mn ei•'•! 1 i •
• •
010.
•• •• : •■
• • •
i •••as
•
,•va■■••i■•■■■J■■••wa■■••.,
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
BOUNDARY
39
2. Compile Inventory of Sites Appropriate for Intensification of Use
In addition to the vacant sites identified as suitable for new development
of multiple-family units, sites located within several older residential
neighborhoods in Redding's core might be suitable for redevelopment
to higher density use. For example, a neighborhood comprised of older
single-family homes whose use has changed to primarily lower-cost
rentals. Several neighborhoods located in the Parkview Area of Redding
were developed 40-50 years ago as single-family areas with zoning
which would allow development as high as 30+ units per acre. Similar
neighborhoods exist in several other areas of the City and might also
lend themselves to more intensive use or redevelopment.
The City will undertake the study of selected areas of the City whose
age, condition, or present pattern of use might lend itself to
redevelopment into affordable housing. An inventory of appropriate
sites will be compiled and made available to developers of affordable
housing projects.
Total increase in available acreage at 18+ units per acre: 25 acres
Time Frame: FY 92-94
3. Annexation. Program
The City will continue its ongoing program of annexation of property
adjacent to existing boundaries. As annexations occur, the potential for
upzoning of vacant land will be considered.
Total increase in available acreage at 18+ units per acre: Unknown
Time Framer Ongoing.
Summary
Through implementation of the Area Plan Update Program, the Land
Redevelopment Study, and to a lesser extent,the Annexation Program, detailed
above, the City will increase the inventory of land suitable for development of
higher density units sufficiently to accommodate the anticipated population
growth over the next ten years.
The level of annexation activity which the City will undertake during the next
five year period is undetermined at this point in time. For that reason, the total
amount of higher density acreage to be added to the City land inventory
j through annexation is unable to be accurately identified. No projection of
acreage to be gained through annexation is included in the following acreage
totals for the three actions.
By July 1994 a minimum of 200 acres of higher density land will have been
added, by July 2002 an additional 105 acres is anticipated to be added.
40
I
It is important to note that the actions described above are subject to public
input throughout the update process. Upzoning and General Plan classification
changes are potentially controversial actions and the subsequent outcome is to
a large extent dependent upon resident desires.
D. Infrastructure Status and Limiting Factors
The City of Redding provides the majority of utility services within the city
limits including water, electrical service, solid waste disposal and waste water
services. A summary of the current status of these services and future
capacity is provided below. Utilities to newly annexed property in the City are
transitioned over time from private vendors to City services.
The City has owned and operated the community's primary water system since
1938. The City water utility supplies water to the majority of City residents
and businesses. In the northeast and westerly portions of the City, two
independent water districts, Bella Vista and Centerville, supply this service.
The principal source of supply for the City's system is the Sacramento River,
with secondary reliance on a series of deep water wells. Current storage
capacity is 28 million gallons and current annual distribution is approximately
6,136 million gallons. The City operates the system as a self-supporting utility.
The City has a long-range water master plan which calls for approximately $31
million of system improvements over the next ten years. It is anticipated that
the current system and the planned-for improvements will be sufficient to
accommodate the level of population growth anticipated during the planning
period.
The City of Redding has owned an electrical power distribution system in the
City since 1921. Redding obtains its energy from a variety of sources including
the Western Area Power Administration, hydro-electric projects solely-owned
or partially-owned by the City Electric Department, and supplemental power
purchased from P.G.& E. Redding's electric distribution system has
approximately 32,000 customers. The system is served by 10 substations.
It is estimated that during the five-year planning period ending in July of 1997,
the City's electric system will be serving 42,000 customers. The City's Electric
Utility has developed a long-range resource plan which will assist the City to
develop and maintain sufficient power resources to meet the future power
requirements of it's customers.
The City of Redding provides all waste water services within the City limits.
The City currently relies upon two regional wastewater treatment facilities,
Clear Creek Treatment Plant and the Stillwater Treatment Plant, for all of its
wastewater treatment needs. The two plants have a combined capacity to
process 12.8 million gallons of wastewater daily. Expansion of both of these
plants is anticipated within the next 10 years, increasing total capacity to 16
million gallons daily, sufficient to accommodate population growth projections
for the next ten-year period.
41
f
• •
Solid waste disposal services are provided by the City at competitive rates for
all City residents. The City currently shares a landfill facility with the County
which is not expected to reach capacity for at least another 30 years. The City
is in the process of selecting a new site for a solid waste transfer station, as
well as a potential future landfill site. It is not anticipated that the landfill site
will become operational during this planning period.
All school districts within the City of Redding charge school fees to developers
to assist with the cost of buildings and facilities to accommodate a growing
student population. In the recent months, a district located within Shasta
County but outside of the City's Sphere of Influence, was successful in
implementing additional development fees on top of those already imposed by
every district in the County. The likelihood is great that other districts will also
pursue these extra fees from residential development during the planning
period.
The City requires developers of all types of projects to contribute to the cost
of providing streets, street lighting, curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements,
and other infrastructure, such as storm drains and sewer lines impacted by the
development. Developer contributions can be in the form of impact fees or
actual construction or improvement of affected infrastructure. The City utilizes
a major portion of its redevelopment tax increment revenues to assist in
defraying the cost of large infrastructure projects and also pursues available
state and federal funds for these projects.
In summary, while cost factors to provide utility services, educational services,
and an adequate transportation system will continue to increase over the next
five-year period, all of these elements will have adequate capacity to serve the
anticipated growth during the same period, as long as money is available for
necessary improvements.
,i
I
42
IV. GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS TO MAINTENANCE, IMPROVEMENT, AND
DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING
Housing affordability is influenced by factors in both the private and public sectors.
Actions by the City can have an impact on the price and availability of housing in the
City. Land-use controls, such as the implementation of the City's General Plan, land
zoning, building code enforcement, and on-and off-site improvement requirements; as
well as fees and exactions, permit processing and other local actions intended to
improve the overall quality of housing, may serve as a constraint to housing
development. This chapter discusses these possible constraints to development and
the actions the City will take or has taken to mitigate the negative effects.
A. Land Use Controls
1. City of Redding's General Plan
Redding's General Plan sets forth policies applicable to nearly all
development. The Land Use Element of the General Plan and'
corresponding zoning provide for a full range of residential types and
densities spread throughout the City. Densities range from 0.1 - 4.0
units per acre in Low-Density Residential areas up to 24.0 units per acre
in areas designed for High-Density Residential. These land-use
classifications and zoning categories are discussed at length in the Land
Use Element of the Redding General Plan.
In determining appropriate density classification for residential land, the
following factors are taken into consideration: existing land use of
surrounding parcels, availability of urban services, size of parcel, street
access, and natural topography. Areas in excess of 20 percent slope or
subject to flooding by a 100-year flood or storm event are generally
unable to be developed unless an entire parcel is so designated, in which
case, by use permit, one dwelling unit per 20 acres may be permitted.
For higher densities, 12 units per acre or greater, generally full urban
services must be available and the parcel must be in close proximity to
a major arterial. At the current maximum residential density
classification, 24 units per acre, parcels must be located in urban core
areas where public transportation is available and many shopping and
service needs can be met by nonmotorized transportation methods.
The City of Redding facilitates the availability of affordable housing
through several development and land use mechanisms. Developers of
housing for seniors are allowed an automatic 100% increase in assigned
density and granted development concessions, such as reduced parking
requirements which add to the affordability of projects. The City has
adopted a condominium conversion ordinance which encourages new
condominium construction rather than conversions in order to assist in
maintaining an adequate supply of rental housing. The City's Accessory
Apartment Ordinance allows second units adjacent to existing single-
family homes in order to add inexpensive rental units to the City's
43
1
housing stock to meet the needs of smaller low- and moderate-income
households. Placement of mobilehomes is allowed in all residential
neighborhoods according to existing development standards.
The City's Planned Development Ordinance allows density bonuses for
high quality projects that provide increased amounts of open space and
are designed in a manner sensitive to the existing topography and
surrounding lands. Increases range up to 50 percent depending upon
residential density classification. The condominium ordinance allows a
ten percent density bonus.
In addition, the City's Density Bonus Ordinance follows current State
law which requires that density bonuses of at least 25 percent be
available to developers of both single-family and multi-family units if:
a. Twenty percent of the developed units are kept affordable for
lower-income households (income less than 80 percent of the
median); or
b. Ten percent of the developed units are kept affordable for very-
low income households (less than 50 percent of the area
median); or
C. Fifty percent of the total units are set aside for senior citizens (62
years or older; 55 years or older if it's a senior citizen
development).
As indicated in Table A-2, an estimated 29,305 additional dwelling units
could be developed within current City boundaries under Redding's
present General Plan within a wide range of residential densities.
Additional units could also be developed in other classifications. As of
January 1, 1991, 28,285 dwelling units existed within the City. Clearly,
the current General Plan has the needed capacity to accommodate the
area's projected growth. According to State HCD, housing affordable
to the area's lower-income population would be more likely to be
developed at higher densities. The relative scarcity of land currently
classified by the General Plan as appropriate for higher density residential
development has been identified as a possible constraint to the provision
of affordable housing in the community. Section IV B-C identifies the
actions the City will undertake during the planning period to mitigate this
possible constraint to development of affordable housing.
Historically, within the City limits, Building Department records indicate
an average residential building rate of approximately 1,200 dwelling
units per year from January 1989 through December 1991. Building
officials anticipate that this rate will continue or increase slightly through
the next planning period.
44
Land absorption for Redding since 1988 indicates that approximately
640 acres, or about one square mile, is used by new development each
year. Of this, about 400 acres is consumed by residential use.
According to City Planning and Community Development Department
records, current building patterns in Redding indicate residential
development projects typically utilize the full capacity of units allowed
by the General Plan. In a recent study of three completed multifamily
projects and two multifamily projects entering the construction phase,
consisting of a total of 353 units, four of the five projects resulted in a
greater number of units per acre than the General Plan classification
under which they were built.
I
2. Zoning
The Zoning Ordinance is the City's principal tool for effectuating the land
use proposals of the General Plan. Redding's Zoning Ordinance
establishes various zoning districts which control both land use and
development standards. Redding's Zoning Ordinance includes a wide
variety of residential districts including both single- and multi-family
development, as well as numerous combining districts which serve to
address special residential situations, such as accessory apartments,
mobile homes, etc. These are discussed in detail in the Land Use
Element of the General Plan.
The City has adopted development standards as part of the Zoning
Ordinance which address usable open space, slope density standards,
and building set-backs. These provide for passive and active recreational
opportunities, reduce hillside erosion and water course siltation, and
protect the public health and safety by slowing the spread of fires and
ensuring adequate light and air passage.
These development standards are viewed as necessary to protect public
health, safety, and welfare and maintain the quality of life, and are not
considered constraints to the development of housing. The City has
adopted a Density Bonus Program pursuant to State law which allows
for negotiation of reduction of development standards to assist in the
development of affordable housing units.
3. Building Code Enforcement
Building construction standards in Redding are based upon the 1990
Uniform Building Code. This Code is updated every three years as per
State requirements. The City also utilizes the Uniform Plumbing Code,
Housing Code, Electrical Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, and enforces
Title 24 regarding handicapped and energy provisions. Generally, the
City does not require stricter construction standards than are contained
in these codes. However, a variety of code revisions have been
implemented which address unit security, energy conservation, fire
safety, and increased structural requirements based upon the area's
winter climate. These revisions are not considered constraints to
45
development as the cost factors in meeting the heightened requirements
are minor. Redding does not enforce a stricter seismic code than
required by State law. The City has not established an ongoing
systematic enforcement of building code standards for existing
dwellings. Existing units are inspected only when complaints are
received by the City, or when an owner seeks a permit for additional
construction. Existing units undergoing rehabilitation, are not required
to meet current code standards. They are, however, required to meet
the code under which they were constructed.
4. On- and Off-Site Improvements
Redding, like most cities in California, requires developers to provide a
full compliment of on-and off-site improvements including streets, curb,
gutter, sidewalk, street trees, drainage, water, sewer, electric and
communication utilities, and in some cases,traffic mitigations. The cost
of these improvements is passed on to the eventual buyers or tenants
in the form of higher purchase prices or increased rents.
Given the prevailing public sentiment to require new development to pay
its own way rather than have the existing residents pay the cost through
a broader base of financial support such as local taxes, it is unlikely that
the cost burden of site improvements will markedly decrease in the near
future.
The City has adopted off-street parking requirements for all residential
developments. These range from two covered spaces per single-family
dwelling, to a formula based number of open spaces required for multi-
family projects based upon the total number of units and bedrooms in
the individual project. For example, parking requirements for a 20 unit
project would range from 30 to 40 uncovered, off site parking spaces
depending upon the unit mix of bedroom sizes. As density increases,the
off site parking requirements are slightly reduced. For example, 36 2
bedroom units built at 9 units/acre density would require approximately
72 off street parking stalls, the same complex built at 24 units/acre
would require 63 parking stalls. It is felt that these requirements guard
the public health and safety by discouraging burglaries, vandalism, and
car theft. The initial higher cost is offset by long-term savings in police
service costs. These requirements are also seen as a means of
enhancing the community's appearance. As previously noted, senior
citizen projects can be developed at 50°x6 of the off-street parking
required for conventional apartments. Also, the City allows reduced
parking for mobilehome parks.
5. Site Development Standards
The City has adopted Site Development Standards which provide general
guidelines for the development of all residential projects. Most projects
undertaken in the City are subject to some level of discretionary review
to assure compliance with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and the
following standards.
46
General
a. Single-family subdivisions should not have lots with direct access
to major arterials.
b. Residential uses should be :separated from major arterials by
screening, sound barriers,.and acoustical insulation.
C. The density of a development should be reflective of the
topography. For example, the greater the slope, the lower the
density.
d. Higher densities should be located closer to transportation
corridors.
e. Residential units should not be constructed in areas where there
is a high probability of hazard to life or property.
f. Dwelling units other than senior-citizens housing should be
discouraged in the retail-commercial districts.
g. Residential uses other than caretaker units should be discouraged
in Heavy Commercial and Industrial areas. j
h. Emergency facilities for the homeless which provide temporary
or limited shelter shall be allowed in commercial districts subject
to a use-permit.
i. Where higher-density housing adjoins lower-density housing
efforts should be made to preserve the privacy of the lower-
density housing through screening, berms, fencing, windowless
walls, and lowered building height.
j. Large residential subdivisions should have two points of access
in case of emergency.
k. Attempts should be made to create viable residential
neighborhoods with parks,schools or open-space as focal points.
I. Residential areas should incorporate walks for pedestrian safety
along streets.
M. Residential areas should have adequate street setbacks and
landscaping to provide an attractive community.
47
I!
it ' � •
Mobilehomes
Mobilehomes should continue to be permitted in the City in areas where
"ST" or "RT" zoning is adopted and where there is a pattern of
mobilehomes prior to annexation. Mobilehomes and other manufactured
housing are allowed in other zones subject to meeting building code
requirements. Mobilehome parks are allowed in multi-family areas and
retail commercial areas. Travel trailer parks are allowed in retail areas.
Assisted Housina
Development of assisted or below market rate housing in the City should
follow the guidelines listed below:
a. Single-Family Housing
1) Subsidized single-family housing shall be located in areas
designated for single-family use by the General Plan and
Zoning Ordinance, and construction shall be at densities
compatable with those existing in the area.
2) Subsidized single-family housing units developed in
existing subdivisions shall be disbursed throughout the
subdivision and no more than two units shall be adjacent
to each other at any one location.
3) Sites for assisted single-family housing units shall be
selected so that public facilities are available and
community services are within a reasonable distance, or
public transportation is readily available from the project
to the services.
b. Multiple-Family Housina Projects
.I
1) Density bonus units in fully subsidized projects shall not
exceed 25 percent of the total number of units in the
project.
2) Fully subsidized multiple-family housing projects shall not
be closer than 500 feet to another assisted housing
project.
3) Subsidized multiple-family housing projects shall be
located where public facilities are available and
community services are within a reasonable distance, or
public transportation is readily available from the project
to the services.
48
C. Rehabilitation
1) Rehabilitation of existing housing units shall occur only in
area designated for residential uses by the General Plan
and Zoning Ordinance, excluding residential hotels and
senior-citizen facilities in retail areas and homeless
shelters within commercial districts, unless waived by the
Planning Commission.
d. General
1) All assisted housing projects, regardless of size, shall be
reviewed by the City for conformance to local codes and
ordinances, the General Plan, and the preceding
guidelines. The Planning Commission may consider a
waiver of Site Development Standards if, in their opinion,
a project is worthy of consideration and would not be
materially detrimental to the concepts outlined or to the
neighborhood.
2) Projects shall not be eligible for more than one density
bonus per program per project. For example, a
development cannot obtain both a State density bonus
and a planned development bonus unit for the same
project.
B. Fees and Exactions
Various fees and assessments are charged by the City to cover the costs of
processing permits and providing services and facilities, such as utilities,
schools, and infrastructure. Nearly all of these fees are assessed through a pro
rata share system, based on the magnitude of the project's impact or on the
extent of the benefit which will be derived. These fees, however, contribute
to the cost of housing and may constrain the development of lower priced
units. In order to mitigate this effect,other programs such as Density Bonuses,
State and Federal funded construction programs, and tax free Mortgage
Revenue Bond Financing, which all serve to greatly reduce overall production
costs, are promoted by the City.
Table 6 presents typical development fees associated with the construction of
a single-family house of four various sizes. Similarly, Table 7 summarizes the
typical development fees associated with the construction of a duplex and
fourplex. The fees include various building permits and plan check fees,
development fees, water and sewer fees,traffic impact fees,and school impact
fees. It is estimated that City development fees contribute approximately 7% -
10% to the overall cost of housing development.
I
Fees collected on zoning and subdivision applications presently do not cover
staff costs for processing the application. Building fees represent the estimated
cost of service for processing, plan check, inspection, etc.
49
In addition to building and development fees, zoning, and subdivision
application fees, subdividers are required to dedicate land to be developed into
neighborhood parks or pay a per-unit fee in lieu thereof (or both) as a condition
of approval of a final map or parcel map (Chapter 17.42 of the Redding
Municipal Code). The Land Use Element establishes policies on how a
developer can retain density credits for areas dedicated at no cost for park,
streets, and school sites.
C. Processing and Permit Procedures
I! Redding's General Plan establishes the potential capacity of housing units which
can be built in the City. As required by law, in order to build these units a
series of approvals (tentative subdivision map, use permit, variance, etc.) must
be obtained to assure that certain standards are met. Development review can
affect housing costs primarily because interest on loans must continue to be
paid, and the longer it takes for a project to be approved, the higher the
development cost.
The issue of affordable housing is blamed on local government, State
government, tax, laws, lenders, builders, building codes, suppliers,
environment, realtors, etc. The truth of the matter is that entry level homes
built in the first half of this century were smaller than entry level homes being
built today. Homes now have 1 '/2 or 2 baths, central air conditioning and other
amenities. The problem of affordability can be met in a large part by a minimal
entry level house, one that can be added to and improved as new income
allows.
The review process in Redding is governed by four levels of decision-making
authority: City Council, Planning Commission, Board of Administrative Review,
and the Director of Planning and Community Development. In order to expedite
the processing of routine and simple use permits and variances (zoning
exceptions), the City, in February 1989, established an administrative permit
procedure. These permits may be processed and approved by the Director of
Planning and Community Development instead of the Board of Administrative
Review or Planning Commission, and do not require a public hearing.
A wide variety of discretionary permits are processed by the City's Planning
Department. Most permits can be processed from two weeks up to four
months if an environmental impact report (EIR) or other study is not required.
This processing time is well within the time limits established by the Permit
Streamlining Act (Public Resources Code Section 21 100 et. seq.)
The City Building Division indicates that in most instances, permits for new
housing, rehabilitation, or additions can be approved in about 3-4 weeks, with
many taking far less time. Due to the City's efforts to expedite the approval
process, it is not felt that the amount of time necessary for processing
applications and following existing permit procedures is a constraint to
development.
50
'i
TABLE 6
SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT FEES
FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS
1200 SF 1500 SF 1800 SF 2100 SF
BUILDING FEES
Building 497 564 627 685
Electric 57 67 78 88
Plumbing 110 110 110 110
Mechanical 44 44 44 44
Plan Check 317 360 401 438
Subtotal: $1,025 $1,145 $1,260 $1,365
DEVELOPMENT FEES
Parks 275 275 275 275
Electric 100 100 100 100
Capital Improvements 200 200 200 200
Storm Drain 168 198 198 198
Traffic Fees 800 800 800 800
Subtotal: T_$1,543 $1,573 $1,603 $1,633
WATER & SEWER
Sewer 1,950 1,950 1,950 1,950
Water Meter 55 55 55 55
Water Connection 1,700 1,700 1,700 1,700
Subtotal: $3,705 $3,705 $3,705 $3,705
SCHOOL FEES
@ $1.58 per square foot $1,896 $2,370 $2,844 $3,318
TOTAL: $8,169 1 $8,793 $9,412 $10,021
The City of Redding has established benefit districts to fund public improvements that relate to specific
geographic areas. These are in addition to the above fees. Such fees apply to storm drainage and street
improvements.
Source: Department of Planning & Community Development - Building Department - January 1, 1992
I
51
i
TABLE 7
SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT FEES FOR
A TYPICAL DUPLEX AND FOURPLEX
Duplex - 1000 SF for Each Unit 2/BDR 2/Bath 1 Covered Parking Single story
'i Fourplex800 SF for Each Unit 2/13DR 2/Bath No Covered Parking Two-story
DUPLEX FOURPLEX
PERMITS
Building $668 $836
Electric 75 96
Plumbing 100 160
Mechanical 60 120
d Plan Check 434 543
Subtotal: $1,337 $1,755
'i DEVELOPMENT FEES
Parks $300 $600
Electric 200 400
Capital Improvements 400 600
Storm Drain 240 160
Subtotal: $1,140 $1,760
WATER & SEWER
Sewer $3,900 $3,900
Water Meter 75 100
Water Connection 2,550 4,250
Sewer Tap
Subtotal: $6,525 $8,250
TRAFFIC IMPACT " $1,126 $2,252
SCHOOL FEES $3,160 $5,056
TOTAL: $13,288 $19,073
(") If sewer tap is needed - add $100.00
(") If in Dana District - add $695.45
Source: Department of Planning & Community Development, Building Division, January
1992
52
A
V. NONGOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS TO MAINTENANCE, IMPROVEMENT, AND
DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING
Nongovernmental or "market" constraints are those factors which limit the availability and
affordability of housing but over which the local government has little or no control. State
law requires that the housing element contain a general analysis of these constraints as a
basis for possible actions by the local government to offset the effect of these constraints.
The three market factors which most severely hinder the availability and cost of housing in
Redding are the price of land, the cost of construction, and the availability of financing.
A. Price of Land
Residential land prices within the City of Redding vary considerably depending upon
several factors. The primary factors are: 1) the specific location of the property; 2)
the availability of utility services to the property; 3) the topography of the property;
and 4) if adequate paved access exists.
Over the past six years, (1985-91) prices of both single-family lots and multi-family
parcels within the City limits have seen a substantial increase in price. In 1985, the
cost of a standard City lot in a moderately-priced, residentially zoned neighborhood
averaged $17,000 - $25,000. Similarly located lots today average $35,000 -
$55,000, an average increase of over 100 percent.
The price of land suitable for multi-family development is typically broken down into
a per-unit cost. This allows accurate comparison between parcels of different sizes
and zoning designations. Within the City limits of Redding, the current average cost
of land able to be developed with multi-family units averages between $7,000 -
$8,500 per unit. In comparison, in 1985, the average cost per unit was $2,500 -
$3,000.
As land costs escalate, the added development cost is passed on to the homebuyer
and apartment dweller in the form of correspondingly higher home prices and rental
rates.
Within the current City boundaries, as more and more development occurs, less
premium land is available for future projects. To some degree, the escalation in land
costs over the past five years is due to the increased development activity and the
depleting effect it is having on the existing inventory of undeveloped land. The
escalation in land prices is also a result of Redding's heightened statewide desirability
as a place to reside. Market factors, such as public demand, influence prices on all
consumer goods including land regardless of relative availability.
B. Cost of Development
The cost of development is comprised of four major components; land, fees, material
and labor, and financing. Of these, material and labor costs make up the bulk of the
development cost followed by land, fees, and financing costs. Table 8 illustrates the
typical construction costs for a 1500-square-foot, three-bedroom home in the City of
Redding. These same development factors would affect development of multi-family
units as well.
53
. ' • •
Average construction costs in the City of Redding in 1992 range between $65 and
$95 per square foot for single-family residential construction, and $45 and $65 per
square foot for multi-family construction.
TABLE 8
COST OF DEVELOPMENT, REDDING
Single-Family Detached
(1,500 Square Feet)
LAND = $35,000 to $55,000
Includes Development Fees of $1,573.00 (With Improvements)
CONSTRUCTION - $75/SF @ 1500 SF = $112,500
Includes:
Construction Fees of $7,648
Materials
Labor
Profit & Overhead
CONSTRUCTION FINANCING = $3,500
Interest on Construction Loan
PRICE TO BUYER = $151,000 to 171,000
Source: City Planning Department, January 1992
C. Availability of Financing
According to the Shasta County Board of Realtors, competitive financing is
generally available for properties within the City of Redding, regardless of location,
for both residential construction projects and home purchase. They report there
is no indication of discriminatory lending practices based on property location
within the City limits. The interest rates for financing the cost of construction, as
well as for long-term home financing, have widely fluctuated over the past 10
years. From 17-18 percent during the late 70's and early 80's to the dramatically
low rates (8-9 percent) of the past twelve months, this single factor plays a major
role in the affordability of housing. In the previous section on Housing Cost (IIIA►),
the effect various interest rates have on the ability of low- and moderate-income
households to purchase a home is explored.
Financing for remodeling or rehabilitation of existing structures is also reported by
the Board of Realtors and local lenders to be readily available to qualified borrowers
throughout the City. Commercial lenders offer home equity loans at a slightly
higher interest rate (10 - 12 percent) than primary mortgages. These rates reflect
the slightly greater risk involved in extending credit secured by a second (or
greater) mortgage. In addition to credit history, standard factors taken into con-
54
sideration for this type of loan are: 1) existing equity in the property and; 2) ability
of the loan recipient to repay the increased debt. Many older homes in need of
repair are owned by low- and moderate-income families. These families in many
instances have a difficult time meeting commercial lenders' debt-to-value criteria,
as well as having difficulty with meeting the income requirements necessary for
repayment of the loan. In order to mitigate this constraint, the City offers a variety
of rehabilitation loan programs to assist the low-and moderate-income homeowner
with necessary repairs. The funding sources for these programs range from local
redevelopment funds, State housing rehabilitation funds, to a variety of Federal
Housing and Urban Development grant programs. All programs are available
Citywide and strive to meet the widest variety of housing needs possible.
55
i
VI. ENERGY CONSERVATION OPPORTUNITIES
The need to conserve and efficiently utilize energy supplies, as well as to develop
alternative energy sources, has been recognized by both government and industry
experts. Short- and long-range solutions to energy problems involve changes in
energy-consumption patterns and require willingness on the part of Americans not only
to use less energy but to make qualitative changes or adjustments in their lifestyles.
Examples include changes in consumer preferences such as the use of smaller and
more energy efficient cars,increased use of public transportation and shifts to modified
or new types of housing that are more energy efficient.
The City of Redding Electric Department is the major provider of electrical power within
the City limits. Occasionally, newly annexed areas will continue to receive electrical
service from a previous provider until such time as the customers are transferred over
to the City electrical service.
i The City of Redding Electric Department reports that in 1988, the City's electric load
was 154 megawatts, an increase of 30 percent from the electric usage in 1981 . It
further projects the City's peak load to grow by approximately 53 percent through
1997.
I
As stated in the 1988 City of Redding Electric Resource Plan, any forecasts of the
City's future need for electricity are dependent upon the effectiveness of conservation
and load management programs. The City has embarked on a vigorous campaign to
develop future cost-effective programs and projects. The City employs a full-time
energy conservation specialist to promote community energy awareness and
conservation. Current conservation efforts and programs are listed below:
A. Residential energy audits and general conservation information and materials.
Lending program of recording meters to monitor the electrical usage of various
appliances.
B. Air Conditioning Load Management Program to reduce peak electrical capacity
during the summer months.
C. Swimming Pool Load Management Program to encourage the use of swimming
pool equipment during off-peak hours.
D. Load Curtailment Program promotes the voluntary reduction of electrical usage
by large-use customers and by the general public.
E. Street Light Conversion Program is replacing less efficient mercury vapor street
lamps with more efficient high-pressure sodium lights.
F. Enforcement of mandatory energy efficient building and appliance standards for
both commercial and residential construction continue to reduce the energy
consumption of space heating, air conditioning, water heating, etc.
56
G. Residential rehabilitation programs for private and rental housing require inclu-
sion of energy conservation retrofits and/or repairs when at all feasible. Typical
upgrades include insulation, weatherstripping, installation of dual pane
windows, and provision of newer, more energy efficient heating and cooling
systems.
In addition to the City of Redding, the second primary provider of energy within the
City limits is The Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). PG&E is the sole provider
of natural gas within the City limits and as discussed previously, continues to provide
electric service to several of the City's newly annexed neighborhoods. PG&E is also
actively involved in promoting conservation of energy resources. Its current efforts
include:
A. Home energy audit service is available to all PG&E customers at no cost.
B. Direct Weatherization Program provides for inspection of residences owned or
rented by low-income families. The primary goal of the program is to improve
the energy efficiency of existing structures. Both inspections and installation
of recommended weatherization materials, i.e., weatherstripping, insulation,
etc., is provided at low or no cost to eligible customers.
C. Ceiling Insulation Rebate Program provides a direct cash rebate to eligible
customers as an incentive to upgrade existing insulation R factors.
57
i
' • • •
'i VII. GOALS AND POLICIES
Housing Element law requires that a community set forth in the Housing Element a
statement of it's goals and policies relative to the maintenance, improvement, and
development of housing. This section identifies six primary goals and their
accompanying policies. These goals and policies will serve to guide the actions of the
City of Redding over the next planning period in regard to its identified housing needs.
Goal 1: Improve and Conserve the Existing Housing Stock
Policies
1 . Encourage the private rehabilitation of housing.
2. Continue to apply for Federal and State funding to rehabilitate substandard
housing.
3. Require the abatement of unsafe structures, giving property owners ample
opportunity to correct deficiencies.
4. Establish a code enforcement program to conserve the existing housing stock.
5. Preserve the stock of Single-Room Occupancy Units (SROs) by encouraging
ongoing rehabilitation of these units.
Goal 2: Encourage The Provision of Affordable Housing
Policies
1 . Encourage the construction of affordable housing units utilizing all available
federal and state programs.
2. Support the Redding Housing Authority's efforts to secure all rental housing
subsidies made available to the community.
3. In accordance with State law, provide density bonuses and other incentives
such as cost saving development concessions to encourage the private
development of affordable housing.
4. Develop working partnerships with other community providers of housing
services in order to increase affordable housing opportunities.
5. Preserve future housing affordability in units which have been assisted through
the Rental Rehabilitation Program by requiring rent affordability agreements for
the term of the public financing.
6. Actively support HUD's "Joint Venture for Affordable Housing" efforts by
entering into partnerships with private developers wanting to build affordable
units.
58
7. Continue to monitor all regulations, ordinances, departmental processing
procedures and fees related to the rehabilitation and/or construction of dwelling
units to assess their impact on housing affordability.
Goal 3: Promote Adequate Sites For All Types Of Housing
Policies
1. Maintain an adequate supply of residentially classified land to meet residential
housing needs based on projected growth rates and as a stabilizing factor for
land prices.
2. Allow the mixed use of commercial/residential development in the core area of
the city.
3. Maintain and periodically update the City's inventory of existing structures, as
well as vacant or under-utilized land which would be appropriate for specialized
residential uses (ie shelters, group homes etc.).
4. Use redevelopment powers or other appropriate mechanisms to acquire and/or
assemble sites for residential purposes.
Goal 4: Support a Mix of Housing For All Income Groups
Policies
1. Promote and encourage homeownership for all income levels and utilize
available federal, state, and local resources to achieve this end.
2. Support the use of tax-exempt revenue bonds for housing developments and
provide standards for the occupancy of such housing to include all income
levels.
3. Support the use of Mortgage Credit Certificates for low- and moderate-income
first-time homebuyers.
4. Encourage a mixture of housing types(single-family attached/detached,condo-
miniums/townhouses, duplexes, garden/conventional apartments, group
quarters) through current zoning ordinance and planning practices.
5. Encourage development of housing for groups with special needs; such as the
elderly, and the handicapped.
Goal 5: Promote Equal Housing Opportunities
Policies
1. Promote the nondiscrimination enforcement activities of the State Department
of Fair Employment and Housing.
59
I
2. Continue to support programs which promote and require accessibility and
adaptability of housing for the handicapped.
3. Support the establishment of shelter facilities(both emergency and transitional)
for the area's homeless population.
4. Allow group quarter housing in all residentially zoned neighborhoods.
Goal 6: Encourage Energy Conservation
Policies
1 . Promote public awareness of cost-saving energy conservation measures offered
by utility providers for new and existing housing units.
2. Enhance public awareness of landscaping measures that promote resource
conservation and energy cost-savings for new and existing housing units.
3. Require weatherization measures be taken on all residential property
participating on any City rehabilitation programs.
4. Require the use of energy conservation features in the design and construction
of all new residential structures to increase energy efficiency and reduce
housing costs.
60
VIII. FIVE-YEAR ACTION PROGRAM
A. Review of Previous City 9 Housin Element
A required part of the Housing Element update process is the undertaking of an
in-depth review of the community's progress towards reaching its stated
housing goals. This review generally consists of an evaluation of the actual
achievements accomplished over the elapsed five-year planning period, an
evaluation of the stated housing goals, policies, and objectives of the past
Element to determine continued appropriateness, and an evaluation of the
effectiveness of the past Element towards achieving the community's housing
goals and objectives.
The Housing Element upon which this update is based was adopted by the City
Council on April 16, 1991 (Resolution No. 91-161).
i
Due to the requirements of new State law, the present update is being
undertaken much sooner than would normally occur. For that reason, the
mandatory review will evaluate achievements which have occurred over the
past seven-year period, 1985 - 1991 .
Housing program efforts which resulted in housing units being constructed,
conserved, or rehabilitated over the seven year period, 1985 - 1991, both
through private endeavors and through public program assistance efforts will
be discussed.
While the Housing Element adopted in 1991 listed specific quantified
objectives,the previous Element, adopted in September 1984, did not set forth
quantified objectives against which to evaluate progress. Program
accomplishments over the past seven years are listed individually in Section IX
C, along with proposed program modifications to be implemented during the
next five-year planning period. Cumulative accomplishments for the period
January 1, 1985 through December 31, 1991 ,within the three housing activity
categories: construction, rehabilitation, and conservation, are listed in Table 9
below.
TABLE 9
ACCOMPLISHMENTS 0 985 - 199 1)
i
Number of Units Affordable to:
i
Type With WHO Total
Program Program Very
Assistance Assistance Low Low Mod Above
Housing New
Construction: 670 6,688 7,358 69 155 2,451 4,688
Housing
Rehabilitation: 748 1,400 est. 2,148 305 284 1,060 499
Housing
Conservation: 679 Unknown 679 1 515 49 100 15
61
New Construction Activities
The past seven years have seen unprecedented levels ,of new housing
construction in the City. Approximately 7,358 new housing units were added
to the City's housing stock; 71 percent in the form of single-family units, 28.5
percent as new multi-family units, and less than 1 percent in the form of new
mobilehome units. (Note: Mobilehome units are only counted in the Building
Department statistics if placed upon a permanent foundation. Those added to
mobilehome parks are not counted.)
The City's efforts to stimulate affordable housing development through its
Density Bonus Program and through the use of existing Federal and State
financing programs met with some success although less than anticipated.
Forty-nine units of senior/disabled housing were developed utilizing a
combination of both federal and local funding; 3 projects participated on the
Density Bonus Program resulting in 309 new multi-family units; 212 units of
manufactured housing were developed for occupancy by seniors under the
j HUD-sponsored Joint Ventures for Affordable Housing Program;, and 100 units
of senior congregate housing were developed with financing by a Rental
Housing Revenue Bond issue from the Redding Housing Authority.
'! The Density Bonus Program, while in existence since 1984, has not been
widely used by the local development community. For the upcoming planning
period, marketing efforts will continue to be made to publicize the benefits of
the program to local developers and to explain the recent changes to the
program which make affordable development more feasible. Interest in the
program has been increasing over the past six months and several possible
projects are being formulated by local developers.
'j New opportunities for affordable housing development will be available during
j the upcoming planning period through Federal HOME funding. The City will
submit an application for these funds in September 1992 and each year
thereafter as funds are available. The City will continue to use both its CDBG
grant funds (Program 2.4) and its redevelopment LMIHF (Program 2.8) to
finance affordable housing development projects. In May 1992, the City
committed $148,070 of its FY 92 - 94 CDBG grant to two new affordable
housing projects. A $78,000 funding request for the use of the LMIHF on a
third proposed affordable housing project is currently being processed by the
Redding Redevelopment Agency.The current lower-interest rates for mortgages
should also help to stimulate development in the affordable housing market, as
i� well as to open the doors for more lower-income households to become
homeowners. In addition, in June 1992,the City Council sitting as the Redding
Housing Authority established a non-profit housing development corporation
(RHDC) which will pursue the development of affordable housing within the
City of Redding (Program 2.11). Several local non-profit organizations have
also expressed an interest in development of affordable housing within the
community in the near future (Program 2.12). To date,affordable projects have
been proposed for seniors,handicapped households, lower-income families,and
homeless families during the planning period. These combined efforts should
result in significant progress towards the City's affordable housing goals over
i
the next five year planning period.
62
The ability of both private and public developers of affordable housing to reach
projected goals over the next five years will be dependant upon many factors,
including continued availability of local,state,and federal low-cost financing for
affordable housing development, public approval through the referendum
process of local and state financed projects, continued availability of low-
interest private financing and motivated local lenders due to the Community
Reinvestment Act, and continued availability of appropriately zoned land. The
quantified objectives contained within the Housing Element assume that these
critical factors will improve over the planning period. The numbers projected in
Table 10 for new construction are based upon these assumptions. As local
entities gain experience in the development of new affordable units, it is
anticipated that more ambitious projects will be undertaken. The projected
numbers are considered to be realistic.
A significant detriment to the increase of affordable housing opportunities
within the community occurred recently when a ballot measure seeking
referendum authority for affordable housing projects utilizing public financing
was placed on the ballot in June 1992 and defeated by a 2 to 1 margin. The
City will work towards placing another referendum authority ballot measure on
the ballot at the earliest opportunity.
Rehabilitation Activities
It is estimated that approximately 2,148 housing units have been rehabilitated
in the community over the past seven years. Of these, 748 units were repaired
utilizing City administered rehabilitation programs and approximately 1,400
units privately.
The City has administered a very successful housing rehabilitation program for
over fifteen years. The cornerstone of the City's efforts has been the
Homeowner Rehabilitation Program, primarily funded through the City's
Community Development Block Grant Program, with supplemental funding
through a variety of local, State, and Federal sources. This program was
successful in rehabilitating 283 single-family homes and 55 mobilehomes over
the past seven years.
Since 1985, the City has been successful in applying for and receiving over
$1.9 million in Federal Rental Rehabilitation Grant funds. These funds have
been used to leverage over $ 1 .7 million in private dollars to rehabilitate 410
rental units which are rented at a rate which is affordable to lower-income
households. The City's rental rehabilitation activities suffered somewhat during
1990 when HUD transferred authority to administer the program to the State.
Funding delays brought about by this transition forced the local program to lose
some credibility and momentum, however, renewed marketing efforts resulted
in a more than doubling of the number of rental units rehabilitated utilizing this
program in 1991. Although 1992 will be the last year funds will be available
for the Rental Rehabilitation Program, a similar rental program will be developed
utilizing available HOME funds.
63
During the past seven years, the City has successfully accessed several other
Federal and State sources of funding for local rehabilitation projects, including
the 312 Loan Program, the State Deferred Loan Program, and the State
Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program for owner-occupied housing. The variety
of funding sources allowed the City to participate in projects requiring
substantial rehabilitation, which in the past had been ineligible because the cost
of rehabilitation exceeded existing local program resources. The continued
rehabilitation of the area's existing housing units is considered a priority and
will be pursued throughout the upcoming planning period.
Conservation Activities
Activity projections under conservation of the area's housing stock included
activities under several programs. Among these were the Section 8 Rental
Assistance Program, the Shared Housing Program, the proposed Rent Deposit
Guarantee Program, the Downpayment Assistance Program, the Mortgage
Credit Certificate Program, and a variety of Federal and State programs
anticipated to be utilized by area nonprofit housing service providers.
Over the past seven years,the Redding Housing Authority has been successful
in applying for and receiving 485 new Federal and State rental assistance
subsidies for the very-low income households in.the community. Obviously,
competition is strong for the limited program funds available. The Redding
Housing Authority will continue to pursue new rental subsidies as HUD or other
sources make them available. During 1992,the Redding Housing Authority will
be submitting applications to HUD under the HOPE for Elderly Independence
Program, the Family Unification Program and the Family Self-Sufficiency
Program, as well as to the State for the State Aftercare Program. These
applications have the potential to add 135 new rental subsidies per year.
Other conservation efforts, such as the Shared Housing Program and the Rent
Deposit Guarantee Program, have been unable to be fully implemented, due to
lack of sufficient funding. The Shared Housing Program which relies upon
several funding sources to operate, lost financial support from the Shasta
County Community Action Agency and the State. In June 1992, the Redding
Redevelopment Agency allocated $18,000 for the operation of the Shared
Housing Program during FY 92-93. The Rent Deposit Guarantee Program also
ran into funding difficulties during the planning period and as a result was not
able to be implemented as expected. For the upcoming planning period,
alternative funding sources will be explored for this program.
The Downpayment Assistance Program (DAP) and the Mortgage Credit
Certificate Program (MCC) established in 1988 and 1989, respectively, were
able to assist a total of 164 low and moderate income households since
implementation. These programs continue to be of great help to the
community's lower-income first-time homebuyers. Homes in the Redding area
have experienced substantial appreciation in recent years. Due to the higher
purchase prices involved, DAP loans on the average have become larger also.
The annual budget for the DAP program is able to assist a correspondingly
'! fewer number of households. At the present time, approximately 45
households are assisted each year with DAP loans which average $10,057
64
I
apiece. Lower-income households are eligible for DAP loans of up to $22,000.
In September 1991 , the City's application was approved by the State for a
second issue of Mortgage Credit Certificates totaling $500,000. These will be
distributed through December 1992. In May 1992, the City was successful in
its application for a third allocation of Mortgage Credit Certificates totaling
$1,250,000. These can be used through 1993.
During the past seven-year period, local housing service providers were
successful in securing funding from a variety of state and federal sources for
the acquisition of 30 units of affordable housing. The City participated with
additional funding from its Community Development Block Grant for ten (10)
of these units. All of the units are being used as transitional facilities for the
area's homeless families. During the next planning period it is anticipated that
additional units will be acquired both for transitional purposes and for
permanent housing. The City has committed $115,000 out of its
Redevelopment Set-Aside Fund to assist a local non-profit agency with the
acquisition and rehabilitation of twelve 0 2) units of permanent rental housing
affordable to lower-income households. The purchase will be final in August
1992.
Conservation activities in the upcoming planning period will include activities
to preserve the community's affordable housing units which are at risk of
converting to market-rate usage during the planning period. The City will also
continue negotiations with HUD for the purchase of a 78-unit senior residential
hotel which provides needed affordable housing to this vulnerable population
group. i
B. App noprtateness of Goals, Pbicies, &Objectives
The City has Ibng been committed to the availability of decent housing for all of its citizens.
The basic goals set forth in the 1984 Housing Bement are stl reflective of efforts being made
today. Housing and land use policies have dnanged as the face of the commuty has
dnanged aver time, as pubic opinion and desires have changed, and as the economic
aw ronrmert has changed over the past seven years. Current poises reflect a community
desire to maintain a dean,energy efficient environment,faciitate the development of housing
for all economic groups, and reflect the community's desire to mantain a non-urban, small
town appearance. As stated previously,the Housing Gernert adopted in 1984,did not captain
specific quantified o*c,'tives against which to judge progress. The Housing Gement adopted
in 1991,which was substantially revised at that time,set forth objectives which the City has
reached to achieve during the shat period of elapsed time since that Bement and this revision.
The updated Housing Bernent continues to project community housing goals, poicies, and
objectives which are sin,flar to the 1991 Housing Gemert.These directives, which reflect an
acute awareness of the essential nature of decent,affordable housing will set the direction and
foal of the City's housing efforts over the next five (5) year planning period, 1992- 1997.
During this period, the City wi pursue the provision of affordable housing through a multi-
faceted strategy which iickxles both moderate and substantial rehabillitatim of the eAsting
housing stock, provision of direct rental subsidies for those groups with the most need,
conservation of the corrrnurWs existing affordable hosing stock, and construction of
affordable housing units.
65
C. Implementation Programs and Quantified Objectives
The following section sets forth the schedule of actions the City of Redding is
undertaking or intends to undertake within the current planning period in order
to implement the previously listed policies and achieve the community's stated
housing goals. Included within most action/program descriptions is a quantified
objective which states the progress towards the goal the City expects to
accomplish during the planning period. Each program description also lists
actual accomplishments of the individual program over the past seven years
and any proposed changes to the program to be implemented during the current
planning period. New programs authorized under the Cranston-Gonzalez
Affordable Housing Act of 1990 have been discussed as well as anticipated
funding levels for these programs.
Table 10 is a summary of the number of units expected to be constructed,
rehabilitated, or conserved both privately and through implementation of the
programs contained in this section over the next five years:
TABLE 10
SUMMARY OF PROJECTED HOUSING ACTIVITIES 1992-97
# Units # Units Affordable to:
With Program Private Total
Type Assistance Development Very
Low Low Mod Above
Housing New
Construction: 950 (Programs 7,100 8,050 710 240 2,485 4,615
2.1-2, 2.4-5,
2.8-9, 2.11-12,
4.1)
Housing
Rehabilitation: 675 (Programs 1,000 1,675 265 305 305 800
1.1-3, 6.3)
I
Housing
Conservation: 1,437 (Programs Unknown 1,437 1,000 222 215 0
1.7-8, 2.3, 2.6-
9, 4.2-3, 5.3,
5.6-11)
66
Goal 1: Improve and Conserve the Existing Housing Stock
1 .1 Program Name: Homeowner Rehabilitation Program
Program Description: The City currently operates a comprehensive housing
rehabilitation program which is available City-wide to homeowners who are at
moderate-income level or below. Eligible activities include basic code related
repairs; weatherization improvements; site improvements such as curbs,
gutters, and sidewalks; as well as some general property improvements. The
CDBG funded rehabilitation program was established in 1975. Over 516 single-
family homes have been rehabilitated utilizing this program, 203 of these units
in the past seven year period.
Redding Redevelopment Agency Housing Set-aside funding was added to the
program in 1987. Forty-six units have been rehabilitated utilizing RRA funds.
Other State and Federal financing has assisted another 75 units undergo
rehabilitation. Because of the wide variety of funding sources for this
endeavor, the City is able to offer a variety of financing terms and conditions
ranging from low-interest (3-5%) deferred payment loans, below market-rate
interest(8%) amortized loans,and 10-15 year emergency deferred low-interest
loans.
Funding/Administration: Funding for the above rehab programs comes from the
following sources: Community Development Block Grant funds (1991 -
$157,000); Redding Redevelopment Agency housing set-aside funds (1991 -
$200,000); State Owner-Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program funds
(1991 - $176,000); as well as the Rehabilitation Revolving Loan Fund
(approximately $180,000 - $250,000 per year). The latter fund consists of
amortized payments and lump sum payoffs on existing CDBG rehabilitation
loans. Funding from all current sources, except redevelopment and the Revolv-
ing Loan Fund, is on a yearly, competitive application basis to either the state
or the federal government. The City will apply for all appropriate new sources
of funding for rehabilitation of the existing housing stock.
Local administration is through the Housing Division of the Planning and
Community Development Department.
Proposed Changes: None anticipated.
Obiective: To rehabilitate 55 single-family homes per year. Of these,
approximately 12 (22%) will be very-low income homeowners, approximately
28 (51%) will be low-income homeowners, and approximately 15 (27%) will
be moderate-income homeowners.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
1 .2 Program Name: Rental Rehabilitation Program (RRP)
Program Description: This program consists of a stipulated grant provided to
owners of rental property in order to elevate property to local acceptable
dwelling standards. The program requires the owner match the grant portion
with private funds in order to cover the cost of repairs. Owners agree to
maintain the property as rental stock for a period of ten years and affirmatively
market available units to low-income families to assure affordability. Over 400
67
I
units throughout the City have been rehabilitated utilizing this program. 1991
y program budget - $400,000. Anticipated 1992 program budget - $125,000.
'I Since implementation in 1985, over 1 .6 million dollars in RRP grant funds have
been committed along with over 1 .7 million in private rehab dollars.
Funding/Administration: HUD Rental Rehabilitation Program funds are
administered on a state-wide basis through the State Department of Housing
and Community Development. Application is made on an annual, competitive
basis to the State. It is anticipated that this program will not be funded by
HUD beyond FY 92.
Local administration of the program is through the Housing Division of the
Department of Planning and Community Development.
Proposed Changes: Federal funding for this program will end in FY 92. A
i; similar program will be designed utilizing available state or HOME funding.
Objective: To rehabilitate 65 rental units by the end of FY 92, which are
anticipated to be occupied by approximately 34 (52%) very-low income
households, 25 (38%) low-income households, and 6(9%)above lower-income
households. An application will be made for all available HOME funds starting
in FY 92-93 for approximately $400,000.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
1.3 Program Name: Mobilehome Repair Program
Program Description: This program provides rehabilitation grants for low-income
mobilehome owners. Basic health and safety-related repairs are eligible.
Assistance is given in the form of a grant not-to-exceed $1,500 per household.
This program was developed to assist mobilehome owners who were not
eligible for the rehabilitation loan program due to lack of equity or the fact that
the mobile is located in a mobilehome park. The grant funds can be combined
with Social Security Special Circumstance funds to increase the individual
project amount to $3,000.
This program has been in operation since 1989 and averages 10 - 15 units per
year.
Funding/Administration: Funding is through the City's Community Development
Block Grant Program administered locally by the Housing Division of the Depart-
ment of Planning and Community Development. Special Circumstance funds
are administered through the Shasta County Department of Social Services.
Proposed Changes: The program has been expanded substantially for FY 92-93
and 93-94 in order to assist a larger population group and to undertake a wider
range of repairs. It is proposed that low-interest loans be utilized instead of the
current grant in order to establish a self-sustaining revolving loan fund for future
years. In addition, it is proposed that the size of the loan be increased from
$1,500 to a maximum of $5,000. This would allow the program to extend the
scope of its services to cover more costly repair work. It is also proposed to
target all lower-income mobile-home owners rather than just the very-low
income group currently served.
68
.• i
b' ive: To rehabilitate a minimum of 15 mobile home units per year. All of
these will be lower-income households.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
1 .4 Program Name: Rehabilitation Loans for Affordable Housing Units Acquired by
Non-profit Organizations
Program Description: In 1991 , the City of Redding expanded its CDBG-funded
Rehabilitation Loan Program to include rehabilitation loans to non-profit
organizations who have acquired affordable housing units. The purpose of the
loan program was to enhance the affordability of the units by keeping the
overall debt service costs to the non-profit owners as low as possible. The
savings would then be passed on to the lower-income tenants by way of lower,
affordable rents. Marketing materials will be developed and the benefits of the
loan program will be promoted to area non-profit organizations. It is anticipated
that this loan program will be utilized throughout the planning period.
Fundina/Administration: Loans made under this program will be funded through
the City's CDBG Housing Rehabilitation Revolving Loan Fund. Administration
is by the City of Redding Housing Division.
Proposed Changes: None proposed.
i
Objective: To assist in the provision of affordable housing units.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
1.5 Proaram Name: California Housing Rehabilitation Program - Rental
Program Description: Program currently provides assistance for the acquisition
and rehabilitation of multi-family rental units, including single-room occupancy
units. The owner must agree to reserve a minimum of 30% of the acquired
units for occupancy by lower-income households. In addition, the contract rent
for the "assisted" units must remain at an affordable level for the term of the
financing. The City will continue to make information available to interested
developers regarding this form of financing as a way of stimulating the private
development of affordable housing units within the community.
Funding/Administration: Funding is through the State Department of Housing
and Community Development. Interested participants apply directly to HCD.
The City's involvement consists of information, referral, and application
assistance in individual cases if needed.
Proposed Changes: None proposed.
Objective: To inform local rental property owners of the availability of this
source of rehabilitation financing.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
i
69 j
1 .6 Program Name: Abatement Program
�i
j; Program Description: This program provides for the abatement of hazardous
properties/structures through a multi-phased hearing process. Upon initiation
of the abatement process, owners are instructed to cure subject
properties/structures of the hazardous conditions. Ultimate action by the City
upon noncompliance of the owner is to remove the offending structure or
1 condition from the property. Since 1985, approximately 84 units have been
subject to abatement proceedings. The great majority of these were able to be
resolved prior to demolition of the structure by the City.
Funding/Administration: Funding for the hearing process is part of the operating
budget of the Planning and Building Departments. The program is overseen by
the City Attorney and City Building Official.
Proposed Changes: In order to facilitate the availability of safe, sanitary housing
for residents of Redding, the City will work with local non-profit housing advo-
cates to consider establishing a pro-active code-enforcement program for exist-
ing rental housing. Current State law prohibits owners of substandard rental
dwellings cited for code violations from taking State income tax deductions for
interest, taxes and depreciation. Extra tax revenues collected under this provi-
sion are able to support local governments in their code enforcement efforts.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
1 .7 Program Name: Conservation of the Lorenz Hotel
Program Description: The Lorenz Hotel,a 78-unit senior residential hotel located
in downtown Redding, is currently being considered for purchase by the City
of Redding. The hotel was acquired by HUD in 1991 through a foreclosure
action. The hotel is an important source of affordable housing for low-income
seniors and disabled persons in the City. The City and the Redding Housing
Authority are in the process of negotiating a possible purchase with HUD.
I
Funding/Administration: If purchased by the City, the hotel would be under the
administration of the Redding Housing Authority. It is anticipated that a private
rental management firm would be contracted with for day-to-day administration
of the hotel.
Proposed Changes: New Activity.
Obiective: To conserve 78 units of affordable senior housing.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 93
1.8 Program Name: Conservation of Units at Risk
Program Description: During the planning period a variety of housing units in
the community are at risk to convert to non-low-income use. These units
represent a sizeable portion of the current affordable housing inventory in the
City. In order to limit the loss of these units to the community, a number of
actions will be undertaken. Section II-1 describes these actions as they apply
i
to each at-risk project.
70 ;,
i
Funding/Administration: The activity will be undertaken by the Housing Division
of the Department of Planning and Community Development. See discussion
in Section II-1 regarding possible funding sources for activity.
Proposed Changes: New Activity.
Obiective: To conserve 174 multi-family units.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97.
Goal 2: Encourage The Provision of Affordable Housing
2.1 Program Name: Density Bonus Program
Program Description: The current program allows for density bonuses of 25%
over the maximum land density specified in the general plan plus additional
concessions if needed to enhance affordability of the project Q provision by the
City of other incentives of equivalent financial value. Eligible projects are those
consisting of 5 or more units where the developer is either: a) reserving 20%
of total units constructed for lower income households; or b) reserving 10% of
total units constructed for very-low income households; or c) reserving 50% of
total units constructed for seniors. There have been three projects which
qualified for density bonuses since 1984. A total of 309 units were built, with
approximately 20% available for occupancy by lower-income households. In
1990, the Density Bonus Program underwent major revisions. These revisions
ensure a greater number of affordable units than in the previous version of the
program.
Funding/Administration: City contributes planning staff time for permit
processing. Monitoring the compliance of developers to the requirements of the
density bonus is the responsibility of the Housing Division.
Proposed Changes: In order to increase developer participation during the
upcoming planning period, the Density Program will be actively marketed to the
development community through a multi-media approach. Other communities
in the State which have successfully utilized a similar program will be consulted
and appropriate changes to the local program will be considered based upon
these successful models.
Objective: To facilitate the construction of a minimum of 50 affordable housing
units per year.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
2.2 Program Name: Joint Ventures for Affordable Housing Program (JVAHP)
Program Description: The JVAHP is a collective effort among public and private
sector groups who share a commitment to the creation of more affordable
housing, and are linked through a series of coordinated projects and activities.
The JVAHP encourages housing development cost reductions through such j
regulatory concessions as reduced site development standards, expedited
processing procedures, increased densities, and the use of new and improved
technologies. The City will consider partnerships with developers proposing
construction of affordable units under HUD JVAHP guidelines on a per project i
71
I
I
basis. One project, a 212-unit Planned Development for seniors .has been
undertaken utilizing this program.
Funding/Administration: The loss of revenues due to any proposed fee
reductions will be considered on a case by case basis. Most concessions are
likely to be in the category of adjusted development standards and should not
result in an added cost to the City. Local administration of the program is
through the City Department of Planning and Community Development.
Proposed Changes: None proposed.
Obiective: To inform the private development community of the availability of
Planned Unit Development guidelines and to encourage its use.
Time Frame: Ongoing program, City will consider developer proposals on a
case-by-case basis.
2.3 Program Name: HUD Section 8 Rental Assistance Program
Program Description: Provides rental assistance to very-low income
seniors/disabled individuals and families. Assistance is given on a priority
system basis.
;i Funding/Administration: Funding is received directly from HUD for eligible
participants. Local administration of the program is through the Redding
Housing Authority. The 1991-92 budget for the Housing Authority is $3.5
million. A total of 937 rental subsidies are currently administered by this office
and another 419 project-based rental subsidies are administered directly by
.i
HUD.
d The HoumV Authority has experienced contrxious growth over the past 10 years. Today's
rental assistance program revenue is tenfold as longe as that in 1980. Since 1985,the Housing
Authority has been successftul in bmxJng 485 new subsidies to the convyxrrty. This growth
is due primarily to the Housing Authority's aggressive pur" of all HUD rental subsidy
programs. The City has made and will cont nue to make application to HUD at every available
opportunity in order to sears new subsides for the very low-income renters of the cammur ity.
Proposed Changes: Constant monitoring of the priority system will continue to
assure that eligible households are served in as timely and equitable manner as
possible. Periodic adjustments in procedures, etc. will be made as necessary.
Obiectives: To serve an additional 75 households each year.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
2.4 Program Name: Construction of New Affordable Multi-Family Dwellings
Program Description: The City will continue to support the development of
new affordable multifamily projects within the City of Redding by both for-profit
and non-profit developers. The City will provide direct financial support to
these projects through the use of its CDBG funds, its redevelopment LMIHF,
and its HOME funds. During the next two year period, the City has committed
$148,070 of its FY 92-94 CDBG grant for new affordable housing projects.
72
i
The City will also provide technical assistance if needed, on applications for
funding under the federal 202 and 811 programs. The City has participated in
the past with developers of affordable housing in the issuance of mortgage
revenue bonds and will consider similar partnerships in the future. The City,
through the Redding Housing Development Corporation, will develop a minimum
of 20 affordable multi-family units during FY 92-93, and a minimum of 40 h
affordable units each year thereafter. In order to realize these new construction
goals, the City will apply for all available sources of funding which can be
utilized for development of affordable units. The City will apply during FY 92-
93 for approximately $500,000 in HOME funds to be used for new
construction. Two multi-family projects with a total of 149 units have been
constructed over the past seven years utilizing the above forms of,financing.
Approximately 69 of these units are set aside for occupancy by lower-income
households. Affordability of units will continue to be the focus of all of these
programs in the future.
Funding/Administration: Funding is available to developers through a variety of
sources for affordable housing projects. The City, through its Planning and
Community Development Department, acts as a resource to private developers
seeking information regarding these sources and, if necessary, will assist in the
application process. Planning staff, contracting with the newly established
Redding Housing Development Corporation, will also be aggressively pursuing
direct funding for RHDC projects.
Proposed Changes: Emphasis will be given to seeking out all available sources
of development financing for new affordable housing projects. Funding made
available by the Community Reinvestment Act, private foundation funding
sources, as well as local, state, and federal financing sources will be pursued.
Objectives: To provide information and technical assistance regarding these
programs to the local development community. To apply for funding as
available. It is anticipated that a minimum of 700 new affordable units will be
developed through local non-profit entities during the planning period.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
2.5 Program Name: Low-Income Tax Credit Program
Proaram Description: Federal and State tax credits for eligible low-income rental
housing projects are currently available by application to the State Mortgage
Bond Allocation Committee. Strong consideration is given to projects which
target special groups such as large families, homeless or the at risk population.
The City will act as an information and referral service to interested developers
regarding available tax subsidies. Developers of new rental construction
projects or existing rehabilitation projects apply directly to this State committee
for consideration. It is anticipated that the use of this mechanism will increase
the number of affordable units available in the community.
Funding/Administration: Funded and administered at the State level. Local
involvement is as a source of program information only.
I
73
Proposed Changes: In order to make the development of affordable housing as
cost effective as possible, the City will lobby for continued state and federal
approval for this program.
Objectives: To provide information regarding this program to the local
development community.
Time Frame: Implementation is dependent on continued Congressional approval.
2.6 Program Name: Shared Housing Program
Program Description: The Shared Housing Program attempts to match those
who have housing to share with low-income households who need housing.
The program is especially successful in working with the elderly and/or
handicapped population group but is not restricted to those clients. Between
1988 and 1991 , the Shared Housing Program (Project Match) has made 142
housing matches.
'i
!; Fundina/Administration: Funding during FY 87 - 91 had been provided, in part,
through the Redding Redevelopment Agency's housing set-aside funds.
Operation of the program is contracted to the Golden Umbrella, a local non-
profit agency. For FY 92 - 93, program funding will be provided through the
Shasta County Housing Authority ($9,000), a United Way Grant ($9,000), and
.i the Redding Redevelopment Agency ($18,000).
Proposed Changes: Permanent funding for this program will be pursued during
the planning period.
Obiectives: To provide housing shelter assistance to 100 very-low income City
of Redding households.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 93.
9 2.7 Program Name: Rent Deposit Guarantee Program
Program Description: Program provides security deposit funds including last
month's rent if required for very-low income homeless families to enable them
to establish a permanent home. Assistance is in the form of a guarantee to
participating landlords that the household will pay the required deposit on an
installment basis. No funds are utilized from the guarantee account unless the
household defaults on the required payments.
Funding/Administration: Funding sources for the program are being researched.
Proposed Changes: Permanent funding for this program will be pursued during
the planning period.
Obiectives: To assist homeless households with move in costs associated with
securing permanent housing.
Time Frame: FY 93 - 97
74
2.8 Program Name: Redevelopment Low-Moderate Income Housing Set-Aside Fund
Program Description: State law requires redevelopment agencies to provide
20% of their tax increment income to improve housing opportunities for low-
to moderate-income persons. In fiscal year 90 - 91 , the Redding
Redevelopment Agency expended LMIHF set-aside funds to operate the
Homeowner Rehabilitation Program (see Program 1 .1), the Downpayment
Assistance Program (Program 4.2), the Mortgage Credit Certificate Program
(Program 4.3), and the Shared Housing Program (Program 2.6). Other
programs funded through this fund have included the Rent Deposit Guarantee
Program (Program 2.7), and multi-family new housing development (Program
2.4).
Funding/Administration: Approximately $500,000 in funding is provided
annually through the Redevelopment Agency's tax increment income. Local
administration is through the Housing Division of the Planning and Community
Development Department.
Proposed Changes: This fund will be a primary source to leverage non-local
funding for affordable housing development. Project proposals will be
considered on a case-by-case basis and funding priority will be given to those
development projects which assist the greatest number of lower-income
households, leverage the greatest amount of outside funding, are located within
a redevelopment project area, and address community housing needs as
identified in the Housing Element, the Comprehensive Housing Affordability
Strategy, and the Redevelopment Housing Plan.
Objectives: Overall objective is to improve housing opportunities for low- to
moderate-income persons. Quantified objectives for programs funded through
this source are listed under the individual program descriptions.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
2.9 Program Name: HOME Investment Partnership Act
Proaram Description: The HOME program was included as part of the Cranston-
Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of 1990. The legislation authorized
funding to states and local governments to provide incentives to develop and
support affordable rental housing and homeownership opportunities. Eligible
activities include: real property acquisition, rehabilitation, and construction of
affordable housing. Distribution of HOME funds is by formula based upon a
variety of measures including local housing market factors, local housing stock
conditions, cost of producing housing in the local market, and extent of poverty
in the community.
Fundina/Administration: The City of Redding at this time does not qualify to
receive an automatic formula HOME allocation from HUD. The City of Redding
will apply on a competitive basis for HOME funds through the State of
California in September 1992. The City will apply for approximately 8500,000
in funding to be used for affordable housing construction, approximately
8500,000 in funding to be used for rehabilitation of existing rental units, and
approximately 8100,000 in funding for tenant-based subsidies.
75
Proposed Changes: None (New program).
Obiective: To apply for approximately $1 .15 million in funding during FY92-93.
j To increase the availability of affordable rental housing in the community and
to develop homeownership opportunities for lower income households.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
2.10 Program Name: HOPE 1,11,111
Program Description: The HOPE grant program is designed to increase
homeownership for lower-income households through resident purchase of
public housing, purchase of vacant or foreclosed properties held by the
government, and purchase of distressed properties held by FHA. At this time,
there is no publicly owned housing in the community. According to local real
estate sources, few, if any, housing units in the community are classified
distressed or are held by the government through foreclosure.
Funding/Administration: Funding would be through competitive application to
HUD by local entities, nonprofit organizations, and resident organizations.
Proposed Changes: None (New program).
Objective: It is anticipated that the City will submit an application for funding
through the HOPE III program during the planning period. At this time it is not
known when applications will be accepted or for what amount. HUD has
indicated that more complete program information will be forthcoming later in
1992.
2.11 Program Name: Redding Housing Development Corporation (RHDC)
li
Program Description: Under the sponsorship of the Redding Housing Authority,
the RHDC is a newly created local non-profit organization organized solely for
the development of affordable housing in Redding.
Funding/Administration: The RHDC will pursue development and administrative
funding from all appropriate local, state, federal, and private sources. The
RHDC will contract with the City of Redding for staff services on its
development projects. The RHDC has applied for and received $110,920 in
City CDBG grant funds for land acquisition and staff development costs
associated with its first 20 unit project. HOME funds and LMIHF funds in the
amount of $1,000,000 will be sought during FY 92-93.
Proposed Changes: None (New program).
Obiective: To facilitate the development of affordable housing units within the
City of Redding. The RHDC will develop a minimum of 200 units of affordable
housing over the next five year planning period.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
76
2.12 Program Name: Other Local Non-Profit Housing Development Entities
i
Program Description: In the past year, several local organizations have been
established or have expanded their scope of services to include development
of affordable housing in Redding. These entities include Mercy Housing,
Northern Valley Catholic Social Services (NVCSS), and Shasta Housing
Development Corporation (SHDC).
i
SHDC is currently undertaking a 100+ unit affordable senior project to be
funded through a combination of federal 202 funds and local LMIHF monies.
NVCSS is developing an 8 unit affordable housing project. Funding consists of
a federal 811 loan and City CDBG funding. Mercy Housing Foundation has
indicated an interest in developing an affordable family housing project of
undetermined size in Redding in the near future. Funding would likely be from
a combination of private and local housing funds. During the upcoming
planning period, it is anticipated that these organizations will undertake a
variety of affordable housing projects.
Funding/Administration: These groups will pursue development . and
administrative funding from all appropriate local, state, federal, and private
sources. Each entity will administer its individual projects.
Proposed Changes: None.
Obiective: It is anticipated that, collectively, these entities will development a
minimum of 500 units of affordable housing over the next five year planning
period.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
Goal 3: Promote Adequate Sites For All Types Of Housing
3.1 Program Name: Annexation
Program Description: The City has an ongoing program of annexation of land
area adjacent to existing City boundaries. This allows the City to maintain an
adequate inventory of developable land as well as to provide desired city
services to previously developed areas.
Funding/Administration: Annexation costs to the City are typically those related
to staff time in processing the annexation. Annexation activities are handled
through the Planning and Community Development Department.
Obiective: It is anticipated that approximately 6,500 acres, or a little over 10
square miles could be annexed during the next 5-10 years.
Time Frame: Ongoing
3.2 Program Name: Available Land Inventory
Program Description: As part of the Land Use Element update, an inventory of
existing land for residential development was compiled. This inventory will be
updated as needed on a regular basis and as part of the element review
i
77
process, every five years. The basic inventory may be expanded in the future,
to identify underutilized and appropriately zoned land and/or existing structures
suitable for developing housing for the elderly, handicapped, homeless, or other
identified groups with special housing needs.
Fund ina/Administration: The land inventory and updates will be compiled as
part of the Land Use Element review process by the Department of Planning
and Community Development.
Obiective: To maintain a vacant site inventory with a potential dwelling unit
capacity adequate to house Redding's projected future population, distributed
among single-family and multi-family zones.
Time Frame: Ongoing
3.3 Proaram Name: Update and Consolidate Area Plans
Program Description: The City and its Sphere of Influence is divided into
;i planning units called area plans. Over the next ten years, the City will evaluate
existing land-use and zoning within these areas. As part of each Area Plan
update the City will upzone existing multifamily designated vacant land in order
to increase the availability of land suitably classified for multiple family projects.
i Area Plans containing vacant land within the current City limits with the
greatest potential for development of affordable housing will be evaluated early
in the action program. A pFepesed schedule and map is located in Section IIIC.
Funding/Administration: Funding for this long-range planning activity will be
through the City's General Fund as well as from the City's CDBG program. The
project will be undertaken by the Department of Planning and Community
Development.
ii Obiective: To increase the availability of vacant land suitable for development
i� of higher-density, affordable housing projects. There will be 280 acres upzoned
to 18+ units per acre over the next ten years: 175 acres by July 1, 1994; and
an additional 105 acres by July 1, 2002.
Time Frame: FY 92-02
3.4 Program Name: Land-Use Intensification Study
Program Description: The City will undertake the study of current land-use
patterns for areas within the urban core of the community in order to identify
areas which have the potential for intensification of use due to current
underutilization or changing market conditions which may have rendered an
a
i area economically obsolete.
Funding/Administration: Funding for this long-range planning activity will be
from the City's General Fund. Other sources of financing for the project will
also be pursued. Department of Planning and Community Development staff
will be responsible for the project's completion.
i
i
78
f
Objective: To identify and inventory existing sites within the City which would
be appropriate for intensification of use. Approximately 25 acres of land will
be identified through this process.
Time Frame: FY 92-94
Goal 4: Support a Mix of Housing For All Income Groups
4.1 Proaram Name: Tax Exempt Mortgage Revenue Bonds
Program Description: Mortgage revenue bonds can be issued by cities or
housing authorities to support the development of multi-family or single-family
housing for low- and moderate-income households. Bonds can be used for the
purchase, rehabilitation, and construction of housing, as well as capital
improvements related to housing. Federal and State law requires that a
percentage of the total units in an assisted project be reserved for lower income
households. Past tax exempt mortgage revenue bond issues by the City have
facilitated the development of 100 units of new housing, a percentage of which
are available to low- and moderate-income households in accordance with
Federal and State law. Issuance of bonds is conditioned upon the affordability
of project units for lower-income households.
Because of the expense involved in packaging and processing a bond issue,
developers of smaller scale projects will be directed to utilize the services of the
California Housing Finance Agency (CHFA). CHFA provides financing for the
development of affordable housing through the sale of tax exempt revenue
bonds which combine projects throughout the State.
Funding/Administration: Financing would be tax-exempt bonds issued by the
City of Redding for specific projects. This type of bond is typically structured,
marketed, and sold by the bond underwriters. A selected lender receives the
proceeds of the bond sale and originates and services the subsequent loan to
the developer.
Objective: To inform the development community of the availability of this
source of financing for affordable housing projects. To use the authority of the
City and the Redding Housing Authority for the issuance of revenue bonds for
financing multi-family housing development projects.
Time Frame: At the present time, the City does not have any developer
applications for this type of financing. Developer inquiries would be considered
on an individual basis.
4.2 Proaram Name: Downpayment Assistance Program
Program Description: Program offers assistance with the downpayment required
when purchasing a home. Eligible participants must be first-time homebuyers,
buying a home in the City of Redding, and be moderate-income or less.
Assistance is in the form of an equity-sharing mortgage recorded as a second
lien on the newly purchased property. Since implementation in July 1988, the
Downpayment Assistance Program has assisted 113 families purchase their
first home. Of these families, 33 were low-income households. This program
has undergone minor revisions since 1988 in order to reach those population
79
groups which traditionally have a more difficult time purchasing property. It is
anticipated that the current program will continue with no further modifications.
Funding/Administration: Funding is from the Redding Redevelopment Agency's
Housing Setaside Fund. The program is locally administered by the Housing
Division of the City Planning and Community Development Department.
Funding received since 1988 is approximately $1,300,000. All payoffs on
existing DAP loans will go into a revolving loan fund in order to be utilized for
further DAP loans. The program is expected to be self-supporting in 5-8 years.
The program features a flexible loan maximum allowing the greatest assistance
to be given to lower-income households.
Proposed Changes: DAP program regulations are reviewed on an annual basis
to ensure that the program is responsive to current housing market conditions.
Objective: To assist 45 low- to moderate-income first-time homebuyers
purchase homes per year.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97.
4.3 Program Name: Mortgage Credit Certificate Program
Program Description: The program offers IRS tax credits for low-to-moderate
level income first-time homebuyers. It enables.the potential homebuyer to
qualify more easily for the primary financing on the purchase as well as to
realize a substantial tax savings. This program was first implemented in July
1989. Fifty-one households have been issued Mortgage Credit Certificates
since that time. The local program features a flexible rate where the greatest
assistance is given to lower-income households.
Funding/Administration: Funding for the program is through the City's
authorized tax-free bond allocation. Application is made at the state level to
utilize MCC tax credits rather than bond authority. Local administration is
through the Housing Division of the Planning and Community Development
Department.
Proposed Changes: The structure of the program is reviewed annually to ensure
N that it remains responsive to the local housing market.
Objective: To assist approximately 110 low- to moderate-income first-time
homebuyers purchase homes.
Time Frame: Redding's second allocation of $500,000 can be utilized through
December 1992. A third allocation of $1,250,000 can be utilized through
1993.
Goal 5: Promote Equal Housing Opportunities
5.1 Program Name: Fair Housing Referral and Information Program
Program Description:The program provides basic information about fair housing
rights to both landlords and tenants. Referrals are made for discrimination in
housing complaints to the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing.
80
i
Special outreach efforts are made to include groups likely to experience
discrimination in housing including minorities,the elderly, the handicapped, and
lower-income families. These efforts include providing staff speakers at service
agency meetings, and periodic informational mailouts to service organizations.
In addition, all tenants and landlords participating on the HUD Section 8 and
Rental Rehabilitation Programs are counseled as to fair housing rights and
responsibilities. For the 8 month period ending May 31 , 1992, the program
assisted approximately 293 households with fair housing information.
Funding/Administration: Funding for this program is through the City's
Community Development Block Grant Program. Local administration is by the
Housing Division of the City Planning and Community Development
Department.
Proposed Changes: During FY 1992, the City will negotiate with local providers
of legal services to lower-income households to have an independent entity
provide the Fair Housing services to City residents.
Objective: To educate the public regarding fair housing law including anti-
discrimination regulations.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
5.2 Program Name: Uniform Building Code, Title 24 Handicapped
Adaptability/Accessibility Regulations Compliance, Disabled Americans Act
Compliance.
Program Description: Local code enforcement of required handicapped
adaptability/accessibility features on new multifamily residential projects
containing 5 or more units per building. Proposed projects are reviewed prior
to construction for compliance to Title 24 regulations as well as monitored
during the construction process.
Funding/Administration: Building permit fees extracted for each project cover
a large portion of the cost related to operating the compliance program. Local
administration is by the City Building Department.
Proposed Changes: All City administered programs and projects will be
reviewed to determine compliance with the recent Disabled Americans Act.
Obiective: Title 24 compliance on required new multifamily construction
projects.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
5.3 Program Name: Homeless Assistance
Program Description: Several federal and state programs are currently available
to developers of projects designed to shelter homeless persons or families,
including those with special needs such as substance abusers, and the
physically or mentally handicapped, on an emergency, transitional, or
permanent basis. In addition, the City has used and will continue to use its
CDBG grant money for a variety of shelter programs. Past projects include a
local seasonal emergency shelter, an emergency shelter for battered women
81
1
and children, and a 12-unit transitional facility for homeless teen parents. It is
anticipated that a variety of local nonprofit service agencies will continue to
I
apply for monies from local, State or Federal sources such as the State
Emergency Shelter Program and/or McKinney Act funded programs.
Funding/Administration: Both State and Federal governments have allocated
monies to assist in the provision and operation of housing facilities for the
homeless. Administration of individual projects will be the responsibility of the
nonprofit agency initiating the application.
Proposed Changes: None proposed.
Obiective: A minimum of 20 transitional units per year. To establish a
permanent, year round emergency shelter which can provide services to a
minimum of 50 individuals per night.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
5.4 Program Name: Affordable Housing Task Force
Program Description: In response to a recommendation made in the City's 1992
Community Needs Assessment Report, the Redding Housing Authority was
given authority by the City Council to establish and oversee the Affordable
Housing Task Force. The Task Force is charged with studying affordable
housing issues, particularly those dealing with local housing development
standards and requirements, including density issues, and analyzing the role
these play in the development of affordable housing. Specific affordable
housing topics to be studied include the City's zoning ordinance as it relates to
residential development, current multi-family residential density classifications,
development standards including parking requirements, set-back requirements,
and the current development and building fee structure. Task Force
conclusions including any recommendations of changes or modifications to
current policies will be presented to Council in a final report during August
1993.
Fundina/Administration: The Task Force will be comprised of local community
persons involved in or concerned with the issue of affordable housing, with
technical assistance by Planning and Community Development staff, and
overseen by the City Council sitting as the Redding Housing Authority.
Proposed Changes: None (New Program)
Objective: To identify and analyze factors which constrain or contribute to the
constraint of development of affordable housing within the City of Redding. To
present the Task Force findings in a written final report to the City Council by
August 1993.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 93
82
I�
5.5 Program Name: Zoning Ordinance Revisions
Program Description: During FY 92 - 93, Planning Department staff will review
and revise the language of the City's Zoning Ordinance to specify both
transitional housing and homeless shelters as uses in specific zoning categories.
Funding/Administration: The revisions will be overseen by the Department of
Planning and Community Development and will be subject to review by the
Redding Planning Commission and City Council.
Proposed Changes: None (New Program) �.
Obiective: To bring the City's Zoning Ordinance into conformance with current
State law.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 93
5.6 Program Name: Section 8 Homeless Program
Program Description: The Redding Housing Authority currently operates a
Homeless Program which offers homeless families rent subsidies and a variety
of supportive services. The intent of the program is assist the homeless family
to achieve stability in their shelter needs. The Redding Housing Authority
currently has 15 rental subsidies for use with this program. As families achieve
the desired level of stability, they are transitioned to a regular case status and
a new homeless family is taken into the program.
Funding/Administration: Funding is by direct competitive application to HUD.
The Redding Housing Authority administers the program in the community.
Proposed Changes: None (New program)
Obiective: It is anticipated that a minimum of 15 homeless households will be
assisted by this program each year.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
5.7 Program Name: State After-Care Program
Program Description: The Redding Housing Authority currently operates a
supportive housing program for persons with mental, developmental, or
physical disabilities. The program is able to offer rental subsidies to individuals
who are receiving a variety of supportive services through State approved
organizations. The program currently has 16 one-bedroom subsidies, 3 two-
bedroom subsidies, and one three-bedroom subsidy. An application will be
made to the State Department of Housing and Community Development for 25
additional subsidies in FY 92.
Fundina/Administration: Funding for the program is received from the State
Department of Housing and Community Development. The Housing Authority
administers the housing subsidy portion of the program. A variety of service
organizations provide the supportive services portion of the program.
83
'I
t.
Proposed Chan9es: None proposed.
Objective: To submit an application to the State which, if funded, will provide
I� an additional 25 disabled households with housing assistance to enable them
! to live independently in the community.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
5.8 Program Name: HOPE for Elderly Independence
Program Description: This program was developed by HUD as part of the overall
HOPE legislation in 1990. It is considered a demonstration program to test the
effectiveness of combining rental assistance with supportive services to help
frail elderly persons live independently.
Funding/Administration: Funding is by competitive application direct to HUD.
The Redding Housing Authority submitted an application for funding to HUD in
July 1992. Upon funding notification, the proposed program will be
administered by the Redding Housing Authority.
Proposed Changes: None (New program)
Objective: To assist 60 very-low income frail elderly households to live
independently in the community per year.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
I
5.9 Program Name: Family Self-Sufficiency Program
Program Description: This program was developed by HUD as part of the overall
HOPE legislation in 1990. It builds upon the experience of two prior HUD
initiatives, Project Self-Sufficiency and Operation Bootstrap. Like these two
initiatives, Family Self-Sufficiency strives to assist very-low income households
achieve financial independence through a combination of rental subsidies and
supportive services.
Funding/Administration: Funding is by competitive application direct to HUD.
The Redding Housing Authority submitted an application in January 1992 and
was awarded 35 subsidies to be used on the program.
'I Proposed Changes: None (New program)
Objective: To assist 35 very-low income households per year.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
5.10 Program Name: Operation Bootstrap Program
Program Description: The Redding Housing Authority currently operates an
Operation Bootstrap Program which offers very-low income families rent sub-
sidies and a variety of supportive services in order to achieve self-sufficiency.
84
• •
Fundina/Administration: New funding is not available for this program. Previous
allocations were the result of competitive application direct to HUD. The
Redding Housing Authority which administers the program in Redding, currently
has 55 rental subsidies reserved for this program.
Proposed Changes: No new subsidies will be available under this program.
Applications will be submitted under the Family Self-Sufficiency Program and
the Homeless Demonstration Program.
Objective: To assist a minimum of 55 very-low income households per year.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97 j
5.11 Program Name: Family Unification Program
Program Description: The program which was enacted by Congress in 1990,
will help prevent the unnecessary separation of children from their families
because of homelessness and housing problems. The program will provide
housing assistance through the Section 8 Program to families who meet regular
eligibility criteria, and whose children are at risk of placement in out-of-home
care or delayed in returning from care, because of homelessness or severe
housing problems.
Fundina/Administration: Funding is by competitive application direct to HUD.
It is anticipated that program regulations and a NOFA will be published in mid
1992. The Redding Housing Authority will submit an application during FY
1993. The proposed program will be administered by the Redding Housing
Authority in conjunction with the Shasta County Child Protective Agency.
Proposed Changes: None (New program)
Objective: To submit an application to HUD which, if funded, will provide
approximately 25 very-low income families with rental assistance.
Time Frame: FY 93 - 97
Goal 6: Encourage Energy Conservation
6.1 Proaram Name: Uniform Building Code, Title 24 Energy Conservation
Compliance
Proaram Description: Local code enforcement of required energy conservation
features and appliance guidelines for construction of residential structures.
Proposed projects are reviewed prior to construction for compliance to Title 24
regulations as well as monitored during the construction process.
Fundin /Administration: Building permit fees extracted for each project cover
a large portion of the cost related to operating the compliance program. Local
administration is by the City Building Department.
Proposed Chances: None proposed.
Objective: Title 24 compliance of all new construction projects.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97 `
85
r • •
6.2 Program Name: Energy Conservation Programs
Program Descriotion: An assortment of programs designed to lessen the
consumption of electricity by both homeowners and businesses. (See previous
section on Energy Conservation) At this point, the programs are completely
voluntary, however, as energy resources are stretched to their limits by increas-
ing public demand due to population growth and irresponsible usage, it is likely
that energy providers will begin to utilize punitive measures such as imposing
much higher energy costs on excessive users to encourage participation.
Funding/Administration: City Electric Department funds and administers all of
the current conservation programs.
Proaosed Changes: None proposed.
Obiective: To achieve a conservative level of energy usage by both private and
public users of electricity based upon current and future energy supplies.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
6.3 Program Name: Weatherization
Program Descrir)tion: Weatherization improvements are provided to eligible
homeowners and landlords as part of the City's ongoing Homeowner,
Mobilehome, and Rental Rehabilitation programs. Eligible repairs include
weatherstripping, insulation, installation of storm doors, installation of dual-
pane windows, and caulking. Weatherization repairs have been made to the
over 1,000 units which have participated in City sponsored rehabilitation
programs since 1977. These types of repairs will continue to be encouraged
and in some cases required on all City programs.
Funding/Administration: Funding is from a variety of Federal, State, and local
sources including CDBG, State Deferred Loan Program, HUD Rental Rehabilita-
tion Grants, and Redevelopment funds. All programs are administered by the
Housing Division of the City Planning and Community Development
Department.
Proposed Changes: None proposed.
Objective: As part of the regular rehabilitation loan programs, 392 units will be
assisted, including weatherization measures if necessary.
Time Frame: FY 92 - 97
86
i
IX. APPENDIX
I
I
i
�I
i
87
1
Ask
SLAL� I = I.5 MI.
III
NORTHWEST QUADRANT p
NORTHEAST QUADRANT
ro
I 4
SOUTHWEST QUADRANT SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
CITY LIMIT
BOUNDARY
SPHERE OF
INFLUENCE
OUADRANT
BOUNDARRYY L 0 CA TION AIA P
BOUND
'i 88
- I
NOT TO SCALE
�11", 6 UNITS/AC. or 9 UNITS/AC.
12 UNITS/AC.or 18 UNITS/AC.
11
9W
J
1 �
�/ uL
�qr rte'
i
r m
r
A?
WR 7 RWR ?
44F Y(f/UO]
RWR =
BENTON ® A 1i
WiM11'R � � m
REDOiNO �
CITY LIMIT
BOUNDARY
SPHERE OF
INFLUENCE
QUADRANT
BOUNDARY
NORTHWEST QUADRANT
89
NO—.
�I�I�J i
op
%j 6 UNITS/AC. or 9 UNITS/AC.
• 12 UNITS/AC. or 18 UNITS/AC.
I� SHASTA
it 15 COWWNITY
COLLEGE
1�� Sp 299
la
g �
�I �*S SR 2g9
9
,a
r
� o
O
O�
11 i
M
I'
OLDLTURAS
DM
S
CITY LIMIT
BOUNDARY
SPHERE OF
I, INFLUENCE
QUADRANT
BOUNDARY T
NORTHEAST QUADRANT
90
• •
NOT TO 6 UNITS/AC. or 9 UNITS/AC.
NiSrLEtoE
12 UNITS/AC. or 18 UNITS/AC
I ..AR rNEIL
I
W LCHA VISTA
3
I
1 ' RANCHO ROAD
s
T
U
r^
1
REDDING
uRPORT I
_ , . _ . . _ CITY LIMIT
BOUNDARY
SPHERE OF
INFLUENCE - , i i
QUADRANT
BOUNDARY
SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
91
0
w
TABLE Al
INVENTORY OF ALL LAND CLASSIFICATIONS WITHIN SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
Gross Undeveloped
Classification Acres Acres
Industrial
General Industrial 1,110 Acres
Light Industrial 130 Acres
Planned Industrial 900 Acres
Total: 4,353 Acres 2,140 Acres (49%)
Commercial
Service Commercial 1,295 Acres 300 Acres (23%)
Retail Commercial 1,407 Acres 430 Acres (31%)
Highway Commercial 245 Acres 100 Acres (41%)
Total: 2,947 Acres 830 Acres (28%)
Office
Office 325 Acres 205 Acres (63%)
Office/Residential 142 Acres 50 Acres (35%)
Total: 467 Acres 255 Acres (54.6%)
Airport Service 1,127 Acres Undetermined
Public or Institutional 2,532 Acres 741.6 Acres (29%)
Parks and Golf 1,463 Acres 1,202.8 Acres (82%)
Agriculture 1,516 Acres 740.5 Acres (49%)
Residential 32,531 Acres 17,302 Acres (53%)
Greenway 16,544 Acres 16,544 Acres (100%)
Urban Reserve 0 Acres 0 Acres
TOTAL: 63,490 Acres 39,756 Acres (62.6%)
Source: Redding Department of Planning & Community Development, Land Use Survey July
1991.
92
r.
TABLE A2
INVENTORY OF VACANT RESIDENTIAL LAND WITHIN CITY LIMITS - JULY 1991
I
Undeveloped - Potential Population Potential
i
Classification Acres Units Factor Population
Residential 0.1 units/acre 0 0 3 0
Residential 0.2 units/acre 730.7 146 3 438
Residential 0.5 units/acre 113.3 57 3 171
Residential 1.0 units/acre 309.7 310 3 930
Residential 2.0 units/acre 2,857.3 5715 3 17,145
Residential 3.0 units/acre 2,560.4 7681 3 23,043
i
Residential 3.5 units/acre 977.2 3420 3 10,260
Residential 4.0 units/acre 361.1 1444 3 4,332
Residential 6.0 units/acre 241.8 1451 2 2,902
Residential 9.0 units/acre 647.2 5825 2 11,650
Residential 12.0 units/acre 211.3 2536 1.75 4,438
Residential 18.0 units/acre 40 720 1.75 1,260
TOTAL: 9,050 29,305 76,569
Source: Redding Department of Planning & Community Development, Land Use Survey of
July 1991.
i
i
I
i
I
i
I
93