Dinuba City Council
October 14, 2025

City of Dinuba
Housing Plan
2023-2031 Housing Element A7-15
 Facilitate 150 units of missing middle housing (e.g., duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, townhouses, courtyard buildings) in high-opportunity areas by the end of the planning period.
 As funding allows, and in collaboration with affordable housing developers, facilitate 25 affordable housing units in high-opportunity areas.
 Eliminate disparity between census tracts in Downtown/Southeast Dinuba and the rest of the city based on median income level and percent of households in poverty.
 Increase housing mobility options in Dinuba through the use of ADUs and SB-4 implementation. Facilitate the development of five units on religious institution sites.

Program 9: Preservation of At-Risk Housing
The City has 768 housing units that are deed-restricted as affordable housing for lower-income households. No units are considered at risk of conversion during this Housing Element planning period.

Nevertheless, the City will work to preserve these units and will proactively monitor all other units to encourage continued affordability beyond existing covenants and work proactively with owners of affordable units to assist in rehabilitation needs.

Specific Actions, Objectives and Timelines  Monitor affordable units during the planning period.  Maintain annual contact with property owners of affordable housing regarding any change in status/intent or need for assistance, such as rehabilitation assistance.
 Maintain the AB 987 database to include detailed information on all subsidized units, including those that have affordability covenants.

Update annually.
 Ensure tenants are properly noticed by the property owners should a Notice of Intent to opt out of low-income use is filed. Notices must be filed three years, one year, and six months in advance of conversion.

Additionally, the City shall provide tenants with information about available resources and their tenant rights during the Notice of Intent period.
 In the event of potential conversion, conduct outreach to other nonprofit housing providers to acquire projects opting out of low-income use. As funding permits, assist in funding the acquisition or support funding applications by nonprofit providers.

Primary Responsible Departments Planning Department
Funding Sources General Fund
Relevant Policies 3.6, 5.5
AFFH Themes  Anti-Displacement and Tenant Protection
Geographic Targeting Citywide
AFFH Outcomes  Preserve all 768 affordable housing units.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
A7-16
Program 10: Housing Preservation and Rehabilitation
More than 51 percent of the housing stock in Dinuba is more than 40 years old. The City actively seeks and encourages the rehabilitation of housing units, utilizing various programs and community partnerships. Self-Help Enterprises is a community development organization that offers a variety of programs for low-income families in the region. This includes deferred payment loans available to qualified homeowners for essential health and safety repairs such as roofing, plumbing, electrical, heating/cooling, foundation, windows, and handicap accessible modifications. The loan is due and payable upon sale, change of title or change of use.

Specific Actions, Objectives and Timelines  Coordinate with Self-Help Enterprises to fund rehabilitation efforts in the city. Annually research funding opportunities, such as CHAFA, for rehabilitation grants.
 Advertise available rehabilitation grant programs on the City’s website.

Ensure that Code Enforcement has the information when addressing enforcement cases.
 Expand the City’s Housing Rehabilitation Program.
 Apply for additional funding for the Homebuyer Rehabilitation Program by 20265 to serve at least 12 households by the end of the planning period. Prioritize Downtown/ Southeast Dinuba and Southwest Dinuba (areas of greatest need).
 Publish resources on homeowner rehabilitation assistance on the City’s website by July 20265.
 Pursue/provide rehabilitation assistance that includes energy conservation and weatherization improvements as eligible activities.

Primary Responsible Departments Planning Department, Code Enforcement Funding Sources General Fund
Relevant Policies 3.6, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 5.5
AFFH Themes  Outreach and Education
 Place-Based Strategy for Neighborhood Improvements
Geographic Targeting Downtown/ Southeast Dinuba and Southwest Dinuba AFFH Outcomes  Assist with at least 12 rehabilitation projects over 8 years.

Program 11: Lower-Income and Special Needs Housing
To assist in the development of housing to meet the needs of extremely low, very low- and low-income households, the HATC offers the following programs:
 Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs): The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program (sometimes referred to as “Section 8 Housing”) is a federal program offered through the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that provides financial assistance to very low-income, elderly, and disabled households. The HATC receives funds directly from HUD and facilitates the HCV Program in Tulare County. Under the HCV Program, participants are free to choose housing that meets the requirements of the program. Participants receive a fixed subsidy, which is paid directly to the landlord by the HATC, and the remaining rent is paid by the participant. In most cases, there is a five-year time limit to this type of rental assistance because the fixed subsidy is designed to help families stabilize their housing costs in order to achieve self-sufficiency and save for other housing opportunities. The HATC maintains a list of rental units in Dinuba in which the landlord has indicated they are willing to participate in the HCV Program. As of December 2023, there are several rental complexes in the city currently accepting applications (https://www.hatc.net/unit-referralPage 380 of 1180 City of Dinuba
Housing Plan
2023-2031 Housing Element A7-17
listing.php?city=DINUBA). Furthermore, in 2020, the State passed SB 222 and SB 329 that identify public assistance as a legitimate source of income for housing payments. Landlords are no longer permitted to reject HCV recipients.
 Public Housing: Provides rental assistance to low -income families and individuals. The HATC owns and manages all rental units offered under this program, which are located in communities throughout Tulare County.

The City will continue to work with the HATC to obtain HCVs and provide the community with information about the HATC’s other available programs. Additionally, Self-Help Enterprises is a community development organization that offers a variety of programs for low-income families in the region, including the Downpayment Assistance program and Home Ownership Education program.

Please also refer to Program 1, Regional Collaboration, to see the efforts underway to help with transportation needs for persons with special needs (including persons with disabilities, seniors and low income persons).

Specific Actions, Objectives and Timelines  Assist 122 Dinuba households through HCVs  Contract with Self-Help Enterprises to provide financial assistance programs to low-income households, including the Homebuyer Assistance Program.
 Collaborate with Self-Help Enterprises to pursue HOME and CDBG grant opportunities to expand funding for financial assistance programs.
 Expand program awareness and participation to low-income households throughout the city.
 Annually conduct one workshop for prospective low-income homebuyers, starting in 2025, for a total of seven workshops during the planning period.
 Over the 8-year planning period, after each Point-in-Time Count, conduct workshops for the Planning Commission and City Council to share the data from the count. Invite the Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance to attend.  Identify potential programs to aid low- and moderate-income homeownership opportunities and develop a list of resources by July 2025. Apply for feasible funding opportunities by December 2025.  Connect low-income residents with housing assistance resources, including the HCV program.
 Add information on the HCV Program and Self-Help Enterprises’ financial assistance programs to the City’s website by January 2025.  Promote the availability of assistance programs through all City’s social media pages.
 Attend at least two community events to spread awareness and distribute fact sheets on available financial assistance programs.  In collaboration with the Housing Authority of Tulare County (HATC)Housing Authority, provide education to property owners and managers to expand awareness of the HCV program to increase acceptance of tenant-based HCVs and to facilitate mobility and provide choices for lower-income households throughout the city. Identify and address challenges that property owners/managers have with existing or prospective HCV holders.
 In collaboration with the Tulare County Housing AuthorityHATC, organize one workshop for landlords on the HCV program at least

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
A7-18
twice during the planning period, for a total of two workshops during the planning period.
 Review the General Plan, applicable Specific Plans, and Zoning Code and Zoning Map to evaluate opportunities for removing barriers to development of emergency shelters and identify additional zoning districts where emergency shelters may be permitted. Review General Plan, Specific Plans, and Zoning Code and Zoning Map by January 2026 and implement any changes by January 2027.
 Consistent with State law that mandates the provision of housing for ELI households, the City will prioritize processing and funding allocation for projects that include units for ELI households, especially farmworker housing.
 Consistent with State law that mandates the provision of housing for special needs households, the City will prioritize processing and funding allocation for projects that include units for special needs households.  Beginning in 2025 and annually thereafter, work with developers to pursue funding available at the State and Federal levels for affordable housing development. Specifically, pursue funding programs that target the needs of extremely low and very low income households.  Provide letters of support to funding applications by developers if the proposed projects are consistent with the goals and objectives of this Housing Element, as requested.
 The City, County, and Tulare area collaboration partners will pursue a variety of strategies and funding to encourage the development, rehabilitation and conservation of housing for farmworkers such as funding development, integrating housing for farmworkers into development, developer identification, maintaining an inventory of suitable sites, site development, ensure zoning and development standards facilitate a variety of housing types for farmworker housing needs. The City and collaborative partners will make a specific and at least annual effort to assist in the development of housing for farmworkers and conserve and improve the existing housing stock for farmworkers, including but not limited to:
 Contacting nonprofit developers at least every other year to identify opportunities for the development or improvement of housing for farmworkers.
 Coordinating and participating with regional organizations, including non-profit, academic, and employers, to raise awareness, share and employ strategies, or target new resources.
 Coordinating annually with organizations that represent or serve farmworkers.
 Providing incentives and other strategies beyond state density bonus law to encourage housing for farmworkers, including setting aside housing for farmworkers within developments, supporting funding applications, prioritizing entitlements and establishing appropriate zoning and development standards.
 Target code enforcement and other resources to the existing housing stock with the most need for rehabilitation and sanitary conditions that could be more likely to house farmworkers and work with regional or other organizations to improve living conditions for farmworkers.  Twice annually, in coordination with the County’s Homeless Initiatives Program Coordinator, provide outreach to persons experiencing homelessness including connections with available resources.

Primary Responsible Departments Planning Department

City of Dinuba
Housing Plan
2023-2031 Housing Element A7-19
Funding Sources HUD, Self-Help Enterprise funding sources Relevant Policies 3.2, 5.1, 5.4, 5.5, 7.4
AFFH Themes  Outreach and Education
 Housing Mobility
 New Housing Opportunities in Areas of High Resources
 Anti-Displacement and Tenant Protection
Geographic Targeting Citywide; Moderate and High Resource Tracts, especially Northwest Dinuba AFFH Outcomes  Promote with the goal of expanding the use of HCVs in the city by 10 percent by December 2030, using 2023 data as baseline
Program 12: Community and Economic Development
Well-maintained infrastructure creates a safe and accessible urban environment, fostering a sense of community and belonging. Moreover, investing in such improvements attracts businesses and investments, contributing to economic growth and ensuring equal access to essential services. The City will implement the following actions to expand community and economic development citywide.

Specific Actions, Objectives and Timelines  Annually coordinate with the Workforce Investment Board (WIB) of Tulare County to carry out the WIB’s Local Plan, including identified workforce priorities that will benefit the residents of Dinuba.  Every other year, apply for available grants to help implement measures within the Revitalization Plan for South El Monte Neighborhood beyond what is scheduled in the CIP.
 Continue with the construction of Well 21 to help meet the future water demands in Dinuba.
 Annually coordinate with the Public Works Department to review the City’s Capital Improvement Projects Plan (CIP) to ensure public facilities and infrastructure are supportive of the needs of underserved communities, including. In particular, the City should ensure that the CIP includes the following measures: :.
 Annual CIP funding for city sidewalk improvements and ADA ramp improvements area include underserved areas.

That the annual CIP funding for city sidewalk improvements and ADA ramp improvements area included in underserved areas
 As part of the annual CIP program updates,Thatmeasures from the Revitalization Plan for the South El Monte Neighborhood (Downtown and Southeast Dinuba) and the Active Transportation Plan.evaluate public improvement needs in Downtown and Southeast Dinuba and Measures from the Revitalization Plan for the South El Monte Neighborhood (Downtown and Southeast Dinuba) and the Active Transportation Plan prioritize improvements on sites that accommodate the City’s lower-income RHNA.

That the scheduled (2022-2026) downtown improvements will assist with attracting new commercial opportunities.

The sScheduled (2022-2026) shade structure project at Delgado and Roosevelt parks.
 2023 Circulation Element policies that call for: Pedestrian Priority Corridors, Complete Streets identified in the 2023 Circulation Element are included (El Monte Way, Alta Avenue and Kamm Avenue).
 Scheduled (2022-2026) shade structure project at Delgado and Roosevelt parks.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
A7-20
 2023 Circulation Element policies that call for: Pedestrian Priority Corridors, Complete Streets identified in the 2023 Circulation Element are included (El Monte Way, Alta Avenue and Kamm Avenue)
 At least annually collaborate with the Tulare County Economic Development Office to attract new businesses and jobs to Dinuba.  On an ongoing basis, connect local business owners and interested parties to the Tulare County Economic Development Office to receive assistance on starting a business, including assistance with permitting, applying for incentives, and finding site locations. Connect at least five potential business owners with the Tulare County Economic Development Office.
 Starting in 2025 and annually thereafter, partner with the local employment organizations to connect Dinuba residents with job opportunities and workforce training program opportunities.  By the end of 2026, partner with the Tulare County Workforce Investment Board and Employment Connection to host an annual job fair and workforce training event in Dinuba.
 Annually work with TCaT and the Fresno County Rural Transit Agency to provide free bus passes to residents attending job fairs and interviews.  By 2026, partner with the Chamber of Commerce, local business owners, and potential businesses to identify planning and infrastructure needs to support business development in Dinuba.
 As part of a regional effort and/or individually, develop a report on planning and infrastructure needs for business development by January 2025 and present to City Council. If adopted, implement at least 50 percent of the recommendations in the report by the end of the planning period.
 At least every other year, coordinate with Tulare County and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District to develop and implement a plan to reduce pollution burden throughout the city, targeting air quality, water quality, and pesticide use. Implement Environmental Justice policies adopted as part of General Plan Update in August 2023 to address pollution burden in Downtown and Southeast Dinuba.  By 2025, complete the South El Monte Revitalization Plan which covers the southern part of Southeast Dinuba. The Plan includes analysis of:

Community Beautification and Landscaping, Public Facilities (sidewalks, parks, streets, etc.), Community Lighting, Housing Rehabilitation, Infrastructure, Economic Development, and Crime Prevention and Public Safety.
 Use the South El Monte Revitalization Plan to leverage funds to implement the actions and goals of the Plan.
 Complete programmed improvements around the new Dinuba High School located in Southeast Dinuba and surrounding planned residential neighborhoods, including bike lanes, new walkways, new parks.

Construction of the High School is expected August 2024.

Primary Responsible Departments Planning Department
Funding Sources General Funds
Relevant Policies 3.1, 4.4
AFFH Themes  Place-based Strategies for Neighborhood Improvement Geographic Targeting Downtown and Southeast Dinuba, and tracts with sites that can accommodate lower-income housing

City of Dinuba
Housing Plan
2023-2031 Housing Element A7-21
AFFH Outcomes  Complete 5 CIP projects during the planning period.Implement five minor and five major recommended infrastructure actions from the Revitalization Plan for the South El Monte Neighborhood by the end of the planning period.
 Implement at least two active transportation projects in Downtown and Southeast Dinuba by the end of the planning period.
 Complete Well 21 project
Program 13: Energy Conservation
The City provides referrals to local programs for homeowners and developers including energy savings programs; federal tax credit programs; savings for energy efficient commercial designs; and technical assistance, green building program coordination and cash incentives for multi-family units.

Specific Actions, Objectives and Timelines  Annually, update energy conservation programs on the City website.

Also provide information to homeowners and developers during the project application process. Provide information to homeowners during Code Enforcement cases.
 When available, pursue/provide rehabilitation assistance that includes energy conservation and weatherization improvements as eligible activities
Primary Responsible Departments Community Development Department Funding Sources General Fund
Relevant Policies 6.1, 6.2
AFFH Themes  Place-based Strategies for Neighborhood Improvement Geographic Targeting Citywide with emphasis on Downtown and Southeast Dinuba.

AFFH Outcomes Refer 5 low-income households to energy conservation programs annually.

Refer developer energy conservation programs to all multi-family projects proposed during the planning period.

Program 14: Fair Housing Outreach and Enforcement
The City of Dinuba partners with the Fair Housing Council of Central California (FHCCC) to provide fair housing information and resources to residents and housing providers. The FHCCC is a nonprofit organization that investigates complaints involving housing discrimination and predatory lending practices to ensure compliance with federal and state housing laws. The City also works with the HATC to ensure compliance with fair housing laws and to address complaints.

The City does not have the capacity to address fair housing complaints internally. The City refers fair housing issues and complaints to Fair Housing Council of Central California (FHCCC) and the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing. The Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) maintains a record of housing discrimination complaints filed in local jurisdictions.

The HATC refers fair housing issues and complaints to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO).

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
A7-22
Specific Actions, Objectives and Timelines  Coordinate with FHCCC/other fair housing nonprofit organizations to provide fair housing and tenant/landlord services, including investigation of discrimination complaints, fair housing counseling and education, fair housing testing, and tenant/landlord counseling and mediation.  Coordinate with non-profit organizations, local community groups, and service organizations to increase awareness of and access to housing resources and fair housing assistance.
 Beginning in 2025, release educational program about housing rights and resources to be conducted annually, in English and Spanish. The educational program will include a variety of media outlets, including but not limited to, social media, print media, newspaper, radio, and/or television.
 Update the City’s website to include fair housing rights and responsibilities for landlords and lenders. Add a language translation feature to the City’s website. Complete updates by January 20265.  Utilize the Technical Advisory Committee at TCAG to cCoordinate onwith TCAG to offeringto offer outreach on housing services and opportunities in conjunction with other regional planning efforts. Organize one workshop in Dinuba to provide information on housing services and programs in 2025. Please also refer to Program 1, Regional Collaboration.
 Continue to provide Spanish translation services for all public meetings and outreach events.
 Develop a Fair Housing factsheet to be included with the ADU application packet to inform property owners of their responsibility with state and federal fair housing laws. Publish fair housing guide with ADU applications on or before January 2025.
 Provide annual trainings for City staff on how to refer residents for fair housing complaints. Beginning in 2025, provide annual training to City staff on how to refer residents for fair housing complaints.  Conduct outreach to homeless individuals to identify needs of the city’s homeless population and connect individuals with available resources and services.
 Provide annual trainings to the City’s Police Department staff on how to engage with the city’s homeless population and how to connect them with resources. Starting in 2025, provide annual trainings to City staff on engaging with the homeless population.
 Work with TCaT and the Fresno County Rural Transit Agency to provide free transit passes to homeless individuals receiving assistance.
 Annually, conduct outreach and education on energy efficiency and water conservation measure through a social media campaign.

Primary Responsible Departments Planning Department
Funding Sources General Fund
Relevant Policies 3.1, 4.4
AFFH Themes  Enforcement and Outreach
Geographic Targeting Downtown and Southeast Dinuba
AFFH Outcomes  Assist at least 15 residents and landlords with fair housing services annually, throughout planning period.
 Distribute printed educational materials to at least 75 property owners, apartment managers, tenants, and realtors during the planning period, prioritizing outreach in Downtown and Southeast Dinuba.

City of Dinuba
Housing Plan
2023-2031 Housing Element A7-23
A7.3 AFFH Actions Summary
Government Code §8899.50 requires “meaningful actions” well beyond combating discrimination to overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities. Actions to affirmatively further fair housing include:
 Enhancing housing mobility strategies
 Encouraging development of new affordable housing in high resource areas  Increasing fair housing enforcement and fair housing outreach capacity  Improving place-based strategies to encourage community conservation and revitalization, including preservation of existing affordable housing
 Protecting existing residents from displacement
Actions to affirmatively furthering fair housing are summarized below.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
A7-24
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Action Matrix
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach
Program 143: Fair
Housing Outreach and
Enforcement
 Coordinate with FHCCC/other fair housing nonprofit organizations to provide fair housing and tenant/landlord services, including investigation of discrimination complaints, fair housing counseling and education, fair housing testing, and tenant/landlord counseling and mediation.
 Coordinate with non-profit organizations, local community groups, and service organizations to increase awareness of and access to housing resources and fair housing assistance. Starting in 2025:
 Release educational program about housing rights and
resources to be conducted annually, in English and Spanish.

The educational program will include a variety of media outlets, including but not limited to, social media, print media, newspaper, radio, and/or television.
 Update the City’s website to include fair housing rights and responsibilities for landlords and lenders. Add a language translation feature to the City’s website. Complete updates by January 20265.
 Utilize the Technical Advisory Committee at TCAG to Ccoordinate with TCAG toon offering outreach on housing services and opportunities in conjunction with other regional planning efforts.

Organize one workshop in Dinuba to provide information on housing services and programs in 2025. Please also refer to Program 1, Regional Collaboration.
 Provide Spanish translation services for all public meetings and outreach events.
 Develop a Fair Housing factsheet to be included with the ADU application packet to inform property owners of their
responsibility with state and federal fair housing laws. Publish fair housing guide with ADU applications on or before January 2025.  Beginning 2025, provide annual trainings for City staff on how to refer residents for fair housing complaints. Beginning in 2025, provide annual training to City staff on how to refer residents for fair housing complaints.
2024-2032
Starting 2025,
then ongoing
January 2025
Citywide with emphasis
on Downtown and
Southeast Dinuba
Assist at least 15 residents
and landlords with fair
housing services annually,
throughout planning period.

Distribute printed
educational materials to at
least 75 property owners,
apartment managers,
tenants, and realtors during
the planning period,
prioritizing outreach in
Downtown and Southeast
Dinuba.

City of Dinuba
Housing Plan
2023-2031 Housing Element A7-25
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics  Annually, conduct outreach and education on energy efficiency and water conservation measure through a social media
campaign.
 Beginning 2025, provide annual trainings to the City’s Police Department staff on how to engage with the city’s homeless population and how to connect them with resources.
 By the end of 2028, conduct outreach to homeless individuals to identify needs of the city’s homeless population and connect individuals with available resources and services.
 Work with TCaT and the Fresno County Rural Transit Agency to provide free transit passes to homeless individuals receiving assistance. Initiate discussions with TCaT and the Fresno County Rural Transit Agency by the end of 2026. If feasible, implement by the end of 2027.
 Collaborate with TCAG and other jurisdictions to pursue regional, state, and federal funding opportunities for disadvantaged communities, such as the California Strategic Growth Council grant programs, EPA Environmental Justice Grants, and
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.

By the end of 2028
Initiate by the end
of 2026, implement
by the end of 2027.

Housing Mobility
Program 1: Regional
Collaboration
 Participate in regional meetings related to housing and homeless issues to pursue funding and coordination opportunities.  Collaborate with TCaT and/or TCAG to prepare a study on transit and active transportation needs for Dinuba residents and identify actions to address those needs, focusing on connecting residents to job centers, and prioritizing residents in Downtown and Southeast Dinuba.
2024-2032
Annually
Study by 2026,
implementation by
2028
Downtown and
Southeast Dinuba
Annually pursue funding
opportunities for regional
housing issues.

Prepare a transit needs
study by January 2026 to
identify potential actions.

Implement at least one of
those actions by the end of
2028.

Program 2: Adequate
Sites for RHNA and
Monitoring of No Net
Loss
 Offer expedited processing and fee deferrals, reductions, or waivers for affordable units in development on large sites identified in the sites inventory.

Beginning in 2025 South Dinuba Facilitate the development of 678 units, including 300
affordable to lower income
households, on large sites.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
A7-26
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics Program 5: Accessory
Dwelling Units
 Amend the Zoning Code in compliance with state law by July 2025.
 Beginning in 2025, facilitate the production of ADUs through efforts including, but not limited to:
 Updating ADU webpage to include available resources for ADU production, such as grants for pre-development costs available to lower-income homeowners through California Finance Agency (CalHFA).
 Offering expedited reviews for ADU applications.
 Promote the development of ADUs, prioritizing Northeast, Northwest, and Southwest Dinuba.
 Conduct three educational workshops, campaigns, or
outreach events to promote ADU development in the city to residents, with at least two events targeted to residents and developers in Northeast, Northwest, and Southwest Dinuba, by the end of the planning period.
 Implement strategies to streamline the ADU permitting process.  Develop an ADU application checklist and publish the checklist on the City’s website by December 2025.
 Add information on the ADU permitting process, as well as available resources and incentives, on the City’s website by December 2025.
 Adopt pre-approved ADU plans, potentially using SJV REAP’s Template ADU Program and SJV REAP Tool: Pre-Reviewed Plan Set, by January 2026, and publish on the City’s website.  Determine and implement strategy to promote ADUs for
moderate- and lower-income households.
 Prepare a report on potential strategies to encourage affordability of ADUs for moderate and lower-income
households, including but not limited to, promoting the use of HCVs or development of cost incentive programs or nointerest loan program for ADU developers in exchange for income restrictions. Prepare report by January 2026 and present to City Council for adoption by August 2026. If adopted, implement pilot program by January 2027.

July 2025
Beginning in 2025
December 2025
January 2026
January 2026/
January 2027
Northeast, Northwest,
and Southwest Dinuba
Support the development of
at least 16 ADUs citywide
with at least five 10 ADUs in
Northeast, Northwest, and
Southwest Dinuba during
the planning period.

City of Dinuba
Housing Plan
2023-2031 Housing Element A7-27
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics Program 11: Lower
Income and Special
Needs Housing
 Contract with Self-Help Enterprises to provide financial assistance programs to low-income households, including the Homebuyer Assistance Program.
 Collaborate with Self-Help Enterprises to pursue HOME and CDBG grant opportunities to expand funding for financial assistance programs.
 Expand program awareness and participation to low-income households throughout the city.
 Annually conduct one workshop for prospective low-income homebuyers, starting in 2025, for a total of seven workshops during the planning period.
 Over the 8-year planning period, after each Point-in-Time Count, conduct workshops for the Planning Commission and City Council to share the data from the count. Invite the Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance to attend.
 Identify potential programs to aid moderate-income
homeownership opportunities and develop a list of resources by July 2025. Apply for feasible funding opportunities by December 2025.
 Connect low-income residents with housing assistance resources, including the HCV program.
 Add information on the HCV Program and Self-Help
Enterprises’ financial assistance programs to the City’s website by January 2025.
 Promote the availability of assistance programs through all City’s social media pages.
 Attend at least two community events to spread awareness and distribute fact sheets on available financial assistance programs.
 In collaboration with the Housing Authority, provide education to property owners and managers to expand awareness of the HCV program to increase acceptance of tenant-based HCVs and to facilitate mobility and provide choices for lower-income households throughout the city. Identify and address challenges that property owners/managers have with existing or prospective HCV holders.

Annually
January 2025,
then annually
2024-2032
July 2025/
December 2025
By January 2025,
then ongoing
Citywide; Moderate and
High Resource Tracts,
especially Northwest
Dinuba
Assist 122 Dinuba
households through HCVs
Promote with the goal of
expanding the use of HCVs
in the city by 10 percent by
December 2030, using 2023
data as baseline.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
A7-28
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics  In collaboration with the Tulare County Housing Authority, organize one workshop for landlords on the HCV program at least twice during the planning period, for a total of two workshops during the planning period.
 Review the General Plan, applicable Specific Plans, and Zoning Code and Zoning Map to evaluate opportunities for removing barriers to development of emergency shelters and identify additional zoning districts where emergency shelters may be permitted. Review General Plan, Specific Plans, and Zoning Code and Zoning Map by January 2026 and implement any changes by January 2027.
 Beginning in 2025 and annually thereafter, pursue funding available at the State and Federal levels for affordable housing development. Specifically, pursue funding programs that target the needs of extremely low and very low income households.  The City and collaborative partners will make a specific and at least annual effort to assist in the development of housing for farmworkers and conserve and improve the existing housing stock for farmworkers.
 Twice annually, in coordination with the County’s Homeless Initiatives Program Coordinator, provide outreach to persons experiencing homelessness including connections with available resources.

January 2026/
January 2027
Beginning 2025 and
annually thereafter
Annually
New Housing Opportunities in Higher Opportunity Areas
Program 2: Adequate
Sites for RHNA
 Concurrent with adoption of the Housing Element, rezone properties as outlined above and detailed in the Housing Resources section of this Housing Element to fully accommodate the remaining RHNA of 1,283 units and specifically a RHNA shortfall of 381 units (216 lower income and 165 moderate income units). As part of the rezoning, establish appropriate development standards (including parking, height, setback, lot coverage, etc.) to ensure maximum allowable densities at the respective zones can be achieved.
 Concurrent with the adoption of the Housing Element, develop a formal procedure to monitor no net loss in capacity pursuant to SB 166.
 By 2026, complete update to water and sewer master plans.

Concurrent with
Housing Element
adoption
Citywide Facilitate the development
of 1,588 units over 8 years
(387 very low-income, 238
low-income, 238 moderateincome, and 695 above
moderate-income units).

City of Dinuba
Housing Plan
2023-2031 Housing Element A7-29
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics  Concurrent with the adoption of the Housing Element, adopt a policy to prioritize the allocation of water and sewer services to affordable housing projects (SB 1087)
 Maintain an inventory of available vacant and prospective sites that can accommodate new housing; update annually. Make this inventory available to the public and interested developers on the City website.
 Annually meet with property owners and interested developers to pursue housing development in the city.

Program 3: By Right
Approval
 Concurrent with the Housing Element adoption and Development Code update to provide adequate sites for the RHNA (see Program 2), update the Development Code to address the byright approval requirements. Lower-income sites included in the site inventory with a proposed zoning change, as well as vacant sites identified in two previous housing elements and non-vacant sites identified in the previous housing element, will be rezoned, in compliance with Government Code Section 65583.2(h) and (i), to permit owner-occupied and rental multifamily uses by-right (without discretionary approval) for developments in which 20 percent or more of the units are affordable to lower-income households. Any subdivision of the sites shall be subject to all laws, including, but not limited to, the local government ordinance implementing the Subdivision Map Act.

Concurrent with
Housing Element
adoption
Citywide Facilitate the development
of 1,588 units over 8 years
(387 very low-income, 238
low-income, 238 moderateincome, and 695 above
moderate-income units).

Program 6: Zoning Code
Amendments
 Complete Zoning Code Amendments outlined in Program 6 to facilitate the development and remove constraints to the development of housing for special needs populations.

By the end of 2025
or concurrent with
Housing Element
adoption (see
Program 6)
Citywide Facilitate the development
of 20 units for special needs
populations during the
planning period.

Program 7: Transparency
in Government
 Evaluate the City’s compliance with the new transparency requirements per Government Code Section 65940.1(a)(1) and make changes as necessary by December 2025.
 Update links on the City’s Planning and Development Services Department webpage to connect to the most recent versions of each resource and document.

December 2025
By July 20265
Citywide Facilitate the development
of 1,588 units over 8 years
(387 very low-income, 238
low-income, 238 moderateincome, and 695 above
moderate-income units).

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
A7-30
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics Program 8: Facilitating
Affordable Housing
Development
 In annual coordination with Self-Help Enterprises, proactively work with Self-Help and other housing developers to locate sites and housing opportunities in infill sites in high opportunity areas.

Pursue funding designed to assist in the affordable housing space.  Annually pursue funding at the local, regional, state, and federal levels such as State CDBG, CalHome, PLHA, and Project Homekey funds.
 Work with other jurisdictions in Tulare County to create a regional list of affordable housing developers. Annually conduct outreach to these developers with information on potential sites, available regulatory concessions and incentives, and potential funding opportunities.
 By December 31, 2025, revise the Density Bonus Ordinance in compliance with State law (Government Code §65915) to equally provide for density bonuses in all zoning districts where residential uses are permitted and to include provisions relative to density bonuses, incentives, and concessions as required by State law.
 Facilitate the development of affordable housing through the provision of the following regulatory concessions and incentives:
 Density increases under the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance.  Expedited and streamlined project application review
involving any of the following housing categories: abovemoderate-income households; very low-income households; large families; persons with disabilities or developmental disabilities; and farmworkers.
 Potential fee waivers/reductions/deferrals.
 Develop a web-based Housing Development Toolkit that outlines a step-by-step process for residential development, including identifying steps in the entitlement and building permit process, detailed information on development incentives, and funding programs and resources for affordable housing development.

Publish the Housing Development Toolkit on the City’s website by August 20265.

Starting in 2025 and
annually thereafter
December 31, 2025
Starting 2025
August 2025
Citywide with emphasis
on moderate and high
resource census tract
including Downtown
and Southwest Dinuba.

Increase the percent of the
city’s housing stock that is
multifamily from 25 percent
to 28 percent by December
2030, using 2020 Census
data as a baseline.

Eliminate disparity between
census tracts in
Downtown/Southeast
Dinuba and the rest of the
city based on median
income level and percent of
households in poverty.

Increase housing mobility
options in Dinuba through
the use of ADUs, and SB4
implementation.

Facilitate 150 units of
missing middle housing (e.g.,
duplexes, triplexes,
fourplexes, townhouses,
courtyard buildings) in highopportunity areas by the
end of the planning period.

As funding allows, and in
collaboration with
affordable housing
developers, facilitate 25
affordable housing units in
high-opportunity areas.

City of Dinuba
Housing Plan
2023-2031 Housing Element A7-31
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics  Review the General Plan, applicable Specific Plans, and Zoning Code and Zoning Map to evaluate opportunities for removing barriers to housing production, adding housing capacity, and accommodating a greater mix of dwelling types and sizes households (e.g., duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, townhouses, courtyard buildings), prioritizing opportunities and sites particularly in Northwest Dinuba and the northern part of Northeast Dinuba (Census Tract 06107000401).
 Review General Plan, Specific Plans, and Zoning Code and Zoning Map by January 2026 and implement any changes by January 2027 (see Program 6).
 Acquire funds from the state and federal grant opportunities, including the HCD Infill Infrastructure Grant Program, to support the development of affordable housing, housing for special needs, and support service projects. Leverage City funding to partner with affordable housing developer on new affordable housing developments in the city. Prioritize subsidies for financing for rental housing units affordable to extremely low-income households, senior households, farmworkers, persons with disabilities, veterans, large households, and other households with special needs.
 Apply for state and federal funds in 2025 and annually thereafter to facilitate the development of affordable housing, including housing for extremely low-income households and those with special housing needs. Partner with nonprofit housing developers to support the entitlement of at least 100 subsidized housing units affordable to extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households in the city during the planning period, including at least 30 percent of units outside of areas of high segregation and poverty or near public transit and services
 Residential Development Standards for Religious Facilities: SB 4 (Housing on Higher Education Institution and Religious Institution Sites), effective in January 2024, ensures that churches, faith institutions, and nonprofit colleges are able to build affordable housing on their land without having to go through an expensive and difficult rezoning and discretionary approval process. AB 1851 (Religious Facility Housing) provides relief in parking requirements when a religious institution partners with a nonprofit organization to provide affordable housing on site. AB 1851 applies only to religious facility properties in residential January 2026/
January 2027
In 2025, then as
funding becomes
available

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
A7-32
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics zones or nonresidential zones that also allow residential uses.

Establishing standards for residential uses on religious facilities sites could provide opportunities for housing in a variety of locations throughout the City, providing mobility options for residents. To promote these opportunities, the City would create an outreach and technical advisory program that would consist of:
 Conducting a workshop in 2027 and 2029 to explain SB 4, AB 1851 and how it can apply to religious facility properties in Dinuba.  Invite religious facility owners and local nonprofit developers to participate
 Provide informational materials on the development process  City staff will provide technical assistance to religious facility property owners to assist with the project entitlements.  Review the General Plan and applicable zoning regulations, and revise as necessary, to facilitate affordable housing on religious facility sites.
-
Facilitate the development
of five units on religious
institution sites.

Place-based Strategies for Neighborhood Revitalization
Program 1: Regional
Collaboration
 Hold at least two community workshops in Downtown and Southeast Dinuba by December 2026 to identify active
transportation needs and apply for funding to implement projects by December 2027.
 Participate in the Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan’s update scheduled for 2028.
2024-2032
December 2026/
December 2027
Downtown and
Southeast Dinuba
Implement at least two
active transportation
projects in Downtown and
Southeast Dinuba by the end
of the planning period.
 Invite affordable housing developers, Community Based Organizations (CBOs), and other interested parties to discuss affordable housing production in the County.

Annually Citywide with emphasis
on Downtown and
Southeast Dinuba
Utilize monthly TCAG TAC
meetings to identify at least
one resource-sharing effort
or planning strategy
annually.

Program 10: Housing
Preservation and
Rehabilitation
 Coordinate with Self-Help Enterprises to fund rehabilitation efforts in the city. Annually research funding opportunities, such as CHAFA, for rehabilitation grants.
 Advertise available rehabilitation grant programs on the City’s website. Ensure that Code Enforcement has the information when addressing enforcement cases.
 Expand the City’s Housing Rehabilitation Program.

Annually
By July 20265
By 20265
Downtown/ Southeast
Dinuba and Southwest
Dinuba
Assist with at least 12
rehabilitation projects over 8
years.

City of Dinuba
Housing Plan
2023-2031 Housing Element A7-33
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics  Apply for additional funding for the Homebuyer Rehabilitation Program by 2025 to serve at least 12 households by the end of the planning period. Prioritize Downtown/ Southeast Dinuba and Southwest Dinuba (areas of greatest need).
 Publish resources on homeowner rehabilitation assistance on the City’s website by July 20265.

By July 20265
Program 12: Community
and Economic
Development
 Annually coordinate with the Workforce Investment Board (WIB) of Tulare County to carry out the WIB’s Local Plan, including identified workforce priorities that will benefit the residents of Dinuba.
 Every other year, apply for available grants to help implement measures within the Revitalization Plan for South El Monte Neighborhood beyond what is scheduled in the CIP.
 Continue with the construction of Well 21 to help meet the future water demands in Dinuba.
 Annually coordinate with the Public Works Department to review the City’s Capital Improvement Projects Plan(CIP) to ensure public facilities and infrastructure are supportive of the needs of underserved communities, in particular the City should ensure that the CIP includes the following measure:
 Annual CIP funding for city sidewalk improvements and ADA ramp improvements area include underserved areas.
 Measures from the Revitalization Plan for the South El Monte Neighborhood (Downtown and Southeast Dinuba) and the Active Transportation Plan prioritize improvements on sites that accommodate the City’s lower-income RHNA.
 The scheduled (2022-2026) downtown improvements will attract new businesses.
 The scheduled (2022-2026) shade structure project at Delgado and Roosevelt parks.
 2023 Circulation Element policies that call for: Pedestrian Priority Corridors, Complete Streets identified in the 2023 Circulation Element are included (El Monte Way, Alta Avenue and Kamm Avenue).
 As part of the annual CIP program updates, evaluate public improvement needs in Downtown and Southeast Dinuba and
prioritize improvements on sites that accommodate the City’s lower income RHNA.

Annually
Annually
Annually
By the end of 2026
By 2026
Downtown and
Southeast Dinuba, and
tracts with sites that
can accommodate
lower-income housing
Complete 5 CIP projects
during the planning period.

Implement five minor and
five major recommended
infrastructure actions from
the Revitalization Plan for
the South El Monte
Neighborhood by the end of
the planning period.

Implement at least two
active transportation
projects in Downtown and
Southeast Dinuba by the end
of the planning period.

Complete Well 21 project

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
A7-34
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics  At least annually, collaborate with the Tulare County Economic Development Office to attract new businesses and jobs to Dinuba.
 Connect local business owners and interested parties to the Tulare County Economic Development Office to receive
assistance on starting a business, including assistance with permitting, applying for incentives, and finding site locations.

Connect at least five potential business owners with the Tulare County Economic Development Office.
 Partner with the local employment organizations to connect Dinuba residents with job opportunities and workforce
training program opportunities.
 By the end of 2026, partner with the Tulare County Workforce Investment Board and Employment Connection to host an annual job fair and workforce training event in Dinuba.
 Work with TCaT and the Fresno County Rural Transit Agency to provide free bus passes to residents attending job fairs and interviews.
 By 2026, partner with the Chamber of Commerce, local business owners, and potential businesses to identify planning and infrastructure needs to support business development in Dinuba.  As part of a regional effort and/or individually, develop a report on planning and infrastructure needs for business development by January 2025 and present to City Council. If adopted, implement at least 50 percent of the
recommendations in the report by the end of the planning period.
 Coordinate with Tulare County and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District to develop and implement a plan to reduce pollution burden throughout the city, targeting air quality, water quality, and pesticide use. Assess pollution burden in Downtown and Southeast Dinuba and create an action plan to reduce pollution burden in these neighborhoods, as well as addressing proper remediation plans for cleanup sites and hazardous waste sites.
 Regularly assess and monitor pollution burden in each census tract, using tools such as CalEnviroScreen and identify major At least every other
year
Beginning in 2025
and every two years
thereafter
By the end of 2025

City of Dinuba
Housing Plan
2023-2031 Housing Element A7-35
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics sources of pollution. Develop a pollution burden reduction strategy for the city and for Downtown and Southeast Dinuba by 2026 with metrics and timelines.
 Complete the South El Monte Revitalization Plan which covers the southern part of Southeast Dinuba. The Plan includes analysis of:

Community Beautification and Landscaping, Public Facilities (sidewalks, parks, streets, etc.), Community Lighting, Housing Rehabilitation, Infrastructure, Economic Development, and Crime Prevention and Public Safety. The Plan is expected to be completed by the end of 2024.
 Use the South El Monte Revitalization Plan to leverage funds to implement the actions and goals of the Plan.
 Complete programmed improvements around the new Dinuba High School located in Southeast Dinuba and surrounding planned residential neighborhoods, including bike lanes, new walkways, new parks. Construction of the High School is expected August 2024.

Program 13: Energy
Conservation
 Annually, update energy conservation programs on the City website. Also provide information to homeowners and
developers during the project application process. Provide information to homeowners during Code Enforcement cases.  When available, pursue/provide rehabilitation assistance that includes energy conservation and weatherization improvements as eligible activities
Annually Citywide with emphasis
on Downtown and
Southeast Dinuba
Refer 5 low-income
households to energy
conservation programs
annually.

Refer developer energy
conservation programs to all
multi-family projects
proposed during the
planning period.

Tenant Protection and Anti-displacement
Program 1: Regional
Collaboration
 Partner with the Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance to proactively address shelter, including emergency shelters, low barrier navigation centers, transitional and supportive housing, housing and support services for people experiencing homelessness.

Starting in 2025 and
annually thereafter
Citywide Annually coordinate
meetings with the
Kings/Tulare Homeless
Alliance to address need in
Dinuba.

Program 4: Replacement
Housing
 Amend the Zoning Code to address the replacement housing requirements.

Concurrent with
Housing Element
adoption
N/A Replace all units as required
pursuant to AB 1397.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
A7-36
Program Specific Commitment Timeline Geographic Targeting Eight-Year Metrics Program 9: Preservation
of At-Risk Housing
 Monitor affordable units during the planning period.
 Maintain annual contact with property owners of affordable housing regarding any change in status/intent or need for assistance, such as rehabilitation assistance.
 Maintain the AB 987 database to include detailed information on all subsidized units, including those that have affordability covenants. Update annually.
 Ensure tenants are properly noticed by the property owners should a Notice of Intent to opt out of low-income use is filed.

Notices must be filed three years, one year, and six months in advance of conversion. Additionally, the City shall provide tenants with information about available resources and their tenant rights during the Notice of Intent period.
 In the event of potential conversion, conduct outreach to other nonprofit housing providers to acquire projects opting out of lowincome use. As funding permits, assist in funding the acquisition or support funding applications by nonprofit providers.

Annually Citywide Preserve all 768 affordable
housing units.

City of Dinuba
Housing Plan
2023-2031 Housing Element A7-37
A7.4 Quantified Objectives
Dinuba has established quantified objectives for housing production and rehabilitation for the Housing Element. These objectives are based upon expected availability of resources to address the City’s housing needs, expectations regarding future housing development, as well as prior objectives established in earlier housing plans. Table A7-1 below summarizes the City’s quantified objectives for implementing its various programs and actions outlined above.

Table A7-1 Quantified Objectives 2023-2031
Target Income and Affordability Level New Construction Rehabilitation Conservation Extremely Low 178 3 256
Very Low 209 3 256
Low 238 3 256
Moderate 268 3 0
Above Moderate 401 0 0
Total 1,588 12 768

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
A7-38
This page left intentionally blank.

Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2023-2031 Housing Element
prepared by
Tulare County Association of Governments
Planning Division, Department of Community Development
210 North Church Street B
Visalia, California 93291
Contact: Ted Smalley, Executive Director
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
706 South Hill Street, Suite 1200
Los Angeles, California 90014
Public Review Draft, February 2025

Table of Contents
2023-2031 Housing Element i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction and Public Participation ............................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Housing Element Purpose and Content ................................................................................ 1-1

1.2 Relationship to Other General Plan Elements....................................................................... 1-2

1.3 Organization of the Housing Element ................................................................................... 1-3

1.4 Data Sources and Methods................................................................................................... 1-3

1.5 Regional Collaboration .......................................................................................................... 1-4

1.5.1 Regional Challenges and Opportunities................................................................ 1-4

1.5.2 Regional Planning Efforts...................................................................................... 1-5

1.5.3 Opportunities for Regional Collaboration............................................................. 1-5

1.6 Community Engagement....................................................................................................... 1-6

1.6.1 Public Noticing ...................................................................................................... 1-6

1.6.2 Project Website..................................................................................................... 1-7

1.6.3 City Council Presentations .................................................................................... 1-7

1.6.4 Community Workshops......................................................................................... 1-7

1.6.5 Stakeholder Interviews ......................................................................................... 1-8

1.6.6 Housing Needs Survey......................................................................................... 1-10

1.6.7 Public Comment Letters...................................................................................... 1-11

1.6.8 Public Review of the Draft Housing Element...................................................... 1-11

1.6.9 Public Engagement for the Revised Draft Housing Element............................... 1-12

1.6.10 Response to Community Input ........................................................................... 1-13 2 Regional Housing Needs Assessment................................................................................................ 2-1

2.1 Population Characteristics..................................................................................................... 2-1

2.2 Population Growth ................................................................................................................ 2-1

2.3 Age Characteristics................................................................................................................ 2-2

2.4 Race and Ethnicity ................................................................................................................. 2-3

2.5 Economic Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 2-4

2.5.1 Employment.......................................................................................................... 2-4

2.5.2 Income Definitions and Income Limits.................................................................. 2-8

2.6 Household Characteristics................................................................................................... 2-13

2.7 Large Households................................................................................................................ 2-14

2.8 Overcrowding ...................................................................................................................... 2-15

2.9 Special Needs Groups.......................................................................................................... 2-16

2.9.1 Seniors ................................................................................................................. 2-16

2.9.2 Persons with Disabilities (including Developmental Disabilities) ....................... 2-21

2.9.3 Large Households................................................................................................ 2-27

2.9.4 Female-Headed Households............................................................................... 2-29

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
ii

2.9.5 Extremely Low-Income Residents....................................................................... 2-31

2.9.6 Farmworkers....................................................................................................... 2-33

2.9.7 Persons Experiencing Homelessness .................................................................. 2-36

2.10 Housing Stock Characteristics ............................................................................................. 2-40

2.11 Housing Growth................................................................................................................... 2-40

2.12 Housing Type and Tenure.................................................................................................... 2-40

2.13 Vacancy Rate ....................................................................................................................... 2-42

2.14 Housing Unit Size................................................................................................................. 2-43

2.15 Age and Condition of Housing Stock ................................................................................... 2-43

2.16 Housing Costs...................................................................................................................... 2-46

2.16.1 Median Home Sale Price ..................................................................................... 2-46

2.17 Distribution of Owner-Occupied Units................................................................................ 2-47

2.18 Housing Rents...................................................................................................................... 2-49

2.19 Housing Affordability........................................................................................................... 2-50

2.19.1 Workforce Housing.............................................................................................................. 2-52

2.19.2 Cost Burden......................................................................................................... 2-52

2.20 Assisted Housing Units........................................................................................................ 2-53

2.20.1 Funding Sources for Assisted Housing ................................................................ 2-54 3 Regional Housing Constraints Analysis ............................................................................................. 3-1

3.1 Non-Governmental Constraints............................................................................................ 3-1

3.1.1 Land Costs............................................................................................................. 3-1

3.1.2 Construction Costs................................................................................................ 3-3

3.1.3 Availability of Financing ........................................................................................ 3-3

3.1.4 Mortgage and Rehabilitation Financing................................................................ 3-4

3.2 Governmental Constraints.................................................................................................... 3-6

3.2.1 Land Use Controls................................................................................................. 3-6

3.2.2 Residential Development Standards..................................................................... 3-7

3.2.3 Housing for Persons with Disabilities.................................................................. 3-13

3.2.4 Planning and Development Fees......................................................................... 3-13

3.2.5 Inclusionary Housing Ordinance ......................................................................... 3-14

3.2.6 Permit Procedures and Processing Times........................................................... 3-14

3.2.7 Short-Term Housing Rentals............................................................................... 3-14

3.2.8 Code Enforcement .............................................................................................. 3-15

3.3 Environmental Constraints.................................................................................................. 3-15

3.3.1 Floodplains.......................................................................................................... 3-15

3.3.2 Seismic Zones...................................................................................................... 3-16

3.3.3 Wildland/Urban Fire Hazards.............................................................................. 3-16

3.3.4 Soil Contamination.............................................................................................. 3-16

Table of Contents
2023-2031 Housing Element iii
4 Regional Housing Resources............................................................................................................. 4-1

4.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.2 Future Housing Needs........................................................................................................... 4-1

4.2.1 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) ......................................................... 4-1

4.3 Meeting the RHNA................................................................................................................. 4-2

4.4 Development Trends............................................................................................................. 4-3

4.4.1 Summary of Development Trends...................................................................... 4-16

4.4.2 Pipeline Projects by Jurisdiction.......................................................................... 4-17

4.5 Site Selection Criteria .......................................................................................................... 4-21

4.5.1 Density and Parcel Size ....................................................................................... 4-22

4.6 Realistic Development Capacity .......................................................................................... 4-23

4.7 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing ................................................................................. 4-24

4.8 Supporting Information....................................................................................................... 4-24

4.8.1 Summary of Interviews with Development Community .................................... 4-24

4.9 Financial Resources for Affordable Housing ....................................................................... 4-24

4.10 Administrative Resources.................................................................................................... 4-26

4.10.1 San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Agencies Policy Council .......................... 4-26

4.10.2 Non-Profit Organizations .................................................................................... 4-26 5 Regional Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Analysis.................................................................. 5-1

5.1 Introduction and Overview ................................................................................................... 5-1

5.1.1 Methodology......................................................................................................... 5-1

5.2 Data Sources.......................................................................................................................... 5-3

5.2.1 HCD AFFH Data Viewer ......................................................................................... 5-3

5.2.2 Urban Displacement Project................................................................................. 5-3

5.2.3 CalEnviroScreen .................................................................................................... 5-3

5.2.4 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps............................................................................... 5-4

5.2.5 HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Data....................... 5-4

5.2.6 U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS) .................................................. 5-4

5.2.7 AllTransit ............................................................................................................... 5-5

5.3 Fair Housing Resources ......................................................................................................... 5-5

5.3.1 Enforcement and Outreach Capacity.................................................................... 5-5

5.4 Ability to Address Complaints............................................................................................... 5-5

5.5 Segregation and Integration Patterns and Trends................................................................ 5-6

5.5.1 Race and Ethnicity................................................................................................. 5-7

5.5.2 Persons with Disabilities ....................................................................................... 5-7

5.5.3 Familial Status..................................................................................................... 5-12

5.5.4 Household Income .............................................................................................. 5-14

5.5.5 Poverty and Segregation..................................................................................... 5-17

5.5.6 Concentrated Areas of Affluence........................................................................ 5-21

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
iv

5.6 Disparities in Access to Opportunities ................................................................................ 5-21

5.6.1 Transit Access and Walkability............................................................................ 5-21

5.6.2 Access to Quality Education................................................................................ 5-25

5.6.3 Economic Outcomes ........................................................................................... 5-27

5.6.4 Healthy and Safe Housing Environment ............................................................. 5-30

5.7 Disproportionate Housing Needs........................................................................................ 5-34

5.7.1 Housing Cost Burden........................................................................................... 5-34

5.7.2 Overcrowding...................................................................................................... 5-34

5.7.3 Housing Problems............................................................................................... 5-37

5.7.4 Persons Experiencing Homelessness .................................................................. 5-39

5.7.5 Farmworkers....................................................................................................... 5-40

5.7.6 Displacement ...................................................................................................... 5-41

5.8 Local Area Knowledge ......................................................................................................... 5-41

5.8.1 Historic Patterns of Segregation ......................................................................... 5-41

5.8.2 Community and Stakeholder Input..................................................................... 5-44 Tables
Table 2-1 Population Change (2000 - 2020)..................................................................................... 2-2 Table 2-2 Population by Age Group (2020)...................................................................................... 2-3 Table 2-3 Population by Race........................................................................................................... 2-4 Table 2-4 Major Employers .............................................................................................................. 2-5 Table 2-5 Employment by Industry (2020)....................................................................................... 2-6 Table 2-6 HUD Income Limits by Person per Household (dollars) ................................................... 2-8 Table 2-7 State of California Income Categories.............................................................................. 2-8 Table 2-8 Median Household Income by Race/Ethnicity (dollars)................................................. 2-10 Table 2-9 Overpayment by Tenure................................................................................................. 2-11 Table 2-10 Overpayment by Tenure for Low-Income Households.................................................. 2-12 Table 2-11 Cost Burdened Households............................................................................................ 2-13 Table 2-12 Households by Type ....................................................................................................... 2-14 Table 2-13 Large Households by Tenure .......................................................................................... 2-15 Table 2-14 Overcrowding Severity by Tenure .................................................................................. 2-16 Table 2-15 Senior Households by Tenure......................................................................................... 2-17 Table 2-16 Overpayment by Tenure among Senior Households, Tulare County............................. 2-18 Table 2-17 Cost Burdened Senior Households................................................................................. 2-19 Table 2-18 Inventory of Senior Housing........................................................................................... 2-20 Table 2-19 Population by Number of Disabilities............................................................................. 2-22 Table 2-20 Disability by Age for the Total Population...................................................................... 2-23 Table 2-21 Developmental Disability by Age.................................................................................... 2-24 Table 2-22 Developmental Disability by Residence ......................................................................... 2-24 Table 2-23 Inventory of Housing for People with Disabilities.......................................................... 2-25

Table of Contents
2023-2031 Housing Element v
Table 2-24 Services for Persons with Disabilities............................................................................. 2-27 Table 2-25 Large Households by Tenure .......................................................................................... 2-28 Table 2-26 Large Households and Units........................................................................................... 2-28 Table 2-27 Single Female-Headed Households with own Children ................................................. 2-29 Table 2-28 Single Female-Headed Households by Tenure............................................................... 2-30 Table 2-29 Extremely Low-Income Households by Tenure.............................................................. 2-31 Table 2-30 Extremely Low-Income Households by Tenure and Cost Burden .................................. 2-32 Table 2-31 Extremely Low-Income Resources ................................................................................. 2-33 Table 2-32 Farmworker Population.................................................................................................. 2-34 Table 2-33 Farmworker Population Overtime (Tulare County) ....................................................... 2-35 Table 2-34 Resources for Farmworkers............................................................................................ 2-35 Table 2-35 Homelessness by Type (2023)........................................................................................ 2-38 Table 2-36 Resources for Persons Experiencing Homelessness....................................................... 2-39 Table 2-37 Total Housing Units Over Time (1980 to 2020).............................................................. 2-40 Table 2-38 Total Housing Units by Type........................................................................................... 2-41 Table 2-39 Housing Units by Tenure ................................................................................................ 2-42 Table 2-40 Vacancy Status by Type for Total Vacant Units.............................................................. 2-42 Table 2-41 Housing Unit Size............................................................................................................ 2-44 Table 2-42 Total Occupied Housing Units by Year Built................................................................... 2-45 Table 2-43 Substandard Housing Units............................................................................................ 2-46 Table 2-44 Median Housing Value Over Time (1980 to 2020) ......................................................... 2-47 Table 2-45 Owner Occupied Units by Race ...................................................................................... 2-48 Table 2-46 Median Rent by Number of Bedrooms .......................................................................... 2-49 Table 2-47 Housing Affordability Matrix – Tulare County (2021) .................................................... 2-50 Table 2-48 Cost Burdened Owner-Occupied Households Over Time .............................................. 2-52 Table 2-49 Cost Burdened Renter-Occupied Households Over Time .............................................. 2-53 Table 2-50 Inventory of Public Assisted Complexes......................................................................... 2-56 Table 3-1 Listed Land Prices – Tulare County................................................................................... 3-2 Table 3-2 Sold Land Prices – Tulare County ..................................................................................... 3-2 Table 3-3 Listed and Sold Land Prices .............................................................................................. 3-2 Table 3-4 Estimated Construction Cost............................................................................................ 3-3 Table 3-5 Race and Loan Action ....................................................................................................... 3-5 Table 3-6 Loan Action and Loan Type .............................................................................................. 3-5 Table 3-7 Race and Loan Action ....................................................................................................... 3-5 Table 3-8 Ethnicity and Loan Action................................................................................................. 3-6 Table 3-9 Statewide Density Bonus Parking Standards.................................................................... 3-8 Table 4-1 Tulare County Regional Housing Needs Determination Allocation.................................. 4-2 Table 4-2 Regional Development Trends....................................................................................... 4-17 Table 4-3 Dinuba Pipeline Projects................................................................................................. 4-18 Table 4-4 Exeter Pipeline Projects.................................................................................................. 4-18

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
vi
Table 4-5 Farmersville Pipeline Projects ........................................................................................ 4-19 Table 4-6 Lindsay Pipeline Projects................................................................................................ 4-19 Table 4-7 Porterville Pipeline Projects ........................................................................................... 4-20 Table 4-8 Tulare Pipeline Projects.................................................................................................. 4-20 Table 4-9 Woodlake Pipeline Projects............................................................................................ 4-21 Table 4-10 Recent Developments on Large Sites in San Joaquin Valley .......................................... 4-22 Table 5-1 Domains and List of Indicators for Opportunity Maps..................................................... 5-4 Table 5-2 HUD Certified Fair Housing Providers Active in the Tulare County.................................. 5-5 Table 5-3 Tulare County Fair Housing Complaints (2006-2020) ...................................................... 5-6 Table 5-4 Employment Status by Disability Status (Tulare County)............................................... 5-10 Table 5-5 Tenure by Household Type and Presence of Children (Tulare County) ......................... 5-12 Table 5-6 Mean Salary by Occupation (Tulare County).................................................................. 5-28 Figures
Figure 2-1 Median Household Income .............................................................................................. 2-9 Figure 2-2 Homelessness by Type Over Time, Households, Kings/Tulare County CoC ................... 2-37 Figure 2-3 Median Contract Rent .................................................................................................... 2-49 Figure 3-1 Historical Mortgage Rates in the United States (2013-2023) .......................................... 3-4 Figure 5-1 Percent of Total Non-White Population (Tulare County)................................................. 5-8 Figure 5-2 Predominant Populations (Tulare County)....................................................................... 5-9 Figure 5-3 Disability by Type (Tulare County).................................................................................. 5-10 Figure 5-4 Percent of Population with a Disability (Tulare County)................................................ 5-11 Figure 5-5 Female-Headed Households with Children Present, No Spouse/Partner Present (Tulare County) ........................................................................................................................... 5-13 Figure 5-6 Median Household Income (Tulare County) .................................................................. 5-15 Figure 5-7 Percent of Low- to Moderate-Income (LMI) Population (Tulare County)...................... 5-16 Figure 5-8 Poverty Status (Tulare County)....................................................................................... 5-18 Figure 5-9 Areas of High Segregation and Poverty (Tulare County)................................................ 5-19 Figure 5-10 Racial Segregation and Integration (Tulare County) ...................................................... 5-20 Figure 5-11 Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (Tulare County)............................................ 5-22 Figure 5-12 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Education Outcomes (Tulare County) ................................. 5-26 Figure 5-13 TCAC Opportunity Areas - Economic (Tulare County).................................................... 5-29 Figure 5-14 CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile Scores (Tulare County) ................................................. 5-31 Figure 5-15 TCAC Opportunity Areas - Environmental (Tulare County)............................................ 5-32 Figure 5-16 SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities (Tulare County).................................................... 5-33 Figure 5-17 Overpayment by Home Owners (Tulare County)........................................................... 5-35 Figure 5-18 Overpayment by Renters (Tulare County)...................................................................... 5-36 Figure 5-19 Overcrowded Households (Tulare County).................................................................... 5-38 Figure 5-20 Displacement Risk (Tulare County)................................................................................. 5-42

Introduction and Public ParticipationCommunity Engagement 2023-2031 Housing Element 1-1
1 Introduction and Public
ParticipationCommunity Engagement
California Housing Element law requires every jurisdiction to prepare and adopt a housing element as part of its general plan. The cites of Dinuba, Exeter, Farmersville, Lindsay, Porterville, Tulare, and Woodlake, with the support of the Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG), have prepared a Regional Housing Element for the 6th housing element cycle.

The Tulare County Regional Housing Element (referred to as the "Housing Element”) represents an innovative approach to meeting State Housing Element law and coordinating resources to address the region’s housing needs. Each participating jurisdiction will adopt the Housing Element separately, and the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) will certify the Housing Element separately for each jurisdiction. On a regional level, the Housing Element provides the opportunity for the participating jurisdictions to respond to countywide housing issues and work together to accommodate the region’s share of housing need (known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation, or RHNA).

1.1 Housing Element Purpose and Content
The State of California has stated that the availability of decent and suitable housing for every California family is “a priority of the highest order.” This objective has become increasingly urgent in recent years as communities across the state struggle to meet the housing needs of all their residents. The housing element is the primary tool used by cities and counties in meeting their housing goals. The housing element is a comprehensive strategy for encouraging the development of safe, decent, and affordable housing for all residents and preventing housing loss.

The California Government Code, Sections 65580 through 65589, Chapter 1143, Article 10.6 outlines state housing element requirements. HCD administers the law by reviewing housing elements for compliance with state law and by reporting its written findings to the local jurisdiction. Although state law allows local governments to decide when to update their general plans, state housing element law mandates that housing elements be updated every eight years. This Housing Element covers the planning period of December 31, 2023, through December 31, 2031.

In accordance with Government Code 65583, the Housing Element must include:

1. An identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs, available housing resources, and potential constraints to the maintenance and development of housing.

The communities of the Tulare County region have a long history of supporting housing and have done a great job providing it. We look forward to continuing the delivery of projects and programs that deliver the housing that our residents need. - Benjamin Kimball, Deputy Executive Director, TCAG

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
1-2

2. A statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, and scheduled programs for preservation, improvement, and development of housing.

3. An inventory of land suitable for residential development showing adequate sites to meet housing needs.

4. An assessment of local fair housing issues and meaningful actions to address disparities in housing needs and access to opportunities.

5. Adequate provision for existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community.

The Housing Element assists the seven participating jurisdictions in determining how to address existing and future housing needs and plan for growth. Housing policies and actions contained in the Housing Element do not commit the jurisdictions to construct new housing units but identify ways in which each jurisdiction will encourage development of housing intended to meet the housing needs of residents during the housing element update cycle.

In addition to ensuring compliance with state law, a jurisdiction’s housing element status affects eligibility to receive state funding for a variety of transportation, infrastructure, and housing programs.

Funding through these programs is competitive and can be essential for jurisdictions to develop and maintain transportation, infrastructure, and affordable housing assets.

Housing and transportation needs at the regional scale are outlined in TCAG’s 2022 Regional Transportation Plan & Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). The Housing Element supports implementation of TCAG’s 2022 RTP/SCS, which promotes regional collaboration and planning efforts.

1.2 Relationship to Other General Plan Elements
Per state law, the housing element is aone of the eight required elements of each local jurisdiction’s general plan and must be consistent with all other elements of the general plan. Other optional elements can be added, and some subject areas can be combined. Pursuant to Government Code section 65302, the other subjects or “Elements” that a general plan must contain are Land Use, Circulation, Conservation, Open Space, Noise, Safety, and for some jurisdictions, Environmental Justice.

Cities and counties in the San Joaquin Air Pollution Control District, which includes all cities in Tulare County, must also address air quality in their general plans.

Government Code section 65302.10(a) requires that each city and county review and update the Land Use Element of its general plan, based on available data, including, but not limited to, the data and analysis developed pursuant to Government Code section 56430, of unincorporated island, fringe, or legacy communities inside or near its boundaries. Pursuant to Government Code section 65588, on or before the due date for each subsequent revision of its housing element, each city must review, and if necessary, amend, its general plan to update the analysis regarding these communities identified within the city’s sphere of influence.

Each jurisdiction is mandated by Government Code Section 65302(g)(3) to update its Safety Element in conjunction with any Housing Element update, or upon the update of the next Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Additionally, jurisdictions must incorporate environmental justice policies into their general plans, either in a separate Environmental Justice element or by integrating related goals, policies, and objectives throughout the other elements. This update must happen upon the adoption or next revision of two or more elements. Therefore, if a jurisdiction updates the Safety Element concurrently with the Housing Element, the jurisdiction must also update environmental justice policies or the Environmental Justice Element.

Introduction and Public ParticipationCommunity Engagement 2023-2031 Housing Element 1-3
To the extent possible, Tthe policies and implementation programs for each jurisdiction in this Housing Element for Dinuba, Exeter, Farmersville, Lindsay, Porterville, Tulare, and Woodlake are consistent with the policies and implementation programs in the other elements of each the corresponding jurisdiction’s general plan. As elements of the jurisdictions’ general plans are amended in the future, each local government will review and revise as necessary to ensure internal consistency is maintained.

1.3 Organization of the Housing Element
The Housing Element employs regional and local scale analyses to comprehend the complexities of the region’s housing needs and challenges. As such, the Housing Element contains a regional component, comprised of the five chapters in the Housing Element, and jurisdiction-specific components, included as individual appendices with one dedicated appendix for each participating jurisdiction.

1. Chapter 1: Introduction and Community Engagement: This section provides an introduction, review of the purpose, process, and scope of the Housing Element, and highlights the public outreach methods employed and community input received for the Housing Element.

2. Chapter 2: Regional Housing Needs Assessment: This section reviews the existing and projected housing needs of the region. The assessment profiles socio-demographic information, such as population characteristics, household information, housing stock, tenure, and housing affordability.

The assessment also considers local special housing needs, such as extremely low-income households, seniors, farmworkers, homeless individuals, large households, and female-headed households with children.

3. Chapter 3: Regional Housing Constraints Analysis: This section identifies and analyzes impediments to housing production, maintenance, and improvements at the regional level across all income levels. The analysis examines government constraints (including land use controls, permit processing procedures, and governmental fees) as well as non-governmental constraints such as the availability of financing, cost of land and construction, and environmental constraints.

4. Chapter 4: Regional Housing Resources: This section describes recent development trends, infrastructure capacity, and other factors to inform the development potential of sites in each city.

5. Chapter 5: Regional Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Analysis: This section identifies geographic disparities between populations in the region based on socioeconomic characteristics and the potential factors that perpetuate differences in access to opportunities.

The Housing Element contains one appendix lettered appendices for each of the participating jurisdictions. Each appendix evaluates the jurisdiction’s localized housing needs, includes a summary of community- specific engagement efforts and input, an analysis of constraints to housing development, an inventory of suitable land to accommodate their share of the RHNA, an assessment of fair housing, and an evaluation of accomplishments during the previous housing cycle. Each appendix also includes the jurisdiction’s individual Housing Plan, which includes goals, policies, and objectives designed to preserve, improve, and develop housing.

1.4 Data Sources and Methods
Data from a variety of sources is used to complete the Housing Element. The most cited source is the U.S. Census, which provides consistent demographic characteristics that are widely accepted. The American Community Survey is a feature offered by the U.S. Census and includes five-year estimates on population and demographic characteristics. Other data sources include the following:

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
1-4
 U.S. Census and the American Community Survey (ACS)
 California Department of Finance (DOF)
 California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)  California Housing Finance Agency
 California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC)
 Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG)
 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) lending data
 Regional Homeless Point-in-Time (PIT) Count
 State Employment Development Department (EDD)
 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS)
 United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)  Jurisdiction staff
 Local housing organizations

1.5 Regional Collaboration
In recent years, jurisdictions in Tulare County have collaborated on regional issues including housing, infrastructure, and transportation. The seven participating jurisdictions, in conjunction with TCAG, conducted a collaborative effort to develop the Housing Element, with the acknowledgement that a coordinated strategy for addressing the housing needs of communities throughout the region would be the most effective approach.

1.5.1 Regional Challenges and Opportunities
Tulare County features unique regional qualities that
create a significant need and distinct challenges for
housing. The anticipated population growth is
expected to be one of the highest (per capita) of any
region in the state. This growth is driven in part by
the flight of urban residents from the state’s larger
cities toward rural areas like Tulare County due to
relatively lower cost of living, economic
opportunities, as well as higher birthrates than other
parts of the state. Tulare County is consistently in the top three counties in the nation for agricultural
production. The county also has a healthy tourism
industry due to proximity to Sequoia National Park,
Kings Canyon National Park, the Sequoia National Monument, and other natural and recreational attractions.

The region also faces unique challenges that affect the future of housing throughout the county. Tulare County suffers from high poverty rates and lack of adequate services, facilities, and public funding.

Development trends in the region indicate that most residential projects developed, or will develop, on vacant land or land zoned for agricultural use, creating a need for infrastructure such as roads, sewers, and water supply to serve new development.

Introduction and Public ParticipationCommunity Engagement 2023-2031 Housing Element 1-5
Recent trends in the housing market reflect similar outcomes as the rest of the state, with increasingly unaffordable housing costs and difficulty obtaining housing among households of all income levels in the county. Fluctuations in mortgage interest rates in recent years have had a large impact on housing affordability. Higher interest rates increase a homebuyer’s monthly payment and decrease the range of housing that a household can afford. Lower interest rates result in a lower cost and lower monthly payments for the homebuyer. Mortgage rates in 2023 were significantly higher compared to rates during the past 10 years, making it difficult for households to purchase a home.

Environmental conditions throughout the region pose a potential risk to existing and future residents if not properly planned for and addressed. Tulare County is in the most polluted air basin in the country due to a combination of geographical, climate, and anthropogenic variables. Environmental concerns such as flooding, ground water depletion, and land subsidence present other challenges in Tulare County.

1.5.2 Regional Planning Efforts
Jurisdictions in Tulare County collaborate with regional agencies and organizations to address the county’s challenges and provide opportunities. The RTP/SCS, developed with input from each jurisdiction in the county, serves as a blueprint for sustainable development and transportation solutions within the county and with neighboring counties. The RTP/SCS aims to create a more interconnected and environmentally friendly transportation network for the region’s residents. In 2021, the Tulare County Regional Transit Agency, Visalia Transit, and the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority executed an agreement to develop an operation plan for the Cross Valley Corridor that will serve the planned Kings/Tulare High Speed Rail Station in Hanford. The rail plan will connect communities within Tulare County to major urban centers, fostering economic growth and mobility for residents and businesses.

A multitude of regional efforts address the growing prevalence of homelessness throughout the region.

The Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance is a partnership between homeless service providers, advocacy groups, government agencies and homeless individuals working to support the needs of the homeless population with the goal of preventing and reducing homelessness. The Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance carries out the region’s long range planning regarding homelessness and implements various programs to provide temporary and permanent housing and basic services for those in need. Tulare County has also convened a Task force on homelessness to develop and implement innovative strategies to address homelessness in the county and coordinate local services and programs. The Task force consists of appointed and voluntary representatives from various government agencies including the cities of Porterville, Farmersville, Dinuba, Tulare, and Visalia, and community organizations.

1.5.3 Opportunities for Regional Collaboration
To promote regional collaboration, Program 1 of each Housing Plan directs the jurisdiction to partner with the other jurisdictions throughout the region to collectively address challenges related to housing, transit, economic development, and homelessness.

Opportunities for collaboration during the planning period include:
 Regional meetings related to housing and homeless issues to pursue funding and coordination opportunities.
 Cooperating with the Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance to proactively address shelter, housing and support services for people experiencing homelessness.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
1-6
 Collaboration with transit agencies to prepare a study on transit and active transportation needs for residents of the project jurisdictions.

1.6 Community Engagement
The Housing Element must reflect the values and preferences of the community. Accordingly, community participation is an important component of the development of this Housing Element.

Government Code Section 65583(c)(9) states that the local government must make “a diligent effort…to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element.”
An email list of 127 individuals and organizations
representing affordable and market-rate housing
developers, community and advocacy groups, non-profits, faith-based organizations, school-based organizations,
disability advocates, and neighborhood groups was
maintained to conduct outreach for the project and
provide noticing. Input on the Housing Element was
solicited through interviews, surveys, a project-specific website, community events, and public meetings. A
summary of the community engagement is detailed below.

Copies of community engagement materials are provided
in this chapter.

1.6.1 Public Noticing
To reach the largest and broadest spectrum of community members, each jurisdiction utilized the following notification methods throughout the Housing Element engagement process to introduce the project, survey, public workshops and meetings, and release of the Draft Housing Element for public review:
 Website updates
 Posts to the Cities’ social media accounts
 Email blasts
 Flyers in English and Spanish posted at government facilities, community centers, and in public areas

Introduction and Public ParticipationCommunity Engagement 2023-2031 Housing Element 1-7

1.6.2 Project Website
To facilitate the distribution and gathering of information, a project website dedicated to the Housing Element update was created (https://tulareregionalhousingelement.rinconconsultants.com/).

The website could be translated into Spanish through an automatic translation widget. The project website provided detailed background information on the Housing Element, answers to frequently asked questions, upcoming events, and past event materials. Bilingual flyers were available on the project website to inform residents about the Housing Element, the need for adequate housing, how to plan for new housing, types of housing, a project schedule, and contact information.

Project materials associated with the Housing Element update were regularly posted on the project website, including documents available for public review, the site inventories for each city, information for upcoming events, and workshop PowerPoint presentations.

The project website displayed the draft site inventories for each of the participating jurisdictions with options for submitting public input on the sites. A link on the website enabled people to sign up for project email updates and provide comments at any time throughout the project process. No comments on the Housing Element were received via the project website.

1.6.3 City Council Presentations
In February and March 2023, each City’s staff presented at a City Council meeting that was open to the public. City staff presented an introduction to the Housing Element, the RHNA, state legislation, and the project timeline.

1.6.4 Community Workshops
Community workshops were held for each of the seven participating jurisdictions in May and June 2023 to help inform the Housing Element. The workshops aimed to educate the community on housing element requirements and assess participants’ housing needs, priorities, and concerns in their community. The workshops also obtained feedback from participants about housing needs in the community, their experience finding housing, potential programs to address housing needs, and input on the housing opportunity sites.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
1-8
In-person workshops were hosted in Tulare,
Porterville, Woodlake, and Exeter, on May 22,
May 23, May 24, and May 25, 2023,
respectively. Virtual workshops were held for
Dinuba, Farmersville, and Lindsay on May 30,
May 31, and June 1, 2023, respectively. Each
workshop presented an informative
PowerPoint presentation and provided
opportunities for the public to provide input on
the proposed housing opportunity sites,
priority housing needs, and fair housing
concerns through written comments and
sticker dots at in-person workshops, and
through discussion at virtual workshops.

Workshop participants were encouraged to complete comment cards, the housing needs survey and a questionnaire about the proposed sites that was also available on the project website. The PowerPoint presentation was written in both English and Spanish. Live Spanish translation was available upon request for both in-person and virtual workshops. Each workshop also had a Q&A and public discussion period.

In total, 19 participants attended the workshops: two in Dinuba, one in Exeter, three in Lindsay, two in Porterville, four in Tulare, and seven in Woodlake. No participants attended the virtual workshop in Farmersville due to a technical issue, but a recording of the presentation was posted on the City’s website.

Input from the workshops is summarized as follows:
 Important aspects when looking for housing include quality and size of housing, affordability, and proximity to work or school.
 The largest barriers to affording desirable housing include cost and quality of housing, low supply, and lack of rent restricted housing.
 The most urgent housing issues in the region include affordability and availability of housing and homelessness.
 The most beneficial programs to assist residents with housing needs are rental assistance, special needs housing, homebuyer loan counseling services, home rehabilitation, and assistance for people experiencing homelessness.

1.6.5 Stakeholder Interviews
A series of stakeholder interviews were hosted on March 21, March 23, and April 4, 2023, via Zoom. The meetings presented an opportunity to discuss key issues with representatives of community organizations and affordable and market-rate housing providers. Stakeholder meetings were organized by topic: market-rate housing developers, affordable housing developers, and service providers and community organizations. An email was sent to the project contact list developed by TCAG and the participating jurisdictions inviting participants to the meetings.

Three attendees participated in the Market Rate Developer meeting on March 21, 2023. Twenty-two attendees participated in the Service Provider and Community Organization meeting on March 23, 2023.

Since only one affordable housing developer attended the March 23 meeting, a questionnaire was sent

Introduction and Public ParticipationCommunity Engagement 2023-2031 Housing Element 1-9
to all affordable housing provider contacts via email on April 4, 2023. No responses were received from the questionnaire.

Market Rate Housing Developers: Key Findings
Three market Rate Housing Developers participated in the March 21, 2023, meeting: Bravo Development, LLC, Smee Homes, and Yanez Construction. Input from the meeting is summarized as follows:
 Parking requirements were cited as an expensive barrier to developing housing at higher densities.

Fee reductions or cost reductions were cited as ways to incentivize multifamily development in cities’ downtowns.
 Construction costs for projects have increased, so any reduction on soft fees would help development.
 Commercial retail development is considered easier than residential development projects as state residential requirements constantly change.
 Developers have had to submit conditional use permits to overcome high parking requirements which add delays and costs (although this was discussed as a greater issue in cities outside the Tulare region).
 The environmental review (California Environmental Quality Act) process was identified as expensive and time consuming.

Affordable Housing Developers: Key Findings
Two affordable housing developers that participated in the meeting on March 23, 2023: Linc Housing and Habitat for Humanity. Input from the meeting is summarized as follows:
 The most pressing housing issue is finding landlords willing to accept Housing Choice Vouchers/supportive housing for formerly homeless residents.  Maintaining housing habitability can be difficult, especially for issues with flooding. Some homeowners cannot afford flood insurance but then encounter flood damage. Cities need adequate infrastructure to help flooding issues. Some state grants may be available to assist the cities with flooding concerns.
 The Point-In-Time Count (a count of sheltered and unsheltered people experiencing homelessness) does not include people staying with friends or living in trailers. Many families and children in Tulare County live in these conditions.
 Cities can support affordable housing by employing staff who are familiar and knowledgeable on grant guidelines such as CalHOME to help residents navigate the requirements and application process. City Council support is crucial; therefore, a functional Housing Element substantially assists and can potentially encourage the council members’ support for affordable housing. In addition, Cities should develop strong relationships with affordable housing providers, in particular, those with who are familiar with grant requirements and guidelines such as Self-Help Enterprises. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development offers a variety of programs to assist local jurisdictions in developing and preserving affordable housing and provide financial support to individuals and families in obtaining affordable housing. Some cities in Tulare County are eligible to receive USDA funds while others are not eligible.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
1-10
 There is a need for more affordable housing options throughout the county.  The cost of building houses has increased, and these costs are passed down to the owner. GRID Alternatives, a national nonprofit organization that installs solar power systems in underserved communities, used to provide solar for free to meet solar requirements, now it’s a cost up front.

Service Providers and Community Organizations: Key Findings Seventeen service Providers and Community Organizations participated in the March 21, 2023 meeting:

Altura Centers for Health, BAART Methadone Clinic, CSET, CVRC, Family Crisis Center, Family Services of Tulare County, Health & Human Services Agency, Leadership Council for Justice and Accountability, Housing Support Program, Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance, Proteus, Inc., Sequoia Family Medical Center, Sierra View Medical Center, Tulare County Economic Development Corporation, Tulare County Regional Transit Agency, United Way Tulare County/211 Tulare, and Valley Center for the Blind. Input from the meeting is summarized as follows:
 There is a lack of housing options near grocery and commercial stores, medical facilities, and public transportation is a limitation to residents.
 There is a need for affordable housing and housing near medical services and public transportation across Tulare County as most clients don’t have a vehicle and rely on public transportation to reach medical appointments and other services.
 There is a lack of walkable communities in addition to lack of affordable housing near transit.  Communities are facing issues with aging housing stock which creates additional expenses (money for repairs).
 There are significant disparities between available amenities in cities and smaller rural areas.  Farmworkers need more affordable housing options. Many farmworkers have been displaced from labor camps due to lack of required documentation or rent doubling/tripling in cost despite a lack of updates.
 Cities need to address people living in their cars as there are no safe parking lots in the region.

1.6.6 Housing Needs Survey
An online survey solicited input on housing needs and preferences. The survey was available in English and Spanish on the Housing Element website from February 6 to March 16, 2023, and 129 responses were received (125 in English and four in Spanish). The overall input from the survey is summarized in this chapter. Input specific to each jurisdiction is discussed in each jurisdiction-specific appendix.

The following themes were collected from the survey:
 Respondents selected “quality and size of housing,” “affordability,” and “close to work and/or school” as most important when looking for housing.
 Respondents selected “cost of quality housing” as the largest barrier to affording desirable housing.

Respondents also identified the low supply of housing and lack of rent-restricted housing as barriers to affording housing.
 The three most selected urgent housing issues were affordability of desired housing, availability of desired housing, and homelessness.
 The three most selected beneficial programs to assist residents with housing needs were rental assistance or housing vouchers, homebuyer loan counseling services, and housing assistance for residents with special needs. Respondents also cited pathways to homeownership and programs for

Introduction and Public ParticipationCommunity Engagement 2023-2031 Housing Element 1-11
first-time homeowners as beneficial programs to assist with housing needs. More than 20 percent of respondents identified home rehabilitation assistance and landlord/tenant mediation services as beneficial programs.
 “Housing with three or more bedrooms” was ranked as most needed in the region followed by “housing with 1-2 bedrooms.”
 Almost 30 percent of respondents were interested in developing ADUs on their existing or future property. No respondents already had an ADU on their property.  Respondents from all jurisdictions identified a need for supportive housing programs for individuals experiencing homelessness.
 Respondents from all jurisdictions expressed the need for median-income housing and “higher end” housing to keep families in the region.
 Respondents from across jurisdictions made requests for rezoning and higher density zoning.

1.6.7 Public Comment Letters
One public comment letter was submitted via email from Self-Help Enterprises on October 20, 2023. The following list summarizes the comments contained in the letter:
 Regarding Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, the ratio of housing opportunity sites in high- /highest-resource areas to low-resource areas should be 1:1. The housing opportunity sites should be overlaid with the 2023 California Tax Credit Allocation Committee Opportunity maps.  The jurisdictions should adopt a program to review all surplus property within one year of adoption of the Housing Element and make those sites available for the development of affordable housing, in compliance with the Surplus Land Act.
 Regarding the entitlement process, jurisdictions should ensure their Municipal Code and local practices do not conflict with streamlining processes for affordable housing development, including “by right” pathways to project approvals through State Density Bonus law, Senate Bill 35 permit streamlining, and the Housing Accountability Act.
 Suitable sites for housing must include sewer, water, dry utilities, reasonable density of 20 to 50 units per acre, and access to quality transit. At least 50 percent of the acreage in the Site Inventory should have a minimum parcel size of 2.5 to 3.0 acres.
 The jurisdictions should consider adding a program to allow manufactured homes on a permanent foundation in all zones that allow single-family housing.  The jurisdictions should consider adding a program for housing projects that include 100 percent affordable housing serving low-income households to waive permitting fees or defer permitting fees for up to 30 years for affordable single-family housing developments and 55 years for affordable multi-family housing development.

1.6.8 Public Review of the Draft Housing Element
The draft Tulare County Regional Housing Element was available for public review for 31 days from June 6 to July 7, 2024. On June 6, TCAG and all Cities participating in the project sent an email to the project stakeholder list notifying interested parties of the availability of the draft Housing Element with instructions for review and comment. TCAG posted a physical flyer to advertise the draft Housing Element on the TCAG public display board and provided printed copies of the draft Housing Element at the TCAG office at 210 N Church Street in Visalia. Digital notifications of the availability of the draft Housing Element were posted on the TCAG website and TCAG social media accounts and sent to TCAG

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
1-12
email contact lists. TCAG also coordinated with community organizations that serve low-income and special housing needs populations, including Food Link, Community Services Employment Training, and Self-Help Enterprises, to send notices to these organizations’ membership and contacts. The draft Housing Element was posted on the project website
(https://tulareregionalhousingelement.rinconconsultants.com/). In addition, most of the participating Cities publicized the draft Housing Element on their website and through their social media platforms and provided physical copies of the document at their City Hall locations. Details of how each City notified residents and interested parties of the draft Housing Element are included in the Introduction and Community EngagementPublic Participation chapters of each jurisdiction-specific appendix.

1.6.9 Public Engagement for the Revised Draft Housing Element The draft Tulare County Regional Housing Element was submitted to HCD on July 29, 2024. The draft Housing Element was revised per the HCD comment letters received for each City in the project in October 2024. Prior to resubmitting the draft Housing Element to HCD, the Cities conducted additional public engagement to inform the Housing Element.

Housing Developer Outreach
The City of Porterville led a discussion with local and regional housing developers on December 10, 2024. The meeting was part of the City’s regular meeting to coordinate with developers, but invited discussion on conditions in all Tulare County jurisdictions participating in the Regional Housing Element Update effort. The City contacted approximately 30 housing developers and the following individuals, companies, and organizations attended:
 The Building Industry Association of Tulare/Kings Counties  Ennis Builders & Realtors
 Phil O’Sullivan
The housing developers provided the following input:
 Cumulative state and local requirements may hinder the ability to develop projects to the maximum density allowed by a city’s zoning code. State requirements such as those for trash enclosures may limit buildable space for multifamily projects. Locally, parking requirements for multifamily projects may also limit buildable space. Alternatives to surface parking lots, such as underground or stacked parking, may present challenges with meeting accessibility compliance standards.  Current and foreseeable market demand for housing products includes larger (three or more stories) rental housing complexes and smaller single-family homes/small lot development. There is high demand for both rental and for-sale single-family homes, but there is a market for for-sale single-family homes that are made relatively more affordable due to smaller unit size, no garage, and smaller lot compared to traditional development.
 Inclusionary zoning policies hinder housing production. If a jurisdiction allows flexibility in its development standards, the building industry can produce innovative housing types that respond to market demand, including housing affordable to lower-income households. Local regulation that adds cost or does not provide flexibility will make development too costly.

Introduction and Public ParticipationCommunity Engagement 2023-2031 Housing Element 1-13
Outreach to Lower-Income and Special Housing Needs Groups The Participating cCities of Dinuba, Exeter, Farmersville, and Porterville conducted additional outreach to persons and organizations that serve lower-income and special needs groups in those each cityies.

Details of how each City notified residents and interested parties of the draft Housing Element are included in the Introduction and Public Participation chapters of each jurisdiction-specific appendix.

1.6.91.6.10 Response to Community Input
The Introduction and Community Engagement chapter of each appendix details how input received from community engagement was incorporated into each jurisdiction’s housing site selection process and housing goals, policies, and programs.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
1-14
This page intentionally left blank.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-1
2 Regional Housing Needs Assessment
This section provides a comprehensive assessment of the region’s housing needs as the basis for preparing responsive policies and implementation programs. This section summarizes demographic, employment, and housing characteristics for the jurisdictions in Tulare County. The main source of the information is the pre-approved data package for jurisdictions approved by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), which is noted in the sources for the data tables in this section. The pre-approved data package uses several data sources, including the 2020 U.S. Census, American Community Survey (ACS), and the California Department of Finance (DOF). Other sources of information in this section include the following: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, the California Employment Development Department (EDD), the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and local economic data (e.g., home sales prices, rents, wages).

It is important to note that the ACS data is a multi-year estimate based on sample data and has a large margin of error, especially for smaller cities. Two jurisdictions (Tulare County and Visalia) did not participate in the multi-jurisdictional housing element but are still presented in the tables analysis to provide comparisons. City-specific assessments of housing needs for the cities participating in this regional Housing Element are provided in Appendices A through G.

2.1 Population Characteristics
Population characteristics, such as growth rate, age, and income levels, affect the type and amount of housing needed in a community. Residents’ age and income, employment trends, and other factors influence the type of housing needed and the community’s ability to afford housing. The following section analyzes Tulare County’s population characteristics and trends. At the time of the preparation of this document, limited data from the 2021 Census was available and is used where applicable; therefore, this information presented on population characteristics mainly relies on the 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS) estimates.

2.2 Population Growth
U.S. Census Bureau population estimates for each county jurisdiction are shown in Table 2-1. Analyzing population change can help assess where there may be a need for new housing and services.

Tulare County had a total population of 463,955 in 2020. About one-third of the countywide population resides in the city of Visalia. The unincorporated county has the next largest population of 134,876, followed by the cities of Tulare and Porterville, with 68,875 and 62,623 residents, respectively. The remaining cities have populations of about 25,000 or less.

Countywide population grew by over twenty percent from 2000-2010, with Porterville, Visalia, and Tulare having the highest growth rates, respectively. None of the jurisdictions in the region experienced a decline in population during this time. During the next decade, from 2010 to 2020, the countywide population grew by 4.9 percent, with the cities of Porterville, Tulare, and Dinuba having the highest growth rates. Farmersville, Exeter, and the unincorporated county jurisdictions experienced decreases in population during this decade. The county’s 4.9 percent change from 2010-2020 was slightly less than the statewide percent change of 5.6 percent.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-2
Table 2-1 Population Change (2000 - 2020)
Jurisdiction 2000 2010 2020
Percent Change
2000-2010
Percent Change
2010-2020
Tulare County 368,021 442,179 463,955 20.2% 4.9%
Dinuba 16,844 21,453 24,563 27.4% 14.5%
Exeter 9,168 10,334 10,321 12.7% -0.1%
Farmersville 8,737 10,588 10,397 21.2% -1.8%
Lindsay 10,297 11,768 12,659 14.3% 7.6%
Porterville 39,615 54,165 62,623 36.7% 15.6%
Tulare 43,994 59,278 68,875 34.7% 16.2%
Visalia 91,565 124,442 141,384 35.9% 13.6%
Woodlake 6,651 7,279 7,419 9.4% 1.9%
Unincorporated County 141,150 142,872 134,876 1.2% -5.6% California 33,971,648 37,253,956 39,346,023 9.7% 5.6%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, 2010; Social Explorer tables for Census 2020.

2.3 Age Characteristics
Although population growth strongly affects total demand for new housing, housing needs are also influenced by age characteristics. Typically, different age groups have distinct lifestyles, family characteristics, and incomes. As people move through each stage of life, their housing needs and preferences also change. Age characteristics are, therefore, important in planning for the changing housing needs of residents.

Table 2-2 shows a breakdown of each jurisdiction’s population by age group and each group’s percentage of the total population. The age groups include preschool (under 5 years), school-age students (5 to 17 years), college-age students (18 to 24 years), young adults (25 to 44), middle-aged adults (45 to 64), and seniors (65 and over). A population with a large percentage of seniors may require unique housing, located near health care, transit, and other services. College students may need smaller and more affordable homes. Young adults and middle-aged adults, which make up the workforce, may need homes located near employment or transit centers.

The regional population tends to be younger than the statewide average. All jurisdictions in the region have a lower share of the population that is middle-aged (45 to 64 years old) and senior (ages 65 and older) compared to the statewide average. Conversely, all jurisdictions have a higher share of the population that are school-age students (five to 17 years) than the statewide average. All jurisdictions except Lindsay have a share of young children (under five years of age) that is higher than the statewide average. Exeter, Porterville, and Visalia have the largest senior populations, comprising 12 or 13 percent of the cities’ populations. Young adults (ages 25 to 44) make up the largest proportion of the population in each city, varying between 24 and 29 percent. Farmersville has the highest college-age student population, accounting for 12.3 percent of its population, while Woodlake has the smallest college-age student population, accounting for 7.8 percent.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-3
Table 2-2 Population by Age Group (2020)
Jurisdiction
Under 5
years
(Preschool)
5 to 17
years
(School-age
Students)
18 to 24
years
(College-age
Students)
25 to 44
(Young
Adults)
45 to 64
(Middleaged
Adults)
65 years
and over
(Seniors)
Total
Population
Tulare County 36,942 105,835 46,977 124,822 96,553 52,826 463,955 Percent 8.0% 22.8% 10.1% 26.9% 20.8% 11.4%
Dinuba 2,282 6,561 2,501 7,288 4,099 1,724 24,455
Percent 9.3% 26.8% 10.2% 29.8% 16.8% 7.1%
Exeter 806 2,413 925 2,630 2,317 1,342 10,433
Percent 7.7% 23.1% 8.9% 25.2% 22.2% 12.9%
Farmersville 877 2,470 1,331 3,024 2,433 707 10,842
Percent 8.1% 22.8% 12.3% 27.9% 22.4% 6.5%
Lindsay 759 3,012 1,411 3,087 3,071 1,453 12,793
Percent 5.9% 23.5% 11.0% 24.1% 24.0% 11.4%
Porterville 4,188 13,683 6,364 15,959 11,567 7,295 59,056 Percent 7.1% 23.2% 10.8% 27.0% 19.6% 12.4%
Tulare 5,826 16,244 7,427 17,070 12,692 5,287 64,546
Percent 9.0% 25.2% 11.5% 26.5% 19.7% 8.2%
Visalia 11,221 27,393 12,318 37,541 27,115 17,512 133,100 Percent 8.4% 20.6% 9.3% 28.2% 20.4% 13.2%
Woodlake 845 1,842 604 2,256 1,342 819 7,708
Percent 11.0% 23.9% 7.8% 29.3% 17.4% 10.6%
Unincorporated
County
10,138 32,217 14,096 35,967 31,917 16,687 141,022
Percent 7.2% 22.9% 10.0% 25.5% 22.6% 11.8%
California 2,409,082 6,547,559 3,724,239 1,241,816 9,778,830 5,644,497 39,346,023 Percent 6.1% 16.6% 9.5% 28.6% 24.9% 14.4%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B01001.

2.4 Race and Ethnicity
Table 2-3 shows race and ethnicity of residents in county jurisdictions. The majority of the population in all jurisdictions – except for Exeter – is Hispanic/Latino (any race). Countywide, 65 percent of the population identified as being of Hispanic/Latino origin. The populations of Dinuba, Farmersville, Lindsay, and Woodlake are all more than 86 percent Hispanic/Latino. Exeter has the lowest percentage at 47 percent. The second largest population group is white (not Hispanic) with a high of 46 percent in Exeter. The Hispanic/Latino populations across county jurisdictions are significantly higher than the statewide rate of 39 percent.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-4
Table 2-3 Population by Race
Jurisdiction
Asian, not
Hispanic
Black, not
Hispanic
White, not
Hispanic
Other race,
not Hispanic*
Hispanic/ Latino
(any race)
Total
Population
Tulare County 15,857 5,923 128,751 11,505 301,919 463,955 Percent 3.4% 1.3% 27.8% 2.5% 65.1%
Dinuba 335 78 2,388 399 21,255 24,455
Percent 1.4% 0.3% 9.8% 1.6% 86.9%
Exeter 320 81 4,846 270 4,916 10,433
Percent 3.1% 0.8% 46.5% 2.6% 47.1%
Farmersville 14 86 1,014 115 9,613 10,842
Percent 0.1% 0.8% 9.4% 1.1% 88.7%
Lindsay 114 47 1,574 47 11,011 12,793
Percent 0.9% 0.4% 12.3% 0.4% 86.1%
Porterville 2,752 200 13,423 2,187 40,494 59,056
Percent 4.7% 0.3% 22.7% 3.7% 68.6%
Tulare 1,437 1,913 18,096 2,038 41,062 64,546
Percent 2.2% 3.0% 28.0% 3.2% 63.6%
Visalia 7,574 2,877 50,565 2,977 69,107 133,100
Percent 5.7% 2.2% 38.0% 2.2% 51.9%
Woodlake 174 - 487 79 6,968 7,708
Percent 2.3% 0.0% 6.3% 1.0% 90.4%
Unincorporated County 3,137 641 36,358 3,393 97,493 141,022 Percent 2.2% 0.5% 25.8% 2.4% 69.1%
California 5,743,983 2,142,371 14,365,145 1,713,595 15,380,929 39,346,023 Percent 14.6% 5.4% 36.5% 4.4% 39.1%
*Note: Other race includes American Indian and Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander, Two or More Races, and Some Other Race.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B01001.

2.5 Economic Characteristics

2.5.1 Employment
Occupations held by residents determine the income earned by a household and their corresponding ability to afford housing. Higher-paying jobs provide broader housing opportunities for residents, while lower-paying jobs limit housing options. Understanding employment and occupation patterns can provide insight into present housing needs. Table 2-4 shows the largest employers in the region.

The largest employers in the county are located in the cities of Visalia and Porterville. Other major employers include Kaweah Delta Hospital, Visalia Unified School District, City of Visalia, College of the Sequoias, and industrial businesses in Visalia.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-5
Table 2-4 Major Employers
Employer Location Number of Employees
Walmart Distribution Center Porterville 1,000-4,999
Tulare County Office of Education Visalia 1,000-4,999
Valley Labor Services Inc. Dinuba 500-999
Tulare Local Healthcare District Tulare 500-999
Tulare Joint Union High School Tulare 500-999
Tulare County Child Care Program Visalia 500-999
Tulare City Tulare 500-999
Sierra View Medical Center Porterville 500-999
Saputo Cheese USA Inc. Tulare 500-999
Prima Wawona Cutler 500-999
Monrovia Nursery Co. Woodlake 500-999
Eagle Mountain Casino Porterville 500-999
Porterville Developmental Center Porterville 500-999
Latino Farm Labor Service Visalia 500-999
Source: California Employment Development Department
Table 2-5 shows employment by industry for each jurisdiction. In Tulare County, the most common industry is “educational services, and health care and social assistance” with 21.6 percent of employed residents. This industry is also the most common in Exeter, Farmersville, Porterville, Visalia, and Woodlake.
“Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining” is the most common industry in Dinuba, Lindsay, and the unincorporated county, ranging from 20 to 30 percent of total industry, which is higher than the countywide total of 15.6 percent and the statewide total of 2.1 percent.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element 2-6Table 2-5 Employment by Industry (2020) Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing And
Hunting, And Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transportation And Warehousing,
And Utilities
Information
Finance And Insurance, And Real
Estate, And Rental And Leasing
Professional, Scientific, And
Management, And Administrative,
And Waste Management Services
Educational Services, And Health Care
And Social Assistance
Arts, Entertainment, And Recreation,
And Accommodation And Food
Services
Other Services, Except Public
Administration
Public Administration
Tulare County 28,627 10,863 15,074 6,000 20,382 9,021 2,062 5,252 12,541 39,809 15,326 8,228 10,691 Percent 15.6% 5.9% 8.2% 3.3% 11.1% 4.9% 1.1% 2.9% 6.8% 21.6% 8.3% 4.5% 5.8% Dinuba 2,022 334 887 636 955 541 145 229 386 1,951 768 443 374 Percent 20.9% 3.5% 9.2% 6.6% 9.9% 5.6% 1.5% 2.4% 4.0% 20.2% 7.9% 4.6% 3.9% Exeter 285 316 358 73 352 185 52 144 333 1,034 224 122 229 Percent 7.7% 8.5% 9.7% 2.0% 9.5% 5.0% 1.4% 3.9% 9.0% 27.9% 6.0% 3.3% 6.2% Farmersville 730 144 345 274 528 259 0 39 210 840 678 186 188 Percent 16.5% 3.3% 7.8% 6.2% 11.9% 5.9% 0.0% 0.9% 4.8% 19.0% 15.3% 4.2% 4.3% Lindsay 1,052 300 408 102 507 43 12 165 440 583 502 182 244 Percent 23.2% 6.6% 9.0% 2.2% 11.2% 0.9% 0.3% 3.6% 9.7% 12.8% 11.1% 4.0% 5.4% Porterville 3,419 961 1,306 369 3,411 1,045 305 566 1,340 5,246 2,417 1,385 1,516 Percent 14.7% 4.1% 5.6% 1.6% 14.6% 4.5% 1.3% 2.4% 5.8% 22.5% 10.4% 5.9% 6.5% Tulare 2,673 1,429 2,661 977 3,647 1,543 146 616 1,857 5,866 2,264 775 1,733 Percent 10.2% 5.5% 10.2% 3.7% 13.9% 5.9% 0.6% 2.4% 7.1% 22.4% 8.7% 3% 6.6% Visalia 2,481 3,784 5,083 1,268 6,265 2,928 1,119 2,384 4,612 16,007 4,486 3,253 4,148 Percent 4.3% 6.5% 8.8% 2.2% 10.8% 5.1% 1.9% 4.1% 8.0% 27.7% 7.8% 5.6% 7.2%

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-7
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing And
Hunting, And Mining
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transportation And Warehousing,
And Utilities
Information
Finance And Insurance, And Real
Estate, And Rental And Leasing
Professional, Scientific, And
Management, And Administrative,
And Waste Management Services
Educational Services, And Health Care
And Social Assistance
Arts, Entertainment, And Recreation,
And Accommodation And Food
Services
Other Services, Except Public
Administration
Public Administration
Woodlake 425 235 239 123 306 231 50 59 247 524 325 144 91 Percent 14.2% 7.8% 8.0% 4.1% 10.2% 7.7% 1.7% 2.0% 8.2% 17.5% 10.8% 4.8% 3.0% Unincorporated County
15,540 3,360 3,787 2,178 4,411 2,246 233 1,050 3,116 7,758 3,662 1,738 2,168 Percent 30.3% 6.6% 7.4% 4.3% 8.6% 4.4% 0.5% 2.0% 6.1% 15.1% 7.1% 3.4% 4.2% California 394,290 1,190,537 1,676,497 514,234 1,942,421 1,028,818 542,674 1,118,253 2,581,266 3,960,265 1,894,858 952,302 850,479 Percent 2.1% 6.4% 9.0% 2.8% 10.4% 5.5% 2.9% 6.0% 13.8% 21.2% 10.2% 5.1% 4.6% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table C24050.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-8

2.5.2 Income Definitions and Income Limits
The State and Federal governments classify household income into several categories based upon the relationship to the county area median income (AMI), adjusted for household size. HUD estimate of AMI is used to set income limits for eligibility in Federal housing programs. The income categories include:
 Acutely low-income households, which earn up to 15 percent AMI;  Extremely low-income households, which earn up to 30 percent AMI;  Very low-income households, which earn between 31 and 50 percent AMI;  Low-income households, which earn between 51 and 80 percent AMI; and  Moderate income households, which earn between 80 and 120 percent AMI.

For all income categories, income limits are defined for various household sizes based on a four-person household as a reference point. Income limits for larger or smaller households are calculated by HUD (See Table 2-6). According to HUD, the AMI for a four-person household in Tulare County was $80,300 in 2022.

Table 2-6 HUD Income Limits by Person per Household (dollars) Household Size: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Extremely Low-Income 16,350 18,700 23,030 27,750 32,470 37,190 41,910 46,630 Very Low-Income 27,300 31,200 35,100 38,950 42,100 45,200 48,300 51,450 Low-Income 43,650 49,850 56,100 62,300 67,300 72,300 77,300 82,250 Median-Income 56,200 64,250 72,250 80,300 847,300 931,500 99,550 106,000 Moderate-Income 67,450 77,100 89,700 96,350 104,050 111,750 119,450 127,200 Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), 2022.

The State of California uses the income categories shown in Table 2-7 to determine eligibility for state housing programs. The State’s methodology for calculating AMI is slightly different from HUD’s methodology, and therefore the AMI and income limits vary.

Table 2-7 State of California Income Categories
Income Category Percent of County Area Median Income (AMI) Extremely Low 0-30% AMI
Very Low 31%-50% AMI
Low 51%-80% AMI
Moderate 81%-120% AMI
Above Moderate 120% AMI or greater
Source: Section 50093 of the California Health and Safety Code.

Figure 2-1 shows actual median household income for the jurisdictions in Tulare County as reported by the 2016-2020 ACS. This median income is for all households, regardless of household size. The median household income in California was $78,672 in 2020, higher than the Tulare County median of $52,534.

The city with the highest median household income in 2020 was Visalia with $66,668. The city with the lowest household median income was Lindsay with $37,073.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-9
Figure 2-1 Median Household Income
Note: Data not available for unincorporated area.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B19013.

Table 2-8 shows the median household income for all county jurisdictions by race in 2020. Asian American households had the highest median income across all jurisdictions except Exeter and Visalia, where white (alone) had the highest median income. Hispanic/Latino households generally had lower median incomes than white alone households, except in Farmersville, Lindsay, and Woodlake. $52,534
$46,163 $48,605 $44,286
$37,073
$44,095
$56,024
$66,668
$44,483
$78,672
$-
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
$80,000
$90,000
Median Household Income

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element 2-10Table 2-8 Median Household Income by Race/Ethnicity (dollars) Jurisdiction White, alone
Black/African
American, alone
American Indian
and Alaskan
Native, alone
Asian
American,
alone
Native Hawaiian
and Other Pacific
Islander, alone
Some Other
Race, alone
Two or More
Races, alone
Hispanic/ Latino,
Any Race
Tulare County 64,453 44,708 37,632 67,396 N/A 47,520 62,159 46,063 Dinuba 69,706 N/A N/A 71,058 N/A 38,438 32,457 43,426 Exeter 59,318 N/A 59,792 48,578 N/A 32,292 N/A 40,156 Farmersville 35,417 N/A N/A N/A N/A 55,299 N/A 46,346 Lindsay 23,504 N/A N/A N/A N/A 36,125 N/A 39,977 Porterville 46,500 N/A 31,912 52,350 N/A 47,297 56,765 42,788 Tulare 61,888 N/A N/A 82,120 85,859 48,966 65,482 53,319Visalia 71,733 N/A 59,528 70,250 N/A 60,547 71,544 64,465Woodlake 34,659 N/A N/A N/A N/A 43,456 60,799 44,675 California 90,496 54,976 60,182 101,380 81,682 59,287 76,733 62,330Note: Data not available for Unincorporated County Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B19013.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-11
State and federal housing law defines overpayment (also known as cost burden) as a household paying more than 30 percent of gross income for housing expenses. Table 2-9 examines overpayment among owner-occupied and renter-occupied units based on the most-recent data provided by CHAS. Among overpaying households, Farmersville has the highest owner-occupied percentage (52.6 percent of those overpaying), and Lindsay has the highest renter-occupied percentage (71.0 percent of those overpaying). In all areas of the county, renters account for a higher percentage of overpaying households. Compared to total households, Lindsay has the largest percentage of overpaying households (47.0 percent), while Woodlake has the lowest (33.4 percent). Countywide, 37.9 percent of households are overpaying for housing, slightly lower than the statewide average.

Table 2-9 Overpayment by Tenure
Jurisdiction
Owner-Occupied
Overpaying
Renter-Occupied
Overpaying
Total
Overpaying
Total
Occupied Units
Tulare County 22,694 29,740 52,434 138,240
Percent 16.4% 21.5% 37.9%
Dinuba 829 1,542 2,371 6,175
Percent 13.4% 25.0% 38.4%
Exeter 616 668 1,284 3,425
Percent 18.0% 19.5% 37.5%
Farmersville 519 468 987 2,855
Percent 18.2% 16.4% 34.6%
Lindsay 508 1,244 1,752 3,750
Percent 13.5% 33.2% 46.7%
Porterville 2,749 4,438 7,187 17,225
Percent 16.0% 25.8% 41.7%
Tulare 3,148 3,954 7,102 18,420
Percent 17.1% 21.5% 38.6%
Visalia 6,305 8,159 14,464 43,250
Percent 14.6% 18.9% 33.4%
Woodlake 269 411 680 2,120
Percent 12.7% 19.4% 32.1%
Unincorporated County 7,751 8,856 16,607 41,020
Percent 18.9% 21.6% 40.5%
California 2,112,710 2,947,155 5,059,865 13,044,265
Percent 16.2% 22.6% 38.8%
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, CHAS 2015-19 (5-Year Estimates), Table 7.

Low-income households, especially low-income renter households, are more likely to experience overpayment compared to households of all income levels. In jurisdictions across Tulare County, between 48 and 70 percent of low-income households are experiencing overpayment, which is significantly higher than the 32 to 42 percent of households of all income levels that are experiencing cost burden, as shown in Table 2-10. The city of Tulare has the highest rate of overpayment among lowincome households (75 percent) and Woodlake has the lowest rate (48 percent).

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-12
In California and throughout Tulare County, low-income renter households have a higher rate of overpayment than low-income owner households. The city of Lindsay has the greatest difference in the percent of low-income renters experiencing overpayment (72 percent) compared to low-income owners (48 percent), with a 24 percent difference. Other cities with a large gap between the percent of lowincome renters and low-income owners experiencing overpayment, include Dinuba, Exeter, Farmersville, and Visalia. The cities of Porterville and Tulare have a more even distribution of lowincome renters and owners experiencing displacement.

Table 2-10 Overpayment by Tenure for Low-Income Households Jurisdiction
Low-Income OwnerOccupied Overpaying Low-Income RenterOccupied Overpaying Total Low-Income Overpaying
Total Low-Income
Occupied Units
Tulare County 18,065 28,385 46,450 72,425
Percent 59.4% 67.5% 64.1%
Dinuba 730 1,510 2,240 3,665
Percent 51.8% 67.0% 61.1%
Exeter 470 654 1,124 1,945
Percent 50.0% 65.1% 57.8%
Farmersville 515 470 985 1,915
Percent 44.4% 62.3% 51.4%
Lindsay 515 1,200 1,715 2,730
Percent 48.1% 72.3% 62.8%
Porterville 2,425 4,305 6,730 9,910
Percent 64.9% 69.7% 67.9%
Tulare 2,140 3,850 6,730 8,950
Percent 63.0% 69.3% 75.2%
Visalia 4,885 7,250 12,135 17,460
Percent 64.0% 73.8% 69.5%
Woodlake 430 245 670 1,395
Percent 44.6% 57.0% 48.0%
California 1,396,865 2,688,975 4,085,840 6,203,065
Percent 57.3% 71.4% 65.9%
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, CHAS 2015-19 (5-Year Estimates), Table 7.

Table 2-11 identifies the rate at which households are overpaying for housing. Lindsay, Porterville, and the unincorporated county have the highest percentages of households spending more than 50 percent of their income on housing. The cities of Tulare, Dinuba, and Exeter have the highest percentages of households paying between 30 and 50 percent of their income on housing (known as severe housing cost burden). Countywide, 37.9 percent of households have a housing cost burden, which is slightly lower than statewide (38.8 percent).

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-13
Table 2-11 Cost Burdened Households
Jurisdiction
No Cost Burden
<= 30%
Cost Burden
>30% to <=50%
Severe Cost
Burden >50%
Cost Burden
Not Calculated
Total Occupied
Units
Tulare County 84,225 27,570 24,864 1,581 138,240
Percent 60.9% 19.9% 18.0% 1.1% 100.0%
Dinuba 3,760 1,332 1,039 44 6,175
Percent 60.9% 21.6% 16.8% 0.7% 100.0%
Exeter 2,083 742 542 58 3,425
Percent 60.8% 21.7% 15.8% 1.7% 100.0%
Farmersville 1,868 549 438 - 2,855
Percent 65.4% 19.2% 15.3% 0.0% 100.0%
Lindsay 1,972 764 988 - 3,724
Percent 53.0% 20.5% 26.5% 0.0% 100.0%
Porterville 9,899 3,313 3,874 139 17,225
Percent 57.5% 19.2% 22.5% 0.8% 100.0%
Tulare 11,083 4,083 3,019 235 18,420
Percent 60.2% 22.2% 16.4% 1.3% 100.0%
Visalia 28,458 8,525 5,939 328 43,250
Percent 65.8% 19.7% 13.7% 0.8% 100.0%
Woodlake 1,357 412 268 83 2,120
Percent 64.0% 19.4% 12.6% 3.9% 100.0%
Unincorporated
County
23,745 7,850 8,757 668 41,020
Percent 57.9% 19.1% 21.3% 1.6% 100.0%
California 7,807,275 2,632,205 2,427,660 177,125 13,044,265 Percent 59.9% 20.2% 18.6% 1.4% 100.0%
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, CHAS 2015-19 (5-Year Estimates), Table 7.

2.6 Household Characteristics
A household refers to the people occupying a home, such as a family, a single person, or unrelated persons living together. This estimate does not include people living in group homes. Families with children often prefer single-family homes, while couples without children or single persons may need or prefer apartments or condominiums.

Table 2-12 provides information on households with couples across all jurisdictions in the county. There are 139,044 households in Tulare County, of which 41,830 (30.1 percent) are married or cohabitating couples with children, higher than the statewide average of 23.7 percent. Lindsay, Tulare, and Woodlake have the highest percentage of total households that are comprised of married-couple households with children.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-14
Table 2-12 Households by Type
Jurisdiction
Married-Couple Household Cohabitating Couple Household Total Total Children No Children Total Children No Children Households Tulare County 73,140 35,234 37,906 10,809 6,596 4,213 139,044 Percent 52.6% 25.3% 27.3% 7.8% 4.7% 3.0%
Dinuba 3,240 1,686 1,554 413 305 108 6,354
Percent 51.0% 26.5% 24.5% 6.5% 4.8% 1.7%
Exeter 1,637 706 931 150 98 52 3,295
Percent 49.7% 21.4% 28.3% 4.6% 3.0% 1.6%
Farmersville 1,408 590 818 230 151 79 2,862
Percent 49.2% 20.6% 28.6% 8.0% 5.3% 2.8%
Lindsay 2,077 1,065 1,012 285 115 170 3,866
Percent 53.7% 27.6% 26.2% 7.4% 3.0% 4.4%
Porterville 8,386 4,267 4,119 1,612 926 686 17,649
Percent 47.5% 24.2% 23.3% 9.1% 5.3% 3.9%
Tulare 9,733 5,371 4,362 1,875 1,278 597 18,381
Percent 53.0% 29.2% 23.7% 10.2% 7.0% 3.3%
Visalia 22,392 10,463 11,929 3,163 1,909 1,254 43,867
Percent 51.1% 23.9% 27.2% 7.2% 4.4% 2.9%
Woodlake 1,351 699 652 221 153 68 2,184
Percent 61.9% 32.0% 29.9% 10.1% 7.0% 3.1%
Unincorporated
County
22,916 10,387 12,529 2,860 1,661 1,199 40,586
Percent 56.5% 25.6% 30.9% 7.1% 4.1% 3.0%
California 6,510,580 2,784,123 3,726,457 896,192 327,712 568,480 13,103,114 Percent 49.7% 21.2% 28.4% 6.8% 2.5% 4.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B11012.

2.7 Large Households
A large household is defined as any household with five or more occupants. Table 2-13 provides information on large households by tenure across all county jurisdictions. Countywide, there is a higher percentage of households that are large households than the statewide average. Dinuba, Farmersville, and Lindsay have the highest percentage of large households, ranging from 26.3 to 29.9 percent of all households. Exeter and Visalia have the lowest percentage of large households. The difference in percentage of owner-occupied large households to renter-occupied varies across each jurisdiction.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-15
Table 2-13 Large Households by Tenure
Jurisdiction Total
Owner-Occupied
Large Households
Renter-Occupied
Large Households
5-Person 6-Person 7-or-More Person 5-Person 6-Person 7-or-More Person Tulare County 29,599 8,116 4,101 3,237 7,507 3,896 2,742 Percent 21.3% 5.8% 3.0% 2.3% 5.4% 2.8% 2.0%
Dinuba 1,841 416 173 189 486 457 120
Percent 29.0% 6.6% 2.7% 3.0% 7.7% 7.2% 1.9%
Exeter 597 153 110 42 120 143 29
Percent 18.1% 4.6% 3.3% 1.3% 3.6% 4.3% 0.9%
Farmersville 857 312 253 82 149 - 61
Percent 29.9% 10.9% 8.8% 2.9% 5.2% 0.0% 2.1%
Lindsay 1,016 301 126 94 315 95 85
Percent 26.3% 7.8% 3.3% 2.4% 8.2% 2.5% 2.2%
Porterville 3,582 886 390 615 941 365 385
Percent 20.3% 5.0% 2.2% 3.5% 5.3% 2.1% 2.2%
Tulare 4,360 1,346 622 341 952 769 330
Percent 23.7% 7.3% 3.4% 1.9% 5.2% 4.2% 1.8%
Visalia 6,983 2,070 891 647 1,918 835 622
Percent 15.9% 4.7% 2.0% 1.5% 4.4% 1.9% 1.4%
Woodlake 449 114 98 17 129 45 46
Percent 20.6% 5.2% 4.5% 0.8% 5.9% 2.1% 2.1%
Unincorporated
County
9,914 2,518 1,438 1,210 2,497 1,187 1,064
Percent 24.4% 6.2% 3.5% 3.0% 6.2% 2.9% 2.6%
California 1,809,518 567,528 238,866 195,326 458,328 201,263 148,207 Percent 13.7% 4.3% 1.8% 1.5% 3.5% 1.5% 1.1%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25009.

2.8 Overcrowding
HCD defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by one person or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens). Units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. A typical home might have a total of five rooms, excluding the kitchen (three bedrooms, living room, and dining room). If more than five people were living in that typical home, it would be considered overcrowded. Overcrowding is strongly related to household size, particularly for large households, and the availability of suitably sized housing. Overcrowding in households typically results from either a lack of affordable housing (which forces more than one household to live together) and/or a lack of available housing units of adequate size. Overcrowding increases health and safety concerns and stresses the condition of the housing stock and infrastructure. Overcrowding impacts both owners and renters; however, renters are generally more significantly impacted.

While family size and tenure are critical determinants in overcrowding, household income also plays a strong role in the incidence of overcrowding. Generally, overcrowding levels tend to decrease as income rises, especially for renters.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-16
Table 2-14 provides information on overcrowding by tenure across all jurisdictions. The cities with the highest rates of overcrowding include Exeter with a total of 63.1 percent of households overcrowded, Farmersville with 66.0 percent of households, and Visalia with 59.6 percent of households.

Table 2-14 Overcrowding Severity by Tenure
Jurisdiction
Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied
Total

1.0 to 1.5
Occupants
per Room
More than 1.5
Occupants per
Room Total

1.0 to 1.5
Occupants per
Room
More than 1.5
Occupants per
Room
Dinuba 3,375 161 97 2,979 580 114
Percent 53.1% 4.8% 2.9% 46.9% 19.5% 3.8%
Exeter 2,079 23 8 1,216 189 -
Percent 63.1% 1.1% 0.4% 36.9% 15.5% 0.0%
Farmersville 1,888 119 41 974 145 136
Percent 66.0% 6.3% 2.2% 34.0% 14.9% 14.0%
Lindsay 1,999 83 34 1,867 328 44
Percent 51.7% 4.2% 1.7% 48.3% 17.6% 2.4%
Porterville 8,900 608 208 8,749 730 284
Percent 50.4% 6.8% 2.3% 49.6% 8.3% 3.3%
Tulare 10,512 688 70 7,869 905 271
Percent 57.2% 6.5% 0.7% 42.8% 11.5% 3.4%
Visalia 25,950 587 267 17,917 1,676 507
Percent 59.2% 2.3% 1.0% 40.8% 9.4% 2.8%
Woodlake 1,122 58 - 1,062 114 11
Percent 51.4% 5.2% 0.0% 48.6% 10.7% 1.0%
Unincorporated County 23,528 1,662 568 17,058 2,242 643 Percent 58.0% 7.1% 2.4% 42.0% 13.1% 3.8%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 06-10, 11-15, 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25014.

2.9 Special Needs Groups
Within the general population there are several groups of people who have special housing needs.

These needs can make it difficult for members of these groups to locate suitable housing. The following subsections discuss these special housing needs of six groups identified in State Housing Element Law (Government Code, Section 65583(a)(7): elderly, persons with disabilities (including developmental disabilities), large households, farmworkers, families with single-headed households, and families and persons in need of emergency shelter. This section also describes the needs of extremely low-income households. Where possible, estimates of the population or number of households in Tulare County belonging to each group are shown.

2.9.1 Seniors
Table 2-15 identifies senior households by tenure across all county jurisdictions. The percentage row identifies the percent of the specified age range within the owner-occupied or renter-occupied tenure.

There is a larger number of owner-occupied senior households across each jurisdiction when compared to renter-occupied senior households. In Tulare County, there are 29,976 senior households, 22,482 (75

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-17
percent) of which own their homes and 7,494 (25 percent) of which rent their homes. Homeownership among senior households is slightly greater in Tulare County than statewide, where approximately 72 percent of senior households own their homes.

Table 2-15 Senior Households by Tenure
Jurisdiction
Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied
65 to 74 75 to 84 85 and over 65 to 74 75 to 84 85 and over Tulare County 12,787 6,686 3,009 4,613 1,643 1,238
Percent 56.9% 29.7% 13.4% 61.6% 21.9% 16.5%
Dinuba 394 132 105 187 51 22
Percent 62.4% 20.9% 16.6% 71.9% 19.6% 8.5%
Exeter 449 231 65 78 48 25
Percent 60.3% 31.0% 8.7% 51.7% 31.8% 16.6%
Farmersville 183 144 8 45 41 7
Percent 54.6% 43.0% 2.4% 48.4% 44.1% 7.5%
Lindsay 247 104 61 218 57 12
Percent 60.0% 25.2% 14.8% 76.0% 19.9% 4.2%
Porterville 1,284 928 301 968 294 117
Percent 51.1% 36.9% 12.0% 70.2% 21.3% 8.5%
Tulare 1,319 553 273 510 110 122
Percent 61.5% 25.8% 12.7% 68.7% 14.8% 16.4%
Visalia 4,297 2,320 1,199 1,455 599 693
Percent 55.0% 29.7% 15.3% 53.0% 21.8% 25.2%
Woodlake 134 136 - 63 74 21
Percent 49.6% 50.4% 0.0% 39.9% 46.8% 13.3%
Unincorporated
County
4,480 2,138 997 1,089 369 219
Percent 58.8% 28.1% 13.1% 64.9% 22.0% 13.1%
California 1,350,393 688,443 301,853 484,266 234,067 139,828 Percent 57.7% 29.4% 12.9% 56.4% 27.3% 16.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25007.

Table 2-16 shows housing cost burden data for senior households by income level in Tulare County based on data extracted through the CHAS database. As shown, 54 percent of all senior households countywide are considered lower-income by the Household Area Median Family Income. Among owneroccupied units, 45.1 percent of households are lower-income, compared to 78.5 percent of households in renter-occupied units. Additionally, in all lower-income categories, senior households that rent experience significantly higher rates of cost burden than seniors households that own their home.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element 2-18Table 2-16 Overpayment by Tenure among Senior Households, Tulare County Owner occupied Renter occupied
Grand
Total
Elderly
Family
Elderly
NonFamily Total % Elderly Family
Elderly
NonFamily Total % %
Household Income <= 30% HAMFI Extremely Low-Income 950 2,115 3,065 13.6% 840 1,915 2,755 33.6% 5,820 18.9% Number w/ Cost Burden <= 30% 160 575 735 3.3% 105 515 620 7.6% 1,355 4.4% Number w/ Cost Burden > 30% to <= 50% 125 240 365 1.6% 125 445 570 6.9% 935 3.0% Number w/ Cost Burden > 50% 665 1,300 1,965 8.7% 610 955 1,565 19.1% 3,530 11.5% Household Income > 30% to <= 50% HAMFI Very Low-Income 1,620 1,850 3,470 15.4% 720 1,370 2,090 25.5% 5,560 18.1% Number w/ Cost Burden <= 30% 640 960 1,600 7.1% 215 510 725 8.8% 2,325 7.6% Number w/ Cost Burden > 30% to <= 50% 490 395 885 3.9% 370 455 825 10.1% 1,710 5.6% Number w/ Cost Burden > 50% 490 495 985 4.4% 135 405 540 6.6% 1,525 5.0% Household Income > 50% to <= 80% HAMFI Low-Income 2,045 1,575 3,620 16.1% 935 660 1,595 19.4% 5,215 17.0% Number w/ Cost Burden <= 30% 1,290 960 2,250 10.0% 520 375 895 10.9% 3,145 10.2% Number w/ Cost Burden > 30% to <= 50% 480 400 880 3.9% 280 130 410 5.0% 1,290 4.2% Number w/ Cost Burden > 50% 275 215 490 2.2% 135 155 290 3.5% 780 2.5% Subtotal Lower Income (<= 80% HAMFI) 4,615 5,540 10,155 45.1% 2,495 3,945 6,440 78.5% 16,595 54.0% Household Income > 80% to <= 100% HAMFI 1,485 915 2,400 10.7% 275 265 540 6.6% 2,940 9.6% Household Income > 100% HAMFI 7,295 2,680 9,975 44.3% 560 665 1,225 14.9% 11,200 36.4% Total 13,395 9,135 22,530 100.0% 3,330 4,875 8,205 100.0% 30,735 100.0% HAMFI = HUD Area Median Family Income Source: HUD Consolidated Planning, CHAS database, 2015-2019, accessed 2023. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/cp.html

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-19
Table 2-17 summarizes cost burden data for units occupied by senior households. Countywide,

36.6 percent of all senior households are overpaying for housing, including 16.9 percent with a cost burden between 30 and 50 percent, and 19.7 percent with a cost burden greater than 50 percent (severe housing cost burden). Compared to total households, the percentage of cost burdened senior households is lower than the percentage of all cost burdened households countywide, where 19.9 percent experience a cost burden between 30 and 50 percent and 18.0 percent experience a cost burden greater than 50 percent.

Table 2-17 Cost Burdened Senior Households
Jurisdiction
Cost Burden
<= 30%
Cost Burden >30% to
<=50% Cost Burden >50% Total Occupied Units
Tulare County 19,485 5,180 6,070 30,735
Percent 63.4% 16.9% 19.7% 100.0%
Dinuba 697 183 174 1,054
Percent 66.1% 17.4% 16.5% 100.0%
Exeter 624 223 102 949
Percent 65.8% 23.5% 10.7% 100.0%
Farmersville 208 105 99 412
Percent 50.5% 25.5% 24.0% 100.0%
Lindsay 385 145 95 625
Percent 61.6% 23.2% 15.2% 100.0%
Porterville 2,150 765 834 3,749
Percent 57.3% 20.4% 22.2% 100.0%
Tulare 1,888 734 610 3,232
Percent 58.4% 22.7% 18.9% 100.0%
Visalia 6,950 1,445 2,014 10,409
Percent 66.8% 13.9% 19.3% 100.0%
Woodlake 198 44 69 311
Percent 63.7% 14.1% 22.2% 100.0%
Unincorporated
County
6,385 1,536 2,073 9,994
Percent 63.9% 15.4% 20.7% 100.0%
California 1,963,195 620,335 736,510 3,320,040
Percent 59.1% 18.7% 22.2% 100.0%
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, CHAS 2015-19 (5-Year Estimates), Table 7.

Resources for Senior-Headed Households
Table 2-18 includes an inventory of senior rental units countywide. As shown, there are 1,601 rental units intended for seniors in the county, including units available to very low-, low-, and moderateincome households. As identified in Table 2-16 above, there are 6,440 lower-income senior households in renter-occupied housing units. Due to the high rate of cost burden among households in renteroccupied and significant gap between the number of lower-income senior households and affordable senior rental units, it can be concluded that senior housing is a significant need in the county. United Way of Tulare County’s program, 211 Tulare County, connects members of the community with a broad range of additional resources, services, and opportunities including resources for seniors.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-20
Table 2-18 Inventory of Senior Housing
Housing
Development Address Number of Units Description
Cypress Cove 1501 E Cypress Ave, Tulare, CA 93274 53 Rental units for low- and moderateincome seniors.

Kimball Court 303 W Kimball Ave, Visalia, CA 93277 94 Rental units for seniors.

Linmar
Apartments
2395 14th Ave, Kingsburg, CA 93631 48 Very low-, low-, and moderate-income seniors.

Santa Fe Plaza 250 N 3rd St, Porterville, CA 93257 105 Rental units for low-income seniors.

Visalia Garden
Villas
4901 W Crenshaw Dr, Visalia, CA 93277 60 Rental units for low- and moderateincome seniors.

Westport Village 3123 S Avocado St, Visalia, CA 93277 25 Rental units for seniors at or below 60 percent of AMI.

Village Grove
Apartments
675 S Farmersville Blvd, Farmersville, CA 93223 48 Rental units for seniors or individuals 55 and older with a disability.

Palomar Court
Apartments
833 S Farmersville Blvd, Farmersville, CA 93223 40 Rental units for seniors or individuals 55 and older with a disability.

Haden
Apartments
315 E Tulare St, Dinuba, CA 93618 24 Rental units for seniors or individuals 55 and older with a disability.

Euclid Village 600 N Euclid Ave, Dinuba, CA 93618 5 Handicap accessible units to serve disabled individuals and families
El Monte West
Apartments
999 W El Monte Way, Dinuba, CA 93618 40 Family and Senior housing.

Emperor Estates
Senior
Apartments
350 North M St, Dinuba, CA 93618 61 Rental units for residents 55 years and older
West Northway
Apartments
245 W Northway, Dinuba, CA 93618 38 Rental units for seniors disabled individuals.

Earlimart Senior
Apartments
1094 E Washington, Earlimart, CA 93291 35 Rental units for seniors disabled individuals.

Exeter Senior
Villa
655 Vine, #45, Exeter, CA 93221 40 Rental units for seniors disabled individuals.

Lindsay Senior
Villa
1127 Fresno, Lindsay, CA 93247 38 Rental units for seniors and disabled individuals.

Mt Whitney
Place
Apartments
181 E Honolulu St. Lindsay, CA 93247 29 Rental units for seniors Sequia View
Apartments
41334 Road 127, Orosi, CA 93647 42 Rental units for families and seniors.

Porterville
Gardens
Apartments
1585 W Putnam, Porterville, CA 93257 56 Rental units for seniors and disabled individuals.

Sierra Hills 2500 W. Henderson Ave., Porterville, CA 121 Rental units for seniors.

Sequoia Dawn 35800 Highway 190, Springville, CA 93265 118 Rental units for seniors and disabled individuals.

Silvercrest
Apartments
350 N L Street, Tulare, CA 93274 55 Rental units for seniors 62 and older or disabled individuals.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-21
Housing
Development Address Number of Units Description
Tulare Gardens
Apartments
498 S Blackstone, Tulare, CA 93274 60 Rental units for seniors 62 and older or disabled individuals.

Sierra Meadows 1120 E Tulare Ave, Visalia, CA 93291 42 Rental units for seniors 62 or older.

The Meadows 3900 W Tulare Ave, Visalia, CA 93277 99 Rental units for seniors.

Town Meadows 115 W Murry, Visalia, CA 93291 90 Rental units for seniors and disabled individuals.

Valencia House 248 N Valencia Blvd, Woodlake, CA 93286 46 Rental units for seniors and disabled individuals.

Woodlake
Manor
200 E Sierra Ave, Woodlake, CA 93286 44 Rental units for seniors and disabled individuals.

Total units: 1,601
Source: Housing Authority of Tulare County, https://www.hatc.net/subsidized-housing-referral-listing.php, Accessed June 2023.

2.9.2 Persons with Disabilities (including Developmental Disabilities) Persons with disabilities typically have special housing needs because of their physical and/or developmental capabilities, fixed or limited incomes, and higher health costs associated with their disabilities. A disability is defined broadly by the Census Bureau as a physical, mental, or emotional condition that lasts over a long period of time and makes it difficult to live independently. The Census Bureau defines six disabilities: hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, or independent living disabilities.

Persons with disabilities have different housing needs depending on the nature and severity of the disability. Physically disabled persons generally require modifications to their housing units, such as wheelchair ramps, elevators or lifts, wide doorways, accessible cabinetry, and modified fixtures and appliances. Special design and other considerations for persons with disabilities include single-level units, availability of services, group living opportunities, and proximity to transit. While regulations adopted by the State require all ground floor units of new apartment complexes with five or more units to be accessible to persons with disabilities, single family units have no accessibility requirements. If a disability prevents a person from operating a vehicle, then proximity to services and access to public transportation are particularly important. If a disability prevents an individual from working or limits income, then the cost of housing and the costs of modifications are likely to be even more challenging.

Those with severe physical or mental disabilities may also require supportive housing, nursing facilities, or care facilities. In addition, many disabled people rely solely on Supplemental Security Income (SSI), which is insufficient for market rate housing.

Table 2-19 identifies the populations of each county jurisdiction by number of disabilities. Farmersville, Lindsay, and Porterville are the only three jurisdictions with a larger percentage of their populations having two or more disabilities than a single disability. Exeter has the highest percentage of persons with disabilities among all other jurisdictions, while Dinuba and Woodlake have the lowest.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-22
Table 2-19 Population by Number of Disabilities
Jurisdiction Total
With One Type
of Disability
With two or More
types of Disability No Disability
Tulare County 459,748 28,405 25,355 405,988
Percent 6.2% 5.5% 88.3%
Dinuba 24,355 1,071 915 22,369
Percent 4.4% 3.8% 91.9%
Exeter 10,404 787 675 8,942
Percent 7.6% 6.5% 86.0%
Farmersville 10,842 638 767 9,437
Percent 5.9% 7.1% 87.0%
Lindsay 12,701 715 872 11,114
Percent 5.6% 6.9% 87.5%
Porterville 58,174 3,217 3,325 51,632
Percent 5.5% 5.7% 88.8%
Tulare 64,166 4,219 3,291 56,656
Percent 6.6% 5.1% 88.3%
Visalia 131,663 8,659 7,183 115,821
Percent 6.6% 5.5% 88.0%
Woodlake 7,708 374 259 7,075
Percent 4.9% 3.4% 91.8%
Unincorporated County 139,735 8,725 8,068 122,942
Percent 6.2% 5.8% 88.0%
California 38,838,726 2,089,065 2,057,886 34,691,775
Percent 5.4% 5.3% 89.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table C18108.

Table 2-20 summarizes residents with a disability by age categories for each jurisdiction. Countywide, 6,680 residents under the age of 18 have at least one disability. These residents account for 1.5 percent of the population countywide, which is higher than the proportion of residents under 18 with a disability statewide (0.8 percent). Similarly, the percentage of residents 18 to 64 with a disability is higher in the county (5.6 percent) compared to the state (5.0 percent). Residents 65 years or older with at least one disability account for a smaller percentage of the total population in the county (4.6 percent) than in California (4.9 percent).

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-23
Table 2-20 Disability by Age for the Total Population
Jurisdiction Total Population
Under 18 Years
with one or
more Disability
18 to 64 Years
with one or
more Disability
65 Years and Older
with one or
more Disability
Tulare County 459,748 6,680 25,918 21,162
Percent 100.0% 1.5% 5.6% 4.6%
Dinuba 24,355 345 1,160 481
Percent 100.0% 1.4% 4.8% 2.0%
Exeter 10,404 161 703 598
Percent 100.0% 1.5% 6.8% 5.7%
Farmersville 459,748 6,680 25,918 21,162
Percent 100.0% 1.5% 5.6% 4.6%
Lindsay 12,701 82 726 779
Percent 100.0% 0.6% 5.7% 6.1%
Porterville 58,174 627 3,300 2,615
Percent 100.0% 1.1% 5.7% 4.5%
Tulare 64,166 1,205 3,808 2,497
Percent 100.0% 1.9% 5.9% 3.9%
Visalia 131,663 2,060 7,549 6,233
Percent 100.0% 1.6% 5.7% 4.7%
Woodlake 7,708 41 292 300
Percent 100.0% 0.5% 3.8% 3.9%
Unincorporated County 139,735 1,902 7,634 7,257
Percent 100.0% 1.4% 5.5% 5.2%
California 38,838,726 306,806 1,944,580 1,895,565
Percent 100.0% 0.8% 5.0% 4.9%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table C18108.

Table 2-21 shows data for residents with a developmental disability. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) defines developmental disabilities as a group of conditions due to an impairment in physical, learning, language, or behavior areas. These conditions begin during the developmental period, may impact day-to-day functioning, and usually last throughout a person’s lifetime. Countywide, there are 6,272 residents with a developmental disability, more than half of these residents are under the age of 18 (3,201 residents) and 3,071 residents 18 years old or older, a trend that mirrors the statewide average. In Porterville, Farmersville, and Woodlake, there are more residents with a developmental disability who are 18 years old and older than those who are younger than 18.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-24
Table 2-21 Developmental Disability by Age
Jurisdiction Under 18 Years 18 Years and Older
Total Population with a
Development Disability
Tulare County 3,201 3,071 6,272
Dinuba 194 132 326
Exeter 100 96 196
Farmersville 60 64 124
Lindsay 118 88 206
Porterville 541 707 1,248
City of Tulare 584 486 1,070
Visalia 1,039 973 2,012
Woodlake 55 58 113
Unincorporated County 358 346 704
California 192,384 185,353 377,737
Source: California Department of Developmental Services, Quarterly Consumer Report, December 2021.

Table 2-22 includes data summarizing the housing location of residents with developmental disabilities.

A majority of445 residents (445) with a developmental disability in Tulare County live in the home of a parent, family member, or guardian, as is common throughout the region and the state. An additional 12 residents live in community care facilities.

Table 2-22 Developmental Disability by Residence
Jurisdiction
Residence Type
Total
Residents
Home of
Parent /
Family /
Guardian
Independent /
Supported
Living
Community
Care Facility
Intermediate
Care Facility
Foster /
Family
Home Other
Tulare County >5,763 4,652 389 526 93 76 27
Dinuba >316 300 16 <11 0 <11 0
Exeter >176 165 <11 <11 11 <11 0
Farmersville >115 102 <11 0 13 <11 <11
Lindsay >193 181 12 <11 <11 <11 <11
Porterville >1,003 831 126 257 17 14 15
City of Tulare >1,068 870 66 73 29 30 <11
Visalia >2,083 1,660 169 184 23 47 <11
Woodlake >98 98 <11 <11 0 <11 <11
Unincorporated County >469 445 0 12 0 0 12
California 380,258 309,381 27,881 23,728 6,188 8,288 4,792 Source: California Department of Developmental Services, DDS Quarterly Consumer Report, January 2022.

The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program, administered by the U.S. Social security Administration, shows the number of persons with disabilities who may have housing needs because of

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-25
their low incomes. As of December 2021, 14,228 SSI recipients in Tulare County were receiving benefits because they were blind or disabled1.

Resources for Persons with Disabilities
Table 2-23 identifies 576 rental units for residents with a disability countywide. Additionally, according to the State of California Department of Developmental Services data, 5,449 Tulare County residents with a developmental disability live with family or a guardian.2 Despite these housing opportunities, with
53,760 residents with a disability countywide (Table 2-19), the gap between residents with a disability and housing resources is considerable. United Way of Tulare County’s program, 211 Tulare County, connects members of the community with a broad range of additional resources, services, and opportunities including resources for people with disabilities.

Table 2-23 Inventory of Housing for People with Disabilities Housing
Development Address
Number
of Units Description
Village Grove
Apartments
675 S Farmersville Blvd, Farmersville, CA 93223 48 Rental units for individuals 55 and older with a disability.

Palomar Court
Apartments
833 S Farmersville Blvd, Farmersville, CA 93223 40 Rental units for individuals 55 and older with a disability.

Euclid Village 600 N Euclid Ave, Dinuba, CA 93618 5 Handicap accessible units to serve disabled individuals and families
Robinwood
Court
5738 W Robin Wood Ct, Visalia, CA 93291 10 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Tule Vista 612 S D St, Tulare, CA 93274 3 Rental units for disabled individuals.

North Park
Apartments
1655 N Crawford Ave, Dinuba, CA 93618 3 Rental units for disabled individuals.

West Northway
Apartments
245 W Northway, Dinuba, CA 93618 38 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Earlimart Senior
Apartments
1094 E Washington, Earlimart, CA 93291 2 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Westwood
Manor
211 S Ash, Earlimart, CA 93219 2 one-bedroom units for disabled individuals.

Exeter
Apartments
855 W Visalia Rd, Exeter, CA 93221 3 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Exeter Senior
Villa
655 Vine, #45, Exeter, CA 93221 4 Rental units for seniors disabled individuals.

Jacob Square 301 Jacob, Exeter, CA 93221 3 Two-bedroom handicap units.

Oakwood
Apartments
15753 Avenue 327, Ivanhoe, CA 93235 5 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Delta Vista
Manor
701 N Ash, Lindsay, CA 93247 2 Two-bedroom handicap units. 1 Source: U.S. Social Security administration. SSI Recipients by State and County, 2021. https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/ssi_sc/2021/ca.html Note: Although these figures can give a sense of the proportion of the population with different types of disabilities, a much smaller proportion of the population may actually require specially adapted housing to accommodate disabilities.) 2 U.S. Department of Developmental Services, Quarterly Consumer Report by Age and Residence Type, January 2022.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-26
Housing
Development Address
Number
of Units Description
Lindsay Senior
Villa
1127 Fresno, Lindsay, CA 93247 4 Rental units for seniors and disabled individuals.

Monte Vista
Manor
901 W Tulare, Lindsay, CA 93247 1 Two-bedroom handicap unit.

Alta Vista
Apartments
41730 Road 128, Orosi, CA 93647 42 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Orchard Manor
Apartments
12495 Avenue 416, Orosi, CA 93647 3 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Pixley
Apartments
735 E Terra Bella Ave, Pixley, CA 93256 2 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Carolita
Apartments
1055 W. Pioneer Ave., Porterville, CA 93257 8 Rental units for disabled individuals Alder
Apartments
45 N Salisbury, Porterville, CA 93257 64 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Evergreen
Apartments
65 N Salisbury, Porterville, CA 93257 4 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Mountain View
Apartments
870 N Plano St, Porterville, CA 93257 2 Two-bedroom handicap units.

Porterville
Gardens
Apartments
1585 W Putnam, Porterville, CA 93257 6 Rental units for seniors and disabled individuals.

Sequoia Village
at Rivers Edge
424 South E Street, Porterville, CA 93257 2 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Villa Siena
Apartments
200 North E Street, Porterville, CA 93257 4 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Villas Robles
Apartments
450 W Springville Dr, Porterville, CA 93257 4 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Porterville
Family
Apartments
93 E. Date Ave., Porterville, CA 93257 4 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Sequoia Dawn 35800 Highway 190, Springville, CA 93265 118 Rental units for seniors and disabled individuals.

Strathmore Villa
Apartments
19734 Road 231 Unit B, Strathmore, CA 93267 2 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Tipton Terrace 584 N Thompson Rd, Tipton, CA 93272 2 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Parkwood
Manor
414 - 430 Meadow Drive, Tulare, CA 93274 10 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Silvercrest
Apartments
350 N L Street, Tulare, CA 93274 4 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Tulare
Apartments
1101 S Irwin, Tulare, CA 93274 8 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Tulare Gardens
Apartments
498 S Blackstone, Tulare, CA 93274 4 Rental units for seniors 62 and older or disabled individuals.

Westside Palm
Village
900 W Pleasant, Tulare, CA 93274 2 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Goshen Village 30940 Road 72, Visalia, CA 93291 6 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-27
Housing
Development Address
Number
of Units Description
Town Meadows 115 W Murry, Visalia, CA 93291 9 Rental units for seniors and disabled individuals.

Valencia House 248 N Valencia Blvd, Woodlake, CA 93286 46 Rental units for seniors and disabled individuals.

Woodlake
Garden
Apartments
705 W Sequoia, Woodlake, CA 93286 3 Rental units for disabled individuals.

Woodlake
Manor
200 E Sierra Ave, Woodlake, CA 93286 44 Rental units for seniors and disabled individuals.

Total Units 576
Source: Housing Authority of Tulare County, https://www.hatc.net/subsidized-housing-referral-listing.php, Accessed June 2023.

Several local agencies provide services for residents with a disability. Table 2-24 provides a list of disability resource contacts throughout the county.

Table 2-24 Services for Persons with Disabilities
Organization Phone Address
Behavioral Health Centers:

Lindsay 559.592.7300 831 N. Sequoia Ave., Lindsay, CA
Exeter 559.592.7300 1014 San Juan Ave., Exeter, CA
Visalia 559.624.3300 1100 S. Akers, Visalia, CA
Tulare County Mental Health Department 559.623.0900 520 E. Tulare Street, Visalia, CA Tulare County Mental Health Hillman Center 559.684.4530 1062 South ‘K’ St, Tulare, CA Porterville Adult Mental Health Clinic 559.781.1200 1055 W. Henderson Ave., Porterville, CA Hope Horizon Porterville 559.781.0649 837 N. Main Street #C, Porterville, CA Porterville Wellness Center 599.570.5000 333 W. Henderson Ave., Porterville, CA Hope Horizon Mental Health 559.688.2043 327 South ‘K’ Street, Tulare, CA Kingsview 559.687.0929 201 North ‘K’ Street, Tulare, CA Blind Services:

California Council of the Blind 800.221.6359 2143 Hurley Way, Suite 250, Sacramento, CA Valley Center for the Blind 559.222.4447 3417 W. Shaw Ave., Fresno, CA Deaf Services:

Deaf and Hard of Hearing Service Center 559.334.0134 113 N Church St. #222, Visalia, CA Fox Interpreting Sign Language Services 559.636.3294 1105 W Center Ave, Visalia, CA Veteran Services:

Tulare Veterans' Clinic 559.684.8703 10550 N Cherry St, Tulare, CA Veterans' Medical Center 559.225.6100 2615 E Clinton Ave, Fresno, CA Source: Tulare County CSET, https://www.cset.org/ accessed June 2023.

2.9.3 Large Households
Table 2-25, below, quantifies large households in the county. Countywide, 29,599 households contain more than five people. These households account for 21.3 percent of total households. Of these

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-28
households, 14,145 (10.2 percent of total households and 47.8 percent of all large households) are renter-occupied households.

Table 2-25 Large Households by Tenure
Jurisdiction Total
Owner-Occupied
Large Households
Renter-Occupied
Large Households
5-Person 6-Person
7-or-More
Person 5-Person 6-Person
7-or-More
Person
Tulare County 29,599 8,116 4,101 3,237 7,507 3,896 2,742 Percent 21.3% 5.8% 3.0% 2.3% 5.4% 2.8% 2.0%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25009.

Resources for Large Households
Table 2-26 compares the number of households with five or more people to the number of units with five or more bedrooms. As shown, there are a total of 150,079 housing units in the county, including 2,820 units with five or more bedrooms. These large housing units represent 1.9 percent of the countywide housing stock, significantly less than the percentage statewide (4.3 percent). Compared to the number of large households (29,599) there is a considerable resource gap in the county of more than 20,000 units appropriate for large households. United Way of Tulare County’s program, 211 Tulare County, connects members of the community with a broad range of additional resources, services, and opportunities including resources for large households.

Table 2-26 Large Households and Units
Jurisdiction Total Households
Large Households
(5 or more persons) Total Units
Large Units
(5 or more bedrooms)
Tulare County 139,044 29,599 150,079 2,820
Percent 100% 21.3% 100% 1.9%
Dinuba 6,354 1,841 6,552 40
Percent 100% 29.0% 100% 0.6%
Exeter 3,295 597 3,620 72
Percent 100% 18.1% 100% 2.0%
Farmersville 2,862 857 2,921 5
Percent 100% 29.9% 100% 0.2%
Lindsay 3,866 1,016 3,979 72
Percent 100% 26.3% 100% 1.8%
Porterville 17,649 3,582 18,654 186
Percent 100% 20.3% 100% 1.0%
Tulare 18,381 4,360 19,526 399
Percent 100% 23.7% 100% 2.0%
Visalia 43,867 6,983 46,139 1,218
Percent 100% 15.9% 100% 2.6%
Woodlake 2,184 449 2,285 27
Percent 100% 20.6% 100% 1.2%

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-29
Jurisdiction Total Households
Large Households
(5 or more persons) Total Units
Large Units
(5 or more bedrooms)
Unincorporated County 40,586 9,914 46,403 801
Percent 100% 24.4% 100% 1.7%
California 13,103,114 1,809,518 14,210,945 617,193
Percent 100% 13.7% 100% 4.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table C18108, Table B24024.

2.9.4 Female-Headed Households
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, a single-headed household contains a household head and at least one dependent, which could include a related or unrelated child, or an elderly parent. Female-headed households have special housing needs because they are often either single parents or single elderly adults living on low- or poverty level incomes. Single-parent households with children often require special consideration and assistance because of their greater need for affordable housing, accessible day care, health care, and a variety of other supportive services. Moreover, because of their relatively lower household incomes, single-parent households are more likely to experience difficulties in finding affordable, decent, and safe housing.

Table 2-27 identifies all single female-headed householders residing with their own children under age

18. The table values do not include female-headed households with unrelated dependents. Dinuba, Exeter, and Porterville have the highest percent of single female-headed households, while Lindsay, Woodlake, and unincorporated county have the lowest percent. The countywide average is 7.7 percent which is considerably higher than the statewide average of 4.7 percent.

Table 2-27 Single Female-Headed Households with own Children Jurisdiction Total Households Single Female-Headed Households* Percent Tulare County 139,044 10,655 7.7%
Dinuba 6,354 1,036 16.3%
Exeter 3,295 346 10.5%
Farmersville 2,862 222 7.8%
Lindsay 3,866 207 5.4%
Porterville 17,649 1,756 9.9%
City of Tulare 18,381 1,614 8.8%
Visalia 43,867 2,833 6.5%
Woodlake 2,184 205 9.4%
Unincorporated County 40,568 2,436 6.0%
California 13,103,114 615,734 4.7%
* Single Female-Headed Households with own children under age 18, does not include unrelated dependents.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B11012.

Table 2-28 provides data on all single female-headed households by tenure. Countywide there are 23,911 single-female headed households, including 8,979 owner-occupied households and 14,932 renter-occupied households. Across all areas of the county, renter-occupied households account for a larger proportion of single female-headed households than owner-occupied households. Porterville, Woodlake, and Tulare have the largest percentage of single female-headed households that rent. The

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-30
proportion of single female-headed households that rent in the county (62.4 percent) is higher than the proportion statewide (58.5 percent).

Table 2-28 Single Female-Headed Households by Tenure
Jurisdiction Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Total
Tulare County 8,979 14,932 23,911
Percent 37.6% 62.4% 100.0%
Dinuba 689 1,050 1,739
Percent 39.6% 60.4% 100.0%
Exeter 287 309 596
Percent 48.2% 51.8% 100.0%
Farmersville 295 316 611
Percent 48.3% 51.7% 100.0%
Lindsay 185 348 533
Percent 34.7% 65.3% 100.0%
Porterville 1,083 2,609 3,692
Percent 29.3% 70.7% 100.0%
Tulare 1,224 2,334 3,558
Percent 34.4% 65.6% 100.0%
Visalia 2,642 4,359 7,001
Percent 37.7% 62.3% 100.0%
Woodlake 125 262 387
Percent 32.3% 67.7% 100.0%
California 702,489 990,785 1,693,274
Percent 41.5% 58.5% 100.0%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25011.

Resources for Single-Parent and Female-Headed Households Tulare County Community Services Employment Training (CSET) Resource Centers Tulare County CSET provides families with access to services including nutrition and health education, housing and utility assistance, and employment training. Each Resource Center has established partnerships and referral processes with local agencies, food pantries, and the faith-based community to be able to provide assistance quickly and smoothly. Tulare County CSET operates offices family resource centers in Tulare and Earlimart.3

Tulare County Family Resource Network
The core services of the Tulare County Family Resource Network include family advocacy, parenting education, ongoing intensive family support services, resource and referrals to partner agencies, family health and wellness, home visitation and child development services. The organization connects special needs groups, including single female-headed households, to the Housing Authority of Tulare County for 3 Tulare County CSET, https://www.cset.org/ accessed June 2023.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-31
rental assistance. The Tulare County Family Resource Networks operates Family Resources Centers in the community of Orosi, Lindsay, and Visalia, Porterville and Woodlake.4

2.9.5 Extremely Low-Income Residents
Extremely low-income households are defined as those households with incomes under 30 percent of the county’s median income. Extremely low-income households typically consist of minimum wage workers, seniors on fixed incomes, people with disabilities, and farmworkers. This group of households has specific housing needs that require greater government subsidies and assistance, housing with supportive services, single room occupancy (SRO) and/or shared housing, and/or rental subsidies or vouchers. This income group is likely to live in overcrowded and substandard housing conditions. In recent years rising rents, higher income and credit standards imposed by landlords, and insufficient government assistance has exacerbated the problem. Without adequate assistance this group has a high risk of homelessness.

Table 2-29 identifies extremely low-income households by tenure for all county jurisdictions. Renteroccupied households make up a larger percentage of total extremely low-income households in every jurisdiction. Lindsay has the highest percentage of extremely low-income households compared to total households at 26.9 percent, followed by Porterville with 21.3 percent, and the unincorporated county at

20.8 percent. Visalia and Tulare have the lowest percentage of extremely low-income households at

11.2 percent and 12.9 percent, respectively.

Table 2-29 Extremely Low-Income Households by Tenure
Jurisdiction
Extremely Low-Income Households (Income <=30% HAMFI)
Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Total Households
Total Extremely LowIncome Households
Tulare County 6,940 16,145 23,085 139,044
Percent 5.0% 11.6% 16.6% 100.0%
Dinuba 179 817 996 6,354
Percent 2.8% 12.9% 15.7% 100.0%
Exeter 215 395 610 3,295
Percent 6.5% 12.0% 18.5% 100.0%
Farmersville 245 303 548 2,862
Percent 8.6% 10.6% 19.1% 100.0%
Lindsay 252 789 1,041 3,866
Percent 6.5% 20.4% 26.9% 100.0%
Porterville 994 2,765 3,759 17,649
Percent 5.6% 15.7% 21.3% 100.0%
Tulare 548 1,820 2,368 18,381
Percent 3.0% 9.9% 12.9% 100.0%
Visalia 1,654 3,255 4,909 43,867
Percent 3.8% 7.4% 11.2% 100.0%
Woodlake 104 314 418 2,184
Percent 4.8% 14.4% 19.1% 100.0%
4 Tulare County Family Resource Center Network, http://www.tcfrcn.org/ accessed June 2023.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-32
Jurisdiction
Extremely Low-Income Households (Income <=30% HAMFI)
Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Total Households
Total Extremely LowIncome Households
Unincorporated County 2,749 5,687 8,436 40,586
Percent 6.8% 14.0% 20.8% 100.0%
Source: US Housing and Urban Development, CHAS 2015-19 (5-Year Estimates), Table 7.

U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B11012.

Table 2-30 shows data for extremely low-income households overpaying by tenure and cost burden. In all areas of the county, households that rent are far more likely to experience housing cost burden.

Countywide, 13.3 percent of extremely low-income renters experience a cost burden, and 49.4 percent experience severe cost burden.

Table 2-30 Extremely Low-Income Households by Tenure and Cost Burden Jurisdiction
Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Total
Extremely
LowIncome
Households
No Cost
Burden
<30%
Cost
Burden
>30%
Severe
Cost
Burden
>50%
No Cost
Burden
<30%
Cost
Burden
>30%
Severe
Cost
Burden
>50%
Tulare County 980 865 5,095 1,650 3,080 11,415 23,085
Percent 4.2% 3.7% 22.1% 7.1% 13.3% 49.4% 100.0%
Dinuba 29 25 125 83 184 550 996
Percent 2.9% 2.5% 12.6% 8.3% 18.5% 55.2% 100.0%
Exeter 25 95 95 90 25 280 610
Percent 4.1% 15.6% 15.6% 14.8% 4.1% 45.9% 100.0%
Farmersville 50 25 170 10 119 174 548
Percent 9.1% 4.6% 31.0% 1.8% 21.7% 31.8% 100.0%
Lindsay 89 - 163 24 140 625 1,041
Percent 8.5% 0.0% 15.7% 2.3% 13.4% 60.0% 100.0%
Porterville 99 155 740 265 420 2,080 3,759
Percent 2.6% 4.1% 19.7% 7.0% 11.2% 55.3% 100.0%
Tulare 64 49 435 170 325 1,325 2,368
Percent 2.7% 2.1% 18.4% 7.2% 13.7% 56.0% 100.0%
Visalia 239 140 1,275 295 675 2,285 4,909
Percent 4.9% 2.9% 26.0% 6.0% 13.8% 46.5% 100.0%
Woodlake 20 25 59 85 94 135 418
Percent 4.8% 6.0% 14.1% 20.3% 22.5% 32.3% 100.0%
Unincorporated
County
365 351 2,033 628 1,098 3,961 8,436
Percent 4.3% 4.2% 24.1% 7.4% 13.0% 47.0% 100.0%
California 117,890 92,945 381,175 172,130 216,880 1,038,395 2,019,415 Percent 5.8% 4.6% 18.9% 8.5% 10.7% 51.4% 100.0%
Source: US Housing and Urban Development, CHAS 2015-19 (5-Year Estimates), Table 7.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-33
Resources for Extremely Low-Income Households
HATC provides assistance to lower and moderate-income families in need of housing through the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program.5
HATC currently administers approximately 700 public housing units, 3,100 households receiving HCVs, and 860 units of local, non-traditional housing.6

Table 2-31 includes additional resources of benefit to extremely low-income households in Tulare County. United Way of Tulare County’s program, 211 Tulare County, connects members of the community with a broad range of additional resources, services, and opportunities including resources for extremely low-income households.

Table 2-31 Extremely Low-Income Resources
Organization Phone Address
Central California Legal Services 559.733.8770 208 W. Main Street Suit U-1, Visalia, CA City of Visalia Community Development Agency 559.713.4460 315 E. Acequia, Visalia, CA Hands in the Community 559.734.4040 Visalia, CA
Salvation Army Tulare 599.687.2520 314 E. San Juaquin Ave. Tulare, CA St. Anne’s Food Pantry 559.783-8018 271 S. Wallace St., Porterville, CA Central CA Food Bank 599.237.3663 4010 E. Amemdola Dr., Fresno, CA Love INC of Tulare County 559.467-5167 250 S. K St., Tulare, CA Central California Family Crisis Center 599.781.7462 211 N. Main St., Porterville, CA Porterville Pregnancy Resource Center 599.782.1225 303 W. Henderson Ave., Porterville, CA Porterville Area Coordinating Council 599.793.0213 368 E. Date Ave., Porterville, CA City of Porterville Community Development Department 599.782.7460 291 N. Main St., Porterville, CA CSET 599.788.1400 1063 W. Henderson Ave., Porterville, CA CSET 599.216.0525 108 E. Morton Ave., Porterville, CA
CSET - Tulare Family Resource Center & Employment
Connection Affiliate
559.684.1987 304 E. Tulare Avenue, Tulare, CA
Tulare Emergency Aid Council 559.686.3693 424 North ‘N’ Street, Tulare, CA Source: Tulare County CSET, 2023.

2.9.6 Farmworkers
Due to a combination of limited English language skills and very low household incomes, the ability of farmworkers to obtain housing loans for home purchase is extremely limited. For the same reasons, rentals are also difficult to obtain. Housing needs include permanent family housing as well as accommodations for migrant single men, such as dormitory-style housing, especially during peak labor activity in May through October.

A growing number of migrant workers do not leave California during the non-farm season, but instead stay in the area and perform non-farm work such as construction and odd jobs. Housing needs of this migrant but non farmworker population are partially addressed by year-round housing units, but additional migrant units are needed.
5 Tulare County, Housing, Homeless and Rental Assistance, https://covid19.tularecounty.ca.gov/housing-homeless-and-rental-assistance/ accessed June 2023.
6 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Housing Authority of Tulare County, https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/ph/mtw/tulare accessed June 2023.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-34
Migrant and other seasonal farmworkers usually do not have a fixed physical address and work intermittently in various agricultural and non-agricultural occupations during a single year, with only casual employer-employee links. Many workers and/or their families live in rural, often remote areas and are reluctant to voice their housing needs and concerns to local government or housing authorities.

According to California Employment Development Department, the median wage for farmworkers was $14.77/hour in 2020 or approximately $34,560 per year for full-time work, which is considered extremely low-income in California. Many farmworkers are forced to pay market rate for their housing, since most farm owners do not provide housing for their workers, and many publicly-owned or managed housing complexes are restricted to families. Because market rate housing may be more than they can afford, many workers are forced to share a housing unit with several other workers, causing a severely overcrowded living situation. Migrant and seasonal farmworkers face several housing challenges, but primarily substandard housing conditions and overcrowded housing.7 The nature of agricultural work also affects the specific housing needs of farmworkers. For instance, farmworkers employed on a year-round basis generally live with their families and need permanent affordable housing much like other lower-income households. Migrant farmworkers who follow seasonal harvests generally need temporary housing only for the workers themselves. Migrant and resident farmworkers constitute distinct populations, each with its own special needs. In many instances, migrant workers are experiencing the worst employment, job security, and housing conditions. Many migrants do not have a social support network and must locate both employment and housing on their own. Resident farmworkers, on the other hand, often have support networks in place and are more likely to gain access to off-farm employment, such as in food packing or transportation.8 Table 2-32 provides 2020 census data for farmworkers by jurisdiction in the county. According to the 2020 census, there are 28,627 people employed as farmworkers in the county. Most of the farmworker population is distributed throughout the unincorporated county, making up 54.3 percent of the total farmworker population. Porterville has the second largest population of farmworkers at 11.9 percent.

Table 2-32 Farmworker Population
Jurisdiction Farmworkers Percent of Total Farmworkers
Dinuba 2,022 7.1%
Exeter 285 1.0%
Farmersville 730 2.6%
Lindsay 1,052 3.7%
Porterville 3,419 11.9%
Tulare 2,673 9.3%
Visalia 2,481 8.7%
Woodlake 425 1.5%
Unincorporated County 15,540 54.3%
Total Tulare County 28,627 100%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table C24050. 7 National Center for Farmworker Health. 2021. Monterey, Kern, and Tulare Cali Rapid Assessment – Survey Report. https://www.ncfh.org/uploads/3/8/6/8/38685499/monterey_kern_tulare_cali_rapid_assessment_-_survey_report_2021.pdf 8 Housing Assistance Council. Farmworker Case Study – Kern County, California. https://ruralhome.org/wpcontent/uploads/storage/documents/farmcase.pdf

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-35
Table 2-33 provides USDA Census of Agriculture data for farmworkers by population over time. While the number of hired farmworkers increased between 2007 and 2012, the most recent 2017 census observes a decrease in the number of farmworkers by 8.0 percent from 25,247 to 23,233 workers. The ongoing transition from agriculture-based industries to metropolitan-oriented employment in the larger jurisdictions, including Visalia, Tulare, and Porterville, is a key factor in the decrease in the population of farmworkers, as evidenced by the decrease in farms with hired labor during the same period from 2,448 to 2,160.

Table 2-33 Farmworker Population Overtime (Tulare County) Type of Farm Labor 2007 2012
Percent Change
'07 - '12 2017
Percent Change
'12 - '17
Hired farm labor (farms) 2,103 2,448 16.4% 2,160 -11.8% Hired farm labor (workers) 24,978 25,247 1.1% 23,233 -8.0% Workers by days worked – 150 days or more 12,549 11,745 -6.4% 11,017 -6.2% Workers by days worked – less than 150 days 12,429 13,502 8.6% 12,216 -9.5% Migrant farm labor on farms with hired labor 350 180 -48.6% 146 -18.9% Migrant farm labor on farms reporting only
contract labor
184 65 -64.7% 60 -7.7%
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Census of Agriculture, https://www.nass.usda.gov/AgCensus/ accessed June 2023.

Resources for Farmworkers
The Housing Authority of Tulare County offers a farm labor housing program that provides housing to very low, low, and moderate-income families with two to nine members who have current farm labor income. Under this program the Housing Authority rents over 400 units to non-migratory farm workers for very low amounts and offers rental assistance when needed. 9 Housing is provided in Visalia, Poplar, Tulare, Terra Bella, and Woodville. To be accepted, the head of household must be a U.S. citizen or legal resident and must meet a minimum requirement for income from farm labor, or for days worked in farm labor during the past year.

Table 2-34 identifies agencies providing services benefitting farmworkers. United Way of Tulare County’s program, 211 Tulare County, connects members of the community with a broad range of additional resources, services, and opportunities including resources for large households including resources for farmworkers.

Table 2-34 Resources for Farmworkers
Organization Phone Address Description
Proteus Inc. 599. 781-1852 54 N. Main St. #10,
Porterville, CA
Education, workplace training, job placement, and other support services to farm working families and diverse
program participants to empower them to achieve selfsufficiency Housing
Authority of
Tulare County
559. 781-6873 290 N. 4th St.,
Porterville, CA
Provides affordable housing opportunities for lower-income households and farmworkers
9 Housing Authority of Tulare County, https://www.hatc.net/farm-labor.php?nbl=RP accessed June 2023.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-36
Organization Phone Address Description
California
Farmworker
Foundation (CFF)
661.778.0015 1120 Kensington
Street, Delano, CA
Works to offer and create opportunities that would enable Farmworkers that reside in California to develop personal and professional skills through five areas of service: Education, Health & Wellness, Workforce Development, Immigration
Services, and Community Engagement.

United Way of
Tulare County
559.685.1766 1601 E. Prosperity
Avenue, Tulare, CA
Offers $600 cash cards for eligible farm and food workers in California
Source: Proteus Inc. https://www.proteusinc.org/ accessed June 2023.

Housing Authority of Tulare County, https://www.hatc.net/ accessed March 2023.

California Farmworker Foundation, https://californiafarmworkers.org/ accessed June 2023.

United Way of Tulare County, https://www.unitedwaytc.org/ accessed June 2023.

The Tulare County Housing Authority operates six farmworker housing developments providing a total of 418 apartments and townhouses. These farmworker housing units are concentrated in Visalia, providing 206 units, and Porterville with 178 units. Below is an inventory of farmworker housing found throughout Tulare County:
 La Puente. Located in Visalia on North Bridge Street. Provides 15 two- and three-bedroom units.  Linnell Farm Labor Center. Located in Visalia on North Mariposa Avenue near Farmersville. Provides 191 two-, three-, and four-bedroom apartments.
 Poplar Grove Apartments. Located in Poplar along Avenue 145. Provides 50 two-, three-, and fourbedroom units.  Sonora Apartments. Located Tulare on South O Street. Provides 52 townhouses and single-story units.
 Terra Bella Farm Labor Center. Located in Terra Bella along Road 328. Provides 14 two- and threebedroom units.  Villa Siena Apartments. Located at 200 North E Street in Porterville. Provides 70 units one-, two-, and three-bedroom units.
 Woodville Farm Labor Center. Located in Porterville along Road 192. Provides 178 two-, three-, and four-bedroom units.

2.9.7 Persons Experiencing Homelessness
Most families become homeless because they are unable to afford housing in a particular community.

Nationwide, about half of those experiencing homelessness over the course of a year are single adults.

Most enter and exit the system quickly. The remainder live in the homeless assistance system, or in a combination of shelters, hospitals, the streets, jails, and prisons. There are also single homeless people who are not adults, including runaway and “throwaway” youth (children whose parents will not allow them to live at home).

There are various reasons that contribute to one becoming homeless. These may be any combination of factors such as loss of employment, inability to find a job, lack of marketable work skills, or high housing costs. For some the loss of housing is due to chronic health problems, physical disabilities, mental health disabilities, or drug and alcohol addictions, and an inability to access support services and long-term care may result in homelessness. Although each category has different needs, the most urgent need is for emergency shelter and case management (i.e., help with accessing needed services). Emergency shelters have minimal supportive services for homeless persons and are limited to occupancy of six

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-37
months or less. No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay.

For many, supportive housing, transitional housing, long-term rental assistance, and/or greater availability of low-income rental units are also needed. Supportive housing has no limit on length of stay and is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist residents in retaining housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community.

Transitional housing is usually in buildings configured as rental housing developments, but operated with State programs that require the unit to be cycled to other eligible program recipients after some pre-determined amount of time. Transitional housing programs provide extended shelter and supportive services for homeless individuals and/or families with the goal of helping them live independently and transition into permanent housing. Some programs require that the individual/family be transitioning from a short-term emergency shelter. Transitional housing may be configured for specialized groups within the homeless population such as people with substance abuse problems, the mentally ill, domestic violence victims, veterans, or people with HIV/AIDS. In many cases transitional housing programs will provide services for up to two years or more. The supportive services may be provided directly by the organization managing the housing or by other public or private agencies in a coordinated effort with the housing provider.

The Kings and Tulare counties have formed a regional Continuum of Care (CoC), a community-based organization that provides information on homeless services and data on the region’s homeless population. Figure 2-2 shows total households experiencing homelessness by living situation between 2005 to 2022. As shown, 2005 had the highest reported number of households (3,793) within the Continuum of Care (CoC), the majority of which were unsheltered. Data for 2022 indicates that 1,082 households were experiencing homelessness, including 773 that were reported as unsheltered.

Figure 2-2 Homelessness by Type Over Time, Households, Kings/Tulare County CoC Source: U.S. HUD, CoC Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2005, 2010, 2015, 2020, 2022).

The Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance (KTHA) conducted a Point in Time (PIT) count on the evening of January 22, 2023. Volunteers from local jurisdictions, law enforcement, the faith-based community, nonprofit partners, and community stakeholders conducted brief surveys with people who meet the HUD

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-38
definition of homeless. Volunteers canvassed locations where people experiencing homelessness tend to congregate including encampments, libraries, and food distribution sites. The PIT Report provides a snapshot of the people experiencing homelessness in Kings and Tulare Counties in 2023 and provides data specific to areas within the cities of Porterville, Tulare, and Visalia, and the county of Tulare as a whole.10
Among those counted, there were a total of 1,053 people experiencing homelessness. Approximately 97 percent of this population lives in either Porterville, Tulare, or Visalia, while the remaining three percent (36 residents) live throughout all other jurisdictions, Table 2-35 identifies those counted in 2023.

Table 2-35 Homelessness by Type (2023)
Jurisdiction Emergency Shelter Transitional Housing Unsheltered Total Porterville 56 16 227 299
Tulare 21 36 227 284
Visalia 83 57 294 434
Balance of County 5 0 31 36
Sources:

Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance, 2023 Point in Time Report, July 7, 2023.

U.S. HUD, CoC Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2020).

The Kings/Tulare CoC data also considers ethnicity. Among those counted, 45 percent identify as Hispanic/Latino (of any race).

The 2023 PIT Report identified 1,053 people experiencing homelessness in the county, which was a 14 percent increase over 2022 and a 91 percent increase over 2012. Of those counted, 779 were unsheltered, 165 slept in an emergency shelter and 109 in transitional housing. Additionally, 430 reported having a disability and 58 persons were unaccompanied youth. The vast majority of those counted identified as white (70 percent). Data for ethnicity shows that 49 percent identified as Hispanic/Latino (of any race).

Resources for Persons Experiencing Homelessness
KTHA is a broad-based coalition of homeless housing and service providers, advocates, government representatives and consumers working together to shape regional planning and decision making.

KHTA provides a coordinated entry system, Every Door Open. The system is based on national best practices and is consistent with federal guidelines, which ensure that vulnerable populations receive housing resources. Through a partnership with service and housing providers, Every Door Open is structured to deliver a consistent level of services and housing to those that are at-risk of homelessness or experiencing homelessness in Kings/Tulare counties. Every Door Open coordinates local investment towards preventing and reducing homelessness.

Every Door Open directs households who are at risk of becoming homeless or are currently experiencing homelessness, to seek assistance through a Housing Navigator, partner agency, or through 2-1-1.

Households are evaluated through the Vulnerability Index Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (VI-SPDAT). Assistance is prioritized for households who have been literally homeless for long periods of time and have high service needs.11 Table 2-36 identifies additional resources for residents experiencing or at risk of homelessness. United Way of Tulare County’s program, 211 Tulare County, also connects 10 Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance, 2022 Point in Time Report, June 1, 2022. 11 Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance, Coordinated Entry System, https://www.kthomelessalliance.org/coordinatedentry accessed June 2023.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-39
members of the community with a broad range of additional resources, services, and opportunities including resources for large households including resources for people experiencing homelessness.

Table 2-36 Resources for Persons Experiencing Homelessness Organization Phone Address
Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance 559.738-8733 1900 N Dinuba Blvd Ste G, Visalia, CA 93291 Women’s Center of Hope 559.734.7921 324 N East 1st Avenue Visalia, CA 93291 Men's Shelter 559.740.4178 322 NE 1st Avenue, Visalia, CA 93291 Open Gate Ministries 559.591.1241 511 North K St Dinuba, CA 93618 United Way of Tulare County 559.685.1766 1601 E Prosperity Avenue, Tulare, CA Porterville Navigation Center 599.521.0619 140 South C Street, Porterville, CA 93257 Central California Family Crisis Center 599.781.7462 211 N Main St, Porterville, CA 93257 Source: Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance (KTHA), https://www.kthomelessalliance.org accessed March 2023.

There are five emergency shelter providers throughout Tulare County offering short-term housing and basic amenities to those in need. There are currently 196 emergency shelter units, and an additional 200 beds planned in the city of Tulare in summer 2024, which will bring the total to 396 beds. These beds will provide shelter for approximately 37 percent of all people experiencing homelessness in the county based on the number provided in the 2023 PIT count. Below is an inventory of emergency shelter facilities found throughout Tulare County:
 Visalia Rescue Mission – Men’s Shelter. Located on NE First Avenue in Visalia. Provides 50 beds to men 18 years and older for up to 90 days.
 Visalia Rescue Mission – Shelter of Hope. Located on N Burke Avenue in Visalia. Provides 40 beds to women and children for up to 90 days. The shelter is available to girls 17 years of age and younger and boys 12 years of age and younger.
 The PAAR Center. While not a homeless specific resource, the PAAR Center, with its main office on W. Belleview Avenue in Porterville, provides 57 beds to individuals recovering from substance abuse. The PAAR Center welcomes all guests in need of shelter and provides a bed for up to 90 days and basic amenities including showers.
 Open Gate Ministries. Located on N K Street in Dinuba. Provides 34 beds for anyone in need.  Tulare Cares Temporary Encampment. Located on E Walnut Avenue in Tulare. Temporary emergency encampment currently active and providing tents for up to 178 guests.  Porterville Navigation Center. Located on South C Street in Porterville. Provides 15 low-barrier emergency shelter beds and fifteen bridge housing beds with wrap-around services, including daily meals, case services to help individuals find permanent housing, income, healthcare, and stability.

Provides day services, showers, laundry, breakfast, lunch, and case management services.  Hillman Center Project. Planned homeless shelter in the city of Tulare. Located at the Hillman Health Campus, near E O’Neal Avenue and S O Street. Will provide approximately 200 beds, 75 percent of which will be allocated for residents of the city of Tulare and the remaining beds will be allocated for residents throughout the county. Construction will begin in summer 2024 and operation will commence in 2025.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-40

2.10 Housing Stock Characteristics
A community’s housing stock is defined as the collection of all housing units located within the jurisdiction. The characteristics of the housing stock, including growth, type, age, condition, tenure, vacancy rates, housing costs, and affordability are important in determining the housing needs for the community. The following sections detail the housing stock characteristics of Tulare County to identify how well the current housing stock meets the needs of current and future residents.

2.11 Housing Growth
Table 2-37 indicates the growth in the housing stock by providing the total number of units overtime for each Tulare County Jurisdiction. Dinuba, Lindsay, and Porterville have the greatest percent change in total units from 2010 to 2020 indicating the fastest growing housing stocks in the past decade. Exeter had the lowest housing stock growth from 2010 to 2020 with the addition of 20 new units over the 10- year period.

Table 2-37 Total Housing Units Over Time (1980 to 2020) Jurisdiction 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Dinuba 3,182 3,836 4,670 5,868 6,552
Percent 20.6% 21.7% 25.7% 11.7%
Exeter 2,060 2,651 3,168 3,600 3,620
Percent 28.7% 19.5% 13.6% 0.6%
Farmersville 1,640 1,732 2,269 2,726 2,921
Percent 5.6% 31.0% 20.1% 7.2%
Lindsay 2,344 2,678 2,865 3,193 3,979
Percent 14.3% 7.0% 11.5% 24.6%
Porterville 6,605 10,073 12,691 16,734 18,654
Percent 52.5% 26.0% 31.9% 11.5%
Tulare 7,774 11,316 14,253 18,863 19,526
Percent 45.6% 26.0% 32.3% 3.5%
Visalia 18,190 27,154 32,654 44,205 46,139
Percent 49.3% 20.3% 35.4% 4.4%
Woodlake 1,279 1,585 1,874 2,067 2,285
Percent 23.9% 18.2% 10.3% 10.6%
Unincorporated County 37,578 43,988 45,195 44,440 46,403 Percent 17.1% 2.7% -1.7% 4.4%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1980(STF1:T65), 1990(STF1:H1), 2000(SF1:H1); ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B2001.

2.12 Housing Type and Tenure
Table 2-38 identifies the total housing units by type across each Tulare County jurisdiction. Most of the housing stock across Tulare County are single-family detached homes, making up 75.0 percent of the county’s total housing units. This percentage is notably higher than the statewide average of 57.7 percent. The second most common unit type are mobile homes, with 9,096 units or 6.1 percent of the total housing stock. The third most common unit type are 3- or 4-unit dwellings with 7,936 units or 5.3 percent of the total housing stock.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-41 Table 2-38 Total Housing Units by Type Jurisdiction Total
1,
Detached
1,
Attached 2 3 or 4 5 to 9 10 to 19 20 to 49 50 or more
Mobile
Home
Boat, RV,
Van, etc.

Tulare County 150,079 112,528 4,416 3,704 7,936 4,077 2,262 2,362 3,535 9,096 163 Percent 75.0% 2.9% 2.5% 5.3% 2.7% 1.5% 1.6% 2.4% 6.1% 0.1% Dinuba 6,552 4,571 152 200 367 589 354 54 80 180 5
Percent 69.8% 2.3% 3.1% 5.6% 9.0% 5.4% 0.8% 1.2% 2.8% 0.1% Exeter 3,620 2,887 156 88 170 109 30 44 35 101 -
Percent 79.8% 4.3% 2.4% 4.7% 3.0% 0.8% 1.2% 1.0% 2.8% 0.0% Farmersville 2,921 2,283 74 52 151 92 129 10 22 108 -
Percent 78.2% 2.5% 1.8% 5.2% 3.2% 4.4% 0.3% 0.8% 3.7% 0.0% Lindsay 3,979 2,845 53 22 183 107 176 208 261 124 -
Percent 71.5% 1.3% 0.6% 4.6% 2.7% 4.4% 5.2% 6.6% 3.1% 0.0% Porterville 18,654 12,744 341 742 1,038 625 504 603 1,067 969 21 Percent 68.3% 1.8% 4.0% 5.6% 3.4% 2.7% 3.2% 5.7% 5.2% 0.1% Tulare 19,526 15,103 662 541 984 653 285 267 499 532 -
Percent 77.4% 3.4% 2.8% 5.0% 3.3% 1.5% 1.4% 2.6% 2.7% 0.0% Visalia 46,139 34,316 1,631 1,535 3,659 1,295 521 858 1,162 1,162 - Percent 74.4% 3.5% 3.3% 7.9% 2.8% 1.1% 1.9% 2.5% 2.5% 0.0% Woodlake 2,285 1,632 93 119 216 53 55 15 67 35 -
Percent 71.4% 4.1% 5.2% 9.5% 2.3% 2.4% 0.7% 2.9% 1.5% 0.0% Unincorporated County
46,403 36,147 1,254 405 1,168 554 208 303 342 5,885 137 Percent 77.9% 2.7% 0.9% 2.5% 1.2% 0.5% 0.7% 0.7% 12.7% 0.3% California 14,210,945 8,206,621 1,009,488 339,846 773,994 840,296 721,132 705,450 1,083,247 515,666 15,205 Percent 57.7% 7.1% 2.4% 5.4% 5.9% 5.1% 5.0% 7.6% 3.6% 0.1% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table C24050.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-42
Table 2-39 indicates housing units by tenure countywide. There are more owner-occupied units than renter units in each jurisdiction. Exeter, Visalia, and Farmersville have the highest percentages of units that are owner-occupied. Lindsay, Porterville, and Woodlake have the largest percentage of units that are renter-occupied.

Table 2-39 Housing Units by Tenure
Jurisdiction Total
OwnerOccupied
Percent
OwnerOccupied RenterOccupied
Percent
RenterOccupied
Tulare County 139,044 79,353 57.1% 59,691 42.9%
Dinuba 6,354 3,375 53.1% 2,979 46.9%
Exeter 3,295 2,079 63.1% 1,216 36.9%
Farmersville 2,862 1,888 66.0% 974 34.0%
Lindsay 3,866 1,999 51.7% 1,867 48.3%
Porterville 17,649 8,900 50.4% 8,749 49.6%
Tulare 18,381 10,512 57.2% 7,869 42.8%
Visalia 43,867 25,950 59.2% 17,917 40.8%
Woodlake 2,184 1,122 51.4% 1,062 48.6%
Unincorporated County 40,586 23,528 58.0% 17,058 42.0%
California 13,103,114 7,241,318 55.3% 5,861,796 44.7%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25042.

2.13 Vacancy Rate
The vacancy rate indicates the match between the demand for and supply of housing. Vacancy rates of

5.0 percent to 6.0 percent for rental housing and 1.5 percent to 2.0 percent for ownership housing are generally considered normal. A higher vacancy rate may indicate an excess supply of units, a softer market, and result in lower housing prices. A lower vacancy rate may indicate a shortage of housing and high competition for available housing, which generally leads to higher housing prices and reduced affordability. Table 2-40 provides data on vacancy status by type for the total vacant units across all county jurisdictions. Units for rent and other vacant units are the most common types of total vacant units. The unincorporated county has the most vacant units, and Woodlake and Dinuba have the highest percentage of vacant units that are available for rent.

Table 2-40 Vacancy Status by Type for Total Vacant Units Jurisdiction Total For Rent
Rented,
not
Occupied
For
Sale
Only
Sold, not
Occupied
For Seasonal,
Recreational, or
Occasional Use
For
Migrant
Workers
Other
Vacant
Tulare County 11,035 1,542 449 901 398 3,004 39 4,702
Percent 14.0% 4.1% 8.2% 3.6% 27.2% 0.4% 42.6%
Dinuba 198 91 - 35 - 11 - 61
Percent 46.0% 0.0% 17.7% 0.0% 5.6% 0.0% 30.8%
Exeter 325 - 101 12 28 - - 184
Percent 0.0% 31.1% 3.7% 8.6% 0.0% 0.0% 56.6%

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-43
Jurisdiction Total For Rent
Rented,
not
Occupied
For
Sale
Only
Sold, not
Occupied
For Seasonal,
Recreational, or
Occasional Use
For
Migrant
Workers
Other
Vacant
Farmersville 59 - - 14 - - - 45
Percent 0.0% 0.0% 23.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 76.3%
Lindsay 113 44 - - 23 - - 46
Percent 38.9% 0.0% 0.0% 20.4% 0.0% 0.0% 40.7%
Porterville 1,005 231 - 93 54 60 - 567
Percent 23.0% 0.0% 9.3% 5.4% 6.0% 0.0% 56.4%
Tulare 1,145 163 180 261 26 - - 515
Percent 14.2% 15.7% 22.8% 2.3% 0.0% 0.0% 45.0%
Visalia 2,272 758 65 194 65 123 - 1,067
Percent 33.4% 2.9% 8.5% 2.9% 5.4% 0.0% 47.0%
Woodlake 101 50 - 20 - - - 31
Percent 49.5% 0.0% 19.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 30.7%
Unincorporated
County
5,817 205 103 272 202 2,810 39 2,186
Percent 3.5% 1.8% 4.7% 3.5% 48.3% 0.0% 37.6%
California 1,107,831 227,993 54,898 77,702 53,437 378,023 3,326 312,452 Percent 20.6% 5.0% 7.0% 4.8% 34.1% 0.3% 28.2%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25004.

2.14 Housing Unit Size
Table 2-41 provides housing unit size data for all county jurisdictions. Three-bedroom units are the most common type across the county, followed by two-bedroom and one- bedroom units which mirrors the statewide housing unit size trend; however, there is a larger stock of three-bedroom units countywide (48.3 percent) than in the state (33.7 percent). Except for Farmersville and Lindsay, all jurisdictions in the county have a smaller percentage of housing units that are studio and one-bedroom units than the statewide average. All county jurisdictions have a smaller percentage of five-bedroom units than the statewide average. Conversely, most county jurisdictions have a higher percentage of housing units that are three- and four-bedroom units than the statewide average.

2.15 Age and Condition of Housing Stock
Housing age can be an indicator of the need for housing rehabilitation. Generally, housing older than 30 years (i.e., built before 1990), while still needing rehabilitation, will not require rehabilitation as substantial as what would be required for housing units older than 50 years old (i.e., built before 1970).

Housing units older than 50 years are more likely to require complete rehabilitation of housing systems such as roofing, plumbing, and electrical. Table 2-42 provides data on total occupied housing units by year built. More than 22,770 units were constructed in the county between 2000 and 2009, but production was reduced to 9,725 in the following decade.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element 2-44Table 2-41 Housing Unit Size Jurisdiction Total Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom 5 of More Bedroom Tulare County 139,044 2,322 7,462 33,867 67,094 25,533 2,766 Percent 1.7% 5.4% 24.4% 48.3% 18.4% 2.0%
Dinuba 6,354 122 277 1,399 3,129 1,387 40
Percent 1.9% 4.4% 22.0% 49.2% 21.8% 0.6%
Exeter 3,295 - 177 931 1,459 668 60
Percent 0.0% 5.4% 28.3% 44.3% 20.3% 1.8%
Farmersville 2,862 138 176 483 1,410 650 5
Percent 4.8% 6.2% 16.9% 49.3% 22.7% 0.2%
Lindsay 3,866 35 540 1,265 1,378 576 72
Percent 0.9% 14.0% 32.7% 35.6% 14.9% 1.9%
Porterville 17,649 553 1,169 4,707 8,528 2,506 186
Percent 3.1% 6.6% 26.7% 48.3% 14.2% 1.1%
Tulare 18,381 271 692 3,974 9,677 3,368 399
Percent 1.5% 3.8% 21.6% 52.7% 18.3% 2.2%
Visalia 43,867 750 2,329 10,016 20,671 8,900 1,201
Percent 1.7% 5.3% 22.8% 47.1% 20.3% 2.7%
Woodlake 2,184 11 114 603 1,126 303 27
Percent 0.5% 5.2% 27.6% 51.6% 13.9% 1.2%
Unincorporated County 40,586 442 1,988 10,489 19,716 7,175 776 Percent 1.1% 4.9% 25.8% 48.6% 17.7% 1.9%
California 13,103,114 547,466 1,686,731 3,527,970 4,418,085 2,336,619 586,243 Percent 4.2% 12.8% 26.9% 33.7% 17.8% 4.4% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25042.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-45 Table 2-42 Total Occupied Housing Units by Year Built Jurisdiction Total
2014 or
later
2010 to
2013
2000 to
2009
1990 to
1999
1980 to
1989
1970 to
1979
1960 to
1969
1950 to
1959
1940 to
1949
1939 or
earlier
Tulare County 139,044 5,070 4,655 22,770 20,677 20,078 25,486 13,063 12,537 7,205 7,503 Percent 3.6% 3.3% 16.4% 14.9% 14.4% 18.3% 9.4% 9.0% 5.2% 5.4% Dinuba 6,354 316 454 884 885 538 1,289 469 643 470 406
Percent 5.0% 7.1% 13.9% 13.9% 8.5% 20.3% 7.4% 10.1% 7.4% 6.4% Exeter 3,295 27 - 696 472 489 426 286 288 144 467
Percent 0.8% - 21.1% 14.3% 14.8% 12.9% 8.7% 8.7% 4.4% 14.2% Farmersville 2,862 89 97 501 377 265 745 248 354 127 59 Percent 3.1% 3.4% 17.5% 13.2% 9.3% 26.0% 8.7% 12.4% 4.4% 2.1% Lindsay 3,866 95 315 452 282 585 660 146 439 185 707
Percent 2.5% 8.1% 11.7% 7.3% 15.1% 17.1% 3.8% 11.4% 4.8% 18.3% Porterville 17,649 339 394 2,401 3,246 2,630 3,009 1,793 2,064 661 1,112 Percent 1.9% 2.2% 13.6% 18.4% 14.9% 17.0% 10.2% 11.7% 3.7% 6.3% Tulare 18,381 722 814 3,691 3,289 2,583 2,749 1,632 1,125 785 991 Percent 3.9% 4.4% 20.1% 17.9% 14.1% 15.0% 8.9% 6.1% 4.3% 5.4% Visalia 43,867 2,298 1,590 8,985 5,993 7,065 8,689 3,453 3,054 1,609 1,131 Percent 5.2% 3.6% 20.5% 13.7% 16.1% 19.8% 7.9% 7.0% 3.7% 2.6% Woodlake 2,184 143 99 467 274 246 354 213 129 163 96
Percent 6.5% 4.5% 21.4% 12.5% 11.3% 16.2% 9.8% 5.9% 7.5% 4.4% Unincorporated County
40,586 1,041 892 4,693 5,859 5,677 7,565 4,823 4,441 3,061 2,534 Percent 2.6% 2.2% 11.6% 14.4% 14.0% 18.6% 11.9% 10.9% 7.5% 6.2% California 13,103,114 294,667 234,646 1,432,955 1,448,367 1,967,306 2,290,081 1,740,922 1,767,353 763,029 1,163,788 Percent 2.2% 1.8% 10.9% 11.1% 15.0% 17.5% 13.3% 13.5% 5.8% 8.9% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25036.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-46
Table 2-43 provides information on substandard housing units across all county jurisdictions. There is a higher percentage of units lacking complete kitchen facilities than units lacking complete plumbing facilities across all jurisdictions except for Farmersville and Woodlake. Porterville, Woodlake and Visalia have the largest percentage of substandard housing, while Lindsay, Tulare, and Woodlake have the lowest percentage of substandard housing units.

Table 2-43 Substandard Housing Units
Jurisdiction Total
Lacking Complete Plumbing
Facilities
Lacking Complete Kitchen
Facilities
Tulare County 139,044 481 971
Percent 0.4% 0.7%
Dinuba 6,354 15 27
Percent 0.2% 0.4%
Exeter 3,295 - 20
Percent 0.0% 0.6%
Farmersville 2,862 30 12
Percent 1.1% 0.4%
Lindsay 3,866 - -
Percent 0.0% 0.0%
Porterville 17,649 69 146
Percent 0.4% 0.8%
Tulare 18,381 17 78
Percent 0.1% 0.4%
Visalia 43,867 235 499
Percent 0.5% 1.1%
Woodlake 2,184 10 -
Percent 0.5% 0.0%
Unincorporated County 40,586 105 189
Percent 0.3% 0.5%
California 13,103,114 54,342 151,660
Percent 0.4% 1.2%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25049.

2.16 Housing Costs

2.16.1 Median Home Sale Price
Table 2-44 provides information on the median housing value across all county jurisdictions from 1980 to 2020. Prices rose steadily across the county from 1980 to 2000, increasing between 20 and 50 percent. From 2000 to 2010, there were large value increases between 68 and 124 percent. Increases in value have slowed since 2010, with generally five to 17 percent growth between 2010 and 2020 staying.

Median home value decreased in Porterville during this time, while Woodlake had a percent change of

41.7 percent.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-47
Table 2-44 Median Housing Value Over Time (1980 to 2020) Jurisdiction 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Dinuba 46,400 67,200 95,700 196,400 210,100
Percent 44.8% 42.4% 105.2% 7.0%
Exeter 44,300 67,900 94,800 211,400 224,000
Percent 53.3% 39.6% 123.0% 6.0%
Farmersville 36,000 49,100 77,600 151,300 173,800
Percent 36.4% 58.0% 95.0% 14.9%
Lindsay 38,600 56,300 78,000 162,100 189,700
Percent 45.9% 38.5% 107.8% 17.0%
Porterville 52,300 70,800 92,200 183,200 182,100
Percent 35.4% 30.2% 98.7% -0.6%
Tulare 45,300 70,100 92,900 208,500 226,500
Percent 54.8% 32.5% 124.4% 8.6%
Visalia 64,000 90,100 112,200 231,900 254,600
Percent 40.8% 24.5% 106.7% 9.8%
Woodlake 35,900 57,000 81,300 136,600 193,500
Percent 58.8% 42.6% 68.0% 41.7%
Unincorporated County 48,900 73,400 96,500 211,200 223,600 Percent 50.1% 31.5% 118.9% 5.9%
Note: Data are not inflation-adjusted to current 2022 dollars.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1980(ORG STF1), 1990(STF3), 2000(SF3); ACS 06-10, 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25077.

2.17 Distribution of Owner-Occupied Units
Due to historical practices of segregation, redlining, displacement, and other discriminatory practices, accumulating wealth through homeownership has been difficult for non-white households. Table 2-45 provides data on the number of owner-occupied housing units by race across all county jurisdictions. In terms of race, households with occupants who identified as two or more races, “some other race,” and white have the highest percentage of housing unit ownership in the county, ranging from 55.7 to 82.2 percent of households. Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander and Black/African American households have the lowest rate of housing ownership in Tulare County. Asian American households in the county have a homeownership rate that is far lower than the statewide average. The homeownership rate in the county for households with occupants who identify as Hispanic/Latino (of any race) is double the statewide average.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element 2-48Table 2-45 Owner Occupied Units by Race Jurisdiction White
Black/African
American
American Indian
and Alaska Native
Asian
American
Native Hawaiian
and Other
Pacific Islander
Some Other
Race
Two or More
Races
Hispanic/Latino of
any Race
Tulare County 58,375 710 784 2,682 45 10,916 5,841 38,702 Percent 73.6% 0.9% 1.0% 3.4% 0.1% 13.8% 7.4% 48.8%
Dinuba 2,281 8 45 68 4 561 408 2,665
Percent 67.6% 0.2% 1.3% 2.0% 0.1% 16.6% 12.1% 79.0%
Exeter 1,708 - 38 24 - 246 63 506
Percent 82.2% - 1.8% 1.2% - 11.8% 3.0% 24.3%
Farmersville 1,051 9 25 10 4 522 267 1,647
Percent 55.7% 0.5% 1.3% 0.5% 0.2% 27.6% 14.1% 87.2%
Lindsay 1,421 - - 21 - 255 302 1,593
Percent 71.1% - - 1.1% - 12.8% 15.1% 79.7%
Porterville 6,106 56 75 578 - 1,286 799 4,592
Percent 68.6% 0.6% 0.8% 6.5% - 14.4% 9.0% 51.6%
Tulare 7,882 190 73 255 6 1,042 1,064 5,408
Percent 75.0% 1.8% 0.7% 2.4% 0.1% 9.9% 10.1% 51.4%
Visalia 19,441 357 248 958 - 3,328 1,618 10,071
Percent 74.9% 1.4% 1.0% 3.7% - 12.8% 6.2% 38.8%
Woodlake 664 - 14 31 - 308 105 987
Percent 59.2% - 1.2% 2.8% - 27.5% 9.4% 88.0%
Unincorporated County 17,821 90 266 737 31 3,368 1,215 11,233 Percent 75.7% 0.4% 1.1% 3.1% 0.1% 14.3% 5.2% 47.7%
California 4,831,347 286,043 48,100 1,111,582 18,182 576,852 369,212 1,741,159 Percent 66.7% 4.0% 0.7% 15.4% 0.3% 8.0% 5.1% 24.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25003.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-49

2.18 Housing Rents
The U.S. Census Bureau defines contract rent as the monthly rent agreed upon regardless of any furnishings, utilities, or services that may be included. The median contract rent in the county is $833 per month (Figure 2-3). Visalia has the highest median contract rent of $965, followed by Tulare with a median of $919. Farmersville and Woodlake have the lowest median contract rent with a median of $671 and $618, respectively.

Figure 2-3 Median Contract Rent
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 17-21 (5-year Estimates), Table B25058.

Table 2-46 below provides an overview of median rent for rental housing by number of bedrooms. The median rent data provided by Zumper shows the estimated rent for June 2022 in Tulare County. Zumper is an online tool that compiles rent price data to identify average rent prices at the local, regional, and national levels. Four-bedroom units in Woodlake have a higher median rent than in comparable cities.

One- or two-bedroom units have a higher median rent in Visalia and Tulare than other areas of the county.

Table 2-46 Median Rent by Number of Bedrooms
Jurisdiction Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom Dinuba N/A $795 $1,000 $1,900 $2,200
Exeter N/A $695 $950 $1,695 $1,495
Farmersville N/A N/A N/A $850 N/A
Lindsay N/A $695 $850 $2,100 N/A
Porterville $500 $628 $950 $1,800 $2,450
City of Tulare $660 $900 $1,300 $1,795 $2,095
Visalia $1,300 $1,250 $1,300 $1,900 $2,448
Woodlake N/A $750 N/A N/A $3,447
Unincorporated County N/A $795 $1,000 $1,900 $2,200
Source: Zumper.com, Rental data for June 2022, accessed June 2023. $833 $790 $846
$671 $686
$794
$919 $965
$618
$-
$200.00
$400.00
$600.00
$800.00
$1,000.00
$1,200.00
Median Contract Rent

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-50

2.19 Housing Affordability
Housing affordability can be inferred by comparing the cost of renting or owning a home in the city with housing affordability for different income levels. This information indicates the number of households likely to experience displacement, overcrowding, and overpayment.

Housing affordability levels are determined by HUD, which conducts annual nationwide household income surveys to determine household eligibility for federal housing assistance. Based on survey results, State HCD determined annual income limits for monthly housing costs, including housing payments (rent or mortgage), utilities, and taxes (if housing owner). These income limits are further broken down by household size. Table 2-47 shows the maximum amount that a household can pay for housing each month without incurring a cost burden (spending more than 30 percent of income on housing costs).

Table 2-47 Housing Affordability Matrix – Tulare County (2021) Annual
Income
Limits
Affordable
Monthly
Housing Costs
Rental Utility
Allowance
(2020)
Taxes, Insurance,
Homeowners
Association Fees
Affordable
Rent
Affordable
Home Price
Extremely Low-Income (0-30% AMI)
1-Person (Studio) $17,700 $443 $181 $155 $262 $66,457
2-Person (1 BR) $20,235 $506 $202 $177 $304 $76,010
3-Person (2 BR) $22,755 $569 $227 $199 $342 $85,507
4-Person (3 BR) $25,290 $632 $263 $221 $369 $93,824
5-Person (4 BR) $32,778 $819 $298 $287 $521 $121,125
Very Low-Income (30%-50% AMI)
1-Person $29,500 $738 $181 $258 $557 $108,987
2-Person $33,725 $843 $202 $295 $641 $124,632
3-Person $37,925 $948 $227 $332 $721 $140,183
4-Person $42,150 $1,054 $263 $369 $791 $155,827
5-Person $45,525 $1,138 $298 $398 $840 $168,324
Low-Income (50%-80% AMI)
1-Person $47,200 $1,180 $181 $413 $999 $174,526
2-Person $53,960 $1,349 $202 $472 $1,147 $195,142
3-Person $60,680 $1,517 $227 $531 $1,290 $219,474
4-Person $67,440 $1,686 $263 $590 $1,423 $243,950
5-Person $72,840 $1,821 $298 $637 $1,523 $263,503
Median-Income (80%-100% AMI)
1-Person $59,000 $1,475 $181 $516 $1,294 $213,391
2-Person $67,450 $1,686 $202 $590 $1,484 $243,987
3-Person $75,850 $1,896 $227 $664 $1,669 $274,402
4-Person $84,300 $2,108 $263 $738 $1,845 $304,998
5-Person $91,050 $2,276 $298 $797 $1,978 $329,438

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-51
Annual
Income
Limits
Affordable
Monthly
Housing Costs
Rental Utility
Allowance
(2020)
Taxes, Insurance,
Homeowners
Association Fees
Affordable
Rent
Affordable
Home Price
Moderate-Income (100%-120% AMI)
1-Person $70,800 $1,770 $181 $620 $1,589 $256,116
2-Person $80,940 $2,024 $202 $708 $1,822 $292,832
3-Person $91,020 $2,276 $227 $796 $2,049 $329,330
4-Person $101,160 $2,529 $263 $885 $2,266 $366,045
5-Person $109,260 $2,732 $298 $956 $2,434 $395,374
Assumptions:

1. Income limits are the 2021 HCD limits for Tulare County.

2. Affordable housing costs are 30 percent of gross household income.

3. Utility costs are based on Tulare County Housing Authority Utility Allowance Schedule for 2022.

4. Taxes, insurance, private mortgage insurance, and homeowners association dues are calculated at 35 percent of monthly affordable cost.

5. Affordable home price assumes a 30-year fixed mortgage with a 3 percent interest rate and 10 percent down payment.

6. Taxes and insurance costs apply to owners only.

Sources: 2022 HCD Income Limits, Tulare County Housing Authority Utility Allowance Schedule, 2022.

Extremely Low-income Households
Extremely low-income households earn 30 percent or less of the county AMI. According to HCD estimates, extremely low-income households have an annual income of $17,700 or below for a oneperson household and $32,778 or below for a five-person household. Extremely low-income households cannot afford market-rate rental or ownership housing in Tulare County.

Very Low-income Households
Very low-income households earn between 31 and 50 percent of the county AMI – up to $29,500 for a one-person household and up to $45,525 for a five-person household in 2022. A very low-income household can generally afford homes offered at prices between $108,987 and $168,324, adjusting for household size. After deductions for utilities, a very low-income household can afford to pay approximately $557 to $840 in monthly rent, depending on household size. Given the cost of housing in Tulare County, very low-income households cannot afford to purchase a home or rent an adequately sized unit.

Low-income Households
Low-income households earn between 51 and 80 percent of the county AMI – up to $47,200 for a oneperson household and up to $72,840 for a five-person household in 2022. A low-income household can generally afford homes offered at prices between $174,526 and $263,503, adjusting for household size.

After deductions for utilities, a low-income household can afford to pay approximately $999 to $1,523 in monthly rent, depending on household size. Finding appropriately sized market-rate rental housing is challenging to households in this income group.

Median-Income Households
Median-income households earn between 80 and 100 percent of the county AMI – up to $59,000 for a one-person household and up to $91,050 for a five-person household in 2022. The affordable home price for a moderate-income household ranges from $213,391 to $329,438 depending on household size. After deductions for utilities, a one-person median-income household could afford to pay up to

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-52
$1,294 in rent per month and a five-person low-income household could afford to pay as much as $1,978. Finding appropriately sized market-rate rental housing is challenging to households in this income group.

Moderate-Income Households
Moderate-income households earn between 100 and 120 percent of the county AMI – up to $70,800 for a one-person household and up to $109,260 for a five-person household in 2022. The maximum affordable home price for a moderate-income household is $256,116 for a one-person household and $395,374 for a five-person family. Moderate-income households in Tulare County could afford to purchase the median priced home; however, finding an affordable adequately sized home can be a challenge for households earning incomes at the lower end of the moderate-income category. The maximum affordable rent payment for moderate-income households is between $1,589 and $2,434 per month. Appropriately sized market-rate rental housing is generally affordable to households in this income group.

2.19.1 Workforce Housing
Federal guidelines define workforce housing as housing that is affordable to households earning incomes within the range of 60 to 120 percent of the AMI (in Tulare County that range is $50,580 to $101,160). A broader definition of workforce housing is housing that is affordable to people who work in the county. A four-person household with an annual income of $84,300 could afford monthly rent of $1,845 for a three-bedroom housing unit and a home purchase price of $304,998 without being burdened by housing costs. The average monthly rental price for a three-bedroom unit is $1,720, just below the affordable rent for a four-person median income household in the county.

As noted in Table 2-5, the median annual salary for the largest number of workers located in the county (educational services, healthcare, and social assistance) is approximately $52,534. With this salary, single-earner households with two or more people would be considered a low-income household.

2.19.2 Cost Burden
Table 2-48 and Table 2-49 identify cost-burdened households by tenure overtime across each jurisdiction in the county. As shown, there has been a steady decrease in the number of owner-occupied cost-burdened households since 2010, except for slight increases in Lindsay and unincorporated county.

However, cost-burdened renter-occupied households have generally increased during the same time except for Farmersville and Woodlake.

Table 2-48 Cost Burdened Owner-Occupied Households Over Time Jurisdiction 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Dinuba 211 254 546 974 611
Percent 20.4% 115.0% 78.4% -37.3%
Exeter 76 210 322 671 431
Percent 176.3% 53.3% 108.4% -35.8%
Farmersville 121 162 418 588 502
Percent 33.9% 158.0% 40.7% -14.6%
Lindsay 90 146 399 552 603
Percent 62.2% 173.3% 38.4% 9.2%

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-53
Jurisdiction 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Porterville 416 694 1,230 2,745 1,906
Percent 66.8% 77.2% 123.2% -30.6%
Tulare 609 846 1,432 2,802 2,376
Percent 38.9% 69.3% 95.7% -15.2%
Visalia 1,169 1,947 3,249 6,587 5,398
Percent 66.6% 66.9% 102.7% -18.1%
Woodlake 61 92 179 267 204
Percent 50.8% 94.6% 49.2% -23.6%
Unincorporated County 2,130 2,553 3,926 6,076 6,221
Percent 19.9% 53.8% 54.8% 2.4%
Note: Data are not inflation-adjusted to current 2022 dollars.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1980 (ORG STF1), 1990 (STF3), 2000 (SF3); ACS 06-10, 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25077.

Table 2-49 Cost Burdened Renter-Occupied Households Over Time Jurisdiction 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Dinuba 293 563 560 914 1,277
Percent 92.2% -0.5% 63.2% 39.7%
Exeter 255 313 328 475 520
Percent 22.8% 4.8% 44.8% 9.5%
Farmersville 200 314 242 636 368
Percent 57.0% -22.9% 162.8% -42.1%
Lindsay 277 326 435 666 934
Percent 17.7% 33.4% 53.1% 40.2%
Porterville 947 1,626 2,012 2,731 4,190
Percent 71.7% 23.7% 35.7% 53.4%
Tulare 1,066 1,755 1,648 3,011 3,423
Percent 64.6% -6.1% 82.7% 13.7%
Visalia 2,465 4,153 3,950 6,365 6,262
Percent 68.5% -4.9% 61.1% -1.6%
Woodlake 132 253 227 299 394
Percent 91.7% -10.3% 31.7% 31.8%
Unincorporated County 2,519 4,001 4,018 5,569 7,200
Percent 58.8% 0.4% 38.6% 29.3%
Note: Data are not inflation-adjusted to current 2022 dollars.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1980(ORG STF1), 1990(STF3), 2000(SF3); ACS 06-10, 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25077.

2.20 Assisted Housing Units
Assisted housing units are those that are restricted for use by occupants with limited household incomes. These units are assisted under federal, state, and/or local programs, including HUD programs, State and local bond programs, former redevelopment agency (RDA) programs, density bonus, or direct assistance programs.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-54
At-Risk Housing Units
The California Housing Partnership maintains an affordable housing database to monitor changes in affordable housing and to identify units or housing developments that are at risk of converting to market-rate uses. Assisted units in the preservation data base are classified by the following risk categories:
 Low Risk: affordable housing units that are at-risk of converting to market rate in 10+ years and/or are owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer.  Moderate Risk: affordable housing units that are at-risk of converting to market rate in the next 5- 10 years that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer.  High/Very High Risk: affordable housing units that are at-risk of converting to market rate in the next 1-5 years that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer.

2.20.1 Funding Sources for Assisted Housing
HUD Section 8 Program
Under the HUD Section 8 program, The Housing Choice Voucher Program, is the federal government’s major program, administered by HATC for assisting very low-income families, the elderly and people with disabilities afford decent and safe housing. The housing choice voucher program places the choice of housing in the hands of the individual family. When the voucher holder finds a unit that it wishes to occupy and reaches an agreement with the landlord over the lease terms, the public housing authority must inspect the dwelling and determine that the rent requested is reasonable.

The public housing authority calculates the maximum amount of housing assistance allowable. The maximum housing assistance is generally the lesser of the payment standard minus 30 percent of the family's monthly adjusted income or the gross rent for the unit minus 30 percent of monthly adjusted income. The property owners are entitled to receive HUD Fair Market Rents (FMRs) for units with Section 8 contracts.

The Housing Choice Voucher Program is provided to eligible participants, on a first-come, first-served basis. When funding is not available, participants may be placed on a waiting list.

Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC)
Created in 1986 by the Federal government, the LIHTC program offers tax incentives to encourage the development of affordable housing. The LIHTC is jointly administered by the IRS and State Housing Credit Agencies (HCA) and has funded over eight billion annual tax credit units nationwide. California’s HCA is the State Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC).

California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA)
CalHFA uses approved private lenders and purchases loans that meet CalHFA standards to support very low-, low-, and moderate-income assisted units. CalHFA partners with jurisdictions, developers, and other organizations to provide a variety of resources including loan assistance programs for homebuyers and renters aimed at increasing housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income residents.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-55
Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Asset Fund
Preservation of At-Risk Units
California housing element law requires all jurisdictions to include a study of low-income housing units which may at some future time be removed from the affordable inventory by the expiration of some type of affordability restrictions. The planning period for this at-risk housing analysis extends from 2023 through 2033. Table 2-50 provides an inventory of public assisted housing in the county.

There are 6,582 affordable housing units countywide. During the 2023-2031 periodIn the next 10 years (2023-2033), 19 49 units are at very high or high risk of being converted to market rate and 127 284 units are at moderate risk of being converted to market rate. – Shasta Villa Apartments in Farmersville.

Based on conversations with the owner of Shasta Village Apartments, the owner desires to extend affordability for these units beyond 2024. The City is assisting the owner to achieve the extension.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element 2-56Table 2-50 Inventory of Public Assisted Complexes Name Address City Zip
Affordable
Units
Total
Units Active Program(s)
Estimated Affordability End Year/Date Risk Level
College Park Apartments 1850 South College Avenue Dinuba 93618 53 54 LIHTC 2052 Low Greene Street Townhomes 1600 S. Green Avenue Dinuba 93618 28 36 LIHTC 2055 Low North Park Apartments 1655 North Crawford
Avenue
Dinuba 93618 79 80 LIHTC, HCD 2058 Low
Parkside Village Apartments 1151 N. Villa Avenue Dinuba 93618 75 76 LIHTC; HUD; USDA 2059 Low North Park Apartments II 1435 North Crawford Avenue
Dinuba 93618 80 81 LIHTC, HCD 2062 Low
Euclid Village 600 N. Euclid Avenue Dinuba 93618 56 57 LIHTC; USDA 2064 Low Dinuba Senior Apartments 350 N. M Street Dinuba 93618 61 62 LIHTC; HCD 2067 Low Viscaya Gardens 1000 Rosemary Avenue Dinuba 93618 47 48 LIHTC; HCD 2067 Low El Monte West Apartments 999 West El Monte Way Dinuba 93618 39 40 LIHTC; USDA 2069 Low Grace & Laughter Apartments 1051 N. Eaton Avenue Dinuba 93618 39 40 LIHTC; HUD 2072 Low Sierra Village II 1375 N Crawford Ave Dinuba 93618 63 64 LIHTC 2075 Low Garden Estates 1400 South Green Dinuba 93618 43 44 LIHTC; USDA 2076 Low West Northway Apartments 245 W. Northway Dinuba 93618 38 38 USDA 20359** Moderate Dinuba Manor 1333 South Greene Avenue Dinuba 93221 24 24 LIHTC; HCD 2047 Low Dinuba Village 1375 N. Crawford Avenue Dinuba 93618 43 44 LIHTC; HCD 2074 Low Jacob's Square 301 Jacobs Place Exeter 93221 18 45 LIHTC; HCD 2049 Low Belmont Family Apartments 1110 West Palm Ave Exeter 93221 24 25 LIHTC 2069 Low Exeter Elderly 501 N. B Street Exeter 93221 24 24 USDA 2007* LowHighExeter Senior Villa 655 Vine Street Exeter 93221 44 44 USDA 2008* LowHighExeter Apartments 855 West Visalia Road Exeter 93221 58 58 USDA 2038 Low Shasta Villa Apartments 232 North Shasta Street Farmersville 93223 19 20 LIHTC 2024 Very High Park Creek Village 398 West Walnut Avenue Farmersville 93223 47 48 LIHTC; HCD 2058 Low Gateway Village 200 N. Stevens Avenue Farmersville 93223 47 48 LIHTC; USDA 2063 Low Gateway Village II 200 N. Steven Avenue Farmersville 93223 16 16 LIHTC 2063 Low

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-57
Name Address City Zip
Affordable
Units
Total
Units Active Program(s)
Estimated Affordability End Year/Date Risk Level
Village Grove Apartments 675 South Farmersville
Blvd.

Farmersville 93223 47 48 LIHTC; USDA 2064 Low
Palomar Court 823 Farmersville Blvd. Farmersville 93223 39 40 LIHTC, HCD, Local 2065 Low Los Arroyos II Southeast Corner of Walnut Avenue and Farmersville Boulevard Farmersville, CA 93223 Farmersville 93223 53 54 LIHTC 2075 Low
Los Arroyos I Walnut Avenue and
Farmersville Boulevard, Farmersville CA, 93223
Farmersville 93223 53 54 LIHTC 2076 Low
Lindsay Family Apartments 151 North Westwood
Avenue
Lindsay 93247 60 61 LIHTC 2059 Low
Harvard Court Apartment Homes
328 S. Harvard Ave. Lindsay 93247 80 81 LIHTC 2062 Low
Liberty Family Apartments 548 East Honolulu Street Lindsay 93247 42 43 LIHTC 2062 Low Harvard Court Apartment Homes Phase II 328 S. Harvard Avenue Lindsay 93247 40 40 LIHTC 2062 Low Lindsay Apartments 115 S. Locke Street Lindsay 93247 59 60 LIHTC; USDA 2065 Low Lindsay Senior Apartments 187 N. Westwood Ave. Lindsay 93247 72 73 LIHTC; USDA; HCD 2065 Low Sequoia Villas 780 Sequoia Avenue Lindsay 93247 18 18 LIHTC 2066 Low Delta Vista Manor 701 North Ash Avenue Lindsay 93247 39 40 LIHTC; USDA 2070 Low Lindsay Senior Villa 1127 W. Fresno Street Lindsay 93247 41 42 LIHTC; USDA 2075 Low Monte Vista Manor 901 W. Tulare Road Lindsay 93247 43 44 LIHTC; USDA 2075 Low Palm Terrace II 200 N Westwood Ave Lindsay 93618 53 54 LIHTC 2075 Low Mt. Whitney Plaza 181 East Honolulu Street Lindsay 93618 29 29 LIHTC; HCD 2051 Low Lindsay Village 700 Hermosa Street Lindsay 93618 49 50 LIHTC; HCD 2074 Low Poplar Grove 18959 Road 190 Poplar 93618 49 50 LIHTC; USDA 2057 Low Porterville Garden Apartments 1585 W. Putnam Avenue Porterville 93257 63 63 USDA 2040 Low

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element 2-58
Name Address City Zip
Affordable
Units
Total
Units Active Program(s)
Estimated Affordability End Year/Date Risk Level
Mountain View 870 N. Plano St Porterville 93257 59 60 LIHTC 2049 Low Porterville Family Apartments 93 East Date Avenue Porterville 93257 77 78 LIHTC 2057 Low Park View Village 550 West Springville Avenue
Porterville 93257 80 81 LIHTC 2058 Low
Sequoia Village at River's Edge
424 South E. Street Porterville 93257 63 64 LIHTC, HCD 2061 Low Alder Apartments 45 N. Salisbury St Porterville 93257 244 250 LIHTC; HUD; USDA 2062 Low Villa Robles Apartments 450 W. Springville Drive Porterville 93257 99 100 LIHTC 2067 Low Newcomb Court Apartments 707 N. Newcomb St Porterville 93257 79 80 LIHTC 2068 Low Nupchi Xo'oy (Mulberry Project) 648 W. Mulberry Ave Porterville 93257 39 40 LIHTC 2073 Low Carolita Apartments 1055 Pioneer Avenue Porterville 93257 67 68 LIHTC 2075 Low Finca Serena 358 South E Street Porterville 93257 78 80 LIHTC 2075 Low La Serena Apartments 290 N. 4th St Porterville 93257 65 65 HUD 2024 Low Santa Fe Plaza 250 N. 3rd St. Porterville 93257 105 105 HUD 2028* LowMode rate
St. James Place Apartments 256 North Main Street Porterville 93257 14 14 HCD 2030* LowMode rate
Villa Siena Apartments 200 North E Street Porterville 93257 69 70 LIHTC; USDA; HCD 2066 Low Tulare Gardens 498 S. Blackstone St Tulare 93274 64 64 USDA 2040 Low Cypress Cove 1501 East Cypress Avenue Tulare 93274 52 52 LIHTC 2047 Low Country Manor 955 North A Street Tulare 93274 39 40 LIHTC 2052 Low Cambridge Court Apartments 400 South Blackstone Street
Tulare 93274 60 61 LIHTC 2052 Low
Valley Oaks Apartment Homes
351 N. West Street Tulare 93274 80 81 LIHTC 2062 Low
West Trail Apartments 1350 W. San Joaquin Ave Tulare 93274 48 49 LIHTC; USDA, HCD 2065 Low

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-59
Name Address City Zip
Affordable
Units
Total
Units Active Program(s)
Estimated Affordability End Year/Date Risk Level
Valley Oaks Apartments Phase II
351 N. West Street Tulare 93274 70 72 LIHTC 2065 Low
Tule Vista 510 W. Elm Ave. Tulare 93274 56 57 LIHTC 2065 Low The Aspens 1500 Aspen Avenue Tulare 93274 46 47 LIHTC 2067 Low Westside Palm Apartments 900 W. Pleasant Avenue Tulare 93247 39 40 LIHTC; USDA 2070 Low Parkwood Manor 414 W. Meadow Drive Tulare 93247 74 75 LIHTC 2071 Low Mission Court Apartments 1150 South Morrison St Tulare 93247 64 65 LIHTC 2072 Low Santa Fe Commons I 537 N West St Tulare 93247 80 81 LIHTC 2075 Low Santa Fe Commons II 537 N. West St Tulare 93247 56 57 LIHTC 2076 Low Madson Gardens 26442 N. Highway 99 Tulare 93247 57 57 HCD 2077 Low Bardsley Gardens 1150 So. Laspina St Tulare 93247 49 49 USDA 2031 Moderate Salvation Army Tulare Silvercrest 350 N. L St Tulare 93247 59 60 HUD 2046 Low
Sonora Apartments 210 S. Sacramento Street Tulare 93247 52 52 USDA; HCD 2066 Low Westwood Manor 211 South Ash Street Unincorporated Tulare County
93219 40 40 USDA 2032 Moderate
Earlimart Senior Apartments 1094 East Washington
Avenue
Unincorporated Tulare County
93618 35 35 LIHTC; USDA 2041 Low
Pixley Apts. 735 East Terra Bella
Avenue
Unincorporated Tulare County
93618 40 40 USDA 2042 Low
Nueva Sierra Vista Apartments
20939 Guerrero Ave Unincorporated
Tulare County
93618 34 35 LIHTC; HCD 2049 Low
Villa De Guadalupe 12554 Avenue 408 Unincorporated
Tulare County
93618 59 60 LIHTC; HCD 2055 Low
Goshen Village 30490 Road 72 Unincorporated
Tulare County
93618 63 64 LIHTC; HCD 2057 Low
Rosewood Villas Apartment Homes
40606 Road 128 Unincorporated
Tulare County
93618 60 61 LIHTC 2059 Low

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element 2-60
Name Address City Zip
Affordable
Units
Total
Units Active Program(s)
Estimated Affordability End Year/Date Risk Level
Sand Creek 41020 Road 124 Unincorporated
Tulare County
93618 59 60 LIHTC; USDA; HCD 2060 Low
Mirage Vista Family Apartments
875 E. Terra Bella Avenue Unincorporated
Tulare County
93618 54 55 LIHTC 2063 Low
Tulare Portfolio (Site A) 41730 Road 128 Unincorporated Tulare County
93618 156 160 LIHTC; USDA 2065 Low
Goshen Village II 31114 Road 72 Unincorporated
Tulare County
93618 55 56 LIHTC; HCD 2065 Low
Sequoia Commons II (Formerly Goshen Village East)
31161 Florence Avenue Unincorporated
Tulare County
93618 59 60 LIHTC 2074 Low
Oakwood Apartments 15753 Avenue 327 Unincorporated
Tulare County
93618 42 42 USDA 2036 Low
Strathmore Villa Apartments 19734 Road 231 Unincorporated Tulare County
93618 42 42 LIHTC; USDA 2038 Low
Tipton Terrace c/o CBM 584 N. Thompson Rd Unincorporated Tulare County
93221 34 34 USDA 2040 Low
Sultana Acres 41692 Road 105 Unincorporated
Tulare County
93618 29 36 LIHTC; HCD 2043 Low
Vera Cruz Village c/o Awi Management
639 Road 210 Unincorporated
Tulare County
93221 49 49 USDA 2045 Low
Oakwood II Apartments 15756 Paradise Avenue Unincorporated Tulare County
93221 54 54 HCD 2047 Low
Washington Plaza 170 North Church Road Unincorporated
Tulare County
93221 43 44 LIHTC; USDA; HCD 2060 Low
Ivanhoe Family Apartments 15999 Avenue 327 Unincorporated Tulare County
93221 71 72 LIHTC; HCD 2068 Low
Sequoia Commons 31161 Florence St Unincorporated
Tulare County
93221 65 66 LIHTC; HCD 2073 Low
Visalia Garden Villas 4901 West Crenshaw Drive Visalia 93223 60 60 Local 2042 Low

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-61
Name Address City Zip
Affordable
Units
Total
Units Active Program(s)
Estimated Affordability End Year/Date Risk Level
Fairview Village 2700 N. Willis St. Visalia 93223 8 8 LIHTC; HCD 2048 Low Willowbrook I (Site A) 1819 Tipton Street Visalia 93223 10 10 LIHTC 2050 Low Kimball Court 303 W. Kimball Avenue Visalia 93223 94 95 LIHTC 2054 Low Court and Paradise Apartments (Site A) 1526 S. Court St. Visalia 93223 20 20 LIHTC 2065 Low
Visalia Village 2423 N. Highland Street Visalia 93223 35 36 LIHTC 2069 Low Town Meadows 115 W. Murray Avenue Visalia 93223 99 100 LIHTC; HUD 2072 Low The Sequoia 1400 S. Mooney Blvd Visalia 93223 45 50 HCD 2075 Low Lofts at Fort Visalia 300 E Oak Ave Visalia 93247 79 80 LIHTC 2075 Low Myrtle Avenue Senior Apartments 4316 West Myrtle Avenue Visalia 93247 65 66 LIHTC 2075 Low East Tulare MHSA 653 East Tulare Avenue Visalia 93247 22 22 CalHFA 2040 Low Visalia Senior Housing II 111 W. School Ave Visalia 93247 59 60 HUD 2042 Low Tulare Farm Labor (Sonora Apts.) 1436 N. Mariposa Avenue Visalia 93247 393 393 USDA; HCD 2045 Low Sierra Meadows 1120 East Tulare Avenue Visalia 93247 42 43 HUD 2051 Low Westport Village 3123 S Avocado St Visalia 93277 25 25 Local 2029 Low The Meadows 3900 W Tulare Ave Visalia 93277 99 99 Local 2054 Low Valencia House 248 Valencia Blvd. Woodlake 46 47 LIHTC 2037 Low Castle Rock Estates c/o Buckingham Property Management 455 E. Wutchumna Avenue Woodlake 93286247 40 40 USDA 2046 Low Parkside Court 351 Danielle Way Woodlake 23 24 LIHTC, HCD 2061 Low Woodlake Manor Apartments 200 E. Sierra Avenue Woodlake 93286247 43 44 LIHTC; USDA 2062 Low Woodlake Family Apartments 702 W. Sierra Avenue Woodlake 67 68 LIHTC 2062 Low Bravo Village 444 Ropes Avenue Woodlake 93286618 59 60 LIHTC; USDA, HCD 2067 Low Woodlake Terrace 448 Ropes Avenue Woodlake 30 31 LIHTC; CalHFA 2073 Low

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element 2-62
Name Address City Zip
Affordable
Units
Total
Units Active Program(s)
Estimated Affordability End Year/Date Risk Level
Woodlake Garden Apartments
705 West Sequoia Avenue Woodlake 93286618 48 48 USDA 2042 Low Walsburg Apartments 495 Whitney Avenue Woodlake 93286 11 11 HCD 2047 Low Note: All locally assisted or restricted developments may not be included in this list. *Indicates units that are expected to extend their affordability period based on discussion with property owner.; therefore, the risk level is listed as low despite the expiration date.. **California Housing Partnership records indicate that the affordability end year is 2039. However, the USDA verified that the affordability covenant of the USDA loan for this complex expires in 2035.Source: California Housing Partnership, 2023.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-63
Acquisition/Rehabilitation
If these units are 100 percent deed restricted affordable housing with an expiring regulatory agreement, transferring ownership of an at-risk project to a non-profit housing provider is one of the least costly ways to ensure that the at-risk units remain affordable for the long term. By transferring property ownership to a non-profit organization, low-income restrictions can be secured, and the project would become potentially eligible for a greater range of governmental subsidies.

Under AB 1521, there are now prescribed steps for owners of deed restricted properties to take prior to the expiration of those affordability requirements. This law requires that the owner consider an offer to purchase the deed-restricted units. A cursory survey of older apartment buildings sold in the cities that are included in this Housing Element was conducted in November 2024, which indicates a price range of $63,545 to $230,835 per unit with an average sales price of $131,229 per unit.12 At this sales price, the cost for the 87 at-risk units would be approximately $11.4 million.

Since only a portion of the property has deed-restricted units, it is unclear how a transaction like this could occur. Also, tThe feasibility of this option depends on funding sources to buy and potentially rehabilitate the propertiesy, which might be challenging since it is not a 100 percent deed restricted property. Another option to preserve the affordability of this at-risk project is to support a Joint Power Authorities purchase of the property. If this option is exercised, it would require deed restrictions for 100 percent of the residential units but also allows for bond financing that would allow the owner to maintain the project as affordable housing.

There are two several organizations that are listed in the HCD Qualified Entities in accordance with Government Code Section 65863.11. These Two entities, ROEM Development Corporation and SelfHelp Enterprises, are listed as qualified agencies with the potential to assist or lead efforts to preserve affordable housing in Tulare County. HCD also maintains a list of qualified entities for all counties.13 The following qualified entities could also assist or lead efforts to preserve affordable housing:

A. F. Evans Development, Inc. Green Development Company Affirmed Housing Hampstead Development Group, Inc.

Affordable Housing Access Inc Highland Property Development, LLC Ai Development Corporation Horizon ELOM Holdings, LLC
Alliant Strategic JEMCOR Development Partners
Allied Pacific Development, LLC Jonathon Rose Companies American Baptist Homes of the West KDF Communities, LLC American Community Developers, Inc. Linc Housing Corporation AOF/Pacific Lincoln Avenue Capitol, LLC
April Housing, LLC Maximus Properties, LLC
Avanath Capital Management, LLC MBK Management Corporation 12 Homes.com. 2024. https://www.homes.com/tulare-county-ca/multi-family-homes-for-sale/ 13 HCD. 2023. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/policy-and-research/preserving-existing-affordable-housing

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-64
Bank of America, N.A. Mercy Housing California
Bayside Communities Mercy Housing, Inc.

Belveron Real Estate Partners, LLC Mesa Realty Advisors Berkadia National Affordable Housing Trust
BRIDGE Housing Corporation National Community Renaissance BUILD Leadership Development, Inc. Newport Development, LLC Cabouchon Properties, LLC Novin Development Corp. "NDC" Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation Petaluma Ecumenical Properties Inc.

California Coalition for Rural Housing Phoenix Realty Group California Commercial Investment Group Post Real Estate Group, Inc.

California Community Reinvestment Corp. Preservation Partners Development California Housing Finance Agency RAHD Group, LLC
California Housing Partnership Corporation Reiner Communities LLC California Human Development Corporation Reliant Group Management Catalyst Housing Group, LLC Renaissance Housing Communities Chelsea Investment Corporation Resources for Community Development Colrich Multifamily Investments, LLC Richman Group of California, LLC.

Community Housing Assistance Program, Inc. Security Properties Community HousingWorks Sinergia Housing
Community HousingWorks Skyline Real Estate Development & Acquisitions, Inc.

Corporation for Better Housing Solari Enterprises, Inc.

Creative Housing Coalition Squier Properties, LLC
Dawson Holdings, Inc. Standard Property Company, INC. (DBA Standard Communities)
DBR Development LLC The John Stewert Company
Department of Housing and Community
Development
The Michaels Development Company I, L.P.

DeSola Capital Group, LLC The Trinity Housing Foundation DML & Associates Foundation Thomas Safran & Associates Development, Inc.

Domus Development, LLC University River Village
EAH, Inc. USA Properties Fund
East Los Angeles Community Corporation USA Properties Fund Eden Housing, Inc. Valued Housing II, LLC

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
2023-2031 Housing Element 2-65
Fairfied Residential LLC Veritas Urban Properties LLC
Fallbrook Capital Corporation Wakeland Housing & Development Corporation Foothill Affordable Housing Foundation West Bay Housing Corporation Foundation for Affordable Housing, Inc. William G. Ayyad, Inc.

GAL Affordable LP WIP-A, LLC
Goldrich & Kest Industries, LLC WNC Community Preservation Partners, LLC Construction of Replacement Units
The cost of developing housing depends upon a variety of factors, including density, size of the units (i.e., square footage and number of bedrooms), location, land costs, and type of construction, as discussed in the Non-Governmental Constraints section of Chapter 3: Regional Housing Constraints Analysis. The typical cost of construction for below market-rate housing in Tulare County in 2022 was $337,540 per unit. Based on this per unit cost, the total cost to replace the 19 87 high-risk affordable units with new construction would be approximately $6.429.4 million. The cost of preserving the affordability of the units with subsidies depends on the location of the units, and that analysis is included in each city-specific appendix. and the cost of preserving would be approximately $39,273 per year. Housing elements should identify the cost of construction of new regulated housing intended to replace at-risk units when they are converted to market-rate units to understand the significant effects that result when at risk- units are lost from the supply of affordable housing.

Rental Subsidies
HATC provides rental assistance to very low- and moderate-income families, seniors and people with disabilities throughout the county. HATC offers many different programs, including the conventional public housing program, the housing choice voucher program, the farm labor program for families with farm labor income, senior housing programs, and other housing programs. All programs are handicap accessible. Reasonable accommodation may be requested from HATC staff and reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
2-66
This page intentionally left blank.

Regional Housing Constraints Analysis
2023-2031 Housing Element 3-1
Regional Housing Constraints Analysis
Actual or potential constraints to the provision of housing affect the development of new housing and the maintenance of existing units for all income levels. State housing element law requires cities and counties to review both governmental and non-governmental constraints to the maintenance and production of housing for all income levels. Since local governmental actions can restrict the development and increase the cost of housing, State law requires the housing element to “address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing” (Government Code Section 65583(c)(3)). The housing element must also analyze potential and actual constraints upon the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities.

Non-governmental constraints are not specific to each community and are described in this section at the regional level. Governmental constraints, which are specific to each local government, are described generally in this section. City-specific assessments of housing constraints for the cities participating in this regional Housing Element, including an in-depth analysis of governmental constraints, are provided in Appendices A through G.

3.1 Non-Governmental Constraints
The availability and cost of housing is strongly influenced by market forces over which local governments have little or no control. Nonetheless, state law requires that the housing element contain a general assessment of these constraints, which can serve as the basis for actions to offset their effects.

The primary non-governmental constraints to the development of new housing are land costs, construction costs, and availability of financing. This section also addresses environmental constraints that might affect housing development.

3.1.1 Land Costs
The cost of land can be a major impediment to the production of affordable housing. Land costs are influenced by many variables, including land scarcity and developable density (both of which are indirectly controlled through governmental land use regulations), location, site constraints, and the availability of public utilities. For example, land prices in Visalia have an average sale price of $86,000 per acre, nearly four times higher than the county average of $22,799. Sites in major cities tend to be smaller and/or occupied by existing uses that generate revenue for property owners. As shown in Table 3-1 and Table 3-2, smaller sites (under 10 acres) in the region have a much higher cost-per-acre in both the cities and unincorporated area.

As shown in Table 3-1, listed land prices in the unincorporated county are lower than in incorporated cities. In the unincorporated county, 16 properties were listed for sale. Listings ranged from one acre priced at $43,000 to 14,672 acres priced at $14,525,933 ($990 per acre). The average list price per acre in the unincorporated area was $32,356.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
3-2
Table 3-1 Listed Land Prices – Tulare County
Lot Size
Average Price per Acre (Listed)
Incorporated Unincorporated
Less than 10 acres $242,383 $53,453
10 or more acres $37,368 $11,259
Average $/acre $139,876 $32,356
Source: Zillow, Inc., February 2023.

In contrast to listed land prices, based on aggregate property sales data from 2022, land sold for less in the incorporated cities than in unincorporated county. Table 3-2 considers land sale prices across the eight major cities and in the unincorporated county. Property sales ranged from 0.1 acres for $215,000 ($2,150,000 per acre) to 126.3 acres for $1,250,000 ($9,897 per acre). The average sale price per acre was $146,449 in incorporated cities and $209,732 in the unincorporated county.

Table 3-2 Sold Land Prices – Tulare County
Lot Size
Average Price per Acre (Sold)
Incorporated Unincorporated
Less than 10 acres $242,383 $400,959
10 or more acres $50,515 $18,505
Average $/acre $146,449 $209,732
Source: AcreValue, 2023.

Most incorporated cities in Tulare County have a higher price per acre for listed land for sale than for recently sold land, indicating that land prices have increased (Table 3-3). The cities of Lindsay, Farmersville, Porterville, and Exeter have the highest average price per acre for listed land, while Woodlake and the unincorporated county have the lowest.

Table 3-3 Listed and Sold Land Prices
Jurisdiction Average Price per Acre (Listed) Average Price per Acre (Sold) Dinuba $152,631.21 $154,520.41
Exeter $222,479.67 $140,933.85
Farmersville $360,611.90 $133,237.38
Lindsay $360,611.90 $133,237.38
Porterville $222,535.45 $63,810.51
Tulare $170,643.08 $148,449.58
Woodlake $80,168.92 $42,178.51
Incorporated Tulare County $139,876.00 $146,449.00
Unincorporated Tulare County $53,453.00 $209,732.00
Source: Zillow, Inc., 2023. AcreValue, 2023.

Regional Housing Constraints Analysis
2023-2031 Housing Element 3-3

3.1.2 Construction Costs
Construction costs can be divided into two primary categories: materials and labor. A major component of the cost of housing is the cost of building materials, including wood and wood-based products, cement, asphalt, roofing materials, and pipe. The availability and demand for such materials affect prices for these goods.

The cost of labor in Tulare County is comparatively low compared to other areas in California due to the relatively lower cost of living. Labor for government-subsidized housing construction is generally more costly than market-rate housing construction in the Central Valley, as wages are rooted in the required State Labor Standards based on prevailing wages in Northern and Southern California.

Table 3-4 shows the estimated cost of constructing a basic 2,000 square foot single-family home in Tulare County to be approximately $337,540. The estimate includes direct and indirect (e.g., insurance, permits, utilities, plans) construction costs, including material, labor, and equipment costs, but does not include the price of land or development impact fees.

Table 3-4 Estimated Construction Cost
Item Cost
Material $204,226
Labor $126,001
Equipment $7,313
Total $337,540
Source: Promatcher.com, 2023.

There is little that municipalities can do to mitigate the impacts of high construction costs related to materials and labor except by avoiding local amendments to uniform building codes that unnecessarily increase construction costs.

3.1.3 Availability of Financing
Financing for affordable housing projects and programs are available through federal, state, and local funding sources. Funding through these programs can help developers, local governments, and nonprofit organizations offset the cost to build new affordable housing units, preserve or rehabilitate existing affordable housing, and fund programs that offer homebuyer assistance to low-income households.

Mortgage interest rates have a large influence on housing affordability. Higher interest rates increase a homebuyer’s monthly payment and decrease the range of housing that a household can afford. Lower interest rates result in a lower cost and lower monthly payments for the homebuyer. As shown in Figure 3-1, in the past 10 years mortgage rates across the United States remained relatively steady (between 3.5 and 4.8 percent through 2019, then dropped below three percent between 2020 and 2021). During 2022, mortgage rates increased significantly, reaching a high of 7.1 percent for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage at the end of 2022. In early 2023, mortgage rates declined slightly but remain high compared to trends over the past 10 years, making it difficult for households to purchase a home.

Tulare County Association of Governments
Tulare County Regional Housing Element
3-4
When interest rates rise, housing prices tend to decrease due to the increased cost of financing and decreased demand. Similarly, when interest rates decrease, housing prices typically begin to rise and demand increases. There is often a lag in the market, causing housing prices to remain high when interest rates rise until the market adjusts. Lower-income households often find it difficult to purchase a home during this period.

Figure 3-1 Historical Mortgage Rates in the United States (2013-2023) Source: Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey
Interest rates are determined by national policies and economic conditions and there is little that a local government can do to affect these rates. To extend home buying opportunities to lower-income households, jurisdictions can offer interest rate write-downs. Additionally, government insured loan programs may be available to reduce mortgage down payment requirements.

Where financing is available, construction capital seems to be directed at those with large, established, and well-capitalized sponsors. Given recent trends of increasing interest rates, the availability of financing is likely to be more of a constraint on new housing construction during this Housing Element planning period than it has been previously.

3.1.4 Mortgage and Rehabilitation Financing
The most recent data available for the County of Tulare (2022) shows that 18,154 households applied for a home financing loan, which includes loans for home purchase, home improvement and refinancing.

Table 3-5 shows that of the total applications received for home purchase, 54.1 percent of the loans originated, and 5.9 percent were denied.

Conventional loans are made by the private sector (banks, mortgage companies, etc.) and are not guaranteed or insured by the U.S. government. Conversely, government-backed loans, such as those issued by the Federal Housing Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Rural Housing Services/Farm Service Agency, are completely or partially insured by the U.S. government. Within the county, 12,849 of the applications received were for conventional loans and 5,305 were for government backed loans. Table 3-6 shows that 49 percent of the conventional loans originated, and 17.6 percent of the applications were denied. The table also shows that 43.4 percent of the government backed loans originated and 9.9 percent of the applications were denied.

Regional Housing Constraints Analysis
2023-2031 Housing Element 3-5
County data in Table 3-7 shows that by race, residents who reported as white had the highest number of loans originated. Residents who reported as white also had the highest percentage of loans originated.

By ethnicity, Hispanic/Latino residents comprised 38 percent of the total applications of loans received while non-Hispanic/Latino comprised 29 percent. As shown in Table 3-8, residents who reported as not Hispanic/Latino had a higher rate of loan origination and lower rate of loan denial compared to residents who reported as Hispanic/Latino. Of Hispanic/Latino residents who applied for loans, 53.3 percent of loans originated, and 18.1 percent were denied. Comparatively, of the non-Hispanic/Latino residents that applied, 56.2 percent of loans originated, and 15.5 percent were denied.

Table 3-5 Race and Loan Action
Loan Action
Home Purchase
(% of total)
Home
Improvement
(% of Total)
Refinancing
(% of Total)
Other
(% of Total)
Total
(% of Total)
Loan Originated 4,453 (54.1%) 470 (39.2%) 988 (42.7%) 2,690 (42%) 8,601 (47.4%) Application Approved
but not Accepted
141 (1.7%) 64 (5.3%) 83 (3.6%) 151 (2.7%) 439 (2.4%)
Application Denied 482 (5.9%) 492 (41.1%) 430 (18.6%) 1,375 (21.5%) 2,779 (15.3%) Application Withdrawn 1,241 (15.1%) 96 (8%) 442 (19.1%) 1,104 (17.2%) 2,883 (15.9%) Purchased Loan 1,777 (21.8%) 19 (1.6%) 133 (5.7%) 535 (8.4%) 2,464 (13.6%) Other 144 (1.8%) 57 (4.8%) 240 (10.4%) 547 (8.5%) 988 (5.4%) Total Loans 8,238 1,198 2,316 6,402 18,154
Source: FFIEC Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. 2022 Dataset Table 3-6 Loan Action and Loan Type
Loan Type Conventional Loan Government Backed Loan
Loan Originated 6,300 (49%) 2,301 (43.4%)
Application Approved but not Accepted 324 (2.5%) 115 (2.2%) Application Denied 2,255 (17.6%) 524 (9.9%)
Application Withdrawn 1,967 (15.3%) 916 (17.3%)
Other 2,003 (15.6%) 1,449 (27.3%)
Total Loans 12,849 5,305
Source: FFIEC Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. 2022 Dataset Table 3-7 Race and Loan Action
Racial Group
Loan
Originated
Application
Approved but
Not Accepted
Application
Denied
Application
Withdrawn
Purchased
Loan Other Total
Two or More Races 11
(52.4%)
0 6
(28.6%)
2 1 1 21
American Indian or
Alaska Native
90 (44.3%)
9 48
(23.6%)
39 1 16 203
Asian American 348
(49.9%)
21 134
(19.2%)
127 24 44 698
Black/African
American
20 (50.4%)
4 49
(20.6%)
54 3 8 238