HCD has also identified racially concentrated areas of affluence (RCAAs) in California as census tracts in which the total population that identifies as White is 1.25 times higher than the average percentage of the total White population in the local COG (60.3 percent in FCOG) and a median income that is 1.5 times higher.
There are 36 tracts identified as areas of high segregation and poverty in the City of Fresno; one within the limits of the City of Sanger and surrounding unincorporated areas; two within the limits of the City of Parlier, two within the limits of the City of Orange Cove and surrounding unincorporated areas; two within the limits of the City of Mendota, including the surrounding unincorporated areas; one within the limits of the City of Reedley; and one within the limits of the City of Huron, including the surrounding unincorporated areas; all of which are discussed in more detail in their respective jurisdictional analysis.
There are several other areas of high segregation and poverty in the southern San Joaquin Valley region in Tulare County, and in San Benito County, while there are several in the cities of Merced and Madera (see Figure 3-15, Regional Areas of High Segregation and Poverty, 2023). However, the incidence of areas of high segregation and poverty is far greater in the larger, more urbanized jurisdiction of Fresno. In contrast, there are several RCAAs in Fresno County (see Figure 3-16, Regional RCAAs), in the cities of 137
274
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-29 Clovis and Fresno, including unincorporated islands and unincorporated areas east of Clovis and Fresno.
RCAAs are also evident throughout the southern and eastern portions of the region, including portions of the cities of Visalia, Tulare, and Hanford and adjacent unincorporated area, and the Sequoia National Forest communities.
At the local level, the AFFH diversity data map provides a current reflection of local integration. As shown in Figure 3-17, Diversity Index for Fresno County, the Diversity Index percentile closely corresponds to the racial demographics data presented in Figure 3-18, Fresno County Jurisdiction Racial Demographics. Areas with the lowest diversity indices are found in Clovis and the unincorporated island in northern Fresno, as well as the eastern communities of Squaw Valley and Aubrey. The majority of cities fall within the 70.0 to 85.0 percent diversity percentile, with the highest diversity scores above the 85th percentile found in and surrounding the City of Fresno, in the City of Fowler, west and south in the unincorporated county towards the cities of Caruthers, Huron, and Coalinga, and also in portions of the City of Mendota and the City of Kerman. In some jurisdictions, the percentage of the population that identifies as other Non-White (including Black/African American, Native American, Asian, and Multiple Race) is so low, as shown in the Figure 2-1, Race and Ethnicity (2020), in the Needs Assessment, that diversity indices may not accurately represent their distribution. 138
275
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-30 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 FIGURE 3-15 REGIONAL AREAS OF HIGH SEGREGATION AND POVERTY, 2023 Source: California Tax Credit Allocation Committee and HCD, 2023 139
276
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-31 FIGURE 3-16 REGIONAL RCAAS
Source: 2015-2019 ACS, HCD 2022
140
277
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-32 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 FIGURE 3-17 DIVERSITY INDEX WITHIN FRESNO COUNTY
Source: Esri, 2018
141
278
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-33 FIGURE 3-18 FRESNO COUNTY JURISDICTION RACIAL DEMOGRAPHICS Source: 2016-2020 ACS
Familial Status
Patterns of familial status present a potential indicator of fair housing issues, as it relates to availability of appropriately sized or priced housing when certain family types are concentrated. As a protected characteristic, concentrations of family types may also occur as a result of discrimination by housing providers, such as against families with children or unmarried partners. Furthermore, single-parent, femaleheaded households are considered to have a greater risk of experiencing poverty than single-parent, maleheaded households due to factors including the gender wage gap and difficulty in securing higher-wage jobs.
In 2021, the HUD Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) reported the number of housing discrimination cases filed with HUD since January 2013. Of the 140 cases in Fresno County, approximately
9.3 percent (13 cases) alleged familial status discrimination (Table 3-1, Regional Familial Status Discrimination, 2013-2021). According to the FHEO, six cases were filed in Fresno County in 2020, none 14.0% 10.7%1.9% 9.9%4.4% 7.9%2.3%3.0% 1.8% 7.5% 10.4% 6.9% 2.6% 2.9% 1.2% 1.5% 1.0%0.9%2.0% 4.4% 26.1%49.5% 28.2% 5.8% 19.8% 3.4%12.0% 41.0% 3.6% 3.0% 1.8% 14.2%15.0% 1.5% 10.7% 39.6% 28.7% 3.3% 4.5% 5.0% 4.7% 2.1%1.9% 3.4% 2.7% 1.5%1.6% 3.2% 3.1% 49.7% 32.7% 62.0% 94.1% 65.2% 94.5%81.7% 47.7% 96.0% 95.3% 97.7% 79.3% 80.5% 97.5%85.0% 47.7% 53.4%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Hispanic or Latinx American Indian, Other or Multiple Races, Non-Hispanic White, Non-Hispanic Black or African American, Non-Hispanic Asian / API, Non-Hispanic
142
279
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-34 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 of which were familial status related. While it is important to note that some cases may go unreported, 13 cases in 8 years reflects fairly low rates of familial status discrimination in Fresno County. Further, the incidence of discrimination against familial status in Fresno County is relatively low compared to the region, with three counties having lower rates, and two counties having rates approaching 30.0 percent.
Table 3-1 Regional Familial Status Discrimination, 2013-2021 County Total Cases*
Cases Alleging Familial Status Discrimination
Number Percentage of Total Cases
Fresno County 140 13 9.3%
Inyo County N/A N/A N/A
Kings County 14 4 28.6%
Madera County 11 0 0%
Merced County 27 3 11.1%
Mono County 2 0 0%
Monterey County 98 18 18.4%
San Benito County 10 3 30.0%
Tulare County 47 4 8.5%
*Cases that were withdrawn by the complainant without resolution, resulted in a no-cause determination, or were not pursued as a result of failure of the complainant to respond to follow-up by HUD are not included in this total.
Source: HUD, 2021
While discrimination against familial status does not appear to pose a fair housing issue in Fresno County, particularly compared to the region, there are still notable patterns of distribution for varying family types.
As seen in Figure 3-19, Percentage of Children in Married-Couple Households in the Region, most of Fresno County has moderate to high rates of this family type, comparable to surrounding San Joaquin Valley jurisdictions. In the San Joaquin Valley, in areas where residences are typically more dispersed and uses are more agricultural or limited by topography, there is a higher incidence of families with children than is found in the central and southern neighborhoods of the City of Fresno, as well as portions of the cities of Coalinga, Kerman, Mendota, Firebaugh, Fowler, Parlier, Orange Cove, and Sanger, inclusive of adjacent unincorporated areas. This trend is also present in the more urbanized areas of Tulare, Merced, and Madera Counties. In contrast, Inyo, Mono, the eastern portion of Monterey, and San Benito Counties, which have relatively few pockets of urbanization, have the highest rates of married-family households with children. The highest rates of female-headed households with children in Fresno County, between 20.0 and 40.0 percent, are in, or immediately adjacent to, incorporated cities, likely where there is better access to schools, transit, services, and jobs, as well as a greater range of housing types to meet a variety of needs (Figure 3-20, Percentage of Children in Female-Headed Households in the Region). This pattern is seen throughout the San Joaquin Valley region, with greater concentrations of female-headed households in and near cities, as well as in the eastern areas of Fresno and Tulare Counties, and throughout Mono and Inyo Counties. Higher rates of married-couple households are found further from urban centers, west of SR 99, in higher-income communities, and also in the eastern areas of Fresno, Madera, Merced, and Tulare Counties, and throughout Mono and Inyo Counties.
143
280
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-35 Within Fresno County, the highest concentration of female-headed households, 60.0 to 80.0 percent of total households, is evident in two census tracts in the City of Fresno. There are several tracts in Fresno, predominantly along SR 99 and SR 41, with proportions of female-headed households comprising 40.0 to
60.0 percent of the total households, as well as two tracts in the City of Clovis. In line with this, Fresno has tracts with lower concentrations of married-couple households with children, which is the dominant family type in the remainder of the county and nearby areas of the unincorporated county. In other jurisdictions in the county, there is a more balanced representation of a variety of family types, though married couples are still the primary family type throughout Fresno County and the region. 144
281
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-36 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 FIGURE 3-19 PERCENTAGE OF CHILDREN IN MARRIED-COUPLE HOUSEHOLDS IN THE REGION Source: 2015-2019 ACS
145
282
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-37 FIGURE 3-20 PERCENTAGE OF CHILDREN IN FEMALE-HEADED HOUSEHOLDS IN THE REGION Source: 2015-2019 ACS
146
283
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-38 Disability Rates
Figure 3-21, Population with a Disability in the Region, and Figure 3-22, Regional Disability by Type, identify that a majority of Fresno County has a disability rate of 13.0 percent. The proportion of the population with disabilities range from a low of 6.4 percent in Mono County to a high of 15.3 percent in Inyo County, with the rates in Merced and Madera Counties slightly exceeding that of Fresno County. Monterey County and San Benito County to the west report a lower incidence of persons with disabilities than Fresno County and the remainder of the region.
Overall, independent living and ambulatory disability are the most common types of disability experienced, with the highest incidence of cognitive and vision problems found in Fresno County. Inyo County reports the highest proportion of persons experiencing independent living problems, followed by Fresno County and then Tulare County, reflecting the more urban opportunities found in the cities of Fresno, Clovis Visalia, and Tulare.
147
284
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-39 FIGURE 3-21 POPULATION WITH A DISABILITY IN THE REGION
Source: 2015-2019 ACS
148
285
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-40 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 FIGURE 3-22 REGIONAL DISABILITY BY TYPE
Source: 2016-2020 ACS
13.0%
3.7%
3.2%
5.8%
7.0%
3.1%
6.90%
15.3%
6.2%
2.7%
5.7%
8.9%
3.1%
8.5%
11.9%
3.3%
2.3%
4.4%
6.5%
2.6%
6.2%
13.4%
4.5%
2.6%
4.9%
7.3%
2.2%
3.7%
13.1%
3.5%
3.0%
5.5%
7.3%
2.8%
6.3%
8.9%
2.7%
1.6%
3.6%
4.7%
2.2%
2.9%
6.4%
2.3%
1.5%
1.1%
2.3%
0.7%
1.7%
10.2%
2.9%
1.3%
4.1%
5.2%
2.2%
4.6%
11.7%
3.4%
2.5%
4.6%
6.4%
2.3%
6.6%
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0% 18.0%
Total with Disability
Hearing Disability
Vision Disability
Cognitive Disability
Ambulatory Disability
Self Care Disability
Independent Living Disability
Tulare County San Benito County Mono County Monterey County Merced County Madera County Kings County Inyo County Fresno County
149
286
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-41 In Fresno County, the only areas having a concentration of persons with a disability over 20.0 percent are in the cities of Fresno and Clovis, suggesting a correlation between housing opportunities for seniors in more urbanized areas with access to public transportation, services, and amenities. The other jurisdictions in Fresno County either contain a population of which less than 10.0 percent of the population reports a disability, or the jurisdiction is split between areas of less than 10.0 percent, and 10.0 to 20.0 percent of the households experiencing one or more disabilities.
As shown in Table 3-2, Regional Demographic Characteristics of the Population with a Disability, 41.6 percent of the population in Fresno County with a disability falls into the over 65 age group, suggesting that the higher rate of disability in the Fresno/Clovis area is likely due to the concentration of seniors. With the exception of these two areas of senior populations, disability rates in Fresno County largely reflect patterns seen throughout the San Joaquin Valley, with slightly higher rates of disability in the more urbanized areas in Tulare and Madera Counties. This is likely due to proximity to services and accessible housing options that are often desirable to persons with disabilities.
Regional service providers indicate that residents living with disabilities prefer to live independently but limited housing options may restrict options to care facilities. Additionally, senior residents typically make up a substantial share of residents living with disabilities.
Table 3-2 Regional Demographic Characteristics of the Population with a Disability Disability
Characteristic
Jurisdiction
Fresno
County
Inyo
County
Kings
County
Madera
County
Merced
County
Monterey
County
Mono
County
San Benito
County
Tulare
County
Race and Ethnicity
White Non-Hispanic 17.1% 19.2% 14.7% 20.0% 18.2% 14.1% 8.2% 14.6% 17.3% Black or African
American 19.5% 29.3% 16.5% 16.2% 19.7% 15.3% 0.0% 14.3% 14.9% Alaska Native 18.7% 11.7% 17.6% 14.0% 19.0% 14.9% 6.2% 11.0% 17.0% Asian 10.4% 8.3% 15.2% 12.2% 10.5% 12.2% 1.1% 7.4% 14.6% Native Hawaiian/
Pacific Islander
16.9% 0.0% 4.1% 0.0% 1.2% 13.8% 0.0% 11.1% 9.0%
Some other race or
multiple races 10.6% 6.2% 9.3% 11.5% 12.5% 4.9% 4.8% 8.5% 9.0% Hispanic or Latino 10.8% 7.2% 9.3% 9.3% 10.6% 5.7% 1.6% 7.2% 9.0% Age
Under 18 years 4.5% 3.0% 3.7% 4.1% 4.9% 3.3% 1.4% 4.0% 4.7% 18 to 34 years 7.3% 11.0% 6.4% 7.8% 5.8% 4.0% 4.8% 5.2% 5.9% 35 to 64 years 14.6% 10.0% 13.9% 14.0% 15.7% 7.6% 4.8% 10.3% 12.8% 65 years and over 41.6% 38.5% 40.8% 39.8% 44.1% 31.0% 19.6% 31.6% 41.0% Note: As a percentage of race/ethnic category
Source: 2016-2020 ACS
150
287
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-42 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Access to Opportunity
Transit Mobility
Transit mobility refers to an individual’s ability to navigate a region daily to access services, employment, schools, and other resources. Indicators of transit mobility include the extent of transit routes, proximity of transit stops to affordable housing, and frequency of transit.
AllTransit is a transit and connectivity analytic tool developed by the Center for Neighborhood Technology for the advancement of equitable communities and urban sustainability. The tool analyzes the transit frequency, routes, and access to determine an overall transit score at the city, county, and regional levels. AllTransit scores geographic regions (e.g.., cities, counties, MSAs) on a scale of 0 to 10. Figure 3-23, AllTransit Transit Access in the Region, depicts where in Fresno County transit is available and areas with higher connectivity scores. Although it appears public transit in Fresno County is largely isolated within incorporated jurisdictions, with little to no available transit between cities or within unincorporated areas with the exception of cities along SR 99 and SR 41, the AllTransit methodology does not take into account the Fresno County Rural Transit Agency services (described herein), which include 25 local transit operators providing both intra- and inter-city services within and to outlying communities.
Therefore, the scores identified at the jurisdictional level may not accurately reflect the transit opportunities available through public service providers. AllTransit ranks the lowest scores in Fresno County in the cities of San Joaquin (0.0), Kerman (0.1), Caruthers (0.5), Selma and Kingsburg (0.7), and higher scores are found in the cities of Clovis (1.1), Coalinga (1.1), Huron (1.2), Reedley (2.2), and Fresno (5.0). Amtrak offers the San Joaquins route with connections from Bakersfield to Oakland or Sacramento, and the Amtrak Thruway system offers city to city connections throughout California that has stops along the SR 99 corridor. 151
288
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-43 FIGURE 3-23 ALLTRANSIT TRANSIT ACCESS IN THE REGION
As shown in Table 3-3, Regional AllTransit Performance Scores, transit accessibility in Fresno County reflects the scores of neighboring counties with large agricultural industries and a few principal jurisdictions, such as Kings, Tulare, and Merced Counties, which also have county-wide, commuter and intercity transit systems, and is somewhat more limited than Monterey County, which, while primarily a rural county, includes the City of Monterey, which is more urban in character. Although in Mono County the AllTransit Score is comparable to Fresno County, the ranking appears to be linked to the regional connectivity of the Eastern Sierra Transit system, which aligns with I-395 between Reno and Lancaster, with a concentration of multiple route systems between Lone Pine, Bishop, and Mammoth Lakes, reflecting the recreational-based character of the county. Overall, in the San Joaquin Valley region, public transit mobility opportunities are typically available in the more urban areas, while in more rural areas there is more limited public transit mobility, with private contracted or individually managed jurisdictional-level services providing intercity and rural area connectivity, reflecting the AllTransit scores below those found throughout Fresno County, and likely below the actual levels of service available. 152
289
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-44 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Table 3-3 Regional Alltransit Performance Scores
Jurisdiction AllTransit Score
Fresno County 3.2
Inyo County 0.4
Kings County 3.0
Madera County 1.2
Merced County 2.4
Monterey County 4.2
Mono County 3.5
San Benito County 1.7
Tulare County 4.1
Source: AllTransit.cnt.org, 2022
In Fresno County, there are several transit options available to residents that do not appear to have been included in the AllTransit methodology, depending on where they live within the county. The Fresno County Rural Transit Agency (FCRTA) operates 25 transit subsystems that operate in 13 rural incorporated cities throughout the Valley (Table 3-4, Fresno County Rural Transit Agency Intercounty Connections, and Figure 3-24, Fresno County Rural Transit Agency Intercounty Routes). Several of the connections operate on fixed-route schedules, although most are on demand or require reservations. None of the services are available on Sunday, while Sanger Transit, Rural Transit, Reedley Transit, and Coalinga Inter-City Transit offer Saturday service. The FCRTA’s transit services are available to the elderly (60+), disabled, and veterans at no charge and to the general public within each of the 13 rural incorporated cities of Fresno County.
Table 3-4 Fresno County Rural Transit Agency Intercounty Connections Fixed Route/
On Demand
Fresno County Rural Transit Agency Services
SubSystem Provider Transit Service Routes
On Demand Auberry Transit
Provides transit service between the foothill communities and the Big Sandy and Cold Springs Rancherias, inter-city service to the FresnoClovis area is available Tuesdays and requires 24-hour advance reservation.
On Demand Coalinga Transit Provides Dial-A-Ride service within the City of Coalinga.
Fixed Route Coalinga Intercity Transit
Provides scheduled round-trip service from Coalinga to the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area with stops in Huron, 5-Points, Lanare, Riverdale, Caruthers, Raisin City, Easton.
On Demand Del Rey Transit Provides service within the Community of Del Rey and to and from City of Sanger.
Fixed Route Dinuba Connection
Travels from Dinuba in Tulare County to Reedley in Fresno County.
Transfers to Cutler-Orosi, Orange Cove, Parlier, Sanger, and the FresnoClovis Metropolitan Area are available. Stops include the Dinuba Vocational Center, Adventist Medical Center, Reedley College, Palm Village Retirement Community, and Walmart.
On Demand Firebaugh Transit Provides local intracity transit service.
On Demand Firebaugh-Mendota Transit Provides local intercity transit service between Firebaugh and Mendota.
On Demand Fowler Transit Provides local intracity transit service.
On Demand Huron Transit Provides local intracity transit service. 153
290
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-45 Fixed Route/
On Demand
Fresno County Rural Transit Agency Services
SubSystem Provider Transit Service Routes
Fixed Route Huron Inter-City Transit Scheduled round-trip service between Huron and Coalinga.
On Demand Kerman Transit Dial-A-Ride provides (demand responsive) curb-to-curb service to the general public.
Fixed Route
Kings Area Regional
Transit (KART) – Hanford
Fresno Transit
Provides transportation from Hanford in Kings County to the FresnoClovis Metropolitan Area. Stops include Valley Children’s Hospital, the Veteran’s Hospital, and Kaiser Hospital.
Fixed Route Kingsburg to Reedley
College Transit
Provides scheduled round-trip service between Kingsburg, Selma, Fowler, and Parlier to Reedley College.
Fixed Route Laton Transit Operated by KART with scheduled round-trip intercity service between Laton and Hanford with stops in Grangeville and Hardwick.
On Demand Mendota Transit Provides local intracity transit service.
On Demand Orange Cove In-City
Transit Provides local intracity transit service.
Fixed Route Orange Cove Intercity
Transit
Scheduled round-trip inter-city service through Orange Cove, Reedley, Parlier, Sanger to the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area.
On Demand Parlier Transit Provides local intracity transit service.
On Demand Reedley Transit Provides local intracity demand responsive service.
On Demand Rural Transit
Addresses the previously unmet transit needs of truly rural area residents living beyond the existing transit service areas, which is considered outside the city limits and Spheres of Influence (SOIs) of the 15 incorporated cities in Fresno County. Requires 24-hour advance notice.
On Demand Sanger Transit Local intracity transit service.
Fixed Route Sanger Express to Reedley Service from the Sanger Community Center to Reedley College.
On Demand San Joaquin Transit
Intracity and inter-city service from San Joaquin to Tranquility, Cantua Creek, Halfway, El Porvenir, and Three Rocks. Requires reservations or Dial-A-Ride is available with reservations and limited on-call availability.
On Demand Selma Transit Local intracity transit service.
Fixed Route Southeast Transit Round-trip inter-city service between Kingsburg, Selma, and Fowler to the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area.
Fixed Route Westside Transit Round-trip inter-city service between Firebaugh, Mendota, and Kerman to the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area.
Source: Fresno County Rural Transit Agency, 2022
154
291
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-46 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING
FIGURE 3-24 FRESNO COUNTY RURAL TRANSIT AGENCY INTERCOUNTY ROUTES Source: Fresno County Rural Transit Agency, 2019
155
292
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-47 FCRTA offers connections to the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area through the following area transportation providers:
Fresno Area Express (FAX) with 16 scheduled, fixed-route service with connections to Valley Children’s Hospital in Madera County
FAX’s Handy Ride Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) demand-responsive services Clovis Transit’s Stageline with two scheduled, fixed-route services Clovis Transit’s Round-Up’s demand-responsive ADA services Kings Area Rural Transit (KART) scheduled, fixed-route service to Fresno and Hanford Dinuba Connection scheduled fixed-route travels from Dinuba to Reedley with transfers to Cutler-Orosi, Orange Cove, Parlier, Sanger, and Fresno
Yosemite Area Regional Transit System offers a fixed-route system from Fresno to the Yosemite Valley with options for commuter passes, and reduced fares for seniors, veterans, and persons with disabilities ValleyRides rideshare matching service for commuters within the San Joaquin Valley region While there are a variety of transit options available in Fresno County, residents in many smaller incorporated jurisdictions, agricultural, and rural communities are more limited than elsewhere in the region to demandresponsive transit options that do not offer weekend service, which may limit employment opportunities for those employed in certain occupations, such as retail, medical/hospital, or restaurant services, and present a barrier to housing mobility for those households reliant on transit.
Since January 26, 1992, in compliance with requirements of the ADA, FCRTA’s fixed-route service has been able to deviate from its specified route on a demand-responsive basis up to a 0.75 mile in either direction (1.5-mile path) to pick-up or drop-off a disabled passenger. As such, the FCRTA is exempt from the requirement to prepare a “Comparable Service Paratransit Plan” for implementing the ADA.
In 2023, FCRTA released a public draft of its 2024-2028 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP). As part of the plan’s public outreach process, members of the public expressed concerns they had about the current state of the transit network and suggested possible changes to the transit and transportation system that would benefit them. Two of the primary comments received as part of the agency’s workshops were a desire to see extended weekend and evening service to support farmworkers and an interest in seeing better collaboration between the County and FCRTA. The latter is addressed by many programs in individual jurisdiction’s Housing Element Action Plans. In an online survey for the same study, many expressed a desire to see demand-response transit expanded to better serve rural areas that are not well served by fixed-route transit. The SRTP noted that the Measure C sales tax measure indicated that providing funding for expanded rural fixed-route service was an approved funding goal, along with providing free transit service for seniors.
156
293
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-48 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 In 2018, FCRTA successfully applied to FCOG for a Regional Sustainable Infrastructure Planning Grant and was awarded $160,000 to fund a study analyzing the feasibility of expanding FCRTA’s Rural Transit service and creating new service regions for FCRTA’s Rural Transit service throughout Fresno County. As identified in the FCRTA Electric Vehicle Rideshare/Carshare/Rural Transit Expansion Plan, December 2020, social service organizations have voiced the concern that many of their clients have limited or no access to a vehicle and reside outside of a one-half-mile service area of an existing transit stop, which can negatively impact their quality of life.
In October 2022, FCRTA launched a pilot of an electric car-based carshare program in Biola, where subsidized rides would be provided in electric vehicles driven by professional drivers hired through MV Transportation.3 The
project is funded by Measure C sales tax funds and a donation from the League of Women Voters, and the agency hopes to expand to other parts of Fresno County as drivers are hired and trained. However, at the time of the project’s launch, FCRTA noted that the project was having a hard time hiring enough qualified drivers for the program.
Community groups have also organized to address gaps in fixed-route rural service. Green Raiteros is an indigenous, community-led rideshare service based in Huron that serves Fresno, Madera, Kings, and Kern Counties. The group is part of the Latino Equity Advocacy & Policy Institute (LEAP Institute), a 501(c)3 nonprofit public benefit organization. The service is funded by both public and private grants and was initially built on the existing network of retired farmworkers that had been providing transportation services on an informal basis. The group owns 10 electric vehicles that are used to provide the service, and was able to secure four high-speed chargers. The program expressly includes in its mission dual goals of improving local health outcomes by connecting rural residents with health services and providing quality transportation services for farmworkers. Other community-based rideshare programs were forced to close during the pandemic, such as the Van y Viene service in Cantua Creek.4 However,
the success of Green Raiteros suggests that there is a demand for this type of service in more rural areas that could be met with community leadership.
Vanpool services are also available to farmworkers in the county, who may not reside in proximity to a bus stop that provides a connection to employment sites, as their work sites may change depending on the crop harvest schedule. The California Vanpool Authority is a public transit agency governed by a consortium of public agency board members, including Fresno County COG. The California Vanpool (CalVans) program provides qualified agricultural workers with safe, affordable vans they can use to drive themselves and others to work. A one-time start-up grant provided money to set-up the CalVans program and to purchase the 15-passenger vans, which have since been remodeled to carry eight passengers and the driver. The money to sustain and expand the program comes from the riders themselves, who generally pay less than $2.00 to ride in a CalVans vanpool. The fee covers the agency’s cost of maintaining and insuring the vans, as well as the cost of replacing vehicles based on established safety criteria. Drivers receive no compensation or training and operate their vanpool on a voluntary basis. 3 Diaz, L.S. (2017, October 17). EV Ride-Sharing Coming to Rural Fresno County, Calif. GovTech.com. https://www.govtech.com/fs/ev-ride-sharing-coming-to-rural-fresno-county-calif 4 Ortiz-Briones, M. G. and Garibay, C. 2022, February 06. “Fresno County’s rural residents face transportation gaps. How electric rideshare programs help.” Freno Bee. https://www.fresnobee.com/fresnoland/article255313821.html 157
294
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-49 As of 2020, FCRTA is the Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA) for the rural areas of Fresno County and administers funding for these services. In 2021, Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission was awarded a contract to provide transit services in coordination with local human services agencies. As of August 2023, a joint request for proposals (RFP) has been issued by FCRTA and the City of Fresno to provide social services and transportation services in both the rural areas of Fresno County and the Fresno metropolitan area.
Additionally, the Fresno COG is currently updating the Fresno County Coordinated Human Services Transportation Plan, which will identify strategies for improving transportation options for seniors, persons with disabilities, lowincome individuals, veterans, unhoused persons, and youth.
Housing Mobility
Housing mobility refers to an individual’s or household’s ability to secure affordable housing in areas of high opportunity, move between neighborhoods, and purchase a home if they so choose. Indicators of housing mobility include distribution of Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs), availability of rental and ownership opportunities throughout the jurisdiction, and vacancy rates. As shown in Figure 3-25, Percentage of Renters Using Housing Choice Vouchers, the highest rates of HCV use occur within the City of Fresno, particularly in the central, north, and east sides of the city. Some areas of the City of Fresno have HCV use rates up of to 52.2 percent of households in tracts along SR 41 (1,800 HCVs in four tracts) and a concentration of areas with rates between 15.0 and 30.0 percent of households in the central portion of the city and along the SR 99 corridor. The higher rates of HCV use also tend to correspond to, or are adjacent to, census tracts where public housing or subsidized housing is located.
Although there are pockets of HCV use between 15.0 and 30.0 percent in the surrounding San Joaquin Valley region, within the cities of Tulare and Merced in the vicinity of SR 99, Fresno County is the only jurisdiction within the greater San Joaquin Valley region with such a high concentration of HCVs. The Cities of Selma, Orange Cove, and Sanger each have areas where up to 15 percent of renter households use HCVs. The Cities of Coalinga, Kerman, Kingsburg, Fowler, Parlier, Firebaugh, and Reedley also have areas where up to 5 percent of renter households use HCVs. This indicates that while many HCVs are used within the City of Fresno, HCVs have also supported housing mobility across the cities of Fresno County without creating an overconcentration in any one city.
As of the 2017-2021 ACS, 24.8 percent of Hispanic or Latino households of any race in Fresno County had incomes under the poverty line, as did 29.5 percent of Black or African-American families, compared to 11.1 percent of White, non-Hispanic households. Therefore, encouraging housing mobility through the use of HCVs can also help to mitigate the potential for any racial and ethnic isolation that could result from overconcentration of lower-income households in any one area.
HCVs, or Section 8 vouchers, provide assistance to lower-income households to secure housing in the private market that might otherwise be unattainable. In Fresno County, vouchers are allocated by the Fresno Housing Authority to residents throughout the county, including both incorporated and unincorporated areas. Section 8 participants can use their voucher to find the housing unit of their choice that meets health and safety standards established by the local housing authority. The housing authority will then subsidize an amount up to the fair-market rent (FMR) established by HUD toward the contract rent, with any remainder to be paid by the participant. The subsidy increases housing mobility opportunities for Section 8 participants and ensures that they are provided safe 158
295
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-50 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 housing options. Fresno County falls within the Fresno MSA, for which HUD establishes FMRs annually to be used as the baseline for Section 8 subsidies (Table 3-5, Fresno MSA Fair-Market Rents, 2022).
Table 3-5 Fresno MSA Fair-Market Rents, 2022
Unit Size FMR
Studio $899
1-bedroom $904
2-bedroom $1,137
3-bedroom $1,607
4-bedroom $1,847
Source: HUD, 2022
A “healthy” vacancy rate is considered to be approximately 5.0 percent, indicating that there are available housing units for those seeking housing, but not an oversaturated market that results in homes left unused. In Fresno County, the vacancy rate in 2020 was approximately 5.7 percent, indicating a relatively “healthy” vacancy rate, reflecting a fairly similar rate as most primarily agricultural counties in the surrounding region (Table 3-6, Regional Vacancy Rates). This suggests that residents living in Fresno County, or seeking to live in Fresno County, have similar mobility options overall compared to most of the region, with the more tourism and recreational/natural resourcebased counties, Mono and Inyo, having higher proportions of vacancies based likely on the seasonal rental nature of their economies. Mobility based on vacancy varies within Fresno County by jurisdiction is discussed further herein.
Table 3-6 Regional Vacancy Rates
Jurisdiction Total Housing
Units
Occupied
Housing Units
Vacant Housing
Units
Percentage
Occupied
Percentage
Vacant
Fresno County 338,441 319,296 19,195 94.3% 5.7%
Inyo County 9,469 8,046 1,423 85.0% 15.0%
Kings County 46,287 44,100 2,987 95.3% 4.7%
Madera County 49,572 45,607 3,965 92.0% 8.0%
Merced County 87,783 83,464 4,319 95.1% 4.9%
Monterey County 143,631 131,789 11,842 91.8% 8.2%
Mono County 13,589 5,474 8,115 40.3% 59.7%
San Benito County 20,365 19,484 826 95.7% 4.3%
Tulare County 150,562 141,987 8,575 94.2% 5.8%
Source: Department of Finance E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates, 2022 159
296
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-51 FIGURE 3-25 PERCENTAGE OF RENTERS USING HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS Source: HUD, 2021
160
297
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-52 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Employment Opportunities
HUD developed two indices to analyze access to employment opportunities: the jobs proximity index and the labor market engagement index. The jobs proximity index identifies census tracts based on their proximity to employment opportunities and the labor market engagement index scores labor force participation and human capital in each tract, with consideration of unemployment rates and educational attainment. For both indices, a higher score indicates stronger job proximity or labor force participation.
According to these indices, Fresno County has fairly comparable proximity to jobs as the adjacent Madera and Tulare Counties. In Fresno County, stronger proximity scores are found to the west of SR 99 and lower proximity scores are found to the east towards the Sierra Nevada range and rural western edges of the counties. However, much of the land that identifies as having the closest job proximity in these eastern areas and counties to the north of Fresno County is rural farmland or open space, which suggests that the property owner lives and works on-site, compared to residents’ access to employment opportunities within incorporated jurisdictions. Labor force engagement patterns in Fresno County more closely reflect the neighboring Madera and Tulare Counties, where population distribution and industries are similar to most of Fresno County.
Higher labor force engagement scores are evident in the western side of Fresno, including the unincorporated county islands in northern Fresno, and the majority of Clovis and unincorporated area immediately adjacent to Clovis on the east, as well as in the more urbanized jurisdictions found within Fresno County and in adjacent Madera and Tulare Counties along SR 99 and SR 41 (Figure 3-26, Regional Jobs Proximity, and Figure 3-27, Regional Labor Market Engagement). The area with the lowest labor force engagement in Fresno County is in the furthest western tract that includes the cities of Mendota and Firebaugh adjoining San Benito County. In Firebaugh, there is a sizable senior population (22.0 percent of the total households), a population more likely to be retired, although this does not apply to Mendota. However, given that there remains a sizeable working force in these cities, other factors are likely to influence the low labor force engagement scores.
161
298
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-53 FIGURE 3-26 REGIONAL JOBS PROXIMITY
Source: HUD, 2017
162
299
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-54 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 FIGURE 3-27 REGIONAL LABOR MARKET ENGAGEMENT
Source: HUD, 2017
163
300
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-55 As shown in Figure 3-28, Regional Unemployment Rates, 2010-2022, the unemployment rate in Fresno County in 2022 is moderate at 6.0 percent, in comparison to other counties in the adjacent counties region, including Tulare, Merced, and Kings Counties at 7.4 percent, 7.3 percent, and 6.6 percent, respectively. The lowest unemployment rates correspond to the least urbanized counties, Inyo and Mono, which are largely sportsmen based-tourism economies associated with travelers to the Mammoth Lakes recreation area, with ranching as the local industry.
However, Fresno County saw one of the largest decreases in unemployment since 2010, surpassed only by Madera and Merced Counties, and closely followed by Tulare, San Benito, and Kings County.
FIGURE 3-28 REGIONAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATES, 2010-2022
Source: California EDD, 2022
The U.S. Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) reports the distance and direction between home and work for residents of each jurisdiction and the ratio between jobs and households. According to LEHD, approximately 72.8 percent of Fresno County’s labor force works within the county and 27.2 percent work outside Fresno County. In comparison, 37.7 percent of the Tulare County workforce, 52.7 percent of the Kings County workforce, and 56.7 percent of the Madera County workforce work outside of the county in which they reside. Of the 27.2 percent of the Fresno County labor force that commutes outside of the county, 4.2 percent travel to destinations within adjacent Tulare County, 3.8 percent travel to adjacent Madera County, and 1.6 percent travel to Kings County. Approximately 2.7 percent commute into Los Angeles County and 1.5 percent into Santa Clara County. Overall, approximately 27.2 percent of the individuals that work in Fresno County commute in from areas
17.1%
10.0%
16.5%
17.0%
18.4%
13.0%
10.4%
15.5%
17.6%
6.0%
3.1%
6.6%
5.7%
7.3%
5.8%
2.9%
4.6%
7.4%
0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0% 18.0% 20.0% Fresno County
Inyo County
Kings County
Madera County
Merced County
Monterey County
Mono County
San Benito County
Tulare County
2022 2010
164
301
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-56 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 outside of the county, with the largest shares coming in from Tulare County (4.8 percent), Madera County (3.8 percent), and Kings County (2.2 percent).
The greatest concentration of jobs are in the City of Fresno (71.2 percent of Fresno County jobs), City of Clovis (10.6 percent), City of Reedley (2.8 percent), City of Sanger (2.5 percent), and the City of Kerman (2.1 percent).
Approximately 57.3 percent of Fresno County residents live within 10 miles of their job. Of those residents commuting 10 to 24 miles, 24.6 percent commuted northwest into the City of Fresno from the southern jurisdictions of Fowler, Selma, Parlier, and Kingsburg, whereas 24.0 percent traveled south or southwest from the City of Fresno and Clovis towards the jurisdictions along SR 99. Approximately 17.6 percent of Fresno County residents report commuting more than 50 miles to their job, with 35.5 percent commuting northwest into the Bay Area, and 29.2 percent into Tulare County and towards Bakersfield. In comparison, 34.7 percent of residents in Madera County live within 10 miles of their job, and 21.7 percent live more than 50 miles from their job; in Tulare County, 45.7 percent of residents live within 10 miles of their job, and 25.0 percent live more than 50 miles from their job; and in Kings County, 38.7 percent of residents live within 10 miles of their job, with 24.5 percent living more than 50 miles from their job.
In Fresno County, the jobs-household ratio, which is an indicator of whether there is a balance between the number of jobs and the number of households, was 1.23 in 2020 according to 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS). This ratio suggests that there was a surplus of jobs in Fresno County to support the number of households, which may partially contribute to the number of commuters coming from outside of the county for work. This also indicates that there is a shortage of housing to support the job base in this region. Generally, Fresno County appears to have sufficient housing for those jobs in the county filled by residents, as 72.8 percent of the jobs in the county are filled by residents according to U.S. Census LEHD data. However, Fresno County still has a higher rate of unemployed persons than the overall rate of unemployment in the state regardless of the job opportunities, which also suggests that there is a lack of correlation between the types of employment opportunities in the region and the job qualifications and experience of the residents in Fresno County.
Educational Opportunities
School quality is often tied to housing, with neighborhoods or communities with higher median incomes and home values often having access to higher-performing schools than residents of lower-income neighborhoods. Income distribution influences home values and property taxes, and therefore funding for public schools. As such, school districts with higher concentrations of affordable housing typically have lower test scores in schools, creating a cyclical problem of not offering these students equal educational opportunities. Therefore, disparities in access to strong school opportunities serves as an indicator of fair housing and equal access to opportunities.
Each year, the California Department of Education (DOE) publishes performance metrics for public schools in the state, including student assessment results for English Language Arts and Mathematics as they compare to the state grade-level standards and demographic characteristics of each school’s student population. The characteristics reported on include rates of chronic absenteeism and suspension, percentage of students that are socioeconomically disadvantaged, percentage of students that are in foster care, percentage of students learning the English language, and the percentage of high school students that are prepared for college. Chronic absenteeism refers to the percentage of students who are absent for 10.0 percent or more of instructional days that they were enrolled at the 165
302
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-57 school, with the state average being 10.1 percent of students. Students who are eligible for free or reduced-priced meals, or who have parents or guardians who did not receive a diploma, are considered socioeconomically disadvantaged. TCAC and HCD rely on this data from DOE to determine the expected educational outcome in each census tract and block group within the state. TCAC and HCD’s educational domain score reflects mathematics proficiency, reading proficiency, high school graduation rates, and student poverty rates of all schools for which this data is available, culminating in a score ranging from 0 to 1, with higher values being the most positive expected educational outcome.
In 2021, TCAC/HCD reported the strongest projected educational outcomes for students in the cities of Clovis, Kingsburg, Sanger, and the unincorporated communities of Riverdale, Auberry, and Caruthers as well as the unincorporated areas east of Clovis and west of Sanger as well as portions of the county along the southern boundary from Riverdale to east of Reedley (Figure 3-29, Regional TCAC/HCD Educational Domain Scores). However, the unincorporated county areas with the highest educational scores according to TCAC/HCD, also have the lowest population density in the county, and likely either attend the higher-performing schools in adjacent jurisdictions or are home schooled. As such, for a regional analysis, the TCAC/HCD map may not accurately compare educational opportunity in Fresno County to the surrounding region. However, similar TCAC/HCD Educational Domain patterns are seen in adjacent Tulare, Merced, and Madera Counties. At the local level, data based on school performance is more readily available and likely more accurate.
166
303
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-58 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 FIGURE 3-29 REGIONAL TCAC/HCD EDUCATIONAL DOMAIN SCORES Source: TCAC/HCD, 2021
167
304
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-59 The HUD School Proficiency Index more accurately reflects school performance by residential living patterns in the region. The HUD School Proficiency Index ranges from 0 to 100, with higher values indicating better school performance. Though demographic patterns have changed throughout the region slightly since 2010, as discussed in the local assessment, typically schools in Fresno County and throughout the region are more proficient in areas of increased population density and affluence or in affluent unincorporated areas, particularly in the portions of the county east of the Cities of Clovis and Fresno (see Figure 3-30, HUD School Proficiency Index). Although residents of Fresno County in the vicinity of Fresno and particularly Clovis have access to higher-performing schools than the western portion of the county, schools throughout the remainder of Fresno County generally score lower than those in much of Monterey County, and portions of Tulare County, which correspond to higher-income areas. To ensure all students have access to a quality education, the local assessment identifies appropriate programs.
168
305
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-60 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 FIGURE 3-30 HUD SCHOOL PROFICIENCY INDEX
Source: HUD, 2020
169
306
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-61 Environmental Health
A disadvantaged community or environmental justice community (EJ Community) is identified by the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA) as “areas that are disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative health effects, exposure, or environmental degradation,” and may or may not have a concentration of low-income households, high unemployment rates, low homeownership rates, overpayment for housing, or other indicators of disproportionate housing need. In February 2021, the California Office for Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (COEHHA) released the fourth version of CalEnviroScreen, a tool that uses environmental, health, and socioeconomic indicators to map and compare community environmental scores. In the CalEnviroScreen tool, communities that have a cumulative score in the 75th percentile or above (25.0 percent highest score census tracts) are those that have been designated as disadvantaged communities under Senate Bill (SB) 535. The cumulative score that can result in a disadvantaged community designation is calculated based on individual scores from two groups of indicators: Pollution Burden and Population Characteristics. Pollution Burden scores exposure to negative environmental hazards, such as ozone concentrations; fine inhalable particles, with diameters that are generally 2.5 micrometers and smaller (PM2.5) concentrations; drinking water contaminants; lead risk from housing; traffic impacts; and more.
Population Characteristics scores the rate of negative health conditions and access to opportunities, including asthma, cardiovascular disease, poverty, unemployment, and housing cost burden. For each indicator, as with the cumulative impact, a low score reflects positive conditions.
Much of Fresno County, particularly the western area and the cities along the SR 99 corridor, have high cumulative scores, as shown in Figure 3-31, Regional CalEnviroScreen Percentiles. This is a result of high scores for indicators of pollution burden, primarily pesticides, drinking water contaminants, particulate matter, and ozone, although the western portion of the county is primarily agricultural land with limited residential development, so these scores are likely a result of agricultural industry practices. In the surrounding region, high percentiles are mostly concentrated in the urbanized communities along SR 99 and prevalent in the rural agricultural areas. Fresno County closely reflects the agricultural areas of Merced, Madera, Tulare, and Kings Counties. Within each jurisdiction of Fresno County, patterns differ as a result of level of urbanization and socioeconomic population characteristics; however, regionally, Fresno County reflects jurisdictions to the north and south rather than the eastern Mono and Inyo County and western San Benito and Monterey County jurisdictions.
The Public Health Alliance of Southern California developed the Healthy Places Index (HPI), a supplemental data tool, in partnership with the Virginia Commonwealth University’s Center on Society and Health. The tool maps an index of characteristics linked to more positive health outcomes. Community condition indicators include economic stability, neighborhood and built environment, health and access to health care, education, social and community context. Housing conditions discussed elsewhere in this analysis, such as rates of overcrowding or housing cost burden, are also included in the HPI. The HPI provides a single health metric for each Census tract using 25 community characteristics. Higher HPI values indicate healthier conditions. As shown in Figure 3-32, Healthy Places Index Percentile, the HPI also reflects agricultural areas as least healthy due in part to pesticides, dust, and agricultural runoff, as well as exposure to industrial and road pollution. Similar pollution sources also contribute to low (unhealthy) scores 170
307
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-62 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 in the more urbanized areas, particularly those along the SR 99 and SR 41 corridors in Tulare, Madera, Kings, and Merced Counties. The percentage of adults with health insurance is an important factor that drives lower HPI scores in Fresno County’s more rural areas, especially in the south and west parts of the county. Facets of the urban form, such as lack of park access, minimal active transportation use, and limited tree cover also contribute to lower scores throughout the county but particularly in its rural areas, which could be mitigated through park planning, landscaping as part of housing site plans, or local safe streets investments.
171
308
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-63 FIGURE 3-31 REGIONAL CALENVIROSCREEN PERCENTILES
Source: COEHHA, 2021
172
309
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-64 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 FIGURE 3-32 HEALTHY PLACES INDEX PERCENTILE
Source: PHASC, 2022
173
310
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-65 The counties within San Joaquin Valley and surrounding jurisdictions to the east and west in the Fresno County region have a challenging environmental context as a major agricultural producer and part of the San Joaquin Valley air basin, raising serious air and water quality concerns. Agricultural production can harm water quality by discharging fertilizer contaminants into the groundwater via runoff. Over time, the region’s water supply has contended with a wide range of contaminants, including nitrates, arsenic, and pesticides. Due to geographic, topographic, meteorologic, and environmental conditions, the region’s air basin has particular challenges for air quality. Given the regional context, the local assessment places an emphasis on assessing disproportionate impacts pollutant exposure has on disadvantaged communities or lower-income housing sites in their purview.
Disproportionate Housing Need and Displacement Risk
Overcrowding
Overcrowding occurs when the number of people living in a household is greater than the home was designed to hold. The U.S. Census Bureau considers a household overcrowded when there is more than one person per room, excluding bathrooms, hallways, and kitchens, and severely overcrowded when there are more than 1.5 occupants per room. A typical home might have a total of five rooms that qualify for habitation under this definition (three bedrooms, living room, and dining room). If more than five people were living in the home, it would be considered overcrowded. Overcrowding is strongly related to household size, particularly for large households, and the availability of suitably sized housing. A small percentage of overcrowded units is not uncommon, and often includes families with children who share rooms or multi-generational households. However, high rates of overcrowding may indicate a fair housing issue resulting from situations such as two families or households occupying one unit to reduce housing costs (sometimes referred to as “doubling up”). Situations such as this may indicate a shortage of appropriately sized and affordable housing units as overcrowding is often related to the cost and availability of housing and can occur when demand in a jurisdiction or region is high.
In Fresno County, approximately 6.1 percent of households experience overcrowding and 3.6 percent experience severe overcrowding, as presented in Table 2-21, Overcrowding by Tenure (2020), in the Needs Assessment.
Overcrowding is a greater problem among renter-occupied households, at 8.6 percent of households, which exceeds the statewide average of 5.2 percent compared to 3.9 percent of owner-occupied households, which falls below the statewide average.
As shown in Figure 3-33, Overcrowded Households in the Region, Fresno County has some areas in the City of Fresno, jurisdictions to the south along SR 99, and in the western jurisdictions with higher incidence of overcrowding, including concentrations above 20.0 percent of households. The overall rate of overcrowding countywide is lower compared to some of the counties in the region to the north and south along SR 99, and fairly equivalent to Merced and Kings Counties. Following the trends of several other fair housing indicators in the region, the overall rate of overcrowding is lower in Inyo, Mono, and San Benito Counties, although each has a particular tenure population experiencing a higher incidence of overcrowding. Among renter households, Fresno County has significantly lower overcrowding rates than Madera, Monterey, San Benito, and Tulare Counties (Figure 3-34, Reginal Overcrowded Households by Tenure), although the rates of severely overcrowded renters in Fresno County is higher than all counties except for Monterey County. Typically, areas with higher rates of lower-income households and more dense housing types have higher rates of overcrowding, as is seen in census tracts within or 174
311
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-66 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 adjacent to the incorporated jurisdictions in the region, although overcrowding also is shown in some of the agricultural areas, suggesting the presence of extended or large families or lack of appropriately sized housing units.
Many farmworkers pay market rates 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 unaffordable, workers may share a housing unit with other workers to afford housing costs, resulting in severely overcrowded living situations. The rate and pattern of overcrowding in Fresno County generally reflects the communities in the immediate region, with higher rates of renter overcrowding, although homeowner overcrowding rates are lower in Fresno County than the majority of jurisdictions in the region. The relatively lower rates of overcrowding in Fresno County may indicate that there are more appropriately sized housing opportunities at a range of price points to meet housing demand than is found in other areas of the region, although concentrations of overcrowding are more prevalent in the more densely developed City of Fresno. 175
312
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-67 FIGURE 3-33 OVERCROWDED HOUSEHOLDS IN THE REGION
Source: CHHS, 2021
176
313
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-68 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 FIGURE 3-34 REGIONAL OVERCROWDED HOUSEHOLDS BY TENURE
Source: 2016-2020 ACS
Overpayment
HUD considers housing to be affordable for a household if the household spends less than 30.0 percent of its income on housing costs. A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30.0 percent of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50.0 percent of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” In Fresno County, approximately 25.4 percent of all households were costburdened in 2020, and 16.3 percent were severely cost-burdened (Figure 3-35, Overpayment Rates in the Region). Of these households, a significantly larger proportion of renters experienced overpayment than owners.
This trend can be seen throughout both the region, on average over 15.0 percent of owners and over 22.0 percent of renters are cost burdened, and generally over 25.0 percent of homeowners and 20.0 percent of renters are severely cost burdened. Fresno County is comparable to surrounding counties, with 15.3 percent of owners and 25.4 percent of renters cost burdened and 10.1 percent of owners and 27.0 percent of renters severely cost burdened. While owner overpayment rates in Fresno County are comparable or slightly lower than the region overall (with the exception of Kings and Inyo Counties), renter overpayment rates are slightly higher (with the exception of Monterey County). This reflects feedback from stakeholders and service providers received for the San Joaquin Valley REAP, Taking Stock: A Comprehensive Housing Report for the San Joaquin Valley, in 2022. Stakeholders throughout the region reported a shortage of rental opportunities resulting in disproportionately high prices for tenants. 8.6% 1.5% 8.7% 15.5% 8.6% 12.4% 3.3% 10.1%11.6% 6.2% 1.5% 3.5%5.3% 3.2% 7.8% 0.0% 4.6% 3.4%3.9% 0.7% 3.9% 4.1% 4.3%5.40% 4.6% 2.10%
5.00%
1.0%
0.0%
1.2%
1.1%
1.3%
1.7%
0.0%
1.8%
1.6%
6.1%
1.4%
6.1%
8.0%
6.3%
8.8%
4.2%
4.9%
7.8%
3.6%
9.0%
2.3%
2.9%
2.2%
4.8%
0.0%
2.8%
2.4%
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
16.0%
18.0%
Fresno
County
Inyo County Kings County Madera
County
Merced
County
Monterey
County
Mono
County
San Benito
County
Tulare
County
Overcrowded Renters Severely Overcrowded Renters Overcrowded Homeowners Severely Overcrowded Homeowners Total Overcrowded Total Severely Overcrowded 177
314
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-69 FIGURE 3-35 OVERPAYMENT RATES IN THE REGION
Source: HUD, CHAS 2014-2018
Substandard Housing
As discussed in the Housing Needs Assessment, housing condition can be an indicator of quality of life. Substandard conditions present a barrier to fair housing as occupants are susceptible to health and safety risks associated with poor housing conditions, as well as at risk of displacement if conditions make the unit unhabitable or if property owners must vacate the property to conduct repairs. As housing units age, they deteriorate without ongoing maintenance, which can present a fair housing issue for occupants, reduce property values, and discourage private reinvestment in neighborhoods dominated by substandard conditions. Typically, housing over 30 years is more likely to need repairs or rehabilitation than newer units. As shown in Figure 3-36, Age of Housing Stock in the Region, approximately 64.8 percent of housing units in Fresno County are older than 30 years and may need repairs.
This is relatively comparable to adjacent Merced and Tulare Counties, at 62.2 and 62.7 percent, respectively, yet higher than Madera, Kings, and San Benito Counties, at 54.7, 58.3, and 59.5 percent respectively. However, Mono, Inyo, and Monterey Counties have a higher proportion of older housing than Fresno County, with the largest proportion of homes built during the 1970s. This may indicate a fairly comparable or slightly greater need for rehabilitation in Fresno County compared to the greater region with the exception of the counties that are at the eastern and western edges of the more centralized counties in the valley region. 25.4% 20.6% 22.3% 24.3% 23.7%29.2% 27.1%
26.1%
24.1%
27.0%
14.1%
19.1%
21.8%
20.3%
24.2%
8.4%
20.0%
24.3%
15.3%
9.1%
14.7%
16.7%
15.7%
17.9%
30.4%
24.4%
17.1%
10.1%
12.4%
8.5%
12.0%
9.5%
12.3%
9.5%
12.6%
12.8%
52.4%
34.7%
41.4%
46.1%
44.0%
53.4%
35.5%
46.1%
48.4%
25.4%
21.5%
23.2%
28.7%
25.2%
30.2%
39.9%
37.0%
29.9%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
Fresno
County
Inyo County Kings
County
Madera
County
Merced
County
Monterey
County
Mono
County
San Benito
County
Tulare
County
Renters Overpaying Renters Severely Overpaying Homeowners Overpaying Homeowners Severely Overpaying Total Renters Overpaying Total Homeowners Overpaying 178
315
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-70 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 FIGURE 3-36 AGE OF HOUSING STOCK IN THE REGION
Source: 2016-2020 ACS
Farmworkers
According to the 2014 San Joaquin Valley Fair Housing and Equity Assessment, Fresno County and adjacent counties have the highest farmworker population compared to other regions in California. Farmworkers often face unique challenges locating affordable housing due to a combination of a higher rate of this population having limited English language proficiency, very low incomes, challenges securing home loans, and barriers to qualifying for rental units. Additionally, USDA data collected at the state and national level indicates that familial composition of farmworkers has changed since 1996 to include more families and fewer individuals; therefore, farmworker housing needs have likely also shifted from primarily seasonal housing for migrant workers to more permanent affordable housing for low wage working families. Although housing for all household types of farmworkers must be accommodated, much of the housing need for family households is best met near services, educational facilities, amenities and other resources that are more readily available in suburban and urban areas.
The Association of Bay Area Governments has identified three types of farmworkers in the state:
Permanent Residents: Permanent residents of the county in which they work and may require housing which accommodates families and may fall into the extremely low-income category for seasonal workers who do not work in the off-season.
Migrant Farmworkers: Perform agricultural labor on a seasonal or temporary basis and typically need housing for individuals, such as single occupancy rooms, bunkhouses, or dormitory style living.
35.1%
17.3%
41.8%
45.4%
37.8%
24.2%
22.6%
40.8%
37.3%
64.8%
82.7%
58.3%
54.7%
62.2%
75.8%
77.3%
59.5%
62.7%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% Fresno County
Inyo County
Kings County
Madera County
Merced County
Monterey County
Mono County
San Benito County
Tulare County
Over 30 Years Less Than 30 Years
179
316
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-71 H-2A Visa Workers: Enter the U.S. under a federal guest worker program for a limited term and require a sponsor employer who provides housing, meals, and transportation to the job site.
The California Institute for Rural Studies (CIRS) reports that an estimated 85.0 percent of farmworkers in the state are from various regions in Mexico, and 5.0 percent from Central America, largely depending on which immigration period they entered the United States. An Indigenous Farmworker Study conducted in 2010 by California Rural Legal Assistance and other private parties estimated that approximately 25.0 percent of farmworkers statewide speak non-Spanish native languages of Mexico (including Zapoteco, Triqui and Mixteco), with significantly higher concentrations (up to one-third of farmworkers) in the Central Valley and Central Coast regions.
History of Farm Working
A history of farm working in the United States prepared by the National Farm Worker Ministry, an organization that advocates for and represents farmworkers, reports that following the Civil War, the gold rush and concurrent expansion of the railroad system led to California becoming a major agricultural center, in particular Fresno, Tulare, and Kern counties in the San Joaquin Valley. Initially, immigrants from China turned to agricultural labor as rail work diminished, followed by a wave of immigrants from elsewhere in Asia, primarily from Japan, the Philippines, and the Punjab province of India. According to federal law at the time, these newer immigrants were not allowed to own property or become citizens. During WWI, with most local American farm laborers engaged in the war, the demand for farmworkers increased. The Youth and Young Adults (YAYA) Timeline for Agricultural Labor in the U.S.A. reports that the first guestworker program was initiated in 1914 for Mexican labor to meet the need, ending in 1921. Following this, a combination of the Dust Bowl and the Depression brought a surge of migrant workers from the central states to California, as farmers were forced to sell their farms and travel west in search of work.
Concurrently, the population of Mexican migrant workers decreased, as pressure increased for this population to leave or be deported during what was called the Mexican Repatriation.
The 2014 San Joaquin Valley Fair Housing and Equity Assessment found that White Dust Bowl farm laborers lived in shacks, tent camps, trailers, even their vehicles, as the Farm Security Administration established only eight farm labor camps in the entire San Joaquin Valley region. Where camp accommodations were provided for non-White farmworkers, they were segregated from the White camps and typically substandard in comparison. Most farmworkers had to find lodging in less desirable neighborhoods in cities or rural settlements, many of which were largely devoid of infrastructure improvements. Labor laws that were passed in the 1930s did not apply to farm workers, excluding them from protections such as worker’s compensation, child labor, unionizing and collective bargaining, and overtime pay.
In August 1942, due to labor shortages associated with WWII, and six months after the start of the internment camps and the forced relocation of Japanese farmworkers, the federal government allowed for temporary contract laborers from Mexico as part of the Emergency Farm Labor Relief, or Bracero program. Although the Bracero program was initially established as a temporary wartime measure, Congress extended it through the late 1940s until it was ended in 1964. By the late 1950s, it is estimated that up to 200,000 of the laborers that migrated to the United States as part of this program worked in the San Joaquin Valley, many living in the vacated redlined urban neighborhoods left behind as previous immigrants integrated into the communities and were able to relocate, or within the post180 317
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-72 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Depression farm labor camps that had been inhabited by the White Dust Bowl migrant laborers. These communities expanded as immigrants from Mexico and Central America continued to fill cheap labor positions.
Many farmworker communities developed in rural areas, just outside of, or within, jurisdictions’ spheres of influence in the late 1900s, and often were not included in governmental investment of basic infrastructure as they generally were considered temporary accommodations. Additionally, many of these neighborhoods were exposed to higher rates of environmental pollution due to adjacency of major circulation routes, contaminated water systems associated with pesticides and agricultural runoff, and heavy industrial uses. Many of these neighborhoods have grown into established communities such as Del Rey, Cantua Creek, Easton, Five Points, Tranquility, and Raisin City, as well as others, yet continue to be underserved. These areas are analyzed in more detail in the local assessments of fair housing.
Key Housing Issues and Trends
The 2017 USDA Census of Agriculture reported 4,774 farms in Fresno County, a reduction from 5,683 in 2012.
Although the 2022 Census of Agriculture has not yet been released, it is likely that this trend that has continued as development occurs at the periphery of jurisdictions, as well as the effect of the drought. As shown in Figure 3-37, Regional Farm Operations and Agricultural Farmworkers, Fresno County has the largest number of agricultural operations in the region and 89.5 percent of its land designated for agriculture, followed by Tulare County with 4,187 farms and 81.8 percent of land designated for agriculture. North of Fresno County, both Madera and Merced Counties have fewer agricultural operations, with 1,386 and 2,337 farms, respectively, but a higher proportion of land designated for agriculture (88.2 percent in Madera County and 91.1 percent in Merced County).
Similarly, while Kings County only has 968 reported farm operations, 91.8 percent of its land is designated for agriculture. In contrast, counties west of Fresno County are less agriculturally oriented. Although there are 1,104 farms in Monterey County, only 61.3 percent of the land is designated for agriculture, and there are 610 farms in San Benito County with 75.6 percent of acreage designated for agriculture. Both Mono and Inyo Counties have fewer than 100 farms each, and therefore are not reflected on Figure 3-37. 181
318
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-73 FIGURE 3-37 REGIONAL FARM OPERATIONS AND AGRICULTURAL EMPLOYEES Source: 2016-2020 ACS and U.S. Census of Agriculture, USDA, 2017 Note: Inyo and Mono Counties are not included in chart as the proportion of persons employed in agriculture, forestry, fishing and wildlife was below 4.0 percent
Local stakeholders estimate that official counts of farmworkers significantly underestimate the true numbers, as undocumented residents often do not participate in traditional data collection methods. Further, farmworkers may be difficult to count due to their mobility, shared housing situations, and distrust of authorities. According to the 2016-2020 ACS, the largest concentration of farmworkers in the region are in Fresno County, although this population comprises only 8.8 percent of employed residents in Fresno County. Following Fresno County, Monterey and Tulare Counties have comparable numbers of farmworkers, but the population represents a notably higher proportion of the employed persons population in each county, at 15.8 and 15.6 percent of the labor force, respectively. Further, 15.0 percent of the labor force in Madera County, 15.4 percent in Kings County, and 11.7 percent in Merced County are employed in agricultural operations. Only San Benito (6.7 percent), Mono (2.0 percent), and Inyo Counties (3.7 percent) have lower proportional representations of farmworkers than Fresno County.
As discussed previously, farmworkers face unique housing challenges due to low wages, high poverty rates, linguistic isolation, and, in many cases, citizenship status. The composition of farmworker households is shifting from primarily migrant individual males to more family households, including a growing number of single femaleheaded households with children according to the CIRS COVID-19 Farmworker Survey. The combination of socioeconomic characteristics of farmworkers, in Fresno County suggest that the conventional housing resources generally available to such lower-income households often correspond to TCAC/HCD Areas of High Segregation and Poverty. Further, due to housing costs, multiple families or individuals may share a single-family unit, converted garages, or accessory structures. The correlation between potential areas where farmworkers may access 28,627
1,973
29,975
12,772
8,769
8,271
36,163
4,187
610
1,104
2,337
1,386
963
4,774
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 Tulare County
San Benito County
Monterey County
Merced County
Madera County
Kings County
Fresno County
Farm Operations Agricultural Employees and Farm Workers 182
319
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-74 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 affordable housing opportunities is discussed in more detail in each of the individual jurisdictions’ assessments of fair housing.
According to the State of California’s Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing, privately owned employee housing licensed by the State of California has been steadily diminishing and currently only accommodates a small fraction of agricultural workers in the state. According to HCD’s Employee Housing Facilities database, there are 562 units of farmworker employee housing throughout Fresno County with potential to house approximately 1,260 persons, including 6 set-aside units in Parlier Apartments in Parlier and Maldonado Plaza in Firebaugh. There are 645 units for H-2A workers, which can accommodate approximately 2,540 workers, which often are bunkhouses, dorms, or motel rooms. An additional 261 farmworker housing resources, including beds in the Parlier Migrant Center, single units, apartment complexes managed by the Fresno Housing Authority for seasonal and permanent occupancy, and 60 units of farmworker housing in Mendota, developed as part of the USDA Rural Area Development Program.
Between September 2021 and January 2022, the Fresno County conducted a Farmworker Survey and a Farmworker Employer Survey. A second round of each survey was conducted between February 2022 and July 2022. In total, the County surveyed 240 farmworkers, of whom 100 were homeowners, and 170 farm employers. Overall, less than 1 percent of all farmworkers surveyed desired to live in some type of farm labor housing, and 47.0 percent of nonhomeowner households desired homeownership opportunities for single-family units. Of farm employers, 25 currently have some type of farm labor housing on-site. Of those that do not have on-site farm labor housing, 28 reported that they would consider adding labor housing as single houses or cottages and 1 specified that they would consider adding apartment style farm labor housing. Based on phone conversations, dairy farmers were most interested in providing on-site housing due to the 24-hour staffing required. All employers indicated that they would consider adding housing if financing was provided by the government or through grants.
Housing Need
The surveys conducted by CIRS and Fresno County indicate that traditional farm labor and worker camp housing is not desired by most Fresno County farmworkers and laborers, and only a small number of Fresno County farm employers are interested in providing on-site housing if government subsidies were available. Further, based on survey results farmworkers expressed greater interest in off-site housing options, reflecting the concerns of farm employers of finding farmworkers to live in on-site units.
While many of the farmworkers in Fresno County may reside in communities where affordable housing resources are available, and some permanent residents may be eligible for HCVs, they must compete with other lower-income households, often resulting in overcrowding, substandard conditions, and overpayment. Often, particularly for single laborers, dwellings are converted garages, vehicles, farm buildings, or tents. Undocumented laborers face even greater challenges in securing housing. The shortage of affordable housing for the farmworker community represents a significant barrier to fair housing for this population in Fresno County, as well as the region and statewide. Throughout Fresno County, farmworkers face a disproportionate need for safe and affordable housing options that provide access to jobs as well as other resources and amenities. This need is analyzed locally to inform each jurisdiction’s Action Plan in the local Assessment of Fair Housing. 183
320
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-75 Displacement Risk
A combination of factors can result in increased displacement risk, particularly for lower-income households.
Displacement risk increases when a household is paying more for housing than their income can support, their housing condition is unstable or unsafe, and when the household is overcrowded. Each of these presents barriers to stable housing for the occupants. As discussed in the analyses of Patterns of Integration and Segregation, Overcrowding, and Overpayment, there are disproportionate patterns of concentrated poverty in the county that may correlate with increased displacement risk. The identification of over 40 areas of high segregation and poverty in the county is also a significant factor in the potential for displacement, particularly in the incorporated areas of Fresno, Sanger, Reedley, Orange Cove, Mendota, Huron, and San Joaquin, and unincorporated areas east and west of I-5 in the western portion of the county. Other factors contributing to the risk of displacement include those previously discussed, as well as vacancy rates, availability of a variety of housing options, and increasing housing prices compared to wage increases. Additionally, the increase in the incidence of both sheltered and unsheltered homelessness points to the correlation between housing affordability, income, and, in many cases, racial and ethnic characteristics. According to the Urban Displacement Project (Figure 3-38, Sensitive Communities, 2020), a large portion of Fresno County, largely corresponding to census tracts with low median incomes and high diversity and/or concentrations of populations of color, have been identified as sensitive communities, which are susceptible to changes if housing prices increase.
The annual rate of increase in average home value or rental prices compared with annual changes in the average income in the county may also indicate an increased risk of displacement due to housing costs outpacing wage increase, a trend that is felt throughout the region, state, and nation. Dramatic increases in home and rental prices have impacted residents throughout the county, though renters are typically disproportionately burdened by housing market increases in annual rate increases, compared to homeowners who have fixed-rate mortgages. For households attempting to enter the homeowner market for the first time, however, the cost of homes and rising interest rates present a barrier for lower-income households to attain homeownership.
According to Zillow and Redfin (July 2022), the average home value in Fresno County has increased 122.6 percent since 2013, an average of 15.3 percent annually. However, the annual average increase in home prices between 2013 and 2020 pre-pandemic was 7.6 percent, while the median home cost increased 12.7 percent during the height of the pandemic between 2020 and 2021, and 28.9 percent between 2021 and 2022. According to Zillow and Redfin, the median sales price of a home in Fresno County jumped from $291,409 in 2021 to $375,000 in 2022. As shown in Table 2-22, Home Sales Recorded 2021-2022, in the Needs Assessment, the survey of home sales in each jurisdiction, with the exception of the City of Clovis as no data was available at the time of the survey, and unincorporated areas conducted in May 2022 by CoreLogic, the highest increases in housing costs were seen in Kingsburg, Coalinga, and City of Fresno, followed by Fowler, Kerman, and Selma, as well as the unincorporated communities of Shaver Lake and Caruthers.
184
321
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-76 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 FIGURE 3-38 SENSITIVE COMMUNITIES, 2020
Source: Urban Displacement Project, 2021
185
322
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 3-77 While housing costs have increased rapidly, wages have not kept pace. The average median household income in Fresno County has increased an average of 3.1 percent annually from $45,741 in 2012 to $57,109 in 2020 according to 2016-2020 ACS data. Until 2020, the annual rate of increase in income was keeping a fairly steady pace with rising housing prices. However, between 2020 and 2022, based on a 2022 HCD estimate of Fresno County median income at $80,300, the annual rate of increase in household income was 6.8 percent, as compared to the rate of increase in housing prices discussed previously. The difference in these trends indicates growing unaffordability of housing in Fresno County.
In general, the Fresno County region has relatively low housing values and lower housing costs compared to many areas of the state; however, homeowners and renters experience housing cost burdens on par with state levels due to the region’s comparatively lower incomes. According to the San Joaquin Valley REAP 2022, estimated home values are at their highest point in decades. The impact of demographic shifts since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic are noticeable in home values in the Fresno County region, with values in several counties having risen nearly $100,000 since early 2020. As shown in Table 2-24, Fresno County Ability to Pay, in the Needs Assessment, the median home price in Fresno County is only affordable to moderate- and above moderate-income households, based on a family of four. Rent prices in Fresno County have also increased significantly and present a barrier to lower-income households at a comparable rate with home values, at 7.6 percent annually. Between 2014 and 2021, the average rent for a two-bedroom unit, for example, increased from $1,200 to $1,835 according to a Zillow 2021 survey, and was affordable only to moderate-income households and above.
Data from Rentcafe.com (2022) indicates that 7.0 percent of units in the City of Fresno rent for less than $1,000 monthly, 54.0 percent rent for $1,001 to $1,500 monthly,30.0 percent rent for $1,501 to $2,000 monthly, and 10.0 percent are above $2,000 monthly. However, these rent ranges do not differentiate between studio units and threeto four-bedroom units, and therefore the median rent estimate of $1,480 may not represent the overpayment and overcrowding challenges faced by special needs and larger households. Rentcafe.com also provides average rents for other jurisdictions in Fresno County and adjacent counties, with Clovis at $1,588, Coalinga at $1,114, Kerman at $1,167, Hanford at $1,581, Sanger at $1,093, Tulare at $1,787, Visalia at $1,691, and Merced at $1,262. The countywide rate of lower-income renter overpayment is 75.4 percent, with rates exceeding those in the cities of Fresno, Fowler, Reedley, Sanger, and Selma. As renter households within most of the Fresno County jurisdictions comprise between 40.0 and 60.0 percent of the total households, and lower-income renters tend to have higher rates of overpayment than moderate- and above moderate-income renter households, this constitutes a significant proportion of renter households. As discussed in the analysis of Patterns of Integration and Segregation, the highest rates of poverty along the SR 99 corridor are in the City of Fresno, Sanger, Selma, Parlier, and Reedley, corresponding to the highest rates of cost-burdened, low-income renter households. In comparison, the lowerincome renter overpayment rate in the unincorporated county is 13.5 percent.
In Fresno County, overpayment is pervasive and is not necessarily linked to areas with a lower median income, although within the county, 60.2 percent of lower-income homeowner households overpay as compared to 25.0 percent of total homeowners; and 75.4 percent of lower-income renters overpay compared to 52.2 percent of total renter households. The highest rates of lower-income homeowner overpayment above the countywide rate are present in Fresno, Kerman, Kingsburg, Mendota, Parlier, Reedley, Sanger, San Joaquin, and Sanger, while the lowest rates are found in the unincorporated county, Coalinga, Fowler, Firebaugh, and Huron. 186
323
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 3: REGIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
3-78 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Feedback received in response to the San Joaquin Valley REAP, Taking Stock: A Comprehensive Housing Report for the San Joaquin Valley, have identified that there is an overall lack of production at any price point, but particularly in multifamily construction and affordable units. For rentals, very low inventory and high cost to initiate tenancy (e.g., deposits, first and last month’s rent) may result in the need for hundreds or thousands of dollars up front to secure the rental unit.
According to the California Housing Partnership, the average cost of living for a family of three in the San Joaquin Valley is about $48,293. This regional cost of living is 14.0 percent below the regional median household income of $56,247; however, it is 66.0 percent higher than the state minimum wage income of $29,120. 187
324
Section , Item 9A.
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 4-i
OPPORTUNITIES FOR
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Opportunities for Residential Development ....................................................................... 4-1 Regional Housing Needs Allocation ................................................................................................... 4-1 Assembly Bill 1233 RHNA “Carry-Over” Analysis .............................................................................. 4-3 Availability of Land and Services ........................................................................................................ 4-3 Opportunities for Energy Conservation ............................................................................................ 4-13 TABLES
Table 4-1 2023-2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation by Jurisdiction ......................................................... 4-2 Table 4-2 Financial Resources ............................................................................................................................ 4-7 Table 4-3 Fresno Housing Authority Properties ................................................................................................ 4-10 4 188
325
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
4-ii FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 This page intentionally left blank.
189
326
Section , Item 9A.
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 4-1
OPPORTUNITIES FOR
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION
State law (California Government Code Section 65584) requires that each city and county plan to accommodate its share of the region’s housing construction needs, called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The RHNA is intended to promote an increase in the housing supply and mix of housing types, infill development, socioeconomic equity, and efficient development patterns; protect environmental and agriculture resources; and improve jobs/housing relationships.
The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is responsible for projecting the housing needs for each of the state’s regional governing bodies, or councils of governments. This demand represents the number of additional units needed to accommodate the anticipated growth in the number of households within each region. State law provides for councils of governments to prepare regional housing allocation plans that assign a share of a region’s housing construction need to each city and county.
In Fresno County, the Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG) is the entity authorized under state law to develop a methodology to distribute the future housing needs to the jurisdictions within the region. The jurisdictions and FCOG collaborated to determine how the regional need would be distributed among the jurisdictions. In October 2022, FCOG adopted its final Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan for the June 30, 2023, through December 31, 2031, RHNA projection period. As required by state law, the Plan divides the allocation of projected housing demand into four income categories:
Very low-income – Up to 50 percent of the area median income; Low-income – 51 to 80 percent of the area median income; Moderate-income – 81 to 120 percent of the area median income; and Above moderate-income – More than 120 percent of the area median income.
Adjusting the allocation by income category allows for a balanced distribution of lower-income households between jurisdictions. Based on the requirements of Assembly Bill (AB) 2634 (Statutes of 2006), each jurisdiction must also address the projected needs of extremely low-income households, defined as households earning less than 30 percent of the median income. The projected extremely low-income need can be assumed as 50 percent of total need for the very low-income households. Table 4-1 shows the RHNA for all jurisdictions in Fresno County, adjusted to include the projected needs for extremely low-income households. 4 190
327
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
4-2 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 State law also requires all jurisdictions in Fresno County, including the County of Fresno, to demonstrate that they have or will make available adequate sites with appropriate zoning and development standards to accommodate the RHNA. The following section discusses the assumptions for this analysis and Section 2 of Appendix 2 shows how each jurisdiction will meet this requirement through units built or under construction, planned or approved projects, and vacant and underutilized sites.
Table 4-1 2023-2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction
Housing Units by Income Level Total
Housing Very Low Units 1 Low Moderate Above
Moderate
Clovis 2,926 1,549 1,448 3,054 8,977
Coalinga 157 96 89 224 566
Firebaugh 102 46 66 229 443
Fowler 94 57 47 141 339
Fresno 9,440 5,884 5,638 15,904 36,866
Huron 45 45 55 174 319
Kerman 285 134 168 476 1,063
Kingsburg 248 161 150 323 882
Mendota 129 68 97 348 642
Orange Cove 66 49 86 268 469
Parlier 147 94 108 384 733
Reedley 403 183 211 666 1,463
San Joaquin 39 193 245 644 1,121
Sanger 412 28 36 97 573
Selma 393 165 233 701 1,492
Unincorporated County 706 391 370 883 2,350
Total County 15,592 9,143 9,047 24,516 58,298
1Adjusted to include extremely low-income units
Source: FCOG Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan, October 2022. 191
328
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 4-3 ASSEMBLY BILL 1233 RHNA “CARRY-OVER” ANALYSIS
AB 1233, passed in 2005, amended State Housing Element law (Government Code Section 65584.09) to promote the effective and timely implementation of local housing elements. This bill applies to jurisdictions that included programs in their previous housing elements to rezone sites as a means of meeting their previous RHNA, as well as jurisdictions who failed to adopt a State-certified housing element in the previous housing element cycle. Key provisions of Government Code Section 65584.09 state that where a local government failed to identify or make adequate sites available in the prior planning period, the jurisdiction must zone or rezone adequate sites to address the unaccommodated housing need within the first year of the new planning period. In addition to demonstrating adequate sites for the new planning period, the updated housing element must identify the unaccommodated housing need from the previous planning period.
These jurisdictions must identify their unaccommodated housing need from January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2023, RHNA projection period. Where applicable, an analysis has been included in the local jurisdictions section in Appendix 1.
The methodology used to calculate the unaccommodated need starts with the 2006-2013 RHNA and subtracts:
The number of units approved or constructed (by income category) since the beginning of the previous RHNA projection period start date (i.e., January 1, 20013); The number of units that could be accommodated on any appropriately zoned sites available during the previous RHNA projection period;
The number of units accommodated on sites that have been rezoned for residential development pursuant to the site identification programs in the element adopted for the previous planning period (if applicable); and
The number of units accommodated on sites rezoned for residential development independent of the sites rezoned in conjunction with the element’s site identification programs, as described previously.
If this analysis reveals an unaccommodated need (in any income category) from the 2013-2023 RHNA, the jurisdiction must adopt a program to rezone sites within the first year of the new planning period to meet the housing need pursuant to Government Code Sections 65584.09 and 65583(c)(1).
AVAILABILITY OF LAND AND SERVICES
The State law governing the preparation of housing elements emphasizes the importance of an adequate land supply by requiring that each housing element contain “an inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having potential for redevelopment, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites” (Government Code Section 65583(a)(3)). 192
329
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
4-4 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Units Built or Under Construction and Planned or Approved Projects Jurisdictions can credit units from approved or projects pending approval to meet a portion of the RHNA. Each jurisdiction’s Housing Element includes a list of all residential projects that are planned or approved and scheduled to be built by the end of the current RHNA projection period (December 31, 2023).
Accessory Dwelling Unit Potential
California Government Code Section 65583.1(a) states that a town, city, or county may identify sites for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) based on the number of ADUs developed in the prior Housing Element planning period, whether the units are permitted by right, the need for ADUs in the community, the resources or incentives available for their development, and any other relevant factors. Based on recent changes in state law reducing the time to review and approve ADU applications, requiring ADUs that meet requirements to be allowed by right, eliminating discretionary review for most ADUs, and removing other restrictions on ADUs, it is anticipated that the production of ADUs will increase in the 6th cycle Housing Element planning period.
Vacant and Underutilized Land Inventory
The residential land inventory is required “to identify sites that can be developed for housing within the planning period and that are sufficient to provide for the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need for all income levels” (Government Code Section 65583.2(a)). The phrase “land suitable for residential development” includes vacant and underutilized sites zoned for residential use as well as vacant and underutilized sites zoned for nonresidential use that allow residential development. All parcels (or portions of parcels) in the vacant and underutilized sites inventory were reviewed by local staff and the consultants to confirm vacancy status, ownership, adequacy of public utilities and services, possible environmental constraints (e.g., flood zones and steep slopes), and other possible constraints to development feasibility.
Sites Identified in Previous Housing Element
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65583.2(c), a nonvacant site identified in the previous planning period and a vacant site identified in two or more previous consecutive planning periods cannot be used to accommodate the lower-income RHNA unless the site is subject to an action in the Housing Element that requires rezoning within three years of the beginning of the planning period that will allow residential use by right for housing developments with at least 20 percent units affordable to lower-income households.
Affordability and Density
To identify sites that can accommodate a local government’s share of the RHNA for lower-income households, housing elements must include an analysis that demonstrates the appropriate density to encourage and facilitate the development of housing for lower-income households. The statute (Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(3)) provides two options for demonstrating appropriate densities:
193
330
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 4-5 Provide a detailed market-based analysis demonstrating how the adopted densities accommodate this need.
The analysis shall include, but is not limited to, factors such as market demand, financial feasibility, or information based on development project experience within a zone or zones that provide housing for lower-income households.
Use the “default density standards” that are “deemed appropriate” in state law to accommodate housing for lower-income households given the type of the jurisdiction. With the exception of the cities of Fresno and Clovis, all jurisdictions in Fresno County are considered “suburban jurisdictions” with a default density standard of 20 units per acre. HCD is required to accept sites that allow for zoning at this density as appropriate for accommodating a jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need for lower-income households. The cities of Fresno and Clovis are considered metropolitan jurisdictions and have a default density of 30 units per acre.
Density is a critical factor in the development of affordable housing. In theory, maintaining low densities typically increases the cost of land per unit and increases the amount of subsidy needed to ensure affordability while higherdensity development can lower per-unit land cost and facilitate construction in an economy scale.
Refer to each local jurisdiction’s Appendix 1 for a full sites analysis to meet the RHNA.
Adequacy of Public Facilities
One major constraint to new housing development is the availability and adequacy of infrastructure, including water and wastewater infrastructure. The unincorporated areas of the county are particularly constrained by a lack of infrastructure. The County of Fresno generally does not provide water and sewer services in existing unincorporated communities. These services are provided by independent community services districts. Most of the existing community services districts do not have excess capacity and would require significant expansion to accommodate any additional growth. For this reason, most new growth is directed to urban areas where infrastructure systems are more developed.
However, many of the cities also face infrastructure constraints. Water and sewer infrastructure needs to be extended into new-growth areas before development can occur, and existing infrastructure systems will require upgrades.
Jurisdictions rely on development impact fees to cover the cost of infrastructure improvements as they grow. These costs are added to the cost of new housing units, impacting affordability.
Water supply is one of the most critical issues for Fresno County. Jurisdictions in the county rely on a combination of groundwater and surface water. While projects in the county are served by independent wells or community facilities districts, cities typically have independent water sources either from a third party or a municipally operated system. During drought years or other mandated reductions for environmental purposes, total water supply can fluctuate from year to year. In rural areas, groundwater levels are dropping, causing domestic wells to dry up. 194
331
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
4-6 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Jurisdictions in Fresno County have and will continue to pursue grant funding to improve infrastructure availability and reliability. Furthermore, the jurisdictions may adopt, or work with local water providers to adopt, policies to grant priority for water and sewer service to proposed developments that include housing units affordable to lowerincome households.
Financial and Administrative Resources
Jurisdictions in Fresno County have access to a variety of existing and potential funding sources for affordable housing activities. These include programs from federal, state, local, and private resources. This section describes the key housing funding sources currently used in the city, which include Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from the state and Section 8 rental assistance. Table 4-2 lists a range of potential financial resources that may be used in these jurisdictions.
195
332
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 4-7 Table 4-2 Financial Resources
Program Name Description Eligible Activities
Federal
Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG)
Grants administered and awarded by the state
on behalf of HUD to cities through an annual
competitive process.
Acquisition
Rehabilitation
Homebuyer Assistance
Economic Development
Infrastructure Improvements
Homeless Assistance
Public Services
HOME Investment Partnership Act
Funds
Flexible grant program for affordable housing
activities awarded by the state on behalf of
HUD to individual cities through an annual
competitive process.
Acquisition
Rehabilitation
Homebuyer Assistance
New Construction
Section 8 Rental Assistance
Program
Rental assistance payments to owners of
private market-rate units on behalf of very
low-income tenants.
Rental Assistance
Section 203(k)
Single-family home mortgage program
allowing acquisition and rehabilitation loans
to be combined into a single mortgage.
Land Acquisition
Rehabilitation
Relocation of Unit
Refinancing of Existing
Indebtedness
State Programs
Emergency Shelter Grant Program
Program funds to rehabilitate and operate
emergency shelters and transitional shelters,
provide essential social services, and prevent
homelessness.
Support Services
Rehabilitation
Transitional Housing
Supportive Housing
Rural Development Loans and
Grants
Capital financing for farmworker housing.
Loans are for 33 years at 1 percent interest.
Housing grants may cover up to 90 percent of
the development costs of housing. Funds are
available under the Section 515 (Rental
Housing), Section 502 (Homeownership Loan
Guarantee), Section 514/516 (Farm Labor
Housing), and Section 523 (Mutual Self-Help
Housing) programs.
Purchase
Development/Construction
Improvement
Rehabilitation
Multifamily Housing Program
(MHP)
Deferred payment loans for new construction,
rehabilitation, acquisition, and preservation of
permanent and transitional rental housing.
New Construction
Rehabilitation
Acquisition
Preservation
California Housing Finance Agency
(Cal HFA) Residential
Development Loan Program
Low interest, short-term loans to local
governments for affordable infill, owneroccupied housing developments. Links with CalHFA’s Down Payment Assistance
Program to provide subordinate loans to firsttime buyers. Two funding rounds per year.
New Construction
Rehabilitation
Acquisition
California Housing Finance Agency
(Cal HFA) Homebuyer’s Down
Payment Assistance Program
CalHFA makes below market loans to firsttime homebuyers of up to 3% of sales price.
Program operates through participating
lenders who originate loans for CalHFA.
Funds available upon request to qualified
borrowers.
Homebuyer Assistance
196
333
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
4-8 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Program Name Description Eligible Activities
California Housing Finance Agency
(Cal HFA)
The Forgivable Equity Builder Loan gives
first-time homebuyers a head start with
immediate equity in their homes via a loan of
up to 10% of the purchase price of the home.
The loan is forgivable if the borrower
continuously occupies the home as their
primary residence for five years.
Homeowner Assistance
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
(LIHTC)
Tax credits are available to persons and
corporations that invest in low-income rental
housing. Proceeds from the sale are typically
used to create housing.
New Construction
Rehabilitation
California Self-Help Housing
Program
State program that provides technical
assistance grants and loans as well as deferred
payment conditionally forgivable mortgage
assistance loans for the rehabilitation or
construction of new affordable housing.
New Construction
Rehabilitation
CalHOME
Grants to cities and nonprofit developers to
offer homebuyer assistance, including down
payment assistance, rehabilitation,
acquisition/rehabilitation, and homebuyer
counseling. Loans to developers for property
acquisition, site development,
predevelopment, and construction period
expenses for homeownership projects
Predevelopment, Site
Development, Site
Acquisition
Rehabilitation
Acquisition/rehab
Down Payment Assistance
Mortgage Financing
Homebuyer Counseling
Tax Exempt Housing Revenue
Bond
Supports low-income housing development by
issuing housing tax-exempt bonds requiring
the developer to lease a fixed percentage of
the units to low-income families at specified
rental rates.
New Construction
Rehabilitation
Acquisition
Affordable Housing Sustainable
Communities Program
This program provides grants and/or loans, or
any combination, that will achieve GHG
emissions reductions and benefit
Disadvantaged Communities through
increasing accessibility of affordable housing,
employment centers, and key destinations via
low-carbon transportation.
New Construction
Local
First Time Homebuyer Assistance
Program (HAP)
The First Time Homebuyer Assistance
Program (HAP) offers no-interest loans of up
to 20 percent of a home's sale price to incomequalifying first-time home buyers. The buyer must contribute at least 1.5 percent of the sale
price and must purchase the house as their
primary residence.
Down Payment Assistance
Mortgage Financing
Housing Assistance Rehabilitation
Program (HARP)
This program provides no-interest loans to
income-qualifying households for moderate to
substantial home reconstruction/rehabilitation
projects. Code deficiencies, as well as ownerrequested non-luxury improvements, are addressed. HARP loans are funded by various
federal and state agencies and are specifically
designed to assist low-income families make
such improvements.
Rehabilitation
197
334
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 4-9 Program Name Description Eligible Activities
Rental Rehabilitation Program
(RRP)
This program offers zero-interest loans to
repair rentals in unincorporated areas and
participating cities. Loans cover the entire cost
of rehabilitation and are repaid over 20 years.
Rehabilitation
Habitat for Humanity – Greater
Fresno Area
Homeownership through sweat equity.
Homeowners also receive counseling and
training on homeownership and maintenance.
Homeowners buy their completed homes from
Habitat for Humanity and repay them over 30
years through an affordable mortgage
Homebuyer Assistance
Private Resources/Lender/Bank Financing
Federal National Mortgage
Association (Fannie Mae)
Community Homebuyers Program
Fixed rate mortgages issued by private
mortgage insurers. Homebuyer Assistance
Mortgages that fund the purchase and
rehabilitation of a home.
Homebuyer Assistance
Rehabilitation
Low down payment mortgages for singlefamily homes in underserved low-income and minority cities.
Homebuyer Assistance
California Community
Reinvestment Corporation (CCRC)
Nonprofit mortgage banking consortium
designed to provide long-term debt financing
for affordable rental housing. Nonprofit and
for-profit developers contact member banks.
New Construction
Rehabilitation
Acquisition
Federal Home Loan Bank
Affordable Housing Program
Direct subsidies to nonprofit and for-profit
developers and public agencies for affordable
low-income ownership and rental projects.
New Construction
Freddie Mac
Home Works – Provides first and second
mortgages that include rehabilitation loan.
County provides gap financing for
rehabilitation component. Households earning
up to 80% Median Family Income (MFI)
qualify.
Homebuyer Assistance
Combined with Rehabilitation
Bay Area Local Initiatives Support
Corporation (LISC)
Provides recoverable grants and debt
financing on favorable terms to support a
variety of community development activities
including affordable housing.
Acquisition
New Construction
Rehabilitation
Northern California Community
Loan Fund (NCCLF)
Offers low-interest loans for the revitalization
of low-income communities and affordable
housing development.
Acquisition
Rehabilitation
New Construction
Low-Income Investment Fund
(LIHF)
Provides below-market loan financing for all
phases of affordable housing development
and/or rehabilitation.
Acquisition
Rehabilitation
New Construction
Administrative Resources
RH Community Builders
RH Community Builders is a nonprofit
housing developer active in the region. The
organization develops cost effective, high
quality, permanently affordable housing
throughout the Central Valley and beyond.
RH Community Builders is focused on
building a multi-faceted approach to ending
homelessness in the Central Valley. By
assisting community members in accessing
needed services and increasing the inventory
of affordable housing.
New Construction
Rehabilitation
Acquisition
198
335
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
4-10 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Administrative Capacity
Beyond local city and county staff that administer housing programs, there are a number of agencies and organizations that are important in the overall delivery system of housing services in the region, including new construction, acquisition and rehabilitation, and preservation of affordable housing.
Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission
The Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission (Fresno EOC) is a private nonprofit corporation governed by a 24-member tripartite Board of Commissioners. The Fresno EOC provides services that include energy services such as the weatherization program for both homeowners and renters in Fresno County who are income eligible.
Fresno Housing Authority
The Fresno Housing Authority provides affordable housing to over 50,000 residents throughout Fresno County, either through Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) or in Housing Authority-owned complexes. Specifically, the HCV program is assisting 12,000 households. As of October 2015, there are 42,587 residents outside the City of Fresno on the waitlist for HCVs. Applicants are randomly selected through a lottery system.
Table 4-3 shows the subsidized rental units owned and/or managed by the Fresno Housing Authority throughout the county.
Table 4-3 Fresno Housing Authority Properties
Community/
Apartment Complex Location Number of Units
Biola
Biola Apartments 4955 North 7th Avenue 12
Del Rey
Del Rey Apartments 5662 South Oak Lane Avenue 30
Firebaugh
Cardella Courts 419 P Street 32
La Joya Commons (Firebaugh
Family Apartments) 1501 Clyde Fannon Road 34
Firebaugh Elderly 1662 Thomas Conboy Avenue 30
Maldonado Plaza 1779 Thomas Conboy Avenue 64
Mendoza Terrace 1613 Mendoza Drive 50
Mendoza Terrace II 1661 Allardt Drive 40
Rio Villas 1238 P Street, Firebaugh 30
Fowler
Magnolia Commons (Magill Plaza) 325 East Vine Street 60 199
336
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 4-11 Community/
Apartment Complex Location Number of Units
Fresno
541 (South Tower) 541 South Tower, North Fulton Street 14 Alegre Commons 130 West Barstow Avenue 42
Bridges at Florence 649 East Florence Avenue 34
Brierwood 4402 West Avalon Avenue 74
Cedar Courts 4430 East Hamilton Avenue 119
Cedar Courts II 4430 East Hamilton Avenue 30
City View at Van Ness 802 Van Ness Avenue 45
Dayton Square 3050 East Dayton Avenue 66
DeSoto Gardens 640 East California Avenue 40
DeSoto Gardens II 640 East California Avenue 28
El Cortez Apartments 4949 North Gearhart Avenue 48
Fairview Heights Terrace 2195 South Maud 74
Fenix at Calaveras 250 North Calaveras Street 22
Fenix at Glenn 172 North Glenn Avenue 8
Garland Gardens 3726 North Pleasant Avenue 51
Golden State Triage Center 1415 West Olive Avenue, Fresno 48 Inyo Terrace 510 South Peach Avenue 44
Marcelli Terrace 4887 North Barcus Avenue 24
Mariposa Meadows 1011 West Atchison Avenue 40
Monte Vista Terrace North 1st Street and East Tyler Avenue 44 Pacific Gardens 5161 East Kings Canyon Road 56
Parc Grove Commons South 2674 East Clinton Avenue 363
Pinedale Apartments 160 West Minarets Avenue 50
Renaissance at Alta Monte 205 North Blackstone Avenue 30 Renaissance at Santa Clara* t 1555 Santa Clara Street 70 Renaissance at Trinity 524 South Trinity Street 21
San Ramon 1328 East San Ramon Avenue 32
Sequoia Courts 515 South Modoc Street 60
Sequoia Courts Terrace 549 S. Thorne Avenue 78
Sierra Plaza 838 Tulare Street 70
Sierra Pointe** 1233 West Atchison Avenue 53
Sierra Terrace 937 Klette Avenue 72
Step Up 99 1240 North Crystal Avenue 99
200
337
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
4-12 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Community/
Apartment Complex Location Number of Units
Sun Lodge 1101 North Parkway Drive 98
The Arthur at Blackstone 3039 North Blackstone Avenue 41 The Monarch at Chinatown 1101 F Street 57
The Villages at Broadway 1828 Broadway Street 26
The Villages at Paragon 4041 Plaza Dr E 28
Viking Village 4250 North Chestnut Avenue 40
Villa del Mar 3950 North Del Mar Avenue 48
Woodside Apartments 3212 East Ashcroft Avenue 76
Yosemite Village 709 West California Avenue 69
Huron
Cazares Terrace 36487 O Street 24
Cazares Terrace II 36333 Mouren Street 20
Corazon Del Valle Commons 17053 12th Street 61
Parkside Apartments 36200 North Giffen Avenue 50
Kerman
Granada Commons 14570 California Avenue 16
Helsem Terrace 938 South 9th Street 40
Kingsburg
Linnaea Villas 2530 Sierra Street 47
Marion Villas 1600 Marion Street 48
Laton
Laton Apartments 6701 East Latonia Street 20
Mendota
Mendota RAD Apartments 778 Quince Street 60
Esperanza Commons 241 Tuft Street 60
Rios Terrace 424 Derrick Avenue 24
Rios Terrace II 111 Straw Street 40
Orange Cove
Citrus Gardens 201 Citrus Avenue and 452 10th Street 30 Kuffel Terrace 791 I Street 60
Mountain View Apartments 1270 South Avenue 30
Parlier
Oak Grove 595 Bigger Street 50
Orchard Commons* 295 South Newmark Avenue 41
Parlier Migrant Center* 8800 South Academy Avenue 131
201
338
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 4-13 Community/
Apartment Complex Location Number of Units
Reedley
Sunset Terrace 629 East Springfield Avenue 20
Sunset Terrace II 806 Lingo Avenue 20
Kings River Commons 2020 E. Dinuba Avenue 60
Sanger
Blossom Trail Commons 285 J Street 48
Elderberry at Bethel 2505 5th Street 74
Wedgewood Villas 2415 5th Street 64
San Joaquin
San Joaquin Apartments 8610 South Pine Avenue 20
Taylor Terrace 8410 5th Street 28
Selma
Cueva De Oso (William Shockley
Plaza) 1445 Peach Street 48
TOTAL 4,048
Source: Fresno Housing Authority, 2022.
Notes:
* Including one manager's unit
** Single-family homes
Nonprofit Housing Providers
There are numerous nonprofit organizations that are active in constructing, managing, and preserving affordable housing in the region. According to Affordable Housing Online, there are 12,585 units of affordable housing in 138 properties throughout the county, including those operated by the Housing Authority. More than half of these affordable units are in the City of Fresno; however, every city and several unincorporated communities also contain affordable housing units. Within the smaller cities and unincorporated areas, one of the more active nonprofit housing providers has been Self-Help Enterprises. Self-Help Enterprises focuses on providing self-help housing, sewer and water development, housing rehabilitation, multifamily housing, and homebuyer programs in the San Joaquin Valley of California. They currently assist the City of Coalinga to oversee their housing rehabilitation and down payment assistance programs.
OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENERGY CONSERVATION
State law requires an analysis of the opportunities for energy conservation in residential development. Energy efficiency has direct application to affordable housing since higher energy bills result in less money available for rent or mortgage payments. High energy costs have particularly detrimental effects on low-income households that do not have enough income or cash reserved to absorb cost increases and many times must choose between basic needs, such as shelter, food, and energy.
202
339
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
4-14 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 California Building Code, Title 24
California Title 24 regulations require higher energy-efficiency standards for residential and nonresidential buildings. The building code provides a great deal of flexibility for individual builders to achieve a minimum “energy budget” through the use of various performance standards. These requirements apply to all new residential construction, as well as all remodeling and rehabilitation construction.
Utility Programs
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), which provides electricity service in Fresno County, provides a variety of energy conservation services for residents as well as a wealth of financial and energy-related assistance programs for low-income customers:
The Budget Billing Program (BPP). Designed to eliminate big swings in customer monthly payments by averaging energy costs over the year.
CARE (California Alternate Rates for Energy). PG&E provides a 20 percent discount on monthly gas and energy bills for low-income households.
Energy Savings Assistance Program: Provides low-income customers with energy-efficiency upgrades such as attic insulation, caulking, weather stripping, water-saving devices, and energy-efficient lighting. Multifamily Energy Savings Program: Offers cash incentives on the installation of new, energy-efficient equipment or systems.
The Family Electric Rate Assistance (FERA) Program. PG&E provides a rate reduction program for low-income households of three or more people.
REACH (Relief for Energy Assistance through Community Help). The REACH program is sponsored by PG&E and administered through the Salvation Army. PG&E customers can enroll to give monthly donations to the REACH program. Through the REACH program, qualified low-income customers who have experienced unforeseen hardships that prohibit them from paying their utility bills may receive an energy credit up to $200.
The Fresno Economic Opportunities Commission (FEOC) operates over 35 human service programs designed to reduce poverty, increase self-sufficiency, and build stronger communities. The agency budget is approximately $100 million annually with funding from private, local, regional, state, and federal sources. One of the programs includes energy services such as free solar panel installation and weatherization programs:
Free Home Solar Program: The Transform Fresno Project provides up to a 6,000 Watts solar system for homes in the designated project area. The solar system and installation are 100 percent free. Homeowners will own the system free and clear. A limited number of systems are available. Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP): Provides financial assistance to help offset an eligible Fresno County household’s home energy cost.
203
340
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 4-15 Weatherization services: Homeowners and renters in Fresno County who are income-eligible can qualify for weatherization services with qualified mobile homes, apartments, houses, and condos. Weatherization measures include:
Weather-stripping doors and caulking windows or gaps around home Testing, repairing, or replacement of refrigerators, water heaters, heating and/or cooling systems, and cooking appliances
Insulating exterior walls, ceilings, and floors
Installing low-flow shower heads
Upgrading interior and exterior lighting services to LED Duct repair and replacement
204
341
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 4: OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
4-16 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 This page intentionally left blank.
205
342
Section , Item 9A.
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 5-i
HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Housing Constraints ................................................................ 5-1 Governmental Constraints ......................................................................................................... 5-1 Nongovernmental Constraints ................................................................................................. 5-13 TABLES
Table 5-1 Statewide Density Bonus Parking Standards ......................................................................... 5-3 Table 5-2 Fresno COG Transportation Impact Fee .............................................................................. 5-10 Table 5-3 Listed Land Prices, Incorporated Cities (2022) .................................................................... 5-13 Table 5-4 Listed Land Prices, Unincorporated Areas (2022) ............................................................... 5-14 Table 5-5 Land Sale Prices, Incorporated Cities (August 2022) .......................................................... 5-14 Table 5-6 Land Sale Prices, Unincorporated Areas (August 2022) ..................................................... 5-14
FIGURES
Figure 5-1. Historical Mortgage Interest Rates, United States 2015-2022 ............................................. 5-16
5 206
343
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
5-ii FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 This page intentionally left blank.
207
344
Section , Item 9A.
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 5-1
HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
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 nongovernmental 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 on the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities.
Nongovernmental constraints are not specific to each community and are described in this section at the regional level. Governmental constraints, on the other hand, are specific to each local government and are described only generally in this section. The appendices contain a more detailed governmental constraints analysis for each local government.
GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
Local governments have little or no influence on the national economy or the federal monetary policies that influence it. Yet, these two factors have some of the most significant impacts on the overall cost of housing.
The local housing market, however, can be encouraged and assisted locally. One purpose of the housing element is to require local governments to evaluate their past performance in this regard. By reviewing local conditions and regulations that may impact the housing market, the local government can prepare for future growth through actions that protect public health and safety without unduly adding to the cost of housing production.
It is in the public interest for a local government agency to accommodate development while protecting the general welfare of the community, through a regulatory framework/environment. At the same time, government regulations can potentially constrain the supply of housing available in a community if the regulations limit the opportunities to develop housing, impose requirements that unnecessarily increase the cost to develop housing, or make the development process so arduous as to discourage housing developers.
Land Use Controls
Land use controls provided in the general plan and the zoning ordinance influence housing production in several ways. The permitted and conditionally permitted uses in each district guide new development and provide both developers and the public with an understanding of how vacant land will develop in the future.
This includes the density of development that will occur within a particular zone, the compatibility of planned uses in a given area, and the range and type of buildings and uses that will be located throughout the city or the county.
5 208
345
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
5-2 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 General Plan
Each city and county in California must prepare a comprehensive, long-term general plan to guide growth and development. The land use element of the general plan must contain land use designations, which establish the basic allowed land uses and density of development for the different ranges and areas within the jurisdiction. Under State law, the zoning districts must be consistent with the general plan land use designations. The general plan land uses must provide suitable locations and densities to accommodate each jurisdiction’s regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) and implement the policies of the housing element. Appendix 2 provides a description of each jurisdiction’s general plan land use designations.
Zoning Ordinance
Land use controls provided in the zoning ordinance influence housing production in several ways. The permitted and conditionally permitted uses in each district guide new development and provide both developers and the public with an understanding of how vacant land will develop in the future. This includes the density of development that will occur within a particular zone, the compatibility of planned uses in a given area, and the range and type of buildings and uses that will be located throughout the jurisdiction.
Local governments regulate the type, location, and scale of residential development primarily through the zoning ordinance. The zoning ordinance implements the general plan. It contains development standards for each zoning district consistent with the land use designations of the general plan. Appendix 2 provides a description of each jurisdiction’s zoning districts and development standards.
Residential Development Standards
Each jurisdiction’s zoning ordinance contains development standards for each zoning district. These standards vary by jurisdiction, but typically include density, parking requirements, lot coverage, height limits, lot size requirements, setbacks, and open space requirements. The Housing Element must analyze whether development standards impede the ability to achieve maximum allowable densities.
Parking
Parking requirements do not constrain the development of housing directly. However, parking requirements may reduce the amount of available lot areas for residential development. Most of the participating jurisdictions require two parking spaces per single-family dwelling unit. Several, but not all jurisdictions, have reduced parking standards for multifamily and elderly housing.
Open Space and Park Requirements
Open space and park requirements can decrease the affordability of housing by increasing developer fees and/or decreasing the amount of land available on a proposed site for constructing units. All jurisdictions require that park space is set aside in new subdivisions, or that developers pay a fee in lieu of providing parks.
209
346
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 5-3 Density Bonus
Under current state law (Government Code Section 65915), cities and counties must provide a density increase up to 80 percent over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the Municipal Code and the Land Use Element of the General Plan (or bonuses of equivalent financial value) when builders agree to construct housing developments with 100 percent of units affordable to low- or very lowincome households.
Density bonus law also imposes statewide parking standards that a jurisdiction must grant upon request from a developer of an affordable housing project that qualifies for a density bonus. These parking standards are summarized in Table 5-1. These numbers are the total number of parking spaces, including guest parking and handicapped parking. The developer may request these parking standards even if they do not request the density bonus. Appendix 2 provides a description of whether or not individual jurisdictions comply with California’s density bonus law.
Table 5-1 Statewide Density Bonus Parking Standards
Number of Bedrooms Required On-Site Parking
Studio/1 bedroom 1 space
2 to 3 bedrooms 1.5 space
4 or more bedrooms 2.5 spaces
Source: Government Code Section 65915 (9)(p)(1)
Growth Control
Growth-control ordinances or policies are designed to limit the amount or timing of residential development. Since growth-control policies, by definition, constrain the production of housing, local governments must analyze whether or not local growth-control policies limit the ability to meet the RHNA.
Most jurisdictions have not adopted growth-control policies. Appendix 2 describes which jurisdictions have other growth-control policies or ordinances.
While not a form of growth control, all jurisdictions in Fresno County are subject to the City/County memorandum of understanding (MOU), which establishes procedures for annexation of land to cities. The City/County MOU encourages urban development to take place within cities and unincorporated communities where urban services and facilities are available or planned to be made available in an effort to preserve agricultural land. The MOU standards for annexation require that a minimum of 50 percent of annexation areas have an approved tentative subdivision map or site plan. Therefore, cities must wait for private developers to request an annexation before initiating an annexation. In cities that are mostly built out within their current city limits, the MOU limits the cities’ ability to accommodate future housing needs.
While cities can take certain steps to “prezone” land in advance of annexation, the annexation of land into the city limits is not entirely within the cities’ control. 210
347
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
5-4 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Airport Land Use Compatibility
State law requires each local agency having jurisdiction over land uses within an Airport Influence Area (AIA) to either: (1) modify its general plan, zoning ordinance, or other applicable land use regulation(s) to be consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP); or (2) overrule all or part of the ALUCP within 180 days of its adoption. If a city or county fails to take either action, the agency is required to submit all land use development proposals to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for consistency review until such time as the ALUC deems their general plan consistent with the ALUCP. The Fresno Council of Governments (COG) Airport Land Use Commission has completed ALUCPs for airports within its jurisdiction. The following are the most recently adopted plans for public airports in Fresno County. Coalinga Airport Land Use Plan
Fresno County Airports Land Use Policy Plan
Fresno-Chandler Executive Airport Land Use Plan
Fresno Yosemite International Airport Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Harris Ranch Land Use Plan
Reedley Airport Land Use Plan
Selma-Reedley-Firebaugh-Mendota Airports Land Use Plans Sierra Sky Park Land Use Plan
The ALUCP has the potential to constrain residential development, if deemed incompatible with the ALUCP. No incompatibility has been identified with existing General Plan land uses and none is anticipated in the future. Sites identified in the residential sites inventory are not constrained by the land use compatibility requirements of any ALUCP. As such, the ALUCP is not considered a significant constraint in Fresno County and is not addressed in Appendix 2.
Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types
State Housing Element law (Government Code Section 65583(c)(1) and 65583.2(c)) requires that local governments analyze the availability of sites that will facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobile homes, housing for farmworkers and employees, emergency shelters, transitional and supportive housing, single-room occupancy (SRO) units, group homes and residential care facilities, and second dwelling units.
Multifamily
Multifamily housing includes duplexes, apartments, condominiums, or townhomes, and is the primary source of affordable housing. Appendix 2 provides descriptions of the restrictions on multifamily housing units in each jurisdiction.
211
348
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 5-5 Manufactured Housing
Manufactured housing can serve as an alternative form of affordable housing in low-density areas where the development of higher-density multifamily residential units is not allowed or not feasible because of infrastructure constraints. California Government Code Sections 65852.3 and 65852.4 specify that a jurisdiction must allow manufactured homes on a foundation on all “lots zoned for conventional single family residential dwellings.” Permanently sited manufactured homes built to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Code are subject to the same rules as site-built homes, except architectural requirements concerning the manufactured home’s roof overhang, roofing materials, and siding materials.
The only two exceptions that local jurisdictions are allowed to make to the manufactured home siting provisions are if: (1) there is more than 10 years’ difference between the date of manufacture of the manufactured home and the date of the application for the issuance of an installation permit; or (2) if the site is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and regulated by a legislative body pursuant to Government Code Section 37361.
Appendix 2 provides descriptions of the allowances and restrictions on manufactured homes in each jurisdiction and whether the zoning ordinances in the jurisdictions comply with State law requirements for manufactured homes.
Farmworker Housing/Employee Housing Act
The Employee Housing Act (Health and Safety Code Sections 17021.5 and 17021.6) requires jurisdictions to permit employee housing for six or fewer employees as a single-family use. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) also indicates that employee housing shall not be included within the zoning definition of a boarding house, rooming house, hotel, dormitory, or other similar term that implies that the employee housing is a business run for profit or differs in any other way from a family dwelling. Jurisdictions cannot impose a conditional use permit, zoning variance, or other zoning clearance of employee housing that serves six or fewer employees that are not required of a family dwelling of the same type in the same zone. In addition, in any zone where agriculture is permitted or allowed by a conditional use permit, employee housing containing up to 36 beds and 12 units must be treated as an agricultural use. No conditional use permit, zoning variance, or other zoning clearance shall be required for this type of employee housing that is not required of any other agricultural activity in the same zone.
Appendix 2 provides an analysis of whether or not each jurisdiction complies with the Employee Housing Act.
212
349
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
5-6 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Emergency Shelters
Emergency shelters are defined by the California Health and Safety Code (Section 50801) as:
Housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of six months or less by a homeless person. No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay”
Senate Bill (SB) 2 (Government Code Section 65583) was enacted in 2008 to support the needs of the homeless by removing barriers to and increasing opportunities for development of emergency shelters. SB 2 requires every jurisdiction in California to identify a zone (or zones) where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a conditional use permit or other discretionary permit. To address this requirement, a local government may amend an existing zoning district, establish a new zoning district, or establish an overlay zone. The zone(s) must provide sufficient opportunities for new emergency shelters to meet the homeless need identified in the analysis and must in any case accommodate at least one yearround emergency shelter. SB 2 requires that emergency shelters only be subject to those development and management standards that apply to residential or commercial use within the same zone, except the local government may apply certain objective standards, as follows:
The maximum number of beds or persons permitted to be served nightly by the facility. Off-street parking based on demonstrated need, provided that the standards do not require more parking for emergency shelters than for other residential or commercial uses within the same zone. The size and location of exterior and interior on-site waiting and client intake areas. The provision of on-site management.
The proximity to other emergency shelters provided that emergency shelters are not required to be more than 300 feet apart.
The length of stay.
Lighting.
Security during hours that the emergency shelter is in operation.
Assembly Bill (AB) 2339 (Government Code Section 65583 (a)(4)) requires jurisdictions provide a calculation methodology for determining the sufficiency of sites available to accommodate emergency shelters in the identified zoning designation.
Appendix 2 analyzes each jurisdiction’s compliance with State law requirements for emergency shelters.
Low-Barrier Navigation Centers
Government Code Section 65662 requires that the development of low-barrier navigation centers be developed as a use by right in zones where mixed uses are allowed or in nonresidential zones that permit multifamily housing. For a navigation center to be considered “low barrier,” its operation should 213
350
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 5-7 incorporate best practices to reduce barriers to entry, which may include, but are not limited to, the following:
Permitting the presence of partners if it is not a population-specific site, such as for survivors of domestic violence or sexual assault, women, or youth
Pets
Ability to store possessions
Providing privacy, such as private rooms or partitions around beds in a dormitory setting or in larger rooms with multiple beds
Appendix 2 analyzes each jurisdiction’s compliance with State law requirements for low-barrier navigation centers.
Transitional and Supportive Housing
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583, transitional and supportive housing shall be treated as a residential use and allowed in all zones that allow residential uses, subject only to those restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone.
According to recent changes in State law, Government Code Sections 65650 and 65583 (AB 2162), states that the City must also allow 100 percent affordable projects that include 25 percent, or 12 units of supportive housing, by right where multi-unit and mixed-use development is permitted. The Housing Element includes an implementation program to comply with this new provision of State law. Transitional housing is a type of housing used to facilitate the movement of homeless individuals and families to permanent housing. Residents of transitional housing are usually connected to supportive services designed to assist the homeless in achieving greater economic independence and a permanent, stable living situation.
Transitional housing can take several forms, including group quarters with beds, single-family homes, and multifamily apartments; and typically offers case management and support services to help return people to independent living (often six months to two years).
The State defines transitional housing as:
“Transitional housing” shall mean buildings configured as rental housing developments, but operated under program requirements that require the termination of assistance and recirculating of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at a predetermined future point in time that shall be no less than six months from the beginning of the assistance (Health and Safety Code Section 50675.14).
Supportive housing links the provision of housing and social services for the homeless, people with disabilities, and a variety of other special-needs populations. Similar to transitional housing, supportive housing can take several forms, including group quarters with beds, single-family homes, and multifamily apartments. The State defines supportive housing as:
214
351
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
5-8 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 “Supportive housing” shall mean housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community (Health and Safety Code Section 50675.2(h)).
The State defines the target population as:
“Target population” shall mean persons with low incomes who have one or more disabilities, including mental illness, HIV or AIDS, substance abuse, or other chronic health condition, or individuals eligible for services provided pursuant to the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act (Division 4.5 (commencing with Section 4500) of the Welfare and Institutions Code) and may, among other populations, include families with children, elderly persons, young adults aging out of the foster care system, individuals exiting from institutional settings, veterans, or homeless people (Health and Safety Code Section 53260(d)).
Appendix 2 analyzes compliance with State law requirements for transitional and supportive housing in each jurisdiction.
Single-Room Occupancy Units
Single-room occupancy (SRO) unit means a living or efficiency unit, as defined by California Health and Safety Code Section 17958.1, intended or designed to be used, as a primary residence by not more than two persons for a period of more than 30 consecutive days and having either individual bathrooms and kitchens or shared bathrooms and/or kitchens. SRO units can provide affordable private housing for lower-income individuals, seniors, and persons with disabilities. These units can also serve as an entry into the housing market for formerly homeless people. Appendix 2 provides descriptions of the allowances and restrictions for SRO units in each jurisdiction.
Group Homes/Residential Care Facilities
The Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act (Lanterman Act) and Health and Safety Code Sections 1267.8, 1566.3, and 1568.08 sets out the rights and responsibilities of persons with developmental disabilities. A State-authorized, certified, or licensed family care home, foster home, or a group home serving six or fewer disabled persons or dependent and neglected children on a 24-hour-a-day basis must be considered a residential use that is permitted in all residential zones. Local agencies must allow these licensed residential care facilities in any area zoned for residential use and may not require licensed residential care facilities for six or fewer persons to obtain conditional use permits or variances that are not required of other family dwellings.
Appendix 2 provides descriptions of the restrictions on group homes in each jurisdiction. 215
352
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 5-9 Accessory Dwelling Units
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs), also called “second units” or “granny flats” are attached or detached residential dwellings that provide complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons. That is, they include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as a single-family dwelling and must be permitted ministerially subject to objective design standards (Government Code Section 65852.2).
Junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs) are ADUs of less than 500 square feet and must be permitted within the walls of the proposed or existing single-family dwelling. An existing bedroom or interior entry into the single-family home is not required for JADUs.
Appendix 2 analyzes compliance with State law requirements for ADU/JADUs in each jurisdiction.
On-/Off-Site Improvement Standards
On/off-site improvement standards establish infrastructure or site requirements to support new residential development, such as streets, sidewalks, water and sewer, drainage, curbs and gutters, street signs, park dedications, utility easements, and landscaping. While these improvements are necessary to ensure public health and safety and that new housing meets the local jurisdiction’s development goals, the cost of these requirements can sometimes represent a significant share of the cost of producing new housing.
Appendix 2 describes specific site improvement standards for each jurisdiction. Although improvement requirements and development fees increase the cost of housing, jurisdictions have little choice in establishing such requirements due to the limitations on property taxes and other revenue sources needed to fund public improvements.
Fees and Exactions
State law limits fees charged for development permit processing to the reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged. Local governments charge various fees and assessments to cover the costs of processing permit applications and providing services and facilities, such as parks and infrastructure. Almost all of these fees are assessed based on the magnitude of a project’s impact or on the extent of the benefit that will be derived. Additional fees and/or time may be necessary for required environmental review, depending on the location and nature of a project.
In 2019, National Impact Fees Survey examined 37 jurisdictions in California. The study reports average impact fees of $37,471 per single-family unit and $21,703 per multifamily unit in California.
Appendix 2 provides an analysis of permit and processing and development impact fees in each jurisdiction.
In addition to the fees shown in Appendix 2, jurisdictions in Fresno County are subject to two regional impact fees, including Regional Transportation Mitigation fees and San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District fees.
216
353
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
5-10 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Regional Transportation Mitigation Fees
In addition to local planning and development impact fees, Regional Transportation Mitigation Fees, shown in Table 5-2, are payable to the Fresno COG as a part of “Measure C,” approved by Fresno County voters in 2006. Jurisdictions have no control of these fees, which are paid to ensure that future development contributes toward the cost to mitigate cumulative, indirect regional transportation impacts. These fees are the same throughout the county and fund important improvements needed to maintain the transportation system.
Table 5-2 Fresno COG Transportation Impact Fee
Residential Developments
($/Dwelling Unit) Fee
Single-Family Dwelling (Market-Rate) $2,118
Single-Family Dwelling (Affordable) $1,059
Multifamily Dwelling (Market-Rate) $1,642
Multifamily Dwelling (Affordable) $821
Source: Fresno Council of Governments, 2020.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Fees
Fresno County is within the regulatory jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). The air basin as a whole does not meet ambient air quality standards set at the state and federal levels and is within a “non-attainment” area for ozone, particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10; state), and particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5).
As a consequence of these conditions, the SJVAPCD has implemented an Indirect Source Review (ISR) process to reduce the impacts of growth in emissions from all new land development. An Air Impact Assessment (AIA) and potential mitigation fees are required for residential projects that contain 50 or more units and when there is a discretionary approval required. Fees are also exacted by the SJVAPCD to offset emissions created by typical operational sources. These fees can add hundreds of dollars to the cost of development. However, the cost is applied to all jurisdictions in the air basin and may be eliminated for a lesser number of units or reduced with additional mitigation measures.
Processing and Permit Procedures
Jurisdictions have various procedures that developers must follow for processing development entitlements and building permits. Processing times vary and depend on the size and complexity of the project. Appendix 2 provides more information on the processing and permit procedures in each jurisdiction. 217
354
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 5-11 Senate Bill 35
SB 35 requires jurisdictions that have failed to meet their RHNA to provide a streamlined, ministerial entitlement process for housing developments that incorporate affordable housing.
Appendix 2 analyzes each jurisdiction’s compliance with State law requirements.
Senate Bill 330
SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, established specific requirements and limitations on development application procedures. Housing developments for which a preliminary application is submitted that complies with applicable general plan and zoning standards is subject only to the development standards and fees that were applicable at the time of submittal. This applies to all projects unless the project square footage or unit count changes by more than 20 percent after the preliminary application is submitted. The developer must submit a full application for the development project within 180 days of submitting the preliminary application.
Appendix 2 analyzes each jurisdiction’s compliance with State law requirements.
Building Codes and Enforcement
Building codes and their enforcement can increase the cost of housing and impact the feasibility of rehabilitating older properties that must be upgraded to current code standards. In this manner, building codes and their enforcement can act as a constraint on the supply of housing and its affordability.
The California Building Standards Code, Title 24, serves as the basis for the design and construction of buildings in California. State law prohibits the imposition of additional building standards that are not necessitated by local geographic, climatic, or topographic conditions, and requires that local governments making changes or modifications in building standards must report such changes to HCD and file an expressed finding that the change is needed. Appendix 2 provides more information on building codes and enforcement by jurisdiction.
Constraints on Housing for Persons with Disabilities
In accordance with SB 520 (Chapter 671, Statutes of 2001), jurisdictions must analyze the potential and actual governmental constraints on the development of housing for persons with disabilities. Appendix 2 contains a detailed review of zoning laws, policies, and practices in each jurisdiction to ensure compliance with fair housing laws.
California Building Code
The 2019 California Building Code, Title 24 regulations, provide for accessibility for persons with disabilities. The Housing Element must identify the version of the Building Code adopted in each jurisdiction and whether or not a jurisdiction has adopted any amendments to the Code that might diminish the ability to accommodate persons with disabilities. Appendix 2 provides information on which 218
355
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
5-12 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 jurisdictions have adopted the 2019 California Building Code, including Title 24 regulations of the code concerning accessibility for persons with disabilities.
Definition of Family
There are a number of state and federal rules that govern the definition of family, including the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, the California Fair Housing and Employment Act, the California Supreme Court case City of Santa Barbara v. Adamson (1980), and the California Constitution privacy clauses. The laws surrounding the definition of family have a few primary purposes: to protect people with disabilities, to protect nontraditional families, and to protect privacy. According to HCD and Mental Health Advocacy Services, there are three major points to consider when writing a definition of family:
Jurisdictions may not distinguish between related and unrelated individuals. The definition may not impose a numerical limit on the number of persons in a family. Land use restrictions for licensed group homes for six or fewer individuals must be the same as those for single families.
Appendix 2 analyzes whether or not the zoning ordinances in each jurisdiction contain restrictive definitions of “family.”
Zoning and Land Use Policies
Restrictive land use policies and zoning provisions can constrain the development of housing for persons with disabilities. The Housing Element must analyze compliance with fair housing laws, provisions for group homes, and whether or not jurisdictions have adopted any minimum distance requirements or other zoning procedures or policies that would limit housing for persons with disabilities. Appendix 2 provides information on zoning and land use policies.
Reasonable Accommodation Procedure
Both the federal Fair Housing Amendment Act (FHAA) and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act direct local governments to make reasonable accommodations (i.e., modifications or exceptions) in their zoning laws and other land use regulations when such accommodations may be necessary to afford disabled persons an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. It may be reasonable to accommodate requests from persons with disabilities to waive a setback requirement or other standard of the zoning ordinance to ensure that homes are accessible for the mobility impaired. Whether a particular modification is reasonable depends on the circumstances and must be decided on a case-by-case basis. Appendix 2 provides information on reasonable accommodation policies and procedures in each jurisdiction. 219
356
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 5-13
NONGOVERNMENTAL 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 nongovernmental constraints to the development of new housing are land costs, construction costs, and availability of financing. This section also discusses environmental constraints that might affect housing development in the region.
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 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, available land parcels in downtown Fresno are small in size due to limited available land. The range is from $375,000 to $495,000, less than the high county average. This is often because sites are smaller and/or occupied by existing uses that generate revenue to property owners. As shown in Table 5-3 and Table 5-4, smaller sites (under 10 acres) have a smaller cost-per-acre in both the cities and unincorporated area.
As shown in Table 5-3, in August 2022, land was listed for more in the incorporated area. Excluding the City of Fresno, whose land costs are not reflective of the rest of the county, seven properties were listed for sale in the incorporated cities (three in Clovis, and one each in Kerman, Orange Cove, Parlier, and San Joaquin). The properties ranged in size from 1.7 acres for $499,000 ($297,024 per acre) to 20 acres for $358,000 ($17,900 per acre). The average list price per acre was $282,686.
As shown in Table 5-4, in the unincorporated area (Auberry, Squaw Valley, Wonder Valley outside of Sanger), eight properties were listed for sale in August 2022. The properties ranged from 4.7 acres for $80,000 ($17,021 per acre) to 25 acres for $199,000 ($7,960 per acre). The average list price per acre was $18,048.
Table 5-3 Listed Land Prices, Incorporated Cities (2022) Lot Size
Incorporated
Average Per-Acre Cost Average Range PerAcre Cost Number of Listings Less than 10 acres $383,601 $40,379 – $1,269,430 5
10 or more acres $30,398 $17,900 – $42,895 2
Average $/acre $282,686 $17,900 – $1,256,410 7
Source: Redfin, August 2022.
220
357
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
5-14 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Table 5-4 Listed Land Prices, Unincorporated Areas (2022) Lot Size
Unincorporated
Average Average Range Number of Listings
Less than 10 acres $23,325 $17,021 – $36,853 5
10 or more acres $9,253 $7,800 – $12,000 3
Average $/acre $18,048 $7,800 – $36,853 8
Source: Redfin, August 2022.
As shown in Table 5-5, in August 2022, land sold for less in the incorporated area. Excluding the City of Fresno, whose land costs are not reflective of the rest of the county, eight properties were sold in cities (two in Sanger, three in Clovis, one each in Selma, Coalinga, and Firebaugh). The properties ranged from 0.5 acres for $135,000 ($6 per acre) to 160.0 acres for $1,559,396 ($9,746 per acre). The average sale price per acre was $67,582.
As shown in Table 5-6, in the unincorporated area, 13 properties were sold in August 2022, ranging from
4.1 acres for $35,000 ($8,495 per acre) to 54.3 acres for $215,000 ($3,959 per acre). The average cost per acre of all sold properties in Fresno County was $13,907.
Table 5-5 Land Sale Prices, Incorporated Cities (August 2022) Lot Size
Incorporated
Average Range Number of Listings
Less than 10 acres $85,152 $6–$236,666 6
10 or more acres $14,873 $9,746–$20,000 2
Average $/acre $67,582 $6–$236,666 8
Source: Redfin, August 2022.
Table 5-6 Land Sale Prices, Unincorporated Areas (August 2022) Lot Size Unincorporated
Average Range Number of Listings
Less than 10 acres $19,924 $6,237 – $44,291 8
10 or more acres $4,280 $2,563 – $5,338 5
Average $/acre $13,907 $2,563 – $44,291 13
Source: Redfin, August 2022.
221
358
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 5-15 Construction Costs
Construction costs for a single-family home are approximately $143 per square foot. This is based on costs calculated for a 2,000-square-foot, wood-framed, single-story, four-cornered home of good quality construction and including a two-car garage and forced-air heating and cooling in Fresno County. Estimated total construction costs for such a home are $286,664. These construction costs include labor, materials, and equipment but do not include costs of buying land.1
Costs for multifamily construction are approximately $95 per square foot. This is based on costs calculated for a three-story building in Fresno County with 30 units and an average unit size of 800 square feet each.
The calculation is for a wood or light steel frame structure, including forced-air heating and cooling and constructed of good-quality materials. The estimated total construction costs for each unit are $71,736, and total construction costs for the building are $2,294,428. These construction costs include labor, materials, and equipment but do not include costs of buying land.2
The availability and demand for materials, such as asphalt, roofing, and pipes, affect prices for these goods.
Another major cost component of new housing is labor. The cost of labor in Fresno County is comparatively low because the area’s cost of living is relatively low compared to other areas in California.
According to a 2020 study of project costs in TCAC project application budgets, construction worker compensation only represents 14 percent of the total per-unit cost for a multifamily project. White collar labor costs, including developer fees, contractor income, and architecture and engineering fees, represent a combined 19 percent of per-unit costs. While prevailing wage requirements do add to project costs, low construction worker wages can create negative externalities by requiring construction workers to enroll in public safety net programs such as Temporary Aid for Needy Families (TANF), Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Additionally, construction workers not receiving adequate pay could experience the same challenges of housing cost burden that affordable housing programs seek to address. Therefore, there is a regional benefit in maintaining livable wages for construction workers. There is little that municipalities can do to mitigate the impacts of high construction costs except by avoiding local amendments to uniform building codes that unnecessarily increase construction costs without significantly adding to health, safety, or construction quality. Because construction costs are similar across jurisdictions in Fresno County, the cost of construction is not considered a major constraint to housing production.
Dry Utilities
Dry utilities, including cable, electricity, and telephone service, are available to all areas in the city. There is sufficient capacity to meet the current need and any future need. Service providers for Fresno County are:
1 2022 National Building Cost Manual and 2022 15 zip code modifiers, Craftsman Book Company. 2 2022 National Building Cost Manual and 2022 15 zip code modifiers, Craftsman Book Company. 222
359
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
5-16 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Electricity: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E)
Telephone:
Landline: Pacific Bell
Cellular: AT&T, Verizon, Sonic, and more
Internet Service: AT&T, Verizon, Sonic, and Xfinity
Availability of Financing
Mortgage interest rates have a large influence over the affordability of housing. 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. When interest rates rise, the market typically compensates by decreasing housing prices. Similarly, when interest rates decrease, housing prices begin to rise. There is often a lag in the market, causing housing prices to remain high when interest rates rise until the market catches up. Lower-income households often find it most difficult to purchase a home during this time period.
As shown in Figure 5-1, the interest rate on a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage was an average of 3.85 percent in 2015. Interest rates hit a historic low in 2020 at 2.96 percent for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage. As of August 2022, rates remain near average rates around 4.3 percent.
FIGURE 5-1. HISTORICAL MORTGAGE INTEREST RATES, UNITED STATES 2015-2022
Source: Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey, August 2022.
Interest rates are determined by national policies and economic conditions and there is little that a local government can do to affect these rates. However, to extend homebuying opportunities to lower-income households, jurisdictions can offer interest rate write-downs. Additionally, government-insured loan
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
4.0%
4.5%
5.0%
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
30- Year Fixed Rate Mortgages 15-Year Fixed Rate Mortgage 223
360
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 5-17 programs may be available to reduce mortgage down payment requirements.
Homebuyer assistance programs that provide mortgage assistance can be useful tools for helping lowerincome residents with down payment and closing costs, which are often significant obstacles to homeownership. There are also areas of the county where housing is deteriorating. Residents in these areas are often unable to qualify for home improvement loans because of their low income. Housing rehabilitation programs can help these low-income residents with meeting their home improvement needs.
Environmental Constraints
Typical environmental constraints to the development of housing in Fresno County include physical features such as floodplains, sensitive biological habitat, and seismic zones. In many cases, development of these areas is constrained by state and federal laws (e.g., Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] floodplain regulations, the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act, and the California Fish and Game Code and Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act), Agricultural Mitigation, Sustainable Groundwater Management, and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) preparation timelines.
Floodplains
Official floodplain maps are maintained by FEMA. FEMA determines areas subject to flood hazards and designates these areas by relative risk of flooding on a map for each community, known as the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The 100-year flood is defined as the flood event that has a 1 percent chance of occurring in any given year.
Principal flooding problems lie along the San Joaquin and Kings Rivers, smaller perennial streams in the Sierra Nevada foothills, and to areas in western Fresno County. This area includes the cities of Huron and Mendota that become flooded from streams flowing east from the Coast Range. Friant and Pine Flat Dams, upstream reservoirs, and stormwater detention/retention facilities operated by the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Flood Control District have minimized flooding problems in highly urbanized areas in the valley.
Development within a flood zone typically is required to be protected against flood damage. FEMA requires developers to obtain a flood zone elevation certificate when they apply for their permit. These certificates require elevating the developed area (i.e., house pad) above the known flood level of that particular flood zone. The sites in the inventory must obtain a flood zone elevation certificate, which may increase the cost of a development but is necessary nation-wide to protect against flood risks.
Each sites inventory provides parcel-specific environmental constraints, including whether or not the site is within the FEMA 100-year flood zone. While residential development can certainly occur within these zones, it has the potential to add an additional constraint. 224
361
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 5: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
5-18 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Seismic Zones
There are a number of active and potentially active faults within and adjacent to Fresno County. Two of the active faults in western Fresno County have been designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Hazard Zones. No structure for human occupancy may be built within an Earthquake Hazard Zone (EHZ) until geologic investigations demonstrate that the site is free of fault traces that are likely to rupture with surface displacement. Special development standards associated with Alquist-Priolo requirements would be necessary for development in those areas.
Although all development must consider earthquake hazards, there is no specific threat or hazard from seismic ground shaking to residential development within the county, and all new construction will comply with current local and State building codes. Between the minimal historical hazard of earthquakes in the county and the use of the most current building codes and construction techniques, earthquakes pose a lessthan-significant danger to residential development.
Biological Resources
A large percentage of Fresno County is occupied by orchard-vineyard habitat that grows crops such as almonds, nectarines, figs, and table wine and raisin grapes. Cultivated vegetable, fruit, and grain crops are also grown on cropland in Fresno County and can consist of corn, cotton, or grapes in this part of the valley.
Urban development occurs mostly in the valley floor and Sierra Nevada foothill regions.
Fresno County supports a large diversity of habitats for vegetation and wildlife in four generalized biotic regions. Approximately one-third of the county lies within land under federal jurisdiction. The United States Forest Service and National Park Service manage these lands for recreation, biology, wilderness, tourism, timber, and mining under guidelines, policies, and laws separate from local government. Areas that are outside of federal ownership and, therefore, most subject to development include the Coast Range, valley floor, and lower Sierra Nevada foothill biotic regions. Sensitive biological resources are associated with specific habitat types (natural habitat areas not intensively farmed, wetlands, riparian, vernal pools, etc.) or habitat elements such as specific soil types (clay, alkaline, serpentine). The western valley floor and Coast Range biotic regions, in particular, have special planning concerns because of the San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), San Joaquin kangaroo rats (Dipodomys nitratoides), and blunt-nosed leopard lizard (Gambelia silus). Regional habitat planning efforts can be used as the basis for addressing sensitive biological resources in the area.
225
362
Section , Item 9A.
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 6-i
HOUSING PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Housing Plan ............................................................................ 6-1 Goals and Policies ..................................................................................................................................... 6-1
1. New Housing Development ...................................................................................................... 6-1
2. Affordable Housing .................................................................................................................... 6-2
3. Housing and Neighborhood Conservation ................................................................................ 6-3
4. Special Needs Housing ............................................................................................................. 6-3
5. Fair and Equal Housing Opportunities ...................................................................................... 6-4
6. Energy Conservation and Sustainable Development ............................................................... 6-5
6 226
363
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 6: HOUSING GOALS AND POLICIES
6-ii FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 This page intentionally left blank.
227
364
Section , Item 9A.
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 6-1
HOUSING PLAN
This eight-year housing plan sets forth a comprehensive strategy and program of actions to address housing issues identified within the participating jurisdictions in Fresno County. The first section contains the shared goals and policies that the County of Fresno and the cities of Coalinga, Firebaugh, Fowler, Fresno, Huron, Kerman, Kingsburg, Mendota, Orange Cove, Parlier, Reedley, San Joaquin, Sanger, and Selma will all strive to achieve. Appendix 1 contains the specific programs to be implemented by each of the jurisdictions over the eight-year planning period.
GOALS AND POLICIES
1. New Housing Development
Every jurisdiction in Fresno County must plan to accommodate its agreed upon fair share of the regional housing needs. As a region, the total housing needed over the 2023-2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) projection period is 58,298 units. For the jurisdictions participating in the Multijurisdictional Housing Element, the total RHNA is 49,321 units. This includes 12,666 very lowincome units 7,595 low-income units, 7,599 moderate-income units, and 21,462 above moderate-income units. This housing element reflects the shared responsibility among the cities and the unincorporated County to accommodate the housing needs of all economic segments of the community.
Goal 1 Facilitate and encourage the provision of a range of housing types to meet the diverse needs of residents.
Policy 1.1 Provide adequate sites for new housing development through appropriate planned land use designations, zoning, and development standards to accommodate the regional housing needs for the 2023-2031 planning period.
Policy 1.2 Facilitate development of new housing for all economic segments of the community, including extremely low, very low-, low-, moderate-, and above moderate-income households.
Policy 1.3 Continue to direct new growth to urban areas in order to protect natural resources.
Policy 1.4 Promote balanced and orderly growth to minimize unnecessary development costs adding to the cost of housing.
Policy 1.5 Encourage infill housing development on vacant, by-passed, and underutilized lots within existing developed areas where essential public infrastructure is available.
Policy 1.6 Promote development of higher-density housing, mixed-use, and transit-oriented development in areas located along major transportation corridors and transit routes and served by the necessary infrastructure.
6 228
365
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 6: HOUSING GOALS AND POLICIES
6-2 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Policy 1.7 Ensure the adequate provision of water, sewer, storm drainage, roads, public facilities, and other infrastructure necessary to serve new housing.
Policy 1.8 Approve new housing in accordance with design standards that will ensure the safety, quality, integrity, and attractiveness of each housing unit.
Policy 1.9 Encourage development around employment centers that provides the opportunity for local residents to live and work in the same community by balancing job opportunities with housing types.
Policy 1.10 Encourage developers and contractors to evaluate hiring local labor, hiring from, or contributing to apprenticeship programs, increasing resources for labor compliance and providing living wages.
2. Affordable Housing
The shortage of affordable housing is an issue facing most communities in California. In Fresno County, nearly half of all households are considered “cost burdened,” paying more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs. For lower-income households, this rate is even higher – nearly three-quarters of lowerincome households are cost-burdened. Building affordable housing has become even more challenging after the State eliminated redevelopment agencies, depriving jurisdictions of the largest source of local funding for affordable housing. At the same time, State and Federal funding for affordable housing has also been reduced. While the region faces many challenges in meeting their housing needs for lower-income residents, there are several actions jurisdictions can take to facilitate affordable housing.
Goal 2 Encourage and facilitate the development of affordable housing.
Policy 2.1 Support innovative public, private, and nonprofit efforts in the development of affordable housing, particularly for the special needs groups.
Policy 2.2 Continue to support the efforts of the Fresno Housing Authority in its administration of Section 8 certificates and vouchers, and the development of affordable housing throughout the County.
Policy 2.3 Encourage development of affordable housing through the use of development incentives, such as the Density Bonus Ordinance, fee waivers or deferrals, and expedited processing.
Policy 2.4 Provide technical and financial assistance, where feasible, to developers, nonprofit organizations, or other qualified private sector interests in the application and development of projects for Federal and State financing.
Policy 2.5 Pursue grant funding to subsidize the development of affordable housing for low- and very low and extremely low income households through new construction, acquisition, and/or rehabilitation.
Policy 2.6 Encourage the development of second dwelling units to provide additional affordable housing opportunities.
229
366
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 6: HOUSING GOALS AND POLICIES
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 6-3 Policy 2.7 Work to ensure that local policies and standards do not act to constrain the production of affordable housing units.
Policy 2.8 Expand homeownership opportunities to lower- and moderate-income households through downpayment assistance and other homeownership programs.
Policy 2.9 Encourage sweat equity programs as a means for increasing homeownership opportunities for lower-income residents.
3. Housing and Neighborhood Conservation
The existing affordable housing stock is a valuable resource and conserving and improving the existing affordable housing stock is a cost-effective way to address lower-income housing needs. Actions are needed to monitor the status of these units and work with non-profits and the private sector to preserve affordable housing. In addition, improvements are needed to maintain existing ownership housing and the quality of residential neighborhoods.
Goal 3 Improve and maintain the quality of housing and residential neighborhoods.
Policy 3.1 Preserve the character, scale, and quality of established residential neighborhoods by protecting them from the encroachment of incompatible or potentially disruptive land uses and/or activities.
Policy 3.2 Assist low income homeowners and owners of affordable rental properties in maintaining and improving residential properties through a variety of housing rehabilitation assistance programs.
Policy 3.3 Continue code enforcement efforts to work with property owners to preserve the existing housing stock.
Policy 3.4 Encourage and facilitate the improvement or replacement of unsafe, substandard dwellings that cannot be economically repaired.
Policy 3.5 Invest in public service facilities (streets, curb, gutter, drainage and utilities) to encourage increased private market investment in declining or deteriorating neighborhoods.
Policy 3.6 Preserve assisted rental housing for long-term occupancy by low- and moderate-income households.
4. Special Needs Housing
Within the general population there are several groups of people who have special housing needs. These special needs can make it difficult for members of these groups to locate suitable housing. Special needs groups include persons experiencing homelessness; single-parent households; seniors; persons with disabilities including developmental disabilities; farmworkers; and large households. 230
367
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 6: HOUSING GOALS AND POLICIES
6-4 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 Goal 4 Provide a range of housing types and services to meet the needs of individuals and households with special needs.
Policy 4.1 Encourage public and private entity involvement early and often through the design, construction, and rehabilitation of housing that incorporates facilities and services for households with special needs.
Policy 4.2 Assist in local and regional efforts to secure funding for development and maintenance of housing designed for special needs populations such as the senior and persons with disabilities.
Policy 4.3 Support the use of available Federal, State, and local resources to provide and enhance housing opportunities for farm workers.
Policy 4.4 Encourage development of affordable housing units to accommodate large households (three and four bedroom).
Policy 4.5 Ensure equal access to housing by providing reasonable accommodation for individuals with disabilities.
Policy 4.6 Working in partnership with the other jurisdictions and the private/non-profit sectors in Fresno County, facilitate the provision of housing and services for persons experiencing homelessness and those at-risk of becoming homeless.
5. Fair and Equal Housing Opportunities
Federal and State laws ensure all persons, regardless of their status, have equal opportunities to rent or purchase housing without discrimination. Mediating tenant/landlord disputes, investigating complaints of discrimination, providing education services, and improving public awareness are all part of a comprehensive program.
Goal 5 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (Government Code Section (65583(C)(C)(5) & (10) by securing safe, sanitary, and affordable housing for all members of the community regardless of race, sex, or other factors.
Policy 5.1 Collaborate with state and federal agencies and local fair housing agencies to enforce fair housing laws addressing discrimination in the building, financing, selling or renting of housing based on race, religion, family status, national origin, disability, or other protected class.
Policy 5.2 Collaborate with local and regional agencies to provide multilingual fair housing education services and regional efforts to affirmatively further fair housing.
Policy 5.3 Work with federal, state, local and private entities to identify funding, financing and assistance programs throughout the planning period.
231
368
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 6: HOUSING GOALS AND POLICIES
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 6-5
6. Energy Conservation and Sustainable Development
High energy costs have particularly detrimental effects on low-income households that do not have enough income or cash reserves to absorb cost increases and must choose between basic needs such as shelter, food, and energy. While new construction can help achieve energy conservation goals, more than half of the housing stock in the region was built before California’s energy code was adopted in the 1980s.
Consequently, the existing building stock offers considerable opportunity for cost-effective energy efficiency retrofits to decrease energy consumption.
Goal 6 Encourage energy efficiency in all new and existing housing.
Policy 6.1 Encourage the use of energy conserving techniques in the siting and design of new housing.
Policy 6.2 Actively implement and enforce all State energy conservation requirements for new residential construction.
Policy 6.3 Promote public awareness of the need for energy conservation.
232
369
Section , Item 9A.
SECTION 6: HOUSING GOALS AND POLICIES
6-6 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | NOVEMBER 2023 This page is intentionally left blank.
233
370
Section , Item 9A.
A Regional Plan for Addressing Housing Needs
Fresno County Coalinga Firebaugh Fowler Fresno City Huron Kerman Kingsburg Mendota Orange Cove Parlier Reedley San Joaquin Sanger Selma 234
371
Section , Item 9A.
Fresno Council
of Governments
235
372
Section , Item 9A.
A Regional Plan for Addressing Housing Needs
Fresno County Coalinga Firebaugh Fowler Fresno City Huron Kerman Kingsburg Mendota Orange Cove Parlier Reedley San Joaquin Sanger Selma APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
Fresno Multi-Jurisdictional
2023-2031 Housing Element
Adoption Draft
July 2024
236
373
Section , Item 9A.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1D-i FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1D-0: Summary of Needs and Conditions ............................................................................ 1D-1 Housing Needs Assessment................................................................................................................... 1D-1 Section 1D-1: Action Plan .................................................................................................................... 1D-6 Regional Collaboration............................................................................................................................ 1D-6 Adequate Sites........................................................................................................................................ 1D-9 Affordable Housing Development and Preservation............................................................................. 1D-10 Removal of Governmental Constraints ................................................................................................. 1D-17 Housing Quality..................................................................................................................................... 1D-22 Housing Assistance............................................................................................................................... 1D-23 Quantified Objectives ............................................................................................................................ 1D-28 Section 1D-2: Sites Inventory ............................................................................................................ 1D-30 Fifth Cycle Housing Element - AB 1233 RHNA Carryover Analysis..................................................... 1D-30 Sixth Cycle Housing Element RHNA Analysis...................................................................................... 1D-31 Availability of Infrastructure and Services ............................................................................................. 1D-37 Realistic Development Potential ........................................................................................................... 1D-38 Section 1D-3: Local Assessment of Fair Housing........................................................................... 1D-41 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1D-41 Outreach................................................................................................................................................ 1D-42 Fair Housing Issues .............................................................................................................................. 1D-42 Sites Analysis........................................................................................................................................ 1D-97 Contributing Factors............................................................................................................................ 1D-116 Section 1D-4: Constraints ................................................................................................................ 1D-116 Land Use Controls .............................................................................................................................. 1D-116 Section 1D-5: Review of Past Accomplishments .......................................................................... 1D-136 Progress Toward the RHNA................................................................................................................ 1D-136 Efforts to Address Special Housing Needs......................................................................................... 1D-137 Section 1D-6: Public Outreach and Engagement .......................................................................... 1D-148 Joint Planning Commission/City Council Study Session .................................................................... 1D-148 Joint Planning Commission/Workshop Session.................................................................................. 1D-148 Community Workshop......................................................................................................................... 1D-149 Local Stakeholder Consultations ........................................................................................................ 1D-149 Public Comments ................................................................................................................................ 1D-154 Noticing of Study Sessions and Community Workshops.................................................................... 1D-154 Noticing of the Draft Housing Element................................................................................................ 1D-154
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1D-1 Summary of Quantified Objectives..................................................................................... 1D-28 Table 1D-2 RHNA Summary, Fowler, December 2023 ........................................................................ 1D-32 Table 1D-3 Fowler 6th Cycle Vacant and Underutilized Sites ............................................................... 1D-33 Table 1D-4 Realistic Capacity Project Examples.................................................................................. 1D-39 Table 1D-5 Fresno County Jurisdictions AllTransit Performance Scores............................................. 1D-60 Table 1D-6 School Performance Scores in Fowler, 2019..................................................................... 1D-67 Table 1D-7 Cost Burden in Fowler, 2010-2018 .................................................................................... 1D-73 Table 1D-8 Demographic Characteristics of the Homeless Population, 2022...................................... 1D-79 Table 1D-9 Services to Address Homelessness................................................................................... 1D-81 Table 1D-10 Farmworker Housing Facilities in Fowler......................................................................... 1D-85 Table 1D-11 RHNA Capacity by Census Tracts in Fowler ................................................................... 1D-98 Table 1D-12 Factors Contributing to Fair Housing Issues.................................................................. 1D-116 Table 1D-13 Residential Development Standards.............................................................................. 1D-119 Table 1D-14 Residential Parking Requirements................................................................................. 1D-120 Table 1D-15 Hypothetical Site Analysis.............................................................................................. 1D-122 Table 1D-16 Variety of Housing Types ............................................................................................... 1D-125 237
374
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-ii Table 1D-17 Schedule of Permit Processing Fees for Residential Development .............................. 1D-129 Table 1D-18 Schedule of Development Impact Fees for Residential Development........................... 1D-130 Table 1D-19 Schedule of Contributing Costs to Residential Construction ......................................... 1D-131 Table 1D-20 Approvals and Processing Times for Typical Developments......................................... 1D-132 Table 1D-21 Assisted Housing Developments, Fowler ...................................................................... 1D-135 Table 1D-22 Units Built during RHNA Projection Period, City of Fowler, 2006-2013......................... 1D-137 Table 1D-23 City of Fowler 5TH Cycle Program Evaluation ................................................................ 1D-139
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1D-1 Fowler Sites Inventory ...................................................................................................... 1D-35 Figure 1D-2 Local TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas................................................................................ 1D-46 Figure 1D-3 Local Median Income........................................................................................................ 1D-47 Figure 1D-4 Local Poverty Rate............................................................................................................ 1D-50 Figure 1D-5 Local Racial Demographics .............................................................................................. 1D-51 Figure 1D-6 Single-Parent, Female-Headed Households With Children In Fowler.............................. 1D-53 Figure 1D-7 Percentage Of The Population With A Disability In Fowler .............................................. 1D-55 Figure 1D-8 Fowler Alltransit Performance Score ................................................................................ 1D-59 Figure 1D-9 Transit Access................................................................................................................... 1D-63 Figure 1D-10 Jobs Proximity Index....................................................................................................... 1D-64 Figure 1D-11 Zoning In Fowler ............................................................................................................. 1D-65 Figure 1D-12 Local TCAC/HCD Educational Domain Score................................................................ 1D-68 Figure 1D-13 Calenviroscreen Scores.................................................................................................. 1D-70 Figure 1D-14 Overcrowding In Fowler.................................................................................................. 1D-72 Figure 1D-15 Percentage Of Homeowners Overpaying....................................................................... 1D-75 Figure 1D-16 Percentage Of Renters Overpaying................................................................................ 1D-76 Figure 1D-17 Vulnerable Community Designation ............................................................................... 1D-89 Figure 1D-18 Census Tracts In Fowler............................................................................................... 1D-100 Figure 1D-19 Percent Unit Capacity By TCAC/HCD Resource Designation...................................... 1D-103 Figure 1D-20 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Median Income ......................................................... 1D-104 Figure 1D-21 Percentage Unit Capacity By Poverty Rate .................................................................. 1D-105 Figure 1D-22 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Percentage Non-White Population ........................... 1D-107 Figure 1D-23 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Disability Rate........................................................... 1D-108 Figure 1D-24 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Percentage Of Children In Female-Headed Households ............................................................................................................................................................ 1D-109 Figure 1D-25 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Jobs Proximity Index Scores .................................... 1D-110 Figure 1D-26 Percentage Unit Capacity By Overcrowding................................................................. 1D-113 Figure 1D-27 Percentage Unit Capacity By Rate Of Homeowner Overpayment ............................... 1D-114 Figure 1D-28 Percentage Unit Capacity By Rate Of Renter Overpayment........................................ 1D-115 238
375
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-1 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
SECTION 1D-0: SUMMARY OF NEEDS AND CONDITIONS
Housing Needs Assessment
As part of the Housing Element, the City prepared a detailed Needs Assessment (Section 2) analyzing Fowler’s demographics.
Key Findings
The Regional Needs Assessment identified a number of trends that informed the goals and policies of the updated Housing Element, including:
• The City’s population increased by 3.4 percent on average between 2000 and 2022, which was higher than the countywide average annual growth rate of 2.0 percent. Similarly, the number of households in Fowler increased by 1.8 percent between 2010 and 2020, a higher rate of growth than the rate countywide.
• The largest group of residents in Fowler by age were school-age students (5 to 17 years, 28.9 percent of residents), and there were equally sized populations of young adults (25 to 44 years, 24.1 percent of residents) and middle-aged adults (45 to 64 years, 24.1 percent of residents). • Over half residents of Fowler, 66.4 percent, identified as Hispanic or Latino of any race. • The median household income in Fowler in 2020 was $59,663, slightly higher than the countywide median income of $57,109.
• In 2020, the most common industry for employment in Fowler was educational services, and health care and social assistance, with 30.1 percent of employed residents working in this field. • In 2022, 3.6 percent of Fowler residents were unemployed, among the lowest rates of unemployment in the county.
• Over half of all households in Fowler (53.4 percent) were renters as of 2020. • Fowler’s vacancy rate in 2022 was 4.5 percent across all housing units, regardless of tenure. This was a notable decrease from its 2010 vacancy rate of 6.5 percent. • Over half of all housing units in Fowler (51.7 percent) were built more than 30 years ago, and 31.3 percent were built more than 50 years ago. This is lower than the rate of older housing stock countywide.
• Fowler had a lower rate of households overpaying for housing than the county as a whole in 2018, with 35.1 percent of all households in the city overpaying for housing compared to 37.8 percent across the county. Similarly, the number of lower-income households overpaying for housing was lower in Fowler (69.7 percent in Fowler compared to 70.6 percent countywide). • In 2020, the city had the same rate of household overcrowding as the countywide rate (6.1 percent of households in both jurisdictions). There was a higher rate of severe overcrowding within Fowler (4.6 percent of households) than in the county as a whole (3.6 percent) 239
376
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-2 • Fowler had a lower rate of large households, those with five or more members, compared to the county as a whole (13.7 percent of households in Fowler compared to 18.1 percent countywide). • Between 2021 and 2022, the average sale price of a home in Fowler increased by 12.4 percent.
Average sale prices rose 15.4 percent in the county as a whole during the same period. • In 2020, the percentage of Fowler’s population that was aged 65 or older was higher than the percentage of seniors in the county as a whole (14.1 percent in Fowler compared to 12.0 percent of the county). Over half (57.2 percent) of Fowler’s senior households were homeowner households. • Of the total number of seniors living in the city, 51.3 percent had a disability. • The percentage of Fowler households with single female heads of household was lower than the countywide rate (6.3 percent in the city compared to 7.3 percent in the county). However, 42.0 percent of single-female-headed households in Fowler were living under the poverty level, which is disproportionate to the total number of households in poverty in the city (13.8 percent). • Fowler had a higher rate of residents with disabilities than the county as a whole (17.3 percent compared to 12.9 percent across the county). Ambulatory difficulties were the most commonly reported disability.
• Estimates from the 2022 Point-in-Time count suggest that 3 persons in Fowler may have been experiencing homelessness at that time.
• Of the 58,762 year-round and seasonal farmworkers across the county in 2017, 37,819 (64.3 percent) worked 150 days or more each year, and 35.7 percent worked less than 150 days per year.
An estimated 7.5 percent of Fowler’s employed population worked in agriculture, which is lower than the countywide rate (8.8 percent).
• Extremely low-income residents (those earning 30 percent or less of median income) made up 15.5 percent of the total households in Fowler. Of those, 84.7 percent were renter households.
Summary of Findings
Fowler’s population has seen an increase of 3,189 persons from 2000 to 2022. The population of Fowler is predominately made up of Hispanic residents (66.4 percent) with a high presence of school-age, young adults, and middle-aged adults (77.1 percent). Typically, younger residents need multifamily options, homes with three or more-bedroom units, and ownership opportunities. Lower-income households typically require assistance through City, County, State, or federal homebuyers’ programs to purchase a home. For example, a down payment assistance loan program can help a household that can afford monthly mortgage payments and other housing-related costs but due to their limited income, has difficulty saving enough money for a down payment. In response to this need, the City has included the following programs to increase housing mobility for lower-income households: Program 22 to connect 20 prospective homebuyers with the County’s Homebuyer Assistance Program and Program 13, which will explore the use of land trusts, tiny homes, and other alternative housing types to diversify the housing stock in areas with predominantly single-family homes.
240
377
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-3 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 In 2018, 10.4 percent of households were extremely low income in Fowler compared to 11.6 percent countywide. Of the 10.6 percent of households, 7.8 percent were renter households and 2.6 percent were owner households. This indicates a greater need for rental housing to support extremely low-income households. Furthermore, very low-income households (88.1 percent) are overpaying for housing, a higher rate than 69.0 percent of all extremely low-income households and low-income households (59.7 percent) (2018). Overall, 35.5 percent of households in Fowler are overpaying for housing (2018). Given the significantly higher rates of overpayment among extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households, there is a great need for financial support and affordable units to meet the needs of this population. In response to these needs, the City has included Program 6 to incentivize and support construction of affordable units, Program 9 to incentivize and encourage construction of units specifically targeting extremely low-income households, Program 17 to incentivize and support construction of 40 multifamily units, and Program 24 to increase the availability of information and access to Section 8 rental assistance and units. Additional resources to fund affordable housing activities are described in the Multijurisdictional Housing Element in Section 4, Opportunities for Residential Development, in the subsection called Financial and Administrative Resources.
It is estimated that approximately three residents in Fowler were unsheltered in 2022, representing 1.5 percent of the total homeless population in Fowler. This was a decrease of three individuals from the 2013 Point-in-Time (PIT) count where six individuals were identified. Several services are available to homeless residents locally and in the region, including those provided by Catholic Social Services, Emergency Housing Center (Plaza Terrace), Evangel Home, Inc., United Way, Fresno Rescue Mission, and Marjaree Mason Center. A comprehensive list and description of resources is included in the Regional Multijurisdictional Housing Element in Section 2, Regional Housing Needs Assessment, in the subsection called Homeless. The City has included Program 3 to cooperate with neighboring cities, the County, and other agencies in the development of programs aimed at providing homeless shelters and related services.
Given the small size of the farmworker population in Fowler, the housing needs for this group can be met through Program 6, Program 9, and programs identified to serve extremely low-, very low-, and lowincome households, as well as other special-needs groups. In 2020, 7.5 percent of the population was employed in agriculture, which has decreased since 2012 by 5.5 percent. Looking at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Census of Farmworkers, the number of permanent farmworkers in Fresno County overall has decreased slightly from 2002 to 2017, decreasing from 18,751 to 16,876 farmworkers. However, there was a slight increase from 2007 to 2012, showing an increase from 14,873 to 17,751 farmworkers.
Therefore, to prioritize housing for farmworkers, the City has included Program 7 to support funding for farmworker housing through technical support and incentives to housing developers, including the Fresno Housing Authority and Self-Help Enterprises, in the application of funds for farmworker housing, for the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and USDA Rural Development loans, and Program 8 to require developers to give qualified farmworker households a preference for 15.0 percent of the new units. Additional resources to assist farmworkers are listed in the Regional Multijurisdictional Housing Element in Table 2-45, Resources for Farmworkers. 241
378
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-4 Looking closer at special-needs groups within Fowler, large households saw a significant decrease from 2010, decreasing from 27.4 to 13.7 percent in 2020. Similarly, female-headed households have decreased from 9.3 to 6.3 percent. Overall, seniors and persons with disabilities all saw increases anywhere from 4.3 to 7.3 percent. While the need for housing for special-needs groups may not be as high as it was in previous years, the need is still there. To address the needs of special-needs groups in Fowler, the City has included Program 6: Affordable Housing Incentives, Program 7: Support Funding for Farmworker Housing, Program 9: Extremely Low-Income Households, Program 13: Housing for a Variety of Needs, and Program 17: Monitoring of Planning and Development Fees, to facilitate construction of 40 multifamily units during the planning period and remove any potential constraints for the construction of affordable multifamily units, to facilitate construction of 40 multifamily units during the planning period and remove any potential constraints for the construction of affordable multifamily units.
Fowler residents were primarily employed in health and educational services (30.1 percent of jobs), arts and entertainment (8.6 percent of jobs), and retail trade (12.9 percent of jobs), which is consistent with data from 2011. This shows a consistent trend within the employment industry for over 10 years. Unemployment in Fowler has decreased slightly from 12.6 percent in 2014 to 3.6 percent in 2022.
The unit composition of Fowler’s housing stock has remained relatively consistent since 2010, with the predominant housing type being single-family detached units comprising 73.2 percent of the housing stock in 2010 and 75.3 percent in 2020. Multifamily units represent 19.2 percent of the housing stock, which has only seen a 0.9 percent decrease from 2010 to 2020. As stated previously, owner-occupied households account for 53.4 percent of households in Fowler and renter-occupied households account for 46.6 percent.
As discussed in the Fair Housing section, it is estimated that zero owner-occupied and 60 renter-occupied units in Fowler lack a complete kitchen or plumbing. In 2010, it was estimated that 33 renter-occupied households lack a complete kitchen or plumbing. The decrease in complete plumbing facilities is a measure of substandard housing conditions. In response to the existing substandard units, the City has included Program 20: Housing and Rental Rehabilitation Programs. Additional resources to assist with home rehabilitation are listed in the Regional Multijurisdictional Housing Element in Section 4, Opportunities for Residential Development, in the subsection called Financial and Administrative Resources. 242
379
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-5 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Overcrowding rates are significant in Fowler, with only 9.8 percent of renters experiencing overcrowding and 2.7 percent of homeowners experiencing overcrowding. However, overpayment rates for renters and owners have decreased quite significantly since 2011. Overpayment for owner-occupied households decreased from 31.5 percent in 2011 to 18.2 percent in 2018, while overpayment for renter-occupied households increased from 50.7 percent in 2011 to 54 percent in 2018. When considering overpayment rates, overcrowding, and recent development trends, renters appear to have a housing need for adequately sized and priced housing opportunities in Fowler. This shows a need for affordable housing programs. For example, a down payment assistance loan program can help a renter household achieve homeownership that might not otherwise be able to, with a loan that enables them to afford monthly mortgage payments and other housing-related costs. In response to this need, the City has included Program 11 to encourage construction of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) as a potential affordable housing option, Program 24 improve access to Section 8 housing opportunities for renters, Program 22 to promote all available homebuyer resources on the City’s website, and Program 6 to promote the use of density bonuses to expand the affordable housing supply.
Housing Constraints
While the City has made extensive efforts to encourage development of affordable and market-rate housing, there are many governmental and nongovernmental constraints that can make housing development more difficult. Governmental constraints are typically rules that apply to all development and are intended to meet other community interests.
• The City continues to encourage and facilitate the development of ADUs. • The City’s Zoning Ordinance provides for a range of housing options. Updates to the ordinance are underway to bring it in line with State law, including changes to the zones that permit ADUs, emergency shelters, low-barrier navigation centers, residential care facilities, farmworker and employee housing, single-room occupancy units, transitional and supportive housing, and mobile and manufactured homes.
• The City’s Affordable Housing Density Bonus will need to be updated to be consistent with State law.
• Fees charged by the City as part of the development process, along with fees charged by regional agencies, are not considered a constraint to development but will be monitored by the City.
• Current standards for on-site and off-site improvements are not considered a barrier to housing production.
• The City will review its design standards to ensure objectivity. • The City will establish formal procedures for permit processing consistent with the requirements of SB 330 and will establish an application process related to SB 35. • The City does not currently have a formal process to grant reasonable accommodation requests. The zoning ordinance will be amended to establish a formal reasonable accommodations process.
243
380
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-6 • The City will amend its Zoning Ordinance to update the definition of “family.” • Nongovernmental constraints include challenges such as water access, availability of financing, and the high cost of land in the City and across the region. A number of the goals and policies in the Housing Element are aimed at eliminating or lessening constraints to the development of housing.
Housing Resources
A major component of the Housing Element is an analysis of sites that are available for the development of housing to meet the City’s RHNA. The Housing Element identifies sites in Fowler where zoning is in place to allow for housing development, including higher-density housing (20+ units per acre) that is suitable for affordable housing development.
• The City has identified sufficient housing sites to meet its lower-, moderate- and abovemoderate housing allocation. • The City partners with Fresno County to provide several programs designed to help residents find affordable housing. These programs include the Fresno County Housing Assistance Rehabilitation Program (HARP), the Fresno County Rental Rehabilitation Program (RRP), and the Fresno County Homebuyer Assistance Program (HAP). • The City was awarded a Permanent Local Housing Assistance (PLHA) Grant which will be used for first time homebuyer downpayment assistance.
• The City will encourage the development of ADUs by educating the public about this housing type and providing informational materials to all discretionary land use applicants.
SECTION 1D-1: ACTION PLAN
Regional Collaboration
Program 1: Regional Collaboration on Housing Opportunities The Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element provides an opportunity for countywide housing issues and needs to be more effectively addressed at the regional level rather than just at the local level, and the 15 participating jurisdictions are committed to continuing the regional collaboration in the implementation of the Housing Element. By working together, the jurisdictions can share best practices, explore opportunities for further collaboration, and make the best use of limited resources. The following efforts will be made to further regional collaboration:
▪ The County of Fresno Public Works and Planning Department, with assistance of the Fresno COG, will take the lead in coordinating the Countywide Sixth Cycle Housing Element Committee meetings.
244
381
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-7 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 ▪ Continue to participate in the Countywide Housing Element Technical Committee to collaborate on housing program implementation and regional issues including, disadvantaged unincorporated communities (SB 244), infrastructure challenges, farmworker housing, homelessness, and fair housing.
▪ The Committee will meet at least biannually to evaluate successes in implementation of programs and to identify gaps and additional needs.
▪ The Committee will meet annually with the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to discuss funding opportunities and challenges in implementation of programs and seek technical assistance from HCD and other State agencies in the implementation of housing programs and the pursuit of grant funding.
▪ The Committee will meet periodically with Fair Housing of Central California to discuss fair housing issues and opportunities for education.
▪ The Committee will advocate on behalf of the Fresno County region for more grant funding for affordable housing and infrastructure improvements.
▪ Continue to seek partnerships with other jurisdictions in the region and other agencies (such as the Housing Authority), housing developers, community stakeholders, and agricultural employers/employees to explore viable options for increasing the availability of farmworker housing in suitable locations in the region.
▪ Develop a directory of services and resources for lower-income households available in the region, and review and update it annually. Make the directory available on City/County websites and at City/County offices.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame
Continue to meet with the Housing Element Technical Committee twice per year, meet with HCD annually. Develop a directory of services and resources by December 2025, update annually as needed.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.3, Policy 1.4, Policy 2.1, Policy 4.2 245
382
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-8 Program 2: Review Annexation Standards in Memorandum of Understanding All jurisdictions in Fresno County are subject to a City-County Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which establishes procedures for annexation of land to cities. The City/County MOU encourages urban development to take place within cities and unincorporated communities in an effort to preserve agricultural land. The MOU standards for annexation require that development be imminent and a minimum of 25 percent of annexation areas have an approved tentative subdivision map or site plan, with the exception of annexations necessary to accommodate a City RHNA. While cities can take certain steps to “prezone” land in advance of annexation, the annexation of the land into the city limits is dependent upon private developers to request an annexation.
During the Housing Element planning period, the County of Fresno and the cities within the County shall work together to review and revise, as deemed appropriate by all parties, the standards for annexation contained in the Memorandum of Understanding between the County and the cities.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame:
Meet with the County by December 2026 to review the MOU standards, and update within a year if changes are needed
Implementation
Responsibility:
City Manager
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.1, Policy 1.2, Policy 1.3, Policy 1.4 Program 3: Homeless/Unhoused Needs
The City will cooperate with neighboring cities, the County, and other agencies in the development of programs aimed at providing homeless shelters and related services. During this coordination, the City will monitor the demographic composition of the unhoused population to identify needs for targeted resources and determine what efforts to take, such as providing education on financial assistance and programs available. The City has also recently entered into the County of Fresno’s Joint Powers Authority (JPA) to participate in the County’s Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) program for homeless services and other eligible activities through the County Department of Social Services in partnership with the Fresno-Madera Continuum of Care. The City will also support local homeless service providers, agencies, and other community organizations to pursue funding from other available sources for homeless services.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame:
Continue to engage with the County and other agencies regularly to assist homeless persons.
246
383
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-9 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Quantified Objective
Assist with program development and funding identification that will assist at least three homeless persons.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.1, Policy 1.2, Policy 4.6
Adequate Sites
Program 4: Provision of Adequate Sites
The City of Fowler will provide for a variety of housing types and ensure that adequate sites are available to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 339 units. As part of this Housing Element update, the City has developed a parcel-specific inventory of sites suitable for future residential development. The suitability of these sites has been determined based on the development standards in place and their ability to facilitate the development of housing to meet the needs of the City’s current and future residents, pursuant to State laws. The City will:
▪ Maintain and annually update the inventory of residential land resources. ▪ Provide the updated inventory on City website and make copies available upon request. ▪ Monitor the availability of sites appropriate for lower-income housing in keeping with state “no net loss” provisions (Government Code Section 65863), if development projects are approved at densities lower than anticipated in the sites inventory, and, if necessary, rezone sufficient sites to accommodate the RHNA within 180 days, ensuring that there is sufficient higher-density residential land available in areas throughout the city to deconcentrate poverty. ▪ Monitor and report residential development through the HCD annual report process. ▪ Amend the zoning ordinance to require the minimum number of residential units equal to the units identified in the site inventory for sites zoned for commercial uses, unless it can be shown that the assumed capacity has already been met. This provision would apply to Sites 3 and 4. ▪ Actively participate in the development of the next RHNA Plan to better ensure that the allocations are reflective of the regional and local land use goals and policies.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame:
Annually monitor as projects are processed. Amend the zoning ordinance by December 31, 2024 to require a minimum number of residential units on commercially-zoned sites as identified in the sites inventory. 247
384
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-10 Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Relevant Policies:
Policy 1.1, Policy 1.2, Policy 1.3, Policy 1.4, Policy 1.5, Policy 1.6, Policy 1.7, Policy 1.8, Policy 1.9
Program 5: Water and Wastewater Service
The development viability of the vacant sites in the inventory is directly linked to the availability and capacity of public facilities and services. The City continues to work to address water supply issues and infrastructure capacity limitations.
Additionally, California Government Code Section 65589.7 requires water and sewer providers to establish specific procedures and grant priority water and sewer service to developments with units affordable to lower-income households. The statute also requires local governments to immediately deliver the housing element to water and sewer providers. The City of Fowler is the water service provider; the SelmaKingsburg-Fowler County Sanitation District (SKF) provides sewer service in the City.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame:
By 2025, adopt procedures to allocate priority water and sewer service in compliance with Government Code Section 65589.7.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department, Public Works Department, and SKF
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.7
Affordable Housing Development and Preservation
Program 6: Affordable Housing Incentives
The City continues to have needs for affordable housing for lower-income households, especially for seniors, people with disabilities (including persons with developmental disabilities), farmworkers, femaleheaded and single-parent households, persons experiencing homelessness, and extremely low-income households. The City will continue to work with housing developers to expand affordable housing opportunities by doing the following:
248
385
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-11 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 ▪ Continue to seek partnerships and meet at least every other year with other agencies (such as the Housing Authority), housing developers, community stakeholders, and employers to discuss and pursue viable opportunities for providing affordable housing, with an emphasis on housing opportunities for very low- and extremely low-income households, as well as specialneeds populations, such as seniors, persons with disabilities (including developmental disabilities), farmworkers, female-headed and single-parent households, persons experiencing homelessness, and extremely low-income households. Meet more frequently if development rates increase. The City will identify development opportunities for affordable housing on an annual basis and provide this information to city partners. ▪ Work with public or private sponsors to identify candidate sites for new construction of housing for special needs and take all actions necessary to expedite processing of such projects. ▪ Continue to offer fee reductions and deferral of development impact fee payments to facilitate affordable housing development and special-needs projects, particularly those on infill sites. ▪ Continue to promote the State density bonus and provide streamlined processing to facilitate affordable housing development and provide for additional flexibility for affordable housing and special-needs housing through the minor deviation process. The City will promote this program by publicizing the incentives on the City website and by conducting pre-application consultation with developers regarding available incentives. Examples of flexible development standards include reduced parking requirements; reduced requirements for curb, gutter, and sidewalk construction; common trenching for utilities; and reduced water and wastewater connection fees.
▪ Consider incentives for builders to provide housing with multiple bedrooms affordable to lower- and moderate-income households to meet the needs of female-headed, single-parent, and large-family households of all income levels. Possible incentives may include reduced setbacks, reduced parking requirements, and technical assistance with applications for funding. ▪ Continue to streamline the environmental review process for housing developments to the extent possible, using available State categorical exemptions and federal categorical exclusions, when applicable.
▪ Monitor HCD’s website annually for Notices of Funding Ability (NOFA) and, where appropriate, prepare or support applications for funding for affordable housing for lowerincome households (including extremely low-income households), such as seniors, disabled (including persons with developmental disabilities), the homeless, and those at risk of homelessness.
▪ Facilitate the approval process for land divisions, lot line adjustments, and/or specific plans or master plans resulting in parcel sizes that enable affordable housing development and process fee deferrals related to the subdivision for projects affordable to lower-income households. ▪ Work with developers of multifamily and affordable housing projects on an annual basis to identify site opportunities in higher-resource areas and areas with higher median incomes to reduce concentrations of poverty and improve access to resources. 249
386
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-12 Financing:
HOME, CDBG, Successor Agency funds, LIHTC, Multi-Family Housing Revenue Bond, and other funding sources as available
Time Frame:
Ongoing, as projects are processed by the City. Annually apply for funding.
Identify site opportunities and communicate those opportunities to affordable housing developers on an annual basis.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
Expand the City’s affordable housing inventory by 26 units over the next eight years –2 extremely low-income, 2 very low-income, 6 low-income, and 16 moderate-income units. At least 50 percent of this objective will be located in relatively higher-income areas.
Relevant Policies:
Policy 1.2, Policy 2.1, Policy 2.2, Policy 2.3, Policy 2.4, Policy 2.5, Policy 2.6, Policy 2.7, Policy 4.3, Policy 4.4, Policy 5.2
Program 7: Support Funding for Farmworker Housing
The farming industry is the foundation of the County’s economy base. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2017 Census of Agriculture, about 37,819 workers were employed in farm labor throughout the county, indicating a significant need to provide housing for farmworkers and their families, particularly during peak harvest seasons.
The City will engage with housing developers in the application of funds for farmworker housing, including HCD and USDA Rural Development loans and grants and other funding sources that may become available.
The City will also continue to offer incentives such as density bonuses, streamlined processing, and the minor deviation process to facilitate development of farmworker housing.
The City will annually monitor the status of farmworker housing as part of their annual report to HCD on Housing Element progress and evaluate if City efforts are effective in facilitating the provision of farmworker housing. If appropriate, the City will make necessary changes to enhance opportunities and incentives for farmworker housing development.
Financing: General Fund
250
387
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-13 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Time Frame:
Continue to engage with farmworker housing developers and advocates on a biannual basis to discuss their needs and offer assistance in the form of letters of recommendation for grant applications, assistance with site identification and grant opportunities, and discuss incentives for constructing farmworker housing. Identify development opportunities to support the development of housing for farmworkers at least twice in the planning period and communicate these opportunities to the farmworker housing developers.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
10 lower-income units set aside for farmworkers and their families to reduce displacement risk for this population.
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.2, Policy 2.1, Policy 2.2, Policy 2.4, Policy 2.5, Policy 4.2, Policy 4.3 Program 8: Farmworker Preference in New Affordable Housing For new affordable housing projects developed with City assistance, incentives, and/or subject to City requirements, the City will require that the developer give qualified farmworker households a preference for 15 percent of the new units. Should demand from farmworker households be insufficient to fill the setaside units, then the units will be made available to other qualified households. The City will annually reach out to affordable housing developers to gather interest and input on how to best implement this program and will provide information on available funding.
Financing: General Fund, CDBG, HOME, USDA Rural Development Time Frame:
Ongoing, as projects are processed; annually reach out to developers and determine next steps within six months.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
20 lower-income units set aside for farmworkers or other qualified households to reduce displacement risk.
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.2, Policy 2.1, Policy 4.2, Policy 4.3 251
388
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-14 Program 9: Extremely Low-Income Households
Assembly Bill (AB) 2634 requires the quantification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs of extremely low-income households. To support the development or rehabilitation of single-room occupancy (SR) units and/or other units affordable to extremely low-income households, such as supportive and multifamily units, the City will continue to seek and pursue state and federal funds to offer a variety of incentives or concessions, such as:
▪ Provide financial support annually, as available, to organizations that provide counseling, information, education, support, housing services/referrals, and/or legal advice to extremely lowincome households, to mitigate risk of displacement and support housing stability for extremely low-income households, persons with disabilities, farmworkers, and persons experiencing homelessness.
▪ Expand regulatory incentives for the development of units affordable to extremely low-income households and housing for special-needs groups, including persons with disabilities (including developmental disabilities), and individuals and families in need of emergency/transitional housing.
▪ Encourage the provision of affordable housing for young adults, particularly former foster youth and young mothers, through planning consultations, streamlined permit processing, and funding assistance. Establish provisions to permit SRO facilities, transitional and supportive housing, and other special housing arrangements.
Financing: General Fund, CDBG, HOME
Time Frame:
Ongoing, as projects are processed. By December 2024, conduct outreach to organizations that support extremely low-income residents to understand funding needs, and review and prioritize local funding at least twice in the planning period, and support expediting applications on an ongoing basis.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
151 lower-income units, including 15 units for extremely low-income households to prevent displacement and provide housing mobility opportunities.
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.2, Policy 2.1, Policy 4.2, Policy 4.6 252
389
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-15 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Program 10: Preservation of At-Risk Housing Units
Preserving the existing affordable housing stock is a cost-effective approach to providing affordable housing in Fowler. The City must guard against the loss of housing units available to lower-income households. As of October 2022, there are no affordable units considered at risk of conversion to market rate in the next 10 years. The City has a total of 143 publicly assisted rental units in three projects. No publicly assisted rental housing units are considered at risk of converting to market-rate housing before December 31, 2031. For complexes at risk of converting to market rate, the City shall:
▪ Contact property owners of units at risk of converting to market-rate housing within one year of affordability expiration to discuss the City’s desire to preserve complexes as affordable housing. ▪ Coordinate with owners of expiring subsidies to ensure the required notices to tenants are sent out at 3 years, 12 months, and 6 months.
▪ Reach out to agencies interested in purchasing and/or managing at-risk units. ▪ Work with tenants to provide education regarding tenant rights and conversion procedures pursuant to California law.
Financing:
General Fund, LIHTC, Multifamily Housing Revenue Bond, and other funding sources as available.
Time Frame:
Annually monitor units at risk of converting; coordinate noticing as required per California law.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Relevant Policies: Policy 3.6
Program 11: Encourage and Facilitate Accessory Units
An accessory dwelling unit (ADU), sometimes called a “granny flat,” is an additional self-contained living unit either attached to or detached from the primary residential unit on a single lot. It has cooking, eating, sleeping, and full sanitation facilities. ADUs can be an important source of affordable housing given that they typically are smaller and have no associated land costs. The City will encourage the construction of ADUs, particularly in predominantly single-family neighborhoods with higher median incomes. The City will:
▪ By 2024, implement a public education program advertising the opportunity for ADUs by updating informational handouts and brochures about ADUs that are available on the City’s website and at the public counter annually, or as needed to reflect changes in State law. Reach out directly with the information materials to homeowners participating in predominantly single-family neighborhoods with higher median incomes.
▪ Provide informational materials on ADU opportunities to all discretionary land use applicants. 253
390
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-16 ▪ At least annually, publish informational materials pertaining to ADUs through a combination of media, including the City’s social media accounts and direct mailing. ▪ By December 2025, provide resources for ADU standard plans to developers for their use in the City.
▪ By December 2024, identify and implement incentives for construction of ADUs with new development, which may include differing collection times for impact fees for the square footage associated with the ADU.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame:
Update ADU materials annually, or as needed to reflect changes in State law, and identify and implement incentives for construction by December 2024.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
3 ADUs for lower-income households, 4 for moderate-income households, and 3 for above moderate-income households to improve housing mobility opportunities and reduce displacement risk. At least 5 of these ADUs should be located within higher-income areas.
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.3, Policy 2.1, Policy 2.6
Program 12: Replacement Units
To reduce displacement risk and in accordance with California Government Code Section 65583.2(g), the City will require replacement housing units subject to the requirements of California Government Code Section 65915(c)(3) on sites identified in the sites inventory when any new development (residential, mixed-use, or nonresidential) occurs on a site that has been occupied by or restricted for the use of lowerincome households at any time during the previous five years.
This requirement applies to:
▪ Non-vacant sites;
▪ Vacant sites with previous residential uses that have been vacated or demolished.
Financing: General Fund, HOME, CDBG
Time Frame:
Ongoing, the replacement requirement will be implemented immediately and applied as applications on identified sites are received and processed. 254
391
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-17 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Relevant Policies: Policy 3.3, Policy 3.6
Program 13: Housing for a Variety of Needs
The City will encourage a variety of housing types to address the housing needs of a variety of household types, sizes, and incomes. This could include duplexes, townhomes, apartment buildings, and condominiums in neighborhoods and new subdivisions and will identify innovative and alternative housing options that provide greater flexibility and affordability in the housing stock while promoting mixed-income development. This may include consideration for further reduction in regulatory barriers for community land trusts, tiny houses, microhomes, cottage homes, small lot subdivisions, and other alternative housing types, as well as exploration of a variety of densities and housing types in all zoning districts.
The City will use the findings of this program to target development of a variety of housing types in areas of predominantly single-family development and of concentrated overpayment to reduce displacement risk, promote inclusion, and support integration of housing types based on income.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame:
Identify innovative and alternative housing options to help further housing production by December 2025; amend the Zoning Ordinance as needed.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
8 lower-income units, 8 moderate-income units, and 3 above moderate-income units to reduce displacement risk for all residents and facilities in incomeintegrated neighborhoods.
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.2, Policy 2.1, Policy 4.4
Removal of Governmental Constraints
Program 14: Zoning Ordinance Amendments
▪ In compliance with State laws, the City will amend its Zoning Ordinance to address the provision of a variety of housing options, especially housing for special needs groups. Specifically, the City will amend the Zoning Ordinance to address the following:
255
392
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-18 ▪ Density Bonus: Consistent with Government Code, a density bonus up to 100 percent over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the applicable zoning district will be available to developers who provide affordable housing as part of their projects. Developers of affordable housing will also be entitled to receive incentives on a sliding scale to a maximum of three, where the amount of density bonus and number of incentives vary according to the amount of affordable housing units provided.
▪ Emergency Shelters: Develop managerial standards for emergency shelters and allow sufficient parking to accommodate all staff working in the emergency shelter, provided that the standards do not require more parking for emergency shelters than other residential or commercial uses within the same zone, in compliance with Government Code Section 65583(a)(4)(A)(ii)). Emergency shelters will also be added as a by-right use to the C-2 zone district and the definition of emergency shelters will be amended to include interim interventions.
▪ Low-Barrier Navigation Centers: Permit low-barrier navigation centers, defined as lowbarrier, temporary service-enriched shelters to help homeless individuals and families to quickly obtain permanent housing by-right in zones where mixed uses are allowed or in nonresidential zones that permit multifamily housing (Government Code Section 65662; AB 101).
▪ Residential Care Facilities/Group Homes: Update the Zoning Ordinance to comply with the Lanterman Act and allow group homes for six or fewer persons by-right in all residential zones.
The Zoning Ordinance also needs to make provisions for large residential care facilities for more than six persons (regardless of licensing) to be permitted in all zones allowing residential uses and similar to other residential uses, including the standards applied. ▪ Farmworker/Employee Housing: Comply with the Employee Housing Act which requires farmworker housing up to 12 units or 36 beds be considered an agricultural use and permitted in any zone that permits agricultural uses, and employee housing for six or fewer employees to be treated as a single family structure and permitted in the same manner as other dwellings of the same type in the same zone.
▪ Reasonable Accommodation: Establish a reasonable accommodation procedure to provide flexibility in policies, rules, and regulations in order to allow persons with disabilities access to housing.
▪ Definition of Family: Remove the definition of family in the Zoning Ordinance, or amend the definition to ensure it does not differentiate between related and unrelated individuals, or impose a numerical limit on the number of persons in a family. ▪ Single-Room Occupancy (SRO) Housing: Amend the Zoning Ordinance to address the provision of SRO housing.
▪ Transitional and Supportive Housing: Permit transitional housing and supportive housing as residential uses only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone (Government Code Section 65583(a)(5)). Additionally, allow supportive housing in multifamily and mixed-use zones (Government Code Section 65651). 256
393
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-19 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 ▪ Manufactured Housing: Update the Zoning Ordinance to permit manufactured homes in a manner consistent with single family housing.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame:
Complete remaining Zoning Ordinance amendments by December 2024.
Annually review the effectiveness and appropriateness of the Zoning Ordinance and process any necessary amendments to remove or mitigate potential constraints to the development of housing.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.1, Policy 2.7, Policy 5.2
Program 15: Reasonable Accommodations and Universal Design The City will develop and formalize a general process that a person with physical and developmental disabilities can use to make a reasonable accommodation request to accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities and streamline the permit review process. The City will provide information to individuals with disabilities regarding reasonable accommodation policies, practices, and procedures based on the guidelines from HCD. This information will be available through postings and pamphlets at the public counter and on the City’s website.
The City will also implement State requirements (Sections 4450 to 4460 of the California Government Code and Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) to include accessibility in housing and public facilities for persons with disabilities:
▪ Encourage housing developers to include mobility-impaired accessibility in their project designs and prioritize these types of projects to increase housing mobility opportunities for seniors and persons with disabilities.
▪ Review regulations and procedures for City-funded or operated housing programs to ensure that they do not exclude participation by persons with disabilities. ▪ Include accessibility considerations in the preparation of the City’s capital improvement plan and the allocation of funding for capital improvements in support of housing and residential neighborhoods for persons with physical or developmental disabilities.
Financing: General Fund, SB 2 Grant Funding, LEAP Grant Funding 257
394
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-20 Time Frame:
Develop and adopt a reasonable accommodations ordinance by December 2024; create brochures on universal design and the reasonable accommodations ordinance by July 2025 and update biannually, or as needed.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
Assist two residents with reasonable accommodation requests to reduce displacement risk and encourage one accessible unit to improve housing mobility.
Relevant Policies: Policy 4.1, Policy 4.5
Program 16: Lot Development Feasibility
To create additional opportunities for infill development and affordable housing, the City will help to facilitate development on both large and small lots. Lot consolidations to combine small lots identified as part of a larger site in the site inventory into larger developable lots for housing will be expedited. The City will also expedite processing of and consider deferral of development impact fees for subdivisions, lot splits, and lot line adjustments that will facilitate the creation of new developable parcels on sites greater than 10 acres that are included in the lower income category site inventory. The City will also pursue funding to complete off-site improvements for sites greater than 10 acres for the lower income category to further incentivize development. The City will meet with local developers and property owners to discuss development opportunities and incentives to accommodate affordable housing units and consider additional incentives brought forth by developers. By 2026, the City will review the effectiveness of this program and revise as appropriate. The City will also evaluate grant funding for parcel assemblage land banking when it is available.
Financing: General Fund (legislative efforts); Grant funding (implementation) Timeframe:
Meet with developers and property owners starting in 2024 and annually thereafter. Based on the meetings with developers and property owners, add incentives as appropriate. Provide ongoing support for lot consolidations and subdivisions as applicable housing applications are received. Pursue grant funding during planning period if California legislation and/or programs enable a tax-increment or similar program that leads to funding for site preparation, including off-site improvements for inventory sites greater than 10 acres.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
258
395
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-21 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Relevant Policies: Policy 1.1, Policy 1.2, Policy 1.4, Policy 1.5, Policy 2.4 Quantified Objective:
By December 2025 staff will have conducted an inventory of possible sites that could be merged or subdivided and reached out to those property owners.
Program 17: Monitoring of Planning and Development Fees The City charges various fees to review and process development applications. Such fees may add to the cost of housing development. The City will analyze housing-related development fees, particularly for multifamily housing, on an annual basis to ensure they do not unduly constrain development. As part of the analysis process, meet with multifamily developers at least once by December 2024 to request input regarding constraints associated with fees. Based on feedback received, reduce fees if found to be a constraint. Further, the City will offer deferred or reduced fees to facilitate affordable housing development, as appropriate.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame:
Meet with multifamily developers by December 2024 and revise fees, if necessary, by December 2025. Review fees annually.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
Facilitate construction of 40 multifamily units during the planning period, targeting missing-middle development in higher-resource areas and encouraging at least 15 of the units to be affordable to lower-income households.
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.2, Policy 1.4
Program 18: Preliminary Applications (SB 330) and Streamlined Approval (SB 35) The City will develop a preliminary application form and procedure or will adopt the Preliminary Application Form developed by HCD, pursuant to SB 330. The City will also establish a written policy and/or procedure, and other guidance as appropriate, to specify the SB 35 streamlining approval process and standards for eligible projects under Government Code Section 65913.4. The applications will be available on the City’s website for developers interested in pursuing the streamlined process or vesting rights.
Financing: General Fund
259
396
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-22 Time Frame:
Develop or adopt HCD’s SB 330 preliminary application form by December 2024. Develop an SB 35 streamlined approval process by June 2025 and implement as applications are received.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
Facilitate construction of 3 very low-income units and 3 low-income units to increase housing mobility opportunities, prioritizing new opportunities in higher-resource areas.
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.4, Policy 2.3, Policy 2.4
Program 19: Objective Design Standards
The City will develop objective design guidelines and standards to provide clear and objective standards related to single-family, multifamily, and mixed-use residential developments.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame: Adopt objective design standards by December 2025 and implement thereafter.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Relevant Policies: Policy 1.8, Policy 2.7
Housing Quality
Program 20: Housing and Rental Rehabilitation Programs
The City of Fowler does not currently participate in either of Fresno County’s rehabilitation programs, including the Fresno County Housing Assistance Rehabilitation Program (HARP) and the Fresno County Rental Rehabilitation Program (RRP). However, the City has recently entered into the County of Fresno’s Joint Powers Authority (JPA) to participate in the County’s HOME and CDBG programs, which include the HARP and the RRP programs. These programs provide funding for eligible improvements, including energy-efficiency upgrades and installations, health and safety and hazard corrections, and accessibility modifications to reduce displacement risk and facilitate place-based revitalization Financing: CDBG and HOME funds
Time Frame: Identify opportunities for rehabilitation programs by 2025. 260
397
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-23 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
Participate in the HARP, RRP, and other rehabilitation programs offered through the County JPA with the goal of assisting 8 households over the planning period (2 very low-income, 3 low-income, and 3 moderate-income households). Such efforts should be targeted in relatively lower-income areas.
Relevant Policies: Policy 3.2, Policy 4.1
Program 21: Code Enforcement
The City’s Community & Economic Development Department is in charge of enforcing the City’s building codes with the objective of protecting the health and safety of residents. Code Enforcement officials perform routine inspections of housing in the city, including targeted surveys for health and safety violations under the Health and Safety Section 17910. The City will continue to utilize code enforcement and substandard abatement processes to bring substandard housing units and residential properties into compliance with City codes.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame:
Make informational materials on rehabilitation assistance programs available by January 2025, to be provided on an ongoing basis when violations are confirmed, conduct code enforcement as complaints are received.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective
Participate in the HARP, RRP, and other rehabilitation programs offered through the County JPA with the goal of assisting 8 households over the planning period (2 very low-income, 3 low-income, and 3 moderate-income households). Such efforts should be targeted in relatively lower-income areas.
Relevant Policies: Policy 3.1, Policy 3.3
Housing Assistance
Program 22: First-Time Homebuyer Resources
Fowler residents have access to a number of homebuyer assistance programs offered by the California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA):
261
398
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-24 ▪ Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC): The MCC Tax Credit is a federal credit which can reduce potential federal income tax liability, creating additional net spendable income which borrowers may use toward their monthly mortgage payment. This MCC Tax Credit program may enable first-time homebuyers to convert a portion of their annual mortgage interest into a direct dollar for dollar tax credit on their U.S. individual income tax returns. ▪ CalPLUS Conventional Program: This is a first mortgage loan insured through private mortgage insurance on the conventional market. The interest rate on the CalPLUS Conventional is fixed throughout the 30-year term. The CalPLUS Conventional is combined with a CalHFA Zero Interest Program (ZIP), which is a deferred-payment junior loan of three percent of the first mortgage loan amount, for down payment assistance. ▪ CalHFA Conventional Program: This is a first mortgage loan insured through private mortgage insurance on the conventional market. The interest rate on the CalHFA Conventional is fixed throughout the 30-year term.
CalHFA loans are offered through local loan officers approved and trained by CalHFA. The City also recently executed a funding agreement through the Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) grant to offer downpayment assistance for low-income first time homebuyers.
The City will promote all available homebuyer resources on the City’s website and at public counters and will annually review funding resources available at the state and federal levels and pursue as appropriate to provide homebuyer assistance.
Financing: CalHFA
Time Frame:
Ensure informational materials on all homebuyer resources are on the City’s website and available at public counters by June 2024. Update materials annually, or as new information is provided by the County, and send out targeted promotion at least every other year.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
Connect 20 prospective homebuyers with the County program to facilitate housing mobility opportunities in the city.
Relevant Policies: Policy 2.1, Policy, 2.4, Policy 2.5, Policy 2.8 262
399
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-25 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Program 23: Energy Conservation
The City promotes energy conservation in housing development and rehabilitation. The City will continue to promote and support Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) programs that provide energy efficiency rebates for qualifying energy-efficient upgrades by providing a link to PG&E programs on City website and make available brochures about PG&E programs at City counters. Additionally, the City will expedite review and approval of alternative energy devices, such as solar panels.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame:
Make information easily available on the City’s website and at public facilities by June 2025.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
Assist five low-income residents annually in need of assistance with energyefficiency improvements to reduce displacement risk due to housing costs.
Relevant Policies: Policy 6.1, Policy 6.2, Policy 6.3
Program 24: Housing Choice Vouchers
The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program extends rental subsidies to extremely low- and very lowincome households, including families, seniors, and the disabled. The program offers a voucher that pays the difference between the current fair market rent (FMR) as established by the HUD and what a tenant can afford to pay (i.e. 30 percent of household income). The Fresno Housing Authority administers the housing choice voucher program in Fresno County. The City will:
▪ Provide information on the HCV program on City website and public counters. ▪ Refer interested households to the Fresno Housing Authority and encourage landlords to register their properties with the Housing Authority for accepting HCVs. ▪ Work with the Housing Authority to disseminate information on incentives for participating in the HCV program throughout the City neighborhoods with varying income levels to promote housing opportunities for all residents.
▪ Meet with the Fresno Housing Authority by June 2024 to discuss the process of developing printed informational materials, with the goal of making materials available at public counters by June 2025.
Financing: HUD Section 8
263
400
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-26 Time Frame:
Provide information on the City’s website by February 2024. Meet with the Housing Authority by June 2024 and develop informational materials by June 2025. Target outreach to property owners and landlords at least annually.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Fresno Housing Authority and Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
25 lower-income units in high-opportunity areas to promote access to resources and mobility for target households.
Relevant Policies: Policy 2.2
Program 25: Housing Discrimination Monitoring and Referral The Fresno Housing Authority publicizes all information related to housing opportunities, programs fairhousing information and assistance in English, Spanish, Hmong, French, German, Chinese, Arabic, Dutch, Italian, Korean, Portuguese, and Russian. However, while all public notices and information on the Housing Authority website are translated to all of the previously mentioned languages, general circulation of information and secondary links, such as applications, are available only in English. The City will coordinate with the Housing Authority, Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG), and other Fresno County jurisdictions to encourage the development of Spanish-language printed materials to improve accessibility to fair housing resources for residents. If additional languages become more prevalent in the county, materials will be translated into those languages as needed.
The City will also:
▪ Establish a procedure to refer residents with fair housing questions or issues to the Fair Housing Council of Central Valley (FHC-CC), California Rural Legal Aid (CLRA), and other fair housing organizations.
▪ Provide fair housing information on the City’s website and in printed materials available in public buildings in both English and Spanish.
▪ Coordinate with Fresno Housing Authority to encourage the production of promotional materials in Punjabi.
▪ Encourage local fair housing service providers to conduct biannual trainings for landlords and tenants on fair housing laws, rights, and responsibilities and ongoing access to legal counseling.
Financing: General Fund, grant funding
264
401
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-27 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Time Frame:
Either individually or as part of the Countywide Housing Element Technical Committee (Program 1), meet annually with FHC-CC to discuss fair housing issues and opportunities for education. Make fair housing information available on the City’s website and in public buildings by June 2025.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department, Fresno Housing Authority
Quantified Objective:
Reduce displacement risk for 5 individuals or families resulting from language barriers and 3 from discrimination by landlords or property owners.
Relevant Policies: Policy 5.1
Program 26: Improve Access to Resources
The City shall take the following actions to improve access to resources and opportunities citywide, but with a particular emphasis on neighborhoods with a concentration of lower-income residents who often face additional barriers in accessing resources:
▪ Work with Fresno County Rural Transit Agency (FCRTA) and other jurisdictions in the county to develop a fact sheet, or similar informational materials, of FCTA programs to be posted on the City’s website, social media, and in public buildings by January 2026, and advertised annually in the City’s newsletter to help connect seniors and other residents to services in the city and throughout the county.
▪ Prioritize projects that facilitate place-based revitalization through the City’s Capital Improvement Plan, such as projects that improve public infrastructure in deteriorating or underserved areas.
Review and pursue funding opportunities that will allow the City to fund projects currently unfunded in the budget to invest in community amenities such as water and sewer infrastructure, parks and recreation facilities, or active transportation facilities on an annual basis and apply as they become available. Apply for funding for at least four community amenity projects during the planning period.
▪ Post information about flood-related resources on the City's website. ▪ Ensure program availability and funding announcements are made available in Spanish and translation is available at public meetings.
▪ Facilitate place-based revitalization and promote healthy environments for new housing by evaluating transitional buffers between residential and agricultural uses and highways and working with developers as projects are proposed to mitigate impacts associated with emissions from agricultural industries and traffic and facilitate access to healthy outdoor spaces. 265
402
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-28 ▪ Meet with school district representatives by June 2025 to analyze whether housing security poses a barrier. Work with the school district to assist in securing grant funding for teacher recruitment and retention bonuses, classroom materials, and other incentives for teachers to facilitate positive learning environments citywide.
Financing: General Fund
Time Frame: Refer to each bulleted action for specific timeframes.
Implementation
Responsibility:
Community & Economic Development Department
Quantified Objective:
Improve access to resources and reduce displacement risk resulting from a variety of factors for at least 8 residents.
Relevant Policies: Policy 3.1, Policy 3.5, Policy 5.1, Policy 5.2 Quantified Objectives
The Housing Element must contain quantified objectives for the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing. The quantified objectives set a target goal to achieve based on needs, resources, and constraints. Table 1D-1 shows the quantified objectives for the 2023-2031 Housing Element planning period. These quantified objectives represent targets. They are not designed to be minimum requirements. They are estimates based on past experience, anticipated funding levels, and expected housing market conditions.
Table 1D-1 Summary of Quantified Objectives
Program Extremely
Low
Very
Low
Low Moderate
Above
Moderate
RHNA 15 94 57 47 141
New Construction
Program 6 – Affordable Housing
Incentives 2 2 6 16
Program 9 – Extremely Low-Income
Households 15 94 57
Program 11 – Encourage and
Facilitate Accessory Units 3 4 3
Program 13 – Housing for a Variety
of Needs 8 8 3
Program 17 – Monitoring of Planning
and Development Fees 15 25
266
403
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-29 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Program Extremely
Low
Very
Low
Low Moderate
Above
Moderate
Program 18 – Preliminary
Applications (SB3 330) and
Streamlined Approval (SB 35)
3 3
Rehabilitation
Program 20 – Housing and Rental
Rehabilitation 2 3 3
Program 21 – Code Enforcement 2 3 3
Conservation
Program 23 – Energy Conservation 5
Program 24 – Housing Choice
Voucher 25
Note: In some cases, quantified objectives overlap and therefore identify multiple strategies to achieve the RHNA.
267
404
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-30 SECTION 1D-2: SITES INVENTORY
Fifth Cycle Housing Element - AB 1233 RHNA Carryover Analysis AB 1233 was signed into law on October 5, 2005, and applies to housing elements due on or after January 1, 2006. Specifically, the law states that if a jurisdiction fails to provide adequate sites in the prior planning period, within one year of the new cycle, the jurisdiction must rezone/upzone adequate sites to accommodate the shortfall. This requirement is in addition to rezoning/upzoning that may be needed to address the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the new cycle.
This law affects the City of Fowler’s 2023-2031 Housing Element, requiring the City to address its deficit in sites, if any, for the previous housing element cycle (2015-2023).
The potential AB 1233 penalty will be equal to the portion of RHNA not accommodated either through actual housing production or land made available for residential development within each income category.
To determine any potential penalty, the analysis in this Housing Element uses the following approach outlined by HCD:
▪ Step 1: Subtracting the number of housing units constructed, under construction, permitted, or approved since January 1, 2015 by income/affordability level; and ▪ Step 2: Subtracting the number of units that could be accommodated on any appropriately zoned sites available in the city during the RHNA cycle.
In the previous planning period (fifth cycle), the RHNA assigned to the City of Fowler was 524 units (206 low-income, 75 moderate-income, and 243 above moderate-income units). The 2015-2023 Fowler Housing Element identified a surplus capacity of 849 units. The City of Fowler provided enough adequate sites within the City’s 5th Cycle Housing Element. As a result, the City is not required to complete a carry-over analysis for its 6th Cycle Housing Element.
268
405
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-31 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Sixth Cycle Housing Element RHNA Analysis
For the sixth cycle Housing Element update, Fowler has been assigned a RHNA of 339 units, including 94 very low-income units, 57 low-income units, 47 moderate-income units, and 141 above moderate-income units.
The sites inventory uses the following assumptions:
▪ Relation of density to income categories. The following assumptions were used to determine the income categories according to the allowed densities for each site:
Lower-income Sites. Sites that allow at least 16 units per acre were inventoried as feasible for lowerincome (low- and very low-income) residential development in accordance with the market-based analysis included in this housing element. This includes sites with the following zoning:
▪ Sites that are Multi-Family Residential (RM-3, RM-3-A) (up to 21.8 units per acre); ▪ Sites that are zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) and Community Commercial (C-2) (up to
21.8 units per acre); and
▪ Sites that are zoned Form Based Code Area (FBC) (up to 21.8 units per acre).
Moderate-Income Sites. Sites that are zoned Residential Medium (RM-2) allow for a density range of 5.6 to 13.5 dwelling units per net acre. Typical dwelling units include small apartments and other attached units. These areas were inventoried as feasible for moderate-income residential development.
Above Moderate-Income Sites. All other sites, which allow only single-family homes at lower densities, were inventoried as above moderate-income units (R-1 zones). ▪ Realistic Development Potential. The inventory assumes buildout of 80 percent of the maximum permitted density for all residential sites. This estimate is fairly consistent with suburban development and the City’s development standards are not considered excessive. Furthermore, the City’s FBC zone is specifically designed to provide flexibility and facilitate the efficient use of land by offering incentives such as off-site and shared parking options. Multi-family development in the RM and FBC zones can also exceed 21.8 units per acre with the approval of a CUP. See the “Realistic Development Potential” section below for additional information regarding the appropriateness of the assumed densities used for buildout.
RHNA Summary
Table 1D-2 provides a summary of Fowler’s ability to meet the 2023-2031 RHNA. The total RHNA for the 2023-2031 RHNA is 339 units, including 94 very-low-income units, 57 low-income units, 47 moderateincome units, and 141 above moderate-income units. After accounting for units built or under construction, planned and approved projects, and capacity on vacant sites, Fowler has a surplus capacity of 25 units.
Residential potential on vacant RM, Commercial, and FBC properties is sufficient to meet the City’s lowerincome RHNA. Therefore, the City’s sites inventory is more than adequate to accommodate the City’s RHNA for this Housing Element planning period without including units built or under construction or planned and approved projects.
269
406
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-32 Table 1D-2 RHNA Summary, Fowler, December 2023
Units by Income Level Total
Units ELI/VLI LI M AM
2023-2031 RHNA 94 57 47 141 339
Units Built or Under Construction -- -- -- -- --
Planned or Approved Projects (Table 2D-4) -- -- -- -- -- Capacity on Vacant Sites (Table 2D-2) 162 57 145 364
Surplus Capacity111 10 4 25
1 Surplus Capacity is calculated by subtracting capacity on vacant sites and capacity on prezoned sites from the total RHNA.
Source: City of Fowler
270
407
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-33 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Table 1D-3 Fowler 6th Cycle Vacant and Underutilized Sites Site
Number APN Size (acres)
GP Land
Use1
Zoning/
Pre-zoning
Existing
Use
Density
Range
(per
acre)
Units by Income
Level Total Realistic
Development
Potential2
Environmental
Constraints
Zoning in
Place for
5 th Cycle LI MI AMI RHNA3
1 343-143-10 0.17 HDR FBC Vacant 21.8 2 2 None NA
1 343-143-11 0.34 HDR FBC Vacant 21.8 5 5 None NA
2 343-142-14T 0.27 CC FBC Partially
Vacant
21.8 4 4 None
NA
2 343-142-13 0.26 CC FBC Vacant 21.8 4 4 None NA
3 343-020-09 0.69 CC C-2 Vacant 21.8 4 4 None Yes
3 343-020-18 15.65 CC C-2 Vacant 21.8 95 95 None Yes
4 343-360-40 5.66 NC C-1 Vacant 21.8 34 34 None Yes
5 343-233-02ST 0.44 CC FBC Vacant 21.8 7 7 None NA
5 343-233-03ST 0.41 CC FBC Vacant 21.8 7 7 None NA
6 343-270-13 5.70 MDR RM-2 Vacant 13.5 57 57 None Yes
7 345-10-007 29.05 MLDR R-1-7 Vacant 5.5 145 145 None NA Total Capacity Counted Towards Sixth Cycle RHNA (2023-2031) 162 57 145 364 Source: City of Fowler, 2023.
1. HDR = High Density Residential; CC = Community Commercial; NC = Neighborhood Commercial; MDR = Medium Density Residential; MLDR = Medium Low Density Residential.
2. Buildout of sites identified in residential zone districts is assumed to be at 80 percent of maximum density, rounded down to the nearest whole unit; Buildout of sites identified in commercial zone districts is assumed to be at 80 percent of maximum density for 35 percent of the total site area, which is an effective 28 percent assumption for the total site, rounded down to the nearest whole unit.
3. ‘NA’ denotes that the site was not included in the 5th Cycle Housing Element as an inventory site. 271
408
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-34 This page is intentionally left blank.
272
409
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-35 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-1 Fowler Sites Inventory
273
410
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-36 This page is intentionally left blank.
274
411
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-37 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Availability of Infrastructure and Services
The City of Fowler provides water services to residents and businesses in the City. Fowler is served by six groundwater wells for its domestic water supply and is equipped with a network of mains, pipelines, and laterals that help to distribute water throughout the service area. An additional well is currently offline and another well is currently under construction approximately 0.45 miles west of State Route (SR) 99 at the northeast corner of East South Avenue and Stanford Avenue, which is designed to produce the minimum desired 1,200 gallons per minute (gpm) that is consistent with the existing City production well yields in the area. The City has planned for a two percent increase in water supplies, which aligns with historical growth trends within the City. Although the projected water supply is sufficient to meet this two percent growth in demand, it is not sufficient for the full buildout of the General Plan by its planning horizon in 2040. To address this, goals, policies, and action items included in the General Plan ensure the necessary improvements to infrastructure. However, with the addition of the new well west of SR 99, the City will increase its potable water supply to have sufficient capacity to accommodate development projected in the current City limits, including to meet the demands of development required to meet RHNA. The City has infrastructure and planning procedures in place to ensure the service levels needed for future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years are sufficient.
The Selma-Kingsburg-Fowler County Sanitation District (SKF), a Joint Power Authority, provides sewer service to the City of Fowler as well as to the Cities of Kingsburg and Selma. According to the District Engineer, the SKF treatment plant has a capacity of 8.0 (mgd) with existing flows of 4.2 mgd (52.5 percent of capacity). By 2026, the SKF Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects total flow at 5.71 mgd (71 percent of capacity). Fowler has 2,061 residential units as of January 1, 2019. In 2025, if flow ratios from the three cities remain constant, SKF will have capacity for approximately 2,725 residential units in Fowler, significantly higher than the RHNA allocation for Fowler (339 units) during the Housing Element period.
At full capacity to 8.0 mgd, SKF can service 7,702 units. SKF would have capacity for an estimated 3,840 residential units in Fowler which is sufficient to meet the 6th Cycle RHNA. The total RHNA allocation for Kingsburg, Fowler, and Selma is 2,731 units. At full capacity, SKF will have capacity to accommodate the combined RHNA for all three member jurisdictions during the Housing Element period. There is sufficient wastewater capacity to meet the RHNA needs.
Expansion plans for a wastewater treatment plant are generally required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board when 70 percent of design capacity is reached. This threshold is not expected at the SKF plant until after 2025. The District, however, is updating its Master Plan to include provisions for long-term expansion and will make interim improvements (refurbishing aerators, basin improvements, fleet replacements, etc.) in conformance with the 10-year CIP.
The City also has dry utilities, including cable, electricity, and telephone service, available to all areas in the City with sufficient capacity to accommodate the projected growth. 275
412
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-38 Realistic Development Potential
In determining the realistic capacity for the City’s inventory of sites, the City considered land use controls and site improvements and assumed an 80 percent adjustment to the maximum number of units on the site to reflect developable acreage due to on-site improvements, including sidewalks, utility easements, and infrastructure improvements (roadway access, water, sewer, and stormwater). All sites are served by or are planned to be served by infrastructure, with no constraints identified that would reduce capacity beyond the 80 percent adjustment. To confirm this realistic capacity assumption, the City also considered and evaluated the implementation of its current multifamily development standards (e.g., setbacks, building height, parking, density requirements, land use controls, water and wastewater access, and open space requirements), as well as project examples from nearby cities with similar development standards to determine approximate density and unit capacity so as to not over-project unit potential. Examples of recent multifamily projects, including projects in mixed-use and commercial zones, both in Fowler as well as projects in Kerman, Sanger, Reedley, Riverdale, and Firebaugh are identified in Table 1D-4 Realistic Capacity Project Examples.
The average buildout capacity of all multifamily residential projects included in Table 1D-4, not including mixed-use projects, is 84 percent. When considering only the multifamily residential projects in the City of Fowler, the average buildout capacity is 89 percent. While these recent projects show that the average development capacity of multifamily projects exceeds the assumed 80 percent buildout capacity, the City has chosen to keep the more conservative buildout assumption of 80 percent in projecting anticipated units for inventory sites identified above in Table 1D-3 Fowler 6th Cycle Vacant and Underutilized Sites.
However, the total realistic development potential listed in Table 1D-3 has been rounded down to the nearest whole unit, which has reduced the assumed development capacity for each site further, resulting in realistic development capacities of 61 percent to 71 percent for residential districts. The following inventory sites are zoned for multifamily uses:
• Sites 1, 2, and 5 are zoned FBC, which allows for 100 percent residential development at densities of up to 21.8 dwelling units per acre. Each of these sites include two adjacent parcels that are owned or optioned by the same entity and equal over 0.5 acres in size to facilitate development. Site 1, as an example, has recently been approved for the 10-unit Casa Blanca Apartments project (19.5 dwelling units per acre), facilitated by the common ownership of the two smaller, adjacent parcels that Site 1 was comprised of.
• Site 2 is identified as partially vacant. APN 343-142-14T contains a vacant building that was previously used as a church; however, there is a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) for the property, executed in January 2023, requiring demolition of the building to facilitate development in conjunction with the adjacent vacant parcel (APN 343-142-13). • Site 6 is 5.7 acres in size and is zoned RM-2, which allows for development at densities of up to
14.5 dwelling units per acre.
276
413
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-39 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 In Fowler, residential development is allowed in commercial districts, including the C-1 and C-2 districts as part of a mixed-use project. Residential units may be integrated into the project either as vertical mixeduse or as horizontal mixed-use. While residential uses are not permitted to be 100 percent of the uses on the site, there is no minimum requirement for non-residential uses. Therefore, residential uses are permitted to make up a majority of the project site in these commercial districts. For purposes of estimating the realistic capacity of these sites, the City considered mixed-use projects developed in surrounding jurisdictions, including Reedley and Kingsburg. The average development capacity of these projects was 124 percent.
However, recognizing that project examples are limited and to ensure not to over-project capacity, the City has taken a conservative approach and assumed a 28 percent capacity on sites in commercial zones that allow residential uses. This assumption was derived from assuming that only 35 percent of the total acres would develop with residential uses and that the residential uses would build out at 80 percent of the maximum density allowed for residential portion of the site. However, the total realistic development potential listed in Table 1D-3 has been rounded down to the nearest whole unit, which has reduced the assumed development capacity for each site further, resulting in realistic development capacities of approximately 27 percent for commercial districts. The following inventory sites are in commercial districts:
• Site 3 is zoned C-2, which allows for residential development at densities of up to 21.8 dwelling units per acre, which would accommodate units in the lower income category. This site is over 10 acres in size and such sites are deemed to be inadequate for accommodating lower income housing need (Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(2)(B)). However, the City has taken specific actions to facilitate development of this site, including holding pre-application discussions with an interested party to develop the site with a mix of uses, including residential. The City has also included Program 16: Lot Development Feasibility that directs the City to pursue funding for the completion of off-site improvements for lower income inventory sites of over 10 acres in size to offset development costs. Program 16 further commits the City to expediting the processing of subdivisions, lot splits, and lot line adjustments that will facilitate the creation of new developable parcels on this site as well as consider the deferral of development impact fees. The City regularly processes subdivisions of land, including approval of five residential subdivisions of parcels larger than 10 acres since 2019, facilitating over 511 residential units. • Site 4 is 5.66 acres and is zoned C-1, which allows for residential development at densities of up to 21.8 dwelling units per acre.
Table 1D-4 Realistic Capacity Project Examples
Project Name Affordability Acres Project
Status
General
Plan /
Zoning
Max.
Allowable
Density
(du/ac)
Total
Project
Units
Max.
Allowable
Units
Realistic
Capacity
City of Fowler
Casa Blanca
Apartments Lower 0.52 Approved CC / FBC 21.8 10 11 91%
277
414
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-40 Project Name Affordability Acres Project
Status
General
Plan /
Zoning
Max.
Allowable
Density
(du/ac)
Total
Project
Units
Max.
Allowable
Units
Realistic
Capacity
Sumner Village Lower 5.68 In process NC / C-1 21.8 108 123 87% City of Kerman
Gateway Villas Lower 4.43 Completed -
2016 HDR / R-3 24 61 106 69%
Hacienda
Heights Lower 5.37 Completed -
2010
HDR / SD-R2.5 20 69 107 64%
Paseo 55 MixedUse 100% AMI 1.76 Constructed
2016 CC / CC 29 55 51 108%
Reedley I
Mixed-Use Lower 4.25 Approved
2022 LI / ML 15 80 63 127%
Kashian MixedUse: Workforce
Housing
Extremely Low 2.11 Approved
2022 CC / CC 29 70 61 115%
City of Kingsburg
Stone Plaza
Mixed Use
Project
Market Rate 0.28
Under
Construction
2023
CC / CC 21.4 10 6 145%
City of Sanger
Sanger Crossing
1 and 2 Lower 4.96 Constructed
2021
MDR / RM2.5 17.4 81 86 94%
City of Reedley
Reedley Family
Apartments 100% AMI 3.66
Phase 1
Constructed
2014
Phase 2
Constructed
2021
HDR / RM-2 21.78 7980 71 101%
City of Firebaugh
Del Rio Place Market Rate 3.8
Under
Construction
– 2023
HCD / R-3 29 56 110 51%
2020 S. Landucci Moderate 0.56 Constructed
– 2019 MDR / R-2 10 8 7 114%
Average Multifamily Projects 84%
Average Mixed-Use Projects 124%
Average Total Projects 97%
Source: Cities of Fowler, Kerman, Kingsburg, Sanger, Reedley, and Firebaugh, 2024. 278
415
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-41 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 SECTION 1D-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
Introduction
Assembly Bill (AB) 686 requires that all housing elements due on or after January 1, 2021, contain an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) consistent with the core elements of the analysis required by the federal Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Final Rule of July 16, 2015. Under California law, AFFH means “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics.”1
California Government Code Section 65583 (10)(A)(ii) requires local jurisdictions to analyze racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAP), disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risk. Although this is the Housing Element for the City of Fowler, Government Code Section 65583(c)(10) requires all local jurisdictions to address patterns locally and regionally to compare conditions at the local level to the rest of the region. To that end, a Multijurisdictional Housing Element was completed for the cities of Firebaugh, Fowler, Fresno, Huron, Kerman, Kingsburg, Mendota, Orange Cove, Parlier, Reedley, San Joaquin, Sanger, Selma, and the County of Fresno, including a regional AFH and each participating jurisdiction prepared a local AFH.
This section is organized by fair housing topics. For each topic, the regional assessment is first, followed by the local assessment. Strategies to address the identified issues are included throughout the section.
Through discussions with housing service providers, fair housing advocates, and preparation of this AFH, the City of Fowler identified factors that contribute to fair housing issues. These contributing factors are included in Table 1D-12 Factors Contributing to Fair Housing Issues, with associated actions to meaningfully affirmatively further fair housing related to these factors. Additional programs to affirmatively further fair housing are included in Section 2D-1, Action Plan.
This section also includes an analysis of the Housing Element’s sites inventory as compared with fair housing factors. The location of housing in relation to resources and opportunities is integral to addressing disparities in housing needs and opportunity and to fostering inclusive communities where all residents have access to opportunity. This is particularly important for lower-income households. AB 686 added a new requirement for housing elements to analyze the distribution of projected units by income category and access to high-resource areas and other fair housing indicators compared to citywide patterns to understand how the projected locations of units will affirmatively further fair housing. 1California Department of Housing and Community Development, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: Guidance for All Public Entities and for Housing Elements (April 2021 Update), April 27, 2021, preface page, https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/affh/docs/affh_document_final_4-27-2021.pdf 279
416
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-42 Outreach
The City of Fowler completed a public outreach effort at the local and regional level as part of the regional Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element effort. Public outreach activities are discussed in more detail in 1D-6: Public Outreach and Engagement, but generally efforts included:
• Maintaining a regional project website;
• Conducting stakeholder consultations and focus groups; • Hosting study sessions with Planning Commission, City Council, and the County Board of Supervisors; and
• Organizing community workshops.
Community Events
On August 24, 2022, the City had a booth at the regular Wednesday Nights at the Park event held at Panzak Park in Fowler. The City promoted the community event through social media pages, emails to stakeholders, and distribution of information through the FCOG email listserv and the Fresno Housing Authority to residents of affordable housing. The Fowler Unified School District also promoted the event to increase attendance.
At the event, the City met with residents to share information about the initial results of the FCOG Transportation Survey and future events related to the Housing Element update for residents to share their input. Residents were able to sign up for future updates on the housing element update using the sign in sheet provided. Five residents signed in, three of which were interested in receiving additional information.
Due to the number of vendors and booths at the event, visitors to the City booth were limited.
Study Session
A City Council study session was held virtually on August 2, 2022, to discuss the Housing Element Update and process. The study session was open to the public and held in person. Few comments were provided and no public comment related to fair housing was received at the meeting, instead focusing on the implications of SB 9 and Zoning Ordinance updates to address new legislation.
Fair Housing Issues
Since 2017, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) and California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) have developed annual maps of access to resources such as high-paying job opportunities; proficient schools; safe and clean neighborhoods; and other healthy economic, social, and environmental indicators to provide evidence-based research for policy recommendations. This effort has been dubbed “opportunity mapping” and is available to all jurisdictions to assess access to opportunities within their community.
280
417
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-43 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 The TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps can help to identify areas within the community that provide strong access to opportunity for residents or, conversely, provide low access to opportunity. The information from the opportunity mapping can help to highlight the need for housing element policies and programs that would help to remediate conditions in low-resource areas and areas of high segregation and poverty and to encourage better access for lower-income households and communities of color to housing in high-resource areas. TCAC/HCD categorized census tracts into high-, moderate-, or low-resource areas based on a composite score of economic, educational, and environmental factors that can perpetuate poverty and segregation, such as school proficiency, median income, and median housing prices. The TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps use a regional index score to determine categorization as high, moderate, and low resource.
Areas designated as “highest resource” are the top 20.0 percent highest-scoring census tracts in the region.
It is expected that residents in these census tracts have access to the best outcomes in terms of health, economic opportunities, and education attainment. Census tracts designated “high resource” score in the 21st to 40th percentile compared to the region. Residents of these census tracts have access to highly positive outcomes for health, economic, and education attainment. “Moderate resource” areas are in the top
30.0 percent of the remaining census tracts in the region and those designated as “moderate resource (rapidly changing)” have experienced rapid increases in key indicators of opportunity, such as increasing median income, home values, and an increase in job opportunities. Residents in these census tracts have access to either somewhat positive outcomes in terms of health, economic attainment, and education; or positive outcomes in a certain area (e.g., score high for health, education) but not all areas (e.g., may score poorly for economic attainment). Low-resource areas are those that score in the bottom 30.0 percent of census tracts and indicate a lack of access to positive outcomes and poor access to opportunities. The final designation are those areas identified as having “high segregation and poverty;” these are census tracts that have an overrepresentation of people of color compared to the county as a whole, and at least 30.0 percent of the population in these areas is below the federal poverty line ($27,750 annually for a family of four in 2022).
At the time of this writing (Summer 2022), HCD’s AFFH Data Viewer included the 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map. Therefore, the following assessment of fair housing is based on data from 2021.
However, since the time of writing, the AFFH Data Viewer was updated with the 2022 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map followed by the subsequent 2022 COG Geography TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map, which is based on a similar formula but compares each tract to those within the COG region rather than regions defined by TCAC. In the case of Fresno County, the comparison region changed from the Central Valley Region to the boundaries of Fresno COG, resulting in internal comparisons of Fresno County cities and communities.
At the COG level, the data for Fresno County presents a potentially skewed perspective as most cities in the county have small populations, housing stocks, and employment centers compared to the cities of Fresno and Clovis. Fresno and Clovis, as the two largest cities in the county and among the largest in the region, provide access to educational and economic opportunities that are not typically found outside of large cities.
Further, both, though particularly Clovis, include affluent neighborhoods that influence TCAC scores. 281
418
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-44 Therefore, access to resources using this methodology appears to weigh proximity to Fresno and Clovis more heavily than local resources. For example, in the 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map, the community of Biola and the City of Kingsburg are both designated as moderate to highest resource areas based on local context. However, in the 2022 COG Geography TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map, both are designated as low resource areas. The number of jobs, school performance, environmental conditions, median incomes, and other factors that are included in the Opportunity Map methodology did not change significantly between 2021 and 2022 in these communities. The primary driver of the change in resource area designation is likely based on proximity to resources and opportunities in the major cities of Fresno County. As many communities in the county are largely rural and agricultural in nature, most local resources have more limited capacity, but do serve the local population.
Given the potential limitations of an internal comparison, FCOG opted to maintain the analysis based on a larger geographic comparison to other jurisdictions in the Central Valley Region to reflect the interconnectedness of economies in this region, and similarities between the size and nature of many communities. However, where HCD has determined significant changes in resource area designation between the 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map and 2022 COG Geography TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map (i.e., high resource to low resource, or vice versa), the analysis notes the differences, potential causes, and strategies to address local discrepancies in access to opportunities.
The 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map designates the city as high resource south of East Adams Avenue and highest resource designation north of East Adams Avenue. In comparison, the 2022 COG Geography TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map designates the entire city as low resource. However, as is discussed in this analysis, many neighborhoods within the two census tracts in Fowler reflect positive economic, environmental, and educational characteristics that are more consistent with a moderate or high resource designation when compared to other jurisdictions in the region. In contrast, when taken only in the smaller context of the Fresno COG in the 2022 methodology, the quality of life indicators may not reflect as positive outcomes when compared against the higher scoring conditions in Clovis and Fresno.
For example, in the Sumner and Sunnyside, RJ Hill, and Aspire Avenue southwestern neighborhoods west of SR 99, positive indicators of quality of life include a moderate median income, moderately high ownership rates, moderate expected educational attainment scores, high anticipated economic outcome scores and more. Based on these characteristics, this neighborhood likely reflects moderate to high access to resources for residents in the regional context. However, according to the 2022 methodology, in comparison with the more skewed positive quality of life indicators at the COG layer from Clovis and Fresno, the less positive educational attainment scores, less positive environmental scores, and other factors yields a 2022 low resource designation. Similarly, the census tract east of SR 99 includes several neighborhoods with positive quality of life indicators of moderate to high educational attainment scores, moderately high anticipated economic outcome, relatively high homeownership rates, and others; although the small triangular shaped downtown neighborhood has a low economic percentile and a fairly equivalent distribution of occupancy tenure. In contrast, when taken in the context of the COG, economic domain and educational attainment scores are in the lower percentiles, as well as the environmental conditions, reflected in a 2022 TCAC/HCD Opportunity designation of Low Resource. 282
419
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-45 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 However, it is worth noting that the use of the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps are just the basis of the Assessment of Fair Housing, and a more detailed analysis of specific conditions within the jurisdiction provides a more comprehensive understanding of current patterns. The Opportunity Maps, and the full Assessment, inform programs to improve access to resources throughout the city. As seen in Figure 3-6, Regional TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas, in Section 3: Regional Assessment of Fair Housing, most of Fresno County, particularly in the incorporated cities, is primarily a mix of low-resource or moderateresource areas and areas of high segregation and poverty, with pockets of high-resource designations.
Kingsburg and Fowler are the only two cities along State Route 99 (SR 99) designated as high resource areas and do not have any housing segregation and poverty within their Cities with the data present in the figures below.
Patterns of Integration and Segregation
Income Distribution
The City of Fowler consists of two census tracts, both of which include unincorporated county land outside of city boundaries, and four block groups, two of which include adjacent unincorporated county areas.
TCAC/HCD Opportunity Area maps designate the entire city as High or Highest Resource (Figure 1D-2 Local TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas). According to 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS) data, the citywide median household income is $59,663, which is below the statewide median of $78,672, yet above the 2020 Fresno County median of $57,109. Only the jurisdictions of Kerman, Kingsburg, Clovis, and the unincorporated county have median incomes higher than the City of Fowler.
The area with the lowest median household income in Fowler, $25,781, is reported in the central block group east of South Golden State Boulevard, bound by East Adams Avenue to the north and East Main Street to the south (Figure 1D-3 Local Median Income). This area includes the downtown commercial area and businesses, city buildings, Panzak Park and the Edward Blaney Senior Center, Fremont Elementary School, Fowler Veterans Park, older residential housing, and industrial/agricultural processing. The adjacent block group to the north, which is predominantly unincorporated area, includes the East Adams Avenue neighborhood, affordable Fowler Apartments, and the Marshall School; this area has a median income of $46,731. New market-rate residential subdivisions are currently under construction in this area, which suggests that the median income may increase in this area. The western and southeastern portions of the city have slightly higher median incomes. The southeastern block group, which includes the Fowler California neighborhood, has a median income of $58,566, just above the county median, and includes business and commercial adjacent to the city core area, and two affordable housing complexes. The western block group, which encompasses the Sumner and Sunnyside, Aspire Avenue, and RJ Hill neighborhoods, has the highest median income of $61,318. Residents in this neighborhood are in close proximity to a commercial corridor and have access to the Valley Mobile Home Park and Donny Wright Park. 283
420
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-46 Figure 1D-2 Local TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas
284
421
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-47 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-3 Local Median Income
285
422
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-48 The ACS estimates that, in the City of Fowler, 13.8 percent of households have incomes less than 30.0 percent AMI, which is considered extremely low income and corresponds to the poverty threshold, as compared to 16.7 percent in Fresno County and 9.0 percent statewide. Overall, the rate of households in poverty has decreased from 20.2 percent in 2010. When looking at the total population in poverty, the proportion of the total population in poverty in the portion of the city east of South Golden State Boulevard, is 20.8 percent, a decrease from the 2014 rate of 23.6 percent (Figure 1D-4 Local Poverty Rate). Similarly, on the west side of the rail line, the rate of population with a median income below the poverty threshold has declined from 24.4 percent in 2014 to 19.7 percent in 2020. Overall, 82.5 percent of households in poverty identify as Hispanic. These rates suggest there is a higher concentration of persons in poverty in the east side of the city where four affordable housing complexes and older housing stock are located.
However, although data is not available at the block group level, 2016-2020 ACS data indicates that renters comprise 46.6 percent of the households in the city, and 95.1 percent of families in poverty are renters.
Therefore, a higher number of persons in poverty may be present in the vicinity of the affordable rental housing developments throughout the city.
The median household income in Fowler has increased between 2014 and 2020. Citywide median household income in 2014 was $44,539, while in 2020, citywide median household income was $59,663.
In 2020, the median household income had increased in the eastern census tract from $35,017 in 2014, although this is a composite of three block groups that range from a median income below the poverty level to above the county median income. The western census tract had a median income of $49,877, although both census tracts include a large area outside of the city boundary and so may not be reflective of conditions specifically for Fowler residents. However, the upward trend in income in Fowler suggests growing economic opportunities for residents, as several affordable housing options exist to reduce displacement risk.
Racial and Ethnic Characteristics
The City of Fowler’s largest demographic group is Hispanic, comprising 66.4 percent of the city’s population, placing the city among Fresno County jurisdictions with a lower proportion of Hispanic residents. Overall, non-White residents, including Hispanic, comprise 83.1 percent of the city’s population.
White non-Hispanic residents comprise 16.9 percent, followed by Asian at 13.1 percent, the second highest representation of Asian population in the county after the City of Fresno. Black and African-American residents comprise 1.4 percent of the population, and Other/Multiple Race at 1.8 percent, with all other racial and ethnic groups represented by smaller populations, each comprising less than 1.0 percent of the city’s population.
There appears to be a pattern indicating a slightly uneven spatial distribution of demographic groups within the City of Fowler (Figure 1D-5 Local Racial Demographics), with the distribution of populations of color predominantly located in the southeastern (89.9 percent) and central (83.2 percent) portions of the city. Non-White residents in the northern East Adams and Marshall Estates neighborhoods represent 73.7 percent of the total population. In the western census tract, 61.3 percent of the population identifies as Hispanic, and 20.9 percent identifies as White, non-Hispanic. The Asian population is also more highly 286
423
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-49 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 represented in the western (14.0 percent) and southeast (12.2 percent) neighborhoods than in other areas of the city.
Within the central city area, where the median income is below $30,000, the Hispanic population represents
86.0 percent of the population. In the eastern block group, the median income is just over the county median of $57,100, but the proportion of the population that identifies as Hispanic decreases to 77.4 percent.
Similarly, the western block group has relatively high median incomes, between $55,000 and $87,100, and has the lowest proportion of Hispanic residents, but the highest representation of Asian residents, while the proportion of White, Non-Hispanic is 20.9 percent. However, the correlation between non-White residents and income found in these areas is not found consistently throughout the city. The northern block group, in contrast, does not emulate this pattern. In this area, the median income is between $30,000 and $55,000, while the proportion of White, non-Hispanic residents is 26.3 percent, and the Hispanic population is 62.0 percent, suggesting that this pattern may be partially attributed to the racial and ethnic composition within the unincorporated area, which comprises almost the entirety of the block group.
The proportion of non-White residents in Fowler has increased between 2010 and 2020, becoming more diverse over time, mostly attributed to the increase in residents that identify as Other and Two or More Race classifications, increasing from 1.3 percent in 2010 to 4.4 percent in 2020. While the proportion of White non-Hispanic residents dropped slightly from 20.0 to 19.8 percent, the Hispanic population also dropped from 66.2 to 65.2 percent, as well as slight drops in the proportion of Asian and Black and AfricanAmerican populations.
There are no areas identified as a R/ECAP, as defined by HUD, in the city, and no TCAC/HCD designations of an Area of High Segregation and Poverty. Further, the City of Fowler does not contain any racially concentrated areas of affluence (RCAAs). As the proportions of White-identifying and Hispanic residents has decreased slightly, household income has risen (see Section 2: Housing Needs Assessment, “Income Distribution” section). Relatedly, the incidence of poverty has decreased, in combination with lower diversity rates than in many other jurisdictions within the county, suggests that there is income integration within the communities of color and opportunities for housing mobility.
Program 4: Provision of Adequate Sites ensures there is sufficient land inventory to develop the variety of housing types necessary to meet the identified Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The RHNA promotes the development of mixed-income neighborhoods by ensuring sites for a variety of housing choices. Additionally, several programs specifically support the development of housing types that may otherwise be underrepresented, such as Program 6: Affordable Housing Incentives, Program 7: Support Funding for Farmworker Housing, and Program 11: Encourage and Facilitate Accessory Units. Program 13: Housing for a Variety of Needs promotes the development of products to support the needs of households of various types, sizes, and incomes.
287
424
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-50 Figure 1D-4 Local Poverty Rate
288
425
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-51 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-5 Local Racial Demographics
289
426
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-52 Familial Status
Like several other jurisdictions in Fresno County, the majority of households in the City of Fowler are family households (78.3 percent). Family households are defined by California law as a household of two or more persons, regardless of relationship status. The City of Fowler’s rate of married-couple households is 53.8 percent, and an additional 7.9 percent of households are unmarried couples. The western side of the city sees 43.0 percent of the population over age 18 (note: not households) living with a spouse and 5.7 percent living with an unmarried partner; fairly comparable to 46.1 percent and 9.1 percent in the eastern side of the city, respectively.
Approximately 16.6 percent of the City of Fowler households are family households headed by single adults, lower than both the Fresno County rate of 22.2 percent and 21.0 percent in California. The east side of the city sees a higher proportion of single-headed family households, at 23.2 percent of the population over age 18, compared to 13.1 percent in the western portion; similarly, a higher proportion of persons over the age of 18 live alone within the eastern side as compared to the west, at 9.9 percent compared to 6.0 percent.
The City of Fowler’s proportion of single, female-headed households is 24.7 percent of total households, of which, 47.0 percent live alone, 25.7 percent have their own children, and 27.3 percent live with other related children, relatives, or roommates. Single, male-headed householders comprise 13.6 percent of total households, of which, 74.4 percent live alone and only 13.7 percent have their own children. While there is a higher representation of married- and unmarried-couple households in the eastern portion of the city, the rate of single householders is also higher in the eastern side of the city: as well, between 20.0 and 40.0 percent of children in the eastern tract reside with single female-headed households. It is possible that the rate of children residing in single female-headed households is higher in the east side of the city where all of the affordable rental complexes, the Magnolia public housing property, and all of the public schools are located (Figure 1D-6 Single-Parent, Female-Headed Households With Children In Fowler). Fewer than 20.0 percent of the female-headed households with children live on the west side of South Golden State Boulevard, within the portion of the city with no affordable housing complexes. and a lower proportion of single-person households
The rate of female-headed households with household incomes below the poverty line, at 42.0 percent, is higher than both the Fresno County rate and the statewide rate of 21.5 percent. In the eastern portion of the city, there are both higher rates of poverty and female-headed households, suggesting a possible concentration in proximity to commercial, agricultural, industrial, and other nonresidential uses. The slightly lower presence of single, female-headed households with children in the City of Fowler at 6.3 percent of total households as compared to 7.3 percent of households in Fresno County, may indicate barriers to housing for single-parent, female-headed households in high-opportunity areas within the City of Fowler. However, lower-income neighborhoods have TCAC/HCD high-resource designations, and proximity to these opportunities may offer benefits to single female householders with children, indicating that additional housing mobility opportunities for single-parent households, particularly those in poverty, should be provided.
290
427
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-53 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-6 Single-Parent, Female-Headed Households With Children In Fowler 291
428
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-54 Single-person households constitute 21.7 percent of total households, compared to 29.1 percent of households in Fresno County overall, and 23.7 percent of households statewide. Seniors living alone, comprising 9.6 percent of households both county- and statewide, constitute 6.5 percent of the City of Fowler’s households. Of the seniors living alone, 65.2 percent are homeowners, and the remaining 34.8 percent are renters. This may suggest that the City of Fowler may be an attractive place for senior couples to retire, or that senior couples have aged in place and remain in their homes to access services and amenities in the city catering to senior needs.
Program 15: Reasonable Accommodations and Universal Design outlines a process for the City to ensure reasonable accommodations requests can accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities. Additionally, several programs specifically support the development of housing types that may otherwise be underrepresented, such as Program 6: Affordable Housing Incentives, Program 7: Support Funding for Farmworker Housing, Program 11: Encourage and Facilitate Accessory Units, and Program 13: Housing for a Variety of Needs.
Disability Rates and Services
Persons with disabilities typically have special housing needs due to physical or developmental capabilities, fixed or limited incomes, and higher health costs. Seniors typically experience disabilities at higher rates.
Approximately 17.3 percent of the City of Fowler’s population lives with one or more types of disabilities (Table 2-28, Seniors with Disabilities [2020], in Section 2: Housing Needs Assessment), greater than both the Fresno County rate of 12.9 percent and the state rate of 10.7 percent. Although there is a slightly lower population of older residents (15.0 percent) in the city compared to Fresno County at 19.5 percent, 51.3 percent of the senior population in the City of Fowler experiences one or more disabilities, the highest rate in the county.
Residents living with disabilities in the eastern side of the city, inclusive of the adjacent unincorporated area within the census tract, comprise 15.8 percent of the population, of whom, 40.7 percent are seniors (Figure 1D-7 Percentage Of The Population With A Disability In Fowler). While seniors comprise 18.7 percent of the eastern portion of the city, 34.3 percent report a disability. In the western side of the city, the overall rate of disability is 9.7 percent. While seniors comprise only 11.7 percent of the population in this tract, 40.7 percent of this age cohort experiences one or more disabilities, representing 49.0 percent of total persons with disabilities in this tract.
292
429
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-55 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-7 Percentage Of The Population With A Disability In Fowler 293
430
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-56 The spatial distribution of City of Fowler residents living with disabilities has shifted between 2014 and 2020, decreasing within the western tract and increasing in the eastern tract. In 2014, the eastern side of the city had a disability rate of 9.5 percent, compared to 15.8 percent in 2020, with seniors comprising 53.0 percent of total disabilities in this tract, which is 51.2 percent of the total senior population, although seniors made up just 9.9 percent of the population within this tract. In comparison, the western side had a rate of
10.9 percent in 2014 compared to 9.7 percent in 2020, with seniors comprising 44.7 percent of total persons with disabilities in this tract, although the proportion of seniors residing in the western side of the city in 2014 was comparable to the 2020 rate, at 11.4 percent. The shift in representation of persons with disabilities over the years may reflect increased accessibility of services, amenities, and housing opportunities catering to persons with disabilities available within the eastern side of the city.
As shown in Table 2-32, Disability by Type (2020), in Section 2: Housing Needs Assessment, ambulatory disabilities were the most prevalent disability type, reported by 52.6 percent of the population with a disability, followed by independent living problems at 37.1 percent, hearing difficulties at 32.7 percent, and vision difficulties at 22.5 percent. Cognitive difficulties and self-care problems were reported by 21.1 and
13.7 percent of the population with a disability, respectively. The City of Fowler has a small population of residents with developmental disabilities (less than 1.0 percent of the total population), of which, approximately 46.7 percent are under 18 years of age and live at home, with parents or a caregiver.
Residents with disabilities in the City of Fowler are served by the Fresno County Senior Resource Center, which operates an Adult Protective Services program, assisting both disabled adults and seniors with all requests for assistance. Fowler residents also have access to the Dial-A-Ride program, operated by the local Fresno County Rural Transit Agency (FCRTA) subsystem, which offers transportation services to the elderly (age 65 and older), disabled, low-income, and general public. Dial-A-Ride services are wheelchair equipped and operate Monday through Friday between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., with fares priced at $1.00 one-way or $2.00 round trip. The Fresno County Human Services System, Department of Adult Services, also provides housing and basic needs assistance to elderly persons. The Fresno/Madera Area Agency on Aging (FMAAA) provides connections to programs, services, and resources elderly residents can use to maintain and improve their quality of life as they age.
For seniors and other persons requiring a supportive housing setting, there are 210 licensed care facilities in Fresno County with 4,953 beds. While the majority of these facilities are in the Cities of Fresno and Clovis, The Harvest at Fowler is a senior residential care facility with 36 beds to serve aging residents of Fowler.
Access to Opportunity
Transit Mobility
Transit mobility refers to an individual’s ability to navigate the city and region on a daily basis to access services, employment, schools, and other resources. Indicators of transit mobility include the extent of transit routes, proximity of transit stops to affordable housing, and frequency of transit. 294
431
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-57 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Fowler residents are served by FCRTA, providing fixed-route service on the Southeast, KingsburgReedley, and Kings Area Regional Transit (KART) lines (see Figure 3-24, Fresno County Rural Transit Agency Intercounty Routes, in Section 3: Regional Assessment of Fair Housing). Access to transit is displayed based on one-half mile buffer to potential housing sites in the City of Fowler (see Figure 1I-9) Southeast Transit provides three round trips on weekdays between Fowler and Fresno, stopping in Fowler at the bus shelter on the west side of East Merced and North 7th Street, and at Children’s Hospital. Buses originating in Kingsburg arrive in Fowler at 7:28 a.m., 10:23 a.m., and 3:28 p.m. before traveling on to Fresno. Return service departs from Fresno at 8:45 a.m., 2:00 p.m., and 4:45 p.m., arriving in Fowler after approximately 20 to 30 minutes, continuing to Selma before terminating in Kingsburg. Service is provided on 30-passenger, Americans with Disability Act (ADA) wheelchair-accessible buses. Monthly passes for general service between Fowler and Fresno are priced at $45.00, with discounted fares available for senior, youth, and disabled residents at $35.00 monthly.
The Kingsburg-Reedley Transit line provides three daily round trips between Reedley College and Fowler on weekdays. Buses to Reedley originate in Kingsburg, stop in Selma, and stop in Fowler at approximately 7:22 a.m., 11:23 a.m., and 2:53 p.m., then continue to Parlier before arriving at Reedley College. Return service departs from Reedley College at 9:15 a.m., 12:20 p.m., and 3:45 p.m., stopping again in Parlier, then in Fowler at approximately 9:45 a.m., 12:50 p.m., and 4:15 p.m. before continuing to Selma and Kingsburg. Service is provided on 30-passenger, ADA wheelchair-accessible buses. Monthly passes for general service between Fowler and Reedley are priced at $94.00, with discounted monthly student bus passes available for purchase through Reedley College at a rate of $35.00.
Kings Area Regional Transit (KART) is Kings County’s public transportation provider. KART provides regular, out-of-town transportation services to Fresno on weekdays. KART Transit Route 17 – Fresno provides service to Fresno originating in Hanford and stopping in Fowler at Valley Children’s Hospital before continuing on to Fresno, with return service from Fresno to Hanford stopping again at Valley Children’s Hospital. Monthly passes for general service between Fowler and Fresno are priced at $60.00, with discounted rates for eligible groups available for $50.00. Children 11 years of age and younger ride for free.
With daily access to the Cities of Fresno and Reedley, the FCRTA also provides Fowler residents with access to employment opportunities and connections to regional transit services, including Amtrak, Greyhound, and Fresno Area Express (FAX), which in turn provide connections within the metropolitan Fresno area and between Stockton, Bakersfield, and other regional hubs.
AllTransit is a transit and connectivity analytic tool developed by the Center for Neighborhood Technology for the advancement of equitable communities and urban sustainability. The tool analyzes the transit frequency, routes, and access to determine an overall transit score at the city, county, and regional levels.
AllTransit scores geographic regions (e.g., cities, counties, Metropolitan Statistical Areas [MSAs]) on a scale of 0 to 10, with 10 being complete transit connectivity. Figure 1D-8 Fowler AllTransit Performance Score, shows Fowler’s AllTransit Performance score, including metrics representing average household 295
432
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-58 transit access. Fowler’s score is 1.5, demonstrating “very low” connectivity. Table 1D-5 Fresno County Jurisdictions AllTransit Performance Scores, shows transit accessibility in Fowler in relation to other Fresno County jurisdictions. Fowler’s score is consistent with other comparable Fresno County jurisdictions, which are typified by smaller rural and semi-rural communities. However, as described in Section 3: Regional Assessment of Fair Housing, the AllTransit methodology does not appear to fully capture FCRTA and KART services. Therefore, AllTransit scores identified at the jurisdictional level may not accurately reflect the complete range of transit opportunities available through private and public service providers. Among Fresno County jurisdictions, the City of Fresno represents an outlier both in terms of population size, degree of urbanization, and transit accessibility. 296
433
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-59 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-8 Fowler AllTransit Performance Score
Source: AllTransit.cnt.org, 2022
297
434
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-60 Table 1D-5 Fresno County Jurisdictions AllTransit Performance Scores Jurisdiction Score
City of Fresno 5.0
Fresno County 3.2
Reedley 2.2
Fowler 1.5
Huron 1.2
Clovis 1.1
Coalinga 1.1
Parlier 1.0
Firebaugh 1.0
Mendota 0.9
Sanger 0.9
Selma 0.7
Kingsburg 0.7
Kerman 0.1
San Joaquin 0.0
Source: AllTransit.cnt.org, 2022
Housing Mobility
Approximately 46.6 percent of occupied households in Fowler are renter-occupied. Rates of renter occupancy are evenly distributed in Fowler. As shown in Section 2: Housing Needs Assessment, Table 2- 18, for 2022, the California Department of Finance (DOF) reported an overall vacancy rate of 4.5 percent in Fowler. Vacancy data is not available by tenure through the DOF; however, the 2020 ACS 5-year estimate indicates a rental vacancy rate of 0.0 percent and an ownership unit vacancy rate of 2.2 percent, with an overall vacancy rate of 3.2 percent. A healthy housing market is generally considered to have a 5.0 percent vacancy rate. ACS 5-year estimate vacancy rates draw on large sample sizes and may not precisely represent vacancy on the ground. Instead, these rates are presented as general estimates indicating approximate conditions in the local housing market.
In Fowler, a substantial proportion of vacant properties were categorized as “other vacant,” a category of properties that are vacant but not available for rent or purchase. Properties may be categorized as “other vacant” due to one or more factors, which may include ongoing legal proceedings, active renovation or repair, abandonment, or an owner’s preference for vacancy, among other potential factors. These categories of vacancy are accounted for in the overall vacancy rate estimate but are not included in the rental and ownership vacancy rate estimates, which only consider those units immediately available for rent or purchase.
298
435
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-61 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Fowler’s very low rental vacancy rate indicates a tight rental market with few housing mobility opportunities for current and prospective renters. Similarly, the low ownership unit vacancy rate indicates an absence of available homes for sale in Fowler for prospective homebuyers.
The 2020 ACS 5-year estimate indicates that median gross rent is $1,084 in Fowler, slightly higher than $1,029 reported for Fresno County (see Section 2: Housing Needs Assessment). Fowler’s vacancy rates are among the lowest in Fresno County, and median rents are higher than most other comparable Fresno County jurisdictions (see Section 2: Housing Needs Assessment).
Median rent in Fowler rose from $723 in 2010 to $1,084 in 2020, reflecting an increase of 49.9 percent over the 10-year period and indicating that renting costs have risen in recent years. Similarly, as found in Section 2: Housing Needs Assessment, Table 2-22, Home Sales Recorded in 2021-22, home prices in Fowler increased by 12.4 percent between 2021 and 2022. While rent is relatively affordable in Fowler compared to the state, rental costs have risen over the last 10 years. Additionally, a shortage of available housing units for rent and for sale may indicate limited mobility options for prospective and existing Fowler residents seeking ownership opportunities. In Fowler, affordable housing and denser housing options like the Ruby Court Apartments and Magnolia Commons are primarily found on the north side of the railroad, while residential housing on the south side of the railroad almost exclusively consists of single-unit homes.
No Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) use is reported in the census tract south of the railroad, and approximately 5.1 percent of renters in the census tract north of the railroad use HCVs.
Program 22: Fresno County Homebuyer Assistance Program, Program 24: Housing Choice Vouchers, and Program 26: Improve Access to Resources all promote housing mobility by providing access to first-time homebuyer programs, housing choice vouchers, and similar programs. Additionally, Program 13: Housing for a Variety of Needs promotes the development of housing types to support households of various types, sizes, and incomes.
Employment Opportunities
The HUD jobs proximity index measures employment accessibility in residential neighborhoods by calculating distances to potential job locations within the area, with larger employment centers weighted more heavily, and factoring in the population size of the local workforce. According to this index, most primarily residential areas in Fowler score between the 56th and 89th percentiles, indicating close proximity to employment opportunities (Figure 1D-10 Jobs Proximity Index). The section of the city north of East Adams Avenue scores the lowest, while areas southwest of South Golden State Boulevard score the highest.
Fowler is close to the City of Fresno, the region’s primary employment center, located approximately 10 miles northwest of Fowler, likely contributing to Fowler’s relatively high index scores among Fresno County jurisdictions.
Fowler’s primary industry is agriculture and agribusiness, with several businesses headquartered in the city, including Boghosian Raisin, Bee Sweet Citrus, and National Raisin Company. Approximately 91.3 percent of Fowler residents commute outside of the city for work, with 8.7 percent of residents both living and working within city limits. This figure has remained consistent over time – in 2010, 89.1 percent of Fowler 299
436
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-62 residents commuted outside of the city for work.
2 Fowler residents primarily work in the industries of
Health Care and Social Assistance (14.2 percent); Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting (12.0 percent); and Educational Services (11.5 percent).
3 In total, 73.3 percent of residents live within 24 miles of their workplace, an area that includes the Cities of Fresno, Reedley, Parlier, Sanger, Selma, and Bowles, each of which employ Fowler residents. This includes approximately 40.4 percent of Fowler residents who live within 10 miles of their place of employment. In contrast, 19.2 percent of Fowler residents travel more than 50 miles to work. Fowler is in a central location relative to several other jurisdictions. According to the ACS, the jobs-housing ratio in Fowler is 1.25, decreasing from a ratio of 1.63 in 2010, indicating an improved balance between employment and housing opportunities. A high jobs-housing ratio may indicate that adequate housing is less affordable or available to local workers, but a shortage of jobs for people that live in Fowler to work in Fowler.
Commercial activity within Fowler is focused in the historical core, generally in the vicinity of South Golden State Boulevard, 6th Street, 7th Street, and East Merced Street. Given the nature of the city’s main industries, many Fowler residents will likely continue to work outside of the city. The City’s zoning map (Figure 1D-11 Zoning In Fowler) shows that the majority of land in the city is designated for residential uses. The prevalence of residential uses with strong access to Fresno’s job market reflects the City’s relatively high scores for HUD’s jobs proximity index.
The City of Fowler’s 2040 General Plan includes an economic development element which outlines access to economic opportunities within the City.
2 U.S. Census Bureau, 2022, Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics (LEHD) Origin-Destination Statistics (2002-2019). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal-Employer Household Dynamics Program, accessed September 2022.
3 U.S. Census Bureau, 2022, Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics (LEHD) Origin-Destination Statistics (2002-2019). Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal-Employer Household Dynamics Program, accessed September 2022.
300
437
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-63 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-9 Transit Access
301
438
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-64 Figure 1D-10 Jobs Proximity Index
302
439
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-65 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-11 Zoning In Fowler
Source: City of Fowler, Accessed October 2022
303
440
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-66 Educational Opportunities
Fowler students are served by the Fowler Unified School District (FUSD), which has eight public schools reported on by the California Department of Education (CDE), including three elementary schools, one middle school, one high school, and several alternative programs. One of these schools, Malaga Elementary, is outside of the City of Fowler. The alternative programs, including Fowler Academy Community Day, Fowler Academy Continuation, and Fowler Academy Independent Study, typically serve students who have experienced challenges in traditional school environments. While these schools have limited data on performance scores for English language arts (ELA) and mathematics, they offer a valuable resource for students to continue their education in a supportive environment.
Of the five schools for which ELA and mathematics performance scores were available in 2019, CDE reported that Fowler High, Fremont Elementary, and Marshall Elementary scored above state grade-level standards for ELA, with Marshall Elementary also scoring above the state grade-level standard for mathematics. All other scores for schools in the FUSD were below the state-grade level standards for ELA, mathematics, or both (see Table 1D-6 School Performance Scores in Fowler, 2019).
The proportion of each non-alternative school’s population that was considered socioeconomically disadvantaged in 2019 ranged from 68.6 percent at Marshall Elementary to 75.9 percent at John Sutter Middle. For alternative and continuation programs, rates were substantially higher, ranging between 80.0 and 100.0 percent. Marshall Elementary is in an area with a median household income of $46,731 and a TCAC/HCD Education Doman Score in the 24th percentile. John Sutter Middle is in an area where median household income is $58,566 and the TCAC/HCD Educational Domain Score is also in the 24th percentile.
Within the City of Fowler, TCAC/HCD Educational Domain Scores range between the 10th and 24th percentiles (Figure 1D-12 Local TCAC/HCD Educational Domain Score). This data indicates that students living in different parts of Fowler generally have similar levels of access to educational opportunities, regardless of median household income in the immediate vicinity of the schools. 304
441
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-67 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Table 1D-6 School Performance Scores in Fowler, 2019
School Name ELA
Score
Math
Score
Chronic
Absenteeism
Rate
Suspension
Rate
Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged
Foster
Youth
English
Learners
Fowler Academy Community Day (9-12) - - - 8.6% 100.0% 0.0% 50.0% Fowler Academy Continuation - - - 0.0% 93.8% 0.0% 12.5% Fowler Academy Independent Study - - - 0.0% 80.0% 0.0% 60.0% Fowler High +17.4 -83.7 - 1.6% 70.5% 0.0% 10.2%
Fremont Elementary +6.1 -10.5 4.1% 0.6% 70.7% 1.1% 26.1% John Sutter Middle -6.4 -43.2 7.4% 3.0% 75.9% 1.0% 16.9% Marshall Elementary +4.1 +10.0 8.5% 0.2% 68.6% 0.9% 25.3% Source: California Department of Education, 2019
305
442
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-68 Figure 1D-12 Local TCAC/HCD Educational Domain Score
306
443
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-69 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Environmental Health
The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) reports CalEnviroScreen 4.0 scores for Fowler demonstrating relatively adverse environmental conditions, with census tracts in and around Fowler scoring between the 86th and 96th percentiles (Figure 1D-13 CalEnviroScreen Scores). In Fowler, residents in different parts of the jurisdiction experience the same scores, indicating that residents across the city do not have different access to environmental outcomes.
The primary pollution indicators leading to high scores as reported by OEHHA’s CalEnviroScreen, are, in order of significance, ozone, fine inhalable particles less than 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5), diesel particulate matter (PM), pesticides, drinking water contaminants, groundwater threats, and solid waste. Fowler is in a sparsely populated area, with few industrial uses and relatively low pollution from vehicular emissions.
However, commercial agriculture and natural resource extraction occurring close to Fowler may contribute to adverse environmental conditions. Population characteristics contributing to the high scores include asthma, low birth weight, education, unemployment, and poverty. The entirety of Fowler falls within the boundaries of an area considered to be a Senate Bill (SB) 535-qualifying disadvantaged community, representing the 25.0 percent of highest-scoring census tracts in CalEnviroScreen 4.0, census tracts previously identified in the top 25.0 percent in CalEnviroScreen 3.0, and census tracts with high amounts of pollution and low populations. This indicates that, as compared with statewide averages, Fowler represents an area of potential concern regarding fair housing and disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards and a concentration of vulnerable populations.
The City of Fowler’s 2040 General Plan includes Community Health and Equity and Open Space elements, both of which includes policies and programs designed to increase access to healthy outdoor spaces and reduce exposure to pollutants.
307
444
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-70 Figure 1D-13 CalEnviroScreen Scores
Source: OEHHA, 2021
308
445
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-71 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Disproportionate Housing Need and Displacement Risk
Overcrowding
Overall, approximately 6.0 percent of households in Fowler are considered overcrowded, nearly identical to the percentage of overcrowding in Fresno County as a whole (6.1 percent). In addition, approximately
2.3 percent of households in Fowler report being severely overcrowded, compared to 3.6 percent of households in Fresno County. However, overcrowding is significantly higher among renters in Fowler, of whom, 9.8 percent are overcrowded, than among homeowners, of whom, 2.7 percent are overcrowded.
As shown in Figure 1D-14 Overcrowding In Fowler, the ACS estimates that overcrowding occurs at a slightly higher rate west of Golden State Boulevard (14.6 percent of households) than to the east (10.3 percent). Fowler has the second-lowest rate of overcrowding for all households among all jurisdictions in Fresno County, which may represent a balance of housing type with demand and need. According to the 2016-2020 ACS, approximately 69.7 percent of housing units in Fowler have three or more bedrooms, which typically reduce the need for occupants to share rooms.
Despite the relatively low rates of overcrowding currently, it has increased over the last decade. In 2010, approximately 5.3 percent of all households in Fowler experienced overcrowding, compared to 6.0 percent in 2020. This increase has been experienced exclusively by renters, who experienced overcrowding at a rate of 3.3 percent in 2010 compared to 9.8 percent in 2020. In contrast, homeowner overcrowding decreased from 5.6 to 2.7 percent. However, both renters and homeowners have experienced an increase in severe overcrowding, with renter severe overcrowding increasing from 1.4 to 3.0 percent and homeowner severe overcrowding from 3.0 to 4.4 percent. The increasing rate of overcrowding, particularly in light of the high proportion of larger housing units, may indicate a growing lack of affordability resulting in households needing to share costs, or may indicate that demand for housing exceeds supply. 309
446
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-72 Figure 1D-14 Overcrowding In Fowler
310
447
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-73 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Overpayment
In Fowler, 22.6 percent of households are cost burdened, and 12.9 percent are severely cost-burdened, for a total of 35.5 percent of all households (Table 1D-7 Cost Burden in Fowler, 2010-2018). Of these households, approximately 71.5 percent are renters, though renters comprise only 46.6 percent of households in the city. In total, 35.2 percent of renters are cost burdened, and 18.8 percent are severely cost burdened, compared to 10.5 percent and 7.7 percent of homeowners, respectively. As shown in Figure 1D-15 Percentage Of Homeowners Overpaying, Fowler has one of the lowest rates of homeowner overpayment in the area east of Golden State Boulevard, when compared to the surrounding region. In this portion of the city, just 16.9 percent of homeowners are overpaying for housing. In comparison, west of Golden State Boulevard, 36.6 percent of homeowners are estimated to be overpaying for housing. While this rate is more reflective of patterns found in neighboring jurisdictions, the stark difference within the city may be as a result of the new construction that has occurred in the western portion of the city. In this area, Somerset Crossing and Aspire at Sunnyside are new homes that are priced from approximately $400,000 to $550,000, which has likely contributed to the significant rise in the median home value in Fowler in recent years, as described herein. In contrast to geographic discrepancies in homeowner overpayment, renter home value is relatively constant throughout the city (Figure 1D-15 Percentage Of Homeowners Overpaying). However, overall, the ACS estimates lower rates of renter overpayment in Fowler compared to neighboring cities and census tracts, including Sanger, Parlier, and Selma.
Table 1D-7 Cost Burden in Fowler, 2010-2018
Household Type
Cost Burdened Severely Cost Burdened
2010 2018 Percent
Change 2010 2018 Percent Change
All Households 14.4% 22.6% 8.2% 17.1% 12.9% -4.1%
Renters 16.7% 35.2% 18.6% 25.4% 18.8% -6.6%
Homeowners 12.9% 10.5% -2.4% 11.4% 7.7% -3.6%
Lower-Income Households 22.5% 38.9% 16.4% 46.7% 31.8% -14.8% Renters 28.8% 48.9% 20.2% 43.8% 30.9% -12.8%
Homeowners 10.0% 14.0% 4.0% 52.5% 31.9% -20.6%
Moderate-Income Households 8.3% 19.4% 11.0% 5.6% 2.6% -3.0% Renters 0.0% 27.8% 27.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Homeowners 13.0% 6.2% -6.9% 8.7% 6.2% -2.5%
Above Moderate-Income
Households 10.3% 9.6% -0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Renters 0.0% 9.4% 9.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Homeowners 13.7% 9.7% -3.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Sources: CHAS 2006-2010 and 2014-2018
311
448
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-74 As discussed in the Overpayment section of Section 2: Housing Needs Assessment, overpayment often impacts lower-income households at a higher rate due to financial constraints. As such, these households are most at risk of displacement due to overpayment resulting from more limited flexibility in responding to changes in income or rent. In Fowler, 38.9 percent of all lower-income households are cost burdened and
31.8 percent are severely cost burdened, for a total of 70.7 percent of all lower-income households experiencing some degree of cost burden (Table 1D-7 Cost Burden in Fowler, 2010-2018). Lower-income renters experience overpayment at a significantly higher rate than homeowners, with 48.9 percent of renters overpaying, compared to just 14.0 percent of homeowners. This may suggest that lower-income homeowners live in the northern portion of the city, where homes tend to be older, are slightly smaller, and tend to be more affordable. Overpayment rates drop to 19.4 percent of moderate-income households, and
9.6 percent of above moderate-income households. The rate of above moderate-income households overpaying, particularly among homeowners, is relatively high compared to other jurisdictions in Fresno County, likely due to the availability of new construction units, which tend to be larger and therefore priced higher.
Since 2010, the rate of overpayment among lower-income households has increased significantly, which has primarily been as a result of increased overpayment among lower-income renters (Table 1D-7 Cost Burden in Fowler, 2010-2018). Moderate- and above moderate-income renters have also experienced moderate-to-large increases in overpayment as well. All income groups, across tenures, have experienced a decrease in severe overpayment since 2010, indicating that while households are still overpaying at a significant rate, the amount over 30.0 percent of their income they have to spend on housing has decreased.
The greatest decrease in severe overpayment benefited lower-income homeowners. The changes in overpayment between 2010 and 2018 suggest growing unaffordability of the rental market for all households in Fowler.
While home value data from 2010 is not available, in May 2014, the median home value in Fowler was $215,708, which had increased by 85.2 percent to $399,394 in 2022 for an average annual increase of 10.6 percent, according to Zillow. Data on rental prices is more limited in Fowler, but it can be assumed that housing price increases have impacted rental units as well, particularly given the rising rates of overpayment among renters. The ACS estimates that the median gross rent increased from $803 in 2015 to $1,084 in 2020, for an average annual increase of 7.0 percent. While the median value of ownership units has increased more rapidly, lower- and moderate-income renters have been disproportionately impacted by rising housing costs in Fowler.
Program 22: Fresno County Homebuyer Assistance Program and Program 24: Housing Choice Vouchers outline the City’s activities to increase access to homebuyer and housing choice programs that help promote housing mobility.
312
449
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-75 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-15 Percentage Of Homeowners Overpaying
313
450
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-76 Figure 1D-16 Percentage Of Renters Overpaying
314
451
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-77 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Substandard Housing Conditions
Approximately 51.7 percent of Fowler’s housing units are over 30 years old, and 31.3 percent of units are over 50 years old (Table 2-19 Age of Housing Stock (2020), in Section 2: Housing Needs Assessment).
Older units are generally more frequently subject to maintenance issues than newer housing stock. Even units that are not urgently in need of repair may benefit from energy-efficiency improvements to reduce energy usage and related climate impacts. The oldest housing units in Fowler are largely concentrated in the center of the city, east of Golden State Boulevard, south of E. Adams Avenue, and west of S.
Temperance Avenue. This area is closest to the original, and current, commercial district and the railway that brought early growth to the area. While considered a high-resource area, this portion of the city, and others, have a median income well below the state median. Therefore, it is possible that many households may not have the financial capacity to complete needed repairs on aging homes.
Another measure of substandard housing conditions is the presence of kitchen and plumbing facilities. The 2015–2019 ACS estimated that there are no owner-occupied units in Fowler that lack a complete kitchen or plumbing, but 60 renter-occupied units meet these criteria, all of which are occupied by lower-income residents. These units account for approximately 2.9 percent of Fowler’s total housing stock and 6.3 percent of renter-occupied units, indicating that renters, particularly lower-income renters, are disproportionately burdened by housing conditions.
Program 20: Housing and Rental Rehabilitation Programs seeks funding for targeted assistance for property owners and landlords of rental properties, code enforcement, and to market availability of rehabilitation assistance.
Homelessness
In January 2022, the Fresno-Madera Continuum of Care (FMCoC) published its Homeless Census and Survey Report (Point-in-Time [PIT]) count, which estimated 3,938 persons experiencing homelessness in Fresno County. Of that number, 1,728 persons were sheltered homeless and 2,210 were unsheltered homeless (Table 2-35, Total Unsheltered and Sheltered Homeless Count: Fresno County [2022], in Section 2: Housing Needs Assessment). Of this population, 3,397 individuals were counted in the City of Fresno and the remaining 541 were in the remainder of the county.
Throughout the FMCoC area, which includes Madera County, approximately 60.0 percent of the homeless population identified as male, 29.0 percent as female, and 1.0 percent as transgender. Approximately half of the population identified as Hispanic, 6.0 percent identified as Native American or Alaska Native, 3.7 percent as Asian, 15.6 percent as Black or African American, 0.8 percent as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 60.6 percent as White, and 12.8 percent as multi-racial or belonging to another race. Additionally, 205 people, or 4.9 percent of the homeless population, were veterans; 15.0 percent were survivors of domestic violence; and 19.0 percent had a serious mental illness. While the age of homeless persons was reported generally, it did not identify the senior population. The PIT report does not distinguish the characteristics of the homeless population in Fresno County, so it is assumed that these statistics generally represent the Fresno County population. Further, the 2022 PIT does not identify the locations of those individuals in the remainder of the county. However, in 2021, the County of Fresno released a 315
452
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-78 Homelessness Update that identified 196 homeless persons in the “rural informal county,” which includes the cities of Coalinga, Firebaugh, Fowler, Huron, Kerman, Kingsburg, Mendota, Orange Cove, Parlier, Reedley, Sanger, and Selma, and the unincorporated communities of Raisin City and West Park. No homeless residents were counted in Fowler.
Table 1D-8 Demographic Characteristics of the Homeless Population, 2022, identifies the proportion of each of the protected characteristics identified in the 2022 PIT compared to the proportion of each Fresno County jurisdictions’ population, to identify whether any protected classes are disproportionately represented as part of the homeless population. The percentages for a protected characteristic population in bold are overrepresented in the homeless population compared to that jurisdiction’s total population. As there are no known homeless persons in the City of Fowler, Table 1D-8 compares the regional homeless population to the City’s population to identify discrepancies on a larger scale. 316
453
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-79 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Table 1D-8 Demographic Characteristics of the Homeless Population, 2022 Jurisdiction Vetera
n
Mental
Disabilit
y
Hispani
c
Native
American/Alask
a Native
Asian Black/Africa
n American
Native
Hawaiian/Pacifi
c Islander
White Other/Multipl
e Races
Total Homeless 4.9% 19.0% 50.0% 6.0% 3.7% 15.6% 0.8% 60.6% 12.8% Clovis 7.0% 4.7% 32.7% 0.2% 10.7
%
2.6% 0.2% 49.5
%
4.0%
Coalinga 4.4% 5.1% 62.0% 2.0% 1.9% 2.9% 0.5% 28.2
%
2.6%
Firebaugh 1.3% 2.2% 94.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 5.8% 0.1% Fowler 6.4% 3.9% 65.2% 0.3% 9.9% 0.4% 0.0% 19.8
%
4.4%
Fresno 5.1% 6.3% 49.7% 0.5% 14.0
%
6.9% 0.1% 26.1
%
2.7%
Huron 1.1% 1.8% 94.5% 1.8% 0.0% 0.3% 0.0% 3.4% 0.0%
Kerman 3.9% 5.7% 81.7% 0.0% 4.4% 0.3% 0.0% 12.0
%
1.4%
Kingsburg 7.0% 4.0% 47.7% 0.0% 7.9% 0.3% 0.0% 41.0
%
2.7%
Mendota 0.5% 2.2% 96.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.6% 0.3%
Orange Cove 7.0% 2.6% 95.3% 0.0% 0.0% 1.2% 0.3% 3.0% 0.1% Parlier 1.1% 2.4% 97.7% 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8% 0.2%
Reedley 4.1% 4.0% 79.3% 0.2% 2.3% 1.5% 0.1% 14.2
%
2.4%
Sanger 3.6% 3.6% 80.5% 0.5% 3.0% 0.0% 0.3% 15.0
%
0.7%
San Joaquin 0.8% 1.5% 97.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 1.5% 0.0% 317
454
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-80 Jurisdiction Vetera
n
Mental
Disabilit
y
Hispani
c
Native
American/Alask
a Native
Asian Black/Africa
n American
Native
Hawaiian/Pacifi
c Islander
White Other/Multipl
e Races
Selma 3.6% 3.5% 85.0% 0.1% 1.8% 0.9% 0.0% 10.7
%
1.6%
Unincorporated
County 5.7% 4.8% 47.7% 0.6% 7.5% 2.0% 0.1% 39.6%
2.5%
Sources: FCOG Data Packet, 2022; Fresno/Madera Continuum of Care, 2022; 2016-2020 ACS 318
455
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-81 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 As seen in Table 1D-8 Demographic Characteristics of the Homeless Population, 2022, all protected characteristics are overrepresented in the majority of Fresno County jurisdictions, with individuals with mental disabilities and residents that identify as Native American, Alaska Native, Black, African American, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, White, or Other/Multiple Races being overrepresented in all Fresno County jurisdictions. Homelessness is often a cross-jurisdictional issue; therefore, the City participates in, and offers, several homelessness resources and programs that are available regionally, identified in Table 1D-9 Services to Address Homelessness.
Table 1D-9 Services to Address Homelessness
Service/Resource Description Operator Location
Multi-Agency
Access Program
(MAP Point)
Traveling food truck and fixed
locations that provide linkage to
government resources and services
(housing, behavioral health,
physical health, food linkages, and
transportation) at no cost to all
residents of Fresno County
Fresno County
Department of
Behavioral Health
(funding)/ Kings
View Corporation
(operation)
Countywide
Physical
locations:
Firebaugh,
Fowler, Fresno,
Huron, Kerman,
Mendota,
Parlier, and
Reedley
Fresno County
Behavioral Health
WARM Line
Available during weekday business
hours for non-emergency emotional
and coping support for residents
throughout the county
Fresno County
Department of
Behavioral Health
Countywide
Multi-Agency
Response to
Community
Homelessness
(MARCH)
Countywide collaboration to
address homelessness through
coordination of resources regionally
and cross-jurisdictionally,
engagement of the community,
attracting private funding to support
community-specific programs, and
inclusion of rural representatives
selected by FCOG
FCOG/Jurisdictions Countywide
Turning Point of
Central California
Mental health services including a
full-service partnership program
Contracted by Fresno
County Department
of Behavioral Health
Countywide
Fresno County
Department of
Social Services
Homeless
Assistance
Temporary housing, permanent
housing, or arrears payments for
families eligible for CalWorks once
during a 12-month period
Fresno County
Department of Social
Services
Countywide
Catholic Charities
Clothing, shelter, diapers, a food
pantry, rent and mortgage
assistance, DMV ID vouchers,
application assistance for CalFresh
Catholic Charities
Countywide
319
456
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-82 Service/Resource Description Operator Location
and food stamps, application
assistance for PG&E discounts,
assistance with immigration
services, and senior companionship
assistance. Also has a Rural
Outreach Program to serve residents
throughout the region and work
with migrant farmworkers.
Physical
location: City of
Fresno
Emergency Housing
Voucher
Assist persons experiencing, at-risk
of becoming, or recently homeless
and those fleeing domestic
violence, dating violence, sexual
assault, stalking, or human
trafficking
Fresno Housing and
FMCoC Countywide
United Way
Emergency informational services
to connect persons in need with
Homeless Prevention Programs,
food and shelter assistance, help
with landlord-tenant issues, legal
services referrals, and more
United Way Countywide
Groceries2Go
Provides grocery boxes of shelfstable food items through an appointment-based system.
Central California
Food Bank Countywide
CalFresh Enrollment
Assistance
Application assistance and
assistance navigating the CalFresh
process.
Central California
Food Bank Countywide
Fresh Produce
Distribution
Mobile Pantry Program and
Neighborhood Markets operating
out of self-contained vehicles that
travel to rural and remote areas
throughout the county. A schedule
of distribution locations is available
online.
Central California
Food Bank Countywide
Senior Hunger
Program
Food boxes to senior-serving
partners tailored to the dietary
needs of seniors.
Central California
Food Bank Countywide
Partner Feeding
Sites
Provides food to over 220 sites
including churches, community
centers, and other organizations to
feed hungry residents in local
neighborhoods
Central California
Food Bank Countywide
USDA Partnership
Distribute food acquired by the
USDA to 47 organizations in
Fresno County.
Central California
Food Bank Countywide
320
457
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-83 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Service/Resource Description Operator Location
Fresno County Food
Map
Online service mapping locations of
feeding sites, food banks, etc. Fresno County Countywide Projects for
Assistance in
Transition from
Homelessness
(PATH)
Street outreach for people
experiencing or at risk of
homelessness and referrals to
housing resources, medical care,
mental health counseling, and social
services.
Fresno County
Department of
Behavioral Health
(funding)/ Kings
View Corporation
(operation)
Countywide
Emergency shelters also include Marjaree Mason Center, Fresno Rescue Mission, Evangel Home Inc., and Plaza Terrace.
Program 3: Homeless/Unhoused Needs outlines activities to address homelessness concerns in the City of Fowler.
Farmworkers
As discussed in the Regional Assessment of Fair Housing, farmworkers are considered a special needs group because they traditionally earn low wages and often migrate between farms, resulting in many farmworkers living in overcrowded and substandard housing conditions. Although Fresno County’s overall economy has historically been largely based on agricultural operations, the number of farmworkers living in each of the jurisdictions in the county in more recent years varies depending on location, size, and diversification of their individual economic base. Further, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the industry started shifting toward recruiting and employing H-2A visa workers, many of whom are from Mexico and Central America. However, farmworkers are essential to Fresno County’s and Fowler’s economies as well as to local and national food supplies, and their needs for safe and affordable housing resources must be addressed.
The 2017 Census of Agriculture identified 150 farm operations within the 93625 zip code, which includes the City of Fowler and land in unincorporated Fresno County around the city. Additionally, there are 300 farm operations in the adjacent 93725 zip code, to the west of Fowler, and 48 farm operations in the 93616 zip code, northeast of Fowler. It is likely that some portion of the farm operations in these zip codes, particularly in the areas closest to Fowler, employ farmworkers that reside or use resources in the city.
Despite its location within an active agricultural region of the county, only 7.5 percent of Fowler’s labor force is employed in agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, or mining, according to the 2016-2020 ACS.
Other jurisdictions in the county (including unincorporated county) have higher rates of the labor force in these industries (see Table 2-39 Estimated Farmworkers (2020)). Though it is possible that not all these workers are engaged in farm labor, the data allow comparisons between jurisdictions and to gauge segments of the population at risk of overpayment, overcrowding, substandard housing conditions, or displacement.
Based on the most recent (2022) farmworker employment figures collected by the California Employment Development Department (EDD), there are 96,300 farmworkers employed throughout the county, yet 321
458
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-84 farmworker housing facilities for only 2,540 occupants were contracted by H2-A employers and farm operators, according to the HCD Employee Housing Facilities Permit Services database. Although this is equivalent to only about 2.6 percent of the farmworker employment countywide, it is important because H2A workers must be provided with housing accommodations. The seasonal and often migrant nature of farm labor, and accounting for undocumented workers, suggest that this data likely underrepresents the actual farmworker population, because undocumented residents do not often participate in traditional data collection.
The Phase 1 COVID Farmworker Survey Report, completed by the California Institute for Rural Studies and published in February 2021, estimates that undocumented workers comprise approximately 50 percent of workers statewide. They are predominantly Mexican, and the majority are Mixteco and Trique indigenous non-Spanish-speaking people. According to the article “In the Valley of Fear,” published in December 2018 on workingimmigrants.com, most of the farmworkers in the San Joaquin Valley have been working the fields for at least a decade and have established families in the vicinity of their workplace.
Between September 2021 and January 2022, Fresno County conducted a Farmworker Survey and a Farmworker Employer Survey. A second round of each survey was conducted between February 2022 and July 2022. In total, the County surveyed 240 farmworkers and 170 farm employers. Only one respondent to the Farmworkers Survey reported residing in Fowler, though an additional four respondents lived in the nearby unincorporated community of Easton. Of this sample, all of the respondents disclosed their status as either permanent residents or citizens having lived in the U.S. for a minimum of 28 years. None of the respondents were H-2A visa workers. According to the countywide survey effort, 37.0 percent of the respondents reported being citizens, 38.2 percent reported being permanent residents, 16.0 percent identified their status as undocumented workers, 6.3 percent did not respond, and 1.3 percent had H-2A visa status. Due to the small representation of respondents residing in or near Fowler, a definitive determination of the proportion of undocumented workers cannot be made; therefore, the representation of undocumented workers throughout Fresno County as found by the survey may be applicable to the farmworker population in Fowler and surrounding communities.
According to the EDD, the most recent data from 2014 measured median wage for farmworkers at $13.44 per hour, or approximately $25,804 per year for full-time work, which is considered extremely low income, correlating with the 2019 poverty threshold of $25,750. Seasonal workers without a year-round income could have lower incomes. The median income in the city is $59,663, and 13.8 percent of the population lives below the poverty threshold. While 66.4 percent of the households in the city are Hispanic, 82.5 percent of the total households in poverty are Hispanic households. The findings from the Fresno County Farmworker Survey indicate that 99.6 percent of farmworkers surveyed countywide are Hispanic. When the ACS 2016-2020 data that 7.5 percent of the labor force in Fowler is employed in agriculture are combined with and the above poverty and EDD wage data, it suggests that a majority of the labor force employed in agricultural industries are Hispanic (HNA Table 2-10, Employment by Industry), and it is likely that many of these workers have incomes below the poverty threshold. 322
459
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-85 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 To meet the housing needs of the farmworker population in Fowler, as shown by Table 1D-10 Farmworker Housing Facilities in Fowler, the HCD Employee Housing Facilities Permit Services database identifies one H-2A visa housing facility within the vicinity of the city with capacity for 15 occupants. Even though there is a low proportion of persons is engaged in the agricultural industries in Fowler, the lack of farmworker housing facilities, paired with the high proportion of Hispanic households in poverty, suggests that the farmworkers in the city may have difficulty finding affordable, appropriately sized housing.
Table 1D-10 Farmworker Housing Facilities in Fowler
Name of Facility Location # of Rooms Maximum
Occupancy
On-Site Farmworker Housing Facilities
N/A
H-2A Visa Farmworker Housing Facilities
Berberian 20 Dorm 4343 S. Fowler Ave. – Fowler 1 15
Source: HCD Employee Housing Facilities Permit Services database, January 2023.
Note: Facilities reported in operation as of 12/31/2022.
Given the shortage of farmworker housing units, many farmworkers are likely forced to pay market rate for their housing or find other options, such as sleeping in vehicles or garages. In Fowler, the H-2A farmworker facility is not suitable for families, based on unit size. Farmworkers that are citizens and permanent residents may have access to 170 HUD, USDA, or locally assisted affordable housing opportunities in Fowler, although they must compete with other lower-income households for the limited number of units. For undocumented workers, options are more limited, and a large number of farmworkers may live in spaces not intended for human habitation, such as shacks, outbuildings and sheds, and converted garages, often in severely overcrowded conditions.
Permanent resident farmworker households are included in ACS estimates and therefore part of CHAS housing need estimates. Consequently, the housing needs of lower-income farmworker households are not differentiated from other lower-income households experiencing overpayment, overcrowding, and substandard housing. Because about 7.5 percent of the labor force in Fowler are employed in agricultural operations and similar fields, farmworkers may comprise a portion of extremely low- and very low-income households that experience one or more housing problems in the city. Based on the Fresno County Farmworker Survey, 81.7 percent of respondents countywide reported incomes below $2,500 per month, which corresponds to an extremely low-income household of four. However, the respondent from Fowler reported a household income of approximately $2,900 per month, and of the four respondents residing in Easton, 50.0 percent had incomes above $2,500 monthly. Despite these slightly higher-than-average incomes for farmworkers in the county, farmworkers in Fowler still likely face challenges finding affordable housing; or conversely, based on the difficulty of finding affordable housing in Fowler, lowerincome farmworkers may choose to live elsewhere, which could be a reason for the low proportion of farmworkers in the city.
323
460
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-86 Based on socioeconomic and demographic characteristics indicators of the farmworker community in the San Joaquin Valley, it is likely that a portion of farmworker households that reside in the city, particularly those with lower incomes, have located housing opportunities in the central downtown neighborhood, where the median income is $25,781 and 43.3 percent of residents are below the poverty line, conditions that reflect the regional farmworker population. While roughly 66.4 percent of the households in the city are Hispanic, the highest representation of Hispanic households (between 83.2 and 89.2 percent) is in the older central downtown and southeast portion of the city, adjacent to major transportation corridors, industrial, and other nonresidential uses. Though this area includes two of the three affordable housing complexes in the city, affordable housing opportunities not associated with assisted housing resources may also be found in the older residential stock. The higher proportion of Hispanic households in these areas aligns with the findings of the Farmworker Survey and statewide statistics that farmworkers are overwhelmingly Hispanic.
Citizens, noncitizens with permanent status, and H-2A visa workers are eligible for public housing, HCVs, USDA rural rental assistance, and Section 8 project-based rental assistance. Section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980, as amended, makes certain categories of noncitizens eligible for assistance, including most categories of immigrants, but excludes unauthorized immigrants (e.g., undocumented) and those in temporary status (e.g., tourists and students). Section 214 applies to specific programs, primarily federal rental assistance programs administered by HUD and the USDA, including Public Housing, Housing Choice Voucher, Section 8 project-based rental assistance programs, and rural rental assistance. Undocumented residents are subject to eligibility requirements based on whether Section 214–covered programs are administered by HUD or USDA, which implement different regulatory treatment for mixed-status households depending on householder status. For HUD Section 214 projects, an ineligible noncitizen may reside with family members who are eligible to qualify for affordable housing (such as an undocumented single parent with U.S. citizen children or an undocumented worker married to an eligible householder), although Section 8 benefits are prorated depending on the number of undocumented household members. For USDA Section 214 projects, a undocumented householder would not be eligible to participate in the HCV program, and therefore would not qualify to live in any USDAassisted affordable multifamily housing complexes (i.e., Fowler Apartments, Ruby Court Senior Apartments, and Walnut Grove Villas). However, a family with an eligible householder that includes undocumented household members (such as a U.S. citizen householder married to an undocumented worker) would qualify to reside in these properties and receive full HCV benefits. This assistance-ineligible population is considered underserved and at higher risk of overpayment, overcrowding, and displacement compounded by the legal complexities of eligibility and language barriers.
Similar to most jurisdictions in Fresno County, the majority of the residential opportunities in Fowler are single family detached and attached units, which comprise 75.5 percent of the housing stock. Multifamily units comprise 22.5 percent of the housing stock, of which 36.0 percent are affordable. Fowler has a small proportion of mobile homes (2.0 percent of the stock), which are naturally more affordable than singlefamily residential units and may serve as a valuable housing resource for workers unable to qualify for market rate or affordable rental housing, or other accommodations. 324
461
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-87 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 The high renter rate in the older single-family, lower-income central neighborhood, which does not have any affordable housing complexes, may support findings of the Farmworker Survey, where respondents countywide indicated that their preference for dwelling unit type are single-family units regardless of owner or renter status. Additionally, although the southwest portion of the city has a higher homeowner rate, it is likely that this distribution can be attributed to a newer single-family subdivision at the eastern edge of the city, because housing conditions and neighborhood characteristics in the remainder of this block group are similar to the older downtown housing stock and may have been converted to rentals. Of the farmworkers surveyed who live in Fowler and Easton, 60.0 percent are renters, and 58.2 percent of all survey respondents identified as renters, compared to the Fowler citywide rate of 46.6 percent. According to the Fresno County Farmworkers Survey, 95.6 percent of the renters responded that they desired to be homeowners. Further,
78.4 percent of the farmworker renter households consisted of three or more persons, of which 93.6 percent had resided in the U.S. for 10 or more years, 3.7 percent less than 10 years, and 2.7 percent did not respond.
The prevalence of households with three or more persons, coupled with the longevity in the U.S. of the majority of the renters, and the preference for single-family unit type further substantiate the need for housing to accommodate families.
Conversely, the lower proportion of owner-occupied housing units corresponding to neighborhoods with lower incomes, higher representation of non-White population, and higher rates of poverty suggests that the cost of homeownership in one of the highest priced jurisdictions in the county, with a median priced home at $455,000 (see Table 2-22 Home Sales Recorded in 2021-22, in the HNA) is more than the majority of households in the city, and likely farmworkers, are able to pay. For this reason, the low proportion of farmworkers residing in the city may reflect that farmworkers seeking homeowner opportunities choose to live in communities where the cost of housing for purchase is lower.
The Farmworker Survey found that the average household size of respondents was 3.9 persons, larger than average household size citywide (3.1 persons). In Fowler, the rate of overcrowding ranges from 10.3 percent o to 14.6 percent, suggesting that farmworker households and other large households may face challenges finding adequately sized units, resulting in households sharing a dwelling or multiple family members sharing rooms. Survey results indicated that 58.4 percent of the farmworkers countywide were living in overcrowded conditions, with renter households finding units large enough to accommodate household size more of a challenge. Based on this, it is likely that larger lower-income farmworker renter households would have difficulty finding appropriately sized affordable housing in Fowler and might find more suitable housing elsewhere in the county or experience overcrowding and/or overpayment.
In response to the observed need for continued support and housing resources for local farmworkers, the City includes Program 8 to reach out to local farm employers to identify housing needs, seek funding to support development of farmworker housing, and provide materials on available resources and financial assistance on the City website.
325
462
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-88 Displacement Risk
The Urban Displacement Project, a joint research and action initiative of the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of Toronto, analyzes income patterns and housing availability to determine the level of displacement risk at the census-tract level. Levels of displacement risk range from “probable displacement” to “extreme displacement,” with four total levels of displacement risk, if displacement risk is present. The Urban Displacement Project has not identified any areas of elevated risk in Fowler, though the area north of S. Golden State Boulevard has been identified as a “vulnerable community” (Figure 1D17 Vulnerable Community Designation). Vulnerability is defined as areas in which the share of very lowincome residents is above 20.0 percent, and the tract meets at least two of the following criteria:
▪ Share of renters is above 40.0 percent,
▪ Share of people of color is above 50.0 percent,
▪ Share of very low-income households that are severely rent burdened households is above the county median, or
▪ They or areas in close proximity have been experiencing displacement pressures.
The Urban Displacement Project defines displacement pressures as a percentage change in rent greater than the county median for rent increases. While the Urban Displacement Project does not specify the conditions that led to the vulnerability determination for Fowler, it can be assumed that residents in northern Fowler experience heightened displacement risk compared to residents in the southern area and elsewhere in the county due to a combination of incomes and housing prices.
As found in the analysis of overpayment, for-sale home costs have increased by an average of 10.6 percent annually since 2014, and rental costs have increased by an average of 7.0 percent annually since 2015. In contrast, the ACS estimates that, since 2014, the median income in Fowler has increased by an average of
4.2 percent annually. When comparing change in median income to change in home prices, it is clear that the increase in housing costs outpaces increases in wages, indicating increasing displacement risk for residents of Fowler. Given the rapid increase in home values, current and prospective homeowners are likely impacted the greatest by changes in housing cost. In comparison, countywide, median incomes have increased by approximately 4.4 percent annually and rents have increased by 3.2 percent on average. While Zillow does not report countywide home values, the ACS estimates that these have increased by 3.9 percent annually, on average. Therefore, in contrast to conditions in Fowler, there may be a moderate decrease in displacement risk countywide due to home costs. The inflated displacement risk resulting from discrepancies in wages and housing costs in Fowler reflects a disproportionate need for affordable options in the city.
Program 22: Fresno County Homebuyer Assistance Program and Program 24: Housing Choice Vouchers outline the City’s activities to increase access to homebuyer and housing choice programs that help promote housing mobility, among other programs established in the housing element. 326
463
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-89 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-17 Vulnerable Community Designation
327
464
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-90 Other Relevant Factors
In addition to the indicators analyzed previously, there are several other factors that can influence housing mobility and access to opportunity in a jurisdiction. For example, historical development patterns may have resulted in neighborhoods that are largely or exclusively made up of single-family homes, or historical discrimination may have influenced a city’s racial and ethnic composition. Further, given current market trends, newer market-rate neighborhoods may not be financially accessible to lower-income households without overpayment or overcrowding. Other factors may include public and private investment, local regulatory or economic development plans, and historical policies. Those factors that are considered relevant vary between jurisdictions and are described at the local level herein.
Land Use and Zoning Patterns
According to the 2016-2020 ACS, 75.5 percent of the housing stock in Fowler is single-family units, inclusive of single-family attached units, indicating a higher proportion of single-family units relative to other Fresno County jurisdictions. Duplex, triplex, and fourplex unit types make up approximately 7.0 percent of housing units. Approximately 9.3 percent of the housing stock consists of multifamily units in structures of five to nine units, which is a significantly higher proportion than Fresno County overall. The remainder of multifamily units (6.2 percent of total housing stock) are in structures with 10 or more units.
Mobile homes, a housing type that is often naturally more affordable, comprise 2.0 percent of the housing stock, a slightly smaller proportion than other Fresno County jurisdictions, with the majority of the units in the Valley Mobile Home Park. Although the majority of the housing stock in the City of Fowler is made up of single-family detached and attached unit types, approximately 30.6 percent of the single-family detached and attached housing stock is renter occupied, indicating that a significant portion of the singlefamily housing stock has been converted to rental property, in addition to other unit types available for rent.
While in most communities single-family zoning can create desirable places to live, higher entry costs associated with this housing type can also pose a barrier to access for lower- and even moderate-income households, restricting access to economic, educational, and other opportunities that may be available in single-family neighborhoods. In the City of Fowler, all of the single-family residential neighborhoods are in areas designated as high resource by TCAC and HCD. Therefore, housing type does not necessarily indicate more positive access to educational, services, employment, and business resources. However, the price of available single-family units listed for purchase on Zillow.com in October 2022 generally exceeded the price threshold of moderate-income households, including the single-family residential areas in the vicinity of the downtown on the east side of the rail line, where the concentration of households with the lowest median income are found.
Affordable housing development in the current market typically requires higher-density zones to support construction; therefore, zones limited to single dwelling units on each lot generally do not support affordable development. As shown in Figure 1D-11 Zoning In Fowler, there are two base zonesfor higherdensity multifamily housing. The RM-2 district is intended to accommodate a variety of housing types, such as small-lot single-family homes, detached zero lot line developments, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, townhouses, condominiums, and garden apartments. The RM-3 district is intended for high-density 328
465
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-91 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 residential development and accommodates attached homes, duplexes to fourplexes, apartment buildings, and condominiums. Mixed-uses with residential are permitted subject to a PUD within any C-1 or C-2 district, and higher-density residential is also accommodated in the Form-Based Code zone applied to the town center area.
The RM-2 and RM-3 zones in the City of Fowler are spread throughout the city, as seen in Figure 1D-11.
However, a higher concentration of RM-3 parcels are found southeast of South 5th Street where the affordable Magill Terrace, Walnut Grove Villas, and Ruby Court age-restricted multifamily complexes are located; and four blocks within the downtown core area between Merced and Main Streets on the east side of South Golden State Boulevard. Additionally, the affordable Fowler Apartments are on an RM-3 parcel on East Adams Avenue surrounded by single-family residential zoning in the northern section of the city.
RM-2 parcels are within the eastern community core area along East Main, Merced, Fresno, Vine, and Tulare Streets; as well as a large vacant parcel west of SR 99 at the corner of West Fresno Street and Fowler Avenue. The potential for mixed-use residential development in the C-2 zones as part of a PUD expands the opportunities for higher-density units within the high-resource designated corridor between SR 99 and Golden State Boulevard, fostering access to business, services, and employment opportunities, as well as direct access to the regional SR 99 throughfare. Although limited, there also are opportunities for integration of residential uses in the C-1 zones to the west of SR 99, providing a transition between the commercial uses adjacent to the freeway and lower-income residential neighborhoods to the west.
The location of RM-2 and RM-3 parcels in the city suggests some opportunities for income-integrated neighborhoods and improved access to services and amenities given proximity to the downtown business district, where mixed-use residential infill and redevelopment opportunities exist, and near parks and recreation opportunities. Many of the parcels zoned for multifamily and residential mixed-use are near the rail line and adjacent to industrial uses, which is consistent with a countywide pattern for multifamily housing, particularly affordable complexes, although in the City of Fowler, the potential for higher-density residential is in high-resource areas, regardless of proximity to nonresidential uses and major transportation thoroughfares.
Historical Development Patterns
According to Fresno County Sesquicentennial, the community of Fowler was established in 1872 when State Senator Thomas Fowler implemented the “Fowler Switch” along the southern extension of the Central Pacific Railway. In its early years, the community was a center for the cattle ranching industry, and activity surrounded the railroad tracks within the historical core. The Sanborn Company produced Fire Insurance maps in the early years of Fowler’s development, which provide insight on how the community grew and changed. In 1896, the City of Fowler was contained largely within a 16-block area bordered by Mariposa Street to the north, the Southern Pacific railway tracks to the west, Fifth Street to the east, and Fresno Street to the south. Blocks were laid out in a uniform grid and included north to south alleys. Despite the small size of the community, Merced Street east of the railroad had already become a center of commercial activity, with several buildings lining the public right-of-way. The city incorporated in 1908 and by 1945 had expanded north to Adams Avenue, remaining compact and walkable in form. Merced Street, east of the railway tracks, continued as a commercial center, adding new businesses and institutions along its route. 329
466
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-92 The railroad experienced reduced significance with the construction of the original SR 99 (now Golden State Boulevard). Later, construction of the new SR 99 and the removal of the train depot impacted the central functionality of the downtown. The vitality of the city’s downtown core diminished as the freeway enhanced access to employment, commercial, and shopping resources in surrounding communities, while effectively bypassing the historical commercial core, resulting in residential development flourishing at the perimeter of the city. The city has since implemented a number of planning, design, revitalization, and economic development programs to support renewed interest and attention to the historical downtown, which promotes opportunities for mixed-income residential uses in the Form-Based Code zone, and placebased revitalization, as well as potential for residential uses at all income levels in the C-1 and C-2 zones between the central downtown and SR 99.
Limited new market-rate small multifamily infill projects are being completed in the older residential fabric within and surrounding the downtown, fostering higher-income housing integration and housing mobility options. Residential development has extended to the southeast with construction of three affordable multifamily complexes: Ruby Court Villas, an age-restricted senior complex; Walnut Grove Villas; and Magill Terrace, as well as a number of market-rate single-family residential subdivisions south of East South Avenue. Residential development has also expanded north of East Adams Avenue with construction of the affordable Fowler Apartments, and new single-family residential subdivisions in the northeastern and northwestern corners of the city.
Public Investment Patterns
Public and private investment typically includes construction, maintenance, and improvements to public facilities, including infrastructure, acquisition of land, and major equipment. Historically, investment in the City of Fowler has been influenced by the role of SR 99 through the city, which improved access to commercial and employment opportunities in surrounding jurisdictions, supporting expansion of residential development. Despite the highway facilitating access to other commercial cores, new development on West Merced Street after 2000 brought new economic development opportunities and services to the community primarily oriented toward SR 99. As a result, many properties adjacent to and west of Golden State Boulevard saw diminished activity or were vacated and many historical structures east of Golden State Boulevard deteriorated despite the addition of new commercial tenants. The disinvestment in the downtown led to fragmentation of downtown land uses and limited activity on street corridors. In December 2007, the Central Fowler Revitalization Plan was adopted, and the city’s Zoning Code was subsequently amended in 2013 to adopt Form-Based Code regulations and standards to guide investment in the revitalization of the city core.
The City has taken significant action to promote place-based revitalization of the downtown, increase affordable housing mobility opportunities in the central core accessible to local commercial businesses and services resources, and provide mixed-income residential opportunities throughout the city, and any infrastructure or facilities in need of improvement citywide are identified for investment in the City’s annual Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The CIP is funded from a variety of sources that can each be used for specific purposes. These funds are allocated to improve roadways and other transportation infrastructure, implement the 2007 Downtown Revitalization Plan, and other projects, including:
330
467
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-93 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 ▪ Pedestrian Connectivity. The City aims to improve accessibility and pedestrian mobility through installation and maintenance of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) curb ramps, reconstruction of deteriorating sidewalks, improved signalization at Manning Avenue, and maintenance of the Golden State Boulevard Bike Path.
▪ Water and Sewer Infrastructure. The City has allocated funding to improve water and sewer service capacity through the Annual Well Maintenance Program among other ongoing maintenance to infrastructure to support current and future development needs. ▪ Public Facility Improvements. The City aims to promote community activities and access to resources by funding improvements to the Fowler Public Library, Job Training Center, and Senior Center.
▪ Parks and Recreation Facilities. To promote safe and healthy spaces and outdoor recreation, the City allocates funding for improvements to local parks, including the Donny Wright Park and Panzak Park among others, as well as acquisition of new park land and construction of the new Harris Park.
Priority is based on projects that will result in the greatest community benefit, mitigate existing issues, and address public demand and need, particularly place-based revitalization within the Downtown Revitalization plan area. The City has secured funding for the restoration and improvement of storefronts along Merced Street, and new construction along West Merced has encouraged a continuous pedestrian environment across Merced Street. Additional investment, such as the fire station completed in 2020 and the new library along Seventh Street, has encouraged downtown’s centrality.
In response to historical disinvestment downtown and based on the recommendations of the Central Fowler Revitalization Plan, the City is investing significant funds in continued downtown revitalization. Capital improvement projects focus on creating more public facilities, public safety, and recreational amenities for residents of the city, expanding the capacity of the water, sewer, and roadway infrastructure network, and preparing for expansion of the city’s development within, and at the perimeter of the city for industrial, commercial, and residential development, including general maintenance and infrastructure rehabilitation throughout the city.
Local Knowledge
The Downtown Revitalization Plan includes Fowler’s central commercial area and immediate neighborhoods, bounded by Adams Avenue along the northeast, Golden State Boulevard to the west, Tuolumne Street to the northwest, and Main Street to the south, including Merced Street west of Golden State Boulevard to SR 99. The area also includes the approximately one-mile section of the Golden State Boulevard Corridor between Adams Avenue to the north and West Peach Street to the south, and selected areas observed as important opportunities to connect existing neighborhoods and future development to the downtown and schools.
331
468
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-94 Adoption of a Form-Based Code for this area is intended to stimulate cohesive place-based revitalization to foster a vibrant town center through a mix of uses with shop fronts and commercial uses at street level, overlooked by canopy shade trees, upper-story residences, and offices. The inclusion of upper-story residences provides housing mobility opportunities for households of all incomes, potential for higherincome household integration into a portion of the city experiencing low median incomes and high rates of Non-White populations, as well as increased access to commercial, services, linkage to the multi-use pedestrian/bike path system and public facilities resources, as well as employment opportunities.
The “Highway Business” Overlay District is intended to promote attractive development along SR 99 through the City of Fowler and establish consistent standards with other jurisdictions in Fresno County.
The regulations of this district seek to balance the economic health of the community with a visually improved corridor.
The Golden State Corridor Economic Development Infrastructure Improvements Project, financed by Measure C, will provide improved access to the community, including pavement, signalization, and bike trail improvements. The project includes a realignment of Golden State Boulevard through the city, which will provide new commercial parcels and increase demand for commercial development, increasing access to commercial resources and employment opportunities for existing and future residents. In the southern extension of the city between SR 99 and Golden State Boulevard, the Temperance/Valley Drive loop has been completed and 70.0 percent of the industrial property has been developed, including the Three Crowns industrial project, thus increasing demand for local affordable housing for the additional workforce, and conversely, expanding employment opportunities for existing residents.
Enforcement and Outreach Capacity
Compliance with Fair Housing Laws
In addition to assessing demographic characteristics as indicators of fair housing, jurisdictions must identify how they currently comply with fair housing laws or identify programs to become in compliance. The City of Fowler enforces fair housing and complies with fair housing laws and regulations through a twofold process: review of local policies and codes for compliance with state law, and referral of fair housing complaints to appropriate agencies. The following identifies how the City complies with fair housing laws:
▪ Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915). The City has included Program 14:
Zoning Ordinance Amendments to amend the density bonus ordinance to allow up to a 50.0 percent increase in project density depending on the proportion of units that are dedicated as affordable, and up to 80.0 percent for projects that are completely affordable, in compliance with state law.
▪ No-Net-Loss (Government Code Section 65863). The City has identified a surplus of sites available to meet the Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation. In total, the City’s surplus unit capacity is 339 units, composed of 151 lower-income units, 47 moderate-income units, and 141 above moderate-income units.
332
469
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-95 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 ▪ Housing Accountability Act (HAA) (Government Code Section 65589.5). The City does not condition the approval of housing development projects for very low-, low-, or moderate-income households or emergency shelters, unless specific written findings are made. Further, the City currently allows emergency shelters by-right, without limitations, in the M-1 zoning district. ▪ Senate Bill 35 (Government Code Section 65913.4). The City will comply with SB 35 by establishing a written policy or procedure, as well as other guidance as appropriate, to streamline the approval process and standards for eligible projects by September 2023 (Program 18:
Preliminary Applications (SB 330) and Streamlined Applications (SB 35)). ▪ Senate Bill 330 (Government Code Section 65589.5). The City complies with SB 330, relying on regulations set forth in the law for processing preliminary applications for housing development projects, conducting no more than five hearings for housing projects that comply with objective general plan and development standards, and making a decision on a residential project within 90 days after certification of an environmental impact report or 60 days after adoption of a mitigated negative declaration or an environmental report for an affordable housing project. The City has included Program 18: Preliminary Applications (SB 330) and Streamlined Applications (SB 35) to formalize this process by establishing a written procedure to be made available on the City’s website and at public counters.
▪ California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and Federal Fair Housing Act. The City provides protections to residents through referrals to legal assistance organizations, such as California Rural Legal Assistance, to increase access to these organizations which may be able to provide assistance.
▪ Review Processes (Government Code Section 65008). The City reviews affordable development projects in the same manner as market-rate developments, except in cases where affordable housing projects are eligible for preferential treatment, including, but not limited to, on residential sites subject to AB 1397.
▪ Assembly Bill 686 (Government Code Section 8899.50). The City has completed this AFH and identified programs to address identified fair housing issues in Table 2D-6, Contributing Factors to Fair Housing Issues.
▪ Equal Access (Government Code Section 11135 et seq.). Upon request, the City provides translation services for all public meetings and materials and offers accessibility accommodations to ensure equal access to all programs and activities operated, administered, or funded with financial assistance from the state, regardless of membership or perceived membership in a protected class.
Fair Housing Outreach
Regional outreach efforts for the Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element included interviewing Fair Housing of Central California (FHCC) for feedback on housing need, fair housing concerns, and opportunities to affirmatively further fair housing throughout the county. FHCC is a non-profit, civil rights organization dedicated to the elimination of discrimination in housing and the expansion of housing opportunities for all persons. They accomplish this through advocacy, assistance for victims of discrimination, and enforcement of fair housing laws.
333
470
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-96 In response to the request for input, FHCC noted that the most common fair housing issues reported throughout Fresno County are discrimination on the bases of disability and race. Further, they expressed concern about the aging multifamily housing stock becoming uninhabitable due to physical conditions.
However, given the shortage of affordable housing in the region, FHCC noted that many units that have already physically deteriorated are still occupied, posing a risk to occupants. Discrimination by landlords or agents as well as deliberate segregation has resulted in fair housing concerns, particularly for protected and special needs populations, such as persons with disabilities and lower-income households.
FHCC emphasized a need for more government involvement in enforcement of fair housing laws.
Currently, affordable housing options are often concentrated in specific neighborhoods. When developers are encouraged to continue to build affordable units in these areas as a result of zoning or other government regulations, this results in either intentional or unintentional segregation based on income. When asked about opportunities for local governments to actively improve outreach regarding fair housing and to combat existing issues, FHCC identified several opportunities including local rent controls to manage affordability and reduce displacement risk, code enforcement to ensure a safe and habitable housing stock, funding fair housing groups such as FHCC to enforce fair housing laws, and adjusting regulations or encouraging development of a variety of unit types and sizes throughout the jurisdiction to promote mobility and integration.
In response to the feedback received, the City has included Program 26: Improve Access to Resources to improve fair housing outreach capacity and multilingual accessibility to all public resources, information, and meetings, including fair housing resources. Steps to establish a procedure to connect residents with fair housing organizations, make information readily available and accessible on the City’s website and in public buildings, and conduct biannual trainings for landlords on fair housing laws, rights, and responsibilities, are also covered by the programs identified in the Action Plan.
Discrimination Cases
In its 2020 Annual Report, the California Civil Rights Department (previously Department of Fair Employment and Housing) reported that it received nine housing complaints from residents of Fresno County, approximately 1.0 percent of the total number of housing cases in the state that year (880). As part of the Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP), the Civil Rights Department also dual-files fair housing cases with HUD’s Region IX Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), reporting them by the origin of the issue.
HUD FHEO reported that there were no cases filed, or inquires made, by residents of the City of Fowler between January 2013 and April 2021. However, a lack of formal cases does not necessarily mean that there is no discrimination in Fowler. In some cases, residents may be hesitant to report discrimination, such as in the case of undocumented residents that fear retaliation or may not be aware of fair housing legal assistance available to them.
334
471
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-97 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Program 22: Fresno County Homebuyer Assistance Program and Program 24: Housing Choice Vouchers outline the City’s activities to increase access to homebuyer and housing choice programs that help promote housing mobility, among other programs established in the housing element.
Sites Analysis
The location of housing in relation to resources and opportunities is integral to addressing disparities in housing needs and opportunity and to fostering inclusive communities where all residents have access to opportunity. This is particularly important for lower-income households. AB 686 added a new requirement for housing elements to analyze the location of lower-income sites in relation to areas of high opportunity.
Table 1D-11 RHNA Capacity by Census Tracts in Fowler, presents the RHNA capacity by census tracts in the city, and the existing conditions of each tract as they relate to indicators of fair housing. Figure 1D-18 Census Tracts In Fowler, shows the location of each census tract within the city. Tract 16 includes land within the city as well as land within the adjacent unincorporated county to the north, south, and east.
Tract 17 also includes land within the city as well as land within the adjacent unincorporated county to the north, south, and west. As shown, sites with stand-alone unit capacity for lower-, moderate-, and above moderate-income levels have been identified within census Tract 17, although there are no sites that colocate unit capacity with potential for mixed-income development; while Tract 16 identifies only lowerincome unit capacity. 335
472
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-98 Table 1D-11 RHNA Capacity by Census Tracts in Fowler
Census
Tract
Existing
Households
RHNA Capacity
AFFH Indicators
Integration and Segregation Access to Opportunity Displacement Risk Low Mod. Above
Mod.
Median
Income
Poverty
Rate
Low- to
ModerateIncome
Population
Non-White
Population
Disability
Rate
R/ECAP
Status
Resource
Designation
Jobs
Proximity
Index
CalEnviro
Screen
Percentile
Overcrowding
Rate
Renter
Overpayment
Rate
Homeowner
Over-payment
Rate
% Renter
Households
16 1,630 29 0 0
$25,781 -
$58,566 20.8% 36.6% - 71.0% 73.7% -89.2% 15.8% No
High and
Highest
Resource
56 - 73 86th 10.3% 59.2% 16.9% 49.4%
17 1,475 133 57 145 $61,318 19.7% 46.5% 79.1% 9.7% No High Resource 89 96th 14.6% 41.3% 36.6% 44.1% 336
473
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-99 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 This page left intentionally blank.
337
474
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-100 Figure 1D-18 Census Tracts In Fowler
338
475
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-101 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 As identified in the analysis of Patterns of Integration and Segregation, there are no census tracts that meet the criteria of being considered a R/ECAP in Fowler. In the regional context, as previously discussed, both census tracts in the city are designated High and Highest Resource. However, within Tract 16, the central downtown neighborhood has a population with socioeconomic indicators that reflect increased risk of displacement for segments of the community. This concentration of poverty and non-White population includes the triangular block group that includes the downtown area and older portions of the city, east of Golden State Boulevard, south of East Adams Avenue. and northwest of Main Street. This area has a median income of $25,781 and 71.0 percent of the population falls within low/moderate-income categories, 43.3 percent of households with incomes below $25,000 (correlating to poverty level), and a non-White population of 89.2 percent. Additionally, approximately 50.0 percent of households are renters, of which,
59.2 percent are cost burdened in this area.
The southeastern neighborhood in Tract 16 (south of Main Street) also has indicators that reflect a segment of the population at risk of displacement. While the median income is $58,566, the rate of non-White population is 89.2 percent, 20.8 percent of households have incomes below $25,000, the proportion of low/moderate-income households is 56.0 percent, and there is a high rate of renter households at 46.2 percent, of which, almost 60.0 percent overpay for housing. This neighborhood also has two multifamily complexes with 98 deed-restricted units, and housing stock consists of generally older, single- and small multifamily structures, as well as larger apartment complexes.
In addition, the neighborhoods in Tract 16 north of East Adams Avenue have a median income of $46,731, a non-White population of 73.7 percent, 28.0 percent of the households have incomes below $25,000, and
42.0 percent of the population falls within low/moderate-income categories. However, the majority of this portion of Tract 16 consists of new residential subdivisions and unincorporated area. The entire Tract 16 has a high CalEnviroScreen score, in the 87th percentile, ranking the tract as a disadvantaged community.
A total of 8.0 percent of the RHNA unit capacity is identified in this tract to reduce the displacement risk for lower-income households. Only lower-income unit capacity (17.9 percent of lower-income unit capacity) is identified in Tract 16, with sites in the downtown neighborhood totaling 51.7 percent of Tract 16-unit capacity. The remainder of Tract 16-unit capacity is identified on sites adjacent to the Fowler Public Library south of the downtown, to increase affordable housing opportunities to facilitate housing mobility while allowing lower-income residents to remain in their neighborhood.
Tract 17, which includes the portion of the city west of Golden State Boulevard and encompasses the Sumner and Sunnyside, Aspire, and RJ Hill neighborhoods, has the highest percentage of RHNA unit capacity (64.8 percent), including all of the moderate- and above moderate-income sites and 82.1 percent of lower-income unit capacity. In this tract, 46.5 percent of the population are lower- and moderate-income households, with a slightly higher median income and a slightly lower poverty rate than tract 16, and a nonWhite population rate of 79.1 percent. While homeowners are the predominant tenure, 44.1 percent of households are renters; 41.3 percent of renters are cost burdened and 36.6 percent of homeowners are cost burdened, and overall 14.6 percent of households are overcrowded. Compounded by a high CalEnviroScreen score, this tract shows characteristics of vulnerability to displacement and 339
476
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-102 disproportionate housing need. Identified sites will include multifamily and single-family residential development. The inclusion of lower-income unit capacity will foster improved housing mobility for lowerincome residents, facilitate mixed-income and more integrated, diverse neighborhoods, combat patterns of concentrated poverty in the downtown and older southeastern portions of the city, while additional moderate- and above moderate-income unit capacity housing stock provides mobility options for existing and future moderate- and higher-income households in a high-resource designated area.
The City has included Program 13: Housing for a Variety of Needs to support construction of higherdensity housing in areas with better access to opportunities and encourage integration of a variety of unit types to facilitate mixed-income neighborhoods, combat patterns of income segregation, and provide housing mobility opportunities for a range of households. The distribution of sites identified in Table 1D11 is based on the availability of sites and potential for development during the planning period.
Figure 1D-19 through Figure 1D-28 compare the distribution of projected units by income category of the following indicators compared to citywide patterns to understand how the projected locations of units will affirmatively further fair housing: TCAC opportunity areas, median income, predominant population, disability rates, educational score, environmental health, and overpayment. The following sites inventory discussion includes an analysis of the number of projected units by income category, and total RHNA capacity by income category to further assess the potential impacts of the sites inventory to affirmatively further fair housing.
Potential Effect on Patterns of Integration and Segregation TCAC Resource Category
The entire city and surrounding unincorporated areas south of East Adams Avenue are designated as TCAC/HCD High Resource, and Highest Resource north of East Adams Avenue. All of the unit capacity identified to meet the RHNA is in High Resource opportunity areas, with none of the identified unit capacity in the Highest Resource designation north of East Adams Avenue. However, while the sites are identified in a census tract determined as High Resource, it should be considered in the context of comparison to opportunities and potential outcomes within other jurisdictions within the San Joaquin Valley region. 340
477
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-103 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-19 Percent Unit Capacity By TCAC/HCD Resource Designation Source: City of Flower 2023, AFFH Dataviewer 1.0, 2016-2020 ACS In the High Resource areas, opportunity for 100.0 percent of lower-income unit capacity has been identified on vacant parcels, therefore not risking displacement of existing residents. There are four sites with 9.3 percent of the lower-income unit capacity within the downtown core, and two lower-income sites with capacity for 8.6 percent of lower-income units in the vicinity of the intersection of Vine Street and Golden State Boulevard near the Fowler Public Library, all of which have access to commercial, light industrial, services, and transit amenities east of Golden State Boulevard. The majority of lower-income unit capacity (82.1 percent) is identified on sites in areas west of Golden State Boulevard that have slightly more positive quality of life indicators than the eastern portion of the city south of East Adams Avenue. Two sites totaling
61.1 percent of total lower-income unit capacity (29.6 percent of the total unit capacity west of Golden State Boulevard in Tract 17) are identified along N. 8th Street between West Tuolumne Street and the Valley Mobile Home Park in the vicinity of the downtown. An additional site has been identified adjacent to SR 99 off East Sumner Avenue and south of the Estrella Apartment complex, providing 21.0 percent of total lower-income unit capacity (and 10.1 percent of the total unit capacity on the west side). The lowerincome units counter potential displacement of existing residents throughout the city by increasing the stock of affordable housing opportunities and provide opportunities for more income-integrated neighborhoods adjacent to newer single-family residential subdivisions.
Approximately 15.7 percent of the site inventory to meet the RHNA is identified as moderate-income, located on a vacant property within the western side of the city in the Aspire Avenue neighborhood near Donny Wright Park, with direct southbound access to SR 99. The moderate-income site contributes 17.0 percent of the unit capacity in the tract west of Golden State Boulevard. All of the above moderate-income unit site capacity, comprising 40.0 percent of the total unit capacity and 43.3 percent of the unit capacity west of Golden State Boulevard, is identified on a large High Resource-designated site south of the RJ Hill neighborhood, which helps to facilitate mixed-income neighborhoods and above moderate-income housing mobility.
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%
High Resource
Total RHNA Capacity Above Moderate-Income Capacity
Moderate-Income Capacity Lower-Income Capacity
341
478
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-104 Income
As previously discussed, Fowler is a low- to moderate-income community with a 2020 median income of $59,663, slightly above the county median income of $57,100, although household income levels vary between different areas of the city. While the household median income falls below the statewide median in all census tracts within the city, it is also below the county median in the downtown and East Adams Avenue neighborhoods, regardless of TCAC/HCD resource designations. However, there is no unit capacity identified in the East Adams Avenue neighborhood (north of East Adams Avenue), and only 4.1 percent of total unit capacity, all for lower-income households, identified in the downtown.
As shown in Figure 1D-20 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Median Income, a larger percentage of the unit capacity (95.9 percent) has been identified on sites within areas that have median incomes correlating to the 2020 moderate-income category (80.0 -120.0 percent of 2020 AMI) west of Golden State Boulevard with a median income of $61,318, and in the southeast Fowler California neighborhood east of Golden State Boulevard, which has a median income of $58,566. Capacity for 9.3 percent of lower-income unit capacity is identified on sites at or below the 2020 Fresno County median income, which expands the more affordable housing stock resources and provides mobility opportunities for residents who want to move yet remain within their existing neighborhoods, thereby preventing displacement. In contrast, 90.7 percent of lower-income unit potential is distributed within the moderate-income neighborhoods, which facilitates deconcentration of lower-income households from the central downtown portion of the city, which has a median income corresponding closely to the 2020 HUD poverty threshold, to higher-income portions of the city. Further, future construction potential of lower-income units in higher-income neighborhoods not only integrates income mix in higher-income neighborhoods and facilitates housing mobility for lowerincome households, it also aims to reduce existing income patterns and pressure on housing shortages in areas of concentrated need.
Figure 1D-20 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Median Income Source: City of Fowler, 2023, 2016-2020 ACS, and 2020 HCD State Income Limits for Fresno County
9.3%
4.1%
90.7%
100.0%
100.0%
95.9%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% Lower-Income Capacity
Moderate-Income Capacity
Above Moderate-Income Capacity
Total RHNA Capacity
Below $28,555 (Very Low-Income) $45,687 to $68,531 (Moderate-Income) 342
479
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-105 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 The inclusion of 100.0 percent of the moderate- and above moderate-income unit potential on vacant sites on the west side of the city will help to facilitate mixed-income neighborhoods and encourage future income integration in moderate-income neighborhoods and provides housing mobility opportunities for moderateand above moderate-income households.
As presented in Figure 1D-21 Percentage Unit Capacity By Poverty Rate, approximately 92.0 percent of RHNA unit capacity is identified west of Golden State Boulevard where poverty rates are between 10.0 and 19.9 percent, with 8.0 percent of unit capacity identified east of Golden State Boulevard. While at the tract level the poverty rate is fairly equivalent between the eastern (20.8 percent) and western (19.7 percent) sides of the city, at the block group level, the poverty rate within the downtown is 43.3 percent.
Approximately 82.1 percent of lower-income unit capacity is identified on sites in the western tract to encourage the development of housing mobility opportunities for lower-income households in potentially more stable, higher-income neighborhoods while reducing the concentration of households in poverty in the downtown. The remainder of the lower-income site capacity (17.9 percent) is projected in areas with an existing need for an increased supply of affordable housing for households in poverty, lower-income, and overcrowded households to remain in their neighborhoods and reduce the risk of displacement; of which,
39.1 percent are identified on sites within the downtown. Development of these lower-income units in these areas will help to alleviate existing patterns of overpayment and overcrowding and encourage place-based revitalization through development of vacant, often unsightly parcels, providing new, safe housing in areas of more concentrated poverty.
Figure 1D-21 Percentage Unit Capacity By Poverty Rate
Source: City of Fowler, 2023, and 2016-2020 ACS
82.1%
100.0%
100.0%
92.0%
17.9%
8.0%
0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%
Lower-Income Capacity
Moderate-Income Capacity
Above Moderate-Income Capacity
Total RHNA Capacity
10.0% to 19.9% of households ≥20.0% of households
343
480
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-106 In addition to 82.1 percent of lower-income units, all moderate- and above moderate-income units are projected in the slightly lower poverty neighborhoods to affirmatively further fair housing through mixedincome neighborhoods. In addition, the City has included Program 11: Encourage and Facilitate Accessory Units to actively promote construction of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in higher medianincome areas and monitor affordability of new ADUs to lower- and moderate-income households.
The combination of this program and facilitating the development of additional high-density housing in a community that has historically been dominated by single-family units will help ameliorate patterns of segregation, particularly in the downtown. The development of these sites will make Fowler more accessible to households with a wider range of incomes, while simultaneously increasing housing mobility opportunities and de-concentrating areas of poverty and low-income households.
Race and Ethnicity
As discussed previously, Fowler is among Fresno County’s more diverse jurisdictions, which, while communities of color comprise 83.1 percent of the population, 66.4 percent identify as Hispanic, 13.1 percent identify as Asian, and 3.4 percent identify as Other (Black, Other, and American Indian). Only Clovis, Coalinga, Fresno, Kingsburg, and the unincorporated area have lower rates of Hispanic residents.
As shown in Figure 1D-5 Local Racial Demographics, there is a pattern of a higher concentration of nonWhite households within the eastern tract of the city south of East Adams Avenue, predominantly Hispanic (between 77.2 and 80.0 percent) coinciding with older portions of the city, neighborhoods with relatively lower incomes and higher rates of poverty in the downtown; while the western tract and newer neighborhoods north of East Adams Avenue have Hispanic populations just over 61.0 percent and higher proportions of White non-Hispanic residents as well as a representation of Asian residents between 14.0 and 8.6 percent, respectively.
As shown in Figure 1D-22 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Percentage Non-White Population, 8.0 percent of the capacity to meet the RHNA is in areas where more than 80.0 percent of the population identifies as non-White. Of the lower-income unit capacity, 82.1 percent is identified on sites in areas in which 70.0 to 79.9 percent of the population identifies as non-White. This offers an opportunity for lowerincome, non-White households that may have been priced out and excluded from housing mobility opportunities to access resources in higher-income neighborhoods while facilitating income integration and reducing concentrations of non-White populations in the central downtown and southeast areas of the city.
The remaining 17.9 percent of lower-income sites are within the tract with higher concentrations of nonWhite households to increase housing resources for residents who may otherwise be priced out and are vulnerable to displacement in their own neighborhoods.
344
481
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-107 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-22 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Percentage Non-White Population Source: City of Fowler, 2023, and 2016-2020 ACS
As shown in Figure 1D-22, all of the moderate- and above moderate-income unit capacity is identified on sites in areas that have non-White populations between 70.0 and 79.9 percent, which will facilitate income integration and housing mobility opportunities for higher-income households through a more diverse range of housing types.
Disability
Approximately 12.9 percent of Fowler’s population lives with one or more types of disability, as shown on Figure 2-32, Percentage of Population with a Disability, in the Housing Needs Assessment. As discussed previously, data indicates that a smaller proportion of residents in Fowler’s higher-income areas on the east side of the city are living with disabilities (9.7 percent) compared to lower-income areas in the downtown and southeast neighborhoods, and that those residents who are living with a disability are found at higher rates (15.8 percent) in lower-income areas.
As illustrated by Figure 1D-23 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Disability Rate, approximately 92.0 percent of the total RHNA capacity identified in the sites inventory is in areas in which fewer than 10.0 percent of residents have a disability in the western tract of the city, and 8.0 percent in the eastern tract in which more than 15.0 percent of residents have a disability. As stakeholders identified, high housing costs and a shortage of permanently supportive housing in the county has generally increased displacement risk for residents with disabilities and presents a barrier to persons with disabilities.
82.1%
100.0%
100.0%
92.0%
17.9%
8.0%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% Lower-Income Capacity
Moderate-Income Capacity
Above Moderate-Income Capacity
Total RHNA Capacity
70% to 79.9% of the population 80% to 89.9% of the population 345
482
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-108 Figure 1D-23 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Disability Rate Source: City of Fowler, 2023, and 2016-2020 ACS
Approximately 82.1 percent of the lower-income unit capacity and all of the moderate- and above moderateincome unit capacity is identified in the western side of the city where the rate of disability is below 14.9 percent, although seniors comprise a larger portion of the persons with disabilities on the west side than the east. Locating units affordable to lower- and moderate-income residents in proximity to the Adventist Medical Center, the downtown commercial hub, and both SR 99 and Golden State Boulevard will help to improve access for and accommodate the needs of persons living with disabilities, who benefit from close access to services and amenities as well as proximity to transit.
An additional 17.9 percent of the lower-income unit capacity has been identified on sites where the rate of disabilities are above 15.0 percent of the population, providing housing mobility and additional affordable housing supply opportunities in the vicinity of the downtown to access resources.
Familial Status
As previously discussed, 6.3 percent of the households in the city are single, female-headed households with children, of whom, 42.0 percent had incomes below the poverty level, which suggests that singleparent, female-headed households may have more challenges securing housing. The spatial distribution of single-parent, female-headed households with children as a percentage of total households is generally consistent with median household incomes, as well as availability of affordable housing (all of the deedrestricted units and a greater amount of older housing stock in the city is on the east side of Fowler), and location of school facilities. As such, between 20.0 and 40.0 percent of children in the eastern tract reside in a single female-headed household, corresponding to most of the city’s affordable housing resources, compared to below 20.0 percent of children residing in single female-headed households within the western side of the city.
82.1%
100.0%
100.0%
92.0%
17.9%
8.0%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% Lower-Income Capacity
Moderate-Income Capacity
Above Moderate-Income Capacity
Total RHNA Capacity
Below 14.9% of households Above 15.0% of households
346
483
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-109 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 As presented in Figure 1D-24 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Percentage Of Children In FemaleHeaded Households, approximately 8.0 percent of total unit capacity distributed on sites identified on 5th, 6th, and 7th Streets, providing the potential for 17.9 percent of the lower-income unit capacity in areas with the highest rate of children in female-headed households on the east side of the city. Housing unit potential on these sites increases the opportunities for female-headed households currently experiencing overpayment and/or overcrowding to acquire affordable and adequately sized housing with access to downtown businesses, medical facilities, and services; as well as Fremont Elementary School, Marshall Elementary School, Sutter Middle School, and Fowler High School. Additionally, 82.1 percent of the lowerincome, and 100.0 percent of moderate- and above moderate-income anticipated units have been identified in areas with higher incomes yet lower representations of children in single, female-headed households, which will increase housing mobility opportunities for single, female-headed households at all income levels, as well as all other household types, to find appropriate units within Fowler, while contributing toward de-concentration of higher rates of poverty on the east side. Overall, female-headed households of any economic status will have access to new housing opportunities, as well as other single-parent households, persons living alone, seniors, lower-income families, and other households.
Figure 1D-24 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Percentage Of Children In Female-Headed Households
Source: City of Fowler, 2023, and 2016-2020 ACS
Potential Effect on Access to Opportunity
Job and Transit Proximity
Fowler residents are served by FCRTA, providing fixed-route service on the Southeast, KingsburgReedley, and Kings Area Regional Transit (KART) lines (see Figure 3-34, Fresno County Rural Transit Agency Intercounty Routes, in Section 3: Regional Assessment of Fair Housing). Southeast Transit provides three round trips on weekdays between Fowler and Fresno, stopping in Fowler at the bus shelter on the west side of East Merced and North 7th Street, and at Valley Children’s Healthcare off West Fresno
82.1%
100.0%
100.0%
92.0%
17.9%
8.0%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% Lower-Income Capacity
Moderate-Income Capacity
Above Moderate-Income Capacity
Total RHNA Capacity
<20% of children 20.0 to 29.9% of children
347
484
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-110 Street to the west of Golden State Boulevard. The single KART stop in Fowler is at Valley Children’s Healthcare.
While there is a prevalence of residential uses with strong access to Fresno’s job market, much of the employment in Fowler is provided by local fruit packing and distribution facilities, including Bee Sweet Citrus, National Raisin, Lion Raisins, Pacific Packaging, and more; as well as a strong presence of other manufacturing and packaging/distribution facilities. These local employment opportunities, as well as close proximity to employment in nearby Fresno and Clovis, is reflected in jobs proximity index scores between the 56th and 89th percentiles throughout the city, with higher ranking scores in the higher-income and highresource western portions of the city.
As shown in Figure 1D-25 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Jobs Proximity Index Scores, 92.1 percent of the RHNA unit capacity is sited in areas with the highest jobs proximity index score within the western side of the city, including 82.1 percent of lower-income and 100.0 percent of moderate- and above moderate-income unit capacity, thus improving access to employment opportunities within the industrial area in the southern portion of the city and north towards Fresno. As the city is predominantly residential, siting of unit capacity at all income levels in the higher-proximity areas will aid in improving access to employment opportunities both inside and outside of the city.
Figure 1D-25 Percentage Of Unit Capacity By Jobs Proximity Index Scores Source: City of Fowler, 2023, and 2016-2020 ACS
The remaining 19.7 percent of lower-income unit capacity is on the east side, with 8.6 percent of lowerincome unit capacity in the downtown area, and 9.3 percent of the unit capacity in close proximity to both the downtown and Valley Children’s Healthcare that are currently serviced by inter-city transit providers, providing close proximity to transit for occupants of these units.
8.6%
3.8%
9.3%
4.1%
82.1%
100.0%
100.0%
92.1%
0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%
Lower- Income Capacity
Moderate-Income Capacity
Above Moderate-Income Capacity
Total RHNA Capacity
<60th to 69th percentile 70th to 79th percentiles ≥80th percentile 348
485
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-111 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 When considering where to locate future housing for all income levels, and particularly lower-income units, sites with access to West Merced Avenue to connect with SR 99 towards Fresno and jurisdictions to the south offers the most convenient access to jobs available within the city and transit to other parts in the region. Further, construction of these sites will help to further improve the jobs-housing ratio with residential development in and near Golden State Boulevard commercial and SR 99 transit corridors, thus improving jobs proximity for current and future residents of Fowler.
Environmental Health
As previously discussed, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) reports CalEnviroScreen 4.0 scores for Fowler demonstrating relatively adverse environmental conditions, with census tracts in and around Fowler scoring between the 86th and 96th percentiles (Figure 1D-13 CalEnviroScreen Scores). In Fowler, residents in different parts of the jurisdiction experience the same scores, indicating that residents across the city do not have different access to environmental outcomes. The entire city falls within the boundaries of areas considered SB 535-qualifying disadvantaged communities, the 25.0 percent highest-scoring census tracts in CalEnviroScreen 4.0. This indicates that, compared with statewide averages, portions of Fowler represent an area of potential concern regarding fair housing and disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards and a concentration of vulnerable populations.
All of the sites inventory capacity has been identified in neighborhoods scoring in the 87th to 92nd percentiles. Many of the lower-income sites are in areas with close proximity to the Golden State Boulevard commercial corridor and SR 99, while the moderate- and above-moderate sites are closer to agricultural uses. Development potential in the disadvantaged community is envisioned to improve environmental conditions through incorporation of outdoor spaces, transitional buffers and screening between residential and nonresidential uses, and promotion of pedestrian and bicycle facilities, thus promoting environmental sustainability. Investment through development of vacant sites with capacity for lower-income levels will help facilitate place-based revitalization in the downtown and older southeast neighborhoods and will increase the supply of affordable housing in an area susceptible to displacement due to housing costs, while also encouraging income integration in new development.
Further, all of the moderate- and above moderate-income capacity is identified in the western side of the city where scores are the highest, in the 92nd percentile, providing above higher-income housing mobility opportunities. The distribution of 82.0 percent of the lower-income unit capacity west of Golden State Boulevard facilitates housing mobility opportunities in higher-income neighborhoods, designed to promote environmental sustainability, and promotes a reduction of concentration of poverty and lower-income households in the downtown and southeastern neighborhoods. 349
486
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-112 Potential Effect on Displacement Risk
Overcrowding
Overcrowding in Fowler is relatively low in comparison to other jurisdictions in the county, which may represent a greater balance of housing type with demand and need. This may be partially attributed to 69.7 percent of housing units having three or more bedrooms, which typically reduces the need for occupants to share rooms, although these are predominantly single-family units, which have higher rates of homeownership. Overcrowding is significantly higher among renters (12.8 percent) compared to homeowners (4.4 percent), which, although slightly more households east of Golden State Boulevard are renters, indicates that overcrowding occurs at a higher rate west of Golden State Boulevard (14.6 percent of households) than to the east (10.3 percent) (Figure 1D-14 Overcrowding In Fowler). However, the incidence of overcrowding has been increasing in Fowler, which, particularly in light of the high proportion of larger housing units, may indicate a growing lack of affordability resulting in households needing to share costs, or may indicate that demand for housing exceeds supply, particularly in the west side.
As presented in Figure 1D-26 Percentage Unit Capacity By Overcrowding, the largest proportion of the unit capacity, 92.0 percent, is identified in areas of the city with higher overcrowding rates (above 12.0 percent) in the western tract, including 100.0 percent of moderate-income units and 82.1 percent of lowerincome units to help to alleviate this issue by increasing the affordable housing supply. The remainder of the lower-income capacity will facilitate housing mobility opportunities near services and resources in the downtown commercial area east of Golden State Boulevard. Additionally, the inclusion of 100.0 percent of above moderate-income sites in the portions of the city with rates of overcrowding above 12.0 percent will ease pressure on the housing stock, thus potentially reducing displacement risk and overcrowding for these households as well as more units become available.
350
487
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-113 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-26 Percentage Unit Capacity By Overcrowding
Source: City of Fowler, 2023, and 2016-2020 ACS
Overpayment
Similar to conditions throughout the state, owners and renters throughout Fowler are overpaying for housing, likely due to increases in housing costs that have outpaced wage increases, with 35.5 percent of households experiencing some level of overpayment, as shown by Table 1D-7 Cost Burden in Fowler, 2010-2018, Figure 1D-15 Percentage Of Homeowners Overpaying, and Figure 1D-16 Percentage Of Renters Overpaying. Of these cost burdened households, approximately 71.5 percent are renters, though renters comprise only 46.6 percent of households in the city. Lower- and moderate-income households are most at risk of displacement due to overpayment. Moderate-income renters are often more impacted by rising rental costs, as they are outside of eligibility for Section 8 and other affordable unit types, while the increase in median home value has primarily impacted lower-income households. Additionally, specialneeds populations, including female-headed households, large families, persons with disabilities, and seniors, often fall into the lower-income category and may be particularly at risk of displacement when housing opportunities at affordable costs, sizes, or access to resources are not available.
East of Golden State Boulevard, just 16.9 percent of homeowners are overpaying for housing. In comparison, west of Golden State Boulevard, 36.6 percent of homeowners are estimated to be overpaying for housing, although poverty rates are lower and incomes higher than in the eastern side of Fowler. This may be partially attributed to the new market rate construction that has occurred in the western portion of the city, which is affordable only to above moderate-income households. In contrast to geographic discrepancies in homeowner overpayment, rental home value is relatively constant throughout the city. 351
488
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-114 As presented in Figure 1D-27 Percentage Unit Capacity By Rate Of Homeowner Overpayment, in the western tract where homeowner overpayment rates are between 30.0 and 40.0 percent of homeowners, the majority of total unit capacity (92.0 percent) is identified, including all of moderate- and above moderateincome unit potential, and 82.1 percent of lower-income unit potential. Typically, above moderate-income units are unaffordable to cost-burdened households yet will provide housing mobility opportunities for higher-income households that may be overpaying due to limited availability of housing stock, while lowerand moderate-income housing units can help alleviate overpayment by providing additional housing stock to reduce competition for limited affordable housing mobility opportunities. On the east side, sites for 17.9 percent of new lower-income units have been identified with the intent of increasing the supply of affordable housing, thus reducing risk of displacement due to overpayment.
Figure 1D-27 Percentage Unit Capacity By Rate Of Homeowner Overpayment Source: City of Fowler, 2023, and 2016-2020 ACS
As shown in Figure 1D-28 Percentage Unit Capacity By Rate Of Renter Overpayment, the distribution of RHNA unit capacity identifies 17.9 percent of lower-income unit capacity in areas with the highest rates of renter overpayment (59.2 percent) in the downtown neighborhoods. An increase in the supply of lowerincome rental units in this portion of the city, particularly those near commercial and services in the downtown, will help to alleviate conditions that contribute to overpayment by reducing the gap between supply and demand for this type of housing. The identification of 82.1 percent of lower-income unit capacity in the western neighborhoods also facilitates lower-income integration in higher-income neighborhoods.
17.9%
8.0%
82.1%
100.0%
100.0%
92.0%
0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%
Lower- Income Capacity
Moderate-Income Capacity
Above Moderate-Income
Capacity
Total RHNA Capacity
Below 20% of homeowners 30% to 40.0% of homeowners
352
489
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-115 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Figure 1D-28 Percentage Unit Capacity By Rate Of Renter Overpayment Source: City of Fowler, 2023, and 2016-2020 ACS
Special-needs groups that may be disproportionately affected by high housing costs include large families, single-parent households, and seniors. As discussed in the Overcrowding analysis, large family households often face housing challenges due to a lack of adequately sized affordable housing available. The higher costs of homes with multiple bedrooms can result in larger families experiencing a disproportionate cost burden and increase the risk of housing insecurity. The ACS also reports that single-parent households comprise 16.6 percent of the total households in Fowler, the majority of which are female single parents.
Of female-headed, single-parent households, 42.0 percent are below the poverty threshold, indicating that these households may have to spend a greater percentage of their income on housing and are at risk for displacement without assistance. However, the identification of 82.1 percent of lower-income unit capacity in the tract with higher incomes provides additional housing supply to alleviate overpayment, and suggests that single female householders with children may be able to obtain housing in areas with lower rates of poverty, segregation, and renter overpayment.
Seniors, comprising 26.8 percent of Fowler’s households, often face increased displacement risk due to overpayment as this population more frequently relies on fixed incomes, such as retirement savings or social security, with approximately 36.9 percent of seniors falling in the extremely low-income category.
Additionally, 57.2 percent of all seniors are homeowners, a portion of which are likely to be lower income, indicating a need for affordable ownership units that accommodate the needs of seniors, as well as other persons with disabilities or special needs. Therefore, the addition of these units will help to alleviate existing overpayment by offering lower- and moderate-income units to current and future residents where there is need and increasing the housing stock overall to alleviate the demand on an existing shortage of housing at affordable price points, as well as responding to demands of special-needs populations. Further, the site capacity and distribution of units by income category will facilitate mobility opportunities for all households.
82.1%
100.0%
100.0%
92.0%
17.9%
8.0%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% Lower- Income Capacity
Moderate-Income Capacity
Above Moderate-Income Capacity
Total RHNA Capacity
40% to 49.9% of renters 50% to 59.9% of renters
353
490
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-116 Contributing Factors
Through discussions with stakeholders, fair housing advocates, and this assessment of fair housing issues, the City identified factors that contribute to fair housing issues, as shown in Table 1D-12 Factors Contributing to Fair Housing Issues. While there are several strategies identified to address the fair housing issues, the most pressing issues are the concentration of lower-income households in the southeastern portion of the city where most multifamily uses are and barriers to strong educational, economic, and environmental conditions and opportunities. The combination of these factors present challenges to housing and economic mobility in the short and near term for many households, particularly lower-income households. Prioritized contributing factors are bolded in Table 1D-12 and associated actions to meaningfully affirmatively further fair housing related to these factors are bold and italicized.
Additional programs to affirmatively further fair housing are included in Section 1D-1, Action Plan.
Table 1D-12 Factors Contributing to Fair Housing Issues AFH Identified Fair Housing
Issue Contributing Factor Meaningful Actions
Disparities in access to services
and resources
High jobs-housing ratio, indicating
insufficient housing availability
Low housing vacancy rates
Limited transit connectivity
Low-scoring school performance
Exposure to commercial agricultural and
natural resource extraction
Programs 3, 9, 10, 11 and
25 promote access to
educational opportunities,
while Programs 20, 22, and
24 promote economic
opportunities within the
community.
Displacement risk for lower- and
moderate-income renters
Concentration of multifamily options in
the southeastern portion of the city
Rapid increases in rent costs
Programs 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23,
25, and 26 are aimed at
reducing displacement risk
in the community.
Housing mobility barriers for
current and prospective
homeowners
Cost of new construction in the southern
portion of the city
Cost of rehabilitation or repairs to older
units
Programs 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23,
25, and 26 are aimed at
reducing displacement risk
in the community.
SECTION 1D-4: CONSTRAINTS
Land Use Controls
General Plan
Analysis
The City of Fowler General Plan contains the following residential land use designations:
Low Density: 0.0-3.6 dwelling units per gross acre
354
491
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-117 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Medium-Low Density: 3.7-5.5 dwelling units per gross acre Medium Density: 5.6-13.5 dwelling units per gross acre
Medium-High Density: 8.0-13.5 dwelling units per gross acre High Density: 13.6-21.8 dwelling units per gross acre
Community Commercial: 13.6-21.8 dwelling units per gross acre Conclusion
The City offers a range of housing densities in the community. The densities are sufficiently high to allow the development of affordable housing for all income levels.
Recommended Action
None required.
Zoning Ordinance
Analysis
The City’s Zoning Ordinance provides for the following residential districts:
One Family Residential (R-1-12, R-1-10, R-1-8.5, R-1-7, R-1-6, R-1-5): The R Districts are intended primarily to provide living areas at locations designated by the General Plan for Low, Medium Low, and Medium Density, involving single family dwellings.
Multi-Family Residential (RM-2-A, RM-2, RM-3-A, RM-3): The RM Multi-Family Residential Districts are intended primarily for the development of multifamily residential structures at densities consistent with policies of the General Plan. Multi-family housing is permitted by right in the RM zones. Multi-family housing exceeding 21.8 units per acre is conditionally permitted in the RM-3 zone.
In addition, the City’s Zoning Ordinance allows residential uses in the following nonresidential zones:
Neighborhood Commercial (C-1): This district is intended primarily for the provision of retail and personal service facilities to satisfy the convenience-goods needs of the consumer relatively close to residential neighborhoods. Horizontal or vertical mixed-use development subject to the development standards of the RM-3 district is conditionally permitted.
Community Commercial (C-2): The Community Commercial District is to be applied to the community commercial areas of the City, as may be designated by the General Plan. These areas provide a wide range of retail, financial, governmental, professional, business service, and entertainment activities. Horizontal or vertical mixed-use development subject to the development standards of the RM-3 district is conditionally permitted.
Form-Based Code Area (FBC): The Form-Based Code Area is intended to foster a vibrant town center through a mix of uses with shop fronts and commercial uses at street level, overlooked by canopy shade trees, upper story residences, and offices. The code regulates land development by setting controls on building form in order to achieve the vision for the community set forth in the Fowler General Plan. Mixed355 492
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-118 use development and stand-alone residential development (subject to the RM-3 standards) are conditionally permitted, including developments that exceed 21.8 units per acre.
Urban Reserve District (UR): This district is intended to protect lands designated for eventual urban development to ensure the orderly conversion of these lands to nonagricultural use; to preserve lands best suited for agriculture from the encroachment of incompatible uses; and to provide appropriate areas for certain open uses of land that are not injurious to agriculture but that may not be harmonious with urban uses. The district allows one-family and farm employee housing that are incidental to permitted or conditionally permitted uses, including crops and the raising of animals or fowl.
Conclusion
The City’s Zoning Ordinance provides for a range of housing options.
Recommended Action
None required.
Residential Development Standards
Analysis
Table 1D-13 lists and describes the residential zoning districts in the City of Fowler Zoning Ordinance that allow residential development. The table indicates the minimum lot size requirements, minimum site area per unit, setbacks, height restrictions, and open space requirements that apply in each of the city’s residential zoning districts. Table 1D-14 lists the parking requirements for residential developments. Consistent with Government Code Section 65940.1(a)(1) related to transparency requirements, the zoning and development standards for all parcels in the city are available on the City’s website. These development standards are typical and consistent with standards established in surrounding communities. 356
493
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-119 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Table 1D-13 Residential Development Standards
Characteristics of
Lot, Location,
and Height
R-1-5 R-1-6 R-1-7 R-1-8.5 R-1-10 R-1-12 RM-2-
A
RM-2
RM-3-
A
RM-3
Minimum Lot Area
(SF) 5,000 sf 6,000 sf 7,000 sf 8,500 sf 10,000 sf
12,000
sf 7,000 sf 7,000 sf 7,000 sf 7,000 sf
Minimum Lot
Dimensions
(Interior Lots)
Width
Depth
50’
90’
60’
95’
65’
100’
70’
110’
80’
110’
90’
120’
50’
100’
50’
100’
50’
100’
50’
100’
Maximum Lot
Coverage 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 55% 55% 55% 55%
Minimum Setbacks
Front
Rear
Side
20’
10’
5’
20’
10’
5’
20’
10’
5’
20’
10’
7’
25’
10’
7’
35’
10’
10’
15’
10’
5’
15’
10’
5’
15’
10’
5’
15’
10’
5’
Maximum Height 2 Stories
35’
2 Stories
35’
2 Stories
35’
2 Stories
35’
2 Stories
35’
2 Stories
35’ 35’ 35’ 35’ 35’
Private Open Space
(SF/DU) -- -- -- -- -- -- 100 100 100 100
Source: City of Fowler Zoning Ordinance, 2022
Note: Multifamily housing is conditionally permitted in the Neighborhood Commercial and Community Commercial zones, as well as the Form-Based Code Area at RM-3 standards.
357
494
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-120 Parking
Table 1D-14 shows residential parking requirements in Fowler, which vary by housing type.
Table 1D-14 Residential Parking Requirements
Residential Use Required Parking Spaces
Single-family 2 spaces per unit, including 1
garaged space
Multi-family
Studio 1.5 spaces 1/2 of required
spaces shall be
covered; plus 1
guest space per
each 5 units
1 BR 1.5 spaces
2 BR 1.5 spaces
3 or more BR 2 spaces
Secondary Dwelling Units 1 space
Source: City of Fowler Zoning Ordinance, 2022
Specifically, the City of Fowler Zoning Ordinance provides reduced parking and encourages shared parking to “provide flexibility for the development or redevelopment of small sites” and “promote projects that use flexible and creative incentives to reduce parking needs.” Flexibilities offered by the Form Based Code include the following:
▪ 1.5 parking space per unit regardless of unit size;
▪ Parking requirement can be met on-site or within 350 feet of the site; ▪ Shared parking is encouraged; and
▪ Off-street parking is not required for properties fronting Merced Street between Seventh Street and the alley between Fourth and Fifth Streets; and
▪ Off-street parking can be reduced by 50 percent within other specified areas in the Form Based Code Area.
Building Height
Buildings or structures in the R-1 zones cannot exceed a maximum height of 35 feet or two stories. Building height in the R-2 and R-3 zones is subject to the same 35-foot limit but with no limitation on the number of stories.
Open Space and Park Requirements
For multifamily development, the City requires setting aside 10 percent of the space as usable open space (which include swimming pools, green space, landscaping, and recreation room). For a single-family development, 5 percent of the space is required to be set aside for usable open space. These requirements are in addition to the park development fees (discussed later). Overall, the park dedication requirement, the park improvement fees, and the open space requirements do not represent excessive constraints on residential development.
358
495
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-121 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Cumulative Impact of Development Standards
The City evaluated the cumulative impact of its land use controls on the cost and supply of housing, including development standards that limit the building envelope (setbacks, private open space, and parking) and lot coverage restrictions. Based on this evaluation, none of the land use controls in conventional residential zoning districts would prevent an applicant from reaching the maximum density allowed for single-family developments in single-family zones and multifamily developments in all zones where multifamily is allowed, or otherwise constrain housing development.
Current development standards for the residential zones that permit multifamily housing were applied to theoretical sites of varying size. The results confirmed the above conclusion, and each scenario achieved the respective zone’s maximum allowable density. On sites from one-quarter acre to one-half acre, a multifamily housing development in the highest density zone, RM-3, could achieve maximum density with two-bedroom units served by on-site covered and uncovered parking. Sites larger than one-half acre were not evaluated, as development standards do not become more restrictive as parcel sizes increase. The City also analyzed theoretical development capacity on minimum lot size parcels in the RM-3 zone. Even on the smallest sites, maximum density could be achieved with a mix of studio and one-bedroom units served by a combination of covered and uncovered parking. Covered parking is counted toward the maximum building footprint, and uncovered parking is not. Density bonus units are not factored into the calculations.
The RM-2 zone was not analyzed because it possesses the same development standards as the RM-3 zone, but at a lower density. The FBC zones was not analyzed because they contain the same or more favorable development standards (i.e. reduced parking ratios). The C-1 and C-2 zones were “derated” to 35% as part of the Realistic Development Potential analysis described in Section 1D-2 because these zones require multifamily uses to be located at the rear or above a permitted use (horizontal or vertical mixed use).
The RM-3 zone was evaluated with hypothetical sites in the manner described herein. Interior lots with three-story products were evaluated, as this condition enforces the most restrictive setback requirements.
The City currently requires 2 parking spaces for each single-family dwelling and 1.5 to 2 parking spaces for each multifamily dwelling.
The maximum allowed densities in the RM-3 zone is 21.78 units per acre. Comparing two hypothetical site sizes (one half acre and 6,000 sq. ft.), maximum allowed densities are achievable on sites in both zones, as demonstrated below. The first step in the analysis was to determine the allowable building footprint given the site size and the maximum lot coverage. The next step was to determine the maximum allowed building envelope given the site area minus the required setbacks, open space, and parking. Since the RM-3 zone allows buildings up to 35 feet (three stories), the building envelope was multiplied by three to determine the maximum building square footage.
359
496
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-122 Table 1D-15 Hypothetical Site Analysis
Hypothetical RM-3 Site 1 Hypothetical RM-3 Site 2
Lot Area 22,000 square feet 6,000 square feet
Length 200 feet 100 feet
Width 110 feet 60 feet
Maximum Allowed Lot Coverage 55% 55%
Maximum Building Footprint, given
Lot Coverage
12,100 sqft 3,300 sqft
Maximum Building Envelope, given
Setbacks1:
Front – 15 feet
Rear – 16 feet
Side – 11 feet
Private Open Space 10%
Parking Requirements – 2 per unit
and 1 guest for every 5 units, at 200
sqft each
8,585 sqft 960 sqft
Number of Units 11 3
Average Unit Square Footage 2,341 960
Maximum Density Achieved 21.8 21.8
Maximum Allowable Density 21.8 21.8
1 Rear and side setbacks are the average between the minimum and required “step back” setbacks. 360
497
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-123 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Conclusion
The City’s development standards are reasonable and typical, and do not serve to constrain housing development and would not preclude the development of multi-family housing at the upper end of the allowable density range. The Form Based Code offers flexible parking standards with the expressed intent to encourage the efficient use of land and facilitate development/redevelopment of small infill sites. The Form Based Code Area (FBC) and RM 3 zones also allow for residential development to exceed 21.8 units per acre subject to approval of a CUP.
Recommended Action
None required.
Growth Management
Analysis
The Fowler General Plan contains a policy on growth management. Specifically, the policy establishes urban growth boundaries and associated thresholds which are used determine when development may continue into the next growth tier. Development thresholds do not require all land within previous tiers to be developed before moving into the next tier. However, the policy does require a minimum number of units at Medium High and High Density, which most closely translates to multi-family building typologies, be constructed before development continues into the next tier in order to encourage the construction of more affordable units. Additionally, the City permits deed-restricted affordable housing units be constructed in the next growth tier before development thresholds are met.
Conclusion
Fowler’s growth management policy does not place a restriction on how many units may be built within the City, only restricting where units may be built to maintain orderly development patterns and adequate provision of services. Furthermore, the development thresholds provide some flexibility by not requiring 100 percent fill of a previous growth tier and by maintaining exceptions for affordable housing and some master planned developments. Therefore, the growth management policy would not unduly constrain the City’s ability to accommodate its RHNA.
Recommended Action
None required.
Density Bonus
Analysis
The City’s density bonus ordinance does not currently include provisions for moderate-income housing units, childcare facilities, land banking, or condominium conversions. Furthermore, the City’s ordinance does not vary the density bonus granted based on the proportion of affordable units provided. The City will 361
498
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-124 need to amend the density bonus ordinance to meet all requirements of SB 1818 and AB 2222, among other related and minor amendments.
Conclusion
The City’s density bonus provisions do not meet current State law requirements.
Recommended Action
Amend the Zoning Ordinance within one year of Housing Element adoption.
Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types
Analysis
Title 9 of the City of Fowler Municipal Code describes the City’s regulations for residential development.
Table 1D-16 summarizes the housing types permitted and conditionally permitted under the Zoning Ordinance.
362
499
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-125 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Table 1D-16 Variety of Housing Types
R-1-5 R-1-6 R-1-7 R-1-8.5 R-1-10 R-1-12 RM-2-A RM-2 RM-3-A RM-3 UR Single Family P P P P P P P P P P P
Multifamily NP NP NP NP NP NP P P P P NP
Manufactured/Mobile
Homes
P/A P/A P/A P/A P/A P/A P/A P/A P/A P/A NP
Mobile Home Park NP NP NP NP NP NP CUP CUP CUP CUP NP
Farmworker / Employee
Housing NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP P
SRO NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP
Foster Homes
(six or fewer) P/A P/A P/A P/A P/A P/A P/A P/A P/A P/A NP Group Homes and
Residential Care Facilities
(six or fewer)
CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP CUP
NP
Group Homes and
Residential Care Facilities
(seven or more)
NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP
NP
Second Dwelling Units P P P P P P P P P P P
P = Permitted; P/A = Permitted with Administrative Approval; CUP = Conditional Use Permit; NP = Not Permitted Source: City of Fowler Zoning Ordinance, 2022
363
500
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-126 The following is a description of the City’s requirements for various housing types:
Multifamily
Multiple family dwellings are permitted by right in the RM zone, and conditionally permitted in the commercial and Form Based Code zones.
Manufactured Housing
The City requires Administrative Approval for manufactured housing in the R and RM districts while single family dwellings are permitted by right.
Farmworker/Employee Housing
The Fowler Zoning Ordinance defines farm employee housing as “living quarters, including dwellings with sleeping accommodations and dining facilities, maintained for occupancy by persons employed principally in farming and related pursuits on land owned, leased or rented by the owner, lessee, or tenant of the site on which the farm employee housing is located; excepting a labor camp or trailer park.” While the City permits farm employee housing in the Urban Reserve zone district, the City’s definition of farmworker housing in the Zoning Ordinance is not consistent with State law, which specifically states that the housing needs not be occupied by persons employed by the farm operations on site.
Emergency Shelters
The City previously amended its Zoning Ordinances to comply with State law in place at that time and currently permits emergency shelters in the M-1 zone district. Emergency shelters are currently defined as:
Emergency shelter shall mean housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of six (6) months or less by a homeless person. No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay.
However, recent state law (AB 2339) expands the definition of “emergency shelters” to include other interim interventions, including but not limited to, navigation centers, bridge housing, and respite or recuperative care.
Emergency shelters are also now required by right in a zone district that allows residential uses. Program 14 (Zoning Ordinance Amendments) proposes to update the definition of emergency shelters to include interim interventions as well as add emergency shelters as a by-right use to the C-2 zone district, which allows residential uses.
Legislation also requires that the City demonstrate site capacity in the zone identified to be appropriate for the development of emergency shelters. Within the identified zone, only objective development and management standards may be applied, given they are designed to encourage and facilitate the development of or conversion to an emergency shelter. According to the Fresno/Madera Continuum of Care, the homeless population in Fowler is estimated at six persons. APN 343-40-019S is 2.53-acre vacant site that is zoned C-2 and is located near transit, retail, and social and health services. The site would provide adequate capacity for the City’s six homeless residents, as a minimum of 200 square feet per person is required pursuant to Government Code Section 65583(a)(4)(I). 364
501
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-127 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Transitional and Supportive Housing
The City amended the Zoning Ordinance on May 19, 2015 to address the provision of transitional and supportive housing as a residential use subject to the same development standards and regulations as similar uses in the same zones.
Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Units
The Zoning Ordinance does not currently contain provisions for SRO housing.
Residential Care Facilities/Group Homes
The Zoning Ordinance permits foster homes for six or fewer with an Administrative Approval in all residential zones. However, all other types of residential care facilities for six or fewer require a Conditional Use Permit. The Zoning Ordinance makes no provisions for large residential care facilities for more than six persons. This Housing Element proposes Program 14 (Zoning Code Amendments), which will add provisions to the zoning code for group homes for six persons or less and for seven or more persons in accordance with State law.
Second Units
The City permits secondary residential units in all of its residential zones, subject to additional development standards.
Conclusion
In summary, amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance are required to address the provision of a variety of housing types:
Residential Care Facilities: The Zoning Ordinance needs to be updated to comply with the Lanterman Act and allow group homes for six or fewer persons in all residential zones. The Zoning Ordinance also needs to make provisions for large residential care facilities for more than six persons.
Manufactured Housing: The Zoning Ordinance will need to be updated to permit manufactured homes in a manner consistent with single family housing.
Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Housing: The Zoning Ordinance does not currently contain provisions for SRO housing.
Emergency Shelters: The Zoning Ordinance does not permit emergency shelters by-right in residential zones.
Farmworker/Employee Housing: The Fowler Zoning Ordinance is not consistent with State law requirements for farmworker and employee housing.
Recommended Action
The Housing Element includes an action to amend the Zoning Ordinance to address residential care facilities, manufactured housing, emergency shelters, SRO units, and farmworker and employee housing.
On/Off-Site Improvements
Analysis
365
502
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-128 Fowler has residential development requirements for residential streets, sidewalks, solar access, landscaping, walls, street lighting, and parking. Improvement requirements for new developments are regulated under the Subdivision Ordinance (Title 9, Chapter 4 of the Municipal Code). Major improvements required by the City include:
Local roads are improved to a 40-foot curb-to-curb width within an overall 60-foot right of way. Gutters and monolithic sidewalks in a 5-foot pattern are required on all local streets with a 5-foot landscape strip. Right-of-way may be reduced to 56 feet for cul-de-sacs and short streets.
Major streets are developed to 70, 80, and 100-foot rights-of-way, depending on their classification. The subdivider is responsible for dedicating sufficient right-of-way adjacent to the project to provide one-half of the major street with two travel lanes, including curb, gutter, parking lane, sidewalk, and a 10-foot landscape strip on one side.
Sewer, water, and drainage lines are located in streets or within easements within the project boundaries. Easements for underground electrical, natural gas, telephone, and cable facilities are provided as requested by the affected utilities.
A landscaped strip 10 feet in width is required adjacent to major streets between the sidewalk and wall to include street trees, ground cover, and an automatic irrigation system.
In order to adequately provide water supply for use and safety purposes, it may be necessary for individual projects to dedicate a well site, install a well in the subdivision vicinity, or retrofit existing wells to increase flows from the wells.
In areas lacking master drainage facilities, a temporary on-site ponding basin adequate to remove surface water and storm water from the project is required.
Streetlights and traffic signs are required in accordance with the City’s Standard Specifications.
All utilities are placed underground, in accordance with the requirements of the utility concerned, in either City street easements or appropriate utility easements.
Conclusion
Development requirements of the City of Fowler are considered standard in the Central Valley and are comparable to surrounding cities. In order to reduce housing costs, the City does not require improvements other than those deemed necessary to maintain the public health, safety, and welfare.
Recommended Action
None required.
Fees and Exactions
Analysis
Some of the typical City fees are summarized in Table 1D-17 and Table 1D-18. 366
503
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-129 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Table 1D-17 Schedule of Permit Processing Fees for Residential Development Permit Processing Fees Base and Deposit
Pre-Application Design Review
Conditional Use Permit
Minor #% $1,173
Major #% $2,340
Site Plan Review
Minor #% $1,140
Major #% $2,801
Subdivisions
Tentative Map, Tentative Parcel Map (5-
10 units) #% $ 10,342
Tentative Map (>10 units) #% $12,303
Final Subdivision Map Check (5-10
units) $3,434
Final Subdivision Map Check (> 10
units) $5,295
Land Use / Zoning /
Environmental Review
General Plan Amendment (Minor) #% $2,554
General Plan Amendment (Major) #% $5,109
Zoning Amendment (Minor) #% $2,523
Zoning Amendment (Major) $5,039
Negative Declaration #%^ $6,148
Mitigated Negative Declaration #%^ $7,684
Environmental Impact Report #%^ $13,931
Building Permit 6.5 percent of construction
value (average)
Source: City of Fowler, 2023.
# More complex projects require a consultant proposal for estimated cost. % Should a project require additional study, staff time, public hearings, or notification, then additional funds shall be deposited in an amount determined by the Director. ^ For Negative Declarations and EIRs prepared by qualified consultants under contract to the City, the fee shall be cost +
367
504
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-130 Table 1D-18 Schedule of Development Impact Fees for Residential Development Development Impact Fee MFR Fee per
Unit
SFR Fee per
Unit
ADU Fee5
City Management and General Services $941 $1,344 $806
Law Enforcement $663 $947 $568
Fire Protection $785 $1,121 $673
Parks $2,767 $3,955 $2,373
Water Facilities $1,883 $2,691 $1,615
Sewer Facilities $2,856 $4,082 $2,449
Traffic $561 $532 $319
Ground Water Recharge $623 $891 $535
Storm Drain1$499 $1,205 $723
Total City Fees $11,578 $16,768 $10,061
Indirect Source Review2$11 $11 -
Fowler Unified School District3$4,790 $9,580 $5,748
Selma-Kingsburg-Fowler County Sanitation District $3,866 $5,154 $3,092 Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee4$1,642 $2,118 -
All Applicable Fees $21,887 $33,631 $18,901
Source: City of Fowler, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Fowler Unified School District, Selma-Kingsburg-Fowler County Sanitation District, Fresno Council of Governments, 2023. 1Assuming 17.44 and 4.4 dwelling units per acre for MFR and SFR Fee, respectively. 2Assuming cost is spread amongst 50 units.
3Assuming 1,000, 2,000, and 1,200 square feet per MFR, SFR, and ADU dwelling unit, respectively. 4Fee assumes market rate units. Fee is halved for affordable developments. 5Assuming fee is proportional (1,200 sqft ADU / 2,000 sqft main residence) to SFR Fee.
Table 1D-19 below depicts the cumulative construction costs for a prototypical single-family home and multifamily dwelling. Construction costs for a single-family residence are approximately $144 per square foot. This is based on costs calculated for a 2,000-square-foot, wood-framed, single-story, four-cornered home of good quality construction and including a two-car garage and forced air heating/cooling in Fowler. Estimated total construction costs for such a home are $289,732. Costs for prototypical multifamily construction are approximately $137 per square foot, based on costs calculated for a 2-story building in Fowler with 20 units and an average unit size of 1,000 square feet. The multifamily calculation is for a wood or light steel frame structure, including forced air heating and cooling and constructed of good quality materials. The estimated total construction costs for each multifamily unit are $131,207, with a total construction cost for the building of $2,572,848. These construction costs, for both single-family and multifamily units, include labor, materials, and equipment but do not include the costs of buying land.
368
505
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-131 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Table 1D-19 Schedule of Contributing Costs to Residential Construction Cost MFR Unit SFR Unit
Typical Building Construction Costs1$131,207 $289,732
Building Permit $853 $1,883
Development Impact Fees $21,887 $33,631
Total Development Fees $22,740 $35,514
Total Housing Costs (not including cost of land) $153,947 $325,246 Fees as a % of Total Housing Costs 14.8% 10.9%
Source: City of Fowler, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Fowler Unified School District, Selma-Kingsburg-Fowler County Sanitation District, Fresno Council of Governments, 2023. 2022 National Building Cost Manual, Craftsman Book Company.
Conclusion
In summary, development impact fees total approximately $23,000-$35,000 per unit, or approximately 10.9 percent of the total development costs for single family development and 14.8 percent for multifamily development.
However, approximately one-half of the fees are school and regional impact fees that are consistent throughout the County. The City’s development impact fees are generally below the statewide average of $37,471 for single family and $21,703 for multifamily per unit given inflation. Additionally, the City recently prepared a nexus study to substantiate its fees. In summary, development impact fees would not serve to constrain housing development in Fowler. All update fees are posted on City of Fowler website at: https://fowlercity.org/wpcontent/uploads/2023/03/Master-Fee-Schedule-2023.pdf.
Recommended Action
A program is included in the Housing Element to monitor the City’s fees and impacts on residential development.
Processing and Permit Procedures
Analysis
The City permits most types of residential development by right with a site plan review by the staff. Residential uses in commercial and Form Based Code districts do require the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. For the Conditional Use Permit, the conditions for approval are:
▪ That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate such use and all yards, spaces, walls and fences, parking, loading, landscaping and other features required; ▪ That the site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the quantity and kind of traffic generated by the proposed use; ▪ That the proposed use will have no adverse effect on abutting property or the permitted use; ▪ That the conditions are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. Such conditions may include:
o Special yards, spaces, and buffers;
o Fences and walls;
o Surfacing of parking areas subject to specifications; 369
506
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-132 o Requiring street dedications and improvements (or bonds) subject to the provisions of site plan review of this article, including service roads or alleys when practical; o Regulation of points of vehicular ingress and egress; o Regulation of signs;
o Requiring landscaping and the maintenance;
o Requiring the maintenance of the grounds;
o Regulation of noise, vibration and odors;
o Regulation of time for certain activities;
o A bond for the removal of such use within a specified period of time; and o Such other conditions as will make possible development in an orderly and efficient manner.
For Site Plan Review, the conditions for approval relate strictly to site planning considerations such signage, fences, ingress/egress, noise/vibration levels, location of utilities and landscaping, and hours of operation, etc.
The City has no community plan or specific plan implementation areas, environmentally sensitive areas, or other procedures to delay project processing. Although the City does have a Highway Beautification Overlay zone, the increased landscaping requirements in this zone are also not likely to delay project processing. The City encourages concurrent processing of applications and considers all entitlement applications, including the environmental document, at single public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council.
Table 1D-20 Approvals and Processing Times for Typical Developments SingleFamily
SingleFamily
(2–4 units)
Single-Family
(5+ units)
MultiFamily
(2–4 units)
MultiFamily
(5+ units) Mixed Use
Approvals
Required Director Director Planning Commission Director Director Planning Commission Processing
Time 45 days 45-60 days 90 days 45-60 days 45-60 days 45-60 days Conclusion
The City does not have a lengthy project review process and the fees and project review processing timelines are in line with surrounding cities within Fresno County. Under Program 14, Zoning Ordinance Amendment, the City will update the Zoning Ordinance to ensure that objective standards are considered during the application review process.
Recommended Action
None required.
Building Codes and Enforcement
Analysis
370
507
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-133 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 The City adopted the entirety of the 2022 California Building Code, including appendix chapters, amendments, supplements, and errata as promulgated by the California Building Standards Commission; the California Fire Code, current edition, including those sections and appendices as more specified in Chapter 14.35; and the National Fire Codes, current edition, as adopted by the National Fire Protection Association.
Code Enforcement officials perform routine inspections of housing in the city, including targeted surveys for health and safety violations under the Health and Safety Section 17910.
Conclusion
No major local amendments to the building codes, beyond adoption of the 2022 California Building Code and other applicable Fire Codes as noted above, have been made that would significantly increase the cost of housing.
Recommended Action
None required.
Constraints on Housing for Persons with Disabilities
Analysis
California Building Code
The City adopted the current California Building Code, including Title 24 regulations of the code concerning accessibility for persons with disabilities.
Definition of Family
The definition of “family” in Fowler’s Zoning Ordinance is as follows: “An individual, or two (2) or more persons related by blood or marriage, or a group of not more than six (6) persons not necessarily related by blood or marriage, living together in a dwelling unit; full-time domestic servants of any such persons may reside on the same premises, and shall not be counted with respect to the foregoing definition.” This definition exceeds the zoning power of a local jurisdiction and would be considered restrictive.
Zoning and Land Use Policies
The Ordinance permits foster homes for six or fewer with an Administrative Approval in all residential zones.
However, all other types of residential care facilities for six or fewer require a Conditional Use Permit. The Zoning Ordinance makes no provisions for large residential care facilities for more than six persons.
Reasonable Accommodation
The City does not currently have a formal process to grant reasonable accommodation requests. The Zoning Ordinance must be amended to establish a formal reasonable accommodations process.
Conclusion
371
508
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-134 Amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance are required to address the definition of family, allowances and procedures for large residential care facilities (for more than six persons), and reasonable accommodation procedures.
Recommended Action
The Housing Element includes Program 14 to amend the Zoning Ordinance to implement a barrier-free definition of family, require ministerial approval process for residential care facilities (six or fewer), address the allowance for residential care facilities (seven or more) and ensure they are being permitted consistent with other residential projects in the same zone, and formally adopt reasonable accommodation procedures. 372
509
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-135 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 At-Risk Analysis
Analysis
As required by California Government Code Section 65583, the Housing Element must analyze the extent to which below-market rate units are at risk of converting to market-rate housing. If there are at-risk units, the element should include programs to encourage preservation of these units or to replace any that are converted to market rate. The units to be considered are any units that were constructed using federal assistance programs, state or local mortgage revenue bonds, redevelopment tax increments, in-lieu fees or an inclusionary housing ordinance, or density bonuses.
Housing is considered to be “at risk” if it is eligible to be converted to non-low-income housing due to: (1) the termination of a rental subsidy contract, (2) mortgage prepayment, or (3) the expiration of affordability restrictions.
The time period applicable in making this determination is the 10-year period following the last mandated update of the Housing Element, which, in the case of all Fresno County jurisdictions, is December 31, 2023. Table 1D-21 shows assisted housing units in Fowler. There are 186 assisted affordable units in Fowler and no units are at risk of expiring in the next 10 years.
Table 1D-21 Assisted Housing Developments, Fowler
Name Address Target
Population Funding Source # of Units
# of
Affordable
Units
Affordable
Units
Expiration
Risk
Level
Ruby
Court
Apartments
1391 E Sumner
Ave Senior
USDA Section 515,
Rural Development
Rental Assistance;
LIHTC
45 44 Perpetuity Not at
risk
Fowler
Apartments 340 E Adams Ave Family
USDA Section 515,
Rural Development
Rental Assistance
44 44 2042 Low
Walnut
Grove
Villa
1446 E Sumner
Ave
NonTargeted
USDA Section 515,
Rural Development
Rental Assistance
40 39 2073 Low
Magill
Terrace
401 East Nelson
Street Family HUD Public Housing 60 59 2071 Low
Total 189 186
Total At Risk -- 0
Sources: Fresno Council of Governments HCD Pre-Approved Data Package; www.affordablehousingonline.com, 2022.
373
510
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-136 Conclusion
As previously stated, there are three methods to preserve the at-risk units: acquisition and rehabilitation, replacement, or rent subsidy. As of October 2022, there are no affordable units at risk of conversion due to acquisition and rehabilitation, replacement, or rent and subsidy, thereby placing no constraint on preserving affordable housing units for lower-income households.
Recommended Action
None.
SECTION 1D-5: REVIEW OF PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS
This section reviews and evaluates the City’s progress in implementing the 5 th Cycle Housing Element. It reviews
the results and effectiveness of programs from the previous Housing Element planning period in order to make recommendations about the programs.
Per California Government Code Section 65588,
Each local government shall review its housing element as frequently as appropriate to evaluate all of the following: (1) The appropriateness of the housing goals, objectives, and policies in contributing to the attainment of the state housing goal. (2) The effectiveness of the housing element in attainment of the community’s housing goals and objectives. (3) The progress of the city, county, or city and county in implementation of the housing element. (4) The effectiveness of the housing element goals, policies, and related actions to meet the community’s needs, pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583.
Progress Toward the RHNA
Each jurisdiction in California is responsible for accommodating its share of the region’s housing needs. The process of determining each jurisdiction’s share of housing needs is called the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The RHNA projection period for the previous Housing Element was from December 31, 2015 to December 31, 2023. The City of Fowler was assigned a RHNA of 524 units, divided into four income categories:
Very Low-Income (less than 50 percent of the Area Median Income): 123 units Low-Income (50 to 80 percent of the Area Median Income): 83 units Moderate-Income (80 to 120 percent of the Area Median Income): 75 units Above Moderate-Income (greater than 120 percent of the Area Median Income): 243 units Table 1D-22 summarizes the City’s accomplishments in meeting the RHNA during the previous RHNA projection period. Since December 31, 2015, 490 new units have been constructed in the City. The City has met 100 percent of its moderate-income RHNA. However, due to limited development interests in multifamily housing and limited funding available, just under 5 percent of its low-income units were constructed. 374
511
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-137 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Table 1D-22 Units Built during RHNA Projection Period, City of Fowler, 2006-2013 Very Low
Income
Units
Low
Income
Units
Moderate
Income
Units
Above
Moderate
Income Units
Total
Units
2015-2022 RHNA 123 83 75 243 524
Units Built 2015-2022 0 4 230 256 490
Percent of RHNA Met 0.0% 4.8% 306.6% 105.3% 93.5%
Source: City of Fowler, 2024.
The City is seeing renewed interest in residential development and is also beginning to receive inquiries about mixed use development. To facilitate residential development in the future, recognizing the challenges of the City’s sites inventory being comprised primarily of small sites and commercial properties, the 6 th Cycle Housing Element
included Program 4: Provision of Adequate Sites and Program 16: Lot Development Feasibility. These programs have been modified and continued from previous programs included in the 5th Cycle Housing Element, as noted in Table 1D-23 below, to more specifically facilitate development on identified sites during the 2023-2031 planning period.
Efforts to Address Special Housing Needs
California Government Code Section 65588 requires that local governments review the effectiveness of the housing element goals, policies, and related actions to meet the community’s special housing needs. As shown in the Review of Previous 2015-2023 Housing Element Programs matrix (Table 1D-23), the City worked diligently to promote housing for special-needs groups in a variety of ways. Some of these accomplishments are:
• The City continued to offer incentives such as minor deviations, density bonuses, and a streamlined process to housing developers to help facilitate the development of farmworker and lower-income housing. The City recently adopted a Program EIR to facilitate the streamlining of environmental review for discretionary projects.
• The City approved the Magill Terrace (Magnolia Commons) affordable housing development, which facilitated construction of 60 low-income affordable family units by the Fresno Housing Authority (HA) including 20 replacement units and 40 new units. The City assisted the Fresno HA with the application for project funding through the Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC). The City also partnered with Fresno HA on the TCAC application for the Walnut Grove project, which rehabilitated 40 low-income affordable housing units.
• The City received Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) allocations in 2019, applied for distribution of funding during Round 2 of the PLHA program in 2021, and executed a funding agreement in 2023 for $346,456. The PLHA funds will be used to provide down payment assistance to low-income first-time home buyers.
375
512
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-138 • The City continued to connect residents with the Fair Housing Council of Central California (FHCCC) upon request. FHCCC provided several services, including mediation, counseling, advocacy, research, and fair housing training and workshops for residents as well as housing providers. The City also provided references to the Fresno Housing Authority on the Housing Choice Voucher program, which can assist extremely low-income households
376
513
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-139 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Table 1D-23 City of Fowler 5
TH Cycle Program Evaluation
Program Status Evaluation Recommendation
1: Regional Collaboration on Housing Opportunities
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ The County of Fresno Public Works and Planning
Department, with assistance of the Fresno COG,
will take the lead in coordinating the Countywide
Fifth Cycle Housing Element Committee
meetings.
▪ Continue to participate in the Countywide Housing
Element Technical Committee to collaborate on
housing program implementation and regional
issues including, disadvantaged unincorporated
communities (SB 244), infrastructure challenges,
farmworker housing, homelessness, and fair
housing.
▪ The Committee will meet at least biannually to
evaluate successes in implementation of programs
and to identify gaps and additional needs.
▪ The Committee will meet annually with the
California Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) to discuss funding
opportunities and challenges in implementation of
programs, and seek technical assistance from HCD
and other State agencies in the implementation of
housing programs and the pursuit of grant funding.
▪ The Committee will meet periodically with Fair
Housing of Central California to discuss fair
housing issues and opportunities for education.
▪ The Committee will advocate on behalf of the
Fresno County region for more grant funding for
affordable housing and infrastructure
improvements.
▪ Continue to seek partnerships with other
jurisdictions in the region and other agencies (such
as the Housing Authority), housing
developers, community stakeholders, and
agricultural employers/employees to explore
Ongoing Throughout the planning period, the City continued to attend quarterly meetings with the 13 participating
jurisdictions in Fresno COG (Committee) to develop
committee goals to address housing issues. As part of
this collaboration, the City evaluated successes in the implementation of Housing Element programs and
shared insights and guidance to other committee
members as they implemented their programs. The
Committee also identified gaps and additional needs,
including a lack of grant funding for housing and
competition between jurisdictions, shortage of staff
time and resources, and a need for universal
informational materials about funding resources
available to all jurisdictions, from a variety of potential funding sources. One gap that was identified by the
Committee was accurate, current information on
preferred locations for the development of affordable
housing, including farmworker housing. In response,
the Committee supported the County’s effort to create
a survey in 2021 to determine farmers’ need for
housing on their farmland. Also in response to
identified needs of jurisdictions, the Committee
supported the County’s effort in 2023 to conduct a
feasibility study on a regional housing trust for
affordable housing. The City of Fowler continues to
participate in the Countywide Housing Element
Technical Committee which collaborates on
implementation including infrastructure challenges,
homelessness, and fair housing.
Modify and continue
as new Program 1:
Regional
Collaboration on
Housing
Opportunities.
377
514
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-140 Program Status Evaluation Recommendation
viable options for increasing the availability of
farmworker housing in suitable locations in the
region.
▪ Develop a directory of services and resources for
lower-income households available in the region,
and review and update it annually. Make the
directory available on City/County websites and at
City/County offices.
2: Review Annexation Standards in Memorandum of
Understanding
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ During the Housing Element planning period, the
County of Fresno and the cities within the County
shall work together to review and revise, as
deemed appropriate by all parties, the standards for
annexation contained in the Memorandum of
Understanding between the County and the cities.
Ongoing The MOU between the City and the County is currently being renegotiated to streamline the annexation process by reducing the percentage of imminent development
required for annexations from 50 percent to 25 percent
and to allow annexations without any development if
the annexation is necessary to accommodate the City’s
RHNA. The City anticipates taking the negotiated
MOU to City Council for approval in April 2024.
Modify and continue
as new Program 2:
Review Annexation
Standards in
Memorandum of
Understanding.
3: Provision of Adequate Sites
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Maintain and annually update the inventory of
residential land resources.
▪ Provide the updated inventory on City website and
make copies available upon request.
▪ By 2018, develop specific development standards
and incentives to facilitate residential and mixeduse development in commercial zones, particularly in the Downtown Form Based Code Area.
▪ Monitor development and other changes in the
inventory to ensure the City has remaining
capacity consistent with its share of the regional
housing need.
▪ Actively participate in the development of the next
RHNA Plan to better ensure that the allocations
are reflective of the regional and local land use
goals and policies.
Ongoing The City maintained the inventory of land, made it available upon request, and ensured sufficient land to
accommodate the City’s RHNA throughout the
planning period. In 2021, the City prepared an
interactive map as part of their General Plan Update
and due to the benefit of making this information
available to the public, the City has retained this map on their website as a resource. The City initiated an
update and refinements to this map to retain it as an
ongoing resource to the public and development
community, along with additional mapping resources.
Modify and continue
as new Program 4:
Provision of
Adequate Sites.
378
515
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-141 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Program Status Evaluation Recommendation
4: Monitoring of Residential Capacity (No Net Loss)
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Develop and implement a formal evaluation
procedure pursuant to Government Code Section
65863.
▪ Monitor and report through the HCD annual report
process.
▪ If rezoning/upzoning is required to replenish the
sites inventory for meeting the RHNA shortfall,
the sites shall be adequate in size to accommodate
at least 16 units per site at a minimum density of
20 units per acre, and shall be rezoned within two
years.
Ongoing The City completes its Annual Progress Reports as well as participates in the multi-jurisdictional housing effort to ensure that there is no net loss in land zoned for residential development.
Modify and combine
with and continue as
new Program 4:
Provision of
Adequate Sites.
5: Lot Consolidation and Lot Splits
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Assist interested developers/property owners in
identifying opportunities for lot consolidation or
lot splitting.
▪ Continue to process requests for lot consolidation
and lot splitting concurrent with other
development reviews.
▪ Annually monitor lot consolidation activities as
part of the City annual report to HCD on Housing
Element progress and evaluate if City efforts are
effective in facilitating lot consolidation of small
sites for residential development. If appropriate,
make necessary changes to facilitate lot
consolidation.
▪ Encourage the use of master plans/specific plans to
provide a cohesive development strategy for large
lots.
Ongoing As part of permit review process, the City supported lot consolidations and lot line adjustments to facilitate
development of housing projects. Additionally, the
City is currently updating the subdivision ordinance to further facilitate lot consolidations for residential
development.
Modify and continue
as new Program 16:
Lot Development
Feasibility.
6: Water and Wastewater Capacity
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Continue to monitor water and wastewater
capacity and make improvements, as appropriate
Ongoing The City continues to monitor and map water and wastewater concerns. Through this monitoring, the
City identified one well with elevated TCP levels. The
City received funding to treat the well, which is
currently in design. A water model was also completed
Modify and continue
as new Program 5:
Water and
Wastewater Service.
379
516
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-142 Program Status Evaluation Recommendation
and feasible, to better serve existing development
and strive to accommodate the RHNA.
▪ Establish procedures by the end of 2016 for
granting priority water and sewer service to
developments with lower-income units in
compliance with California Government Code
Section 65589.7.
in 2020 to identify areas of concern related to water
capacity. Need for an additional water well was
identified on the west side of the City, grant funding
was received, and the new well is now under
construction. Due to the ongoing monitoring and
proactive pursuit of grant funding and project design
and approvals for new infrastructure needs, the City
has had sufficient capacity for both water and
wastewater to serve new developments, including
lower income projects.
7: Affordable Housing Incentives
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Maintain a list of interested developers and
annually contact developers to explore affordable
housing opportunities.
▪ Continue to promote the State density bonus,
flexible development standards, and other
incentives to facilitate affordable housing
development by publicizing the incentives on City
website and by conducting pre-application
consultation with developers regarding incentives
available.
▪ Continue to streamline the environmental review
process for housing developments to the extent
possible, using available state categorical
exemptions and federal categorical exclusions,
when applicable.
▪ Annually pursue State, Federal and other funding
opportunities to increase the supply of safe,
decent, affordable housing in Fowler for lowerincome households (including extremely lowincome households), such as seniors, disabled (including persons with developmental
disabilities), farmworkers, the homeless, and those
at risk of homelessness.
Ongoing A comprehensive zoning ordinance update is underway which will update the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance.
The City regularly coordinates with Fresno Housing
Authority and Self Help Enterprises to identify
opportunities for new affordable housing projects.
Additionally, the City regularly offers one on one
meetings with prospective developers interested in
affordable housing or the implementation of the density bonus ordinance. The City approved the construction
of 234 low- and moderate-income units that satisfied
the 5th cycle RHNA, including an additional 40 units of rehabilitated affordable units.
Modify and continue
as new Program 6:
Affordable Housing
Incentives.
380
517
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-143 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Program Status Evaluation Recommendation
▪ Expand the City’s affordable housing inventory by
50 units over the next eight years – 5 extremely
low-income, 5 very low-income, 10 low-income,
and 30 moderate-income units.
8: Farmworker Housing
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Continue to support and encourage other agencies
and housing developers, such as the Fresno
Housing Authority and Self-Help Enterprises, in
the application of funds for farmworker housing,
including State HCD and USDA Rural
Development loans and grants and other funding
sources that may become available.
▪ Continue to offer incentives such as gap financing
(as funding is available), density bonus,
streamlined processing to facilitate the
development of farmworker housing.
▪ Annually monitor the status of farmworker
housing as part of the City’s annual report to HCD
on Housing Element progress and evaluate if City
efforts are effective in facilitating the provision of
farmworker housing. If appropriate, make
necessary changes to enhance opportunities and
incentives for farmworker housing development.
Ongoing The City continues to work with the Fresno Housing Authority and Self-Help Enterprises in seeking grant
funding for farmworker housing. The Walnut Grove
project was funded through the USDA Rural assistance
program and more recently, the City supported the
Fresno Housing Authority with their TCAC application
to secure funding for the rehabilitation of 40 affordable units.
Modify. And continue
as new Program 7:
Support for
Farmworker
Housing and new
Program 8:
Farmworker
Preference in New
Affordable Housing.
9: Preserving Assisted Housing
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Continue to monitor status of affordable housing
projects. If projects become at risk of converting to
market-rate housing:
o Monitor the status of any Notice of Intent and
Plan of Action filed by property owners to
convert to market-rate units.
o Identify nonprofit organizations as potential
purchasers/managers of at-risk housing units.
Ongoing The City assisted the Fresno Housing Authority in their efforts to obtain tax credit allocation for their 40-unit Walnut Grove apartment complex. The 60-unit Magill
Terrace (Magnolia Commons) project was also
constructed using funding received through the tax
credit allocation in coordination with Fresno Housing
Authority and was completed in 2019. The City will
continue to monitor the status of these and other
assisted housing projects.
Modify and Continue
as new Program 10:
Preservation of AtRisk Housing Units.
381
518
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-144 Program Status Evaluation Recommendation
o Explore funding sources available to purchase
affordability covenants on at-risk projects,
transfer ownership of at-risk projects to public
or nonprofit agencies, purchase existing
buildings to replace at-risk units, or construct
replacement units.
o Ensure the tenants are properly noticed and
informed of their rights and eligibility to
obtain special Housing Choice Vouchers
reserved for tenants of converted HUD
properties.
10: Accessory Units
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ By 2019, consider fee reductions for second units
and implement a public education program
advertising the opportunity for second units
through the City website and at the planning
counter.
Ongoing The City has amended their Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) ordinances to be compliant with new state law
and prepared an information brochure for distribution
to the public and development community. The City
has approved 13 ADUs since 2020. Development
impact fees are waived for ADUs.
Modify and continue
as new Program 11:
Encourage and
Facilitate Accessory
Units.
11: Zoning Code Amendments
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Amend Zoning Code to address State law
requirements within one year of Housing Element
adoption.
▪ Annually review the effectiveness and
appropriateness of the Zoning Code and process
any necessary amendments to remove or mitigate
potential constraints to the development of
housing.
Within one
year of
Housing
Element
adoption
The City is currently undergoing a comprehensive
zoning ordinance update. Program requirements from
the 5th Cycle that have not already been addressed, will be included in the updated zoning ordinance.
Modify and continue
as new Program 14:
Zoning Ordinance
Amendment and new
Program 19:
Objective Design
Standards.
12: Monitoring Planning and Development Fees
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Continue to monitor the various fees charged by
the City to ensure they do not unduly constrain
housing development.
Ongoing The City monitors and evaluates their fees each January. A nexus study was adopted in 2022 in support
of its current development impact fees. However, some
exclusions apply from impact fees, including ADUs.
Modify and continue
as new Program 21:
Code Enforcement.
382
519
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-145 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Program Status Evaluation Recommendation
▪ As appropriate, consider incentives such as
deferred or reduced fees to facilitate affordable
housing development.
13: Code Enforcement
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Continue to utilize code enforcement and
substandard abatement processes to bring
substandard housing units and residential
properties into compliance with city codes.
▪ Pursue funding from state and federal programs to
reinstate the City’s Home Improvement Grant
program (suspended with the dissolution of the
Redevelopment Agency) with the goal of assisting
20 households over the planning period (5 very
low-income, 5 low-income, and 10 moderateincome households).
Ongoing The City reinstated the Code Enforcement Division in 2019 and hired a dedicated Community Compliance
Officer in 2022. In 2023, the City has entered into the County of Fresno’s Joint Powers Authority (JPA) to
participate in the County’s HOME and CDBG
programs, which include the HARP and the RRP
programs. The City will continue to look for other
grant programs to assist property owners to bring their homes into compliance with City codes.
Modify and continue
as new Program 21:
Code Enforcement.
14: First-Time Homebuyer Resources
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Promote available homebuyer resources on City
website and public counters in 2016.
▪ Annually review funding resources available at the
state and federal levels and pursue as appropriate
to provide homebuyer assistance.
Ongoing The City was allocated funding through the Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) program beginning
in 2019. The City applied to receive funds during the
second round of funding distribution in 2021 and
proposed to use the funding for a down payment
assistance program for low-income recipients. The
funding agreement was executed in 2023 and the City
is now able to receive PLHA funding to provide lowincome downpayment assistance for first-time homebuyers. The City will update their website with
information on this program and include reference to
resources for first-time homebuyers.
Modify and continue
as new Program 22:
First-Time
Homebuyer
Resources.
15: Energy Conservation
Timeframe and Objectives:
Ongoing The City continues to support PG&E programs that provide energy efficiency rebates and implements the
Building codes that support and encourage alternative
energy. The City has also established a streamlined
approval process for solar panel systems.
Modify and continue
as new Program 23:
Energy
Conservation.
383
520
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-146 Program Status Evaluation Recommendation
▪ Consider incentives to promote green building
techniques and features in 2017, and as
appropriate, adopt incentives in 2018.
▪ Continue to promote and support Pacific Gas and
Electric Company (PG&E) programs that provide
energy efficiency rebates for qualifying energyefficient upgrades by providing a link to PG&E programs on City website and make available
brochures about PG&E programs at City counters.
▪ Expedite review and approval of alternative energy
devices.
16: Housing Choice Vouchers
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Provide information on the HCV program on City
website and public counters in 2016.
▪ Refer interested households to the Fresno Housing
Authority and encourage landlords to register their
properties with the Housing Authority for
accepting HCVs.
▪ Work with the Housing Authority to disseminate
information on incentives for participating in the
HCV program throughout the City neighborhoods
with varying income levels to promote housing
opportunities for all residents.
Ongoing The City continues to partner with Fresno HA and regularly communicates with interested parties to
connect them to the HA for more information about the
HCV program.
Modify and continue
as new Program 24:
Housing Choice
Vouchers.
384
521
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-147 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Program Status Evaluation Recommendation
17: Fair Housing
Timeframe and Objectives:
▪ Work collaboratively with other jurisdictions in
the region to provide education to lenders, real
estate professionals, and the community at large.
▪ Actively advertise fair housing resources at the
public counter, community service agencies,
public libraries, and City website.
▪ Refer fair housing complaints to HUD, DEFH,
Fair Housing Council of Central California, and
other housing agencies, as appropriate.
Ongoing The City works with the Fresno Housing Authority to connect interested developers with resources offered
through the Housing Authority, including providing
education to lenders, real estate professionals, and the community at large to promote fair housing services
available in the region, including additional
organizations such as the Fair Housing Council of
Central Valley. The City also performs safety
inspections and when warranted, refers cases to Central California Legal Services (CCLS).
Addressed through
new Program 25:
Housing
Discrimination
Monitoring and
Referral and new
Program 26:
Improve Access to
Resources.
385
522
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-148 SECTION 1D-6: PUBLIC OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT
State law requires cities and counties to make a diligent effort to achieve participation from all segments of the community in preparing a Housing Element. Section 65583[c][6] of the California Government Code specifically requires that “[t]he local government shall make a diligent effort to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the Housing Element, and the program shall describe this effort.” The diligent effort required means that local jurisdictions must do more than issue the customary public notices and conduct standard public hearings prior to adopting a Housing Element. State law requires cities and counties to take active steps to inform, involve, and solicit input from the public, particularly low-income and racial and ethnic households that might otherwise not participate in the process. Spanish-language materials were available, and Spanish translation was made available by request.
To meet the requirements of State law, the City of Fowler completed the public outreach at both the local level and as part of the regional Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element effort to encourage community involvement. These efforts included:
▪ Regional Project Website
▪ Stakeholder Consultations and Focus Groups
▪ Study Sessions with Planning Commissions, City Councils, and the County Board of Supervisors ▪ Community Workshops
Regional efforts included three sets of community workshops, consultations, and a community survey, all of which are discussed in detail in Appendix 1: Regional Housing Element Public Outreach.
Joint Planning Commission/City Council Study Session
On August 2, 2022, a Joint Planning Commission/City Council Study Session was held to introduce the 2023-2031 Housing Element update and to review new State laws. The public was also invited to attend and participate in this event. Staff presented an overview of the Housing Element update process and required contents of the element, discussed early strategies and possible sites to meet the City’s RHNA, reviewed new state laws, and solicited feedback from the City Council, Planning Commission, and community members on these strategies and other housing needs in Fowler. City Council expressed concerns about the tensions between State and local land use control, the impacts of State laws at the local level, and about cities’ abilities to implement the new laws. No public comments or questions were received during the study session.
Joint Planning Commission/Workshop Session
On June 20, 2023, a Joint Planning Commission/City Council Workshop was held to present the 2023-2031 Housing Element update. The workshop was held during the 30-day public review period and the public was invited to attend and participate. Staff presented an overview of the Housing Element update process, outreach conducted as part of the process, and summarized the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA). Review of the fair housing assessment and the programs included for Fowler in the Housing Element were also presented and discussed. 386
523
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-149 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Community Workshop
California Coalition for Rural Housing (CCRH) staff attended a community event hosted by the City of Fowler.
CCRH was able to support the City of Fowler in promoting the community event through social media updates, emails to stakeholders, distribution through the Fresno COG email list, and distribution through the Fresno Housing Authority to residents of affordable housing. The Fowler Unified School District also promoted the event with the community at a Fowler High School pep rally and an alumni event.
CCRH had a booth at the community event where the Coalition met with residents to share information about future events and workshops that residents could attend to provide their input on the housing element update process.
Residents were able to sign up for future updates on the housing element update using the sign-in sheet provided.
CCRH also shared information about the Central California Travel Survey which includes questions regarding the transportation and housing needs of Fresno County residents.
Local Stakeholder Consultations
To ensure that the City solicits feedback from all segments of the community, consultations were conducted with service providers and other stakeholders who represent different socioeconomic groups. Throughout the summer and fall of 2022, several interviews were conducted with stakeholders who work in areas such as housing, homelessness, and other social services in Fowler and throughout the Fresno County area. Summaries of interviews from stakeholders working in Fowler or the County as a whole are included below.
BIA of Fresno/Madera Counties
The President of the Building Industry Association of Fresno/Madera Counties (BIA), Mike Prandini, was interviewed in November 2022. The BIA is an industry organization that represents builders, developers, subcontractors, and affiliated businesses in the residential, commercial, and industrial building industry throughout the region.
The current shortage of housing has created demand, which can be a positive for BIA’s members. Most jurisdictions have sufficient available land to build new housing. Kingsburg was identified as an outlier in this, as they have a growth limitation ordinance, so the two builders that work in the area have been able to work but at a slower pace.
The statewide move to require all-electric utilities rather than gas is a concern. For market-rate housing, the State’s vehicle miles traveled (VMT) regulations are a large barrier, as transit isn’t reliable, and a car is necessary to get around. Builders have to pay a fee to get around the cost of mitigating car miles unless city councils can make a finding of an unavoidable impact. For affordable housing, the prevailing wage requirements are a barrier to development due to the increased cost. Infrastructure costs also affect both types of projects. Streamlining tools help control costs, but not enough. A lack of local water access is also a barrier to development. He expressed concern that the State assigned the RHNA without this in mind. There may not be enough water access to support the housing development that the State is looking to see.
In his experience, single-family homes are in greatest demand. There is a lot of demand for low-income housing projects, but these aren’t financially viable for developers without government subsidy. However, including government subsidy in projects increases the overall cost to build, as it triggers prevailing-wage requirements. A 387
524
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-150 recent affordable development in the City of Fresno cost around $400,000 per unit to build. Condo-style projects are also a possibility, but in his experience, they don’t tend to be successful in this region. To keep prices within reach of local residents, recent projects have needed to be built at higher densities. A typical project is between 8 and 15 units per acre on small lots, with single-family homes built as two-story structures in order to reach 1,200 or 1,300 square feet. Developers need to build higher-density projects to spread out the cost of infrastructure among a larger number of units. Demand isn’t as high in smaller communities as it is in the cities of Fresno and Clovis.
These cities have better access to jobs, education, and medical centers. VMT mitigation costs increase in communities that are far from these economic centers, so it’s less of an issue in closer communities like Sanger, Reedley, Kingsburg, Fowler, and Kerman. Reedley is too far away from the economic center of the region, which causes challenges. Many residents of Mendota and San Joaquin have incomes that are too low to afford development at its current costs. He indicated that more downpayment assistance and maintenance programs are needed throughout the region. Fresno Housing Authority has some, but they are limited.
Fair Housing of Central California
A representative from Fair Housing of Central California (FHCCC) was interviewed on September 27, 2022. The organization works to eliminate housing discrimination and expand housing opportunities to all persons. The FHCCC receives fair housing complaints and tracks these complaints by location, zip code, gender, race or ethnicity, and type of complaint. The most common fair housing issue that clients report is discrimination related to disability or race. She expressed concern that fair housing practices are not really embraced by local government, and that cities should avoid promoting the development of new housing in neighborhoods where segregation is deliberately continued by landlords and real estate agents. Her clients prefer decent, affordable, and accessible housing, but as the cost of purchasing a home increases, opportunities decline. She feels there is adequate rental housing in the community, including for seniors and persons with disabilities, but affordability and accessibility remain barriers.
Fresno Madera Continuum of Care
As a representative for the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care (CoC), Laura Moreno was interviewed in October 2022. Ms. Moreno is a program manager for Fresno County’s Department of Social Services (DSS). The CoC does not provide direct services, but instead is a collaborative of agencies that work together to provide homeless services. At present, there is insufficient low-income housing for those who are homeless. Many people in the region are on a fixed income, including disability or social security, and cannot afford housing. 388
525
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-151 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 Law Office of Patience Milrod
Fresno-area civil rights attorney Patience Milrod was interviewed on October 31, 2022. While Ms. Milrod supports the continued attention to inclusionary housing, she has concerns about the passive language of “facilitate” and “encourage” that have been common in past Housing Elements. She identified code enforcement as a strategy for improving housing quality that could be strengthened. At present, rents are increasing while the quality of housing is decreasing, and there isn’t a lot of energy locally to correct that imbalance. This particularly hurts lower-income households. With more aggressive code enforcement in place, she suggested that some landlords may decide that the cost of maintaining their property isn’t worthwhile and may choose to sell to a community land trust or Habitat for Humanity rather than entering receivership. She would like to see that as a specific goal. The biggest barrier to finding affordable, decent housing in the region that she identified was that lower-cost housing tends to also be low quality or ill maintained. However, she cautioned that the supply problem won’t be solved with suburban or exurban single-family dwelling units. There’s also local disinclination to build lower-income housing in areas of opportunity. She suggested that cities should ask for affordability covenants in perpetuity and highlighted the land trust model as a way to enable that.
Central Valley Urban Institute
On September 7, 2022, Eric Payne, executive director of the Central Valley Urban Institute (CVUI), was interviewed. The CVUI is an advocacy organization working throughout the Fresno area. He indicated that there may be opportunities to increase affordable housing stock production, particularly within infill areas and brownfields as well as to increase homeownership through programs like the downpayment assistance program.
However, he expressed concerns about high building costs, lack of financing, and poor leadership in the area.
Community members would like to see intergenerational housing, middle-income housing, and “missing-middle” sized housing as well as housing to end homelessness, particularly among college-aged youth. At present, he does not believe that there are adequate opportunities for homeownership or adequate rental housing. The largest barriers are access to credit, lack of financial education, and existing housing cost burden. There is a lack of investment in programs that serve low to moderate-income communities. 389
526
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-152 Resources for Independence Central Valley
On November 1, 2022, a representative from the organization Resources for Independence Central Valley was interviewed. The representative expressed concern about laws in the City of Fresno that prevent homeless community members from camping or living in their cars. Homelessness is increasing, but the City is investing resources in enforcing these laws rather than providing assistance. There is funding to move homeless people around, but not to improve anyone’s living situation. Access to Section 8 can be a challenge, as the waiting list can be four or five years long. Additionally, rental housing can require incomes of two to three times the rent, which can be a barrier to some who need to access rental housing. For those who may be able to access housing, some landlords levy additional fees during the application process that can present a prohibitive cost. Credit checks are becoming a barrier for residents to get into housing. Community members with disabilities can experience additional challenges trying to find homes that have necessary accessibility features. Homeowners with disabilities end up needing to make expensive home improvements in order to make their homes accessible for themselves. For renters, these improvements may be more challenging to implement, and those who use service or support animals may experience discrimination against pets. There isn’t enough higher-density housing, housing near transit or major transportation corridors, or housing in good repair.
Llaves de tu Casa Iniciativa
As a follow-up to the regionwide stakeholder focus groups held in October and November 2022, a collection of members from the Llaves de tu Casa Iniciativa (LDTC) met on December 13, 2022, to respond to several stakeholder interview questions. The initiative is a financial education program open to all County of Fresno residents but with a focus on increasing Latino homeownership rates. Eight initiative members represented organizations and companies, including Envision Fresno (Mirna Garcia), Self Help Enterprises (Rick Gonzales, Alicia Bohigian), CORE Home Loans (Pablo Estrada), Union Bank (Reyes Ruiz), the California Association of Realtors (Sabrina Brown), and the National Association of Hispanic Realtors (Aldiva Rubalcava, Lucy Sandoval).
The group collectively serves Fresno County, and members also serve other counties in the Central Valley.
The opportunities for future housing in the region that the initiative members identified included LTDC’s ability to provide homeownership education virtually and in partnership with other local organizations. There has been a lack of financial literacy in the community along with challenges in using technology and language barriers.
The initiative members expressed concerns about affordability, including the location of affordable housing in undesirable areas. Upzoning single-family zoning would create more opportunities for the development of multifamily housing in more desirable locations. Some funding is only available in certain areas, which can exacerbate existing patterns of segregation and close proximity to industrial uses. They also expressed concern about investors displacing community members in order to establish short-term rentals while community members live in hotels. The State’s mandate to install solar panels on new homes was also cited as an additional cost that will drive up the buyers’ or renters’ cost.
390
527
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
1D-153 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 The gap between ownership housing affordability and program income limits was identified as a barrier to accessing housing. Moderate-income households earn too much to qualify for housing assistance, but those who qualify aren’t able to afford the housing available. In addition to a lack of multifamily rental housing, there aren’t many condo buildings in the region, which could present another affordable homeownership strategy. The establishment of land trusts was also identified as a potential strategy for increasing affordability, as well as donations of land from municipalities.
Self Help Enterprises has partnered with the City of Clovis on their recent accessory dwelling unit program and has partnered with Salt + Light to develop tiny homes for transitional housing.
Fresno Housing Authority
Two representatives from the Fresno Housing Authority, Doreen Eley and Michael Duarte, were interviewed on January 11, 2023. The Fresno Housing Authority currently has housing projects in every jurisdiction participating in the Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element except for Coalinga. The City of Fresno has a separate Housing Authority.
The representatives noted that there is tremendous demand for housing in all communities in Fresno County. The last time the Section 8 waiting list opened they received more than 50,000 applications. Recently, when a 60-unit development in Clovis opened, they received more than 10,000 applications. When a project in downtown Fresno opened, they received 4,000 applications within a two-week period. Rents are high, which is challenging for residents but good for developers. The region needs more housing opportunities for people experiencing homelessness.
In rural and unincorporated communities lack of water and sewer capacity are major concerns. The Housing Authority can’t build housing in areas with no services.
For local developers, state funding and streamlining programs trigger skilled, trained, and prevailing wage requirements, which can be a barrier. Entitlement processing timelines are a barrier to development for the Housing Authority. The representatives gave the example of a recent project in San Joaquin where streamlined initiatives were used, but the project still took a year to finish the project review process. Many communities don’t have much staff capacity and have part-time consultants to complete the work.
There is also a lack of capacity among agencies that provide services in rural and unincorporated areas. This is especially challenging for special needs populations that need mental health services. There is a countywide Department of Behavioral Health, but no offices within smaller cities. The representatives gave the example of a Homekey project in Huron that the Housing Authority wanted to assist with, but there were no service providers available to serve the project.
While there is a lot of interest within the community for homeownership opportunities, more funding is available for multifamily rental projects. The Housing Authority is more focused on rental projects and arriving at deeper affordability levels.
391
528
Section , Item 9A.
APPENDIX 1D: CITY OF FOWLER
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | AUGUST 2024 1D-154 The Housing Authority is following the State’s lead in providing housing in high opportunity areas. There are lots of incentives to do this to compete for tax credits and other state funding programs. The representatives mentioned that they are trying to balance this need by also working to improve the lower-resource areas where folks are already living along with disadvantaged communities like Del Ray and Lenar.
The COVID-19 pandemic brought challenges for many residents of Housing Authority projects. There were increases in domestic violence, and it was challenging for property managers to enforce rules.
Public Comments
The City received no public comments during this public comment period from June 20, 2023, to July 20, 2023.
Noticing of Study Sessions and Community Workshops
Notice of the Joint Study Session was made available as part of the City’s standard meeting notice process for City Council and Planning Commission meetings.
The Community Workshop was advertised to members of the public through multiple information channels. Flyers in English and Spanish were distributed at local events in the community as well as at the Community Center.
Current residents of the Riverland Apartments and prior applicants to that building received information through flyers and email, and residents in Fresno Housing Authority units received information about the workshops by email. The availability of Spanish translation was noted in outreach materials.
Noticing of the Draft Housing Element
Per California Government Code Section 65585, the draft Housing Element was made available for public comment for 30 days, from June 20 to July 20, 2023. No, Public comment was received. The draft was made available on the City’s website and was noticed to residents through the same methods as used for Planning Commission and City Council meetings. Additional direct noticing was sent to local housing advocate groups and other stakeholders. 392
529
Section , Item 9A.
A Regional Plan for Addressing Housing Needs
Fresno County Coalinga Firebaugh Fowler Fresno City Huron Kerman Kingsburg Mendota Orange Cove Parlier Reedley San Joaquin Sanger Selma 393
530
Section , Item 9A.