Fresno City Council
December 12, 2024

0.47 62 62
Parking lot for IRS building. Housing
Authority owned site. Assumed that IRS
building will remain. HD2 is planned for
student housing.

HD3 1617
46615318 Private Owner

0.85 16 48 64
The Business Journal parking lot and
right of way. HD3 is planned to receive
Low Income Housing Tax Credits. ROW City of Fresno
HD4 2473 46620656T
Housing
Authority
(HACF)

0.47 15 40 55
Parking lot for IRS building. Housing
Authority owned site. Assumed that IRS
building will remain. HD4 is planned to
receive Low Income Housing Tax
Credits.

HD 5 1615
46620650T
City of Fresno 0.95 56 56 112
Parking lot across from IRS building in
Downtown Fresno. On this site is
proposed Market 1 by Fresno Housing
with 112 market rate units. No
development project submitted in Accela.

There is currently a lease agreement in
place for Fresno County. The most recent
extension dated September 16, 2022
allowed a five-year extension expires
December 31, 2027
46620651T
HD 6 1618 46615315 Private Owner 0.91 50 50 100 Closed CVS parking lot and right of way.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-44 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 City
Project
ID
Site
ID APN Ownership
Calculated
Project
Acres
Units by Income Level Total
Units Site Description

ELI VLI LI M AM
ROW City of Fresno On this site is proposed Market 2.

HD 7 2484
46704023ST City of Fresno

2.32 26 74 97 97 294
Recently demolished building on the
parcel owned by the City. The other
parcel is privately-owned owned by
46704020S Private Owner Fresno Sports and Events Partners Inc HD 8 1525
46707115 Private Owner

0.78 21 50 71 Abandoned building
46707120 Private Owner
HD 9 2485 46707402 Private Owner 0.33 8 22 30 Existing commercial buildings TOTAL 7.63 86 371 0 203 203 863
Source: City of Fresno, September 2024.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-45 Figure 1E-2.3: IIGC Sites HD1 - HD6 (Fulton Street)
Figure 1E-2.4: IIGC Site HD7 (H Street Site in the South Stadium District) SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-46 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-2.5: IIGC Sites HD8 - HD9 (Bing Kong and Peacock Sites in Chinatown) APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-47 Table 1E-2.98: Publicly-Owned Sites
Site ID APN Zoning
Code Acres
Capacity (Units)
Address Ownership Existing Use
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate
Status and Remaining Steps
287 45603034T
5471 E
Belmont Ave RM-1 4.17 57 City of Fresno
Vacant; potential brownfield
remediation
In September 2024, the City of Fresno will release a
Request for Proposal (RFP) for the development of a
vibrant community featuring 24 ARPA funded tiny
homes on wheels and 26 ERF funded prefabricated
micro homes, totaling 50 homes, all provided by the
City. The development will include a community center,
trail, or park. The submission deadline will be
November 2024. Construction is anticipated to start in
October 2025 and be completed in August 2026
304 31332107T RS-4 0.45 2 City of Fresno
Vacant; near future retail
center and BRT
395 48130033ST RS-4 5.68 27 City of Fresno Vacant
423 48109027T RS-5 0.99 8 Fresno Unified School District Vacant 424 48109028T RS-5 31.04 261 Fresno Unified School District Vacant 431 48111042T RS-5 10.24 86 City of Fresno Vacant
484 49408103T RS-4 0.19 1 City of Fresno Vacant
485 49408104T RS-4 0.19 1 City of Fresno Vacant
486 49408105T RS-4 0.19 1 City of Fresno Vacant
487 49408106T RS-4 0.19 1 City of Fresno Vacant
488 49408107T RS-4 0.19 1 City of Fresno Vacant
499 49408108T RS-4 0.19 1 City of Fresno Vacant
500 49408109T RS-4 0.19 1 City of Fresno Vacant
501 49408110T RS-4 0.19 1 City of Fresno Vacant
502 49408111T RS-4 0.19 1 City of Fresno Vacant
503 49408112T RS-4 0.19 1 City of Fresno Vacant
526 47015306T RS-5 0.16 1 State of California Parking lot 535
536
537
47005201T
3702 E
Ventura St NMX

3.40 0.29

2.85 0.26
109
91 9

2 Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)
City of Fresno
City of Fresno
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
47005202T
3754 E
Ventura St NMX
47005203T
3745 E El
Monte Way RS-5
660
45205308 1556 E Olive
Ave
CMS 0.17 4 Fresno Irrigation District Vacant
708 45021106T
929 N Fruit
Ave RS-5 0.21 2 City of Fresno Vacant
As of September 2024, this property has not been
declared a surplus site.
714 45015401T
761 W
Hammond Ave RM-1 0.16 2 State of California Vacant
758 50808202ST RS-5 0.78 7 City of Fresno Vacant
SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-48 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Site ID APN Zoning
Code Acres
Capacity (Units)
Address Ownership Existing Use
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate
Status and Remaining Steps
762 50810201ST RS-5 0.46 4 State of California Vacant
763 50810202ST RS-5 0.23 2 State of California Vacant
766 50601006T RS-5 7.80 66 Central Unified School District Vacant 778 50601014T RM-2 4.26 77 City of Fresno Vacant
778 50601014T RM-2 2.70 49 City of Fresno Vacant
987 51135201ST RS-4 0.26 1 City of Fresno Vacant
As of September 2024, this property has not been
declared a surplus site.
1048 45028037T RS-5 0.35 3 State of California Vacant
1049 45028001T RS-5 0.32 3 State of California Vacant
1050 45028002T RS-5 1.00 8 State of California Vacant
1051 45028003T RS-5 1.91 16 State of California Vacant
1052 45028012T RS-5 2.70 23 State of California Vacant
1053 45028036T RS-5 0.08 1 State of California Vacant
1054 45028031T NMX 6.94 222 State of California Vacant
1096 46404059T RS-4 0.98 5 State of California Vacant City surplus site 1097 46404073T RS-4 2.32 11 State of California Vacant City surplus site 1098 46431210T
1108 S
Roeding Dr RS-4 0.18 1 State of California Vacant
City surplus site
1099 46431211T
1122 S
Roeding Dr RS-4 0.23 1 City of Fresno Vacant
City surplus site
1100 46431212T
1136 S
Roeding Dr RS-4 0.24 1 City of Fresno Vacant
City surplus site
1101 46431213T
1150 S West
Ave RS-4 0.46 2 City of Fresno Vacant
City surplus site
1102 46431214T
1164 S West
Ave RS-4 0.39 2 City of Fresno Vacant
City surplus site
1103 46427237T
1212 S West
Ave RS-4 1.05 5 City of Fresno Vacant
City surplus site
1124 46410208T
2022 S West
Ave
CMX 0.27 10 City of Fresno Vacant
No known barriers to development. As of September
2024, this property has not been declared a surplus site. 1129 47704075ST
901 W
Atchison Ct
RM-2 1.19 21 Housing Authority (HACF) Vacant
Though the Housing Authority does not have
development plans in place for these properties at this time. Lot acres have been reduced to usable portion of
the site.
1130 47704075ST
901 W
Atchison Ct
RM-2 4.91 88 Housing Authority (HACF)
Mostly vacant. Community
garden on portion of
site.Vacant
1131 47704073T
555 W
California Ave CMX 8.06 302
Housing Authority
(HACF)City of Fresno Vacant
1135 47711109ST CMX 3.59 135 Redevelopment Agency Vacant APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-49 Site ID APN Zoning
Code Acres
Capacity (Units)
Address Ownership Existing Use
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate
Status and Remaining Steps
(RACF)
1151 47712113T
33 E Atchison
St RS-5 0.21 2
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF) Vacant
1153
1154
47712105T
NMX
NMX

0.37 0.18

0.19 126
6 Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)
Vacant; adjacent sites.

Vacant
City surplus site adjacent to privately owned site 1152.

Could be consolidated with nearby parcels to become a
larger development opportunity.
47712106T
1179 47706004T RS-3 7.71 26
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF) Vacant
1275 32821138T NMX 2.37 76 State of California Vacant
1342 47808144T NMX 0.33 11 City of Fresno Vacant
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1379
46724601T
731 E
California Ave
NMX
NMX
NMX
NMX
NMX
NMX
NMX
NMX

2.92 0.24

0.18 0.09

0.09 0.17

1.33 0.69

0.14 9342
22 8
6 3
3 6
5 Housing Authority (HACF)
Housing Authority (HACF)
Housing Authority (HACF)
Housing Authority (HACF)
Fresno County
Housing Authority (HACF)
Housing Authority (HACF)
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
Site within the West Fresno CAN! Choice
Neighborhood Initiative planned for new housing. Phase
1: 60 new affordable units in vertical mixed-use
development slated for planning application submittal in Q4 of 2025; entitlement approval in Q2 of 2026,
construction drawings in Q3 of 2027; and building
permit issuance in Q2 of 2028.
46724506T 537 Inyo St
46724505T
811 Waterman
Ave
46724504T
813 Waterman
Ave
46724503T
46724507T
661 E
California Ave
46724511T 854 Klette Ave
46724509T
46724512T 864 Klette Ave
46724508T
46724510T 842 Klette Ave
46726201T
46726202T 851 Klette Ave
46726203T
46726204T
601 E
California Ave
1386 46718609T
1128 Collins
Ave RS-5 0.34 3 City of Fresno Vacant
As of September 2024, this property has not been
declared a surplus site.
1391 46715507T
1107 B St
RS-5 0.15 1
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)
Vacant parcel adjacent to 4
other vacant parcels.

City surplus site
1418 46517421T
1511 B St
RS-5 0.13 1
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF) Vacant
City surplus site
1419 46517422T
1515 B St
RS-5 0.13 1
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF) Vacant
City surplus site
1423 46516302T RS-5 0.24 2
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF) Vacant
SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-50 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Site ID APN Zoning
Code Acres
Capacity (Units)
Address Ownership Existing Use
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate
Status and Remaining Steps
1436 46411313T
130 W Lemon
Ave RS-5 0.14 1
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF) Vacant
City surplus site
1489 46706124T
1535 Fresno St
DTN 0.34 25 State of California Vacant
Site is planned for transit-oriented development
according to the High Speed Rail Station Master Plan.

Status of State’s plan for this site is unknown.
1490 46706123T DTN 0.12 9 State of California Vacant
1492 46706211T 1526 Fresno St DTN 0.26 20 State of California Vacant 1493 46706203T 1141 G St DTN 0.26 20 State of California Parking 1502 46706334U DTN 0.43 33 Fresno Unified School District Vacant 1510 46706319T DTN 0.07 5 State of California Vacant
1520 46706337T DTN 0.08 6 State of California Vacant
1521 46706318T DTN 0.04 3 State of California Vacant
1523 46707410T
930 E St
DTN 0.35 26 City of Fresno
Parking Lot adjacent to
privately-owned site 1522.

Potential lot consolidation for
a larger development
opportunity
As of September 2024, this property has not been
declared a surplus site.
1529 46707316T
730 F St
DTN 0.60 46
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)City of Fresno Vacant
These properties were declared surplus in 2024 and
RACF will follow the SLA guideline.
1530 46707305T
723 G St
DTN 0.09 7
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF) Vacant
These properties were declared surplus in 2024 and
RACF will follow the SLA guideline.
1531 46707306T DTN 0.18 13
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)City of Fresno Vacant
These properties were declared surplus in 2024 and
RACF will follow the SLA guideline.
1532 46708116T 655 G St DTN 0.35 26 City of Fresno Paved In June 2024, this project was declared surplus. 1536 46708105T DTN 0.06 5 State of California Vacant
1538 46708122T DTN 0.02 1 State of California Vacant
1562 46705013ST
555 H St
DTN 1.417 111107 State of California Vacant
Part of the property is abandoned for widening of Caesar Chavez underpass.
1573 46822212T
550 M St
DTG 0.30 25
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF) Vacant
As of September 2024, this property has not been
declared a surplus site. The RACF is preparing to take
this to the Fresno City Council for surplus site
declaration consideration in 2025.
1574
1575
46822215T
525 N St
DTG
DTG

0.60 0.26

0.34 50 21
29 Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)
Vacant
Vacant
As of September 2024, this property has not been
declared a surplus site. The RACF is preparing to take
this to the Fresno City Council for surplus site
declaration consideration in 2025.
46822216T
505 N St
1576
1577
1578
46822301T 461 N St
DTG
DTG
DTG

0.43 0.17

0.09 0.17

3614
7 14
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
As of September 2024, this property has not been
declared a surplus site. The RACF is preparing to take
this to the Fresno City Council for surplus site
declaration consideration in 2025.
46822302T 453 N St
46822319T
461 N St
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-51 Site ID APN Zoning
Code Acres
Capacity (Units)
Address Ownership Existing Use
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate
Status and Remaining Steps
1579 46819534T
2402 Ventura
St
DTG 0.73 61
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)
Only counting vacant part of
parcel
As of September 2024, this property has not been
declared a surplus site. The RACF is preparing to take
this to the Fresno City Council for surplus site
declaration consideration in 2025.
1580
1581
46819213T
2504 Ventura
St
DTG
DTG

0.95 0.15

0.30 79 12
25 Redevelopment Agency
(RACF) owns two parcels four
parcels are privately-owned as
of September 2024
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF)
Vacant
Vacant
As of September 2024, this property has not been
declared a surplus site. The RACF is preparing to take
this to the Fresno City Council for surplus site
declaration consideration in 2025. 46819214T
2518 Ventura
St
46819236 530 O St
46819237 534 O St
46819222 2526 Ventura
St
46819227 2534 Ventura
St
1591 46840054T DTG 2.87 238
City of Fresno (Convention
Center) Parking lot
1606 46621522T
1822 Fresno St
DTC 2.78 250 State of California Parking lot
State-owned site within the Station Master Plan Area
(“Merchant’s Lot). City will work with State to pursue
development.
1607
46621426T
DTC 0.320.78 70 29 City of Fresno Parking lot
Will serve as temporary parking until parking garage
behind Hotel Fresno is built. Hotel Fresno has recently been converted to affordable housing. Permits are not
being sold for this lot and parking is being deferred to this lot. As of September 2024, this property has not
been declared a surplus site. These parcels are RDAF
parcels to be disposed of going to the Hotel Fresno
46621427T group
1610 46703039ST
1705 Fresno St
DTC 2.25 202 State of California Dairy Semi-truck parking Will serve as temporary parking until parking garage
behind Hotel Fresno is built. Hotel Fresno has recently been converted to affordable housing. Permits are not
being sold for this lot and parking is being deferred to this lot.
1612 46504038ST
1301 H St
DTC 2.98 268 City of Fresno Small building on site
This is a brownfield site acquired by the City in 2002.

In 2023, the City was awarded $3,122,648 in ECRG
grant funding from DTSC to remediate the hazardous
site for future Affordable housing. Our team is currently working with DTSC to complete the remediation by
2026. The proposed reuse consists of developing a
micro home community of 26 prefabricated units of
100% Affordable rental housing. The units will be
reserved for households at or below 30% AMI and will
see unhoused individuals transition to permanent
housing.
1613 46620518T 1408 H St DTC 0.29 26 State of California Vacant 1750 43033402T CMX 0.12 4 City of Fresno Vacant
SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-52 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Site ID APN Zoning
Code Acres
Capacity (Units)
Address Ownership Existing Use
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate
Status and Remaining Steps
1776 48111053T RS-3 0.88 3 City of Fresno Vacant
1811 44405116T RS-5 0.12 1 City of Fresno Vacant
As of September 2024, this property has not been
declared a surplus site.
1891 50409212T RS-5 1.74 15 City of Fresno Vacant
As of September 2024, this property has not been
declared a surplus site. It is proposed to be disposed of to a developer for a mixed-housing project.
2342 47711110T CMX 0.52 19
Redevelopment Agency
(RACF) Vacant
2380 46516301T RS-5 0.11 1 City of Fresno Vacant
2396 46707307T DTN 0.28 21 City of Fresno Vacant City surplus site 2473 46620656T DTC 1.40 126 Housing Authority (HACF) Vacant 2486 44502013T
3374 E Shields O 2.8 224
State of California
Vacant Building: Dept of
Water Resources
This project is on state surplus land (per State Executive Order N-06-19), and the State is partnering with the City to develop the site as multi-unit housing. The state
completed its RFP process at the end of 2023 and
selected Alexis Laing as the Developer. Project is now
in predevelopment. Development of the 2.8 acre site
with multi-unit housing including 50% 3-bedroom units
and with a range of affordability in two phases: Ph. 1
includes 84 units and deeper affordability with a special needs set-aside. Ph 2 is anticipated at 140 units with
higher AMI unit mix. Development will include energy
efficient plumbing and lighting fixtures, as well as
drought tolerant landscaping and hydrozones to
maximize water efficiency on site. Each building will
achieve a minimum silver LEED or GreenPoint rating.

Solar PW panels will be installed on both projects.

Phases 1 and 2: Due Diligence, Community Outreach,
Entitlement, Financing 11/23 – 5/25; Construction 11/25 TOTAL 55.24145.79 1,9772,042 59 1,116339
Source: City of Fresno, July September 2024.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-53 Suitability of Large Sites
There are 10 vacant sites and12 non-vacant sites included in the lower-income inventory that are larger than 10 acres. While the allowable density on these sites exceeds the default density of 30 units per acre, qualifying them as lower-income sites, the size and sheer number of units allowed make it more likely that they would be further subdivided and/or built with a mix of housing types at various income levels. Several assumptions are applied to large sites to reflect more realistic assumptions for the mix of incomes that could be accommodated on the sites.

Most of these large sites are in the West Area Neighborhood Specific Plan (WANSP) boundary, west of Highway 99. The City is in the process of developing a Specific Plan for the future growth and development in this area. The Specific Plan is scheduled to be considered for adoption in the first quarter of 2025. The Draft Specific Plan calls for land use changes; however, because it is not yet adopted, the Public Review Draft Housing Element reflects the currently adopted land use designations. Once the Specific Plan has been adopted, the Draft Housing Element will be updated to reflect the new designations. There is a significant amount of developable land in the area, so many of the sites in the inventory are within the plan area boundary. Because the area has been and continues to transition from agriculture to urban development, many of the sites are larger in size than sites in other parts of the city.

Most of the large sites in the WANSP area are located along the Shaw Avenue Corridor, in an area referred to as the West Shaw Avenue Town Center. Assumptions for the Town Center parcels are described in more detail in the following section below.

Based on recent examples of large site developments (refer to Table 1E-2.12), large scale 100 percent affordable projects, with more than 150 units, have successfully been built in Fresno. For example, Parc Grove Commons is an affordable development with 215 units. Given this trend, the Housing Element assumes that if a site’s total capacity is 250 units or fewer, it is feasible to develop the site as 100 percent affordable housing. For larger sites where the total capacity exceeds 250 units, it is assumed that the project would be subdivided to create a mixed-income development, with 20 percent lower-income units, 60 percent moderate-income units, and 20 percent above moderate-income units. This is similar to how Fancher Creek and West Creek Village were developed (see Table IE-2.11).

One Two of the four large vacant sites outside of the West Shaw Avenue Town Center boundary is are owned by the Fresno Housing Authority (Sites 988 and 1129/1130). This Site 988 is a 14.57-acre parcel zoned RM-2, while Site 1129/1130 is an 11.3-acre split zoned parcel, with a 6.10-acre portion of the site zoned RM-2. It is realistic to assume that this these RM-2 sites will be developed with 100 percent affordable housing given ownership by the Housing Authority (see Table 1E-2.109 below).

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-54 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Of the non-vacant sites, Tthere is one other large vacant RM-2 site (Site 988) and are four large non-vacant RM-2 sites outside of the Town Center (Sites 808, 979, 1076, and 1223). The large vacant RM-2 site is a 14.5- acre vacant parcel on West Dakota Avenue (Site 988), and the non-vacant RM-2 sites include an 18.8-acre parcel currently in agricultural use on South Walnut Avenue (Site 1223), an 18.4-acre parcel on West Whites Bridge Avenue also currently in agricultural use (Site 1076), an 11.92-acre parcel on N Bryan Ave at Bullard Ave currently in agricultural use (Site 808), and a 28.37-acre parcel split-zoned parcel of which 22.57 acres is zoned RM-2 (Site 979). There is also one large non-vacant site zoned RM-3 (Site 853) at 6277 W Shaw Ave that is currently in agricultural use. The sites inventory applies an assumption of 50 20 percent lowerincome, 25 60 percent moderate-income, and 25 20 percent above moderate-income housing on these six parcels (see Table 1E-2.109 below).

The last parcel in Table 1E.2-109 is a 10.6-acre parcel zoned RMX (APN 417-34-223) on the corner of West Shaw Avenue and Blackstone Avenue. There are two small retail uses on the site, including a restaurant and an eyeglass store, as well as a residence that collectively cover about half of the site. The sites inventory assumes only 60 percent of the site is developed with residential infill housing and the remaining 40 percent remains occupied by existing uses.

In total, the inventory assumes 3,2733,279 units on the eight eleven large sites shown in Table 1E-2.109, including 1,5651,480 lower-income units, 730 1,329 moderate income-units, and 730 470 above moderateincome units.

West Shaw Avenue Town Center
One of the areas with the greatest amount of future housing potential is the West Shaw Avenue Town Center, which is envisioned in the General Plan to be developed as a high-density, urban mixed-use corridor supported by enhanced transit service. There are 29 sites in the West Shaw Avenue Town Center mostly designated for mixed use development; 11 sites are larger than 10 acres and are considered “large sites.” Because all of the sites are concentrated in one area, the assumptions described below are applied to all sites within the Town Center, not just large sites.

While the Draft Specific Plan does not call for any specific phasing of the Town Center, given the scale of the Town Center, it is expected that it will develop over a longer timeframe than the 8-year housing element planning period. Also, given the large size of the mixed use sites and the lack of existing retail in the area, it is anticipated that there will be a greater percentage of commercial uses compared to the smaller, infill parcels located on mixed use corridors where there is already a significant amount of existing retail. To reflect this, the sites inventory applies the following assumptions to both small and large sites in the West Shaw Avenue Town Center:
 Mix of uses. Sites designated mixed-use in the Town Center are assumed to have 60 percent residential and 40 percent commercial. This is slightly higher than the 30-40 percent residential that is required in the mixed use designations. This assumption for the mix of uses is layered on top of the 50 percent realistic densitylikelihood assumptions applied to the site, which already accounted for a portion of the site developing as commercial.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-55  Mix of incomes. Sites in the Town Center that allow 30 units per acre and, qualify as “lowerincome sites,” and have a capacity of 250 units or fewer are counted as 100 percent affordable. The remaining sites are counted as 50 20 percent lower-income, 25 60 percent moderate-income, and 25 20 percent above moderate-income to reflect a vision of a variety of housing types and to avoid a concentration of lower-income units on large sites. This applies to sites designated CMX, RMX, and RM-2. The parcel designated RM-1 is assumed to be above moderate-income. While the allowed density would qualify the site to be counted as moderate-income, the site is included in the above moderate-income inventory to avoid an over concentration of sites in the lower- and moderate-income categories and to help comply with AB 725 (see discussion below).  Development phasing. Only 50 percent of the capacity of the sites in the Town Center is counted in the sites inventory to reflect an assumption that about half of the area could build out during the Housing Element planning period. Rather than selecting which parcels to include and which to exclude, the 50 percent capacity assumption is applied to all sites in the Town Center. This is shown in the table as “50% Likelihood.” This means that what is shown as the total capacity for each individual site is significantly less than the actual realistic capacity for the site.

Figure 1E-2.63 shows the sites within the West Shaw Avenue Town Center and Table 1E-2.10 11 summarizes the inventoried capacity by land use designation. In total, there are 3,2313,227 units counted in the sites inventory in this area, including 1,5731,177 lower-income, 784 1,585 moderate-income, and 874 395 above moderate-income units.

To help achieve the assumptions used in the sites inventory, the Housing Element includes an implementation program to help facilitate the subdivision of large sites into parcels that are more appropriately sized for affordable housing.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-56 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Table 1E-2.109: Large Sites (Excluding West Shaw Avenue Town Center) Site
ID APN
Parcel
Size
(Acres)
Zone Location/ Site
Description
LowerIncome
Units
Moderate
- Income
Units
AboveModerate
Units
Total
Inventoried
Units
Assumptions Existing
Use
Vacant Large Sites
768 506-13-
039 10.48 RM-2
Near W Sierra
Ave & N Vista
Ave
94189 470 470 188189
100% Lower
50% Lower,
25% Mod,
25% AboveMod
Vacant
780 504-09-
209 13.1 RM-2
N Hayes Ave
near W
Herndon Ave
118236 590 590 236
100% Lower
50% Lower,
25% Mod,
25% AboveMod
Vacant
988 511-02-
301 14.57 RM-2
5677 W Dakota
Ave (Housing
Authority site)
131262 660 660 263262
100% Lower
50% Lower,
25% Mod,
25% AboveMod
Vacant
1129
/
1130
477-04-
075ST

11.30 (splitzoned);

6.10-acres
zoned RM2
RM-2
901 W Atchison
Ct. (Housing
Authority site)
109 - - 109 100% Lower Vacant
Non-Vacant Large Sites
127 417-34-
223 10.65 RMX
Corner of
Blackstone and
Shaw (20 W
Shaw Ave)
14457 172 7257 288286
60% Res, 40%
Com
5020% Lower,
2560% Mod,
2520% AboveMod
Assortment
of uses,
portion of site
is vacant
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-57 Site
ID APN
Parcel
Size
(Acres)
Zone Location/ Site
Description
LowerIncome
Units
Moderate
- Income
Units
AboveModerate
Units
Total
Inventoried
Units
Assumptions Existing
Use
808 505-08-
042S 11.92 RM-2 N Bryan Ave at Bullard Ave 107214 540 540 215214 100% Lower
50% Lower,
25% Mod,
25% AboveMod
Agriculture
853 512-03-
203 19.23 RM-3 6277 W Shaw Ave 325130 162389 162130 649 5020% Lower,
2560% Mod,
2520% AboveMod
Agriculture,
canal through
middle of
parcel
979
512-04-
317S
(28.37-
acre
parcel
with split
zoning)

22.57-acre
portion RM-2
Corner of W
Ashlan Ave &
N Grantland
Ave
20381 102244 10281 407406
5020% Lower,
2560% Mod,
2520% AboveMod
Agriculture
1076 326-10-
076 18.38 RM-2 3555 W Whites Bridge Ave 16566 83199 8366 331 5020% Lower,
2560% Mod,
2520% AboveMod
Agriculture
1223 328-08-
001S 18.80 RM-2 2867 S Walnut Ave 16968 85203 8568 339
5020% Lower,
2560% Mod,
2520% AboveMod
Agriculture
2478 310-20-
103 58.05 RM-2 3518 N Fowler 68 122 68 258
20% Lower,
60% Mod,
20% AboveMod
Residential/
Agriculture
TOTAL 1,4801,565 1,329730 470730 3,279 3,273
Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, July September 2024.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-58 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Table 1E-2.1110: West Shaw Avenue Town Center Sites
Site ID APN Total Parcel
Size (Acres) Zoning Location/Site Description Max Density Total Capacity
at Max Density
Inventoried Capacity
Assumptions Existing
Use LowerIncome Units
ModerateIncome UnitsAboveModerate Units Total Units
Vacant Sites
816
505-06-008
(38.33 acre
parcel, split
zoning)

13.26 portion RM-1
6785 W Barstow Ave
16 212 -0 -90 900 90 50% Likelihood
100% Above-Mod
817 16.98 portion CMX 75 1,274 9638 48115 4838 192191 50% Likelihood Vacant 60% Res, 40% Com
5020% Lower, 2560% Mod,
2520% Above-Mod 818 7.80 portion CMX 75 585 4418 2253 2218 8889 819
505-06-074 24.05
RM-2
W Scott Ave near W Barstow Ave
and End of N Ensenada Ave
(consolidated sites)
30 735 11044 55132 5544 220
50% Likelihood
5020% Lower, 2560% Mod,
2520% Above-Mod
505-06-066 1.33 Vacant
820 505-06-070 0.45
826 505-06-024 3.30 CMX 6130 W Shaw Ave 75 248 1937 90 90 37 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Vacant
827 505-06-068 5.15 CMX 6010 W Shaw Ave 75 387 2958 140 140 5758 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Vacant
828 505-06-067 9.20 CMX End of W Keats Ave 75 690 52103 260 260 104103 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Vacant
830 508-03-025 13.27 RMX N Island Waterpark Dr at canal 90 1,194 9036 45107 4536 180179 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
5020% Lower, 2560% Mod,
2520% Above-Mod
Vacant
831 508-03-004 5.56 RMX 5708 W Shaw Ave 90 500 3875 190 190 7675 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Vacant
2315 508-03-014 22.38 CMX North of W Shaw Ave, south of Island Waterpark 75 1,678 12650 63151 6350 252251
50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
5020% Lower, 2560% Mod,
2520% Above-Mod
Vacant
2316 508-03-026 7.23 RMX North of W Shaw Ave, south of
Island Waterpark 90 651 490 2498 240 9798
50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Vacant
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-59 Site ID APN Total Parcel
Size (Acres) Zoning Location/Site Description Max Density Total Capacity
at Max Density
Inventoried Capacity
Assumptions Existing
Use LowerIncome Units
ModerateIncome UnitsAboveModerate Units Total Units
2317 508-03-005 11.16 RMX N Lola Ave at W Shaw Ave 90 1,005 7530 3890 3830 151150 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
5020% Lower, 2560% Mod,
2520% Above-Mod
Vacant
Non-Vacant Sites
821 505-06-007 28.65 RMX 5326 N Grantland Ave 90 2,578 19377 97232 977 387386 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
5020% Lower, 2560% Mod,
2520% Above-Mod
Agriculture
822 505-06-033 2.30 CMX North of W Shaw Ave and N
Bryan Ave intersection 75 173 1326 60 60 2526
50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Agriculture
823 505-06-020 2.84 RMX 6824 W Shaw Ave 90 255 2138 100 100 4138 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Residence
and
trucking
824 505-06-076 16.52 RMX 6730 W Shaw Ave 90 1,486 11145 56134 5645 223224 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
5020% Lower, 2560% Mod,
2520% Above-Mod
Agriculture
and
residence
825 50-506-016S
(19.09 acre
parcel, split
zoning)

14.93 portion RMX
W Shaw Ave east of N Grantland
Ave
90 1,343 10140 50121 5040 201 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
5020% Lower, 2560% Mod,
2520% Above-Mod
Agriculture
2440 4.20 portion CMX 75 315 249 1228 129 4846
829 508-03-027 3.62 RMX N Island Waterpark Dr 90 325 2449 120 120 4849 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Part of
parcel
vacant
2430 505-06-041 2.31 CMX 6556 W Shaw Ave 75 173 1326 70 70 2726 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Agriculture
2431 505-06-042 2.12 CMX W Shaw Ave north of intersection with N Bryan Ave 75 159 1224 60 60 24
50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Agriculture
2432 505-06-034 11.00 CMX 6518 W Shaw Ave 75 825 62124 310 310 124 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Agriculture
and
residence
SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-60 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Site ID APN Total Parcel
Size (Acres) Zoning Location/Site Description Max Density Total Capacity
at Max Density
Inventoried Capacity
Assumptions Existing
Use LowerIncome Units
ModerateIncome UnitsAboveModerate Units Total Units
2433 505-06-036 2.34 RMX North of W Shaw Ave & N
Grantland Ave intersection 90 210 1632 80 80 32
50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Agriculture
2434 505-06-037 3.93 RMX 6972 W Shaw Ave 90 353 2753 130 130 53 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Agriculture
, Farmstand
2435 505-06-038 2.30 RMX East of 6972 W Shaw Ave 90 207 1631 80 80 3231 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Agriculture
2436 505-06-034 2.30 CMX North of W Shaw Ave & N Bryan
Ave intersection 75 173 1326 60 60 2526
50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Agriculture
2437 505-06-017 20.31 CMX 6392 W Shaw Ave 75 1,523 11446 57137 5746 228229 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
5020% Lower, 2560% Mod,
2520% Above-Mod
Agriculture
2438 505-06-039 0.85 CMX West of 6150 W Shaw Ave 75 64 510 20 20 910 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
100% Lower50% Lower,
25% Mod, 25% Above-Mod
Agriculture
2439 505-06-040 14.31 CMX 6150 W Shaw Ave 75 1,073 8032 4097 4032 160161 50% Likelihood
60% Res, 40% Com
5020% Lower, 2560% Mod,
2520% Above-Mod
Agriculture
TOTAL 1,1771,573 1,585 784 395874 3,2273,231
Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, July September 2024.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-61 Figure 1E-2.63: West Shaw Avenue Town Center Sites, Fresno 2023 Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, June 2023
SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-62 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 This page intentionally left blank.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-63 Large Site Examples
The sites inventory assumes that larger parcels could be further subdivided to create smaller developable sites for housing at a range of income levels. There are several recent developments that serve as examples that this is possible. Table 1E-2.11 12 depicts recent examples which include below market rate units and the following section provides more detail for each project.

Table 1E-2.1112: Summary of Recent Developments on Large Sites Project Total Size (acres) Deed-Restricted
Affordable Market Rate Total Units
Fancher Creek Town
Center 91 acres 420 240 660
The Vineyards 38.92 acres 158 0 158
West Creek Village 120 acres 120 135 255
Parc Grove Commons 24 acres 213 2 215
Campus Pointe 27.45 acres 0 550 550
Avalon Commons 7.1 acres (total site:

17.8 acres) 104 1 105
Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, July 2024.

Fancher Creek Town Center
The Fancher Creek Town Center is a recent example of a large-scale, mixed-use project that provides a mix of affordable and market rate housing integrated into a shopping and employment district, with well over one million square feet of commercial, office, civic, hotel, theater, plaza, recreation, and park uses. The Fancher Creek Town Center encompasses three 2015-2023 Fresno Housing Element Sites (APNs 31302101 at 46.84 acres, 31310124 at 40.08 acres, and 31310122 at 4.14 acres) for a total of 91 acres. The project includes 660 multi-family residential units across three projects: the constructed Brandhaven Senior Affordable Housing with 180 units, the Sarah’s Court Family Affordable Housing with 120 units in Phase 1 (under construction) and an additional 120 units planned, and a planned four-story 240-unit market rate multifamily residential building. This project is an example of a large site that was developed with 63 percent lower-income housing (i.e., 420 affordable units) and 36 percent market rate (240 units).

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-64 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Fancher Creek Town Center Site Plan
Source: City of Fresno, 2024.

The Vineyards California Armenian Home Community – Senior Housing California Armenian Home, a not-for-profit corporation, donated 40-acres of land to develop The Vineyards, a continuing care retirement community. The Vineyards opened for residency in January 2018 and includes a total of 158 units featuring 12 resort-style independent living villas with two car garages, 60 independent living apartments, and 50 assisted living and 36 memory care apartments. The Vineyards was developed on a prior 2015-2023 Fresno Housing Element Site (APN 31328043) at 22.22 acres. The Vineyards also offers outdoor amenities such as gardens, courtyards, patios, sheltered walkways, open park space, fountains, and large outdoor pavilions.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-65 Image of The Vineyard
Source: Life at the Vineyards.

West Creek Village
The West Creek Village Project is a 120-acre multi-phase mixed-use project consisting of single-family homes, multi-family mixed-income housing, a new community park and approximately 323,000 square feet of medical, business, and retail. All three phases of the West Creek Villages are planned on an 18-acre site.

All properties were annexed into the city after the 2015-2023 Housing Element. The overall project was conceived from the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan adopted in 2017.

The West Creek Village project includes the built West Fresno Center – Fresno City College (600 E Church Avenue), entitled/permits issued City of Fresno community park, proposed commercial, approved tract map for Emerald Creek single family residential (134 units) subdivision, and entitled Phase 1 of the Villages at West Creek by Self Help Enterprises with 121 supportive multi-family housing units (120 affordable units and 1 market rate manager’s unit) consisting of 38 one bedroom, 51 two bedrooms and 32 three bedrooms.

The Villages at West Creek assumes 53 percent of the restricted units will serve households with incomes less than 30 percent of AMI; 11 percent for households with incomes less than 50 percent of AMI; and 36 percent for households earning less than 60 percent of AMI; and 1 percent will be a manager’s unit.

Additionally, the project will set aside a minimum number of units for farmworkers and those impacted by homelessness.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-66 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 West Creek Village Site Plan
Source: City of Fresno, 2024. Blue Ocean Development, 2021.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-67 Parc Grove Commons
Parc Grove Commons, a two- and three-story affordable housing community consisting of 215 units in 32 buildings, was developed in two-phases in 2011 and 2014 by the Fresno Housing Authority. This development is all residential on a 24-acre site made up of four parcels (10.63, 7.73, 4.51, and 1.74 acres respectively). Parc Grove Commons has 67 extremely and very low-income units, 146 low-income units, and 2 manager’s units.

Parc Grove Commons Site Plan
Source: City of Fresno, 2024.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-68 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Campus Pointe
Campus Pointe is a 48.18-acre horizontal mixed-use development containing senior and student housing owned by Fresno State University and a local developer. The 550 units of residential was built in four phases. Phase one residential was the Palazzo at Campus Pointe apartments built in 2009 on 11.18 acres (244 units). Phase two residential was the Palmilla at Campus Pointe apartments built in 2012 is on 5.74 acres (144 units). Phase three residential was the Maravillosa-Luxury Senior Living apartments built in 2021 on a 3.66-acre site (142 units). Phase 4 residential, on a 6.56-acre site, is under construction is an extended stay Hyatt House with 138 rooms offering condo-like living and is scheduled for completion in 2025. The retail portion of the development was built in 2015 and includes 20.73 acres plus parking.

Campus Pointe Site Plan
Source: City of Fresno, 2024.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-69 Avalon Commons
Avalon Commons is a 105-unit affordable multi-family housing project by Fresno Housing utilizing Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) and No Place Like Home (NPLH) funding. The project is located at Chestnut and Alluvial Avenue in northeast Fresno. The original site was approximately 18 acres and was subdivided into two parcels, an 11.5-acre parcel for Rocky Ranch luxury apartments and a 7.1-acre site for Avalon Commons. Avalon Commons was approved and entitled on June 25, 2022. Construction is underway with a slated completion date of July 1, 2025. There will be two phases of this development.

Phase I contains 60 units, including 59 affordable units. Phase II will include 45 affordable units.

AB 725 Compliance
Assembly Bill 725 (2021) – which requires that at least 25 percent of the remaining above moderate-income RHNA be accommodated on sites that have a density standard that allows at least four units of housing, and that at least 25 percent of the remaining moderate-income RHNA be accommodated on sites that allow at least four units of housing but a density of no more than 100 units per acre. After counting the units in planned and approved projects and final subdivision maps, the remaining RHNA is 14,83613,830 above moderate-income units and 3,6804,597 moderate-income units. In order to comply with AB 725, the sites inventory must include 3,7093,458 above moderate-income units and 920 1,149 moderate-income units on sites meeting the above mentioned criteria.

The Housing Element sites inventory meets the requirements of AB 725 through the following:
 Sites smaller than 0.5 acres that are zoned as high density residential (RM-2, RM-3), mixed use and commercial (NMX, CMX, RMX, CR, CMS), and Downtown districts (DTN, DTC, DTG, DTG-AH) are counted toward the above moderate-income inventory. All of these sites have zoning that allows at least four units of housing.
 Sites larger than 10 acres and all sites within the West Shaw Avenue Town Center that meet the default density standard for lower-income RHNA (i.e., 30 units per acre) are counted in the sites inventory with a mix of incomes, generally 50 20 percent lower-income, 25 60 percent moderateincome, and 25 20 percent above moderate-income. This assumption helps to ensure the inventory complies with AB 725.
 The moderate-income RHNA is met on sites within the RM-2 and RM-MH zones, both of which allow at least four units of housing per site but are well below the 100 units per acre maximum identified in AB 725.

Table 1E-2.12 below summarizes how the Housing Element complies with AB 725. The sites inventory includes capacity for 4,6373,483 above moderate-income units on sites complying with AB 725 criteria, which exceeds the target of 3,7093,458 above moderate-income units; and the inventory includes capacity for 4,0314,756 moderate-income units on sites complying with AB 725 criteria, which also exceeds the target of 920 1,149 moderate-income units.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-70 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Table 1E-2.12: AB 725 Compliance
Capacity (Units) Above Moderate Income Moderate Income
RHNA 15,904 5,638
Approved Projects 961,107 1,9581,041
Final Subdivision Maps 967 -
Remaining RHNA 14,84113,830 3,6804,597
25% of Remaining RHNA (AB 725 Target) 3,7103,458 9201,149 Capacity on Qualifying Sites 4,6373,483 4,0314,756
Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, 2024.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-71 Figure 1E-2.74: Sites Inventory, Fresno 2023
Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, June 2023.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-72 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 This page intentionally left blank.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-73 Sites Identified in Previous Housing Elements
Per statute (Government Code Section 65583.2I), a non-vacant site identified in the previous planning period and a vacant site that has been included in two or more previous consecutive planning periods can only be used to accommodate the lower income RHNA if the site is subject to a program in the housing element allowing residential development by right for housing developments in which at least 20 percent of the units are affordable to lower-income households.

Several sites included in the inventory for lower-income housing have been included in previous housing element planning periods. However, the City cannot easily distinguish which vacant sites were included in the Fourth Cycle Housing Element lower-income sites inventory. The sites inventory identifies all sites – vacant and non-vacant – that were included in the Fifth Cycle Housing Element and applies the by-right policy to all the identified lower-income sites. These sites are identified in Table 1E-7.1 and Table 1E-7.2 in Section 1E-7 (Detailed Sites Inventory Tables). The Housing Element includes a policy that commits the City to allowing residential use by right on these sites when at least 20 percent of the units are affordable to lower income households.

Accessory Dwelling Units
Per state law, a projection of the number of ADUs expected to be built within the eight-year planning period can also be considered as part of the inventory. The City has seen an increase in ADU production in recent years, particularly since 2018 when the state passed several bills to facilitate ADUs statewide. Table 1E-2.13 14 shows the total number of ADU building permits issued by year since 2018, which equates to an average of 11 ADUs per year. For the purpose of the Housing Element, it is assumed that ADU production will continue at the same pace experienced since 2018, resulting in 94 ADUs counted toward the 2023-2031 RHNA (8.5 year planning period). The City has included a program to monitor compliance with State law and facilitate construction of ADUs.

Table 1E-2.1314: ADU Building Permits, 2018-2023
Year ADU Permits Issued
2018 2
2019 4
2020 6
2021 19
2022 22
Average 11
Projected ADUs 94
Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, 2023.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-74 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Because regional affordability analysis of ADUs was not available for Fresno County, the City applied rental rates for one- and two-bedroom units as a proxy for ADU rental rate. According to 2017-2021 ACS 5-year estimates, the median gross rent for one-bedroom units in Fresno is $873 per month, and $941 per month for two-bedroom units. Low-income households in Fresno County can afford between $1,091 (one-person households) and $1,558 (four-person households) in monthly housing costs without being cost burdened (see Table 2-24). Comparing rental rates with the affordability of low-income households demonstrates that ADUs are appropriate to credit toward the City’s lower-income RHNA, based on the median price of one- and twobedroom units. However, the City has decided to take a conservative approach and assume that 30 percent of ADUs will be affordable to lower-income households, 40 percent affordable to moderate-income households, and 30 percent affordable to above moderate-income households. Based on this methodology, the sites inventory includes a projection of 94 ADUs, including 28 affordable to lower-income households, 38 affordable to moderate-income households, and 28 affordable to above moderate-income households.

RHNA Summary
Table 1E-2.14 15 provides a summary of Fresno’s ability to meet the 2023-2031 RHNA of 36,866 housing units. Within the city limits, available vacant and underutilized sites are adequate to accommodate the RHNA for all income categories. The city has capacity for 18,7831919,512 lower-income units, which is 4,1883,459 lower-income units in excess of the lower-income RHNA.

Table 1E-2.1415: RHNA Summary, Fresno, June 2023
Project
Units by Income Level
Total Units

VLI LI MI AMI
2023-2031 RHNA 9,440 5,884 5,638 15,904 36,866
Planned or Approved Projects (Table 1E-2.3) 2921 284317 1,9581,041 961,107 2,6302,757 Vacant Land with Final Subdivision Maps
Under Construction (Table 1E-2.4) 0 0 0 967 967
Capacity on Vacant Sites (Table 1E-7.1) 11,11111,358 3,0962,893 8,0259,254 22,23223,506 Capacity on Underutilized Non-vacant Sites
(Table 1E-7.2)
7,0357,554 2,4881,237 8,1278,422 17,65017,213
Accessory Dwelling Units (Table 1E-2.13) 28 38 28 94
Total Capacity 18,78319,512 6,6646,127 18,25418,772 43,70044,410 Surplus/Shortfall 3,4594,188 1,026489 2,8682,350 7,5446,834 VLI = Very-low Income, LI = Low-income, M = Moderate-income, AM = Above-moderate Income 1 Includes Extremely-low Income and VLI units
Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, 2024.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-75 Availability of Infrastructure and Services
Realistic site development potential indicated in the sites inventory is consistent with the development capacity reported in the Fresno General Plan Urban Form, Land Use, and Design Element. Full urban-level services are available throughout the city and specifically to each site in the inventory. Such services are more than adequate for the potential unit yield on each site. Specifically, water and sewer services are available or are programmed to be made available for all the sites included in the inventory, indicating the capacity to accommodate the City’s total share of the RHNA.

Infrastructure Current Availability
The City of Fresno Department of Public Utilities (DPU) provides potable water to the majority of the city and non-potable water to a small portion of the city for irrigation. The city currently receives water from four water supply sources:

1. Surface water that is delivered to the city by two separate sources:
a. Fresno Irrigation District (FID) Agreement for Kings River water. b. United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) Central Valley Project (CVP) Friant Division Contract for San Joaquin River water.

2. Groundwater that is pumped from wells located within the city.

3. Recycled water that is treated at the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF) and North Fresno Wastewater Reclamation Facility (NFWRF). This water may be used for non-potable uses.

The City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) demonstrates that under normal water year, single dry water year, and five-year consecutive drought, the City’s water supplies are adequate to meet projected demands. The UWMP analysis includes current water demands within the city as well as anticipated water demands associated with future development projects and planning areas within the Fresno General Plan Sphere of Influence (SOI) through 2045. The City has always met system water demand and regardless of regional hydrology is projected to meet existing and future water demands.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-76 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 The City has adopted long-range capital and strategic programs through the City of Fresno Metro Plan, City of Fresno Recycled Water Master Plan, and City of Fresno Wastewater Master Plan. The City has also adopted the State’s 2013 CalGreen Building Code, Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, and Graywater Standards, which combine for a 10- to 20-percent reduction in water use in most new construction. General Plan Policy RC-6-b directs the City to adopt and implement ordinances, standards, and policies to achieve the intent of the City of Fresno Urban Water Management Plan, Fresno-Area Regional Groundwater Management Plan, and City of Fresno Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan to ensure a dependable supply of water. General Plan Policy RC-6-c directs land use and development projects to adhere to the objective of the Fresno Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan to provide sustainable and reliable water supplies to meet the demand of existing and future customers through 2045.

The City completed construction on the 80-mgd Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility (SESWTF) in 2018, while the City’s Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility (NESWTF) currently has a 30-mgd capacity and the capability to expand up to 60 mgd. The City is also planning to develop additional groundwater recharge facilities that would optimize use of available surface water supplies in normal and wet years. The timing for the NESWTF expansion and the development of additional groundwater recharge facilities will be examined as part of the City’s future Metro Plan update and determined based on need as the city grows and demands increase. The City also plans to continue expanding its recycled water distribution system to offset potable water demands.

A substantial reduction in water demand followed the completion of residential meter installation in 2013 combined with drought restrictions and water conservation messaging. As a result, demand has averaged roughly 120,000 acre-feet per year (afy) for 2018 to 2020 instead of growing to roughly 170,000 afy by 2020 as projected in the 2014 Metro Plan. The increase in use of surface water supplies combined with decrease in demands through conservation is allowing the groundwater basin to recover. These developments positioned the City to participate in development of the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) and to meet the requirements of the 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).

The City of Fresno is the regional sewer agency for the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area. The City owns and maintains the wastewater collection system that serves the city and the other participating agencies. The City also owns and operates the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF), located southwest of the city, and the North Fresno Water Reclamation Facility.

The City of Fresno Department of Public Utilities (DPU) manages the sewer system through the implementation of the sewer maintenance program provided in its Sewer System Management Plan and the construction of sewer development projects recommended in its Wastewater Collection System Master Plan (Master Plan). The Master Plan evaluates sewer system capacity under existing and anticipated future conditions based on the buildout of development to the City’s SOI as represented in the Fresno General Plan. The 2015 Master Plan incorporated all of the recommended sewer projects into a Capital Improvement Program for implementation to 2025. The City of Fresno has been regularly implementing various elements of the Capital Improvement Program since the adoption of the Master Plan.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-77 The capacity analysis conducted in the 2015 Master Plan determined that the collection system has sufficient capacity to convey Base Water Flow, Peak Dry Weather Flow, and Peak Wet Weather Flow. However, there were a few areas where deficiencies were found in the existing and future sewer collection system capacity and improvement projects were recommended. Most improvements identified were driven by future development, which consist of new sewers that serve future growth or improvements to existing facilities that are needed to serve future growth. The City’s first priority is to upgrade existing facilities and then build new trunks to serve future users. Improvement projects in the Master Plan were organized into four phases spanning from 2014 through 2030.

General Plan Objective PU-4 directs the City to ensure provision of adequate trunk sewer and collector main capacities to serve existing and planned urban development, consistent with the Wastewater Master Plan.

Supporting polices include continued coordination and consultation with the City of Clovis, to plan and construct sewer collection facilities, pursuing construction of new or replacement sewer trunk facilities or other alternatives consistent with the Wastewater Master Plan, and pursuing enlargement or extension of the sewage collection system to serve planned urban development.

The permitted wastewater treatment capacity of the RWRF is currently 91.5 million gallons per day (mgd) as an annual monthly average flow, and 101 mgd as a maximum monthly average flow. The 2015 Master Plan determined the existing annual monthly average flow at the RWRF to be about 64.7 mgd. Therefore, the RWRF has sufficient capacity for existing influent flows and to accommodate growth for several years to come.

Nonetheless, the City is required by State statutes to begin planning for increased capacity when flows reach 75 percent of the current design capacity.

Additionally, in 2017, Phase I of a tertiary treatment system was completed at the RWRF. The current design flow for the tertiary treatment system is 5.0 mgd but can be expanded in two subsequent phases to 15 mgd (Phase II) and ultimately 30 mgd (Phase III). The City of Clovis maintains the rights and capacity to discharge

9.3 mgd to the facility. The City of Fresno maintains the rights to the remaining capacity.

Infrastructure Future Availability
The Fresno General Plan Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR), adopted July 2021, identified the need for the expansion of existing and development of new water supply and wastewater collection infrastructure and treatment facilities. These improvements are based on build out of the General Plan. While the sites inventory represents a fraction of General Plan build out, infrastructure improvements will ensure adequate level of water and wastewater services to future development on identified sites.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-78 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 To address water supply capacity for the General Plan 2035 horizon, the City, by approximately 2025, will construct an approximately 30-mgd expansion of the existing northeast surface water treatment facility, an approximately 20-mgd surface water treatment facility in the southwest portion of the city, a 25,000 acrefeet/year tertiary recycled water expansion to the RWRF, 65 new groundwater wells, a 2.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Water Storage Tank T2) near the intersection of Clovis and California Avenues, a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Water Storage Tank T5) near the intersection of Ashlan and Chestnut Avenues, a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Water Storage Tank T6) near the intersection of Ashlan Avenue and Highway 99, 50.3 miles of regional water transmission mains ranging in size from 24-inch to 48- inch, and 95.9 miles of 16-inch transmission grid mains.

To address wastewater capacity, for the General Plan 2035 horizon, the City, by approximately 2025, will construct an approximately 70 million gallons per day (mgd) expansion of the RWRF and approximately 0.49- mgd expansion of the North Facility and a 24 mgd wastewater treatment facility within the Southeast Development Area, and a 9.6 mgd expansion at the RWRF. By approximately after the year 2025, the City will construct a 24 mgd wastewater treatment facility within the Southeast Development Area, and a 9.6 mgd expansion at the RWRF. The City will also construct capacity improvements along sewer trunk lines.

The Housing Element is consistent with adopted General Plan land use policy. As determined in the PEIR for the General Plan, planned infrastructure improvements will ensure sufficient future water and sewer capacity to accommodate the planned development, including the identified housing need (RHNA).

Environmental Constraints and Hazards
Below is a description of potential environmental constraints and hazards pertinent to the city of Fresno and how they relate to the sites in the inventory.

Flooding
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) develops flood maps that identify areas with the highest risk of flooding. Figure 1E-2.85 shows the locations of the existing FEMA 100-year flood zones in the city of Fresno with the Housing Element sites. While the majority of the sites in the inventory are not within a 100- year flood zone, 28 sites are within this zone (see Table 1E-7.1 and Table 1E-7.2). Siting a development in a 100-year flood zone is not an impediment to construction because a minimal amount of fill can be added to the site to mitigate the potential flood risk. Construction can occur as long as the completed floor level is one foot above flood elevation. These sites must also comply with the City’s Flood Plain Ordinance, which protects against risk to new and existing development by requiring any building proposed within a special flood hazard area to obtain a building permit and provide information specifically related to flood risk. The permit is reviewed by the Building Official, who has been designated as the Flood Plain Administrator, to ensure that the project will be reasonably safe from flooding and will not adversely increase flood risk elsewhere. Therefore, the presence of a 100-year flood zone will not preclude development on any of the sites in the inventory or expose future residents to potential harm.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-79 Airport Safety Zones
There are two public airports in the city, Fresno-Yosemite International Airport and Fresno Chandler Executive Airport, and one private airport open to public use, Sierra Sky Park. The Fresno County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) provides guidance to local jurisdictions on determining appropriate and compatible adjacent land uses through an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). The ALUCP establishes six airport safety zones to identify the areas surrounding an airport that could be impacted by an airport accident (see Figure 1E-2.96). Each of the six zones have land use compatibility standards that restrict the development of land uses that could pose particular hazards to the public or to vulnerable populations in case of an aircraft accident. The accident risk level is highest within Zone 1 (Runway Protection Zone) and diminishes with each subsequent zone, with Zone 6 (Traffic Pattern Zone) having the lowest accident risk level. Structures of any kind (except for ones set by aeronautical function) are prohibited in Zone 1. Residential development is limited to very low density residential in Zones 2, 3, 4 and 5. There are no limits on residential in Zone 6 areas.

There are a number of sites in the inventory that are within zones that prohibit or severely limit residential development (i.e., Zones 1, 2, 3. and 4), making development on these sites infeasible or not possible and should be removed from the inventory (see Figure 1E-2.96). The ALUC recently (October 2, 2023) approved the adoption of an amended Airport Influence Area (AIA) for the Fresno-Chandler Executive Airport that changed the boundaries of the airport safety zones. Upon receiving this new data, the sites inventory was updated to remove sites within Zones 1-4 of the new AIA for Fresno-Chandler Executive Airport.

Other Constraints and Hazards
In terms of other potential constraints, a small portion of the city north of Cooper Avenue is within a Military Training Flight Route, where there are a few above moderate and lower-income sites in the inventory. The City is required to send development applications under training routes to the military for review and comment. The military then reviews the development application for compatibility with surrounding military activities and submits any comments to the City. This process would not preclude development on these sites and the referral process has not resulted in delays or other barriers to development.

Wildfire threats are minimal in the city, as the city lacks steep topographies and is largely urbanized or made up of working agricultural land. The city is not located within a very high fire hazard severity zone and therefore no sites in the Housing Element are at risk.

Williamson Act contracts, which allow local governments to enter into contracts with private landowners for the purpose of restricting specific parcels of land to agricultural or related open space use is another potential constraint to residential development. However, none of the sites in the inventory have Williamson Act contracts.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-80 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 There are no other known environmental constraints or conditions within the city that could preclude development on identified sites within the planning period, including hazards, and related land use controls, shape, access, property conditions, contamination, easements, or overlays. However, there are some areas with existing industrial uses, specifically in Southwest Fresno, that are transitioning to facilitate more residential and mixed use development. Based on public comments, the City closely reviewed sites in this area and removed sites whichthat would be most impacted by existing industrial uses during the Housing Element planning period.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-81 Figure 1E-2.85: Environmental Constraints and Hazards, 100-year Flood Zones, Fresno 2023 Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, October 2023.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-82 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-2.96: Environmental Constraints and Hazards, Airport Safety Zones, Fresno 2023 Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, October 2023.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-83 Financial Resources
The City utilizes several sources of funding to assist in the provision of quality housing to lower-income residents (see Table 1E-2.15 16 and Table 1E-2.16 17 for a list of available funding mechanisms in Fresno). Several funding programs from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) allow the City to fund community development and housing activities. The City of Fresno receives federal funding as an entitlement jurisdiction for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) program, Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing for Persons with HIV/AIDS (HOPWA) funds from HUD. Table 1E-2.15 16 shows funds received through these programs for the years 2019 through 2022. On average the City received about $7 million in CDBG, $3.3 million in HOME, $600,000 in ESG, and nearly $700,000 in HOPWA funds during this timeframe.

The City also received Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) in 2020 and 2021 and Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention (HHAP) in 2020 through 2022. Other one-time sources of funding in recent years included CARES Act, American Rescue Plan funds, and Encampment Resolution funds to prevent, prepare for, and respond to the spread of COVID-19 during the pandemic; prevent eviction; and address homeless encampments and emergency shelter.

Affordable housing developers are eligible for several federal and state funding programs. Three of the most significant programs include the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program, Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) program, and Project Homekey.

Created by the 1986 Tax Reform Act, the LIHTC program has been used in combination with City and other resources to encourage new construction and rehabilitation of rental housing for lower-income households.

The program provides investors an annual tax credit over a 10-year period, provided that the housing meets the following minimum low-income occupancy requirements: 20 percent of the units must be affordable to households at 50 percent of AMI or 40 percent of the units must be affordable to those at 60 percent of AMI.

The total credit over the 10-year period has a present value equal to 70 percent of the qualified construction and rehabilitation expenditure. The tax credit is typically sold to large investors at a syndication value.

The AHSC program, funded through the State’s Cap and Trade program, provides an additional source of funding for affordable housing. This program awards funding to both public and private entities to build transit-oriented affordable housing and supporting transportation infrastructure, such as pedestrian improvements and bike lanes. The program awards are determined with a points formula; 0.25 points are awarded to projects which directly implement a policy in a long-range planning document (e.g., General Plan, Specific Plan), including new development on sites contained within the housing element’s sites inventory.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-84 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Project Homekey leverages a combination of federal and state funding streams to provide grant funding to projects that will provide interim or permanent housing options for people experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of severe illness from COVID-19. This program awards funding to public entities for the acquisition and rehabilitation of a variety of housing types – including hotels, motels, vacant apartment buildings, and residential care facilities. Funding is allocated by region based on the regions’ proportionate shares of people experiencing homelessness (indicated by 2021 Homeless Point-in-Time Counts) and severely cost-burdened extremely low-income households.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | JULY 2024 1E-2-85 Table 1E-2.1516: Housing Funding Resources, City of Fresno, 2019-2022 Funding Program 2019 2020 2021 2022 Average Description Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG)
$6,942,458 $7,112,639 $7,184,218 $6,839,072 $7,019,597 Fair housing, public services, senior paint program, owneroccupied rehab, park improvements, neighborhood street improvements, micro enterprise, section 108 loan repayment HOME Investment
Partnerships (HOME)
$3,037,353 $3,255,075 $3,289,681 $3,625,073 $3,301,796 Affordable housing development, CHDO, TBRA Emergency Solutions Grant
(ESG)
$585,863 $610,018 $606,586 $603,908 $601,594 Outreach/emergency shelter, homeless prevention, rapid rehousing, HMIS
Housing for Persons with

HIV/AIDS (HOPWA)
$564,747 $636,124 $714,258 $875,943 $697,768 Services for low-income persons living with HIV/AIDS and their families
Permanent Local Housing
Allocation (PLHA)
- $3,407,603 $ 5,296,470 - $4,352,037 Affordable housing development, first time homebuyer assistance, home repair (mobile homes)
Homeless Housing Assistance
and Prevention (HHAP)
- $6,158,246 $2,911,171 $7,524,257 $5,531,225 Shelter services and street outreach Community Development
Block Grant CARES Act
(CDBG-CV)
- $7,980,086 - - N/A Shelter operations, medical clinic investments, medical clinic operations, tenant/landlord counseling, shelter
acquisition/conversion/rehab
Emergency Solutions Grant
CARES Act (ESG-CV)
- $10,948,95
3 - - N/A Deposit assistance, shelter operations, street outreach, HMIS HOME American Rescue Plan
(HOME-ARP)
- - $11,922,873 - N/A Affordable housing development, supportive services, acquisition, and development of non-congregate shelters Low Income Housing Trust
Fund (LHTF)
- - $5,000,000 - N/A Affordable housing development
American Rescue Plan Act
(ARPA)
- - $14,200,000 - N/A Affordable housing development and landlord incentives Encampment Resolution
Funding (ERF)
- - - $5,070,058 N/A Encampment resolution and shelter
Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, 2022
SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-86 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Table 1E-2.1617: Other Financial Resources and Programs Program Name Description Eligible Activities
Federal Programs
Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG)
Grants administered and awarded by the state on
behalf of the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development (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
families.

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
New Construction
Rehabilitation
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-87 Program Name Description Eligible Activities
permanent and transitional rental housing. 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 first-time buyers.

Two funding rounds per year
New Construction
Rehabilitation
Acquisition
California Housing
Finance Agency (Cal
HFA) Homebuyer’s Down
Payment Assistance
Program
The Forgivable Equity Builder Loan gives firsttime 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
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 (AHSC)
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 Programs
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
Homebuyer Assistance
Homebuyer Counseling
SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-88 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Program Name Description Eligible Activities
years through an affordable mortgage.

Fresno County Housing
Assistance Rehabilitation
Program (HARP)
Provides loans to eligible low and moderate
income homeowners to rehabilitate their
affordable homes in the unincorporated area and
partner cities to bring the homes up to current
building code health and safety standards. Loans
are currently zero interest with affordable
monthly payments based on the family's income.

Rehabilitation
Fresno County Rental
Rehabilitation Program
(RRP)
Provides loans to eligible rental housing owners
with low-/mod-income tenants, to rehabilitate
affordable rental units in the unincorporated area
and partner cities, to bring the rental units up to
current building code health and safety standards.

Loans are zero interest and amortized over 20 to
30 years (with a balloon payment at 20 years),
based upon the income of the rental-housing
owner and the case flow of the rental project
Rehabilitation
Fresno County
Homebuyer Assistance
Program (HAP)
Provides homebuyer down payment and
mortgage assistance loans to enable eligible lowand moderate-income families to purchase their first home in the unincorporated area and partner
cities. Homes to be purchased must meet current
building code health and safety standards. Loans
are zero interest with payments deferred for 30
years or until the primary mortgage is fully paid,
whichever occurs first.

Homebuyer Assistance
Fresno County Affordable
Housing Development
Program (AHDP)
Provides gap-financing loans to nonprofit
organizations and other eligible developers to
construct new affordable housing, including
multi-family rental housing projects and singlefamily owner-occupied housing projects. May also be used to substantially rehabilitate existing
affordable housing projects.

New Construction
Rehabilitation
Fresno County
Mobilehome Park
Program (MPP)
Provides zero-interest loans to help finance the
preservation of affordable mobile home parks and
development of new affordable mobile home
parks.

New Construction
Acquisition and Preservation
Private Resources/Lender/Bank Financing Programs
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 single-family Homebuyer Assistance APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-2-89 Program Name Description Eligible Activities
homes in underserved low-income and minority
cities.

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% MFI
qualify
Homebuyer Assistance
combined with 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
Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, June 2023.

SECTION 1E-2: SITES INVENTORY
1E-2-90 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 This page is intentionally left blank.

FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-1 SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
Introduction
Land use policies and planning directly impact the ability of individuals and families to live in neighborhoods that offer high levels of opportunity. This includes access to high-performing schools, availability of jobs, and safe convenient access to transit and services. Despite the long-standing federal mandate established by the Fair Housing Act (FHA) 1 – which prohibits discrimination concerning the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status, and disability status – people within protected classes continue to encounter limits in housing choice and mobility.

Background
Government Code Chapter 15 Section 8899.50, signed into law in 2018 under Assembly Bill (AB) 686, requires all public agencies in California to “administer its programs and activities relating to housing and community development in a manner to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH), and take no action that is materially inconsistent with its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing.” 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.” 2
This means cities and counties are required to take deliberate actions to address disparities in housing needs, access to opportunity, and settlement patterns for protected populations. Consistent with Government Code Section 65583, housing elements are required to address the following components:
 Inclusive and Equitable Outreach: Local jurisdictions must make a diligent effort to equitably include all community stakeholders in the housing element participation process.  Assessment of Fair Housing: All housing elements must include an assessment of integration and segregation patterns and trends, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risk.  Analysis of Sites Inventory: Local jurisdictions must evaluate and address how particular sites available for housing development will meet the needs of households at all income levels. The housing element must analyze and conclude whether the identified sites improve or exacerbate conditions for fair housing.
1 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3631 2 California 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.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-2 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024  Identification of Contributing Factors: Based on findings from the previous steps, housing elements must identify, evaluate, and prioritize the contributing factors related to fair housing issues.
 Policies and Actions to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing: Local jurisdictions must adopt fair housing goals and actions that are significant, meaningful, and sufficient to overcome identified patterns of segregation and affirmatively further fair housing. The housing element should include metrics and milestones for evaluating progress and fair housing results.

Outreach
As part of the Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element update process, the City hosted and participated in a variety of outreach efforts. The purpose of outreach was to solicit feedback from local stakeholders and members of the community to inform the assessment of housing needs and program development. This Assessment of Fair Housing includes a summary of outreach activities conducted through the process. A full summary of outreach efforts for the Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element update can be found in Chapter 2, Public Outreach and Engagement.

Study Sessions
A study session was held with the City Council on September 15, 2022, to discuss the Housing Element Update and process. The study session was open to the public and held in person, with a livestream option to reach members of the public who could not attend in person. Commentary was limited and no public comment related to fair housing was received at the meeting; instead, commissioners and council members expressed concern regarding the implications of new and changing housing legislation on small cities with limited financial resources.

Community Workshops and Meetings
The City held a number of community workshops and meetings to solicit feedback from the community and stakeholders on the Housing Element update. In addition to the workshops and consultations facilitated with California Coalition of Rural Housing (CCRH) and Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG), the City worked with a local nonprofit with roots in the community, Every Neighborhood Partnership (ENP), to conduct supplemental outreach to solicit as much input as feasible to inform the update to the Housing Element.

Workshops and meetings were conducted throughout the span of the project, starting in August of 2022. A series of joint community meetings were then held by the City of Fresno Long Range Planning and Housing Divisions between October 27 and November 28, 2022. Several additional meetings were held in February and March of 2023. More information about the City’s diligent efforts to engage with the public, and summaries of the feedback received, are described in more detail in Section 1E-6: Public Outreach and Engagement.

The City notified the community with flyers distributed in English, Spanish, Hmong, and Punjabi through the FCOG listserv of regional stakeholders and community based organizations (CBOs) and through Fresno Housing. Linguistica interpreters were available for Spanish, Hmong, and Punjabi monolingual speakers.

Materials in Spanish, Hmong and Punjabi were available in-person at several workshops and then online at the project website, accessible via link or QR code.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-3 More than 250 community participants attended the City’s workshops and meetings for the Housing Element update. The following describes some of the most relevant themes and feedback received.  Critical Housing Issues. Community members expressed that some of the most critical issues in Fresno are related to lack of affordability and frequently changing housing costs, infrastructure needs, lack of information and education, and lack of community amenities.  Most Impacted Groups. Participants identified a number of special needs groups that are most impacted by housing needs such as residents with low- and extremely low- incomes, undocumented residents, people experiencing homelessness, seniors, single-parent households, people with disabilities and mental disabilities, and college students/youth.  Fair Housing Needs. When asked about Fresno’s most significant fair housing issues, participants noted historical disinvestment in southwest and west Fresno, inability to access credit, housing costs, and access to opportunities. Some of the suggestions for programs to include in the Housing Element include: more landlord education and incentives for Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs), regular roundtable meeting with community leaders, and better promotion of ongoing/current information via social media.
 Suggestions and Solutions. Participants expressed support for building more affordable housing and suggested the City develop more programs to provide financial assistance to low-income families, funding to rehabilitate homes, rent control, and more housing near amenities like grocery stores. Participants also made suggestions for increasing community involvement in the Housing Element update.

Following the workshops, the City posted copies of the workshop presentations on the Fresno County Multijurisdictional Housing Element Update website in multiple languages for residents to access at their convenience. Feedback received during the workshops was used to inform this assessment as well as associated programs, as identified in Table IE-3.18, Factors Contributing to Fair Housing Issues. For a full summary of the workshops, see Section 1E-6, Public Outreach and Engagement.

Regional Focus Groups
As described in Chapter 2 of the Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element, two regional focus groups were held as part of the Housing Element development process. Stakeholders included representatives from FCOG member jurisdictions including County of Fresno, City of Fresno, City of Clovis, City of Fowler, City of Parlier, City of Sanger, and City of Selma. Other organizations and stakeholder represented at the focus groups include California Apartment Association (CAA), California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA), Envision Realty, Northern California Carpenters Council (NCCRC), Building Industry Association (BIA), Fresno Housing, The Fresno Center, and We Plan Cities.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-4 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Participant groups were presented with information about the Housing Element process, particularly sections regarding community needs and fair housing, and were given the opportunity to weigh in on community needs. Some key topics that came up as regional housing issues include: corporate acquisition of mobile home parks, lack of reliable access to water and other infrastructure such as internet access and cell phone reception, over-reliance on commercially zoned property to accommodate RHNA (not much higher density zoning in the County relative to commercial), outdated community plans hindering development, and difficulties securing funding for new housing in low resource areas. There was also a fair amount of discussion on the need for more outreach and education to increase awareness/accessibility of existing assistance programs, and financial literacy to help low-income residents better compete for affordable housing/home ownership opportunities. Attendees highlighted the gap between program eligibility and the ability to afford available housing, as some applicants to affordable housing programs make too much money to qualify but still can’t afford housing without the program’s assistance. At a recent workshop for community members interested in participating in a down payment assistance program, none of the attendees qualified because their incomes were higher than 80 percent of the area median income.

For other community members, being able to show an income level of at least twice the rent of an apartment in the area is impossible.

During one of the focus group meetings, a participant referenced the Llaves de tu Casa Inciativa which is a financial education program open to all County of Fresno residents but with a focus on increasing Latino homeownership rates. The partners driving the initiative are NAHREP (National Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals) Fresno, the City of Fresno, Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLBank) of San Francisco, Self-Help Enterprises, and Union Bank. The Llaves De Tu Casa Iniciativa program consists of down payment and closing cost assistance, home buyer grants, comprehensive home buyer education and counseling including first-time home buyer workshops and flexible mortgage products and programs for Fresno neighborhoods. As a follow-up to the regionwide stakeholder focus groups, a group of initiative members representing various organizations and companies met to discuss housing needs and programs for the regional Housing Element effort.

Regional and 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 Fresno and throughout the Fresno County area.

The following organizations and stakeholders provided one-on-one input or written feedback on housing needs and programs in Fresno. Note, this is not an extensive list of all of the organizations and stakeholders that participated in the process of the Housing Element update.  Leadership Counsel for Justice and
Accountability
 Central Valley Urban Institute
 Resources for Independence Central Valley
 Law Office of Patience Milrod – Civil
Rights Attorney
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-5  BIA of Fresno/Madera Counties
 Fair Housing Council of Central California
(FHCCC)
 Fresno Housing
 Fresno-Madera Continuum of Care
 Llaves De Tu Casa Inciativa
 Nor Cal Carpenter’s Union
In each consultation, stakeholders were asked about: opportunities and concerns for housing in the region, housing needs by type, barriers and unmet needs, constraints, and housing conditions. Stakeholders were also asked about equity and fair housing such as “What factors limit or deny civil rights, fair housing choice, or equitable access to opportunity? What actions can be taken to transform racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity (without displacement)? What actions can be taken to make living patterns more integrated and balanced?”
Common themes in stakeholder responses were concerns about affordability, including the location of affordable housing in undesirable areas and the gap between housing affordability and program income limits.

Limited capacity and resources include funding, time, staff, infrastructure, labor supply etc. The opportunities and suggestions for future housing in the region that stakeholders proposed are local rent controls to manage affordability and reduce displacement risk, code enforcement to ensure a safe and habitable housing stock, taking advantage of State incentives to build more housing in high opportunity areas, funding fair housing groups such as FHCC to enforce fair housing laws, establishing a land trust, acknowledging a labor shortage in residential construction, and adjusting regulations or encouraging development of a variety of unit types and sizes throughout the jurisdiction to promote mobility and integration.

Stakeholders also highlighted the unique needs of community members who are undocumented including how it is impossible to achieve homeownership and challenging to have the required proof of income for rental housing. Several stakeholders identified lack of credit and low incomes as a barrier to many residents in accessing stable housing. The following describes some of the themes and feedback from the consultations.  Opportunities and Concerns. Stakeholders described the rising cost of housing, the shortage of affordable housing available in the city, increasing rates of homelessness, sprawl in the city, infrastructure, the need for multifamily or single-family unit types, not enough accessible units for people with disabilities, substandard housing conditions, and insufficient code enforcement as concerns. Stakeholders noted that some opportunities include: availability of vacant land, repurposing old buildings into housing, tools for process streamlining, more incentives, proactive code enforcement, and requirements for inclusionary development.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-6 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024  Housing Barriers/Needs. Stakeholders described housing costs, inaccessibility of listings, and credit checks as barriers for residents to get into housing. Stakeholders also expressed that there has been insufficient progress toward meeting the lower-income Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) referring to units for low-, very low-, and extremely low-income households (i.e., not enough affordable housing being built). Most of the stakeholders encouraged the City to provide more funding for home repairs and maintenance. Stakeholders noted the economic disadvantages to market rate developers to build affordable housing and identified processing times and general costs as significant constraints.
 Equity and Fair Housing. Stakeholders encouraged the City to proactively AFFH and incorporate fair housing into Housing Element programs. In terms of factors that limit or deny civil rights, fair housing choice, and/or equitable access to opportunities, stakeholders noted access to credit, deposit and income requirements, language barriers, lack of inclusionary housing requirements, and poor financial education. Someone also noted that previous evictions and criminal records create barriers to equity. Lastly, stakeholders described how fringe/sprawl development patterns have resulted in disproportionate resources and opportunities.  Other Topics and Suggestions. Some of the other key topics that came up were the increased costs and competition for housing due to COVID, the need for long term rental assistance in Fresno, infrastructure costs and water accessibility, inclusionary housing, code enforcement, community land trusts, mobile home park protections, and capacity building for lower income residents and nonprofits/community-based organizations. Stakeholders encouraged the City to include specific programs and timelines with designated responsible parties.

Fair Housing Assessment
This section serves as an assessment of fair housing practices in the city of Fresno and has been prepared pursuant to Government Code Section 65583 (c)(10). It examines existing conditions and demographic patterns including patterns of integration and segregation within the city, concentrated areas of low- and moderate-income housing, and areas of low and high opportunity. Information on Fresno is also compared to regional trends, describing settlement patterns across the Central Valley. The analysis is primarily based on data from the U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS), the HCD AFFH Tool, and the City’s Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (Draft – February 2020). A regional assessment of Fair Housing in Fresno County is provided in Chapter 3: Regional Assessment of Fair Housing.

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. This section also includes an analysis of the Housing Element sites inventory as compared with fair housing factors. Through discussions with housing service providers, fair housing advocates, and this assessment of fair housing issues, the City of Fresno identified factors that contribute to fair housing issues. These contributing factors are included in Table 1E-3.24, Factors that Contribute 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 1E-1: Action Plan.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-7 Notes on Geospatial Analysis
In this report, “neighborhoods” are approximated by an aggregation of census tracts. Census tracts are statistical geographic units defined by the U.S. Census Bureau for the purposes of disseminating data.

Throughout this report, neighborhood level segregation measures are calculated using census tract data.

However, some data is reported at the census block or census block group (block groups) level. Fresno County is used as the primary point of comparison for regional trends. References to the “Central Valley” refer to the San Joaquin basin within Fresno County.

Figure 1E-3.1 displays a neighborhood map for the city of Fresno. Throughout this document, the following neighborhood names will be used to generally categorize census tract or block group data. This report uses an expansive definition of Downtown. The General Plan directed that the Downtown Planning Area be further refined through specific and community plans which include the plan areas for the Downtown Neighborhood Community Plan and the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan. While these areas are functionally similar, these neighborhoods vary culturally, rich with strong communities such as the city’s historic Chinatown.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-8 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.1: Neighborhood Map, City of Fresno
Source: City of Fresno, 2022.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-9 Patterns of Integration and Segregation
Race and Ethnicity
As described in the Regional Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (Chapter 3), the racial and ethnic representation of residents in the County set the baseline, and closely correspond to those in the city of Fresno. Countywide, the majority of the population in most jurisdictions is Hispanic (of any race).

Similarly, the city of Fresno’s Hispanic population constitutes nearly half of all residents (49.7 percent).

Countywide and within the city, Hispanic representation has grown significantly since the 2000 Census. In real numbers, the Hispanic population increased from 170,520 people to 261,751 over the 20-year timeframe, a 53.5 percent increase (see Table 1E-3.1).

Table 1E-3.1: Population by Race and Hispanic Origin, Fresno, 2000-2020 2000 2010 2020
Number
of People
Percent Number
of People
Percent Number
of People
Percent
White 159,473 37.3% 148,598 30.0% 137,216 26.1%
Black or African American 34,357 8.0% 37,885 7.7% 36,089 6.9% American Indian and Alaska
Native
3,259 0.8% 3,127 0.6% 2,445 0.5%
Asian 47,136 11.0% 60,939 12.3% 73,892 14.0%
Native Hawaiian and Other
Pacific Islander
427 0.1% 663 0.1% 726 0.1%
Some Other Race 728 0.2% 984 0.2% 1,026 0.2%
Two or More Races 11,752 2.7% 10,414 2.1% 13,002 2.5%
Hispanic or Latino 170,520 39.9% 232,055 46.9% 261,751 49.7% Total 427,652 494,665 526,147
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 and ACS05-10 (5-year Estimates), Table B03002. U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census Table H007.

Residents identifying as White are the second largest population segment in the city of Fresno, comprising a quarter of the city’s total population. Since 2000, the percentage of the city’s White population has decreased, from 159,473 people (37.3 percent of the city) in 2000 to 137,216 (26.1 percent) in 2020. Asian or Pacific Islanders comprise Fresno’s third largest population segment, making up 14.0 percent of the city, roughly similar to their 2000 population share of 11.0 percent. From 2000 to 2020, Fresno gained an additional 26,700 Asian or Pacific Islander residents. During this 20-year timeframe, the city also experienced a decrease in Black or African American residents and Native American residents.

Figure 1E-3.2 displays the distribution of households in Fresno by race and Hispanic origin. While Fresno’s population is relatively evenly distributed throughout the city, the spatial distribution of the population indicates considerable levels of segregation by race and ethnicity. As shown in the figure, Hispanic residents are more concentrated in the southern half of the city, specifically in the Downtown, while neighborhoods in the northern half of the city have a greater predominance of White residents.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-10 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.2: Population by Race and Hispanic Origin, Fresno, 2019 Source: Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on 2015-2019 American Community Survey data.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-11 The dissimilarity index provides another measure of the magnitude of segregation within a city or county.

The dissimilarity index measures the degree to which two specific groups are distributed across a geographic area. The score varies between 0 and 100 and measures the percentage of one group that would have to move across neighborhoods to be distributed the same way as the second group. A dissimilarity index of 0 indicates conditions of total integration under which both groups are distributed in the same proportions across all neighborhoods. A dissimilarity index of 100 indicates conditions of total segregation such that the members of one group are located in completely different neighborhoods than the second group. For example, if an index score is above 60, more than 60 percent of people in the specified area would need to move to eliminate segregation. The following can be used to interpret the index:
 Less than 40: Low Segregation
 Between 40 and 54: Moderate Segregation
 Greater than 55: High Segregation
Table 1E-3.2 displays the dissimilarity index scores in the city compared to the county. It is important to note that the dissimilarity index uses White residents as the primary comparison group. That is, all dissimilarity index values compare racial and ethnic groups against the distribution of White residents and do not directly measure segregation between two minority groups (e.g., Black or African American, and Hispanic/Latino segregation). The dissimilarity index scores are intended to contextualize the level of segregation between racial and ethnic groups city- and countywide. As shown below, the dissimilarity index for Black or African American residents is 0.49 in this city. This would mean that nearly half of Black or African American (or White) residents would need to move to a different neighborhood to achieve balance in the demographics.

Table 1E-3.2: Dissimilarity Index Scores for City of Fresno and Fresno County, 2020 Race/Ethnicity City of Fresno Fresno County
American Indian/Alaska Native 0.66 0.66
Asian 0.39 0.41
Pacific Islander 0.79 0.82
Black or African American 0.49 0.54
Hispanic/Latino 0.39 0.45
Other 0.73 0.72
Multiracial/ Two or More Races 0.33 0.31
Total Non-White Population vs. White 0.36 0.40
Source: U.S Census ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2020, Table B03002.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-12 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 As discussed previously, White, and Hispanic/Latino groups comprise the majority of the population in the city (77.2 percent). The dissimilarity index shows that there is a low magnitude of segregation between these respective groups (0.39). This is comparable, but lower, than patterns countywide (0.45). The dissimilarity index also shows that the highest levels of segregation within the city are between Pacific Islander (0.79), American Indian/Alaska Native (0.66) and other racial/ethnic groups not listed (0.73).

However, when calculating and analyzing the dissimilarity index, it is important to note that dissimilarity index values are less reliable for a population group if that group represents less than 5 percent of the jurisdiction’s total population, approximately. Scores are innately higher because there is a smaller population size relative to the total.

Asian residents on the other hand account for 14 percent of the city’s total population and the dissimilarity index score between Asian and White residents is 0.39 which is the same as the score between White and Hispanic/Latino groups. These scores are below the threshold of 0.40 which would indicate lower levels of segregation amongst the city’s census tracts based on numerical statistics. The dissimilarity index scores for the total Non-White population indicate that the county as a whole has moderate and higher levels of racial/ethnic segregation, with dissimilarity index scores of 0.36 and 0.40, in the city and county respectively.

Figure 1E-3.3 below visualizes racial segregation/integration measures based on methodology from the Othering & Belonging Institute (OBI) and 2021 census tract boundaries. OBI’s data compares integrated neighborhoods to highly segregated White neighborhoods and highly segregated neighborhoods that are predominantly populations of color (POC). In the figure below, South Fresno stands out with the highest POC segregation. While there are more tracts in northern Fresno with highly segregated White neighborhoods (shown in green below), there are two census tracts in the Woodward Park area that are classified with high POC segregation. The central core of established neighborhoods surrounding the Shaw Avenue corridor are more racially integrated with most neighborhoods on the outskirts of those neighborhoods experiencing low to medium segregation (as indicated by the yellow cluster in the central core and lighter red color surrounding those tracts in Figure 1E-3.3). It is worth noting that several census tracts throughout the city do not have data assigned to them. This includes tracts in the Woodward Park, West, Downtown, and Roosevelt areas.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-13 Figure 1E-3.3: Racial Segregation/Integration by Census Tract, City of Fresno Source: Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool 2.0 in 2023, based on 2021 census tract boundaries and data from the Othering & Belonging Institute 2020.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-14 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Income Distribution
In 2020, Fresno’s citywide median household income was $53,368 which was below the Fresno County median income of $57,109 and the statewide median income of $78,672. Median incomes by racial group, shown below in Figure 1E-3.4, vary greatly. White and Asian households had median incomes that are very close at $63,517 and $63,460 respectively. Hispanic households had a median income that was approximately $17,500 less than White and Asian households at $45,984 while Black or African American households had the lowest median household income at $34,361. These trends are also displayed for the whole of Fresno County where Hispanic households had a median income of $47,141 compared to $70,763 for White households and $68,274 for Asian households while Black or African American households had a median income of $39,621.

Figure 1E-3.5 displays the distribution of households in the city by median household incomes. North, northwest, west, and east neighborhoods of the city, including portions of the Woodward Park, Bullard, West, and Roosevelt community areas, have the highest median incomes relative to the rest of the city.

Census block groups that most closely match the city’s median incomes ($50,000-$87,100) and are generally in line with the statewide average median income of $78,672, are located in between the highest and lowest median income neighborhoods. While the city’s average annual median income was $53,368, most of the city has incomes that are less than $50,000. Compared to the trends in residential integration and segregation shown in Figure 1E-3.3 above, incomes tend to be lowest where there is “low to medium segregation” and “high POC segregation,” particularly in Downtown and inner core neighborhoods, such as west Fresno adjacent to SR 99, south Fresno, Jane Addams and Jefferson. Residents in high poverty areas tend to have lower levels of access to opportunity due to the absence of critical resources and disinvestment in their communities. As poverty increases, disparities in access to opportunities often increase among population groups and disadvantaged communities become even more isolated.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-15 Figure 1E-3.4: Median Household Income by Race, Fresno, 2020 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B19013. $63,517
$34,361
$46,021
$63,460
$59,551
$45,931
$48,165
$45,984
$70,763
$39,621
$52,511
$68,274
$45,595
$45,525
$57,763
$47,141
$0 $15,000 $30,000 $45,000 $60,000 $75,000
White Alone Non-Hispanic
Black Or African American Alone Non-Hispanic
American Indian And Alaska Native Alone Non-Hispanic
Asian Alone Non-Hispanic
Native Hawaiian And Other Pacific Islander Alone NonHispanic Some Other Race Alone Non-Hispanic
Two Or More Races Non-Hispanic
Hispanic Or Latino of Any Race
Fresno County City of Fresno
SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-16 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.5: Median Household Income, Fresno, 2019
Source: Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on 2015-2019 American Community Survey data.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-17 The Area Median Income (AMI) for Fresno County is $80,300 in 2022.In 2022, a family of four making $27,750 or less would be classified as extremely low income in Fresno. In the city of Fresno, 15.8 percent of households make less than 30 percent of the AMI, which is considered extremely low income. This income equates to a wage of $14.76 per hour for a single wage-earner, which is below the minimum wage in Fresno ($15.50 per hour). An extremely low-income family of four described above could afford a monthly housing cost of approximately $694. As reported in the regional assessment of fair housing, only 7.0 percent of units in the city of Fresno rent for less than $1,000 monthly, while 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 rent for above $2,000 monthly, making it very hard for extremely low-income families to afford housing and support themselves.

As such, most block groups in the city have high levels of poverty on average than other cities in the state, and the overall poverty rate in Fresno is 19.2 percent. Despite Fresno being the country’s most agriculturally productive region, it has become known for its high levels of poverty and unemployment. 3 There are large disparities among racial and ethnic groups with regard to poverty (see Figure 1E-3.6).

Black or African American, “Other Race,” and Hispanic populations experience the greatest rates of poverty in Fresno, while the White population has the least amount of poverty (less than 10 percent) among all population groups. Exposure to poverty varies by location in the city, with some areas of the city experiencing higher rates of poverty than others. Specifically, block groups in south and west Fresno tend to have higher exposure to poverty, while the city’s northernmost block groups have relatively low levels of poverty (see Figure 1E-3.7).

Figure 1E-3.6: Percent of Households in Poverty by Race or Hispanic Origin, Fresno, 2020 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B17010A. 3 Benner, C. and Pastor, M. 2015. Equity, Growth, and Community: What the Nation Can Learn from America's Metro Areas. “Struggle and the City: Conflict-Informed Collaboration.” University California Press. Pp. 130-160.

Accessed via: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/j.ctt1ffjnd4.9.

9.5%

28.9%

22.0%

18.4% 16.7%

25.2%

15.4%

24.5%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%
White Alone
Non-Hispanic
Black Or
African
American
Alone
American
Indian And
Alaska Native
Alone
Asian Alone Native
Hawaiian
And Other
Pacific
Islander
Alone
Some Other
Race Alone
Two Or More
Races
Hispanic Or
Latino of Any
Race
Percent of Total Households
SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-18 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.7: Distribution of Poverty, Fresno, 2019
Source: Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on 2015-2019 American Community Survey data.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-19 Familial Status
The FHA also bans discrimination based on "familial status," which refers to the presence of at least one child under 18 years old. Housing discrimination based on familial status can occur when a landlord, property manager, real estate agent, or property owner treats someone or a group of people differently because they have a family with children under the age of 18. In Fresno County, the majority of households are family households (72.3 percent). Family households are defined by California law as a household of two or more people, regardless of relationship status. Approximately 67.8 percent of households in the city of Fresno are family households including 40.7 percent married couple households, 9.4 percent of households that are unmarried cohabitating couples, and an additional 17 percent of households with alternative compositions such as single-parent households.

As shown in Table 1E-3.3, 34.3 percent of households in the city had a child under the age of 18 according to ACS. Since 2000, the overall share of families with children in the city of Fresno has declined by 22.1 percentage points despite an increase in the number of families overall. A similar decline occurred at the regional level, where families with children decreased from 55.8 percent of all households in 2000 to 35.4 percent in 2020, despite gaining over 30,000 additional families with children.

Table 1E-3.3: Families with Children, Fresno, 1990-2020 Number
of
Families
Percent of
all
Households
Number of
Families
Percent of
all
Households
Number of
Families
Percent of
all
Households
2000 2010 2020
City of Fresno 44,690 56.4% 59,626 53.0% 58,288 34.3%
Fresno Region 79,423 55.8% 112,139 52.3% 109,759 35.4%
Source: Decennial Census, ACS. 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16- 20 (5-year Estimates), Table B11012.

Figure 1E-3.8 shows the distribution of children in married couple households, while Figure 1E-3.9 shows the distribution of children in female-headed households with no partner or spouse present. Most of Fresno County has moderate to high rates of children in married-couple households especially in the unincorporated county areas. Generally, throughout the San Joaquin Valley, areas where residences are typically more dispersed and uses are more agricultural or limited by topography have higher rates of families with children than is found in the central and southern neighborhoods of the city of Fresno. Within the city, there is a greater presence of children living in married couple households in the west and northwest neighborhoods. The inner city near Downtown has smaller populations of children living in married couple households.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-20 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.8: Percent of Children in Married Couple Households, Fresno, 2019 Source: Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on 2015-2019 American Community Survey data.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-21 Figure 1E-3.9: Percent of Children in Single-Female Headed Households, Fresno, 2019 Source: Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on 2015-2019 American Community Survey data.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-22 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 As described in the Regional Assessment of Fair Housing (Chapter 3 of the Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element), female-headed households tend to live in and around the cities of Fresno and Clovis. This could be due to the proximity of schools, transit, services, and jobs in an incorporated city; however, the urban areas of the county also have a greater range of housing types that single-female headed households can afford. While female-headed households compose 30.7 percent of households in the city overall, there are several neighborhoods where they are the predominant household type. As shown in Figure 1E-3.9, there are several tracts in Fresno, predominantly along State Route 41, State Route 99 and State Route 180, with proportions of female-headed households that comprise 40 to 80 percent of the total households. Femaleheaded households are also predominant in the Woodward Park area in northern Fresno, the neighborhood areas in the east bordering old town Clovis (generally surrounding Clovis Avenue), and the Roosevelt community area in southern Fresno surrounding Kings Canyon Road and California Avenue.

Female-headed households have special housing needs because they tend to be either single-parents or single-elderly adults that are living on low- or poverty-level incomes. In 2021, According to the U.S.

Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice, 9.5 percent of children living with two parents lived below the poverty level, compared to 31.7 percent of children living with a single parent. Children living with only their mothers in 2021 were more than twice as likely to live in poverty than those living with only their fathers (35.0 percent vs. 17.4 percent) 4
. Comparing Figures 1E-3.8 and 1E-3.9 with Figures 1E-3.5 and 1E-3.7, a connection can be made to higher concentrations of single parent households and higher poverty levels and lower median incomes in Fresno. Single-parent households with children often require special consideration and assistance as a result of their greater need for affordable housing, accessible day care, health care, and a variety of other supportive services. Because of their relatively lower household incomes, single-parent households are more likely to experience difficulties in finding affordable, decent, and safe housing and the presence of a child in the household tends to receive unequal treatment in the rental housing market. Fresno ranks fourth worst among the 50 most populous U.S. cities for the percentage of single mothers with an income below the poverty line (63.1 percent). Single mothers in this city can expect to spend 31.8 percent of their income on rent annually. 5 Population with Disabilities
The U.S. Census Bureau defines disability as one of the following: hearing difficulty, vision difficulty, cognitive difficulty, ambulatory difficulty, self-care difficulty, and independent living difficulty. Persons with disabilities tend to have lower fixed-incomes, higher health care costs, and special housing needs. Persons with disabilities typically have special housing needs because of their physical and/or developmental capabilities, fixed or limited incomes, and higher health costs associated with their disabilities. 4 Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 2022. “Poverty status of children by family structure.” Accessed via: https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/statistical-briefingbook/population/faqs/qa01203#:~:text=In%202021%2C%209.5%25%20of%20children,17.4%25 5 Solum, A. 2022. “Where Single Mothers Fare Worse Economically – 2022 Study.” Accessed via:
https://smartasset.com/data-studies/where-single-mothers-fare-worse-economically-2022 APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-23 According to 2016-2020 ACS 5-Year Estimates, 14.3 percent of Fresno’s population has a disability, which is slightly higher than the county rate of 13.0 percent. By disability type, the city is similar to the region, with ambulatory difficulties being the most prevalent disability type (affecting 50.1 percent of the city of Fresno population and 49.7 percent of the regional population with one or more types of disability).

Cognitive and independent living difficulties are the next most prevalent, affecting 44.0 percent and 39.5 percent of the disabled population. Smaller percentages of the population are affected by hearing difficulties, vision difficulties, and self-care difficulties.

Figure 1E-3.10 shows the population of persons with a disability by census tract in the city using ACS data from 2015-2019. As stated in the Regional Assessment of Fair Housing (Section 3 of the MultiJurisdictional Housing Element), the only areas in Fresno County having a concentration of persons with a disability over 20 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 percent of the population reports a disability, or the jurisdiction is split between areas of less than 10 percent, and 10 to 20 percent of the households experiencing one or more disabilities. Within Fresno, households with a disability have higher concentrations in southwest Fresno, the Fresno High-Roeding neighborhood in central Fresno, the McLane neighborhood west of the airport, and a small tract of the Bullard neighborhood.

These areas correlate with the neighborhoods with supportive housing and assisted care facilities for seniors and others that may require supportive housing.

Fresno residents with disabilities 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. 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.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-24 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.10: Percentage of the Population with a Disability in City of Fresno Source: Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on 2010-2014 and 2015-2019 American Community Survey data.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-25 Concentrated Areas of Race and Income
Areas of Poverty
One indicator of segregation is the presence of racially concentrated areas of poverty. Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAP) are neighborhoods in which there are both racial concentrations and high poverty rates. The Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD’s) definition of a R/ECAP is:
 A census tract that has a Non-White population of 50 percent or more (majority-minority) or, for non-urban areas, 20 percent, AND a poverty rate of 40 percent or more; OR  A census tract that has a Non-White population of 50 percent or more (majority-minority) AND the poverty rate is three times the average tract poverty rate for the county, whichever is lower.

Households within R/ECAP tracts frequently represent the most disadvantaged households within a community and often face a multitude of housing challenges. Overrepresentation of Black and Hispanic populations in areas of concentrated poverty can exacerbate racial disparities related to safety, employment, access to jobs and quality education, and conditions that lead to poor health. Areas of concentrated poverty generally have less private investment from financial institutions, grocery stores, and other retail outlets.

R/ECAPs are meant to identify where residents may have historically faced discrimination and continue to be challenged by limited economic opportunity. As will be discussed later in the section on Fresno’s local history, concentrated areas of poverty today were shaped by various land use practices that were historically used in communities across the nation to spatially segregate neighborhoods, including redlining and racially restrictive covenants.

Figure 3-15 of the regional assessment displays R/ECAPs in the Fresno County region. While the region as a whole appears to be fairly integrated economically and racially, concentrated poverty and racial segregation remains a major concern in several communities throughout the San Joaquin Valley. As the largest city in the region, Fresno has the highest number of R/ECAPs. There are currently 39 census tracts that are designated as R/ECAPs in the city of Fresno. Approximately 40 percent of Fresno residents live in R/ECAP census tracts. Hispanic residents make up the majority of the population living in R/ECAP tracts.

Recalling Figure 1E-3.2 which shows where predominant concentrations of various racial/ethnic groups live in Fresno and Figure 1E-3.3 which shows racial segregation/integration, individual R/ECAPS can be linked to census tracts with predominant Hispanic populations where there are high concentrations of POC segregation. Looking at familial status, recalling Figure 1E-3.9, more than half of the families living in Fresno’s R/ECAP tracts have children.

Figure 1E-3.11 displays R/ECAPs in the city of Fresno. R/ECAP census tracts cover all Downtown neighborhoods, such as Jane Addams, Edison, Lowell, and Jefferson, as well as west and south Fresno.

There are also two R/ECAP census tracts in the Bullard neighborhood of northern Fresno, in or near the campus of Fresno State University. A third isolated R/ECAP in the Bullard neighborhood is located around State Route 41.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-26 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 The Downtown neighborhoods are some of the oldest in Fresno, as the city began as a railroad town around the Central Pacific Railroad Depot in 1872. Spurred by the railroads and expanding agricultural opportunities, the town grew quickly and in 1885 was incorporated into a city. Many of the immigrants that first arrived were ethnic minorities, who settled in downtown neighborhoods such as Chinatown, Armenian Town, German Town and Italian Town. The town expanded rapidly and between 1913 and 1929, eleven high-rise buildings rose to create a distinct Fresno skyline. However, the Great Depression, redlining practices, and the construction of freeways that cut through these neighborhoods left their mark and contributed to the decline of these neighborhoods over time. However, over the last decade, residents and community leaders have worked together to reinvest in Downtown neighborhoods. A new Development Code was put in place to streamline development, the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan was adopted, and the Transform Fresno Program resulted in over $120M in investment in Southwest Fresno and Chinatown, and a new community college opened its doors in the neighborhood in 2024.

The R/ECAPS that are southwest and southeast of Downtown, including the outer portions of Southwest Fresno, portions of the Roosevelt and McLane Communities were affected by these same factors. While redlining did not occur south of Church Avenue, State Routes 41 and 99 traverse those neighborhoods. In addition, poor coordination between City and County planning resulted in the County allowing residential development to occur in these areas in spite of the fact that the City had planned industrial development in the areas south of Downtown from as early as 1918 due to the abundance of transportation options available (freeways and rail). The City is investing in these neighborhoods as well, with several specific planning efforts complete or underway, including the Central Southeast Specific Plan and the South Central Specific Plan.

The R/ECAPS in north Fresno developed later. The neighborhood in the Bullard Community at Shaw and Blackstone was developed between the 1950’s and the 1980s in the County, and parts of it were then annexed into the City. Factors that contribute to it include its eastern interface with Blackstone Avenue, a large commercial corridor, and the proximity of the then-newly expanded State Route 41. The previously quiet neighborhood was affected by high traffic volumes and noise from the commercial interface much like those affected by the Downtown freeway construction.

Finally, the R/ECAP in the Hoover Community around Fresno State is mostly occupied by students.

Unfortunately, much of the housing stock was cheaply built in the 1960s by absentee landlords and has not been well maintained. In recent years, newer student housing has been constructed, accommodating students, while some of the older off-campus student housing has turned over and is being rented to low income non-student residents. The El Dorado Park Neighborhood Plan, incorporated into the Hoover Community Plan in 2009, was an effort to revitalize one of the near-campus neighborhoods. After the plan was adopted, Fresno Housing revitalized two old apartment buildings and provided upgraded deed restricted housing for this neighborhood. This inspired neighboring property owners to make improvements to their properties as well, and the PARCs Department now runs programs from a church property which is in the neighborhood.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-27 Figure 1E-3.11: Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty, Fresno, 2017 Source: Data download from the HCD AFFH Mapping tool in 2021. Based on R/ECAP data from HUD 2013-2017.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-28 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 As will be discussed in more detail in a later section, several policies and historical forces 6 have contributed to the formation of R/ECAPs in Fresno and other communities across the country, including:
 Redlining: The discriminatory practice of denying loans and other financial services to residents of certain areas based on racial or ethnic composition has left lasting impacts on community development and wealth accumulation. 7
 Discriminatory Housing Practices: Including restrictive covenants, racial steering, and unequal lending practices, which limited where minority populations could live and invest. 8  Urban Renewal: Policies aimed at redeveloping urban areas often displaced minority communities, further entrenching segregation and poverty. 9
 Economic Disparities: Structural economic inequalities, including low engagement in the labor market and wage gaps, have exacerbated poverty levels in these communities. 10  Education Inequality: Income disparities and unequal educational resources have perpetuated limited social mobility for residents of R/ECAPs. 11
Moreover, there are systemic and structural issues which have contributed to the perpetuation of concentrated poverty including but not limited to: high unemployment rates and low engagement in the labor market, wage gaps, limited social safety nets, and disparities in access to educational resources.

Relative to other areas in the city, R/ECAPs in Fresno tend to exhibit the following characteristics:
 Higher percentages of non-White populations (Figure 1E-3.2) and medium to high rates of segregation for populations of color (Figure 1E-3.3)
 Median incomes less than $50,000 per year (Figure 1E-3.5)  Higher poverty rates (Figure 1E-3.7)
 Higher rates of children in single-family households (Figure 1E-3.9)  Lower academic performance and fewer educational resources based on the 2021 TCAC Opportunity Index (Figure 1E-3.15)
 Low engagement with the labor market (Figure 1E-3.17) 6 San Joaquin Valley Fair Housing and Equity Assessment, 2014. Available via:
https://academics.fresnostate.edu/oced/documents/SJV_Fair-Housing-and-Equity-Assessment_April-2014.pdf 7 Aguilera, D. October 2015. “Rare Maps Reveal Fresno’s Overlooked History of Segregation.” Accessed via:
https://www.kvpr.org/community/2015-10-27/rare-maps-reveal-fresnos-overlooked-history-of-segregation 8 Ramon D. Chacon, “A Case Study of Ghettoization and Segregation: West Fresno’s Black and Chicano Community During the 1970s,” Standford Center for Chicano Research. Working Paper Series No. 12 (Jan 1986). 9 San Joaquin Valley Fair Housing and Equity Assessment, 2014. Available via:
https://academics.fresnostate.edu/oced/documents/SJV_Fair-Housing-and-Equity-Assessment_April-2014.pdf 10 Montalvo, M. December 2022. “Labor leaders sound the alarm about low-wage job growth in California’s Central Valley.” Accessed via: https://fresnoland.org/2022/12/09/labor-leaders-sound-the-alarm-about-low-wage-jobgrowth-in-californias-central-valley/ 11 Californians for Justice.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-29  Poor environmental conditions (Figure 1E-3.23 through Figure 1E-3.25)  Higher percentages of Housing Choice Voucher usage (Figure 1E-3.29)  Higher rates of overcrowding (Figure 1E-3.30) and housing cost burden (Figure 1E-3.31 and Figure 1E-3.32)
In contrast, the communities north of Shaw including Woodward Park, Bullard, and also the McLane community are not characterized as racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty. These communities developed in the 1980s amidst construction of the State Route 99, 41, and 180 freeway loops around Downtown. As shown in the demographic analysis above, there is less racial and ethnic diversity in these communities. Figure 1E-3.3 indicates that these neighborhoods have higher rates of integration as compared to central core neighborhoods. Regarding income distribution, household incomes are generally higher around the northern fringes of the city. In fact, these communities are characterized as racially concentrated areas of affluence. This is described in more detail in the following section.

Furthermore, the built environment, or the physical resources built for the residents of Fresno, can have a significant impact on quality of life. Some ways the built environment can affect quality of life positively include physical activity, good housing conditions, and access to healthy food and healthcare. Physical activity includes walkability, bikeability, park access, and in Fresno’s hot summers, tree canopy coverage.

Housing conditions can be measured by the level of repair and maintenance needed. Access to healthy foods can include the number of and distance to grocery stores. Healthcare access can include the number of and distance to hospitals, clinics, and doctor’s offices. When comparing Fresno’s R/ECAPs to Fresno’s Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs – see next section for definition and location) in terms of the built environment the following is known about the quality of life:
• Walkability: Based on data from the 2017 Fresno Active Transportation Plan (ATP) there is a much higher percentage of sidewalk gaps in R/ECAPs compared to RCAAs. The gaps in the R/ECAPs occur within existing neighborhoods, in neighborhoods adjacent to freeways, and along major roadways in Southwest Fresno.
• Bikeability: Based on data from the ATP, there is a much higher percentage of bikepath gaps in R/ECAPs compared to RCAAs. The gaps in the R/ECAPs occur throughout and are most notable in Downtown Fresno, Southwest Fresno, and the eastern portion of the Fresno High-Roeding. • Walkability and Bikeability: Based on data from the 2017 Fresno Active Transportation Plan there is a much higher percentage of trails in the RCAAs compared to the R/ECAPs. In 2019, the RCAAs had 18 miles of trails and one of those trails, the Fresno Sugar Pine Trail, connects to miles of Clovis trails.
• Walkability and Bikeability: In the 2019 Fresno Network Expansion Feasibility Plan, the City evaluated all proposed unfunded trails identified in the ATP based on the Active Transportation Prioritization Tool adopted with the ATP. The criterion included access and equity, connectivity, traffic control, mode shift, and user comfort. The R/ECAPs have 30 segments of needed trails totaling 16.5 miles whereas the RCAAs areas have 10 segments totaling 3.16 miles. Twenty-eight of the trails in the R/ECAP scored a higher priority than all the trail needs in the RCAAs.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-30 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 • Park Access: In 2024, there are two regional, three community, and 13 neighborhood parks for a total of 18 City parks in R/ECAPs and one regional, three community, and six neighborhood parks for a total of 10 City parks in RCAAs areas. The RCAAs areas have 15 Clovis or Central Unified School District campuses with open campus policies, which allow residences to use outdoor courts and playfields and structures after school and on weekends. These school campuses have similar amenities to neighborhood and community parks.
• Park Access: The parks in the R/ECAPs were built between 1903 and 2014 with the median year being 1968 and the parks in the RCAAs areas were built between 1988 and 2006 with the median year being 1994. In 2016, during the Parks Master Plan process the park consultants evaluated 50 percent of the parks in the R/ECAPs to be in poor condition and 50 percent in fair condition.

Whereas, in the RCAAs areas, the parks were considered fair to good condition. • Park Access: The Measure P tax initiative went into effect in 2020 and required at least 50 percent of the funds be allocated to the highest need neighborhoods in Fresno. Through analysis, the Fresno PARCS Department determined the highest need neighborhoods by census tract. There are no highest need neighborhood census tracts in the RCAAs areas while there are 21 in the R/ECAPs. • Tree Canopy Coverage: In 2024, the City completed an Urban Forest Management Plan. The Plan conducted an analysis to determine a planting priority score for all census tracts in the city. Among all census tracts the lowest score was zero, the highest 78, and the median 22. The R/ECAPs had 20 census tracks above the median and the RCAAs areas had two. • Housing Conditions: In 2010, the City did a windshield neighborhood condition survey as part of the General Plan update. The study concluded that the housing was in good condition in the RCAAs areas and in fair to poor condition in the R/ECAPs.
• Healthy Food: According to the USDA Economic Research Service, in 2019, there were 12 census tracts with low income and low access to food and most were in Southwest Fresno. • Healthcare: According to FELT there are eight hospitals and clinics within or near the RCAAs areas and eleven in the R/ECAPs. There is a large network of doctor’s offices along Herndon Avenue between Highways 99 and 41 near the RCAAs areas and in Downtown Fresno within the R/ECAPs.

To improve the quality of life and access to opportunities in R/ECAPs, the Housing Element includes several key programs and initiatives, summarized below (see Section 1E-1 Action Plan for more details on each of these programs).
 Program 2 – Variety of Housing Opportunities in High Resource Areas. Increase the availability of affordable housing units in higher resource areas to alleviate pressure in R/ECAP areas, reduce housing cost burdens, and improve living conditions.  Program 11 – Incentives for Housing Development. Provide incentives to encourage private developers to include affordable housing in their projects.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-31  Program 19 – Home Buyer Assistance. Promote homeownership programs that provide down payment assistance and affordable mortgage options for low-income families.  Program 22 – Housing Rehabilitation. Launch a housing rehabilitation program that offers grants or low-interest loans to homeowners for repairs and maintenance. Provide resources and support for weatherization and energy efficiency upgrades.
 Program 23 – Comprehensive Code Enforcement. Implement code enforcement initiatives to ensure landlords maintain rental properties to health and safety standards.  Program 27 – Environmental Justice. Prepare an Environmental Justice Element with actions to improve public health and quality of life in disproportionately impacted neighborhoods focusing on: equitable distribution of parks, recreation facilities, and other beneficial civic and cultural facilities; planting native trees and vegetation in neighborhoods with less tree canopy coverage; access to multi-modal transportation opportunities; and healthy food access.  Program 28 – Equitable Community Investments. Develop publicly accessible tools for the evaluation and tracking of infrastructure projects in areas of greatest need (high segregation & poverty, low resource, and moderate resource).
 Program 29 – Equitable Engagement. Expand outreach and public education strategies to increase engagement amongst historically underrepresented populations and residents with the greatest need.
 Program 30 – Workforce Development. Provide job training programs to improve economic opportunities, reduce poverty, and increase financial stability.  Program 33 – Mobile Home Parks. Protect mobile home park residents from excessive rent increases and preserve mobile homes as opportunities for homeownership to individuals and households who might not be able to afford other housing purchase options.  Program 34 – Eviction Protection Program. Defend tenants renting an apartment or house in the city of Fresno from unlawful eviction.
 Program 36 – Homeless Assistance. Invest in various initiatives to provide housing, emergency shelter, and essential services to people experiencing homelessness.

Areas of Affluence
Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs) are neighborhoods in which there are both high concentrations of White households and high household income rates. Using HCD’s methodology for identifying RCAAs in California, RCAAs in Fresno County are census tracts with: 1) an average total White population that is 1.25 times higher than the average total White population in the Fresno County region and 2) a median household income that is 1.5 times higher than the Fresno County AMI in 2019.

Based on this methodology, there are several RCAAs in Fresno County (see Figure 3-16, Regional RCAAs) including in the cities of Fresno and Clovis. As shown in the figure, RCAAs are present in unincorporated islands including additional unincorporated areas east of Clovis and Fresno.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-32 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.12 displays a closer look at RCAAs in the city of Fresno. There are 18 RCAA tracts within the city limits. Several of the RCAA tracts overlap with areas that are not incorporated into Fresno city limits as of 2022. Within Fresno City, RCAAs are generally found in the North and Northeast Fresno neighborhoods, often characterized by high property values, excellent schools, and well-maintained infrastructure. Neighborhoods deemed as RCAAs include portions of the Woodward Park, Bullard, McLane, and Roosevelt community areas.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-33 Figure 1E-3.12: Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence, Fresno, 2019 Source: Data download from the HCD AFFH Mapping tool in 2021.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-34 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Several policies and historical forces have contributed to the formation of RCAAs. Areas of affluence in Fresno largely developed as a result of newly constructed freeways and new subdivision development at the outer edges of the city where land was less expensive. Historically, lending practices have favored white, affluent borrowers, facilitating easier access to home loans and homeownership in these areas while zoning regulations favored single-family homes and large lot sizes limiting the availability of affordable housing to maintain high property values. Affluent households began to purchase new single family homes on inexpensive land in north and northeast Fresno. These northern suburbs have the advantage of Clovis Unified School District’s high performing schools and a healthcare sector along Herndon Avenue . Affluent northern neighborhoods are also well served by large amounts of park land since they were developed more recently when the City established a mechanism to require land dedication and fees for park development, while many of the central neighborhoods in Fresno lack convenient access to parks and fall well below the City standard of 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents, since these neighborhoods were developed prior to having park dedication and development requirements.

As will be discussed, these neighborhoods have the greatest access to resources including positive educational outcomes, high labor market engagement (despite having further proximity from major employment centers), and healthier environmental conditions relative to the region. Compared to other areas in the city, RCAAs have distinct characteristics:
 Predominantly white population (Figure 1E-3.2)
 Median household incomes greater than $100,000 per year (Figure 1E-3.5)  Significantly lower poverty rates (Figure 1E-3.7)
 Higher percentages of children in married-couple households (Figure 1E-3.8) than single-parent households (Figure 1E-3.9)
 Lower rates of people living with disabilities (Figure 1E-3.10)  Positive educational outcomes based on the 2021 TCAC Opportunity Index (Figure 1E-3.15)  Greater labor market engagement (Figure 1E-3.17)
 More positive environmental conditions Index (Figure 1E-3.23 through Figure 1E-3.25)  Higher percentage of owner-occupied units (Figure 1E-3.28)  Lower rates of housing cost burden (Figure 1E-3.31 and Figure 1E-3.32) The Housing Element includes the following programs, many of which are already established and ongoing, which will help to promote inclusivity, affordability, and diversity in RCAAs (see Section 1E-1 Action Plan for more details on each of these programs):
 Program 2 – Variety of Housing Opportunities in High Resource Areas. Create additional capacity for multi-unit lower-income housing units in high and highest resource areas.  Program 3 – Encourage and Facilitate Accessory Dwelling Units. Promote the construction of ADUs to increase affordable housing options and diversify housing types in RCAAs.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-35  Program 11 – Incentives for Housing Development. Encourage the development of affordable housing in RCAAs by providing financial and regulatory incentives.  Program 14 – Partnerships with Affordable Housing Developers. Partner with affordable housing developers and stakeholders to facilitate the development of housing affordable to lowvery low- and extremely low- income households, with at least 40 percent developed in high or highest resource areas to facilitate housing mobility for lower-income households and special-needs groups.
 Program 20 – Housing Choice Voucher Incentive Program. Provide housing vouchers and subsidies to low-income families, allowing them to move to RCAAs. Partner with landlords and property managers in RCAAs to encourage participation in voucher programs.  Program 26 – Fair Housing Services. Provide training and resources for landlords and property managers on fair housing laws and best practices to prevent bias based on race, ethnicity, income, or family status.

Contributing Factors to Patterns of Segregation
Municipal land use policies (e.g., zoning, code enforcement, and redevelopment) are one of the focal determinants affecting race and class segregation. In most cities throughout the San Joaquin Valley, it is common for higher income areas (e.g., RCAAs) to be zoned single family or low density residential, while lower-income areas (e.g., RECAPs) contain most of the higher density residential zoning. This trend is applicable to development patterns in Fresno particularly in new growth areas, such as Northeast Fresno, which start out with predominantly single family development then fill in with higher density residential later. Regulatory constraints have perpetuated patterns of spatial inequality since middle- and lowerincome households have traditionally been excluded from these high opportunity areas.

Access to Opportunity
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.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-36 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 HCD defines access to opportunity as a concept to approximate place-based characteristics linked to critical life outcomes.
12 Improving access to opportunity means both improving the quality of life for residents of low-income communities, as well as supporting mobility and access to “high resource” neighborhoods.

This encompasses education, employment, economic development, safe and decent housing, low rates of violent crime, transportation, and other opportunities, including recreation, food, and healthy environment (air, water, safe neighborhood, safety from environmental hazards, social services, and cultural institutions).

The opportunity mapping process includes three domains: economic, environmental, and education. Each domain uses a number of indicators to determine its individual score. Table 1E-3.4 shows the full list of indicators. The indicators are then averaged into a composite index score.

Table 1E-3.4: Domains And List Of Indicators For Opportunity Maps Domain Indicators
Environmental CalEnviroScreen 4.0 pollution indicators and processed values Economic Poverty
Adult education
Employment
Job proximity
Median home value
Education Math proficiency
Reading proficiency
High School graduation rates
Student poverty rates
Poverty and Racial Segregation Poverty: tracts with at least 30 percent of population under federal poverty line Racial Segregation: Overrepresentation of people of color relative to the county (i.e., Tracts with a racial location quotient higher than 1.25 for Black or African American, Hispanic, Asian, or all people of color in comparison to the county) Source: CA Fair Housing Task Force, Methodology for TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps, December 2021.

The opportunity mapping tool maps areas of highest resource, high resource, moderate resource, moderate resource (rapidly changing), low resource, and high segregation and poverty.  Highest Resource. Areas designated as “highest resource” are the top 20 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 economic opportunities, health, and education attainment.  High Resource. 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.
12 California Department of Housing and Community Development(HCD) AFFH Guidance Memo, April 2021 update, pg. 34.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-37  Moderate Resource. “Moderate resource” areas are in the top 30 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. Low-resource areas are those that score in the bottom 30 percent of census tracts and indicate a lack of access to positive outcomes and poor access to opportunities.  High Segregation and Poverty. 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 percent of the population in these areas is below the federal poverty line ($27,750 annually for a family of four in 2022).

Overall, in comparison to other more affluent areas of California, the San Joaquin Valley has very little access to opportunity.
13 Figure 1E-3.13 shows the composite score of the 2022 TCAC Opportunity Areas in the Fresno County region. As shown in the figure, most of Fresno County is a mix of low-resource or moderateresource areas and areas of high segregation and poverty. There are pockets of high-resource designations throughout incorporated areas and in the northeast and eastern portions of the county. Lower resource areas of high segregation and poverty are identified in the western unincorporated areas of the county.

Figure 1E-3.14 shows a closer look at the TCAC Opportunity Areas in the city of Fresno. As the largest city in the county, Fresno has the greatest variation in resource area designations among the incorporated cities of Fresno County. Growth areas on the periphery of established neighborhoods along the northern and eastern edges of the city are designated moderate and high resource designations, including an annexation area, designated as highest. The central portion of the city is designated as low resource and high segregation and poverty.

Across the nation, affordable housing has been disproportionately developed in minority neighborhoods with high poverty rates, thereby reinforcing the concentration of poverty and racial segregation in low opportunity and low resource areas. Fresno is no different. While communities of color account for more than half of the population in the county, the county’s racial inequities persist across all indicators of community health and well-being. These inequities threaten future economic prosperity14. 13 San Joaquin Valley Fair Housing and Equity Assessment, 2014. Available via:
https://academics.fresnostate.edu/oced/documents/SJV_Fair-Housing-and-Equity-Assessment_April-2014.pdf. 14 PolicyLink, 2017. Advancing Health Equity and Inclusive Growth in Fresno County. Accessed via:
https://www.policylink.org/sites/default/files/advancing-health-equity-and-inclusive-growth-in-fresno.pdf.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-38 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.13: TCAC Opportunity Areas - Composite Score, Region, 2022 Source: Data downloaded from the California State Treasurer TCAC/HCD Opportunity Area Maps in 2022.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-39 Figure 1E-3.14: TCAC Opportunity Areas - Composite Score, Fresno, 2022 Source: Data downloaded from the California State Treasurer TCAC/HCD Opportunity Area Maps in 2022.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-40 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Educational Opportunity
School proficiency is an indication of the quality of education that is available to residents of an area. High quality education is a vital community resource that can lead to more opportunities and improve quality of life. Historically, neighborhoods or communities with higher median incomes and home values have had access to higher-performing schools than residents of lower-income neighborhoods since income distribution influences home values and property taxes, and therefore funding for public schools.

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. Historically, school districts with higher concentrations of affordable housing typically have lower test scores in schools. 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. Students who are eligible for free or reduced-priced meals, or who have parents or guardians who did not receive a diploma are also 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.

Figure 1E-3.15 shows the 2021 TCAC/HCD education domain score in Fresno. Access to proficient schools among block groups varies significantly throughout the city. Clovis Unified School District and Central Unified School District are performing best as indicated in this map. Block groups in north Fresno, which have higher proportions of white residents, have the highest school proficiency index scores (greater than .75). Despite the presence of CSU Fresno and University High School, a top 100 school by U.S. News and the highest ranked high school in Fresno, census tracts surrounding the CSU Fresno campus scored between 0.25 and 0.5 indicating less positive education outcomes. The area is classified as a racially concentrated area of poverty, and as described above and shown in Table 1E-3.4, student poverty rates are a determining variable in measuring educational opportunity and outcomes. School proficiency index scores are lowest in the southern and western portions of the city, areas in which Hispanic and Black or African American residents generally reside, and within Fresno Unified and Washington Union school districts.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-41 Figure 1E-3.15: TCAC Opportunity Areas - Education Score, Fresno, 2021 Source: Data downloaded from the HCD AFFH Data Tool in 2021. Note that this data is based on 2021 TCAC Opportunity Areas as the 2022 data by indicator is not yet available through the HCD AFFH Tool.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-42 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Results from the survey conducted for the 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice in Fresno echoed concerns surrounding disparate access to proficient schools, with approximately 40 percent of survey respondents noting that schools in the city are not equally provided for. In addition, public comments received on the Draft Housing Element expressed concerns that students in certain areas of the city, particularly in R/ECAP areas, face unsafe and challenging conditions traveling to and from school. This is due to the lack of or incomplete sidewalks, stormwater drainage, and streetlights in these areas; coupled with inefficient public transportation options in neighborhoods at the fringes of the city; and the use of local roads by heavy-duty truck traffic. These conditions also have a significant impact on the quality of the environment in which learning is taking place. The City intends to prepare an Environmental Justice element that will dive deeper into these issues to develop specific actions related to educational opportunity and equitable access.

Employment Opportunity
Although neighborhoods with jobs in close proximity are often assumed to have good access to jobs, distance alone does not capture any other factor such as transportation options, the type of jobs available in the area, or the education and training necessary to obtain them. There may be concentrations of jobs and low-income neighborhoods in urban centers, but many of the jobs may be unattainable for residents of lowincome neighborhoods. This section analyzes both the labor market engagement and jobs proximity indices, developed by HUD, which together offer a better indication of job accessibility for residents of specific areas. The jobs proximity index measures the physical distance between place of residence and job locations, with employment centers weighted more heavily. It also takes into account the local labor supply (i.e., competition for jobs) near such employment centers. The Labor Market Engagement Index is based on unemployment rate, labor force participation rate, and the percentage of the population age 25 and over with a bachelor’s degree or higher. For both indices, census block group results are standardized on a scale of 0 to 100 based on relative ranking nationally. A higher score indicates stronger job proximity or labor force participation.

Figure 1E-3.16 shows the Jobs Proximity Index in Fresno. Fresno generally has moderate levels of jobs proximity. Block groups with high proximity to jobs are well-distributed across the city indicating employment centers. Jobs Proximity Index scores are higher for Downtown neighborhoods as well as in north Fresno around the Hoover neighborhood and California State University (CSU) Fresno. Additionally, data shows that the majority of workers employed in the city both live and work in Fresno (56.8 percent) while a lower proportion of residents live in Fresno but commute to employment elsewhere (43.2 percent).

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-43 Figure 1E-3.16: Jobs Proximity Index, Fresno, 2017
Source: Data downloaded from the HCD AFFH Data Tool in 2021. Based on 2014-2017 HUD Jobs Proximity Index.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-44 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.17 maps Labor Market Engagement Index scores for block groups in Fresno. Despite being one the largest cities in the county, there are stark disparities in labor market engagement in that most of Fresno’s southern block groups indicate low levels of engagement with the labor market. Regionally, the highest labor force engagement scores are in the unincorporated county islands in northern Fresno and the majority of Clovis and unincorporated area immediately adjacent to Clovis on the east. While block groups in north Fresno display high levels of labor market engagement, the southern areas of the city have low levels of engagement with the labor market, which can indicate high unemployment rates and/or low educational attainment. Compared to Figure 1E-3.7 above, Distribution of Poverty, the population living below the poverty line generally has higher levels of jobs proximity compared to the population in the city as a whole but lower levels of labor market engagement, indicating an inability to access jobs due to factors other than proximity or a choice to not engage in the labor market. Comparing Figures 1E-3.5 and 1E-3.7, not engaging in the labor market can be a contributing factor to lower median incomes and poverty.

Interviews with stakeholders in the city conducted for the 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice indicated that contributing factors to lower labor market engagement may also be a result of lack of access to transportation and/or mismatches between available jobs and worker education and skillsets.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-45 Figure 1E-3.17: Labor Market Engagement Index, Fresno
Source: Data downloaded from the HCD AFFH Data Tool in 2021. Based on HUD Labor Market Engagement Index.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-46 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 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. The city of Fresno is generally car-dependent but there is some variation in level of transit access, walkability, and access to amenities.

AllTransit is one type of transit and connectivity analytic tool developed by the Center for Neighborhood Technology for the advancement of equitable communities and urban sustainability 15. The tool analyzes the transit frequency, routes, and access to determine an overall transit score at the city, county, and regional levels. Geographic regions (e.g., cities, counties, Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs)) are scored on a scale of 0 to 10, with 10 being complete transit connectivity. The Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element Chapter 3, Table 3-18 displays AllTransit Performance Scores for all Fresno County jurisdictions based on data from 2019. Figure 1E-3.18 below shows Fresno’s performance score representing average household transit access. Fresno’s score is 5.0, indicating a low combination of trips per week and number of jobs accessible, enabling fewer people to take transit to work. Overall, Fresno has a higher performance score than the county (3.2) however the city of Fresno represents an outlier both in terms of population size, degree of urbanization, and transit accessibility amongst jurisdictions in the county. It should be noted that since the last update of AllTransit analytics in 2019, transit routes have been added, frequencies increased, and fares reduced.

Figure 1E-3.18: AllTransit Performance Score, Fresno, 2019 Source: AllTransit.cnt.org, 2019
15 Center for Neighborhood Technology, 2019, AllTransitTM, alltransit.cnt.org APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-47 There are three major public transit operators that serve the residents in the city and county of Fresno. The City of Fresno’s Fresno Area Express (FAX) is the largest transit operator, offering high capacity fixedroute services and a demand responsive service for disabled riders (Handy Ride). The City of Clovis’ Stageline offers four fixed routes with 30-minute headways, limited weekend fixed-route service, and a demand responsive paratransit service (Round Up). In smaller cities and rural communities, the Fresno County Rural Transit Agency (FCRTA) provides limited fixed route service and demand responsive services within and between communities through several community-focused transit subsystems. FCRTA links to FAX and Stageline services in the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area (FCMA).

Fresno residents are primarily served by FAX, operated by the City of Fresno. FAX operates on a modified grid system and provides service on 18 transit routes on weekdays and weekends. The fixed route system consists of 10 lines that provide service in a predominantly north-south direction, seven east-west cross-town lines, and a 15.7-mile Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line that operates on Blackstone Avenue from north Fresno to Downtown and on Ventura/Kings Canyon from Downtown to Clovis Avenue. In addition to the BRT, FAX operates 15-minute frequencies on Route 9 (Shaw Avenue), Route 34 (First Street), and Route 38 (Cedar Avenue). To better serve residents in neighborhoods on the fringe, FAX recently extended Route 45 farther into West Fresno and extended Route 34 farther into South Central Fresno. They also recently upgraded Route 34 to a 15-minute frequency route. The system is designed to facilitate bus travel by making transfers convenient between intersecting lines and between seven lines that converge Downtown at Courthouse Park.

The FAX system map is shown in Figure 1E-3.19. Note that the figure does not reflect the most recent extensions of Routes 34 and 45 into West and South Central Fresno.

FAX generally serves the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area. Within the city of Fresno, FAX is strongly connected to the Central Business District. The Central Business District is the local and regional governmental center for federal, state, county, city, and educational offices, and contains the Community Regional Medical Center and a regional shopping center (Fulton Street). The Fresno Convention Center, two major hotels, various private office buildings, Amtrak, the regional bus station, and the future highspeed rail station, are also located in this area. Seven of FAX's 18 routes converge in the Central Business District and other routes serve several other regional centers of employment. Residents living on the fringe of the city experience barriers to public transportation access as there are fewer routes available in these areas. The fringe includes both disadvantaged neighborhoods which are more strongly reliant on public transportation and high resource neighborhoods in North, Northwest, and East Fresno.

FAX Handy Ride is a shared ride, curb-to-curb service, provided from any origin to any destination throughout the service area for any trip purpose. The accommodation service was designed to meet the transportation needs of eligible persons with disabilities who cannot functionally use the FAX City bus system. Service hours for Handy Ride mirror those of FAX fixed route service, and reservations are required one day in advance of the scheduled trip to comply with ADA regulations. A limited number of will calls are provided each day based on availability, with priority going to medical appointments. FAX is in full compliance with the ADA. The Handy Ride service area mirrors the FAX fixed route service area plus three-quarters of a mile. The service area for Handy Ride is shown in Figure 1E-3.20. The current service area is bounded by Copper Avenue on the north, Central Avenue on the south, Grantland/Polk Avenue on the west, and Willow/Temperance Avenue on the east.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-48 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.19: Fresno Area Express (FAX) System Map
Source: City of Fresno, Department of Transportation, 2022.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-49 Figure 1E-3.20: Handy Ride Service Area Map, 2023
Source: City of Fresno, Department of Transportation, 2023.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-50 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.21 displays HUD’s Transportation Cost Index for the region and Figure 1E-3.22 displays a closer look at index scores in the city of Fresno. While access to low-cost transportation is moderate and relatively uniform throughout most neighborhoods in the city, block groups in Downtown, proximate to the Yosemite International Airport and CSU Fresno campus, and in centrally located established neighborhoods have lower transportation cost levels with the lowest levels located at the major transportation hubs of Herndon and Blackstone Avenues and the Central Business District in Downtown. Higher transportation costs exist in neighborhoods that are on the fringe of the city. According to the 2020 Analysis of Impediments, transit usage is highest in South and West Fresno and lowest in the city’s most northern block groups. Within the region, Black or African American, Hispanic, and Asian or Pacific Islander populations below the poverty line use public transportation more than White populations. Overall low levels of transit performance in Fresno combined with moderate levels of access indicates potential challenges for residents without access to vehicles in accessing needed services and amenities. Transit fares in the city are now the lowest they have ever been, with expanded free fares to children under 12 and Veterans/Active Military.

As part of the Zero Fare Clean Air Act, on May 13, 2022, Kaiser Permanente Fresno awarded grant funds to FAX to subsidize fares for Reduced Fare riders. Reduced Fare riders include seniors 65 or older with ID, Medicare card holders, and persons with disability placards. This project is supported by Kaiser Permanente Northern California Community Benefit Programs. Then in January 2023, Fresno State University, State Center Community College District, and Fresno Unified School District started subsidizing transit fares for students, faculty, and staff. Despite this, there are still barriers to mobility for residents, particularly those living on the fringe of the city. Barriers include lengthy travel times due to long bus wait times, lack of direct routes, and route limitations requiring residents to use multiple modes of transportation to reach their first and last stop. High transportation costs also contribute to overall low levels of affordability in Fresno.

For a typical household in Fresno, combined housing and transportation, makes up an estimated 61 percent of household income according to the 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. For a moderate-income household in the region, the proportion jumps to 71 percent. Notably, combined housing and transportation costs are lower closer to the city center and are generally higher further out from the city.

According to comments received during the public review process for the Draft Housing Element, other issues related to transit mobility in the city are:
 Inadequate and/or absent infrastructure to facilitate safe and efficient active transportation, including but not limited to sidewalks, curbs, stormwater drainage, streetlights, crosswalks, and protected bike lanes.
 Inadequate and/or absent protection from extreme weather, including climate-related weather events, such as extreme heat and flooding, that impact walking, biking, and public transportation use. This includes but is not limited to the availability of shade (e.g., trees, structures), shelter, sidewalks, and stormwater drainage.
 The presence of high volumes of traffic, including heavy-duty truck traffic, on roadways used by pedestrians or bicyclists, including in and near areas zoned for industrial land uses and along designated truck routes.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-51 To address these issues, the Housing Element includes a program to direct investments to address infrastructure and public service deficiencies in high-need areas including areas classified as high segregation and poverty, low resource, and moderate resource in Figure 1E-3.14. As funding allows, the City will prioritize neighborhood infrastructure improvements such as water, sewer, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streets, curb ramps, driveway approaches, curb cuts, and streetlights in areas of greatest needs in coordination with new residential developments.

Figure 1E-3.21: Transportation Cost Index, Fresno County Region, 2017 Source: Data downloaded from the HCD AFFH Data Tool in 2021. Based on 2013-2017 HUD Low Cost Transportation Index.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-52 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.22: Transportation Cost Index, Fresno, 2017 Source: Data downloaded from the HCD AFFH Data Tool in 2021. Based on 2013-2017 HUD Low Cost Transportation Index.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-53 Environmental Health and Opportunity
CalEnviroScreen was developed by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to evaluate pollution sources in a community while accounting for a community’s vulnerability to the adverse effects of pollution. Measures of pollution burden and population characteristics are combined into a single composite score that is mapped and analyzed. Higher values on the index indicate higher cumulative environmental impacts on individuals arising from these burdens and population factors.

The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) compiles these scores to help identify California communities disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution. In addition to environmental factors (pollutant exposure, groundwater threats, toxic sites, and hazardous materials exposure) and sensitive receptors (seniors, children, persons with asthma, and low birth weight infants), CalEnviroScreen also considers socioeconomic factors such as educational attainment, linguistic isolation, poverty, and unemployment. The TCAC Environmental Health Index summarizes this into a map to identify potential exposure to harmful toxins at a neighborhood level. Index values range from 0 to 100 and the higher the index value, the less exposure to toxins harmful to human health. Therefore, the higher the value, the better the environmental quality of a neighborhood, where a neighborhood is a census blockgroup.

Fresno has long struggled with environmental, health, and economic disparities, including high concentrations of poverty, air pollution, and toxin and pesticide exposure. In Fresno, lower-income housing and racially segregated communities are disproportionately impacted by a combination of locational factors such as proximity to landfills, freeways, industrial areas, and other toxins and pollutants. There are a number of historical disparities that exist between north and south Fresno. 16 The life expectancy of residents in south Fresno is significantly lower than that of residents living in the northern part of town. Southwest Fresno specifically has been recognized as one of the most pollution-burdened communities in the state.

According to a study published in 2018 by the National Center for Health Statistics and the National Association for Public Health Statistics, the life expectancy of residents in south and central Fresno was 77 years, compared to 85 years for residents in northern Fresno. The outbreak of COVID-19 worldwide also disproportionately impacted POC in Fresno. Social determinants of health (e.g., income level, occupation, access to health care, and living conditions, which includes housing and built environment) have not only contributed to higher rates of underlying medical conditions for POC in Fresno, but also increased their risk of contracting the virus, being hospitalized, and dying from COVID-19. 17 16 Martinez, N. 2021. Tale of Two Cities: Environmental Injustice in Fresno. Accessed via:
https://fresnoalliance.com/tale-of-two-cities-environmental-injustice-infresno/#:~:text=According%20to%20a%20study%20published,for%20residents%20in%20northern%20Fresno. 17 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2021. Megally, H., Pacheco-Werner, T., Mireles, D., Celedon, S., Frost, B., Sataraka, J., Williams, K., Davies-Balch, S., Mendoza, S., Banerjee, S., Chan, S., Dhaliwal, S., Ward, L., Silva-Aguilar, Y., & Gasga, L. A Neighborhood Approach to Mitigate COVID-19 Transmission in BIPOC and People with Disabilities: Benefits and Lessons Learned Using the Community Health Worker Model. (2021) Central Valley Health Policy Institute. California State University, Fresno.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-54 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.23 maps TCAC Environmental Health Index scores for Fresno. Most block groups in the city of Fresno score poorly. The highest environmental health scores in the city can be found in the city’s most northern block groups, which include high proportions of open space and residential land uses. In contrast, the lowest scoring tracts are in south Fresno that also have lower access to opportunity. Fresno County is a major agricultural producer and agricultural production processes harm water supply and 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. These factors and others contribute to the environmental problems in Fresno including its role as the region’s center for agricultural industry and its location as the intersection of several major state highways. Topographically, low elevations in the Central Valley trap emissions from commuter vehicles and logistics vehicles like semi-trucks, along with high levels of pollutants from farming and pesticide use. Until 2004, farmers in the region would routinely burn tons of debris at the end of a growing season, which generated large amounts of particulate matter in the air. While agricultural burning has decreased, it has not been phased out completely. 18 The Central Valley also experiences above average temperatures, especially in the summer, when ozone pollution becomes much worse due to the longer periods of time ozone can develop in the sunlight. Regional and state forest fires also contribute to poor air quality during the summer and fall. Smoke and particles from the fires tend to accumulate and build up along the base of the mountains to the north and east of the city severely impacting Fresno’s air quality especially for those living in north and east Fresno. As a result of these conditions, many residents suffer from respiratory illness and poor health outcomes.

As described in the Regional Fair Housing Assessment, much of Fresno County, particularly the western area and the cities along the State Route 99 corridor, have high cumulative CalEnviroScreen scores, see Figure 1E-3.24. This is a result of high scores for indicators of pollution burden, primarily pesticides, drinking water contaminants, particulate matter, diesel particulate matter, toxic releases from facilities, hazardous waste, and ozone. Fresno also suffers from some of the highest asthma, low birth weight, and cardiovascular disease levels in the state.
18 Benner, C. and Pastor, M. 2015. Equity, Growth, and Community: What the Nation Can Learn from America's Metro Areas. “Struggle and the City: Conflict-Informed Collaboration.” University California Press. Pp. 130-160.

Accessed via: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/j.ctt1ffjnd4.9.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-55 Figure 1E-3.23: TCAC Opportunity Areas – Environmental Score, Fresno, 2022 Source: Data downloaded from the HCD AFFH Data Tool in 2021. Note that this data is based on 2021 TCAC Opportunity Areas as the 2022 data by indicator is not yet available through the HCD AFFH Tool.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-56 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.24: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores, Fresno
Source: Data downloaded from the Office of Environmental Health and Hazard Assessment in 2022.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-57 Citywide, the average Fresno resident has more exposure to air pollution than nearly 70 percent of census tracts nationwide and adult asthma rates are higher in Fresno than both the state and nation overall. 19 Spatial patterns of Environmental Health Index scores and residential patterns by race/ethnicity show that there are varying levels of disparity among racial and ethnic groups with regard to environmental quality. Hispanic, Black or African American, and Asian or Pacific Islander populations that live below the poverty line in the city are exposed to the worst environmental health conditions. 20 As shown in the figure below, nearly all of the census tracts with the highest CalEnviroScreen 4.0 score results align with predominantly Hispanic neighborhoods that have high POC segregation or low-medium rates of segregation. In the established neighborhoods north and south of Shaw Avenue near the Hoover planning area, residential patterns are more balanced and integrated, but environmental health scores are still poor. Policies and land use decisions which have affected these patterns will be described in further detail later in this chapter (see “Other Relevant Factors and Local Knowledge”).

SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities
A disadvantaged community (DAC) 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. Disadvantaged communities in California are specifically targeted for investment of proceeds from the state’s Cap-and-Trade Program. These investments are aimed at improving public health, quality of life and economic opportunity in California’s most burdened communities, and at the same time, reducing pollution that causes climate change.

In the CalEnviroScreen tool, census tracts receiving the highest 25 percent of overall scores in CalEnviroScreen 4.0 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. The designation takes into account the latest and best available data and considers factors related to data unavailability. Other qualifying criteria for a disadvantaged community includes:
19 PolicyLink, 2017. Advancing Health Equity and Inclusive Growth in Fresno County. Accessed via:
https://www.policylink.org/sites/default/files/advancing-health-equity-and-inclusive-growth-in-fresno.pdf 20 Ibid SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-58 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024  Census tracts lacking overall scores in CalEnviroScreen 4.0 due to data gaps, but receiving the highest 5 percent of CalEnviroScreen 4.0 cumulative pollution burden scores.  Census tracts identified in the 2017 DAC designation as disadvantaged, regardless of their scores in CalEnviroScreen 4.0.
 Lands under the control of federally recognized Tribes. For purposes of the DAC designation, a Tribe may establish that a particular area of land is under its control even if not represented as such on CalEPA’s DAC map and therefore should be considered a DAC.

The San Joaquin Valley has the most disadvantaged communities per capita statewide. As shown in Figure 1E-3.25, in the city of Fresno specifically, nearly 70 total tracts in Fresno are considered a SB 35 DAC, comprising an estimated 85 percent of the city’s land area. Fresno also has several tracts that scored in the highest 5 percent of CalEnviroScreen scores which is likely attributed to the fact that there are two National Priorities List (NPL) Superfund sites within the city of Fresno include the 145-acre Fresno Municipal Sanitary Landfill in southwest Fresno and the half-acre Industrial Waste Processing site in north Fresno.

The 5-acre T.H. Agriculture & Nutrition Company site, a deleted NPL site in the city, was removed from the NPL in 2006 following cleanup. A Superfund site is any land in the United States that has been contaminated by hazardous waste and identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a candidate for cleanup because it poses a risk to human health and/or the environment. One NPL site exists immediately outside of the city of Fresno in the community of Malaga. The EPA also manages a Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) to track the management of certain toxic chemicals that may pose a threat to either human health or the environment. There are 18 industrial facilities in Fresno that must report annually how much of each chemical is recycled, combusted for energy recovery, treated for destruction, and disposed of or otherwise released on- and off-site. This information is collectively referred to as production-related waste managed. The facilities are clustered in south and west Fresno.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-59 Figure 1E-3.25: SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities
Source: Data downloaded from the HCD AFFH Data Tool in 2021. Data is based on CalEnviroscreen 4.0 Scores from the Office of Environmental Health and Hazard Assessment in 2022.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-60 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 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. A few indicators of housing mobility include availability of rental and ownership opportunities throughout the jurisdiction, vacancy rates, distribution of Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs), and housing costs and affordability.

Tenure and Rates of Homeownership
One of the most prevalent consequences of residential segregation is the intergenerational inaccessibility of homeownership. Homeownership is typically the largest asset of most households in the U.S. and hugely impacts generational wealth, as it is contingent upon passing down assets. For low-income families, maintaining homeownership provides an opportunity for future generations to progress their wealth by increasing the family’s equity. Systems of institutional racism created through federal housing policies and discriminatory mortgage lending practices prior to the Fair Housing Act of 1968, along with insufficient access to credit, have had significant impacts on the homeownership rates of racial and ethnic minorities — particularly Black or African American and Hispanic populations. 21 These discriminatory practices will be described in further detail later in this section (see “Other Relevant Factors and Local Knowledge”).

According to the 2016-2020 American Community Survey, there are 170,137 households in Fresno.

Approximately 46.8 percent of households own their homes. Homeownership rates are highest for White (51.1 percent) and Asian households (49.6 percent). About 40.1 percent of Hispanic households in the city own their homes while Black or African American (27.8 percent), American Indian or Alaska Native (30.9 percent), and Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander residents (31.3 percent) have the lowest homeownership rates (see Figure 1E-3.26).
21 Reid, C. 2021. Crisis, Response, and Recovery: The Federal Government and the Black/White Homeownership Gap. Terner Center for Housing Innovation. Available via: https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-andpolicy/crisis-response-and-recovery-the-federal-government-and-the-black-white-homeownership-gap/ APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-61 Figure 1E-3.26: Housing Tenure by Race and Hispanic Origin Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25003 Figure 1E-3.27 shows the distribution of renter-occupied households in the city and indicates that renters are more predominant in central Fresno. Areas where the percentage of renters exceeds 80 percent are near Fresno State University, Downtown, southeast Fresno, and in the Pinedale neighborhood of north Fresno.

Conversely, there is low renter occupancy and homeownership is more prevalent in southeastern Fresno along north and south Fowler Avenues.

51.1%

27.8%

30.9%

49.6%

31.3%

40.9% 39.7% 40.1%

48.9%

72.2%

69.1%

50.4%

68.7%

59.1% 60.3% 59.9%

0.0%

25.0%

50.0%

75.0%
100.0%
White Alone
Non-Hispanic
Black Or
African
American
Alone
American
Indian And
Alaska Native
Alone
Asian Alone Native
Hawaiian And
Other Pacific
Islander
Alone
Some Other
Race Alone
Two Or More
Races
Householder
Hispanic or
Latino of Any
Race
Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied
SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-62 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.27: Renter Households in Fresno, 2019
Source: Data downloaded from the HCD AFFH Data Tool in 2021.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-63 Housing Supply Summary
According to the 2016-2020 American Community Survey, there are 180,020 housing units in Fresno, which represents an increase of 5.1 percent since 2010 and 20.8 percent since 2000.

Vacancy Rates
Of Fresno’s total housing units, 95.5 percent are occupied, and 5.5 percent are vacant. Vacancies in Fresno County are at 7.0 percent of all housing units. The vacancy rate, calculated from ACS data, includes housing that is available for sale or rent, housing that has been rented or sold but not yet occupied, seasonal housing, and other vacant units. Figure 1E-3.28 displays the total number of vacant units in Fresno by type. Note the categories are determined by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Figure 1E-3.28: Vacant Units by Type, City of Fresno, 2020 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25004 Seasonal, Recreational, or Occasional Use units are typically used or intended for use only in certain seasons or for weekends or other occasional use throughout the year. Seasonal units include those used for summer or winter sports or recreation, such as beach cottages and hunting cabins. Seasonal units also may include quarters for such workers as herders and loggers. Interval ownership units, sometimes called sharedownership or timesharing condominiums, also are included here. Migrant Worker units include vacant units intended for occupancy by migratory workers employed in farm work during the crop season. If a vacant unit does not fall into any of the categories specified above, it is classified as “Other vacant.” For example, this category includes units held for occupancy by a caretaker or janitor, and units held for personal reasons of the owner.
3,240
33%
864
9% 832
8%
483
5%
727
7%
0 0%
3,737
38%
For Rent
Rented, Not Occupied
For Sale Only
Sold, Not Occupied
For Seasonal, Recreational, Or
Occasional Use
For Migrant Workers
Other Vacant
SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-64 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Unit Sizes
Availability of housing in a variety of sizes is important to meet the needs of different demographic groups.

Neighborhoods with multi-bedroom detached, single-family homes will typically attract larger families, whereas dense residential developments with smaller unit sizes and fewer bedrooms often accommodate single-person households or small families. But market forces and affordability impact housing choice and the ability to obtain housing of a suitable size, and markets that do not offer a variety of housing sizes at different price points can lead to barriers for some groups. Rising housing costs can, for example, lead to overcrowding as large households with lower incomes are unable to afford pricier, larger homes and are forced to reside in smaller units. On the other hand, people with disabilities or seniors with fixed incomes may not require large units but can be limited by higher housing costs in densely populated areas where most studio or one-bedroom units are located.

Table 1E-3.5 summarizes housing units in Fresno by size and tenure. Housing units with two- and threebedrooms represent the largest share of renter-occupied units in Fresno (approximately 65 percent). Threeand four-bedroom units represent the largest share of owner-occupied units (approximately 80 percent). For comparison, only 5.9 percent of renters occupy four-bedroom units, which may indicate limited choice for larger renter families. Stakeholder outreach for the 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing in Fresno noted the need for larger, affordable units to meet the needs of large families 22.

Table 1E-3.5: Housing Tenure by Number of Bedrooms (2020) City of Fresno Fresno County
Number of
Households
Percent Number of
Households
Percent
Homeowners
Owner - No Bedroom 614 0.8% 1,024 0.6%
Owner - 1 Bedroom 756 0.9% 1,534 0.9%
Owner - 2 Bedrooms 10,392 13.0% 19,752 11.9%
Owner - 3 Bedrooms 44,342 55.6% 91,033 54.7%
Owner - 4 Bedrooms 19,534 24.5% 43,719 26.3%
Owner - 5 or More Bedrooms 4,059 5.1% 9,358 5.6%
Owner - Subtotal 79,697 46.8% 166,420 53.7%
Renters
Renter - No Bedroom 10,353 11.4% 12,510 8.7%
Renter - 1 Bedroom 14,720 16.3% 21,532 15.0%
Renter - 2 Bedrooms 35,433 39.2% 54,803 38.1%
22 Draft 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Fresno. Available via:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2020/02/Draft-2020-Analysis-of-Impediments-to-FairHousing-Choice.pdf APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-65 City of Fresno Fresno County
Number of
Households
Percent Number of
Households
Percent
Renter - 3 Bedrooms 23,789 26.3% 42,406 29.5%
Renter - 4 Bedrooms 5,346 5.9% 10,847 7.5%
Renter - 5 or More Bedrooms 799 0.9% 1,579 1.1%
Renter - Subtotal 90,440 53.2% 143,677 46.3%
Total Households 170,137 310,097
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25042 Housing Choice Voucher Usage
The Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCV, formerly Section 8) is a federally funded program that provides rental assistance through approximately 11,000 vouchers, to eligible low-income individuals and families in Fresno County. Eligible applicants who receive a voucher are responsible for finding an apartment or house in the private rental market. HCVs are portable and their distribution throughout the city is subject to fluctuate based on location preferences of individual voucher households and the participation of landlords in the HCV program. Approximately 3,000 owners of rental properties in Fresno County accept tenants who participate in the program, but HCV use is most concentrated within the city of Fresno, with rates up to 52.2 percent of households in tracts along State Route 41 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 State Route 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.

Figure 1E-3.29 displays the rate of HCV usage in the city. HCVs are used most across west, central, and south Fresno. Central Fresno has clusters of HCV use east of State Route 41 and south of East Ashlan Avenue. In Southeast Fresno, census tracts abutting Sequoia-Kings Canyon Freeway, and further south along East Kings Canyon Road show clustering of HCV use. HCV use is also prevalent in West Fresno, south of North Santa Fe Avenue. This area, separated by railroad tracks from northwest Fresno, indicates the stark difference between northwest and northeast Fresno and the rest of the city. Northeast Fresno has very limited HCV use, with only four census tracts north of Herndon Avenue containing any HCVs, and of those four tracts, no tract exceeds 5 percent HCV use. Northwest Fresno also has limited HCV use; the single census tract north of North Santa Fe Avenue with HCV use is composed of approximately 18 percent vouchers.

A recent change to state law went into effect in January 2020 that protects HCV holders from discrimination by landlords based on their participation in the HCV program. With this new prohibition against landlords refusing HCV tenants, resources to educate northeast and northwest Fresno landlords who have traditionally not participated in the HCV program are included in the Housing Element as a way to improve and balance the distribution of HCVs in the city.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-66 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.29: Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Usage, Fresno Source: Data download from the HCD AFFH Data Tool in 2021.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-67 Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk
In the city of Fresno and Fresno county, renter-occupied households and households of color are more likely to have a housing need than White households or owner-occupied households. 23 In fact, several demographic
groups experience a disproportionately greater rate of housing need compared to White households and owner-occupied households. There are four housing problems that are typically reported on to assess affordability and other types of housing needs. These are: 1) housing units that lack complete kitchen facilities; 2) housing units that lack complete plumbing facilities; 3) households that are overcrowded (i.e., more than

1.0 people per room); and 4) households that are cost burdened (i.e., monthly housing costs exceed 30 percent of monthly income). A household is said to have a housing problem if they have one or more of these four problems. A household is said to have a severe housing problem if the housing unit lacks complete kitchen or plumbing facilities and/or includes severe cost burden (more than 50 percent of monthly income is spent on housing costs) or severe overcrowding (more than 1.5 people per room). As shown in Table 1E-3.6, more than 80,870 households have at least one housing problem in Fresno, comprising 51 percent of all households.

Of these, nearly one-third (31 percent) of all households have a severe housing problem. In the region, housing problems occur at slightly lesser rates; 137,555 households (48 percent) have at least one housing problem and 83,265 households (29 percent) have a severe housing problem.

Table 1E-3.6: Demographics of Disproportionate Housing Needs, 2017 City of Fresno Fresno County
Total
Number of
Households
Number
with
Problems
Percent
with
Problems
Total
Number of
Households
Number
with
Problems
Percent
with
Problems
Households Experiencing Any of the Four Housing Problems White 64,665 25,400 39.3% 126,010 46,335 36.8%
Black of African
American 13,775 8,140 59.1% 15,785 9,105 57.7%
Hispanic 61,070 36,850 60.3% 118,935 67,555 56.8%
Asian Pacific
Islander 15,637 8,443 54.0% 22,482 11,353 50.5%
Native American 684 445 65.1% 1,522 764 50.2%
Other 3,338 1,595 47.8% 5,100 2,455 48.1%
Total 159,165 80,870 50.8% 137,555 289,815 47.5%
23 Draft 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Fresno. Available via:
https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2020/02/Draft-2020-Analysis-of-Impediments-to-FairHousing-Choice.pdf.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-68 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 City of Fresno Fresno County
Total
Number of
Households
Number
with
Problems
Percent
with
Problems
Total
Number of
Households
Number
with
Problems
Percent
with
Problems
Households Experiencing Any of the Four Severe Housing Problems White 64,665 13,305 20.6% 126,010 23,600 18.7%
Black or African
American 13,775 5,290 38.4% 15,785 5,860 37.1%
Hispanic 61,070 24,615 40.3% 118,935 44,840 37.7%
Asian Pacific
Islander 15,637 5,402 34.6% 22,482 7,121 31.7%
Native American 684 250 36.6% 1,522 429 28.2%
Other 3,338 960 28.8% 5,100 1,420 27.8%
Total 159,165 49,810 31.3% 289,815 83,265 28.7%
Note: All % represent a share of the total population.

Source: Draft Assessment of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, Fresno, 2020. CHAS, 2017.

The highest rates of housing needs are found in census tract 54.08 around Fresno State University, census tract 25.02 along parts of Sequoia Kings Canyon Freeway that are immediately east of Downtown, and census tract 47.04 in northwest Fresno bordered by West Shields Avenue to the south, North West Avenue to the east, and West Dakota Avenue to the north. Census tracts in southwest, southeast, west, and central Fresno have elevated levels of housing problems with tracts typically having at least 50 percent of all households having at least one housing problem.

The following sections describe trends in households experiencing the greatest housing needs.

Overcrowding
A household is overcrowded if there is more than 1.0 people per room, not including kitchen or bathrooms.

Severe overcrowding refers to households with more than 1.5 people per room. Nearly 11 percent of households in the city are considered overcrowded. Similar to trends across the state, overcrowding is more common among renters than homeowners. By tenure, approximately 15.3 percent of Fresno renter-occupied households are overcrowded compared to 4.4 percent of owner-occupied households are overcrowded (See Table 1E-3.7). This is consistent with the previously described summary of housing unit sizes which suggested that larger rental families have less housing options.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-69 Table 1E-3.7: Tenure and Occupants per Room, Fresno, 2020 Households Percent
Owner Occupied

0.50 or less occupants per room 51,937 65.2%

0.51 to 1.00 occupants per room 23,298 29.2%

1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room 3,215 4.0%

1.51 to 2.00 occupants per room 807 1.0%

2.01 or more occupants per room 440 0.6%
Total Owner Occupied Units 79,697 46.8%
Renter Occupied

0.50 or less occupants per room 38,052 42.1%

0.51 to 1.00 occupants per room 38,522 42.6%

1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room 7,311 8.1%

1.51 to 2.00 occupants per room 3,541 3.9%

2.01 or more occupants per room 3,014 3.3%
Total Renter Occupied Units 90,440 53.2%
Total 170,137 100.0%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25014.

As shown in Figure 1E-3.30, the ACS estimates that there is a higher rate of overcrowding in Southwest Fresno and Downtown. As shown in the racial segregation and integration trends discussed previously, these areas correlate to areas with the highest rates of POC segregation. In addition, there is a greater presence of single-parent households and low levels of labor market engagement. Data indicates that there are a few areas of more severe overcrowding conditions (more than 20 percent) in the Pinedale area, around the Fresno Yosemite International Airport, in Downtown, and south of Downtown. Overall, the neighborhoods that are most impacted by high rates of overcrowding align with racially concentrated areas of poverty in the city.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-70 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.30: Overcrowding in Fresno, 2020
Source: Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-71 Overpayment
This section provides an analysis of the proportion of households overpaying for housing. Current standards measure housing cost in relation to gross household income: households spending more than 30 percent of their income, including utilities, are generally considered to be overpaying or cost burdened. Severe overpayment occurs when households pay 50 percent or more of their gross income for housing. For owners housing costs include mortgage payment, taxes, insurance, and utilities.

Typically, the impact of high housing costs falls disproportionately on extremely low-, very low-, and lowincome households, especially renter households. Lower-income households are defined as those that earn 80 percent or less of the area median household income (AMI). While some higher-income households may choose to spend a greater proportion of their income on housing, lower-income households may be limited by a lack of affordable housing.

In Fresno, 33,460 households (19.8 percent of all households) are cost burdened and 34,945 (20.7 percent of all households) are severely cost-burdened, for a total of 68,405 households (40.6 percent) (see Table 1E-3.8, Overview of Cost Burden in Fresno, 2019). As discussed in the Overpayment section of the Housing Needs Assessment, overpayment often impacts lower-income households at a higher rate due to financial constraints. Of the cost-burdened households in Fresno, approximately 48,615 (71.0 percent) are renters and 19,790 (28.9 percent) are homeowners.

Table 1E-3.8: Overview of Cost Burden in Fresno, 2019
Number of Households
(Owners + Renters) Percent of Households
Cost Burden <=30% 97,620 57.9%
Cost Burden >30% to <=50% 33,460 19.8%
Cost Burden >50% 34,945 20.7%
Cost Burden not available 2,600 1.5%
Total 168,625 100.0%
Source: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) data 2015-2019 Since 2010, overpayment rates have decreased. As seen in Table 1E-3.9, there was a 32.0 percent decrease in overpayment for moderate-income homeowner households and a 64.5 percent decrease for abovemoderate income homeowner households. Overpayment rates also decreased amongst low-income households (incomes between 50 percent and 80 percent of the AMI) since 2010. This is largely due to the fluctuation in the number of low-income homeowners experiencing cost burden. As shown in the table, severe overpayment rates decreased for low-income homeowners by 48.1 percent and 28.8 percent for lowincome renters, thus influencing the percent change for all low-income households.

On the other end of the income spectrum, extremely low-income households have experienced a disproportionate growth in overpayment regardless of tenure. Since 2010, overpayment rates have increased by

36.0 percent for extremely low-income households and severe overpayment rates have increased 26.9 percent.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-72 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Table 1E-3.9: Cost Burden in Fresno, 2010-2019
Household Type by Tenure and
Income Level
Cost Burdened Severely Cost Burdened
2010 2019
%
Change
(2010-
2019)
2010 2019
%
Change
(2010-
2019)
Total Households 156,225 168,625 - 156,225 168,625 -
All Households 70,700 68,410 -3.2% 36,110 34,945 -3.2%
Renters 42,320 48,615 14.9% 24,375 26,735 9.7%
Homeowners 28,380 19,790 -30.3% 11,735 8,210 -30.0%
Extremely Low-Income Households
(Income is less than or equal to 30% of AMI)
19,530 26,555 36.0% 17,255 21,905 26.9%
Renters 16,965 22,285 31.4% 15,120 18,555 22.7%
Homeowners 2,560 4,270 66.8% 2,130 3,350 57.3%
Very Low-Income Households
(Income is between 30% and 50% of AMI)
17,145 19,295 12.5% 10,310 9,050 -12.2%
Renters 12,310 14,845 20.6% 6,940 6,640 -4.3%
Homeowners 4,840 4,455 -8.0% 3,375 2,415 -28.4%
Low-Income Households
(Income is between 50% and 80% of AMI)
14,985 13,965 -6.8% 4,945 2,920 -41.0%
Renters 8,995 8,650 -3.8% 1,840 1,310 -28.8%
Homeowners 5,995 5,310 -11.4% 3,105 1,610 -48.1%
Moderate-Income Households
(Income is between 80% and 100% of AMI)
5,655 3,845 -32.0% 1,455 615 -57.7%
Renters 2,300 1,745 -24.1% 350 130 -62.9%
Homeowners 3,350 2,095 -37.5% 1,105 480 -56.6%
Above Moderate-Income Households
(Income is greater than 100% of AMI)
13,385 4,750 -64.5% 2,145 455 -78.8%
Renters 1,750 1,090 -37.7% 125 100 -20.0%
Homeowners 11,635 3,660 -68.5% 2,020 355 -82.4%
Source: CHAS (Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy) data 2006-2010 and 2015-2019.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-73 Figure 1E-3.31 and Figure 1E-3.32 display the trends of overpayment for renters and homeowners in Fresno between 2014 and 2019. As described above, the rate of households experiencing overpayment significantly decreased during this time. As shown below, overpayment is most concentrated in census tract

54.08 around Fresno State University, census tract 25.02 along parts of Sequoia Kings Canyon Freeway that are immediate east of Downtown, and census tract 47.04 in northwest Fresno bordered by West Shields Avenue to the south, North West Avenue to the east and West Dakota Avenue to the north. Census tracts in south and west Fresno have the most elevated levels of overpayment with tracts having at least 40 to 60 percent of all households overpaying towards housing costs. These areas tend to align with racially concentrated areas of poverty where there is a greater presence of children in single female-headed households and low job market engagement. Downtown and the neighborhoods north and south of Shaw Avenue display lower rates of overpayment overall. In 2020, HUD released a comprehensive housing market analysis which summarizes housing market trends in Fresno between 2010 and 2020. 24 According to the report, after the Great Recession of 2008, home sales and prices began to stabilize again during 2010 and 2011. Home prices then increased every year between 2012 and 2018, although there were some fluctuations around 2014. The sales market began to balance out while rental market conditions began tightening. In the Fresno rental market, high levels of renter household growth and decreased rental construction contributed to a decline in vacancy rates and rising rents since 2015. Although rents rose, local economic conditions reportedly kept pace as the city experienced a net increase in jobs available. Between 2010 and 2018, the median gross rent increased by a total of 21 percent, while the median income of renter households increased by 29 percent. As shown in the figure below, overpayment amongst renters decreased throughout most of the city between 2014 and 2019. Overpayment amongst homeowners generally decreased in the existing neighborhoods north and south of Shaw Avenue during the same time period.

Overpayment remained higher for both renters and homeowners closer to new growth areas and priority development areas such as neighborhoods along BRT corridors. 24 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2020. Comprehensive Housing Market Analysis: Fresno, California. Retrieved from: https://www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/pdf/FresnoCA-CHMA-20.pdf.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-74 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.31: Percent of Renters Overpaying, Fresno, 2014-2019 Source: Data download from the HCD AFFH Data Tool in 2021.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-75 Figure 1E-3.32: Percent of Homeowners Overpaying, Fresno, 2014-2019 Source: Data download from the HCD AFFH Data Tool in 2021.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-76 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Substandard Housing Conditions
More than 65 percent of housing units in Fresno were built prior to 1990, making a majority of the housing stock over 30 years old, and approximately half of those are over 50 years old (Table 2-19, Age of Housing Stock (2020), in the Regional 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.

In Fresno, older homes are primarily concentrated the city’s Downtown Neighborhoods historic core, including in Downtown, Chinatown, Southwest Fresno, Huntington, and Fulton-Lowell. Outside of the Downtown Neighborhoods, older homes also exist in historic communities that were annexed into the city, like Highway City and Pinedale. As the city grew outward, many commercial, office, and educational opportunities did as well, having the impact of reducing resources within these older, established neighborhoods. Homes in these neighborhoods are often in greater need of repair due to the limitation of available resources compounded with their age. Another measure of substandard housing conditions is the lack of presence of kitchen and plumbing facilities. The 2016–2020 ACS estimated that there are 1,804 renteroccupied units and 291 owner-occupied units in Fresno that lack a complete kitchen or plumbing. In total, these 2,095 units account for less than 2.0 percent of the total housing stock in Fresno. This indicates that renters are disproportionately burdened by substandard housing conditions and risk displacement if conditions deteriorate beyond the lack of a kitchen or plumbing, particularly beyond what is considered habitable.

Input received during the community engagement process for the City’s 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice aligns with age trends to indicate the need for housing rehabilitation in Fresno. Residents and other stakeholders noted the need for single-family home repair and rehabilitation, rental rehabilitation, and improvements to aging mobile homes, particularly roof repair. This need was most identified in Southwest Fresno, although some participants noted homes in need of rehabilitation in other areas as well.

The Housing Element includes a program to provide targeted assistance to extremely low-income homeowners and targeting marketing in mobile home parks and similar areas. In addition, a program has been added to market the availability of additional rehabilitation assistance programs in areas of greatest need, such as the Southwest Fresno neighborhoods.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-77 Homelessness
In January 2023, the Fresno-Madera Continuum of Care (FMCoC) conducted its annual Homeless Census and Survey Point-in-Time (PIT) Report, which estimated 3,207 individuals experiencing homelessness in the city of Fresno (71.4 percent) out of 4,493 persons experiencing homelessness throughout the entire Continuum of Care area (both Fresno and Madera Counties). Of that number, 1,388 persons were sheltered and 1,819 were unsheltered. Between 2022 and 2023, the total number of people experiencing homelessness in the city decreased by 5.6 percent, although the number of people unsheltered increased by 7.3 percent.

Based on Fresno’s quarterly tally, those experiencing unsheltered homelessness are living in all parts of the city, with a modest concentration in downtown Fresno and Southern Blackstone Corridor areas, where approximately 175 people are living. Generally, the unhoused population tends to be more concentrated in areas where they can more easily access services and public transportation. The main service providers for people experiencing homelessness in the city are in the central core of the city while north Fresno and the fringe neighborhoods have fewer services available.

The City utilizes the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care network as access sites (entry points) to homeless services. The access sites are part of the coordinated entry system for individuals that are experiencing homelessness or are at risk of homelessness. Access sites offer services ranging from shelter to diversion, depending on needs and availability of service. In addition to the 9 Fresno sites listed below, there are two mobile teams called Homeless Outreach Progressive Engagement (HOPE) teams which provide mobile services, connecting to locations known to be frequent camp locations or based on service requests.

Fresno-Madera Continuum of Care Access Sites:
 MAP Point at Poverello House
 Naomis House
 Poverello House Outreach Team
 The Welcome Center
 Fresno Home
 Golden State Triage Center
 Clinica Sierra Vista
 Marjaree Mason Center
 WestCare California Inc
SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-78 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Throughout the FMCoC area, which includes both Fresno and Madera Counties, approximately 63 percent of the homeless population identified as male, 36 percent as female, and 1 percent as transgender, questioning, or a gender that is not singularly male or female (e.g., non-binary, genderfluid, agender).

Approximately half of the population identified as Hispanic (51 percent), with Hispanic individuals in Fresno being disproportionately represented among those experiencing homelessness. By race, 7 percent identified as Native American or Alaska Native, 3 percent as Asian, 16 percent as Black or African American, 1 percent as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 70 percent as White, and 3 percent as multiracial or belonging to another race. Additionally, 235 people, or 6 percent of the homeless population, were veterans — veterans are overrepresented compared to the general population and nearly twice as likely to experience ,homelessness. About 19 percent were survivors of domestic violence (769 people), a group that is particularly vulnerable to homelessness due to the nature of domestic violence leaving individuals with few safe housing options. Approximately and 33 percent of the homeless population reported a mental health problem, compared to 14 percent of the general population with a disability in the city of Fresno.

About Additionally, 36 percent reported a substance use disorder. In Fresno, individuals with mental health issues or substance abuse disorders are significantly more likely to experience homelessness due to difficulties maintaining employment, housing stability, and social support. Among the FMCoC homeless population, 389 persons (9 percent) were under 18 and 278 persons (6 percent) were 64 or older, with older adults facing a heightened risk of homelessness due to fixed incomes. Single adults and couples accounted for 86 percent of the population experiencing homelessness, while persons in family households (with children) accounted for 14 percent. The PIT report does not distinguish the characteristics of the homeless population in Fresno County or the city of Fresno separately from the COC, so it is assumed that these statistics generally represent the City of Fresno and Fresno County population.

Table 1E-3.10, Demographic Characteristics of Homeless Population, Fresno-Madera COC2023, identifies the proportion of each of protected characteristics identified in the 2023 Fresno-Madera COC dashboard report compared to the proportion of the population in Fresno and Madera counties, to identify whether any protected classes are disproportionately represented as part of the homeless population. Individuals that identify as White (including both White Hispanic and non-Hispanic) and Asian are the only demographic groups that are underrepresented in the homeless population compared to the total population living in Fresno and Madera counties. Residents identifying as Hispanic, Native American or Alaska Native, and Black or African American, are overrepresented in the homeless population.

Table 1E-3.10: Demographic Characteristics of the Homeless Population, Fresno-Madera COC, 2023
Characteristic Homeless Population Total Population
(Fresno and Madera Counties)
Hispanic 51% 45%
Native American or Alaska Native 7% 3%
Asian 3% 10%
Black or African-American 16% 6%
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-79 Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 1% 0.3%
White1 70% 77%
Other/Multiple Races 3% 3%
1White is assumed to include both Hispanic and non-Hispanic.

Source: Fresno/Madera Continuum of Care Point-in-Time Executive Summary, 2023.

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 1E-3.11.

Table 1E-3.11: City and County of Fresno 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 crossjurisdictionally, 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 fullservice 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 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.

Catholic Charities
Countywide
Physical location:

City of Fresno
SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-80 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Service/Resource Description Operator Location
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 shelf-stable
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
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
City of Fresno
Mobile Shower and
Restroom
Mobile trailers with bathing and restroom
facilities for the unhoused. Facilities
include showers, toilets and sinks, with
ADA accessibility.

Contracted by City
of Fresno
Various locations:

City of Fresno
Emergency Shelter
services
Providing critical intervention for
individuals and families experiencing
homelessness with short-term shelter
accommodations.

Elevate Location: City of
Fresno
Youth Emergency
Shelter services
Providing access to immediate help and
supportive resources for youth in crisis.

Also assisting with overnight shelter for
homeless youth ages 18-24
Fresno Economic
Opportunities
Commission (EOC)
Location: City of
Fresno
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-81 Service/Resource Description Operator Location
Fresno Home Bridge
and Triage shelter
Providing temporary housing to homeless
individuals that are located throughout the
City of Fresno.

Mental Health
System (TURN)
Countywide.

Physical location:

City of Fresno
Emergency Shelters
Services
Providing short-term shelter
accommodation at multiple sites
throughout the City. Poverello provides
24-staffing, meals, case management to the
unhoused community.

Poverello House Citywide
Domestic Violence
Services
Marjaree Mason Center provides county
wide collaboration to provides services
that focus on services for victims of
Domestic Violence. MMC also provides
safe houses for survivors to ensure the
victims have a safe place to reside.

Marjaree Mason
Center
Countywide.

Physical location:

City of Fresno
Fresno Rescue
Mission
Providing 24-hour services for those in
need. Services range from Case
management, food services, counseling,
employment and temporary housing
Fresno Rescue
Mission
Physical Location:

City of Fresno
Source: City of Fresno, 2024
Emergency shelters also include Marjaree Mason Center, Fresno Rescue Mission, Evangel Home Inc., and Plaza Terrace. To address the needs of residents experiencing or at risk of homelessness, the Housing Element includes a program to connect vulnerable households with available resources and collaborate with County jurisdictions to increase the availability of homelessness resources.

Displacement Risk
The Urban Displacement Project, a joint research and action initiative of UC Berkeley and the University of Toronto, analyzes income patterns and housing availability to determine the level of displacement risk at the census tract level. Figure 1E-3.33 shows the communities in Fresno that are sensitive to displacement as of 2017, according to the Urban Displacement Project. Sensitive communities include areas where a high proportion of residents may be vulnerable to displacement due to rising housing costs and market-based displacement pressures present in and/or near the community. In total, 27 percent of census tracts in the state of California are identified as areas that are sensitive to displacement.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-82 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.33: Communities Sensitive to Displacement, Fresno Source: Data downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer in 2021. Based on data from the Urban Displacement Project.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-83 Displacement pressures are generally defined as a percent change in rent greater than the county median for rent increases or a difference between the tract median rent and median rents for surrounding tracts that are greater than the median for all tracts in the county. Communities were designated “sensitive” if they met the following criteria:
1) They currently have populations vulnerable to displacement in the event of increased redevelopment and drastic shifts in housing cost. Vulnerability is defined as:
 Share of very low-income residents is above 20 percent in 2017; and,  The tract meets two of the following criteria:
• Share of renters is above 40 percent in 2017
• Share of people of color is above 50 percent in 2017
• Share of very low-income households that are severely rent burdened households is above the county median in 2017
2) They, or areas in proximity, have been experiencing displacement pressures. Displacement pressure is defined as:
 A percent change in rent above the county median for rent increased between 2012 and 2017; or  Local and nearby increases in rent were greater than the regional median between 2012-2017 OR the 2017 rent gap is greater than the regional median rent gap.

As shown in Figure 1E-3.33, a substantial amount of the land area in the city is sensitive to displacement pressure. Tracts identified as sensitive to displacement correspond with concentrated areas of poverty and neighborhoods which generally have lower median incomes, greater populations of color, and larger proportion of renter households. While the Urban Displacement Project does not specify the conditions that led to the vulnerability determination for Fresno, it can be assumed that residents of Fresno experience heightened displacement risk compared to residents elsewhere in the county due to a combination of lower incomes and high housing prices. Notably, the West and north Woodward Park area neighborhoods, which are experiencing higher percentages of cost burden from housing costs but have lower percentages of renteroccupied households than central core neighborhoods, were not found to be sensitive to displacement (see Figure 1E-3.33).

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-84 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Using 2015 to 2019 data, Urban Displacement Project released an Estimated Displacement Risk (EDR) model for California that identifies varying levels of displacement risk for low-income renter households in all census tracts in the state. The model includes three separate displacement layers: the “Overall Displacement” layer, the “50-80% AMI” layer which shows the level of displacement risk for low-income households specifically, and the “0-50% AMI” layer which shows the level of displacement risk for extremely low-income and very low-income households combined. 25 These are shown for the City of Fresno below in Figures 1E-3.34 through 1E-3.36.

Tracts are assigned to one of the following categories, with darker red colors representing higher displacement risk and lighter orange colors representing less risk:
 Low Data Quality: the tract has less than 500 total households and/or the census margins of error were greater than 15 percent of the estimate (shaded gray).  Lower Displacement Risk: the model estimates that the loss of low-income households is less than the gain in low-income households. However, some of these areas may have small pockets of displacement within their boundaries.
 At Risk of Displacement: the model estimates there is potential displacement or risk of displacement of the given population in these tracts.
 Elevated Displacement: the model estimates there is a small amount of displacement (e.g., 10 percent) of the given population.
 High Displacement: the model estimates there is a relatively high amount of displacement (e.g., 20 percent) of the given population.
 Extreme Displacement: the model estimates there is an extreme level of displacement (e.g., greater than 20 percent) of the given population.

In Fresno, very low-income and low-income households are experiencing elevated, high, or extreme displacement risk in downtown and in central core neighborhoods (displayed in the dark red tracts). Looking more closely at displacement risk by income group in Figure 1E-3.35 and Figure 1E-3.36, very low- and extremely low-income households (0-50 percent of AMI) are experiencing extreme levels of displacement risk California’s recent history has shown that environmental disasters such as wildfires, earthquakes, and floods can also be significant causes of displacement, and that climate change is accelerating the risk from such disaster events.
25 Urban Displacement Project modeled displacement risk as the net migration rate of renter households at varying income levels. Tracts that have a predicted net loss within these groups are considered to experience displacement.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-85 Figure 1E-3.34: Estimated Displacement Risk - 2019
Source: Data downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer in 2023. Based on data from the Urban Displacement Project and 2014-2019 5-year American Community Survey data.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-86 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.35: Estimated Displacement Risk - 0% - 50% AMI (2019) Source: Data downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer in 2023. Based on data from the Urban Displacement Project and 2014-2019 5-year American Community Survey data.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-87 Figure 1E-3.36: Estimated Displacement Risk - 50% - 80% AMI (2019) Source: Data downloaded from the AFFH Data Viewer in 2023. Based on data from the Urban Displacement Project and 2014-2019 5-year American Community Survey data.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-88 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Displacement Avoidance Efforts
The Fresno Transformative Climate Communities Collaborative (Collaborative) began with a participatory process to identify a series of projects to invest in that will result in significant environmental and economic benefits in Downtown, Chinatown, and Southwest Fresno. Anyone who lived, worked, or owned property in these areas was encouraged to participate. The purpose of the Collaborative was to promote and nurture creative project ideas, develop local criteria to define the type of catalytic and connective impact projects should have, and provide the City of Fresno with direction on the proposal of integrated projects included in the application to the Strategic Growth Council (SGC) for funding.

The Collaborative met regularly in 2017 and resulted in an active, engaged, 164 member Community Steering Committee. During these meetings, participants were encouraged to propose projects, and eligible projects were then gathered into five packages that were presented for a community vote. At the final Community Steering Committee public meeting, voting members approved a project package designed by residents of Southwest Fresno and developed and submitted a proposal to SGC for $66.5 million from the Transformative Climate Communities Program (TCC).

These engagement efforts resulted in Transform Fresno, a community-driven initiative to transform the 4.9 square mile project area— comprised of Chinatown, Downtown and Southwest Fresno —through a suite of projects and plans that will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions while also providing local environmental, health, and economic and social equity benefits (see Figure 1E-3.37, Transform Fresno Project Area). In early 2018, SGC awarded Transform Fresno a TCC grant of $66.5 million to implement the projects identified through community-driven planning processes.

Transform Fresno is anticipated to bring a number of benefits to residents of the city; however, there are reasons to be concerned about the negative effect that increased investment and development might have on vulnerable populations as displacement can occur whether a neighborhood is experiencing disinvestment or reinvestment. Disinvestment-related displacement describes when the value of a property does not justify investing in its maintenance, leading to decay and abandonment. Reinvestment-related displacement refers to the process in which investments in a neighborhood result in increased rent to a point where it is profitable for landowners to sell or raise the rent and existing tenants are forced to leave.

The City of Fresno has taken actions to prevent displacement of residents and businesses in and around the Transform Fresno project area. Notably, TCC funded projects will not cause direct displacement, as all proposed housing units will be constructed on vacant lots and transportation activities will occur within the public right-of-way. However, indirect displacement from rising property values - as a result of large-scale investment in historically underserved TCC neighborhoods - remains a concern for residents and business owners. To address these concerns in a meaningful way, the City of Fresno established an AntiDisplacement Task Force (ADTF) in November of 2018.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-89 Figure 1E-3.37: Transform Fresno Displacement Program Area Source: City of Fresno
SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-90 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 The TCC Program also requires policies and programs to avoid the displacement of existing residents and local businesses, to help ensure all members of the community benefit from the investment. The City of Fresno adopted a Displacement Avoidance Plan (DAP) in 2019 in efforts to reduce economic displacement risk within the Transform Fresno project area. The DAP outlines policies intended to understand the impact of TCC investments on existing households and businesses, while opening discussions about preventative measures and proactive solutions to displacement. To support this effort, Thrivance Group – a contracted local consultant selected to implement the DAP –gathered and analyzed data related to displacement vulnerability within the Transform Fresno project area, conducted educational and informational community workshops, and made 48 displacement avoidance policy recommendations in the 2021 “Here to Stay: A Policy-Based Blueprint for Displacement Avoidance in Fresno.” The City incorporated several recommendations from “Here to Stay” into the One Fresno Housing Strategy, which was the basis for several new implementation programs in this Housing Element.

Farmworkers
Farmworkers are traditionally defined as persons whose primary incomes are earned through seasonal or permanent agricultural labor. There are generally three types of farmworkers in the state:
 Permanent Residents: Permanent residents of the county in which they work who may require housing that accommodates families, including housing affordable to extremely low-income households for seasonal workers who do not work in the off-season.  Migrant Farmworkers: Temporary residents who 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.
 H-2A Visa Workers: Temporary residents who 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.

Farmworkers are essential to Fresno County’s and the city’s economies as well as to local and national food supplies. Across the state, housing for farmworkers has been recognized as an important and unique concern. Farmworkers are generally considered a special housing needs group due to their limited income and often-unstable nature of their employment. According to one of the more recent studies (2022) that touches on the housing needs of farmworkers, “Farmworker Health in California, Health in a Time of Contagion, Drought, and Climate Change,” published by the Community and Labor Center at UC Merced, over half of the state’s farmworker population lives in the San Joaquin Valley (61 percent). The study was based on interviews with a sampling of over 1,200 California farmworkers from five agricultural regions, including the San Joaquin Valley. Some key findings related to farmworker housing needs from the study included:
 Only three percent of farmworkers primarily speak English at home, which indicates that language barriers could pose a challenge to securing housing.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-91  92 percent of farmworkers rent their housing, indicating that there are barriers to accessing homeownership and that there may be a higher risk of displacement amongst farmworkers.  Farmworkers face a range of housing problems, indicating a need for assistance with repairs to housing or assistance with finding more suitable housing. The housing problems included lack of access to water inside the home (10 percent), bad tasting water at home (24 percent very bad; 13 percent bad), challenges in keeping the home cool (39 percent) or warm (36 percent), and other poor housing conditions such as rotting wood (16 percent), mold (14 percent), water damage (13 percent), water leaks (12 percent), cockroaches (24 percent), or rodents (17 percent).  Survey respondents, “lived in large, overcrowded households with low incomes and several household problems.” Approximately 70 percent of the sample lived with children under the age of 18. The median household size was four, and one-fourth of farmworkers lived in households with six or more persons, indicating a need for larger family-sized housing units, while more than one-fourth reported sleeping in a room with three or more persons, indicating overcrowding.  Along with large household sizes, the farmworkers reported a median annual household income of $25,000. Although the study acknowledged that this figure may have under-reported the income of the entire household, it likely still underscores the fact that housing affordability would be an acute need for a very large portion of farmworker households who would struggle to afford larger-sized homes on the relatively low wages associated with farm work.  The accompanying data dashboard26 indicates that of the 512 responses received from farmworkers in the San Joaquin Valley region, 70.1 percent of respondents occupy a single-family home; 16.8 percent live in an apartment; 4.1 percent live in a labor camp/boarding house/ or motel; 8.6 percent are sleeping in a car, RV, or garage; and about 0.4 percent of respondents are renting a room or did not specify their living arrangement.

Data collected as part of the USDA Census of Agriculture indicates that the composition of farmworker households has changed since 1996 to include more families and fewer individuals. As a result, farmworker housing needs have likely shifted from primarily seasonal housing for migrant workers (such as dormitorystyle housing available during peak labor activity in May through October) towards more permanent affordable housing for low wage working families, although there remains a need for both housing types. 26 UC Merced, 2022. Farmworker Health Study Data Dashboard. https://clc.ucmerced.edu/farmworker-healthstudy/farmworker-health-study-data-dashboard. Accessed March 2024.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-92 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 As shown in Table 1E-3.12, the 2017 USDA Agricultural Census reported 2,540 farms and an estimated 37,819 farmworkers in Fresno County. Most farmworkers were seasonal (55.4 percent), working less than 150 days per year. Estimates from the 2020 ACS report that there were 36,163 people in Fresno County (8.8 percent of the overall workforce) employed in the Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining industries. In the city of Fresno, there were 9,414 people employed in this category (4.3 percent of the overall workforce). However, ACS data does not accurately capture the farmworker population as it includes employment in various non-agricultural industries and excludes farm labor contractors, which significantly underestimates the number of farmworkers. Moreover, 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. As such, there is little data available on farmworkers in the city.

Table 1E-3.12: Hired Farm Labor (Countywide), 2017
Labor Term Number of Farm Operations Number of Workers
Year-Round Labor (150 days or
more) 1,557 16,876
Seasonal Labor (Less than 150
days) 1,753 20,943
Source: USDA Agricultural Census, Table 7, 2017.

Although census data indicates that there is a small population of farmworkers in the city relative to other jurisdictions in Fresno County, school enrollment data suggests that some of region’s farmworker population utilize services within Fresno. While these estimates are at the school district level (students can live in one city and attend a school located in a different city), the data shows there were approximately 5,902 migrant students enrolled in school districts throughout Fresno County with 2,975 migrant students enrolled in schools in the city of Fresno and 43 enrolled in Clovis Unified during the 2020-2021 school year, as shown in Table 1E-3.13. Generally, migrant student enrollment has increased steadily throughout the county. Nearly half of the county’s migrant student population attend school in the city of Fresno. The greatest enrollment of migrant students is in Orange Center Elementary, located in the unincorporated county outside the southwestern fringe of the city.

Table 1E-3.13: Migrant Student Enrollment
School District 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 Clovis
Clovis Unified 51 51 49 44 43
City of Fresno
American Union - - - - -
Fresno County Office of Ed 32 22 39 32 33
Fresno Unified 725 867 850 713 918
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-93 School District 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 Monroe Elementary 41 43 33 25 22
Orange Center Elementary 1,139 1,289 1,392 1,481 1,607
Pacific Union Elementary - - - - -
Washington Colony Elementary - - - - -
Washington Unified 155 175 189 203 218
Washington Union High - - - - -
West Fresno Elementary - - - - -
West Park Elementary 14 19 17 15 13
Central Unified 208 179 172 153 164
Total City of Fresno 2,314 2,594 2,692 2,622 2,975
Total Fresno County 4,780 5,061 5,185 5,445 5,902
Source: California Department of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), Cumulative Enrollment Data (Academic Years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-2021) Farmworkers face unique challenges securing affordable housing due to a combination of limited English language skills, very low household incomes, and difficulty qualifying for rental units or home purchase loans. Based on farmworker employment figures collected by the California Employment Development Department (EDD) in 2022, the median wage for farmworkers statewide was $14.72 per hour or $30,625 annually. Farmworkers in the Fresno region had a slightly lower median wage of $14.52 per hour or $30,202 annually, which is considered a very low-income based on HCD’s household income limits for Fresno County. Seasonal farmworkers (employed in farm labor less than 150 days per year) who do not find supplemental income during the off-season are often considered extremely low income. Many farmworkers pay market-rate prices for housing, despite having incomes qualifying for housing assistance, due to a shortage of employer-provided housing and difficulty securing publicly-assisted housing.

Fresno Housing manages 194 units of seasonal farmworker housing for migrant farmworkers, none of which are within the city of Fresno. According to HCD’s Employee Housing Facilities database, there are 23 permanent employee housing facilities in the city of Fresno which can house 478 employees. Of these, 12 facilities are reserved for workers with H-2A visa which often are bunkhouses, dorms, or motel rooms which could accommodate 185 workers. These units are privately funded and provided by employers as a requirement of the H-2A visa program.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-94 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 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, County staff surveyed a total of 240 farmworkers and 170 farm employers. Twentyfive farm employers currently have some type of farm labor housing on site (not necessarily in use); five of those employers would consider retaining the farm labor housing. Staff surveyed 145 farm employers who do not have any farm labor housing on site; 28 of those surveyed would consider adding labor housing as single houses or cottages; one farm employer specified labor housing as apartments. Farmworkers expressed a preference for detached single-family housing and a very small percentage (0.02 percent) expressed farmworker housing as desirable future housing.

In summary, the surveys indicate that traditional farm labor/worker camp housing is not desired by the Fresno County farmworkers/laborers, and even though there was a small number of Fresno County farm employers that might be interested in providing housing, it would only be if the housing was subsidized.

Similar to other special needs groups, much of the housing need for farmworkers, especially farmworker households with families, is best met near services, schools, and other resources and amenities.

The following is a list of organizations that provide resources and support to Central Valley farmworkers that can be accessed by Fresno residents:
 Binational Central California: Provides services related to immigration, health care, and educational resources.
 California Farmworker Foundation: Provides services related to education, workforce development, health care, immigration, and community wellness.  California Rural Legal Assistance: Provides legal counseling and representation in matters of housing advocacy, immigration law, removal defense, impact litigation, labor and employment, pesticide and work safety, sexual harassment prevention.  Central California Legal Services: Provides legal counseling and support.  Centro La Familia: Offers domestic violence assistance, sexual assault and human trafficking services, consumer and family advocacy, CalFresh outreach and education, telecommunications education and assistance in multiple languages, and immigration support services.  Cultiva la Salud: Provides services to build leadership capacity and improve access to healthy food, beverages, and physical activity opportunities.
 Fair Housing Council of Central California: Provides fair housing advocacy and tenant support.  Green Raiteros: Provides transportation assistance, workforce development, and small business support.
 Rural Mobile Health: Offers medical services and screenings at no cost.  Self-Help Enterprises: Provides financial assistance, rental housing, housing rehabilitation, community development, and other support services to address housing and community development needs in rural and disadvantaged communities.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-95  United Farm Workers Foundation: Provides assistance related to immigration status filings, including Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, family-based petitions, naturalization/citizenship, representation before the Board of Immigration Appeals, legislative advocacy, and referrals to other support services.

In addition, the Housing Element includes Program 24 to address the housing needs of farmworkers.

Through Program 24, the City will identify development opportunities for farmworker housing and meet 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 and discuss incentives for constructing farmworker housing. The City will also offer incentives such as density bonuses, streamlined processing, and the minor deviation process to facilitate development of farmworker housing.

Other Relevant Factors and Local Knowledge
In addition to the indicators analyzed above, there are several other factors that can influence housing mobility and access to opportunity in a jurisdiction. Historic development patterns in Fresno have resulted in neighborhoods that are largely or exclusively made up of single-family homes and historic discrimination has influenced the city’s racial and ethnic composition. Further, given current market trends, newer market rate neighborhoods may not be financially accessible to low-, moderate-, and some above-moderate income households without overpayment or overcrowding. Other factors may include the distribution of public and private investments, local regulatory or economic development plans, and historic policies. Those factors that are considered relevant vary between jurisdictions and are described at the local level below.

Local History of Fresno
The San Joaquin Valley is the traditional homeland of the Yokuts people, who lived in the foothills, and Mono peoples, who occupied the upper reaches of Fresno County’s rivers. 27 Missionaries and trappers were the first non-native people to roam the area, beginning in the late 1770s. Miners soon followed during the “Gold Rush” period. 28
27 Fresno County Historical Society. The People and Communities of the 19th Century Central Valley - Native Americans. Accessed via: https://www.valleyhistory.org/native-americans 28 UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation, 2023. 2023 Progress Report on Implementation of the Transformative Climate Communities Program Grant, “A Brief History of Fresno: The Legacy of Environmental Injustice” Accessed via:
https://innovation.luskin.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Transform-Fresno-2023-Progress-Report.pdf SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-96 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 By 1869, railroad investors were constructing a railroad through the valley and speculating on sites for new town development. Fresno was founded by the Central Pacific Railroad Company in 1872, and Leland J.

Stanford, a Director for the Railroad, is credited with selecting the site of the city. 29 The new site was formally named Fresno Station in 1874, and was later incorporated into the City of Fresno in 1885. 30 By
the 1900s, the city of Fresno was the county’s metropolis, “a true Victorian city” with its horse-car lines, dirt streets, and wood sidewalks. 31
After Fresno was established, it saw a boom in agriculture that demanded an expanded labor force. 32 Throughout the 1850s and 1860s, Asian settlers were recruited as a major source of labor for the mining and railroad industries in the western U.S. Because of the railroad and its geographical location, the new city quickly attracted hundreds of settlers and became the county seat.

In the early 1880s, the U.S. Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which restricted Chinese immigration to the U.S. Other exclusionary laws aimed at Chinese immigrants were passed by Congress between 1888 and 1902, effectively reducing the number of Chinese people entering the U.S. Although Chinese immigrants helped build the Central Pacific Railroad, they were viewed as outsiders by local White residents and were forced to settle west of the tracks in what is now Chinatown. Nearly all Valley cities including Lodi, Stockton, Modesto, Turlock, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Visalia, Tulare, and Delano developed strict land use policies to segregate and contain migrant immigrants, including Chinese settlers, to one “undesirable” side of town. In Fresno (home to California’s second largest Chinatown), White residents convinced major landowners not to allow Chinese residents to own property east of the railroad tracks and local police criminalized any Non-Whites found on the east side of town. 33 As the city grew, Black or African American people and many immigrant groups – including Germans and Armenians – were relegated to the Southwest and Downtown. Today, Germantown and Armeniantown along with Chinatown are cherished as some of Fresno’s early ethnic neighborhoods. 29 City of Fresno, nd. Historic Preservation. Accessed via: https://www.fresno.gov/planning/historic-preservation/ 30 Calvarese, M., Osborne, B., Moulton, J. (2016). Downtown Land-Use Change: A Historical Geography of Fresno, California’s Central Business District, 1860–2010. The California Geographer, Volume 55, p 19-38. Accessed via:
https://scholarworks.csun.edu/handle/10211.3/170952?show=full 31 Fresno County Historical Society, Past and Present Journal Volume 42 No. 4. Accessed via:
https://www.valleyhistory.org/history-of-fresno-county 32Pacheco-Werner, T. L., Corona, K., Corona, G., Chan, S., Conley, A., & Dhillon, H. (2018). Fresno Building Healthy Communities (BHC) Timeline. Central Valley Health Policy Institute. California State University, Fresno. Accessed via: https://www.sutori.com/en/story/fresno-bhc-timeline--wGb27reQQeEt6ZoHv1qgPZfx 33 San Joaquin Valley Fair Housing and Equity Assessment. Ramon D. Chacon, “A Case Study of Ghettoization and Segregation: West Fresno’s Black and Chicano Community During the 1970s,” Standford Center for Chicano Research. Working Paper Series No. 12 (Jan 1986): 2,5, 7, Table 4.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-97 In 1918, Fresno’s first City plan was created by Charles Henry Cheney, Architect and City Planner. It sought to establish a land use plan that limited industrial encroachment into residential areas and vice versa.

At that time, the industrial area of the city was established in the south, strategically located to utilize the railroads and take advantage of the prevailing winds, which were from the northwest. Residential neighborhoods were shown equally distributed to the west, north, and east upwind of the industrial area.

Building on development patterns that were already existing at the time, the plan designated areas for single family dwellings, flats, group housing and apartments, churches, schools and parks, businesses, and various types of industrial development. The development patterns in the plan are still reflected in the Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods as they stand today.

The population continued to grow in the San Joaquin Valley where most jurisdictions, including Fresno, built tract housing and new subdivisions in formerly agricultural areas. As more and more people came to the city, migration from central neighborhoods began to occur. Development away from the urban core, in combination with newly constructed freeways, Clovis Unified School District’s high performing schools, available riverfront property, and a healthcare sector along Herndon Avenue, attracted White and residents of other races and ethnicities to the affluent neighborhoods of north Fresno. These new, often larger homes, attracted a variety of middle- and upper-class residents away from the urban core of the city. As these suburbs grew, resources were not distributed evenly due to the financial burden to provide schools, transit, and infrastructure.

As a result of this outward expansion, the core of the city gradually became a severely concentrated area of poverty. Shaw Avenue, for example, is often described by local leaders as “an economic line of demarcation between the more affluent northern parts of Fresno and the modest-to-poorer neighborhoods in central and south Fresno.” 34 Several stakeholders consulted during the Housing Element update process also provided local knowledge reiterating a trend of disinvestment in west and southwest Fresno due to urban sprawl.

According to CSU Fresno researchers, “obsolete buildings, congested roads, difficult access, and increased crime rates coupled with lower land prices outside the city core, left [the city] less alluring than in previous decades. With less investment and fewer middle class residents, the quality of the community in terms of crime rates and school quality suffered. However, adoption of the General Plan in 2014 with its focus on downtown and infill investment, as well as the Transform Fresno program are current efforts to reverse these trends.
34 Sheehan, T. 2019. “Fresno’s Tale of Two Cities: Which neighborhoods receive the most government aid?” Fresno Bee. Available via: https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article236821658.html 35 San Joaquin Valley Fair Housing and Equity Assessment, 2014. Available via:
https://academics.fresnostate.edu/oced/documents/SJV_Fair-Housing-and-Equity-Assessment_April-2014.pdf SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-98 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Redlining and Urban Renewal
Many of the racial and spatial divisions described in the assessment above originated through land use patterns that paved the way for rural and urban concentrated areas of poverty.The process of urban renewal, prevalent practices of redlining, and the construction of high density, low-income housing projects perpetuated the segregation of lower income communities of color on one side of town, and higher income communities on the other.

The Federal Housing Act of 1949 focused on eliminating substandard living conditions through the clearance of central-city slum areas and provided federal subsidies for cities attempting to remedy serious housing shortages.

The Act originally centered on improving the housing stock in “blighted” communities and stipulated that all redevelopment projects be predominantly residential. During this era, government officials saw the opportunity to capitalize on state and national urban renewal programs to assist in the construction of State Routes 99, 41, and 180 to form a freeway loop through Downtown, redirect traffic around the city’s core rather than through it.

The construction of the freeway loop had a devastating impact on Downtown and its surrounding neighborhoods.

The efforts resulted in the demolition of more than 20 blocks of residences in West Fresno and isolation of historic immigrant neighborhoods from the rest of the city. Formerly unified neighborhoods were cut in two by freeways without surface crossings. The new freeway cemented racial divides and led to the northern areas of the city becoming increasingly affluent and White, while the south became increasingly poor, Latino, Black or African American, and Asian. Facilitated by the freeways, the City continued to stretch onto inexpensive land to the north and east, aiding the migration of people and businesses away from the city.

Redlining refers to the process of delineating neighborhoods worthy or unworthy of private investment.

Even before the Depression, private lenders chose to avoid certain areas, particularly those home to certain ethic groups including Black or African Americans, new immigrants, and neighborhoods with older cheaper housing. 36 During the 1930s, the federal government established the Home Owner’s Loan Corporation (HOLC) and HOLC developed an evaluation method to rate neighborhoods based on their desirability.

Investors categorized neighborhoods as “red” or “yellow” if there was said to be an “infiltration of undesirable populations” or a “lack of homogeneity.” Once a neighborhood was “redlined,” banks refused to grant home mortgages and loans to residents in the area. Figure 1E-3.38 is an illustration of HOLC maps in Fresno. Red and yellow neighborhoods were prevalent. HOLC maps demonstrate the role that access to credit plays in the well-being of urban neighborhoods as most of the red and yellow neighborhoods remain low-income, low resource communities today.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-99 Figure 1E-3.38: HOLC Maps, Fresno, YEAR
Source: Robert K. Nelson, LaDale Winling, Richard Marciano, Nathan Connolly, et al., “Mapping Inequality,” American Panorama, ed. Robert K. Nelson and Edward L. Ayers, accessed November 22, 2022, https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/#loc=13/36.751/-119.834&city=fresno-ca.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-100 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Land Use and Zoning Patterns
Decisions regarding land use and zoning have a direct and profound impact on affordable housing and fair housing choice, shaping a community or region’s potential diversity, growth, and access to opportunity.

Zoning determines where housing can be built, the type of housing that is allowed, and the amount and density of housing that can be provided. Zoning also can directly or indirectly affect the cost of developing housing, making it harder or easier to accommodate affordable housing.

In Fresno, the Development Code (Chapter 15 of the Code of Ordinances) divides the city into 29 primary zoning districts, including six single family dwelling districts, three multifamily dwelling districts, one mobile/manufactured home district, and six mixed-use and Downtown residential districts, plus overlay zones (mostly related to historic and environmental resources protection). Figure 1E-3.39 displays the City’s Official Zoning Map. Through the adoption of the Fresno General Plan in 2014 and subsequent rezonings implemented through the new Development Code and Zoning Map in 2015, Fresno shifted from a preference for single-family detached housing to residential and mixed-use zones that allow more density and housing diversity. The Development Code and Zoning Map, however, still maintain single family detached only zoning districts (RE, RS-1, RS-2, and RS-3) – with no duplexes, townhomes, triplexes, row homes, garden homes, zero lot line dwellings, or the like. (Accessory/Secondary dwelling units are permitted, however, in all single-family districts.)
Affordable housing development typically requires high density zones to support construction and financing; therefore, zones limited to single dwelling units on each lot do not support affordable development. Although there are opportunities to expand the array of housing types in traditionally single-unit neighborhoods, multiplexes are not sufficient to accommodate housing needs for all economic segments of the community. The flexibility of multi-unit and mixed-use zoning increases opportunities for affordable housing.

As shown in Figure 1E-3.39, multi-family zones in Fresno are located along major corridors that span throughout the city. Rather than being concentrated in one area, the City has adopted amendments to the citywide development code to encourage higher density development along strategic infill corridors, referred to as Activity Centers in the Fresno General Plan. Some of these Activity Centers are generally located on land along the first phase of the BRT system, composed of corridors along Blackstone Avenue between Downtown and the major shopping centers from Herndon Avenue to Nees Avenue, and along Ventura Avenue-Kings Canyon Road from Downtown to Clovis Avenue.

Fresno has made significant policy changes to make it easier to build higher-density housing in Downtown and along Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors, creating the first by-right zoning district in the city through the adoption of the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan in 2016 and lifting the caps off maximum dwelling units in mixed-use zone districts through the adoption of the mixed-use text amendment in 2022.

Despite the policy changes, it continues to be difficult to build any new affordable housing without significant public subsidy.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-101 Also, through the adoption of the Fresno General Plan in 2014, Fresno prioritized locating roughly one-half of future development in infill areas (within the city limits as of December 31, 2012) and roughly one-half of future development in growth areas. Tracking residential development from July 2013 to July 2020 as shown in Table 1E-3.14 below, there were a total of 8,223 dwelling units built and the breakdown was as follows: 4,099 single family in city limits, 1,165 single family in Sphere of Influence (SOI), 2,787 multifamily in city limits, and 176 multifamily in SOI. A total of 6,886 dwelling units (84 percent) were built in the city limits and 1,341 dwelling units (16 percent) were built in the SOI.

Table 1E-3.14: Residential Development Built Between July 2013 and July 2020 Area
Type of Dwelling Unit Location of Development
Multifamily Total
and
Townhouse
Single
Family
Dwelling Units
in City Limits
(December
31,2012)
Dwelling Units in
Growth Areas (SOI)
Annexed after
December 31, 2012
Downtown Planning Area
and BRT Corridors 364 20 384 0 384
Established Neighborhoods
South of Shaw 272 2,304 2,563 13 2,576
Established Neighborhoods
North of Shaw 2,279 1,109 3,060 328 3,388
South Industrial 0 0 0 0 0
DA-1: North 7 834 658 183 841
DA-1: South 41 2 43 0 43
DA-2: North 0 279 0 279 279
DA-2: South 0 402 0 402 402
DA-3: Southeast 0 0 0 0 0
DA-4: East 0 116 0 116 116
DA-4: West 0 198 178 20 198
Sub Totals 2,963 5,264 6,886 1,341 8,227
Total Units 2013- 2020 8,227 8,227 8,227
Source: City of Fresno, Annual Progress Report submitted to The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, April 1, 2021. Retrieved from: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2022/07/6_2020-General-PlanAnnual-Progress-Report.pdf.

In most cases, the Development Code and other land use code sections are reasonably permissive and allow for flexibility as to the most common fair housing issues. The highest density zones, and the majority of mobile home park designations are sited next to or close to State Routes. Medium and high density residential mixed use zones are equally distributed over all TCAC/HCD resource opportunity designations.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-102 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.39: Zoning Map, Fresno
Source: City of Fresno, 2022. Accessed January 2023.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-103 Public Investment Patterns
Public and private investment typically includes construction, maintenance, and improvements to public facilities, including infrastructure, acquisition of land, and major equipment. Investments are typically prioritized based on need and available funding. Public investments such as subsidized housing, roads, infrastructure, and economic development can significantly impact access to opportunities in any given neighborhood. While the city has experienced patterns of disinvestment in certain areas particularly near the inner core of the city including such areas as Downtown, south, and southwest parts of the city, some of these patterns of disinvestment can be traced back to the variety of systemic factors that have influenced segregation nationwide including discriminatory lending practices, redlining, and urban renewal policies.

Specific areas of the city have historically been underserved and have faced a lack of economic opportunity and social mobility, including various challenges like high poverty rates, limited job opportunities, and insufficient access to affordable housing or quality healthcare. This section will describe investments occurring in Fresno to improve quality of life throughout the city. In recent years, the City has focused on several key areas of investment, including:
 Parks and Recreation: The City recently adopted a Parks Transactions and Use Tax through ballot Measure P. Measure P was developed by Fresno for Parks, a diverse, non-partisan group of Fresno residents who believed that safer, cleaner parks for all Fresnans was important to the health, safety and overall quality of life of the community and placed the measure on the November 2018 ballot after gathering more than 35,000 signatures of local support. The citizen-led measure provides a guaranteed, local funding source for parks through a 3/8-cent sales tax in the city of Fresno. It generates an estimated $38 million per year to be used for clean and safe parks; new parks and recreation facilities; youth and senior recreation and after-school facilities and job training; improved walking and biking trails; the San Joaquin River Parkway; beautification of streets; and expanded access to arts and culture.  Public Safety: Fresno has invested in public safety initiatives to reduce crime and improve community safety. These initiatives include the implementation of community policing programs and hiring more officers including the recently added Park Rangers to patrol city parks and addressing non-emergency calls for service while maintaining clean parks.  Economic Development: To attract new businesses and create new job opportunities in the city, the City has invested in several economic development initiatives including business incubators, workforce training programs, and Downtown revitalization.  Transportation: A multitude of transportation projects have been executed in the city to improve mobility and connectivity. Projects include the construction of new bike lanes, the expansion of the FAX bus system, and the development of the high-speed rail system. In September of 2013 the City of Fresno received a $15.9 million Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation for the Fulton Mall Reconstruction Project which returned the Fulton Mall in Downtown to a complete street, reintroducing vehicle traffic to Downtown’s former main street. The restoration of Fulton Main Street occurred over 11 city blocks and included bicycle and pedestrian accommodations, streetscape improvement elements, and integration of existing fountains and sculptures.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-104 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024  Housing: The City also invests in housing initiatives to address housing needs in the city. The City utilizes Federal, State, and locally sourced funding to aid in the development of new housing, new affordable housing units, housing rehabilitation, displacement avoidance, emergency and supportive housing, and homebuyer assistance. In 2018, the City established its Rental Housing Registry Division of the Code Enforcement team. The purpose of the Rental Housing Division is to address the issue of substandard rental properties, promote greater compliance with health and safety standards and to preserve the quality of Fresno’s neighborhoods and available housing opportunities. The goal is to work with property owners to achieve compliance of health and safety code violations that are a threat to the occupant’s safety, structural integrity of the building, and have a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhoods.  Infrastructure: In 2023, the City was awarded funding from HCD to finance key infrastructure improvements to water, sewer, streets, and parking to support a minimum of 862 Downtown housing units — of which 557 are marked for affordable housing. 37 On top of the $250 million in state funds for revitalizing Downtown over the next three years, the City is set to receive $43.7 million in state grants to build Downtown infrastructure for housing. The following estimates depict how the City intends to allocate this funding:
• $16.8 million for sewer improvements
• $14.3 million for water infrastructure improvements
• $11.7 million for a structured parking garage on Fulton Street • $913,000 for street improvements near the Tuolumne Street and Van Ness Avenue intersection High-Speed Rail Project
The California High Speed Rail project is a major infrastructure investment impacting multiple communities across the state. One line of the rail system is designed to connect San Francisco to Los Angeles, running through the San Joaquin Valley with a stop in Fresno. The Fresno Station will be located in Downtown between H and G Streets and Fresno and Tulare Streets. The California High Speed Rail Authority has been working closely with the City of Fresno to ensure that the project is completed successfully. The authority has conducted environmental studies, community outreach, and design work in Fresno to ensure that the project meets the needs of the community and is integrated into the existing transportation infrastructure. The City also dedicated staff to help relocate residents and businesses located in the proposed High Speed Rail right of way. Sometimes the City offered creative solutions to help incentivize the move such as offering publicly owned land at the convention center for the Cosmopolitan to build a new restaurant. The High Speed Rail is expected to be completed in several phases, with the first phase connecting San Francisco to Los Angeles by 2033.
37 Shaikh Rahsad,O. 2023. “Fresno mayor wants 10,000 people to live in the city’s downtown. Here’s the plan.” Fresnoland. Accessed via: https://fresnoland.org/2023/08/30/revitalizing-downtown-fresno/ APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-105 The project is expected to create thousands of jobs in Fresno, providing employment opportunities and stimulating economic growth in Fresno. New businesses and new job opportunities in Fresno are likely to increase demand for housing. The improved transportation connectivity resulting from the High Speed Rail project could also increase mobility for commuter households that want to live in the city and commute elsewhere. Overall, the high-speed rail system is expected to promote transit-oriented development around the transit station in Fresno which could increase access to affordable housing for residents who rely on public transportation.

Funding for Housing, Economic, and Community Development The City receives HUD funding for capital improvement projects in qualifying low- and moderate-income neighborhoods within the city’s sphere of influence. The City’s Public Works Construction Management Division typically oversees the infrastructure projects that are approved. More than $200 million in funding has gone toward CDBG projects during the previous Housing Element cycle. Projects included street construction, parks, traffic signal, sewer and water, and transportation projects.

In 2022 alone, the City initiated funding in two locations– the Burroughs Elementary Neighborhood Street Reconstruction Project (Phase I) and the West Fresno Elementary and MLK Neighborhood Street Improvements Project. The City also funded additional projects for overall neighborhood street improvements – the Yosemite Middle School Complete Streets Project, the Ericson Elementary Neighborhood Project, the Highway City Neighborhood Reconstruction Project, the Maple-Gettysburg-Holland Street Reconstruction Project, the Olive-Maple-Whitney-Chestnut Street Reconstruction Project, the Shields-Cedar-Dakota-Maple Street Reconstruction Project, and the Burroughs Elementary Neighborhood Street Reconstruction Project (Phase II). Across these eight projects, it is estimated that the City served 66,685 people.

The City also used $4.9 million in CDBG funds to acquire property on Blackstone Avenue for the future development of a senior center. The senior center is anticipated to be about 29,000 square feet and will provide various services and indoor and outdoor amenities.

The 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan also identifies Affordable Housing Development in high opportunity areas as a priority. In 2022, the City allocated $3.1 million in HOME funds for Affordable Housing Development or Rehabilitation and an additional $3.6 million in CDBG funds for land acquisition in support of affordable housing development. Additionally, the City allocated 28.5 percent of its third allocation of Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) for development of affordable multifamily rental housing and 28.5 percent for development of affordable single-family housing, focusing on areas of opportunity. Out of the total PLHA allocations, the City will have $4.1 million for the development of affordable multifamily rental housing and another $4.1 million for the development of single-family housing. The City is awaiting receipt of executed Standard Agreements from the State of California for these funds.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-106 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Priority Investments in Established Neighborhoods
Roughly one half of development in the city is anticipated to be within infill areas through 2035, as described in the General Plan. The other half or so of development in the city is anticipated to be in new growth areas, which include unincorporated land planned for urban use.

One of the City’s primary planning considerations is to address the need for increasing the affordable housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income households, with special emphasis on persons with disabilities, people experiencing homelessness, large families, persons living in substandard housing, and persons paying rent that exceeds 50 percent of their monthly income. Through the General Plan, the City prioritized specific areas within the core of the city for incentives and other benefits to accelerate reinvestment and rehabilitation for homes and businesses.

Figure 1E-3.40 displays the City’s Priority Areas for Development Incentives, these areas include:
 “Infill Opportunity Zones” (IOZs) – Established Neighborhoods Generally South of Herndon Avenue, including many of Fresno’s established neighborhoods, which are in need of both large, catalytic reinvestment projects, as well as smaller-scale strategic interventions;  BRT corridors, including the Phase 1 corridors along Blackstone Avenue and Ventura Avenue/Kings Canyon Road and the Phase 2 corridors along Shaw Avenue and California Avenue;  Downtown Planning Area, which includes the Central Business District, Civic Center and other Downtown centers, Chinatown, South Stadium/South Van Ness, Downtown neighborhoods and special districts; and
 South Industrial Area, including much of Fresno’s established heavy industrial uses, which may need infrastructure investment to meet the needs of major job-creation industry sectors, as well as improvements to enhance current business operations.

Priority for infrastructure projects will be given to serving established neighborhoods, including generally south of Herndon Avenue as shown in Figure 1E-3.40: Priority Areas for Development Incentives, along BRT and enhanced transit corridors, and in the Downtown Planning Area, consistent with General Plan policies.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-107 Figure 1E-3.40: Priority Areas for Development Incentives, City of Fresno Source: City of Fresno, 2014. Figure 1M-1 of the Fresno General Plan.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-108 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.41 presents the sequencing of development on the fringe of the city, as presented in the City’s General Plan. To prioritize infrastructure investments within Growth Area 1 the City considers planned infrastructure expansion, public service capacity, and other fiscal considerations. The boundaries of these areas are Development Areas 1 North, 1 South, 2 North, and 2 South. Growth Area 2 has significantly less access to completed infrastructure. Any development in these areas would require all infrastructure costs to be borne by the new development.

As part of the implementation of the Housing Element, programs are identified to upgrade the city’s infrastructure as needed in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods with the greatest needs.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-109 Figure 1E-3.41: Sequencing of Development, City of Fresno General Plan Source: City of Fresno, 2014. Figure 1M-2 of the Fresno General Plan.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-110 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Building Healthy Communities Initiative
The City has been coordinating with community groups to address priorities of residents in south Fresno – generally those neighborhoods south of State Route 180. One such group, The California Endowment, launched a Building Healthy Communities Initiative (BHC). The BHC is a 10-year, $1 billion investment which began in 2010 with the goal of improving employment opportunities, education, housing, neighborhood safety, unhealthy environmental conditions, and inequitable access to healthy foods in 14 communities throughout the state. Central, Southeast, and Southwest Fresno have received and allocated funding as part of the BHC initiative. The BHC Initiative addresses a broad range of land use and social issues, which include:
 Ensure that the built environment is clean, well maintained, and conducive to health in all city neighborhoods and includes adequate and equitable provision of sewer and water within a reasonably priced homeownership market.
 Establish effective education and job training for area youth that is both academic and trade oriented.
 Ensure that underserved neighborhoods are included in strategies for job creation, including opportunities for home grown business development.
 Actively seek opportunities to create and maintain safe parks of all sizes in every city neighborhood to provide families with spaces to interact with their neighbors and promote physical activity.  Create opportunities both public and private for the Downtown neighborhoods that include entertainment, stores (e.g., retail, food, clothing), parks, recreation centers and after school programs, especially for youth.
 Acknowledge and address attitudes within the government institutions, economic systems and law enforcement culture toward immigrant and ethnic minority communities that perpetuate inequality.  Develop a system of transportation that responds to the needs of the most vulnerable sectors of the community, including focused bus routes for specific geographic areas of need and/or particularly vulnerable subgroups (e.g., the elderly, disabled and farm workers).  Provide accessible healthcare services beyond emergency care.  Establish an equitable system of public safety that supports community while also reducing crime.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-111 Transform Fresno
As described previously the City is also actively engaged in the Transform Fresno initiative, which includes a number of community-driven projects to revitalize and improve the physical and social infrastructure in Chinatown, Downtown, and Southwest Fresno. Projects will reduce GHG emissions while also providing local environmental, health, and economic and social equity benefits. Much has happened after SGC’s announcement of Fresno’s TCC award in January 2018. From then through the close of the 2021-2022 fiscal year (June 30, 2022), a period of four and a half years, project partners have made considerable progress toward implementing an ambitious, unprecedented climate action initiative. Actions have included retrofitting homes to use less energy, increased urban tree cover, and workforce development.

Location of Existing Publicly Supported Housing
There are two divisions of Fresno Housing – one serves residents in the city of Fresno and the other serves residents in the greater Fresno County region. Fresno Housing’s 2023 Annual Plan provide the most recent record of the public housing inventory. Fresno Housing reports that there are 4,912 public housing units and 10,638 housing choice vouchers in use, totaling 15,550 publicly supported housing units in the city of Fresno, see Table 1E-3.15. There are more than 43,000 subsidized affordable housing units in the county of Fresno as a whole.

Table 1E-3.15: Public Housing Units by Fresno Housing, 2023 Public Housing
Units
Housing Choice
Vouchers Jurisdiction Total
City of Fresno Housing Authority 4,912 10,638 15,550
Housing Authority of the County of Fresno 19,505 8,294 27,799 Region Total 24,417 18,932 43,349
Source: 2023 Annual Plan for Fresno Housing and the City of Fresno.

Figure 1E-3.42 below depicts the location of individual buildings with public housing units throughout the city of Fresno, based on HUD’s national feature layer “Public Housing Buildings” from the National Geospatial Data Asset dataset. Public housing comes in all sizes and types, from scattered single family houses to high-rise apartments for elderly families. HUD administers federal aid to local housing agencies that manage the housing for low-income residents at rents they can afford. HUD furnishes technical and professional assistance in planning, developing and managing these developments. Publicly supported housing in Fresno is concentrated in certain areas of the city including in existing neighborhoods north of Shaw Avenue as well as in the southwest neighborhoods west of State Route 41 and north of the industrial district. (Figure 1E-3.42).

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-112 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.42: Public Housing Buildings
Source: HCD, AFFH 2.0 Data Viewer. HUD, 2021.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-113 Food Access
Food access is another important component of access to opportunity, as access to food that is both affordable and nutritious is a challenge for many individuals and families in the United States. While data on food access by neighborhood or census tract is not available for the city of Fresno, stakeholders interviewed to prepare the 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice noted a lack of access to fresh food outlets in south and west Fresno.

In the survey issued to inform that planning process, respondents repeated concerns surrounding food access in the city, with 52 percent noting that grocery stores and other shopping opportunities are not equally provided. Only 22 percent of respondents described grocery stores and other shopping as equally provided in the city. As higher proportions of Hispanic residents live in south and west Fresno, lower levels of food access in these areas of the city may present fair housing concerns.

Enforcement and Outreach Capacity
Compliance with Fair Housing Laws
Fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity refers to the ability of a locality and fair housing entities to disseminate information related to fair housing laws and rights and provide outreach and education to community members. Enforcement and outreach capacity also includes the ability to address compliance with fair housing laws, such as investigating complaints, obtaining remedies, and engaging in fair housing testing.

The Fair Employment and Housing Act and the Unruh Civil Rights Act are the primary California fair housing laws. California state law further extends anti-discrimination protections in housing to several classes that are not covered by the federal FHA of 1968, including prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) has statutory mandates to protect the people of California from discrimination pursuant to the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Ralph Civil Rights Act, and Unruh Civil Rights Act (with regards to housing).  FEHA prohibits discrimination and harassment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions), gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, military or veteran status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, and genetic information, or because another person perceives the tenant or applicant to have one or more of these characteristics.  Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51) prohibits business establishments in California from discriminating in the provision of services, accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges to clients, patrons and customers because of their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-114 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024  Ralph Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51.7) guarantees the right of all persons within California to be free from any violence, or intimidation by threat of violence, committed against their persons or property because of political affiliation, or on account of sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, immigration status, or position in a labor dispute, or because another person perceives them to have one or more of these characteristics.

The City enforces fair housing and complies with fair housing laws and regulation through a twofold process: review of local policies and code for compliance with state law and the referral of fair housing complaints for investigation and resolution by the regional fair housing provider. Table 1E-3.16 demonstrates the City’s compliance with fair housing laws and other related laws.

In Fresno and Fresno County, local housing, social services, and legal service organizations include the Fair Housing Council of Central California, Central California Legal Services, California Rural Legal Services, and the Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability. A summary of each organization’s focus is included in Table 1E-3.17.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-115 Table 1E-3.16: City of Fresno Compliance with Fair Housing Laws State Law/ Requirement Description of Compliance
Housing Accountability Act and Housing Crisis Act. The Housing Accountability Act (Government Code Section 65589.5) limits the ability of a local government to deny, reduce the density of, or make infeasible housing development projects, emergency shelters, or farmworker housing that are consistent with objective local development standards and contribute to meeting housing need. The Housing Crisis Act of 2019, commonly known as Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) expedites permit processing for housing projects and restricts local governments’ ability to downzone and limits fee increases on housing applications.

The City complies with the Housing Accountability Act and the Housing Crisis Act in reviewing and approving projects. The City has taken steps to facilitate housing in mixed use zones by removing maximum densities and adopting objective standards. Currently (2023), the City offers an optional preliminary application checklist for all entitlement applications to advise a prospective applicant of current City standards and requirements.

Pre-application meetings have helped to shorten the review process and allow for better communication between applicants, City departments, and utility providers. The City has not yet developed an SB 330 preliminary application form, however it does enforce SB 330. The Housing Element includes a program to establish such an application to streamline processing procedures. The City complies with regulations set forth in state law for processing preliminary application 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 Housing Element includes a program to further review and amend site development and design standards in the Development Code for residential and mixed use zones to ensure standards are clear and objective (Program 6 – Objective Design Standards).

Density Bonus. State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code Section 65915- 65918) allows developers to increase density on a property above the maximum set under a jurisdiction’s General Plan land use plan if specific conditions are met.

The City complies with State density bonus law. The City has included Program 25 (Development Code Amendments for Compliance with State Law and to Reduce Barriers to Housing Development) to amend the ordinance to be consistent with the most recent changes in state law and to continue to monitor density bonus law to make further modifications as needed.

No-Net-Loss. No Net Loss Law (Gov. Code Section 65863) requires a jurisdiction to always maintain a sufficient supply of adequate sites in its housing element throughout the housing element planning period to meet a jurisdiction’s remaining unmet share of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for each income category.

The City will continue to comply with No-Net-Loss through identifying a surplus of sites available to meet the RHNA allocation and tracking the remaining capacity as projects are approved on sites in the inventory (Program 1).

Least Cost Zoning Law. Gov. Code Section 65913.1 establishes a duty for local governments to designate and zone sufficient vacant land for residential use with appropriate standards. "Appropriate standards" means densities and requirements with respect to minimum floor areas, building setbacks, rear and side yards, parking, the percentage of a lot that may be occupied by a structure, amenities, and other requirements The City conducted a comprehensive inventory of all vacant and non-vacant developable land within city limits, demonstrating that there is enough housing capacity to meet RHNA targets within the Housing Element planning period. By designating and zoning this land with appropriate standards, Fresno ensures the economic feasibility of producing housing at the lowest possible cost while balancing economic and environmental factors and maintaining public health and safety.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-116 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 State Law/ Requirement Description of Compliance
imposed on residential lots pursuant to the zoning authority which contribute to the economic feasibility of producing housing at the lowest possible cost given economic and environmental factors, the public health and safety.

Fair Housing Law / Discrimination in Land Use. Government Code Section 65008 prohibits actions by a local government that deny residence, tenancy or ownership based on familial status or method of financing for proposed developments or intended occupancy of developments by persons of very low, low, moderate or middleincome.

The City complies with Government Code Section 65008. In addition, the Housing Element includes strategies to affirmatively further the objectives of fair housing law.

Strategies include enforcing source of income protection and providing education to property owners on laws prohibiting the ability to refuse to rent to an applicant based on their source of income (Program 20); referring discrimination to appropriate State and Federal enforcement agencies (Program 26); and working to mitigate impediments to fair housing opportunities, with an emphasis on supporting the needs of populations and neighborhoods most impacted by fair housing issues (Program 27).

Anti-Discrimination. California Government Code Section 11135 prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, ethnic group identification, age, mental disability, physical disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, or sexual orientation, and provides protection from discrimination from any program or activity that is conducted, funded directly by, or receives any financial assistance from the State.

The City of Fresno recognizes the rights of all its residents, workers, and visitors, including the right to reside, work, and visit. No discrimination shall be exercised, threatened or promised by any person in the employ of the city against or in favor of any applicant, eligible or employee because of any classification protected by state or federal law.

Local Fair Housing Enforcement
Eviction Protection Program. The Eviction Protection Program (EPP) is a local program which defends tenants renting an apartment or house in the City of Fresno from unlawful eviction. If the City determines a tenant is potentially facing unlawful eviction, the tenant may be eligible to receive a City-appointed attorney or legal services to assist in the judicial process at no charge. This program is open to any City of Fresno resident who is facing an unlawful eviction regardless of financial or documented status.

Emergency Rental Assistance Program. In response to the impacts of COVID-19, the City received nearly $64 million for emergency rental assistance from state and federal governments. The Emergency Rental Assistance Program provides relief to lower-income renters and landlords that were negatively impacted by COVID-19 and were unable to pay their rent and utilities. As of 2023, the City of Fresno’s Emergency Rental Assistance Program has distributed all available funding and the program is now closed.

Mobile Home Park Rent Review and Stabilization Program. Adopted in 1987, the purpose of this program is to protect mobile home park residents from excessive rent increases while at the same time providing mobile home park owners a level of rent sufficient to provide a just, fair and reasonable return on their investment in mobile home park property and to cover increased costs of repairs, maintenance, rehabilitation, capital improvements, services, amenities, upkeep and insurance. The ordinance provides a structure for consideration of proposed mobile home park rent increases through resident’s committees and a Mobile Home Park Rent Review and Stabilization Commission. See Fresno Municipal Code Article 20 for more information.

Source: City of Fresno, 2024.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-117 Table 1E-3.17: Fair Housing Advocacy Organizations, Fresno County Organization Focus Area
Fair Housing Council of Central California
The Fair Housing Council of Central California is a
professional, non-profit, civil rights organization dedicated to the elimination of discrimination in housing and the
expansion of housing opportunities for all persons. The Fair Housing Council accomplishes its goal through the advocacy of equal housing opportunities, assisting victims of housing discrimination and enforcing compliance with fair housing laws, including the Community Reinvestment Act and the
Equal Credit Opportunity Act. It provides a multifaceted program of private enforcement, education and outreach, research and advocacy to affirmatively further the goal of equal housing opportunity in the San Joaquin Valley
Central California Legal Services
Central California Legal Services Inc. is a private, not-forprofit, public interest law firm established for the purpose of providing free civil legal assistance to low-income
individuals, families, organizations, and communities.

California Rural Legal Services
California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc. (CRLA) is a nonprofit law firm serving low-income residents of California's rural areas and small cities.

Community Housing Council of Fresno
Community Housing Council of Fresno (CHC) is a nonprofit organization which provides first time homebuyer assistance, counseling and other assistance to home buyers and owners who are struggling with their mortgage obligations.

Leadership Counsel for Justice and
Accountability
The Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability
(Leadership Counsel) advocates at the local, regional, and statewide levels on the overlapping issues of land use, transportation, climate change, safe and affordable drinking water, housing, environmental justice, equitable investment, and government accountability. Based in the San Joaquin and Eastern Coachella Valleys, Leadership Counsel services
include community organizing, research, legal representation, and policy advocacy.

Resources for Independence Central Valley
Resources for Independence, Central Valley is 1 of 28 Centers for Independent Living in California. Independent Living Centers, like Resources for Independence Central Valley, are community-benefit, nonprofit organization run by and for persons with disabilities. Both the staff and board of directors must consist of at least 51 percent persons with disabilities.

As a hub for independent living services and disability resources, Resources for Independence, Central Valley
provides a foundation of core consumer-controlled,
community-based, cross-disability and person-focused
programs and assistance.

Central Valley Regional Center
Central Valley Regional Center is 1 of 21 regional centers in the State of California. Each regional center is a private nonprofit entity on contract with California’s Department of Developmental Services (DDS). The Center’s mission is to help families and individuals with developmental disabilities.

Source: City of Fresno, Ascent, 2023.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-118 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Fair Housing Complaints
The City complies with federal and state fair housing laws, which are enforced by HUD and the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH). Both the City and Fresno County refer discrimination complaints to FEH, which dual files fair housing cases with HUD’s Region IX Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), as part of the Fair Housing Assistance Program. In Fresno County, the most common types of housing discrimination complaints between 2006 and 2020 were discrimination on the basis of disability or race (see Table 1E-3.18).

Table 1E-3.18: Housing Discrimination Complaints Filed with HUD, Fresno County, 2006-2020 Basis of Complaint Number of Complaints
Race 72
Color 7
National origin 28
Disability 136
Familial status 38
Religion 5
Sex 24
Retaliation 39
Total Complaints Filed 272
Source: HUD FHEO 2020.

HUD FHEO reported that there were 150 complaints filed by residents of the City of Fresno between 2015 and 2019. Of the complaints that resulted in a potential case, 76 cases were received and processed by HUD for housing in Fresno. As shown in Table 1E-3.19, disability was cited as the basis of discrimination in 42 cases, followed by race in 25 cases; retaliation in 11 cases; familial status in 9 cases; color in 6 cases; national origin in 5 cases; and sex in 5 cases. More than one basis of discrimination may be cited in a single complaint.

Table 1E-3.19: Housing Discrimination Complaints Filed with HUD, City of Fresno, 2015-2019 Basis of Complaint* Number of Complaints
Race 25
Color 6
National origin 5
Disability 42
Familial status 9
Religion 0
Sex 5
Retaliation 11
Total Complaints Filed 76
*More than one basis of discrimination may be cited in a single complaint.

Source: 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, City of Fresno.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-119 The City contracts with local fair housing service providers to support enforcement of State and federal Fair Housing Laws and provide fair housing services that include, but are not limited to, the following fair housing services:
 Referring inquiries and landlord/tenant complaints concerning housing discrimination to the applicable regulatory body (State Department of Fair Employment and Housing, HUD, or private counsel) for processing;
 Disseminating fair housing information citywide by sponsoring workshops, housing information fairs, monitoring of affirmative marketing, and working closely with the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing;
 Advertising fair housing laws and complaint procedures through literature displays at City and County offices, non-profit organizations such as Central California Legal Services, Lao Family Organization, Fresno Interdenominational Refugee Ministries, Central Valley Regional Center, property management organizations, lenders, and other such organizations. Literature is provided in English, Spanish, Hmong, Cambodian, Vietnamese, and Lao; and,  Disseminating fair housing information through radio, television, and other media.

From 2016 to 2020, the City made annual CDBG contributions to the Fair Housing Council of Central California (FHCCC) for education, complaint, and referral services. During this time, FHCC addressed an average of 800 fair housing complaints per year. Table 1E-3.20 displays the cases that were opened by FHCCC for further investigation and/or referral for relief. A small percentage of complaints were referred to HUD for administrative or injunctive relief. FHCCC’s work often results in referral of cases to attorneys for further action or direct assistance to complainants. For example, FHCCC was able to cause reasonable accommodations to be provided that had initially been denied in several apartment complexes in Fresno.

Table 1E-3.20: Fair Housing Cases Opened by FHCCC, City of Fresno, 2017-2020 Discrimination Complaints (Protected Basis) 2017 2018 2019 2020 Race 35 78 65 28
Religion 2 0 - 2
Color 30 76 64 30
Sex/Gender 7 6 5 2
Disability 47 50 76 32
Familial Status 25 10 14 9
National Origin 8 56 31 3
Other State Violations (FEHA, Unruh, Ralph Civil Rights) 11 11 20 7 Total 165 287 275 116
Source: City of Fresno, Fair Housing Council of Central California Reports, 2017-2019 In 2021, CCLS received approximately 70 complaints of housing discrimination during the reporting period and made referrals, as appropriate, see Table 1E-3.21.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-120 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Table 1E-3.21: Discrimination Complaints, City of Fresno (March 1 – August 30, 2021) Discrimination Complaints
(Protected Basis)
Number of
Complaints
Discrimination
Complaints
(Issue/Type)
Number of
Complaints
Race 16 Rental 25
Religion 0 Sales 0
Color 4 Advertisement 0
Sex/Gender 7 Lending/Redlining 0
Handicap 2 Zoning 0
Familial Status 0 Accessibility 0
National Origin 3 Terms/Conditions 4
Other State Violations (FEHA,
Unruh, Ralph Civil Rights) 4 Harassment 5
Total 36 Total 34
Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Central California Legal Services Quarterly Reports, 2021.

Since July 2021, the City has contracted with other service providers to provide various fair housing servicesincluding the Fresno Interdenominational Refugee Ministries (FIRM), Resources for Independence Central Valley, Inc. (RICV), Central California Legal Services (CCLS), and the Community Housing Council of Fresno. Through FIRM, in 2023-24, the City provided public Fair Housing education and outreach to over 3,70013,007 residents persons or households through webinars, in-person outreach events, ethnic media, and informational resource distribution both city-wide and by targeted canvassing (e.g., dropping materials off at relevant agencies and organizations). Outreach materials were distributed in five languages throughout areas where low-income Southeast Asian, Spanish, and Arabic-speaking communities congregate, including zip codes 93702, 93722, 93727, 93703, and 93725. RICV also worked on an outreach and education program for vulnerable populations in the city with specific emphasis on easy-to-understand information on housing rights, housing discrimination, housing resources and subsidies, and overall fair housing issues. Training and materials were made available through social media, direct mail, the RICV newsletter, and email blasts. RICV also distributed an easy-to-understand booklet to 217 low-income individuals through individual outreach. The City works with Central California Legal Services (CCLS) to refer inquiries and landlord/tenant complaints; and the Community Housing Council of Fresno to conduct fair housing workshops for prospective homebuyers and real estate/finance professionals.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-121 Outreach Effectiveness
Outreach reached significantly more persons and households from the prior year (13,007 households in 2024 compared to 3,700 households in 2023). The zip codes where the outreach was conducted included portions of the central, southeast, and northwest portions of the City. Downtown (93721) Southwest Fresno (93706) areas were harder to document due to difficulty in securing trusted locations (usually markets and bakeries) and participants who decline to share their demographic information, but these areas also house populations that may be vulnerable to fair housing issues. Tables 1E – 3.3 Racial Segregation by Census Tract and 1E-3.7, Distribution of Poverty, show high concentrations of people of color and over 40 percent of households living in poverty in the Downtown and Southwest areas of Fresno. In addition, Table 1E3.10 shows a high percentage of population with a disability in these areas. Program 26, Fair Housing, includes strengthened language to ensure fair housing outreach is conducted in all neighborhoods of high need.

Fair Housing Testing
FHCCC conducted a Systemic Testing project in Fresno. The target area was all available new home developments on the basis of race and familial status. During PY 2019, 16 paired tests (32 tests) were completed. 5 paired tests were conducted on the basis of race and 11 paired tests were conducted on the basis of familial status. All testing was done according to the available rental market. Testing at 25 properties were located within the metropolitan area with most of the area zip codes. Results showed that people of color suffered some form of housing discrimination in new developments across the city 48 percent of the time (i.e., refusal to rent, lying about availability, or imposing different rules, terms, or conditions of tenancy).

The Housing Element includes a program committing the City to continue working with local fair housing providers to ensure residents and landlords are aware of fair housing laws, rights, and requirements.

Through this action, the City will ensure resources are accessible to residents should they experience discrimination.

Fair Housing Lawsuits
Several noteworthy lawsuits have been litigated during the previous Housing Element planning period regarding alleged housing discrimination practices affecting fair and affordable housing in Fresno or the region: a HUD negotiated settlement targeting unfair lending practices by California mortgage lenders and two state court lawsuits against local jurisdictions seeking to compel compliance with their obligations under their respective General Plans and Housing Elements to provide affordable housing and services to disadvantaged groups.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-122 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 [Redacted] v. Benchmark Communities, LLC, FHEO Case No. 09-16-5484-8 (Title VIII) (HUD Conciliation Agreement entered March 7, 2017).

HUD facilitated a settlement agreement resolving accusations of unfair lending practices between a complainant and three California mortgage lenders, American Financial Network of Brea in Orange County, Benchmark Communities of Fresno, Brigantino Enterprise of Hollister, and also a Benchmark employee. The complainant filed a housing discrimination complaint with the FHEO in 2016 alleging he was unfairly denied an opportunity to pre-qualify for a mortgage loan based on his perceived Hispanic national origin, which precluded him from purchasing a home in Hollister. Equal access to credit for qualified individuals, regardless of their national origin or other protected status, is an important element of fair housing. Benchmark agreed to provide annual fair housing training to employees who interact with prospective homebuyers. American Financial agreed to train current and new employees and pay the complainant $5,000 in damages.

Comunidades Unidas por un Cambio v. County of Fresno, Case Number 18CECG04586 (Fresno County Sup. Ct., file date Dec. 28, 2018).

In 2018, Comunidades Unidas por un Cambio (Communities United for Change) with the assistance of nonprofit Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability, filed an action against Fresno County and its Board of Supervisors seeking to enforce the County’s obligations under its General Plan and Housing Element to facilitate the development and maintenance of affordable housing and to address the needs of disadvantaged unincorporated communities (specifically for clean water and functioning sewer services, stormwater drainage, and other infrastructure). The lawsuit outlines multiple deadlines the County has missed for accommodating affordable housing and improving infrastructure and other needs in historically disadvantaged communities. Plaintiffs allege that the County’s failure to comply disproportionately impacts Latinos and other minority groups and deprives them of the opportunity to live in decent, quality affordable housing and healthy and complete neighborhoods.

The County asserted that it is currently in the midst of a revision and update to the General Plan that will include elements that address some of the purported concerns of the Plaintiffs. The County also contends that Plaintiffs’ suit is premature because the County should be given more time to complete the action items and programs identified in its General Plan, and also argues that the deadlines and HCD guidelines that Plaintiffs claim the County has failed to meet are nonbinding. In 2020, the Superior Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, and issued a Preemptory Writ of Mandate ordering the County to implement several specific programs of the Housing Element and bring the General Plan into compliance by analyzing infrastructure needs in historically disadvantaged communities. Comunidades Unidas waived the other allegations of housing discrimination in violation of FEHA and discriminatory land use actions in violation of state law.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-123 Martinez v. City of Clovis, Case Number 19CECG03855 (Fresno County Sup. Ct., file date Oct. 23, 2019).

In 2019, Central California Legal Services (CCLS), on behalf of local citizens, filed suit in the Fresno County Superior Court against the City of Clovis alleging that the City’s Housing Element was out of compliance with state law by failing to meet a commitment in the 2016 Housing Element to provide an adequate supply of suitably zoned land for lower-income housing development. The complaint also alleged that the inadequate supply of land zoned for affordable housing is discriminatory towards people based on race and income, in violation of both federal fair housing law and state law. The Superior Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, finding that the City’s application of a zoning overlay for affordable high-density housing does not sufficiently meet the City’s obligation to provide suitably zoned land for housing affordable to lower-income households. The Court, however, did not find that the City’s housing policy violated federal fair housing law or that its actions were discriminatory. The City contended that its Housing Element was in full compliance with all regulations governing affordable housing. The City appealed, and in April 2023, the appellate court upheld the zoning inadequacy ruling but remanded discrimination claims for further proceedings. The California Supreme Court denied the City’s petition for review in July 2023.

A settlement was reached on February 20, 2024, in which the City agreed to implement several actions to facilitate affordable housing.

HCD Technical Assistance Letter
The City of Fresno is in receipt of a letter of Technical Assistance from the Department of Housing and Community Development dated August 7, 2024 noting the City Council’s vote to decline funds for Fresno’s Quality Inn Homekey project. The Technical Assistance letter analyzed the impact of this action in relation to the City’s obligation to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing and requested that the City strengthen program commitments to discourage similar decisions in the future. A requirement has been added to Program 2-Variety of Housing Opportunities in High Resource Areas to include in project approval documents a statement of the City’s obligation to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing and an accompanying analysis of project consistency with the law.

Housing Sites Analysis
State housing element law, Government Code Section 65583(c)(10), requires that the sites inventory (see Section 1E-2) be analyzed with respect to AFFH to ensure that affordable housing is dispersed equitably throughout the city rather than concentrated in areas of high segregation and poverty or low resource areas that have historically been underserved. By comparing the sites inventory to the fair housing indicators in this assessment, this section analyzes whether the sites included in the Housing Element sites inventory improve or exacerbate fair housing conditions, patterns of segregation, and access to opportunity throughout the city.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-124 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 As determined by the Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG), the City of Fresno’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) is a total of 36,866 new housing units. This RHNA includes 9,440 very lowincome units, 5,884 low-, 5,638 moderate-, and 15,904 above moderate-income units. Note that the City’s extremely low-income RHNA is equal to 50 percent of the very low-income RHNA allocation (4,720 units).

Within the city limits, available vacant and underutilized sites are adequate to accommodate the RHNA for all income categories. A summary of Fresno’s ability to meet the 2023-2031 RHNA of 36,866 housing units is provided in Section 1E-2: Sites Inventory. Using data and research from the HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool 1.0, Table 1E-3.22 presents the housing unit capacity and existing conditions as they relate to indicators of fair housing analyzed in this assessment for each census tract in the city. For more information about the indicators, refer to the local assessment discussed previously in this chapter.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-125 Table 1E-3.22: Housing Capacity by Census Tract, City of Fresno, 2023-2031 Census
Tracts
Existing
Households
Housing Capacity Patterns of Segregation Access to Opportunity Disproportionate Housing Needs/ Displacement Risk Low Mod Above
Mod
Total %of
Total
Population
Majority
Median
Income
Disability
Rates
R/ECAP
or RCAA
TCAC
Score
Jobs
Index
CES4
Scores
SB 35
DAC
Overcrowding Overpayment
(Renters)
Overpayment
(Homeowners)
Displacement
Risk

1.00 804 685
708
20619
8 400
310
1,2911
,216

3.0%2.7
4%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 <30% R/ECAP No Data >80 >90-100 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% No Data Y

2.00 728 471
738
0 140
143
61088
1 1.4%1.9
8%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR >80 >90-100 DAC 15%-20% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

3.00 1,103 667
437
970 539
538
1,3039
75 3.0%2.2
0%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 20%-30% R/ECAP HSR >80 >90-100 DAC 15%-20% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

4.00 1,337 781
656
0 418
551
1,1991
,207

2.8%2.7
2%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR >80 >90-100 DAC >20% 40%-60% <20% Y

5.01 829 18 0 18 35 0.1%0.0
8%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR >80 >90-100 DAC >20% 60%-80% 60%-80% Y

5.02 1,019 141 0 174 315 0.7%0.7
1%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR >80 >90-100 DAC >20% 40%-60% <20% Y

6.01 1,763 0 0 219 219 0.5%0.4
9%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR >80 >90-100 DAC >20% 40%-60% 60%-80% Y

6.02 366 625
649
0 389
389
1,0141
,038

2.3%2.3
4%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR >80 >90-100 DAC >20% 40%-60% 60%-80% Y

7.01 785 47 0 25 25 72 0.2%0.1
6%
Hispanic/Latino No Data 20%-30% HSR >80 >90-100 DAC 12%-15% 40%-60% 60%-80% Y

7.02 426 778 0 1,633
1,633
2,410 5.5%5.4
3%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 20%-30% HSR >80 >90-100 DAC 12%-15% 40%-60% 60%-80% Y

9.01 760 547
542
0 619
624
1,166 2.7%2.6
3%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% HSR >80 >90-100 DAC 12%-15% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

9.02 1,578 468
435
0 317
342
78577
7 1.8%1.7
5%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR >80 >90-100 DAC >20% 60%-80% 60%-80% Y

10.00 1,179 179
280
155
273
625
642
1,078 2.5%2.4
3%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR >80 >90-100 DAC 15%-20% 60%-80% 60%-80% Y

11.00 754 41 0 172
161
213
202

0.5%0.4
8%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR >80 >90-100 DAC >20% 40%-60% 60%-80% Y

12.01 1,387 0 0 59 59 0.1%0.1
3%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 60-80 >90-100 DAC >20% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

12.02 1,147 0 15075 253
328
403 0.9%0.9
1%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Low 40-80 >90-100 DAC 15%-20% 40%-60% 40%-60% Y

13.01 1,521 10991 1224 7772 192 0.4%0.4
3%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP Low 20-80 >90-100 DAC 15%-20% 60%-80% 40%-60% Y

13.03 613 0 6 2 8 0.0%0.0
2%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 60-80 >90-100 DAC >20% 40%-60% <20% Y

13.04 1,475 0 44 43 87 0.2%0.2
0%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 40-60 >90-100 DAC >20% 40%-60% 60%-80% Y

14.07 1,526 117 84 1721 142 0.3%0.3
2%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 20-40 >80-90 DAC 12%-15% 60%-80% 40%-60% Y

14.08 1,082 0 0 3 3 0.0%0.0
1%
White $55,001-$87,100 <30% Moderate 20-40 >60-70 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

14.09 660 0 8 9 17 0.0%0.0
4%
White $87,101-$99,999 10%-20% RCAA High 20-40 >50-60 <8.2% <20% 20%-40%

14.11 2,099 403 240 70 712 1.6%1.6
1%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High 20-60 >80-90 DAC 15%-20% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

14.12 755 0 0 162 162 0.4%0.3
7%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High 20-40 >60-70 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

14.13 1,846 42 0 39 81 0.2%0.1 Hispanic/Latino $87,101-$99,999 <10% High <20 >60-70 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40% SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-126 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Census
Tracts
Existing
Households
Housing Capacity Patterns of Segregation Access to Opportunity Disproportionate Housing Needs/ Displacement Risk Low Mod Above
Mod
Total %of
Total
Population
Majority
Median
Income
Disability
Rates
R/ECAP
or RCAA
TCAC
Score
Jobs
Index
CES4
Scores
SB 35
DAC
Overcrowding Overpayment
(Renters)
Overpayment
(Homeowners)
Displacement
Risk
8%

14.15 1,481 0 121 751
1,109
872
1,230

2.0%2.7
7%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Low 20-60 >80-90 DAC 12%-15% 40%-60% 20%-40%

14.16 1,271 0 396 176
203
572
599

1.3%1.3
5%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Low 20-40 >80-90 DAC 12%-15% 40%-60% 20%-40%

14.17 1,684 77 0 282 359 0.8%0.8
1%
Hispanic/Latino $100,000-$149,999 10%-20% High <20 >70-80 8.3-12% 40%-60% 20%-40%

14.18 731 1,005 0 26 1,031 2.4%2.3
2%
Hispanic/Latino $100,000-$149,999 10%-20% High <20 >70-80 8.3-12% 60%-80% 20%-40%

15.00 627 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP Low >80 >90-100 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 40%-60% Y

18.00 1,299 0149 0 0 0149 0.0%0.3
4%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Low >80 >90-100 DAC 8.3-12% 20%-40% 20%-40%

20.00 1,969 1,128
906
1 249
195
1,378
1,102

2.5%3.1
1%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR <20-80 >90-100 DAC 12%-15% 40%-60% 60%-80% Y

21.00 2,080 0 2 27 29 0.1%0.0
7%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Low 40-80 >90-100 DAC 8.3-12% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

22.00 1,490 0 0 64 64 0.1%0.1
5%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Moderate 40-80 >80-90 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 40%-60% Y

23.00 1,299 71 0 120 191 0.4%0.4
3%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% HSR 60->80 >90-100 DAC 8.3-12% 60%-80% 40%-60% Y

24.00 1,474 33 50 32 115 0.3%0.2
6%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 60->80 >90-100 DAC 12%-15% 60%-80% 40%-60% Y

25.01 1,214 0 0 41 41 0.1%0.0
9%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 20-60 >90-100 DAC 15%-20% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

25.02 1,233 0 13 50 63 0.1%0.1
4%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 40-80 >90-100 DAC >20% 60%-80% 40%-60% Y

26.01 1,380 36 0 33 69 0.2%0.1
6%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 40-<80 >90-100 DAC 15%-20% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

26.02 990 0 0 31 31 0.1%0.0
7%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Moderate 60->80 >90-100 DAC 8.3-12% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

27.01 1,300 0 0 60 60 0.1%0.1
3%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% HSR 20-40 >80-90 DAC 15%-20% 60%-80% 40%-60% Y

27.02 1,272 21 0 66 86 0.2%0.1
9%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 20-40 >90-100 DAC >20% 60%-80% 40%-60% Y

28.00 1,356 351 7 61 419 1.0%0.9
4%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 20-40 >90-100 DAC >20% 60%-80% 40%-60% Y

29.03 1,206 130 13470 3599 299 0.7%0.6
7%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 20%-30% R/ECAP HSR 20-40 >80-90 DAC >20% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

29.04 860 0 0 5 5 0.0%0.0
1%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Low 20-40 >70-80 DAC 8.3-12% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

29.05 888 0 0 9 9 0.0%0.0
2%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% HSR 20-60 >80-90 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 40%-60% Y

29.06 1,583 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP Moderate 40-80 >70-80 DAC >20% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

30.01 916 503 57 3 562 1.3%1.2
7%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP Low 40-60 >90-100 DAC 15%-20% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

30.03 1,083 256 0 3 259 0.6%0.5
8%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 20-40 >80-90 DAC 15%-20% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

30.04 650 116 3119 820 155 0.4%0.3
5%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 20%-30% Moderate 20-40 >70-80 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-127 Census
Tracts
Existing
Households
Housing Capacity Patterns of Segregation Access to Opportunity Disproportionate Housing Needs/ Displacement Risk Low Mod Above
Mod
Total %of
Total
Population
Majority
Median
Income
Disability
Rates
R/ECAP
or RCAA
TCAC
Score
Jobs
Index
CES4
Scores
SB 35
DAC
Overcrowding Overpayment
(Renters)
Overpayment
(Homeowners)
Displacement
Risk

31.04 1,679 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High 60-80 >60-70 <8.2% 20%-40% 40%-60% Y

32.01 1,708 0 6 11 17 0.0%0.0
4%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Low 20-60 >90-100 DAC 12%-15% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

32.02 1,581 0 4 0 4 0.0%0.0
1%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% HSR 20-60 >90-100 DAC >20% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

33.01 1,138 0224 0 0 0224 0.5%0.0
0%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP Moderate 20-40 >80-90 DAC 15%-20% 60%-80% 40%-60% Y

33.02 1,668 0 0 2 2 0.0%0.0
0%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Moderate 20-40 >80-90 DAC 8.3-12% 40%-60% <20% Y

34.01 1,109 0 0 5 5 0.0%0.0
1%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 40-60 >90-100 DAC 8.3-12% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

34.02 710 0 0 5 5 0.0%0.0
1%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR 40-60 >90-100 DAC 8.3-12% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

35.00 2,183 142 16 18 176 0.4%0.4
0%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 20%-30% R/ECAP Moderate 20-60 >80-90 DAC 8.3-12% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

36.00 1,820 0 0 9 9 0.0%0.0
2%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High 20-60 >40-50 <8.2% 20%-40% 20%-40%

37.01 1,026 0 0 4 4 0.0%0.0
1%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP Low 20-40 >80-90 DAC 12%-15% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

37.02 1,671 0 23 0 23 0.1%0.0
5%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% HSR <20-60 >90-100 DAC 8.3-12% 40%-60% 40%-60% Y

38.04 1,704 0 0 136 136 0.3%0.3
1%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Moderate <20 >60-70 DAC 8.3-12% 40%-60% 20%-40%

38.05 2,095 83 197 130 410 0.9%0.9
3%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Low <20-40 >90-100 DAC 12%-15% 60%-80% 60%-80% Y

38.07 1,056 0 91 155 246 0.6%0.5
5%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% HSR <20-60 >90-100 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

38.08 1,584 0 0 122 122 0.3%0.2
7%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High <20 >60-70 DAC 12%-15% 40%-60% 20%-40%

38.09 1,369 0 584
521
110
173
694 1.6%1.5
6%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 <10% Low 40-80 >80-90 DAC 12%-15% 40%-60% 20%-40%

38.10 1,787 171 0 157 327 0.8%0.7
4%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High 20-40 >60-70 8.3-12% 40%-60% 20%-40%

38.11 1,979 131
262
660 124 58 321
320

0.7%0.7
2%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High <20 >60-70 DAC 8.3-12% >80% 20%-40%

38.12 539 647
525
102
244
3,256
3,235
4,0056 9.2%9.0
3%
Hispanic/Latino $100,000-$149,999 10%-20% High <20 >60-70 DAC 8.3-12% >80% 20%-40%

42.05 1,883 430 50 53 532 1.2%1.2
0%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% HSR 60-80 >80-90 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

42.08 2,421 0 0 4 4 0.0%0.0
1%
White $87,101-$99,999 <10% RCAA Highest <20 >30-40 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

42.10 1,300 0 4 3 7 0.0%0.0
2%
White <$55,000 10%-20% High <20-40 >40-50 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

42.11 2,408 0 0 109 0 109 0 0.0%0.2
5%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High <20-40 >60-70 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

42.12 4,323 241 109 26 376 0.9%0.8
5%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High 20-80 >70-80 DAC 8.3-12% 40%-60% 20%-40%

42.13 1,302 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High 60-80 >40-50 <8.2% 20%-40% <20%

42.14 1,932 0 0 4 4 0.0%0.0
1%
White $87,101-$99,999 20%-30% Highest 20-60 >20-30 <8.2% 20%-40% 20%-40% SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-128 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Census
Tracts
Existing
Households
Housing Capacity Patterns of Segregation Access to Opportunity Disproportionate Housing Needs/ Displacement Risk Low Mod Above
Mod
Total %of
Total
Population
Majority
Median
Income
Disability
Rates
R/ECAP
or RCAA
TCAC
Score
Jobs
Index
CES4
Scores
SB 35
DAC
Overcrowding Overpayment
(Renters)
Overpayment
(Homeowners)
Displacement
Risk

42.15 1,345 1,056
968
106 0 12115 1,194
1,070

2.5%2.6
9%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High <20 >60-70 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

42.16 1,441 0 184 0 184 0.4%0.4
1%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High <20 >60-70 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

42.17 987 367
375
9057 96 135 553
567

1.3%1.2
8%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Moderate 40-60 >80-90 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 40%-60%

42.18 1,853 2,032
2,410
1,937
1,180
1,077
695
4,665
4,668

10.7%

10.52%
Hispanic/Latino $87,101-$99,999 10%-20% Moderate 20-40 >80-90 DAC <8.2% >80% 40%-60%

43.01 1,745 68 0 13 81 0.2%0.1
8%
White $150,000-$199,999 10%-20% RCAA Highest 40-80 >20-30 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

43.02 1,897 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $100,000-$149,999 10%-20% RCAA Highest 60->80 >30-40 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

43.03 1,948 0 0 2 2 0.0%0.0
0%
White $87,101-$99,999 10%-20% RCAA Highest 60-80 >30-40 <8.2% 60%-80% 20%-40%

44.04 984 342 0 9692 438
434

1.0%0.9
9%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Moderate >80 >90-100 DAC >20% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

44.05 1,363 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $100,000-$149,999 10%-20% RCAA Highest 60-80 >20-30 <8.2% 40%-60% <20%

44.06 2,393 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $55,001-$87,100 <10% Highest >80 >30-40 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

44.09 1,168 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High >80 >60-70 <8.2% 20%-40% 20%-40%

44.10 1,039 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $55,001-$87,100 <10% Highest >80 >40-50 8.3-12% 20%-40% 20%-40%

44.11 777 0 0 66 66 0.2%0.1
5%
White $87,101-$99,999 <10% Highest >80 >40-50 8.3-12% 40%-60% 20%-40%

45.03 2,183 0 35 0 35 0.1%0.0
8%
White $55,001-$87,100 20%-30% High >80 >50-60 <8.2% 40%-60% 40%-60%

45.04 2,078 99 0 243 342 0.8%0.7
7%
White <$55,000 10%-20% High >80 >80-90 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 40%-60% Y

45.05 2,083 836
923
217
117
7257 1,1102 2.6%2.5
1%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% R/ECAP Moderate 60-80 >80-90 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% <20% Y

45.06 1,418 150 0 6 156 0.4%0.3
5%
White $87,101-$99,999 10%-20% RCAA Highest >80 <8.2% 40%-60% <20%

46.01 1,383 19 10 3 32 0.1%0.0
7%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High 40-80 >40-50 <8.2% 40%-60% <20%

46.02 913 59 5 0 64 0.1%0.1
4%
White $87,101-$99,999 <10% RCAA Highest 60-80 >40-50 <8.2% 40%-60% <20%

47.03 1,181 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Moderate 20-60 >70-80 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 40%-60% Y

47.04 1,515 0 24 63 86 0.2%0.1
9%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR <20-40 >80-90 DAC >20% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

47.05 654 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Moderate 40-80 >70-80 DAC <8.2% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

47.06 1,812 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Moderate 40-80 >70-80 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

48.01 1,791 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 <10% R/ECAP HSR 20-40 >60-70 12%-15% 40%-60% 40%-60% Y

48.02 1,441 0 84 0 84 0.2%0.1
9%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR <20-40 >70-80 DAC 15%-20% 60%-80% 40%-60% Y

49.01 1,659 0 12 3 15 0.0%0.0
3%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High 40-60 >50-60 12%-15% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-129 Census
Tracts
Existing
Households
Housing Capacity Patterns of Segregation Access to Opportunity Disproportionate Housing Needs/ Displacement Risk Low Mod Above
Mod
Total %of
Total
Population
Majority
Median
Income
Disability
Rates
R/ECAP
or RCAA
TCAC
Score
Jobs
Index
CES4
Scores
SB 35
DAC
Overcrowding Overpayment
(Renters)
Overpayment
(Homeowners)
Displacement
Risk

49.02 735 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High 40-60 >40-50 8.3-12% 40%-60% 20%-40%

50.00 1,518 628 1 16 646 1.5%1.4
6%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Moderate 60->80 >80-90 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

51.00 2,220 32 610
305
30335 672 1.5%1.5
1%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% HSR 40-80 >90-100 DAC <8.2% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

52.02 1,139 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% HSR 20-60 >90-100 DAC >20% >80% 40%-60% Y

52.03 1,595 0 0 12 12 0.0%0.0
3%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% HSR 20-60 >80-90 DAC <8.2% 60%-80% 20%-40% Y

52.04 1,287 0 5 16 21 0.0%0.0
5%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Moderate 40-80 >80-90 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 40%-60% Y

53.01 1,866 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Moderate 60-80 >80-90 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

53.02 1,888 0 0 11 11 0.0%0.0
2%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% HSR 60-80 >70-80 <8.2% 40%-60% 40%-60% Y

53.04 2,076 0 0 14 14 0.0%0.0
3%
Hispanic Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Moderate 60-80 >70-80 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

53.05 1,149 0 27 12 39 0.1%0.0
9%
Hispanic/Latino $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Moderate 40-80 >80-90 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y

54.03 1,647 158 0 2 160 0.4%0.3
6%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% R/ECAP HSR >80 >80-90 DAC 8.3-12% 60%-80% 20%-40%

54.05 1,759 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High >80 >60-70 <8.2% 20%-40% 20%-40%

54.06 1,475 0 0 5 5 0.0%0.0
1%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High >80 >60-70 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

54.07 1,338 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High 60-80 >40-50 <8.2% 40%-60% <20%

54.08 321 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $55,001-$87,100 <10% R/ECAP Low 60-80 >90-100 DAC <8.2% 40%-60% <20%

54.09 1,297 0 0 2 2 0.0%0.0
0%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Moderate >80 >60-70 DAC 8.3-12% 60%-80% 20%-40%

54.10 1,057 23 0 3 26 0.1%0.0
6%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Moderate >80 >70-80 DAC 8.3-12% 40%-60% <20%

55.03 2,369 211 89 1,241 1,541 3.5%3.4
8%
White $100,000-$149,999 <10% RCAA Highest <20-40 >10-20 <8.2% 60%-80% 20%-40%

55.04 1,001 0 0 13 13 0.0%0.0
3%
White $100,000-$149,999 <10% RCAA Highest <20 >20-30 <8.2% 20%-40% 20%-40%

55.05 1,834 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $100,000-$149,999 10%-20% RCAA Highest <20 >20-30 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

55.07 2,214 50 0 13 63 0.1%0.1
4%
White $100,000-$149,999 <10% RCAA Highest 40-80 >10-20 <8.2% 40%-60% <20%

55.08 2,094 0 260 430 30 0.1%0.0
7%
White $100,000-$149,999 <10% RCAA Highest <20-60 >10-20 <8.2% 20%-40% 20%-40%

55.09 1,690 59 419
232
0187 478 1.1%1.0
8%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Highest 40-80 >50-60 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

55.16 2,775 0 0 1 1 0.0%0.0
0%
White $87,101-$99,999 <10% RCAA Highest <20-60 >30-40 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

55.26 799 0 0 2 2 0.0%0.0
0%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Highest >80 >40-50 <8.2% 40%-60% <20% Y

55.27 1,407 81 0 0 81 0.2%0.1
8%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% Highest 60-80 >40-50 <8.2% 40%-60% <20% Y SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-130 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Census
Tracts
Existing
Households
Housing Capacity Patterns of Segregation Access to Opportunity Disproportionate Housing Needs/ Displacement Risk Low Mod Above
Mod
Total %of
Total
Population
Majority
Median
Income
Disability
Rates
R/ECAP
or RCAA
TCAC
Score
Jobs
Index
CES4
Scores
SB 35
DAC
Overcrowding Overpayment
(Renters)
Overpayment
(Homeowners)
Displacement
Risk

55.28 659 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $87,101-$99,999 <10% RCAA Highest <20 >10-20 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

55.29 1,993 0 0 6 6 0.0%0.0
1%
White $100,000-$149,999 <10% RCAA Highest <20 >10-20 <8.2% 60%-80% 20%-40%

56.05 500 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $87,101-$99,999 10%-20% RCAA High 60-80 >30-40 <8.2% 20%-40% 20%-40%

58.04 1,942 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0
0%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% High 60-80 >60-70 DAC <8.2% 20%-40% 20%-40% Y

58.05 2,096 68170 154
115
532
517
75480
2 1.7%1.8
1%
White $55,001-$87,100 10%-20% RCAA Highest 60-80 >50-60 <8.2% 40%-60% 20%-40%

59.04 1,895 0 0 263 263 0.6%0.5
9%
White $87,101-$99,999 10%-20% RCAA Highest 20-40 >40-50 <8.2% 20%-40% 20%-40%

86.00 1,289 718
817
19983 1,1761
,193
2,093 4.8%4.7
2%
Hispanic/Latino <$55,000 10%-20% Low 60-80 >90-100 DAC 12%-15% 40%-60% 20%-40% Y Total 18,755 6,579 18,179 43,512 100.0%
R/ECAP = Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Area of Poverty RCAA=Racially Concentrated Area of Affluence HSR= High Segregation & Poverty CES4=CalEnviroScreen 4.0 DAC= Disadvantaged Community Source: City of Fresno, Ascent 2024.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-131 There are 135 census tracts in the city. Figure 1E-3.43 displays the housing capacity identified in the sites inventory relative to the city’s census tracts. The housing capacity identified in the Draft Housing Element is generally distributed throughout the city with the greatest opportunities in the Downtown, along commercial corridors designated for mixed use development, and in the new growth areas at the periphery of the city. As shown in Figure 1E-3.44, the West Area contains the most capacity from the inventory (26 percent of the total identified capacity) followed by Downtown (20 percent), the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan area (17 16 percent), and the Roosevelt Community Plan area (14 percent). The distribution of sites across the city displays a concentration of lower-income housing in areas like Downtown and the West Area, while other areas like McLane and Woodward Park have a higher proportion of moderate and above moderate-income housing, reflecting an unequal distribution of housing capacity across the city. This has the potential to exacerbate fair housing issues in Fresno by providing more capacity for lower-income housing in disproportionately impacted communities. The Housing Element includes several policies and programs to address these issues (see Table 1E-3.28 at the end of this section for a summary of these actions).

Relative to all of the census tracts within the city, two census tracts have slightly higher concentrations than the rest. These are census tracts 38.12 and 42.18 which account for 9.09.2 percent and 10.510.7 percent of the housing capacity for the Draft Housing Element respectively. These tracts are located west of Highway 99 within the West Area. The West Area is one of the City’s new growth areas in which the City is preparing a Specific Plan that provides significant opportunities for new higher density, mixed use neighborhoods, which will be integrated with the urbanized areas of Fresno to the east through future BRT corridors.

Census tract 38.12, on the periphery of the West Area, is largely vacant land zoned to accommodate medium density residential single-family development (RS-5 zoning), but also contains zoning for higher density multi-family housing. The inventory identifies capacity for 647 525 lower-income units, 102 244 moderateincome units, and 3,2563,235 above moderate- income units in tract 38.12. It is a high resource area and there is a substantial amount of developable land in the area. The majority of the population in this census tract is Hispanic/Latino, although there are only about 500 539 existing households in the census tract.

Median incomes typically average between $100,000 and $149,000. Although it is classified as high resource, it is also designated as an SB 35 Disadvantaged Community (DAC). This is in line with an estimated 85 percent of the city’s land area being designated as a DAC. The addition of housing units in this census tract on sites identified in the Housing Element inventory will likely improve performance indicators.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-132 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.43: Sites Inventory by Census Tract, City of Fresno, July 2024 Source: City of Fresno, Ascent, 2024.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-133 Figure 1E-3.44: Distribution of Housing Capacity by Community Plan/Specific Plan Area 1%
8%
1%
4%
12%
14%
15%
27%
20%
4%
1%
12%
8%
9%
22%
4%
3%
37%
2%
1%
5%
7%
3%
13%
22%
18%
29%
2%
4%
4%
5%
8%
14%
17%
20%
26%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Fresno High-Roeding
Hoover
McLane
Woodward Park
Bullard
Roosevelt
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan
Downtown
West
Percent of Total Capacity Percent of Above Moderate Income Capacity Percent of Moderate Income Capacity Percent of Lower Income Capacity SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-134 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, 2024.
1%
8%
2%
4%
13%
14%
14%
27%
18%
3%
1%
7%
4%
8%
17%
7%
5%
47%
2%
2%
6%
8%
2%
12%
23%
18%
27%
2%
4%
5%
6%
8%
14%
16%
20%
26%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
Fresno High-Roeding
Hoover
McLane
Woodward Park
Bullard
Roosevelt
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan
Downtown
West
Percent of Total Capacity Percent of Above Moderate Income Capacity Percent of Moderate Income Capacity Percent of Lower Income Capacity APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-135 Census tract 42.18 is in the boundaries of the proposed West Area Neighborhood Specific Plan (WANSP).

The Housing Element inventory identifies capacity for 2,4102,032 lower-income units, 1,1801,937 moderate-income units, and 1,077695 above moderate- income units in tract 42.18. Given the significant amount of land zoned for high-density mixed use in this area, this is where the highest portion of the capacity for lower- and moderate-income units are. In total, there is capacity for 3,2733,227 units included in the sites inventory in the West Shaw Avenue Town Center alone, including 1,5651,177 lower-income, 730 1,585 moderate-income, and 730 395 above moderate-income units. Because the area has been and continues to transition from agriculture to urban development, many of the sites are larger in size than sites in other parts of the city. Approximately 1,853 people currently live in this census tract; households are predominantly Hispanic/Latino with mostly moderate- and lower- income households. Median incomes are generally moderate (exactly or within the range of $87,101-$99,999) and lower income (less than $50,000).

The Town Center provides an opportunity for more rental developments at higher densities that could produce affordable housing units for lower- and moderate- income households. There is a substantial amount of developable land in the area, and it is currently designated moderate resource. The addition of a Town Center also provides foundations to increase access to opportunities, amenities, and resources.

Sites in the inventory are also distributed throughout the city’s established neighborhoods north and south of Shaw Avenue. This includes in the Hoover community area, the Fresno High-Roeding community, McLane, and Roosevelt community. As there is little vacant land for new development in these neighborhoods, they contribute minimally to the overall housing capacity identified in the Housing Element inventory. For example, approximately 2 percent of the total inventory identified is in Fresno HighRoeding, comprising 1 percent of the lower-income capacity, 4 3 percent of the moderate-income capacity, and 2 percent of the above moderate-income capacity. Moreover, the Hoover and McLane communities each account for 4 percent and 5 percent of the inventory respectively (see Table 1E-3.23).

With regards to fair housing indicators, the established neighborhoods north of Shaw Avenue –including the Woodward Park, Bullard, and Hoover communities– have higher percentages of White residents with higher household incomes. According to the TCAC Opportunity Index, these communities have greater life outcomes for children from lower income households. Educational outcomes are higher in these communities than other areas of the city, there is greater labor market engagement, and environmental conditions are generally better. While the capacity in these areas is less than other community plan areas in the city, Table 1E-3.23 shows that the Housing Element identifies capacity for over 7,700 7,500 new housing units in the Woodward Park, Bullard, and Hoover community plan areas including an estimated 4,500 for lower-income households. More affordable housing in these areas will provide greater access to opportunity for lower-income residents.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-136 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Table 1E-3.23: Housing Capacity by Community Plan/Specific Plan Area LowerIncome
Housing
Capacity
Percent of
LowerIncome
Capacity
ModIncome
Housing
Capacity
Percent
of ModIncome
Capacity
Above
ModIncome
Housing
Capacity
Percent of
Above
ModIncome
Capacity
Total
Capacity
Percent
of Total
Capacity
Bullard 2,3482,347 12.5%12% 559565 8.5%9% 377607 2.1%3% 3,2843,519 7.5%8% Downtown 5,0725,204 27.0%27% 307198 4.7%3% 3,2213,376 17.7%18% 8,6008,778 19.8%20% Fresno HighRoeding180 1.0%1% 221 3.4%4% 327 1.8%2% 729 1.7%2% Hoover 1,476 7.9%8% 72 1.1%1% 277273 1.5%1% 1,8251,821 4.2%4% McLane 362240 1.9%1% 474740 7.2%12% 1,170860 6.4%5% 2,0061,840 4.6%4% Roosevelt 2,648 14.1%14% 1,1081,317 16.8%22% 2,2412,417 12.3%13% 5,9976,382 13.8%14% Southwest
Fresno
Specific Plan
2,5412,885 13.5%15% 472238 7.2%4% 4,1604,199 22.9%22% 7,1737,321 16.5%17% West 3,4413,818 18.3%20% 3,0812,278 46.8%37% 4,9565,401 27.3%29% 11,47811,4 97 26.4%26%
Woodward
Park
687 3.7%4% 283458 4.3%8% 1,4541,279 8.0%7% 2,425 5.6%5% CITYWIDE 18,75519,4
84 100.0% 6,5796,089 100.0% 18,17918,7
44 100.0% 43,51244,3
16 100.0%
Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, 2024.

In the established neighborhoods south of Shaw Avenue –including Fresno High-Roeding and McClane neighborhoods—fair housing indicators convey moderate fair housing conditions. These communities have a greater amount of diversity and are more racially integrated, as shown in Figure 1E-3.3 previously in this section. However, there are higher poverty rates than in northern Fresno neighborhoods. Fresno HighRoeding and McClane also contain several of the city’s identified R/ECAP areas. Notably, the eastern portion of McClane does not follow the same trends. Fair housing conditions in the eastern McClane community plan area reflect more positive outcomes that are in line with North Fresno and Clovis neighborhoods (e.g., it is classified as a RCAA as opposed to a R/ECAP, there are higher TCAC opportunity scores, fewer disproportionate housing needs, and less risk of displacement). About 12 percent of the moderate-income capacity (740 units) is identified in McLane which reflects the amount of area zoned for multi-family residential with densities below 30 units per acre. The addition of moderate-income housing is not likely to impact fair housing conditions in the McLane community. Depending on the type of housing that is built, it may alleviate pressure for housing in the developed core of the city. The Fresno HighRoeding community area has minimal housing capacity identified across all income levels in the Housing Element inventory.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-137 The City’s developed core neighborhoods – including Downtown and the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan area – have the poorest fair housing conditions. These communities contain the majority of the City’s R/ECAP areas as well as areas classified as high segregation and poverty by the 2021 TCAC Opportunity Index. Fair housing indicators show that there are higher rates of overcrowding and housing cost burden as well as higher percentages of Housing Choice Voucher usage in these communities. In addition, there is lower academic performance, fewer educational resources, low engagement with the labor market, and very poor environmental conditions. In fact, nearly 70 census tracts in Fresno are considered a SB 35 disadvantaged community, comprising an estimated 85 percent of the city’s land area. 38 Downtown Fresno, with its high density of housing and commercial activity, faces challenges such as air pollution, noise, and limited green spaces. The concentration of traffic and industrial activities contributes to higher levels of air pollutants, which can adversely affect residents' health. However, efforts to revitalize Downtown, including the introduction of more green spaces and improved public transportation, aim to mitigate these environmental health issues and make the area more livable.

In the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan area, environmental health conditions are impacted and often more severe. This area has historically been home to a higher concentration of industrial facilities and lowerincome housing, leading to issues such as poor air quality, soil contamination, and inadequate access to clean water and green spaces. Residents in this area are more likely to be exposed to environmental hazards, which can have significant impacts on health outcomes. Given the proximity to industrial uses, the City reviewed sites in the inventory adjacent to existing industrial uses, specifically near State Route 41, and removed those sites which would be most impacted during the timeframe of this Housing Element. These conditions present challenges for increasing housing capacity, as new developments must address and mitigate these environmental health risks to create safe and healthy living environments.

As shown in Table 1E-3.2223, both Downtown and the Southwest Fresno specific plan area contain a high capacity of the sites inventoried in this Housing Element. This includes 27 percent of the lower-income capacity and 20 percent of the above moderate-income capacity identified in the Downtown Community Plan area; and, 15 14 percent of the lower-income capacity and 17 16 percent of the above moderate income capacity in the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan area. While new lower income housing in these areas could help to alleviate the demand for housing in communities that are already experiencing poverty, it could reinforce patterns of concentrated poverty in these areas. Both Downtown and Southwest Fresno are susceptible to displacement pressure as new developments are built. There are about 7,380 7,574 units of above moderate-income housing inventoried in the Housing Element in these communities. Consequently, future development has the potential to exacerbate disproportionate housing needs including risk of displacement. Notably, the capacity for higher density development can provide affordable housing for lower-income households and more options to mitigate displacement for residents. 38 Under Senate Bill (SB) 535, a disadvantaged community includes census tracts receiving the highest 25 percent of overall scores in CalEnviroScreen 4.0. Refer to page 1E-3-52 for more discuss of SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities in Fresno.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-138 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 With regards to environmental health conditions, new higher density developments in Downtown and the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan areas could contribute to alleviating some of the existing environmental health issues, creating more sustainable and healthy urban environments. For example, new developments can integrate green infrastructure, such as parks, green roofs, and community gardens, which help improve air quality, manage stormwater, and provide residents with recreational spaces. This can mitigate urban heat island effects and improve overall environmental health. The Southwest Specific Plan, adopted in 2017, reimagines this area as transitioning from industrial to a series of small, complete neighborhoods made up of community-serving uses, including retail, a range of housing types, a school, and a park. In addition, the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan prohibits new industrial development near residential areas in the Specific Plan area to the maximum extent feasible and instead the zoning encourages high-density developmentscomplete neighborhoods to that incorporate mixed-use designs, where residential, commercial, and recreational spaces are within walking distance. This can reduce the need for driving, lowering traffic congestion and vehicle emissions, thus improving air quality. As it transitions from industrial uses to complete neighborhoods, the City recognizes that there are land use incompatibilities that could have negative impacts. For this reason, the City reviewed sites for the Housing Element inventory closely and removed sites that would be most impacted by existing industrial uses in the short term. As the Housing Element is implemented, it will be essential that new developments are planned and executed with a strong focus on environmental and public health to maximize their positive impact.

Potential Effects on Integration Trends
Race and Ethnicity
The population in the city of Fresno is predominantly Hispanic/Latino (50 percent) and White (26 percent).

As described previously, neighborhoods north of Shaw Avenue are predominantly White households and neighborhoods south of Shaw, western neighborhoods, and the Downtown/Fulton corridor area are predominantly Hispanic/Latino. Figure 1E-3.45 displays the housing capacity identified in this Housing Element by the racial/ethnic majority of each census tract. The housing capacity includes approximately 37,365 37,888units in areas that are predominately Hispanic/Latino households (85 86 percent of the total capacity), and 6,147 6,428units in areas that are predominantly occupied by White households (15 14 percent). As the established neighborhoods north of Shaw Avenue – including the Woodward Park, Bullard, and Hoover communities – continue to experience growth, there are opportunities for increased diversity with the addition of housing for lower income households. The Housing Element identifies capacity for over 7,7007,500 new housing units in the Woodward Park, Bullard, and Hoover community plan areas for this planning period. About 4,500 of those are identified for lower-income households (see Table 1E-3.23).

Additional lower-income housing units can provide options to increase housing mobility for lower-income non-White households in R/ECAPs and thereby increase diversity in the neighborhoods north of Shaw Avenue and improve conditions of segregation based on race and ethnicity. The California State University (CSU) Fresno campus is also adjacent to these established neighborhoods, so more development will provide additional housing opportunities for college students and faculty. The additional capacity identified for housing in the rest of the city will not substantially impact trends of integration given the predominance of non-White households throughout the city already.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-139 Figure 1E-3.45: Sum of Total Housing Capacity by Population Majority of Census Tract Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on ACS data. 16,183
2,572
5,858
721
15,325
2,854
37,365
6,147
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
Hispanic/Latino White
Sum of Lower Income Housing Capacity
Sum of Moderate Income Housing
Capacity
Sum of Above Moderate Income
Housing Capacity
Sum of Total Housing Capacity
16,898
2,586
5,088
1,001
15,903
2,841
37,888
6,428
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
Hispanic/Latino White
Sum of Lower Income Housing Capacity
Sum of Moderate Income Housing
Capacity
Sum of Above Moderate Income
Housing Capacity
Sum of Total Housing Capacity
SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-140 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Income
As was shown in the assessment above, most neighborhoods are composed of lower- and moderate- income households. In 2020, Fresno’s citywide median household income was $53,368. Neighborhoods north of Shaw Avenue, including portions of the Bullard and West community areas, have the highest median incomes.

Otherwise, most census block groups in the city have higher rates of poverty with household incomes that fall below the statewide median. As displayed in Table 1E-3.22 above, the typical income range across many census tracts in the city is less than $50,000 or in the range of $50,001 to $87,100. In fact, 47 percent of census tracts in the city have median incomes below $50,000 and 33 percent have median incomes between $50,000 and $87,100, meaning that in total 81 percent of census tracts have median incomes below the statewide median. Less than 9 percent of census tracts in Fresno have median incomes above $100,000. As shown in Table 1E-3.24 below, which displays the housing capacity for this Housing Element by 2019 median incomes, about half of the inventoried capacity for new housing (21,939 22,060units) is in neighborhoods with incomes less than $50,000, which mirrors the percentage of census tracts in this income range. Figure 1E-3.46 showsthis information. The distribution is largely due to the capacity for new housing in core activity centers where there is significant capacity for high-density infill housing, but existing household incomes are relatively low. This is followed by an additional 8,297 8,928units in census tracts with incomes between $5550,001 and $87,100 (20 19 percent) and 6,984 6,985units in tracts with incomes between $100,000- $149,999 (16 percent). Relative to the percentage of census tracts in the higher income range, the sites inventory distributes a larger share of units to higher income census tracts relative to the percentage of tracts in this income category. This is reflective of the large number of sites in new growth areas at the periphery of the city with higher median incomes.

Table 1E-3.24: Housing Capacity and Median Income of Census Tract LowerIncome
Housing
Capacity
Percent
of LowerIncome
Capacity
ModIncome
Housing
Capacity
Percent
of ModIncome
Capacity
Above
ModIncome
Housing
Capacity
Percent of
Above
ModIncome
Capacity
Total
Capacity
Percent of
Total
Capacity
No Data 47 0.2%0.24
%
0 0.0%0.00
%
25 0.1%0.13% 72 0.2%0.16%
<$50,000 9,954
10,213

53.1%

52.42%
2,464 2,615 37.5%

42.95%
9,521
9,232

52.4%

49.25%
21,939
22,060

50.4%

49.78%
$50,001-
$87,100
4,467
4,335

23.8%

22.25%
1,6771,948 25.5%

31.99%
2,153
2,645

11.8%

14.11%
8,297
8,928

19.1%

20.15%
$87,101-
$99,999
2,401
2,881

12.8%

14.79%
2,1041,308 32.0%

21.49%
1,632
1,999

9.0% 10.67% 6,138
6,189

14.1%

13.95%
$100,000-
$149,999
1,818
1,940

9.7%

9.96%
333217 5.1% 3.57
%
4,834
4,829

26.6%

25.76%
6,984
6,985

16.1%

15.85%
$150,000-
$199,999
68 0.4%

0.35%
0 0.0%

0.00%
13 0. 0.0
7%
81 0.2% 0.18%
Total 18,755
19,484
100.0%
100.00%
6,579 6,089 100.0%
100.00%
18,179
18,744
100.0%
100.00%
43,512
44,316
100.0%
100.00%
Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on ACS data.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-141 Looking more closely at the distribution of sites by income category, the lower-income sites are slightly more concentrated in lower-income census tracts compared to the moderate- and above moderate-income sites.

About 52 53 percent of the lower-income capacity is in census tracts where the median income is below $50,000, compared to nearly 5052 percent of the above moderate-income capacity also in these areas, while only 10 percent of the lower-income site capacity is in tracts with median incomes above $100,000, compared to 26 27 percent of the above moderate-income capacity. The moderate-income capacity is fairly well distributed across census tracts by income. To address this disparity, the Housing Element includes a program to expand capacity for lower-income and missing middle housing types in traditionally single-family neighborhoods and high resource areas, which correspond with areas that are relatively higher income (Program 2). To improve economic opportunities, reduce poverty, and increase financial stability, the Housing Element also includes a program to provide targeted job training opportunities for residents (Program 30).

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-142 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.46: Housing Capacity and Median Income by Block Group Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on ACS data.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-143 Concentrated Areas of Race and Income
There are currently 40 census tracts that are designated as R/ECAPs in the city of Fresno, which are neighborhoods where there are both racial concentrations and high poverty rates. As shown in Figure 1E4.47, R/ECAPs are generally in more centralized parts of the city. The Housing Element identifies capacity for 13,410 13,365 units in R/ECAP areas, including 7,895 7,990 lower-, 1,182939 moderate- and 4,333 4,436 above-moderate income units (Figure 1E-3.48). This accounts for 41 42 percent of the lower-income capacity, 15 18 percent of the moderate-income capacity, and 24 percent of the above moderate-income capacity. The reason that a large portion of the lower-income RHNA is accommodated within areas classified as R/ECAPs is because of City policies to encourage high density housing close to the central core of the city in proximity to jobs and transit. Program 28 (Equitable Community Investments) of this Housing Element, consistent with other policies in the General Plan, prioritizes reinvestment in the city’s core areas. It includes the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan Area, Phase 1 and Phase 2 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and High-Frequency Transit Corridors, Infill Opportunity Zones (IOZs)— which have been defined as established neighborhoods generally south of Herndon Avenue—and the South Industrial Area. These areas align closely with census tracts designated as concentrated areas of poverty. Incentivizing new residential development, expanding transit options, stimulating economic development, and business and job creation will contribute to a higher quality of life for existing and future residents of the city’s core areas.

There are 19 census tracts in Fresno that are designated as RCAAs, which are neighborhoods where there are both high concentrations of White households and high household incomes. As shown in Figure 1E3.49, areas of affluence are primarily in areas within the city SOI but located in unincorporated islands or new growth areas north of Nees Avenue. The sites inventory includes capacity for 2,993 3,041 housing units in these areas of affluence, as shown in Figure 1E-3.47, including capacity for 2,132 2,091 above moderate-income units, 243 256 moderate-income units, and 708 606 lower-income units. The capacity identified in areas designated as RCAAs is predominantly for above-moderate income units.

To address the concentration of lower-income unit capacity in R/ECAPs and the lack of lower-income housing opportunity in RCAAs, the Housing Element includes a program to identify additional sites or rezoning options for land in high resource areas to provide opportunities for higher density development in all areas of the city and reduce concentrations of poverty (Program 2). This includes developing zoning standards to permit residential conversions in the Office Zone District and facilitating the development of missing middle and multi-unit housing types such as duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, townhomes, and SB 9 lot splits.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-144 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.47: Sites Inventory and Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAP)
Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on ACS data.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-145 Figure 1E-3.48: Sum of Total Housing Capacity by R/ECAP or RCAA Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on ACS data. 606
7,895
256
1,182
2,132
4,333
2,993
13,410
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000

RCAA RECAP
Sum of Lower Income Housing Capacity
Sum of Moderate Income Housing
Capacity
Sum of Above Moderate Income
Housing Capacity
Sum of Total Housing Capacity
7,990
708 939
243
4,436
2,091
13,365
3,041
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000

R/ECAP RCAA
Sum of Lower Income Housing Capacity
Sum of Moderate Income Housing
Capacity
Sum of Above Moderate Income
Housing Capacity
Sum of Total Housing Capacity
SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-146 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.49: Sites Inventory and Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAA) Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on ACS data.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-147 Potential Effects on Access to Opportunity
Fresno has a mix of low-resource, moderate-resource, and high or highest resources areas. There are also several areas categorized as high segregation and poverty. Growth areas on the periphery of established neighborhoods along the northern and eastern edges of the city are designated moderate and high resource, including an annexation area, designated as highest. The central portion of the city is designated as low resource and high segregation and poverty. Table 1E-3.25 displays the sum of census tracts in the city SOI by TCAC classification.

Table 1E-3.25: TCAC Opportunity Areas by Census Tract, City of Fresno 2022 TCAC Opportunity Area Sum of Census Tracts in City SOI Percent of Tracts
Highest Resource 24 17.8%
High Resource 29 21.5%
Moderate Resource 23 17.0%
Low Resource 15 11.1%
High Segregation and Poverty 43 31.9%
No Data 1 0.7%
Total 135 100.0%
Source: City of Fresno, 2023. California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTAC), 2022.

Figure 1E-3.50 below estimates the number of housing units in each opportunity area. Generally, the sites inventory adds more housing in all resource areas. The most housing capacity is estimated in high or highest resource areas and areas of high segregation and poverty, which is consistent with the bulk of developable areas in Fresno (see Figure 1E-3.51). In total, the inventory includes capacity for approximately 12,818 13,101 units in high or highest resource areas (30 29 percent of the total capacity), 8,302 8,101 units in moderate resource areas (18 19 percent of the total capacity), 5,844 6,388 units in low resource areas (14 13 percent of the total capacity), and approximately 15,258 15,510 units in areas of high segregation and poverty (35 percent of the total capacity). One census tract (census tract 1.00 in the Downtown development area) does not have any data associated with it from the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Mapping tool, and this accounts for 1,2161,291 units from the Housing Element inventory (3 percent of the total capacity).

Over half of the above moderate-income housing capacity (52 53 percent) is in low resource areas and areas of high segregation and poverty, combined, creating opportunities to balance the concentration of poverty in these areas of the city with higher income households. Conversely, about 24 25 percent of the lowerincome housing capacity is in high and highest resource areas, compared to 37 38 percent of the above moderate-income housing capacity. This is largely due to the predominance of single-family zoning in neighborhoods north of Shaw Avenue. Program 2, described above, has been added to the Housing Element to address this disparity by expanding opportunities for lower- and moderate-income housing in high and highest resource areas.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-148 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.50: Sum of Total Housing Capacity and TCAC Opportunity Areas 746
3,900
4,710
1,413
7,301
685
480
845
2,313
1,587
1,147
206
2,381
4,466
1,278
2,844
6,810
400
3,607
9,211
8,302
5,844
15,258
1,291
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000
Highest Resource
High Resource
Moderate Resource
Low Resource
High Segregation & Poverty
No Data
Sum of Total Housing Capacity
Sum of Above Moderate Income
Housing Capacity
Sum of Moderate Income Housing
Capacity
Sum of Lower Income Housing
Capacity
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-149 Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on ACS data. 848
3,803
4,959
1,643
7,522
708
654
875
1,435
1,621
1,305
198
2,153
4,768
1,707
3,124
6,683
310
3,655
9,446
8,101
6,388
15,510
1,216
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000
Highest Resource
High Resource
Moderate Resource
Low Resource
High Segregation & Poverty
No Data
Sum of Total Housing Capacity
Sum of Above Moderate Income
Housing Capacity
Sum of Moderate Income Housing
Capacity
Sum of Lower Income Housing Capacity
SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-150 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.51: Sites Inventory and TCAC Opportunity Areas Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on ACS data.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-151 Potential Effects on Disproportionate Housing Needs
Cost Burden or Overpayment
Across all census tracts, the average percent of housing cost burdened populations is between 40 and 60 percent for renters and 20 to 40 percent for homeowners. Table 1E-3.26 and Table 1E-3.27 below display where housing capacity exists relative to housing cost burden. Approximately 25,336 26,218 units (59 58 percent) of the housing capacity is identified in tracts with a renter overpayment between 40 and 60 percent; 8,852 8,620 units (19 20 percent) of the capacity is in tracts with rates between 60 and 80 percent; and 8,989 8,994 units (21 percent) are in tracts with rates above 80 percent. The majority of capacity for lower income units (62 63 percent) is within census tracts where 40 to 60 percent of renters are overpaying for housing, primarily located in southwest, southeast, west, and central Fresno. The capacity for lower income households in these areas can facilitate housing mobility opportunities for renters who need more affordable options to avoid displacement and homelessness. With regards to overpayment for homeowners, more than half (56 55 percent) of the capacity in the inventory is in areas where 20 to 40 percent of homeowners are overpaying for housing. As shown in Table 1E-3.27, this includes 9,360 9,645 lower-income units, 3,283 3,718 moderate-income units, and 11,403 11,456 above moderate-income units. The addition of these units could 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. Additionally, the site capacity and distribution of units by income category can facilitate mobility opportunities for all households.

Table 1E-3.26: Housing Capacity by Percent of Renter Overpayment Sum of
Lower
Income
Housing
Capacity
Percent
of Lower
Income
Capacity
Sum of
Moderate
IncomeHousing
Capacity
Percent
of
Moderate
Income
Capacity
Sum of
Above
Moderate
-Income
Housing
Capacity
Percent
of Above
Moderate
Income
Capacity
Total
Capacity
Percent
of Total
Capacity
<20% 0 0.0%

0.00%
8 0.1%

0.13%
9 0.0%

0.05%
17 0.0%

0.04%
20%-40%
0149 0.0%

0.76%
026 0.0%

0.43%
318292 1.7%

1.56%
318467 0.7%

1.05%
40%-60%
11,791
12,176

62.9%

62.49%
3,182
3,232

48.4%

53.09%
10,362
10,809

57.0%

57.67%
25,336
26,218

58.2%

59.16%
60%-80%
4,144
3,970

22.1%

20.38%
1,207
1,474

18.3%

24.20%
3,501
3,177

19.3%

16.95%
8,852
8,620

20.3%

19.45%
>80%
2,820
3,189

15.0%

16.37%
2,181
1,348

33.2%

22.15%
3,988
4,457

21.9%

23.78%
8,989
8,994

20.7%

20.30%
Total
18,755
19,484
100.0%
100.00%
6,579
6,089
100.0%
100.00%
18,179
18,744
100.0%
100.00%
43,512
44,316
100.0%
100.00%
Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on ACS data.

SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-152 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Table 1E-3.27: Housing Capacity by Percent of Homeowner Overpayment Sum of
Lower
Income
Housing
Capacity
Percent
of Lower
Income
Capacity
Sum of
Moderate
IncomeHousing
Capacity
Percent
of
Moderate
Income
Capacity
Sum of
Above
Moderate
-Income
Housing
Capacity
Percent
of Above
Moderate
Income
Capacity
Total
Capacity
Percent
of Total
Capacity
<20%
2,1412,104 11.4%

10.80%
237137 3.6%

2.25%
679827 3.7%

4.41%
3,0573,068 7.0%

6.92%
20%-40%
9,3609,645 49.9%

49.51%
3,2833,718 49.9%

61.07%
11,40311,4
56 62.7%

61.12%
24,04624,8
19 55.3%

56.01%
40%-60%
3,4233,568 18.3%

18.31%
2,3371,638 35.5%

26.90%
1,9432,290 10.7%

12.22%
7,7027,496 17.7%

16.91%
60%-80%
3,1453,459 16.8%

17.75%
515397 7.8%

6.53%
3,7553,861 20.7%

20.60%
7,4157,718 17.0%

17.41%
>80%
685708 3.7%

3.65%
206198 3.1%

3.25%
400310 2.2%

1.65%
1,2911,216 3.0%

2.74%
Total
18,75519,4
84 100.0%
100.00%
6,5796,089 100.0%
100.00%
18,17918,7
44 100.0%
100.00%
43,51244,3
16 100.0%
100.00%
Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on ACS data.

Displacement
As described above, a substantial amount of the city land area is vulnerable to displacement pressure using the methodology from UC Berkeley’s Urban Displacement Project. There are 77 census tracts in the city that are considered susceptible to displacement risk, making up more than half of the city (57 percent).

Figures 1E-3.52 and 1E-3.53 below display the quantity and location of the sites inventory capacity relative to displacement risk in Fresno. The inventory provides a substantial capacity for new housing in areas identified as vulnerable. This includes capacity for 11,484 11,673 lower income units and 9,588 9,335 above-moderate income units in areas that are susceptible to displacement. Although the addition of lowerincome housing should alleviate some of the pressures of displacement, the Action Plan also includes Program 34 – Eviction Protection Program to protect tenants from eviction and displacement pressures.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-153 Figure 1E-3.52: Sum of Housing Capacity and Areas at Risk of Displacement Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on data and methodology from the Urban Displacement Project.
7,271
11,484
4,136
2,442
8,591 9,588
19,998
23,514
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
Not Vulnerable Vulnerable
Sum of Lower Income Housing Capacity
Sum of Moderate Income Housing
Capacity
Sum of Above Moderate Income
Housing Capacity
Sum of Total Housing Capacity
7,810
11,673
3,613
2,475
9,408 9,335
20,832
23,484
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Not Vulnerable Vulnerable
Sum of Lower Income Housing
Capacity
Sum of Moderate Income Housing
Capacity
Sum of Above Moderate Income
Housing Capacity
Sum of Total Housing Capacity
SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-154 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Figure 1E-3.53: Sites Inventory and Areas at Risk of Displacement Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Data downloaded from HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool in 2021, based on data and methodology from the Urban Displacement Project.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-3-155 Fair Housing Issues, Contributing Factors, Meaningful Actions HCD defines a fair housing issue as “a condition in a geographic area of analysis that restricts fair housing choice or access to opportunity, which includes such conditions as ongoing local or regional segregation or lack of integration, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and affluence, significant disparities in access to opportunity, disproportionate housing needs, and evidence of discrimination or violations of civil rights law or regulations related to housing.” In Fresno, there are substantial barriers to homeownership especially for communities of color and lower income households as denoted by lower income households, POC households, and individuals living below the poverty line concentrated in south and west neighborhoods in the city. Fresno has concentrated areas of poverty and many of these same census tracts have been identified as R/ECAPs or designated as “Low Resource” or “High Segregation & Poverty” by the HCD/TCAC Opportunity mapping methodology. In addition, most of the city is considered vulnerable to displacement from housing market pressures and poor environmental quality, or impacts from extreme heat and climate change. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583 (c)(10)(A)(v), the Housing Element includes several policies and programs to work towards addressing fair housing issues and replacing segregated living patterns with integrated and balanced communities. Table 1E-3.28 below summarizes the fair housing issues, contributing factors, and implementation programs included in the Housing Element to affirmatively further fair housing in the city of Fresno. For more details on the actions in each implementation program, refer to Section 1E-1: Action Plan.

Table 1E-3.28: Summary of Fair Housing Issues, Contributing Factors, and Meaningful Actions to AFFH, City of Fresno
Identified Fair
Housing Issue Contributing Factor Priority Level Meaningful Action Segregation based on
race and income; and
presence of Racially
and Ethnically
Concentrated Areas of
Poverty (R/ECAPs)
and Racially and
Ethnically
Concentrated Areas of
Affluence (RCAAs)
Past land use and zoning
practices favoring outward
expansion and resulting in
subsequent disinvestment in
core, south, and west
neighborhoods
High Program 2 – Variety of Housing
Opportunities in High Resource Areas
Program 3 – Encourage and Facilitate
Accessory Dwelling Units and Small
Homes
Program 11 – Incentives for Housing
Development
Program 20 – Housing Choice Voucher
Incentive Program
Public housing and other
forms of affordable housing
are limited by location and
type
High Program 11 – Incentives for Housing
Development
Program 12 – Local Housing Trust Fund
Program 14 – Partnerships with
Affordable Housing Developers
Program 18 - Mixed Income
Neighborhood Trust (MINT)
SECTION 1E-3: LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING
1E-3-156 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Identified Fair
Housing Issue Contributing Factor Priority Level Meaningful Action Unequal Access to
Opportunity including
Access to Safe and
Healthy
Environments,
Reliable Public
Transit, and Access to
Education
Lack of lower- and moderateincome capacity in high and highest resource areas
High Program 2 – Variety of Housing
Opportunities in High Resource Areas
Program 3 – Encourage and Facilitate
Accessory Dwelling Units and Small
Homes
Program 11 – Incentives for Housing
Development
Program 20 – Housing Choice Voucher
Incentive Program
Continued need for
reinvestment in low-and
moderate- income census
tracts
High Program 28 – Equitable Community
Investments
Disparities in access to
healthy environments based
on location of residence
High Program 27 – Environmental Justice
Program 28 – Equitable Community
Investments
Disproportionate
Housing Needs and
Elevated
Displacement Risk,
Particularly for
Lower Income
Households
Rising housing costs without
effective tenant protections to
ensure stable housing
(including for mobile homes)
and prevalence of sensitive
communities due to
economic pressures, market,
and environmental hazards/
climate change conditions
High Program 16 – Community Land Trust
Program 18 - Mixed Income
Neighborhood Trust (MINT)
Program 22 – Housing Rehabilitation
Program 32 – Opportunity to Purchase
Act
Program 33 – Mobile Home Parks
Program 34 – Eviction Protection
Program
Rising incidence of
homelessness
High Program 36 – Homeless Assistance
Barriers to
Homeownership for
Black and Indigenous
People of Color
(BIPOC) communities
Past land use and zoning
practices including redlining,
racial covenants, and urban
renewal projects have created
systemic disparities to access
homeownership
Medium Program 19 – Home Buyer Assistance
Difficult to find rental
housing that is accessible
Medium Program 24 – Special Needs Housing
Stakeholder input and data on
housing discrimination
complaint calls and filings
indicate that more fair
housing education is needed
for landlords, lenders, and the
general public
Medium Program 20 – Housing Choice Voucher
Incentive Program
Program 26 – Fair Housing Services
Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, November 2023. This page intentionally left blank.

FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-1 SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
Land Use Controls
Analysis
General Plan
The Fresno General Plan sets forth policies that guide new development, including new residential development. As described in the Urban Form, Land Use, and Design Element, growth in the City of Fresno over the past few decades has traditionally been low density suburban style development, which has resulted in conditions of sprawl in various areas of the city. With the adoption of an updated General Plan in 2014, the City shifted emphasis to encourage more balanced development patterns between low density suburban growth and higher density urban development to establish complete communities through the following:
infill, rehabilitation, Downtown and neighborhood revitalization, transit-oriented development along major streets, and mixed-uses in growth areas. Table 1E-4.1 summarizes the General Plan land use designations within the city that allow residential uses and corresponding zoning districts from the Development Code, as well as their permitted net densities (without application of a density bonus).

Table 1E-4.1: Fresno General Plan Land Use Designations General Plan
Designation
Minimum
Density
(DU per
acre)
Maximum
Density
(DU per
acre)
Maximum Floor
Area Ratio
(non-residential
only)
Development Code Zoning
District
Buffer -- 0.05 (1 unit
per 20 net
acres)
-- (B) Buffer
Low Density
Residential
1 unit per 5
acres

3.5 -- (RE) Residential Estate
(RS-1) Residential Single
Family, Extremely Low Density
(RS-2) Residential Single
Family, Very Low Density
(RS-3) Residential Single
Family, Low Density
Medium Low
Density Residential

3.5 6 -- (RS-4) Residential Single
Family, Medium Low Density
Medium Density
Residential
5 12 -- (RS-5) Residential Single
Family, Medium Density
Medium High
Density Residential
12 16 -- (RM-MH) Mobile Home Park
(RM-1) Residential MultiFamily Medium High Density
Urban
Neighborhood
Density
16 30 -- (RM-2) Residential MultiFamily, Urban Neighborhood High Density
Residential
30 45 -- (RM-3) Residential MultiFamily, High Density
SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-2 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 General Plan
Designation
Minimum
Density
(DU per
acre)
Maximum
Density
(DU per
acre)
Maximum Floor
Area Ratio
(non-residential
only)
Development Code Zoning
District
Neighborhood
Mixed Use
12 No Limit 1.5 (NMX) Neighborhood Mixed
Use
Corridor/Center
Mixed Use
16 No Limit 1.5 (CMX) Corridor/Center Mixed
Use
Regional Mixed Use 30 No Limit 2.0 (RMX) Regional Mixed Use Downtown
Neighborhood
-- No Limit No Limit (DTN) Downtown
Neighborhood
Downtown General -- No Limit No Limit (DTG) Downtown General Downtown Core -- No Limit No Limit (DTC) Downtown Core
DU= Dwelling Unit
Source: Fresno General Plan, Urban Form, Land Use, and Design Element; Table 3-1.

Zoning and Development Code
The City’s Development Code provides for the following districts to permit residential uses including the Buffer1 designation, six single-family districts, four multi-family districts, three mixed-use districts, three downtown districts, and two commercial districts. These districts are designed to implement the General Plan vision for new infill and redevelopment, transit-oriented development along major streets, and new Activity Centers with mixed-uses and neighborhoods in growth areas.  Residential Single-Family Districts (RE, RS-1, RS-2, RS-3, RS-4, RS-5) -- The Residential zones are intended to provide specific areas in the city where residential developments of varying densities may be developed as specified in the land use element of the General Plan.  Residential Multi-Family Districts (RM-1, RM-2, RM-3, RM-MH) -- The purpose of the Residential Multi-Family (RM) Districts are to provide opportunities for the development of higher-density and affordable housing in neighborhoods throughout the city implementing regulations for "Medium High Density Residential," "Urban Neighborhood Density Residential," and "High Density Residential" General Plan classifications. 1 The Buffer land use designation in the City of Fresno General Plan, Urban Form, Land Use, and Design Element is intended to separate urban uses from long-term agricultural uses in order to preserve long-term viable agricultural areas and intensive farming operations adjoining but outside the Planning Area.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-3  NMX Neighborhood Mixed-Use -- The NMX district is intended to provide for mixed-use residential districts that include local-serving, pedestrian-oriented commercial development, such as smaller independent retail shops and professional offices in two- to three-story buildings.

Development is expected to include ground-floor neighborhood retail uses and upper-level housing or offices, with a mix of small lot single-family houses, townhomes, and multi-family dwelling units on side streets, in a horizontal or vertical mixed-use orientation. The maximum FAR for nonresidential development is 1.5.2  CMX Corridor/Center Mixed-Use -- The CMX district is intended to allow for either horizontal or vertical mixed-use development along key circulation corridors in the city where height and density can be easily accommodated. Ground-floor retail and upper-floor residential or offices are the primary uses, with residential uses, personal and business services, and public and institutional space as supportive uses. The maximum FAR for non-residential development is 1.5.  RMX Regional Mixed-Use -- The RMX district is intended to support regional retail and mixeduse development in large-scale activity centers outside of Downtown, as identified by the General Plan. It accommodates urban-scale mixed-use development that serve residents and businesses of the region at large. Medium-scale retail, housing, office, civic and entertainment uses, and shopping malls with large-format or "big-box" retail are allowed, as are supporting uses such as gas stations, hotels, and residential in mixed-use or single-use buildings. The maximum FAR for non-residential development is 2.0
 DTN Downtown Neighborhood -- The DTN District is intended to create walkable, mixed-use urban neighborhoods surrounding the Downtown Core.
 DTG Downtown General -- The DTG District is intended to support a high concentration of regional activity generators such as governmental buildings and convention centers within a pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use urban setting.
 DTC Downtown Core -- The DTC District will foster the enhancement of Fresno's business, shopping, and cultural heart by guiding the development of the densest, most active, and most interesting mixed-use urban center in the region.
 CMS Commercial - Main Street -- The CMS district is intended to preserve or promote smallscale, fine-grain commercial development in neighborhoods where single-family residential and townhomes are predominant. A traditional "Main Street" character is achieved with active storefronts, outdoor seating and pedestrian-oriented design. 2 Per Zoning Code Section 15-309 (Determining Floor Area Ratio), “Floor area ratio (FAR) is the measure of the intensity of non-residential development. It is the ratio of the non-residential floor area, excluding the areas described below, of all principal and accessory buildings on a site to the site area. To calculate FAR, non-residential floor area is divided by site area, and typically expressed as a decimal. For example, if the non-residential floor area of all buildings on a site totals 20,000 square feet, and the site area is 10,000 square feet, the FAR is expressed as 2.0.” SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-4 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024  CR Commercial – Regional -- The CR district is intended to meet local and regional retail demand, such as large-scale retail, office, civic and entertainment uses, shopping malls with largeformat or "big-box" retail, and supporting uses such as gas stations and hotels. Buildings are typically larger-footprint and urban-scaled. Development and design standards will create a pedestrian-orientation within centers and along major corridors, with parking generally on the side or rear of major buildings, but automobile-oriented uses also will be accommodated on identified streets and frontages.

Downtown Development Code
The Downtown Development Code (DDC) is a form‐based code that contains most of the standards and requirements for development and land use activity within the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan and Fulton Corridor Specific Plan areas. Regulations regarding development patterns are generally consistent with the existing scale and character of the plan areas’ various neighborhoods districts and corridors. Form‐based codes address the relationship between building facades and the public realm (streets and parks), the form and massing of buildings in relation to one another, and the scale and types of streets and blocks. The City incorporated the DDC into the Citywide Development Code in 2016 and implements these form-based standards through the DTN, DTC, and DTG zoning district standards.

Residential Development Standards
Table 1E-4.2 lists the zoning districts from the City of Fresno Development Code that allow residential development and describes the development standards for residential projects. Zoning regulations are designed to implement the policies of the City’s General Plan and protect and promote health, safety, and general welfare of residents. The Code sets forth the City’s specific residential development standards to preserve the character and integrity of existing neighborhoods and at the same time offer flexibility in providing a wide range of residential opportunities and dwelling unit types. The section below provides an overview of primary development standards that affect the maximum development intensity of a housing project, including density, height, setbacks, floor area ratio (FAR), parking, and open space requirements.

To accelerate housing production in infill areas and incentivize investment along the City’s transit and mixed-use corridors, the City adopted amendments to: (1) remove maximum density limitations in the Mixed Use Districts and (2) modify the restriction that prohibits ground floor residential uses in mixed-use districts so that only corner properties along arterials with Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) stops will have mandated commercial uses. With those amendments, the City now relies on FAR and height limits to rather than regulatinge density. This action was intended to encourage higher density development in mixed-use districts.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-5 Prior to adoption, the City performed an analysis of a typical development project comparing the existing density limits with the new FARheight-based limits to determine how this change could affect project buildouts. For the purpose of the environmental analysis, consultants analyzed 10 parcels (2 within each district) and applied the applicable development standards for the corresponding zone district to create conceptual site plans. It was determined that the following are reasonable densities that would be developed based on typical multi-family and mixed-use developments built in Fresno:
 CMS: 48 dwelling units per acre
 CMX: 75 dwelling units per acre
 CR: 80 dwelling units per acre
 NMX: 64 dwelling units per acre
 RMX: 90 dwelling units per acre
SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-6 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Table 1E-4.2: City of Fresno Development Standards by Zoning District Zoning
District
Max.

Height
Min. Lot
Width
Minimum Yard Setback
Min.

Lot
Area
Density (DU per
Acre)
Max. Floor
Area Ratio
(FAR) (nonresidential
only)
Max. Lot
Coverage
Permitted
Uses
Front Side Rear
Buffer (B) District
B 35 130 35 20-35 20 26,000 1 - 5% SF/MF*
Residential Single Family (RS) Districts
RE 35 80-160 35 10-35 20 5 acres 0.2 - 30% SF*
RS-1 35 80-160 35 10-25 20 36,000 1.2 - 30% SF*
RS-2 35 80-130 30 10-25 20 20,000 2.2 - 30% SF*
RS-3 35 60-90 25 5-20 20 9,000 0.2-3.5 - 35% SF*
RS-4 35 40-70 13 4-10 10 5,000 3.5-6 - 50% SF*
RS-5 35 30-60 13 3-10 10 4,000 5-12 - 60% SF/MF*
Residential Multi-Family (RM) Districts
RM-1 40 -- 10-20 10-15 20 -- 12-16 - 50% SF/MF*
RM-2 50 -- 10-20 10-15 15 -- 16-30 - 50% MF*
RM-3 60 -- 10-20 10-15 15 -- 30-45 - 60% MF*
RM-MH 35 -- 10-20 10-15 10 -- 12-16 - 50% MF*
Mixed-Use (MX) Districts
NMX 40 -- -/10 -- -- -- Min. Density – 12
du/ac
No Max. Density

1.5 -- SF/MF*
CMX 60 -- -/10 -- -- -- Min. Density – 16
du/ac
No Max. Density

1.5 -- SF/MF*
RMX 75 -- -/10 -- -- -- Minimum Density
– 30 du/ac

2.0 -- SF/MF*
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-7 Zoning
District
Max.

Height
Min. Lot
Width
Minimum Yard Setback
Min.

Lot
Area
Density (DU per
Acre)
Max. Floor
Area Ratio
(FAR) (nonresidential
only)
Max. Lot
Coverage
Permitted
Uses
Front Side Rear
No Maximum
Density
Commercial (C) Districts Allowing Residential Development CMS 35 -- 0 0 0 -- No Limit 1.0 -- SF/MF*
CR 75 100 15 0 0 10,000 No Limit 1.0 -- SF/MF*
Downtown (DT) Districts
DTN 90 -- 2-10 0-10 0 -- No Limit No Limit -- SF/MF*
DTG 140 -- 2-10 (1) 0-10 (2) 0 -- No Limit No Limit -- SF/MF* DTC 190 -- 2-10 0-10 0 -- No Limit No Limit -- SF/MF*
Notes: Densities in the Residential Single-Family Districts are based on corresponding land use designation in the Fresno General Plan. For Mixed Use zones, minimum residential density is not required for projects on lots less than 20,000 sq. ft. in area or projects further than 1,000 feet from a planned or existing BRT route. For mixed-use and commercial districts, all permitted uses are allowed either alone or in combination with other permitted uses unless otherwise stated.

Specific Limitations:
1 Front setback along Mariposa Street between M Street and P Street (min./max.): 10/18 ft. 2 Street Side setback along Mariposa Street between M Street and P Street (min./max.): 10/15 ft. *See Development Code for more information.

Source: City of Fresno Development Code, 2022.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-8 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 The environmental assessment prepared for the projects estimated that there are approximately 791 acres of mixed-use zoned property that has the potential to be developed in the next few decades. These 791 acres consist of land that is considered vacant and underutilized and includes parcels that have an existing land use of ‘vacant,’ ‘parking,’ or ‘open space/ag’ per City of Fresno Existing Land Use layer. Based on this acreage and the reasonable densities identified above, the potential development of residential units that could result from the amendment would be 60,880 units, as compared to the previous 20,434-unit capacity (see Table 1E-4.3).

Table 1E-4.3: Summary of Mixed-Use Density Increases
Zone
Districts Acres
Previously Allowed Density Achievable Density under FARbasedNew Standards DU/AC Units DU/AC Units
CMS 10 16 165 48 495
CMX 320 30 9,590 75 23,975
CR 248 16 3,966 80 19,830
NMX 99 16 1,577 64 6,308
RMX 114 45 5,136 90 10,272
Total 791 - 20,434 - 60,880
Note: The numbers are rounded to the nearest whole number.

Source: City of Fresno Mitigated Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment/Development Code Text Amendment Application No. P22-02413 Environmental Assessment. August 2022.

As mentioned above, the text amendment revised the restriction that prohibits ground floor residential uses in mixed-use districts so that only corner properties along arterials with BRT stops will have mandated commercial uses. Other high-activity uses may be approved at the discretion of the Review Authority.

However, this does not impose a constraint on housing development in these areas because larger multifamily developments can be activated with active ground floor additions or a residential lobby.

Lot Sizes
Density in single-family zones is driven by the minimum lot area requirements. The lot size requirements in single family zones typically reflect the development pattern of the surrounding subdivision. Lot sizes range from a minimum of 5 acres in the RE zone, 36,000 square feet in the RS-1 zone, and 4,000 square feet in the RS-5 zone. There are no minimum lot area requirements for multi-family and mixed-use zones except in the CR district, where the minimum lot area is 10,000 square feet.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-9 Per State law, local governments may not impose minimum lot size requirements on accessory dwelling units (ADUs) (referred to as second units in the Fresno Development Code) since these development types are not required to observe minimum lot size requirements for the underlying zoning district. Currently (2022), the City states the following minimum lot sizes for these units: 6,200 square feet for second dwelling units, 6,000 square feet for an interior lot and 5,000 square feet for a corner size lot for backyard cottages, and 5,000 square feet for accessory living quarters. This language pre-dates the adoption of the State laws, therefore the City defers to the State regulations when reviewing ADU applications. The Housing Element includes a program to amend these standards for second units, backyard cottages, accessory living quarters and SB 9 units (i.e., accessory dwelling units (ADUs).

Maximum Floor Area Ratio
The City does not have maximum floor area ratio (FAR) requirements for residential uses in residential zones, as it is typically the measure of the intensity of non-residential development. However, the Development Code and General Plan do have standards that limit FAR in the mixed-use zones. The total allowable FAR per lot includes the floor area of residential units.  CMS: Maximum FAR of 1.0
 CMX: Maximum FAR of 1.5
 CR: Maximum FAR of 1.0
 NMX: Maximum FAR of 1.5
 RMX: Maximum FAR of 2.0
Height Requirements
Height limitations are intended to allow projects to achieve the maximum allowable density, while also being responsive to community character. The districts that provide the highest densities for residential development also provide for the highest maximum heights. The maximum height in all residential single-family districts, including the mobile home residential district (RM-MH), is 35 feet, which allows for three stories.

Developments in multi-family districts have the following height limits: 40 feet in the RM-1 district; 50 feet in RM-2; and 60 feet in RM-3. These height limits allow for the maximum densities to be achieved in each zone. With a minor deviation, an applicant can add up to 10 percent to a building’s height and with the approval of a Planned Development (PD) Permit, additional deviations from the Development Code and/or General Plan could also be permitted. Developments in Mixed Use Districts have the following height limits:
40 feet in the NMX; 60 feet in CMX; and 75 feet in RMX. Commercial districts allowing for mixed uses including residential development permit buildings up to 35 feet in the CMS zone and 75 feet in the CR zone.

This could include small-scale development such as attached single-family residential and townhomes.

Downtown Districts allow the most intense development patterns. Height limits are: 90 feet in DTN (approximately 6 stories), 140 feet in DTG (approximately 10 stories), and 190 feet in DTC (approximately 15 stories). These height standards allow for a range of high-density housing types in the Downtown.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-10 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Setbacks
A setback is the required minimum or maximum horizontal distance between the front, sides, and rear of the lot to the building. The City’s setback standards are comparable to those of other jurisdictions and are not a constraint to achieving maximum densities. In RS Districts, front setbacks range from 13 feet in the RS-4 and RS-5 zones to 35 feet in the RE and RS-1 zones. Rear setbacks range from 10 feet in RS-4 and RS-5 zones to 20 feet in the rest of the RS zones. Side setbacks in the RS Districts vary from 3 to 35 feet.

Downtown, Mixed-Use, and Commercial zones allowing residential development have lower frontage setbacks, averaging about 10 feet, with no rear property setback requirements in mixed use zones or a minimum of 0 feet in downtown and commercial zones. Side property setbacks range from 0 feet in MixedUse Districts to 15 feet in the CR district.

Parking
Table 1E-4.4 shows the residential parking requirements in Fresno. The City determines the required number of parking spaces based on the type and size of the residential unit and has found the required parking spaces to be necessary to accommodate the number of vehicles typically associated with each residence.

Requirements for covered parking spaces or garage parking are due in large part to the climate of Fresno and extreme heat events. With the passage of AB 2097 in 2022, the City cannot impose minimum parking requirements on projects within a half mile of public transit if the project (1) dedicates a minimum of 20 percent of the total number of housing units to very low-, low-, or moderate-income householdsforstudents, the elderly, or persons with disabilities, (2) contains fewer than 20 housing units, or (3) is subject to parking reductions based on any other applicable law. Public transit in this case is defined as a major transit stop with an intersection of 2 or more high frequency bus route stops with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods. Figure 1E-4.1 shows the areas within the city that would be subject to AB 2097 in relation to the sites inventory. Areas subject to AB 2097 in the northern part of the city are north of Herndon Avenue between N. Blackstone Avenue and State Route (SR) 41, and along Shaw Avenue at N Blackstone Avenue, First Street, and Cedar Avenue. Additional areas exist Downtown, in and around the Downtown Transit Center, and in the South Industrial area along E Jensen Avenue.

The Housing Element includes a program to amend the Development Code to remove parking minimums within a half mile of public transit, consistent with AB 2097. Parking requirements for ADUs, emergency shelters, and transitional and supportive housing are inconsistent with current (2023) state law therefore the Housing Element includes a program to amend parking requirements for these uses. Additionally, parking for emergency shelters should be based on staffing at the shelter at a rate of one space per employee. The City provides several reductions in parking requirements, including for affordable housing developments (up to 2-bedroom units), mixed-use residential uses (up to 1-bedroom units), specific multi-family developments with transit accessibility, and developments that have shared parking. Residential care developments are eligible for these parking reductions; however, feedback from recent developers state that while the parking reduction is advantageous, the overall number of parking required before and after reduction is high. In response to this feedback, the City has added an action to reduce the parking standard for Residential Care, General.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-11 Table 1E-4.4: Residential Parking Requirements
Use Parking Requirement Notes
Single-unit residential constructed prior
to adoption of 2016 Development Code
1 space per dwelling unit Must be covered.

Single-unit residential 1 space per dwelling unit Must be within a garage.

Duplex 1 space per dwelling unit Must be within a garage.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)/
Second Dwelling Units, Backyard
Cottages, or Accessory Living Quarters
1 covered space per 1-
bedroom unit; 1 additional,
covered or uncovered,
parking space for 2 or more
bedrooms in the second
dwelling unit.

A tandem parking space may also be
used to meet the parking requirement
for the Second Dwelling Unit,
providing such space will not encumber
access to a required parking space for
the primary single-unit dwelling.

An existing 2 vehicle garage and/or
carport may not be provided in-lieu of
these parking requirements unless the
parking spaces are accessed from
different garage doors.

Multi-Unit Residential (Studio and 1-
bedroom)
1 space per unit; 0.75 spaces
per unit in MX and CMS
Districts; 0.5 spaces per unit
in DT Districts
Required parking shall be covered. One
additional uncovered guest parking
space shall be provided for every 4
units.

Multi-Unit Residential (2-bedrooms) 1 space per unit; 0.5 spaces per unit in DT Districts
Required parking shall be covered. One
additional uncovered guest parking
space must be provided for every 2
units. In MX and CMS Districts, one
additional guest parking space must be
provided for every 4 units for projects
greater than 4 units.

Multi-Unit Residential (3+ bedrooms) 1.5 spaces per unit; 0.5 spaces per unit in DT
Districts
Required parking shall be covered. One
additional uncovered guest parking
space must be provided for every 2
units. In MX and CMS Districts, one
additional guest parking space must be
provided for every 4 units for projects
greater than 4 units.

Affordable Housing (studio, 1-, and 2-
bedroom)

0.75 spaces per unit --
Affordable Housing (3+ bedrooms) 1.5 spaces per unit -- Residential Care, Limited (6 or fewer
clients)
None in addition to parking
required for residential use.
--
Residential Care, General (more than 6
persons)
2 spaces for the ownermanager plus 1 for every 5
beds and 1 for each nonresident employee.
--
SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-12 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Use Parking Requirement Notes
Residential Care, Senior 1 space for every 7 residents
plus 1 for each live-in
caregiver. Facilities serving
more than 15 residents shall
also provide 1 space for
each caregiver, employee,
and doctor on-site at any
one time.
--
SRO 0.5 spaces per unit --
Emergency Shelters 1 per 500 sq. ft. of floor
area.

Transitional and Supportive Housing Subject to parking
requirements of the same
residential type.

Source: City of Fresno Development Code, 2022.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-13 Figure 1E-4.1: Assembly Bill 2097 Areas, Fresno 2023
Source: City of Fresno and Ascent, October 2023.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-14 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Open Spaces and Parks
All new residential developments have an obligation to provide parkland and/or contribute to the development and maintenance of parks consistent with the Quimby Act. Fresno City Code requires that a minimum of 3 acres per 1,000 population be set aside for parks. Pursuant to State law, in-lieu fees may be paid instead of land dedication. The Park Quimby Fee is $1,542 per unit for single-family dwellings and $1,164 per unit for multi-family dwellings. Article 4.7 Section 12-4.705 states that single-family developments with fewer than 50 parcels shall be responsible for paying the park fee but not for dedicating land. Subdivisions with 50 parcels or more shall pay the fee and dedicate 0.6 acres per 1,000 residents in the form of pocket parks.

Residential developments are required to set aside specific minimum areas of the lot as usable open space, which may include balconies and up to 50 percent of the area in required yards. In Residential Multi-Family (RM) districts, commercial districts allowing residential development (CMS and CR), Mixed-Use (MX) districts, and Downtown (DT) districts, the minimum requirement for on-site open space is based on the size of the lot, as shown in Table 1E-4.5. These requirements may be met through a combination of private open space, common open space, or public plazas.

Table 1E-4.5: Minimum On-Site Open Space Requirements, City of Fresno Zoning District Percent of Total Lot Area Required to be Dedicated to Open Space*
RM-1 20%
RM-2 15%
RM-3 10%
CMS 15%
CR 8%
CMX 10%
NMX 15%
RMX 8%
DTN 10%
DTG 8%
DTC 5%
*Note: These requirements may be met through a combination of private open space, common open space, or public plazas.

Source: City of Fresno Development Code, 2022. Table 15-1003 and 15-1004-D.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-15 The minimum amount of open space required in DT and MX districts could be reduced by 25 percent in the following circumstances:
 Any portion of the lot is located within 400 feet of a transit stop with regular, scheduled service.  There is a public park within 400 feet of the site, or  The parcel is 15,000 square feet or less in area.

These requirements are in addition to park in-lieu fees which contribute to the public park system. Overall, these open space requirements and the park in-lieu fees do not represent excessive constraints on residential development. The City provides flexibility in how developers can meet the open space requirements.

Additional Standards in Mixed Use Districts
On October 13, 2022, the City adopted the Mixed-Use General Plan and Development Code Text Amendments to modify the development standards for MX Districts and encourage new residential development. Additional standards were added under Section 15-1106 as part of this action. Under these provisions, all projects proposing residential development must prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prior to site approval. In addition, all projects proposing to utilize fill material must conduct property soil testing to ensure the soil is free of contamination. Additional standards listed in Section 15-1106 include not overburdening any existing or planned infrastructure capacities, including, but not limited to, capacities for water, runoff, storm water, wastewater, and solid waste systems. Projects must also comply with all applicable standards from Public Works and the City Public Utility Services. The goal was that if the development complied with all of the items, further environmental analysis could be avoided and a system to process applications ministerially could effectively be established.

Cumulative Impacts Conclusion
The Development Code, like the General Plan, supports increased land use intensity and mixed-use development throughout the city, especially near transit. The cumulative impacts of Fresno’s development standards established in the Zoning Code do not unduly constrain achieving the densities permitted by the zones. The components of the City’s development standards are described as follows:
 The Zoning Code allows multifamily residential properties in residential zones to have densities ranging from 12 dwelling units per acre to up to 45 dwelling units per acre. For multifamily residential developments in mixed-use zones, there is no maximum density.  There are no minimum lot area requirements for multifamily residential developments.  The City does not have maximum FAR requirements for residential uses in residential zones. In mixed-use zones FARs may range between 1.5 and 2.0. There is no maximum FAR requirement for projects in Downtown districts.
 Parking requirements vary, with opportunities for reduced parking in infill areas and for affordable housing.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-16 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024  Multifamily residential developments have maximum height limits ranging from 35-60 feet. Mixed Use Districts have the following height limits: 40 feet in the NMX; 60 feet in CMX; and 75 feet in RMX. Height limits are: 90 feet in DTN (approximately 6 stories), 140 feet in DTG (approximately 10 stories), and 190 feet in DTC (approximately 15 stories).

Table 1E-4.6 analyzes the cumulative impact of development standards on the ability to achieve maximum densities in the City’s multifamily zones. Each of the examples assumes a rectangular one-acre lot and applies the City’s setback, lot coverage, parking, and open space standards to determine if projects complying with City standards can achieve maximum densities. The analysis shows that development standards in the RM-1, RM-2, and RM-3 zones do not limit the ability to achieve maximum densities. There is sufficient excess site area remaining after application of the City’s development standards to allow the incorporation of additional project amenities that are not required, such as additional parking and open space features.

Table 1E-4.6: Analysis of Multifamily Zone Requirements for Prototype Site Development Development Standards RM -1 Zone
Standards
RM-2 Zone
Standards
RM-3 Zone
Standards
Prototype Project Site Size 43,560 43,560 43,560
Net site size w/ required setbacks 33,724 34,668 34,668 Maximum site volume at story limit 101,173 138,672 173,340 Maximum lot coverage (Sq. Ft.) 21,780 21,780 26,136
Maximum permitted density (units) 16 30 45
1 bedroom (900 sf) 11 20 30
2 bedroom (1,100 sf) 5 10 15
Unit square footage total 15,400 29,000 43,500
Unit square footage per story 5,133 7,250 8,700
Parking requirement
1-bedroom units @ 1.25 sp/unit 14 25 38
2-bedroom units @ 1.5 sp/unit 7 15 22
Total parking required 21 40 60
Square footage for surface parking @ 350 sq. ft/space1 7,438 14,000 21,000 Open Space (sq. ft.) 8,712 6,534 4,356
Total sq. ft to accommodate project2 21,283 27,784 34,056 Total excess sq. ft. available3 12,442 6,884 612
1 200 sf/space + 150 sp. Ft. of drive aisle per space
2 Calculated as the net building sq. ft. of the first story + parking sq. ft. + open space sq. ft. 3 Calculated as the net site size – total sq. ft. to accommodate the project Source: Ascent, 2023.

The City’s development standards are reasonable and typical, allow for maximum densities to be achieved, and do not serve to constrain housing development. The recent mixed use text amendments greatly increased the capacity for residential development in commercial and mixed use zones throughout the city.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-17 Recommended Action
Development and zoning codes can facilitate the very types of development needed. Although the City’s land use controls are permissive and flexible, there are additional opportunities to relieve regulatory constraints and facilitate more housing production. Parking standards are one area where many communities are seeking to decrease housing costs. The Housing Element includes a program to identify further ways to facilitate increased housing production throughout the city, including establishing a non-discretionary process to approve qualifying developments based on size, type, affordability level, and location.

Site Improvements
Analysis
Site improvements and property dedications are important components of new development and contribute to the creation of decent housing. Developers are generally responsible for covering the full cost of water, sewer, road, and drainage improvements within their projects. Typically, site improvements are requested during the planning review process.

Improvement requirements are the same throughout the city of Fresno, however some sites require fewer improvements if the infrastructure already exists and is in good condition. Typical off-site infrastructure improvements for new projects include constructing new streets, which include undergrounding of utilities, parkway landscaping, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street lighting that are in compliance with standards as defined in the General Plan and the Municipal Code. Local residential streets require a dedication of 56 feet with a curbto-curb width of 36 feet for a design with parking on both sides of the street (Public Works Standard P-56).

In areas already served by infrastructure, site improvement requirements vary depending on the existing condition of each project site. Usually, only standard connection laterals are required for most project utilities. The undergrounding of utilities from the nearest pole to the project is required of all projects (although there is a process for the granting of waivers in hardship cases), and street tree planting may also be required. New subdivisions typically require public and circulation improvements for the orderly and efficient development of the community.

As stated in the Municipal Code (Section 15-3804), site improvements for residential subdivisions include:
 Grading of streets and alleys, installation of street lighting, drainage pipes or lines, and drainage structures.
 Installation of sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and driveway approaches, unless the Standard Specifications for the Street Section do not require the improvements.  Surfacing of a width and quality suitable for the particular type of street or alley as established in specifications adopted therefore.
 Pedestrian ways, including paving, landscaping, and fences and walls as may be required.  Bikeways as may be required.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-18 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024  Trails, greenways, or parks, as may be required.
 A water system of sufficient design and capacity to furnish an adequate water supply for each lot in the subdivision and for adequate fire protection to the area, as determined by the City Engineer.  Sanitary sewer facilities and connections for each lot.  Services from all utilities for each lot, made in such manner that will avoid or minimize disturbance of completed street improvements.
 The installation and planting of median islands, as may be required.  Street trees
 Street signs
 The installation of an underground street lighting system approved by the City Engineer, as required.

Overall, the purpose of on- and off-site requirements is to ensure the health and safety of residents. On- and off-site improvements vary from about 5 to 20 percent of total development costs depending on the infrastructure improvements needed for the project. Developers indicated that costs in Fresno are equal or slightly higher than other communities, particularly for multifamily housing.. In addition to its Inner City Planning Application Fee Incentive Program, the City of Fresno has several fee waiver programs that apply to infill development in economically disadvantaged areas. The most notable of these for affordable housing is the Infill Incentive Program, which has resulted in the waiver of approximately $3.5M in development impact fees for 10 infill projects totaling 603 residential units since 2021. The average fee waived per unit is $5,918, which can be the financial tipping point that allows affordable projects to attain economic feasibility. The Infill Incentive Program waives development impact fees for police and fire facilities, park facilities, regional streets, new growth streets and traffic signals for qualifying projects.

Conclusion
On- and off- site improvements can be costly, but with the fee waiver programs available, infrastructure costs are not considered a major constraint to development, as the required infrastructure and public facilities are necessary to serve the project. While required on- and off-site improvements may add to the cost of housing, there is not evidence that these requirements and associated costs represent a significantly higher standard than other jurisdictions in the County and beyond.

Recommended Action
None required.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-19 Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types
Analysis
The Development Code classifies residential development projects based on type, use, size, and location in order to determine whether the project is Permitted, Conditionally Permitted (through conditional use permit), or Not Permitted. The Development Code provides for a range of housing types, including singlefamily, multi-family, second dwelling units (i.e., accessory dwelling units), mobile homes, residential care facilities, emergency shelters, supportive housing, transitional housing, and single room occupancy (SRO) units. Refer to Table 1E-4.8 for a summary of Fresno’s Development Code as it relates to ensuring a variety of housing opportunities.

Multifamily
The Development Code allows multifamily units at varying densities in the following districts: Medium High Density (RM-1), Urban Neighborhood (RM-2), High Density (RM-3), Neighborhood Mixed Use (NMX), Corridor/Center Mixed Use (CMX), Regional Mixed Use (RMX), Downtown Neighborhood (DTN), Downtown General (DTG), Downtown Core (DTC), Commercial – Main Street (CMS), and Commercial - Regional (CR) districts. The Development Code and General Plan provide for a range of densities for multifamily in the RM districts (up to 45 units/acre without density bonus in the RM-3 district); and, in the Commercial, Mixed-Use, and Downtown districts with no density limits.

Accessory Dwelling Units - Second Units, Backyard Cottages, and Accessory Living Quarters
In Fresno, Second Dwelling Units, Backyard Cottages, and Accessory Living Quarters are permitted as accessory uses to single-unit dwellings, consistent with the Government Code Section 65852.2. State law refers to these housing types as accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The City’s Development Code contains the following descriptions of these permitted unit types:
 Second Dwelling Unit. Provides separate, independent living quarters for one household. Units may be attached, detached, or located within the living areas of the primary dwelling unit on the lot. Kitchens, including cooking devices are permitted.  Backyard Cottage. May provide separate, independent living quarters for one household. Units may be attached, detached, or located within the living areas of the primary dwelling unit on the lot. Kitchens, including cooking devices are permitted. Backyard Cottages shall be located behind the primary dwelling unit, unless attached and integral to the primary dwelling unit. A Tiny House may be considered a Backyard Cottage.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-20 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024  Accessory Living Quarters. Accessory Living Quarters provide dependent living quarters. They may be attached, detached, or located within the living areas of the primary dwelling unit on the lot. Accessory Living Quarters may not provide kitchen facilities, however a bar sink and an undercounter refrigerator are allowed, but no cooking devices or other food storage facilities are permitted. Accessory Living Quarters shall not be located in front of the primary single-family dwelling.

Regulations regarding development standards for Second Dwelling Units, Backyard Cottages, and Accessory Living Quarters are delineated in Section 15-2754 of the Development Code. Second dwelling units, backyard cottages, tiny houses, and accessory living quarters may be established on any lot in any residential district where single-unit dwellings are existing or permitted. Only one second unit, backyard cottage, tiny house, or accessory living quarters may be permitted on any one lot.

Units shall conform to the height, setbacks, lot coverage and other zoning requirements of the zoning district in which the site is located. Minimum lot sizes for these developments are as follows: 6,200 square feet for Second Dwelling Units, 6,000 square feet for an interior lot and 5,000 square feet for a corner size lot for Backyard Cottages, and 5,000 square feet for Accessory Living Quarters. Minor deviations and/or variances to meet the minimum lot sizes are not permitted. Per State law, local governments may impose certain development standards on accessory dwelling units however, these standards should not include minimum lot size requirements. The City last updated its Second Dwelling Units, Backyard Cottages, and Accessory Living Quarters ordinance in 2018. New changes to State ADU Law became effective January 1, 2021, to further reduce barriers, streamline approval processes, and expand capacity to accommodate the development of ADUs and Junior ADUs. A program has been added to make further amendments to the ordinance to comply with State law.

The City of Fresno’s ADU Program encourages the development of ADUs by offering a selection of preapproved plans to homeowners (www.fresno.gov/ADU). The plans offer a variety of sizes and styles that will match the diversity of Fresno’s neighborhoods and the needs of households throughout the city. These plans can also be used to build small primary homes to help first-time buyers enter the housing market or assist those seeking to downsize.

Senate Bill 9 Subdivisions
Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) became effective January 1, 2022. The bill mandates local jurisdictions to ministerially approve two unit developments and urban lot splits within a single-family residential zone, without discretionary review or hearing, if the proposed development meets certain requirements. For SB 9 developments, the City may apply objective zoning, subdivision, and design standards. The City has developed a submittal checklist application for SB 9 projects.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-21 Manufactured Housing
State law requires local governments to permit manufactured or mobile homes to meet federal safety and construction standards on a permanent foundation in all single-family residential zoning districts (Section 65852.3 of the California Government Code). In Fresno, a manufactured/factory-built house is considered to be a single-family detached dwelling unit and is treated as such.

Residential Care Facilities
Residential Care Facilities Limited (those serving 6 or fewer clients) are allowed by right in all zones that allow residential uses subject to the same development standards and permit processing standards as other residential uses in those zones, pursuant to the California Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act. Residential Care Facilities General (providing care for more than 6 persons) are permitted by right in the RM-2 and RM-3 districts and conditionally permitted in the residential single-family districts (RS-1 to RS-5), the RM-1 district, and in the CMS district. In order for the conditional use to be approved, the following findings must be made by the Director:
• The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and all other chapters of the Municipal Code; • The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any other applicable plans and design guidelines the City has adopted;
• The proposed use will not be substantially adverse to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the community, nor be detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements; • The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed activity are compatible with the existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses in the vicinity; • The site is physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of use being proposed, including access, emergency access, utilities, and services required; and  The proposed use is consistent with the Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (as may be amended) adopted by the Fresno County Airport Land Use Commission pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 21670-21679.5.

The City’s obligation to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) under CA Government Code Section 65580 requires that the findings for a conditional use permit for residential care facilities must be objective.

To comply with Housing Element Law, including its AFFH provisions, the Housing Element includes a program to review the CUP findings to ensure they are objective and do not serve as a barrier to approving residential care facilities for more than six. If determined to be a barrier or subjective then the City will amend CUP findings for residential care facilities. The City will continue to allow reasonable accommodations in the permitting of residential care facilities.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-22 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Farmworker/Employee Housing
The California Employee Housing Act requires that housing for six or fewer employees be treated as a regular residential use. The Employee Housing Act further defines housing for agricultural workers consisting of 36 beds or 12 units be treated as an agricultural use and permitted where agricultural uses are permitted.

The Fresno Development Code defines Agricultural Labor Housing as living accommodations for employees and their immediate families employed for the exclusive purpose of agricultural pursuits either on the premises or off site. It includes single- or multi-unit dwellings, including mobile homes and dormitories. The definition does not place a limitation on the number of beds or units, and the Development Code states that in the event of a conflict between the Development Code and California Health and Safety Code Section 17021.6, relating to agricultural land use designations for employee housing, the Health and Safety Code would prevail. Agricultural labor housing is permitted by right in the Buffer (B) district. The Buffer District is intended to separate urban uses from commercial agricultural uses to preserve long-term viable agricultural areas and intensive farming operations in adjacent areas. The Buffer District serves to prevent urban residential and related uses from developing near agricultural operations, and thereby infringing on full operation of farmland of importance.

While the definition of Agricultural Labor Housing and the allowance in the Buffer District are in compliance with State law, the Development Code allows agricultural uses, such as crop cultivation, in all single family and multifamily residential districts and therefore should allow Agricultural Labor Housing in these districts in order to fully comply with State law. In addition, the Employee Housing Act requires all employee housing for six or fewer occupants, not just agricultural labor housing, to be treated similar to any other residential use. The Fresno Development Code does not explicitly address this requirement.

The previous 2015 Housing Element included a program directing City Staff to review the Development Code to ensure continued compliance with the Employee Housing Act. The Code was found to meet the requirements of the Employee Housing Act regarding Agricultural Labor Housing and no changes to the Development Code were determined to be necessary. However, in order to increase clarity between the Code and State law, the Housing Element includes a program to permit employee housing for six or fewer as a residential use and permit agricultural labor housing in all zoning districts where agricultural uses are permitted.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-23 Transitional and Supportive Housing
Under Housing Element law, transitional housing means 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 (California Government Code Section 65582(h)). Supportive housing means housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population, and that is linked to an onsite or offsite service that assists 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. Target population means 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 of the Welfare and Institutions Code and may include, among other populations, adults, emancipated minors, families with children, elderly persons, young adults aging out of the foster care system, individuals exiting from institutional settings, veterans, and people experiencing homelessness (California Government Code Sections 65582(f) and (g)).

Accordingly, State law establishes transitional and supportive housing as a residential use and therefore local governments cannot treat it differently from other similar types of residential uses (e.g., requiring a use permit when other residential uses of similar function do not require a use permit). The City of Fresno Development Code (Section 15-2762) specifies that transitional and supportive housing constitute residential use and are subject only to those restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same district.

With the passage of AB 2162 (2018), Section 65651(a) of the Government Code now prohibits local governments from applying a conditional use permit or other discretionary review to the approval of 100 percent affordable developments that include a percentage of supportive housing units, either 25 percent or 12 units, whichever is greater, on sites that are zoned for residential use. While supportive housing is generally a permitted use in all zones, the City’s Development Code does not explicitly comply with this new requirement of state law.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-24 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Emergency Shelters
Emergency shelters are allowed without discretionary review in the Regional Mixed-Use (RMX), Commercial – General (CG), Regional Business Park (RBP), Light Industrial (IL), Public and Institutional (PI), Downtown Neighborhood (DTN), Downtown General (DTG), and Downtown Core (DTC) zoning districts. State law (Government Code Section 65583) requires that the Housing Element demonstrate sufficient capacity to meet unmet housing needs for people experiencing homelessness. Chapter 654, Statutes of 2022 (AB 2339), added additional specificity on how cities and counties plan for emergency shelters. Generally, AB 2339 amended State Housing Element Law regarding identification of zones and sites for emergency shelters. Government Code Section 65583 (a)(4) now requires that the zoning designations identified to allow emergency shelters as a permitted use without discretionary review must allow residential uses. In addition, the Housing Element must identify specific sites that could accommodate emergency shelters. If a vacant site is zoned for a non-residential use but allows residential development, such as a mixed-use zone, the site must be located near amenities and services that serve people experiencing homelessness. If the site is nonvacant, the analysis must provide substantial evidence that the existing use is likely to be discontinued during the planning period.

Table 1E-4.7 outlines a summary of vacant land by zoning district that could be utilized to develop an emergency shelter in Fresno. Based on the 2022 Point in Time (PIT) Count, the estimated unhoused population in the City of Fresno is 3,397. There are approximately 1,500 shelter beds available in the city on any given night. Thus, there is a net approximate need of 1,900 new emergency shelter beds to address the City of Fresno’s unmet needs.

Table 1E-4.7: Potential Sites for Emergency Shelters, Fresno, 2023 Zoning District
Number of
Potential Sites
for Emergency
Shelters
Total Acreage
(Acres) Vacancy Status Capacity
(# of people)
DTC 3 0.81 Vacant 176
DTG 16 4.08 Vacant 889
DTN 87 23.98 Vacant 5,224
DTN-AH 2 0.61 Vacant 133
RMX 25 63.65 Vacant 13,862
Total 133 93.13 - 20,284
Source: City of Fresno, 2023. Ascent, 2023.

To comply with State law, the Housing Element only identifies vacant sites in zoning districts that allow residential use. As such, the sites identified in Table 1E-4.7 and Figure 1E-4.2 below are all in either the RMX, DTN, DTG, or DTC Districts, which allow residential and nonresidential mixed uses. A full list of these sites can be found in Appendix 1E-A of the City of Fresno Housing Element. There is additional capacity for emergency shelter beds in the remaining nonresidential and industrial zones that allow emergency shelters by right, or without discretionary review (i.e., CG, RBP, LI, and PI districts).

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-25 Figure 1E-4.2: Potential Sites For Emergency Shelters, Fresno, 2023 Source: Ascent, 2023.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-26 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 This page is intentionally left blank.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-27 Per state law requirements, the capacity on each site was determined by dividing the square footage of the site by a minimum of 200 square feet per person. As shown in the table below, within the RMX, DTN, DTG, and DTC Districts, there is approximately 93.13 acres of vacant land available that could be developed into a new emergency shelter, which is a sufficient capacity to accommodate the need for 1,900 new emergency shelter beds. These sites are all located within close proximity to frequent transportation, employment opportunities, food, and other resources. Most sites are within walking distance to services and amenities (see Figure 1E-4.1).

In addition to the same land use regulations and development standards that apply to all development within the identified districts (e.g., lot size, setbacks, building height), an emergency shelter proposed in these districts must comply with the following operational standards found in Section 15-2729 of the Development Code:
 Number of Residents. The number of adult residents, not including staff, who may be housed on a lot that is smaller than one acre shall not exceed the number of persons that may be accommodated in any hospital, elderly and long term care facility, residential, transient occupancy, or similar facility allowed in the same district.
 Length of Occupancy. Occupancy by an individual or family may not exceed 180 consecutive days unless the management plan provides for longer residency by those enrolled and regularly participating in a training or rehabilitation program.
 Outdoor Activities. All functions associated with the shelter must take place within the building proposed to house the shelter, except for children's play areas, dog parks, outdoor recreation areas, parking, and outdoor waiting. Outdoor waiting for clients, if any, may not be in the public right-ofway, must be physically separated from the public right-of-way, and must be large enough to accommodate the expected number of clients.
 Minimum Hours of Operation. At least eight hours every day between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.  Employee Presence. On-site employee presence must be provided at all times.  Toilets. At least one toilet must be provided for every 15 shelter beds, unless a greater number is required by State law.
 Management Plan. The operator of the shelter must submit a management plan for approval by the Director. The Plan must address issues identified by the Director, including transportation, client supervision, security, client services, staffing, and good neighbor issues.

Most of these requirements are in compliance with State law. However, the hours of operation are expressed incorrectly as shelters are operated at night, not during the day. Public comments also pointed to the standards for the toilets as being excessive. As shown in Table 1E-4.4 above, the parking requirements for emergency shelters is one (1) space per 500 square feet of floor area. As noted in that section, the Housing Element includes a program to amend parking requirements to achieve consistency with State law. The program also includes amending the Development Code to correct the hours of operation, review and confirm standards for toilets, and to ensure that all standards are compliant with State law.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-28 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Low Barrier Navigation Centers
Assembly Bill (AB) 101, passed in 2019, requires that a low barrier navigation center be a use permitted by right in mixed-use zones and nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses if it meets specified requirements. AB 101 defines “low barrier navigation center” as a housing first, low-barrier, serviceenriched shelter focused on moving people into permanent housing that provides temporary living facilities while case managers connect individuals experiencing homelessness to income, public benefits, health services, shelter, and housing. The Housing Element includes an implementation program to amend the Zoning Code to comply with this new requirement of Government Code Section 65662.

Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Units
Single room occupancy (SRO) hotels and/or boarding homes, which house between five and 15 guests, are collectively referred to as SROs in the City of Fresno Development Code. SRO units are one room units intended for occupancy by a single individual. It is distinct from a studio or efficiency unit, in that a studio or efficiency unit is a one-room unit that must contain a kitchen and bathroom. Although SRO units are not required to have a kitchen or bathroom, many SROs have one or the other. Buildings that provide SRO units are permitted by right in the CG zone and conditionally permitted in the RM-2, RM-3, NMX, CMX, and RMX districts. The Housing Element includes a program to review standards for SROs and evaluate objective design standards to ensure that units are maintained and safe for all residents long term.

Summary
Table 1E-4.8 summarizes the housing types permitted and conditionally permitted under the Development Code.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-29 Table 1E-4.8: Variety of Housing Types – Land Use Regulations Uses B RE RS-1 RS-2 RS-3 RS-4 RS-5 RM-MH RM-1 RM-2 RM-3 NMX CMX RMX CMS CR CG DTN DTG DTC Single-Unit Dwelling P P P P P P P - P - - P (1) P (1) P (1) P(2) (4) P(2) (4) - P P - Second Dwelling Units /
Accessory Living
Quarters
P P P P P P P P P P P P (1) P (1) P (1) P(2) (4) P(2) (4) - P P - Duplex - - - - - - C - P P P - - - - - - P P P
Multi-Unit Residential - - - - - - C - P P P P (1) P (1) P(1) P(2) (4) P(2) (4) - P P P Manufactured/
Mobilehomes
- P P P P P P P P - - - - - - - - P P -
Mobilehome Park - - - - - - - P - - - - - - - - - - - - Agricultural Labor
Housing

P - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

SRO - - - - - - - - - C C C C C - - P - - -
Group Residential
(six or fewer)
P P P P P P P - P P P P (1) P (1) P(1) P (3) P(2) - P P P Group Residential (seven
or more)
- - C C C C C - C C C P (1) P (1) P(1) P (3) P(2) - P P P Residential Care
Facilities, Limited
(six or fewer)
P P P P P P P - P P P P (1) P (1) P(1) P (3) P(2) - P P P Residential Care
Facilities, General (seven
or more)
- - C C C C C - C P P - - - C(3) - - P P P
Residential Care, Senior - - - - - - - - C P P P (1) P (1) P(1) C (3) - - P P P Emergency Shelter - - - - - - - - - - - - - P - - P P P P Notes: P = Permitted; C = Requires Conditional Use Permit; “-“= Not Permitted 1 Not allowed on the ground floor within 200 feet of an intersection (measured from the lot line) of two or more major streets with the exception of main building entrances and active community spaces. Other high-activity uses may be approved at the discretion of the Review Authority. Projects with frontage on more than one major street may be excepted from this restriction on one of the major streets at the discretion of the Review Authority. 2 Not allowed on the ground floor along arterials or collectors. 3 Not allowed on the ground floor.
4 Housing projects shall meet the requirements of § 15-1104, § 15-1106, § 15-5102-E, and Table 15-1203-1 in the Development Code.

Source: City of Fresno Development Code, 2022.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-30 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 This page is intentionally left blank.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-31 Conclusion and Recommended Actions
The following amendments to the City’s Development Code are required to address the provision of a variety of housing types The Housing Element includes implementation programs to amend the Zoning Code to address second, units, residential care facilities, and low barrier navigation centers in addition to tracking legislative changes.
 Accessory Dwelling Units: The Development Code is not consistent with State law requirements for accessory dwelling units as new requirements became effective in 2021 including that no minimum lot sizes may be required and new guidance from the State has clarified that a local government must allow one (1) converted ADU, one (1) detached, new construction ADU, and one (1) JADU, in any order, totaling three units. The Code must be updated to achieve consistency with State law and expand capacity to accommodate the development of ADUs and JADUs.  Residential Care Facilities: The Development Code needs to be amended to permit community care facilities for more than six persons in all zones where other residential uses are permitted.  Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Units: The Development Code limits SROs to serve a maximum of 15 guests. This is a potential constraint and will be amended.  Low Barrier Navigation Centers: The Development Code is not consistent with State law requirements for Low Barrier Navigation Centers.
 Parking Requirements: The Development Code is not consistent with State law requirements for parking for ADUs, emergency shelters, and supportive housing.  Supportive Housing. The Development Code does not explicitly comply with Government Code Section 65651(a) (i.e., AB 2162) requirements for affordable housing developments containing a specified percentage of supportive housing units.
 Farmworker and Employee Housing: There is ambiguity between the Development Code and State law so the amendments are recommended to permit employee housing for six or fewer as a residential use and permit agricultural labor housing in all zoning districts where agricultural uses are permitted.

Density Bonus
Analysis
Under current state law (Government Code Section 65915), cities and counties must provide a density increase of 20 to 80 percent, determined on a sliding scale, over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the Municipal Code and the Land Use Element of the General Plan. In addition to the density bonus, eligible projects may receive one to four additional development incentives or concessions, depending on the proportion of affordable units and level of income targeting. These incentives/concessions could address a height limitation, a setback requirement, a floor area ratio, an onsite open-space requirement, or other requirements. State law also provides additional relief from parking requirements if requested by a developer for a density bonus project.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-32 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Article 22 of the City’s Development Code outlines the Density Bonus Ordinance that is in accordance with California Government Code Section 65915. Development Code Section 15-2202 states that “where conflict may occur between the provisions of this section and State law, the State law shall govern.” Conclusion and Recommended Action
The City last updated the Density Bonus Ordinance in 2019 and it does not reflect the latest state law requirements, which require cities and counties to grant up to four incentives or concessions for density bonus projects that include 100 percent of units to low- or very low-income households. The Housing Element includes a program to update the City’s Density Bonus programs and monitor legislation from the State on density bonus requirements and maintain up-to-date marketing and educational materials such as website information or permit bulletins.

Processing and Permit Procedures
Analysis
Processing and permit procedures can affect the time and cost of developing a residential project. Ineffective or unclear processing and permit procedures may also discourage a developer from taking on the risk of proposing a housing project altogether.

Transparency in Development Regulations
The City of Fresno complies with the requirement of providing transparency in development regulations.

The Planning & Development page of the City website provides all necessary information on Planning and Building and Safety divisions (https://www.fresno.gov/darm/). The information on the website covers the following:
• Long-range planning documents, including the General Plan, the City Development Code, and adopted community plans and specific plans
• Permit requirements and development process
• Planning applications, forms, and informational handouts • Schedule of fees
• Property information
• Efficiency and Incentive Programs
Permit Processing
Development review is conducted by the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department with responsibilities including current and advance planning functions. Current planning includes staffing the public counter to receive applications and answer questions, processing and analysis of various entitlements, permit issuance and corrected exhibit processing for public and private projects. It also involves providing engineering and technical staff support to commercial and residential projects.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-33 Advanced planning includes updates to the General Plan and Development Code, preparation of various community and specific plans, and special environmental, transportation, housing and demographic studies.

This division also promotes regional planning coordination with various agencies.

Primary Planning Permits and Actions
The following table displays a brief summary of the permits and actions that are administered under the City’s Development Code (Table 1E-4.9). The table is not regulatory. For complete regulations, procedures, and requirements, see Articles 49 through 66 of the Municipal Code.

Table 1E-4.9: Planning Permits and Actions*
Proposed Activity Permit or Action
Required
Type of
Decision
Review
Authority
Use-Only Proposals
Establishment of a (P) Permitted use, not associated
with development of property
Zone Clearance Ministerial Director
Establishment of a (C) Conditional use Conditional Use
Permit
Discretionary
Quasi-Judicial
Director
(PC on referral)
Establishment of a Temporary use Temporary Use
Permit
Discretionary
Quasi-Judicial
Director
Establishment of use which is not listed in this
Code
Director's
Determination
Ministerial Director
Development Proposals
Development of one single-family home, duplex, or
qualifying Downtown housing** which complies
with all provisions of the Code
Zone Clearance Ministerial Director
Development of property to a greater extent than is
covered by a Zone Clearance
Development Permit
(Formerly Site Plan
Review)
Discretionary
Quasi-Judicial
Director
(PC on referral)
Request for relief from property development
standards due to unique conditions in conjunction
w/a Development Permit
Variance Discretionary
Quasi-Judicial
Director
(PC on referral)
Request for relief from property development
standards of 10% or less in conjunction with a
Development Permit
Minor Deviation Discretionary
Quasi-Judicial
Director
Innovative development proposal which does not
comply with the provisions of any zone district
within this Code
Planned
Development Permit
Discretionary
Quasi-Judicial
Director
(PC on referral)
Other Proposals or Actions
Formal interpretation of this Code, verifications of
prior permits, or confirmation of zoning district
Zoning Inquiry Ministerial Director
Minor changes to approved plans, consistent with
original findings and conditions
Minor Modification Ministerial Director
Change to discretionary permit or change to
approved plans that would affect findings or
conditions
Major Modification Discretionary
Quasi-Judicial
Review
Authority of
Original Permit
SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-34 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Proposed Activity Permit or Action
Required
Type of
Decision
Review
Authority
Violation of conditions or terms of permit Revocation of Permit Discretionary Quasi-Judicial
Director, PC, or
CC
Modifications of or exceptions from regulations to
ensure equal access to housing for individuals with
disabilities
Reasonable
Accommodation for
Housing
Discretionary
Quasi-Judicial
Director
Proposals to change a regulation within this Code Development Code Text Amendment
Discretionary
Legislative
CC
Proposal for development which complies to
regulations of an existing district, but not the one
currently applied to the site
Rezone Discretionary
Legislative
CC
Change of the General Plan land use designation for
a site
Plan Amendment Discretionary
Legislative
CC
Large, multi-phase project which needs certainty
regarding regulations over time in exchange for
public benefits
Development
Agreement
Discretionary
Legislative
CC
* For complete regulations, procedures, and requirements, see Articles 49 through 66 of the Municipal Code. ** Downtown projects that meet all of the following criteria qualify for a Zone Clearance:
 Located within a DT District;
 A minimum of 16 total dwelling units in the project;
 A residential density of no less than 20 du/ac;
 Residential uses must occupy 50 percent or more of the total floor area; and  No historic resources or potential historic resources are located on the site.

PC = Planning Commission and CC= City Council
Source: City of Fresno, Table 15-4907 of the Municipal Code, 2022.

Preliminary Application Process
As of October 1, 2022, the Development Review Committee (DRC) Preliminary Application Review Process is voluntary, and a “formal” DRC Pre-Application is no longer required for most projects.

Preliminary application review is required for subdivisions and voluntary for any project that requires a discretionary approval, including, but not limited to, Development Permits, Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Planned Developments, Rezones, General Plan Amendments, and Annexations. This affords a developer flexibility to determine the feasibility of a project prior to preparing detailed plans and paying the more extensive entitlement. The Fresno Planning and Development Department conducts the preapplication review every Tuesday as part of a Development Review Committee.

Zone Clearance
Zone Clearance is a ministerial, or non-discretionary, entitlement that is reviewed and approved at the staff level.

A Zone Clearance is required to confirm that the project is being proposed in a manner which is compliant with, and without any deviations from, all applicable development standards prior to securing a building permit. The purpose of the Zone Clearance process is to streamline the review of many permitted uses. If a proposed development project does not meet the threshold for a Zone Clearance, it’s required to get a Development Permit.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-35 The City classifies Zone Clearance projects into Low-Level, Moderate-Level, and Major-Level Zone Clearances. Low Level Zone Clearance applies to projects that are typically approved “over-the-counter” and require confirmation by the Current Planning Division that the proposed business or use is consistent with applicable development or performance standards of the Development Code. Applicable uses could include a home occupation or a bed and breakfast – up to 2 rooms. A Low-Level Zone Clearance typically takes 1-7 business days for review if submitted digitally through Citizen’s Portal or the day of, if handled in person “overthe-counter.” Moderate-Level Zone Clearances applies to a single-family residence, duplex, or accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and typically takes 1 to 14 business days to review. Major-Level Zone Clearances apply to projects that typically require input from other internal departments or outside agency staff. To that end, the City’s review of Major-Level Zone Clearance applications requires additional analysis to determine consistency with other department or agency conditions as well as applicable development or performance standards of the Development Code. Certain projects requiring a Major-Level Zone Clearance may also include courtesy noticing to surrounding property owners. Applicable uses could include a streamlined multi-family development. A Major-Level Zone Clearance typically takes 30 business days for review.

Conditional Use Permit, Variance, and Development Permit The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is intended to apply to uses that are generally consistent with the purposes of the district where they are proposed but require special consideration to ensure that they can be designed, located, and operated in a manner that will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of surrounding properties or adversely affect the City's infrastructure, the built or natural environment, City resources, or the City's ability to provide public services. A CUP application is required for exceptions to certain development standards. In order for a CUP to be approved, the following findings must be made by the Director:
• The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and all other chapters of the Municipal Code; • The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any other applicable plan and design guideline the City has adopted;
• The proposed use will not be substantially adverse to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the community, nor be detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements; • The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed activity are compatible with the existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses in the vicinity; • The site is physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of use being proposed, including access, emergency access, utilities, and services required; and • The proposed use is consistent with the Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (as may be amended) adopted by the Fresno County Airport Land Use Commission pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 21670-21679.5.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-36 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 A Variance is a request to modify development standards due to special circumstances. Variances may be granted in conjunction with a Development Permit to vary or modify dimensional and performance standards, but Variances may not be granted to allow uses or activities or increase density that this Code does not authorize for a specific lot or site. Applications for a Variance shall be filed with the Planning Division then the Review Authority of the associated Development Permit shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny applications for Variances based on the following findings:
• There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved that do not apply generally to property in the vicinity and identical zoning classification, and that the granting of a Variance will not constitute a granting of a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on the property in the vicinity and identical zone classifications; • The granting of the application is necessary to prevent a physical hardship which is not of the applicant's own actions or the actions of a predecessor in interest; • The granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience, nor the preservation and conservation of open space lands; and • The granting of the Variance will be consistent with the general purposes and objectives of this Code, any applicable operative plan, the Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (as may be amended) adopted by the Fresno County Airport Land Use Commission pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 21670-21679.5, and of the General Plan.

A Development Permit (formerly Site Plan Review) is required for all new structures, with the exception of one single-family home, a duplex, or a qualifying Downtown housing project which complies with all provisions of the Development Code, which can be completed through a ministerial Zone Clearance. These permits are intended to ensure that projects can be designed, located, and operated in a manner that will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of surrounding properties or adversely affect the built or natural environment, the city’s infrastructure, city resources, or the City’s ability to provide public services. Applications are reviewed by Planning staff and are only considered by the Planning Commission or City Council by appeal. Processing normally does not exceed 60 business days; however, some decisions may be appealed to the Planning Commission, and in such instances, the processing time can be extended by as many as 30-45 business days.

The Director or Planning Commission may only approve a Development Permit application if it finds that the application is consistent with the purposes of the Development Code and with the following:
• The applicable standards and requirements of the Code. • The General Plan and any operative plan or policies the City has adopted. • Any applicable design guidelines adopted by the City Council. • Any approved Tentative Map, Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or other planning or zoning approval that the project required.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-37 • Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (as may be amended) adopted by the Fresno County Airport Land Use Commission pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 21670—21679.5.

Design Review Standards
Site design development standards as well as façade development standards are incorporated into the Development Code for all districts. For mixed use and multifamily, the City provides applicants with a “certainty” option based on objective standards as well as a “flexibility” option if an applicant desires to deviate from objective standards. The standards for site designs are objective for the most part; however, there are some components of façade design standards that rely on the discretion of the Review Authority leaving room for subjectivity. For example, the Development Code states that windows, cladding, and finishing materialsin residential single-family districts must be similar to, or within proportion of, adjacent homes. The Review Authority also has discretionary approval to determine the sufficiency of screening in multifamily developments. While the City’s standards are mostly objective, there are a few standards that could be modified to remove subjectivity.

Subdivision, Tentative Parcel Map Review
Subdivision of real property is initiated via the tentative tract or tentative parcel map process. Tentative maps are processed and approved in 75-90 business days when not being processed along with other entitlements such as Rezones or Plan Amendment applications. The final map process is essentially ministerial with major responsibility for prolonged processing resting with the developer and the developer’s engineer.

Environmental Assessment
An environmental assessment of a residential development is usually conducted simultaneously with the subdivision/parcel map review process or as special permits are processed. The assessment does not substantially add to overall processing time unless significant adverse environmental effects are determined, and evidence indicates that an EIR is required which can then take 9 to 12 months. Since the City of Fresno has certified a Program EIR (PEIR SCH No. 2019050005) for its General Plan and Development Code, some residential development is able to be streamlined by tiering from the citywide analysis of impacts associated with implementing the General Plan and Development Code.

Annexation
The City and County of Fresno continue to process annexations, in conjunction with a joint policy that all urban-intense development within the City’s Sphere of Influence is referred to the City for annexation and the processing of entitlements. The time necessary to process annexations on the urban fringe averages about one year, even with the City’s concurrent processing of entitlements policies. There is sufficient annexed and zoned land within the city to accommodate the housing needs for this Housing Element planning period. The City monitors land supply, underutilized parcels, areas planned for redevelopment, and resulting development to ensure a balance.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-38 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Historic Preservation
Section 12 Article 16 of the Municipal Code codified the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. The overarching goal of the Historic Preservation Ordinance is to sustain historic resources, particularly their character-defining features. For this, there is a Historic Review process in place to consider project proposals. Under the provisions of the Ordinance, Historic Review is required for all demolition permit applications and all permit applications on a designated historic property. All permit applications that require Historic Review shall be routed to the Historic Preservation Specialist through Current Planning or Building and Safety Services staff.

The Pre-Application process is helpful for many to learn the general rules and procedures applicable to projects involving historic resources and can assist the applicant in determining whether a potential project is likely to be permissible under the Ordinance. Applicants are encouraged to have a pre-submittal meeting with the Historic Preservation Specialist prior to the submittal of application materials. The Specialist may approve, in the name of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC), non-substantial alterations based on the application presented.

Prior to submitting a formal application, applicants have the option of submitting conceptual plans to the Historic Preservation Commission for review and comment in order to seek advisement before moving forward in preparation for a proposed project. Initial review for all permit applications that require Historic Review could take up to 10 business days upon receipt by the Historic Preservation Specialist. Additional materials and further review may be required.

Processing Timelines
Considerable holding costs are associated with delays in processing development applications and plans. The City of Fresno’s development review process is designed to accommodate housing development applications of various levels of complexity and requiring different entitlements. Processing times vary with the complexity of the project. Single-family dwelling unit applications typically take 1 to 14 days if a single unit on one lot; 6 to 8 months if part of a subdivision. Multi-family development applications take 2 to 3 months through the Development Permit (previously Site Plan Review) process and an additional 14 to 21 days for building permits.

Table 1E-4.10 shows the approval body and typical processing times for the City’s permitting and processing procedures. These timelines are consistent with the Permit Streamlining Act and are not considered a constraint on housing development.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-39 Table 1E-4.10: Timelines for Permit Procedures
Type of Approval or Permit Typical Processing Time
(# of Business Days) Approval Body
Ministerial Review 1-30 days, depending on Level City Staff Conditional Use Permit 30-90 days, depending on Level Planning Director1 Variance 75-90 days Planning Director 1
Minor Deviation Assessment 1-14 days Planning Director1 Zone Change 90-120+ days City Council
General Plan Amendment 90-120+ days City Council
Tract Maps 75-90 days Planning Commission
Parcel Maps 75-90 days Planning Director1
Historic District Review 10 days Historic Preservation Commission Environmental Assessment Categorical Exemption = 1-14 days Negative Declaration (ND) &
Mitigated ND = 75-90 days
Environmental Impact Report = 9-
12 months
Same approval body as Type of
Approval or Permit
1 Subject to appeal
Source: City of Fresno,2023.

Typical Development Processing Procedures for Residential Projects Processing procedures vary by the residential use and the size of the proposed development. Residential development projects, based on type and size, are subject to one or more of the procedures listed above.

The Planning and Development Department is responsible for application intake, plan checking, permit issuance, and inspection services for public and private projects. This Department provides public counter services, subdivision processing, urban growth management, various entitlements associated with development, and engineering and technical staff support to commercial and residential projects. The Current Planning Division and Building and Safety Services Division within the Department have as a primary objective the expeditious and accurate review of all development projects.

For single-family developments, it typically takes up to 30 days for developers to pull building permits after receiving entitlements are approved. For multifamily developments, the time between entitlement approvals and building permit submittals is longer. Based on recent projects, it can take three months to a year for developers to pull building permits after entitlements are approved. To encourage development in the central, more urbanized parts of Fresno, the City provides priority processing to all projects within the boundaries of the Downtown Planning Area and in Inner City Residential areas.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-40 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Table 1E-4.11 generally identifies the typical approvals required for various residential projects along with the estimated processing times of the planning and building departments.

Table 1E-4.11: Approvals and Processing Times for Typical Developments Project
Type
Typical Approval
Requirements
Approval
Body
Typical
Processing
Time
(# of Business
Days)
Number
of Public
Hearings
Findings
Accessory
Dwelling
Units
• Zone Clearance
• Building Plan
Review
• Permitting
• Inspection
City Staff Planning = 2
days
Plan Check =
14-21 days 2
0 No findings required
SingleFamily
• Zone Clearance
• Building Plan
Review
• Permitting
• Inspection
City Staff Planning = 1-14
days
Plan Check =
14-21 days 2
0 No findings required
Multifamily
• DP/CUP1
• Building Plan
Review
• Permitting
• Inspection
Development
Permit: City
Staff
CUP: City
Staff or PC
on referral
Planning = 75-
90 days
Plan Check = 21
days 2
0-1 Development Permit
Required Findings
(Sec. 15-5206)
Conditional Use Permit
Required Findings
(Sec. 15-5306)
Subdivision • Tentative Map
• Subdivision
Review Committee
• Environmental
Assessment
• Planning
Commission
• Building Plan
Review
• Public Works Plan
Review
• Final Map
• Permitting
• Inspection
Planning
Commission
Planning = 75-
90+ days if no
accompanying
rezone or plan
amendment
application.

Plan Check =
14-21 days 2
1 Tentative Maps
required findings (Sec.
15-3309)
1 Subject to appeal. A CUP only applies when multifamily housing is proposed in the RS-5 (single family) zone district. 2 Varies by sq. ft., building type, design, complexity and volume of workload; inspection times not included DP = Development Permit
Source: City of Fresno,2023.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-41 Required Findings
The following are the findings required for the various permit types identified in the table above:
 Development Permit Required Findings: The Director or Planning Commission may only approve a Development Permit application if it finds that the application is consistent with the purposes of this article and with the following:

A. The applicable standards and requirements of this Code.

B. The General Plan and any operative plan or policies the City has adopted.

C. Any applicable design guidelines adopted by the City Council.

D. Any approved Tentative Map, Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or other planning or zoning approval that the project required.

E. Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (as may be amended) adopted by the Fresno County Airport Land Use Commission pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 21670—21679.5.
 Conditional Use Permit Required Findings: A Conditional Use Permit shall only be granted if the decision-maker determines that the project as submitted or as modified conforms to all of the following criteria. If the decision-maker determines that it is not possible to make all of the required findings, the application shall be denied.

A. The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Code and all other chapters of the Municipal Code; B. The proposed use is consistent the General Plan and any other applicable plan and design guideline the City has adopted;
C. The proposed use will not be substantially adverse to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the community, nor be detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements; D. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed activity are compatible with the existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses in the vicinity; and
E. The site is physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of use being proposed, including access, emergency access, utilities, and services required; and F. The proposed use is consistent with the Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (as may be amended) adopted by the Fresno County Airport Land Use Commission pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Sections 21670-21679.5.  Tentative Maps Required Findings:

A. Findings. The Review Authority may approve or conditionally approve a Tentative Parcel Map or Tentative Map if it makes all of the following findings:

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-42 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024

1. Consistency. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan, any applicable operative plan, adopted policies or guidelines, and the Municipal Code.

2. Passive and Natural Heating and Cooling. A subdivision for which a Tentative Map is required shall provide pursuant to the Map Act (Section 66473.1), to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision.

Examples of passive or natural heating opportunities in subdivision design include:
a. Design of lot size and configuration to permit orientation of a structure in an eastwest alignment for southern exposure and to take advantage of shade or prevailing breezes. Consideration shall be given to local climate, to contour, to configuration of the parcel to be divided, and to other design and improvement requirements, and such provision shall not result in reducing allowable densities or the percentage of a lot which may be occupied by a building or structure. b. The requirements of this section do not apply to condominium projects that consist of the subdivision of airspace in an existing building when no new structures are added. c. For the purposes of this section, "feasible" means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors.

3. Availability of Water. Water will be available and sufficient to serve a proposed subdivision with more than 500 dwelling units in accordance with the Map Act (Section 66473.7).

4. Infrastructure Capacity. There exists sufficient infrastructure capacity for water, runoff, storm water, wastewater, and solid waste systems to serve the proposed subdivision. In cases where existing infrastructure is found to be deficient, plans shall show how sufficient capacity will be provided.

5. Compliance with Floodplain Regulations. The proposed subdivision is compliant with the City of Fresno Floodplain Management Ordinance and the State of California Code of Regulations Title 23, as well as any other applicable State or federal law.

B. Supplemental Findings. In addition to the findings required for approval of a Tentative Map or Tentative Parcel Map by Subsection A above, the Review Authority shall not approve a Tentative Parcel Map or Tentative Map unless it can also make the following findings, when they are applicable to the specific subdivision proposal.

1. Construction of Improvements. It is in the interest of public health and safety, and it is necessary as a prerequisite to the orderly development of the surrounding area, to require the construction of improvements within a specified time after recordation of a Parcel Map of four or fewer parcels where improvements are required.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-43

2. Condominiums. Any applicable findings required by Section 15-3913, Findings, for Condominium Conversions.

3. Dedications or Exactions. Any applicable findings required by Article 37, Dedications and Reservations, if dedications or exactions are required.

4. Waiver of Parcel Map. The findings required by Section 15-3503, Waiver of Parcel Map, if waiver of a Parcel Map has been requested with the Tentative Map application.

Permit Streamlining
The State Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section 65920) identifies timeframes for review of development applications. The Act also contains provisions that require cities to identify information needed for a complete application, and to provide follow-up information requests within certain timeframes.

Government Code Section 66300 (Senate Bill 330, 2019) and Government Code Section 65913.4 (Senate Bill 35, 2017) also address permit processing streamlining. As described below, Senate Bill 330 applies to housing developments, including mixed-use projects with at least two-thirds of the square footage dedicated to residential. Senate Bill 35 established a streamlined ministerial approval process for qualified affordable housing projects or infill projects of 10 units or fewer. Both of these laws also establish specific timeframes for project approval.

Senate Bill 330
Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) prohibits cities and counties from enacting a development policy, standard, or condition that would impose or enforce design standards that are not objective design standards on or after January 1, 2020 [Government Code Section 663300 (b)(C)]. The bill also established specific requirements and limitations on development application procedures.

In addition, the legislation creates a preliminary application process. Submittal of a SB 330 preliminary application allows a developer to provide a specific subset of information on the proposed housing development before providing the full amount of information required by the local government for a housing development application. Submittal of the preliminary application secures the applicable development standards and fees adopted at that time. The project is considered vested, and all fees and standards are frozen, unless the project changes substantially.

Currently (2023), the City offers an optional preliminary application checklist for all entitlement applications to advise a prospective applicant of current City standards and requirements. Pre-application meetings have helped to shorten the review process and allow for better communication between applicants, City departments, and utility providers. However, the City has not yet developed an SB 330 preliminary application form. The Housing Element includes a program to establish such an application to streamline processing procedures.

The City has adopted objective design standards for multifamily districts, contained in Section 15-1005 of the Development Code.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-44 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Senate Bill 35
Government Code Section 65913.4 requires jurisdictions that have not approved enough housing units to meet their RHNA to provide a streamlined, ministerial entitlement process for housing developments that incorporate affordable housing. However, to be eligible, projects must also meet a long list of other criteria, including prevailing wage requirements for projects over 11 units. In order for applicants to take advantage of Senate Bill 35 (SB 35), per Government Code Section 65913.4 (10)(b)(1)(a)(et seq.) they need to submit a Notice of Intent and jurisdictions need to give Native American tribes an opportunity for consultation. Fresno accepts SB 35 applications consistent with the law. As of January 1, 2022, planners include the following note during the Development Review Committee (DRC) process for projects with more than 25 dwelling units:

The City of Fresno encourages the development of safe, decent, and affordable housing. A streamlined development process may be available for affordable housing projects meeting certain criteria based on Senate Bill 35. For more information on affordable housing incentives please contact your project planner.

Approximately one applicant has requested SB 35 streamlining as of June 2023. Per HCD Guidelines, a local government that has been designated as subject to the Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process by the Department shall provide information, in a manner readily accessible to the general public, about the locality’s process for applying and receiving ministerial approval, materials required for an application as defined in Section 102(b) of the Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process Guidelines, and relevant objective standards to be used to evaluate the application. The Housing Element includes a program to establish written procedures for SB 35 streamlined ministerial approval and make them available on the City’s website.

Conclusion and Recommended Actions
The City's permit procedures do not unduly constrain housing development and average project review process timelines comply with the requirements of the Permit Streamlining Act. The City has made several updates to the development review process to simplify and enhance the process for applicants. The City also provides technical assistance and development incentives (e.g., Infill Incentive Fee Waivers) to make development cheaper and easier. For mixed use and multifamily, the city provides applicants with flexible site design development standards as well as façade development standards. The City attempts to run some processes and approvals concurrently where feasible to limit the approval time frame.

Atypical projects are subject to any number of factors, many outside the control of the City, which may extend the processing time, including environmental review under CEQA and permitting requirements of other agencies. The City offers an optional preliminary application checklist for all entitlement applications which has helped to shorten the review process and allow for better communication between applicants, City departments, and utility providers. The City has been generally successful in executing priority processing for new projects in the Downtown Planning area, with approvals being issued on average in less than 75 days. Additionally, the City continues to provide impact fee waivers for qualifying projects and offers reduced application fees and priority processing for single-family and multi-family projects within the Inner City Fee Program area.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-45 While the City has made significant efforts to streamline the permitting process, there are still additional opportunities to streamline the process. The Housing Element includes programs to further streamline residential development, including exploring ways to approve housing for qualifying developments based on size, type, affordability level, and location, establishing a preliminary application process consistent with SB 330, preparing written procedures for SB 35 applications, and reviewing design standards to ensure objectivity and approval certainty.

Local advocates commented that higher density development in Fresno is prone to local opposition which can slow down the approval of multi-family housing that requires a use permit. Programs to further streamline the development process can address this constraint.

Building Codes and Enforcement
Analysis
The City currently uses the 2022 California Building Code. The 2023 edition will become effective on January 1, 2024.

The 2022 California Residential Code (CRC) and the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code apply to single family residential projects as well as the following codes by reference:
• 2022 California Mechanical Code;
• 2022 California Plumbing Code;
• 2022 California Electrical Code; and
• 2022 California Energy Code
The following codes apply to multi-family residential building projects:
• 2022 California Building Code,
• 2022 California Green Building Standards Code,
• 2022 California Mechanical Code;
• 2022 California Plumbing Code;
• 2022 California Electrical Code; and
• 2022 California Energy Code.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-46 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Amendments to the California Building Code
Amendments to the California Building Code (CBC) per Section 11-102 of the Fresno Municipal Code are as follows:

CBC Chapter 1
103.1 Creation of the Enforcement Agency. The Planning and Development Department of the City of Fresno is hereby established in the City of Fresno as the appropriate code enforcement agency that shall be under the administrative and operational control of the Department Director. 104.1 General. The Director of the Planning and Development Department or his/her designee shall act on behalf of the City of Fresno as "Building Official.” The Building Official is hereby authorized and directed to enforce all provisions of this code. The Building Official shall have the power to render interpretations of this code and to adopt and enforce rules and supplemental regulations in order to clarify the application of the code provisions.
109.2 Schedule of Fees. All fees assessed in accordance with the provisions of the Fresno Building Code shall be set forth in the City of Fresno Master Fee Resolution. 109.5 Related Fees. Where plans are of such complexity, incomplete, or are changed so as to require additional plan review time than contemplated by the fees set forth herein, an additional fee shall be shall be charged in accordance with the special services request provision under the Master Fee Resolution with the following exception:
a) For commercial plans with multiple buildings of identical building footprints and floor plans, the plan review fee shall be as determined by the Building Official. The fee shall be based upon circumstances pertaining to the specific application and shall be designed to recover reasonable costs of the Development and Resource Management Department. 110.3.8 Other Inspections. The Building Official may at his/her discretion require inspections of differing trades to be combined in proper chronological order consistent with construction practices to facilitate the use of combination inspection assignments.
112.1 Connection of Service Utilities. Utility connections shall not be permitted until compliance with the provisions of the Fresno Municipal Code as set herein. Electrical Meter: Electrical meters shall be required to be in place and operational prior to final electrical inspection to facilitate testing and acceptance of the entire system. Installation of devices, fixtures, and wiring shall be completed and in working order for testing purposes.
112.2.1 Construction Utilities. The Building Official may permit use of utilities for the purpose of construction provided no potential hazards to life or property is created and compliance with Article 590.

CEC (Electrical) or Section 1208.0 CPC (Gas) is satisfied.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-47 112.2 Temporary Power. The Building Official may permit use of utilities for temporary occupancy of a building or structure when circumstances exist to justify the issuance of a Temporary Certificate under Chapter 1 Section 111.3 of the CBC, and the owner enters into a security agreement with the City of Fresno, in a form approved by the Building Official, to insure completion of the required improvements. In addition, a deposit to secure such performance shall be made with the City of Fresno in an amount determined by the Building Official. The Building Official may, in his/her sole discretion, waive the requirement of a deposit.

Section 113 Board of Appeals Note. Note: For additional requirements refer to Section 10-50108 of the Fresno Fire Code as established by the City of Fresno Fire Department. 113.1. General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determinations by the Building Official relative to the application and interpretation of the Fresno Building Code, there shall be and is hereby created a board of appeals (hereafter referred to as the "Building Standards Appeals Board") consisting of members who are qualified by experience and training to pass on matters pertaining to building construction and who are not employees of the City of Fresno. The Building Standards Appeals Board shall perform the following appeal duties:
a) Determine the suitability of alternate materials, engineering designs, methods of construction and equipment.
b) Provide reasonable interpretations of the provisions of the Fresno Building Code and other relevant codes.
c) Hear and decide appeals from the orders of the Building Officials directing the vacation, repair, rehabilitation or demolition of dangerous buildings under the provisions of Chapter 11, Article 3 of the Fresno Municipal Code as applicable to compliance to the provisions set forth in the Fresno Building Code and other relevant codes.
d) Hear and decide appeals pursuant to the provisions of Section 10-50108 of the Fresno Municipal Code.
e) Hear and decide appeals from orders of the Building Official directing the vacation, repair, rehabilitation or demolition of substandard buildings under the provisions of Chapter 11, Article 4 of the Fresno Municipal Code as applicable to compliance to the provisions set forth in the Fresno Building Code and other relevant codes.

The Building Official shall serve as an ex officio member of and shall act as secretary to said board but shall have no vote on any matter before the board. The Building Standards Appeals Board shall be appointed by the Mayor and shall hold office at the pleasure of the Mayor.

The Building Standards Appeals Board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business, and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant with a duplicate copy to the Building Official.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-48 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 113.2.1 Limitations of Authority. The Building Standards Appeals Board shall have no authority relative to interpretation of the administrative provisions of this code nor shall the board be empowered to waive requirements of this code.
114.4.1 Violations. The person, firm, or corporation violating any of the provisions of this code shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor.

CBC Chapter 9 Fire Protection Systems Note.

Note: For additional requirements refer to Fresno Fire Code Section as established by the City of Fresno Fire Department.

CBC Chapter 10
Section 1024 Luminous Egress Path Markings Note.

Note: For additional requirements refer to Section 10-51024 of the Fresno Fire Code as established by the City of Fresno Fire Department.

CBC Chapter 12
[1208.4] Efficiency dwelling units shall comply with the following:

1. The unit shall have a living room of not less than 150 square feet (13.9m 2) of floor area. An additional 100 square feet (9.3m 2) of floor area shall be provided for each occupant of such unit in excess of two.

2. The unit shall be provided with a separate closet.

3. The unit shall be provided with a kitchen sink, cooking appliance and refrigeration facilities, each having a clear working space of not less than 30 inches (762 mm) in front. Light and ventilation conforming to this code shall be provided.

4. The unit shall be provided with a separate bathroom containing a water closet, lavatory and bathtub or shower.

CBC Title 24 Appendix O104
Title 24 Appendix O104 of the California Building Code regarding Emergency Sleeping Cabins was in Section 11-102 of the Fresno Municipal Code to read:

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-49 A. General. Emergency sleeping cabins shall have an interior floor area of not less than 100 square feet (9.3 m 2) for a maximum of four occupants. Emergency sleeping cabins shall be limited to two occupants with an interior floor area of not less than 100 square feet (9.3 m 2) for the duration of any City-declared public health emergency. Where more than four persons occupy the cabin at any time, the required floor area shall be 70 square feet (6.5 m 2) for the first occupant and increased at the rate of 50 square feet (4.65 m 2) for each additional occupant.

The interior floor area shall not exceed 400 square feet (37 m 2), excluding lofts.

B. Live loads. Emergency sleeping cabins shall be designed to resist intrusion of wind, rain, and to support the following live loads:

1. Floor live loads not less than 40 pounds per square foot (1.92 kPa) of floor area.

2. Horizontal live loads not less than 15 pounds per square foot (718 Pa) of vertical wall and roof area.

3. Roof live loads not less than 20 pounds per square foot (958 Pa) of horizontal roof area.

4. In areas where snow loads are greater than 20 pounds per square foot (958 Pa), the roof shall be designed and constructed to resist these additional loads.

C. Minimum ceiling height. Habitable space and hallways in emergency sleeping cabins shall have a ceiling height of not less than 80 inches (2,032 mm). Bathrooms, toilet rooms, and kitchens, if provided, shall have a ceiling height of not less than 76 inches (1,930 mm).

Obstructions shall not extend below these minimum ceiling heights including beams, girders, ducts, lighting and other obstructions. Exception: Ceiling heights in lofts constructed in accordance with Section N108 are permitted to be less than 80 inches (2,032 mm).

D. Means of egress. Emergency sleeping cabins shall be provided with at least two forms of egress placed remotely from each other. One form of egress may be an egress window complying with Section 0104.4.1. When a loft is provided, one form of egress shall be an egress window complying with Section 0104.4.1, provided in the loft space.

E. Egress window. The bottom of the clear opening of the egress window shall not be more than 44 inches (1,118 mm) above the floor. The egress window shall have a minimum net clear opening height of 24 inches (610 mm), and a minimum net clear opening width of 20 inches (508 mm). The egress window shall have a minimum net clear opening area of five square feet (0.465 m 2).

F. Plumbing and gas service. If an emergency sleeping cabin contains plumbing or gas service, it shall comply with all applicable requirements of the California Plumbing Code and the California Mechanical Code.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-50 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 G. Electrical. Emergency sleeping cabins shall be provided with all of the following installed in compliance with the California Electrical Code:

1. Continuous source of electricity. Exception: The source of electricity may be solar power or emergency generator.

2. At least one interior lighting fixture.

3. Electrical heating equipment listed for residential use and a dedicated receptacle outlet for the electrical heating equipment. Exception: Electrical heating equipment and a dedicated receptacle outlet for said equipment are not required if a nonelectrical source of heat is provided.

4. At least one GFCI-protected receptacle outlet for use by the occupant(s).

H. Ventilation. Emergency sleeping cabins shall be provided with means of ventilation (natural and/or mechanical) allowing for adequate air replacement, as determined by the enforcing agency.

I. Smoke alarms. Emergency sleeping cabins shall be provided with at least one smoke alarm installed in accordance with the California Residential Code, Section R314.

J. Carbon monoxide alarms. If an emergency sleeping cabin contains a fuel-burning appliance(s) or a fireplace(s), a carbon monoxide alarm shall be installed in accordance with the California Residential Code, Section R315.

Amendments to the California Mechanical Code
Amendments to the California Mechanical Code (CMC) per Section 11-106 of the Fresno Municipal Code are as follows:

CMC Chapter 9
936.0 Wood-burning Appliances
936.1 Definitions. Whenever the following terms are used in Section 933, they shall have the following meanings:
a) EPA shall mean the United States Environmental Protection Agency. b) EPA CERTIFIED WOOD HEATER shall mean any wood heater that meets or exceeds combustion emissions standards set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 60, 26 February 1988.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-51 c) FIREPLACE shall mean any masonry or factory-built device to burn wood, composition fire logs, or other solid fuel, with or without a gas log or log lighter, which may have a firebox in excess of 20 cubic feet, which may weigh in excess of 800 kilograms, and which is not a pellet-fueled wood stove.
d) FIREPLACE INSERT shall mean a type of wood heater which is designed to be installed in the opening of a wood-burning fireplace and is connected to the chimney. e) NEW CONSTRUCTION shall mean any construction or reconstruction or remodeling of any structure requiring the issuance of a building permit by the City of Fresno. f) PELLET-FUELED WOOD STOVE shall mean any commercially manufactured enclosed combustion appliance that is designed to operate on automatically fed pelletized wood fuel and has a usable firebox volume of less than 20 cubic feet.
g) MANUFACTURED FIREPLACE shall mean any fireplace that is of unitary commercial manufacture and is not synthesized on site of masonry construction components. h) STATE OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS shall mean the performance and emission standards set forth in Sections 100 through 190 of Chapter 340, Division 21, Oregon Administrative Rules.
i) WOOD-BURNING APPLIANCE shall mean any device that is designed or used to burn wood, composition wood pellets, or composition fire logs for aesthetic, space heating, cooking, and/or water heating purposes within a structure; to include fireplaces, pellet-fueled wood stoves, and wood heaters.
j) WOOD HEATER shall mean a commercially-manufactured, enclosed wood-burning appliance that meets all the following criteria:
1) A usable firebox volume of less than 20 cubic feet; and 2) A maximum weight less than 800 kilograms, exclusive or chimney and other accessory devices that are not an integral part of the appliance; and
3) A combustion air-to-fuel consumption ratio which averages less than 35-to-1, as determined by EPA certification test procedures set forth in code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 60, 26 February 1988; and
4) A minimum burn rate with less than five kilograms per hour fuel consumption, as determined by EPA certification test procedures set forth the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 60, 26 February 1988.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-52 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 936.1.1 All Wood-burning Appliances Prohibited in New Construction. Notwithstanding any other provision in the Fresno Municipal Code, no wood burning appliance, as defined herein, shall be installed in any new construction. This section shall not apply to any residential structure or dwelling unit having a lawfully installed wood burning appliance in place as of the effective date of this ordinance. 936.2 Installation of Wood-burning Appliances not permitted in Higher Density Residential Developments.

Permits shall not be issued for wood-burning appliances to be installed in dwelling units of residential projects that have densities of more than 10.37 dwelling units per gross acre. However, one wood-burning appliance may be constructed or installed in each common-use recreation facility in these developments. 936.3 Wood-Burning Appliances Require Air Pollution Emissions Certification. Permits shall be issued only for replacement of existing wood burning appliances lawfully installed prior to the effective date of this ordinance and be issued only for those wood burning appliances certified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as meeting the EPA Phase I or Phase II emissions standards; or meeting equivalent State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Standards. Effective March 1, 1991, all wood burning appliances to be installed must be EPA-certified as at least meeting Phase II emissions standards. A permit shall only be issued for installation of a wood burning appliance when adequate EPAapproved documentation is provided to demonstrate that the wood burning appliance or fireplace stove model being installed has the appropriate emissions certification.

EXCEPTION: Those pellet-fueled wood stoves not affected by EPA's testing program under the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, Part 60, Sub-installation by substituting independent, approved, nationallyrecognized testing laboratory documentation showing that they emit less than 4.1 grams per hour of particulate matter.
936.4. Coal-burning Appliances Prohibited. No permit shall be issued to install any fireplace or domestic heating or cooking appliance that is designed and intended to use coal as combustion fuel. 936.5. Installation of Wood-burning Appliances Without Permits. Wood-burning appliances found to be installed on or after November 30, 1990, without required permit(s) shall be cause for an inspection/investigation fee to be charged to the property owner, pursuant to the Master Fee Resolution, and the issuance of a notice to abated (required permits secured, all work completed, and permit final inspection done) within sixty days of owner's receipt of the notice, 75% of the inspection/investigation fee shall be rebated.

If permit(s) were secured to abate the illegal installation, prior to discovery of the illegal installation by the City, no notice shall be issued nor inspection/investigation fee incurred unless the permit(s) to abate the nuisance are not finalized within 90 days.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-53 Amendments to the California Plumbing Code
Amendments to the California Plumbing Code (CPC) per Section 11-106 of the Fresno Municipal Code are as follows:

CPC Chapter 6
604.0 Materials
604.1 Pipe, Tube, and Fittings. The third paragraph of section 604.1 of the California Plumbing Code is hereby deleted in its entirety and amended to read:

Materials for building water piping and building supply piping shall be in accordance with the applicable standards referenced in Table 604.1. Galvanized malleable iron, galvanized wrought iron or galvanized steel are prohibited materials for use both underground and in buildings.

Code Enforcement
The Code Enforcement Division enforces the City’s Minimum Housing Code, which covers safety and livability requirements in housing by processing a variety of cases ranging from public nuisance to zoning.

Code Enforcement has specialty teams as well as area teams that respond to complaints and possess specialized training to enforce violations.

The City of Fresno recently switched to a more proactive code enforcement system. They require all rental property owners to register in a public database and subject all units to a baseline inspection and regular follow ups thereafter. To promote quality neighborhoods and reporting of potential violations, the City of Fresno encourages residents to use the “FresGO” app and by calling 3-1-1, which allows residents to anonymously report issues, concerns, track requests, provide comments, and learn about city services. All complaints are addressed based on their priority level, with the most dangerous cases getting the most urgent response. The City of Fresno also created the “Quality Neighborhoods Guide” to provide residents with facts about City requirements and identifies the 15 most common violations, to encourage voluntary compliance among property owners.

The City works to bring code violation(s) to the attention of the responsible party, typically the property owner. A reasonable amount of time is provided to resolve the violation. Compliance at this stage is referred to as voluntary compliance. Voluntary compliance takes minimal City resources and is often achieved quickly because the property owner is responsive. In the case of unresponsive property owners, however, the City often takes enforcement action, using one or more of the following approaches to achieve compliance: Administrative Citations, Penalties, Abatement by Contractor, Court Appointed Receivership, Property Liens, Judicial Remedies, Referrals, etc.

Conclusion
Local amendments to the California Building Code, California Mechanical Code, and California Plumbing Code do not pose a significant constraint to the production of housing in the city.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-54 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Recommended Action
None needed.

Fees and Exactions
Analysis
Housing construction imposes certain short- and long-term costs upon local government, such as the cost of providing planning services and inspections. As a result, the City relies upon various planning and development fees to recoup costs and ensure that essential services and infrastructure are available when needed. In addition to local planning departments, developers must also work through the Air District, Water Districts, School District and sometimes Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCO) to obtain entitlements for construction of housing. Each additional Agency requirement adds cost to the project and ultimately the housing unit. The time necessary for processing these requirements also raises housing cost.

Coordination and simultaneous processing among agencies should assist in reducing processing time and cost.

Planning and Development Fees
Typical City fees related to planning and development are summarized in Table 1E-4.12 below. Fees are updated every July 1.

Table 1E-4.12: Fees for Residential Development as of July 1, 2022 Application Type Fee
Addressing
Assignment - Parcel Map $248.47
Assignment – Tract Map first 50 lots or less $528.01
Assignment – Tract Map per ea. Additional 50 lots or less $207.43 Change of Address $264.00
Annexations
Inhabited $13,653.836
Uninhabited $10,137.49
Conditional Use Permit – Standard (1)(2)
New Application/Full Review $12,878.46
Amendment $5,648.33
Major Revised Exhibit $2,937.31
Moderate Revised Exhibit $590.12
Minor Revised Exhibit $207.43
Conditional Use Permit – Special (1) (2)
Condominium Conversion – Base Fee $24,825.13
Per 100 unit fee $4,137.53
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-55 Application Type Fee
Development Permit (1)(2)
New Application/Full Review $11,730.38
Amendment $7,447.54
Major Revised Exhibit $2,937.31
Moderate Revised Exhibit $590.12
Minor Revised Exhibit $186.36
Plan Amendment (2)
Plan Amendment – New application $20,170.70
Plan Amendment & Rezone Combo $22,239.46
Plan Mod – Change to plan in process $5,596.19
Traffic Review $163.00
Tentative Parcel Maps
Technical Verification $3,103.69
Credited to base fee upon acceptance
Tentative Map (5 or more lots) $8,275.04
Tentative Parcel Map (4 or less lots) $6,206.28
Traffic Review (Level 3) $518.00
Traffic Review (Level 4) $1,036.00
Fire Review $134.00
Parks, Recreation & Community Review $31.00
Revised Parcel Map – Major $1,655.01
Revised Parcel Map – Minor $827.50
Time Extension/Continuation at request of applicant $2,068.76 Revised Conditions – Major $2,482.51
Revised Conditions – Minor $827.50
Tentative Tract Maps
Technical Verification $4,344.95
Credited to base fee upon acceptance
Base Fee (per map) $21,928.87
Lot Fee (per each 50 lots) $8,275.04
Charged in addition to the Base Fee
Traffic Review (Level 3) $518.00
Traffic Review (Level 4) $1,036.00
Fire Review (per review) $134.00
Parks, Recreation & Community Review $124.00
Revised Tentative Tract Map – Major $12,412.57
Revised Tentative Tract Map – Minor $4,137.53
SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-56 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Application Type Fee
Time Extension/Continuation of Scheduled Item (at the request of the applicant) $5,586.21 Revised Conditions – Major $2,482.51
Revised Conditions – Minor $827.50
1 Fees listed are base amounts. Additional DP and CUP Application Review Fees and Environmental Review and Related Fees apply.
2 Fees listed shall be reduced by 50% for applications in inner-City areas. In the Herndon Townsite, Highway City and Pinedale areas, fees shall only be reduced for residential uses and properties. No inner-City fee reduction will be applied to applications filed by government agencies.
3 No additional environmental review fees shall be charged, unless it is determined that a higher level of review than an exemption is required.
4 Fees are updated every July 1st based on CPI.

Source: City of Fresno, 2022.

Urban Growth Management Fees
Urban Growth Management (UGM) fees apply to residential projects located on the geographic fringe of the city. The process is not intended to prevent development, but it does preclude inordinate costs to the City and limits disorganized growth. The process is specifically intended to ensure adequate municipal facilities, improvements, and services are available when needed, and to protect the city and its residents by minimizing costs.

Fee Exemptions and Reductions
To reduce some of the costs associated with residential development, the City offers various exemptions and reductions in fees. The City’s Fee waiver program permits the exemption of development impact fees when a “small residential development” is replaced or reconstructed, if the development is substantially similar to the unit being replaced or reconstructed and the replacement or reconstruction does not significantly expand or intensify the use of the property. Applications for fee exemption must be submitted to the Director of Public Works. To incentivize infill development, the City reduces application fees by 50 percent on properties in the following core neighborhoods: existing neighborhoods south of Herndon Avenue, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors, and in the Downtown Planning Area. In Herndon Townsite, Highway City, and Pinedale areas, these reduced fees are limited to residential projects.

Typical Fees for Residential Projects
Development impact fees provide a mechanism for development projects to contribute financially to the cost of improving and expanding the infrastructure and facilities needed to accommodate that development.

Fees are a one-time, non-recurring revenue source paid at the start of a development project, typically at building permit issuance. Although development fees help support vital local services to serve incoming residents, locally imposed fees for new residential projects can be a potential constraint as it can be an expensive component of development.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-57 Table 1E-4.13 shows the assessed fees for three examples of typical residential developments, including a 90- lot single family subdivision, a 105-unit multifamily housing development in a new growth area, and a 42-unit multifamily housing development in an infill area. In addition to City fees, several regional fees are charged for development: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), Regional Transportation Mitigation and local school districts. For school fees, the Fresno Unified School District fees for residential construction is $4.79 per square foot (as of June 15, 2022); and the fees for Clovis Unified School District are $4.79 per square foot for level 1 residential construction such as residential additions/remodels and $5.36 per square foot for level 2 development including residential new construction and multi-family developments (as of July 1, 2022). Fees for the 90-lot single family subdivision total $2,315,746 ($25,731 per unit); fees for the 105-unit multi-family development total $1,934,333 ($18,422 per unit); and fees for the 42-unit multifamily infill development total $602,450 ($14,344 per unit).

Table 1E-4.13: Fees for Sample Residential Developments Fee
Project Type
Estimated Fee per Unit
90 Lot SingleFamily
Residential
Multi-family -
Apartments (New
Growth Area)
Multi-family -
Apartments
(Infill)
Total Number of Units 90 105 42
Entitlement Permit Processing $ 38,455 $15,679 $ 9,722
Water Connection Charges $547,698 $124,136 $58,873
Sewer Connection Charges $319,320 $113,985 $ 0
Citywide/Regional Impact Fees
Fire Facilities Impact Fee $205,650 $183,015 $ 62,370
Park Facility Impact Fee $320,940 $404,460 $ 132,594
Quimby Parkland Dedication Fee $138,780 $ 0 $ 0
Citywide Regional Street Charge $160,431 $121,083 $ 44,773 New Growth Area Major Street Charge $366,135 $379,310 $ 0 Police Facilities Impact Fee $85,320 $75,915 $ 20,328
Traffic Signal Mitigation Impact Fee $68,580 $62,055 $ 15,228 Subtotal Citywide/Regional Impact Fees $980,121 $1,225,838 $275,293 Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District
(Drainage Fees + Service Charges)
$243,801 $30,713 $12,000
School Fee $ $185,789 $324,900 $177,000
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District (SJVAPCD)
$ 562 $562 $562
Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee $ 190,620 $98,520 $69,000 Total $2,315,746 $1,934,333 $602,450
Cost per Unit $25,731 $18,422 $14,344
Source: City of Fresno, 2023.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-58 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Conclusion and Recommended Action
The City works to reduce fees to the extent feasible. Fees for entitlement permit processing constitute approximately 2 percent of the total costs. School and regional impact fees make up 20 to 25 percent of the total costs except for the infill example in which school and regional impact fees made up more of the total costs. Generally, fees do not serve to constrain housing development in Fresno. The City will continue to provide reduced application fees and priority processing for single-family and multi-family projects within the Inner City Fee Program area, as referenced in the Municipal Code, to create housing units in infill areas.

In addition, the City will continue to offer impact fee waivers for qualifying infill projects in priority areas.

As the City explores additional strategies to increase housing production, the City will consider the reduction or modification of fees.

Constraints on Housing for Persons with Disabilities
Persons with disabilities have a number of housing needs related to accessibility of dwelling units; access to transportation, employment, and commercial services; and alternative living arrangements that include on-site or nearby supportive living services. Government Code Section 65583(a) and (c) requires municipalities to analyze potential and actual constraints upon the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities, and demonstrate local efforts to remove governmental constraints that hinder the locality from meeting the need for housing for persons with disabilities. Cities are required to include programs that remove constraints and provide reasonable accommodation for housing designed for persons with disabilities.

Analysis
California Codes and Regulations
The City has adopted Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, and the 2019 California Building Code. The 2022 codes are adopted and will be effective on January 1, 2023.

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 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-59 Although the City’s Zoning Districts use "Single-Family" terminology, the Development Code does not define “family.” Section 15-6702 of the Municipal Code references single-unit and multi-unit dwellings as the primary residential use classifications.

Residential Housing Types
Single-Unit Dwelling, Detached. A dwelling unit designed for occupancy by one household and located on a separate lot from any other unit (except second living units, where permitted). This classification includes individual manufactured housing units installed on a foundation system pursuant to Section 18551 of the California Health and Safety Code.

Single-Unit Dwelling, Attached. A dwelling unit designed for occupancy by one household, located on a single lot and typically grouped together in a row of similar units. They may be attached through common vertical party wall(s) to one or more dwellings on abutting lots, or may appear to be attached, but are structurally independent.

Multi-Unit Residential. Three or more dwelling units on a site or lot. Types of multiple unit dwellings include townhouses, garden apartments, senior housing developments, and multi-story apartment buildings.

This use includes multi-unit development in which individual units are occupied exclusively by one or more persons 62 years of age or older.

The Housing includes a program to amend the City’s zoning ordinance to address the definition of “family.” Reasonable Accommodation Procedure
Building and development standards may constrain the ability of persons with disabilities to live in housing units that are suited to their needs. The City is required to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, and services when such accommodations may be necessary to afford a person with a disability the equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. Reasonable accommodation refers to flexibility in standards and policies to accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities. Per state law, a request for a reasonable accommodation may only be denied if:
• The individual on whose behalf the accommodation was requested is not an individual with a disability;
• There is no disability-related need for the requested accommodation (in other words, there is no connection between the disability and the requested accommodation); • The requested accommodation would constitute a fundamental alteration of the services or operations of the person who is asked to provide the accommodation; • The requested accommodation would impose an undue financial and administrative burden on the person who is asked to provide the accommodation; or
SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-60 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 • The requested accommodation would constitute a direct threat to the health or safety of others (i.e., a significant risk of bodily harm) or would cause substantial physical damage to the property of others, and such risks cannot be sufficiently mitigated or eliminated by another reasonable accommodation.3
The City’s Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance is codified in Article 57 of the Development Code. A request for reasonable accommodation may be submitted on an application form provided by the City or be made orally to the Director. Additionally, the City is required to help assist the applicant in preparing the application if needed. Generally, an application for a reasonable accommodation shall be granted in 30 days. It is the responsibility of the Planning and Development Director (the "Director") under the Development Code to approve, conditionally approve, modify, or deny requests for deviations to dimensional requirements and requests for reasonable accommodation, pursuant to Article 56, Minor Deviations, and Article 57, Reasonable Accommodation for Housing. The following findings are required by the City:
 The housing, which is the subject of the request for reasonable accommodation, is to be used by an individual protected under fair housing laws;
 The requested accommodation is necessary to make specific housing available to an individual protected under fair housing laws;
 The requested accommodation does not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the City; and
 The requested accommodation does not require a fundamental alteration in the nature of a City plan, policy, rule, regulation, or code.

Any denial of an application for reasonable accommodation may be appealed in accordance with Section 15-5017 of the Development Code. A Director decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission by filing a written appeal with the Director within 15 days of the decision being made. The appeal will be heard by the Planning Commission within 40 days from the date the appeal is filed.

Permits and Processing
The City does not impose special permit procedures or requirements that could impede the retrofitting of homes for accessibility. The City’s requirements for building permits and inspections are the same as for other residential projects and are straightforward and not burdensome. City officials are not aware of any instance in which an applicant experienced delays or rejection of a retrofitting proposal for accessibility to persons with disabilities.
3 California Code of Regulations, Title 2, § 12179.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-61 Universal Design Element and Retrofit Assistance
Since 2008, the City has implemented a Universal Design Ordinance to govern new construction or modifications of City-subsidized housing. The City defines “Universal Design” as a broader, more comprehensive "design for all" approach to the development of products, architecture, and environments around human diversity. Universal Design is a broad comprehensive house design that makes a home safe and comfortable for everyone, young or old, whether they have a disability or not. The program includes the following four items: 1) one “no step” entry, 2) accessible interior routes, 3) accessible kitchen counter space, and 4) ground floor facilities for units over 750 square feet in size. The City requires the incorporation of Universal Design features in affordable housing developments through a development agreement.

Conclusion and Recommended Action
The City’s development standards do not unduly constrain housing for people with disabilities. Findings for reasonable accommodations are objective and the City continues to implement the Universal Design Ordinance to govern new construction or modifications of City-subsidized housing and provide accessible features in housing. Amendments to the City’s zoning ordinance are required to address the definition of “family.” The Housing Element includes a program to add a definition of family and consistently replace "single family" and "multi-family" terms with "single-unit" and "multi-unit" for internal consistency.

At-Risk Analysis
In the City of Fresno, there are more than 8,500 publicly assisted affordable housing units. Covenants and deed restrictions are the typical mechanisms used to maintain the affordability of these units. Over time, there is a risk of losing the affordable units due to the expiration of covenants and deed restrictions. As the housing market continues to put upward pressure on market rents in the Bay Area, San Joaquin Valley property owners could be inclined to convert the assisted units to market-rate housing or other use. While Fresno has a rich stock of publicly assisted housing, of the total stock, 695 units in 7 developments are at risk of conversion to uses other than low-income residential within 10 years from the Housing Element adoption deadline (i.e., by December 31, 2033). Table 1E-4.14 provides an inventory of these assisted rental housing units and categorizes their level of conversion risk. • ‘Very-High’ Risk – affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate within the next year that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a stable non-profit, mission-driven developer/owner. • ‘High’ Risk – affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in the next 1-5 years that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a stable non-profit, mission-driven developer/owner. • ‘Moderate’ Risk – affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in the next 5-10 years that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a stable non-profit, mission-driven developer/owner.

SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-62 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 • ‘Low’ Risk – affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in 10+ years and/or are owned by a stable mission-driven non-profit developer/owner.

The California Housing Partnership considers at-risk homes to be those with ‘Very-High’ and ‘High’ risk levels. housing market conditions, all assisted housing developments at risk of conversion by December 31, 2033, are included in the at-risk analysis.

Table 1E-4.14: Assisted Housing Developments
At-Risk of Conversion by 2033, City of Fresno
Name Address Affordable
Units
Total
Units
Active
Program(s)
Estimated
Affordability
End Year/Date
Risk
Level
Garland Gardens 3726 N. Pleasant
Ave, Fresno,
93705
51 51 HUD 2025 Low
Delno Terrace 1480 N. Delno St,
Fresno, 93728
60 61 HUD 2026 Low
Fresno Senior
Housing aka Las
Casitas Del Ser
156 South Willow
Ave, Fresno,
93727
25 125 HCD 2027 Moderate
Lula Haynes
Plaza
855 E. Lorena St,
Fresno, 93706
46 46 HUD 2028 Moderate
Sierra Meadows 107 East Sierra
Avenue, Fresno,
93710
44 220 CalHFA 2031 Moderate
Pleasant View
Apts
3513 N. Pleasant
Ave, Fresno,
93705
60 60 HUD 2032 Low
Papillon
Apartments
5464 North
Figarden Drive,
Fresno, 93722
27 132 CalHFA 2033 Low
Total -- 313 695 -- -- --
Source: California Housing Partnership Preservation Database, July 2022.

Preservation Options for At-Risk Properties
State law requires that housing elements include a comparison of the costs to replace the at-risk units through new construction or to preserve the at-risk units. Preserving at-risk units can be accomplished by facilitating a transfer of ownership to a qualified affordable housing organization, purchasing the affordability covenants, and/or providing rental assistance to tenants. Each of these options is described below.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-4-63 Acquisition and Rehabilitation
Transferring ownership of an at-risk project to a non-profit housing provider would make the project eligible for re-financing using affordable housing financing programs, such as low-income housing tax credits and tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds. These financing programs would ensure affordability for at least 55 years. Generally, rehabilitation accompanies a transfer of ownership. Actual acquisition costs depend on several variables such as condition, size, location, existing financing, and availability of financing (government and market). Based on listings of for-sale multifamily buildings throughout Fresno County, prices ranged from $72,916 per unit for a 48-unit complex building in Fresno to $300,000 per unit for a 15-unit complex. Additionally, if the property needs significant rehabilitation, or financing is difficult to obtain, it is important to consider these factors in the cost analysis. Assuming that renovations cost around $25,000 per unit, acquisition and rehabilitation costs could be between $68 million and $226 million for 695 units in 7 developments.

Construction of Replacement Units
New construction is often more expensive than acquisition and rehab. The cost of developing housing depends upon a variety of factors, including density, size of the units, location, land costs, and type of construction. According to a recent report from the Terner Center4 in 2020, the estimated construction costs for new multifamily units are around $400,000 per unit. Based on this research, the total cost to replace the affordable units that are at-risk within the seven developments (313 units) with newly constructed units is estimated at $125 million.

Rent Subsidy
Rent subsidies can also be used to preserve affordability of housing, although there are limited funding sources to subsidize rents. The amount of a rent subsidy would be equal to the difference between the HUDdefined fair-market rent (FMR) for a unit and the cost that would be affordable to a lower-income household based on HUD income limits. Table 1E-4.15 shows this calculation. The total cost to subsidize the 313 affordable units at-risk of conversion is estimated at $788,800 annually.

Another way rent subsidies could be structured is as a rent buy-down. This would involve the City providing a one-time assistance loan to the property owner to cover the present value of the decrease in rents associated with the extended affordability term compared with market rents achievable on the units. This approach offers a benefit to the owner in that they receive cash upfront from the loan, providing funds for rehabilitation improvements.
4 Reid, Carolina. 2020. The Costs of Affordable Housing Production: Insights from California’s 9% Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program. Retrieved from: https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2020/08/LIHTC_Construction_Costs_2020.pdf SECTION 1E-4: CONSTRAINTS
1E-4-64 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Table 1E-4.15: Estimated Cost to Subsidize Rents, Fresno, 2022 Per Unit Affordable Rent
Unit Size
Total
1BR 2BR 3BR
A Low-Income Rent (60% AMI) $904 $1,024 $1,144
B Very Low-Income Rent (50% AMI) $753 $853 $954
C Average (A & B) $828 $938 $1,049
D Per Unit Fair Market Rent2 $904 $1,137 $1,607
E Monthly Per Unit Subsidy (D–C) $76 $199 $558
F Annual Subsidy/Unit (E * 12) $911 $2,383 $6,695
Total “At Risk” Units3 157 94 63 313
Total Annual Subsidy $ 143,027 $ 224,002 $ 421,785 $ 788,814 1 Affordable rent calculation is based on 1.5 persons per bedroom. 2 2022 HUD Fair Market Rent
3 Actual unit size of at-risk units is unknown. Assumes 50% of total “At Risk” units are 1-bedroom, 30% are 2-bedroom, and 20% are 3-bedroom.

AMI = Area Median Income
Source: U.S. HUD, Fair Market Rents, Fresno County, 2022.

FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 SECTION 1E-5: REVIEW OF PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-5-1 SECTION 1E-5: REVIEW OF PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS
State housing element law (Government Code Section 65588) requires cities and counties to assess the achievements under their adopted housing programs to inform the development of new programs. State law also requires that local governments review the effectiveness of the housing element goals, policies, and related actions to meet the community’s special housing needs.

Major Accomplishments
The City has made significant progress in implementing the programs adopted in the 2013-2023 Housing Element. Some major accomplishments are listed below.
 Received Prohousing Designation status and now eligible or funding incentives and additional resources through state grant programs to speed the production of housing.  Established a Local Housing Trust Fund with $6.5 million dedicated to date.  Awarded $300,000 in funding from the Local Early Action Planning (LEAP) program to accelerate housing development by funding site and infrastructure plans for catalyst sites throughout the city.  Provided $827,000 for mobile home rehabilitation. City also took over enforcement of mobile home parks including building permitting of new mobile home placement.  Dedicated $170 million in neighborhood associated infrastructure improvements for 189 park, sewer, street, traffic, and water projects.
 Developed pre-approved accessory dwelling unit (ADU) home plans for residents to use free of charge.
 Created the Anti-displacement Task Force and hired Thrivance Group to study displacement in the city. Most recently prepared “Here to Stay: Displacement Avoidance Policy Report.”  Adopted a Lodging-to-Dwelling Conversion Ordinance and converted two hotels into apartments with many more projects in the works.
 Established a Rental Housing Registry and Rental Inspection Program. To date 86,350 rental units have registered, 13,375 inspections have been conducted, and numerous improvements to rental units have been completed.
 Established the School Area Code Enforcement Team to improve neighborhoods, reduce blight, enhance safety, equip residents for civic engagement, and connect low-income residents to housing resources. Reached 20 school areas and received an Innovative Program of the Year Award from California Association of Code Enforcement Officers.
 Between 2016 and 2019, 2,141 households received temporary shelter, 2,258 people received emergency shelter, 425 people received Rapid Re-housing assistance, and 231 clients with HIV/AIDS received Special Needs Housing Service.

SECTION 1E-5: REVIEW OF PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS
1E-5-2 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024  Between 2020 and 2021, 12,430 unsheltered persons received supportive services; 983 beds were added to the system; 4,812 unduplicated persons were assisted with overnight shelter, triage, or bridge housing; 5,243 people exited the system; and 1,687 people exited to permanent housing.

Progress Toward Meeting 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 January 1, 2013 to December 1, 2023. The City of Fresno was assigned a RHNA of 23,565 units, divided into four income categories:
 Very Low-Income (less than 50 percent of the Area Median Income): 5,666 units  Low-Income (50 to 80 percent of the Area Median Income): 3,289 units  Moderate-Income (80 to 120 percent of the Area Median Income): 3,571 units  Above Moderate-Income (greater than 120 percent of the Area Median Income): 11,039 units Table 1E-5.1 summarizes the City’s accomplishments in meeting the RHNA during the previous RHNA projection period.

Table 1E-5.1: Building Permits Issued During Fifth Cycle RHNA Period Income
Level
2013-
2023
RHNA
2013-
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Total
to
Date
Unmet
RHNA
Very Low 5,666 290 23 - 135 41 68 92 67 311 1,027 4,639 Low 3,289 268 8 4 - 5 25 70 72 452 2,837
Moderate 3,571 384 334 787 - - 11 0 - 1,516 2,055
Above
Moderate 11,039 2,328 923 676 1,202 1,970 2,184 2,134 1,305 1,455 12,722 - Total 23,565 3,270 1,288 1,467 1,337 2,016 2,252 2,262 1,442 1,838 17,172 9,531 *Note: Units serving extremely low-income households are included in the totals for very low-income permitted units.

Source: City of Fresno, 2023 Annual Progress Report.

Program Evaluation
The following section reviews and evaluates the City’s progress in implementing programs from the previous planning period. As part of analyzing prior programs, the City must assess the effectiveness of programs for special needs populations. Table 1E-5.2 summarizes progress on the implementation programs from the previous Housing Element, including programs addressing special needs populations summarized below.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-5-3 Seniors and Persons with Disabilities. As discussed in Section 1E-0: Summary of Needs for the City of Fresno, about 11 percent of the population in Fresno was aged 65 or older in 2020. In the same year, nearly half of the senior population (44.5) percent had a disability. Due to proximity to services, Fresno has a higher rate of residents with disabilities than the county as a whole (13.8 percent compared to 12.9 percent across the county). Seniors and persons with disabilities are especially likely to live on fixed incomes and require accessibility modifications to homes to support mobility and independent living. The City implemented programs to support seniors and special needs households, including Program 7 – Special Needs Housing, Program 10A – Mobile Home Parks, Program 10B – Housing Choice Vouchers, Program 21 – Neighborhood Infrastructure, and Program 22 – Housing Rehabilitation. The City continues to encourage and support development of senior housing and senior residential care facilities that offer a wide range of housing choices and community services. The City also implements a Universal Design Ordinance for new construction or modification of City-subsidized housing using aging in place as a guiding principle (Program 7). The program includes: one “no step” entry, accessible interior routes, accessible kitchen counter spaces, and ground-floor facilities for units over 750 square feet in size. Any developer receiving City funds is required to comply with the Universal Housing Ordinance. Every development project that has received City funds since the Ordinance was adopted has complied with this requirement.

The City also funds home repair and rehabilitation programs with its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership Act (HOME) funding. The City offers a Senior Paint Program in which CDBG funds are used to pay for a licensed contractor to paint home exteriors, occasionally providing minor repairs (e.g., screens, broken windowpanes, loose or damaged gutters) as funds are available. The program serves low-income seniors who own and occupy their home. During the previous planning period, more than 100 projects were completed through the City’s Senior Paint Program. However, home repairs continue to be a need throughout the city, particularly for senior occupied households.

Stakeholders and public meeting participants involved in the Housing Element update process identified various remaining needs including mobile home improvements, particularly accessibility accommodations, weatherization, and roof repairs for seniors. The City has allocated $553,717 of its Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) funding for a total of $1.38 million in PLHA assistance to further its program focused on owner-occupied home rehabilitation for low-income people not eligible for funding through other programs, such as mobile home residents. Once the City receives its executed Standard Agreements for PLHA funds from the State of California, it will implement the program (refer to Program 22 for more information).

The City has also worked to increase the availability of affordable housing in the city by using HOME funds to support the development of affordable housing, including housing for seniors and people with disabilities, and to provide housing rehabilitation for low-income homeowners. Senior housing developments completed/underway during the previous planning period included Self-Help Enterprises Annadale Commons Senior Housing Project in Southwest Fresno (40 new multi-family senior housing units), FCTC Fancher Creek Senior Housing Project (180 new multi-family senior housing units); and Cesar Chavez Foundation’s Las Palmas de Sal Gonzales Sr. Apartments Project located at 5070 E. Kings Canyon (mix of 135 senior and multi-family units).

SECTION 1E-5: REVIEW OF PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS
1E-5-4 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Fresno residents with disabilities 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. 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. The majority of these facilities are located in the City of Fresno, with some 67 facilities in the City of Clovis, one in the cities of Fowler, Huron and Kerman, three in the City of Reedley, and three in the City of Sanger. Furthermore, the Housing Authority provides rental assistance to eligible seniors and disabled residents through housing choice vouchers and project-based vouchers. Of the Housing Authority’s 7,412 vouchers (as of July 2023), 8 percent were used by a senior household and 19 percent were used by households with a disabled member.

With both new housing and rental vouchers, housing needs for seniors and disabled people continue to be addressed, however 7,571 individuals are on the interest list for vouchers and public housing.

Program Effectiveness: During the 5th Cycle, the programs described above served 355 households with new accessible affordable housing, 100 households with home rehabilitation, and provided 2001 HCV to senior households and households with a disabled member. Some households may have been served by the supportive housing available depending on cost. While the services and housing made available during the 5th cycle were effective in serving the targeted populations, data indicates that the needs still exceed the available resources. The following programs in this housing element aim to address more of the need and will depend on resource availability (both public and private) to be effective:
 Program 2 – Variety of Housing Opportunities in High Resource Areas-  Program 3 – Encourage and Facilitate Accessory Dwelling Units  Program 19 – Home Buyer Assistance
 Program 20 – Housing Choice Voucher Incentive Program  Program 22 – Housing Rehabilitation
 Program 24 – Special Needs Housing
 Program 26 – Fair Housing Services
 Program 33 – Mobile Home Parks
 Program 34 – Eviction Protection Program
 Program 37 – At-Risk Housing
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-5-5 Persons with Developmental Disabilities. Living arrangements for disabled persons depend on the severity of the disability. If a disability prevents an individual from working or limits income, then the cost of housing and the costs of modifications are likely to be even more challenging. For this reason, many persons live independently or with other family members. To maintain independent living, disabled persons may need special housing design features, income support, and in-home supportive services for persons with medical conditions. Special design and other considerations for persons with disabilities include single-level units, availability of services, group living opportunities, and proximity to transit. Stakeholders and public meeting participants in the 2020 Analysis of Impediments process highlighted the need for housing for people with developmental disabilities stating that affordability, safety, and landlords who understand their clients are important because it is difficult to obtain housing for this group and evictions are common. For people with developmental disabilities, safety is a key factor and varies from neighborhood to neighborhood even within the same area of the city. The Analysis of Impediments recommended the provision of more disabled-accessible units and housing for persons with mental and physical disabilities. The City of Fresno, along with other jurisdictions in the County, is serviced by the Fresno Center, which provides one point of entry to services for people with developmental disabilities.

The Fresno center partners with the Central Valley Regional Center to help individuals with developmental disabilities. Central Valley Regional Center advocates for clients with developmental disabilities and consults with attorneys regularly on legal issues.

Program Effectiveness: Many of the programs available for seniors and individuals with disabilities also support individuals with developmental disabilities. In order to address more of the need, more financial resources are needed. The following programs in this housing element aim to address more of the need and will depend on resource availability (both public and private) to be effective:
 Program 2 – Variety of Housing Opportunities in High Resource Areas  Program 3 – Encourage and Facilitate Accessory Dwelling Units  Program 19 – Home Buyer Assistance
 Program 20 – Housing Choice Voucher Incentive Program  Program 22 – Housing Rehabilitation
 Program 24 – Special Needs Housing
 Program 26 – Fair Housing Services
 Program 33 – Mobile Home Parks
 Program 34 – Eviction Protection Program
 Program 37 – At-Risk Housing
SECTION 1E-5: REVIEW OF PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS
1E-5-6 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Large Households. Homes consisting of five or more members residing together typically lack adequately sized and affordable housing options. Approximately 17 percent of all households in Fresno have 5 or more members (28,411 households), as of 2020. This consists of 13,282 owner-occupied large households and 15,129 renter-occupied large households. The most critical housing need of large households is access to larger housing units with three or more bedrooms. According to estimates from the U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS), of the 170,137 housing units in the city as of 2020, approximately 68,131 units have at least three bedrooms and an additional 29,738 units have more than four bedrooms. Among these larger units, 69.4 percent are owner occupied (67,935 units) and 30.6 percent are renter occupied (29,934 units). 1 Based on this data, the City concludes that there is a sufficient availability of units suitable for large family households. However, large households would also benefit from the additional development of affordable rental multi-family units with three or more bedrooms. During the previous Housing Element cycle, the City and Housing Authority of the City of Fresno investigated funding sources, developed partnerships, and applied for available local, State, and federal funds to assist in the production of large family units.

Program Effectiveness: While the data indicates that Fresno’s housing stock can accommodate the number of large households in Fresno, data shows a lack of affordable housing for this population. In response to these needs, the City is including Program 24, which seeks to apply additional funding sources for a variety of housing types for special needs groups, including large households. Other programs that could support the provision of affordable housing for large households include the following:
 Program 2 – Variety of Housing Opportunities in High Resource Areas  Program 12 – Local Housing Trust Fund
 Program 13 – Pursue State and Federal Funding Sources for Housing Development  Program 14 – Partnerships with Affordable Housing Developers  Program 19 – Home Buyer Assistance
 Program 20 – Housing Choice Voucher Incentive Program  Program 26 – Fair Housing Services
 Program 34 – Eviction Protection Program
 Program 37 – At-Risk Housing
1 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25042.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-5-7 Single Female-Headed Households. Many single parent households, especially female-headed households, have a greater risk of poverty due to higher family expenses and single-wage incomes. Given the availability of jobs, transit, housing, educational facilities and other services, Fresno has a greater presence of single female-headed households than other cities in the county, except Clovis. As discussed in Section 1E-0: Summary of Needs for the City of Fresno, nearly 31 percent of households in Fresno had single female heads of household in 2020. Additionally, 36 percent of single-female-headed households in Fresno were living under the poverty level (11,582 households). Single-parent households can benefit from most affordable housing programs, including Housing Choice Vouchers (Program 10B), the Homebuyer Assistance Program (Program 8), and the Housing Rehabilitation Program (Program 22). The City offers information on these programs on their website and refers individuals when queried. Assistance programs offered by organizations like First Five Fresno County can also assist these households with securing affordable childcare and housing.

Although the City passed several amendments to the zoning code to encourage the development of more affordable housing near transit and employment centers during the previous planning period, there still has not been enough new development to support the need. The City will continue to provide available resources to single parent households as available and encourage affordable housing in high opportunity neighborhoods. Program Effectiveness: Although the City passed several amendments to the zoning code to encourage the development of more affordable housing near transit and employment centers during the previous planning period, there still had not been enough new development to support the need. However since passage of the zoning code amendment to remove mixed use density caps along transit corridors in 2022, several affordable housing projects in the downtown and along transit corridors have been constructed or are in the pipeline. The City will continue to incentivize this type of development and provide available resources to single parent households as available and while encouraging affordable housing in high opportunity neighborhoods. Programs that could support housing for single female-headed households include the following:
 Program 2 – Variety of Housing Opportunities in High Resource Areas  Program 11 – Incentives for Housing Development
 Program 12 – Local Housing Trust Fund
 Program 13 – Pursue State and Federal Funding Sources for Housing Development  Program 14 – Partnerships with Affordable Housing Developers  Program 19 – Home Buyer Assistance
 Program 20 – Housing Choice Voucher Incentive Program  Program 24 – Special Needs Housing
 Program 25 – Development Code Amendments for Compliance with State Law and to Reduce Barriers to Housing Development
SECTION 1E-5: REVIEW OF PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS
1E-5-8 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Farm Workers. Farmworkers living in urban and suburban areas often have similar needs for affordable rental housing as other lower-wage earners. Due to a combination of limited English language skills and very low household incomes, the ability to obtain housing loans for home purchase is extremely limited. For the same reasons, rentals are also difficult to obtain although farmworkers are more likely to be renters. Research suggests that farmworkers generally experience overcrowded and substandard, potentially hazardous, housing conditions.

As a result, needs are generally accommodated through housing programs and policies that assist low- and very low-income households such as the HCV program (Program 10B) and the Housing Rehabilitation Program (Program 22). In addition, the Fresno Housing Authority manages 194 units of seasonal farmworker housing for migrant workers and 131 units in three year-round housing complexes, exclusively for farm laborers. The City has a relatively small population of farmworkers compared to other jurisdictions in the county but will continue to support regional efforts to provide seasonal and permanent housing facilities for farmworkers.

Program Effectiveness: In the prior planning period, City staff were to conduct a review of the Development Code to verify compliance with the California Employee Housing Act regarding housing for agricultural employees. The Agricultural Employee Housing (AEH) Act was reviewed and no changes to the Development Code were found to be necessary, however the City finds that it can provide clarification between the Code and State Law. In terms of effectiveness in meeting farmworker housing needs, the City did not have access to localized data in the prior period, however the City will be more proactive in reaching out to Fresno Housing and others working to address farmworker housing needs moving forward. This has already started to occur, as the City has applied for Rural Housing Services funding through the US Department of Agriculture for a 54-unit deed restricted farmworker housing project on City-owned land at Ventura and 7th. This Housing Element includes a program to permit employee housing for six or fewer as a residential use and permit agricultural labor housing in all zoning districts where agricultural uses are permitted (Program 25 – Development Code Amendments for Compliance with State Law and to Reduce Barriers to Housing Development). In addition to Program 25, programs that could support housing for farmworkers include the following:
 Program 2 – Variety of Housing Opportunities in High Resource Areas  Program 3 – Encourage and Facilitate Accessory Dwelling Units  Program 11 – Incentives for Housing Development
 Program 19 – Home Buyer Assistance
 Program 20 – Housing Choice Voucher Incentive Program  Program 22 – Housing Rehabilitation
 Program 24 – Special Needs Housing
 Program 25 – Development Code Amendments for Compliance with State Law and to Reduce Barriers to Housing Development
APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-5-9  Program 26 – Fair Housing Services
 Program 33 – Mobile Home Parks
Homeless. Without sufficient protections and affordable housing options, many low-income renters are at risk of experiencing homelessness. The 2023 Point-in-Time (PIT) count estimated that 3,207 persons were experiencing homelessness in the city of Fresno at the time of the count. It is estimated that approximately 1,819 of those residents were unsheltered, representing a 7 percent increase in the unsheltered homeless population in Fresno. The last Point in Time (PIT) count, which was done in 2022, estimated 3,397 individuals experiencing homelessness in the City of Fresno (86.2 percent) out of 3,938 persons experiencing homelessness in Fresno County. Of that number, 1,701 persons were sheltered homeless and 1,696 were unsheltered homeless. The City of Fresno collaborates with service agencies dedicated to providing shelter, housing, and case management services to those in need (Program 9). In addition to coordination at the local level, Fresno has received technical assistance and, in some cases, has been designated a high-priority city as part of initiatives aimed at preventing and ending homelessness.

Between July 2019 and December 2021, the Fresno area received more than $144 million from federal, state, and local sources to increase homelessness services. In 2023, funding that has been allocated to the City in addition to annual funding from HUD’s Community Planning and Development Office includes: Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention (HHAP) Round 1, in the amount of $6,158,246; HHAP Round 2, in the amount of $2,911,171; HHAP Round 3, in the amount of $7,524,257; and an initial disbursement of $5,632,712 from HHAP Round 4. Using state and/or federal emergency funding, the City funded the operations of multiple homeless shelters: Mental Health Systems Triage Center at the Hacienda; Turning Point of Central California’s Golden State Triage Center, Bridge Point Triage Center, Step Up on 99, and Journey Home at Welcome Inn; Sage Commons; and Elevate Community Service’s Villa, Ambassador, and Travel Inn Triage Centers. In 2023, the City’s federally funded programs, designed to assist people experiencing homelessness, assisted 2,464 people with emergency shelter; 269 people with tenant-based rental assistance or rapid rehousing; and 2,837 people with public service activities like street outreach, tenant and landlord counseling, and referral and housing services (all unduplicated). These funds went to the City, the County, the Fresno Madera Continuum of Care, and the Fresno Housing Authority. The City used its funding allocation to add 983 shelter beds and provide emergency and temporary shelter, and transitional housing.

In an effort to provide “housing-first” opportunities for the unsheltered population, the City of Fresno recently approved $1 million in HOME Investment Opportunities (HOME) Investment Partnerships Program funds to be directed to the Fresno Housing Authority for the formation of a local Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) program. The need to provide assistance for the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless through safe low-barrier shelter options, housing-first collaborations, and associated supportive services was a priority area identified in the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan, and in 2022, activities were funded to work toward alleviating housing instability and homelessness for the people of Fresno.

SECTION 1E-5: REVIEW OF PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS
1E-5-10 FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 Program Effectiveness: The 2023 Point-in-Time count estimated that 3,207 persons were experiencing homelessness in the city of Fresno at the time of the count. It is estimated that approximately 1,819 of those residents were unsheltered, representing a 7 percent increase in the unsheltered homeless population in Fresno. The City used its funding allocation to add 983 shelter beds and provide emergency and temporary shelter, and transitional housing, and 40 units of permanent supportive housing. The program was effective in serving the target population, however the need exceeds the resources available. To prevent displacement and homelessness in the City of Fresno, the City has included  Programs 32 - Opportunity to Purchase Act, which allows for qualifying tenants and local nonprofits the opportunity to purchase existing buildings to be used and/or maintained for affordable housing.
 Program 33 – Mobile Home Parks, protects mobile home park residents from excessive rent increases
 Program 35 – Replacement Units, enforces the provision of replacement housing units.  Program 36-Homeless Assistance, invests in various housing and emergency shelters to serve people experiencing homelessness,
 Program 37 – At Risk Housing, preserves at-risk units from converting into market rate housing.

APPENDIX 1E: CITY OF FRESNO
FRESNO MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT | SEPTEMBER 2024 1E-5-11 Table 1E-5.2: Evaluation of Fresno 2015-2023 Housing Element Implementation Measures Program Summary Progress Evaluation Recommendation
1 Adequate Sites to meet 2013-2023 RHNA and
to meet 2008-2013 RHNA. The City will
maintain an inventory of available sites for
residential development and provide it to
prospective residential developers upon request.

The City of Fresno is not responsible for the
actual construction of these units. The City is,
however, responsible for creating a regulatory
environment in which the private market could
build these units. This includes the creation,
adoption, and implementation of General Plan
policies, zoning and development standards,
and/or incentives to encourage the construction
of various types of units.