Agenda packet — Hanford City Council, September 17, 2024 (part 2 of 8)

3 SECTION I

SCOPE OF WORK

City of Hanford August 26, 2024
Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study

www.FinanceDTA.com
appropriate City departments. DTA will consider updates to the City’s current impact fees related to Wastewater Collection and Treatment/Disposal Facilities, Water Supply, Treatment, and Storage Facilities, Parks and Recreation Facilities, Fire Facilities, Police Facilities, Storm Drain Facilities, Refuse/Recycling Facilities, and Circulation (Transportation) Facilities. 3A Survey/Interview City Staff : DTA shall survey/interview City staff to review projected facilities in the City, along with major equipment needs, the timing at which improvements will be needed, and any physical data that would assist in developing the costs estimated below in Subtask 3C. Based upon the results of the surveys and interviews, DTA will verify and, if appropriate, expand the list of new facilities found in the General Plan/CIP to be included within the fee program for the City.
3B Facilities List : Based on the information collected in Subtask 3A, DTA shall prepare a needs list that details the new facilities and equipment to serve new development in the City. 3C Review Cost Estimates : DTA’s engineering and technical staff will, as necessary, consult with City department heads and/or engineering staff or equivalent to ascertain and understand in-house cost data for existing and projected facilities and equipment, apply inflation and cost-of-living escalators to the list of projected public facilities to determine future costs, review and/or refine existing cost data, examine major sources of revenue to fund the construction of new public facilities, and provide a proportional estimate between projected costs for new facilities and estimated revenue from mitigation fees and other sources. 3D Infrastructure or Facilities Improvement Plan : DTA will prepare an Infrastructure or Facilities Improvement Plan that reflects the costs of infrastructure, improvements, real property, financing, other capital and associated appurtenances, equipment, vehicles, furnishings, and other eligible items that are associated with meeting future needs necessary for public facilities as allowed per State statutes.

Deliverable s: Infrastructure or Facilities Improvement Plan; Needs Assessment Report Task 4 – Develop Methodology for Calculating New Fee Amounts DTA’s Fee Study methodology must meet the nexus or benefit requirements of AB 1600, which requires that there be a nexus between the fees imposed, use of the fees, and development projects on which the fees are imposed. Furthermore, there must be a relationship between the amount of the fee and cost of the improvements.

In order to impose a fee as a condition for a development project, the methodology must accomplish the following:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Determine the use to which the fee is to be put (if the use is financing public facilities, the facilities must be identified);
Ascertain if there is a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and type of development project on which the fee is imposed; and
Identify if there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facility and type of development project on which the fee is being imposed.

Page 168 of 1008 ends

4 SECTION I

SCOPE OF WORK

City of Hanford August 26, 2024
Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study

www.FinanceDTA.com
Implicit in these requirements is a stipulation that a public agency cannot impose a fee to cure existing deficiencies in public facilities or improve public facilities beyond what is required based on the specific impacts of new development. The benefit methodology established in this task will be documented in the Final Report.

DTA shall prepare a memo to be submitted to City staff summarizing available methodologies, as well as their respective pros and cons, and providing detailed examples of other cities’, counties’, or agencies’ impact fee programs. Methodologies to review will include programs based on auto vehicle trips or VMT, all mode trips (e.g., auto, transit, bike, and walk), square footages, or household units, etc. The memo will also discuss, as applicable, context-sensitive adjustments and “credits” for capital improvements required as part of a project application. DTA will recommend a Fee Expenditure Plan to ensure that projects can be fully funded and implemented within any required time limits for expenditures of such funds, as well as possible flexibility to allow collected fees to be used to provide the City with a match for grant applications. Finally, the memo will include recommendations for methodology and next steps. Up on review and discussion by City staff, a methodology will be selected.

Deliverable : Memo Summarizing the Fee Methodology Options Task 5 – Determine Fee Levels
This task entails calculating the fee amounts based upon the dwelling unit and commercial/industrial development projections completed in Task 2, facilities needs and costs determined in Task 3, and methodology selected in Task 4. Should the City decide to adopt its fees in a manner consistent with recently approved AB 602, the fee amounts would be calculated on a per square foot basis for residential development.
5A
Calculate Recommended Fee Amounts : DTA shall calculate fees for the City by inputting the data compiled under the preceding tasks and computing each fee to be levied. This work will be done in a spreadsheet format that can be updated annually. DTA will also evaluate this data in comparison to surrounding cities so as to arrive at comparable and acceptable fee levels. 5B Document Fee Derivation : DTA shall document the methodology utilized for the fee calculation model in such a manner that can be easily understood by the City, the public, and various stakeholders. DTA shall prepare written statements documenting the validity of the methodology for deriving each of the fees for the City. These statements will be made to meet the requirements of AB 1600 and documented in the Final Report discussed below. 5C Legal Review : DTA shall coordinate with City staff and counsel regarding their review of the calculation of the fees, the justification of the needs list, and other items as required under the recent Supreme Court case mentioned earlier. DTA expects that counsel will review all aspects of the fee calculation methodology and provide the necessary feedback so that such fees are in compliance with the latest legal codes and court cases.

Task 6 – Prepare Draft and Final Reports
This task entails the preparation of the Draft and Final Reports for consideration by City Council and City staff. Based on the work completed in Tasks 1-5, DTA will prepare the Draft Report for review and consideration by City staff. The Draft Report will be prepared under the standards of AB 1600 and is expected to include an executive summary, po pulation projections, the facilities and improvements list, areas of benefit (if applicable), fee calculations, recommended fee levels, and the

Page 169 of 1008 ends

5 SECTION I

SCOPE OF WORK

City of Hanford August 26, 2024
Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study

www.FinanceDTA.com
suggested process for keeping fees current. After the incorporation of City staff comments and concerns on the Draft Report, DTA will prepare the Final Report for presentation to City Council and City staff.

Deliverable s: Draft and Final Reports
Task 7 – Outline Tasks Required for the Implementation and Administration of the Fee Program DTA will prepare a list of tasks required of the City once it has adopted its new fee program. These tasks include the determination of actual fee levels if the City decides not to impose the maximum fee levels allowed under the Fee Study, the implementation of the fee credit program, and other issues the City may face when implementing the fee program. In addition, DTA shall prepare a Draft Ordinance to adopt the fee program, subject to review and approval by the City's legal counsel.

Task 8 – Attend Up to Three (3) Additional In -Person Meetings, Plus Regular Virtual Meetings for Bi -Weekly Updates
This task entails attendance at a total of three (3) additional in-person meetings with City staff, focus groups, stakeholders, or City Council to present information regarding the status of the impact fee program, Draft Fee Study, and Final Report to obtain input. DTA can attend additional in-person meetings on a time and materials basis at additional cost, as requested by the City, including an additional public meeting and City Council meeting(s). During these meetings, we will take into account community and stakeholder input. For this purpose, DTA will develop handouts for these meetings that summarize the findings and analysis from the Public Review Draft. We shall also schedule standing conference calls or virtual meetings (i.e., bi-weekly) with City staff to stay on track with tasks and deliverables, to the extent allowable under the proposed maximum budget.

Task 9 – Optional Services
DTA shall consult with City staff on an as-needed b asis on minor matters relating to the implementation and utilization of the Fee Study. Such work will be billed on a time and materials basis at additional cost pursuant to the hourly rates listed in the file titled “Proposed Fee Structure and Schedules,” separately enclosed herewith. We will also be available to assist the City in the defense of the fees in the event of an audit or challenge and update the fees, where applicable.

Page 170 of 1008 ends

6 SECTION II

PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE

City of Hanford August 26, 2024
Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study

www.FinanceDTA.com

II PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE
Fees for services shall be charged on an hourly basis according to the rates set forth in the fee schedule below, with invoices being submitted to the City monthly. The estimated fee for the Fee Study shall not exceed $10,000 for Phase 1 and $67,410 for Phase 2 for the Scope of Work, including out-of-pocket expenses, plus an additional $6,491 as a contingency to cover additional tasks, as approved by the City’s Project Manager. Please refer to a copy of our Proposed Fee Structure dated June 18, 2024, for a de tailed fee breakdown . Fees for services shall be charged according to the professional services fee schedule identified in Table 1.

Table 1 : DTA’s Fee Schedule
Labor Category Labor Rate
President/Managing Director $300/Hour
Senior Vice President $275/Hour
Vice President $250/Hour
Senior Manager $210/Hour
Manager $200/Hour
Senior Associate $190/Hour
Associate III $175/Hour
Associate II $165/Hour
Associate I $150/Hour
Research Associate II $140/Hour
Research Associate I $125/Hour
Additional meetings above and beyond the five (5) in-person meetings specified in the Scope of Work shall be billed on a time and materials basis, not to exceed $3,000 per in -person meeting . DTA staff shall also schedule standing conference calls (i.e., bi-weekly) with City staff to stay on track with tasks and deliverables, to the extent allowable under the proposed maximum budget.

Out-of-pocket and administrative expenses are included in the maximum budget listed above and shall be equal to 3% of DTA’s billings for labor, plus travel expenses and any outside vendor payments.

All hourly rates for services apply through June 30, 2025, and are subject to a cost-of-living increase at that time. On or about the first two weeks of each month during which consulting services are rendered hereunder, DTA shall present to the City an invoice covering the current consulting services performed and reimbursable expenses incurred pursua nt to this Notice of Authorization. Each invoice submitted for payment shall contain a brief description of the work billed on that invoice, total billed to date, total paid to date, and amount remaining. Invoices shall be paid by the City within 30 days of the date of each invoice. A 1.2% charge may be imposed monthly against accounts that are not paid within 45 days of the date of each invoice. The prevailing party in any legal action brought by one party against the other and arising out of this Consultant Agreement shall be entitled, in addition to any other rights and remedies it may have, to reimbursement for its expenses, including court costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees.

Page 171 of 1008 ends

7 SECTION II

PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE

City of Hanford August 26, 2024
Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study

www.FinanceDTA.com
A Disclaimer
While DTA has a fiduciary responsibility as a licensed Municipal Advisor, DTA is not, unless otherwise stipulated, acting as the City’s Municipal Advisor. The services discussed herein do not constitute any financial advice or fall under the category of municipal advisory services as defined by the SEC.

B Limitations
B.1 Phase 1 Limitations
The labor costs in the table above include attendance up to one (1) formal in-person meeting with the City Council, virtual meetings with City department personnel, and periodic conference calls with City staff. Attendance at more than one (1) in-person meeting, detailed written responses to resolve disputes, or the preparation of more than one set of major revisions to the Draft Memo will be classified as additional work and may require further billing at the hourly rates identified in Table 1 if the maximum fee level has been exceeded. Other examples of Additional Work include time expended related to obtaining data assigned to the City under “Information to be Provided by the City.”
B.2 Phase 2 Limitations
Additional work requested by the City beyond the tasks identified within the Scope of Work shall be considered out of scope and will be billed on a time and materials basis at the hourly rates identified in Table 1. DTA’s maximum budget includes attendance at a total of four (4) in-person meetings with City staff, plus periodic conference calls with City staff. Attendance at more than four (4) in-person meetings, detailed written responses to resolve disputes, or the preparation of more than one set of major revisions to the Draft Report will be classified as additional work and may require further billing at the hourly rates identified in Table 1 if the maximum fee level has been exceeded. Similarly, in-person meetings shall require additional charges, as noted above. Other examples of additional work shall include:

Additional analyses based on revised assumptions requested by the City, including possible changes in the needs list, infrastructure costs, population projections, future land uses, and related data once the preparation of the Draft Report has been initiated, as well as adjustments to assumptions once the Draft Report has been approved; Additional meetings or lengthy negotiations with st akeholders, including representatives of the BIA or similar representatives of the development community; Tasks related to litigation by stakeholders should it occur once the Fee Study has been completed;
Time expended related to obtaining data assigned to the City under “Information to be Provided by the City”;
Any work related to litigation or any claim or liability arising out of or incident to the April 12, 2024, U.S. Supreme Court decision in Sheetz vs. County of El Dorado asking the California courts to reevaluate impact fees ado pted under the California Mitigation Act to ensure they do not violate the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment Takings Clause, including but not limited to expert witness services; Optional services, as listed in the City’s RFP, including consultation with Ctiy staff on minor matters relating to the implementation and utilization of the study, assistance

Page 172 of 1008 ends

8 SECTION II

PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE

City of Hanford August 26, 2024
Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study

www.FinanceDTA.com
in the defense of fees in the event of an audit or other challenge, and fee updates, where applicable; and
Actual implementation of the fee program(s).

The maximum fee listed above assumes the review and implementation of the fee program with a schedule between initiation of services and public outreach that is within the proposed time frame according to the City ’s specifications .

Page 173 of 1008 ends

99 ALMADEN BOULEVARD, SUITE 875
SAN JOSE, CA 95113
PHONE : (800) 969 -4DTA
www.FinanceDTA.com
Public Finance
Public -Private Partnerships
Development Economics
Clean Energy Bonds

Page 174 of 1008 ends

1 PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE AND

SCHEDULES

City of Hanford June 18, 2024
Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study

www.FinanceDTA.com

PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE AND SCHEDULES
Fees for services shall be charged on an hourly basis according to the rates set forth in the fee schedule below, with invoices being submitted to the City monthly. The estimated fee for the Fee Study shall not exceed $67,410 for the Scope of Work, including out-of-pocket expenses, plus an additional $6,491 as a contingency to cover additional tasks, as approved by the City’s Project Manager. Notably, the figures listed in Table 1 for each task are just estimates and the charges assigned to any one task may be transferred to another task, as long as the overall invoices submitted by DTA do not exceed $ 73,901 , including expenses . This estimated fee is subject to a 60-day price guarantee. Fees for services shall be charged according to the professional services fee schedule identified in Table 2.

Table 1: Proposed Budget
Description Title Hourly Rate Est. Hours Total Cost Task #1: Development of Project
Strategy and Kickoff Meeting
President/MD $300 4 $1,200
Vice President $250 3 $750
Manager $200 8 $1,600
Associate II $165 6 $990
Task 1 21 $4,540
Task #2: Develop Population and
Demographic Projections
President/MD $300 6 $1,800
Vice President $250 4 $1,000
Manager $200 12 $2,400
Associate II $165 10 $1,650
Task 2 32 $6,850
Task #3: Review Facility/Capital
Needs and Levels of Service
President/MD $300 6 $1,800
Vice President $250 8 $2,000
Manager $200 16 $3,200
Associate II $165 12 $1,980
Task 3 42 $8,980
Task #4: Develop Methodology for
Calculating New Fee Amounts
President/MD $300 6 $1,800
Vice President $250 4 $1,000
Manager $200 18 $3,600
Associate II $165 16 $2,640
Task 4 44 $9,040
Task #5: Determine Fee Levels and
Document Comparative Fees
President/MD $300 6 $1,800
Vice President $250 4 $1,000
Manager $200 16 $3,200
Associate II $165 12 $1,980
Task 5 38 $7,980
Task #6: Prepare Draft and Final
Impact Fee Methodology Reports
President/MD $300 6 $1,800
Vice President $250 4 $1,000
Manager $200 18 $3,600
Associate II $165 16 $2,640
Task 6 44 $9,040

Page 175 of 1008 ends

2 PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE AND

SCHEDULES

City of Hanford June 18, 2024
Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study

www.FinanceDTA.com
Description Title Hourly Rate Est. Hours Total Cost Task #7: Outline Tasks Required for
the Implementation and
Administration of the Fee Program
President/MD $300 8 $2,400
Vice President $250 4 $1,000
Manager $200 16 $3,200
Associate II $165 12 $1,980
Task 7 40 $8,580
Task #8: Attend Up to Three (3)
Additional In-Person Meetings, Plus
Regular Virtual Meetings for
Bi-Weekly Updates
President/MD $300 12 $3,600
Vice President $250 6 $1,500
Manager $200 24 $4,800
Associate II $165 0 $0
Task 8 42 $9,900
Total Not to Exceed
President/MD $300 54 $16,200
Vice President $250 37 $9,250
Manager $200 128 $25,600
Associate II $165 84 $13,860
Subtotal 303 $64,910
Out-of-Pocket Expenses (Maximum) $2,500
Contingency (10%) $6,491
Total Not to Exceed $73,901
Note:

1. Any use of the contingency line item will have to be approved (prior to added work) by the City’s Project Manager, so that the City can better track any additional tasks assigned to DTA by the City.

For your reference, DTA’s hourly rate schedule is provided in the table below.

Table 2: DTA’s Fee Schedule
Labor Category Labor Rate
President/Managing Director $300/Hour
Senior Vice President $275/Hour
Vice President $250/Hour
Senior Manager $210/Hour
Manager $200/Hour
Senior Associate $190/Hour
Associate III $175/Hour
Associate II $165/Hour
Associate I $150/Hour
Research Associate II $140/Hour
Research Associate I $125/Hour
Additional meetings above and beyond the four (4) in-person meetings specified in the Scope of Work, including the kickoff meeting, shall be billed on a time and materials basis, not to exceed $3,000 per in -person meeting . DTA staff shall also schedule standing conferenc e calls (i.e., bi-weekly) with City staff to stay on track with tasks and deliverables, to the extent allowable under the proposed maximum budget.

Page 176 of 1008 ends

3 PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE AND

SCHEDULES

City of Hanford June 18, 2024
Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study

www.FinanceDTA.com
Out-of-pocket and administrative expenses are included in the maximum budget listed above and shall be equal to 3% of DTA’s billings for labor, plus travel expenses and any outside vendor payments.

A Disclaimer
While DTA has a fiduciary responsibility as a licensed Municipal Advisor, DTA is not, unless otherwise stipulated, acting as the City’s Municipal Advisor. The services discussed herein do not constitute any financial advice or fall under the category of municipal advisory services as defined by the SEC.

B Limitations
Additional work requested by the City beyond the tasks identified within the Scope of Work shall be considered out of scope and will be billed on a time and materials basis at the hourly rates identified in Table 2. The labor costs in Table 1 include attendance at a total of four (4) in-person meetings with City staff, plus periodic conference calls with City staff. Attendance at more than four (4) in-person meetings, detailed written responses to resolve disputes, or the preparation of more than one set of major revisions to the Draft Report will be classified as additional work and may require further billing at the hourly rates identified in Table 2 if the maximum fee level has been exceeded. Similarly, in-person meetings shall require additional charges, as noted above. Other examples of additional work shall include:

Additional analyses based on revised assumptions requested by the City, including possible changes in the needs list, infrastructure costs, population projections, future land uses, and related data once the preparation of the Draft Report has been initiated, as well as adjustments to assumptions once the Draft Report has been approved; Additional meetings or lengthy negotiations with stakeholders, including representatives of the BIA or similar representatives of the development community; Tasks related to litigation by stakeholders should it occur once the Fee Study has been completed; Time expended related to obtaining data assigned to the City under “Information to be Provided by the City”;
Any work related to litigation or any claim or liability arising out of or incident to the April 12, 2024, U.S. Supreme Court decision in Sheetz vs. County of El Dorado asking the California courts to reevaluate impact fees adopted under the California Mitigation Act to ensure they do not violate the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment Takings Clause, including but not limited to expert witness services;

Page 177 of 1008 ends

4 PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE AND

SCHEDULES

City of Hanford June 18, 2024
Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study

www.FinanceDTA.com
Optional services, as listed in the City’s RFP, including consultation with Ctiy staff on minor matters relating to the implementation and utilization of the study, assistance in the defense of fees in the event of an audit or other challenge, and fee updates, where applicable; and Actual implementation of the fee program(s).

Page 178 of 1008 ends

13.A.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 9/17/2024 AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING

SUBJECT:

A public hearing to accept comments related to the Draft Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element for 2024-2032 and direction to staff to submit the document to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for review.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Council accept the Staff Report and Presentation.

2. Open the public hearing for receiving public comments.

3. Close the public hearing, discuss the matter, and recommend any changes to the Draft.

4. By Motion, authorize staff to submit the 2024-2032 Draft Housing Element and the Fair Housing Analysis to HCD for review and approval.

Recommended Motion:

1. I move to authorize staff to submit the 2024-2023 Draft Housing Element and the Fair Housing Analysis to HCD for review and approval.

I. BACKGROUND

The Housing Element is a State mandated element of the City’s General Plan containing analysis, policies, and programs with the objective to preserve, improve, and develop housing for all economic segments of the community.

The current update covers the period 2024-2032 (Sixth Cycle).

The Draft Housing Element has been prepared in accordance with State Housing Element Law and Guidelines of the State Department of Housing and Community Development Department (HCD). Upon approval of the Draft staff will send the Draft to HCD for review, which review could take up to 90 days.

HCD may approve the Draft, or submit comments requiring revisions to the Draft. A review of the revised Draft would take 60 days for review. Upon obtaining the letter of statutory compliance from HCD, the Final Housing Element will be placed before the Planning Commission and the City Council for Adoption. Once adopted, a copy of the Housing Element will be submitted to HCD for Certification.

A PowerPoint presentation will be made at the meeting showing relevant Tables and Figures in support

Page 179 of 1008 ends

of the presentation by city staff and/or consultant.

II. FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS

California State Law AB 686 created new requirements for all housing elements revised on or after January 1, 2021 to contain an Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) analysis. Under State law, affirmatively further fair housing means “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combatting discrimination, to facilitate deliberate actions to explicitly address, combat, and relieve disparities resulting from past patterns of segregation to foster more inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics”.

The Housing Element analysis must include a Fair Housing Analysis. The city’s consultant has prepared the Housing Element and a Fair Housing Analysis addressing the following mandated topics:

1. Outreach

2. Assessment of Fair Housing
a. Key Data and Background Information
b. Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach Capacity
c. Integration and Segregation Patterns and Trends
d. Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty e. Disparities in Access to Opportunity
f. Disproportionate Housing Needs in the Jurisdiction g. Displacement Risk

3. Sites Inventory

4. Identification of Contributing Factors, Goals and Actions

FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS - FINDINGS

1. Diversity: Diversity captures the racial and ethnic diversity of a geographic area.

The City of Hanford is about as diverse as Kings County. Nearly half of the population, 44%, identifies as Hispanic or Latino. 38.5% identify as White. This is followed by a larger share of people that identify as Asian at 7.4% compared to Kings County’s 3.6%. Hanford has similar share of Black or African Americans, accounting for 5.7% (compared to Kings County’s share of 5.9%). Hanford has a small percentage of American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and other races.

2. GINI Index: The GINI index is a measure of the extent to which the distribution of income among families/households within a community deviate from a perfect equal distribution. The scale is from 0 to 1, with 0 representing perfect equality and 1 representing the highest possible level of inequality. The Gini coefficient for California is 0.49. Both Kings County and the City of Hanford have a Gini index is

0.41. This shows that the City has similar levels of inequality as the state and county, though Hanford and Kings County slightly outperform the state overall.

3. Dissimilarity Index: Dissimilarity suggests that racial or ethnic groups are more unevenly distributed (for example, they tend to live in different neighborhoods). The northern portions of Hanford have low segregation while southern portions have higher segregation and poverty.

Racially or Ethnically Concentrated area of Poverty (R/ECAP): The racial/ethnic concentration threshold must have a non-White population of 50 percent or more within a metropolitan or a micropolitan area.

Outside of these areas, where the non-White populations are likely to be much smaller, the threshold is set at 20 percent. Kings County and its cities are classified as suburban with a population not exceeding 1 million in a Statistical Metropolitan Area less than 2 million. A neighborhood (Census tract) can also be a R/ECAP if it has a poverty rate that exceeds 40 percent or more or is three or more times the average

Page 180 of 1008 ends

tract poverty rate for the metropolitan/micropolitan area, whichever threshold is lower. Of the 13 census tracts in the City of Hanford, only Census Tract 11 is identified as a R/ECAP.

4. Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAA): RCAA exists when the population has a median household income of $125,000 and that is 80 percent or more, White. Census tracts 6.03 and 6.04 are identified as RCAAs. The RCAAs generally coincide with TCAC/HCD highest-resource areas.

Disparities in Access to Opportunities: The City of Hanford presents a complex socio-economic landscape, as evidenced by its mixed resource distribution in TCAC and HCD Opportunity Maps. The north and northwest portions of the city are designated as Highest Resource and High Resource. The south and southeast portions of the city are designated as Low Resource and some Moderate Resource. Additionally, there is one census tract split by Highway 198 that is designated as High Segregation and Poverty.

5. Disproportionate Housing Needs: Housing tenure (owner vs. renter) influences several aspects of the local housing market. Residential mobility is influenced by tenure, with ownership housing evidencing a lower turnover rate than rental housing. The vacancy rate also indicates the match between the demand and supply of housing. Vacancy rates of 5% to 6% for rental housing and 1.5% to

2.0% for ownership housing are generally considered to be optimum. A higher vacancy rate may indicate an excess supply of units, a softer market, and result in lower housing prices. A lower vacancy rate may indicate a shortage of housing and high competition for available housing, which generally leads to higher housing prices and diminished affordability.

Hanford consists of more owners who occupy their own units in comparison to Kings County where about half of homeowners occupied their own unit. In turn, renter-occupied housing units are less common in the City of Hanford compared to Kings County. These conditions, areas with high owner occupancy and low vacancy rates, may see appreciating property values.

6. Displacement: The City of Hanford is at risk of displacement in the southern and central areas.

While one tract contains 1-income group displacement risk, the rest of city is at lower risk of displacement. Neighboring areas have lower risks of displacement as well. Displacement risk refers to the likelihood of residents, particularly low-income renter households, being forced to move out of their neighborhoods due to various factors. This concept is often evaluated in the context of gentrification, rising housing costs, and changing neighborhood dynamics.

7. Site Inventory (Vacant Sites 6,000 Sq. Ft. or Greater): The City of Hanford is identified as Racially Integrated on the east and west with Low-Medium Segregation running from north to south. A number of tracts in the north and center lack sufficient data. There is no identified High POC or High White Segregation. Hanford is not in flood hazard or fire hazard severity zones.

8. Identification of Contributing Factors, Goals and Actions:

Based on the issues identified in the Fair Housing Analysis, the following are the top 5 issues to be addressed through the programs in the Housing Plan:

1. Maintaining and preserving the existing affordable housing stock;

2. Assisting in the provision of housing;

3. Removing governmental constraints, as necessary;

4. Providing adequate sites to achieve a variety and diversity of housing; and

5. Promoting equal housing opportunity.

The new Housing Element has proposed a list Housing Plan (Chapter VI of Housing Element), including

Page 181 of 1008 ends

policies and programs augmenting Fair Housing goals of the City.

III. HOUSING ELEMENT

2024-2032 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT (RHNA) - 6th CYCLE The Housing Element includes an analysis of new Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) requirements under the 6th Cycle as shown in Table 1 and 2 below:

RHNA is a state requirement and the allocation of units are prepared, generally, by Council of Governments and subsequently approved by the State. Regulations for the construction of the housing units should be facilitated by each jurisdiction in each RHNA period. The units may be constructed by the private sector, non-profits, housing authorities, or by the jurisdiction (cities/counties) through grant monies. A certified Housing Element enables the jurisdictions to be eligible to seek various types of grants from the State and Federal governments. Jurisdictions must submit an annual progress report to HCD on the progress of the implementation of the Housing Element.

Table 1
RHNA Allocations by Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction
RHNA
Allocation
Percent of
Total
Avenal 277 3%
Corcoran 715 8%
Hanford 5,547 59%
Lemoore 2,329 25%
Unincorporated 561 6%
TOTAL 9,429 100%

Table 2
RHNA Allocation by Income Category x Jurisdiction
Extremely
Low*
Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate Total Jurisdiction Units Units % Units % Units % Units % Units
Avenal 24 48 17.3% 37 13.3% 55 20.0% 137 49.4% 277
Corcoran 61 122 17.1% 116 16.3% 118 16.5% 359 50.2% 715 Hanford 685 1,369 24.7% 993 17.9% 1,066 19.2% 2,119 38.2% 5,547 Lemoore 293 586 25.1% 437 18.8% 408 17.5% 898 38.6% 2,329 Unincorporated 66 132 23.5% 89 15.9% 106 18.9% 234 41.8% 561 County totals 1,129 2,257 23.9% 1,672 17.7% 1,753 18.6% 3,747 39.7% 9,429

Page 182 of 1008 ends

* Need for Extremely Low-Income Units is considered 50% of Very Low-Income Units by Law. Total number of units listed includes ELI, as part of VLI.

Quantified Objectives:

Based on the RHNA Allocation, a Table showing quantified objectives including New Construction (to match RHNA allocation), Additional New Construction, Rehabilitation of existing units, Conservation/Preservation of existing affordable housing stock, such as mobile homes, throughout the planning period will be prepared.

IV. IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS:

The new Housing Element has proposed a list of Policies and Programs as part of the Housing Plan (Chapter VI of Housing Element), augmenting Fair Housing goals of the City. Some of the existing housing programs from the previous Housing Element Cycle are being continued. The list of programs would be revised based on review and recommendations received from HCD. The programs are intended to bring the City’s codes and housing approvals consistent with State Law.

V. MONITORING:

The city is required to submit to HCD Annual Progress Reports on implementation of the Housing Element.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Attachment 1 - Draft MJ Housing Element 2024-2032

Page 183 of 1008 ends

2024 – 2032 HOUSING ELEMENT

County of Kings
City of Avenal
City of Corcoran
City of Hanford
City of Lemoore

Draft | July 2024

Page 184 of 1008 ends

Acknowledgements
The 2024-2032 Kings County Housing Element update is a cooperative effort of Kings County and the Cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore.

County of Kings
Board of Supervisors Planning Commission
Richard Valle, Chair Riley Jones, Chair
Doug Verboon, Vice Chair April Bryant, Vice Chair
Joe Neves, Supervisor Jim Maciel, Commissioner
Rusty Robinson, Supervisor Steven Dias, Commissioner
Richard Fagundes, Supervisor William Lynch, Commissioner City of Avenal
City Council Planning Commission
Alvaro Preciado, Mayor Tyler Naranjo, Chair
Alejandro Ramirez, Mayor Pro Tem Amado Cervantes, Vice Chair Pablo Hernandez, Councilmember Sergio Ramirez, Commissioner Ricardo Verdugo, Councilmember Jose Barrera, Commissioner Lou Gravelle, Councilmember
City of Corcoran
City Council Planning Commission
Jeanette Zamora-Bragg, Mayor Karl Kassner, Chair
Patricia Nolen, Vice Mayor Kaitlyn Frazier, Vice Chair
Greag Ojeda, Councilmember David Bega, Commissioner
Sidonio "Sid" Palmerin, Councilmember Karen Frey, Commissioner Jerry Robertson, Councilmember Janet Watkins, Commissioner

City of Hanford
City Council Planning Commission
Travis Paden, Mayor Martin Devine, Chair
Mark Kairis, Vice Mayor Gunther Norris, Vice Chair
Kailish Morrow, Councilmember Richard Douglas, Commissioner Diane Sharp, Councilmember Gary Curtis, Commissioner
Lou Martinez, Councilmember Dennis Ham, Commissioner

City of Lemoore
City Council Planning Commission
Patricia Matthews, Mayor Mitchell Couch, Chair
Frank Gornick, Mayor Pro Tem Ray Etchegoin, Vice Chair
Stuart Lyons, Council member Joseph Brewer, Commissioner David Orth, Council member Robert Clement, Commissioner Johnny Garza, Council member Ron Meade, Commissioner

Page 185 of 1008 ends

Technical Steering Committee

County of Kings
Chuck Kinney, Director of Community Development
Alex Hernandez, Deputy Director – Planning
Noelle Tomlinson, Planner II
Maddison Faria, GIS Specialist

City of Avenal
Antony V Lopez, City Manager
Kao Nou Yang, Community and Economic Development Director Maria ‘Angie’ Oritz, City Clerk

City of Corcoran
Kevin Tromborg, Community Development Director/Building Official

City of Hanford
Jason Waters, Deputy City Manager
Gabrielle Myers, Senior Planner
Sandra Lerma-Martinez, Housing Administrative Analyst

City of Lemoore
Kristie Bailey, Management Analyst Steve Brandt, AICP, Contract City Planner

Housing Element Consultants:

Realty Planners Group

Issac A. George, Director of Planning
Bindu Philip, Senior Planner
Amanda Philip, Associate Planner
Brendan Norton, Associate Planner
Luis F Garcia-Perez, Assistant Planner

Page 186 of 1008 ends

Page 187 of 1008 ends

Kings County and Cities of iv 2024-2032
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1. Introduction.................................................................................................. 1-1 A. Planning Context ................................................................................................................ 1-1 B. Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 1-3 C. Community Involvement .................................................................................................... 1-5 Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment ........................................................................... 2-1 A. Population and Household Characteristics ......................................................................... 2-1 B. Employment Trends ........................................................................................................... 2-2 C. Housing Characteristics ..................................................................................................... 2-4 D. Special Needs Groups ....................................................................................................... 2-13 E. Analysis of At-Risk Housing ............................................................................................. 2-26 F. Housing Growth Needs ..................................................................................................... 2-28 Chapter 3. Resources and Opportunities ........................................................................ 3-1 A. Land Resources .................................................................................................................. 3-1 B. Financial and Administrative Resources ............................................................................ 3-7 C. Opportunities for Energy Conservation ............................................................................. 3-9 D. Housing Densities, Potential Growth and Vacant Land .................................................... 3-11 Chapter 4. Constraints ................................................................................................... 4-1 A. Governmental Constraints ................................................................................................. 4-1 B. Non-Governmental Constraints........................................................................................ 4-21 C. Fair Housing .................................................................................................................... 4-25 Chapter 5. Housing Plan ................................................................................................ 5-1 A. Goals and Policies ............................................................................................................... 5-1 B. Housing Programs .............................................................................................................. 5-4 C. Quantified Objectives ....................................................................................................... 5-60 Chapter 6. Glossary of Terms ........................................................................................ 6-1

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Evaluation of the Prior Housing Element
Appendix B: Land Inventory
Appendix C: Public Participation Summary
Appendix 1: County of Kings FHA
Appendix 2: City of Avenal FHA
Appendix 3: City of Corcoran FHA
Appendix 4: City of Hanford FHA
Appendix 5: City of Lemoore FHA

Page 188 of 1008 ends

2024-2032 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1 Kings County Household Population Growth, 1990-2020 2-1 Table 2-2 Age Distribution 2-2
Table 2-3 Race and Ethnicity 2-3
Table 2-4 Household Characteristics 2-4
Table 2-5 Overcrowding by Tenure 2-5
Table 2-6 Median Household Income 2-5
Table 2-7 Household Income Distribution by Tenure 2-6 Table 2-8 Household Overpayment by Tenure 2-7
Table 2-9 Major Employers – Avenal 2-9
Table 2-10 Occupations Held by Civilians 2-10
Table 2-11 Travel Time to Work 2-11
Table 2-12 Work Locations of City/County Resident Workers 2-11 Table 2-13 Housing Units by Type, 2020 2-12
Table 2-14 Household Tenure and Vacancy Rates 2-13
Table 2-15 Tenure by Year Structure Built 2-15
Table 2-16 Housing Conditions 2-16
Table 2-17 Occupied Housing Units Lacking Complete Plumbing or Kitchen Facilities 2-16 Table 2-18 Housing Affordability in Kings County, 2022 2-17 Table 2-19 Kings County Residential Sale Prices, January-June 2023 2-18 Table 2-20 King County Residential Rents, 2023 2-19 Table 2-21 Elderly Households by Tenure 2-21
Table 2-22 Household Type by Tenure 2-23
Table 2-23 Household Size by Tenure 2-24
Table 2-24 Leading Agricultural Commodities, Kings County 2-25 Table 2-25 Agricultural Employment by Jurisdiction 2-26 Table 2-26 Hired Farm Labor-Workers, Kings County 2-26 Table 2-27 Disabilities by Age 2-29
Table 2-28 Persons with Developmental Disabilities Receiving Services by Residential Type 2021 2-30
Table 2-29 Homeless Persons 2-31
Table 2-30 Shelter Facilities in Kings County 2-32
Table 2-31 Assisted Housing Units 2-35
Table 2-32 Regional Housing Needs, 2024-2032 2-37

Table 3-1 Potential New Dwelling Units by Zone 3-17 Table 3-2 Land Inventory and RHNA Targets 3-18

Table 4-1 General Plan Residential Land Use Categories 4-2 Table 4-2 Permitted Residential Development by Zoning District 4-4 Table 4-3 Residential Development Standards 4-17
Table 4-4 Residential Parking Standards 4-18
Table 4-5 Development Review Processing 4-22
Table 4-6 Residential Development Fees 4-27
Table 4-7 On-Site and Off-Site Improvements 4-28

Page 189 of 1008 ends

Kings County and Cities of vii 2024-2032
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

Table 5-1 Quantified Objectives 2016-2024 5-60

Page 190 of 1008 ends

Page 191 of 1008 ends

Kings County and Cities of 1-1 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Chapter 1. Introduction
A. Planning Context
Kings County is located within the agriculturally rich San Joaquin Valley, with Fresno County to the north and west, Tulare County to the east, and Kern County to the south. Created in 1893, Kings County was carved from the western portion of Tulare County and later added another 100 sq uare miles from Fresno County. The Kings River, from which the County derives its name, runs along the northern edges and flows south towards the center of the County. Historically, this river flowed farther south to what was once Tulare Lake. Now referred to as the Tulare Lake Basin, this area is extensively used for agricultural crop production.

Kings County is comprised of four cities (Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore), four unincorporated community service areas (Armona, Home Garden, Kettleman City, and Stratford), and a few other smaller community pockets. According to the California Department of Finance, approximately 150,000 people lived in Kings County as of January 2015, with approximately 13,500 of those housed within the three state prison facilities. The Lemoore Naval Air Station houses approximately 4,900 naval personnel and dependents in approximately 1,630 housing units, while the Santa Rosa Rancheria is home to about 500 Tachi Yokut Indians on 1,535 acres of tribal land.

Access through the County and to other major outside destinations is provided by a network of highways and railroads. While Interstate 5 and State Route 99 provide routes to the Los Angeles and San Francisco Bay metropolitan areas, State Route 41 connects the valley with the Central Coast and Yosemite National Park. State Route 198 provides access to Sequoia National Park. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad connects Kings County to Sacramento and Bakersfield while the San Joaquin Valley Railroad connects to Huron to the west and Visalia and Porterville to the east. The County’s transportation network has pla yed a key role in its economic development. Agriculture remains the predominant landscape of Kings County, with approximately 84% of its land area used for agriculture. While dairy products are the County’s leading commodity, the agricultural industry is diversified with cotton, cattle, field crops, seeds, fruit & nuts, vegetables, apiary products, livestock & poultry, and other related products also having a significant presence.

As Kings County begins the 2024- 2032 planning period, water management is a critical issue in Kings County, given its urban and agricultural importance and the need to balance water use with environmental conservation. As per the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS), Kings County is not affected by drought with August 2023 recorded as the second wettest month in 129 years, and January 2023 to August 2023 was the seventh wettest period in 129 years.

Page 192 of 1008 ends

Chapter 1. Introduction
2024-2032 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Figure 1 – Regional Location Map

Note: General locational map. Des not include recent annexations and boundaries.

I
I
I L----...

Haval Air Station
Lemoo re
FRESNO
COUNTY
41 I
I

I HOME GARDEN I I
l ;---•
~ I
•• I
" I
I
I
~.~ ~ I
<·~~ ~ \ .. . I CORCORAN I 1-.\
COUNTY ,,,,.
f
I I
I
" TULARE
COUNTY
D Community Boundary
D City Boundary
~ Naval Air Station Lemoore Boundary
"'=== ==F= =1 G Tribal Lands

Page 193 of 1008 ends

B. Methodology
Kings County and Cities of 1-3 2024-2032
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
B. Methodology

1. Purpose and Statutory Authority
The Housing Element is mandated by §§65580-65589 of the California Government Code. State Housing Element law requires that each city and county identify and analyze existing and projected housing needs within their jurisdiction and prepare goals, policies, programs and quantified objectives to further the development, improvement, and preservation of housing. To that end, s tate law requires that the housing element:
• Identify adequate sites to facilitate and encourage the development, maintenance and improvement of housing for households of all economic levels, including persons with special needs;
• Remove, as legally feasible and appropriate, governmental constraints to the production, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons of all income levels; • Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of low - and moderate- income households;
• Conserve and improve the condition of housing and neighborhoods, including existing affordable housing;
• Promote equal housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability; and • Preserve lower-income publicly-assisted housing developments within each community.

The Housing Element is organized into the following major sections:
• Analysis of the demographic, housing, and special needs characteristics and trends in Kings County jurisdictions (Chapter 2).
• Analysis of land, financial, and organizational resources available to address the housing goals in Kings County (Chapter 3).
• Review of potential market, governmental, and environmental constraints that affect Kings County jurisdictions’ ability to address their housing needs (Chapter 4). • The Housing Plan to address identified housing needs, including housing goals, policies and programs (Chapter 5).
• Evaluation of each jurisdiction’s accomplishments toward meeting the goals and objectives set forth in the previous Housing Element (Appendix A). • A detailed land inventory of suitable sites for housing development (Appendix B).

2. Framework for the Joint Kings County Housing Element In California, it is typical for each city or county to prepare and maintain its own General Plan and housing element. However, in Kings County the four cities and the County have chosen to collectively prepare a

Page 194 of 1008 ends

Chapter 1. Introduction
2024-2032 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
joint Countywide housing element with administrative support from the Kings County Community Development Agency. While unusual, this collaborative approach to the housing element has a number of advantages, including the following:
• Over the past several decades, the trend in dealing with complex public policy issues has been toward a regional approach to problem-solving. Existing housing element law embodies this principle through the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) process. The Senate Bill 375 establishes a framework for regional planning and “Sustainable Communities Strategies” intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through land use, housing and transportation policies.
• Housing markets are regional in nature and do not stop at jurisdictional boundaries.

Coordinated regional strategies offer the potential to be more effective in addressing housing needs than when each jurisdiction operates individually. • In difficult economic times such as these, economies of scale accruing from shared resources can result in significant cost savings to jurisdictions that jointly prepare housing elements.

Kings County and the local governments collaborate together to integrate land use planning, aligning general plans and zoning ordinances , engaging communities and stakeholders to create more sustainable and interconnected communities within the County.

3. Data Sources
In preparing the Housing Element, various sources of information were consulted. The 2020 decennial Census and the annual American Community Survey updates were used as the primary sources of demographic information. However, other sources supplemented the Census data, including the following:
• Housing conditions surveys conducted by the jurisdictions; • Population and housing data from the California Department of Finance (DOF); • Employment data from the California Employment Development Department (EDD); • Local economic data from the Kings County Economic Development Corporation; • Housing market data from the Kings County Board of Realtors; • Population and housing characteristics from Naval Air Station Lemoore; • Point-in-time homeless data provided by Kings/Tulare Continuum of Care; • Land use data based on the General Plans and zoning ordinances of each jurisdiction; and • Regional housing needs information prepared by the Kings County Association of Governments.

4. Relationship to the General Plans
Government Code Section 65302.1 is a critical component to addressing housing challenges and ensuring that local governments plan for the development of housing, especially affordable housing, in a comprehensive and coordinated manner within the context of their General Plans. State law requires that the Housing Element be consistent with other elements of jurisdictions’ G eneral Plans. Policies and

Page 195 of 1008 ends

C. Community Involvement
Kings County and Cities of 1-5 2024-2032
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
programs set forth in this Housing Element are consistent with policies and programs in other elements of the respective G eneral Plans. However, if during the implementation of this Housing Element any inconsistencies with other portions of the General Plans are identified, appropriate amendments to maintain internal consistency will be proposed. This Housing Element supports the provisions of state law through its assessment of housing needs, setting housing goals and policies, analysis of available resources and constraints, identification of sites for development of a variety of housing types in appropriate locations consistent with the regional growth forecast, regional housing needs plan, and regional transportation plans.

This housing element also includes policies and programs aimed at promoting and faci litating the development of affordable housing units for various income levels. It also includes the environmental review component to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Government Code Sec. 65302 specifies 7 mandatory elements that must be included in the General Plan, including the housing element. These elements help local governments make informed decisions about land use, transportation, housing, conservation, open space and more.

C. Community Involvement
State law requires local governments to make a diligent effort to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element. To that end, each jurisdiction has provided opportunities for residents, interested parties, and local officials to participate in the update process and offer recommendations regarding housing needs and strategies to address those needs.

The public participation process for this Housing Element involved four major stages:

1. Public workshops and meetings in each of the four cities and the unincorporated County during the preparation of the Draft Housing Element;

2. Publication of the Draft Housing Element and subsequent review by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD);

3. Revisions to the Housing Element to address comments from HCD and publication of a revised Draft Housing Element;

4. Public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council of each city and the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors of Kings County prior to adoption of the final Housing Element.

For details regarding the public meetings and hearings, as well as a summary of issues raised during the update process, please refer to Appendix C: Public Participation Summary.

1. Recent Public Meetings
Specific public workshops or meetings were held recently in Kings County and each of the jurisdictions on the housing element and fair housing assessment with details as follows:
• Avenal – Town Hall Meeting on November 8, 2023, at 6:00 pm - Avenal Theater, 233 E.

Kings St., Avenal, 93204
• Corcoran – Planning Commission Meeting on November 20, 2023, at 5:30 pm - Corcoran City Council Chambers, 1015 Chittenden Ave., Corcoran, 93212

Page 196 of 1008 ends

Chapter 1. Introduction
2024-2032 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
• Hanford – Joint Study with City Council & Planning Commission in attendance on November 6, 2023, at 4:00 pm - Hanford City Hall-Training Room 319 N. Douty St., Hanford, 93230 • Lemoore – City Council Meeting on November 7, 2023, at 5:30 pm - Lemoore City Council Chambers, 429 C Street, Lemoore, 93245
• Kings County – Planning Commission Meeting on November 6, 2023, at 7:00 pm - Kings County Government Center, Administration Building #1 Multi-Purpose Room, 1400 W. Lacey Blvd., Hanford, 93230
Notices of the meetings are attached in Appendix C: Public Participation Summary.

Hanford
Several members of the community attended the meeting, but no questions or concerns were raised by those present. The City Council and the Planning Commission discussed topics concerning affordability, available assistance to the public such as fi rst-time home-buyer programs, housing income categories, and income levels to qualify for affordable housing assistance. Questions were answered by both the consultant and staff.

County of Kings
Members of the public did not attend the meeting. The Planning Commission discussed several topics on the Housing Element and the Fair Housing Analysis.

Lemoore
Several members of the community were present in the audience, but no questions or concerns were raised by those present. The City Council and the Planning Commission discussed several topics relating to the housing element and fair housing.

Avenal
Several members of the community attended the meeting and actively participated in discussion on several aspects of Housing Element and Fair housing analysis. Staff answered questions from the public regarding the Housing Element process and a fter consultant presentation Director of Community & Economic Development Department, Kao Nou Yang, closed the meeting encouraging participants to send comments by mail or email.

Corcoran
Members of the community did not attend the meeting. The Planning Commission discussed several topics on zoning, city 's obligations to build, and whether the city could force a developer to build affordable housing.

2. Housing Needs Survey
A housing needs survey was conducted in all jurisdictions. Residents were given the opportunity to respond to 14 questions as shown in Appendix C: Public Participation Summary . The questions related to demographics, income, expenses, housing priorities, and specific responses in relation to housing issues and affordable/fair housing needs.

Page 197 of 1008 ends

C. Community Involvement
Kings County and Cities of 1-7 2024-2032
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Avenal
13 responses to the Housing Needs Survey were collected for the city of Avenal. Of these respondents, 31% live and work in Avenal, 61.5% work in Avenal, and 7.7% were interested in Avenal Housing Issues. 38% of respondents have lived in Kings County for 20 years or more. Another 7.7% of applicants have lived in the County for more than 10 years. 77% of respondents owned their homes, 15% rented, with no respondents that live with family or friends, and no respondents were unhoused. Approximately, 46% of respondents were between 45 and 65 years old, 15% of respondents were 35 to 44 years old, and 38% of respondents were between 25 and 34 years old. 77% of respondents identified themselves as Hispanic/Latino, 15% as White/Caucasian, and 7% identified themselves as two or more races. Approximately, 8% of respondents earned <$35,000 annually, 23% earned between $35,000 a nd $56,000, 8% earned between $56,000 and $72,000, 8% earned between $87,000 and $97,000, and 38% earned 97,000 or more.

When asked what percentage of income is spent on housing costs, 61% of respondents stated they spend between 30-50% of income on housing. Another 23% said they spend less than 30% of income on housing.

Most respondents identified ‘Increase home ownership opportunities for moderate, low and very low - income residents’ (69%) with both ‘Code Enforcement’ and ‘Make it easier to build in Avenal’ at (46%), as the top housing priorities in Avenal followed by ‘Increase the amount of housing that is affordable for moderate, low, and very low-income residents’ (38%) and ‘Improve substandard housing conditions’ (31%). 24% of respondents also identified ‘Programs to help existing homeowners stay in their homes’ as a priority.

Of those surveyed, 77% were satisfied with their housing condition, with 8% that would like to downsize but are unable to find a smaller unit. An additional 8% citied difficulty with completing the survey electronically. With regards to the preferred housing types to be built in the City of Avenal, the majority (46%) identified single-family homes as their top priority followed by Mixed- income Housing (23%) and Townhomes (15%). One respondent gave a detailed response in support of apartments as affordable stepping stones to eventual home ownership.

With regards to whether there is insufficient housing in the community, 69% felt there is insufficient housing for families with children and 46% of respondents felt there is insufficient housing for single individuals.

Respondents selected low-income households and older adults (seniors, elderly) both at 31% as populations with insufficient housing.

Corcoran
Corcoran had a good response to their survey with 33 responses. 48.5% of the respondents live and work in Corcoran, 45.5% work in Corcoran and a further 12.12% were interested in housing issues in Corcoran.

48.5% of respondents have lived in Kings County for 20 years or more . Another 12% of the respondents have lived in the County for more than 10 years. 70% of respondents owned their homes, 12% rented, 18% live with family or friends, and no respondents were homeless. 48.5% of respondents were between 45 and 64 years old. Approximately 21% of respondents were 35-44 years old, 15% of respondents were between 25 and 34 years old and 12% were between 18 and 24 years old. 55% of the respondents identified themselves as Hispanic/Latino, 21% as white/Caucasian, and 9% identified themselves as two or more races.

Approximately 6% of the respondents earned < $35,000 per annum, 24% between $35,000 to $56,000, 9% earned between $56,000 to $72,000, 30% earned between $72,000 to $97,000 and 24% earned $97,000 or more.
33% of the respondents spent more than 50% of their income on housing and another 33% spent between 30% and 50% of their income on housing. Most respondents identified ‘increase home ownership opportunities for moderate, low and very low -income residents (51.5%) and code enforcement (42.4%) as the top housing priorit ies in Corcoran. followed by programs to help existing homeowners stay in their homes (39%), 'make it easier to build in Corcoran ’ (39%) and ‘increase the amount of housing tha t is

Page 198 of 1008 ends

Chapter 1. Introduction
2024-2032 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
affordable for moderate, low and very low -income residents’ (36%). 36% of respondents also identified ‘improve subsidized housing’ as a priority.
79% of the respondents were satisfied with their housing situation, 9% were unable to house all the family members they need to, and 3% identified their unit to be in poor condition needing repairs. 2 respondents gave feedback that it’s too expensive to purchase a home. With regard to the question on preferred home types to be built in Corcoran, the majority (79%) identified single family homes as their top priority followed by mixed-income housing and townhomes. Only 3% of respondents identified multi -family housing (15+ units) as a priority.

In response to whether there is in sufficient housing in the community, 42% of respondents felt there is insufficient housing for single individuals, 30% of respondents felt there is insufficient housing for families with children, 21% for low-income households, and 18% felt there is insufficient housing for older adults (seniors, elderly).

Hanford
Hanford received 70 responses to the survey. 47% of the respondents live in Hanford and 43% of the respondents live and work in Hanford. Only 14% of the respondents were interested in Hanford housing issues. 56% of respondents have lived in Hanford for 20 years or more. 70% of respondents owned their homes, 21% rented, 1 respondent was homeless, and the rest lived with family or friends. 47% of respondents were between 45 and 64 years old. Approximately 23% of respondents were over 65 years old and less than 3% of the respondents were under 25 years old. 59% of respondents identified themselves as white/Caucasian, 20% identified themselves as Hispanic/Latino and 10% as mixed race. Approximately 9% of the respondents earned < $35,000 per annum, 21% between $35,000 to $56,000 and 23% earned $97,000 or more. 41% of respondents spent between 30-50% of their income on housing costs and 16% spent more than 50% of their income on housing costs
The majority of respondents identified the cost of buying a home and limited availability of affordable units as the biggest barriers to affordable housing in Hanford. In response to the top 3 housing priorities, 54% of respondents suggested to increase the amount of housing that is affordable for moderate, low, and very low- income residents, 36% identified more senior housing, and around 30% of respondents identified code enforcement, increased homeownership opportunities for moderate, low, and very low-income residents and programs to help existing homeowners stay in their homes as priorities. 74% of the respondents were satisfied with their housing situation, 4% identified their unit to be in poor condition needing repairs and another 4% identified improvements were required to their units to live with a disability. W ith regard to question on preferred home types to be built in Hanford, the majority (60%) identified single family homes as their top priority followed by homes targeted for a specific purpose or population, including seniors, persons with disabilities, farm employees (30%). 26% of respondents identified low-density multi-family housing (duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes) with 20% identifying mixed income housing and townhomes as priories. Only 13% of respondents identified high density housing (15+ units) as a priority.

In response to whether there is in sufficient housing in the community, 56% of respondents felt there is insufficient housing for older adults (seniors, elderly), 40% of respondents felt there is insufficient housing for low-income households, and 36% of respondents felt insufficient housing for single individuals.

Lemoore
Lemoore received 25 responses to their survey. 70% of the respondents live in Lemoore and 11% of the respondents live and work in Lemoore. 28% of the respondents were interested in Lemoore housing issues.

Page 199 of 1008 ends

C. Community Involvement
Kings County and Cities of 1-9 2024-2032
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
48% of respondents have lived in Lemoore for 20 Y ears or more. 60% of respondents owned their homes, 30% rented. One respondent was unhoused and the rest lived with family and friends. 36% of respondents were between 45-64 years old. Approximately 5% of the respondents were over 65 years old and less than 21% of the respondents were under 25 years.. 46% of respondents identified themselves as white/Caucasian. 29% identified themselves as Hispanic/Latino and 10% as Asian Ancestry, Black/African Ancestry, or mixed race. Approximately 11% of the respondents earned less than $35.000 per annum, 16% between $35,000 and $56,000 and 29% earned $97,000 or more. 46% of the respondents spent between 30-50% of their income on housing costs and 26% spent more than 50% of their income on housing costs.

The majority of respondents identified the cost of buying a home and limited availability of affordable units as the biggest barrier to affordable housing in Lemoore. In response to the top 3 housing priorities, 50% of the respondents suggested increasing the amount of housing that is affordable for moderate, low. and very low-income residents; 43% identified increasing homeownership opportunities for moderate, low and very low-income residents; 38% identified making it easier to build in Lemoore, and 23% identified the need for more senior housing, and 49% identified the need for additional Code Enforcement, creating programs to help existing homeowners stay in their homes, and improving substandard housing as priorities. 70% of respondents were satisfied with their housing situation. 4% identified their unit to be in poor condition and needing repairs and another 6% identified they are unable to house all the family they have.

With regard to the question of preferred home types to be built in Lemoore. 46% identified single family homes as their top priority followed by homes targeted for a specific purpose or population, including seniors, persons with disabilities, farm employees (14%). 10% of the respondents identified low-density multi-family housing (duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes) with 1.2% identifying mixed income housing and town homes as priorities. Only 4% of respondents identified high density (15+ units) as a priority.

In response to whether there is sufficient housing in the community, 59% of respondents felt there is insufficient housing for low -income households. 50% of respondents felt there is insufficient housing for families with children, 35% or respondents felt there is insufficient housing for single individuals; 33% of the respondents felt there is insufficient housing for older adults (seniors, elderly); and 20% of the respondents felt there is insufficient housing for persons with disabilities.

Kings County
Kings County had an excellent response to their survey with 21 7 responses. 72% of the respondents live and work in Kings County and 25% of the respondents were interested in Kings County housing issues. 58% of respondents have lived in Kings County for 20 years or more. Another 13% of the respondents have lived in the County for more than 10 years. 55% of respondents owned their homes, 27% rented, 15% live with family or friends, and no respondents were homeless. 35% of respondents were between 45 and 64 years old. Approximately 29% of respondents were 35-44 years old, and 27% of respondents were between 25 and 34 years old. 50% of the respondents identified themselves as Hispanic/Latino, 33% as white/Caucasian, and 7% identified themselves as two or more races. Approximately 7% of the respondents earned < $35,000 per annum, 35% between $35,000 to $56,000, 16% earned between $56,000 to $72,000, 16% earned between $72,000 to $97,000 and 18% earned $97,000 or more.

The majority of respondents identified the cost of buying a home (38%) and limited availability of affordable units (27%) as the biggest barriers to affordable housing in Kings County.. Another 16% of the respondents felt income limits on affordable housing as a barrier to affordable housing. In response to the top 3 housing priorities, 71% of respondents suggested to increase the amount of housing that is affordable for moderate, low, and very low-income residents, 64% identified increasing home ownership opportunities for moderate, low and very low -income residents and 39% of the respondents identified programs to help existing homeowners stay in their homes as priorities.

Page 200 of 1008 ends

Chapter 1. Introduction
2024-2032 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
67% of the respondents were satisfied with their housing situation, 7% were unable to house all the family members they need to, and 4% identified their unit to be in poor condition needing repairs and another 2% identified improvements were required to their units to live with a disability. With regard to the question of preferred home types to be built in Kings County, the majority (40%) identified single family homes as their top priority followed by homes targeted for a specific purpose or population (23%). 14% identified mixed income housing as a priority and another 8% identified low -density multi- family housing (duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes). Only 5% of respondents identified high density housing (15+ units) as a priority.

In response to whether there is in sufficient housing in the community, 61% of respondents felt there is insufficient housing for low-income households, 50% of respondents felt there is in sufficient housing for single individuals, 45% felt there is insufficient housing for families with children and 35% of respondents felt there is sufficient housing for older adults (seniors, elderly).

Page 201 of 1008 ends

Kings County and Cities of 2-1 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
The availability of decent and affordable housing for residents is an important housing goal. To accomplish this goal, a comprehensive assessment of housing needs provides the basis for developing responsive policies and programs. This chapter presents and analyzes demographic, economic, and housing characteristics and their impact upon housing needs in the cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore and
unincorporated Kings County. The Housing Plan (Chapter 5) provides the policies and strategies to add ress identified housing needs.

A. Population and Household
Characteristics
Housing needs in Kings County are largely determined by population and employment growth, coupled with various demographic variables. Characteristics such as age, household size, occupation, and income combine to influence the type of housing needed and its affordability.

1. Population Trends
Kings County is comprised
of four incorporated cities
(Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford,
and Lemoore) , four
unincorporated community
service areas (Armona,
Home Garden, Kettleman
City, and Stratford), and a
few other smaller
community pockets .

According to the California
Department of Finance
(DOF), Kings County had a
total population of 152,486
in 2020; however, about
10% of that is represented by
persons in group quarters , primarily the state prisons and Naval Air Station Lemoore. Thus, Table 2- 1 presents the household population of King County at approximately 137,000 in 2020.

During 1990 to 2020 time period, as shown in Table 2-1, the City of Hanford experienced the largest growth in household population, with over 27,000 residents, a 90% increase over its 1990 population level.

Hanford’s growth also accounted for a majority (57%) of Kings County’s total household population growth of 47,495 residents during the 30- year period . However, the City of Lemoore had the highest percentage increase (99%) among the four cities in the county from 1990. Avenal and Corcoran saw Table 2-1
Kings County Household Population Growth, 1990-2020
Jurisdiction
Household Population Change 1990-2020
1990 2000 2010 2020 Persons %
Avenal 5,505 7,973 9,082 9,406 3,901 70.9%
Corcoran 8,309 9,539 12,573 13,525 5,216 62.8%
Hanford 29,927 40,839 53,068 56,945 27,018 90.3%
Lemoore 13,606 19,710 24,514 27,014 13,408 98.5%
Unincorporated 32,122 31,271 32,165 30,074 (2,048) (6.4%) County Totals 89,469 109,332 131,402 136,964 47,495 53.1% Note: All numbers exclude persons in group quarters (State prisons and Naval Air Station Lemoore)
Sources: U.S. Census; Cal. Dept. of Finance, E5 & E8 Population & Housing Estimates, 2020 I
I I

Page 202 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2024-2032 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
population increases of about 71 % and 63 %, respectively, during the 1990- 2020 time period. The unincorporated county has experienced a decline in population of about 2,000 residents since 1990.

According to DOF1, Kings County’s household population is projected to reach approximately 153,400 by the year 2030, an increase of 12% over the 2020 estimate.

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

Coupled with housing prices, the homeownership rate is related to householder age. Homeownership rates tend to increase with the age and income of the householder.

Housing needs often differ by age group. For instance, most young adults (under 34) are single or starting families. Housing needs for younger adults are addressed through apartments or first-time homeownership opportunities. Middle-aged residents (34-64) may already be homeowners, are usually in their prime earning years and have dependents living at home, and thus tend to seek larger homes. Seniors often own a home but, due to limited income or disabilities, may need assistance to remain in their homes. As life expectancies increase, the 6 5+ age group is projected to be the fastest -growing population segment, resulting in increasing need for assisted living and care facilities.

As shown in Table 2-2, the median age of countywide residents was 32.0 years in 2020. In comparison to Kings County, the cities of Avenal and Lemoore had a younger overall population, with median ages 29.4 years and 31.3 years, respectively. Whereas, the cities of Corcoran (34.5 years) and Hanford (33.4 years) had higher median ages than the County. Avenal had the highest percentage of the under 20 age group at 34%, while Hanford had the largest percentage of seniors (65 and older) at 12% of the total population.

Table 2-2
Age Distribution
Age Group Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore

Uninc.

Kings
County
Total population 13,033 22,078 57,339 25,867 32,773 151,090 Under 5 years 8.5% 5.4% 7.5% 8.5% 8.3% 7.6%
5 to 19 years 25.9% 16.5% 23.2% 19.2% 25.0% 22.2%
20 to 29 years 16.4% 18.9% 13.9% 19.7% 19.7% 17.1%
30 to 64 years 44.3% 50.5% 43.1% 41.6% 37.6% 42.8%
65 to 84 years 4.9% 7. 8% 10.6% 9.9% 8.5% 9.2%
85 years and over 0.0% 1.0% 1.6% 1.1% 0.9% 1.1%
Median age 29.4 34.5 33.4 31.3 N/A 32.0
Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table S0101

1 California, Department of Finance, P-4 Report, Population Projections for California Counties 2020-2030, 2020.

Page 203 of 1008 ends

A. Population and Household Characteristics
Kings County and Cities of 2-3 2024-2032
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

3. Race and Ethni city
As shown in Table 2-3, the largest racial/ethnic groups in Kings County in 2020 were Hispanics (55%) and Non-Hispanic Whites (32%). Asian, African American and other groups together comprised about 14% of the County total. Of the four cities in the County, Avenal had the highest percentage of Hispanic residents at 87% and then followed by Corcoran at 69%.

Table 2-3
Race and Ethnicity
Racial/Ethnic Group Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Unincorp. Kings County Not Hispanic or Latino 13.0% 30.7% 50.6% 56.0% 49.3% 45.1% -White 8.4% 15.3% 37.3% 38.5% 36.3% 35.2%
-Black or African American 3.3% 11.7% 4.8% 5.7% 5.1% 5.9% -American Indian/Alaska Native 0.5% 0.8% 0.3% 0.2% 2.4% 0.8% -Asian 0.3% 0.7% 4.4% 7.4% 2.4% 3.6%
-Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1%
-Other races or 2+ races 0.5% 2.1% 3.8% 4.1% 3.0% 3.2%
Hispanic or Latino (any race) 87.0% 69.3% 49.4% 44.0% 50.7% 54.9% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table B03002

4. Household Type and Overcrowding
A household refers to the people occupying a home, such as a family, a single person, or unrelated persons living together. Families often prefer single-family homes or condominiums to accommodate children, while s ingle persons generally occupy smaller apartments or condominiums . Single-person households often include seniors or young adults.

Table 2 -4 displays household composition by community as reported by the Census ACS 2015-2020.

Families comprised approximately 78% of all households within Kings County. Countywide, the proportion of single households (male and females living alone) was approximately 17%. At the city level, Lemoore (21%) and Hanford (18%) had the highest percentage of single-person households.

Page 204 of 1008 ends

Kings County and Cities of 2-0 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

Table 2-4
Household Characteristics
Age Group Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Uninc.

Kings
County
Total Households 2,752 3,854 18,960 8,803 9,244 43,604
Family Households 86.5% 80.1% 76.6% 74.9% 81.9% 78.3%
With own children under 18 years 55.0% 41.8% 40.0% 37.6% 43.5% 41.3% Married/Cohabitating Couples 62.4% 56.7% 58.9% 60.3% 68.2% 61.2% With own children under 18 years 39.6% 32.5% 30.4% 28.0% 37.3% 32.2% Male Householder, no spouse/partner present 15.5% 14.1% 16.5% 19.5% 13.6% 16.2% With own children under 18 years 2.4% 0.9% 2.8% 2.9% 1.8% 2.4% Living Alone 6.4% 7.7% 7.9% 12.0% 6.5% 8.3%
Age 65+ 1.4% 2.4% 2.8% 3.1% 1.8% 2.5%
Female Householder, no spouse/partner present 22.2% 29.2% 24.5% 20.2% 18.2% 22.6% With own children under 18 years 13.0% 8.4% 6.8% 6.7% 4.4% 6.8% Living Alone 5.6% 8.7% 9.7% 8.5% 8.1% 8.8%
Age 65+ 3.4% 5.5% 5.3% 3.8% 4.7% 4.7%

Nonfamily households 13.5% 19.9% 23.4% 25.1% 18.1% 21.7% Average household size 3.74 3.42 3.00 2.94 N/A 3.14
Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table DP-2, B11012, and S1101

As noted earlier, Kings County has a significant population of people living in group quarters who are not counted as households. Avenal and Corcoran State Prisons are counted in the total population figures, but are not counted as households. The same is true for persons living on-base at Naval Air Station Lemoore.

Overcrowding
Overcrowding is often closely related to household income and the cost of housing. The U.S. Census Bureau considers a household to be overcrowded when there is more than one person per room, excluding bathrooms and kitchens; and to be severely overcrowded when there are more than 1.5 occupants per room.

Overcrowded households are usually a reflection of the lack of adequate income for housing.

Table 2-5 details the percentage of households that live in overcrowded situations. Overcrowding is more prevalent among renters than owners. For example, countywide, 12% of renters and 5% of owners reported more than one person per room. The difference between renters and owner overcrowding was even more pronounced for the City of Corcoran where 20% were renters and 9% were owners. Overall, Avenal showed the highest percentage of total households (renters and owners) living in overcrowded conditions at 17%, followed by Corcoran at 15%, while the countywide percentage was 8% in 2020. Lemoore showed the lowest percentage of total households (renters and owners) living in overcrowded conditions at 7.5% for renters and 2.5% for owners.

Page 205 of 1008 ends

Page 206 of 1008 ends

Kings County and Cities of 2-0 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

Table 2-5
Overcrowding by Tenure
Occupants per Room Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Uninc.

Kings
County
Total households 2,727 3,845 18,960 8,803 9,244 43,604
Owner occupied: 1,306 1,789 11,353 4,622 4,298 23,368

0.50 or less 36.0% 47.1% 66.0% 57.5% 62.9% 60.7%

0.51 to 1.00 48.9% 43.7% 29.5% 40.0% 32.1% 34.2%

1.01 to 1.50 15.2% 8.6% 3.3% 1.8% 2.3% 3.9%

1.51 to 2.00 0.0% 0.3% 0.2% 0.6% 2.4% 0.7%

2.01 or more 0.0% 0.4% 0.9% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5%
Renter occupied: 1,446 2,056 7,607 4,181 4,946 20,236

0.50 or less 21.6% 27.6% 42.3% 48.6% 38.6% 39.7%

0.51 to 1.00 60.2% 52.1% 45.2% 43.7% 51.2% 48.1%

1.01 to 1.50 13.8% 15.0% 8.8% 5.0% 7.4% 8.7%

1.51 to 2.00 4.4% 4.0% 2.8% 2.4% 2.6% 2.9%

2.01 or more 0.0% 1.2% 0.8% 0.4% 0.2% 0.6%
Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table B25014

5. Household Income and Overpayment
Along with housing prices and rents, household
income is the most important factor affecting
housing opportunities within Kings County.

Housing choices such as tenure (owning versus
renting), housing type, and location are dependent
on household income. On the other hand,
however, household size and type often affect the
proportion of income that can be spent on
housing. Table 2-6 shows the median household
income of each community as reported by the
Census ACS.

The median household income for the entire
County was reported as $61,556. Hanford and Lemoore had the highest median household incomes at approximately $65,974 and $68,658, respectively. This is likely due to the larger proportion of these cities’ workforces with “white -collar” jobs. Avenal and Corcoran had median households below the County average, at $49,781 and $42,997, respectively. In both communities, a larger proportion of the workforce held “blue-collar” jobs such as farming, construction, extraction, manufacturing, production, transportation, and material moving.

Although median household income is a common benchmark for comparison, the distribution of household income also provides a useful measure of housing needs in a community. In housing analysis, households are typically grouped into categories, expressed relative to the Area Median Income (AMI) and adjusted for family size. Using State of California income thresholds, the income groups analyzed were as follows:
• Extremely low income: Up to 30% of AMI
• Very low income: 31-50% of AMI
Table 2-6
Median Household Income
Jurisdiction
Median Household
Income % of County
Avenal $ 49,781 80.9%
Corcoran $ 42,997 69.9%
Hanford $ 65,974 107.2%
Lemoore $ 68,658 111.5%
Unincorporated N/A N/A
Kings County $ 61,556 100%
Source: Census ACS 2016-2020 Table S1901

Page 207 of 1008 ends

A. Population and Household Characteristics
Kings County and Cities of 2-1 2024-2032
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
• Low income: 51-80% of AMI
• Moderate income: 81-120% of AMI
• Upper income: Above 120% of AMI

Table 2 -7 estimates the percentages of households by tenure within each income category in each jurisdiction as reported in HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data based on the Census ACS 2014-2018. Countywide, almost one-quarter (24%) of owner households were in the lower- income category (80% or less than the AMI --extremely-low, very-low and low incomes), while over one- half (55%) of renter households were in the lower-income category. At the city level, Avenal and Corcoran had higher percentages of lower-income owner and renter households than those in Hanford and Lemoore.

For example, as shown in Table 2-7, 35% of Avenal owner households and 82% of renter households were in the lower -income category. This compares to only 18% and 47% of Lemoore’s owner and renter households, respectively, in the lower-income categories. As witnessed at the county and city levels, renters experience a higher proportion of lower-income households.

Table 2-7
Household Income Distribution by Tenure
Income Category Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Uninc.

Kings
County
Owners
<= 30% 7.9% 10.3% 4.1% 5.3% 6.5% 5.5%
>30% to <=50% 6.9% 13.5% 6.8% 4.4% 9.1% 7.3%
>50% to <=80% 20.4% 13.0% 11.0% 8.3% 10.7% 11.0%
>80% to <=100% 10.6% 17.8% 7.8% 7.0% 7.8% 8.6%
>100% 54.2% 45.4% 70.4% 75.0% 65.7% 67.5%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Renters
<= 30% 34.0% 25.0% 19.1% 11.5% 14.1% 17.7%
>30% to <=50% 19.3% 21.8% 12.1% 16.4% 13.3% 14.6%
>50% to <=80% 29.1% 24.0% 21.0% 18.8% 26.5% 22.8%
>80% to <=100% 2.9% 12.5% 9.3% 18.4% 10.5% 11.4%
>100% 15.2% 16.8% 38.5% 35.0% 35.4% 33.5%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: HUD CHAS data based on Census ACS 2014-2018
Extremely Low-Income Households
In 2006 state law was amended (Assembly Bill 2634) to add the extremely low-income (ELI) category (up to 30% AMI) to the required analysis of household characteristics and housing growth needs. Due to their limited incomes, these households have the greatest difficulty finding suitable housing at an affordable price. As Table 2 -7 above shows, both Avenal and Corcoran owner and renter households had higher percentages of extremely low-income households as compared to other areas of Kings County. More than one-third (34%) of Avenal renter households and one-quarter (25%) of Corcoran renter households were in the extremely -low income category. Further discussion of housing costs and affordability, as well as housing growth needs by income category is provided later in this chapter Housing Overpayment
State and federal housing law defines overpayment as a household paying more than 30% of gross income for housing expenses, including utilities. Housing overpayment is especially problematic for lower-income households that have limited resources for other living expenses.

Page 208 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2024-2032 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
As shown in Table 2-8, a significant portion of lower-income households in each community overpaid for housing according to HUD CHAS data (special tabulations based on the Census ACS). However, the overpayment rate varied by tenure and income level. More than half of all very- low- and extremely-low- income households in all jurisdictions, both owners and renters , were reported to be overpaying. In most communities, however, more renter households than owner households were overpaying. Few households with incomes above the median faced overpayment – often less than 10% of households.

Table 2-8
Household Overpayment by Tenure
Income Category Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Uninc.

Kings
County
Owners
<= 30% 82.4% 73.7% 82.4% 69.1% 84.6% 79.0%
>30% to <=50% 86.7% 68.0% 67.1% 60.5% 72.2% 68.6%
>50% to <=80% 6.8% 43.8% 53.9% 75.0% 35.5% 48.3%
>80% to <=100% 17.4% 19.7% 46.0% 42.6% 10.3% 32.8%
>100% 0.0% 4.0% 7.7% 10.1% 5.8% 7.4%
Total 15.7% 27.8% 22.8% 23.1% 20.5% 22.5%
Renters
<= 30% 81.9% 73.0% 77.9% 89.6% 78.3% 79.3%
>30% to <=50% 68.1% 69.0% 85.2% 91.2% 66.0% 78.3%
>50% to <=80% 52.1% 51.0% 53.4% 70.7% 56.8% 57.0%
>80% to <=100% 0.0% 12.0% 32.2% 8.4% 35.1% 22.5%
>100% 0.0% 3.0% 7.2% 7.8% 5.5% 6.4%
Total 56.1% 47.5% 42.1% 42.8% 40.5% 43.2%
Source: HUD CHAS data based on Census; ACS 2014-2018

B. Employment Trends
Kings County’s economy has an important impact on housing needs. Employment growth typically results in increased housing demand in areas that serve as regional employment c enters. Moreover, the t ype of occupation and income levels for new employment also affects housing demand. This section describes the economic and employment patterns in Kings County and how these patterns influence housing needs.

1. Employment by Industry
Kings County supports a diversified economy as illustrated in Figure 2. This figure shows the proportion of jobs held by residents (civilian employed population 16 years and over) living in the County. Based on the Census ACS 2016- 2020 information, the education, health care, social assistance industry was the largest employer of Kings County residents, providing approximately 10,800 jobs, or 20% of workforce.

As important as agriculture is to the County, the agriculture sector was the second largest employer of its residents, which employed 8,300 residents or 15% of the workforce.

Page 209 of 1008 ends

Page 210 of 1008 ends

Kings County and Cities of 2-0 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

Figure 2-1 – Employment by Industry of Kings County Workforce

Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table DP03

According to the California Employment Development Department (EDD), in December 2022, the Kings County’s civilian labor force was estimated at 57,800, with an unemployment rate of 7.0% (not seasonally adjusted). This compares to the statewide unemployment rate of 4.1%. However, compared to recent trends, Kings County’s unemployment rate has decreased significantly from the 2020 annual average unemployment rate of 12.0%.

Historically, agriculture has played a key role in Kings County’s economy. Agriculturally-oriented counties tend to have higher unemployment rates and greater seasonal variations in unemployment. Kings County is ranked 8th among California counties in agricultural production with an annual gross value of $2.2 billion. According to the Kings County 2020 Annual Agricultural Crop Report, milk remains the County’s leading commodity, followed by pistachios (second) and cotton (third). With climate change and the long- term severe drought as well as the 2023 wet winter/spring, it is uncertain to what extent future water supplies will affect agricultural production and employment.

Table 2-9 lists the major employers for the jurisdictions of Kings County. This table reflects the employer data from the California Employment Development Department and the Kings C ounty Economic Development Corporation. As shown in the table, the largest employer in the county is the Naval Air Station Lemoore which employs approximately 5,000 to 9,999 civilian employees. Other key employers in the county include the State prison in Corcoran, the medical center and County administrative offices in Hanford. Although the EDD list in Table 2- 9 does not include any major employers in Avenal, there is a State prison located within the city , which according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation employ approximately 1,300 persons at the prison as of June 2023. Also, given the rural nature of the unincorporated communities, employment and economic activity is concentrated in the cities.

Education, health
care, social
assistance
20%
Agriculture
15%
Public admin.
13%
Retail trade
10%
Arts,
entertainment,
recreation,
accomodation,
food services
8%
Manufacturing
7%
Professional,
scientific,
management,
admin.
7%
Transportation,
warehousing,
utilities
6%
Construction
4%
Other services,
except public
admin.
3%
Finance,
insurance, real
estate
3%
Wholesale trade
3%
Information
1%

Page 211 of 1008 ends

B. Employment Trends
Kings County and Cities of 2-1 2024-2032
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Table 2-9
Major Employers - Avenal
Employer Name NAICS Code Employees Industry
Corcoran
California State Prison 921120 1,000-4,999 Government Office Site California State Prison 922140 1,000-4,999 State Government-Correctional Inst.

JG Boswell Co. 339999 100-249 Manufacturers
Zepeda’s Farm Labor Service 561311 250-499 Labor Contractors Hanford
Central Valley Meat Co. Inc. 311611 250-499 Meat Packer (mfrs.) Costco Wholesales 455211 100-249 Wholesale Club
Del Monte Foods Inc. 311999 1,000-4,999 Food Products & Manufacturers Hanford Community Medical Ctr. 621999 1,000-4,999 Health Services Hanford Regional Healthcare 621111 100-249 Physicians & Surgeons Hanford Sentinel 513110 100-249 Newspaper (publishers/mgrs.) Keller Ford Lincoln 441110 100-249 Automobile Dealers-New Cars Kings County Administration 921120 1,000-4,999 Government Offices-County Marquez Brothers Intl. Inc. 424410 250-499 Mexican Food Products-Wholesale Nichol Farm Inc. 111998 100-249 Farms
Shiny Sugar 311314 100-249 Sugar Refiners (mgrs.)
TC Transcontinental Packaging 322220 100-249 Packaging Materials-Manufacturers Walmart Supercenter 455110 500-999 Department Store
Warmerdam Packing 424480 250-499 Fruits & Veg.-Growers & Shippers Lemoore
Badasci & Wood Transport 484230 100-249 Trucking
Lemoore High School 611110 250-499 School
Lemoore Main Navy Exchange 455219 100-249 General Merchandise-Retail Leprino Foods Co. 311513 250-499 Cheese Processors (mgrs.) Naval Air Station 928110 5,000-9,999 Military Base
NAVAL Hospital Lemoore 622110 250-499 Hospital
West Hills college Lemoore 611210 100-249 Junior-Community College-Tech Inst.

Note: The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is the standard used by Federal statistical agencies in classifying business establishments for the purpose of collecting, analyzing, and publishing statistical data related to the U.S. business economy.

Source: California EDD, July 2023, https://labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/majorer/countymajorer.asp?CountyCode=000031

2. Occupations Held by Residents
Occupations held by residents determine the income earned by a household and their corresponding ability to afford housing. Higher paying jobs provide broader housing opportunities for residents, while lower - paying jobs limit housing options. Understanding employment and occupation patterns can thus provide insight into present housing needs. Table 2-10 presents the percentages of the type of occupations held by civilian residents in each community based on the Census ACS 2016-2020 estimates.

Page 212 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2024-2032 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Table 2-10
Occupations Held by Civilians
Jurisdiction
Avenal
Corcoran
Hanford
Lemoore
Uninc.

Kings
County
Management, business, science, and arts occupations 12.9% 14.3% 27.1% 29.6% 24.9% 25.2% Service occupations 10.9% 20.3% 23.3% 20.5% 16.6% 20.3% Sales and office occupations 9.7% 18.5% 22.0% 17.2% 17.6% 19.0% Natural resources, construction, & maintenance occupations 51.7% 31.3% 14.8% 13.2% 25.6% 20.5% Production, transportation, & material moving occupations 14.8% 15.6% 12.8% 19.5% 15.3% 15.1% Source: Census ACS 2016-2020 Table C24050

In Hanford and Lemoore, at least one-quarter of its civilian labor force held management, business, science, or arts-related jobs. These types of “white-collar” jobs typically pay higher salaries and thus allow residents to afford a greater choice of housing opportunities. However, service occupations, sales/office positions, and “blue-collar” positions typically pay relatively lower wages. Residents in these occupations have more limited ability to afford housing and, in some cases, are in the greatest need of affordable housing and assistance. Over one -half (52%) of Avenal’s civilian labor force had occupations related to natural resources, construction, and maintenance. This was followed by Corcoran, which had almost one -third (31%) in the same related occupations.

3. Jobs -Housing Balance and Commute Patterns
Commuting patterns in Kings County have an important implication for housing needs. Larger employers in the County (e.g., three state prisons, Naval Air Station Lemoore, and agricultural industries) generate a significant number of jobs. However, the workforce employed at these institutions or in the agricultural industries may live in other communities for a variety of reasons, including preferences, the availability of suitable housing, or other reasons.

Commuting patterns show the relationship between where people live and where they work. Long commuting distances increase traffic congestion that strains the existing overcrowded road and highways infrastructure systems that are often in need of maintenance. Long commuting distances also contributes to poor air quality, increases expenses to the commuting workforce, and has been shown to have negative consequences on personal health. One of the aims of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan is to direct new housing growth to employment centers in order to balance the jobs -housing ratio and decrease commuting distances.

Table 2-11 shows that over one-third (37%) of the County’s workforce age 16 years and older who do not work at home travel less than 15 minutes to work and another 32% of workers travel 15- 30 minutes to work. The average time to work for countywide workers was 23 minutes. At the city level, Avenal workers spent on average 36 minutes on the road to work, while Lemoore worker spent only 21 minutes to work.

The table also shows that Corcoran workers had the highest percentage of worker traveling less than 1 5 minutes to work at 47%.

Page 213 of 1008 ends

B. Employment Trends
Kings County and Cities of 2-3 2024-2032
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Table 2-11
Travel Time to Work
Travel Time to
Work Avenal Corcoran Hanford
Lemoore Uninc. Kings
County
Less than 15
minutes 20.8% 46.9% 38.0% 36.8% 35.8% 36.8%
15-30 minutes 19.7% 17.8% 30.8% 37.0% 37.4% 32.0%
30 to 59 minutes 35.8% 28.6% 25.3% 23.2% 22.5% 25.1%
60 or more
minutes 23.6% 6.7% 5.9% 8.0% 4.3% 6.1%
Average Travel
Time 36 min. 24 min. 24 min. 21 min. NA 23
min.

Note: Workers included those 16 years and over who did not work from home.

Source: Census ACS 2016-2020 Table S0801

When considering the work locations of city residents within the Kings County region as illustrated in Table 2-12, the City of Hanford has the largest concentration of workers at 45.5% that live and work within their jurisdictional limits. As the largest jurisdiction in the Kings County region, the City of Hanford has the lowest proportion of residents at 54.4% who commute to jobs elsewhere in Kings County. The City of Avenal has the largest proportion of residents who commute to jobs outside of their home city at 76.6%, followed closely by the City of Lemoore at 69.6%. According to recent Census estimates, 38% of residents work in their city of residence, with 62% commuting to other work locations in Kings County. Interestingly, this is a shift from the 2000 Census data, where 48% of residents worked in their home city and 36% commuted to work elsewhere in Kings County.

When considering work locations of residents in Kings County, the jobs-housing balance can be explored.

The jobs -housing balance refers to the approximate distribution of employment opportunities and workforce population in respect to a geographic area. Research has shown that a jobs -housing balanced area is less likely to have residents who commute long distances in a vehicle. Residents may also be more likely to walk, cycle, or use public transportation when there is a balanced jobs -housing ratio. There i s a general consensus that a balance of jobs to housing within an area can contribute to more sustainable travel in the form of shorter work trip distances. In looking at job locations and travel patterns in the Kings County region, the City of Hanford has the most balanced jobs-housing ratio or the most opportunities for residents to live near their place of employment.

Table 2-12
Work Locations of City/County Resident Workers
Residence
Location
Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Kings County
Number of Resident Workers
(Age 16 and over) 3,423 4,119 23,502 11,854 56,560
Work in Same City/County) 18.6% 35.3% 45.7% 27.5% 75.6% Work Outside of City/County 81.4% 64.7% 54.3% 72.5% 24.1% Totals 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Note: Kings County percentages reflect residents working in or outside of the County. Also, 0.3% of Kings County workers worked outside of California.

Source: Census ACS 2016-2020 Table 0801

I I

I I I I I I

Page 214 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2024-2032 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
C. Housing Characteristics
This section describes the housing characteristics and conditions that affect housing needs in Kings County. Important housing stock characteristics include housing type, tenure, vacancy rates, age, condition, cost and affordability.

1. Housing Type
The California Department of Finance (DOF) provides annual estimates of the number of housing units by type for each jurisdiction based on reported building and demolition permits.

DOF estimated that Kings County had a total of 46,815 housing units in 2020 , representing a growth of 2,948 new units (7 %) countywide since 2010. As is typical in small towns and rural areas, the majority of housing stock in all jurisdictions is comprised of single-family detached houses.

Single-family attached (condominium) units represent just 5% of all units countywide. Approximately 18% of the county’s housing stock consisted of multi-family projects, such as apartments and townhomes. The remaining 4% of housing units in Kings County were mobile and manufactured homes. As shown in Table 2-13, Avenal had the highest total percentage (32%) of multi-family units as well as the highest proportion (15%) of larger multi-family developments with five or more units. Lemoore followed with 22% of multi- family units and 14% of larger multi -family developments with five or more units. Unincorporated areas had the highest percentage (10%) of mobile homes.

Table 2-13
Housing Units by Type, 2020
Jurisdictions
Housing
Units
Percent of Housing by Type
Single-Family
Detached
Single Family
Attached
Multi-Family
(2-4 units)
Multi-Family
(5+ units) Mobile homes
Avenal 2,527 60.7% 3.2% 17.1% 14.8% 4.2%
Corcoran 4,145 74.5% 3.2% 10.3% 7.2% 4.7%
Hanford 2,0353 74.1% 3.1% 8.5% 12.3% 2.1%
Lemoore 9,448 71.4% 3.6% 8.1% 13.7% 3.2%
Unincorporated 10,342 74.3% 10.0% 4.7% 1.5% 9.5%
Kings County 46,815 72.9% 4.7% 8.2% 9.9% 4.3%
Source: California DOF, E-5 Report, May 2021

2. Housing Tenure and Vacanc y Rates
Housing tenure (owner vs. renter) influences several aspects of the local housing market. Residential mobility is influenced by tenure, with ownership housing evidencing a lower turnover rate than rental housing. The vacancy rate also indicates the match between the demand and supply of housing. Table 2-14 details housing tenure and vacancies in Kings County and incorporated communities according to the Census ACS 2016-2020 estimates. Vacancy rates of 5% to 6% for rental housing and 1.5 % to 2.0% for ownership housing are generally considered to be optimum. A higher vacancy rate may indicate an excess supply of units, a softer market, and result in lower housing prices. A lower vacancy rate may indicate a shortage of housing and high competition for available housing, which generally leads to higher housing prices and diminished affordability.

I
I

Page 215 of 1008 ends

C. Housing Characteristics
Kings County and Cities of 2-5 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

Table 2-14
Household Tenure and Vacancy Rates
Housing Type
Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Uninc. Kings County
Units % Units % Units % Units % Units % Units %
Occupied housing units

2,752 95.6% 3,845 91.5%

18,960 95.8% 8,803 95.0% 9,244 91.1% 43,604 94.2%
Owner-occupied housing units 1,306 45.4% 1,789 42.6%

11,353 57.4% 4,622 49.9% 4,298 42.4% 23,368 50.5% Avg. HH size of owner-occupied units 3.81 3.24 2.98 3.15 N/A 3.12 Renter-occupied housing units

1,446 50.2% 2,056 48.9% 7,607 38.5% 4,181 45.1% 4,946 48.8% 20,236 43.7% Avg. HH size of renter-occupied units 3.69 3.57 3.03 2.70 N/A 3.17 Vacant housing units 126 4.4% 356 8.5% 824 4.2% 459 5.0% 898 8.9% 2,663 5.8% For rent 77 2.7% 111 2.6% 46 0.2% 100 1.1% 112 1.1% 446 1.0% Rented, not occupied - 0.0% 19 0.5% 71 0.4% 25 0.3% 25 0.2% 140 0.3% For sale only 21 0.7% 18 0.4% 29 0.1% 250 2.7% 108 1.1% 426 0.9% Sold, not occupied - 0.0% 58 1.4% 66 0.3% - 0.0% 70 0.7% 194 0.4% For seasonal or occasional use 0.0% - 0.0% 9 0.0% - 0.0% 45 0.4% 54 0.1% All other vacant 28 1.0% 50 3.6% 603 3.0% 84 0.9% 538 5.3% 1,403 3.0% Homeowner vacancy rate 1.6% 1.0% 0.3% 5.1% N/A 1.8% Rental vacancy rate 5.1% 5.1% 0.6% 2.3% N/A 2.1%
Total housing units 2,878 100.0% 4,201 100.0% 19,784 100.0% 9,262 100.0% 10,142 100.0% 46,267 100.0% Source: Census, ACS 2016-2020, Tables DP04 and B25004

Page 216 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2016-2024 2-6 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
According to the Census, the housing vacancy rate in Kings County was 1.8% among homeowner units and

2.1% for rental units. However, the vacancy rate varied among communities. Avenal and Corcoran had the highest rental vacancy rate at 5.1 % while Lemoore had the highest homeowner vacancy rate at 5.1%.

Hanford had the lowest vacancy rates for both homeowner and rental units at 0.3% and 0.6%, respectively.

At the same time , Hanford and Lemoore had the highest homeownership rates, at 5 7% and 50% respectively.

3. Housing Condition s
Housing conditions are an important indicator of quality of life in Kings County communities. Like any asset, housing ages and deteriorates over time. If not regularly maintained, structures can deteriorate and discourage reinvestment, depress neighborhood property value s, and even become health hazards. Thus, maintaining and improving housing quality is an important goal for communities.

Housing age can be an indicator of the need for housing rehabilitation. As s hown in Table 2-15, recent Census estimates reported that over half of all housing in Kings County has been built since 1990 and at least 58% of the homes countywide exceeded 30 years of age, which is when most homes require increased maintenance. Common repairs include a new roof, painting, plumbing, appliances and fixtures. Homes older than 50 years often require more substantial re pairs (e.g., new siding, plumbing, or upgrades to electrical systems) in order to maintain the useful life and quality of the structure. Moreover, lead-based paint hazards are also more common in homes built before 1978 and particularly for homes built more than 50 years ago.

Among the four cities and the unincorporated areas, Corcoran’s housing stock was the oldest, with 62% of housing built before 1990 (more than 30 years) and 37% built before 1970 (more than 50 years). Whereas, Lemoore had the lowest percentages with 55% of the housing stock more the 30 years old and 22% over 50 years old.

Another key factor used to determine housing conditions is the observation of the existing housing stock.

The most recent comprehensive housing conditions survey was conducted in 2008/2009 for the jurisdictions in Kings County. The surveys were based upon criteria developed by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Housing was classified according to five categories – sound, minor repair, moderate repair, substantial repair, or dilapidated. Table 2 -16summarizes the results of these housing conditions surveys.

Lemoore found the fewest problems, with 82% of the housing stock reported in sound condition. This is not surprising since Lemoore also has the newest housing stock with 45% of housing built after 1990.

Hanford reported almost three-quarters of its housing stock in sound condition. Avenal and Corcoran reported the highest proportions of structures with problems. In Avenal, 42% needed repair (minor, moderate or substantial) and 9% were considered dilapidated. In Corcoran, 55% of homes required repairs and 8% were dilapidated.

Page 217 of 1008 ends

C. Housing Characteristics
Kings County and Cities of 2-7 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Table 2-15 Tenure by Year Structure Built
Housing Type
Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Uninc Kings County
Units % Units % Units % Units % Units % Units %
Total Occupied housing units 2,752 3,845 18,960 100% 8,803 9,244 43,604 100% Owner-Occupied 1,306 47.5% 1,789 46.5% 11,353 59.9% 4,622 52.5% 4,298 46.5% 23,368 53.6% Built 2014 or later 74 2.7% 149 3.9% 446 2.4% 120 1.4% 51 0.6% 840 1.9% Built 2010 to 2013 23 0.8% 12 0.3% 177 0.9% 100 1.1% 37 0.4% 349 0.8% Built 2000 to 2009 303 11.0% 266 6.9% 2,568 13.5% 1,061 12.1% 753 8.1% 4,951 11.4% Built 1990 to 1999 251 9.1% 264 6.9% 2,476 13.1% 1,076 12.2% 616 6.7% 4,683 10.7% Built 1980 to 1989 174 6.3% 84 2.2% 1,478 7.8% 518 5.9% 480 5.2% 2,734 6.3% Built 1970 to 1979 73 2.7% 304 7.9% 1,197 6.3% 598 6.8% 710 7.7% 2,882 6.6% Built 1960 to 1969 103 3.7% 83 2.2% 1,087 5.7% 682 7.7% 493 5.3% 2,448 5.6% Built 1950 to 1959 103 3.7% 277 7.2% 772 4.1% 192 2.2% 438 4.7% 1,782 4.1% Built 1940 to 1949 85 3.1% 162 4.2% 417 2.2% 125 1.4% 318 3.4% 1,107 2.5% Built 1939 or earlier 117 4.3% 188 4.9% 735 3.9% 150 1.7% 402 4.3% 1,592 3.7% Renter-Occupied 1,446 52.5% 2,056 53.5% 7,607 40.1% 4,181 47.5% 4,946 53.5% 20,236 46.4% Built 2014 or later 0 0.0% 43 1.1% 246 1.3% 252 2.9% 33 0.4% 574 1.3% Built 2010 to 2013 5 0.2% 23 0.6% 206 1.1% 86 1.0% 388 4.2% 708 1.6% Built 2000 to 2009 380 13.8% 273 7.1% 623 3.3% 469 5.3% 861 9.3% 2,606 6.0% Built 1990 to 1999 171 6.2% 336 8.7% 1,790 7.0% 749 8.5% 1,073 11.6% 3,665 8.4% Built 1980 to 1989 175 6.4% 354 9.2% 1,339 9.4% 767 8.7% 467 5.1% 3,553 8.1% Built 1970 to 1979 406 14.8% 216 5.6% 1,087 7.1% 985 11.2% 793 8.6% 3,739 8.6% Built 1960 to 1969 174 6.3% 333 8.7% 602 3.2% 374 4.2% 493 5.3% 1,976 4.5% Built 1950 to 1959 0 0.0% 132 3.4% 668 3.5% 275 3.1% 299 3.2% 1,374 3.2% Built 1940 to 1949 47 1.7% 206 5.4% 492 2.6% 43 0.5% 227 2.5% 1,015 2.3% Built 1939 or earlier 88 3.2% 140 3.6% 305 1.6% 181 2.1% 312 3.4% 1,026 2.4% Source: US Census Bureau, ACS 2016-2020 (5-year Estimates), Table B25036

Page 218 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2016-2024 2-8 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Table 2-16
Housing Conditions
Jurisdiction
Housing Conditions
Sound Minor Repair
Moderate
Repair
Substantial
Repair Dilapidated
Avenal 49% 7% 22% 13% 9%
Corcoran 37% 18% 28% 9% 8%
Hanford 73% 19% 8% <1% <1%
Lemoore 82% 15% 3% <1% <1%
Unincorporated Community
Districts and Public Utility District
<1% 24% 47% 15% 14%
Source: Housing Conditions Reports for individual jurisdictions (2008-09)

Although the Census does not include statistics on housing condition based upon observations, it does include statistics related to substandard housing conditions as a result of units lacking complete plumbing and kitchen facilities. Table 2-17 presents the data from the Census ACS 2016-2020 data on the availability of complete plumbing and kitchen facilities of occupied housing units.

Countywide, 0.1 % of the occupied housing units lacked complete plumbing and 0.5% lacked complete kitchen facilities, which was better than the statewide percentages of 0.4% for plumbing and 1.2% for kitchen facilities. Of the jurisdictions within the County, Lemoore had the highest percent of the occupied units lacking complete plumbing and kitchen facilities at 0.4% and 0 .8%, respectively.

Table 2-17 Occupied Housing Units Lacking Complete Plumbing or Kitchen Facilities
Jurisdictions
Lack of Complete
Plumbing
Lack of Complete
Kitchen
Avenal 0.2% 0.0%
Corcoran 0.0% 0.0%
Hanford 0.0% 0.7%
Lemoore 0.4% 0.8%
Unincorporated 0.2% 0.2%
Kings County 0.1% 0.5%
California 0.4% 1.2%
Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table S2504

4. Housing Affordability
State law establishes five income categories for purposes of housing programs based on the area (i.e., County) median income (“AMI”): extremely-low (30% or less of AMI), very -low (31-50% of AMI), low (51-80% of AMI), moderate (81- 120% of AMI) and above -moderate (over 120% of AMI). Housing affordability is based on the relationship between household income and housing expenses. According to HUD and the California HCD
2, housing is considered “affordable” if the monthly housing cost (including utilities) is no more than 30% of a household’s gross income.

2 HCD memo of 4/15/2015 (http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/hrc/rep/state/inc2k15.pdf)

Page 219 of 1008 ends

C. Housing Characteristics
Kings County and Cities of 2-9 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Table 2-18 presents 2022 income limits and maximum affordable monthly rents and sale prices for Kings County households, which also applies to the four cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore. Based on HCD’s affordability calculator 3, the maximum affordable monthly rent for extremely- low-income households is $420 for a two- bedroom unit. For very low - and lo -income households , the maximum affordable rent s for a two -bedroom unit are $780 and $1,280, respectively. Again, using the HCD affordability calculator, the maximum affordable price to purchase a home for an extremely low -income household would be $39,500 for a two- bedroom house and $47,000 for a three-bedroom house. For very low- and low-income households the maximum sale prices to purchase a two -bedroom house would be $84,200 and $128,900, respectively.

Table 2-18
Housing Affordability in Kings County, 2022 (Cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore)
Limits
(Area Median Income of
$80,300)
1-Bedroom
(1-2 persons)
2-Bedroom
(3 persons)
3-Bedroom
(4 persons)
4-Bedroom
(5 persons)
Extremely Low Income
Annual income limit $16,350 one person
$18,700 two persons
$23,030 $27,750 $32,470
Max. monthly rent $360 $420 $480 $530
Max. sales price $32,100 $39,500 $47,000 $52,900
Very Low Income
Annual income limit $27,300 one person
$31,200 two persons
$35,100 $38,950 $42,100
Max. monthly rent $680 $780 $880 $960
Max. sales price $71,800 $84,200 $96,600 $106,600
Low Income
Annual income limit $43,650 one person
$49,850 two persons
$56,100 $62,300 $67,300
Max. monthly rent $1,120 $1,280 $1,440 $1,560
Max. sales price $111,500 $128,900 $146,300 $160,200
Moderate Income
Annual income limit $67,450 one person
$77,100 two persons
$86,700 $96,350 $104,050
Monthly rent $1,810 $2,050 $2,290 $2,480
Max. sales price $227,400 $259,200 $291,100 $316,600
Source: HCD Income Limits 2022 and HCD Affordability Calculator https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community- development/annual-progress-reports

Housing Prices
According to Zillow listings of single-family homes sold in the first six months of 2023, Hanford had the largest number of homes sold (377 units) among the four cities in the County. In comparing the recent

3 HCD Tools to help with APR completion: Affordability Calculator: https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community- development/annual-progress-reports

Page 220 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2016-2024 2-10 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
home prices to the housing affordability limits in Table 2- 18, affordable residential homes were available to lower-income households (includes extremely low, very low, and low -income) in the four cities. The exceptions to affordability were for extremely low -income households looking for homes in Avenal and Lemoore. For example, as shown in Table 2- 19, the lowest price home that sold in 2023 in Avenal was $50,000 for a two- bedroom house, $60,000 for a three -bedroom house, and $100,000 for a four plus bedroom house. These prices were higher than the maximum affordability sales price for extremely low - income households, which were presented in Table 2-18 as $39,500 for a two-bedroom house, $47,000 for a three-bedroom, and $52,900 for a four plus -bedroom house. It should be noted that although the home sale prices at the lower range may be within the maximum affordability price limit, they are significantly below the median home prices, indicating that only a few homes may be available to lower -income households. To highlight this, the median sales price of the 200 three-bedroom homes sold in Hanford was $325,000, but only 12 homes or only 6% of the homes sold were within the maximum affordability price limit of $160,200 for low-income households.

Table 2-19
Kings County Residential Sale Prices, January-June 2023 Bedrooms
Number of
Homes Sold
Home Prices
Low High Median
Avenal
2-bedroom 7 $50,000 $235,000 $137,000
3-bedroom 11 $60,000 $360,000 $239,000
4+ bedrooms 4 $100,000 $355,000 $230,000
Corcoran
2-bedroom 12 $30,000 $269,000 $127,000
3-bedroom 30 $35,000 $288,000 $218,000
4+ bedrooms 17 $41,000 $380,000 $299,000
Hanford
2-bedroom 51 $26,000 $414,000 $230,000
3-bedroom 200 $45,000 $805,000 $325,000
4+ bedrooms 126 $50,000 $849,000 $425,000
Lemoore
2-bedroom 9 $75,000 $750,000 $180,000
3-bedroom 92 $57,000 $625,000 $300,000
4+ bedrooms 48 $40,000 $549,000 $375,000
Source: Zillow, Homes sold in Kings County, June 2023

Additionally, new homes in Kings County are generally in the price range of over $350,000 to $530,000, which are affordable to households in the above moderate-income group. For example, the Avertine-Choral Series homes by Lennar in the City of Lemoore include 14 homes (1,856 to 3,278 square feet) priced at $397,200 to $511,700.

A relatively small but important component of the housing market is represented by mobile homes.

According to DOF 2020 estimates, Kings County had approximately 1,900 mobile homes, with almost one- half located in unincorporated, rural areas. The average sales prices for mobile homes in Kings County

Page 221 of 1008 ends

C. Housing Characteristics
Kings County and Cities of 2-11 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
(June 2023) was approximately $100,000 for a two-bedroom unit and approximately $130,000 for a three- bedroom unit4. Mobile homes represent an affordable homeownership option for many households.

Rental Market
In June 2023, a listing of rental units by Zillow, which is presented in Table 2- 20, shows only one rental unit available in Avenal and two rental units available in Corcoran. The one unit in Avenal was renting for $1,000 per month and the two Corcoran units were renting at $900 and $1,350 per month. Recent rental rates in Hanford for one and two-bedroom units range from $800 to $2,900, with a median rent of $1,100.

For Lemoore, rental rates for one and two- bedroom units range from $800 to $2,000 with a median of $1,200. When compared to the maximum affordable monthly rents by income level and number of bedrooms shown in previous Table 2-18, no market rate rental units listed in June 2023 would be affordable to lower-income households (extremely low -, very low-, and low - income categories) in any of the four cities. The exception was a single four -plus unit in Hanford renting for $1,550 per month that would be affordable to a low-income household. This indicates a need for more affordable housing for households in the extremely low-, very low-, and low-income categories in each of the four cities.

Table 2-20
King County Residential Rents, 2023
Bedrooms
Number of
Rental Units Low High Median
Avenal
1-2 bedroom 0 - - -
3-bedroom 1 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000
4+ bedrooms - - -
Corcoran
1-2 bedroom 2 $900 $1,350 -
3-bedroom - - -
4+ bedrooms - - -
Hanford
1-2 bedroom 29 $800 $2,900 $1,100
3-bedroom 12 $1,500 $2,950 $2,100
4+ bedrooms 9 $1,550 $4,300 $2,700
Lemoore
1-2 bedroom 18 $800 $2,000 $1,200
3-bedroom 8 $1,800 $2,400 $2,100
4+ bedrooms 6 $1,950 $3,000 $2,200
Source: Zillow, Kings County rental unit listing, June 2023

In addition to the newer market-rate apartment projects, Kings County has a substantial number of assisted multi-family projects . As discussed later in this chapter, Kings County has 45 multi-family projects financed with a variety of local, state, and federal funds. These assisted housing projects provide over 2,500

4 Zillow listed nine mobile home sales in Kings County, June 2023.

Page 222 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2016-2024 2-12 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
units of affordable housing to extremely-low-, very-low- and low-income individuals, families, seniors, and disabled persons

Cinnamon Villas - Lemoore

The Grove - Lemoore

Page 223 of 1008 ends

D. Special Needs Groups
Kings County and Cities of 2-13 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

D. Special Needs Groups
Certain groups have greater difficulty in finding decent, affordable housing due to special circumstances.

Special circumstances may be related to one’s income, family characteristics, and disability status among others. In Kings County, persons and households with special needs include seniors, families with children (large households and single parents with children) military personnel, agricultural employees, persons with disabilities, and the homeless. This section analyzes these special needs groups and identifies resources and programs designed to address these needs.

1. Seniors
According to Census ACS 2016- 2020 estimates presented in Table 2-21, Kings County had estimated 6.917 owner-occupied households and 2,258 renter-occupied households that were headed by seniors age 65 years and older (Table 2-21). In all jurisdictions, the majority of seniors were homeowners.

Senior households have special housing needs primarily due to three concerns – physical disabilities or limitations, limited income, and higher medical costs. The City of Corcoran had the highest percentage of both owner -occupied and renter - occupied householders age 65 and over at 34% and 17%,
respectively. This compares to countywide estimates of 30% owner -occupied and 11% renter -occupied households age 65 and older.

Table 2-21
Elderly Households by Tenure
Age of
Householder
Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Uninc. Kings County
HH % HH % HH % HH % HH % HH %
Owner
occupied: 1,306 100.0% 1,789 100.0% 11,353 100.0% 4,622 100.0% 4,298 100.0% 23,368 100.0% <65 956 73.2% 1,190 66.5% 8,107 71.4% 3,315 71.7% 2,883 67.1% 16,451 70.4% 65 to 74 227 17.4% 381 21.3% 1,755 15.5% 758 16.4% 839 19.5% 3,960 16.9% 75 to 84 123 9.4% 117 6.5% 1,039 9.2% 414 9.0% 448 10.4% 2,141 9.2% 85+ - 0.0% 101 5.6% 452 4.0% 135 2.9% 128 3.0% 816 3.5% Renter
occupied: 1,446 100.0% 2,056 100.0% 7,607 100.0% 4,181 100.0% 4,946 100.0% 20,236 100.0% <65 1,420 98.2% 1,700 82.7% 6,681 87.8% 3,677 87.9% 4,500 91.0% 17,978 88.8% 65 to 74 19 1.3% 219 10.7% 562 7.4% 379 9.1% 291 5.9% 1,470 7.3% 75 to 84 7 0.5% 111 5.4% 284 3.7% 112 2.7% 130 2.6% 644 3.2% 85+ - 0.0% 26 1.3% 80 1.2% 13 0.3% 25 0.5% 144 0.7% Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table B25007

Seniors require a variety of housing options, depending on their life circumstances. While three-quarters of countywide seniors’ households were homeowners, a variety of factors such as fixed retirement incomes,

Page 224 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2016-2024 2-14 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
rising health care costs and physical disabilities can result in deferred home maintenance. Each jurisdiction’s housing plan includes grant or loan programs to help senior s with repairs . Seniors with mobility disabilities may also require home modifications to improve accessibility and facilitate independent living. All jurisdictions have programs to ensure reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities.

Senior renters, while facing similar income and mobility limitations as homeowners, are often at greater risk due to rising housing costs. To address these needs, the Housing Authority administers Section 8 rent subsidy vouchers for extremely-low- and very-low-income seniors. In addition, subsidized rental projects provide affordable housing options for many seniors.

The Kings/Tulare Area Agency on Aging and the Kings County Commission on Aging provide leadership at the local level in developing systems for home - and community-based services that maintain seniors in the least restrictive enviro nment for as long as possible. Each jurisdiction also provides other types of supportive services for seniors. However, at some point in time, seniors may require a more supportive living environment. Congregate care facilities, residential care facilities, and skilled nursing facilities provide a wide range of housing, supportive, and medical services for seniors requiring additional care. The majority of independent and supportive residential environments are located in the most urbanized portions of the County in Hanford and Lemoore.

2. Female -Headed Households
Female-headed households have special housing needs including affordable housing, accessible daycare, health care, and other supportive services. Female -headed households comprised about 17 % of all households in Kings County. State law recognizes that these households face challenges due to a combination of income levels, child care expenses, and housing availability. As shown in Table 2-22, the proportion of female-headed households, which is highlighted in the table, ranged from about 12% in the unincorporated area to 27% in Corcoran. In all jurisdictions, the percentage of female- headed households who rent is significantly greater than those who own their homes.

Page 225 of 1008 ends

D. Special Needs Groups
Kings County and Cities of 2-15 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Table 2-22
Household Type by Tenure
Housing Type
Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Uninc Kings County
HH % HH % HH % HH % HH % HH %
Total Households 2,752 4,201 18,960 8,803 9,244 100% 43,604 100% Renter Occupied 1,446 52.5% 2,056 53.5% 7,607 40.1% 4,181 47.5% 4,946 53.5% 20,236 46.4% Family
households: 2,380 86.5% 3,079 80.1% 14,530 76.6% 6,591 74.9% 7,575 81.9% 34,155 78.3% Married-couple
family: 1,604 58.3% 1,745 45.4% 9,689 51.1% 4,397 49.9% 5,801 62.8% 23,236 53.3% Own children
<18 978 35.5% 906 23.6% 4,961 26.2% 1,999 22.7% 3,162 34.2% 12,006 27.5% No Own
children <18 626 22.7% 839 21.8% 4,728 24.9% 2,398 27.2% 2,639 28.5% 11.230 25.8% Cohabiting
Couple: 112 4.1% 436 11.3% 1,482 7.8% 912 10.4% 500 5.4% 3,442 7.9% Male
householder, no
wife present:
426 15.5% 542 14.1% 3,136 16.5% 1,717 19.5% 1,258 13.6% 7,079 16.2% Own children
<18- 66 2.4% 35 0.9% 529 2.8% 258 2.9% 164 1.8% 1,052 2.4% No own
children<18- 161 5.9% 175 4.6% 639 3.4% 329 3.7% 382 4.1% 1,686 3.9% Female
householder, no
husband present:
610 22.2% 1,122 29.2% 4,653 24.5% 1,777 20.2% 1,685 18.2% 9,847 22.6% Own
children<18 357 13% 322 8.4% 1,287 6.8% 591 6.7% 406 4.4% 2,963 6.8% No own
children <18 80 2.9% 443 11.5% 1,408 7.4% 378 4.3% 503 5.4% 2,812 6.4% Living Alone 153 5.6% 335 8.7% 1,845 9.7% 747 8.5% 745 8% 3,825 8.8% Below poverty
with children 200 7.3% 482 11.5% 827 4.4% 309 3.5% 349 3.8% 2,167 5% Family
household>4
persons-
909 33% 986 23.5% 2,993 15.8% 1,368 15.5% 1,977 21.4% 8,233 18.9% Source: Census 2016-2020 ACS

3. Large Families
Large households are defined as households with five or more persons and are considered a special need population due to the limited availability of affordable and adequately sized housing. Large households may also have lower incomes, frequently resulting in the overcrowding of smaller dwelling units, and sometimes two or more persons per room.

As presented in Table 2 -23, large families represented approximately 18% of all owner households and about 21% of all renter households in Kings County). Large households are most prevalent in Avenal (36% of owners and 3 0% of renters) and Corcoran (21% of owners and 30% of renters) while Hanford and Lemoore have the lowest proportions of large households, even lower than the County levels Large families may have difficulty finding housing units that are large enough to accommodate their needs while still being affordable. The Housing Authority helps address the needs of these families by providing rental assistance in the form of Section 8 vouchers for extremely-low- and very-low-income households.

Vouchers provide the difference between the market rent charged for the unit and the amount of rent that can be afforded by the household, typically no more than 30% of household income.

Page 226 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2016-2024 2-16 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Table 2-23
Household Size by Tenure
House
hold
Size
Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Uninc. Kings County
HH % HH % HH % HH % HH % HH %
Owner 1,306 100% 1,789 100% 11,353 100% 4,622 100% 4,298 100% 23,368 100% 1 155 11.9% 354 19.8% 1,722 15.2% 730 15.8% 733 17.1% 3,694 15.8% 2 237 18.1% 393 22.0% 3,890 34.3% 1225 26.5% 1326 30.9% 7,071 30.3% 3 239 18.3% 262 14.6% 2,290 20.2% 934 20.2% 613 14.3% 4,338 18.6% 4 201 15.4% 402 22.5% 1,761 15.5% 984 21.3% 813 18.9% 4,161 17.8% 5 276 21.1% 229 12.8% 943 8.3% 544 11.8% 451 10.5% 2,443 10.5% 6 101 7.7% 70 3.9% 603 5.3% 149 3.2% 190 4.4% 1,113 4.8% 7+ 97 7.4% 79 4.4% 144 1.3% 56 1.2% 172 4.0% 548 2.3%
Renter 1,446 100% 2,056 100% 7,607 100% 4,181 100% 4,949 100% 20,236 100% 1 173 12.0% 276 13.4% 1,612 21.2% 1,070 25.6% 614 12.4% 3,745 18.5% 2 129 8.9% 430 20.9% 1,909 25.1% 1,000 23.9% 1,053 21.3% 4,521 22.3% 3 479 33.1% 359 17.5% 1,308 17.2% 879 21.0% 877 17.7% 3,902 19.3% 4 230 15.9% 364 17.7% 1,426 18.7% 600 14.4% 1,237 25.0% 3,857 19.1% 5 291 20.1% 319 15.5% 737 9.7% 439 10.5% 739 14.9% 2,525 12.5% 6 125 8.6% 159 7.7% 415 5.5% 181 4.3% 223 4.5% 1,103 5.5% 7+ 19 1.3% 149 7.2% 200 2.6% 12 0.3% 203 4.1% 583 2.9%
Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table B25009

Whereas providing rental assistance helps meet the needs of extremely-low- and very-low-income households, the underlying need for affordable housing units must also be addressed. As discussed in section E, Analysis of At -Risk Housing, Kings County has a total of over 2,500 units of subsidized affordable housing. The majority of these projects are located in Hanford and Lemoore. The Housing Plan (Chapter 5) sets forth programs to encourage the construction of additional affordable rental and ownership housing.

4. Military Personnel and Veterans
The U.S. Navy plays a critical role in Kings County economy and its housing market. Lemoore is home to the Naval Air Station Lemoore ( NASL). Commissioned in 1961, NASL serves as the master training center for carrier -based fighter squadrons for the United States Pacific Fleet. According to NASL, military personnel at the base total approximately 7,700 enlistees and offi cers.

Additionally, there are 1,758 singles and 1,217 families living on base.

There are currently ( 2015) 1,630 residential units on base , plus additional quarters for approximately 2,300 single personnel. On-base housing does not fully satisfy the total housing need for base personnel and their families. In addition to Navy personnel, approximately 2,800 civilians are employed on-base. Because of the housing shortfall, military personnel and civilians must find accommodations in nearby communities.

Page 227 of 1008 ends

D. Special Needs Groups
Kings County and Cities of 2-17 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
The basic housing allowance provided to Navy personnel ranges from $1,494 to $2,412 depending on pay- grade and with and without dependents. Single -service members, grade E -1 through E -4, are typically required to live on- base, while enlistees with their families must compete for the remaining base family housing.

In addition to active personnel, military veterans comprised a significant need group. According to recent Census ACS 2016-2020 estimates, approximately 8,700 military veterans lived within Kings County.

5. Agricultural Employees
Kings County is one of the state’s major agricultural areas, ranking 8th among California counties in total agricultural production. According to a Kings County
2022 Agricultural Crop Report 749,100 acres are
farmland of the total 890,804 acres in Kings County,
resulting in 84% of the total land area in the County
being devoted to farm land. Table 2 -24 shows the
County’s top three leading agricultural products in 2020 were milk ($700 million), pistachios ($214 million), and cotton ($195 million).

Recent Census data in Table 2 -25 shows that 15% of
employed Kings County civilian residents (16 years and
over) worked in agriculture and related industries. Of the four cities, the highest percentage of civilian workers in agricultural related jobs was Avenal, where 45% of its workers were in this industry. This was followed by Corcoran workers at 30%.

Table 2 -26 presents the number of farms and hired
farm workers in Kings County. According to the 2017
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Census
estimates, there were 507 farms and a total of almost
7,000 hired farms workers countywide. The largest
number of worker s (5,820) were employed at farms
with 10 or more employees or 83% of the countywide
total number of hired workers. Also, there were more
permanent hired workers (worked more than 150 days)
than seasonal workers (worked less than 150 days) for
both farm operations with less than 10 employees and
with more than 10 employees.

Table 2-24
Leading Agricultural Commodities, Kings
County
Crop Rank Value
Milk 1 $999,866,000
Pistachios 2 $228,785,000
Cotton, Total 3 $192,811,000
Tomatoes, Processed 4 $177,492,000
Cattle & Calves 5 $151,274,000
Almonds, Total 6 $132,323,000
Corn Silage 7 $123,941,000
Alfalfa, Hay 8 $67,540,000
Wheat, Silage 9 $60,112,000
Plums 10 $55,245,000
Source: Kings County, Dept. of Agriculture, 2022 Crop Report, April 2024

Page 228 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2016-2024 2-18 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore

Table 2-25
Agricultural Employment by Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction of Civilian
Employed Pop. (16 and
over)
Number of
Agricultural
Workers % of Total Workers
Avenal 1,617 45%
Corcoran 1,275 30%
Hanford 2,213 9%
Lemoore 692 6%
Unincorporated 2,474 22%
Kings County 8,271 15%
Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table DP-3

Table 2-26
Hired Farm Labor-Workers, Kings County
Farmworkers No. of Farms
No. of Hired
Workers
Percent of
Total County
Hired
Workers
Total Hired Farm Labor 507 6,998
Farm operations with less than
10 employees 351 1,178 17%
Permanent (> 150 days) 275 1,034 15%
Seasonal (< 150 days) 246 677 10%
Farm operations with 10 or
more employees 156 5,820 83%
Permanent (> 150 days) 96 3,046 44%
Seasonal (< 150 days) 49 2,241 32%
Source: USDA, 2017 Census of Agriculture

Agricultural workers, and especially f armworkers, have special housing needs due to their relatively low wages. According to an article in Rural Migration News , the average hourly wage for all California farmworkers in the years 2015- 2019 was approximately $12 1. This is equivalent to approximately $25,000/year for full-time work. As a result , farmworkers often overpay for housing (in relation to their income) and/or live in overcrowded and substandard living situations.

The nature of agricultural work also affects the specific housing needs of farmworkers . For instance, farmworkers employed on a year -round basis generally live with their families and need permanent affordable housing much like other lower-income households. Migrant farmworkers who follow seasonal harvests generally need temporary housing only for the workers themselves.

California has a statewide shortage of farmworker housing projects. For instance, the number of agricultural employee housing facilities registered with the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has dramatically declined since the 1950s. Between 1955 and 1982, grower-registered

Page 229 of 1008 ends

D. Special Needs Groups
Kings County and Cities of 2-19 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
facilities declined from 9,000 to 1,414 camps. By 1998, only 500 camps were registered with HCD, none of which were in Kings County. According to growers, the dramatic decline in labor camps is due to the high cost of maintaining housing and the climate of litigation facing growers who maintain camps.

Additionally, most farm owners/managers hire the majority of their workers through temporary agencies for planting, picking, pruning, or other specific tasks, so that providing full-time housing for workers is not practical.

Although no farmworker camps exist in Kings County, the County does have a significant number of government-subsidized housing projects (e.g., Section 515 and public housing) that house farmworkers and their families. Many farmworkers live in mobile homes on the farming site. A new farmworker housing project was completed in Hanford during the 2003- 2008 planning period. That project involve d the renovation of an existing former motel into temporary and/or long-term, permanent agricultural employee housing. The project included 24 units plus parking, courtyard, children’s play areas and open space.

In addition, there is a 40-unit apartment complex in unincorporated Kettleman City that serves farm labor families. Th is apartment includes 10 two -bedroom units, 20 three-bedroom units, and 10 four-bedroom units, with approximately 70-100 farmworkers residing in the apartment complex. The Constraints analysis (Chapter 4) contains a discussion of each jurisdiction’s land use and zoning policies and regulations regarding farmworker housing. In communities with large farmworker populations, farmworker housing needs are met through homeownership assistance and rehabilitation loans. The majority of loans under both types of programs are issued to people working in the agricultural industry. Moreover, the m ajority of occupants of Section 515 projects and other subsidized projects also are employed in the farming industry.

In Lemoore the farmworker population is significantly smaller, although many farmworkers also access standard homeownership and/or rehabilitation loans. The Housing Plan (Chapter 5) includes programs to address the housing and supportive services needs of farmworkers.

6. Persons with Disabilities
Because of the multitude of possible functional limitations that may present as disabilities, and in the absence of information on external factors that influence disability, surveys like the Census Bureau’s ACS are limited to capturing difficulty with only selected activities. As such, people identified by the ACS as having a disability are, in fact, those who exhibit difficulty with specific functions and may, in the absence of accommodation, have a disabili ty. In an attempt to capture a variety of characteristics that encompass the definition of disability, the ACS identifies seriou s difficulty with four basic areas of functioning – hearing, vision, cognition, and ambulation.
5 As presented in Table 2-27, the largest number of Kings County residents with disabilities was in the 18 to 64 years age group or the working age population with 8,357 individuals, which represented 11% of the total age group. However, disabilities were most common among senior citizens (65 years and over) .

Approximately 41% of total seniors reported one or more types of disability. At the local level, the proportion of seniors reporting some type of physical disabilit y ranged from 37% in the unincorporat ed area to as high as 63% in the City of Avenal. The most common type of disability among senior was having ambulatory difficulty. For example, 44% of Avenal seniors and 25% of countywide seniors reported having ambulatory difficulty.

5 Source: American Community Survey 2013 Subject Definitions. Beginning in 2008, questions on disability represent a conceptual and empirical break from earlier years of the ACS. Hence, the Census Bureau does not recommend any comparisons of current disability data to 2007 and earlier ACS disability data, or to disability estimates from the 2000 Census.)

Page 230 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2016-2024 2-20 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Developmental Disabilities
As defined by federal law, “developmental disability” means a severe, chronic disability of an individual that:
• Is attributable to a mental or physical impairment or combination of mental and physical impairments;
• Is manifested before the individual attains age 18;
• Is likely to continue indefinitely;
• Results in substantial functional limitations in three or more of the following areas of major life activity: a) self -care; b) receptive and expressive language; c) learning; d) mobility; e) self - direction; f) capacity for independent living; or g) economic self-sufficiency; • Reflects the individual’s need for a combination and sequence of special, interdisciplinary, or generic services, individualized supports or other forms of assistance that are of lifelong or extended duration and are individually planned and coordinated.

The Census Bureau does not record developmental disabilities. According to the U.S. Administration on Developmental Disabilities, an accepted estimate of the percentage of the population that can be defined as developmentally disabled is 1.5 percent. Many developmentally di sabled persons can live and work independently within a conventional housing environment. More severely disabled individuals require a group living environment where supervision is provided. The most severely affected individuals may require an institutional environment where medical attention and physical therapy are provided. Because developmental disabilities exist before adulthood, the first issue in supportive housing for the developmentally disabled is the transition from the person’ s living situation as a child to an appropriate level of independence as an adult.

Page 231 of 1008 ends

D. Special Needs Groups
Kings County and Cities of 2-21 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

Table 2-27
Disabilities by Age
Disability Type by Age
Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Unincorporated Kings County Persons % Persons % Persons % Persons % Persons % Persons % Population under 18 years w/disability 61 1.5% 103 2.3% 914 5.6% 197 3.0% 223 2.3% 1,498 3.7% With a hearing difficulty 0 0.0% - 0.0% 92 0.6% 43 0.7% 58 0.6% 193 0.5% With a vision difficulty 0 0.0% 53 1.2% 336 2.1% 61 0.9% 30 0.3% 480 1.2% With a cognitive difficulty 61 1.5% 38 0.9% 520 3.2% 108 1.6% 163 1.7% 890 2.2% With an ambulatory difficulty 0 0.0% 17 0.4% 58 0.4% 40 0.6% 12 0.1% 127 0.3% With a self-care difficulty 0 0.0% 11 0.2% 115 0.7% 65 1.0% 28 0.3% 219 0.5% Population 18 to 64 years w/disability 419 7.4% 874 12.5% 3,698 11.1% 1,439 9.3% 1,927 11.4% 8,357 10.7% With a hearing difficulty 142 2.5% 170 2.4% 542 1.6% 250 1.6% 528 3.1% 1,632 2.1% With a vision difficulty 84 1.5% 187 2.7% 576 1.7% 197 1.3% 310 1.8% 1,354 1.7% With a cognitive difficulty 22 0.4% 252 3.6% 1,602 4.8% 629 4.1% 504 3.0% 3,009 3.8% With an ambulatory difficulty 171 3.0% 577 8.3% 1,858 5.6% 488 3.1% 993 5.9% 4,087 5.2% With a self-care difficulty 0 0.0% 253 3.6% 681 2.0% 180 1.2% 310 1.8% 1,424 1.8% With an independent living difficulty 22 0.4% 421 6.0% 1,693 5.1% 330 2.1% 628 3.7% 3,094 4.0% Population 65 years and over
w/disability 392 62.6% 794 45.6% 2,693 39.4% 1,174 41.2% 1,126 36.5% 6,179 40.8% With a hearing difficulty 94 15.0% 189 10.8% 1,320 19.3% 458 16.1% 596 19.3% 2,657 17.6% With a vision difficulty 115 18.4% 188 10.8% 565 8.3% 207 7.3% 190 6.2% 1,265 8.4% With a cognitive difficulty 86 13.7% 278 16.0% 576 8.4% 218 7.6% 300 9.7% 1,458 9.6% With an ambulatory difficulty 278 44.4% 590 33.9% 1,530 22.4% 804 28.2% 605 19.6% 3,807 25.1% With a self-care difficulty 51 8.1% 256 14.7% 857 12.5% 151 5.3% 185 6.0% 1,500 9.9% With an independent living difficulty 109 17.4% 489 28.1% 1,303 19.1% 347 12.2% 411 13.3% 2,659 17.6% Note: Numbers represent persons, not disabilities. Persons may report more than one type of disability Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table S1810 and C18108

Page 232 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2024-2032 2-22 Kings County and Cities of
Draft Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore The State Department of Developmental Services (DDS) currently provides community -based services to approximately 243,000 persons with developmental disabilities and their families through a statewide system of 21 regional centers, four developmental cente rs, and two community- based facilities. Kings County is served by the Central Valley Regional Center 6 (CVRC) which is based in Fresno . During 2014, CVRC served approximately 16,200 clients, of which about 900 to 1,000 lived in Kings County. CVRC provides diagnosis, evaluation, and case management services. The Center also operates approximately 20 small group homes for mentally disabled clients and placement services to help clients find affordable, independent housing (typically Section 8 units) . The Kings County Rehabilitation Center in Hanford also offers rehabilitation, vocational and life training, and operates four group homes for mentally and physically handicapped individuals.

Table 2-28
Persons with Developmental Disabilities Receiving Services by Residential Type 2021 City/Community
(Zip Code)
Home of
Parent
/Family
/Guardian
Independent
/Supported
Living
Community
Care
Facility
Intermediate
Care Facility
Foster
/Family
Home Other Total Res
Avenal
(93204)
88 <11 0 0 0 <11 >88
Corcoran
(93212)
127 12 <11 0 <11 0 >139
Hanford
(93230)
648 60 18 0 15 <11 >741
Lemoore
(93245)
283 22 <11 0 <11 <11 >305
Armona (Uninc.)
(93202)
52 <11 0 0 <11 0 >52
Kettleman (Uninc.)
(93239)
14 <11 0 0 0 0 >14
Lemoore Station
(Uninc.)
(93246)
<11 0 0 0 0 0 >0
Stratford (Uninc.)
(93266)
<11 <11 0 0 0 0 >0
Source: CA Dept. of Developmental Services, 2021

State and federal laws mandate minimum accessibility standards for housing. For example, local governments that use federal housing funds must meet federal accessibility guidelines for new construction and substantial rehabilitation. At least 5% of the units must be accessible to persons with mobility impairments, and an additional 2% must be accessible to persons with sensory impairments. New multi-family housing must be built so that: 1) the public and common use portions of such units are readily accessible to and usable by disabled persons; 2) the doors allowing passage into and within such units can accommodate wheelchairs; and 3) all units contain adaptive design features. In addition, state law requires all jurisdictions to provide reasonable accommodation in the application of housing policies and regulations.

6 www.cvrc.org

Page 233 of 1008 ends

D. Special Needs Groups
Kings County and Cities of 2-23 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

7. Homeless
Homelessness is often the result of multiple factors tha t converge in a person’s life. The combination of loss of employment, inability to find a job because of the need for retraining, and high housing costs lead to some individuals and families losing their housing. For others, the loss of housing is due to chronic health problem s, physical disabilities, mental health disabilities or drug and alcohol addictions along with an inability to access the services and long-term support needed to address these conditions.

Obtaining an accurate assessment of the magnitude of the homeless population is difficult because many individuals are not visibly homeless but rather live with relatives or friends, in hotels/motels or shelters, and other temporary
accommodations. In an attempt to address the needs of homeless people in Kings County, the Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance (KTHA) conducted a Point -in-Time (“PIT”) survey of homeless people in these two counties in January 2022. The study used HUD’s definition of homelessness, which is defined as people who reside in emergency shelters, transitional housing, or places not meant for human habitation such as cars, parks, sidewalks, and abandoned buildings.

Based on the 2022 PIT survey, 313 homeless individuals were counted in Kings County, as a whole, including cities within Kern County. Other characteristics identified were as follows:
• 22% chronically homeless
• 39% persons with disability
• 20% suffer from mental disability
• 12% suffer from substance abuse problems
• 11% victims of domestic violence
• 6% veterans
• 2% unaccompanied children
• 12% young adults under age 25

In 2022, 39% of the homeless population was housed in temporary living arrangements (31% in emergency shelter and 8% in transitional housing) . Over half (61%) were unsheltered and living on the streets or in a car.

Table 2-29 presents the 2022 PIT homeless counts for the four cities and unincorporated areas of the County.

The table shows that the City of Hanford had the highest counted with 260 homeless individuals or 83% of the countywide total. This was followed by the unincorporated area with 24 homeless individuals. Avenal had the lowest count with four homeless individuals.

Table 2-29
Homeless Persons
Jurisdiction
Estimated
Homeless
Avenal 4
Corcoran 17
Hanford 260
Lemoore 8
Unincorporated area 24
Kings County totals 313
Source: Kings/Tulare Homeless Alliance Point-in-
Time Survey, 2022

Page 234 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2024-2032 2-24 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Table 2-30
Shelter Facilities in Kings County
Total
Project Name & Organization
PIT
Beds
Use
Count
Use
Rate

EMERGENCY SHELTER
Barbara Saville Shelter - DV 15 4 27%
Barbara Saville Woman's Shelter 23 6 26%
EHA Kings 7 7 100%
PRK Holiday Lodge 57 57 100%
PRK Stardust Hotel 17 17 100%
Temporary Housing Program 7 7 100%
Total 126 98 78%

TRANSITIONAL HOUSING
KGM Men's Transitional 15 15 100%
KGM Women's Transitional 6 6 100%
New Song Academy 6 3 50%
Total 27 24 89%

PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
Anchors II 6 4 67%
Anchors IV 6 5 83%
Grace Homes 13 13 100%
Hope Survives 6 6 100%
Kings County Act 28 28 100%
Kings VASH 5 1 20%
Total 64 57 89%

OTHER PERMANENT HOUSING
HAKC Emergency Housing Voucher 15 14 93%
Total 15 14 93%

RAPID REHOUSING
Bringing Families Home 16 16 100%
HANA 4 4 100%
Housing Support Program 76 76 100%
Kings Rapid Rehousing 1 1 100%
RRH4 Kings 6 6 100%
Total 103 103 100%
Source: Kings Tulare Homeless Alliance, 2023

Page 235 of 1008 ends

D. Special Needs Groups
Kings County and Cities of 2-25 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Table 2-30 lists the shelter facilities in Kings County that served the homeless. It identifies an inventory of 126 emergency shelter beds (78% use rate) , 27 transitional housing beds (89% use rate), 64 permanent supportive housing beds (89% use rate), 15 other permanent housing beds (93% use rate), and 103 rapid rehousing beds (100% use rate) in Kings County.

Additional emergency assistance is provided by the Salvation Army in Hanford, which provides short -term assistance in the form of food, financial assistance for rent and utility bills, motel vouchers and bus or plane tickets. Corcoran Christian Aid provides food, vouchers and other types of emergency financi al assistance within Corcoran.

Despite these services, a significant shortage in emergency shelters and transitional housing remains. In 2007 the State Legislature passed Senate Bill (SB) 2 , which strengthened the planning and zoning requirements for emergency shelters and transitional/supportive housing. SB2 requires that all jurisdictions adopt zoning regulations that allow emergency shelters by -right in at least one zone, subject to objective development standards, or as an alternative, the jurisdiction may meet the need through a mul ti-jurisdictional agreement with up to three adjacent j urisdictions. As noted in the Constraints section, all of the jurisdictions in Kings County have adopted zoning regulations for emergency shelters and transitional/supportive housing in response to SB 2.

Page 236 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2016-2024 2-26 Kings County and Cities of
Draft Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore E. Analysis of At -Risk Housing
State law requires that housing elements include an
analysis of assisted housing projects that are eligible to change from low-income housing to market rate housing
during the next ten years due to termination of subsidy contracts, mortgage prepayment, or expiration of
affordability restrictions. Assisted housing developments include multi- family rental housing that receives
assistance under certain federal and state programs, as well as local programs (e.g., in- lieu fees, inclusionary and/or density bonus programs).

Kings County and its four incorporated cities have 45
projects providing over 2,500 affordable rental units
subsidized through local, state , and federal programs .

Covenants and deed restrictions are used to maintai n the affordability of publicly assisted housing as affordable to low - and moderate -income households. Over time, however, these covenants and use restrictions expire and must be renewed or renegotiated to ensure continued affordability of housing. Table 2-31 shows the assisted rental projects in Kings County for which affordability controls are currently in place.

Of the 45 housing projects, there are 13 projects (highlighted in the table) that have affordability covenants expiring in the year 2032 or earlier, and therefore, are at risk of conversion to market rate. In addition, the California Housing Partnership’s 2023 Affordable Homes At -Risk report indicated that 446 homes were at risk of conversion, with 248 at very high risk, 137 at high risk, and 61 at moderate risk of conversion.

The list of at-risk assisted housing projects identified in Table 2-31 include:
• Wien Manor (City of Avenal) - expires 2027
• Carolyn Apartments (City of Corcoran) - expires 2032
• Corcoran Garden Apartments (City of Corcoran) - expires 2032 • Whitley Gardens I (City of Corcoran) - expires 2029
• Amberwood I (City of Hanford) - expires 2030
• Amberwood II (City of Hanford) - expires 2031
• Cedarbrook (City of Hanford) - expires 2030
• Hanford Senior Villas (City of Hanford) - expires 2032 • Kings View Hanford (City of Hanford) - expires 2031
• View Road Apartments (City of Hanford) - expires 2031 • Lemoore Elderly (City of Lemoore) - expires 2032
• Lemoore Villa (City of Lemoore) - expires 2032
• Kettleman City Apartments (Unincorporated) - expires 2032

Page 237 of 1008 ends

E. Analysis of At-Risk Housing
Kings County and Cities of 2-27 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Table 2-31
Assisted Housing Units
Project/Jurisdiction
Year
Built
Total
Units
Low Income
Units Assistance Program
Covenant
Expires
Avenal
El Palmar Apartments 2004 81 80 TCAC, RDA, CCRC (Large Family) 2059 Hearthstone Village 2005 81 80 TCAC (Large Family) 2060 Pleasant Valley Manor Apts. 1986 40 39 USDA Rural Dev, Section 515 (Family) 2036 Villa Esperanza 2008 81 80 TCAC (Large Family) 2063
Wien Manor 1983 40 38 HUD, Section 515 (Family) 2027
Totals - Avenal

323 317

Corcoran

Avalon Family Apartments N/A 56 55 TCAC (Large Family) 2035 Carolyn Apartments 1983 40 38 HUD, Section 515 (Family) 2032 Corcoran Family Apartments 2009 69 68 TCAC (Large Family) 2064 Corcoran Garden Apartments 2002 38 38 TCAC, Section 515 (Large Family) 2032 Corcoran Station Senior Apt 1997 44 44 CHRPR, RDA, HOME (Elderly) 2047 Kings Manor 2004 81 80 TCAC, Bonds (Large Family) 2059 Saltair Place 2004 42 40 TCAC (Large Family) 2059
Valley View Village 1966 100 100 HUD N/A
Westgate Manor 1985 45 44 Section 515 (Elderly, Disabled) 2035 Whitley Gardens I 1979 63 62 USDA Section 515 2029
Whitley Gardens II 1984 24 24 USDA Section 515) 2035
Totals - Corcoran

602 593

Hanford

Amberwood I 1996 48 42 USDA Rural Dev, Sec. 515 (Family) 2030 Amberwood II 1981 40 39 USDA RD and HUD, Sec 515 (Family) 2031 Cameron Commons 1982 32 32 RHCP perpetuity
Casa Del Sol Apartments 1997 80 79 TCAC (Large Family) 2052 Cedarbrook 1999 70 70 TCAC (Large Family) 2030
Hanford Senior Villas 1982 48 47 USDA Section 515 2032
Heritage Park at Hanford 1997 81 80 TCAC (Senior) 2047
Kings View Apartments Inc N/A N/A 10 N/A N/A
Kings View Hanford N/A 10 10 HUD 2031
Lincoln Plaza 2006 40 39 TCAC (Large Family) 2061
Sunnyside Village 1969 150 150 HUD perpetuity
Tierra Vista Apartments 2010 48 48 TCAC/HOME 2065
View Road Apartments 1983 121 120 USDA Rural Development (Elderly) 2031 Totals - Hanford

768 766

Lemoore

Alderwood 1996 80 79 TCAC (Large Family) 2051
Antlers Hotel 2003 10 10 CDBG/RDA 2058
Brookfair Manor 1968 72 72 FDIC Affordable Housing Prog (Family) 2052 Cinnamon Villas 2013 80 79 USDA RUC/LIHTC RUC
Kings River Apartments 1986 44 43 USDA, Section 515 2034 Lemoore Elderly 1987 23 23 USDA, Section 515 2032
Lemoore Villa 1979 28 28 USDA, Section 515 2032
Montclair Apartments 1999 80 79 TCAC (Large Family) 2054 Montgomery Crossing 2009 57 56 USDA Section 515 2064
Mountain View Apartments 1988 39 38 HUD, Section 515 2037 Villa San Joaquin 1975 36 35 TCAC, Section 515 (Non-Targeted) 2059 Westberry Square Apartments 1998 100 99 TCAC (Large Family) 2053 Totals - Lemoore

649 641

Unincorporated Area

Armona Village 1986 33 32 USDA Rural Development, Section 515 2033 Kettleman City Apartments 1983 40 40 USDA Rural Development, Sec 514/516 2032 Single Family Homes (various) 1980s 7 7 Public Housing perpetuity Sycamore Court 1966 118 118 HUD perpetuity
Totals – Unincorporated Area 198 197
Grand Total – Kings County 2,540 2,514

I I

Page 238 of 1008 ends

Chapter 2. Housing Needs Assessment
2024-2032 2-28 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
F. Housing Growth Needs

1. Overview of the Regional Housing Needs A ssessment
The Regional Housing Needs A ssessment (RHNA) is a key tool for local governments to plan for anticipated growth. The RHNA quantifies the anticipated need for housing within each jurisdiction for the 10-year period from January 31, 2024 through January 31, 2032. Communities then determine how they will address this need through the process of updating the Housing Elements of their General Plans.

In determining the housing allocation for the five jurisdictions within Kings County, the Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG) developed an allocation methodology with the assistance of the RHNA Technical Advisory Committee. This methodology takes into account local growth assumptions and considers certain criteria as specified in Government Code §65584(a). The criteria used in this methodology include an analysis of available data on local housing, population, economic, and other growth factors. One growth assumption deemed relevant to housing growth and demand within Kings County is the housing needs of Naval Air Station Lemoore personnel. Although the housing unit allocations in the RHNA are not required to take into account the military base, the Indian reservation, or prison populations, the Naval Air Station Lemoore is identified as a relevant factor. Using the assumptions and methodology detailed within the RHNA plan, KCAG in coordination with the RH NA Technical Advisory Committee derived the distribution of each jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need and allocated the units according to the four income categories for housing affordability.

Additionally, State law requires that planning for housing be coordinated and integrated with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). To achieve this requirement, the RHNA plan must allocate housing units within the region consistent with the development pattern include d in the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). In September 2022, KCAG adopted the 2022 RTP/SCS update, which incorporates assumptions for housing and employment growth that affect future transportation needs. To achieve the RHNA consistency requirement, this RHNA used the same RTP assumptions for future housing development from the present (2022) to the RTP/SCS 2050 horizon year
The goal of the RHNA Plan is to promote a fair distribution of attainable housing among the four cities and the unincorporated County in a way that also helps meet the state’s housing goals. Attainable housing is defined as housing that is both sufficient in supply and affordably priced. The total housing units specified in the RHNA plan for each jurisdiction are not to be construed as quotas for development. The RHNA Plan only determines the number and affordability of housing units that jurisdictions need to plan for through land use policies, regulations, infrastructure plans, and other housing assistance programs. Construction and development of these allocations is not a requirement of the RHNA plan.

Page 239 of 1008 ends

F. Housing Growth Needs
Kings County and Cities of 2-29 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Table 2-32
Regional Housing Needs, 2024-2032
Jurisdiction
Extremely
Low* Very Low* Low Moderate Above Mod Total
Avenal 24 24 37 55 137 277
Corcoran 61 61 116 118 359 715
Hanford 684 685 993 1,066 2,119 5,547
Lemoore 293 293 437 408 898 2,329
Unincorporated 66 66 89 106 234 561
Kings County total 1,128 1,129 1,672 1,753 3,747 9,429
* 50% of VL units are assumed to be extremely-low per state law Source: KCAG 2015

Table 2-32 shows the regional housing needs allocations for Kings County jurisdictions for the 2024-2032 period. All new units built or preserved after January 31, 2024 are credited in the new RHNA period. A discussion of how each jurisdiction’s land inventory accommodates this growth need is provided in Chapter

Page 240 of 1008 ends

Page 241 of 1008 ends

Kings County and Cities of 3-1 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Chapter 3. Resources and Opportunities
This chapter analyzes the resources available for the development, rehabilitation, and preservation of housing in Kings County and the cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore. This includes an evaluation of the extent to which vacant or underutilized land compares to the regional housing needs allocation, and the financial and administrative resources available to support housing activities and implement the housing programs described in Chapter 5.

A. Land Resources
California law ( Government Code §65584) requires that each city and county, when preparing its s tate- mandated housing element, develop local housing programs designed to address housing needs for all income groups in their community. This concept seeks to ensure that each jurisdiction, to the extent feasible and appropriate, plans for a variety of housing for population growth expected in the region as well as people who might reasonably be expected to reside within the jurisdiction if a variety of housing accommodations appropriate to their needs were available. This section analyzes the capacity for residential development in each jurisdiction and how that capacity compares to the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) identified in the previous chapter.

The current RHNA covers the period January 1, 2024 - January 31, 2032. Jurisdictions must demonstrate that there is adequate capacity to achieve the RHNA targets for all income categories during the planning period based on an analysis of realistic development potential on vacant or underutilized sites.

It is important to recognize that the RHNA is a planning target, not a construction mandate . Since local governments do not build housing, their responsibilities are to create opportunities for residential development for all income levels through appropriate land use plans and regulations, and through implementation of programs designed to facilitate housing development including fair and affordable housing. The focus of these responsibilities is on the provision of housing for lower -income households and persons with special needs since these groups have the greatest difficulty in obtaining adequate and affordable housing.

To fully address RHNA requirements, jurisdictions must demonstrate that there are adequate sites with appropriate zoning and development standards to accommodate their remaining housing need at all affordability levels. To that end, a parcel-specific inventory was prepared by each jurisdiction. The resulting inventory consists of vacant sites or underutilized sites with potential for additional development or redevelopment. Chapter 4 provides an analysis of the appropriateness of zoning regulations and development standards for each jurisdiction to facilitate housing development at all income levels. The land inventory analyses for each jurisdiction with detailed parcel listings and identification of potential development constraints are provided in Appendix B. Sites with Farmland Security Zone or Williamson Act contracts were eliminated from the analysis.

Vacant sites 6,000 square feet of greater for each of the four jurisdictions and unincorporated areas of Kings County (Home Garden, Kettleman City and Stratford) are shown in figures 3-1 to 3-7.

Page 242 of 1008 ends

Kings County and Cities of 3-0 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Figure 3-1 – City of Avenal Vacant Sites 6000 Sq. Ft or Greater

Figure 3-1A - City of Avenal Vacant Sites by Census Tracts

/
Block.G'ol.pl I

17.02 -I --:-::t:L i 7
' ' ,~ fl~', c.._,~--: JJ-'."-.. i.,,.,.,....,.,1
I
~ •• , I i I
- BlockGroup2 i #
City of Avenal Zoning
Vacant Sites 6,000 Square Feet or Greater
City of Avenal
Vacant Land Inventory
Block~l

17.03 LEGEND
Flood Zones
D Vacant Land 6,000 sq ft+
□ city Area
□ Parcels
Zoning
AE
cc
a oc
Ml
a o . PF
Rl
R2
■ RJ
RE
a sc
~ ~ti,:

Maddison Faria
April 11, 2024
Kings County Community
Devek>pment Agency
1'100Wla-,,et,,d,~CA93230
(559)852-2647
o ___ o ~ ===~fL1iles
N
W+E
s
LEGEND
Vacant Land
n FloodZone
D City Boundaries
c::::J Census Blocks
c::::J Census Tracts
Mllppr1$1Med by
Maddison Faria
April 11, 2024
Kings County C:Ommunity
Devvlopment Agency
11001VLJu,"tOl"1 tJ.Jnl!Jl'd,CA9::\2:,0
\559)852-Zf>-17

0.3'

Page 243 of 1008 ends

A. Land Resources
Kings County and Cities of 3-1 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Figure 3-2– City of Corcoran Vacant Sites 6000 Sq. Ft or Greater

Figure 3-2-A – City of Corcoran Vacant Sites by Census Tracts

L J
City of Corcoran and Surrounding Area Zoning
Vacant Sites 6,000 Square Feet or Greater
City of Corcoran and Surroun ~ing Area
Vacant Land Invento 'jY
_J_ _
LEGEND
Flood Zones
D Vacant Land 6,000 sq ~+
D 0ty Area
Parcels
.......... --- -~ ■ =... -■ = -~ -~ = ·--- --- - · :!'.... --........ =· _, ......, ....
2000Sq .l\.
■ -•=· 25005q.tl.. ... •=- .
lOODSq.l\.
" =- ... -,_
--
Map~t,y ;
Maddison Faria
April 11, 2024
IClngs County Community
Devektpment Agency
1400WLaaiyl!lt,,d,Ham)rd,CA9l2lO
($59)1152-2647
._ __ ....,•~·===1MilM
LEGEND
Vacant Land
C Flood Zone
D City Boundaries
D Census Blocks
D Census Tracts
Map~redby:

Maddi son Faria
Apri l 11, 2024
Kings County Community
Development Agency
1400W l aaiyl!M:j,Hamrd,CA fmJO
(~5'J}IJ5N617
-----·-··----1 i!e&

Page 244 of 1008 ends

Chapter 3. Resources and Opportunities
2024-2032 3-2 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Figure 3-3 – City of Hanford Vacant Sites 6000 Sq. Ft. or Greater

Figure 3-3-A – City of Hanford Vacant Sites by Vacant Sites

r----7
; BlockG
'-
G
j
BlodiGroopl
City of Hanford Zoning
Vacant Sites 6,000 Square Feet or Greater
City of Hanford and Unincorporated Area
Vacant Land Inventory
--,- I
T
12 L
81ockGroup2
LEGEND
Flood Zones
0 Vacant Land 6,000 sq ft+
D eity Area
Parcels
Zoning
AP MX·N
• C-H 0
C-N •0-•
C·R PF
• c-s • R·H
•co R·L· 12
• l ·H R-L-5
1-L R·L-8
. MX-C R·M
. MX·D
Mapprepa,redby :

Madd ison Fari a
April 23, 2024
Kings County Community
Devektpment Agency
1'400WuceyBlvd,Hlnford , CA93230
(559)652-2617
LEGEND
Vacant Land
Flood Zone
D City Boundaries
D Census Blocks
D Census Tracts
Mllp pr~r~l:Jy ;
Maddiso n Faria
April 23, 2024
Kings Cou nty Com munity
Devek>pment Agency
l <IOO W l ac,ryBM:j,lilrda'd,CAg3m
(Ss<l)ilS).)647

Page 245 of 1008 ends

A. Land Resources
Kings County and Cities of 3-3 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

Figure 3-4– City of Lemoore Vacant Sites 6000 Sq. Ft. or Greater

Figure 3-4-A – City of Lemoore Vacant Sites by Vacant Sites

City of Lemoore Zoning
Vacant Sites 6,000 Square Feet or Greater
City of Lemoore and Surrounding Unincorporated Area
Vacant Land Inventory

J I I LI
I
HOUSTON AVE.

LEGEND
'"""'"""' 0 Vac.antlald6,000sqft+
□ CityA, ..
e.,,w,
LemooreZonlnQ
""'""' . Agriculture . °"""' -·-
~tlal
. MixedUse,
- ~~ ""'~ "'"""" - ~~ -·-. M!xedUse,
"""''"' eo,,
-Downtown Ponding
MiicedUse,
-Transitional
'"""""'
·=trial -
Ponding
"""
~(PR)
. °"""' --""""""'
()ffia,
Light
""""
·-
SeMceand
lowDeosity
""""'""" """"""'
r=.:ilities
,_ . Rl!gianal
c.ommeroa,
""'"m Traditional
°"""' . ...,_ Residentiill , __
Residerllial
"""""' v.,., ....
-~ °"""' """"""'
Residential
. .......
""'"""""'"'' Maddiso n Faria
April 16, 2024
Kings County Community
Development Agency
l400Wl.acey81Yd,Hadord,CA9lll0
(559)852-2617
;__....; 0a,·5====="'1 iles
LEGEND
Vacant Land
Flood Zone
D City Boundaries
D Census Blocks
D Census Tracts
M"l>P'<!O'"ed""':

Mackllson Fart-,
Aprll11 , 202 ◄
Kings County Community
Developm en1 Agency
! «Kl ~i l..aOly~-..:1, Hao-~. Cl\ ~lilO
(5!9)1152-2&47
'---"'=="", 1ilH

Page 246 of 1008 ends

Chapter 3. Resources and Opportunities
2024-2032 3-4 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore

Figure 3-5 – Kings County Home Garden Vacant Sites 6000 Sq.Ft. or Greater

Figure 3-5-A – Kings County Home Garden Vacant Sites by Census Tracts

Figure 3-6 – Kings County Kettleman City Vacant Sites 6000 Sq.Ft. or Greater I
I
l
Home Garden Community and Su rounding Area Zoning
Vacant Sites 6,000 Square Feet or Greater
□
CJ
~Er1i1
• le:::, I D
§=
City of Lemoore and Surrounding Unincorporated Area
Vacant Land Inventory
-J-
1 I
I I
D
LEGEND
Flood Zones
D Vacant Land 6,000 sq ft+
D oty Area
Parcels
Zoning
OlydHanford County
" AG20
C·R . AG40
• C·S AL10
.1-H . CN
1-L •cs
. HX-C IH
MX-N
Pf
• R·H
R·l·S
R-l.·8
R-M
IL
MU
Pf
R-1-12
R+6
:;:::::R-HJ
RM·l.5
RM-2
RM-)
.... ...

H,p~t,v :

Maddison F•rt•
April 23, 2024
Kings County Community
Devetopment AQency
1400Wlluyllt.d,Hldl:wd,CA9l2l0
(S59)852-2647
LEGEND
Vacant Land
r-----,
Flood Zone
D City Boundaries
D Census Blocks
D Census Tracts
MJpp-q:,il rcdby·
Maddison Fatia
AprilU,2024
Kings County Commu nity
Develop ment Agency
1'!00 wt .... ...,. m..J, l¼-,lun l, CA q31);')
:~IQ)R.P.}M7
-;....--' 'a-·'---,,,, fo~

Page 247 of 1008 ends

A. Land Resources
Kings County and Cities of 3-5 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

Figure 3-6-A – Kings County Kettleman City Vacant Sites by Census Tracts

--
Kettleman City Community Zoning
Vacant Sites 6,000 Square Feet or Greater
Kettleman City Community and Surrounding Area
Vacant Land Inventory
--~
7 1 1
r=
--1_ BlodtGIOup 1

16.01 ~ -,
- ,
""'
LEGEND
Flood Zones
D Vacant Land 6,000 sq ft+
D □tvArea
Parcels
Zoning
AG20 OS
. AG40 PF
ALIO R+I2
. AX R-1-20
§ CH R-1-6
. CN lli R-t--8
CR . RM-1.S
•cs RM-2
~ CT RM· J
. IH RRA
IL RRE
MU . IC-JR
. MU·D • CT·JR
NRC
Hl(l~by:

Maddl9cln F.-ia
April 16,2014
Kings County ComffMlnity
--
J400WUDIV-.-.CA,llJO
(S5')15H64 ?
'"
LEGEND
Vacant Land
Flood Zone
City Boundaries
LJ Census Blocks
CJ Census Tracts
1~
___ 1
~--- ~ - -------.r:::--=_
I
\
~
I
---- - ----- -----<-'
Map prepared by;
Maddison Faria
April 11, 2024
Kings County Community
Development Agency
1400WLaeeyBIYd,Hl>nfool,CA 93230
{559)852-2647

0.1 o.~ iles

Page 248 of 1008 ends

Chapter 3. Resources and Opportunities
2024-2032 3-6 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Figure 3-7 – Kings County - Stratford Vacant Sites 6000 Sq. Ft. or Greater

Figure 3-7-A – Kings County - Stratford Vacant Sites 6000 by Census Tracts

Block Group I
I
I
Stratford Community Zoning
Vacant Sites 6,000 Square Feet or Greater
Stratford Community and Surrounding Area
Vacant Land Inventory

16.01 I
BlodG roup3
I I
\
N
W+E
s
LEGEND
Flood Zones
D Vacant Land 6,000 sq ft+
O atvArea
Parcels
Zoning
••G4o
AL10
=ot
CR
•cs
IH
IL
. MU-0
Pf
R-1-12
R+20
R-1-6
RM·2
RM-3
,.._,~by;
Maddlson Faria
~U, 2024
Kings County Community
DeYetopment Agency
l«IOW'--"'l!hd.~CA932XI
(5S9)115,2-2647
LEGEND
Vacant Land
Flood Zone
City Boundaries
Census Blocks
Census Tracts
Mapprt'!p,ll"OOby:

Maddison Fari a
April 11, 2024
King s County Community
Development Agency
1400Wux:s>yBl.-d,Hanford,CA9l230
(~S9~2-21j<!7

Page 249 of 1008 ends

B. Financial and Administrative Resources
Kings County and Cities of 3-7 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
B. Financial and Administrative Resources
Kings County jurisdictions have access to a variety of local, state, federal, and private resources to assist in the production of affordable housing for extremely-low, very-low, low- and moderate-income households.

In addition, various nonprofit and for -profit agencies may have the administrative capacity to help the jurisdictions further their housing goals. The following section describes the most sign ificant funding sources currently used by cities and the County, and the agencies that can help achieve the housing goals described in Chapter 5.

1. Financial Resources
Home Investment Partnership s (HOME): The federal HOME Program offers funding for local jurisdictions to improve and/or expand the supply of affordable housing opportunities for lower -income households. All projects and programs funded with HOME funds must be targeted to very- low- and low- income households and may have requirements for matching funds from non- federal resources equal to 25% of the requested funds. All of the jurisdictions in Kings County must apply to state HCD for HOME funds annually on a competitive basis. HOME grants are often provided in partnership with local nonprofit groups to fund building, buying, and/or rehabilitating affordable housing for rent or homeownership or providing direct rental assistance to low-income households. Funds are awarded annually and its flexibility allows local jurisdictions to utilize the funds for grants, direct loans, loan guarantees, other forms of credit enhancements, rental assistance or security deposits. Recently, the cities of Avenal and Hanford received HOME grants for first-time homebuyer loans and housing rehabilitation loans. Lemoore received first-time homebuyer grant funds while Kings County and Hanford received Rental New Construction grant funding.

When HOME funds are combined with other federal programs, the impact can be much greater than implementing one program. All Kings County jurisdictions have to review carefully about how these programs can be combined in projects to achieve the greatest return for their resources , while ensuring compliance with all of the HOME requirements.

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG): The objectives of the CDBG program are to develop viable communities by the provision of decent affordable housing, a suitable living environment, and to expand economic opportunities, principally for the benefit of Low - and Moderate-Income (LMI) persons, families, households, and neighborhoods. CDBG funds can be used for a variety of activities, including housing acquisition, housing rehabilitation, new construction, public works, and community facilities. Each year, jurisdictions may apply for up to $800,000 under both the General Allocation and Economic Development components of the CDBG programs. The maximum amount per application is $500,000. In addition, grants of up to $70,000 per year from the General Planning and Technical Assistance allocation and $70,000 per year for the Economic Development Planning and Technical Assistance are awarded and do not count toward the $800,000 cap.

Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program (AHSC): The AHSC Program is an important part of California’s climate and equity strategy by funding affordable housing and transportation projects near jobs, schools, and other daily destinations. The purpose of the AHSC Program is to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through projects that implement land use, housing, transportation, and agricultural land preservation practices to support infill and compact development, and that support related and coordinated public policy objectives, HSC provides funding for affordable housing developments (new construction or renovation) and transportation infrastructure. This may include sustainable transportation

Page 250 of 1008 ends

Chapter 3. Resources and Opportunities
2024-2032 3-8 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
infrastructure, such as new transit vehicles, sidewalks, and bike lanes; transportation-related amenities, such as bus shelters, benches, or shade trees; and other programs that encourage residents to walk, bike, and use public transit.

AHSC funds both loans for affordable housing, and grants for housing-related infrastructure, transportation projects, and community programming. The housing loan is provided at the time of contract signing, shortly after awards are made, and used to close the awardee's construction loan. Grant funds are provided on a reimbursement basis. Historically, most successful awards have included a partnership between developers of affordable and mixed-income housing, local governments, regional transportation agencies, and public transit providers. The AHSC Program includes three eligible Project Area Types: 1) Transit- Oriented Development (TOD) Project Areas; 2) Integrated Connectivity Project (ICP) Project Areas, and 3) Rural Innovation Project Areas (RIPA). Applicants who receive awards are responsible for monitoring and reporting their projects’ emissions reductions using a quantification methodology certified by the California Air Resources Board

2. Administrative Resources
Described below are the major public and non-profit agencies that have been involved in housing activities or are interested in housing activities in Kings County. These agencies play important roles in meeting the housing needs of the community. In particular, they are involved in the improvement of the housing stock, provision of affordable housing, homeownership assistance, and rental assistance to households in need.

Self Help Enterprises: Incorporated in 1965, Self-Help Enterprises of Visalia is a non-profit housing developer that assists low-income residents of rural areas improve their living conditions with housing and related services through the following core activities:
• New construction of single-family homes with requirements for sweat equity and shared labor • Rental housing development and acquisition which includes onsite services that enrich the lives of residents
• Technical assistance and leadership development in rural communities with clean water, sanitary sewer and other infrastructure challenges
• Professional services to cities and counties addressing housing and community development needs, including housing rehabilitation and homebuyer financial assistance • Asset management of rental housing that promotes preservation and long-term sustainability • Training and counseling assistance to promote successful homeownership outcomes • Collaboration with partners to shape strong communities where families thrive Self-Help Enterprises is actively involved in helping farm laborers and other low -income families in becoming homeowners through both training and supervision as self-help builders, and assembling public and private funds in support of new construction. Self-Help Enterprises also develops multi-family housing and administers housing programs for all jurisdictions in Kings County on a contract basis.

Housing Authority of Kings County (HAKC): The Housing Authority’s mission is to promote decent, safe, and affordable housing and economic opportunity to low -income families throughout Kings County and its four incorporated cities . Approximately 1,090 individuals and families receive rental assistance through Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher and affordable housing programs. Following are the available affordable housing solutions:
• 688 Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (Varies According to Funding)

Page 251 of 1008 ends

C. Opportunities for Energy Conservation
Kings County and Cities of 3-9 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
• 268 Public Housing Units
• 32 State Housing Apartments
• 6 Foster Youth Transitional Housing Program Slots
• 45 Farm Labor Housing Residences
• 44 Senior Citizen Apartments
• 1 Market Rate Single Family Home.

C. Opportunities for Energy Conservation
Avenal
The City of Avenal has collaboration with Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Southern California Gas Company (SCG), and the VIEW Partnership to provide businesses, homeowners, renters and even other local governments energy saving resources. Throughout the collaboration, the city also offers rebates and incentives to homeowners and renters to reduce energy use. with energy audits and to provide them with resources to obtain low energy products such as generator/battery, smart thermostat, electric heat pump water heaters & air conditioners, energy efficient appliances, lights and insulation.

Corcoran
The City of Corcoran’s Energy Conservation and Efficiency Project is to identify and implement energy efficiency opportunities in the city. The city engaged Engie Services U.S Inc in 2021 to do a comprehensive review of energy use and Engie identified solar panel projects, variable frequency drive upgrade, LED lighting upgrades and a battery energy storage system to reduce City’s energy use. The city has entered into a 20-year equipment leasing agreement to support these initiatives. In addition, the city provides expedited permit processing for residential solar energy equipment installations and provides information on energy audits, and how low-income households can access energy discount programs.

PG&E’s California Alternate Rates for Energy Program (CARE) offers 20% discount or more on gas and electricity and Family Electric Rate Assistance Program (FERA) offers monthly discount of 18% on electricity to low income households with three or more people. In addition, the Housing Plan includes Program 2.15 to refer lower-income households to the Kings Community Action Organization and other community services agencies that provide financial assistance to offset the cost of home weatherization, heating (including solar photovoltaic water heater systems) and cooling.

Hanford
The City of Hanford has implemented sustainable energy solutions across 16 high energy use sites, including City Hall, the WWTP, the Train Station, the Fire Station, the Airport, the Police Department, the City Auditorium and several parks. Additionally, LED lighting at most City buildings, parks and traffic intersections improved efficiency, performance, visibility, and nighttime roadway safety.

The city supports the Weatherization and Energy Savings Assistance Programs with Kings County and provides information to its residents. Support is also extended to low-income households with regard to information on energy cost discount programs.

In addition, the city requires or encourages the following in residential developments:

• Street trees which reduce heat generated from pavement • Landscaping in new development to shade parking lots

Page 252 of 1008 ends

Chapter 3. Resources and Opportunities
2024-2032 3-10 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
• Solar photovoltaic panels as options
• Require developers to exceed Title 24 Standards (Heat & Energy) by 10% • Increased residential densities
• High Albedo (light-colored roofs are often required)
Lemoore
The Community Design Element of the City ’s General Plan incorporates several policies and implementation actions that support energy conservation and green development. These include:

• Sustainable site planning and green building practices requiring new development to incorporate site planning and building design to incorporate passive heating and natural lighting, reduce surface water runoff, passive solar design, energy efficiency, where feasible. • Incorporate green building standards into the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code to ensure a high level of energy efficiency in new development, including requiring the use of Energy Star appliances in new development and substantial renovations, requiring all new development to qualify for the equivalent of “LEED Silver” rating or better, requiring all new residential development to be pre-wired for optional photovoltaic energy systems and/or solar water heating, and requiring all new projects that will use more than 40,000 kilowatt-hours per year of electricity to install photovoltaic energy systems.
• Environmentally responsible outdoor lighting, energy efficient new street lighting and all outdoor lighting equipment to be energy efficient.

Kings County
Kings County has 21,000 acres of commercial solar development (2022). Kings County has one of the highest per-capita industrial solar power capacities in the state, according to clean energy report released by Next 10, a San Francisco based think tank. The Kings County Community Development Agency provides expedited plan check and permit processing for residential projects designed to comply with the voluntary residential requirements of the California Green Building Standards Code. Expedited plan check/permit processing is also given to photovoltaic systems that provide energy for residential uses.

Weatherization Assistance is available to low-income families and individuals throughout Kings County to improve energy efficiency in the home such as aerators, low-flow shower heads, water heater blankets, minor home repairs to broken windows and doors, and heating/cooling repair or replacement when needed. PG&E's Energy Savings Assistance Program provides income-qualified renters and homeowners with energy saving services including:
• Home including compact fluorescent lights, caulking, showerheads, minor home repair and more • Replacement of old refrigerator, furnace and/or water heater • Insulation and weatherproofing services
• ENERGY STAR Advanced LED light bulbs that use up to 80 percent less energy. • Energy savings tips
In addition, lower-income households are referred to the Kings Community Action Organization and other community services agencies that provide financial assistance to offset the cost of home weatherization, heating (including solar photovoltaic water heater systems) and cooling.

Page 253 of 1008 ends

D. Housing Densities, Potential Growth and Vacant Land
Kings County and Cities of 3-11 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
D. Housing Densities, Potential Growth and Vacant Land

1. General Plan and Zoning
Avenal
Avenal’s 2035 General Plan was adopted in 2018 and includes 5 residential land use designations:

Residential Estate, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential and Mixed-Use Zones. The General Plan land use element allows a density range of 1 to 2 dwellings per acre in Residential Estate zone, 4 to 7 dwellings per acre in low-density residential zone, 10 to 15 units per acre in medium density zone and 14 to 29 units per acre in high density residential zone. Mixed use zone encourages a mixture of employment-generated uses and residences in the southeastern portion of the city near 36th Avenue and Salem Avenue and allows 1 4 to 29 dwelling units per acre. Higher densities in the mixed-use zone will be considered on a case- by-case basis through PD process where measurable community benefit is demonstrated such as affordable housing units, and infrastructure is available. Height limit is 35 feet but structures up to 65 feet may be permitted with a CUP.

Corcoran
Corcoran’s 2005-2025 General Plan was adopted in 2014 and includes 4 residential land use designations:

Very Low Density Residential, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and High-Density Residential Zones. The General Plan land use element allows a density range of 1 to 2 dwellings per acre in Very Low-Density Residential zone, 4.5 to 7.5 dwellings per acre in low-density residential zone, 10 to 15 units per acre in medium density zone and 14 to 29 units per acre in high density residential zone. Higher densities will be considered on a case -by-case basis through PD process where measurable community benefit is demonstrated such as affordable housing units and where infrastructure is available. The City has identified Arterial and Collector locations throughout the city and in-fill locations in the downtown area for high density residential developments.

Hanford
The City of Hanford adopted its updated 2035 General Plan in 2017. It includes several residential land use designations, mainly, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential , High Density Residential, Office Residential, Neighborhood Mixed Use, Corridor Mixed Use and Downtown Mixed-Use zones. The General Plan Land Use & Community Design section allows a density rate of 2 to 10 units per acre in low density residential zone, 7 to 20 dwelling units in medium density residential zone, and 14 to 29 units in high density residential zone . The intent of the mixed- use zone land use designations is to provide for a mixture of stores, services, restaurants, offices and high-density homes (dwelling units) in close proximity to these services to reduce auto dependency and increase the use of public transit.

Lemoore
Lemoore 2030 General Plan was adopted in 2008. It includes several residential land use designations:

Agriculture/Rural Residential (0.05 units per gross acre), Very Low Density Residential (2 to 3 dwelling units per acre), Low Density Residential (3 to 7 dwelling units per acre), Low-Medium Density Residential (7 to 12 units per acre), Medium Density Residential (12 to 17 units per acre) and High Density Residential

Page 254 of 1008 ends

Chapter 3. Resources and Opportunities
2024-2032 3-12 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
(17 to 25 units per acre) intended for development along arterials and in the downtown area. The Mixed- Use designation is intended to provide for retail, residential, office, business, personal services, public and institutional uses in neighborhood-oriented centers with residential densities ranging from 8 to 20 units per gross acre.

Kings County
Kings County’s 2035 General Plan was adopted in 2010 with residential land use designations primarily used in the ‘Urban Fringe’ and the ‘Community Districts’ of Armona, Home Garden, Kettleman City and Stratford where community water and sewer services are provided. There are 7 residential designations in the Plan: Very Low Density Residential (1 dwelling unit per acre), Low Density Residential (1 to 7 dwelling units per acre), Low-Medium Density (1 to 7 dwelling units per acre) , Medium Density (1 to 7 dwel ling units per acre) , Medium High Density (7 to 24 dwelling units per acre) , High Density (7 to 24 dwelling units per acre) and Very High Density (14 to 29 dwelling units per acre). In addition, the General Plan also has a Mixed-Use designation intended for unincorporated community downtowns and community districts.

2. Potential Growth and Vacant Land
The California government forecast indicates that the Kings County population is expected to expand to 159,854 by 2035 from a population of 152,200 in 2020. The average annual growth rate is less than 1 percent per year. Between 2017 and 2022, an average of 380 homes were started per year in Kings County, mostly single-family homes. It is expected that this trend will continue during this housing element period of an average of 400 homes per year.

Avenal
Avenal’s population saw an increase of 5.7% between 2000 and 2010 and a decline of 11.7% between 2010 and 2020. The General Plan estimates Avenal’s population to grow from 13,696 in 2020 to an estimated 16,050 persons by the year 2035. Growth has been located within the present City boundary and concentrated in a northwest to southeast direction, and this trend is projected to continue.

The General Plan identifies 5,254 acres of land as vacant/undeveloped. The site inventory identifies 519 acres of low -density residential land, 25 acres of medium density residential land and 22 acres of high-density residential land. Land availability is not a constraint for future growth in Avenal.

The city of Avenal’s Vacant and Sites Inventory table can be viewed in Appendix B.

Corcoran
Corcoran’s population increased 71.62% to 24,813 between 2000 and 2010 and decreased by about 10% between 2010 to 2020 to 22,339. Corcoran is currently growing at a rate of 0.33% annually and it is expected that the overall growth rate will be less than 1% annually.

The site inventory identifies 412 acres of low density residential, approximately 24 acres of medium density residential and around 8 acres of high density residential/mixed use zones.

The city of Corcoran’s Vacant and Sites Inventory table can be viewed in Appendix B.

Page 255 of 1008 ends

D. Housing Densities, Potential Growth and Vacant Land
Kings County and Cities of 3-13 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Hanford
Hanford General Plan projects an average annual growth rate of 2.1 % till 2035, after taking into account a likely faster growth rate in the cities of Kings County. Between 1990 and 2020, Hanford experienced around 90% gr owth to its 1990 population. However, Hanford experienced <1% overall growth between 2010 and 2020. Therefore, the assumption of 2.1% annual growth in the General Plan is optimistic and should be more than sufficient to meet any future demand.

The General Plan identifies 2,202 acres of vacant low-density residential land, 472 acres of medium density residential land, 123 acres of high-density residential land and 20 acres of office residential land. The City’s site inventory has 13.22 acres of land zone d as Office Residential,

68.06 acres zone d as High Density Residential, 126.13 acres zone d as Medium Density Residential, 300.58 acres zoned as Low Density Residential/RL5, 7.08 acres zone as Low Density Residential/RL8 and 34.69 acres zoned as Very Low Density Residential/R -1-12. In addition to this, 26.27 acres were annexed from unincorporated Kings County.

The city of Hanford's Vacant and Sites Inventory table can be viewed in Appendix B.

Lemoore
Lemoore has been growing at a rate of less than 1 percent per year, with residential developments mostly single-family homes and multi-family condominiums in the northeast and western quadrant of the city planning area.

Over 40 percent of land in the Planning Area is under Williamson Act contracts. The General Plan also identified 2,082 acres or 17 percent of the land as vacant land. Out of the vacant land, more than 50 percent is zoned for low density single family residential, around 500 acres is very low density residential, 200 acres is low -medium density residential, 74 acres is medium density residential, 35 acres of Mobile Home Parks, 118 acres of mixed- use land and 48 acres of neighborhood commercial land. The city of Lemoore’s Vacant and Sites Inventory table can be viewed in Appendix B.

Kings County
The unincorporated areas of Kings County have been experiencing a decline in population since 2000, with a decline of 12% between 2000 and 2010 and a decline of 8% between 2010 and 2020.

It is not expected that this trend will reverse significantly in the near future.

The General Plan has earmarked 1073 acres of land designated for very low density (RRE/RRA), 324 acres for low density (R -1-20), 163 acres of Low Medium Density (R -1-12), 667 acres of Medium Density (R-1-8 or R-1-6), 226 acres of Medium High Density (RM-3), 83 Acres of High Density (RM-2) and 15 acres of very high density (RM-1.5). There are also 38 acres of Downtown Mixed Use (MU-D) designated land, 86 acres of Mixed Use (MU) land and 34 acres of Reserve Mixed Use (MU-(R)). There is sufficient vacant land available to meet future growth. The Kings County Vacant and Sites Inventory table can be viewed in Appendix B.

Realistic
Capacity
Government Code Section 65583.2(c) requires, as part of the analysis of available sites, a local government to calculate the projected residential development capacity of the sites identified in the housing element that can realistically be achieved. The housing element must describe the

Page 256 of 1008 ends

Chapter 3. Resources and Opportunities
2024-2032 3-14 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
methodology used to make this calculation. Jurisdictions have two options to make this calculation.

• Utilize minimum densities (Step 1)
• Utilize adjustment factors (Step 2)

Step1: Utilizing minimum densities to calculate realistic capa city of sites Government Code section 65583.2(c) (1). If the jurisdiction has adopted a law, policy, procedure, or other regulation that requires the development of a site to contain at least a certain minimum residential density, the jurisdiction can utilize that minimum density to determine the capacity of a site.

For the purpose of this analysis, the use of either gross or net acreage is acceptable but should be consistent with the standard the jurisdiction typically uses for determining allowable units for a residential development project.

For example: Site Description Value Size of site (Gross acreage) 3 acres Zoning Residential Multifamily Allowable density 20 (required minimum) – 30 dwelling units per acre

Realistic capacity utilizing minimum 3 X 20 = 60 units

Please note, to meet this standard on a zone that allows for multiple uses, the general plan or zoning must require the specified minimum number of residential units on the identified sites regardless of overlay zones, zoning allowing nonresidential uses, or other factors potentially impacting the minimum density. Otherwise, the capacity of the site must be calculated using the factors outlined in Step 2.

Step 2: Utilizing factors to calculate realistic capacity of sites Government Code section 65583.2(c) (2).

The housing element must describe the methodology used to determine the number of units calculated based on the following factors:

• Land use controls and site improvements requirements, • *NEW* The realistic development capacity for the site, • *NEW* Typical densities of existing or approved residential developments at a similar affordability level in that jurisdiction,
• *NEW* The current or planned availability and accessibility of sufficient water, sewer, and dry utilities.

Land Inventory Summary

The projected residential capacity of different land use zones in each of the jurisdictions in Kings County was calculated based on the minimum densities. Therefore, the proposed number of dwelling units can realistically be achieved. The vacant site inventory is summarized in Table 3-1.

Page 257 of 1008 ends

D. Housing Densities, Potential Growth and Vacant Land
Kings County and Cities of 3-15 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Table 3-1
Potential New Dwelling Units By Zone

General Plan

Zone

Acres
Potential New Units by Income

Lower
Moderate and
Above

Total

AVENAL
LDR R-1 519 2172 2172
MLDR R-2 25 250 250
MDR R-3 22.7 314 314
Sub-Total 566.7 314 2422 2636

CORCORAN
VLDR/LDR RA/R-1-10/R1-6 428 1940 1940
MDR RM2.5, RM-3 22 177 65 242
HDR/Mixed RM-2, CD, PO 8.5 108 108
Sub-Total 458.5 285 2005 2290

HANFORD
VLDR/LDR RL5/RL8/R-1-12 342 1318 1318
MDR RM-3 126 611 494 1105
OR/HDR/Mixed OR/RM-2 81 1276 1276
Sub-Total 549 2794 3892 6686

LEMOORE
VLDR/LDR RL5/RVLD/RLD 332 990 990
MDR RLMD/RMD/RN 146 599 671 1270
HDR/Mixed RM-2, OR, PO 77 626 626
Sub-Total 555 1225 1661 2886
KINGS COUNTY (unincorporated)
VLDR/LDR R-1-20/RR/R-1-
12 247 250 250
MDR RM-3/R-1-6/R-
1-8
142

461 461
HDR/Mixed RM-1.5/RM-2 22 175 175
Sub-Total 411 175 711 886
TOTAL 2540.2 3617 7859 11,376

Table 3-2 analyses the sufficiency of land inventory to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for each jurisdiction. This analysis demonstrates that the land inventory in each jurisdiction is adequate to accommodate the overall RHNA targets in all jurisdictions except in Hanford. Also, the land inventory for above moderate-income levels in Lemoore and low-income levels in Kings County unincorporated is slightly below the RHNA target levels for these income categories. As the site inventory is based on the lowest density in the density range, this is not considered an issue. For Hanford, a program will be added to review and update the site inventory to meet the RHNA targets.

Page 258 of 1008 ends

Chapter 3. Resources and Opportunities
2024-2032 3-16 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Table 3-2
Land Inventory and RHNA Targets
Jurisdiction
Income Category
Total EL/VL Low Mod
Above
Mod
Avenal*

RHNA (Table 2-32) 48 37 55 137 277
Housing sites 314 1,923 1,703 2,736
Adequate Capacity? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Corcoran*
RHNA (Table 2-32) 122 116 118 359 715
Housing sites 285 1,110 895 2,290
Adequate Capacity? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Hanford*
RHNA (Table 2-32) 1369 993 1066 2119 5,547
Housing sites 2,794 1182 2709 6,685
Adequate Capacity? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Lemoore*
RHNA (Table 2-32) 586 437 408 898 2329
Housing sites 1,225 935 726 2,886
Adequate Capacity? Yes Yes No Yes
Kings County Unincorporated*
RHNA (Table 2-32) 132 89 106 234 561
Housing sites 175 410 301 886
Adequate Capacity? No Yes Yes Yes
Notes:
*Housing sites capacity has been calculated based on the lowest density applicable by general plan or zoning in each zone and therefore, considered the realistic density

Page 259 of 1008 ends

A. Governmental Constraints
Kings County and Cities of 4-1 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Chapter 4. Constraints
The Kings County jurisdictions recognize that adequate and affordable housing for all income groups strengthens the community. Government policies and regulations can impact the price and availability of housing and, in particular, the provision of affordable housing. Likewise, non-governmental constraints such as land and construction costs, and environmental and infrastructure constraints can also affect housing cost and availability.

This chapter of the Housing Element discusses potential governmental and non- governmental constraints focusing primarily on those constraint areas that may be mitigated through the policies and programs discussed in Chapter 5.

A. Governmental Constraints
Local policies and regulations can impact the price and availability of housing and, in particular, the provision of affordable housing. Land use controls, residential development standards, and permit processing procedures may present constraints to the maintenance, development, and improvement of housing.

1. Land Use Plans and Regulations
The jurisdictions’ General Plan Land Use Elements contain the primary policies that guide residential development. These policies are implemented through several types of ordinances, including the Zoning and Subdivision ordinances. Zoning regulations establish the amount and distribution of different land uses within the jurisdictions, while subdivision regulations establish requirements for the division and improvement of land.
a. General Plan Land Use Designations
Each city and county in California must prepare a comprehensive, long-term General Plan to guide its future.

The land use element of the General Plan establishes the basic land uses and density of development within each jurisdiction. Under state law, the General P lan elements must be internally consistent, and each jurisdiction’s zoning must be consistent with its General Plan. Thus, the land use plan must provide suitable locations and densities to implement the policies of the Housing Element. During the previous planning period General Plan updates were adopted in Corcoran (2014) and Kings County (2010), and updates are currently underway in Avenal and Hanford.

Table 4-1 shows the residential General Plan land use categories for the Kings County jurisdictions. The land use designations support a variety of housing types, ranging from very low -density development, which generally includes single- family homes on large lots to high- density development, which includes multi - family development ranging from 14 to 29 units per acre.

Page 260 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-2 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Table 4-1
General Plan Residential Land Use Categories
Designation
Density
Range
(units/acre Description
Avenal1
Residential Estate 0-2 Single-family detached with lot sizes greater than 20,000 sf Low Density Residential 2-10 Single-family detached with lot sizes greater than 6,000 sf Medium Density Residential 10-15 Duplex, triplex and fourplex development High Density Residential 15-29 Multi-family apartments and condominiums Downtown Commercial n.a. Residential use allowed in conjunction with commercial Community Commercial n.a. Residential use allowed in conjunction with commercial Corcoran
Very Low Density Residential 0-2 Single-family lots of one-half acre or more Low Density Residential 4.5 – 10 Single-family detached in traditional subdivisions or clustered planned developments. Lot sizes generally are 4,500 - 7,500 sf.

Medium Density Residential 10-15 Duplex, triplex and fourplex development.

High Density Residential 15-29 Multi-family apartments and condominiums.

Hanford2

Low Density Residential 2-10 Single family detached with lot sizes from 5,000 sf to 12,000 sf.

Medium Density Residential
Office Residential
Mixed-Use
7-20 Duplexes, zero lot lines, patio homes, and townhomes on lot sizes from 5,000 sf. with minimum 3,000 sf per dwelling unit.

High Density Residential 14-29 Multi-family apartments and condominiums development. Minimum lot area 5,000 sf with minimum 1,500 sf per dwelling unit Lemoore
Agriculture/Rural Residential 0-1 Single-family detached in rural and semi-rural areas with lot sizes greater than 40,000 sf
Very Low Density Residential 1-3 Single-family detached in semi-rural area with lot sizes between 15,000 sf to 40,000 sf
Low Density Residential 3-7 Single-family detached in typical residential subdivision with lot sizes from 7,000 to 15,000 sf
Low Medium Density
Residential
7-12 Small lot single-family, attached single-family and duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and townhomes with lot sizes from 3,000 -7,000 sf.

Medium Density Residential 12-17 Apartments and townhomes with lot sizes from 2,500 -3,600 sf.

High Density Residential 17-25 Multi-family apartments and townhomes, with lot sizes 1,700- 2,500 sf.

Mixed Use 8-20 Multi-family and commercial uses.

Page 261 of 1008 ends

A. Governmental Constraints
Kings County and Cities of 4-3 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Table 4-1
General Plan Residential Land Use Categories
Designation
Density
Range
(units/acre Description
Kings County
Very Low Density 0-1 Single-family detached with lot sizes of at least one acre Low Density 1-2 Single-family detached
Low-Medium Density 2-4 Single-family detached
Medium Density 4-7 Single family detached
Medium High Density 7-11 Multi-family apartments and condominiums High Density 11-24 Multi-family apartments and condominiums Very High Density 24+ Multi-family apartments and condominiums Notes:

1. Avenal is currently preparing a General Plan update
Sources: Avenal General Plan, 2018
Corcoran General Plan, 2014
Hanford General Plan, 2017
Lemoore General Plan, 2012
Kings County General Plan, 2010
b. Zoning Designations and Housing Opportunities
Each jurisdiction in Kings County regulates the type, location, density, and scale of residential development through local zoning ordinances. The zoning regulations serve to implement each jurisdiction’s General Plan and are designed to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of residents. Housing Element law requires that jurisdictions facilitate and encourage a range in types and prices of housing for all economic and social groups in the comm unity. This includes single -family and mul ti-family housing, manufactured housing, residential care facilities, emergency shelters, transitional housing, and other housing.

A summary of the residential development permitted by each King County jurisdiction is provided in Table 4-2 through Table 4-6.

Page 262 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-4 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Table 4-2
Permitted Residential Development by Zoning District - City of Avenal Housing Type R-E R-1 R-2 R-3 D-C S-C P-F
Single-Family Detached P P P P P
Single-Family Attached P P
Multi-Family P P C
Mobile Home Park C C C C
Accessory Dwelling Units P P P P
Farmworker Housing P1 P1 P1 P1 P1
Emergency Shelters P C
Transitional and Supportive Housing 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Residential Care Facility (6 or less) P P P P
Residential Care Facility (7 or more) C C C C
Senior Housing/Assisted Living3 C C C C C
Single Room Occupancy C C
Group Home/Boarding House C C C C C
Notes:

P=permitted use; C=conditional use

1. Farmworker housing permitted in conformance with Health & Safety Code 17021.5 and 17021.6.

2. Permitted subject only to the same standards and procedures as apply to dwellings of the same type in the same zone.

3. Conventional senior housing is permitted under the same regulations as multi-family. “Retirement or Rest Home” and “Convalescent Hospital/Nursing Home” are conditionally permitted uses.

Source: City of Avenal Zoning Ordinance, 2015

Page 263 of 1008 ends

A. Governmental Constraints
Kings County and Cities of 4-5 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element

Table 4-2 Continued
Permitted Residential Development by Zoning District - City of Corcoran Housing Type RA R-1 RM Other
Single-Family Detached P P P P
Multi-Family - - P P3
Mobile Home Parks C C C -
Accessory Dwelling Units P P P -
Farmworker Housing1 P2 P2 P2 P2
Emergency Shelters - - - P4
Transitional and Supportive Housing P P P -
Residential Care Facility (6 or less) P P P P5
Residential Care Facility (7 or more) C C C P6
Senior Housing/Assisted Living - C C -
Group Homes (includes boarding houses) P7 P7 P8 -
Single Room Occupancy - - - C9
Notes:

P=permitted use; A=administrative permit; C=conditional use Other = CN, CC, CH, CD, CS, PO

1. Employee housing with up to 12 units or 36 beds permitted by-right in the A zone and larger facilities permitted by CUP.

2. Employee housing for 6 or fewer persons permitted as a single-family use. CUP required for housing with 7+ occupants.

3. Permitted in CD and PO zones.

4. Emergency shelters permitted by-right in the CS zone

5. Permitted by-right in PO zone and by administrative permit in CN, CC, CH, CD and CS zones

6. Permitted by CUP in PO zone and by administrative permit in CN, CC, CH, CD and CS zones

7. 6 or fewer residents permitted by-right

8. 6 or fewer residents; larger facilities permitted by CUP in the RM and PO zones

9. Permitted by CUP in CN, CC, CH, CD and CS zones

Source: City of Corcoran Zoning Ordinance, 2015

Page 264 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-6 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore

Table 4-2 Continued
Permitted Residential Development by Zoning District - City of Hanford Housing Type
R-L
5,8,12 R-M R-H OR
C-
N,R,S,
H
MX-

N,C MX-D
Single-Family Detached P P P P - - P
Single-Family Attached P6 -P P P - - P
Multi-Family C6 P P P C1 P1 P
Mobilehome Parks - C - - - - -
Accessory Dwelling Units A A A P - - -
Farmworker Housing3 P4 P4 P4 P4 P4- P4 P4
Emergency Shelters - C C P - - -
Transitional and Supportive Housing 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Residential Care Facility (6 or less) P P P P - P P-
Residential Care Facility (7 or more) C C C C - P P-
Senior Housing/Assisted Living - - C C - C C-
Single Room Occupancy C5,6 C5 C5 P5 - C,P P-
Notes:

P=permitted use; C=conditional use; A= Use Requires Administrative Use Permit

1. Dwellings over a permitted use.

2. Permitted subject only to the same standards and procedures as for other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone

3. Employee housing with up to 12 units or 36 beds permitted as an agricultural use.

4. Employee housing for up to 6 persons is considered a family use.

5. Listed as “Boarding and Rooming Houses”

6. R-L-5 – Single Family Attached/Multi-family dwelling, triplex or fourplex/Boarding or Rooming House

Source: City of Hanford Zoning Ordinance, 2017

Page 265 of 1008 ends

Page 266 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-0 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore

Table 4-2 Continued
Permitted Residential Development by Zoning District - City of Lemoore Housing Type AR RVLD RLD RN RLMD RMD RHD
Single-Family Detached P P P P P P -N
Multi-Family N- N N N P P P
Mobile Home Park -N C C C C A A
Accessory Dwelling Units7 -P P P P P P P
Employee/Farmworker Housing P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 N-
Emergency Shelters2 N- N N N N N N
Transitional and Supportive
Housing

P P P P P P P
Residential Care Facility (6 or
less)3

P P P P P P P
Residential Care Facility (7 or
more)4
-P P P P P P P
Senior Housing/Assisted Living P5 P5 P5 P5 P5 P5 P5
Single Room Occupancy6 -N N N N N N P
Notes:

P=permitted use; A=administrative use permit; C=conditional use permit; N= not permitted

1. Employee housing for 6 or fewer persons. Employee housing for up to 12 units or 36 beds permitted in the AR and AG zones in conformance with Health & Safety Code Sec. 17021.6 (see Program 4.11)

2. Permitted by-right in CF zone and also by CUP in the ML zone

3. Also permitted by-right in DMX-2, DMX-3 and MU zones and by CUP in DMX-1 zone.

4. Also permitted by CUP in MU and NC zones.

5. Permitted subject to the same use regulations as non-age-restricted housing

6. SROs also permitted by CUP in all DMX zones.

7. Additional Units also allowed by AUP in DMX-2 and DMX-3 zones. Additional dwelling as per S66852.21 permitted in AR, RVLD, RLD, RN, RLMD zones

Source: City of Lemoore Zoning Ordinance, 2023

Page 267 of 1008 ends

Page 268 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-0 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore

Table 4-2 Continued
Permitted Residential Development by Zoning District - Kings County

Housing Type A RR R1 RM C MU PF
Single-Family Detached P P P P - P2
Single-Family Attached - - - P - P2
Multi-Family - - -S P - P2
Mobile/Manufactured Home Parks - C C C - -
Accessory Dwelling Units - P P P - -
Farmworker Housing7 P1 - - - - - -
Emergency Shelters - -C C - - - P
Transitional and Supportive Housing P4 P4 P4 P4 P4 P4 P4 Residential Care Facility (6 or less) P P P P - P P3
Residential Care Facility (7 or more) - - - - - - P3
Senior Housing/Assisted Living - - -
Boarding or Rooming House - C5 - C5 - -
Single Room Occupancy - - - - P6 -
Notes:

P=permitted use; C=conditional use; S= site plan review required

1. Up to 6 units permitted pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sec. 17021.5

2. Permitted by Site Plan Review above or to rear of a commercial use.

3. Care facilities for up to 30 persons permitted by Site Plan Review; larger facilities permitted by CUP

4. Housing for up to 6 persons permitted by-right in Residential, Agriculture and MU zones

5. Boarding houses for up to 30 persons permitted by Site Plan Review; larger facilities permitted by CUP

6. SROs permitted by Site Plan Review in the CS, CH and CR districts. 250-300 sf studio apartment for extremely low-income persons

7. Employee housing is housing unit proving accommodation for 6 or less persons as per S.17021.5, and deemed a single-family structure. Farm housing includes living quarters, dwellings, boarding houses, bunkhouses, mobile homes, manufacture homes Source: Kings County Development Code, 2015 and 2023 update from the County

Page 269 of 1008 ends

Page 270 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-0 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore

As shown in Table 4-2 above, Kings County jurisdictions allow for a wide variety of housing types, including single-family and multi-family residences at a variety of densities that facilitate market rate and affordable housing projects. Mixed use is also allowed in designated areas of all jurisdictions.

All jurisdictions allow for the development of manufactured housing and mobile homes, providing a valuable source of affordable housing for seniors, families, and farmworkers. In accordance with state law, all jurisdictions allow accessory dwelling units as a permitted use in all single -family zones. Low -income housing can be accommodated in all districts permitting residential use in Kings County jurisdictions including mixed-use districts.
c. Special Needs Housing
To further fair housing opportunities, Kings County jurisdictions provide for a range of housing opportunities for persons with special needs, including those in residential care facilities, persons with disabilities, the elderly, farmworkers, persons needing emergency shelter or transitional living arrangements, and single - room-occupancy units. Many of these groups also fall under the category of extremely- low-income households. Table 4-2 through Table-6 above show the zoning requirements for each jurisdiction with respect to permitted and conditionally permitted special needs housing types. Each jurisdiction’s provisions for these housing types are discussed further below.

Extremely-Low-Income Households
Many of the persons and households discussed in this section under the topic of special needs fall within the extremely-low-income category, which is defined as 30% or less of area median income of $63,267 in Kings County (2021. The extremely low-income limits in Kings County are $17,350-$32,700 (2023) and acutely low income is $8,800-$16,550 (2023).

As shown earlier in Table 2 -7, both Avenal and Corcoran owner and renter households had higher percentages of extremely low -income households as compared to other areas of Kings County. 7.9% of households in Avenal and 10.3% of households in Corcoran have extremely low incomes. More than one- third (34%) of Avenal renter households and one -quarter (25%) of Corcoran renter households were in the extremely-low income category.

A variety of policies and programs described in Chapter 5 address the needs of extremely- low-income households, including persons with disabilities and those in need of residential care facilities. Such programs include housing rehabilitation, preservation of existing affordable units, Section 8 vouchers, provision of adequate sites for new multi-family housing, administrative, regulatory and financial assistance to affordable projects, zoning to encourage and facilitate farmworker housing, emergency shelters, transitional and supportive housing, single room occupancy (SROs) and accessory dwelling units. However, it must be recognized that the development of new housing for the lowest income groups typically requires large public subsidies, and the level of need is greater than can be met due to funding limitations.

Residential Care Facilities
Residential care facilities refer to any family home, group home, or rehabilitation facility that provides non- medical care to persons in need of personal services, protection, supervision, assistance, guidance, or training essential for daily living. Health and Safety Code §§1267.8, 1267.9, 1566.3, 1567.1, and 1568.08 require local governments to treat licensed group homes and residential care facilities with six or fewer residents no differently than other single-family residential uses. “Six or fewer persons” does not include the operator, the operator’s family, or persons employed as staff. Local agencies must allow these licensed residential care facilities in any

Page 271 of 1008 ends

A. Governmental Constraints
Kings County and Cities of 4-1 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
area zoned for residential use, and may not require licensed residential care facilities for six or fewer clients to obtain conditional use permits or variances that are not required of other single-family dwellings.

For all Kings County jurisdictions, the development standards for licensed resid ential care facilities for six or fewer persons are permitted like other residential uses in the same zone. A conditional use permit is required in some jurisdictions for larger residential care facilities for more than six persons. A deviation in site planning requirements and reduction in parking may be granted through the conditional use process. A discussion of each jurisdiction’s regulations for residential care facilities is provided below:
• Avenal –Residential care facilities that serve six or fewer persons are a permitted use in all residential zones. Facilities serving more than six persons are conditionally permitted in all residential zones. These requirements are consistent with state law and do not pose a constraint on the establishment of such facilities.
• Corcoran – Residential care facilities serving six or fewer persons are permitted by -right in all residential zones as well as the Professional Office (PO) zone. Larger care facilities for more than six persons are permitted by CUP in all residential zones and the PO zone and by administrative permit in CN, CC, CH, CD and CS zones. These requirements are consistent with state law and do not pose a constraint on the establishment of care facilities. • Hanford – Residential care facilities that serve six or fewer persons are a permitted use in all residential zones, mixed use zones and the OR zone. Larger residential care facilities are permitted by CUP in all residential zones and are a permitted use in the mixed -use zones.

State- or county-licensed care facilities that provide housing on a temporary basis and that do not require personal supervision or rehabilitation services are conditionally permitted in all residential zones and the OR zone. These regulations are consistent with state law and do not pose a significant constraint on the establishment of residential care facilities. • Lemoore –Residential care facilities that serve six or fewer persons are permitted by-right in all residential and mixed -use zones subject to the same regulations as other residential uses.

Residential care facilities serving more than six persons are also permitted by-right in all residential and mixed used zones, and NC zones. These regulations are consistent with state law.
• Kings County – Under current zoning regulations, residential care facilities that serve six or fewer persons are a permitted use all residential, mixed use , PF and agricultural zones.

Community care facilities for seven or more persons are conditionally permitted in all residential zones and most agricultural zones. In the PF zone, community care facilities serving 7 to 30 persons are permitted by site plan review and larger facilities are permitted by conditional use permit. These regulations are consisten t with state law and do not pose a significant constraint on the establishment of residential care facilities.

Housing for Persons with Disabilities
Both the federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act impose an affirmative duty on local governments to make reasonable accommodations ( i.e., modifications or exceptions) in their zoning laws and other land use regulations when such accommodations may be necessary to afford disabled persons an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. Additionally, §65008, 65583(a)(4) of the Government Code require local governments to analyze potential and actual government constraints upon the maintenance, improvement or development of housing, and include land use controls, building codes and programs to accommodate housing for disabled persons , older persons or households/persons with low incomes.

Page 272 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-2 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
California’s Building Standards Codes (Physical Access Regulations) are found in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, and complies with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) .

Building codes adopted by all Kings County jurisdictions incorporate accessibility standards contained in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations.. These regulations provide minimum standards that must be complied with in order to ensure the development of safe and accessible housing.

Because many homes in Kings County jurisdictions were built before modern accessibility standards, an important housing issue facing people with disabilities is retrofitting existing homes to improve access. For retrofitting homes, all jurisdictions administratively permit unenclosed ramps to protrude into required setbacks without a variance. Each jurisdiction allows a property owner to build a ramp to allow people with disabilities access into a single-family home upon securing a building permit and payment of local building permit and inspection fees. Each jurisdiction also administers a Housing Rehabilitation Program that provides federally funded loans to eligible homeowners or rental property owners to make accessibility improvements.

Key planning requirements for each jurisdiction related to housing persons with disabilities are described below:

Avenal
Definition of “family” – The Avenal Z oning Code defines family as: “ One or more persons related or unrelated, living together as a single nonprofit housekeeping unit, as distinguished from a group occupying a boarding or lodging house, hotel, club, or similar dwelling for group use. A family shall include domestic servants employed by the family but shall not include a fraternal, religious, social, or business group.” This definition is consistent with current housing law.

Separation requirements – The City’s Zoning Code does not impose any separation requirements between group homes or residential care facilities.

Site planning requirements – The site planning requirements for residential care facilities are no different than for other residential uses in the same zone. Required parking is 1 space per 4 beds.

Reasonable accommodation – Chapter 9.16 of the City’s Zoning Code establishes administrative procedures for reviewing and approving requests for modifications to building or zoning requirements in order to ensure reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities in conformance with state and federal laws. There is no fee for application for accommodation under this chapter.

Corcoran
Definition of “family” – The Corcoran Zoning Code defines family as: “Any group of individuals living together as a single housekeeping unit where the residents and share common living, sleeping, cooking and eating facilities. Family members need not be related by blood but are distinguished from a group occupying a boarding or lodging house, hotel or club suitable for group use.” This definition is consistent with current law.

Separation requirements – The City’s Zoning Code does not impose any separation requirements between group homes or residential care facilities.

Reasonable accommodation – Chapter 11-30 of the Zoning Code provides administrative procedures for reviewing and approving requests for modifications to building or zoning requirements in order to ensure reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities in conformance with state law . A request for

Page 273 of 1008 ends

A. Governmental Constraints
Kings County and Cities of 4-3 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Reasonable Accommodation may be made by any person with a disability, their representative, or any entity, when the application of the Zoning Ordinance or other land use regulations, policy, or practice acts as a barrier to fair housing opportunities.

Hanford
Definition of “family” – The Hanford Zoning Code defines family as: ‘an individual or a group of persons living together who constitute a bona fide single -family housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit, not including a fraternity, sorority, club, or other group of persons occupying a hotel, lodging house or institution of any kind’. The previous definition of family was reviewed as per p rogram 3.12 in the last housing element to ensure conformance with housing law.

Separation requirements – The City’s Zoning Code does not impose any separation requirements between group homes or residential care facilities.

Reasonable accommodation – The City’s Zoning Code (Chapter 17.92) outlines policies and procedures of the city for reviewing and approving requests for modifications to building or zoning requirements in order to ensure reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities in compliance with the Fair Housing Act.

Requests for reasonable accommodation can be made orally or in writing, are reviewed and approved administratively by the Community Development Director within 30 days of receiving an application. There is no fee associated with a reasonable accommodation application.

Lemoore
Definition of “family” – The Lemoore Zoning Code defines “family” as “An individual or group of two or more persons occupying a dwelling and living together as a single housekeeping unit in which each resident has access to all parts of the dwelling and where the adult residents share expenses for food or rent. Family does not include institutional group living situations such as dormitories, fraternities, sororities, monasteries, convents, residential care facilities or military barracks, nor does it include such commercial group living arrangements as boardinghouses, lodging houses, and the like.” This definition is consistent with current law.

Separation requirements – The City’s Zoning Code does not impose any separation requirements between group homes or residential care facilities.

Site planning requirements – The site planning requirements for residential care facilities are no different than for other uses in the same zone. Required parking is 1 space per four beds. Through reasonable accommodations – Zoning Code Sec. 9-2B-6, City’s policy is to provide persons with disabilities reasonable accommodation in rules, policies, and procedures that may be necessary to ensure equal access to housing.

Reasonable accommodation – Zoning Code Sec. 9- 2B-6 establishes administrative policies and procedures for reviewing and approving requests for modifications to building or zoning requirements in order to ensure reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities.

Kings County
Definition of “family” – The Kings County Development Code defines family as: “One or more persons living as a bona fide single nonprofit relatively permanent housekeeping unit as distinguished from a group occupying a boarding or lodging house, hotel or

Page 274 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-4 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
club suitable for group use. A family shall not include a fraternal, social or business group.” This definition is consistent with current housing law.

Separation requirements – The County’s Development Code does not impose any separation requirements between group homes or residential care facilities.

Site planning requirements – The site planning requirements for residential care facilities are no different than for other residential uses in the same zone.

Reasonable accommodation – Article 22 , Section 2208 of the County Development Code establishes administrative procedures for reviewing and approving requests for modifications to building or zoning requirements in order to ensure reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities in conformance with fair housing law. A request may be made by any persona with a disability or their representative when zoning code, other County requirement, policy or practice acts as a barrier to fair housing opportunities.

Farmworker Housing
Housing for agricultural employees occurs in two types of settings: housing accommodations located on farmland that is exclusively for farmworkers; or traditional housing that is intended for lower -income households but is not restricted to farmworkers.

As per the 2020 census estimate, there are 567 farms in Kings County with an estimated 8,300 farm laborers. 156 farms hire more than 10 ten farm workers with approximately 5,800 permanent non-migrant and seasonal laborers. The housing needs of these farmworkers are primarily addressed through the provision of permanent affordable housing, such as apartments, lower-cost single-family homes, and mobile homes. The remaining farm laborers are migrant farmworkers who are not permanent residents of Kings County.

The California Employee Housing Act
7 regulates farmworker housing and establishes requirements for permits, fees, and responsibilities of employee housing operators and enforcement agencies. It generally requires that no conditional use permit, zoning variance, or other zoning clearance shall be required of state- permitted employee housing that serves six or fewer employees that is not required of a family dwelling of the same type in the same zone (Health and Safety Code §17021.5). In addition, state -permitted employee housing facilities with no more than 36 beds in group quarters or 12 units must be treated as an agricultural land use that is not required to obtain any conditional use permit or other approval that is not required of other agricultural uses in the same zone (Health and Safety Code §17021.6).

Each jurisdiction’s regulations regarding farmworker housing are described below. • Avenal – Farmworker housing is permitted in all residential zones , intensive and exclusive agricultural zones and the P -F zone in in conformance with Health & Safety Code 17021.5 and 17021.6. Since Avenal has some of the lowest housing prices and apartment rents in California, the need for farmworker housing is largely met by traditional housing. The City of Avenal actively assists farmworker housing needs: the majority of homeownership loans are made to farmworkers, and a majority of units in assisted multi-family projects are occupied by farmworkers. Farm labor housing for contract labor and housing with on- site employees are permitted uses in R2, R3 and agricultural zones.
• Corcoran – Farmworker housing is permitted in conformance with Employee Housing Act requirements. Employee housing is permitted in all residential zones and are allowed by right for 6 or fewer persons, subject to the same regulations as a single-family home. A conditional use permit is required for employee housing for seven or more employees. Corcoran has some

7 California Health and Safety Code §17000 et seq.

Page 275 of 1008 ends

A. Governmental Constraints
Kings County and Cities of 4-5 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
of the lowest housing prices and apartment rents in California and can meet its needs for farmworker housing through traditional housing. The City actively assists farmworker housing needs: farmworkers receive the majority of homeownership and home rehabilitation loans each year and occupy a larger share of units in assisted multi-family projects. • Hanford – Farmworker housing is permitted in conformance with Employee Housing Act requirements, i.e., housing for up to six employees is permitted in all residential zones, subject to the same regulations as a single -family home. City of Hanford’s First-Time Homebuyers Program is targeted very low to moderate income families. First time homebuyers can borrow up to $75,000 at 2% fixed interest rate for 30 years towards down payment and/or closing costs to purchase a new/existing home. As the most urbanized city in Kings County, Hanford has only a very small amount of agricultural land.
• Lemoore – Farmworker housing for up to six employees is permitted in all residential zones except RHD, therefore a Code amendment is needed to ensure conformance with Employee Housing Act requirements (see Program 4.11 in the Housing Plan) . Employee housing for more than 6 persons is permitted under residential AR zone and AG special purpose zone and with CUP in residential RVLD zone . Farmworker housing complexes with up to 12 units or 36 beds are permitted in any zone where agriculture is a permitted use, in conformance with state law. As a more urbanized community, the City of Lemoore has relatively little farmland within its boundaries and only one small area at the western edge of the city with agricultural zoning. The City’s overall efforts to provide and maintain affordable housing opportunities will help to support the few permanent non-migrant and seasonal laborers who may choose to reside in Lemoore.

Kings County – The Kings County Development Code permits providing accommodation for 6 or fewer farmworkers pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sec. 17021.5. Employee housing shall be deemed a single-family structure for zoning purposes. It is a permitted use in the Agricultural A zone.

Emergency Shelters, Transitional and Supportive Housing Government Code Sections 65583(a)(4) and 65583(a)(5) require that the housing element identifies a zone, or zones, where emergency shelters are a permitted use without discretionary review , demonstrate that transitional housing and supportive housing are subject to only those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone . An emergency shelter is housing with minimal supportive services for people experiencing homelessness and is limited to occupancy of six months or less.

Transitional housing is temporary (often six months to two years) housing for a homeless individual or family who is transitioning to permanent housing. Supportive housing is 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 tenant in retaining the housing; improving his or her health; and maximizing his or her ability to li ve, and, when possible, work in the community. Supportive services includes job training, rehabilitation, counseling to allow individuals to gain necessary life skills in support of independent living.

Each jurisdiction’s policies regarding emergency shelters, transitional and supportive housing are described below.
• Avenal - Emergency shelters/temporary housing are permitted by-right without discretionary review in the R -3 zone and by conditional use permit in the PF zone. Required standards include:
o Maximum of 25 persons per night
o Off-street parking at one space per five beds plus one space for each staff person on duty

Page 276 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-6 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
o Management and security plan
o Minimum separation of 300 feet between emergency shelters o On-site waiting and intake areas screened from the public right-of-way The R-3 zone is located near transit and commercial services, and provides adequate vacant or underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s need for additional shelter facilities.

Transitional and supportive housing are treated as residential uses subject only to those requirements that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone , in conformance with state law.
• Corcoran - Emergency shelters are permitted by right without discretionary review in the Service Commercial (CS) zone and by conditional use permit in the Light Industrial (IL) and Heavy Industrial (IH) zones. Required standards include only those that apply to other uses in the same zone. Parcels within the CS zone are located near transit and commercial services, and provide adequate vacant or underutilized sites to accommodate the City ’s need for additional shelter facilities.

Transitional and supportive housing are treated as residential use s subject only to those requirements that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone , in conformance with state law.
• Hanford – Emergency shelters are permitted by-right without discretionary review in the OR (Office Residential) zone subject to the following standards. o Maximum 25 beds
o A management and security plan prepared in consultation with the City Manager o Off-street parking provided at a ratio of one space per five beds plus one space for each staff person on duty
o Minimum separation of 300 feet between emergency shelters The OR zone encompasses approximately 114 acres, is located near transit and commercial services, and provides adequate vacant or underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s need for additional shelter facilities.

Emergency shelters are also allowed by CUP in the medium (1033 acres) and high density (219 acres) residential areas. Transitional and supportive housing are treated as residential uses subject only to those requirements that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone, in conformance with state law.
• Lemoore – Emergency shelters permitted by right without discretionary review in the Community Facilities (CF) zone and by CUP in the Light Industrial (ML) zone. Required standards include only those that apply to other uses in the same zone. Parcels within the CF zone encompass approximately 589 acres, including 6 vacant parcels totaling over 150 acres, and provide adequate vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City ’s need for additional shelter facilities.

Transitional and supportive housing are permitted uses in all residential and mixed-use zones and are treated as residential uses subject only to those requirements that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone. Kings County – The Development Code allows emergency shelters through a CUP in the RR and R1 residential zones and are a permitted use in the PF zone, in conformance with permissible development standards under Government Code 65583(a)(4) . The PF zone contains approxima tely 325 acres and has the capacity to accommodate additional shelters. Transitional and supportive housing for up to six persons are permitted subject only to those requirements that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone. Program 5.8 is included in the Housing Plan to ensure consistency with state law.

Page 277 of 1008 ends

A. Governmental Constraints
Kings County and Cities of 4-7 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Single Room Occupancy (SRO)
Single room occupancy (SRO) facilities are small studio-type apartment units, typically occupied by one or two extremely-low-income persons. SROs may provide either private or shared kitchen and bathroom facilities. Each jurisdiction’s policies regarding SROs are described below. • Avenal - SROs are permitted by CUP in the Downtown Commercial (DC) and Service Commercial (SC) zones.
• Corcoran – SROs are permitted by CUP in all commercial zones (CN, CC, CH, CD, CS) and the Light Industrial (IL) zone.
• Hanford – SROs are permitted uses in the Office Residential (OR) and MX-C zones and by CUP in all the residential and mixed-use zones.
• Lemoore – SROs are permitted by-right in the High Density Residential (RHD) zone and by CUP in the Downtown Mixed-Use zones (DMX-1, DMX-2 and DMX-3). • Kings County – SROs are permitted by right in the commercial zone and are permitted by ministerial Site Plan Review in the CS, CH and CR districts.

These regulations help to encourage and facilitate the provision of small economical housing units for persons with limited incomes and do not pose an unreasonable regulatory constraint. d. Development Standards
The Kings County jurisdictions regulate the type, location, density, and scale of residential development primarily through their zoning ordinances. Zoning regulations are designed to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of residents, as well as preserve the character and integrity of neighborhoods. The Zoning Ordinance sets forth the specific residential development standards, described below and summarized in Table 4-3.

Page 278 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-8 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Table 4-3
Residential Development Standards
Jurisdiction Development Standard RR

R-L, R-L-5, R-
L-8, R-L-12 RM RH
Kings County Min. Lot Size (sf) 30,000 3,000 – 20,000 3,000-6,000 1,500-6,000 Max. Density (du/ac) 1.5 2-14.5 7-14.5 14.5-29
Lot Coverage (%) 40% 40 - 83% 50% 60 - 70%
Max. Height (ft.) 30 (50 by CUP) 30 (50 by CUP) 30 (50 by CUP) 30 (50 by CUP) Development Standard RE R-1 R-2 R-3
Avenal Min. Lot Size (sf) 20,000 6,000 7,000 6,000
Max. Density (du/ac) 2 1-7 2-14 3-21.8
Lot Coverage (%) 40% 50% 60% 60%
Max. Height (ft.) 35 35 35 35
Development Standard R-A
R-1-12 / R-1-10/
R-1-6
RM-2.5/
RM-3
RM-1.5/
RM-2
Corcoran Min. Lot Size (sf) 20,000 12,000/10,000/
6,000
6,000 6,000
Max. Density (du/ac) 2.2 3.6-7.3 17.5/14.5 29/21.7
Lot Coverage (%) 40% 40% 60% 70%
Max. Height (ft.) 35 35 35 35
Development Standard R-1-20
R-1-12, R-1-8
R-1-6 RM RH
Hanford Min. Lot Size (sf) 20,000 12,000/8,000/
6,000
6,000 6,000
Max. Density (du/ac) 3 3.6-7.3 14.5 21.8
Lot Coverage (%) 40 40% 50% 50%
Max. Height (ft.) 40 35 35 35
Development Standard AR/RVLD/ RLD/RN RLMD RMD/RHD
Lemoore Min. Lot Size (sf) 40,000/15,000 7,000/3,000 3,000 2,000 Max. Density (du/ac) 3 7/12 12 17.4/25
Lot Coverage (%) n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Max. Height (ft.) 40 35 35 45/60
Source: Zoning Ordinances for Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, Lemoore, and Kings County, 2015

Structural Standards
The permitted density of residential development varies between jurisdictions and zon es. The maximum allowable density ranges from up to 22 units per acre in Avenal, and Hanford, up to 25 units in Lemoore, and up to 29 units per acre in Corcoran and Kings County. The wide range of densities allowed in Kings County jurisdictions facilitates a variety of housing types ranging from single -family homes to multi -family apartment complexes.

Minimum lot sizes range from 3,000 square feet to 30,000 square feet for single-family residential zones and from 1,500 to 6,000 square feet per unit for multi -family residential zones. The zoning ordinances also regulate the size of residential structures through lot coverage and height limits. All Kings County jurisdictions have reasonable structural limits with maximum heigh ts ranging from 30 to 60 feet which can accommodate three-story structures and maximum allowable densities in all jurisdictions. However, due to market conditions no residential buildings taller than two stories have been built or proposed in any Kings

Page 279 of 1008 ends

A. Governmental Constraints
Kings County and Cities of 4-9 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
County jurisdictions except Hanford and Lemoore. Multi-family lot coverage requirements are generous, and all jurisdictions allow coverage of at least 50% in multi-family zones. The single -family zones allow lot coverage of at least 40%. Agricultural zones have a lower lot coverage limit due to the predominant non- residential nature of these areas. These development standards are typical of other cities in the San Joaquin Valley and are not considered to be a constraint to development.

Parking Requirements
The parking requirements for Kings County jurisdictions are summarized in Table 4 -4. All jurisdictions require 2 parking spaces for single-family detached units. Requirements for multi-family units vary based on bedroom counts with studio and one -bedroom units typically requiring not more than 1.5 spaces per unit.

Although two covered spaces are required for multi-family units in Avenal, reductions in this ratio have been reduced for projects that qualify for a density bonus , and Program 1.7 includes a commitment to review parking standards as part of the General Plan and Development Code update.

Table 4-4
Residential Parking Standards
Unit Type Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Kings County
Single-family detached
2 covered 2 (1 in garage or
carport)
2 (1 in garage or
carport)
2 (1 in DMX-1 or
DMX-2)
1 Multi-family
2 covered
Studio: 1.5
1 Bedroom: 1.5
2 Bedroom: 2
3 Bedroom: 2
Studio: 1.5
1 Bedroom: 1.5
2 Bedroom: 2
3 Bedroom: 2
(1 covered)
0-1 Bedroom: 1.5
2+ Bedroom: 2
(1 in DMX-1 or
DMX-2)

1.5 per unit + 1 per
3 units guest parking
Second units/ADUs 1 1 or 2 bedrooms: 1
3+ bedroom: 2 1 None 1
SRO units 1 per bedroom 1 1 covered 0.5 1
Boarding houses 1 covered space
per bedroom or 1
space per 150
square feet gross
floor area,
whichever is
greater
1 per 2 beds 1 covered 2 per unit 1 per 2 beds + 1 per
3 beds guest parking
Farm Labor Housing 2 spaces per
dwelling unit 1.5 spaces per unit 2 spaces per unit 2 spaces per unit Residential Care Facility 1 space per 4
resident beds
1 space per
dwelling unit or 1
space per 4 beds
1 per 4 beds 1 per 4 beds
Source: Zoning Ordinances for Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, Lemoore, and Kings County, 2015

Providing adequate parking is necessary to facilitate the sale or rental of a unit. Allowing too few spaces limits the potential occupants of a unit. These parking requirements are designed to accommodate multiple vehicles for households most likely to own more than one vehicle – households in single-family homes and in apartments with two or more bedrooms. According to recent Census data, 81% of households in Kings County have 2 or more vehicles. Therefore, requiring two spaces per residence is a reasonable requirement and does not constrain development in Kings County.

Page 280 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-10 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
e. Accessory Dwelling Units
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are attached or detached units that provide complete independent living facilities for one or more persons including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation, located on the same lot as the primary structure. ADUs often provide affordable housing for extremely-low- , very-low- and low-income households, including seniors. Government Code §65852.2 (AB 1866) requires jurisdictions to allow second units by- right (as permitted uses) in all single -family zones unless specific findings are made. As shown in Table 4-2, ADUs are permitted in single-family zones in all five jurisdictions.

California continues to pass new laws to make ADUs easier and more accessible for home owners. The following changes were made in 2023:

1. Relaxation of height restrictions (up to 25 feet for attached ADUs, up to 18 feet for ADU within 0.5 mile of public transit, up to 18 feet with 2 story multi family dwelling;

2. Permitting offices to approve or deny ADUs within 60 days, and provide a detailed list of reasons if permit is denied;

3. An 800 square foot ADU can encroach on the front setback;

4. Homeowners can still build ADUs if there is unpermitted work on their property;

5. Elimination of mandatory fire sprinklers in the primary ADU

6. Bathroom not required in Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit

7. Permitting offices cannot withhold demolition permits

County of Kings and the 4 city jurisdictions would need to amend their respective zoning ordinances to reflect the above changes.

Specific requirements for ADUs for each jurisdiction are summarized below. • Avenal – The City of Avenal permits accessory dwelling units in residential zones with the following standards set forth in the zoning code: 1) the floor area of the second unit shall not exceed 1,200 square feet or 30% of the primary structure, 2) the height shall not exceed the height of the main dwelling, and 3) one additional parking space shall be provided. These regulations are consistent with AB 1866 but needs updating to reflect recent changes to California law on ADUs.
• Corcoran – The City of Corcoran allows ADUs in residential zones if there is an existing or proposed single family home or multi-family building. Standards include: 1) the floor area of the ADU shall not exceed 1,200 square feet (if detached) or 30% of the primary structure (if attached), 2) the second unit must be integrated into the design of the main unit and conform to applicable development standards for the site, and 3) one additional parking space shall be provided for ADUs with one or two bedrooms, and two additional spaces for ADUs with three or more bedrooms. Corcoran regulations need updating to reflect recent changes to California law on ADUs
• Hanford – The City of Hanford permits ADUs in the OR zone and requires an administrative application for ADUs in residential zones to ensure consistency with development standards set forth in the Zoning Code. These standards include: 1) maximum floor area of 1,200 square feet (if detached) or 30% of the primary structure (if attached) and minimum floor area of 150 square feet, 2) owner occupancy of the primary r esidence or the second unit, 3) at least one additional parking space (which may be tandem), and 4) compliance with the other regulations for the R, RM and OR districts, except as provided in the ADU standards. The city of Hanford is in the process of updating the ADU ordinance, in the meantime, the City relies on State law and HCD’s ADU Handbook to permit ADUs.

Page 281 of 1008 ends

A. Governmental Constraints
Kings County and Cities of 4-11 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
• Lemoore – The City of Lemoore permits ADU in all residential and mixed-use zone districts with development standards set forth in the zoning code. ADUs are permitted on lots with existing or proposed single family or multi-family dwellings. There are no requirements with respect to owner occupancy. Development standards include: 1) a floor area limit of at least 220 square feet and up to 1200 square feet if detached and up to 1,200 square feet or 50% of existing primary dwelling if attached, whichever is greater 2) height limited to the height of the existing unit for attached and 16 feet for detached and 3) compliance with the building setbacks, lot coverage and zoning requirement generally applicable to the zone in which the property is located, except that detached ADUs can be a minimum 4 feet from side and rear property lines. The city also permits JADUs in all residential and mixed use zones on lots with an existing or proposed single-family dwelling. These regulations may need updating to reflect recent changes to California law on ADUs or recommendations from HCD. • Kings County – Kings County permits Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) in RR, R- 1 and RM zones . These standards include: 1) a floor area limit of 1,200 s quare feet if detached or detached with an addition of 150 square feet for ingress/egress, 2) manufactured home shall not exceed 8 feet wide by 40 ft long and 320 square feet in area, 3) 1 ADU in single family residential zones and 1 attached/2 detached ADU’s in multi-family residential zones, 4) at least one additional parking space, and 4) compliance with the other regulations for the R districts . These regulations need updating to reflect recent changes to California law on ADUs
f. Density Bonus
California’s Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code §§65915 - 65918) allows a developer to increase density on a property above the maximum set under a jurisdiction’s General Plan land use plan. In exchange for the increased density, a certain number of the new affordable dwelling units must be reserved at below market rate (BMR) rents. Cities and counties must provide a density increase up to 35% over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the Municipal Code and the Land Use Element of the General Plan (or bonuses of equivalent financial value) when builders agree to construct housing developments with units affordable to low - or moderate -income households. The density bonus policies for each jurisdiction are discussed below.
• Avenal –Section 9.19.01(D) of the Avenal Zoning Ordinance establishes density bonus incentives of up to twenty (20) percent in specified residential projects of five (5) or more units in which at least twenty (20) percent of the units are affordable to persons and families of low income or moderate income or in which ten (10) percent of the units are affordable to lower income households. A request for density bonus and regulatory concessions pursuant to Gov.

Code §§65915 is ministerial and subject to interpretations. • Corcoran – The 2014 Zoning Ordinance update defers to state density bonus law. • Hanford – Sec. 17.39.040 of the Municipal Code establishes density bonus incentives and procedures in conformance with state law.
• Lemoore – The City completed a comprehensive update to the Zoning Code in 2013. Title 9, Chapter 5, Article G – Affordable Housing Incentives (Density Bonus) establishes standards and procedures in conformance with state density bonus law. • Kings County – Article 22 of the Development Code establishes density bonus procedures in compliance with state law. In R-1 and RM zoning districts, the density of the development may be increased and the site areas may be reduced for developments of 5 or more dwelli ng units.

Page 282 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-12 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Mobile Homes/Manufactured Housing
There is often an economy of scale in manufacturing homes in a plant rather than on site, thereby reducing cost. State law precludes local governments from prohibiting the installation of mobile homes on permanent foundations on single-family lots. It also declares a mobile home park to be a permitted land use on any land planned and zoned for residential use, and p rohibits requiring the average density in a new mobile home park to be less than that permitted by the Municipal Code. However, Government Code 2.3 allow cities and counties to preclude installation of manufactured homes that are more than 10 years old t the time a permit is requested for their installation.

As described below, all jurisdictions allow for the development of manufactured housing, factory- built housing and mobile homes, providing a valuable source of housing for seniors, families, as well as farmworkers.
• Avenal – The City of Avenal permits mobile homes, factory-built housing and manufactured housing on permanent foundations subject to the same standards as apply to conventional single-family homes by-right in the A-I, A-E, R-E and R-1 zones and by CUP in the R-2 and R-3 zones. Manufactured homes are subject to Ministerial Permit review, shall be installed on approved permanent foundation system and may be used as single-family dwellings for up to 25 years. The Community Development Director determines the compatibility with surrounding development. Mobile home Parks are subject to a conditional use permit and shall be constructed in accordance with requirements set out in the zoning ordinance with regard to space coverage, on-site utilities, parking, recreational space and amenities. • Corcoran – The City of Corcoran permits mobile homes and manufactured housing on permanent foundations by-right in any residential zone. New mobilehome parks are allowed by CUP in any residential zone and existing MHPs are located in single-family, multi-family, or service commercial zones.
• Hanford – The City of Hanford permits mobile homes and manufactured housing on permanent foundations subject to administrative approval in any residential zones. Mobile home parks are permitted in the RM and RH zones subject to a Conditional Use Permit. • Lemoore The City of Lemoore permits mobile homes and manufactured housing on permanent foundations in the same zones and subject to the same standards as apply to conventional homes. Mobile home parks are permitted by administrative permit or CUP in all residential zones except Agricultural-Residential (AR). The regulations do not unreasonably constrain production of this type of housing. Lemoore uses Health and Safety Code 18008 to define a mobilehome. Since, by definition, all mobile homes were constructed before 1976, Lemoore does not allow mobile homes. However, all manufactured homes built in the last 10 years are allowed and treated the same as stick-built homes. • Kings County – Kings County permits mobile homes and manufactured housing on permanent foundations in the same zones and subject to the same standards as apply to conventional homes. Manufactured housing communities or mobile home parks are permitted in all residential zones with a conditional use permit. g. Planned Unit Development
Planned Unit Development (PUD) includes mixed uses such as commercial and residential within one subdivision. PUDs may include single family homes, condominiums and townhomes, as well as local shops,

Page 283 of 1008 ends

A. Governmental Constraints
Kings County and Cities of 4-13 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
restaurants, business centers and recreational spaces. PUDs can maximize land use and offer home owners convenience, desired amenities and affordable housing.
• Avenal – The City of Avenal permits planned unit developments and small lot subdivisions in cluster combining district and small lot divisions in residential land use zone districts to warrant special methods of development through the encouragement of integrated planning and design. These developments are subject to maximum number of dwelling units and development standards allowed in a residential use district and combining district. Multi - family development standards apply to attached units.
• Corcoran – The City of Corcoran permits PUD in the PUD overlay zone subject to the site plan review process. In other zoning districts, a PUD requires the approval of a use permit in accordance with provisions of Chapter 11-26 Planned Unit Development Permit of the Zoning Code. Land uses permitted in the PO zoning district are also permitted in a PUD located in the RA, R-1 or RM zoning districts. Minimum lot requirements are 60 feet lot width and site area of 10,000 square feet. A 25% density bonus and changes to development standards may be allowed if the application demonstrates that the purpose of PUD is achieved. • Hanford – The City of Hanford permits planned unit developments PUDs are allowed in all zone districts subject to discretionary approval. A PUD cannot add land uses prohibited in the zone district in which the PUD is located . Minimum site area required is 5 acres . Also, the combination of different dwelling types, architectural appearance, and/or varieties of land uses in the development needs to complement each other and be in harmony with the existing and proposed land uses in the vicinity
• Lemoore – The City of Lemoore permits planned unit developments by conditional use permit, subject to a site plan review process. The minimum site area required is an acre.

Variations from permissible land uses and zoning standards need to be supported by showing how the PUD provides a more functional, aesthetically pleasing and harmonious living and working environment. Several home builders have taken advantage of the PUD process in the past few years, thereby increasing the project’s residential density and making homes more affordable.
• Kings County – Kings County permits a Planned Unit Development in any district with a CUP, except in the Agricultural and Overlay Zone Districts . Article 17 of the Development Code establishes procedures for Conditional Use Permits.

2. Residential Permit Processing and Environmental Review Development review procedures exist to ensure that proposals for new residential development comply with local regulations and are compatible with adjacent land uses. As shown in Table 4-5, processing times for Kings County jurisdictions are relatively quick: single -family projects require one to eight weeks, while multi-family projects typically require one to three months.

Page 284 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-14 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore
Table 4-5
Development Review Processing
Permitting Requirements and
Timeframes
Jurisdiction
Avenal Corcoran Hanford Lemoore Kings County
Tentative Tract Map 2 mo. 3 mo. 45-60 days 45-60 days 2-3 mo.

Parcel Map 3 mo. 2 mo. 30-45 days 45 days 4-6 weeks
Required Permits
Conditional Use Permit for
Housing in Residential Zones
Not required for
SF or MF
housing in
residential zones
Not required for
SF or MF
housing in
residential zones
Not required
for SF or MF
housing in
residential
zones
Required for
PUDs only;
60 days
Not required for
SF or MF
housing in
residential
zones
Architectural Review for
Housing in Residential Zones
Administrative as
part of SPR
Only PUDs
30-45 days
Only PUDs
30-45 days
30-45 days
Not required
Administrative Site Plan
Review for Apartments
Required
30 days
Required
30-45 days
Required
30 days
n.a. Required
15 days
Time Frame from plan submittal to approval
- Single-family project 1 week 14 days 30-45 days 60 days 4-6 weeks - Multi-Family project 30 days 1 to 3 mo. 30-45 days 60-90 days 4-6 weeks du=dwelling unit
* Exception is for Planned Unit Developments (PUD)
Source: Cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore; Kings County, 2015.

State planning and zoning law guides permit processing requirements for residential development. Within the framework of state requirements, each jurisdiction has structured its development review process in order to minimize the time required to obtain permits while ensuring that projects r eceive careful review. A description of each jurisdiction’s permit and environmental review process is described below. • Avenal – Residential subdivisions require approval of a tentative map b y the Planning Commission and a final map by the City Council. Typical processing time for a tentative map is two to three months . Multi-family projects are subject only to Site Plan Review by the Director, which must be approved within 30 days if the project’s site plan conforms to the Zoning Ordinance. No findings are required other than conformance with the standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance.
• Corcoran – Individual single-family homes can be built by-right in residential zones, while subdivisions require Planning Commission approval of a tentative map and City Council approval of a final map. Multi-family projects of any size in RM zones require only Site Plan Review, which is approved by the Director with no public hearing. Free-standing multi-family residential projects are also permitted with only Site Plan Review in the Downtown Commercial (CD) and Professional Office (PO) zones, with the exception of projects with six or more units in the PO zone, which require a CUP. Findings required for Site Plan Review approval include 1) consistency with the General Plan and any applicable area plan, specific plan, community plan, or neighborhood plan; 2) compliance with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Code and Municipal Code; and 3) the project is arranged to avoid pedestrian and vehicular circulation hazards. (Sec. 11-23-3. F).
• Hanford – Residential subdivisions require approval of a tentative map by the Planning Commission and a final map by the City Council. Typical processing time for a tentative map is dependent on the level of environmental review required. Projects that do not require an EIR are processed in 3 months. For multi -family projects, a site plan review is required to enable the City to determine whether a proposed project conforms to the intent and provisions of the

Page 285 of 1008 ends

A. Governmental Constraints
Kings County and Cities of 4-15 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
Zoning Ordinance, to guide the Building Official in the issuance of building permits, and to provide for the expeditious review of environmental impact assessments. The Community Development Department makes findings for approval provided the project complies with the following City policies: 1) traffic safety, street dedications, street improvements, and environmental quality, 2) zoning, fire, police, building and health codes, and public works construction standards; and 3) any other applicable federal, state or local require ments.

Architectural review is required only for Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlays, and only one parcel in Hanford is designated as such. Developers follow objective guidelines and the Planning Commission approves the project.
• Lemoore – Residential subdivisions require approval of a tentative map by the Planning Commission and a final map by the City Council. Individual homes are approved administratively with only a building permit and no requirement for a public hearing. Multi- family projects that are allowed in the Zone District they are in are approved administratively through the Site Plan and Architectural Review process. City staff provides a standard checklist of items to developers at the outset of a project. The purpose of the Site Plan Review process is to enable the City to determine whether a project conforms to the intent and provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, to guide the building official in permit issuance, and to provide for expeditious review of environmental assessments. Required findings for Site Plan Review approval include: 1) Consistency with the objectives of the general plan and applicable zoning regulations, specific plan provisions, and improvement standards; 2) The proposed architecture, site design, and landscape are suitable for the purposes of the building and the site and will enhance the character of the neighborhood and community; 3) The architecture, character, and scale of the building and the site are compatible with the character of buildings on adjoining and nearby properties; and 4) The proposed project will not create conflicts with vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian transportation modes of circulation. (Sec. 9-2B- 15. E) The typical time required for review and approval of multi-family projects is 60 to 90 days. As an example of the City’s review and approval process, is the Lacey Ranch Area Master Plan Project to subdivide and develop 156 acres of land into a planned residential community with a mix of single-family and multi-family housing units (up to 825 dwelling units) on a variety of lot sizes . The initial study was prepared in 2020 and identified that the project required General Plan Amendment, Zone Map Amendment, Annexation, and a modification of City’s Sphere of Influence. The CEQA document (EIR) was released in August 2020 and identified significant environmental impacts. Application to be reviewed and approved in 4 phases with CEQA approval in May 2022. Another development that was approved was West Hills college subdivision for 362 units.
• Kings County – Kings County allows single-family and multi-family residential projects by- right in residential zones. No conditional use permits are required for residentia l uses.

Moreover, Kings County does not require architectural review or design review. However, the County does require a ministerial standard site plan review for multi-family housing to enable the County to determine whether a proposed project conforms to the intent and provisions of the Development Code, to guide the Building Official in the issuance of building permits, and to provide for the expeditious review of environmental impact assessments. Processing times are largely a function of compliance with CEQA requirements. Required findings for site plan approval include consistency with the General Plan and Development Code. (Sec. 1603.C) These procedures help to ensure that each jurisdiction ’s development process meets all legal requirements without causing a significant unwarranted constraint to housing development. 1111

Page 286 of 1008 ends

Chapter 4. Constraints
2024-2032 4-16 Kings County and Cities of
Housing Element Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore

3. Developer Fees, Improvement Requirements and Building Codes State law limits fees charged for development permit processing to the reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged. Various fees and assessments are charged by Kings County jurisdictions and other public agencies to cover the cost s of processing permit applications and providing services and facilities such as schools, parks and infrastructure. Almost all of these fees are assessed through a pro rata share system, based on the magnitude of a project’s impact or on the extent of the benefit that will be derived.

After the passage of Proposition 13 and its limitation on local governments’ property tax revenues, cities and counties have faced increasing difficulty in providing public services and facilities to serve their residents.

One of the main consequences of P roposition 13 has been the shift in funding of new infrastructure from general tax revenues to development impact fees and improvement requirements on land developers. Kings County jurisdictions require developers to provide on-site and off-site improvements necessary to serve their projects. Such improvements may include water, sewer and other utility extensions, street construction and traffic control device installation that are reasonably related to the project. Dedication of land or in-lieu fees may also be required of a project for rights-of-way, transit facilities, recreational facilities, and school sites, consistent with the Subdivision Map Act.

State law prohibits the imposition of building standards that are not necessitated by local geographic, climatic or topographic conditions, and requires that local governments making changes or modifications in building standards must report such changes to the Department of Housing and Community Development along with a finding with justification that the change is needed. Kings County jurisdictions’ building codes are based upon the most recent California codes and are updated periodically. These are considered the minimum necessary to protect the public's health, safety and welfare. Although minor amendments have been incorporated to address local conditions, no additional regulations have been imposed that would unnecessarily add to housing costs.

Additional information regarding development fees, improvement requirements , and building codes is provided below.
a. Planning and Development Fees
Housing construction imposes short - and long-term infrastructure costs o n communities. Short -term costs include staffing for planning services and inspections. In addition, new residential developments can result in significant long-term costs to maintain and improve infrastructure, public facilities, parks, and streets. In response to the taxing constraints imposed by Proposition 13, many California cities have relied increasingly on planning and development fees to fund services needed by new housing.

In Kings County, all jurisdictions collect planning and building fees for new development, as well as impact fees to assist in the constructi on of new schools as necessary. In addition, the cities of Avenal, Hanford, Corcoran, and Lemoore collect impact fees to help fund infrastructure improvements. The impact fees include public safety (police and fire), water system supply and distribution, wastewater collection/treatment, streets/thoroughfares, parks and recreation, and various others. Development within special districts (either a community service district or public utility district) requires connection fees to be paid to the respective special district where services were provided.

Table 4-6 presents the development processing and impact fees charged in each jurisdiction. According to a 2001 statewide fee study
8, Kings County jurisdictions’ fees were lower than half of all jurisdictions in the state. Based on current conditions, fees (both processing and impact) range from approximately 6% to 16%

8 Pay to Play: Residential Development Fees in California Cities and Counties. HCD, August 2001.

Page 287 of 1008 ends

A. Governmental Constraints
Kings County and Cities of 4-17 2016-2024
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore Housing Element
of the total cost of housing in Kings County. Given the current realities of local government fiscal conditions, this is considered very modest and is not an unreasonable constraint to housing.

Residential projects may sometimes require the extension of water, sewer, and roads. In these cases, the off- site improvements are more costly than traditional infill development. In Kings County, cities often require the developer to pay for extending water and sewer infrastructure, but then allow the developer to recapture up to 50% of the costs if infill projects developed within ten years are served by that infrastructure extension that was oversized.

Page 288 of 1008 ends

Hanford City CouncilSeptember 17, 2024

Hanford City Council
September 17, 2024