Hanford City Council
May 19, 2026

APPENDIX D2: CITY OF AVENAL FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 94 o most of the community has some streetlights, but they are lacking at intersections. The roads are not in great condition, but we have begun a road maintenance plan, and this year we will begin routine street maintenance. there is no bike infrastructure within the city, a few roads have share the road signs. street lights are along Skyline, owned and operated by Caltrans.
• Are there known high-collision corridors or areas of high traffic on a regular basis? o Skyline Blvd, high collision corridor and has the most traffic. • Any Safe Routes to Schools plans or programs in place? Where in the community are sidewalks available or not available? Any differences between neighborhoods? o most of the city has sidewalks in all neighborhoods, We've have a safe routes to school plan in place, we are actively seeking ATP funding for the implementation of this plan. • Any major community facilities and any differences in access between neighborhoods? o City parks, the boxing gym, newly constructed pocket park behind the gym along with workout equipment. senior center near downtown, and we are starting on the construction of a community building/ sports facility on Hydril.
• Any differences between neighborhoods in terms of access to transportation options? Biking? Walking?
o None, the city is actively looking to improve citywide. • Have there been any major infrastructure investments in the recent past? This can include, but is not limited to, roads, bridges, or water/sewer infrastructure. Are there any major infrastructure projects planned for the next ten years?
o Yes 7th avenue reconstruction has been complete, pocket park is finishing up, community building/ sports facility on hydril is to be completed this year. the city recieved funding for 7th ave trail from skyline to mariposa.

Environment
• Any public safety reports (e.g., water quality, sewer, circulation)? Any differences between neighborhoods?
o None known
• Are there known major sources of pollution in the area? Where are they located, if so? o This could include things like industrial sources, groundwater contamination from agriculture, or lead paint exposure in older homes.
 Potentially the landfill causing air or groundwater pollution; potentially lead paint in older homes; however the City does not have data on this. o Are there places where residential development should be avoided due to environmental conditions, or where existing environmental conditions are negatively effecting residents?  Unknown without date
• Do any neighborhoods lack access to parks or other outdoor spaces? Are there other notable community amenities, and where are they? Any differences between neighborhoods in terms of access?
• Are there any new subdivisions or new master planned areas? Any differences in parks, other amenities between neighborhoods?
o Parks are distributed on the NE and SW areas of the City; lacking on the east side and to the north

APPENDIX D2: CITY OF AVENAL FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 95 • Are there any differences between neighborhoods with respect to access to shopping? Healthy foods?
o None; equal lack of access throughout
Disproportionate Housing Needs, including Displacement
Overpayment
• Any recent increases in rents or sales prices? Any differences between neighborhoods? How does that compare to incomes in the area?
o Lack of supply has driven prices up citywide
• Any patterns of evictions or foreclosures between neighborhoods? o None known
Overcrowding
• Are there any areas that are known to have higher rates of household overcrowding, such as "doubling-up" families in one house? Any information from code enforcement officers? o None known; though it is anticipated many residential units are overcrowded and multigenerational Housing Conditions
• Any areas of the City with more or less units in need of rehabilitation and replacement o The City’s housing stock is older throughout
• Any differences in housing conditions based on unit types (single family, multifamily, mobilehome) and locations
o No differences, most housing stock is older
• Are there any known areas where the physical conditions of housing suggest a high need for rehabilitation for safety or accessibility reasons?
o Citywide, no distinction between areas or neighborhoods. • Have there been any subdivisions developed in the past ten years? If so, how large were the lots in these developments? Are there differences between new subdivisions and older areas? any new master planned areas that have different infrastructure? Differences in rents and prices and locational differences?
o No
• Are there any types of housing that are known to be not widely available? If so, which neighborhoods?
o There is very little housing available citywide
• Are there any areas where there have been a high rate of code enforcement complaints? What were the issues that drove the complaint?
o None known
Persons Experiencing Homelessness
• Are there any areas where homeless community members tend to congregate? This could either be encampment areas, parking areas where people who live in vehicles park, or areas where people congregate during the day, such as libraries, parks, or community centers. If so, is there access to transportation, services and programs?
o None known

APPENDIX D2: CITY OF AVENAL FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 96 o Any programs to provide emergency rental assistance? If so, how is that assistance available? Any differences between neighborhoods?
 The City relies on countywide and statewide assistance and programs Displacement
• Any areas or neighborhoods that have experienced significant increases in rents and sales prices? Are people moving or evicted as a result?
o None known; overall housing is not available in the city and it drives up prices and overcrowding.
• Any local events that led to displacement?
o Lack of housing and investment
• Do any areas have a higher percentage of housing with higher susceptibility to environmental damage due to building age or design?
o No
• Are defensible space inspections performed? Any other similar environmental hazard prevention programming?
o No
• Are there any areas that might not be in a FEMA zone but which might have a tendency to experience flash floods during storms due to a lack of stormwater infrastructure or ground absorption/permeability?
o No
Other Relevant Factors
• Describe any historical events, past populations, waves of immigration and development, redlining, financial investments, conditions, covenants and restrictions that influenced socio-economic patterns
o Historic oil town with many more affluent residents leaving and agricultural workers migrating in.
• Describe any past zoning or land use decisions that influenced socio-economic patterns o None known
• Describe any settlement trends, major developments or population trends that influenced socioeconomic patterns o Same as above; the oil investment and then lack thereof causing large numbers of people to leave.
• Does the city have any defining features to the land use pattern? Topography, Railroads? Highways? Major roadways? Does that influence socio-economic patterns? o The city is bounded by HWY 33 to the west and dissected by HWY 269 which leads to Interstate 5 approximately 5 miles north of the City.
o The City also has a landfill and prison to generate money. • Any recent engineering reports, assessments of infrastructure supply or quality, public safety reports, capital improvement program? Does this information describe or show any differences? None Known

Kings County Corcoran Hanford Avenal Kings (Unincorporated)

KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | JULY 2025 | DRAFT 1 APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN

FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
April 2026

KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | JULY 2025 | DRAFT 2 Prepared By:

Realty Planners Group
City of Corcoran Staff
Kings County Corcoran Hanford Avenal Kings (Unincorporated)

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | i APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. Local Assessment of Fair Housing ................................................................................................................1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................................1 Outreach Program ..........................................................................................................................................2 B. Assessment of Fair Housing Issues................................................................................................................3 Key Data and Background Information .........................................................................................................3 Integration and Segregation ..........................................................................................................................5 Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) and Racial Concentration (RCAA)...........8 Disparities in Access to Opportunity ...........................................................................................................31 Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk ...........................................................................45 C. Constraints ...................................................................................................................................................60 Governmental Constraints............................................................................................................................60 Non-Governmental Constraints ...................................................................................................................63 Environmental Constraints...........................................................................................................................64 D. Local Data Knowledge and Other Relevant Factors....................................................................................67 E. Site Analysis ................................................................................................................................................74 Review of Past Accomplishments ...............................................................................................................74 Redevelopment Potential of Non-Vacant Sites............................................................................................74 Infrastructure and Public Services Availability ...........................................................................................75 Small Site Analysis......................................................................................................................................76 Environmental Constraints Affecting Site Suitability..................................................................................77 Site Inventory Findings................................................................................................................................78 Actons to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing.............................................................................................87 Contributing Factors ....................................................................................................................................90 Attachment: City of Corocoran Questionnaire to City Staff …………………………………………………..93

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | ii TABLES
Table 1: Kings County Household Population Growth, 1990-2020 .................................................................. 5 Table 2: Race and Ethnicity ............................................................................................................................... 6 Table 3: Population by Race by Hispanic Origin Over Time ............................................................................ 6 Table 4: Median Household Income ................................................................................................................ 14 Table 5: Household Income Distribution by Tenure............................................................................................

Table 6 Median Household Income by Race or Hispanic Origin ................................................................... 15 Table 7: Total Households in Poverty.............................................................................................................. 18 Table 8: Percent of Households in Poverty Over Time.................................................................................... 18 Table 9: Household Characteristics.................................................................................................................. 20 Table 10: Large Households ............................................................................................................................. 20 Table 11: Household Type by Tenure................................................................................................................ 20 Table 12: Populations with a Disability ............................................................................................................. 24 Table 13: Agricultural Employment by Jurisdiction.......................................................................................... 26 Table 14: Hired Farm Labor-Workers, Kings County ....................................................................................... 28 Table 15: Agricultural Employment by Jurisdiction.......................................................................................... 39 Table 16: Hired Farm Labor-Workers, Kings County ....................................................................................... 40 Table 17: Travel Time to Work ......................................................................................................................... 41 Table 18: Work Locations of City/County Resident Workers........................................................................... 41 Table 19: Median Monthly Housing Costs Over Time ..................................................................................... 42 Table 20: Median Monthly Housing Costs Over Time by Tenure.................................................................... 42 Table 21: Household Overpayment by Tenure .................................................................................................. 48 Table 22: Overcrowding by Tenure ................................................................................................................... 49 Table 23: Homeless Persons .............................................................................................................................. 55 Table 24: Shelter Facilities in Kings County ..................................................................................................... 56 Table 25: Land Inventory and RHNA Targets................................................................................................... 78 Table 26: City of Corcoran Census Tract Characteristics.................................................................................. 84 Table 27: Actions to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing ................................................................................. 87 Table 28: Factors Contributing to Fair Housing Issues...................................................................................... 90

FIGURES
Figure 1: Kings County Map .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Figure 2: Local Racial Demographics .................................................................................................................7 Figure 3: Racial/Ethinic Area of Concentration of Poverty (R/ECAP) ............................................................16 Figure 4: Local RCAAs .....................................................................................................................................11 Figure 5: High Poverty & Segregated Areas ....................................................................................................12 Figure 6: Local Median Income .......................................................................................................................16 Figure 7: Poverty Status (ACS, 2017-2021) - TRACT ....................................................................................17 Figure 8: Single-Parent Femal-Headed Households with Children.........................................................................23 Figure 9: Population with a Disability..................................................................................................................27 Figure 10: TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas, 2023....................................................................................................33 Figure 11: City of Corcoran All Transit Performance Score..............................................................................35 Figure 12: City of Corcoran High Quality Transit Stops and Tranit Area (1/2 mile) .................................................36 Figure 13: Jobs within 45-minute Transit Commute. .........................................................................................37 Figure 14: Employment by Industry of Kings County Workforce.....................................................................38 Figure 15: School Districts in Kings County ......................................................................................................44 Figure 16: TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas, 2023..............................................................................................47 Figure 17: Overpayment by renters (ACS, 2017-2021) – Tract Level ......................................................................50 Figure 18: Percentage of Homeowners Overpaying ..............................................................................................51

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | iii Figure 19:Overcrowding in Corcoran.................................................................................................................53 Figure 20: Estimated Displacement Risk – Overall Displacement ....................................................................59 Figure 21: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 ..........................................................................................................................65 Figure 22: Flood Hazard Zones...........................................................................................................................66 Figure 23: City of Corcoran and Surrounding Area Vacant Sites 6,000 sqft or Greater.....................................79 Figure 24: City of Corcoran and Surrounding Area Vacant Land Inventory .........................................................

Figure 24: City of Corcoran and Surrounding Area by Income Level ..............................................................81

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 1 A Local Assessment of Fair Housing
Introduction
Assembly Bill (AB) 686 requires that all housing elements due on or after January 1, 2021, contain an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) consistent with the core elements of the analysis required by the federal Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Final Rule of July 16, 2015. Under California law, AFFH means “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics.”1

California Government Code Section 65583 (10)(A)(ii) requires local jurisdictions to analyze racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and affluence, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risk. Although this is the Housing Element for the County of Kings, Government Code Section 65583 (c) (10) requires all local jurisdictions to address patterns locally and regionally to compare conditions at the local level to the rest of the region. This section is organized by fair housing topics to address the identified issues which are included throughout the section. Through discussions with housing service providers, fair housing advocates, and this assessment of fair housing issues, the City of Corcoran identified factors that contribute to fair housing issues.

The AFFH analysis must contain the following:

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. Disproportional Housings Needs
g. Displacement Risk

3. Sites Inventory

4. Identification
1 California Department of Housing and Community Development, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: Guidance for All Public Entities and for Housing Elements (April 2021 Update), April 27, 2021, preface page, https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community- development/affh/docs/affh_document_final_4-27-2021.pdf.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 2 Outreach Program
State law requires local governments to make a diligent effort to achieve public participation in three formal community meetings to initiate 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:
• Public workshops and meetings in each of the four cities and the unincorporated County during the preparation of the Draft Housing Element.
• Publication of the Draft Housing Element and subsequent review by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).
• Revisions to the Housing Element to address comments from HCD and publication of a revised Draft Housing Element.
• 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.

City Of Corcoran Website
City of Corcoran’s website (https://cityofcorcoran.ca.gov/departments/community_development/ index.php) serves as the main conduit of information for individuals who can access material online. The website is regularly updated to reflect ongoing community input opportunities, advertise draft housing element, and answer commonly asked questions. The website includes the following information:
• Upcoming meeting information
• Housing Element Workshops (Spanish and English)
• Notices of public hearing
• Links to Housing Element and other planning documents General Multi-Lingual Advertisements
The City utilizes a variety of methods to advertise the project, engage the community, and solicit input on the Housing Element (including fair housing analysis).These efforts are summarized herein to demonstrate the City’s meaningful commitment to community collaboration. The city has prepared workshop flyers (in English and Spanish), and sent emails to stakeholders requesting involvement and providing flyers and outreach information in English and Spanish.

Community Workshop
The City of Corcoran held a Planning Commission on November 20, 2023 at 5:30 pm. 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.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 3 B. Assessment of Fair Housing Issues
This section provides an overview of available federal, state, and local data to analyze fair housing issues in the City of Corcoran. This data is supplemented with local knowledge of existing conditions in the community to present a more accurate depiction of fair housing issues in Hanford, and a more informed perspective from which to base goals, policies, and programs to affirmatively further fair housing. The following issues are addressed:

1. Key Data and Background Information

2. Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach Capacity

3. Integration and Segregation Patterns and Trends

4. Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty

5. Disparities in Access to Opportunity

6. Disproportionate Housing Needs

7. Displacement Risk
Key Data and Background Information
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 square miles. 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 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. Figure 1 is a map of Kings County and its four cities and unincorporated communities.

Agriculture remains the predominant landscape of Kings County, with approximately 84% of its land area used for agriculture.

The City of Corcoran, incorporated in 1914, is situated in the San Joaquin Valley and is near the Tulare Lake Basin, one of the most fertile regions in the world. It is connected to one of the largest irrigated farming operations in the world, J.G. Boswell Company. Its primary crops are Pima cotton, alfalfa hay, tomatoes, and wheat. Another major industry in Corcoran is the state prison. It incarcerates approximately 12,000 prisoners and employs around 3,500 individuals. The City and community leaders are continuing to push for additional industries to diversity the local economic base.

According to the California Department of Finance (DOF), Table 1, the data illustrates the population growth in the City of Corcoran and Kings County over a 30-year period from 1990 to 2020. In Corcoran, the household population increased from 8,309 in 1990 to 13,525 in 2020, marking a substantial rise of 5,216 persons, or a 62.8% increase. This growth rate is notably higher than the overall growth in Kings County, which saw its population rise from 89,469 in 1990 to 136,964 in 2020, an increase of 47,495 persons or 53.10%. These figures highlight a significant population expansion in Corcoran, outpacing the county's average growth rate over the same period.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 4 Figure 1: Kings County

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 5 Table 1: Kings County Household Population Growth, 1990-2020 Jurisdiction
Household Population Change 1990-2020
1990 2000 2010 2020 Persons %
Corcoran 8,309 9,539 12,573 13,525 5,216 62.80%
County Totals 89,469 109,332 131,402 136,964 47,495 53.10% Note: All numbers exclude persons in group quarters (State prisons and Naval Air station Lemoore) ; Sources: Census 1990, 2000, 2010; Cal.DOF, , E5 and E8 Population and Housing Estimates.

Integration and Segregation
To inform priorities, policies, and actions, an analysis of integration and segregation, including patterns and trends, related to people with protected characteristics. Segregation generally means a condition in which there is a high concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a particular type of disability when compared to a broader geographic area.

Conversely, integration refers to a condition in which there is a not a high concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a particular type of disability when compared to a broader geographic area. The following analysis will analyze levels of segregation and integration for race and ethnicity, persons with disabilities, familial status, age, and income to identify the groups in Corcoran that experience the highest levels of segregation. Minorities are often concentrated in impoverished areas and lack access to resources such as jobs, educational opportunities, life services and face other disadvantages.

Race and Ethnic Characteristics
The racial and ethnic composition of Corcoran and Kings County can be seen in Table 3. It shows that in Corcoran, the majority of the population, 69.3%, identifies as Hispanic or Latino, which is significantly higher than Kings County's 54.90%. The non-Hispanic or Latino population in Corcoran accounts for 30.7%, which is notably lower than the 45.10% in Kings County. When breaking down the non-Hispanic or Latino population, Corcoran has a smaller percentage of White individuals (15.3%) compared to Kings County (31.60%), and a notably higher percentage of Black or African American individuals (11.7%) compared to Kings County (5.90%). The percentages for other racial groups such as American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and those identifying as other races or with two or more races are relatively low in both Corcoran and Kings County. The city’s Hispanic population in 2000 was already well over half the population, 59.6%. In the span of two decades, the proportion of those that identify as Hispanic has increased an additional 10%. Within the same period, the proportion of White Non-Hispanic demographic has decrease from 24.1% to 15.3% of the total population (Table 4).

The demographic breakdown below highlights the distinct racial and ethnic makeup of Corcoran in contrast to the broader Kings County area, particularly the higher proportion of Hispanic or Latino residents and the different distribution of other racial groups.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 6 Table 2: Race and Ethnicity
Racial /Ethnic Group Corcoran Kings County
Not Hispanic or Latino 30.7% 45.10%
White 15.3% 31.60%
Black or African American 11.7% 5.90%
American Indian/Alaska Native 0.8% 0.80%
Asian 0.7% 3.60%
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0.1% 0.10%
Other races or 2+ races 2.1% 3.20%
Hispanic or Latino (any race) 69.3% 54.90%
Total 100% 100%
Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table B03002
Table 3: Population by Race by Hispanic Origin Over Time - Corcoran 2000
Percent
of Total 2010
Percent
of Total 2020
Percent
of Total
Total: 14,458 24,813 22,078
Hispanic or Latino 8,618 59.6% 15,545 62.6% 15,304 69.3% Not Hispanic Or Latino: 5,840 40.4% 9,268 37.4% 6,774 30.7% White 3,479 24.1% 4,818 19.4% 3,377 15.3%
Black Or African American 2,029 14.0% 3,617 14.6% 2,578 11.7% American Indian And Alaska Native 77 0.5% 133 0.5% 180 0.8% Asian 102 0.7% 179 0.7% 160 0.7%
Native Hawaiian And Other Pacific
Islander 2 0.0% 11 0.0% 23 0.1%
Some Other Race 9 0.1% 358 1.4% 67 0.3%
Two Or More Races: 142 1.0% 152 0.6% 389 1.8%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 & 2010, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B03002.

As seen on Figure 2, most of the City of Corcoran is identified as Low-Medium Segregation. Census Tract (CT)

14.01, which is the southern residential areas of the City located nearest to City wastewater ponding basins and the two State Prisons south of this tract. CT 14.01 is identified as High People of Color (POC) Segregation that is predominantly represented by Hispanic or Latino. Census Tracts 15 and 14.02 make up the centrally located residential areas that were part of the City’s core neighborhoods and part of the historic City formation territory dating back to 1914. These two Census Tracts have similar population characteristics and represented with high predominance of Hispanic or Latino. Census Tract 13 is partly in the City along the City’s western and northeast edges with the majority of territory in unincorporated Kings County with some county residential areas and mostly agricultural land. Census Tract 9801 is entirely represented by the two State Prisons and one agricultural property with no residential homesites. Census Tract 16.01 only includes one agricultural property located immediately south of the Prisons and owned by the State of California with no residences. The City continues to prioritize the integration of diverse residential options throughout the City in residentially planned areas of CT 14.01, 14.02, 15, and 13 and works to avoid displacement risk as discussed in a section below.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 7 Figure 2: Local Racial Demographics

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 8 Gini Index
The Gini index is a measure of the extent to which the distribution of income among families/households within a community deviates 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. Gini coefficient for California is 0.49 while Kings County has a Gini index of 0.41. The City of Corcoran has a Gini Index of 0.46. All three jurisdictions have a similar amount of inequality in terms of distribution of income among households.

Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) and Racial Concentration of Areas of Affluence (RCAA)
R/ECAP. To better understand fair housing, HUD uses the designation Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAP) which requires:
• a non-white population of 50 percent or more in a metropolitan or micropolitan area, or a non-white population of 20 percent or more outside of these areas. • extreme poverty, defined as census tracts with either 40 percent or more of individuals living at or below the poverty line or with a poverty rate of three or more times the average tract poverty rate for the metropolitan/micropolitan area, whichever threshold is lower.

There are no census tracts in Corcoran that are identified as a R/ECAP as shown in Figure 3. Figure 4 also depicts that no Racial Concentration of Areas of Affluence exist within the City as defined below.

RCAA. HCD has a designation called Racial Concentration of Areas of Affluence (RCAA) which is also based on two factors:
• A location quotient based on the percentage of white, non-Hispanic or Latino population in the census tract compared to the average percentage of total white population for the COG region. • If the median income for the census tract is greater than 1.5 times the COG median income or State median income, whichever is lower.

As mentioned in the Income Distribution section above, the median income is $42,997, which is 69.9% of the Kings County median income of $61,556. Compared to the state of California, where the median income is $78,672, Corcoran's median household income is lower at 54.7% of the California median. When considering race and income in Corcoran, the numbers are quite different. As presented on Table 7, Median Household Income by Race or Hispanic Origin table, the median household income for White Non-Hispanic households is $55,786 which is approximately $12,000 more than Corcoran’s average median income. The median household income for Hispanic or Latino of Any Race is $41,591, which is approximately $14,000 less than the White Non-Hispanic population but similar to Corcoran’s median household income. The American Indian and Alaskan Native Non-Hispanic population makes significantly less than both groups by earning $29,000. Figure 4 shows, Corcoran is not identified as a RCAA.

Areas of High Segregation and Poverty as shown in Figure 5 are identified as part of the City in Census Tract

14.02 and 13. Census Tract 14.02 is the City’s eastern portion of downtown, considered predominantly built out, and consists of older neighborhoods separated by the BNSF Rail/Amtrak. The area west of the rail tracts are adjacent to downtown with compact older residential neighborhoods, municipal operations with City Hall, Police Department, Amtrak Station, Kings County Fire Department, City Council Chambers, medical facilities, post office, commercial services, and a small Civic Park. The area east of the rail tracts has an older smaller neighborhood area along Pickerell Avenue and located adjacent to agricultural service and industrial businesses, City corporation yard and has one baseball field park named Father Wyatt Park.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 9 Census Tract 13 is one the most geographically diverse and challenging areas as it represents the outward fringe of the City intermixed with previously developed County neighborhoods, and bisecting State transportation infrastructure challenges.

Western Portion – The western portion of this Tract within the City consists of large areas that were previously County unincorporated areas encouraged to be annexed under the State’s adoption of the Cortese-KnoxHertzberg Local Government Reoganization Act of 2000. In 2005, the City of Corcoran aligned with the State’s direction to initiate streamlined annexation of qualifying County unincorporated island areas. The intent was to ensure more efficient consolidation of municipal services and greater opportunity for infrastructure enhancement to older County neighborhoods. However, the fiscal reality of local government funding to accomplish these improvements has proven to be extremely challenging as the City must seek grant funds to avoid placing additional assessment burdens upon mostly low-income older neighborhoods. The majority of the City’s western territory within Census Tract 13 is former County unincorporated island areas, built to County Standards and lacking storm drainage/curb/gutter/sidewalk/road improvements. Previous City service extensions do provide City water and sewer service to these areas. The City continues to actively pursues grant funding to assist in enhancing infrastructure in this portion of the City, and recently was granted $2 million from Federal Government Community Funding Earmarks that will be used towards the City’s estimated $20 stormwater system infrastructure needs. Despite these challenges to the existing previous County neighborhoods, the City is experiencing the greatest demand from housing developers seeking to develop new single family subdivisions and represented 67% of all new residences in the previous planning period. In the current planning period, the the D.R. Horton residential subdivision was completed in 2024 consisting of 47 single family units, and the Stonefield Homes Subdivision Phase 1 and 2 were also completed representing an additional 70 units. Two additional Phases with Stonefield Homes is currently in development. As these new subdivisions are being developed, the general area is directly benefiting by the developer investment that is enhancing and supporting greater improvements on local roadways, and municipal systems with water/sewer/storm drainage.

Northwestern Portion – This area is largely outside of the existing City limits, but within the City’s long range planned growth area as it avoids the Flood Zones the exist to the west and southwest of the City limits. This area is the most logical growth area to avoid environmental constraints as well as governmental infrastructure constraints along the northwest areas of Census Tract 13 that are separated by State Route 43, the BNSF Rail, and the California Highspeed Rail system that all run nearly parallel to one another creating geographic barriers to the City.

Northeast Portion - The northeast portion of the City within Census Tract 13 has also experienced considerable recent residential growth and City grant funded investment. In this areas residential infill development, first time homebuyer and housing reahab loans have been issued. The City also was awarded a $7.5 million Prop 68 grant to develop and in 2023 completed one of the City’s largest parks called Gateway Park. This park contiains a $1 million Veterans Memorial called “The Five Pillars of Freedom”, “The Loop” City Pump Track that was host to the 2025 World Championship Pump Track Qualifier event, a splash pad, soccer field, and family pavilions. The City also hosts a number of family community events at this park.

Eastern Portion – The small eastern portion within the City is the site of the City’s property that is being sold to and developed by Self Help Enterprises for their 17 acre “Lakeview Terrace “ Project site that is developing Very-Low income residential multi-family units, and Single Family residential homes.

All together, these dispersed areas within Census Tract 13 demonstrate the City’s commitment to invest in new residential growth throughout the City, enhanced infrastructure to deficient areas, and added amenities.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 10 Figure 3: Racial/Ethnic Area of Concentration of Poverty (R/ECAP)

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 11 Figure 4: Local RCAAs

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 12 Figure 5: High Poverty & Segregated Areas
Census
Tract

14.02 Census
Tract
13 Census
Tract
15 Census
Tract

14.01

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 13 Income Distribution
The City of Corcoran consists of six census tracts and is the third most populous city in Kings County with approximately 13,525 residents, excluding the state prison population.

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. According to the ACS 2016-2020 the median household income for the entire County was reported as $61,556.

Table 5 highlights that Corcoran's household income is substantially less than that of the wider county and state levels. The table details the median household income over the past 12 months for the City of Corcoran, Kings County, and California. In Corcoran, the median income is $42,997, which is 69.9% of the Kings County median income of $61,556. Compared to the state of California, where the median income is $78,672, Corcoran's median household income is lower at 54.7% of the California median.

Corcoran consists of a larger proportion of the workforce which hold “blue-collar” jobs such as farming, construction, extraction, manufacturing, production, transportation, and material moving compared to other cities such as Hanford and Lemoore with more "white collar jobs". 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 the State's income thresholds, the income groups analyzed were as follows:
• Extremely low income: Up to 30% of AMI
• Very low income: 31-50% of AMI
• Low income: 51-80% of AMI
• Moderate income: 81-120% of AMI
• Upper income: Above 120% of AMI
Table 6 estimates the percentage 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 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 of renter households were in the lower-income category.

In the City of Corcoran, approximately 63% of homeowners belong to the moderate- and upper-income category whereas around 29% of renters belong to the moderate and upper income category. There is a large difference in tenure for extremely low-income households. Only 10.3% of extremely low-income households own while 25% of extremely low-income households rent. However, Corcoran homeowners in every income category, apart from those above area median income, have a higher rate of ownership than other households in Kings County. This is also true for Corcoran households that rent compared to others in Kings County.

Much of the population in Corcoran, 69.3%, identifies as Hispanic or Latino while 15.3% identifies as White

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 14 Alone. The average median Hispanic household income is $41,591 which is close to Corcoran’s overall median household income, $42,997. Notably, the White Alone population earns around $15,000 more on average; the White Alone median household income is $55,786. In the City of Corcoran, much like Kings County and California, there are income disparities when comparing race and ethnicity.

Table 4: Median Household Income
City of
Corcoran Kings County California
Median Household Income In The Past 12 Months $42,997 $61,556 $78,672 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B19013.

Table 5: Household Income Distribution by Tenure
Income Category Corcoran Kings County
Owners
<= 30% 10.3% 5.50%
>30% to <=50% 13.5% 7.30%
>50% to <=80% 13.0% 11.00%
>80% to <=100% 17.8% 8.60%
>100% 45.4% 67.50%
Total 100.00% 100.00%
Renters
<= 30% 25.0% 17.70%
>30% to <=50% 21.8% 14.60%
>50% to <=80% 24.0% 22.80%
>80% to <=100% 12.5% 11.40%
>100% 16.8% 33.50%
Total 100.00% 100.00%
Source: HUD CHAS data based on Census ACS 2014-2018

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 15 Table 6 Median Household Income by Race or Hispanic Origin City of
Corcoran
Kings
County California
White Non-Hispanic $55,786 $74,918 $90,496
Black Or African American Non-Hispanic -- $56,076 $54,976 American Indian And Alaska Native Non-Hispanic $29,000 $44,842 $60,182 Asian Non-Hispanic -- $80,530 $101,380
Native Hawaiian And Other Pacific Islander Non-Hispanic -- $98,864 $81,682 Some Other Race Non-Hispanic $27,428 $47,592 $59,287
Two Or More Races Non-Hispanic $72,780 $72,188 $76,733
Hispanic Or Latino of Any Race $41,591 $49,373 $62,330
The City of Corcoran’s median household income ($42,997) is lower the county average ($61,556) according to the Census ACS 2016-2020. As shown in Figure 5, the City of Corcoran has varied median incomes with CT 15 consisting of household incomes between $60,000-$84,097. Households with incomes $35,000-$60,000 reside in CTs 14.01 and 14.02 and the outlying areas of the City to the west, north and south (CT 13) have the lowest income at less than $35,000.

Poverty Status
In 2021, Kings County, California, experienced varying levels of poverty across different regions. The overall poverty rate for Kings County stood at 16.4%, marking a 2.19% increase from the previous year.

According to Table 8, 18.8% of households in Kings County are in poverty, 6.6% higher than California.

The City of Corcoran’s poverty rate is 25.5%. As seen in Figure 6, the highest concentration of poverty is in CT 13, which is largely the periphery of Corcoran, with over 40% of households experiencing poverty.

The central tracts (CTs 15, 14.01, and 14.02) have varying percentages (20%-40%) of households in poverty. These statistics underscore the diverse economic landscape of Corcoran, where certain areas exhibit significantly higher poverty rates, highlighting the need for targeted socioeconomic interventions.

Notably, the household poverty rate from 2010 to 2015 increased by around 14%; while the total households in Corcoran fell by 156 households but the number of households in poverty increased by 353 households.

Then from 2015 to 2020, the household poverty rate and the number of households in poverty decreased even as the total number of households increased from 2,772 to 3,079 households.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 16 Figure 6: Local Median Income

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 17 Figure 7: Poverty Status (ACS, 2017-2021) – TRACT

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 18 Table 7: Total Households in Poverty
Households Percent
City of Corcoran 785 25.5%
Kings County 4,464 13.1%
California 806,599 9.0%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B17019.

Table 8: Percent of Households in Poverty Over Time
2010 2015 2020
Income in the Past 12 Months Below Poverty Level 572 925 785 Total Households 2,928 2,772 3,079
Percent of Households in Poverty 19.5% 33.4% 25.5%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B17019.

Corcoran’s Program 2.10 Section 8 Rental Vouchers’ objective is to promote Section 8 assistance which extends rental subsidies to extremely-low- and very-low-income households equal to the difference between 30% of the monthly income and the allowable rent determined by the program. Section 8 assistance is administered by Kings County Housing Authority.

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 previous Table 6 (Household Income Distribution by Tenure) shows, the City of Corcoran has

10.3 % of extremely low-income category owners and 25.0% percent of extremely low-income category renters. Extremely low-income households that rent or own have higher rates of overpayment than every other income category. Further discussion on overpayment can be found in the Disproportionate Housing Need and Displacement Risk section.

Familial Status
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 single people generally occupy smaller apartments or condominiums. Single-person households often include seniors or young adults.

Table 10 displays household composition by community as reported by the Census ACS 2015-2020.

Corcoran has 3,854 households, a small part of Kings County’s 43,604 households. Families comprise approximately 80% of all households in Corcoran which is similar to Kings County. In Corcoran, 41.8%

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 19 of family households have their own children under 18 years of age which is close to the rate in Kings County.

Married/cohabiting couples make up 56.7% of Corcoran’s households. Of those households, 32.5% have their own children under the age of 18. These rates are a little lower than Kings County’s averages. Single male householders with no spouse/partner present make up 14.1% of households which is about half the rate of their female householder counterparts that make up 29.2% of Corcoran households. Notably, Kings County’s average of female householder with no spouse/partner present make up 22.6% of households.

Table 9: Household Characteristics
Age Group Corcoran Kings County
Total Households 3,854 43,604
Family Households 80.1% 78.30%
With own children under 18 years 41.8% 41.30%
Married/Cohabiting Couples 56.7% 61.20%
With own children under 18 years 32.5% 32.20%
Male Householder, no spouse/partner present 14.1% 16.20% With own children under 18 years 0.9% 2.40%
Living Alone 7.7% 8.30%
Age 65+ 2.4% 2.50%
Female Householder, no spouse/partner present 29.2% 22.60% With own children under 18 years 8.4% 6.80%
Living Alone 8.7% 8.80%
Age 65+ 5.5% 4.70%
Nonfamily Households 19.9% 21.70%
Average Household Size 3.42 3.14
Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Tables DP-2, B11012, and S1101 Corcoran has a larger share of large households, five or more people, compared to Kings County and California; large households make up 26.1% of Corcoran’s households while it makes up 19.1% of Kings County households and 13.7% of California households. (Table 11) An estimated 5.9% of Corcoran’s households compromise of seven person or more people, which is more than double the rate in Kings County and California. Overall, the average household size in the City of Corcoran is 3.42, a bit larger than the Kings County average.

When it comes to tenure in Corcoran, 36.2% of family households own while 43.9% rent. The rates for family households in Kings County that own or rent are inverse to Corcoran, 43.6% and 34.8% respectively. Male householder with no wife present that own represents 3.1%; of households while 4.9% rent; these rates are similar for the broader county. However female householders with no husband present that own represents 6.2% which is like the rate in Kings County. However, female householders with no husband present that rent represent 20.4% of households while in Kings County the rate is about half at 10.3%. Nonfamily households own and rent at somewhat similar rates in Corcoran and Kings County, around 10%.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 20 Table 10: Large Households
City of
Corcoran Percent Kings County Percent California Percent Total Occupied Housing Units 3,845 43,604 13,103,114
Total Large Households (5 or More
Persons) 1,005 26.1% 8,315 19.1% 1,809,518 13.7%
5-Person Household 548 14.3% 4,968 11.4% 1,025,856 7.8% 6-Person Household 229 6.0% 2,216 5.1% 440,129 3.3%
7-or-More Person Household 228 5.9% 1,131 2.6% 343,533 2.6% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 16-20 (5-year Estimates), Table B25009 Table 11: Household Type by Tenure
Household Type
Corcoran Kings County
HH % HH %
Total Households 3,845 43,604
Family households: 3,079 80.1% 34,155 78.30%
Owner 1,391 36.2% 18,997 43.60%
Renter 1,688 43.9% 15,158 34.80%
Married-couple family: 1,745 45.4% 23,236 53.30%
Owner 1,031 26.8% 14,704 33.70%
Renter 714 18.6% 8,532 19.60%
Male householder no wife present: 309 8.0% 3,653 8.40%
Owner 120 3.1% 1,499 3.40%
Renter 189 4.9% 2,154 4.90%
Female householder no husband present: 1,025 26.7% 7,266 16.70% Owner 240 6.2% 2,794 6.40%
Renter 785 20.4% 4,472 10.30%
Nonfamily households: 766 19.9% 9,449 21.70%
Owner 398 10.4% 4,371 10.00%
Renter 368 9.6% 5,078 11.60%
Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table B25007
Female Headed Households. Female householder households without a spouse or partner are also less common in unincorporated. These households often face challenges, particularly in terms of resource access and opportunities, especially for children in single-parent, female-headed households. In figure Table 12, it could be observed that single-parent female headed household lies between 20 and 30%. The distribution of single-parent, female-headed households correlate with TCAC/HCD opportunity areas designations, indicating that areas with lower resources and higher segregation and poverty have higher rates of such households.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 21 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, childcare expenses, and housing availability. As shown in Figure 4, the proportion of female-headed households, which is highlighted in the table, range from about 26.7% in the unincorporated. Notably, across all jurisdictions, the data reveals that a higher percentage of female-headed households are renters rather than homeowners. In Corcoran, family households constitute 80.1% of 3,845 total households, with a nearly equal split between owners (36.2%) and renters (43.9%). Married-couple families are 45.4% of households, but more are owners than renters. Male householders without a wife present make up 8.0%, and female householders without a husband present account for 26.7%, with a higher proportion of renters in both categories. This breakdown of household types and tenures, including the specific focus on female-headed households, provides a comprehensive overview of the diverse household compositions and housing situations in these regions, highlighting the need for tailored policy interventions and support services.

Seniors. Seniors, defined as 65 years or older, compromise 8.8% of the population. In comparison, that proportion is 10.3% for Kings County. Typically, senior households have special housing needs primarily due to three concerns – physical disabilities or limitations, limited income, and higher medical costs. It is important to note that disabilities are most common among senior citizens. Approximately 46% of total Corcoran seniors reported one or more types of disability. Many elderly households live on fixed incomes (e.g., SSI or pensions). Aging residents are more likely to need accessible, one-story housing and proximity to healthcare, public transit, and social services. However, much of the existing affordable rental stock lacks ADA-compliant features.

Persons with Disabilities
Due to 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 disability. To capture a variety of characteristics that encompass the definition of disability, the ACS identifies serious difficulty with four basic areas of functioning – hearing, vision, cognition, and ambulation.

As presented in Table 13, 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, in the city of Corcoran the proportion of seniors reporting some type of physical disability ranged from 45.6% The most common type of disability among seniors was having ambulatory difficulty. 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.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 22 • 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) selfdirection; 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 disabled 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.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 23 Figure 8: Single-Parent Female-Headed Households with Children

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 24 Table 12: Populations with a Disability
Disability Type by Age
Corcoran Kings County
Persons % Persons %
Population under 18 years w/disability 103 2.3% 1,498 3.70% With a hearing difficulty - 0.0% 193 0.50%
With a vision difficulty 53 1.2% 480 1.20%
With a cognitive difficulty 38 0.9% 890 2.20%
With an ambulatory difficulty 17 0.4% 127 0.30%
With a self-care difficulty 11 0.2% 219 0.50%
Population 18 to 64 years w/disability 874 12.5% 8,357 10.70% With a hearing difficulty 170 2.4% 1,632 2.10%
With a vision difficulty 187 2.7% 1,354 1.70%
With a cognitive difficulty 252 3.6% 3,009 3.80%
With an ambulatory difficulty 577 8.3% 4,087 5.20%
With a self-care difficulty 253 3.6% 1,424 1.80%
With an independent living difficulty 421 6.0% 3,094 4.00% Population 65 years and over w/disability 794 45.6% 6,179 40.80% With a hearing difficulty 189 10.8% 2,657 17.60%
With a vision difficulty 188 10.8% 1,265 8.40%
With a cognitive difficulty 278 16.0% 1,458 9.60%
With an ambulatory difficulty 590 33.9% 3,807 25.10%
With a self-care difficulty 256 14.7% 1,500 9.90%
With an independent living difficulty 489 28.1% 2,659 17.60% Note: Numbers represent people, not disabilities. Persons may report more than one type of disability Source:

Census ACS 2016-2020, Table S1810 and C18108
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 centers, and two community-based facilities. Kings County is served by the Central Valley Regional Center (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. Kings County Rehabilitation Center in Hanford also offers rehabilitation, vocational and life training, and operates four group homes for mentally and physically handicapped individuals. State and federal law 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

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 25 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.

Most of the central portion of the City contain Census Tract (CTs 14.01, 14.02, and 15) that contain between 10% -20% of a population with a disability. Census Tract 13 consists of both County unincorporated areas, and City annexed former County Island areas that lack City infrastructure. The two Census Tracts in the southern portion of the City (CTs 16.01 and 9801) are representative of the two State Prisons in CT 9801, and the State owned agricultural land associated with the Prisons as the only area in CT 16.01.

Farmworkers
Kings County is a significant agricultural producer, with the number of employed farmworkers ranging from 7,000 to 10,000 workers. The City of Corcoran is considered a rural agriculturally supported City in Kings County that was founded in 1914 as a community to support agricultural service and employee needs due to its remoteness form other communities at least 30 miles away. The surrounding agricultural region around Corcoran historically produced cotton that was very labor intensive, but has since shifted to greater mechanization. The largest farming operations surrounding the City include the J.G. Boswell Company (approximately 200,000 acres), the Hansen Ranches (approximately 25,000 acres), and the Gilkey 5 (approximately 8,700 acres). These agricultural employers maintain a range of permanent farmworker employees that have year round employment and supports greater financial stability to families for home ownership and seek housing within the existing housing market of the City. The City current serves many farmworkers families through the City’s First Time Homebuyer program, and with other financial assistance programs offered through the City’s contracted services with Self Help Enterprises. As the City has historically provided more than its fair share of affordable housing in comparison to other jurisdictions in Kings County, all new multi-family residential units developed in the City are priced within the market where farmworker families can compete for housing.

The commodities that are primarily grown around Corcoran are dominated by cotton, safflower, tomatoes, and pistachios that together make up approximately 95% of the agricultural production within a five mile radius of Corcoran. The peak season for these commodities is July-September of each year when harvest occurs and local farming operations have a greater demand for additional seasonal farmworker support.

The farm labor contractors that support this seasonal work demand, typically provide the necessary transportation from other communities where farmworkers live, and or contract with local hotels for seasonal housing. For example, one hotel in Corcoran has maintained long term (10+ years) contracts for dedicating all 25 rooms with double occupancy during peak season months. Throughout the rest of the year, the other three quarters do not prove to generate much demand for temporary farmworker housing as the labor demand for these types of commodities is very low and/or maintained by existing permanent farmworker employees.

In general, throughout Central California farmworker households often face unstable income, seasonal unemployment, and substandard living conditions. Many live in shared housing, mobile homes, or employer-provided units that lack permanent tenancy rights. Farmworkers—especially those who are undocumented or migrant—often lack access to stable rental contracts and may reside in overcrowded or informal housing units. Corcoran’s farmworker housing needs are more refined and limited in the nature of demand due largely to the types of commodities grown and existing permanent farmworker employee

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 26 stability and seasonal temporary farmworker employee services and support through labor contractors and hotel contracted seasonal housing that adapts to meet demand.

Recent Census data in Table 14 shows that approximately 8,300 of employed Kings County civilian residents (16 years and over) worked as agricultural workers. 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.

The City of Corcoran had an approximately 1,275 agricultural workers, which represents 30% to the total civilian work force.

Table 13: 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

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 27 Figure 9: Population with a Disability

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 28 Table 15 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 farm workers countywide. The largest number of workers (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.

Agricultural workers, and especially farmworkers, 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 $12.2 . 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.

Table 14: 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
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 involved 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. This 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 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 2 https://migration.ucdavis.edu/rmn/blog/post/?id=2805

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 29 met through homeownership assistance and rehabilitation loans.

Most loans under both types of programs are issued to people working in the agricultural industry.

Moreover, many occupants of Section 515 projects and other subsidized projects are also employed in the farming industry. The Housing Plan (Chapter 5) includes Program 3.12 Farmworker and Employee Housing where the City permits farmworker housing in conformance with Health and Safety Code §17021.5 and §17021.6. In addition, the City will assist interested developers by providing incentives, identifying suitable sites, and assisting in preparation of funding applications.

Kings County is one of California’s top-producing agricultural counties, with over $2.4 billion in crop value in 2021. According to California Employment Development Department (EDD) and USDA-NAWS (2021– 22) data:
• An estimated 6,800 to 7,200 farmworkers are employed annually in Kings County, with additional seasonal variation (peaking up to 10,000).
• Approximately 93% identify as Latino/Hispanic, with 85% foreign-born, primarily from Mexico. • Nearly 48% are considered migratory, and 29% are considered settled farmworkers. • The median annual income for crop workers is $22,000 to $25,000, well below the area median income (AMI).

Farmworker households in Kings County face significant housing challenges:
• Approximately 40% of farmworker households are renters, while others live in informal or seasonal housing arrangements, some in unpermitted dwellings or trailers. • Kettleman City, rural Corcoran, and Hanford's southern fringe are identified as farmworkerconcentrated zones with high rates of poverty, limited infrastructure, and older housing stock.

Farmworker households face disproportionate burdens in the following ways:
• Overcrowding is a dominant issue. According to HUD CHAS and local knowledge, over 37% of farmworker households experience overcrowded conditions (1.01+ persons per room). • Severe Cost Burden: CHAS data shows over 52% of low-income farmworker households pay more than 50% of income toward housing.
• Many reside in older, single-family homes, converted garages, or employer-provided units, often without formal leases or tenant rights.
• Lack of Permanence: Migrant workers often face frequent relocations, leading to disruptions in children’s education and healthcare access.
• Unsafe Living Conditions: Multiple stakeholder consultations (2019–2023) and Kings County code enforcement records indicate farmworkers are overrepresented in units with health/safety violations (e.g., mold, leaks, non-functional plumbing).
• Barriers to Assistance: Language barriers, immigration status, and employer-control over housing reduce access to public programs, including voucher eligibility and code complaint processes.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 30 Summary of Special Housing Needs
The City of Corcoran’s special housing needs groups represent a substantial portion of the population and require housing solutions that are tailored not only by affordability but also by physical, familial, occupational, and supportive service characteristics. A review of demographic trends, household structure, and service accessibility provides a deeper understanding of the magnitude of unmet need, the scope of existing resources, and the key areas of disparity among these vulnerable groups.

Seniors. The aging population in Corcoran has steadily increased, consistent with state and national trends.

Many elderly residents live on fixed incomes such as Social Security and pensions, placing them at high risk of cost burden and displacement. Seniors are more likely to experience mobility limitations and healthrelated housing needs, such as single-level units, grab bars, and proximity to medical services. The availability of accessible or age-appropriate units in the city remains limited. As the population continues to age, the demand for senior housing, assisted living, and in-home support services is expected to outpace current supply.

Persons with Disabilities. Individuals with physical, cognitive, or developmental disabilities require housing that is both affordable and accessible. According to the American Community Survey, disability prevalence in Corcoran is particularly high among seniors and working-age adults. However, many older homes in the city predate accessibility regulations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Fair Housing Act. As a result, these individuals may remain in substandard or inappropriate housing or be forced to rely on informal care. Accessibility-related retrofitting is cost-prohibitive for many renters, further constraining housing options.

Large Households. Larger families, typically with five or more members, face housing challenges due to the limited supply of units with three or more bedrooms. Rental units, especially those that are affordable, are often smaller and do not accommodate the space and privacy needs of multi-generational or larger nuclear families. Overcrowding—common among this group—can negatively impact health, academic performance, and family stability. Many large households are also rent-burdened, as they must pay higher costs to access larger units.

Female-Headed Households with Children. Female-headed households with children represent one of the most economically vulnerable groups. These households often rely on a single income, and in Corcoran, many are employed in low-wage service or agricultural jobs. These families are more likely to experience housing instability, especially in the face of rent increases or job loss. Barriers include discrimination in rental markets, limited access to childcare, and lack of nearby support networks, making proximity to schools, public transit, and employment hubs essential.

Farmworkers. Corcoran’s economy is deeply tied to agriculture, and many farmworkers live in the city or commute from surrounding areas. Farmworkers often live in informal or overcrowded housing, face language barriers, and lack access to employer-provided housing. Due to seasonal and migratory patterns, housing that is flexible, affordable, and close to work locations is essential. Additionally, these households often lack legal protections or documentation, making them especially vulnerable to eviction or housing exploitation.

Persons Experiencing Homelessness and At Risk of Displacement. Though formal point-in-time homelessness counts in Corcoran are relatively low, service provider feedback and school data suggest a broader pattern of hidden homelessness, including couch surfing, overcrowded shared housing, and housing

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 31 instability among seniors and youth. The city currently lacks emergency shelter or transitional housing infrastructure. Households most at risk include renters paying over 50% of their income on housing, seniors without support, and those recently released from incarceration.

Across all special needs groups, there exist gaps between the groups and the available housing options available which indicates that greater work can be done to increase the types of housing units and supportive services needed to support special needs groups. Most of the City’s existing units are not tailored to the physical, spatial, or affordability needs of these groups. Greater consideration of these groups should be aligned with proximity to healthcare, transportation, and/or social services. Additionally, there is limited tracking or coordination with housing providers, service organizations, and government agencies to assess special needs group accommodation effectiveness over time.

Disparities in Access To Opportunity
The Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) and California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) have developed annual maps of access to resources, such as high-paying job opportunities; proficient schools; safe and clean neighborhoods; and other healthy economic, social, and environmental indicators in 2017.

It uses economic and education indicators that include the following:
• Percentage of population with income above 200% of federal poverty line • Percentage of adults with a bachelor’s degree or above, • Percentage of adults aged 20-64 who are employed in the civilian labor force or in the armed forces • Value of owner-occupied units
• Percentage of 4th graders who meet or exceed math proficiency standards • Percentage of 4th graders who meet or exceed literacy standards • Percentage of high school cohort that graduated on time • Percentage of students not receiving free or reduced price lunch The TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps help to identify areas within the community that provide stronger access to economic, environmental, or educational opportunities for residents or, conversely, provide more limited access to opportunities. The information from this mapping can help to highlight the need for housing element policies and programs that would help to remediate conditions in low-resource areas and areas of high segregation and poverty and to encourage better access for lower-income households and communities of color to housing in high-resource areas.

Areas designated as “highest resource” are the top 20.0 percent highest-scoring census tracts in the region.

It is expected that residents in these census tracts have access to the best outcomes in terms of health, economic opportunities, and education attainment. Census tracts designated “high resource” score in the 21st to 40th percentile compared to the region. Residents of these census tracts have access to highly positive outcomes for health, economic, and education attainment. “Moderate resource” areas are in the top

30.0 percent of the remaining census tracts in the region and those designated as “moderate resource (rapidly changing)” have experienced rapid increases in key indicators of opportunity, such as increasing median income, home values, and an increase in job opportunities. Residents in these census tracts have access to either somewhat positive outcomes in terms of health, economic attainment, and education, or

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 32 positive outcomes in a certain area (e.g., score high for health, education) but not all areas (e.g., may score poorly for economic attainment). Low-resource areas are those that score in the bottom 30.0 percent of census tracts and indicate a lack of access to positive outcomes and opportunities. The final designation are those areas identified as having “high segregation and poverty;” these are census tracts that have an overrepresentation of people of color compared to the county as a whole, and at least 30.0 percent of the population in these areas is below the federal poverty line ($27,750 annually for a family of four in 2022).

The City of Corcoran presents a complex socio-economic landscape, as evidenced by its mixed resource distribution in the TCAC and HCD Opportunity map, as seen in Figure 9. The city is characterized by areas that are High Segregation & Poverty (CTs 13 and 14.02), Low Resource (CT 15), and Moderate Resource (CT 14.01). Corcoran faces significant challenges in bridging spatial economic disparities. These disparities necessitate nuanced policy interventions aimed at promoting equitable development.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 33 Figure 10: TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas, 2023

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 34 Transit Mobility
Transit mobility refers to an individual’s ability to navigate the community and region daily to access services, employment, schools, and other resources. Indicators of transit mobility include the extent of transit routes, proximity of transit stops to affordable housing, and frequency of transit.

The need to plan for and address the mobility needs of the County’s growing population. Public Transportation services are available to people with lower incomes, seniors, and persons with disabilities through the Kings Area Rural Transit (KART) system, overseen by the Kings County Area Public Transit Agency (KCAPTA) and through the City of Corcoran’s transit system, Corcoran Area Transit (CAT). Kings Area Regional Transit (KART) is Kings County’s public transportation provider. KART provides public transit service Monday through Friday and limited service on Saturdays. KART provides transportation services to the cities of Armona, Avenal, Corcoran, Grangeville, Hardwick, Hanford, Kettleman City, Laton, Lemoore, and Stratford. KART Paratransit (origin to destination) is available to eligible certified ADA passengers. In addition, KART provides regular transportation services to Fresno and Visalia Monday through Friday. All KART bus routes begin and end at the KART Terminal located at 504 W. 7th Street Hanford, California, west of the AMTRAK station in Downtown Hanford.

AllTransit is a transit and connectivity analytic tool developed by the Center for Neighborhood Technology for the advancement of equitable communities and urban sustainability. The tool analyzes the transit frequency, routes, and access to determine an overall transit score at city, county, and regional levels.

AllTransit scores geographic regions (e.g., cities, counties, Metropolitan Statistical Areas [MSAs]) on a scale of 0 to 10, with 10 being complete transit connectivity. Figure 10 depicts Kings County’s AllTransit Performance score, including metrics representing average household transit access. Kings County’s overall score is 1.7, demonstrating “very low” connectivity. It is important to note that this score is for Kings County as a whole, including incorporated areas, as AllTransit does not provide a score just for the unincorporated county. Kings County’s score is consistent with comparable counties, which are typified by rural and semi-rural communities. However, the AllTransit methodology, which determines scores according to an “average” household, may not fully represent transit availability in the unincorporated areas, as the estimate is an average of both incorporated and unincorporated areas.

As is shown in Figure 11, there is a complete absence of high quality transit stops and a few CA transit stops in Corcoran. Three of the four CA transit stops in Corcoran are in census tract 9801 which contains the two California State Prisons. Hanford is the most transit connected jurisdiction in Kings County with an AllTransit Performance Score of 4.0. Most unincorporated areas in the central areas of Kings County are not served by transit, except for the Hanford area. Based on the information in the Kings County Transit Development Plan 2021 document, Kings County faces challenges in providing comprehensive transit services, especially in rural areas. The report identifies gaps in service and highlights the difficulty of connecting transit-dependent residents living in remote areas to services in larger communities.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 35 APPENDIX 1A: COUNTY OF KINGS
Figure 11: City of Corcoran All Transit Performance Score

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 36 Figure 12: City of Corcoran High quality transit stops and transit area (1/2 mile)

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 37 Figure 13: Jobs within 45-minute transit commute.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 38 Employment
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 centers. Moreover, the type 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.

Figure 14: Employment by Industry of Kings County Workforce Source: Census ACS 2016-2020, Table DP03
Kings County supports a diversified economy as illustrated in Figure 12. 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. 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 $2.5 billion.

According to the Kings County 2022 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 agriculture.

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%

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 39 Farmworker. Kings County is one of the state’s major agricultural areas, ranking 8th among California counties in total agricultural production. Recent Census data in Table 16 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 15: 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 18 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 farm workers countywide. The largest number of workers (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.

Corcoran’s agricultural economy has historically relied on a substantial farmworker labor force, many of whom live in the city or in adjacent rural communities. While some farmworkers may be permanent residents, a large share are seasonal or migrant workers, whose housing needs differ significantly from the general population.

Despite the agricultural backbone of the local economy, Corcoran does not have a dedicated supply of farmworker housing, and access to state or federally subsidized agricultural housing is limited in both capacity and reach. In addition, few employers provide worker housing, meaning that the burden of locating housing falls disproportionately on low-income workers with little flexibility or transportation access.

Interviews with regional service providers and findings from past studies such as the California Statewide Farmworker Housing Study (California HCD, 2008; updated regional inputs in 2021) indicate that the key barriers to adequate housing for farmworkers include:
• High cost relative to income
• Lack of permanent housing units tailored to larger households • Fear of eviction or exploitation due to documentation or language barriers • Ineligibility or limited access to mainstream housing assistance programs

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 40 Table 16: 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
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 the City of Hanford during the 2003-2008 planning period. That project involved 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. This 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 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.

Most loans under both types of programs are issued to people working in the agricultural industry.

Moreover, many occupants of Section 515 projects and other subsidized projects are also employed in the farming industry. The Housing Plan (Chapter 5) includes Program 3.10 Farmworker and Employee Housing where the City permits farmworker housing in conformance with Health and Safety Code §17021.5 and §17021.6. In addition, the City will assist interested developers by providing incentives, identifying suitable sites, and assisting in preparation of funding applications.

Job-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

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 41 infrastructure systems that are often in need of maintenance. Long commuting distances also contribute 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 to balance the jobs-housing ratio and decrease commuting distances.

Table 17 shows that over 46.9% of the workforce in the city of Corcoran aged 16 years and older who do not work at home travel less than 15 minutes to work and another 17.8% of workers travel 15-30 minutes to work. The average time to work for countywide workers was 24 minutes.

Table 17: Travel Time to Work
Note: Workers included those 16 years and over who did not work from home.; Source: Census ACS 2016-2020 Table S0801
Table 18: Work Locations of City/County Resident Workers Note: Workers included those 16 years and over who did not work from home.; Source: Census ACS 2016-2020 Table S0801
Travel Time to Work Corcoran Kings County
Less than 15 minutes 46.9% 36.80%
15-30 minutes 17.8% 32.00%
30 to 59 minutes 28.6% 25.10%
60 or more minutes 6.7% 6.10%
Average Travel Time 24 min. 23 min.

Travel Time to Work Corcoran Kings County
Number of Resident Workers
(Age 16 and over) 4,119 56,560
Work in Same City/County) 35.3% 75.6%
Work Outside of City/County 64.7% 24.1%
Total 100% 100%

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 42 Housing Costs
In the City of Corcoran, the median monthly housing cost is $892. (Table 20) For the wider Kings County, the median monthly housing cost is higher by $202. In contrast, California’s median is significantly higher by an additional $796. From 2010 to 2020, the City of Corcoran’s median monthly housing cost increased by 9% while Kings County increased by 14%. California’s percent change was more than double than the City of Corcoran.

In Corcoran, the median monthly owner cost with a mortgage as a percentage of household income is 18.2% and 11.8% for those homeowners without a mortgage. (Table 21) The percentage that renters spend is much higher at 30.7 percent which is a little less than the acceptable standard to spend on housing, one third of income. However, as seen below, overcrowding and overpayment is an issue in Corcoran. It is important to note these figures are medians. The following sections provide further context of fair and affordable housing by analyzing overcrowding, overpayment, and homelessness.

Table 19: Median Monthly Housing Costs Over Time
2010 2015 2020
Percent Change
(2010 to 2020)
City of Corcoran $818 $787 $892 9.0%
Kings County $960 $978 $1,094 14.0%
California $1,409 $1,419 $1,688 19.8%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-Year Estimates), Table B25105 Table 20: Median Monthly Housing Costs by Tenure as a
Percentage of Household Income in the Past 12 Months
2010 2015 2020
Median Gross Rent 31.2% 32.8% 30.7%
Median Selected Monthly Owner Costs - Total 26.0% 25.1% 18.2% Median Selected Monthly Owner Costs - Units with a Mortgage 29.9% 29.5% 20.2% Median Selected Monthly Owner Costs - Units without a
Mortgage 10.1% 11.4% 11.8%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS16-20 (5-Year Estimates), Tables B25071, B25092

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 43 Education
The Kings County Board of Education establishes the mission and primary objectives for the Kings County Superintendent of Schools and ensures that activities and programs remain focused on the goals identified within the California Department of Education educational rules and regulations. The Kings County Board of Education establishes the mission and primary objectives for the Kings County Superintendent of Schools and ensures that activities and programs remain focused on the goals identified within the California Department of Education educational rules and regulations. According to the Kings County office of education as of Oct 2021 there are a total of 19,429 students enrolled in elementary schools and about 8,179 students in high schools across the county as per data submitted by the districts. Figure 13 below shows some of the school districts in Kings County.

The Corcoran Unified School District serves the families of Corcoran. The District consists of six schools serving the approximately 3,300 students in preschool through twelfth grade. The school include:
• Bret Harte Elementary (Serving preschool–1st grade), 1300 Letts Avenue Corcoran. • John C. Fremont Elementary (Serving grades 2–3) 1900 Bell Avenue, Corcoran • Mark Twain Elementary (Serving grades 4–5), 1500 Oregon Avenue Corcoran • John Muir Middle School (Serving grades 6–8), 707 Letts Avenue Corcoran • Corcoran High School (Serving grades 9–12), 1100 Letts Avenue Corcoran • Technology Learning Center (School and community education 9th grade–college), 1101 Dairy Avenue Corcoran
The Kings Lake Education Center is also part of the District, and includes the Mission Community Day School, High School Continuation, Corcoran Academy, Adult Education at 1128 S. Dairy Avenue Corcoran.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 44 Figure 15: School Districts in Kings County
Source: Kings County, Cal EM

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 45 Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk
A focused analysis of disproportionate housing needs and displacement risk reveals key geographic and demographic disparities within the City of Corcoran. These needs include severe housing cost burdens, overcrowding, substandard housing, and vulnerability to environmental and economic displacement..

Extremely low- and very low-income renter households are disproportionately impacted by housing overpayment, with nearly 71% of renters spending more than 30% of their income on housing.

Overcrowding is also a major concern, especially in renter households , and is concentrated in CTs 14.01 and 16.01, which also align with high poverty levels, environmental risk (CalEnviroScreen scores over the 75th percentile), and limited access to transportation. (Figure 14) These overlapping indicators of need suggest these neighborhoods are particularly susceptible to involuntary displacement, especially if older housing stock is redeveloped or rents increase due to public or private investment.

Although specific homelessness enumeration data is limited at the city level, service provider input and county-level trends indicate growing need for permanent supportive housing and services. Local stakeholder knowledge suggests that families, seniors, and individuals with disabilities represent a growing share of the unhoused population, often staying with relatives or in overcrowded conditions rather than unsheltered. This "hidden homelessness" is common in rural and small urban communities and is underreported in formal point-in-time counts.

The City’s homeless population generally ranges around 13-15 people annually with recent past fluctuation increases due primarily to natural disaster displacement (i.e. flooding along Tule River in adjacent Tulare County), Covid Emergency Housing for temporary 2-week accommodation at a downtown motel, and fluctuations associated with intentional and unintentional relocation drop off displacement from the Amtrak passenger train service at the Corcoran train station. In general, there are no concentrations of persons experiencing homelessness in the City. Past trends have shown that short term temporary housing at a local motel only served to leave individuals stranded in Corcoran after the two week stay and left with no readily available means to relocate back to their communities of origin or to the nearest cities (i.e. Hanford, Tulare) located approximately 30 miles away where housing and services are more readily available. This unfortunate circumstance of displacement often left non-Corcoran based homeless individuals in a desperate state for shelter and resources. Between 2020 and 2024, the local homeless population grew to approximately 38 individuals who migrated to concentrate around one downtown area park near retail businesses and restaurants where they sought resources. Occasionally, these individuals would seek to occupy vacant structures, and resulted in increased City’s code compliance cases to address unauthorized occupation in uninhabitable structures with no electricity or running water.

The City has limited resources, and no homeless housing funding is available to provide long term and sustainable housing for unsheltered individuals. However, to address the needs of persons experiencing homelessness, the City has attempted to leverage and use Permanent Local Housing Allocation Funds and locally allocated Opioid Settlement funds. These funding sources are currently being utilized by the City to work in partnership with Kings Community Action Organization in providing housing navigation services, voluntary relocation transportation, and connection to drug & alcohol addiction and mental health services. Permanent Local Housing Allocation funding is also prioritized and dedicated to low income housing project development in partnership with Self Help Enterprises.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 46 Additionally, the aging housing stock in central Corcoran, particularly in tracts with the highest cost burdens and poverty rates, likely contributes to substandard housing conditions and underscores the need for targeted rehabilitation programs. Older units are more likely to have structural issues, deferred maintenance, or lack basic amenities—all of which disproportionately affect low-income renters and increase long-term displacement risk.

To address these challenges, the City has identified Program 4.6: Housing Preservation and AntiDisplacement Strategy, which will:
• Conduct proactive housing code enforcement in identified high-need areas; • Establish a rental rehab grant/loan program for small landlords housing low-income tenants; • Coordinate with service providers to improve outreach to persons experiencing homelessness and at risk of housing loss;
• Prioritize housing support in census tracts with documented overcrowding, cost burden, and environmental risk.

This place-based approach will help preserve affordability, protect at-risk residents from displacement, and guide equitable reinvestment in Corcoran’s most vulnerable neighborhoods.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 47 Figure 16: TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas, 2023

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 48 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.

As shown in Table 22, 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-lowincome households in all jurisdictions, both owners and renters, were reported to be overpaying. In most communities, however, more rental households than owner households were overpaying. Few households with incomes above the median faced overpayment – often less than 10% of households.

Table 21: Household Overpayment by Tenure
Income Category Corcoran Kings County
Owners
<= 30% 73.7% 79.00%
>30% to <=50% 68.0% 68.60%
>50% to <=80% 43.8% 48.30%
>80% to <=100% 19.7% 32.80%
>100% 4.0% 7.40%
Total 27.8% 22.50%
Renters
<= 30% 73.0% 79.30%
>30% to <=50% 69.0% 78.30%
>50% to <=80% 51.0% 57.00%
>80% to <=100% 12.0% 22.50%
>100% 3.0% 6.40%
Total 47.5% 43.20%
Source: HUD CHAS data based on Census ACS 2014-2018
These figures indicate that housing affordability is a more critical issue for renters than homeowners in Corcoran, particularly for those with lower incomes. The data also suggests that, overall, residents in Corcoran, especially renters, face greater challenges with housing affordability compared to those in the broader Kings County area.

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. In Figures 15 and 16 the data reveals the overpayment by renters and homeowners at tract level. Overpayment by Corcoran renters is generally about 40%-60% of households residing in CTs 13, 15, and 14.02, with the exception of CT 14.01 where 20%-

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 49 40% of households face overpaying. For overpaying owners, the highest is CT 14.01 at 40%-60% and just north is CT 14.02 at 20%-40%. The rest of the City households is less than 20% overpaying.

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 23 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, there exists a highest percentage of total households (renters and owners) living in overcrowded in Corcoran at 15%, while the countywide percentage was 8% in 2020.

Table 22: Overcrowding by Tenure
Occupants per Room Corcoran Kings County
Total households 3,845 43,604
Owner occupied: 1,789 23,368

0.50 or less 47.1% 60.70%

0.51 to 1.00 43.7% 34.20%

1.01 to 1.50 8.6% 3.90%

1.51 to 2.00 0.3% 0.70%

2.01 or more 0.4% 0.50%
Renter occupied: 2,056 20,236

0.50 or less 27.6% 39.70%

0.51 to 1.00 52.1% 48.10%

1.01 to 1.50 15.0% 8.70%

1.51 to 2.00 4.0% 2.90%

2.01 or more 1.2% 0.60%
Source : Census ACS 2016-2020, Table B25014

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 50 Figure 17: Overpayment by Renters – Tract Level

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 51 Figure 18: Percentage of Homeowners Overpaying

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 52 According to the 2016-2020 ACS, In Corcoran, among the 1,789 owner-occupied households, a lower percentage (47.1%) have 0.50 or fewer occupants per room compared to 60.7% in Kings County, indicating more spacious living conditions in Kings County. For Corcoran’s renter-occupied households (2,056 in total), only 27.6% have 0.50 or fewer occupants per room, which is lower than Kings County's

39.7%, suggesting more pronounced overcrowding among renters in Corcoran. The data also shows that in Corcoran, the percentage of renter-occupied households with higher occupants per room (1.01 to 1.50 and above) is significantly higher than in Kings County, indicating more severe overcrowding among renters in Corcoran. This trend of higher overcrowding in renter-occupied households as compared to owner-occupied households is consistent in both Corcoran and Kings County but is more acute in Corcoran. These differences could be attributed to various factors including the availability, size, and type of rental properties, economic conditions, and population density in these areas.

In Figure 17 below it could be noted that the percentage of overcrowded units in central Corcoran (CTs

14.01 and 15) lies between 10% and 15% and CT 14.02 is 5% to 10%. The area around central Corcoran (CT 13) that encompasses County unincorporated areas as well as City annexed former County Island areas and significantly lacks City infrastructure due to being developed in the County is less than the statewide average of 5.19% of households overpaying.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 53 Figure 19: Overcrowding in Corcoran

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 54 Housing Conditions
Housing quality in Corcoran is shaped by a combination of age, tenancy type, local income levels, and environmental conditions. While prior estimates of units needing rehabilitation or replacement are drawn from past surveys, recent observations and local data suggest that housing condition challenges persist, particularly in central and southern neighborhoods.

Corcoran’s housing stock is aging: more than 60% of units were built before 1980. Many of these structures were developed using materials and standards that no longer meet current building codes or energy efficiency requirements. Common deficiencies include deteriorated roofing, outdated plumbing and electrical systems, foundation cracks, and lack of insulation. In addition, local code enforcement reports an increase in health and safety complaints related to pest infestation, water intrusion, and structural wear— especially in older single-family rentals and duplex units located east of Highway 43.

Staff observations from the City’s Building and Code Enforcement Departments indicate that deferred maintenance is more prevalent in renter-occupied units, where landlords may lack the financial resources or incentive to invest in improvements. These patterns align with data showing that renters are more likely to be low-income and cost-burdened, limiting their ability to advocate for repairs or relocate to bettermaintained homes. In particular, multifamily housing built in the 1960s–1980s is reported to have recurring code violations related to electrical hazards, mold, and ventilation issues.

Environmental exposure also contributes to housing condition deterioration. Areas identified in CalEnviroScreen 4.0 as having elevated scores—due to poor air quality, pesticide exposure, and water system risks—are primarily located where older housing is concentrated. These environmental stressors accelerate deterioration and further affect vulnerable populations already at risk due to age, disability, or income status.

Local knowledge from community stakeholders, including nonprofit service providers and tenant advocates, supports the conclusion that housing conditions have either remained stagnant or worsened in lower-income neighborhoods since the last formal survey. Community outreach efforts have consistently reported concerns about leaking roofs, unsafe stairs, inadequate heating and cooling, and insufficient weatherproofing in aging units.

Based on these observations, the City estimates that while the original replacement and rehabilitation figures (4.5% and 29% respectively) provide a baseline, the true need may be modestly higher today— especially within older rental units and informal housing arrangements in central Corcoran.

Homelessness
Homelessness is often the result of multiple factors that 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 problems, 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. 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

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 55 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, the following portrait of the 313 homeless individuals counted in Kings County included:
• 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
Table 23: 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 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 homeless or in a car.

Table 23 presents the 2022 PIT homeless counts for the four cities and unincorporated areas of the County.

The table shows that the City of Corcoran had 17 homeless individuals or 5% of the countywide total. Only the Cities of Avenal and Lemoore had smaller counts, with four and eight homeless persons, respectively.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 56 Table 24: Shelter Facilities in Kings County

Source: Kings Tulare Homeless Alliance, 2023
Table 24 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 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%

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 57 for rent and utility bills, motel vouchers and bus or plane tickets. Corcoran Christian Aid provides food, vouchers, and other types of emergency financial 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 multijurisdictional agreement with up to three adjacent jurisdictions. 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.

Corcoran’s Program 2.11 Emergency Shelters and Transitional/Supportive Housing continues work with providers to facilitate emergency shelters and transitional/supportive housing. Emergency shelters are already permitted in the C-S (Service Commercial) zone.

Extremely Low-Income (ELI) Households
Extremely Low-Income (ELI) households—those earning 30% or less of the Area Median Income (AMI)— face the most acute housing challenges in Corcoran. These households typically consist of minimum wage workers, seniors on fixed incomes, persons with disabilities, and farmworkers with seasonal or inconsistent earnings. Given their limited financial capacity, ELI households are more likely to experience multiple and overlapping housing challenges, including severe cost burden, overcrowding, substandard housing, and risk of displacement.

ELI households experience the highest levels of severe cost burden (paying more than 50% of income toward housing), far exceeding the rates seen among low-, moderate-, and above-moderate-income groups.

In addition, overcrowding is disproportionately higher among these households, as they often reside in shared rental units or informal housing arrangements due to the lack of affordable one- and two-bedroom rental units.

Many ELI households are concentrated in older housing stock located in central Corcoran, which overlaps with high CalEnviroScreen scores and limited access to amenities such as healthcare, education, and reliable transportation. These spatial and socioeconomic barriers not only increase vulnerability to eviction and homelessness but also restrict access to opportunity and mobility.

Due to these compounded disadvantages, ELI households often require not just affordable units, but deeply affordable housing, supportive services, and access to subsidized housing programs such as Section 8, Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH), and the California HCD-funded No Place Like Home and HOMEARP initiatives. However, the current availability of these resources in Corcoran is limited relative to demand.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 58 Displacement Risk
The Urban Displacement Project, a joint research and action initiative of the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of Toronto, analyzes income patterns and housing availability to determine the level of displacement risk at the census tract level. The EDR provides three layers of displacement information. The “Overall Displacement” map layer shows the number of income groups experiencing any displacement risk. The dark red tracts (2 income groups), our models estimate displacement (Elevated, High, or Extreme) for two income groups. In the light orange tracts categorized as “Probable”, one or all three income groups had to have been categorized as “Probable Displacement”. In Figure 11, it could be observed that all the cities in the county and the southern western region are at predominant risk of At-Risk displacement. "At risk of displacement" 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.

According to Figure 17, CTs 14.01 and 16.01 have the lower risk of displacement. CTs 13 and 15 are identified as At Risk of Displacement and CT 14.02 is identified as 1 Income Group Displacement.

According to the Urban Displacement Project's Estimated Displacement Risk (EDR) model for California, displacement risk is determined by evaluating census tract characteristics that are strongly correlated with a net loss of low-income renter populations. Essentially, a high displacement risk suggests that more low-income households are leaving a neighborhood than moving in, often due to factors like affordability, development pressures, or changes in the housing market.

For affordable housing supply, actions focusing on housing preservation and production must be utilized.

Corcoran’s Program 2.4 Preservation of At-Risk Affordable Housing consists of a preservation strategy for at risk projects and maintain and update at risk project inventory and actions taken. For example, Corcoran has 593 units of affordable housing for very-low, low-, and moderate-income households that are at-risk of market rate conversion in the next 10 years. The City will contact the property owners to determine their intentions, contact qualified non-profits regarding potential opt-out projects, ensure that property owners comply with noticing requirements, and more. Program 2.7 Affordable Housing Development Assistance plans to use a variety of strategies regarding production by seeking applicable grants from state and federal sources including funding specifically targeted to extremely low-income housings, provide an inventory of housing sites to interested developers, and continue to implement the density bonuses. .

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 59 Figure 20: Estimated Displacement Risk – Overall Displacement

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 60 C. Constraints
Governmental Constraints
Development Standards and Permitting for Single-Room Occupancy (SRO) Units Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing provides a vital form of deeply affordable rental housing, typically targeting low- and extremely low-income individuals including seniors, veterans, and persons with disabilities. Each unit usually consists of a single room intended for permanent residence and may include shared or private bathroom and kitchen facilities. Under California Government Code §65583(a)(4), local governments are required to evaluate the availability and feasibility of housing for all income levels and household types. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) recognizes SROs as an essential component in a jurisdiction’s toolkit to address homelessness and housing instability.

In evaluating zoning ordinances, it is critical that SROs be acknowledged not only as a housing type but also that their development be facilitated through clear, objective standards. Key considerations for effective SRO policy include unit size minimums, occupancy limits, access to amenities, and streamlined approval processes. Discretionary review processes such as conditional use permits (CUPs) can present barriers, particularly if not supported by transparent development standards. SROs can also be highly effective in adaptive reuse projects, such as converting motels or underutilized commercial buildings, particularly in urban or commercial zones where services and transit access are present.

Incorporating clear guidance and definitions related to SROs in the zoning ordinance, and ensuring consistency across commercial and mixed-use zones, reinforces a jurisdiction’s compliance with fair housing and housing element law while expanding practical options for meeting the housing needs of vulnerable individuals.

Permit Streamlining Procedure
California Senate Bill 35 (Government Code § 65913.4) requires local jurisdictions to provide a streamlined, ministerial approval process for qualifying multifamily infill housing developments that meet specific criteria, such as affordability requirements, consistency with objective zoning standards, and location eligibility. Jurisdictions are obligated to respond to such applications within 60 days (if fewer than 150 units) or 90 days (if 150 units or more), confirming whether the project qualifies for streamlining. This process is designed to eliminate discretionary review, public hearings, and CEQA review for eligible projects, thereby expediting housing production. City of Corcoran has procedures that follow California State law regarding permitting and approval of infill multifamily units.

Additionally, the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code §§ 65920–65964) mandates specific timeframes for reviewing development applications, including a 30-day completeness review and a maximum of 60 days for approval once an application is deemed complete, unless otherwise specified.

CEQA intersections occur when jurisdictions are lead agencies responsible for environmental review, and the timelines for CEQA documentation must align with those for land use approvals, except in ministerial cases like SB 35. Together, these laws require that local governments clearly document internal processing procedures and provide transparent timelines for applicants. City of Corcoran has clear timelines for each of its planning applications including CEQA review.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 61 Jurisdictions are encouraged to publish written procedures for SB 35 processing and ensure alignment with CEQA and the Permit Streamlining Act timelines. These procedures should clarify whether SB 35 applications are eligible in specific zones, detail required application materials, and indicate decisionmaking authority. Ensuring applicants and the public understand this process strengthens accountability and streamlines compliance.

Administrative Processes and Constraints for Housing for Persons with Disabilities
In alignment with the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), it is critical to ensure that procedural and regulatory mechanisms do not inadvertently restrict housing opportunities for persons with disabilities. A fully accessible housing environment requires not only the availability of units but also the reduction of administrative burdens and permitting processes that could function as barriers. In particular, the processing of reasonable accommodation requests must be clearly outlined in terms of: (1) the body responsible for review and approval, (2) specific timeframes within which decisions must be rendered, and (3) established findings or criteria that guide approval or denial.

Providing transparency and predictability in this process helps ensure compliance with state and federal mandates and avoids delays that could have discriminatory effects.

Additionally, the requirement for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for group homes serving seven or more individuals with disabilities may present a disproportionate constraint if not justified by objective health or safety concerns. As per U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and HUD joint statements, zoning regulations should treat disability-related group homes in a manner comparable to other residential uses of similar size and character. A requirement for CUPs may deter providers due to uncertainty, added time, and cost. An analysis of how this permit requirement impacts the siting, licensing, or financing of such housing, particularly in high-opportunity areas, is essential. Removing or streamlining such requirements— especially when not applied to analogous non-disabled group living situations—can support broader fair housing goals.

By documenting administrative procedures, streamlining permitting for disability housing, and ensuring all standards are applied equitably, the jurisdiction can better align its policies with the intent of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and affirmatively furthering fair housing requirements.

On- and Off-Site Improvement Requirements
On- and off-site improvement requirements—such as street construction, curb and gutter installation, sidewalks, storm drains, street lighting, landscaping, and utility extensions—are essential for ensuring safe, functional, and connected neighborhoods. However, the scope, scale, and design specifications of these improvements can significantly affect development costs and may influence housing feasibility, particularly for smaller or affordable projects. Among these, street width standards are a critical factor, as excessive width requirements increase land dedication, grading, and paving expenses, reduce usable lot area, and can limit the total number of housing units per acre—ultimately increasing per-unit costs.

According to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), local jurisdictions should evaluate whether street width standards are consistent with best practices and whether alternative cross-sections (such as reduced-width local streets or shared access lanes) can accommodate emergency access and circulation needs while supporting cost-efficient housing development. Narrower

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 62 street standards have also been associated with safer pedestrian environments and more compact neighborhood design. The City of Corcoran’s CEQA review includes review by the City Engineer, Public Works Director, and the Community Development director regarding street and roads as it pertains to State law and CEQA review.

Furthermore, cumulative infrastructure requirements may disproportionately impact infill or small-lot developments, where project scale limits the ability to absorb high per-foot improvement costs. Analyzing typical improvement cost components—such as linear foot costs for street paving and utility trenching— helps clarify how these requirements contribute to housing prices and whether adjustments to engineering standards could ease development constraints without compromising safety or quality. The City of Corcoran will continue to analyze the cost for improvements, contract materials, and labor cost for these type of projects.

Development Fees
Development impact fees are a critical funding mechanism used by local governments to ensure new housing projects contribute to the infrastructure and public services they require—such as roads, water, sewer, schools, parks, and fire protection. These fees typically include a combination of planning and zoning fees, building permit fees, utility connection charges, school district fees, and impact fees imposed under the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code § 66000 et seq.). While necessary for community infrastructure, the cumulative financial burden of such fees can act as a constraint on the feasibility of housing development, especially for affordable and multifamily housing projects.

According to HCD’s Building Blocks for Housing Elements, a best practice is to analyze the total fees charged per unit for typical residential developments. This includes calculating and presenting the cost burden for both single-family homes and multifamily units, expressed as a dollar amount per unit and as a percentage of total development cost. In high-cost jurisdictions, total impact fees often range from $30,000 to $150,000 per unit, depending on the scale and complexity of the project. While Corcoran’s fees may be relatively modest compared to larger metropolitan areas, without calculating per-unit impacts, it is difficult to assess whether the aggregate fee load represents a barrier to housing production.

Furthermore, individual fee components may disproportionately affect certain housing types. For example, flat-rate fees per unit may have a larger cost impact on smaller or more affordable units, thereby disincentivizing lower-cost housing production. Similarly, utility connection fees that do not scale with unit size or affordability level can pose a greater constraint on multifamily or infill developments. The City should consider the timing and structure of its fees (e.g., whether they are collected at building permit, occupancy, or final inspection), as front-loading costs can create cash flow challenges for developers.

Finally, fee transparency and predictability are important to facilitate housing investment. Developers benefit from clear, published schedules and streamlined processes that allow them to understand total fee obligations early in the planning stage. This predictability can reduce development risk and enhance financing opportunities. Aligning fee structures with objective planning goals and regularly reviewing their cumulative impact ensures that development remains feasible while supporting community infrastructure needs. Corcoran’s impact fees, County Impact fees, and school fees are posted on the City’s website as well as at the front public counter at Corcoran City Hall.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 63 Non-Governmental Constraints
Nongovernmental constraints—particularly those driven by market conditions—play a significant role in shaping the feasibility, affordability, and pace of housing production. Among the most impactful of these are land prices, labor and material costs, financing conditions, and delays caused by speculative behavior or developer preferences that deviate from planned densities.

Land Cost
Land values have a direct correlation with development feasibility, especially in jurisdictions where developable land is limited or concentrated in areas with high environmental or infrastructure costs. When landowners hold out for higher profits or speculate on rezoning opportunities, this can delay land sales and stifle project initiation, especially for multifamily or affordable housing developers. These conditions create bottlenecks in pipeline development and reduce certainty in planning timelines.

Construction Costs and Labor Constraints
The rising cost of construction materials (e.g., concrete, lumber, steel) and the chronic shortage of skilled construction labor significantly drive up the per-unit development cost. According to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and industry reports (e.g., Terner Center for Housing Innovation), labor shortages and wage inflation have extended project timelines and increased bids, further complicating cost management for both market-rate and subsidized housing.

Financing Barriers
Access to financing—both for developers and end-users—continues to be shaped by broader economic trends, such as interest rate hikes, lending standards, and investor risk appetite. Affordable housing developers, in particular, face challenges navigating multiple funding layers (tax credits, bonds, grants) that must align in both timing and scope. In higher-cost markets, commercial lenders may also hesitate to finance projects intended for moderate or lower-income households due to perceived lower returns.

Lag Between Entitlement and Permitting
The time gap between receiving development approvals and submitting building permit applications is another significant barrier. This delay may be due to financing challenges, permit preparation issues, or speculative holding by entitled property owners. Extended entitlement-to-permit periods affect housing production forecasts and reduce the reliability of site inventory assumptions in meeting RHNA targets. The City of Corcoran inputs planning applications, once accepted as complete, into the Building application process as quick as the developer/property owner(s) apply.

Environmental Health
The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) reports CalEnviroScreen 4.0 scores for the unincorporated county, suggesting relatively adverse environmental conditions throughout the county. (see Figure 18). According to OEHHA, except for some of the smaller tracts in the center of the cities of Hanford, Lemoore, and Corcoran the rest of the areas have scores above the 90th percentile. The environmental conditions in Kings County likely due to the dominance of commercial agricultural practices and natural resource extraction, both of which are known to have negative impacts on the surrounding areas

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 64 resulting from air pollution and other contaminants.

The primary indicators leading to the high environmental scores as reported by OEHHA’s CalEnviroScreen vary across the county, but include ozone, particulate matter (PM) 2.5, diesel PM, pesticides, toxic releases, drinking water contaminants, chemical cleanup, lead in housing, groundwater threats, hazardous waste, impaired water, and solid waste. Ozone, diesel particulate, and PM2.5, forms of pollution generated by car traffic and industrial uses, score higher throughout the county. In the unincorporated county, pesticide use, groundwater threats, and solid waste facilities are more prevalent than in urbanized areas, reflecting the presence of agricultural industries and chemical and waste storage outside of urban areas. Nearly all of Kings County is Senate Bill (SB) 535-qualifying disadvantaged communities excluding areas around Lemoore, north of Hanford and some tracts in Corcoran. This indicates that the unincorporated county represents an area of potential concern regarding fair housing and disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards and a concentration of vulnerable populations. The City of Corcoran predominantly consists of areas which have a CalEnviroScreen count between 50 and 70% in most places and a above 75% in northern and eastern edges indicating a moderate to high level of pollution burden and vulnerability compared to other areas in California.

Further, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) developsflood maps that identify areas with the highest risk of flooding, differentiating them by the degree of severity and frequency of flooding anticipated. In Kings County, while large pieces of land, including Corcoran, are classified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency at a high-risk for flooding. Flood zones include Zone AO, AE, AH, and A, which indicate the depth of the 1.0% annual chance of flooding, and areas with a 0.2% annual chance of flooding (Figure 19). One significant concern is the increased risk of flooding in the region, especially due to subsidence around the Tule River to the east of Corcoran. This subsidence has led to the merging of the Deer Creek and Tule River flood zones near the prison complex in Corcoran. The merging of these floodplains poses a challenge in diverting water away from critical areas, including the prisons which are situated between the Tulare River and Deer Creek. Furthermore, the historic droughts over the past two decades have diminished the effectiveness of levees in managing floodwaters. Dried-out levees lose structural integrity and become more prone to spreading.

This issue is prevalent across the Central Valley's extensive levee system. The City of Corcoran undertook efforts to rebuild its levee in 2017 to guard against the potential re-emergence of Tulare Lake. However, there is concern that these measures might not be sufficient, and efforts are underway to raise the levee by an additional four feet along its entire 15-mile length.

Environmental Constraints
Five key environmental constraints were identified and include Flood Zones, Seismic Activity, Soil Limitations, Agricultural Land Preservation, and Biological Resources. The City is predominantly developed and of uniform sandy loam type soils with no concentrated biological resources. Agricultural land conservation restrictions do not exist within City limits, and seismic activity is considered low risk in this part of the San Joaquin Valley. Flood Zones do pose a risk from the former Tulare Lake that is prone to flooding, however, the City is protected and has a geographic separation from the Corcoran Levee managed by the Cross Creek Flood Control District that protects the City. Flood Zones are identified along the western edges of the City, but are mitigated through the City’s development standards for flood elevation housing pad heights. No environmental constraints are considered to hinder housing sites.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 65 Figure 21: CalEnviroScreen 4.0

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 66 Figure 22: Flood Hazard Zones

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 67 D. Local Data Knowledge and Other Relevant Factors
The local information in this section was developed with input from local staff, demographic characteristics, historical context, and observed trends affecting various population groups.

Segregation and Integration
Race. The City of Corcoran is a majority-minority community, with all areas of the city considered concentrated minority communities. There are no neighborhoods identified as having particularly low concentrations of minority residents, indicating a uniform demographic pattern across the city.

This racial and ethnic composition is strongly influenced by Corcoran’s historical and economic development. As a low-income farming community, the city has long attracted a labor force composed primarily of Latino and other minority populations, especially those engaged in agricultural work. Over time, this has resulted in a consistently high percentage of minority residents citywide, with little demographic variation by neighborhood.

The city’s economic structure—centered on agriculture and limited industrial diversification—continues to reinforce this pattern, as higher-income employment opportunities are scarce. As a result, population shifts are minimal, and there are no current trends indicating substantial change in racial or ethnic distribution.

In summary, Corcoran exhibits no evidence of racial segregation, as minority populations are evenly distributed throughout the city. However, the intersection of race, income, and employment opportunity remains an important consideration for future housing and community development planning, particularly to ensure equitable access to services, amenities, and housing options.

Disability. There are no known geographic concentrations of persons with disabilities in the City of Corcoran, based on available local data and census information. Individuals with disabilities are likely dispersed throughout the community, with no specific neighborhoods identified as having a higher or lower presence of this population group.

The city currently has no licensed group homes or residential care facilities (RCFs) operating within its jurisdiction. Similarly, there have been no known permits issued for accessibility-related home modifications—such as ramps or lifts—during the most recent planning period. Additionally, no requests for reasonable accommodation have been recorded, which may reflect low demand, limited awareness, or lack of formal processes for requesting such modifications.

While no specific neighborhood disparities have been identified, all new residential and commercial construction is required to comply with local development standards, including the installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and handicap-accessible (HC) ramps. These requirements ensure that newly built areas are reasonably accessible; however, older parts of the city may still have infrastructure gaps or physical barriers that could affect residents with mobility challenges.

In conclusion, while there is no evidence of disability-based segregation in Corcoran, the absence of group homes, accommodation requests, and documented home modifications suggests an opportunity for the City to improve its outreach, tracking, and accommodation processes. Future planning efforts should focus on ensuring that accessibility improvements extend to existing neighborhoods, and that persons with disabilities are supported in maintaining independent and integrated living arrangements.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 68 Familial Status. Given Corcoran’s compact size and the general availability of single-family housing, it is likely that families with children are distributed throughout the city. Corcoran is served by several childcare facilities, which provide essential early childhood support for working families. However, the City does not maintain a GIS-based map or inventory of their precise locations. Based on local knowledge, these facilities appear to be spread across different parts of the city, but the absence of detailed geospatial data limits the ability to assess whether any geographic disparities in access to childcare exist.

While there is no evidence of segregation by familial status in Corcoran, the lack of disaggregated household composition data and mapped childcare infrastructure presents a challenge to fully evaluating access. Future efforts should consider developing a spatial inventory of childcare resources and household types to better inform planning and ensure equitable service access for families with children.

Disparities in Access to Opportunity
Education. The City of Corcoran is served by the Corcoran Joint Unified School District (CJUSD), which provides a comprehensive and centralized K-12 public education system. The district operates three elementary schools, one junior high school, one high school, one continuation school, and one adult school.

These institutions are primarily located along Letts Avenue, which runs through the center of town from the north to the south, ensuring citywide accessibility.

CJUSD’s elementary schools are divided by grade level:
• Bret Harte Elementary serves preschool, TK, and grades K–1. • John C. Fremont Elementary serves grades 2–3.
• Mark Twain Elementary serves grades 4–5.

Middle and high school students attend Corcoran Middle School (grades 6–8) and Corcoran High School (grades 9–12), respectively. There is also a state preschool program for children ages 3–4 and an adult school for continuing education.

According to the California School Dashboard, Corcoran schools are performing at levels comparable to other districts in Kings County. Notably, Corcoran High School ranks second in state testing among high schools in the county, demonstrating academic strength at the secondary level. All students in each grade level attend the same school sites, so there are no differences in educational access by neighborhood.

CJUSD partners with the Valley Regional Occupational Program (Valley ROP) to deliver high-quality career technical education (CTE). Students benefit from access to career development programs, workforce preparation, and dual enrollment courses through partnerships with College of the Sequoias and Lemoore Community College. Additionally, CJUSD participates in the Tulare-Kings College and Career Collaborative, supporting college readiness and workforce engagement.

The district has made significant strides in digital equity, providing 24/7 access to technology for students and emphasizing inclusive practices and community partnerships. Programs such as the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP) and After School Education and Safety (ASES) grants, operated in partnership with the RAC, support academic enrichment and tutoring. All CJUSD campuses offer afterschool tutoring, available to all students.

CJUSD does not operate zoned or residence-based school assignments; instead, students are assigned by grade level to designated schools. There are no private or charter school options in Corcoran, and school

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 69 choice is not a factor influencing enrollment.

The high school graduation rate in Corcoran is 86.9%, slightly above the state average, indicating overall student persistence. However, the college-going rate is 31.1%, which is below the state average, suggesting a need for enhanced college access support and postsecondary planning.

No new subdivisions or master-planned areas are currently influencing school access. CJUSD recently acquired property at the corner of Letts Avenue and Whitley Avenue, formerly a church site, but there are no development plans at this time.

Educational access in Corcoran is equitable across all neighborhoods due to centralized school locations and grade-level enrollment policies. The district is actively investing in career pathways, technology, and student support, but challenges remain in improving college-going rates. Continued partnership with local organizations and targeted academic interventions will be important to advancing educational equity and long-term outcomes for Corcoran students.

Economic. The economy of the City of Corcoran is supported by a diverse group of public and private employers, with major industries centered around corrections, agriculture, manufacturing, and healthcare.

Key employers include:
• California State Prison, Corcoran, located at the south end of the city • J.G. Boswell Company and related agricultural operations (e.g., Buttonwillow/Mar Vista) • Camfil Farr, an air filtration manufacturer
• The City of Corcoran and its municipal departments
• Local healthcare providers and facilities
Additionally, many Corcoran residents are employed in food processing and manufacturing facilities in nearby cities, such as Lemoore and Hanford, reflecting regional commuting patterns for employment outside the city.

There have been no significant changes in the city’s industrial landscape in recent years. No new commercial or industrial hubs have developed within Kings County that have shifted the local job market, nor have any existing employment centers in Corcoran been phased out or repurposed.

High-speed internet is available citywide, and residents generally experience reliable cell signal coverage.

This level of connectivity supports access to online education, remote work, and digital economic opportunities, which are increasingly important in enhancing long-term economic mobility and job access.

To support future economic growth, the City of Corcoran contracts with The CrisCom Company, a public affairs and lobbying firm that assists with economic development planning, strategic partnerships, and advocacy efforts in both Sacramento and Washington, D.C. While no specific large-scale economic initiatives are currently underway, this partnership represents a proactive approach to securing investment and promoting local job creation over the next decade.

Corcoran’s economy is stable but reliant on a few major employers, particularly in the public sector and agriculture. With adequate internet infrastructure and regional commuting opportunities, residents have access to a broader job market. However, the lack of new industry growth within city limits underscores the importance of sustained economic development efforts to diversify the employment base and improve upward mobility for local workers.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 70 Transportation. The City of Corcoran is served by a multi-modal transportation network that includes rail, regional transit, and local dial-a-ride services, helping to connect residents with surrounding communities and essential services.

Corcoran has an Amtrak station located within the city limits, providing six northbound and six southbound stops daily, with connections to Bakersfield, Hanford, and Fresno. This station is widely used by both residents and visitors for regional travel.

Locally, the city operates Corcoran Area Transit (CAT)—a grant-funded dial-a-ride system—which provides curb-to-curb transit service within the city and surrounding areas, including for those who do not have access to a private vehicle. In addition, Kings Area Regional Transit (KART) operates Route 13, offering fixed-route service three times a day between Corcoran and Hanford, expanding access to jobs and services outside the city.

The city supports biking and walking infrastructure along major thoroughfares and has established bike routes to improve non-motorized mobility. Two Safe Routes to School (SRTS) plans have been adopted and used over the past decade to enhance pedestrian access for students. Projects have included the installation of sidewalks, handicap ramps, and bike paths. Currently, the city is pursuing grant funding to complete infill sidewalk segments along Letts Avenue, a key school corridor.

Most city streets are in adequate condition, particularly in downtown and built-out residential neighborhoods, where street lighting and pedestrian facilities are generally present. However, annexed areas—particularly those incorporated into the city in 2006—have substandard road infrastructure that does not meet city standards. These areas also lack sufficient street lighting, though the city is gradually addressing these deficiencies as funding becomes available.

The city maintains Landscaping and Lighting Districts (LLDs) and Public Facility Maintenance Districts (PFMDs) for subdivisions developed since 1990, helping to fund improvements in newer neighborhoods.

There are no known high-collision corridors or disproportionate traffic safety concerns. Access to transit, bike paths, and sidewalks is generally equitable across neighborhoods, with no reported disparities in walking or biking infrastructure. All residents, regardless of location, can access the city’s transit services and parks, including the recently developed Gateway Park.

Recent and planned infrastructure projects include:
• Major upgrades to the Wastewater Treatment Plant
• Resurfacing of James Avenue
• Citywide replacement or installation of water meters
• Proposed streetlight installations and urban greening along Whitley Avenue • A planned roundabout at Orange and Otis Avenue to improve traffic flow and safety The City of Corcoran offers a range of transportation options, including rail, regional bus service, and local dial-a-ride transit. Active transportation and road infrastructure are generally adequate, though annexed areas require targeted upgrades. With continued investment in sidewalk infill, road resurfacing, and multimodal connectivity, the city is making steady progress toward equitable transportation access for all residents.

Environment. Environmental conditions across the City of Corcoran appear to be generally consistent

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 71 across neighborhoods, with no documented disparities in access to environmental benefits or exposure to environmental hazards.

The City has no recent public safety reports or environmental assessments indicating disparities between neighborhoods in water quality, sewer infrastructure, or circulation systems. No areas within the city have been flagged for contamination or major environmental threats in public documentation.

There are no known major sources of pollution in the community, such as industrial emissions or hazardous waste sites. Likewise, there is no formal documentation of groundwater contamination, agricultural runoff issues, or significant exposure to lead-based paint in older housing, although like many communities with aging homes, this could be a latent concern.

At present, no neighborhoods have been identified as environmentally unsuitable for residential development, nor are there reports of environmental conditions significantly impacting residents' health or quality of life.

The City of Corcoran has made efforts to ensure equitable distribution of parks and recreational spaces.

Public parks are located in strategic areas throughout the city, and all neighborhoods are considered to have general access to open space. There is no indication of a disparity in park access between older and newer residential areas.

Two recent small subdivisions have been developed, both of which have reasonable proximity to existing parks and amenities, ensuring that new development does not result in environmental or recreational access gaps.

There are no reported differences between neighborhoods in access to grocery stores, retail outlets, or other essential services. However, like many rural communities, overall access to healthy food options may be limited due to the city’s small size and relatively low commercial density, but this issue affects the entire community uniformly rather than any specific area.

The City of Corcoran does not currently exhibit environmental inequities between neighborhoods. Public parks are distributed across the city, and there are no documented pollution sources or environmental hazards concentrated in any particular area. As the city continues to grow and invest in new developments, maintaining this equitable environmental landscape will be essential, particularly through ongoing monitoring and proactive planning.

Disproportionate Housing Needs, Including Displacement
Overpayment. The City of Corcoran, like many other jurisdictions in California, has experienced rising housing costs in recent years. Both rents and home prices have increased, though they remain below the state average. These increases reflect broader statewide housing trends but are not attributed to specific neighborhoods within Corcoran.

Despite the cost increases, no formal data is tracked locally on the incidence of evictions or foreclosures, nor is there data disaggregated by neighborhood. However, given the city's predominantly low- to moderate-income population, it is reasonable to infer that housing cost burden (overpayment)—defined as spending more than 30% of household income on housing—is a citywide issue that affects both renters and homeowners, especially those with fixed or limited incomes.

Overcrowding. The City does not collect data on household overcrowding. However, like many small cities in California, anecdotal evidence suggests that overcrowding is present, particularly

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 72 through multi-generational households or families "doubling up" in single units to share housing costs.

No specific neighborhoods have been identified as disproportionately affected, and code enforcement records do not provide geographic patterns to confirm or refute potential concentrations.

Housing Conditions. A significant portion of Corcoran’s housing stock is aging, with many homes over 30 years old. City staff estimate that approximately 10% of existing housing units may be in need of substantial rehabilitation due to deteriorating conditions. Despite this, no specific areas or neighborhoods have been identified as having disproportionately poor housing quality or higher need for safety or accessibility upgrades.

There are no documented differences in housing condition by type (single-family, multifamily, or mobile homes), nor are there known accessibility concerns associated with older units. Code enforcement complaints are reported to be evenly distributed across the city, with no notable concentrations or hot spots.

Over the past decade, four new subdivisions have been developed in Corcoran. These neighborhoods differ primarily in age and appearance but do not exhibit significant differences in infrastructure quality or housing values when compared to older parts of the city. The new subdivisions have helped to modestly expand the city's housing supply but have not altered the uniformity of housing access or affordability across neighborhoods.

There are no specific housing types that are notably absent or unavailable within the city, and no neighborhoods have been singled out as lacking particular types of housing (e.g., duplexes, townhomes, or accessory dwelling units).

Persons Experiencing Homelessness. There is no formal count or survey of persons experiencing homelessness in Corcoran, but local knowledge indicates that unhoused individuals tend to congregate in informal locations, such as vacant lots, boarded-up buildings, and public spaces. These individuals do not appear to be concentrated in any particular neighborhood, but rather are dispersed opportunistically across the city based on availability of shelter or temporary refuge.

Corcoran does not currently operate any emergency shelters or homelessness assistance programs at the local level. The City also lacks dedicated transitional housing or rapid rehousing programs. As a result, residents facing homelessness or housing insecurity must rely on county- or state-level resources, which may be difficult to access for individuals lacking transportation or digital connectivity.

There are no neighborhood-level differences in access to emergency assistance, primarily because no services are provided directly within city limits. The absence of a localized response highlights a critical gap in housing stability infrastructure, particularly for residents at risk of displacement due to economic hardship, job loss, or eviction.

The City of Corcoran faces broadly distributed housing challenges that do not appear to be concentrated in specific neighborhoods. These include rising costs, aging housing stock, potential overcrowding, and limited local housing resources. While there is no evidence of large-scale displacement or eviction patterns, the city’s lack of affordable housing options and supportive services may place lower-income residents at increasing risk of housing instability. Addressing these challenges will require strategic investment in housing rehabilitation, expansion of affordable housing stock, and regional coordination to support those experiencing or at risk of homelessness.

Displacement. The City of Corcoran has not experienced significant displacement pressures in recent

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 73 years, nor have any neighborhoods been identified as having undergone notable increases in rents or sales prices that would result in widespread resident displacement. While housing costs have risen modestly, they remain below California’s statewide average, and there is no evidence of rent spikes or pricing patterns that differ significantly between neighborhoods.

No local events—such as redevelopment, infrastructure expansion, rezonings, or disasters—have been identified that would have directly led to the displacement of residents. Similarly, the City has not undertaken large-scale redevelopment projects that could result in the involuntary relocation of low-income households or communities of concern.

In terms of environmental risk factors, no areas within Corcoran have been identified as having heightened susceptibility to environmental hazards due to the age or design of the housing stock. Although much of the city’s housing is older and may require maintenance, there is no current data indicating that these conditions are creating displacement risk due to safety or habitability concerns.

At present, the City does not conduct defensible space inspections or operate formal environmental hazard prevention programs such as fire hazard mitigation or structural safety assessments. Additionally, there are no known areas outside of FEMA-designated flood zones that have a history of flash flooding or poor stormwater drainage infrastructure that would contribute to residential instability or housing loss.

Overall, displacement does not appear to be a significant issue in Corcoran at this time. However, the City should continue to monitor housing affordability, code enforcement trends, and environmental vulnerabilities to identify any future risks that may disproportionately affect low-income renters or residents in aging homes. Preventive planning, housing preservation strategies, and interagency coordination will be important to maintaining housing stability and equitable access to housing choice in the years ahead.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 74 E. Site Analysis
Review of Past Accomplishments
Per California Government Code Section 65588, “Each local government shall review its housing element as frequently as appropriate to evaluate all of the following: (1) The appropriateness of the housing goals, objectives, and policies in contributing to the attainment of the state housing goal. (2) The effectiveness of the housing element in attainment of the community’s housing goals and objectives. (3) The progress of the city, county, or city and county in implementation of the housing element. (4) The effectiveness of the housing element goals, policies, and related actions to meet the community’s needs, pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583.” Housing Element Appendix A presents the progress towards meeting prior Housing Programs.

Redevelopment Potential of Non-Vacant Sites
The identification of non-vacant or underutilized sites to meet RHNA obligations must be grounded in a realistic and evidence-based demonstration of redevelopment feasibility. In the Kings County context, approximately 35% of the total identified capacity for lower-income housing is situated on non-vacant sites, including parcels currently used for residential, institutional, parking, or commercial purposes. While general site categories are listed in Housing Element Table B-4.1, redevelopment potential is discussed in this section.

Indicators of Redevelopment Viability:

1. Improvement-to-Land Value Ratio (ILV): Many parcels exhibit ILV ratios below 1.0, which is generally accepted in the planning literature as a redevelopment threshold. For example, sites with parking lots or aging single-family homes on commercially-zoned parcels (e.g., R-3 or MU zones) have ILVs as low as 0.65, indicating underutilization and high potential for intensification.

2. Age and Condition of Structures: Over 60% of the structures on identified nonvacant sites were built prior to 1980, and local code enforcement records indicate deferred maintenance or substandard conditions for a portion of them. This trend increases the feasibility of redevelopment over the planning period.

3. Zoning and Public Infrastructure: All nonvacant sites identified for redevelopment are located in areas with adequate sewer, water, and road infrastructure. These areas are already zoned for multifamily or mixed-use development at densities above 20 du/ac, supporting the realistic potential for high-density infill.

4. Developer Interest and Local Precedents: Between 2018–2023, multiple projects in Hanford and Lemoore have replaced low-density residential or obsolete commercial buildings with higherdensity multifamily units (e.g., Armona Station Apartments, 42 units on a former single-family infill site). Similar parcels in the identified site inventory reflect market-consistent patterns of redevelopment.

5. Land Use Compatibility and Market Demand: Commercial corridors identified for mixed-use infill are already targeted for revitalization. These areas show rising demand for walkable housing

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 75 options, as evidenced by rising permit applications for multifamily developments in the R-3 and R4 zones.

6. Tenure and Leases: Parcel-level review confirms that several nonvacant sites are owned by institutional entities (e.g., churches, fraternal organizations, school districts) with large underutilized land holdings and no recorded long-term leases, opening potential for partnershipdriven redevelopment.

Infrastructure and Public Services Availability
The ability to support residential development through adequate sewer infrastructure is central to determining the viability of identified housing sites. Both Kings County and the City of Corcoran reference sewer service providers in their elements; however, neither provides a conclusive analysis on whether existing and planned sewer system capacity is sufficient to accommodate the full 6th Cycle RHNA. To meet statutory requirements, the Housing Element must clearly demonstrate that public facilities, particularly wastewater treatment and conveyance infrastructure, can support the level of development anticipated.

To ensure the viability of the City’s land inventory in meeting the 2024–2032 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), this section provides an extended analysis of existing and planned infrastructure capacity, focusing on water, sewer, and stormwater systems available to serve identified sites. This analysis affirms the physical readiness of parcels listed in the Housing Element for development across all income levels.

Sewer System Capacity and Service Area
The City of Corcoran owns and operates its Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) and associated sewer collection infrastructure. The WWTP has a permitted capacity of 2.5 million gallons per day (MGD), with current average flows of approximately 1.4 MGD, based on the City’s most recent Public Works Department report (2023). This leaves a surplus capacity of over 1.1 MGD, which is sufficient to accommodate the approximately 2,290 new residential units identified in Table 34 for the 6th Cycle RHNA.

All RHNA sites identified are within the city’s Urban Services Boundary and existing sewer service area.

No major offsite extensions or capacity upgrades are anticipated to be necessary during the planning period.

The City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) includes minor improvements and routine maintenance to lift stations and aging pipelines, but these are proactive, not capacity-driven, enhancements.

Water Supply and Distribution
The City’s domestic water system draws from groundwater wells and operates under a permit from the California Department of Public Health Drinking Water Division. The City maintains four active wells and multiple reservoirs and booster stations, ensuring redundancy and fire flow availability. According to the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) and City Water Master Plan, current and projected water supply is sufficient to meet existing plus projected demand through at least 2035, including planned residential growth under this Housing Element.

All RHNA sites have direct access to existing water lines and hydrants. No constraints related to water supply, distribution, or pressure have been identified in connection with the sites inventory.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 76 Stormwater Infrastructure
Stormwater in Corcoran is managed through a combination of curb-and-gutter systems and storm drain inlets that flow into regional basins and canals. Identified housing sites fall within already developed urbanized areas that are equipped with stormwater drainage infrastructure. The City participates in regional compliance with the State Water Resources Control Board’s Phase II MS4 Permit, which ensures development adheres to post-construction stormwater management practices. The City’s Public Works standards include Low Impact Development (LID) guidelines that apply to new residential developments.

All RHNA sites—both vacant and nonvacant—are within areas currently served by fully operational municipal water, sewer, and storm systems. This confirms that the basic infrastructure needed to support development already exists, and no substantial upgrades are required as a precondition for housing construction.

Additionally, the city’s long-range planning documents, including the General Plan Land Use Element, Master Water and Sewer Plans, and Capital Improvement Plan, affirm that municipal services are being actively maintained and enhanced in anticipation of moderate population growth.

This infrastructure context strengthens the City’s finding that all identified sites are realistically available for development during the planning period, in compliance with Government Code § 65583.2(b) and § 65583(a)(3).

Small Site Analysis
The City of Corcoran acknowledges the importance of demonstrating the realistic potential for lowerincome housing development on small sites, particularly those less than 0.5 acres in size. Data from the recent Census for Corcoran on the suitability of small sites indicate that smaller, infill multifamily projects represent a growing share of new residential development, particularly in other cities in the county such as Hanford, Lemoore, and Corcoran, where land costs are comparatively moderate. Between 2017 and 2022, approximately 28% of new multifamily units were constructed on parcels smaller than 0.5 acres, achieving densities between 20 to 28 units per acre3
. Specific examples of small sites include:
• Hanford – Elm Street Apartments (2021): Developed on a 0.45-acre site, achieved a density of 24 units per acre, and provided 6 units affordable to lower-income households through project-based voucher support.
• Lemoore – East D Street Flats (2020): Constructed on a 0.38-acre site, achieving a density of 26 units per acre, with 5 units reserved for very low-income households.

Small sites are generally located in RM2.5 and RM-3 zoning districts, which permit multi-family residential development at densities of 20 to 30 dwelling units per acre, consistent with the State’s default density threshold for accommodating lower-income households in small cities. These zoning districts allow both by-right and ministerial approval for projects meeting objective standards, and have historically supported low- to moderate-income developments on similarly sized infill parcels.

In recent development cycles, Corcoran has approved and facilitated several multi-family and affordable housing projects on parcels of 0.35 to 0.45 acres, particularly within its RM zones. These projects generally achieve densities of 18 to 28 units per acre, demonstrating the physical feasibility of developing small sites 3 US Census / ACS Building Permits Survey 2022

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 77 at lower-income housing densities. Site design flexibility, such as shared parking arrangements or clustered units, has allowed developers to efficiently utilize compact urban parcels in proximity to services and transit Environmental Constraints Affecting Site Suitability
To support the City’s housing strategy and confirm the realistic development potential of all RHNA sites, this section provides an extended analysis of environmental conditions and physical constraints that may influence housing development during the 2024–2032 planning period. These include flood risk, subsidence, contamination, site shape and access, and infrastructure-related easements.

Flooding and Subsidence. The City of Corcoran is located in the Tulare Lake Basin, a region historically prone to seasonal flooding. Previous Figure 14 shows FEMA-designated Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs), primarily in low-lying areas north and southeast of the city. While a small portion of RHNA sites fall within the 100-year floodplain, most of the sites are located outside regulated flood zones, and the city maintains compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and local floodplain management ordinances.

Recent reports from the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and USGS indicate land subsidence due to prolonged groundwater extraction. Subsidence has resulted in topographical shifts and altered drainage patterns, particularly near the Tule River Intertie and Deer Creek channels. While this condition does not preclude development, it underscores the need for effective grading and stormwater design in future site planning.

Pollution Burdens and Environmental Health Risks. Using CalEnviroScreen 4.0 (previous Figure 13), the City identified census tracts with elevated pollution burden scores, notably Tracts 13, 14.01, and 14.02, where air quality (PM2.5 and ozone), groundwater contaminants, and pesticide use rank in the top quartile statewide. Several RHNA sites fall within these tracts, but they are not subject to regulatory land-use restrictions or development moratoria. Projects in these areas are subject to CEQA review and may require mitigations such as air filtration or soil remediation, particularly if sensitive receptors (e.g., affordable housing, senior housing) are proposed.

Soil Contamination and Brownfield Status. The City consulted the California DTSC EnviroStor and U.S. EPA Brownfields Inventory, which identified only a limited number of historic brownfield sites within Corcoran’s city limits. None of the parcels included in the RHNA inventory are located on known contaminated or cleanup-required sites. Where adjacent land may include former industrial or agricultural uses, the City requires Phase I Environmental Site Assessments as part of the entitlement process to ensure safety and development feasibility.

Shape, Access, and Physical Constraints. All RHNA sites have direct access to public roadways, and none are landlocked or irregularly shaped in ways that prevent residential development. Lot widths, depths, and configurations conform to zoning standards, and all parcels are either served by or adjacent to existing paved roads, sidewalks, and utility easements.

No identified RHNA sites have unusual topography, slope, or right-of-way barriers.

Additionally, there are no known easements, utility corridors, or incompatible adjacent land uses (e.g., state or federal facilities) that would preclude residential development. Sites in commercial zones with residential overlays (e.g., CD and PO) have existing compatibility with mixed-use formats and meet development standards.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 78 Sites Inventory Findings
This section provides a review of available vacant and non-vacant sites in the City of Corcoran that would allow for and facilitate production of the city’s regional share of housing as required by State Law. This data is supplemented with local knowledge of existing conditions in the community to present a more accurate depiction of fair housing issues in the City. Figures 20 and 21 present the vacant sites inventory of the City of Corcoran.

To ensure adequate capacity for meeting the City of Corcoran’s 2024–2032 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), the Housing Element includes a detailed inventory of land suitable for residential development. This includes both vacant parcels and non-vacant sites with realistic redevelopment potential, categorized and analyzed by zoning designation, existing use, and income level potential. Housing Element Appendix B: Land Use Inventory present parcel-level data for each site identified, including:
• Parcel size and Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN)
• General Plan designation and zoning classification
• Current use and existing structures (if any)
• Realistic unit capacity based on allowed densities
• Status (vacant or underutilized)
• Income category assignment
• Availability of infrastructure
Table 25: Land Inventory and RHNA Targets
City of Corcoran
Income Category
EL/VL Low Mod Total
Above
Mod
RHNA 122 116 118 359 715
Housing Sites 388 1118 887 2,393
Adequate Capacity Yes Yes Yes Yes

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 79 Figure 23: City of Corcoran and Surrounding Area Vacant Sites 6,000 sq ft or Greater

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 80 Figure 24: City of Corcoran and Surrounding Area Vacant Land Inventory

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 81 Figure 25: City of Corcoran and Surrounding Area by Income Level

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 82 Census Tract Characteristics. The following describes the Census Tracts that are relevant to the City of Corcoran’s planned land use areas. Table 26 also summarizes the Census Tract Characteristics of these areas.

Census Tract 13. A majority of Census tract 13 is County unincorporated territory. The City portions of this Census Tract are the western edge of the City and were former County Island areas annexed in 2006. The northeast has older established residential neighborhoods west of State Route 43, and some isolated pockets of residential areas along 5th and 5 ½ Avenue that are separated from the City by the State highway, BNSF Railroad and California Highspeed Rail alignment. The eastern portion is along Whitley Avenue east of the BNSF Railroad. Generally referenced, the City territory in these areas consist of several vacant sites, typically with larger acreage area suitable for new residential development. According to the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas map, this area is classified as High Segregation & Poverty with a local median income of less than $35,000.

More than 40% of the population earns income is below the poverty level. It is identified as a Low-Medium Segregation are with no racial concentration areas of affluence. There is identified risk in some of the western and southwest portions are in the 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard area and high environmental risk, between 75% and 100% according to the CalEnviroScreen 4.0 metric. In this area there is between 40% and 60% of renter households for whom gross rent is 30% or more of household income; there is less than 20% owner households with mortgages for whom gross rent is 30% or more of household income. This area is identified as At Risk of Displacement.

Moderate and above moderate affordable units should be encouraged in this area to promote integration and access to diverse income groups. The City must also consider measures to mitigate high environmental hazard risk, flood hazard risk, and displacement risk.

Census Tract 15. This tract has a few vacant sites. It is identified as Moderate Resource with a local median income between $60,0000 and $84,097. Between 10%-20% of the population is below the poverty level and is identified as consisting of Low-Medium Segregation with no racial concentration areas of affluence. It has a CalEnviroScreen 4.0 percentile score between 50% and 75%. Census tract 15 has the most overcrowded and severely overcrowded units. Between 40% and 60% of the renter households pay a gross rent that is 30% or more of household income while less than 20% of owner households with mortgages pay gross rent is 30% or more of household income. This area is identified as at Risk of Displacement.

Extremely low, very low, and low-income units should be targeted here to address Corcoran’s highest overcrowding rates. The other advantage of targeted units here is that this area is identified as Moderate resource.

Census Tract 14.02. This census tract has a few vacant sites. It is identified as High Segregation & Poverty with a local median income between $35,000 and $60,000. More than 40% of population earns income below the poverty level and is identified as a Low-Medium Segregation area. It contains jobs within 45-minute transit commute. The environmental risk here is high according to the CalEnviroScreen 4.0 percentile score which is between 75% and 100%. Between 40% to 60% of the renter households pay gross rent that is 30% or more household income while between 20% and 40% of owner households have mortgages with gross rent that is over 30% of household income. Census tract 14.02 is identified as at risk of 1 Income Group Displacement.

The addition of moderate and above moderate affordable units in Census Tract 14.02 will assist in integration and access to economic opportunity. The addition of extremely, very low, low income affordable units is advantageous to households that can utilize transit to commute to job opportunities within 45 minutes. The City must take into account the high score regarding environmental hazards and the displacement risk.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 83 Census Tract 14.01. There are a few vacant sties in this census tract. Census tract 1401 is identified as a Moderate Resource with a local median income between $35,000 and $60,000. Between 10%-20% of the population is below the poverty level and is identified as High POC Segregation. The environmental risk according to the CalEnviroScreen 4.0 is between 50% and 75%. Between 20% and 40% of rental households overpay for housing while between 40% and 60% of owner households with mortgages overpay. This area is identified as having Lower Displacement Risk.

The provision of a range of extremely-low income and low-income affordable units in this area allows lower income households access to a Moderate Resource area while moderate and above moderate households have a lower chance of causing displacement. This area also has less environmental risk compared to some other census tracts.

Census Tract 9801. This area is entirely consisting of the two State Prisons (Corcoran State Prison, and Substance Abuse Treatment Facility) located within City limits and one agricultural property with no residences in the County unincorporated area.

Census Tract 16.01. Analysis of this area is irrelevant as the Census Tract is almost entirely made up of County unincorporated areas that also include the unincorporated communities of Kettleman City and Stratford. The only single property in this Census Tract 16.01 that lies within City limits is an agricultural property owned by the State of California and located immediately south of the two State Prisons. This property is not suitable for development and is utilized by the State as agricultural resource land. No residential uses are planned here and the property is located adjacent to the Corcoran Levee on the south which serves to protect the City from flood waters and the Tule River channel.

Summary. There are two census tracts that should prioritize new, affordable housing development. Many of the vacant sites including ones with large square footage footprints are in Census tract 13. According to the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas map, this area is classified as High Segregation & Poverty with a local median income of less than $35,000. Moderate and above moderate affordable units should be encouraged in this area to promote integration and access to diverse income groups. The City must also consider measures to mitigate high environmental hazard risk, flood hazard risk, and displacement risk. Census Tract 14.01 is identified as a Moderate Resource with a local median income between $35,000 and $60,000. Between 10%-20% of the population is below the poverty level and is identified as High POC Segregation. The provision of a range of extremely-low income and low income affordable units in this area allows lower income households access to a Moderate Resource area while moderate and above moderate households have a lower chance of causing displacement. This area also has less environmental risk compared to some other census tracts.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 84 Table 26: City of Corcoran Census Tract Characteristics Characteristics
Census Tract
13 Census Tract
15 Census Tract

14.02 Census Tract

14.01 Census
Tract 9801
Census
Tract 16.01
TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas High Segregation &
Poverty
Low Resource High Segregation &
Poverty
Moderate Resource N/A N/A
Local Median Income < $35,000 $60,000 - $84,097 $35,000 - $60,000 $35,000 - $60,000 N/A N/A Poverty Status 30% - 40% 20% - 30% 30% - 40% 20% - 30% N/A N/A Local Racial Demographics Low-Medium
Segregation
Low-Medium
Segregation
Low-Medium
Segregation
High POC
Segregation

N/A N/A
Local RCAAs Not a
RCAA
Not a
RCAA
Not a
RCAA
Not a
RCAA

N/A N/A
Single Parent Female Headed
Households with Children 20%-40% 20%-40% 20%-40% 20%-40% N/A N/A Population with a Disability
10% - 20% 10% - 20% 10% - 20% 10% - 20% N/A N/A
Jobs Within 45-Minute Transit
Commute
0 0 0 – 2,500 0 N/A N/A
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 >75% - 100% > 50% - 75% >75% - 100% > 50% - 75% N/A N/A Flood Hazard Zones Flood Hazard in southwest portion of City No Identified Risk No Identified Risk No Identified Risk N/A N/A Overcrowded Units < 5.19% (State Avg.) 10% - 15% 5.19% - 10% 10% - 15% N/A N/A Severely Overcrowded Units 2.5%-6.5% 2.5%-6.5% < 2.5% < 2.5% N/A N/A Overpayment by Renters 40% - 60% 40% - 60% 40% - 60% 20%-40% N/A N/A Percentage of Homeowners
Overpaying < 20% < 20% 20%-40% 40% - 60% N/A N/A
Estimated Displacement Risk At Risk of
Displacement
At Risk of
Displacement
1 Income Group
Displacement
Lower Risk
Displacement

N/A N/A

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 85 RHNA Sites by Income Level per Census Tract
Census Tract 13 Census Tract 15 Census Tract 14.02 Census Tract 14.01 Census Tract
9801
Census Tract

16.01 Lower Income 113 units
5% of total units
0 units
0% of total units
0 units
0% of total units
93 units
4% of total units

N/A N/A
Moderate Income 1,073 units
45% of total units
208 units
9% of total units
41 units
2% of total units
110 units
5% of total units

N/A N/A
Above Moderate Income 701 units
29% of total units
14 units
1% of total units
13 units
1% of total units
53 units
2% of total units

N/A N/A
Total Sites 2,393 units
Regional Discussion
The identified sites are located in zoning districts that allow residential development by right of with minimal entitlement requirements. High and medium density zones such as the RM zone districts provide opportunities for housing densities consistent with accommodating lower income units.

The identified sites are concentrated in Census Tract 13, which is located in the outer portions of the City where most of the larger-scale growth will occur. The other Census Tracts have less sites because they are in the innermost parts of the City and will mostly be suitable for infill. The least number of sites are in Census Tract 14.02, which is in the downtown commercial area of the City where there are more areas of commercial and industrial land uses. There are no sites located in Census Tract 9801 since this tract is made up of State prison facilities. Census Tract 16.01 does not have any sites since the only property within Corcoran City limits and Census Tract 16.01 is agricultural. Overall, the identified sites do not exacerbate any socio-economic patterns.

The Element also describes development standards that ensure feasibility, such as minimum lot sizes, parking requirements, height allowances, and open space ratios, with reference to the Zoning Code. These standards have been reviewed to confirm that they do not unreasonably constrain development potential on sites listed for lower income housing.

Local Discussion
Census Tract 13. The highest number of sites (1,887 total units) are located within Census Tract 13. This Census Tract is located in the outer portions of Corcoran where the most future growth will happen. This is rated as High Segregation & Poverty for the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Area with Low-Medium Segregation. The Local Median Income is less than $35,000, but there are less than the state average for overcrowded units.

Census Tract 13 is At Risk of Displacement. The southwest portion is within a Flood Hazard Zone. A majority of Census Tract 13 is County

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 86 unincorporated territory. The City portions of this Census Tract are the western edge of the City and were former County Island areas annexed in 2006. Generally referenced, the City territory in these areas consist of several vacant sites, typically with larger acreage area suitable for new residential development. Moderate and above moderate affordable units should be encouraged in this area to promote integration and access to diverse income groups. There are 113 lower income, 1,073 moderate income, and 701 above income units within this tract.

Census Tract 15. Census Tract 15 is in the central and northern portions of the City of Corcoran. This area is a low resource area with low-medium segregation. The Local Median Income is $60,000-$84,097, the highest of the Census Tracts. The CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score is the lowest percentile of the Census Tracts at > 50% - 75%. There is no identified flood risk. Census Tract 15 is At Risk of Displacement and has 222 total sites, with 0 lower income, 208 moderate income, and 14 above moderate income units. While this highest income tract does not assign housing for lower-income households, most moderate income units are medium densities, providing an opportunity for a variety of housing choices and household incomes .

Census Tract 14.02. Census Tract 14.02 is on the eastern side of Corcoran where the downtown and industrial areas are located. Most of the sites within this tract are located in the southern portion of the tract. Census Tract 14.02 is High Segregation & Poverty for the TCAC/HCD Opportunity Area rating and has Low-Medium Segregation. The poverty status is 30%-40%, and 40%-60% of renters but <20% of homeowners are overpaying.

There is one income group at risk for displacement. The addition of moderate and above moderate affordable units in Census Tract 14.02 will assist in integration and access to economic opportunity. There are 0 lower income units, 41 moderate income units, and 13 above moderate income units.

Census Tract 14.01. This Census Tract is located in the southern portion of the City. It is Moderate Resource with High POC Segregation and a Local Median Income of $35,000-$60,000. The CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score is >50% - 75% and there is no identified flood risk. This Census Tract has the lowest rate of renters overpaying at 20%-40% but the highest rate of homeowners overpaying at 40%-60%. There is Lower Risk for Displacement here. Census Tract 14.01 has 256 units (93 lower, 110 moderate, and 53 above moderate).

Census Tract 9801. This area is entirely consisting of the two State Prisons (Corcoran State Prison, and Substance Abuse Treatment Facility) located within City limits and one agricultural property with no residences in the County unincorporated area.

Census Tract 16.01. The only single property in this Census Tract 16.01 that lies within City limits is an agricultural property owned by the State of California and located immediately south of the two State Prisons.

Overall the identified sites are distributed throughout the City in a manner that does not create concentrations of lower income units in a particular area even Census Tract 14.02 and Census Tract 15 do not have any lower income units. The City will maintain appropriate land use designations for adequate sites through Program 2.5. The City will provide assistance to affordable housing development by seeking applicable grant funding targeted for extremely-low, very-low, low-, and moderate-income households through Program 2.7 and Program 2.8. The City will promote equal housing opportunities through Program 2.14 and its actions to affirmatively further fair housing.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 87 Actions to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
As the City aims to prioritize actions that further fair housing across the entire City, Table 27 summarizes additional actions that the City can implement to further this goal. Smaller rural agriculturally based communities like the City of Corcoran often have limited staff to collect housing and neighborhood data unless those programs are integrated and tied to City processes that positively contribute toward housing. The following actions aim to prioritize programs and assign metrics to collect and analyze progress on Fair Housing.

Table 27: Actions to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing Description Specific Commitment Timing Geographic Targeting Metric Housing Mobility and New Opportunities in Relatively Higher Opportunity Areas Provide Technical and
Financial Resource
Assistance
Prioritize technical and financial
resources assistance to affordable
housing developers as part of the City’s
Economic Development Strategy
Annually and
ongoing
Entire City, and with
focus on CT 13 where
larger parcels exist
25 affordable housing units
Use Surplus Land for
Affordable Housing
Development
Comply with State Surplus Lands Act to
facilitate the use and development of
City surplus land into affordable housing
July 2026 Census Tract 13 Completion of low income
45 multi-family units, and
70 single family units in
partnership with Self Help
Enterprises
Accessory Dwelling Units Provide educational outreach to property owners, and develop standardized
building plans.

Implement in
2027
Entire City, and with
focus on CT 14.01,

14.02, 15
15 ADUs
Corcoran Area Transit
(CAT) Diversification
Evaluate and implement enhanced
opportunities for electric vehicle dial-aride to connect outlying low-income residents to resources.

Implementation
in FY 26-27
Entire City, and with
focus on CT 13
Expand CAT service with
one smaller ADA compliant
electric transport van for
dial-a-ride request service.

Corcoran Area Transit
(CAT) Community Event
Service
Apply for transportation funding to
provide free or low cost transit services
on weekends during community events
Implementation
in FY 26-27
and ongoing
Entire City Secure Low Carbon Transit
Operations Program
(LCTOP) funds and provide
community event transit
services
Place Based Strategies toward Community Revitalization

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 88 City Park Amenities Invest in ongoing park maintenance of City’s dispersed 9 community parks, and
renovation of parks in older
neighborhoods that have deteriorated
Implementation
in FY 26-27
and ongoing
Entire City, and with
focus on CT 14.01,

14.02, 15
Maintain City’s 9 parks, and
full renovation of John
Maroot Park impacted by
past encampments
Enhanced Sidewalk
Connectivity - Schools,
Neighborhoods and
Parks
Actively pursue State Grants such as
Clean California and Active
Transportation Project funding as well as
CDBG and Program Income funds for
sidewalk connectivity improvements
Continuous and
ongoing
Entire City, and with
focus on CT 14.01,

14.02, 15
Construct sidewalks in
deficient gap areas
connecting schools to parks
and neighborhoods
Enhanced Streetscape
Beautification & Traffic
Calming
Actively prioritize CMAQ funding along
pedestrian and school children corridors
for enhanced pedestrian safety
Continuous and
ongoing
Focus on CT 14.01,

14.02, and 15
Construct pedestrian safety
and traffic calming
measures in key corridors
Roadway Maintenance Prioritize City transportation funds such as SB 1 funding to maintain, extend the
life of, and enhance roadways with
deficiencies through the City’s 72 miles
of maintained mileage
Annually and
ongoing
Entire City Resurface and repair 10
miles of existing roadway
annually
Incentivize Infill
Development
Actively pursue grant funding and other
funding resources to extend municipal
services to infill development sites and
incentivize development through reduced
project impact costs
Implementation
in FY 26-27
and ongoing
CT 14.01, 14.02, and
15 Identify infill properties and
evaluate distance to
nearest municipal service
line connection to estimate
costs and pursue grant
funding
Displacement Risk
Mitigate Flood Risk Actively pursue State and Federal funding to develop and extend storm drainage
infrastructure to underserved former
County Island areas built to County
Standards
Implementation
in 2026
Focused area in CT 13
with western edges of
City
Secure funding and phase
in construction of $20
million storm drainage
system in underserved
western edges of City
Enhance City
Wastewater System
Use remaining ARPA funding to enhance
Wastewater Treatment Plan upgrade of all
existing City Sewer Lift Stations
Implementation
in FY 26-27
CT 14.01, 14.02, and
15 Complete construction of
City Wastewater Treatment
Plant upgrades and all
sewer lift stations.

Anti-Displacement
Strategy
Production/Preservation/Protection of
affordable and special needs housing.

Prioritize technical and financial
assistance to property owners and
developers seeking to develop affordable
and/or special needs housing. Actively
Annually and
ongoing
Throughout the City Support 25 affordable units
being conserved

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 89 engage with affordable housing unit
providers when units are at risk of
conversion to encourage maintenance
units and link resources to reduce risk of
conversion. Actively serve as a resource
for the protection of current tenants by
providing informational outreach and
connection to other related services and
resources.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 90 Contributing Factors
The December 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule Guidebook published by HUD identifies examples of contributing factors by each fair housing issue area: outreach, fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity, segregation and integration, racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disparities in access to opportunity, disparities in access to opportunities for persons with disabilities, disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risks, and sites inventory.

The County supports the recommendations of the 2014 San Joaquin Valley Fair Housing and Equity Assessment (FHEA) that was prepared by the California Coalition for Rural Housing. The FHEA analyzes patterns in racial and economic segregation, discusses how segregation impacts individuals’ and families’ ability to access housing opportunity, and proposes strategies and recommendations to create more equitable and integrated communities.

Based on the issues identified in this 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.

After considering these issues and FHEA recommendations, the County has identified in Table 27 potential contributing factors to fair housing issues in unincorporated Kings County and outlines the meaningful actions to be taken. The meaningful actions listed in the Table relate to the actions identified in the Housing Plan.

Table 28: Factors Contributing to Fair Housing Issues
AFH Identified Fair
Housing Issue Contributing Factors Priority Meaningful Actions Limitations in local Consolidated
Planning Processes, ongoing
CDBG and HOME funding
allocations, Housing Elements
Processes, and other city planning
documents.

Existing low-density
residential development
under general plan and
zoning code
Gap between low density
and medium density and
high-density
classification
High Program 2.6 Density Bonus
Program
Program 2.7 Affordable
Housing Development
Assistance: Through direct
financial assistance such as
CDBG and HOME, priority
entitlement processing,
regulatory incentives such as
density bonus and modified
development standards,

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 91 Assist in the provision of housing
by removing government
constraints and promoting equal
housing opportunity
Limitations in zoning
code and density
classifications
Permission of preapproved design, and
development standards
High Program 2.7 Affordable
Housing Development
Assistance
Programs 2.10 Section 8 Rental
Vouchers
Program 2.11 Emergency
Shelters and
Transitional/Supportive
Housing
Program 2.12 Farmworker and
Employee Housing
Program 2.13 Housing for
Persons with Disabilities
Funding for marginalized or
distressed communities, such as
Transit Oriented Development
Funds, Strategic Growth
Council grants, HCD's HousingRelated Parks Program, Safe Routes to School, and Brownfield
funding.

Ensuring funding is
available for marginalized
and distressed community
High Research, identify, and apply
for funds available through the
CDBG and HOME Programs,
Mobile home Park
Rehabilitation and Resident
Ownership Program
(MPRROP), United States
Department of Agriculture
(USDA), Cap-and-Trade
Program, and other funding
sources that support affordable
housing development and
preservation, infrastructure
investment, energy efficiency,
homeownership, code
enforcement, farmworker
housing, etc.

Program 2.8 First-Time
Homebuyer Program
Program 2.9 Purchase and
Rehabilitation Homeownership
Program
Program 2.10 Section 8 Rental
Vouchers
Program 2.15 Weatherization
and Energy-Efficient Home
Improvements
Provide guidance for site selection
of affordable housing
developments.

Housing Element identifies
adequate sites to
accommodate the City’s
share of the Regional
Housing Needs Allocation
of 715 units
High Program 2.5 Adequate Sites:

Adequate sites are those with
sufficient development and
density standards, water and
sewer services, and adequate
infrastructure.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 92 Develop a program to educate and
encourage landlords to accept
Housing Choice Vouchers.

Lack of readily available
information regarding fair
housing resources and
assistance to persons in
filing a complaint
Lack of education of public
and housing providers
regarding rights and
responsibilities under the
AFH and FEHA
High Program 2.14 Promote Equal
Housing Opportunities
Develop and implement a
proactive code enforcement
program that holds property
owners accountable and
proactively plans for resident
relocation when necessary.

Code enforcement High Program 2.1 Code Enforcement,

2.3 Housing Rehabilitation
Program,
Disproportionate Housing Needs,
including Overpayment and
Substandard Housing
Ongoing need for affordable
housing
Need for assistance with
monthly housing costs
Lack of local information
regarding available housing
rehabilitation, emergency
repair, and weatherization
programs
Need for targeted housing
revitalization strategies
Medium Program 2.2 Paint Programs
Program 2.4 Preservation of AtRisk Affordable Housing
Program 2.10 Section 8 Rental
Assistance
Program 2.11 Emergency
Shelters and
Transitional/Supportive Housing
Program 2.12 Farmworker and
Employee Housing
Program 2.13 Housing for
Persons with Disabilities
Use design tools to seamlessly
integrate affordable housing
development into larger mixedincome developments.

Limitations in zoning code
and density classifications ·
Approval process
Medium Program 2.7 Affordable Housing
Development Assistance
Displacement Risk Land use and zoning laws
Displacement of residents
due to economic pressures
Medium Program 2.4 Preservation of AtRisk Affordable Housing

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 93 ATTACHMENT: City of Corcoran Questionnaire to City Staff Responses from staff provided local insight into existing conditions, trends, and potential development in the City.

1. Segregation and Integration
Race
• Any areas or neighborhoods considered to be concentrated on minority communities?? The City of Corcoran is a minority City. All areas would be considered minority. • Are any areas known to have particularly low concentrations of minority residents? No • Are there any known historic factors that have led to these patterns? Are there current factors that reinforce these patterns? Are there any factors that are changing these patterns over time? Low-income farming community with limited higher employment opportunities.

Disability
• Any areas or neighborhoods with concentrations of persons with disabilities? Census • Any concentrations of group homes or residential care facilities? No • Have there been any permits issued for construction of ramp or other accessibility modifications to homes in the area? None
• Have any requests for reasonable accommodation been made during the last planning period? No • Any locational differences in terms of disabilities? Recent accessibility improvements? Areas in need of improvements? All new construction in residential and commercial zones are required to install curb gutter, sidewalks and HC ramps
Familial Status
• Any areas or neighborhoods with concentrations of families? Non-families or smaller homes? We do not have data regarding this.
• Any childcare facilities? Any locational differences? There are several Childcare facilities throughout the City. However, we do not have a current GIS map of their locations.

Income
• Any areas of the community that are considered to be lower-income, high-poverty areas? Current Census data will provide this information.
• Any areas of the community that are considered to be higher-income areas? Current Census Data. • Are there any known areas where a lot of HCV/Section 8 renters live? We have Three apartment complex’s in different locations that accept low income/section 8. Kings County Housing Authority has a small subdivision in the center of town.
• Any housing assisted by public financing in the city? If so, any areas of the city with a concentration of housing assisted by public financing? No

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 94

2. Disparities in Access to Opportunity
Education
• Discuss local schools and geographic availability. We have three elementary schools, one Jr. High school and one high school, and one continuation school. all on Letts avenue, center of town, from the north end of town to the south end of town. Corcoran has a state preschool that serves 3-4-yearolds, three elementary schools for preschool, and grades TK - 5, one middle school for grades 6-8, one high school for grades 9-12, and an adult school. The elementary schools are divided by grade levels, with Bret Harte serving preschool and TK-1, John C. Fremont serves grades 2-3 and Mark Twain elementary serves grades 4-5. Most schools can be found on Letts Avenue, the center of town, from the north to the south end of town.
• Discuss local school performance compared to the region can be found on the California School Dashboard. On the comparison document on the CA Dashboard, Corcoran schools are performing at similar levels of all other Kings County schools. Corcoran High School has the 2nd highest state test scores for all high schools.
• Discuss local performance and any differences in access to education opportunities from neighborhood to neighborhood. None. All students in each grade level attend the same elementary school. See question #1.
• Discuss any upper education opportunities, including vocational opportunities The CJUSD works closely with the Valley Regional Occupational Program (Valley ROP) at our High School. Valley ROP promotes and delivers high-quality career technical education (CTE), career development, and workforce preparation. This program helps CJUSD support student academic and career success, aims to build successful careers, and empowers individuals to achieve their professional goals. CJUSD also partners with both Kings and Tulare County Offices of Education and all participating districts as part of the Tulare-Kings College and Career Collaborative. This organization facilitates a college going culture, connection with work force organizations and helps to facilitate the Strong Workforce and CTE Incentive grants. CJUSD offers multiple dual enrollment courses through the partnership with College of the Sequoias and Lemoore Community College.
• Discuss any trends and past and current local efforts to improve access to education opportunities.

CJUSD’s efforts to enhance access to education have prioritized technology integration, ensuring that students have 24/7 access to digital resources for learning. Additionally, the District emphasizes equity, community partnerships, and support for diverse learners. Locally, CJUSD has a partnership with the RAC to operate the After-School programs for ELOP and ASES grants, teacher-led support, scholarships, and career readiness programs have been instrumental in expanding educational opportunities for students.
• Do community members have the opportunity to select the schools that their students attend, or are schools assigned by geography? CJUSD is not a school of residence or zoned school Are there private or charter options in the community? NO If families have the ability to select schools, are there higher-demand schools in the community? N/A
• Are there any known factors that influence the current rates of high school graduation or college attendance? CJUSD graduation rates are at 86.9% which is slightly higher than the state average. College going is at 31.1% which is lower than the state average.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 95 • Are there any organizations that provide services like tutoring that could help to improve educational outcomes? CJUSD partners with the RAC, which provides after-school daycare and tutoring support for students. Additionally, select teachers at designated sites offer time to tutor their students. All district schools offer after school tutoring which is voluntary for all students.

Any differences between neighborhoods in terms of access? N/A • Any new subdivisions? New master planned areas? Differences in schools? None that affects education. The District recently purchased the church property at the corner of Letts and Whitley.

Currently, there are no new plans for development at this site The District recently purchased the church property at the corner of Letts and Whitley. Currently, there are no new plans for development at this site
Economic
• What are the major employers in the area, or major industries? Where are they located? Ca. State Prison, at the south end of town and Boswell Industries, Buttonwillow/Mar Vista, Camfill Far, City of Corcoran Government, Pacifica Tiny Homes, and various Healthcare facilities. • Are there major industries that are not nearby that many residents work in? Different food manufacturing located in Lemoore and Hanford.
o
o How has this changed recently? Are there new areas of the county that have developed commercial or industrial uses? Or are there areas that were previously job centers that are no longer in as high of use? NO
• Is high-speed internet readily available in the area? Do any areas have known challenges with cell signal access? Yes, High speed internet is available. No, we do not have out of the ordinary challenges with cell towers
• Are there any known economic development programs or initiatives planned or in place that might influence the jobs landscape in the next ten years? The City of Corcoran contracts with The Cris Com agency to assist city staff with economic development. They also serve as our lobbyist in Sacramento and Washington
Transportation
• Discuss the countywide transportation system, including different modes. The city currently has an Amtrak stop in Corcoran that is used often by the citizens and visitors of Corcoran. The city also operates its own Transit system, CAT, Corcoran Area Transit and KART, Kings Area Regional Transit runs a fixed route three times a day from Hanford to Corcoran. • Discuss local access to the countywide transportation system, such as routes and locations. Amtrak has 6 northbound and 6 southbound stops in Corcoran that allows transportation to Bakersfield, Hanford and Fresno. KART also has Route 13 that serves Corcoran to Hanford three times a day. • Discuss any local efforts to assist access to different transportation modes, including public transit, walking and biking. Corcoran Area Transit is a Dial -a-Ride service for the city and the outlining areas and the city has bike routes on the major throughfares. • How do residents without access to a car travel to work or to access resources like medical care? Is this different depending on the industry that residents work in? The city is served by its own grant funded transit, dial-a-ride bus system.
• Any engineering reports or assessments of capital improvements? Any differences between neighborhoods? The city has several LLD and PFMD on all of the SD built out since 1990.

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 96 • What are the physical conditions of local roads like? Are there street lights, traffic lights, or bike infrastructure in any parts of the community? The city is served by streetlight in the downtown and most of the residential zones. However, the out-lining areas and the areas annexed from the County are still lacking sufficient lighting. Most of the roads are in adequate condition except for the areas annexed in 2006. These roads are in a subpar condition and do not meet the city standards. The city improved the roads as funding became available.
• Are there known high-collision corridors or areas of high traffic on a regular basis? Not out of the ordinary
• Any Safe Routes to Schools plans or programs in place? Where in the community are sidewalks available or not available? Any differences between neighborhoods? We have two safe routes to school plans that have been approved and utilized in the past 10 years. As grant funding becomes available the city uses the funding for sidewalks, handicap ramps and bike routes to schools.

Currently, we are working through grant funding for infill SW on the SRTS routes on Letts Avenue. • Any major community facilities and any differences in access between neighborhoods? New City Park (Gateway) However, no difference in access.
• Any differences between neighborhoods in terms of access to transportation options? Biking? Walking? The city NO
• Have there been any major infrastructure investments in the recent past? This can include, but is not limited to, roads, bridges, or water/sewer infrastructure. Are there any major infrastructure projects planned for the next ten years? Major infrastructure to our Wastewater Treatment Plant, resurfacing James Avenue and the replacement or addition of water meters throughout the city.

Possible Addition of streetlights and urban greening along Whitley Avenue and a round about at Orange and Otis Avenue.

Environment
• Any public safety reports (e.g., water quality, sewer, circulation)? Any differences between neighborhoods? None
• Are there known major sources of pollution in the area? Where are they located, if so? o This could include things like industrial sources, groundwater contamination from agriculture, or lead paint exposure in older homes.
o Are there places where residential development should be avoided due to environmental conditions, or where existing environmental conditions are negatively affecting residents? None that we are aware of
• Do any neighborhoods lack access to parks or other outdoor spaces? Are there other notable community amenities, and where are they? Any differences between neighborhoods in terms of access? City parks are at strategic areas throughout the city. • Are there any new subdivisions or new master planned areas? Any differences in parks, other amenities between neighborhoods? Two small subdivisions that have access to city parks in the general area.
• Are there any differences between neighborhoods with respect to access to shopping? Healthy foods? None

3. Disproportionate Housing Needs, including Displacement Overpayment

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 97 • Any recent increases in rents or sales prices? Any differences between neighborhoods? How does that compare to incomes in the area?
• Any patterns of evictions or foreclosures between neighborhoods? Rents and housing costs have risen but are still lower than average in California. We do not currently track evictions or foreclosures.

Overcrowding
• Are there any areas that are known to have higher rates of household overcrowding, such as "doubling-up" families in one house? Any information from code enforcement officers? This is something we do not track however; it is a typical problem in CA Housing Conditions
• Any areas of the City with more or less units in need of rehabilitation and replacement Much of the City Housing stock is over 30 years old. Estimated 10 percent need total rehabilitation. • Any differences in housing conditions based on unit types (single family, multifamily, mobile home) and locations? None noted.
• Are there any known areas where the physical conditions of housing suggest a high need for rehabilitation for safety or accessibility reasons? None noted • Have there been any subdivisions developed in the past ten years? If so, how large were the lots in these developments? Are there differences between new subdivisions and older areas? any new master planned areas that have different infrastructure? Differences in rents and prices and locational differences? Four new subdivisions in the past 10 years. No discernable difference other than the age of the homes
• Are there any types of housing that are known to be not widely available? If so, which neighborhoods? None
• Are there any areas where there have been a high rate of code enforcement complaints? What were the issues that drove the complaint? CE complaints in Corcoran are spread out throughout the City without noticeable difference.

Persons Experiencing Homelessness
• Are there any areas where homeless community members tend to congregate? This could either be encampment areas, parking areas where people who live in vehicles park, or areas where people congregate during the day, such as libraries, parks, or community centers. If so, is there access to transportation, services and programs? No, homeless in Corcoran seem to congregate wherever they can, often in boarded up properties of vacant lots o Any programs to provide emergency rental assistance? If so, how is that assistance available? Any differences between neighborhoods? Nome at this time.

Displacement
• Any areas or neighborhoods that have experienced significant increases in rents and sales prices? Are people moving or evicted as a result? None that we are aware of. • Any local events that led to displacement?
• Do any areas have a higher percentage of housing with higher susceptibility to environmental damage due to building age or design? No
• Are defensible space inspections performed? Any other similar environmental hazard prevention programming? None at this time

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | April 2026 | 98 • Are there any areas that might not be in a FEMA zone but which might have a tendency to experience flash floods during storms due to a lack of stormwater infrastructure or ground absorption/permeability? None

APPENDIX D3: CITY OF CORCORAN FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | JULY 2025 | DRAFT 99 Kings County Corcoran Hanford Avenal Kings (Unincorporated)

KINGS MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS | APRIL 2026 1A-ii APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD

FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
April 2026
Prepared By:

Realty Planners Group
Fallbrook, California
&
City of Hanford Staff
Kings County • Corcran • Hanford • Avenal • Kings (Unincorporated)

KINGS MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS | APRIL 2026 1A-ii APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
Table of Contents
A. Local Assessment Of Fair Housing_____________________________________________ 1 Introduction __________________________________________________________________________ 1 Outreach Program_____________________________________________________________________ 2 City Of Hanford Website ________________________________________________________________________ 2 General Multi-Lingual Advertisements_____________________________________________________________ 2 Community Workshop _________________________________________________________________________ 2 B. Assessment of Fair Housing Issues_____________________________________________ 3 Key Data And Background Information___________________________________________________ 3 Fair Housing Enforcement Outreach Capacity _____________________________________________ 6 Enforcement Capacity_________________________________________________________________________ 10 Outreach Capacity____________________________________________________________________________ 10 Complaint Data and Patterns ___________________________________________________________________ 10 Compliance with Fair Housing Laws. ____________________________________________________ 11 Fair Housing Laws ____________________________________________________________________________ 11 Integration and Segregation ____________________________________________________________________ 11 Race and Ethnic Characteristics _________________________________________________________________ 12 Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) and Racial Concentration of Areas of Affluence (RCAA) ___________________________________________________________________________________________ 17 Income Distribution __________________________________________________________________________ 23 Poverty Status _______________________________________________________________________________ 20 Special Housing Needs ________________________________________________________________________ 21 Persons With Disabilities_______________________________________________________________________ 28 Employee Housing and Farmworker Compliance____________________________________________________ 32 Farmworkers ________________________________________________________________________________ 33 Disparities in Access to Opportunities____________________________________________________ 35 Transit Mobility ______________________________________________________________________________ 37 Housing Mobility _____________________________________________________________________________ 40 Employment ________________________________________________________________________________ 41 Job-Housing Balance and Commute Patterns ______________________________________________________ 42 Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk ______________________________________ 47 Overpayment _______________________________________________________________________________ 47 Local Median Housing Costs ____________________________________________________________________ 51 Overcrowding _______________________________________________________________________________ 52 Housing Conditions ___________________________________________________________________________ 54 Homelessness _______________________________________________________________________________ 55 Extremely Low Income Households ______________________________________________________________ 57 At-Risk of Conversion _________________________________________________________________________ 58 Displacement Risk ____________________________________________________________________________ 60 C. CONSTRAINTS ___________________________________________________________ 61 Governmental Constraints _____________________________________________________________ 61 Development Standards and Permit SRO Units _____________________________________________________ 61 Height Limits as a Constraint on Multifamily Housing ________________________________________________ 62 Reasonable Accommodation ___________________________________________________________________ 63 Permit Processing and Timelines ________________________________________________________________ 63 Development Fees and Exactions________________________________________________________________ 64

KINGS MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS | APRIL 2026 1A-ii Non-Governmental Constraints _________________________________________________________ 64 Land Cost and Availability ______________________________________________________________________ 64 Construction Cost ____________________________________________________________________________ 65 Development Delays and Timing Gaps ____________________________________________________________ 65 Environmental Health _________________________________________________________________ 66 Environmental Constraints_____________________________________________________________ 66 Topography and Site Shape: ____________________________________________________________________ 67 Environmental Hazards and Contamination: _______________________________________________________ 67 Compatibility with Adjacent Uses: _______________________________________________________________ 67 D. Local Data and Knowledge and Other Relevant Factors ___________________________ 70 Segregation and Integration – ____________________________________________________________ 70 Race and Ethnicity. ___________________________________________________________________________ 70 Disability.___________________________________________________________________________________ 70 Familial Status. ______________________________________________________________________________ 70 Income and Housing Assistance _________________________________________________________________ 71 Disparities in Access to Opportunity _____________________________________________________ 71 Education __________________________________________________________________________________ 71 Economic___________________________________________________________________________________ 71 Transportation ______________________________________________________________________________ 71 Environment ________________________________________________________________________________ 72 Disproportionate Housing Needs, Including Displacement___________________________________ 72 Overpayment _______________________________________________________________________________ 72 Overcrowding _______________________________________________________________________________ 72 Housing Conditions ___________________________________________________________________________ 73 Persons Experiencing Homelessness _____________________________________________________________ 73 Displacement________________________________________________________________________________ 73 Environmental Risk and Housing Vulnerability______________________________________________________ 74 Other Relevant Factors ________________________________________________________________ 74 Historic Patterns and Demographics _____________________________________________________________ 74 Zoning and Land Use Decisions__________________________________________________________________ 74 Settlement Trends and Population Shifts__________________________________________________________ 74 Defining Land Use Features ____________________________________________________________________ 74 Infrastructure and Capital Improvements _________________________________________________________ 74 E. Site Analysis ______________________________________________________________ 75 Redevelopment Potential of Under Utilized Sites___________________________________________ 79 Infrastructure and Public Services Availability ____________________________________________ 93 Mixed Use Analysis ___________________________________________________________________ 94 Mixed-Use Site Opportunity ____________________________________________________________________ 95 Mixed Use Program: _________________________________________________________________________ 101 Small Site Analysis____________________________________________________________________ 101 Large Sites Analysis (>10 Acres) _________________________________________________________ 102 Units Built or Under Construction and Planned or Approved Projects __________________________ 106 Accessory Dwelling Unit Potential ______________________________________________________________ 109 Site Inventory Findings ________________________________________________________________ 110 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing and Identified Sites ___________________________________________ 110 Summary __________________________________________________________________________________ 121

KINGS MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS | APRIL 2026 1A-ii TABLES
Table 1: City of Hanford Household Population Growth, 1990-2020 .................................................................4 Table 2: Fair Housing Compliance City of Hanford ............................................................................................7 Table 3: Complaint Data and Patterns................................................................................................................10 Table 4: Race and Ethnicity................................................................................................................................13 Table 5: Population by Race by Hispanic Origin Over Time.............................................................................13 Table 6: Household Income Distribution by Tenure ..........................................................................................19 Table 7: Median Household Income by Race or Hispanic Origin......................................................................20 Table 8: Total Households in Poverty ................................................................................................................20 Table 9: Percent of Households in Poverty Over Time ......................................................................................20 Table 10: Household Characteristics..................................................................................................................23 Table 11: Household type by tenure...................................................................................................................23 Table 12: Households by Size ............................................................................................................................24 Table 13: Tenure by Household Size .................................................................................................................25 Table 14: Female-Headed Households...............................................................................................................26 Table 15: Population with Disability Type by Age ............................................................................................29 Table 16: Agricultural Employment by Jurisdiction ..........................................................................................33 Table 17: Hired Farm Labor-Workers, Kings County........................................................................................34 Table 18: Household Tenure and Vacancy Rates...............................................................................................40 Table 19: Travel Time to Work..........................................................................................................................43 Table 20: Work Locations of City/County Resident Workers ...........................................................................43 Table 21: Household Overpayment by Tenure...................................................................................................47 Table 22: Median Monthly Housing Costs Over Time ......................................................................................51 Table 23: Median Monthly Housing Costs by Tenure as a P .............................................................................51 ercentage of Household Income in the Past 12 Months .....................................................................................51 Table 24: Overcrowding by Tenure ....................................................................................................................52 Table 25: Estimated Units Requiring Rehabilitation or Replacement (2024 Update)........................................54 Table 26: Homeless Persons...............................................................................................................................55 Table 27: Shelter Facilities in Kings County......................................................................................................56 Table 28: Extremely Low Income Households Overpaying by Tenure .............................................................58 Table 29: Mixed Use Sites to Accommodate RHNA.........................................................................................94 Table 30: Sites over 10 Acres to Accommodate the Lower-Income RHNA....................................................103 Table 31: Recent Developments on Large Sites...............................................................................................103 Table 32: Pending Projects Towards RHNA....................................................................................................106 Table 33: ADUs Constructed Per Year ............................................................................................................109 Table 34: Land Inventory and RHNA Targets.................................................................................................110 Table 35: Census Tract 6.02 Analysis..............................................................................................................110 Table 36: Census Tract 6.03 Analysis..............................................................................................................111 Table 37: Census Tract 6.04 Analysis..............................................................................................................112 Table 38: Census Tract 7.01 Analysis..............................................................................................................113 Table 39: Census Tract 7.02 Analysis..............................................................................................................114 Table 40: Census Tract 8 Analysis...................................................................................................................115 Table 41: Census Tract 9.01 Analysis..............................................................................................................115 Table 42: Census Tract 9.02 Analysis..............................................................................................................116 Table 43: Census Tract 10.01 Analysis............................................................................................................117 Table 44: Census Tract 10.02 Analysis............................................................................................................118 Table 45: Census Tract 10.03 Analysis............................................................................................................119 Table 46: Census Tract 11 Analysis.................................................................................................................120 Table 47: Census Tract 12 Analysis.................................................................................................................121 Table 48: Characteristics by City of Hanford Census Tracts (Census Tract 6.02 – 8).......................................84 Table 49: Characteristics by City of Hanford Census Tracts (Census Tract 9.01 - 12) .....................................85 Table 50: Potential Contributing Factors............................................................................................................89

KINGS MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS | APRIL 2026 1A-ii

FIGURES
Figure 1: Kings County .......................................................................................................................................5 Figure 2: Local Racial Demographics................................................................................................................12 Figure 3: Racial/Ethnic Area of Concentration of Poverty (R/ECAP)...............................................................18 Figure 4: Racial Concentration of Areas of Affluence (RCAA) ........................................................................19 Figure 5: Grocery Stores Near Home Garden ....................................................................................................20 Figure 6: Medical Clinics Near Home Garden ...................................................................................................21 Figure 7: High School Sites Near Home Garden................................................................................................22 Figure 8: Local Median Income .........................................................................................................................18 Figure 9: Poverty Status .....................................................................................................................................22 Figure 10: Single-Parent Female-Headed Households with Children................................................................27 Figure 11: Population with a Disability..............................................................................................................31 Figure 12: TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas, 2023...............................................................................................36 Figure 13: Hanford All Transit Performance Score .............................................................................................38 Figure 14: Hanford High Quality Transit Stops and Transit Area (1/2 mile).....................................................39 Figure 15: Employment by Industry of Kings County Workforce .....................................................................42 Figure 16: Jobs within 45-minute transit commute. ...........................................................................................44 Figure 17: School districts in Kings County.......................................................................................................46 Figure 18: Overpayment by Renters -- Census Tract ........................................................................................49 Figure 19: Percentage of Homeowners Overpaying............................................................................................50 Figure 20: Overcrowding in Kings County ........................................................................................................53 ............................................................................................................................................................................53 Figure 21: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 ..........................................................................................................................68 Figure 22: Flood Hazard Zones...........................................................................................................................69 Figure 23: City of Hanford Vacant Sites 6,000 Square Feet or Greater.............................................................76 Figure 24: City of Hanford Vacant Land Inventory ...........................................................................................77 Figure 25: with Census Tracts & Block Groups.................................................................................................78 Figure 26: Representative Sites Analysis: Non-Vacant Lots..............................................................................80 Figure 27: Similar Properties – 7536 10th Avenue .............................................................................................81 Figure 28: Similar Properties – 7584 10th Avenue .............................................................................................81 Figure 29: Similar Properties – 8521 12th Avenue .............................................................................................82 Figure 30: Similar Properties – 10711 Thompson Drive....................................................................................83 Figure 31: Similar Properties – 11339 Jones Street............................................................................................85 Figure 32: Similar Properties – 10796 Thompson Drive....................................................................................87 Figure 33: Similar Properties – 382 Thompson Drive........................................................................................89 Figure 34: Representative Sites Analysis: Mixed-Use Sites ..............................................................................91 Figure 35: Small Shed Structures on High-Density Site ....................................................................................93 Figure 36: Mixed Use Site - Southeast Corner of 12th and Fargo Avenues.......................................................95 Figure 37: Mixed Use Site - Hanford-Armona Road, East of 13th Avenue.......................................................97 Figure 38: Proximity of Mixed-Use Site to Commercial Opportunity...............................................................99 Figure 39: Mixed Use Site - 10th Avenue and Cameron Street .........................................................................99 Figure 40: Representative over 10 acres proposed to be utilized for lower-income ........................................104

APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | APRIL 2026 1 A. Local Assessment Of Fair Housing
Introduction
Assembly Bill (AB) 686 requires that all housing elements due on or after January 1, 2021, contain an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) consistent with the core elements ofthe analysisrequired by the federal Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Final Rule of July 16, 2015. Under California law, AFFH means “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics.”1
California Government Code Section 65583 (10)(A)(ii) requires local jurisdictions to analyze racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and affluence, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risk. Although this is the multi-jurisdictional Housing Element for Kings County, including the City of Hanford, Government Code Section 65583 (c)(10) requires all local jurisdictions to address patterns locally and regionally to compare conditions at the local level to the rest of the region. This section is organized by fair housing topics Strategies to address the identified issues are included throughout the section. Through discussions with housing service providers, fair housing advocates, and this assessment of fair housing issues, the County of Kings and the City of Hanford identified factors that contribute to fair housing issues.

The AFFH analysis must contain the following:

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. Disproportional Housings Needs
g. Displacement Risk

3. Sites Inventory

4. Identification
1 California Department of Housing and Community Development, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: Guidance for All Public Entities and for Housing Elements (April 2021 Update), April 27, 2021, preface page, https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community- development/affh/docs/affh_document_final_4-27-2021.pdf.

APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | APRIL 2026 2 Outreach Program
State law requires local governments to make a diligent effort to achieve public participation in three formal community meetings to initiate 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.

City Of Hanford Website
City of Hanford website (www.hanfordca.gov/HousingElement) serves as the main conduit of information for individuals who can access material online. The website is regularly updated to reflect ongoing community input opportunities, advertise draft housing element, and answer commonly asked questions.

The website includes the following information:
• Upcoming meeting information
• Housing Element Workshops (Spanish and English)
• Notices of Public Hearing
• Links to Housing Element and other planning documents General Multi-Lingual Advertisements
The City utilized a variety of methodsto advertise the project, engage the community, and solicit input on the Housing Element (including fair housing analysis).These efforts are summarized herein to demonstrate the City’s meaningful commitment to community collaboration. The city has prepared workshop flyers (in English and Spanish), and sent emails to stakeholders requesting involvement and providing flyers and outreach information in English and Spanish.

Community Workshop
The City of Hanford held a join study session with City Council and Planning Commission on November 6, 2023 at 4:00 pm. Several members of the community were present in the audience. However, no questions or concerns were expressed by the audience. The City Council and the Planning Commission discussed topics regarding housing affordability, available assistance to the public such as first-time home buyer programs, housing income categories, and income levels to qualify for affordable housing assistance.

APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | APRIL 2026 3 B. Assessment of Fair Housing Issues
This section provides an overview of available federal, state, and local data to analyze fair housing issues in the City of Hanford. This data is supplemented with local knowledge of existing conditions in the community to present a more accurate depiction of fair housing issues in Hanford, and a more informed perspective from which to base goals, policies, and programs to affirmatively further fair housing. The following issues are addressed:

1. Key Data and Background Information

2. Integration and Segregation Patterns and Trends

3. Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty

4. Disparities in Access to Opportunity

5. Disproportionate Housing Needs

6. Displacement Risk

7. Local Data Knowledge
Key Data And Background Information
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 square miles. 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 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. Figure 1 is a map of Kings County and its four cities and unincorporated communities.

Agriculture remains the predominant landscape of Kings County, with approximately 84% of its land area used for agriculture.

Hanford was incorporated in 1881 and is the county seat for Kings County, California. Hanford is located in the heart of the San Joaquin Valley and lies equidistant from Los Angeles and San Francisco. The city’s strong sense of community pride, beautifully landscaped streetscapes, and preserved historic buildings are just a few reasons why Hanford is an attractive place to live and is experiencing a strong rate of growth.

Furthermore, Hanford is a probusiness community that promotes responsive and properly planned growth.

To fully understand patterns of segregation, exclusion, and opportunity access, fair housing assessments must be grounded not only in federal and state datasets, but also in lived experiences, historical practices, and community-level knowledge that shape housing access in unique and evolving ways. In Hanford and across Kings County, several locally relevant factors contribute to fair housing disparities and continue to influence residential patterns.

First, legacy zoning policies have had a long-lasting impact. Historical zoning maps and neighborhood layouts indicate that multifamily and affordable housing were historically directed toward west-central and southwest areas of Hanford, away from investment-intensive corridors in the northeast. These areas remain less connected to parks, newer infrastructure, and high-performing schools. While the City has expanded zoning for higher-density housing in recent years, the legacy effects of past exclusionary zoning persist in patterns of homeownership and access to neighborhood amenities.

APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | APRIL 2026 4 Second, physical infrastructure divides—such as State Route 198 (prominent east-west corridor) and rail corridors bisecting older districts—contribute to neighborhood fragmentation and reinforce socioeconomic separation. Communities south of SR-198 face limited pedestrian connectivity, aging sidewalks, and lower access to commercial services, educational resources, medical facilities and services, and full-service grocery stores. This area also tends to house a larger percentage of minority populations and are more likely to exhibit lower income levels These infrastructure barriers function as de facto boundaries to mobility and access to higher opportunity zones..

Additionally, recent building permit and infrastructure investment data suggest spatial disparities in public investment. Capital projects—such as road upgrades, school expansions, and recreational facilities—have been more concentrated in growth areas east of 11th Avenue, while maintenance and redevelopment projects in the historic city core have lagged. This mismatch reinforces perceptions of uneven attention and opportunity across communities.

Table 1 provides data on the growth of the household population in Hanford and Kings County over a thirty-year period. In Hanford, the household population saw a substantial increase, starting from 29,927 in 1990 and rising to 56,945 by 2020. This growth represents an addition of 27,018 persons, translating to a significant 90.3% increase in population over these three decades. Comparatively, Kings County also experienced population growth, but at a much slower rate, 53.1%. This data highlights that Hanford's population growth significantly outpaced that of the overall county, marking it as a key area of demographic change within Kings County.

Table 1: City of Hanford Household Population Growth, 1990-2020 Jurisdiction
Household Population Change 1990-2020
1990 2000 2010 2020 Persons %
Hanford 29,927 40,839 53,068 56,945 27,018 90.3%
County Totals 89,469 109,332 131,402 136,964 47,495 53.10% Note: All numbers exclude persons in group quarters (State prisons and Naval Air station Lemoore) ; Sources:

Census 1990, 2000, 2010; Cal.DOF, , E5 and E8 Population and Housing Estimates.

APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | APRIL 2026 5 Figure 1: Kings County

APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | APRIL 2026 6 Fair Housing Enforcement Outreach Capacity
Equal access to housing is fundamental to each person being able to meet essential needs and to pursuing personal, educational, employment, or other goals. In recognition of equal housing access as a fundamental right, the governments of the United States and the State of California have both established fair housing as a right protected by law. Federal fair housing laws prohibit discrimination in the sale, rental, lease, or negotiation for real property based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, and disability. The California fair housing laws are built upon the federal laws and add marital status, ancestry, source of income, sexual orientation, and “any arbitrary factor” as protected categories under the laws.

Many factors in the public and private domains impede equal access to housing or fair housing choice.

Impediments to fair housing choice are:
• Any actions, omissions, or decisions taken because of race, color, ancestry, national origin, religion, sex, disability, marital status, familial status, source of income, sexual orientation, or any other arbitrary factor which restrict housing choices or the availability of housing choices; or • Any actions, omissions, or decisions which have the effect of restricting housing choices or the availability of housing choices on the basis of race, color, ancestry, national origin, religion, sex, disability, marital status, familial status, source of income, sexual orientation, or any other arbitrary factor. To affirmatively promote equal housing opportunity, a community must work to remove or mitigate impediments to fair housing choice. The City of Hanford is dedicated to providing fair housing opportunities to all residents and to ensure that all applicable laws are complied with throughout the city
The City of Hanford provides resources and programs to address fair housing concerns. Table 2 discusses laws and compliance regarding fair housing. Further discussion of programs is found in the Kings County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element and in the Contributing Factors section of this Fair Housing Assessment (FHA).

An essential component of affirmatively furthering fair housing is the jurisdiction’s demonstrated capacity to conduct enforcement, offer outreach services, and respond meaningfully to incidents of housing discrimination. Kings County and its cities must assess and describe their institutional mechanisms for investigating fair housing complaints, obtaining remedies, and engaging in proactive testing or compliance activities. This includes identifying which agencies, nonprofit organizations, or legal assistance providers are responsible for handling discrimination allegations under state and federal fair housing laws. For instance, organizations such as California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA), the Fair Housing Council of Central California, or the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) may serve residents in the area, but the scope and availability of these services across rural and urban zones must be documented.

Additionally, jurisdictions must provide data on the number and nature of complaints received during the previous planning period—disaggregated, where possible, by protected characteristics such as race, disability, familial status, and national origin—and indicate whether resolutions were achieved through legal settlements, administrative findings, or other remedies. Geographic patterns of complaints, such as concentrations in certain neighborhoods or rental sectors, can also reveal systemic disparities. Any ongoing or resolved lawsuits, judgments, or fair housing compliance agreements (e.g., with HUD or state agencies) should be disclosed, as they demonstrate the region’s legal history and responsiveness to violations. Beyond enforcement, outreach activities—including multilingual tenant rights workshops, housing assistance clinics, or distribution of printed materials—must be evaluated for their reach, accessibility, and frequency.

APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | APRIL 2026 7 Effective outreach is especially critical in areas with high percentages of non-English-speaking residents, undocumented populations, or persons with disabilities. The cumulative analysis of enforcement infrastructure, legal compliance history, complaint resolution data, and outreach coverage will establish whether Kings County is adequately equipped to protect fair housing rights and respond to discrimination in a timely and equitable manner.

Table 2: Fair Housing Compliance City of Hanford
Law Description Compliance
California Fair
Employment and
Housing Act
(FEHA)
The Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA)
applies to public and private employers, labor
organizations and employment agencies and
prohibits discrimination in housing and
employment on the basis ofprotected
characteristics.

The FEHA prohibits those engaged in the
housing business – landlords, real estate
agents, home sellers, builders, mortgage
lenders, among others – from discriminating
against tenants or homeowners based on
protected characteristics.

It is also illegal for cities, counties, or other local government agencies to make zoning or land-use
decisions, or have policies, that discriminate
against individuals based on those traits.

The city complies with employment
requirements through strict
enforcement of hiring practices and
regular training of hiring managers
and human resources staff.

All development projects with City
funding are required to comply with
FEHA.

Under the Community Development
Block Grant Program, the City of
Hanford’s Community Development
Department operates a Fair Housing
Program under Title VIII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1968 aimed at
combating illegal discrimination in
housing.

The City of Hanford is working to
identify community development
priorities, fair and affordable housing
needs, and factors that shape equal
access to housing for incorporation into
the City’s 5-Year Consolidated Plan,
Annual Action Plan, & Analysis of
Impediments to Fair Housing Choice.

Government Code
Section 65008
Covers actions of a city, county, city and county,
or other local government agency, and makes
those actions null and void if the action denies
an individual or group of individuals the
enjoyment of residence, landownership, tenancy,
or other land use in the state because of
membership in a protected class, the method of
financing, and/or the intended occupancy.

For example, a violation under Government Code
section 65008 mayoccur if a jurisdiction applied
more scrutiny to reviewing and approving an
affordable development as compared to market-rate
developments, or multifamily housing as
compared to single family homes.

Compliance is achieved by uniform
application of the City’s codes,
regulations, policies and practices,
including development standards,
design guidelines, application submittal
requirements, fees and approval
findings.

Hanford supports the recommendations of
the San Joaquin Valley Fair Housing and
Equity Assessment and cooperates with
the State in the development of the
Assessment of Fair Housing

APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | APRIL 2026 8 Government Code
Section 8899.50
Requires all public agencies to administer
programs and activities relating to housing and
community development in a manner to
affirmatively further fair housing and avoid
any action that is materially inconsistent with its
obligation to affirmatively further fair housing.

Compliance is achieved through
consultations with community
stakeholders and support agencies as partof
program evaluation and funding decisions.

Government Code
Section 11135 et
seq.

Requires full and equal access to all programs
and activities operated, administered, or funded
with financial assistance from the state,
regardless of one’s membership or perceived
membership in aprotected class.

Compliance is achieved through
promotion/availabilityof activities and
programs to all persons of all
backgrounds to participate equally in
community programs and activities.

Housing
Accountability Act
(Gov. Code, §
65589.5.)
Provides that a local agency shall not
disapprove a housing development project, for
very low, low-, or moderate-income
households, or an emergency shelter, or
condition approval in a manner that renders the
housing development project infeasible for
development for the use of very low, low-, or
moderate-income households, or an emergency
shelter, including through the use of design
review standards, unless it makes certain written
findings, based upon a preponderance of the
evidence in the record.

Compliance is achieved through the
development review process consistent
with the Housing Accountability Act.

Additionally, the city continually reviews
its development standards and to ensure
they facilitate an objective and equitable
review of applicable projects.

Excessive
Subdivision
Standards (Gov.

Code, § 65913.2.)
Provides that, in exercising its authority to
regulate subdivisions a city, county, or city
and county shall:
a) Refrain from imposing criteria for
design, as defined in Section 66418, or
improvements, as defined in Section
66419, for the purpose of rendering
infeasible the development of housing
for anyand all economic segments of
the community. However, nothing in
this section shall be construed to enlarge
or diminish the authority ofa city,
county, or city and county under other
provisions of law to permit a developer
to construct such housing.
b) Consider the effect of ordinances adopted
and actions taken by itwith respect to
the housing needs of the region in
which the local jurisdiction is situated.
c) Refrain from imposing standards and
criteria for public improvements
including, but not limited to, streets,
sewers, fire stations, schools, or parks,
which exceed the standards and criteria
being applied by the city, county, or city
and county at that time to itspublicly
Compliance is achieved through the
implementation of a fair and equitable
development review process whichis
administrated consistent with the
Excessive Subdivision Standards Act.

APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | APRIL 2026 9 financed improvements located in
similarly zoned districts within that
city, county, or city and county.

Housing Element
Law (Gov. Code, §
65583, esp. subds.
(c)(5), (c)(10).)
Section 65583 stipulates that the housing
element shall consist of an identification and
analysis of existing and projected housing
needs and a statement of goals, policies,
quantified objectives, financial resources, and
scheduled programs for the preservation,
improvement, and development of housing.

The housing element shall identify adequate
sites for housing, including rental housing,
factory-built housing, mobile homes, and
emergency shelters, and shall make adequate
provision for the existing and projected needs
of all economic segments of the community.

Subdivision (c)(5) provides that, in order to
make adequate provisionfor the housing needs
of all economic segments of the community,
the program shall promote and affirmatively
further fair housing opportunities and
promote housing throughout the community
or communities for all persons regardless of
race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry,
national origin, color, familial status, or
disability, and other characteristics protected
by the California Fair Employment and
Housing Act (Part 2.8 (commencing with
Section 12900) of Division 3 of Title 2),
Section 65008, and any other state and federal
fair housing and planning law.

Compliance is achieved through
preparation and adoption of a Housing
Element found to be in substantial
compliance with State Housing Element
lawby the California Department of
Housing and Community Development.

The City of Hanford affirms its commitment to fair housing through compliance with federal and state laws prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, disability, marital status, ancestry, source of income, sexual orientation, or any arbitrary characteristic. The City continues to disseminate fair housing information in English and Spanish at City Hall, the library, and other public venues, and refers inquiries or complaints to the California Civil Rights Department (formerly DFEH) in Fresno. While this referral process aligns with basic legal obligations, the City does not currently conduct internal investigations, maintain complaint databases, or engage in fair housing testing, instead relying on external agencies for enforcement and resolution.

The City maintains compliance with the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Government Code §65008, and §8899.50, applying non-discrimination policies uniformly in zoning, permitting, and publicly funded housing projects. Training for staff ensures ongoing adherence to these laws. The City has also supported regional efforts such as the San Joaquin Valley Fair Housing and Equity Assessment (FHEA), and continues to promote equitable housing practices through Program 3.1 (Code Enforcement) and outreach related to voucher acceptance and funding for lower-income neighborhoods.

APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | APRIL 2026 10 Enforcement Capacity
The City of Hanford is dedicated to protecting the rights of renters and landlords and promoting fair housing choice. The City of Hanford collaborates with Community Services and Employment Training, Inc. (CSET), a nonprofit organization, to provide the public with information about fair housing.

The City of Hanford partners with the Fair Housing Council of Central California (FHCCC) to conduct investigations of alleged housing discrimination complaints. FHCCC provides intake services, counseling, investigation, and referral of complaints to appropriate enforcement agencies such as HUD or the California Civil Rights Department (formerly DFEH). City staff within the Community Development Department Housing Division also coordinate with legal services organizations to refer residents with fair housing concerns. Although the City does not directly conduct fair housing testing, FHCCC conducts such testing periodically within the Central Valley region, and results are reviewed to identify emerging patterns of discrimination.

Outreach Capacity
The City of Hanford conducts outreach activities as part of its public participation process, including dissemination of fair housing materials in English and Spanish, hosting community workshops, and maintaining information on the City’s website regarding rights and responsibilities under fair housing laws. Additional outreach is performed through partnerships with community-based organizations, housing advocates, and service providers. The Housing Element’s public outreach program is presented in Appendix C: Public Participation Summary.

Complaint Data and Patterns
Based on data from FHCCC and HUD's Enforcement Management System (HEMS), the volume of fair housing complaints from Kings County remains low. As presented in Table 3 below, most complaints are related to disability discrimination (45%) and familial status discrimination (30%). Complaints are distributed across jurisdictions without significant concentration in any specific geographic area.

Table 3: Complaint Data and Patterns
Category Details
Time Period 2018-2023 (Past 5 Years)
Total Complaints Filed 18
Top Basis for Complaints 1. Disability (45%)

2. Familial Status (30%)

3. Race (15%)
Most Common
Geographic Areas
Evenly distributed across Hanford, Lemoore, and Unincorporated Kings County
Complaint Outcomes - 10 resolved through mediation

APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | APRIL 2026 11 - 6 withdrawn
- 2 referred to HUD/CRD
Fair Housing Testing Conducted regionally by FHCCC (no major violations found specific to Kings County)
Public Outreach Activities
(annual)
- 2 Community Workshops
- 500 Flyers Distributed
- Website Updates and Announcements
Source: FHCC Data Summary (2023); HUD Enforcement Data Reports; Kings County Public Participation Records.

Compliance with Fair Housing Laws.

Fair Housing Laws
The Fair Housing Act of 1988 was adopted to safeguard against illegal housing discrimination. The Law protects a person's right to own, sell, purchase, or rent housing of his or her choice without fear of unlawful discrimination.

Discrimination in housing rental, sales and financing based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, marital status, source of income, disability or familial status is prohibited by Federal Fair Housing Act and state law Housing Discrimination.

The City of Hanford affirms full compliance with existing federal and state fair housing laws, including the federal Fair Housing Act and California's Fair Employment and Housing Act. The City has not been subject to any fair housing lawsuits, findings, settlements, or judgments within the past five years. Going forward, the City will strengthen fair housing enforcement and outreach by:
• Expanding partnerships with regional fair housing providers, • Increasing education campaigns targeted to historically underserved populations, • Reviewing complaint trends annually to inform fair housing strategies, • Evaluating the feasibility of participating directly in periodic fair housing testing programs.

Integration and Segregation
To develop priorities, policies, and actions, an analysis of integration and segregation, including patterns and trends related to people with protected characteristics was prepared. Segregation generally means a condition in which there is a high concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a particular type of disability when compared to a broader geographic area. Conversely, integration refers to a condition in which there is a not a high concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a particular type of disability when compared to a broader geographic area. The following analysis will analyze levels of segregation and integration for race and ethnicity, persons with disabilities, familial status,

APPENDIX D4: CITY OF HANFORD FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS
KINGS COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTION HOUSING ELEMENT | APRIL 2026 12 age, and income to identify the groups in Hanford that experience the highest levels of segregation.

Minorities are often concentrated in impoverished areas and lack access to resources such as jobs, educational opportunities, life services and face other disadvantages.

Race and Ethnic Characteristics
The City of Hanford is a diverse about as diverse as Kings County. As Table 4 shows, 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%, 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.

From the span of 2000 to 2020, the Hispanic or Latino of Any Race population count almost doubled, with a particularly large increase between 2000 and 2010. (Table 5) In a similar time frame, the White NonHispanic population has not decreased dramatically in count, in 20 years the population went down from 20,794 to 19,608.

Notably, in the City of Hanford, there are 1,586 identified households in poverty and close to 70% of those households identify as Hispanic or Latino of Any Race. The Black or African American Non-Hispanic population has increased by a few hundred. The American Indian and Alaska Native Non-Hispanic and Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander Non-Hispanic increased by a few dozen. Although the share of Asian Non-Hispanic group is not large, the population almost doubled.

The City of Hanford includes all or portions of 13 census tracts. According to Figure 2, seven census tracts (CTs 6.02, 7.01, 10.01, 10.02, 10.03. 11, and 12) are identified as Low-Moderate Segregation, and CTs

7.02 and 8 are identified ad High People of Color (POC) Segregation. The others have no data applicable to the census tract boundaries.