Livingston City Council
August 18, 2026

Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-12
Figure E5-7 Percent of Population with a Disability and Residential Elderly Care Facilities (City of Livingston) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer, 2024 and Department of Developmental Services, 2024.

~
~
Livingston City Boundary
' - - , Neighborhoods
e Elderly Care Center
Population With a Disability
(Tract) • ACS (2018-2022)
<10%
10%- 20%
..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....
-------
North Livingston
Central Livingston
South Livingston
®m:r/€ll
I
Al4, Ploce~rlu 2014, HCD 1024, Sources. Estf, TomTom, Garmin, FAD, NOAA,, USGS, C ~nSrrttrMop conmburors, and the GIS UserCommt.1mtv. ACS 2017-1011 , HCD, PloceWotks, HUD Reg,on 9, UC Berlcley UDP, TCAC 1011, CalEnvlroScreen 4.0, 1021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA 0 02 0.4 N
Miles A
742 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-13
Approximately 12 percent of the total employed population in Livingston have one or more disabilities, reflecting a decrease from 2016. Only one percent of the unemployed population has one or more disabilities, a decrease from 16 percent in 2016. Table E5-2 shows employment status by disability status estimates for Livingston.

Table E5-2 Employment Status by Disability Status (City of Livingston) Disability Status
Employed
2012-2016
(Percent of Total
Employed)
Unemployed
2012-2016
(Percent of Total
Unemployed)
Employed
2017-2021
(Percent of Total
Employed)
Unemployed
2017-2021
(Percent of Total
Unemployed)
No Disability 4,958
91%
608
84%
5,145
88%
592
99%
With a Disability 485
19%
119
16%
734
12%
8 1%
Total 5,443 727 5,879 600
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, ACS, Table C18120 Employment Status by Disability Status, 2012-2016, 2017-2021 Estimates.

Familial Status
Familial status refers to the presence of children under the age of 18 and the martial status of the head of the household. Families with children may face housing discrimination by landlords who fear that children will cause property damage. Examples of differential treatment include limiting the number of children in an apartment complex or confining households with children to a specific location. These actions are potentially discriminatory. Single-parent households are protected by fair housing law.

The household composition of total households with children in Livingston is similar compared to Merced County and the Northern SJV region. However, there is a higher percentage of single parent, female-headed households who rent in Livingston than Merced County and the NSJV region.

Livingston has a total of 3,299 households in 2021. Households with children present comprise approximately 36 percent (1,198 households) of the total households in the city. This is similar to the region, where 37 percent of households have children present. Married-couple families with children comprise the largest share of households with children (22 percent), which is lower than observed trends in Merced County (49 percent). Female-headed single-parent households comprise the majority of renter occupied single-parent households. Male-headed single-parent households comprise the majority of owner-occupied single-parent households, although they account for only a small percentage of the population. (Table E5-3)
743 Page 426 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) 5-14
Table E5-3 Tenure by Household Type and Presence of Children (City of Livingston) Household Type Owner-Occupied
Percent of Total
Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied
Percent of Total
Renter-Occupied
Married Couple Family, with
Children Present
497 26.4% 226 15.9%
Single-Parent, Male Householder,
no Spouse Present
59 3.1% 35 2.5%
Single Parent, Female
Householder, No Spouse Present
15 0.8% 366 25.8%
Total Households with Children
Present
571 30.4% 627 44.2%
Total Households 1,881 1,418
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, ACS, Table B25115 Tenure by Household Type and Presence and Age of own Children, 2016-2020 Estimates.

The percentage of children residing in female-headed, single-parent households is greater in the western portion of Central and South Livingston, where the percentage of children a living in a female-headed, single-parent household ranges between 20 and 40 percent (Figure E5-8). Elsewhere in Livingston, less than 20 percent of children are living in female-headed, single-parent households.

The eastern portion of Central Livingston and South Livingston have the highest percentage of children in married-couple households, with 60 to 80 percent of children in married-couple households (Figure E5-9). Across the rest of the city, between 40 and 60 percent of children live in married-couple households.

There are four childcare centers in Livingston, including two in the census tract where more than 20 percent of households are single-parent female-headed, as shown in Figure E5-10. Facilities are accessible to all Livingston neighborhoods.
744 Page 427 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-15
Figure E5-8 Female-Headed Households with Children Present, No Spouse/Partner Present (City of Livingston) Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer, 2024 and Department of Developmental Services, 2024.

II
ll
II
Ii II Livingston City Bounda ry
~ : :, Neighborhoods
Percent of Children in Female
Householder, No Spouse/Partner
Present Households
D Less than 20%
□ 20%- 40%
I
North Livingston
rr;.
ft:-; .• 'I J
.... ....

Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov; Cahfornia State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, So/eGroph, Geo Technologies, Inc, METI/ NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2017-2021, HCD, PlaceWorks, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, Ca/Envir0Screer1 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA -;1
II
IL
\I ,--
0 0.2 0.4 N
Miles A
745 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-16
Figure E5-9 Children in Married-Couple Households (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

:@Imm•-
[I II Livingston City Boundary
~ : :, Neighborhoods
Percent of Children in MarriedCouple Households
- 40% -60%
- 60%- 80%
- 80% -100%
Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov, Ca/ifomia State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGroph, Ge0Tech11ologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management; EPA, NPS, U5 Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2017-2021, HCD, P/aceWorks, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, CoJEnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA

0.2 0.4 N
Miles A
746 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-17
Figure E5-10 Female-Headed Households with Children Present, No Spouse/Partner Present and Child Care Centers (City of Livingston)
Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer, 2024 and Department of Developmental Services, 2024.

l"/liBl'l'i01lli'Ykl
II II Livingston City Bounda ry
~ ~ ~I Neighborhoods
0 Childcare Facility
Percent of Children in Female
Householder, No Spouse/Partner
Present Households (Tract) - ACS
(2018-2022)
D Less than 20%
D 20% -40%
f
North Livingston
00 Central Livingston
I 0
South Livingston
I
I
ACS, Pf ace Works 2024, HCD 2024, Sources: Esri, Tom Tom, Garmin, FAD, NOAA, USGS, © Open Street Mop contributors, and the GIS User Community, ACS 2017-2021, HCO, Place Works, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, ColEnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CA L FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA ~
0 0 0.2 0.4 N
Miles A 1 '· to "'
747 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-18
E5.9 Household Income
Household income is directly connected to the ability to afford housing. Higher-income households are more likely to own rather than rent housing. As household income decreases, households tend to pay a disproportionate amount of their income for housing and the number of persons occupying unsound and overcrowded housing increases. To achieve fair housing objectives, people in lowincome households must have a choice in housing opportunities—that is, when they are able to locate units that are affordable and well maintained in all parts of a jurisdiction and region.

This section identifies household income disparities using data based on median household income and low- or moderate-income (LMI) geographies. HUD defines an LMI area as a census tract or block group where over 51 percent of the population is LMI. The definition of LMI is based on HUD income definitions of up to 80 percent of the area median income (AMI). Data for this analysis is from the HUD Low and Moderate Income Summary based on the 2011-2015 ACS (most recent available data).1
As of 2021 (most recent available data), Livingston has a median household income of $68,958 per year, greater than the county’s median income of $53,992, but significantly lower than the state median household income of $87,100. Median household income across Livingston falls between $55,000 and $90,100 in all census tracts. (Figure E5-11) Median income is higher in North Livingston than it in Central or South Livingston. These areas, particularly the census tract that makes up North Livingston, overlap with unincorporated Merced County, which may skew the median income in these areas. The residential units in this census tract within the city’s boundaries are much newer and in better condition than the residential units located in the unincorporated areas. The majority of residential units in this census tract are located within the boundaries of Livingston.

LMI populations are prevalent throughout the western part of Merced County and Livingston, especially in the northeast portion of North Livingston, and Central Livingston (Figure E5-12). The eastern portion of Central Livingston has the highest percentage of LMI households, with 75 to 100 percent of residents falling into that category. LMI households make up approximately 50 to 75 percent of the western portion of Central Livingston, the northwest portion of North Livingston, and the northwest portion of South Livingston. The western portion of Southern Livingston has the lowest percentage of LMI residents within the city. These areas have newer and larger housing stock compared to the rest of the city. Many of the houses within this neighborhood were constructed within the last 15 years. LMI households in the remainder of the city make up 25 to 50 percent of the population.

Figure E5-13 shows updated low to moderate income household populations, public housing buildings, and subsidized housing units in Livingston. There are five publicly assisted housing projects in Livingston. In addition, there is one mobile home park located in South Livingston.

However, there is no correlation between location of publicly assisted housing and location of publicly assisted housing and concentrations of low- and moderate-income households.

Higher density housing tends to be more affordable for lower income households. As discussed in Section E5.12, Local Area Knowledge, all three Livingston neighborhoods, North, Central, and South, have pockets of areas zoned for higher density residential uses. The block group in North Livingston with the highest concentration of low- and moderate-income households does not have a larger share of higher density residential zones.
1 HUD Exchange 2021: https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/acs-low-mod-summary-data/ 748 Page 431 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-19
Figure E5-11 Median Household Income (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

II
11 II Livingston City Boundary
~-=- _=-1 Neighborhoods
Median Income (Tract) - ACS
(2017-2021)
- Less than $55,000
$55,000 - $90,100
A
j
c.d.!
11 Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov; Cahfornia State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SofeGroph, Geo Technologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2017-2021, HCD, PlaceWorks, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, Ca/EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA I
II
r
I
I
II
0 0.2
Miles
71 I
II
IL

0.4 N
A
749 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-20
Figure E5-12 Low- and Moderate-Income Population (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

ll
\YJJiG%J:il!)(M;,
11 II Livingston City Boundary
~ : :, Neighborhoods
{A) Low to Moderate Income
Population (HUD) - Block Group
- < 25%
25% -50%
□ 50%- 75%
- 75% -100%
A
J
Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov, California State Porks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, Geo Technologies, Inc, M ETI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2015-2019, HCD, PfaceWorks 2021, HUD Region 9 2021, UC Berkley Urban Displacement Project, TCAC 2022, Ca/EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021 I
'

0.2 Miles
l
I
I
I
l1

0.4 N
A
750 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-21
Figure E5-13 Low- and Moderate-Income Population, Public Housing, and Subsidized Housing (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer 3.0, 2025.

~
Ii ii Livingston City Boundary
~: : 1 Neighborhoods
Low to Moderate Income (HUD,
2024) - Block Group
- 25%- 50%
- 50%-75%
- 75%- 100%
Subsidized Housing (CHPC, 2023)
• Up to 50 Units
e 50 - 100 Units
Public Housing Buildings (HUD,
2024)
• 0-4
• 5-15
I
<lentral mvingston
South Livingston
•
CHPC, PlaceWorks 2022, J-ICD 2022, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Sources: Esri, Tom Tom, Garmin, FAQ, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMop contributors, and che GIS User Community, ACS 2017•2021, HCD, Place Works, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, Ca/EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA ===i./ ~

0.2 0.4 N
Miles A
751 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-22
Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty
To identify racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (known as R/ECAPs), the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) includes a poverty concentration and racial segregation filter that aligns with HUD’s R/ECAP methodology but is intended to reflect the level of racial and ethnic diversity more effectively. TCAC categorizes census tracts that have both a poverty rate of over 30 percent and that are designated as being racially segregated (overrepresentation of people of color relative to the region) as areas of high segregation and poverty.

In Livingston there are no designated areas of high segregation and poverty. However, Central Livingston has the highest percentage of LMI households which overlaps with a high percent of nonwhite population. Areas of high segregation and poverty in the Northern SJV region are found in larger cities. This includes the cities of Lodi, Stockton, Modesto, Turlock, Merced, and Los Banos.

Poverty and Segregation
The eastern portion of Central Livingston and South Livingston have poverty rates that range from 30 to 40 percent. Across the rest of Livingston, poverty rates range from 10 to 20 percent (Figure E5-14). This is similar to the unincorporated portions of Merced County, but lower than most nearby jurisdictions such as the cities of Atwater and Merced, where poverty rates exceed 40 percent in some areas. While the census tracts that encompass North Livingston overlap with unincorporated areas, the majority of residents within these census tracts live within city limits. As a result, it is assumed that the percentage of residents earning below the poverty line within these census tracts accurately reflects the neighborhoods of Livingston.

Concentrated Areas of Affluence
The AFFH Data Viewer identifies Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs), defined as white, affluent communities, as census tracts that have a white population that is 1.25 times higher than Merced County and a household median income 1.5 times higher than the AMI. There are no RCAAs in Livingston as defined by HCD. All Livingston neighborhoods have incomes that exceed the county’s household median income of $53,992 per year. However, these neighborhoods also have high percentages of non-white residents. Within the region, RCAAs are located primarily in areas surrounding major cities such as Merced, Atwater, and Los Banos. 752 Page 435 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-23
Figure E5-14 Poverty Status (City of Livingston)
Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

I
~ il
&I
I
I ~~ f
~€0
II k/~
I
u V tr ( L
JJ
IJ II
II II Livingston City Bounda ry
~: :1 Neighborhoods
Poverty Status (Tract) - ACS
(2017-2021)
10% -20%
- 20%- 30%
- 30% -40%
II
I
.....

North Livingston
-
Ii_
j
Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov, California State Porks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, Geo Technologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2017•2021, HCD, PlaceWorks, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, Ca/EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA 1-r-----
11 II
II
- - -
I
0 0.2 0.4 N
Miles A
753 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-24
E5.10 Disparities in Access to Opportunities
Transit Access and Walkability
Livingston encompasses 3.5 square miles, making most facilities and resources easily accessible to most residents. Residents without access to a car primarily rely on the County’s Regional Transit System, or family and friends for transportation to work or medical care. The Livingston medical clinic complex is centrally located along B Street, near shopping, downtown, bus stops, schools, and multi-family housing. Most community facilities are located throughout the city, ensuring convenient access for many residents.

There is limited transit service within Livingston. “The Bus,” Merced County's Regional Transit System, was formed from the consolidation of four former local public transit service providers in July 1996. Today, the Bus is the single public transportation service provider for all of Merced County. The Bus operates 15 fixed routes throughout the region. The Bus offers veterans, seniors and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-eligible passengers to ride for free on all services provided by The Bus throughout Merced County. Within Livingston, there are two fixed route bus lines that run through the city.

The Bus offers the following services in Livingston:
 The Livingston Commuter: The Livingston Commuter line runs through Livingston Winton, Atwater, and Merced. It runs approximately every 1.5 hours. This line operates between 6:14 a.m. to 7:51 p.m. Monday through Friday and 7:15 a.m. to 7:12 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday.  Turlock Commuter: The Turlock Commuter runs through Turlock, Delhi, Livingston, Atwater, and Merced, and runs approximately every hour. This route operates from 5:30 a.m. to 8:50 p.m. on weekdays and from 9:00 a.m. to 6:45 p.m. on weekends.
 Paratransit is a curb-to-curb shred transit service for persons with a disability and seniors.

Paratransit service is available in every city and community in Merced County and operates between 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday.

Access to transit is relatively consistent across Livingston neighborhoods. Transit stops are located around the city, with a concentration of stops in the Downtown area. While service coverage is similar, residents in Central Livingston near the Downtown area have shorter walks to bus stops.

AllTransit is an online database that examines factors related to transit access and produces a performance score that reveals the social and economic impact of transit, such as connectivity and access to jobs. Livingston received an average AllTransit performance score of 2.0 which equates to a very low combination of trips per week and number of jobs that are accessible, enabling a negligible number of people to take transit to work.2 This is similar to the majority of the region where slightly more than one percent of commuters use transit. Walk Score is a private company that offers a walkability index on its website which measures the pedestrian friendliness of a given location by analyzing walking routes to nearby amenities and examining population density and road metrics, including block length and intersection density.3 Livingston received an overall walk 2 AllTransit.Org, 2021. https://alltransit.cnt.org/
3 Walk Score, 2021. https://www.walkscore.com/methodology.shtml 754 Page 437 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-25
score of 56 out of 100, which is considered “somewhat walkable,” and some errands can be accomplished on foot.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also has a walkability index, that ranks block groups according to their relative walkability.4 According to the National Walkability Index, the eastern half of Central Livingston, including Downtown, is the most walkable (Figure E5-15). The City has made significant upgrades to streets and sidewalks in the Downtown area and is actively modernizing sidewalk corners along Main Street to improve accessibility. The western part of Central Livingston, the central portion of North Livingston, and the eastern part of South Livingston are above average walkable, and other areas of the city are considered below average walkable.

There are several transportation planning initiatives that are currently underway that will improve transit access and walkability in the city. The Merced County Association of Governments is currently in the process of updating the 2026 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). This is a long-term (20+ year) plan that provides a vision for the future of transportation and sustainable development in Merced County. The RTP/SCS outlines the vision, goals, and strategies that will guide transportation planning, improve mobility, and promote sustainability throughout the region.

The Merced Regional Multimodal Access Plan (MRMAP) is currently underway. The MRMAP focuses on connecting residents to the future rail stations in Livingston, Atwater, and Downtown Merced. As part of this effort, the City has developed two regional maps showing existing and planned railrelated investments in the region. The maps are currently in draft form but include the future ACE rail line and stations that will run through Livingston, Atwater, and Merced. Furthermore, the City’s General Plan Update, currently underway, will include an update to the Circulation Element.

Based assessments by City staff, right-of-way improvements are in fair to good condition. There are some stretches of roadway where sidewalks are not available, but they are generally located along undeveloped properties and are not concentrated in a single area of the city.

Access to Quality Education
Educational outcomes are measured through the educational opportunity index, which measures the percentage of fourth-grade students testing proficient in reading and math within three miles of a census block group. Scores range from 0 to 1, with 1 being the most positive educational outcome, and 0 being the least positive educational outcome. Educational outcomes are more positive across Livingston (Figure E5-16). Educational outcomes are higher than other nearby jurisdictions such as the cities of Delhi, Winton, and Merced, which all have lower educational outcomes.

The City is served by the Livingston Union School District (LUSD)and the Merced Union High School District (MUHSD). The LUSD serves approximately 2,500 students and operates three elementary schools, one middle school, and two childhood development centers. MUHSD serves several jurisdictions in eastern Merced County, including Livingston. Livingston High School, which is part of MUHSD, serves 1,206 students in grades 9-12. According to Ed-Data, Livingston High School has an overall graduation rate of 98 percent. Approximately 14 percent of students are classified as English learners, and 81 percent are eligible for free or reduce priced meals.5 District boundaries and school locations are shown in Figure E5-17. All Livingston neighborhoods have equal access to educational opportunities. However, schools are primarily located in older, 4 EPA, 2021. https://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/national-walkability-index-user-guide-and-methodology 755 Page 438 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-26
more centralized neighborhoods developed during the city’s early growth. As a result, students living in the eastern, northeastern, and southwestern areas must travel further to access educational facilities. These areas have fewer safe routes to school options, creating additional barriers for families.

The four schools located in Livingston are outdated and in need of improvements. LUSD completed a Facilities Master Plan (FMP) in November 2016 and is in the process of updating the FMP. Since the adoption of the FMP, LUSD has added 24 elementary school classrooms, nine extended learning classrooms, STEM labs to each elementary school, a new multipurpose building, created two kindergarten suites, and reconfigured the pick-up/drop off logistics of two schools to improve traffic flow.

Economic Outcomes
TCAC measures economic opportunity by census tract. They consider poverty, adult education, employment, job proximity, and median home values. A higher economic index score reflects more positive economic outcomes. Economic outcomes are higher in Livingston than in the nearby jurisdictions of Winton and Merced, but lower than a majority of unincorporated area within the eastern side of Merced County (Figure E5-18).

According to 2021 ACS estimates, Livingston has an employment rate of 59 percent, which is higher than the employment rate for the county (49 percent). The largest industries in Livingston are educational services, health care, and social assistance (23 percent of employed population); manufacturing (19 percent); and agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining (14 percent).

Educational services, health care, and social assistance and agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining are also the largest industries in the county based on employment.

Land zoned for commercial and industrial uses in Livingston is primarily located in Central and North Livingston. Foster Poultry Farms, a poultry processing plant located in North Livingston, operates 24 hours per day throughout the year and employs over 3,600 employees at this location. Many employees are Livingston residents. However, many industrial parcels in North Livingston are vacant. The City is working to attract additional industrial employers to North Livingston, but the distance to the freeway and improvement costs are a significant barrier. A small, partially developed industrial park in Central Livingston, east of the Downtown area, contains light industrial uses. The largest employers in this area include Emerald Textiles, which provides commercial laundry services for medical facilities, and the City of Livingston Corporation Yard.

Commercial zones are concentrated in Central Livingston and industrial zones are concentrated in the western end of North Livingston. South Livingston is zoned for residential, which uses do not provide employment opportunities. According to the California Employment Development Department, Foster Poultry Farms in Livingston, the University of California Merced in Merced, Mercy Medical Center in Merced, and Hilmar Cheese in Hilmar are the largest employers within Merced County, within or within commuting distance of Livingston.6 Many residents also work in Regional Trucking Transportation Services.

The employment sector in Livingston has generally remained static over the last several decades.

There have not been any recently developed commercial or industrial areas, job centers, or large employers.
6 California Employment Development Department. 2023.
https://labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/majorer/countymajorer.asp?CountyCode=000047 756 Page 439 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-27
Figure E5-15 Walkability Index (City of Livingston)
Source: National Walkability Index, 2023.

J
~
II I) Livingston City Bounda ry
~ : : 1 Neighborhoods
National Walkability Index
- 1 - 5.75 (Least Walkable)

5.76 - 10.50 (Below
Average Walkable)

10.51 - 15.25 (Above
Average Wal kable)
- 15.26 - 20 (Most
Walkable)
Fresno Counl'y Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov, California State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, Geo Technologies, fnc, METf/NASA, USGS, Bureau of l and Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2015-1019, HCD, PlaceWorks 2021, HUD Region 9 2021, UC Berkley Urban Displacement Project, TCAC 1022, Ca(EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021 I
Miles
Ht H~
757 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-28
Figure E5-16 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Education Outcomes (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

I I .•
:€llirotim:: /
ll ~
(
¾
~
LI
JI II Livingston City Boundary
~ ~ _:-1 Neigh borhoods
COG Geography TCAC/HCD
Opportunity Map - Education
Score (HCD, 2023) - Tract
□ > 0.2-0.4
- > 0.8 - 1 (More Positive
Economic Outcomes)
Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov, California Stace Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, 5afeGraph, Geo Technologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2017·2021, HCD, PlaceWorks, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, Ca/EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA

0.2 0.4 N
Miles A
758 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-29
Figure E5-17 District Boundaries and School Locations (City of Livingston) Source: LUSD Facilities Master Plan, November 2016..

School Sites and District Facilities
D !STRICT O HICE 922 8 St.. Livingston CA 95334
Andres Zamora. Superintendent

CAMPUS PAIK UUIENTUY SCHOOL
1845 H Street, Uv,ngston. CA 95334
Grades· TK-5
Jorge Arteaga, Pnnopal
SHIU HEINDO ELUlfNTAIY SCHOOL
71• Prusso St. Livingston. CA 95334
Grades. TK-5
Stella Monlilnel. Pnnclp;,I
YA ATO COLO Y £ UUNTUY SCHOOL 800 N. Main Strfft, Uv,ngston, CA 9S334 Grades, TK·5
Alma Deluna, Princlp;,I (At the time of the Master Plan)

LIVINGSTON MIDDLE SC IDOL
101 F SL, Livingston. CA 95334
Grades 6-8
V,ctona Bradshaw, P11napal

PRUSSO CNILD DEVHOPMEN CE TU
848 Prusso St, Livingston, CA 9S334
Ages. 3-5 Years old
AIN £NANCE OPUA 10 S TUNSPOHATION 922 1 / 2 "II" Strfft, Livingston. CA 9S334 N,ck Jonu, MOT Director
i
, .... IHOO •••oo I IJ lltN 11,00 , ....
759 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-30
Figure E5-18 TCAC Opportunity Areas - Economic (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

II
il /_
l'JJiJFJwiilDib
11 11 Livingston City Boundary
~ ~ ~1 Neighborhoods
COG Geography TCAC/HCD
Opportunity Map - Economic
Score (HCD, 2023) - Tract
□ > o.4 - o.6
> 0.6-0.8
- > 0.8 - 1 (More Positive
Economic Outcomes)
I
<,nm,f/€ll
I
r
\ \\
- --i--::- ~ - - ---
- l-Jl.j JI 11 j c4ULJJ J [ ][ ccJ[lr l /L.1L ]
JL_J !f Li
r
------i\ f~ c~
J J
:I
/I
Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov, California State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, Geo Technologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2017-2021, HCO, PlaceWorks, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, CafEnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FJRE, OEHHA, FEMA lf - lf
II
II
11 II
JI
I
,r-
~
--

0.2 0.4 N
Miles A l I
760 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-31
As part of the City’s General Plan update, the City will identify new areas for commercial and industrial development. The Plan is expected to incorporate both mixed-use development and designate property for business park land uses, which increase increasing number and variety of job opportunities.

Healthy and Safe Housing Environment
The CalEnviroScreen map identifies the degree to which communities are considered burdened by pollution. CalEnviroScreen identified higher pollution burden across Livingston, with a percentile score between 71 and 80. (Figure E5-19). This is lower than the scores for the majority of Merced County, particularly the western portions. Throughout the city, pollution burden caused by ozone pesticides, and drinking water are high. The TCAC environmental opportunity map also identifies pollution burden, using CalEnviroScreen scores. However, unlike CalEnviroScreen, the TCAC map compares census tracts to other census tracts within the same council of governments to show differences in pollution burden within the region. According to the TCAC opportunity map, environmental outcomes are low across Livingston (Figure E5-20).

State Route 99 runs diagonally through the city between North Livingston and Central Livingston.

This heavily trafficked corridor likely contributes to low environmental outcomes in the city.

Industrial uses in North Livingston are well-buffered from nearby residential areas, reducing potential environmental impacts on nearby households. Current industrial operations primarily utilize steam energy, which significantly lowers air quality impacts within the city. However, there have been occasional complaints regarding odors originating from Foster Poultry Farms. While these odor issues are not health risk, they may affect quality of life for residents in proximity to the facility.

Senate Bill (SB) 535 tasks the California Environmental Protection Agency with identifying disadvantaged communities. Disadvantaged communities are low-income areas that are disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards. Under SB 535, a minimum of 25 percent of funds from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, funded by revenue from the state’s cap-and-trade emissions program, goes to projects that benefit disadvantaged communities. All of Livingston is considered a disadvantaged community under SB 535 (Figure E5-21). This is because population characteristics such as cardiovascular disease, education, and linguistic isolation are also high throughout Livingston and Merced County, in addition to the pollution burden described above.

Livingston has recently invested in the water well system, including refurbishing existing wells and adding new water treatment capabilities. However, due to limited funding, no major infrastructure projects are currently planned.

Parks are evenly distributed across the city and all neighborhoods in Livingston have access to parks and outdoor spaces. A new recreation complex and community park, the Rec-Plex, is being planned along D Street between 6th and 8th streets. The project is in the design phase, and actual construction will depend on costs and available funding. In addition, new multifamily projects are being designed to have sufficient access to park and open space opportunities There are three multifamily projects that are planned or under construction:
761 Page 444 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-32
Figure E5-19 CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile Scores (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

ii iJ Livingston City Boundary
~ -=- _=-1 Neighborhoods
{A) CalEnviroScreen 4.0 - Feb
2021 Update)
- 71-80
- 91 - 100 (Highest Scores)
~
/J
/)
J
Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association a/Gov, California State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, So/eGraph, Geo Technologies, Inc:, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureov af lond Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2015-2019, HCD, PlaceWorks 2021, HUD Region 9 2021, UC Berkley Urban Displacf:'ment Project, TCAC 2022, Ca/EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021 0 L

0.2 0.4 N
Miles A
hF - " H
762 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-33
Figure E5-20 TCAC Opportunity Areas - Environmental (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

ll
II II Livingston City Boundary
~ ~ ~ I Neighborhoods
COG Geography TCAC/HCO
Opportunity Map -
Environmental Score (HCD, 2023)
- Tract
-
0 -0.2 (Less Positive
Economic Outcomes)
□ > 0.2-0.4
Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov, California State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGroph, GeoTechnofogies, Inc, METf/NASA, USGS, Bureau of land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2017-2021, HCD, PfaceWorks, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, CafEnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA

0.2 Miles
763 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-34
Figure E5-21 SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities (City of Livingston)

Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

II
l~L • __
ll ~ - "
11 JI ~ - -- ~~
;~=--.---r
2022) ERE Garmm SafeGraph, GeaTechnalag,es, Inc, ~ ' OEHHA FEMA D t PWP. Merced County Assoc,at1on of Gov, California StaDtR• Parks,98;;~ ~erkl~y UDP, TcAC 2022, CafEnviroScreen 4 0, 2021, CAL FIRE, ' Fresno County ep ' A ACS 2017-2021, HCD, PlaceWorks, HU eg1an ' EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USO ' 764 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-35
 The Villages at Main Street – 480-unit multi-family project located in South Livingston.

Construction is expected to commence in winter 2025.
 Tierra Santa Villas Apartment project – 80-unit affordable housing project presently under construction by Visionary Home Builders along B Street. Occupancy is expected to commence in October 2025.
 River Glen Apartments – 80-unit affordable housing project under construction by Self-Help Enterprises. Occupancy is expected to commence in late 2026.

E5.11 Disproportionate Housing Needs
Disproportionate housing needs refers to a condition in which there are significant disparities in the proportion of members of a protected class experiencing a category of housing need, or the total population experiencing that category of housing need in the applicable geographic area. To analyze the extent of disproportionate housing needs, this section reviews HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data on housing cost burden, overcrowding, and substandard housing conditions (collectively known as “housing problems”), homelessness, and displacement risk.

Housing Problems
According to federal law, “housing problems” refers to any of four housing issues: cost burden and severe cost burden, overcrowding, and substandard housing conditions. Substandard housing is defined as a housing unit lacking complete plumbing or kitchen facilities.

Approximately 42 percent of total households in Livingston experience housing problems. About 24 percent of total households experience severe housing problems. This is similar to the region, where 41 percent of all households experience housing problems and 23 percent of households experience severe housing problems.

Substandard Housing Conditions
HUD considers housing units to be “standard units” if they comply with local building codes, whereas housing units are considered “substandard” if they lack complete plumbing or kitchen facilities. According to 2017-2021 ACS estimates, all units within Livingston have complete plumbing and kitchen facilities.

Approximately 50 percent of Livingston’s housing stock was constructed prior to 1990 and is more than 30 years old. These units are potentially in need of repair and modernization improvements.

According to City staff’s knowledge of rehabilitation needs, older homes located in Central Livingston generally have a greater need for rehabilitation or replacement. These older neighborhoods also tend to have smaller lot sizes compared to areas developed more recently.

Newer housing subdivisions are located in the north, northeast, south, and southwest of the city.

The housing in these areas tends to be higher quality than housing found in Central Livingston.

Housing Cost Burden
The rate of cost burden (spending more than 30 percent of household income on housing costs) is high throughout Livingston. Cost burden by homeowners in North Livingston and the western part of Central and South Livingston is between 20 and 40 percent of owner-occupied households (Figure E5-22). The cost burden among homeowners is higher in the eastern part of Central and South Livingston, with 40 to 60 percent of homeowners overpaying. This is similar to other nearby 765 Page 448 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-36
communities, such as Atwater and Winton, but lower than the City of Merced, where trends indicate that 60 to 80 percent of owners are cost burdened. Cost burden among homeowners in most of the city is lower than the region, where approximately 56 percent of homeowners are experiencing cost burden.

For renter households, between 20 and 40 percent of the renter population is cost burdened (Figure E5-23). Similar to owner-occupied households, this is lower than other nearby jurisdictions such as Atwater and Merced, which have areas where 60 to 80 percent of renters are cost burdened, and lower than the region, where 44 percent of renter households experience cost burden.

Approximately 38 percent of total households in Livingston are cost burdened and 27 percent of households are severely cost burdened (Table E5-4). Both owner- and renter- occupied households experienced cost burden across all income levels. Extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households experienced cost burden at disproportionately high rates compared to moderate and above moderate-income households, for both renter and owner households. The percentage of households experiencing cost burden generally increases as income decreases, which represents trends in Livingston. Approximately 85 percent of all extremely low-income households experienced cost burden, while only 11 percent of moderate and above moderate-income households experienced cost burden.

Table E5-4 Cost Burden by Income Category (2015-2019)
Household by Tenure, Income, and
Housing Problem
Owners Renters Total Household s
Total Percent Total Percent Total Percent
Extremely low-income (0-30% AMI) 60 345 405
With any housing problem 60 100.0% 295 85.5% 355 87.7%
With cost burden >30% 50 83.3% 295 85.5% 345 85.2%
With cost burden >50% 35 58.3% 50 14.5% 85 21.0%
Very low-income (31-50% AMI) 260 255 515
With any housing problem 155 59.6% 240 94.1% 395 76.7%
With cost burden >30% 155 59.6% 240 94.1% 395 76.7%
With cost burden >50% 50 19.2% 15 5.9% 65 12.6%
Low-income (51-80% AMI) 375 540 915
With any housing problem 250 66.7% 265 49.1% 515 56.3%
With cost burden >30% 159 42.4% 265 49.1% 424 46.3%
With cost burden >50% 4 1.1% 275 50.9% 279 30.5%
Moderate & Above Income (>80% AMI) 1220 545 1,765
With any housing problem 205 16.8% 50 9.2% 255 14.4%
With cost burden >30% 140 11.5% 50 9.2% 190 10.8%
With cost burden >50% 40 3.3% 490 89.9% 530 30.0%
Total Households 1,920 1,685 3,605
With any housing problem 670 34.9% 850 50.4% 1520 42.2% With cost burden >30% 514 26.8% 850 50.4% 1364 37.8%
With cost burden >50% 119 6.2% 835 49.6% 954 26.5%
766 Page 449 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-37
Household by Tenure, Income, and
Housing Problem
Owners Renters Total Household s
Total Percent Total Percent Total Percent
Note: Housing Problems: There are four housing problems in the CHAS data: 1) housing unit lacks complete kitchen facilities; 2) housing unit lacks complete plumbing facilities; 3) household is overcrowded; and 4) household is cost burdened. A household is said to have a housing problem if they have any 1 or more of these 4 problems.

Cost burden: Monthly housing costs (including utilities) exceeding 30% of monthly income.

Severe cost burden: Monthly housing costs (including utilities) exceeding 50% of monthly income.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), CHAS ACS tabulation, 2015-2019 release Overcrowding
As discussed in Chapter E3, Housing Needs Assessment, Livingston has 1,202 large households (households with five or more people), comprising approximately 36 percent of total households, as shown in Table E5-5. This is 14 percent higher than the county (22 percent) and 17 percent higher than the Northern SJV region average (19 percent). A higher percentage of owner households (45 percent) are large households compared to renter households (26 percent).

Approximately 13 percent of households in Livingston are overcrowded (more than 1.0 persons residing per room), which is greater than the statewide average of eight percent, and the countywide average of nine percent. The rate of overcrowded households is higher in North Livingston than Central and South Livingston (Figure E5-24). Overcrowding rates are lower than other cities and communities in the county, such as the community of Winton, where overcrowding ranges from 15 to 20 percent, and the City of Merced, which contains areas where over 20 percent of households are overcrowded.

Table E5-5 Large Households (City of Livingston)
Number of Household Percent of Households
Total Occupied Housing Units 3,299 100%
Total Large Households (5 or More Persons) 1,202 36%
5-Person Household 768 23%
6-Person Household 178 5%
7-or-More Person Household 256 8%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Data (2017-2021), Table B25009. 767 Page 450 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-38
Figure E5-22 Overpayment by Home Owners (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

II
f
II II Livingston City Boundary
~ ~ _=-1 Neighborhoods
Overpayment by Home Owners
(2017-2021) - ACS Tract Level
20% - 40%
- 40%- 60%
North Living~\On
Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov, Co(1Jornia State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, Sa/eGraph, Geo Technologies, Inc, METJ/ NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bvreau, USDA, ACS 2017-2021, HCD, PlaceWarks, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, CalEnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA I
II
Miles
768 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-39
Figure E5-23 Overpayment by Renters (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

fil
l'JJlGwN!lcik
,,
[I II Livingston City Boundary
~ ~ .=-1 Neighborhoods
Overpayment by Renters
(2017-2021) - ACS Tract Level
0 < 20%
20% - 40%
- 40% -60%
South Livingston
Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov, California State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, Geo Technologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2017-2021, HCO, PlaceWorks, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, CafEnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FJRE, OEHHA, FEMA I
1r
11 JI

0.2 0.4 N
Miles A
769 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-40
Figure E5-24 Overcrowded Households (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

~ I
~(ell
lf --
'
/j_
11 )
/
tf JL
--i~
I
North Livingston ' se>--=-Ce=n"'itral Livingsto
z [
,.......
,I
II II Livingston City Bounda ry
~ ; l [JL--r- ,
~tr l '{I if _ , [ 1111
~ ~ ~I Neighborhoods
Overcrowding (ACS, 2017 - 2021)
- Tract
I
'
-'
'J[Jl re'/,,.-:,,._,_, ~,,~ ]f 1( ][ U ~L 1~] • '> South Lt ngston _ J _ ILJL,.

I ~ _Jc_, t _L_~-~~~~~~1~ir~=1J- _
D Less than 5%
□ 5%- 10%
- 10% -15%
Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov, California State Parks, Esn, HERE, Garmin, SofeGraph, Geo Technologies, Inc, METf/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2017-2021 , HCD, PfaceWorks, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, CalEnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA 0 0.2
Miles
l
I

0.4 N
A
770 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-41
Homelessness
According to the 2022 Merced City and County point-in-time (PIT) count, 855 unhoused persons were recorded in Merced County and its jurisdictions, representing a two percent increase since 2021.7 In Livingston, 35 unsheltered and sheltered people were recorded in 2022, compared to 34 people recorded in 2021 (three percent increase). The total population in Livingston comprises approximately five percent of the population in Merced County, and the unhoused population in Livingston represents four percent of the total unhoused population recorded in Merced County.

Livingston has a roughly proportional share of the county’s unhoused population. Of the 35 individuals identified during the 2022 PIT count, nine were unsheltered and 26 were sheltered. City staff have observed encampments in Central Livingston, between Liberty Market (1471 B Street) and the railroad tracks. Unhoused individuals are also concentrated just outside the city along the Merced River. Many unhoused individuals in and near Livingston elect not to accept services that are offered and made available to them. Service providers have indicated that most homeless residents reside in the larger cities in the county, such as the city of Merced.

The most recent 2024 PIT Count indicated that there was only one unhoused person in Livingston.

Based on the low number of individuals identified during the 2024 PIT count and the rate of sheltered individuals during the 2022 PIT Count (74 percent sheltered), homelessness is generally a smaller issue in Livingston compared to other areas of the county. The large proportion of homeless, sheltered individuals counted in 2022 also indicates that a significant proportion of the unhoused community has access to assistance.

The PIT Count does not provide demographic information of the unhoused population for Livingston.

There are no emergency shelters located in Livingston. However, within the Merced City and County Continuum of Care (Merced CoC) area there are 454 year-round emergency, safe haven, and transitional housing beds and 193 permanent housing beds, most of which are located in the city of Merced. The Merced CoC implements all annual HUD required activities. The County offers two types of programs for unhoused residents, including temporary and permanent housing assistance.

Temporary Homeless Assistance provides shelter for a maximum of 16 continuous days for families without a place to stay. The payment is provided to one of several pre-selected housing suppliers.

During the temporary period, the County recommends that families should be looking for permanent housing. Once permanent housing is found, families can receive assistance with a security deposit and other necessary deposits/fees in order to move in. Rent on permanent housing cannot be more than 80 percent of the maximum CalWORKs aid payment that the household is eligible for.

Merced County also administers the Home Safe Program to support the safety and housing stability of individuals involved in Adult Protective Services (APS) by providing housing-related assistance using evidence-based practices for homeless assistance and prevention. Home Safe offers a range of strategies to prevent homelessness and support ongoing housing stability for APS clients, including housing-related intensive case management, short-term housing related financial assistance, deep cleaning to maintain safe housing, eviction prevention, landlord mediation, and more. 7 Merced City and County Continuum of Care. 2022. Point in Time. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6149207801c5c134f32b280c/t/625605199113fa3f4be48dbe/1649875108255/Merced+County+C oC+2022+Homeless+Count+and+Survey+Report+
771 Page 454 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-42
Merced CoC funding for Merced County is administered through the Merced CoC. In 2021, the following organizations were awarded Merced CoC funds in the Merced County region:
 County of Merced for $359,876, for Project Home Start and Project Hope Westside 2021 to provide permanent supportive housing.
 Housing Authority of the County of Merced for $77,010 for their Shelter Plus Care program to provide rental assistance.
 Merced County Community Action Board for $118,731 for their Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) administration.

As discussed in Section E5.10 above, The Bus offers the following services in Livingston:
 The Livingston Commuter: The Livingston Commuter line runs through Livingston Winton, Atwater, and Merced. It runs approximately every 1.5 hours. This line operates between 6:14 a.m. to 7:51 p.m. Monday through Friday and 7:15 a.m. to 7:12 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday.  Turlock Commuter: The Turlock Commuter runs through Turlock, Delhi, Livingston, Atwater, and Merced, and runs approximately every hour. This route operates from 5:30 a.m. to 8:50 p.m. on weekdays and from 9:00 a.m. to 6:45 p.m. on weekends.
 Paratransit is a curb-to-curb shred transit service for persons with a disability and seniors.

Paratransit service is available in every city and community in Merced County and operates between 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday.

The Foster Farms, 8th and F Street, and Livingston Health Center stops on the Livingston Commuter line are all accessible to local residents. The 8th and F and Livingston Health Center stations specifically are accessible to the Central Livingston area where encampments have been observed.

Local medical clinics include Livingston Community Health Services, RAN Health Services, MFA Medical Group, Northside Mental Services, and a WIC women’s health clinic. Livingston residents are also served by the Mercy Community Medical Center located in the city of Merced and the Emmanual Medical Center located in the city of Turlock. All local medical clinics, the Livingston Community Health Center, RAN Health Services, MFA Medical Group, Northside Mental Health Services, and WIC women’s health, are located in Central Livingston.

Displacement
The Urban Displacement Project (UDP) designates communities as at risk of displacement if the share of very low-income residents is greater than 20 percent and have any of the two following characteristics:
 The share of renters is above 40 percent
 The share of people of color is above 50 percent
 The share of very low-income households that are severely rent burdened is above the county median
 The percent change in rent is above the county median for rent increases According to the UDP, Livingston is considered to have a low risk of displacement (Figure E5-25).

However, home values and rents have increased significantly in Livingston over the past decade.

According to ACS estimates, between 2016 and 2021, average home value increased from $173,100 772 Page 455 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-43
Figure E5-25 Displacement Risk (City of Livingston)

II
l
!r
=
II
~ ~
V
-... -... -...
~
I --.J
North Livingston !J ~ --ir
-...

Jr
11 ----
,--
Jf
I
tJJI r----- • L
--· "
71 -""""'~,.~ ==-=-------
JI
I l'lJira'ID'.1t!ft"i>
,_
~ -bm-Centrl iving~
= t-=r==-· ~C/~ Jl dfl ,w [L ,-;q---,
' IU[ c" ,;-J1 , JI . /[ [ 1l - ~==I -=-=>,~
II II Livingston City Boundary l~ul I¾?~ '": ";"~'o" [t jl l f ~ ~ : :1 Neighborhoods {R} Estimated Displacement Risk
- Overall Displacement {UCB,
Urban Displacement Project
2022}
Lower Displacement Ri sk
II
II
/1
_c__
Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov, California State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SofeGroph, Geo Technologies, Inc, METf/NASA, USGS, Bureau of land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2015-2019, HCD, P/aceWorks 2021, HUD Region 9 2021, UC Berkley Urban Displacement Project, TCAC 2022, CofEnviraScreen 4.0, 2021 l
r7 ,1
71 0 0.2 0.4 N
Miles A
773 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-44
to $242,400 (40 percent increase) and median rent increased from $933 to $1,145 (23 percent increase. In addition, about 38 percent of all households are cost burdened, meaning many households are paying too much for housing. While the UPD rates the risk of displacement as low across Livingston, these trends indicate cost burdened and low-income households may be at risk of displacement if the cost of housing continues to rise.

There are currently no areas in Livingston where environmental hazards, such as flooding, wildfires, or other natural disasters, pose a significant risk of displacement. The City’s geographic location and land use patterns help minimize exposure to these threats.

E5.12 Local Area Knowledge
Historic Patterns of Segregation
The first inhabitants of Livingston were the Yokuts Indians, which occupied the Orestimba, Garzas, and Quinto creeks. The Yokuts peoples were either forcibly removed and sent to Spanish missions along the coast, or were killed by the Spanish Influenza, which swept the area in 1833. The first settler arrived in the area in 1862. The Southern Pacific Railway crossed the Merced River in 1871, and the Cressy station was built. The development of Livingston into a town site was stimulated by railway gang workers, gold seekers, and farmers. William Little, a landowner, laid out the town by platting a visionary 80 blocks, 40 blocks on each side of the railroad track. In the early 1900s, rightsof-way were established to provide irrigation for Livingston. As a result, Livingston was able to achieve a period of steady growth. It was incorporated in 1922.

Agriculture has been and continues to be a primary industry in Livingston. The grape industry, vineyards, sweet potato, and almond industries are the main agricultural products in the city.

Livingston is the world headquarters for Foster Farms and the largest chicken slaughterhouse and processing plant in the world is within city limits.

There are several historical factors that have shaped racial/ethnic patterns in Livingston.8 The Yamato Colony, established on 3,200 acres in the early 1900s, was a Japanese agricultural community in Livingston. There were a reported 69 Japanese families in the Yamato Colony in 1940.

In 1910, the Japanese Yamato Colony founded the Livingston Farmers Association. At the beginning of World War II, in anticipation of internment, most of the residents of the Yamato Colony formed a corporation headed by a European-American to hold their property. As a result, the Japanese residents of Yamato were able to reclaim their property after the war.

In addition to the Japanese, Livingston is home to several other immigrant populations. From the 1890s to 1930s, the city saw an increase in Hispanic and Latino immigrants, many of whom worked on the railroads. Many railroad workers would work in Livingston seasonally, returning to their country of origin for part of the year. Over time, many of the families immigrated to Livingston and the Hispanic population has remained a majority for many decades. In the 1970s, the Foster Farms chicken processing plant also created new employment opportunities, attracting immigrant workers primarily from India and Latin America. The Hispanic/Latino and Indian populations continue to make up a large proportion of the city’s population.
8 City of Livingston, 2022. 100 Years and Growing Strong. www.cityoflivingston.org/recreation/page/100-years-and-growing-strong. 774 Page 457 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-45
The Portuguese from the Azore Islands are prominent in the dairy industry and in sweet potato farming. Filipinos immigrated to fill farm labor needs. Mennonites found a religious community and remained as family farmers. More recently, Sikhs of India have arrived.

Stakeholder and Community Input
A community workshop was held in Livingston on August 29, 2023. During the workshop, participants expressed rent affordability as one of the biggest housing challenges in Livingston, as well as difficulty finding the type of housing needed, and difficulty buying a home. During workshops held in each jurisdiction as part of the Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element planning effort, participants identified the most significant housing barriers, including rent affordability and rent increases, lack of housing with supportive services, and difficulty buying a home.

The City also participated in a series of stakeholder interviews with service providers, community organizations, and affordable and market-rate housing developers held between August 8 and August 23, 2023. Community organizations identified the need for housing near medical facilities and public transportation. Additional housing needs include transitional housing and citywide and countywide rent control. Compared to larger cities in the region, smaller, rural areas have vastly fewer amenities and housing resources. According to market-rate housing developers, barriers to developing housing include high construction costs, limited resources offered for affordable housing within the Central Valley, and lack of subsidies for affordable housing units. Affordable housing developers described the need for more attainable zoning and entitlement approvals and the necessity of transit being near affordable housing locations. According to affordable housing developers, cities can foster strong relationships with affordable housing providers and maintain knowledgeable staff to pursue grant opportunities for affordable housing.

An online community survey was available on the Merced County Association of Governments Housing Element website in both English and Spanish from May to December 2023. The survey asked participants about housing issues and the types and location of housing development they would like to see in their city. A total of four respondents reported that they live, work, own a business or property, or go to school in Livingston. Respondents in Livingston identified that the most important aspects when looking for housing are affordability, quality and size, and close to work and/or school. The most urgent housing needs are the affordability of housing, availability of housing, homelessness, and fair housing/discrimination. According to respondents, the most beneficial programs to assist with housing needs are homebuyer loan counseling services, rental assistance or HCVs, housing assistance for residents with special needs, and home rehabilitation assistance. Areas that would be best for housing development are areas with existing housing, (increasing the number of housing units that could be built on each property such as with fourplexes, courtyard houses, and other types of apartment complexes) and land that could be converted from an underutilized non-housing use to residential or mixed-use.

Other Relevant Factors
Other factors to fair housing issues in Livingston that have not been previously discussed in this analysis include language barriers and lack of farmworker housing. These contributing factors limit the accumulation of wealth and access to housing resources in historically marginalized communities.
775 Page 458 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-46
Limited English Proficiency
Language barriers can lead to linguistic and cultural isolation. According to the 2017-2021 ACS estimates, 83 percent of Livingston residents speak a language other than English at home, and the majority of those speak Spanish.

Farmworker Housing Needs
Much of the land surrounding Livingston is utilized for agricultural operations and approximately 14 percent of Livingston’s population (859 persons) works in agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining. Livingston is located near Winton, Atwater, and Delhi, all of which contain expansive agricultural operations. Farmworkers employed by nearby agricultural businesses may seek housing in Livingston. However, the migratory and often seasonal nature of farm work often makes it difficult for farmworkers to find affordable housing options. There is currently no public or subsidized housing for farmworkers in Livingston. HACM operates one property for farmworkers in Planada, approximately 25 miles from Livingston. HACM also operates several migrant housing centers across Merced County.

Housing Stock Type
The vast majority of the housing stock in Livingston (86 percent) is made up of detached singlefamily homes, which may not be affordable for lower-income households. Thirty percent of all housing units contain four or more bedrooms which can accommodate large families without overcrowding.

The City of Livingston has 1,202 large households, approximately 36 percent of total households. A higher percentage of owner households (45 percent) are considered large households compared to renter households (26 percent).

North Livingston features a mix of residential uses and some newer commercial development near Highway 99. Most residential dwellings north of Highway 99 are single-family homes, with roughly one-third built before 1985 and the remainder constructed after 2000. Newer homes include full street improvements such as curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and underground utilities, while older neighborhoods often incorporate alleys, overhead utility lines, and some vacant lots lacking sidewalks. Market-rate apartments located at the north end of the city offer lower rents compared to other areas.

Approximately six applications for accessory dwelling units have been submitted in North Livingston.

Newer homes tend to be owner-occupied by higher-income and younger households, whereas older homes are primarily rental properties or occupied by older residents.

More than half of the City’s housing stock is in Central and South Livingston. Of these, approximately one-third were built after 2000. Newer homes are generally concentrated in South Livingston. In contrast, most dwellings near the Downtown area in Central Livingston were constructed prior to the mid-1980s
Land Use
In Livingston, residential development comprises 14.1 percent of the City’s Planning Area.

Public/institutional uses represent 6.1 percent, commercial areas two percent, and parks and open space 1.6 percent. Agricultural land surrounds the city and makes up 60.6 percent of the Planning Area. “Planning Area” refers to the area encompassing all incorporated and unincorporated territory 776 Page 459 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-47
that bears a physical relationship to the long-term planning of the city, as outlined in the Existing Conditions Report of the 2040 General Plan Update.

The City’s Zoning Map is shown in Figure E5-26. Most of the South Livingston area is characterized by single-family residential zones with smaller pockets zoned for high density residential, public/quasi-public facilities, and community commercial uses. Newer residential development in South Livingston features larger homes on lots with a minimum size of 7,000 square feet. Block groups in South Livingston have non-White populations exceeding 81 percent. The western side of South Livingston has an LMI household population representing less than 25 percent of the block group population, compared to the eastern side which has LMI household populations ranging from 25 to 75 percent. The eastern side of South Livingston contains most of the area zoned for higher density residential uses. Higher density housing is typically more affordable to lower income households.

In the southern portion of the city, land uses include commercial development and new multifamily apartment projects. A 480-unit apartment project has been entitled, and the property owner is working with the local irrigation district to underground the irrigation canal that traverses the site.

Additionally, the area contains one large mobile home park, which is currently approximately 50 percent occupied with new mobile homes.

Central Livingston is zoned for a variety of uses including high density residential, medium density residential, low density residential, downtown commercial, highway service commercial, community commercial, and public/quasi-public facilities. Medium and high density residential zones make up most of the perimeter of the Downtown area. Residential uses in Central Livingston typically have smaller lot sizes of less than 5,000 square feet. Central Livingston contains block groups with nonWhite populations exceeding 81 percent and LMI households exceeding 50 percent. The area east of Lincoln Boulevard has a larger population of LMI households compared to the area west. This section of Central Livingston also has the largest area zoned for high density residential uses.

South of Highway 99, land uses consist mainly of commercial and medical facilities near the highway, along with a mix of older commercial and residential development in the Downtown area.

This part of town is characterized by older infrastructure, including alleys, overhead utility lines, and aging structures. Two new affordable multifamily apartment projects are currently under construction along B Street, adjacent to existing low-income affordable apartments operated by Self-Help Enterprises and the Housing Authority. The Downtown area has benefited from recent street improvements, including new curbs, sidewalks, and crosswalks. However, vacant properties in this area are subject to requirements for undergrounding overhead utilities, which can be costprohibitive for new construction projects.

The North Livingston area is characterized by industrial, highway service commercial, low density residential uses with smaller pockets zoned for medium and high density residential and public/quasi-public facilities uses. Residential uses in North Livingston are served by a regional park, a regional transit route, and a community childcare center. LMI households represent 25 to 50 percent of the population in North Livingston block groups.

There has not been much development in the city during the last ten years. The city’s current General Plan was drafted in 1999. The 2008 GP update was challenged by the local Farm bureau, and was overturned by the Courts.
777 Page 460 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-48
Figure E5-26 City of Livingston Zoning

"'f-----f----{_!ccc===3 /====~- ,-------- !i.'
Legend
1==1==t; Railroad
-- Highway
- • City Limits
•- • Sphere of Influence
A-1 Low Density Residential
A-2 Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
C-1 Neighborhood Commercial
C- Community Commercial
.. Highway Service Commercial
.. Downtown Commercial
M-1 Limited Industrial
.. General Industrial
Public/Quasi-Public Facilities
O Open Space
City of Livingston Zoning
wt,
1,000 500 0 1,000Feet
December 19, 20 19 IVC'rG
778 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-49
Figure E5-27 Housing Choice Vouchers (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

I
I
l
r (
~ d
rJ? -j/
LJI JL 71
\VJl;G'mJ'.ffi)J,
II
'-------
11 II Livingston City Boundary
~: :, Neighborhoods
Housing Choice Vouchers Tract
{HUD, 2021}
D No Data
D Less than 5%
--f
~b rth Livingston
_J .
-
. . r , Central Living~ 1
- - -
7 JL,
ri .
-=1outh Livingston
I
Fresno County Dept. PWP, Merced County Association of Gov, California State Porks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, Geo Technologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, ACS 2017•2021, HCD, PlaceWorks, HUD Region 9, UC Berkley UDP, TCAC 2022, Ca/EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA I
Jr l!
11 t
=-~--_ -_---
0 0.2 0.4 N
Miles A
779 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-50
The city’s infrastructure master plans, prepared and adopted with 2008 General Plan, became void.

Consequently, the development impact fees serving new development no longer had a nexus study to substantiate the development costs of planned improvements. Moreover, no annexations have occurred over the last 20 years as the city and county have not adopted a Master Tax Sharing Agreement. The city is trying to negotiate a Tax Sharing Agreement but has not been successful to date.

Historic Growth Patterns
The development of the Central Pacific Railroad in California led to the establishment of many railroad towns throughout the Central Valley, including Livingston. Construction of the Central Pacific Railroad began in 1863. In 1872, in a bid to make Livingston the County seat, William Little, who owned about 2,500 acres of land, plotted the area surrounding Cressey Railway station into city blocks and offered to sell them at a fairly low rate on the condition that the town was chosen as the County seat. The town, however, lost the bid to Merced that year. The land was later purchased by a man named Cyrus Bliven in 1883, and soon after, land speculators began to sell plotted land to families. The implementation of irrigation systems in 1908 led to steady growth and a flourishing agricultural industry in Livingston.

The City was incorporated in 1922. Since then, agriculture has been the main industry and source of jobs for residents. The Yamato Colony, a Japanese agricultural community, was established in Livingston by Kyutaro Abiko in 1904. Abiko bought 3,000 acres of land and put out advertisements in Japanese, encouraging farmers to settle and form a colony. The formation of the Livingston Cooperative Society assisted the colony. The Yamato Colony formed a corporation with two other European-American lead colonies during World War II. The colonies headed by European-Americans held their property during Japanese internment, allowing many of the original residents to return.

The Yamato Colony members were instrumental in founding the Livingston Farmers Association which is still located on 6th Street. Most of the area that once formed this colony is now part of the City of Livingston and the Yamato Colony Elementary school was named to commemorate this part of history. The city continues to have a significant population of Asian American residents, representing 21 percent of the Livingston population compared to only around 7 percent countywide.

E5.13 Subsidized Housing
According to the California Housing Partnership, there are five affordable housing developments in Livingston totaling 200 units. These buildings are scattered throughout the city, with most located in Central and South Livingston.

The HACM administers housing choice vouchers (HCVs) in the City of Livingston. According to the AFFH Data Viewer, there are 14 households (1.68 percent of the renter population) that receive rental assistance through HCVs in Central and South Livingston, as shown in Figure E5-27. No HCV data is available for North Livingston.

There are several existing publicly assisted housing developments within the city. They are as follows:
 Vintage West Apartments, 1005 8th Street (Housing Authority)  Harvest Garden Apartments, 1429 Nut Tree (Housing Authority)  Casitas Del Sol (Self Help Enterprises)
780 Page 463 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-51
 Olive tree Apartments, 1164 -1576 Olive Avenue
 Alicante Garden Apartments, 420 Franci Street
Additionally, there are two affordable housing buildings currently being constructed in Central Livingston totaling 160 units of low-income housing. This will result in a concentration of subsidized housing in Central Livingston.

E5.14 Housing Site Inventory Analysis
This portion of the AFFH analyzes the relation between the housing opportunity sites and AFFHrelated issues. Government Code Section 65583(c)(10) requires the housing opportunity sites to be analyzed with respect to AFFH to ensure that sites designated for low-income households are dispersed equitably throughout the city rather than concentrated in areas of high segregation and poverty or low-resource areas that have historically been underserved, and conversely, that sites designated for above moderate-income households are not concentrated in high-resource areas. By comparing the Site Inventory to the fair housing indicators in this assessment, this section analyzes whether the opportunity sites improve or exacerbate fair housing conditions, patterns of segregation, and access to opportunity.

Housing Sites by TCAC Opportunity Area
For purposes of evaluating fair housing, resource levels designated by TCAC/HCD denote access to economic and educational opportunities such as low-cost transportation, jobs, and high-quality schools and the quality of environmental factors in the area such as proximity to hazards and air quality. TCAC has a composite opportunity score for each census tract. The entirety of the city is designated as a high resource area, as shown in Figure E5-28. All of the housing opportunity sites as well as the planned and approved projects are located in high resource areas.

The City’s Site Inventory can accommodate 773 1,101 housing units on 20 sites. Figure E5-28 shows the housing opportunity sites by TCAC designated resource area. The housing opportunity sites are designated by low-, moderate-, and above moderate-income categories. The appropriateness of sites for various affordability levels is dictated by State housing element law and HCD guidance and includes allowable density, size of site, realistic capacity, existing use(s), and other factors. More information about the sites and income designations is available in Chapter E6, Housing Resources.

All of the housing opportunity sites are in high-resource areas, as all of Livingston is designated a high-resource area.

A portion of the City’s RHNA of 1,097 housing units will be satisfied by planned and approved projects (645 units which fulfills the entirety of the above moderate-income RHNA and a portion of the low -income RHNA). Planned and approved projects will add 160 low-income and 485 above moderate-income units.

Total Units by Resource Area
There are 773 1,101 units planned in areas of high resource: 37 38 percent of those units (392 416 units) will be lower-income units, 327 percent (205 357 units) will be moderate-income units, and 29 30 percent (176 328 units) will be above moderate-income units. Table E5-6 shows the number of proposed housing units by income level in each resource area. 781 Page 464 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-52
Table E5-6 Proposed Housing Units by Resource Area
Income Level Lower-Income Moderate-Income
Above ModerateIncome Total Units
Areas of High Segregation and
Poverty
0 units
(0% of lowerincome units)
0 units
(0% of moderateincome units)
0 units
(0% of above
moderate-income
units)
0 units
(0% of total units)
Low-Resource Areas 0 units
(0% of lowerincome units)
0 units
(0% of moderateincome units)
0 units
(0% of above
moderate-income
units)
0 units
(0% of total units)
Moderate-Resource Areas 0 units
(0% of lowerincome units)
0 units
(0% of moderateincome units)
0 units
(0% of above
moderate-income
units)
0 units
(0% of total units)
High/Highest-Resource Areas 392 416 units
(100% of
lower-income
units)
205 357 units
(100% of
moderateincome units)
176 328 units
(100% of above
moderate-income
units)
773 1,101 units
(100% of total
units)
The planned and approved projects, together with the housing opportunity sites are located in high resource areas. Therefore, overall housing development during the planning period will not contribute to patterns of segregation based on resource designation. On the contrary, the City’s Site Inventory will accommodate lower- and moderate-income housing in areas designated high resource, which will increase the mix of housing at all income levels.

Sites by Income Population
The percentage of LMI households varies throughout Livingston, as shown in Figure E5-29. A portion of South Livingston has the highest percentage of LMI households (86 percent) in the city, and a portion of Central Livingston has the lowest percentage of LMI households (22 percent) in the city.

In areas with the highest percentage of LMI households, the Site Inventory assumes a capacity of 40 40 units appropriate for lower-income households, 178 units for 26 units for moderate-income households, and 152 units for above moderate-income households. Livingston residents will benefit from the mix of households of differing income levels and provide new housing options in areas that need them. Program 10 Housing Preservation and Rehabilitation focuses on the need for housing preservation and housing issues for residents, Program 11 Lower-Income and Special Needs Housing directs the City to collaborate with other agencies to assist in the development of housing for lowerincome residents with an emphasis on Central Livingston, and Program 14 Water and Sewer Service prioritizes the need for public infrastructure improvements specifically water and sewer services.

•
782 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-53
Figure E5-28 Housing Opportunity Sites by TCAC Resource Area (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

II 11 City Boundary
r - -
1 __ 1 Neighborhoods
D Site Inventory
COG Geography TCAC/HCD
Opportunity Map -
Composite Score (HCD,
2023) - Tract
- High Resou rce
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2026
....
1-2
14 3
CJ 15 6
............................
.... .... .... ........ .... .... .... ....
18 ACS 201 7-2021, HCD, PloceWorks, HUD Region 9, American Community Survey, UC Berkley Urban Displacement Project, TCAC 2022, Co/EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA. .... .... ....
0 800 1,600 N
Feet A 22 3 -11::._AFF
yAFF
783 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-54
Figure E5-29 Housing Opportunity Sites by Low- and Moderate-Income Population (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

~ South
C - -
Livingston
L - - I Neighborhoods
D Site Inventory
Low to Moderate Income
Population - Block Group
D < 25%
~ - 25% - 50% 18
- 50%- 75%
- 75% - 100%
0 800 1,600 N
Feet A
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2026
ACS 2017-2021, HCO, PlaceWorks, HUD Region 9, American Community Survey, UC Berkley Urban Displacement Project, TCAC 2022, CalfnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA. 2 1' HE AFF1
" " nt yAF
784 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-55
Sites by Overcrowded Households
Central Livingston and South Livingston have lower rates of overcrowding (less than five percent), while North Livingston has higher rates of overcrowding (5 to 10 percent), as shown in Figure E5-30.

The Site Inventory assumes the areas of Livingston with higher levels of overcrowding could accommodate 60 units (eight percent of the total housing units proposed by the site inventory), including 57 units appropriate for lower-income households (15 percent of the total low-income units) and three units for above moderate-income households (two one percent of the total above moderate-income units). The Site Inventory will not exacerbate overcrowding conditions but will add new housing opportunities in areas that would benefit from development of housing appropriate for a mix of income levels.

Sites by Overpayment by Renters
Overpayment by renters ranges between 20 to 40 percent throughout the entire city of Livingston, as shown in Figure E5-31. North Livingston and the eastern portions of Central and South Livingston have slightly higher rates of overpayment by renters (averaging 39 percent) than the western portion of Central and South Livingston (29 percent). Program 8 Facilitating Affordable Housing Development aims to provide additional affordable housing units and to eliminate the disparity in percent of households in poverty between northern and central/southern Livingston. Additionally, Program 11 Lower-Income and Special Needs Housing provides assistance in finding affordable and subsidized housing options and seeking funds to construct affordable infill housing in Livingston. The Site Inventory assumes that the areas of the city with lower levels of overpayment by renters will accommodate 647 728 units (84 66 percent of the City’s total housing units proposed by the Site Inventory), including 295 526376 units appropriate for lower-income households (75 4590 percent of the total lower-income units), 179 256179 units for moderate-income households (91 50 percent of the total moderate-income units) and 173 250173 units for above moderate-income households (98953 percent of the total above moderate-income units). In areas with higher rates of overpayment by renters, the Site Inventory assumes capacity for 126 373 units (16 33 percent of the housing units proposed by the Site Inventory), including 97 40 units appropriate for lower-income households (25 seven10 percent of the total lower-income units), 178 units for moderate-income households (13 nine50 percent of the total moderate-income units) and 155 units for above moderate-income households (two 47 percent of the total above moderate-income units).

According to the UDP, new market-rate construction in gentrifying areas neither worsens nor eases rates of people moving out of the area.9 It increases rates of people moving to an area across all socio-economic groups, particularly high-socio-economic residents. The UDP recommends subsidized housing construction and housing preservation to help existing residents stay in their neighborhood. Housing preservation and rehabilitation will be implemented in Atwater through Program 10 Housing Preservation and Rehabilitation. The mix of lower, moderate, and above moderate-income housing units in North Livingston, Central Livingston, and South Livingston will provide affordable housing options for existing lower-income residents as well as encourage higherincome households to move into the area. Future residential development on identified opportunity sites will add new rental housing opportunities which may alleviate high costs due to lack of availability.
9 Chapple, Hwang, Jeon, Zhang, Greenberg, and Kumar. New Development for Whom? How New Housing Production Affects Displacement and Replacement in the San Francisco Bay Area. 2022. https://www.urbandisplacement.org/wpcontent/uploads/2022/03/IGS_1_New-Production_Brief_03.01.22.pdf, accessed August, 2023.

-■
785 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-56
Figure E5-30 Housing Opportunity Sites by Overcrowding (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

~l::rn>
[I 1[ City Boundary
r - -
, __ 1 Neighborhoods
D Site Invent ory
Overcrowding {ACS, 2017 -
2021) - Tract
D Less than 5%
D s% -10%
0€Il
Imagery provided by Esri and its ficensors © 2026
Central
Livingston 12--0
14 I 3
CJ 1s--0°
South
Livingston
\
1 &
I
I
I
North
Livingston
~
J ~
____.,,m@\!)!l f!JmiUiliml::rn>
13 □
10 ~t::rn> ,-----,
18 ACS 2017-2021, HCD, PlaceWorks, HUD Region 9, American Community Survey, UC Berkley Urban Displacement Project, TCAC 2022, Ca{EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA. 800
Feet
1,600 N
A 2 ,. 4' _I- _Af i
AH
786 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-57
Figure E5-31 Housing Opportunity Sites by Overpayment by Renters (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

l!lliB\El(,)~ 0€D
[I 1[ City Boundary
r - -
, __ 1 Neighborhoods
D Sit e Invent ory
Overpayment by Renters
(2017-2021) - ACS Tract Level
< 20%
20% -40%
Imagery provided by Esri and its ficensors © 2026
............ , ..................
.................................

Central
Livingston
...... ......
..............................
................................
12 3
CJ
South
Livingston
......
"', ' '
14 \
1 I
North
Livingston
~
I
' ' ' ' '
~~r::Jm:rai:I:fil
' ' ' ' ' ' 13 □
' ' ' ' ' ' '
~ ,-----,
18 ACS 2017-2021, HCD, PlaceWorks, HUD Region 9, American Community Survey, UC Berkley Urban Displacement Project, TCAC 2022, Ca{EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA. ' '
800
Feet
1,600 N
A 2 ,. 4' _I- _Af i
AH
787 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-58
Sites by Areas of Integration and Segregation
The majority of Livingston’s population is comprised of non-white residents, as shown in Figure E5-32. A small portion of North Livingston, west of Olds Avenue and Celia Drive, and north of Walnut Avenue, has a slightly lower percentage of non-white residents than the rest of the city (between 61 and 80 percent). Housing opportunity sites in Livingston accommodate a mix of income levels in areas that already have a diverse mix of ethnic and racial groups. The Site Inventory assumes that all units will be accommodated in areas where greater than 80 percent of residents are non-white, since most areas of the city has greater than 80 percent of residents are non-white.

The Site Inventory will not contribute to segregation based on race/ethnicity or income level.

As discussed in Chapter E3, Housing Needs Assessment, approximately 10 percent of the population has one or more disabilities. For persons with disabilities who live independently or with other family members, independent living can be supported with special housing features, financial support, and in-home supportive services. The location of housing is also an important factor for people with mobility restrictions who rely on public transportation for travel. Although there isn’t a concentration of population with a disability anywhere in Livingston, promoting more growth in areas of the city greater walkability and in proximity to transit stops will allow more residents to live near transit and create housing opportunities for residents who are unable to drive. The City will implement housing Program 1 Regional Collaboration to identify active transportation needs and apply for funding to implement projects to meet the transit needs in the southern areas of the city by the end of the planning period.

Sites by Communities Vulnerable to Displacement
The City of Livingston is considered to have a lower displacement risk, as shown in Figure E5-33. The Site Inventory includes capacity for 392 566416 units appropriate for lower-income households, 205 282357 units for moderate-income households, and 176 253328 units for above moderate-income households. Lower-income units will provide affordable housing options for existing very low and low-income residents, allowing residents to remain in place. To ensure that these housing units are not at risk of conversion, will implement Program 9 Preservation of At-Risk Housing.

Sites by CalEnviroScreen Score
Pollution burden is high throughout Livingston. CalEnviroScreen scores range between 71 and 90 in Livingston, as shown in Figure E5-34. South Livingston and Central Livingston have a slightly higher CalEnviroScreen score (83rd percentile) than North Livingston (80th percentile). The Site Inventory assumes that areas with a CalEnviroScreen score greater than 80 (South and Central Livingston) can accommodate 713 1,098 units, or 92 99 percent of the total site inventory units. This includes 335 566416 lower-income units (10085 percent of the lower-income units), 205 282357 moderateincome units (100 percent of the moderate-income units), and 173 250325 above moderate-income units (92 99 percent of the above moderate-income units). While there are only three percentile points difference between North Livingston and Central and South Livingston, the majority of lowerincome and moderate-income units are located in areas of the city with higher CalEnviroScreen scores, and the majority of above moderate-income units are located in areas with lower CalEnviroScreen scores.
788 Page 471 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-59
Figure E5-32 Housing Opportunity Sites by Total Non-White Population (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

r - -
, __ 1 Neighborhoods
D Site Inventory
Percent of Total Non-White
Population (Racial
Demographics 2020, Block
Group)
- 40% -60%
- 60%- 80%
- 80% -100%
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2026
ACS 2017-2021, HCD, PlaceWorks, HUD Region 9, American Community Survey, UC Berkley Urban Displacement Project, TCAC 2022, Ca/EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA.

Feet
s ,, 2 ... _13
yAF
789 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-60
Figure E5-33 Housing Opportunity Sites by Displacement Risk (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

\'llliJm!01lll'D 0€ll
[1 11 City Boundary
~ ~ ~I Neighborhoods
LJ Site Inventory
Estimated Displacement Risk
- Overall Displacement (UCB,
Urban Displacement Project
2022)
LJ Lower Displa cement
Ri sk
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2026
3 CJ
14 I
1s--0°
South
Livingston
IY!ilEIDlill'l11
i
1 {j
I
I
North
~ i
10 18
ACS 2017-2021, HCD, PloceWorks, HUD Region 9, American Community Survey, UC Berkley Urban Displacement Project, TCAC 2022, Ca/EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA. 800 1,600 N
Feet A 491 iE AF~~
Af ~ 1g~t
790 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-61
Figure E5-34 Housing Opportunity Sites by CalEnviroScreen Percentile Score (City of Livingston) Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2023.

\YJJ'ml:llml/)/iW)
[I II City Bounda ry
~ : :1 Neighborhoods
LJ Site Inventory
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 -
Composite Score Percentile
61- 70%
- 71 - 80%
- 81 -90%
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2026
d 1·2
18 ACS 2017-2021, HCO, PlaceWorks, HUD Region 9, American Community Survey, UC Berkley Urban Displacement Project, TCAC 2022, Ca!EnviroScreen 4.0, 2021, CAL FIRE, OEHHA, FEMA. 0 800 1,600 N
Feet A .4'7 Hf AFF-1
AFFH 1g
791 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-62
Sites Analysis Summary Data
Table E5-7 summarizes the Site Inventory by development priority area, sites, number of units by income level, and census tract characteristics. All of the identified housing sites are located in highresource areas with LMI households that range from 25 to 50 percent, a high percentage of nonwhite residents, a low displacement risk, and incomes greater than the countywide average. The majority of the units are located in areas with lower levels of overcrowding and overpayment by renters, and a slight majority of units are located in areas of the city with higher CalEnviroScreen score, including most lower-income and moderate-income units. 792 Page 475 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-63
Table E5-7 Site Inventory by Census Tract Characteristics Census Tract Number
Number of Existing
Households
Site Inventory Capacity (Units) AFFH Indicators
LowerIncome ModerateIncome
Above
ModerateIncome
Percent
Non-White
Median
Household
Income
Percent LMI
Households
TCAC
Opportunity Area
CalEnviroScreen
Percentile
Percent
Overpayment by
Renters
Percent
Overcrowded
Households
Displacement
Sensitivity
North Livingston
06047000301 1,238 570 0 3 80.1% $62,159 53% High Resource 79.5% 38.9% 9.8% Lower Displacement Risk
South Livingston
06047000305 1,429 412376 170247322 171248323 83.8% $69,.522 86% High Resource 83.3% 29.8% 2.2% Lower Displacement Risk
Central Livingston
06047000305 1,429 114 9 2 83.8% $69,522 38% High Resource 83.3% 29.8% 2.2% Lower Displacement Risk
06047000306 1,005 40 26 0 86.0% $69,097 22% High Resource 83.3% 39.2% 2.6% Lower Displacement Risk
Total 566416 205282357 176253328
Source: California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC)/California Housing and Community Development (HCD), Opportunity Maps (2020); U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Data (2017-2021) 793 Page 476 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-64
This page intentionally left blank.
794 Page 477 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-65
E5.15 Contributing Factors and Meaningful Actions
AB 686 requires the identification and prioritization of contributing factors to fair housing issues based on all the previously required analysis (outreach, fair housing assessment, site inventory). This section lists contributing factors that create, perpetuate, or increase the severity of one or more fair housing issues identified in community outreach and the analysis in this document. Contributing factors were prioritized based on their impact on fair housing issues as well as the City’s ability to address the contributing factors. Chapter E7 provides meaningful actions the City will undertake to affirmatively further fair housing for special needs, racial/ethnic minorities, and low-income residents.

Enforcement and Outreach
The City’s website has limited information on fair housing and no information on fair housing rights and responsibilities for tenants and landlords. In addition, housing information on the City’s website is limited to English. Contributing factors to fair housing enforcement and outreach in Livingston include:
 Language Barriers (Priority Level – High): Eighty-three percent of the population of Livingston speaks a language other than English. Community Development information on the City’s website is provided only in English.
 Lack of local public or private fair housing outreach and enforcement (Medium): The City does not provide its own fair housing outreach or enforcement and does not provide information on partnering agencies or fair housing organizations to provide assistance to tenants and landlords.  Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations on the City’s website (Medium).  Lack of local fair housing laws to support strong enforcement (Medium).  Lack of sufficient distribution of fair housing information: The City’s website does not provide housing information on the City’s website (High).
 Lack of fair housing testing (Low).
 Limited participation in fair housing outreach (Medium).  Rationale: Resources to educate, investigate, and enforce fair housing complaints are key to ensuring fair housing protections are accessible and effective for protected classes. In addition, proactive interventions to fair housing issues prevent displacement.

Segregation and Integration Patterns and Trends
Livingston is a racially/ethnically diverse city with a high percentage of LMI residents and low median household incomes. When it comes to segregation and integration, patterns and trends are generally consistent across the city due to the city’s small size and population. Categories like female single-parent households, LMI residents, or residents living below the poverty line are not concentrated within a particular area of the city. However, multi-family residential zones are concentrated in the eastern portion of Central Livingston where there is a higher percentage of poverty, overpayment by homeowners, and public housing. Contributing factors to segregation and integration patterns and trends in Livingston include:
 Location and type of affordable housing (Priority Level – High): Public housing is clustered in the eastern part of Central Livingston. This area also has a high percentage of LMI residents and the lowest median income in the city.
795 Page 478 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-66
 Displacement of residents due to economic pressures (Medium): Home values and rents have increased significantly in Livingston over the past decade. Between 2016 and 2021, home value increased from $173,100 to $242,400 (40 percent increase) and median rent increased from $933 to $1,145 (23 percent increase). In addition, about 38 percent of all households are cost burdened, meaning many households are paying too much for housing. While the UDP rates the City as having a low risk of displacement, these trends indicate cost burdened and low-income households may be at risk of displacement if the cost of housing continues to rise.  Rationale: Efforts to deconcentrate segregation should focus on two key areas: increasing affordable housing in both high-poverty and low-poverty neighborhoods to facilitate mobility and implementing measures to incentivize affordable housing development and expand opportunities in areas with higher resources.

Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty
Livingston is predominantly Hispanic/Latino (over 80 percent of the population), and there are no designated areas of high segregation and poverty. However, the census tract shared by Central and South Livingston has a higher percental of residents living below the poverty line than other areas in the city.

Contributing factors to racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty in Livingston include:
 Lack of community revitalization strategies (Medium): Livingston’s older housing stock may indicate that a significant number of housing units are in need of repair.  Age of housing stock (Medium): Older housing is concentrated in the eastern part of Central Livingston, while the western part of South Livingston consists almost entirely of newer housing developments.
 Land use and zoning laws (Low): Most of Livingston is zoned for single-family residential or commercial uses with medium- and high-density residential zoning concentrated in the eastern portion of Central Livingston.
 Location and type of affordable housing to accommodate large households (High): Affordable housing units are concentrated in the eastern portion of Central Livingston where there is high overpayment by homeowners.
 Rationale: Efforts to deconcentrate areas with a concentration of minorities and poverty should focus on two key areas: increasing affordable housing in both high-poverty and low-poverty neighborhoods to facilitate mobility and implementing measures to incentivize affordable housing development and expand opportunities in areas with higher resources.

Disproportionate Housing Needs
Cost burden among renters is moderate throughout most of the city. Cost burden among homeowners is highest in the eastern portion of Central and South Livingston. Livingston has a high percentage of large households, approximately 36 percent of all households in the city.

Overcrowding is highest in North Livingston. In addition to overcrowding and the cost burden throughout the city, the eastern portion of Central and South Livingston has an older housing stock than other areas of the city. Approximately 57 percent of housing units in the eastern portion of Central and South Livingston are over 30 years old and 34 percent are over 50 years old. However, this area has the highest poverty rate, indicating that homeowners may not be able afford to afford to pay for repair and maintenance on their homes. Contributing factors to disproportionate housing needs in Livingston include:
796 Page 479 of 912
City of Livingston
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
2024-2032 Housing Element E5-67
 Prevalence of cost burden (Priority Level – Medium): Home values and rent has increased significantly in Livingston over the past decade, which causes increased cost burden among homeowners and renters. According to 2015-2019 CHAS data, approximately 38 percent of all households in Livingston are cost burdened.
 Lack of affordable housing in a range of sizes (High): The vast majority of the housing stock (86 percent) is made up of detached single-family homes, which may not be affordable to lowerincome households. Thirty percent of all housing units contain four or more bedrooms which can accommodate large families without overcrowding.
 Cost of housing maintenance and repairs (Low): Livingston’s older housing stock may indicate that a significant number of housing units are in need of repair.  Homeless Services (Low): Lack of services and resources available locally for unhoused residents or households at risk of becoming homeless.
 Rationale: The lack of affordable housing options can restrict individuals and families to a limited number of choices, forcing them to settle for substandard housing or pay a disproportionate amount of their income on rent. This can perpetuate cycles of poverty and limit upward mobility.

Disparities in Access to Opportunities
All of Livingston is considered high resource; however, the entire city is identified as a disadvantaged community. In addition, the city has low economic and environmental opportunity scores. Central and South Livingston has a high pollution burden from ozone, particulate matter, and pesticide use, and the lowest education and economic opportunity scores.

Contributing factors to disparities in access to opportunities in Livingston include:
 The availability, type, frequency, and reliability of public transportation (Priority Level – Medium): There are only two fixed route public transit options in the city.  Lack of walkability (Low): Central Livingston is the most walkable, while other areas of the city have below average walkability.
 Land use and zoning patterns (Medium): Types of zoning that accommodate land uses with employment opportunities, such as industrial and commercial, are concentrated in the center of the city and in North Livingston. All land zoned medium and high density residential are also concentrated in these areas. The remainder of the city is comprised of low-density residential zoning.
 High pollution burden (Medium): All of Livingston is ranked between the 71 and 80th percentile for pollution burden by CalEnviroScreen.
 Rationale: Improving economic opportunities requires a range of policies designed to create jobs, develop the workforce, create housing closer to jobs and ensure that workers can get to jobs. More jobs and more affordable housing give residents more housing choices (type of housing and mobility).
797 Page 480 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E5-68
E5.16 Meaningful Actions to Address Fair Housing Issues The findings of this analysis were used to develop meaningful actions, metrics and milestones that promote inclusive communities, increase housing opportunities, and address racial/ethnic and economic disparities in the city. The contributing factors were prioritized to better formulate policies and programs and carry out meaningful actions to further fair housing. Meaningful actions to address fair housing issues are included in the housing programs located in Chapter E7, Housing Plan. 798 Page 481 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-1
E6 Housing Resources and Site Inventory
Analysis
This section documents the methodology and results of the Site Inventory analysis conducted to demonstrate the City of Livingston’s ability to meet its share of the 6th cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). This section also discusses infrastructure, services, and financial and administrative resources that are available for the development, rehabilitation, and preservation of housing in the City of Livingston. Background information on regional development trends and analysis are included in Chapter 4, Regional Housing Resources.

The Site Inventory was developed through the analysis of development trends, the identification of available land, and community input. Community engagement events, including a community workshop held in Livingston on August 29, 2023, influenced the selection of opportunity sites.

E6.1 Regional Housing Needs Allocation
This Housing Element covers the planning period of January 2024 through January 2032 (also referred to as the 6th cycle). The Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG), as the metropolitan planning organization for the Merced County region, is responsible for preparing the RHNA for the region based on recent growth trends, income distribution, and capacity for future growth. This methodology must align with State objectives, including but not limited to:
 Promoting infill, equity, and environmental protection  Ensuring jobs-housing balance
 Affirmatively furthering fair housing
Livingston must identify adequate land with appropriate zoning and development standards to accommodate its assigned share of the region’s housing need. Livingston’s share of the RHNA is 1,097 units, which is distributed among five income categories, as shown in Table E6-1.

Table E6-1 Livingston 2024-2032 RHNA
Income Category (Percent of Merced
County Area Median Income [AMI]) Number of Units Percent of Total Units Extremely Low (< 30% of AMI)* 137 12.5%
Very Low (30 to 50% of AMI) 174 15.9%
Low (51 to 80% of AMI) 213 19.4%
Moderate (81% to 120% of AMI) 169 15.4%
Above Moderate (> 120% of AMI) 404 36.8%
Total 1,097 100%
*The RHNA does not project the need for extremely low-income units, but pursuant to Government Code (GC) Section 65583(a), the City must project its extremely low-income housing needs based on Census income distribution or assume 50 percent of the very lowincome units required by the RHNA as extremely low-income units. The City’s very low-income requirement is 311 units. The number of extremely low-income units that the City must plan for shown here was projected using Census data. According to the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), data developed by HUD, 25.5 percent of households in the city earned less than 50 percent of the AMI. Among these households, 44.0 percent earned incomes below 30 percent (extremely low). Therefore, the City’s RHNA allocation of 311 very low-income units was distributed as 137 extremely low (44 percent of the 311 very low-income units required by the RHNA) and 174 very low-income units. However, for purposes of identifying adequate sites for the RHNA allocation, State law does not mandate the separate accounting for the extremely low-income category.

Source: MCAG, 2022. Final Regional Housing Needs Plan.
799 Page 482 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-2
E6.2 Meeting the RHNA
Each jurisdiction must identify adequate land with appropriate zoning and development standards to fulfill its share of the RHNA. Jurisdictions can use planned and/or approved projects, estimated accessory dwelling unit (ADU) production, and vacant and/or underutilized sites to accommodate the RHNA. In some cases, rezoning must occur to ready sites for future residential development.

Once the City has demonstrated in the Housing Element that it has the development capacity to accommodate the RHNA, it has two implementation-related obligations during the planning period:

Maintain a “no net loss” policy of its residential development capacity over the housing element planning period, meaning that sites listed in the adopted Housing Element land inventory may not be down-zoned to a lower-density residential zone or rezoned to a nonresidential zone, unless the City up-zones or rezones alternative sites prior to the density reduction or rezone on the inventoried site.

Continue to allocate available funding resources to and facilitate the development of affordable housing.

E6.2.1 RHNA Credits
The City may use units in approved and/or permitted residential developments which will be completed within the planning period, and anticipated ADU production, as credit towards fulfillment of its RHNA.

Planned and Approved Projects
Residential developments approved and permitted, but not yet built (also called “pipeline projects”) can be credited towards the City’s RHNA provided it can be demonstrated that the units can be built by the end of the 6th cycle planning period. Similarly, units that are under construction but have not yet received a building permit as of June 30, 2023, can also be credited towards the RHNA.

Affordability (the income category in which the units are counted) is based on the actual or projected sale prices, rent levels, or other mechanisms establishing affordability of the units within the project. Pipeline projects that can count toward the City’s 6th cycle RHNA are listed in Table E6-2 and the locations of these projects are shown on Figure E6-1. For the purpose of this Housing Element, the city is divided into three neighborhoods: North Livingston, Central Livingston, and South Livingston.

These pipeline projects are generally concentrated in Central Livingston with one project located in South Livingston. Of the five pipeline projects, three of them (Winton Parkway and B Street, Tierrasanta Villas Apartments, and The Villages) include deed-restricted units affordable to very lowand low-income households. The affordability mechanisms of these projects are as follows:
 Winton Parkway and B Street: Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Funds  Tierrasanta Villas Apartments: Low-income housing tax credits Once building permits are issued, construction depends on the developer and the size of the project, which is outside of the City’s control. Building permits are typically reviewed and approved within 14 business days for first plan check review. The City has provisions that allow time extensions for land use entitlements for projects that can demonstrate substantive efforts to progress the development of the project. As a result, approvals rarely result in expired entitlements.

1. 2.
800 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-3
Table E6-2 Pipeline Projects
Map
ID Project Name
Assessor’s
Parcel Number
(APN)1
Very
LowIncome
Units
LowIncome
Units
ModerateIncome
Units
Above
Moderate
- Income
Units
Total
Units
Percent of
Maximum
Density
Achieved Status
Estimated
Completion
Date
1 Singh Triplex
Townhomes
24123003 0 0 0 3 3 60% Entitlement approved and building permits issued.

Remaining steps: Project
construction and receipt of
certificates of occupancy
End of 2026
2 Winton
Parkway and
B Street
022010021,
022010023
0 80 0 0 80 70% Subject to By-Right under AB 2011.

Currently under construction.

Remaining steps: Completion of
construction and receipt of
certificates of occupancy
2027
3 Saini Duplex 024183008, 009 0 0 0 2 2 67% Currently under construction.

Remaining steps: Completion of
construction and receipt of
certificates of occupancy.

End of 2025
4 Tierrasanta
Villas Apts.
22010026 0 80 0 0 80 70% Currently under construction.

Remaining steps: Completion of
construction and receipt of
certificates of occupancy
End of 2025
5 The Villages 047280020, 029 0 0 0 480 480 96% Building permits to be submitted.

Construction on irrigation
improvements to begin in winter
2025.

Remaining steps: Building permit
submission, project construction
and receipt of certificates of
occupancy
2027
Total 0 160 0 485 645
1An assessor's parcel number is a series of digits used to identify property. Each parcel is assigned an APN that corresponds to a location on a page in a book of maps maintained by the County Assessor's Office.
801 Page 484 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-4
Figure E6-1 Pipeline Projects

~
II I) City Boundary
, - - -, Neighborhoods ·- - - ..
0 Pipeline Projects
d Its I/censors C) 2025. Imagery provided by _Es: :n County of Merced, 2023. Additional data provide Y I
8 Central
Livingston
0€ll
0 North
Livingston
0 South
Livingston
I
8 ~
2 500 N
. A L---Fe«;;e,tt
0 1,250
802 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-5
Based on the status of these projects and given the City’s past trends of project approvals, all units are expected to receive Certificates of Occupancy during the 2024-2032 planning period. There are no known barriers that would impede the completion of these projects. The City will continue to monitor these projects through Program 2 and identify alternative sites if necessary.

Accessory Dwelling Units
Based on an analysis of ADU production in Livingston over the last five years (2018 through 2022), ADU production that will occur during the 6th housing cycle has been estimated and assumed against the City’s RHNA obligation.

The City issued an average of one ADU building permit per year during the last six years.

Extrapolated over the 2024-2032 Housing Element planning period, the City can assume the production of eight ADUs. While it is likely that some ADUs may be affordable to lower- or moderate-income households, as it has been reported that some ADUs permitted in previous years have been in the very low- and low-income categories and without deed restrictions, due to the relatively small sample size of permitted ADUs, all anticipated ADUs were conservatively assigned to the above moderate-income category. This would help preserve adequate sites available in the Site Inventory available to lower-income households if ADUs were to be developed for the abovemoderate income category. Table E6-3 shows the recent history of ADU permit issuance.

Table E6-3 Accessory Dwelling Unit Production, City of Livingston Reporting Year ADU Building Permits Issued
2018 0
2019 2
2020 0
2021 0
2022 0
2023 4
Total 6
Annual Average 1
E6.3 Summary of RHNA Credits
The City can satisfy approximately 48 59 percent of its RHNA requirement with planned and approved units and projected ADU development. To achieve the remaining RHNA, the City must demonstrate the availability of sites with appropriate zoning and development standards that allow and encourage the development of 533 units. This unit count is broken down by household income level. As shown on Table E6-4, Livingston has a remaining RHNA of 311 units affordable to very lowincome households, 53 units affordable to low-income households, and 169 units affordable to moderate-income households.
803 Page 486 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-6
Table E6-4 Remaining Share of RHNA
Affordability Category
(Percent of AMI)
RHNA
Allocation
Units Pending or Approved
or under Construction Estimated ADUs Remaining RHNA
Very-Low 311 0 0 311
Low 213 160 0 53
Moderate 169 0 0 169
Above Moderate 404 485 8 0
Total 1,097 645 8 533
E6.4 Methodology
E6.4.1 Suitable Sites for Affordable Housing
State law requires that jurisdictions demonstrate in the Housing Element that the land inventory is adequate to accommodate that jurisdiction’s share of the regional growth. State law has established “default” density standards for the purpose of estimating potential units by income range. In a suburban jurisdiction, a density standard of 20 or more units per acre (primarily for higher density multi-family developments) would facilitate the development of housing in the low- and very lowincome category.

In addition to default density standards, the California Legislature established size requirements for parcels intended to support the development of lower-income units. Government Code Section 65583.2 establishes that sites between 0.5 and 10 acres in size which are zoned for residential development at greater than 20 units per acre are suitable for lower-income projects. Very small parcels, even when zoned for high densities, may not facilitate the scale of development required to access competitive funding resources. Conversely, typically lower-resource affordable housing developers may be unable to finance the scale of project necessitated by very large parcels. No standalone parcels smaller than 0.5 acres are assumed to accommodate lower-income units. The City assumed no more than 150 lower-income units on any individual site.

E6.5 Nonvacant Sites
Nonvacant sites included on the Site Inventory have comparable predevelopment characteristics to developed residential projects in the region. As discussed in Chapter 4, Regional Housing Resources, residential development in Merced County has occurred primarily on vacant sites and sites occupied by agriculture.

The Housing Element must analyze the extent to which existing uses may impede additional residential development. The Site Inventory accommodates approximately 69 71 percent of its lower-income RHNA and 100 percent of its moderate- and above moderate-income RHNA on vacant sites. As a result of insufficient available vacant land, the City identified the remaining 31 29 percent of the lower-income RHNA on sites currently occupied partially by nonvacant uses.

E6.5.1 Adequacy of Nonvacant Sites
Of the 20 sites identified in the Site Inventory, 18 are vacant and two are partially nonvacant. The nonvacant sites existing use is single-family residential on large properties with vacant land. All identified nonvacant sites were selected for their redevelopment potential and higher probability of 804 Page 487 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-7
turnover, as shown in Table E6-5. The Site Inventory only includes the vacant portions of the sites and does not assume demolition of the current properties.

Table E6-5 Representative Nonvacant Sites
Site Address Description
Size
(acres)
Capacity
(units) Aerial Image
1154 E Peach Ave This 3-acre parcel is currently
occupied by one single family
home and is zoned low-density
residential. Through rezoning to
high density residential, the site
could accommodate 65 dwelling
units.

2.00 40
1018 E Peach Ave This 6.68-acre parcel is currently
occupied by one single family
home and is zoned low-density
residential. Through rezoning to
high density residential, the site
could accommodate 145 dwelling
units.

6.00 121
E6.6 Development Trends
As discussed in detail in Chapter 4, Regional Housing Resources, the development characteristics in the region indicate that most of the recently developed residential projects, or projects that are planned to be developed, are on vacant land. Out of the 17 projects identified, 13 are single-family developments, and four are multi-family developments. Approximately 12 percent of these projects include affordable units.

The densities of these projects range from 1.64 to 51.34 dwelling units per acre due to the various zoning requirements in each jurisdiction. The average density of projects with affordable units is approximately 37 dwelling units per acre, and these projects typically achieved a density of 135 percent of the maximum density allowed by the zoning district.

Projects located in low-, medium-, and high-density residential zones typically achieved a density of 67, 60, and 84 percent, respectively, of the maximum density allowed by the zoning district. Overall average achieved density is 8.8 dwelling units per acre, which is low. This can be attributed to the predominance of single-family residential developments in the region.

Of the projects discussed in Chapter 3, Regional Housing Resources, two projects used to determine regional development trends are in Livingston: Manzanita and Sundance Village. Each project consists of market rate single-family units. These projects have an average density of approximately four units per acre with an average achieved density of 58 percent of the maximum density allowed by the zoning district, as shown in Table E6-6.
805 Page 488 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-8
Table E6-6 Livingston Development Trends
Project Name
Total
Units Acreage Density Zoning District
Zoning District
Density
(du/ac)
Number
of Units
Allowed
Percent
Density
Achieved
Manzanita 213 51.33 4.15 Single-Family
(low density)

7.5 384.98 55%
Sundance Village 97 21.63 4.48 Single-Family
(low density)

7.5 162.23 60%
Livingston Average 4.32 58%
Regional Average 8.80 70%
E6.6.1 Realistic Development Capacity
To create a realistic development assumption, the City assumes that the development capacity on each site will be less than the full development capacity allowed by the parcel's zoning or land use designation. Sites do not always develop to their full capacity potential due to factors such as sitespecific conditions and development standards such as open space or parking requirements. To determine a realistic development achievement on the sites in the inventory, the City reviewed pipeline and recently developed projects in the region. On average, the pipeline projects in Livingston (Table E6-2) achieved an average density of 63 percent of the maximum density allowed on the site based on the site’s zoning and development standards. As discussed in Chapter 4, Regional Housing Resources, the average achieved density for projects collectively in the region is 70 percent. Based on the local and regional trends, the City assumes the realistic capacity of each site would be 70 percent of the maximum allowable density in the R-2 and R-3 zones and 50 percent of the maximum density in the DTC zone. The DTC zone is a mixed-use zone, so the realistic capacity of residential development on those sites accounts for some portion of the development being occupied by non-residential uses.

The Site Inventory includes parcels in three zoning districts with varying allowable densities and development standards. The City’s Zoning Code classifies each site into the following zones:
 Medium Density Residential (R-2): This district allows for multi-family residential uses at a maximum residential density of 11.9 dwelling units per acre.  High Density Residential (R-3): This district allows for multi-family residential uses at a maximum residential density of 29 dwelling units per acre.
 Downtown Commercial (DTC): This district allows for multi-family residential uses at a maximum residential density of 29 dwelling units per acre.

The distribution of income levels among sites was determined by zone, district, and parcel size. It is typical for units in single-family zones to be affordable only to above moderate-income households.

Within multi-family zones that have a higher density, units are more likely to be affordable to lowerand moderate-income units.

Table E6-7 details the realistic capacity of available sites by zoning district. 806 Page 489 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-9
Table E6-7 Realistic Capacity of Sites by Zoning District Zoning District
Total
Acreage
Maximum
Density
Realistic
Density
LowerIncome
Units
ModerateIncome
Units
Above
ModerateIncome Units Total
Units
R-2 0.68 11.9 8.33 0 0 5 5
R-3 3.04 29 20.30 40 22 0 62
DTC 0.88 29 14.5 0 13 0 13
Total 4.59 40 35 5 80
E6.6.2 Likelihood of 100 Percent Nonresidential Uses on Sites The City identified 13 sites in the DTC zone, which allows for 100 percent nonresidential uses. In accordance with State law, the housing element must consider the likelihood of nonresidential development on sites that allow for nonresidential uses. To determine likelihood, the City reviewed development that has occurred in nonresidential zones within the last five years. During this time period, there have not been any developments constructed in the DTC zone. Elsewhere in the San Joaquin Valley, residential uses occurred on approximately 18 percent of projects in mixed-use zones in the City of Visalia between 2019 and 2022. During the 5th cycle in Fresno County, the City of Reedley saw development on 16 mixed-use sites included in their Site Inventory. Of these sites, three were developed with residential use. As a result, regional trends indicate that residential uses occur in nonresidential zones on less than one quarter of projects.

The Site Inventory accounts for the likelihood of nonresidential uses being developed in zones that allow both residential and nonresidential uses by providing an adequate buffer of units in all income categories. If all of the sites in the DTC zone were developed with 100 percent nonresidential uses, the Site Inventory would still maintain a 14 percent buffer of moderate-income units. No lower- or above moderate-income units are considered on DTC sites. Additionally, the inventory conservatively assumes a realistic allowable density of 14.5 dwelling units per acre in the DTC zone, 50 percent of the maximum allowable density of 29 units per acre.

Table E6-8 shows regional residential projects within the last five years (i.e. 2019 through 2024) that have occurred in zones that allow for 100 percent nonresidential uses. Residential projects have generally averaged much higher densities (26 units per acre) than what is assumed on in the Site Inventory (7.5 - 10.5 units per acre). Residential projects in the region also generally achieved nearly 100 percent of their maximum allowable capacity for each zone. Projects that are similar in size, density, and affordability to the identified sites include SPR20-006, and Corvina Duplexes. The majority of the other projects achieve higher densities on parcels of similar or larger sizes. Given these trends, the City believes that the conservative assumptions on DTC zoned sites account for the lower frequency of residential projects developing regionally in mixed-use zones. 807 Page 490 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-10
Table E6-8 Residential Projects in Zones that allow 100 percent Nonresidential Uses Jurisdiction Project Name Acres Total Units
Dwelling Units
per Acre
Percent of
Max
Capacity
Income
Category
Merced County
Merced City Childs Court
Apartments

4.01 119 29.68 No Max
Density
Very Low,
Low
Merced City 3136 E Gerard Ave 9.44 200 21.19 No Max
Density
Above
Moderate
Merced City Andrade Co. 1.33 24 18.05 No Max
Density
Above
Moderate
Merced County SPR20-006 0.18 8 44.44 Low
Livingston Tierrasanta Villas 3.98 80 20.10 No Max
Density
Very Low,
Low
Tulare County
Visalia Corvina Duplexes 0.5 8 16.00 Low
Visalia Lofts at Fort Visalia 1.46 80 54.79 No Max
Density
Very Low,
Low
Visalia Duplex at Murray &
Encina

0.19 2 10.53 No Max
Density
Low
Visalia Rancho Colegio
Affordable Housing

3.47 80 23.05 Very Low,
Low
Visalia Camino Del Rio 3.12 94 30.13 Very Low
Visalia Senior Housing at N
Highland

2.06 70 33.98 Very Low
Visalia Caldwell/Lovers
Apartments

11.41 342 29.97 Very Low,
Low
Visalia Demaree/Houston
Apartments

7.62 243 31.89 Very Low,
Low
Visalia Lovers Tulare
Apartments

2.78 32 11.51 No Max
Density
Low
Visalia Cameron Creek
Garden Units

4.81 30 6.24 Moderate
Visalia S Stonebrook St &
W Cameron Ave

11.77 276 23.45 Moderate
Fresno County
Reedley Paseo 55 1.76 55 31.25 Moderate
Reedley Reedley I Mixed Use 4.25 80 18.82 Low
Reedley Kashian Mixed Use:

Workforce Housing

2.11 70 33.18 Extremely
Low
Kingsburg Stone Plaza Mixed
Use Project

0.28 10 35.71 Above
Moderate
Average 3.82 95.15 26.20
808 Page 491 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-11
Although residential development is not the prevailing trend in mixed-use zones within the region, the City anticipates that the selected sites have high potential of residential development. All sites included in the DTC zone are vacant and do not have existing uses that would impede development.

Additionally, sites are generally located along the city's main arterials and are located in a pedestrian friendly environment with a close proximity to goods, services, and transportation.

Under Program 8, the City commits to expand affordable housing options across all income categories through contacting non-profit and private developers to facilitate housing production and pursue funding opportunities. The Site Inventory considers potential nonresidential development in the DTC zone by assuming conservative realistic densities compared to past and current trends and maintaining an adequate buffer of units for all RHNA income categories. The City will continue to evaluate all future mixed-use development to determine how often development has a residential component and make adjustments, as necessary, to maintain adequate sites throughout the planning period (Program 2, Adequate Sites for RHNA and Monitoring of No Net Loss).

E6.7 Large Sites for Affordable Units
The Site Inventory identifies one two large vacant sites (larger than 10 acres) that could offer affordable housing opportunities for lower- and moderate-income households. This These sites is are currently zoned for low density residential and is are proposed to be rezoned to R-3 to facilitate high density residential development. As discussed in Chapter 4, Regional Housing Resources, Merced County shows strong trends of residential development on large sites. However, these trends support market-rate development, while affordable units have typically occurred on smaller parcels. As a result, the City did not assume any lower-income units on theise sites.

The large parcels is are shown on Table E6-9. The City allocated approximately eight 20 acres of this site to the lower- and moderate-income category and allocated the remaining capacity to the above moderate-income category. The City assumes a realistic capacity of 20 units per acre. These sites would likely need to be subdivided into appropriate sizes to accommodate development similar to typical state and federally funded developments (e.g., 50 to 150 units). These sites assume a mix of incomes to support a variety of housing types.

Table E6-9 Large Sites with Affordable Units
Address APN Zone Acres Existing Use Lower-Income
ModerateIncome
Above
Moderate
-Income
Total
Units
Peach Ave &
Winton
Parkway
022050009 R-3 16.80 Vacant 0 170 171 341
12511 Peach
Avenue
047280003 R-3 15.00 Vacant 1500 77152 77152 304
To facilitate and incentivize affordability units these large sites, the City will implement Program 2 through the following actions:
 Provide technical assistance, incentives, and strategies as appropriate to facilitate development of affordable housing, including parceling at appropriate sizes or other site planning tools such as clustered development, allowing flexibility for the transferring of densities within the property.
809 Page 492 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-12
 Promote the potential subdivision of large sites into multiple parcels for future development through technical assistance, incentives, and strategies during the development phases and when applications are submitted the City for the identified parcels.  Annually meet with property owners and developers to encourage the development of mixed income housing with a mix of unit sizes, types, and prices.  Promote the development of large sites at the densities and affordability levels identified within the Housing Element.
 Allow the development in phases within 8 years of the Housing Element planning period.  Offer expedited processing and fee deferrals, reductions, or waivers for affordable units in development on large sites identified in the Site Inventory.

E6.7.1 Subdivision Process for Large Sites
Site plan and design review projects are referred to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation once the application is deemed complete by the City Staff. Livingstons’s site plan and design review process consists of review by the City Staff, evaluating the project’s consistency with the General Plan, applicable specific plans, design standards, and the Zoning Ordinance. City Staff issues an advisory recommendation to the Planning Commission and recommended conditions to be imposed on the project. The project is presented to the Planning Commission as a public hearing item for evaluation for project consistency which all applicable standards, compatibility with existing and proposed development in the project vicinity, and design compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. The Planning Commission, based on the information presented and public testimony received, makes a recommendation to City Council to either approve or deny the project. The project is then presented to City Council as a public hearing item for evaluation and determination. Site plan review takes an average of five to seven months after the application is deemed complete, or longer if environmental review is required.

Program 2 will promote and incentivize the subdivision of large sites to create parcels at appropriate sizes to support affordable housing projects. Incentives would potentially include, expedited approval of lot splits or creation of new parcels; waiving of the public hearing requirement related to parcel maps; waiving of the public hearing requirement related to approval of large multi-family uses (provided the project is affordable by deed-restriction), additional density bonus, lot coverage, or allowable height; .and fee waivers, reductions, or deferral. By the end of 2027, if development of housing is not feasible on these large sites, within 6 months (by July 2028) the City will identify additional incentives and planning tools or alternative strategies if necessary to ensure adequate capacity for the RHNA.

E6.8 Site Inventory
The Site Inventory lists all sites or parcels that are intended to accommodate residential development in fulfillment of Livingston’s RHNA. The inventory is broken up into three distinct geographic areas of the city:
 North Livingston
 Central Livingston
 South Livingston
810 Page 493 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-13
The sites identified in the inventory are listed in Table E6-7 and Table E6-10. The following items are included for each site in the column heading order from left to right:
 Map Identification number (a unique reference number assigned by the city to reference the parcel on each map)
 Address or nearest cross street
 APN (Government Code Section 65583.2(b)1))
 Size in acres (Government Code Section 65583.2(b)(2))  General Plan land use designation (Government Code Section 65583.2(b)(2))  Zoning designation (Government Code Section 65583.2(b)(2))  Description of existing uses (Government Code Section 65583.2(b)(3))  Minimum allowable density by zone
 Maximum allowable density by zone
 Inventoried income level (units appropriate for lower-, moderate-, above moderate-income households) (Government Code Section 65583.2(c))
 Total number of units realistically assumed on the site  Opportunity category as designated by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC)1 The current zoning of the selected sites is shown geographically in Figure E6-2 and the proposed zoning of the selected sites is shown in Figure E6-3. There are no known barriers outside of financing that would preclude development of these parcels in the planning period.

These sites are also assessed by TCAC Opportunity area which range from areas of High Segregation and Poverty to the Highest Resource areas. The more positive economic, educational, and health outcomes for low-income families, particularly long-term outcomes for children, the higher the score. The scores in each neighborhood are listed below and a breakdown of each opportunity category is discussed in Chapter E5, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.

North Livingston
North Livingston is bounded by city boundaries to the north, east, and west, and the Union Pacific Railroad to the south. This area primarily consists of industrial, commercial, and low-density zones.

North Livingston is in an area of minimal flood hazard.2 This neighborhood can accommodate one site with an assumed capacity of three above moderate-income units. The site identified in this area is currently vacant and has a TCAC designation of High Resource. Through rezoning one site from medium-density to high-density residential, North Livingston can accommodate an additional 57 lower-income units. Overall, this totals to 57 lower-income units and three above moderate-income units in this neighborhood.

Central Livingston
Central Livingston is bounded by the Union Pacific Railroad to the northeast, F Street to the south, and city boundaries to the west. This neighborhood primarily consists of highway service 1 Resource levels designated by TCAC/HCD denote access to economic and educational opportunities such as low-cost transportation, jobs, and high-quality schools and the quality of environmental factors in the area such as proximity to hazards and air quality. TCAC has a composite opportunity score for each census tract. Source: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity/2023/methodology.pdf 2 The city has the Flood Hazard designation of “X”. Zone X is the area determined to be outside the 500-year flood and protected by levee from 100- year flood.

I I
t
L...-,
I
811 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-14
commercial, downtown commercial, and medium- and high-density residential zones. Central Livingston is in an area of minimal flood hazard. An application for a project at Winton Parkway and B Street for 80 low-income units was submitted by Self-Help Enterprise and is subject to By-Right under AB 2011. Central Livingston can accommodate 13 sites with an assumed capacity of 40 lowerincome units, 34 moderate-income units, and two above moderate-income units. All sites are currently vacant and have a TCAC designation of Highest or Moderate Resource. Through rezoning one site from low-density to high-density residential, Central Livingston can accommodate an additional 114 lower-income units. Overall, this totals to 154 low-income units, 35 moderateincome units, and two above moderate-income units in this neighborhood.

South Livingston
South Livingston is bounded by F Street to the north, and city boundaries to the south, east, and west. This neighborhood primarily consists of low-density residential and public/quasi-public facility zones. South Livingston is in an area of minimal flood hazard. Through rezoning four five sites from low-density residential and Highway Service Commercial to high-density residential, South Livingston can accommodate a total of 181 412262 lower-income units 170 247322 moderateincome units, 171 248323 above moderate-income units. 812 Page 495 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-15
Figure E6-2 Livingston Site Inventory (Current Zoning)

e.
11 I
lc:::::::JI City Boundary
r - -
I - - I Neighborhoods
CJ Rezone Si tes
Site Inventory by Zoning
-DTC
R-1
-R-2
-R-3
-C-3
Imagery provided by Esri and its /icensors © 2026.

Addirional doro provided by County of Merced, 2023.
17 Livingston
Central
...a
~ §€!)
20 ,1f
I
I North
Livingston
I
12---1 ~
ID:1ltlJllll"Z&?
19 18
800 1,600 N
Feet A ,.
813 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-16

II II City Boundary
r - - Neighborhoods I - - I
D Rezone Sites
Site Inventory by Zoning
- OTC
R-1
- R-2
- R-3
Imagery provided by Esri and its /icensors © 2023.
,Additional data provided by County of Merced, 2023.

Central
Livingston
20 19
T
1 North
Livingston
~
0 750 1,500 N
Feet A 21 _ 4 tf.

I"
814 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-17
Figure E6-3 Livingston Site Inventory (Proposed Zoning)

II II City Boundary
r - -
, __ 1 Neighborhoods
LJ Rezone Sites•
Site Inventory by Zoning
- DTC
- R-2
- R-3
•zoning for Rezone Si tes show
proposed zoning changes.

E.3
Gt
I
Imagery provided by Esri and its /icensors © 2023.

Additional data provided by County of Merced, 2023.

Central
Livingston
lJ
I
I North
Livingston
~
0 750
Feet
I la
1,500 N
A 7 -JE _A~
,o d
815 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-18

II II City Boundary
r - -
1 __ 1 Neighborhoods
=:J" Rezone Sites*
Site Inventory by Zoning
- DTC
- R-2
- R-3
•zoning for Rezone Sites show
proposed zoning changes.
lmag~ry provided by Esri and its ficensors © 2026
Additional data provided by County of Merced, 2;23.

Livingston
Central
~
~ 0€ll
T
1 efj
I North
Livingston
-~ ~di~
12--1 l?l;mmx;1D/Iro
816 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-19
Table E6-10 Livingston Site Inventory – Opportunity Sites Map
ID Site Address or Street APN Acres Land Use Zoning
Current
Use
Minimum
Density
Maximum
Density
LowerIncome
Capacity
ModerateIncome
Capacity
Above
ModerateIncome
Capacity
Total
Capacity
TCAC
Opportunity
Category
North Livingston
1 1137 Livingston
Cressey Road
024011012 0.41 MD R-2 Vacant 7.6 11.9 0 0 3 3 High
Resource
Total 0 0 3 3
Central Livingston
3 719 7th Street 024162011 0.27 MD R-2 Vacant 7.6 11.9 0 0 2 2 Highest Resource
4 2036 W D Street 024184001 0.18 HD R-3 Vacant 12 29 0 4 0 4 Moderate Resource
5 2036 E D Street 024191005 0.16 HD R-3 Vacant 12 29 0 3 0 3 Moderate Resource
6 S D Street & Hammatt
Avenue
024191006 0.19 HD R-3 Vacant 12 29 0 4 0 4 Moderate
Resource
7 2042 D Street 024191010 0.18 HD R-3 Vacant 12 29 0 4 0 4 Moderate Resource
8 1816 D Street 024191039 0.35 HD R-3 Vacant 12 29 0 7 0 7 Moderate Resource
9 S D Street & Hammatt
Avenue
024184031 0.50 HD R-3 Vacant 12 29 10 0 0 10 Moderate
Resource
10 833 8th Street 024191011 0.52 HD R-3 Vacant 12 29 11 0 0 11 Moderate Resource
11 719 7th Street 024191036 0.95 HD R-3 Vacant 12 29 19 0 0 19 Moderate Resource
12 1225 B Street 024113007 0.15 DC DTC Vacant 0 29 0 2 0 2 Highest Resource
13 C St & 7th Street 024153003 0.26 DC DTC Vacant 0 29 0 4 0 4 Moderate Resource
817 Page 500 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-20
Map
ID Site Address or Street APN Acres Land Use Zoning
Current
Use
Minimum
Density
Maximum
Density
LowerIncome
Capacity
ModerateIncome
Capacity
Above
ModerateIncome
Capacity
Total
Capacity
TCAC
Opportunity
Category
14 824 Main Street 024171011 0.18 DC DTC Vacant 0 29 0 3 0 3 Highest Resource
15 1319 F Street 024171016 0.29 DC DTC Vacant 0 29 0 4 0 4 Highest Resource
Total 40 34 2 77
Livingston Total 40 34 5 80
818 Page 501 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-21
E6.8.1 Rezone Sites
To accommodate this shortfall of capacity, the City is obligated to rezone land suitable to facilitate the development of the listed rezone sites. The City anticipates beginning the rezone process with outreach and public hearings for all properties identified in the Site Inventory following the adoption of the Housing Element. The City anticipates adoption of the rezonings by January 31, 2025. Sites to accommodate 693 1,021 housing units will be rezoned concurrently with the adoption of this Housing Element.

The Site Inventory includes six sites that will be rezoned to facilitate additional residential development. The sites will be rezoned from low-density and Highway Service Commercial office to high-density residential with a maximum density of 29 dwelling units per acre. These sites encompass 34 50.42 acres and can accommodate a total of 352 526376 lower-income units, 170 247322 moderate-income units, and 171 248323 above moderate-income units. Rezone sites are found in each the Central and South neighborhoods of Livingston, as seen in Figure E6-2.

Table E6-11 summarizes the acreage and unit assumptions for sites proposed for rezoning. The rezoned sites shall include the following components pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(i):
 Permit owner-occupied and rental multi-family uses by-right for developments in which 20 percent or more of the units are affordable to lower-income households. By-right means approval without discretionary review.
 Permit the development of at least 16 units per site.  Establish a minimum density of 20 units per acre and a maximum density of at least 20 units per acre for all rezone sites to accommodate lower-income RHNA.  Ensure that either: a) at least 50 percent of the shortfall of low- and very-low-income regional housing need can be accommodated on sites designated for exclusively residential uses; or b) if accommodating more than 50 percent of the low- and very-low-income regional housing need on sites designated for mixed uses, all sites designated for mixed uses must allow 100 percent residential use and require that residential uses occupy at least 50 percent of the floor area in a mixed-use project.

-- --
I
I
J
819 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-22
Table E6-11 Proposed Rezone Sites Realistic Capacity of Rezoned Sites Map
ID
Site Address or
Street APN Acres
Existing
Zoning
District
Proposed
Zoning
District Current Use
Minimum
Density
Maximum
Density
Realistic
Density
LowerIncome
Capacity
ModerateIncome
Capacity
Above
ModerateIncome
Capacity
Total
Capacity
TCAC
Opportunit
y Category
North Livingston
2 1230-1236
Olive Ave
024011016 2.81 R-2 R-3 Vacant 20 29 21.75 57 0 0 57 High Resource
Total 57 0 0 57
Central Livingston
16 F Street &
Winton Parkway
022010018 5.62 R-1 R-3 Vacant 20 29 21.75 114 0 0 114 Highest Resource
Total 114 0 0 114
South Livingston
2 B Street & 1st
Street
022010025 5.00 C-3 R-3 Vacant 20 29 21.75 101 0 0 101 Moderate Resource
17 Peach Ave &
Winton
Parkway
022050009 16.80 R-1 R-3 Vacant 20 29 21.75 0 170 171 341 High Resource
18 480 F St12511
Peach Avenue
022071010*
047280003

1.1615.00 R-1 R-3 Vacant 20 29 21.75 20150 077152 077152 20304 Moderate Resource
19 1154 E Peach
Ave
047310020*
*

2.00 R-1 R-3 Single
Family w/
extra land
20 29 21.75 40 0 0 40 Moderate
Resource
20 1018 E Peach
Ave
047310019*
*

6.00 R-1 R-3 Single
Family w/
extra land
20 29 21.75 121 0 0 121 Moderate
Resource
Total 181262412 170247322 171248323 522907
Livingston Total 34.3950.
42 352526376 170247322 171248323 6931,021
* The unit total aligns with current entitlement for 20 multi-family units. ** The site acreage has been reduced to only consider vacant land and does not assume demolition of the current properties.

■
■
■
820 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-23
E6.8.2 Sites Used in Previous Planning Periods
In accordance with Government Code Section 65583, vacant parcels from both the 4th and 5th cycles and non-vacant parcels from the 5th Cycle may be reused in this Housing Element to accommodate lower-income housing, and must allow residential use by right for housing projects that have at least 20 percent of the units set aside as affordable for lower-income households (i.e., can be approved administratively without requiring Planning Commission or City Council approval). Three sites identified in the Site Inventory were used previously and are subject to this by-right requirement, as shown in Table E6-12. Sites proposed for rezone as part of this Housing Element Update are considered new sites and are not subject to this requirement.

Table E6-12 Sites Used in Previous Planning Periods
Address APN Acres
Existing
Land Use
Existing
Zoning
Proposed
Land Use
Proposed
Zoning
Existing
Use
Total
Units
Central Livingston
833 8th St 024191036 0.95 High Density R-3 – – Vacant 19 1225 B St 024113007 0.15 Downtown
Commercial
DTC – – Vacant 2
C St 024153003 0.26 Downtown
Commercial
DTC – – Vacant 4
Total 1.36 25
E6.9 Adequacy of Residential Site Inventory in Meeting
RHNA
The Site Inventory identifies 392 566416 lower-income units, 205 282357 moderate-income units, and 176 253328 above moderate-income units on 20 sites.

Of the identified sites, the majority of the sites are vacant, and all are vacant and located in a residential zone. Two sites are partially nonvacant, comprising a single-family home extra land. Only six sites are identified for rezoning: all to allow for higher density housing development. There is one rezone site equal to or over 10 acres that has moderate-income units identified on it; however, it is only assumed that eight acres of the site is for moderate-income units. WithAfter rezoning, the Site Inventory includes a surplus of 28 20252 lower-income units, allowing a five 3910 percent buffer for this income category above the RHNA requirement, as well as a surplus of 36 11388 moderateincome for a 21 11167 percent buffer, and a surplus of 176 25328 above moderate-income for a 8144 63 percent buffer. The summary of the residential Site Inventory is presented by neighborhood in Table E6-13.

-
821 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-24
Table E6-13 Adequacy of Residential Site Inventory
Lower-Income Moderate-Income
Above
Moderate-Income Total
City’s Share of RHNA 524 169 404 1,097
Planned and Approved Units 160 0 485 645
ADUs Anticipated 0 0 8 8
Remaining RHNA 364 169 0 533
Opportunity Sites (North Livingston) 0 0 3 3
Opportunity Sites (Central Livingston) 40 35 2 77
Rezone Sites 352526376 170247322 171248323 6931,021
Total Units on Sites 392416566 205282357 176253328 7731,101 Total Unit Surplus 2820252 36113188 176253328 240568
Percent Buffer over RHNA 10395% 1116721% 816344% 5222%
E6.10 Availability of Infrastructure and Services
The City’s Public Works Department is responsible for the City’s water system, wastewater system, storm drain system, parks system, storm drainage system, street system, landscaped areas, municipal buildings and City vehicles and heavy equipment. As such, the City will ensure adequate capacity of all infrastructure and utilities to accommodate the housing growth discussed in this housing element. Although the City has infrastructure and utility capacity to serve the identified sites, additional wells may be needed to be able to serve all anticipated development. Within one week of adoption, City will provide a copy of the adopted 2023-2031 Housing Element to the City’s Public Works Department Division, pursuant to Government Code Section 65589.7.

E6.10.1 Wastewater System
Livingston operates its own wastewater collection system and domestic wastewater treatment plant. The existing sewer collection system is comprised of a network of approximately 29 miles of sewer pipelines, including nine lift stations. Wastewater is conveyed by the sewer collection system to the City’s Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), located northwest of the city. The 2020 Urban Water Master Plan (UWMP)3 reports that the plant has the capacity of two million gallons per day (mgd). The City’s current wastewater flows average 0.9 mgd, which is less than 50 percent of its treatment capacity. Based on population growth projections in the 2020 UWMP and results from the 2023 Merced County Water and Sanitary Infrastructure Capacity Assessment, Livingston has additional capacity and the collection system can accommodate additional housing units that exceeds the RHNA total housing units target of 1,097.4 3 2020 Urban Water Management Plan.
https://www.cityoflivingston.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/public_works/page/2711/city_of_livingston_draft_2020_uwmp_feb _2022.pdf
4 Merced County Association of Governments. 2023. Merced County Water and Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure Capacity Assessment. 822 Page 505 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-25
E6.10.2 Potable Water System
Livingston provides drinking water service to its residential, commercial, industrial and institutional customers within the city limits. The City’s municipal water system extracts water from the underground aquifers via a series of groundwater wells distributed throughout the city. The City’s existing system facilities include nine active groundwater wells (including one standby well), a one million gallon water storage tank, and over 36 miles of pipelines. Not including the standby well, the eight active wells have a combined capacity of 9,200 gallons per minute (gpm). According to the 2020 UWMP, groundwater will continue to be utilized as a primary source, however the City has determined that an additional water supply source is needed.

As population and development within the city increases, additional wells and storage tanks will be added to the water system to meet the growing demand. According to the Water System Capacity Assessment prepared for the City of Livingston on November 17, 2023 and the 2020 UWMP, the City is planning to construct two new wells and two new centralized treatment facilities to remove trichloropropane (TCP) from the groundwater. Each of the two new wells are anticipated to produce 1,200 gpm of water. This new construction would increase City’s total production to 11,300-gpm.

Once the new TCP improvements are completed, the City would have approximately 25 percent remaining capacity for any future new development beyond the presently entitled multi-family and commercial projects and would be able to accommodate development detailed in the Site Inventory. These water system expansion projects are anticipated to be completed by the end of 2026.5
E6.10.3 Storm Water and Drainage
Livingston’s storm water is managed through a program with the Merced Irrigation District (MID).

Storm water is temporarily stored in detention basins, which serve as watersheds within the urbanized area. Each watershed has a lift station that drains the storm water at a controlled rate to available MID canals. Livingston stormwater is collected and discharged by a combination of the following facilities:

Underground storm drains
Detention and percolation basins
Limited discharge into the City sanitary sewer system facilities Discharge into Merced Irrigation District (MID) canals and laterals, via pump stations.

The City’s 2007 Storm Drainage Master Plan states that new development projects will be required to provide site-specific or project-specific storm drainage solutions that are consistent with the overall infrastructure plan. The City will continue to use MID facilities as a part of the storm drainage solution, but also plans to identify locations for new retention basins. The City has also expressed interest in phasing out several of the existing detention basins and consolidating storm drainage from new development areas into a limited number of larger detention basins. According to the City of Livingston Municipal Service Review Update, the MID does not have capacity to accommodate additional storm water drainage from Livingston and new development will need to incorporate adequate storm drainage facilities to address additional demand on the City’s storm water drainage system. 6
5 City of Livingston. 2023. Technical Memorandum, Water system Capacity Assessment. 6 Merced County Local Agency Formation Commission. 2018. City of Livingston Municipal Service Review Update. https://www.lafcomerced.org/pdfs/MunicipalServiceReviews/Livingston%20MSR.pdf

1. 2.

3. 4.
823 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-26
E6.10.4 Dry Utilities
Dry utilities are defined as electricity, natural gas, cable, and telephone services. In Livingston, each dry utility has one provider: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) provides natural gas and electricity services, Charter Communications provides cable, and Frontier provides phone and internet services. The City does not anticipate any issues with connecting future residential development sites during the planning period to these utilities.

E6.11 Environmental Considerations
As noted in Chapter E4, Housing Constraints Analysis, environmental constraints to housing development in Livingston include risk of earthquakes, fire, and flooding. The sites identified in the Site Inventory are all located outside of identified flood zones. No known environmental constraints have been identified for the City of Livingston.

A city’s environmental setting and characteristics can greatly affect the feasibility and cost of developing housing. As noted in Chapter E4, Housing Constraints Analysis, environmental factors in Livingston include potential impacts from wildfire, drought, flood, and the Williamson Act. There are no known barriers related to shape, access, contamination, property conditions, easements, conservation easements, overlays and airport or military compatibility that could impact housing development on identified sites in the planning period.

Wildfire
There are no areas in Livingston classified as a Fire Hazard Zones and the surrounding rural areas have Moderate or no Fire Hazard Zones. The potential impacts of a wildfire would not preclude development of housing in Livingston.

Drought
In the case of drought, there will be minimal impact on the physical structures of buildings and facilities across Livingston, however there may be less reliability on infrastructure. The potential impacts of a drought would not preclude development of housing in Livingston.

Flood
Flood hazards are not a constraint to development, as all sites identified in the Site Inventory are in areas of minimal flood hazards and do not pose any constraints on development. However, the flooding problems in Livingston are in the northern part of the city, closest to the Merced River.

There is a small section of the city that has a one percent annual chance of flood hazard. No new development is planned within this area and is not a constraint on development.

E6.12 Opportunities for Energy Conservation
Energy conservation measures such as weatherization, solar energy utilization, and sustainable building methods can significantly reduce housing costs for households. Residents of Livingston are served by the Merced Irrigation District (MID) and PG&E for electricity and natural gas. The City utilizes the various residential programs PG&E offers, including:
824 Page 507 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Resources and Site Inventory Analysis
2024-2032 Housing Element E6-27
 Rebates on energy-efficient appliances
 California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) Program, which provides assistance for lowerincome households  Family Electric Rate Assistance (FERA) Program for larger households PG&E's Energy Savings Assistance Program provides free weatherization services to qualifying lowincome households. MID also offers a low-income discount program (CARE), providing a 20 percent discount on monthly energy bills, as well as a Solar Rebate Program. Additionally, the U.S.

Department of Agriculture Rural Development has a housing repair program, and the City's rehabilitation loan program can be utilized to improve energy efficiency in homes. These programs aim to increase efficiency, reduce energy consumption, and lower housing costs for residents in Livingston.
825 Page 508 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E6-28
This page intentionally left blank.
826 Page 509 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Plan
2024-2032 Housing Element E7-1
E7 Housing Plan
The 6th cycle, eight-year Housing Plan (2024-2032) sets forth a strategy, including goals, policies, and programs, to address housing issues identified in the City of Livingston.

E7.1 Goals and Policies
Goal 1: Regional Collaboration Work collaboratively with jurisdictions in the County to efficiently address housing issues and find regional solutions.

Policy 1.1 Proactively coordinate with cities, Merced County, and other agencies and organizations to create effective policies and programs and respond to opportunities for achieving common housing goals.

Policy 1.2 As appropriate, pursue State and federal housing funds to address regional housing issues.

Goal 2: Housing Development Provide an adequate supply and range of housing types to meet the diverse needs of residents.

Policy 2.1 Provide adequate sites for new housing development to accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) throughout the planning period.

Policy 2.2 Facilitate a range of housing development that will meet the needs of all income levels including extremely low-, very low-, low-, moderate- and above moderate-income households.

Policy 2.3 Encourage a range of housing types and sizes in large-scale development project proposals.

Policy 2.4 Promote infill development on vacant and underutilized sites within developed areas.

Policy 2.5 Encourage higher-density and mixed-use residential development along major transportation and transit corridors and/or near existing or planned community facilities and services.

Policy 2.6 Enact programs that facilitate well-designed, energy-efficient development and flexible standards to encourage high-quality projects.

Goal 3: Affordable Housing Options Facilitate the development of affordable housing and protect the existing supply of affordable housing to extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate-income households.

Policy 3.1 Provide a range of incentives and tools to encourage affordable housing for all lowerincome levels, including extremely low-income.

Policy 3.2 Support the Housing Authority of the County of Merced (HACM) by promoting Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) opportunities.

Policy 3.3 Establish permit processing procedures that promote streamlining of affordable housing development projects (Senate Bill (SB) 35 and Assembly Bill (AB) 2011). 827 Page 510 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E7-2
Policy 3.4 Support the development of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) as an affordable housing option.

Policy 3.5 Promote home ownership for lower- and moderate-income households by pursuing grant funding for downpayment assistance and other homeownership loan programs.

Policy 3.6 Monitor existing affordable housing developments and pursue preservation strategies to maintain their affordability.

Goal 4: Housing and Neighborhood
Preservation
Maintain and improve the City’s existing housing stock.

Policy 4.1 Preserve existing residential neighborhoods by promoting balanced design and architecture.

Policy 4.2 Support code enforcement efforts to work with property owners with repairs and rehabilitation of housing to preserve existing housing stock.

Policy 4.3 Utilize Capital Improvement Programs for repairs and improvements of public infrastructure and facilities in existing neighborhoods.

Goal 5: Housing for Persons with Special
Needs
Support and provide housing and services for people with special needs in the community. People with special needs include, but are not limited to, seniors, families with children, people with disabilities, single-parent families, farmworkers, and people who are experiencing homelessness or at risk of becoming homeless.

Policy 5.1 Assist in local and regional efforts that address the housing needs of special needs residents.

Policy 5.2 Provide reasonable accommodation for individuals with disabilities to access housing opportunities.

Policy 5.3 Support the development of affordable housing units for farmworkers and farmworker families by encouraging the use of federal, State, and local resources.

Policy 5.4 Coordinate with regional agencies and local non-profit/private developers on housing options and services for people who are experiencing homelessness or at risk of becoming homeless.

Policy 5.5 Proactively apply for and utilize available resources to provide and maintain housing for special needs groups.

Goal 6: Resource Conservation and
Sustainable Development
Utilize energy conservation and sustainable measures for new and rehabilitated housing.

Policy 6.1 Support and, as appropriate, incentivize the use of green building techniques for new housing and rehabilitation.

Policy 6.2 Promote energy conservation and efficiency in residential developments. 828 Page 511 of 912
City of Livingston
Housing Plan
2024-2032 Housing Element E7-3
Goal 7: Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing
Promote housing opportunities and access for residents regardless of age, race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, disability, or economic level in compliance with local, State, and federal fair housing laws.

Policy 7.1 Promote meaningful and informed participation of residents, community groups, and governmental agencies in all local housing and community development activities.

Policy 7.2 Comply with federal, State, and local fair housing anti-discrimination laws ensuring equal access to housing regardless of circumstances as protected by fair housing laws.

Policy 7.3 Provide fair housing services to City residents and ensure that residents are aware of their fair housing rights.

Policy 7.4 Provide residents with housing mobility options by facilitating the development of a variety of housing types and expanding access to housing services.

Policy 7.5 Protect tenants from discriminatory housing practices and displacement.

Policy 7.6 Promote the integration of affordable and special needs housing in existing and planned neighborhoods.

E7.2 Implementing Programs
Program 1: Regional Collaboration
Collaborate with other jurisdictions in the region on housing efforts, including funding opportunities, best practices, and other efforts to address housing, transit, economic development, and homeless issues in Merced County.

Regional collaboration efforts can include, but are not limited to:
 Affordable housing development opportunities
 Regional housing programs and outreach efforts
 Economic development opportunities
 Creation of a regional housing trust fund
 Coordination on funding applications and administration  Identification of transit opportunities and access near new and established residential areas  Development of environmental mitigation that can improve the quality of life for residents  Efforts for the development of emergency shelters, low-barrier navigation centers, transitional and supportive housing as well as support services for persons experiencing homelessness or at risk of becoming homeless in the County, including participation in services offered by the County 829 Page 512 of 912
Merced County Association of Governments
Merced County Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Element (2024-2032) E7-4
Specific Actions, Objectives and Timelines  Starting in 2026, at least annually participate in regional meetings related to housing and homeless issues to pursue funding and coordination opportunities. Annually pursue funding opportunities for regional housing issues.
 Starting in 2026, at least annually partner with the Merced County Human Services Agency and/or the Merced County Community Action Agency to proactively address shelter, housing and support services for people experiencing homelessness.
 Continue to be an active participant with the Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG) and coordinate on regional planning and policy efforts to advance shared goals throughout Merced County.
 Annually work with the Merced Continuum of Care to update and implement the 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness during the planning period.
 Starting in 2026, annually collaborate and coordinate regionally and with the California Department of Housing and Community Development to ensure the effective implementation of the Housing Element. This collaboration will include regular meetings (at least annually), and will include resource sharing, joint efforts with internal and external partners to address regional housing needs and achieve the goals outlined in the Housing Element, including affirmatively furthering fair housing and farmworker needs.
 Starting in 2026, participate in a regional collaboration with developers and affordable housing advocates to support the development of housing and implementation of the Housing Element.  By 2026, establish a working group that meets annually to identify regional housing challenges, including but not limited to affirmatively furthering fair housing efforts and farmworker housing, funding opportunities, and consider input from the working group to coordinate efforts to develop affordable housing and implement the housing element, including making adjustments as appropriate to better achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element.

Primary Responsible Departments Planning Department of Local Jurisdictions Funding Sources General Fund; federal, State, and local grant funds Relevant Policies 1.1, 1.2
AFFH Themes  Outreach and Education
 Housing Mobility
 New Housing Opportunities in Areas of Higher Resources  Anti-Displacement and Tenant Protection
AFFH Geographic Targeting Citywide
AFFH Outcomes N/A
830 Page 513 of 912