Newark City Council
April 9, 2026

• Program H3.5 (Parking Standards Update)
• Program H3.6 (By-Right Approval of Projects with 20 Percent Affordable Units) • Program H4.4 (Small Sites Program)
• Program H4.9 (No Net Loss of Units)
• Program H4.10 (Zoning Ordinance Amendments for Special Needs Housing) • Program H4.11 (Housing for Persons Experiencing Homelessness) • Program H5.4 (Affordable Housing Overlay Zone)
• Program H7.5 (Mid-cycle Review)
• Program H7.6 (Annual Progress towards the City’s RHNA Goals) For your information, pursuant to Assembly Bill 1398 (Chapter 358, Statutes of 2021), as the City did not adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days of the statutory deadline (January 31, 2023), programs to make prior identified sites available or address a shortfall of capacity to accommodate the regional housing need allocation (RHNA) (e.g., Program H3.6) must be completed no later than one year from the statutory deadline. Otherwise, the local government’s housing element will no longer comply with State Housing Element Law, and HCD may revoke its finding of substantial compliance pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (i).

The City must monitor and report on the results of these and other programs through the annual progress report, required pursuant to Government Code section 65400.

Please be aware, Government Code section 65585, subdivision (i) grants HCD authority to review any action or failure to act by a local government that it determines is inconsistent with an adopted housing element or housing element law. This includes failure to implement program actions included in the housing element. HCD may revoke housing element compliance if the local government’s actions do not comply with state law.

Several federal, state, and regional funding programs consider housing element compliance as an eligibility or ranking criteria. For example, the CalTrans Senate Bill (SB) 1 Sustainable Communities grant, the Strategic Growth Council and HCD’s Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program, and HCD’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reporting requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the City now meets housing element requirements for these and other funding sources.

For your information, some general plan element updates are triggered by housing element adoption. HCD reminds the City to consider timing provisions and welcomes the opportunity to provide assistance. For information, please see the Technical Advisories issued by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research at https://opr.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/.

HCD appreciates the hard work and dedication the housing element update team provided throughout the housing element review and update process. HCD wishes the David Benoun, City Manager

City success in implementing its housing element and looks forward to following its progress through the General Plan annual progress reports pursuant to Government Code section 65400. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Helen Eldred, of our staff, at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Paul McDougall
Senior Program Manager

CITY OF NEWARK
2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT

HCD COMPLIANT DRAFT
December 1, 2023

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
NEWARK 2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements 8
SECTION 1 Introduction 9
A. Purpose and Organization of the Housing Element 9
B. Changes in State Housing Law 10
C. Relation to Other General Plan Elements 12
D. Community Engagement 14
SECTION 2 Housing Needs 21
A. Population Growth and Trends 23
B. Housing Tenure 28
C. Housing Needs for Special Needs Populations 41
SECTION 3 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing 53
A. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing 53
B. History of the Land and People 54
C. Summary of Fair Housing Need 56
D. Fair Housing Assessment 58
E. Racially and/or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty + Affluence 74 F. Disparities in Access to Opportunity 76
G. Disproportionate Housing Needs for Low-income Households and Protected Classes 91 H. AFFH Analysis of Sites 123
I. Contributing Factors and Meaningful Actions 141
SECTION 4 Housing Constraints 148
A. Governmental Constraints 148
B. Non-Governmental Constraints 187
C. Environmental Constraints 189
SECTION 5 Housing Resources 192
A. Available Sites For Housing 192
B. City Financial Resources 195
C. Other City and Partner Agency Resources 195
2 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
SECTION 6 Housing Plan 197
A. Evaluation of Accomplishments Under Adopted Housing Element 197 B. Housing Plan: Goals, Objectives, Policies, and Programs 205 Appendices
A. Housing Needs A-1
B. Public Engagement and Input Summary B-1
C. Housing Sites Inventory C-1
D. Public Comment Response D-1
3 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: New State Housing Laws Relevant to
Housing Element Update
Table 1-2: Draft Public Comment
Table 2-1: Population Growth Trends
Table 2-2: Population by Race 2000 to 2019
Table 2-3: Number and Type of Housing Units in
Alameda County 2022
Table 2-4: Newark Cash Rent, 2021
Table 2-5: Newark Rents, 2023
Table 2-6 Overcrowding by Regional Population,
2013-2017
Table 2-7: Substandard Housing Units, 2015-2019
Table 2-8: Subsidized Affordable Housing Units at
Risk of Conversion to Market Rate 2020
Table 2-9: Disability by Type, 2015-2019
Table 3-1: Newark Fair Housing Complaints,
2016-2021
Table 3-2: Fair Housing Complaints Forwarded to Fair
Housing and Equal Opportunity Alameda County,
January 2017- June 2020
Table 3-3: Population by Racial Group, Newark and
the Region, 2000 to 2020
Table 3-4: Race and Ethnicity of Newark Residents,
2000 to 2020
Table 3-5: Dissimilarity Index Between Racial Groups,
2000 to 2020
Table 3-6: Isolation Index for Newark and the Bay
Area, 2000 to 2020
Table 3-7: Domains and List of Indicators for
Opportunity Maps, 2021
Table 3-8: Selected District Level Data -
0161234--Newark Unified for the year 2021-2022
Table 3-9: Residents With A Disability, Newark and
Region, 2015- 2019
Table 3-10: Housing Units at Risk of Conversion, 2022
Table 3-11: Students in Local Public Schools
Experiencing Homelessness, 2016 to 2020
Table 3-12: Migrant Farmworker Student Population,
2016 to 2020
Table 3-13: Distribution of Housing Capacity by
Census Tract with AFFH Indicators
Table 3-14: Site Distribution by Median Income,
2015- 2019
Table 3-15: Sites Along Transit Lines and High or
Moderate Opportunity Areas, 2022
Table 3-16: Summary of Contributing Factors and
Actions Regarding Housing Issues in Newark
Table 4-1: General Plan Land Use Designations
Table 4-2: Residential Development Standards,
Newark 2022
Table 4-3: Housing Types Permitted by Zone, Newark
2022
Table 4-4: Potential Sites for Emergency Shelters in
Newark, 2022
Table 4-5: Level of Review Authority, Selected
Decision Types
Table 4-6: Average Permit Processing Time, Newark,
2022
Table 4-7: Permit Fees, Newark, Fiscal Year
2022-2023
Table 4-8: Residential Development Impact Fees,
Newark, Fiscal Year 2022-2023
Table 4-9: Off-Street Parking Requirements, Newark
2021
Table 6-1: Review of Policies and Programs of 5th
Housing Element Cycle
Table 6-2: Assessors Parcels Numbers Subject to AB
1397, 2022
4 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 6-3: List of Quantified Objectives for the 2023
to 2031 Planning Period
Table C-1: City of Newark Detailed Sites Inventory
Table C-2: City of Newark Sites Inventory APNs and
Acreage
Table C-3: Planned and Proposed Sites with Project
Status
Table C-4: Lower Income RHNA vis-a-vis Non Vacant
Sites, 2023
Table C-5: Grocery Outlet Center Realistic Capacity
Analysis
Table C-6: Thornton Ave. Sites Realistic Capacity
Analysis
Table C-7: Cedar Blvd. and Timber St. Industrial Sites
Realistic Capacity Analysis #1
Table C-8: Cedar Blvd. and Timber St. Industrial Sites
Realistic Capacity Analysis #2
Table C-9: Cedar Blvd. and Timber St. Industrial Sites
Realistic Capacity Analysis #3
Table C-10: E-Z 8 Realistic Capacity Analysis
Table C-11: Cherry Plaza Realistic Capacity Analysis
Table C-12: Sycamore St. Vacant Lot Realistic
Capacity Analysis
Table C-13: Cedar Blvd. Public Storage Realistic
Capacity Analysis
Table C-14: Filbert Ave. Sites Realistic Capacity
Analysis
Table D-1: Housing Element Draft Public Comments
Received and City Response
5 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Population by Age, 2000 to 2019
Figure 2-2: Wage or Works by Place of Residence and
Work, by Income, 2015- 2019
Figure 2-3: Housing Age, 2015- 2019
Figure 2-4: Newark Zillow Home Value Index, 2013
-2022
Figure 2-5: Home Values of Owner Occupied Units,
2015-2019
Figure 2-6: Rents for Renter Occupied Units in
Newark, Alameda County, and the Bay Area, 2015-
2019
Figure 2-7: Housing Tenure by Race, 2015- 2019
Figure 2-8: Vacant Units By Type, 2015- 2019
Figure 2-9: Cost Burdened Households, Renters and
Homeowners, 2015- 2019
Figure 2-10: Low Income Cost Burdened Households,
Renters and Homeowners, 2015- 2019
Figure 2-11: Overcrowding by Tenure and Severity,
2013- 2017
Figure 2-12: Senior Households by Income and
Tenure, 2013- 2017
Figure 2-13: Cost Burdened Rates by Income Level,
Seniors, 2013- 2017
Figure 2-14: Households by Household Size, 2015-
2019
Figure 2-15: Household Type, 2015- 2019
Figure 2-16: Household Type by Tenure, 2015- 2019
Figure 2-17: Households by Household Income Level,
2013- 2017
Figure 3-1: Predominate Racial Groups in Newark,
2010
Figure 3-2: Racial Demographics of Newark, 2018
Figure 3-3: Household Income levels for Newark,
Alameda County and the Bay Area, 2013- 2017
Figure 3-4: Income by Race and Ethnicity, 2013- 2017
Figure 3-5: Median Household Income, 2015- 2019
Figure 3-6: Low to Moderate Income Households and
Percent Non-White Population, 2015- 2019, 2018
Figure 3-7: Area of High Segregation and Poverty,
2021
Figure 3-8: Distribution of TCAC Opportunity Areas
in the San Francisco Bay Area, 2022
Figure 3-9: Composite of Opportunity Areas in
Newark, 2022
Figure 3-10: Percentage of Residents in Low,
Moderate and High Resourced Areas by Race, 2015-
2019
Figure 3-11: Jobs Proximity Index Composite,
2014-2017
Figure 3-12: Economic Opportunity Score, 2021
Figure 3-13: Environmental Opportunity Score, 2021
Figure 3-14: CalEnviroScreen and Non-White
Population, 2021 and 2018
Figure 3-15: Newark School Enrollment, 2017-2022
Figure 3-16: Race and Ethnicity of Newark Unified
School District, 2020-2021 School Year
Figure 3-17: Educational Opportunity Index, 2021
Figure 3-18: Alameda County Transit Bus Stops and
Proposed Transit Stations, 2022
Figure 3-19: Housing and Transportation Costs as a
Percentage of Income
Figure 3-20: Percentage of Households With Children
Under 18 Years of Age, 2015- 2019
Figure 3-21: Family Structures in Newark, 2015-
2019
Figure 3-22: Percent of Married Couples with
Children, 2015- 2019
Figure 3-23: Percent of Children in a Female Headed
Household, 2015- 2019
Figure 3-24: Poverty Levels of Female Headed
Households in Newark, 2015- 2019
6 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-25: Comparison of Household Size for
Owners and Renters in Alameda County and Newark,
2015- 2019
Figure 3-26: Increase of Senior Population. 2010 to
2019
Figure 3-27: Seniors Income Level, Owners and
Renters, 2015- 2019
Figure 3-28: Disability Status By Age, 2016- 2020
Figure 3-29: Newark Senior Population with
Disability, 65 years and Older, 2016- 2020
Figure 3-30: Disability Status by Race, 2016- 2020
Figure 3-31: Cost Burden Renter Households in
Newark Over Time, 2015- 2019
Figure 3-32: Cost Burdened by Income, 2013- 2017
Figure 3-33: Cost Burdened Households, Renters and
Homeowners, 2015-2019
Figure 3-34: Overpayment by Renters, 2015- 2019
Figure 3-35: Overpayment by Homeowners, 2015-
2019
Figure 3-36: Cost Burdened Residents by Race, 2013-
2017
Figure 3-37: Percent of Owner and Renter
Households Living in Crowded Conditions, 2013-
2017
Figure 3-38: Overcrowding by Race and Ethnicity,
2015- 2019
Figure 3-39: Overcrowding and Severe Overcrowding
in Newark and Non-White Population, 2015- 2019
and 2018
Figure 3-40: Subsidized Housing and Housing Choice
Vouchers, 2021
Figure 3-41: Housing Tenure in Newark, 2015- 2019
Figure 3-42: Rates of Homeownership by Race, 2015-
2019
Figure 3-43: Mortgage Applications and Acceptance
by Race, 2018-2019
Figure 3-44: Total Count of People Experiencing
Homelessness For The Point In Time Count On
February 22, 2022
Figure 3-45: Unsheltered Individuals in Newark and
Alameda County, 2022
Figure 3-46: Sheltered Individuals by Race, 2022
Figure 3-47: Permanent and Seasonal Farmworkers
at the County Level, 2022 to 2017
Figure 3-48: Map of Plan and Dumbarton Corridor,
2010
Figure 3-49: Areas in Newark Vulnerable to
Displacement and Percentage of Communities of
Color, 2018 and 2022
Figure 3-50: 100 Year and 500 Year Flooding
Projections for the City of Newark
Figure 3-51: Housing Sites for the RHNA 6th Cycle
Figure 3-52: Sites by Racial Predominance, 2010
Figure 3-53: Site Distribution by Median Income,
2015- 2019
Figure 3-54: Site Distribution By Percent of Low and
Moderate Income Residents, 2015- 2019
Figure 3-55: Site Distribution by CalEnviroScreen
Percentile Score, 2021
Figure 3-56: Percentage of Housing Units by
Resource Opportunity Area, 2022
Figure 3-57: Site Distribution by Resource Level and
Transportation Access, 2022
Figure 3-58: Distribution of Sites by Rates of Cost
burdened, 2015– 2019
Figure 3-59: Distribution of Sites by Displacement
Risk and Percent BIPOC population, 2017 and 2018
Figure 3-60: Housing Sites Vis-a-Vis Disability Status, 2015- 2019
Figure 4-1: Development Review Process
Figure 5-1: Housing Sites for the RHNA 6th Cycle
Figure C-1: Housing Sites for the RHNA 6th Cycle
7 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
City of Newark Staff
Steven Turner, Community Development Director
Art Interiano, Assistant Community Development Director Carmelisa Lopez, Senior Planner
Joseph Balatbat, Associate Planner
Consultant Team
Paul Peninger, BAE Urban Economics
Community Planning Collaborative
Clara Cheeves
Bowen Close
Josh Ellsworth
Corinne Tsai
Newark Community
The City would like to extend its thanks to the community members, advocates and organizations that contributed to this report. An incomplete list of those who contributed their time and knowledge toward this draft is below:
● All the community members that filled out a survey, and attend a community meeting ● Alameda County Department of Health Developmental Disabilities Council ● Clark W. Redeker Newark Senior Center
● El Tímpano
● Greenbelt Alliance
● Housing Consortium of the East Bay
● Promotores
● Second Chance Inc.
● Newark Public Library
● Newark Unified School District: Newark Parent leadership team ● Newark Planning Commission
8 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION
The city of Newark is a growing, vibrant, multicultural city with a diverse commercial and business sector, and an inclusive community character. The City is committed to ensuring that all current and future residents continue to enjoy Newark’s distinctive attributes through the implementation of policies and programs that ensure that all residents have access to housing that meets the full range of household and community needs. To this end, the City is currently engaged in the implementation of an ambitious affordable housing work plan adopted by the Newark City Council in May, 2021. This Work Plan lays the foundation for the update of the City’s General Plan Housing Element, an opportunity for Newark to plan for housing to meet the needs of all segments of Newark’s diverse community.

A. Purpose and Organization of the Housing Element
Housing Element Purpose
California law recognizes the vital role that local governments play in the availability, adequacy, and affordability of housing. Every jurisdiction in California is required to adopt a long-range General Plan to guide its physical development, and the Housing Element is one of the seven required elements of the General Plan. Housing Element law mandates that local governments adequately plan to meet the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community. The law recognizes that in order for the private market to adequately address housing needs and demand, local governments must adopt land use plans and regulatory systems that provide opportunities for, and do not unduly constrain housing production. Housing Element statutes also require the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to review local housing elements for compliance with State law and to report their findings to the local government.

California's Housing Element law requires that each city and county develop local housing programs to meet its "fair share" of existing and future housing needs for all income groups. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is responsible for developing and assigning these regional needs, or "RHNA", to Bay Area jurisdictions. Pursuant to the RHNA planning period, the Newark Housing Element is an eight-year plan extending from 2023 to 2031, also referred to as the 6
th Cycle Housing Element.
9 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Newark’s Housing Element identifies strategies and programs that focus on:

1. Preserving and improving existing housing

2. Removing governmental and other constraints to housing development

3. Promoting and expanding fair and equitable housing opportunities

4. Assisting in the creation of new affordable housing in the City

5. Providing sites for new housing to be built

6. Addressing existing and emergent housing challenges related to climate change Element Organization
The 2023-2031 Newark Housing Element is comprised of the following major components:
● An introduction to review the requirements of the Housing Element, recent State laws and the community engagement process
● A community profile evaluating Newark's demographic, household and housing characteristics and related housing needs
● An analysis of governmental and non-governmental constraints on housing production and maintenance
● A detailed analysis of sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA for the planning period ● An evaluation of available resources to facilitate the production and maintenance of housing, including housing sites, financial and administrative resources available for housing, and opportunities for energy conservation
● A Housing Plan for addressing the City's identified housing needs, constraints and resources; including housing goals, policies and programs A series of appendices provide additional documentation. ● Appendix A is a presentation of the Housing Needs analysis. ● Appendix B provides a summary of public input received from the variety of community engagement opportunities undertaken throughout the Housing Element update process. ● Appendix C presents the parcel-specific Housing Element sites inventory.

B. Changes in State Housing Law
In response to California's worsening affordable housing crisis, in each of the last several years the State legislature has enacted a series of bills aimed at increasing production, promoting affordability and creating greater accountability for localities in addressing their housing needs.

The following items in Table 1-1 represent substantive changes to State housing law since Newark's last Housing Element was adopted and certified in 2014. 10 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 1-1: New State Housing Laws Relevant to Housing Element Update Housing Bills Bill Overview
Housing Element Sites Analysis
and Reporting
AB 879 (2017); AB 1397 (2017); SB
6 (2019)
Requires cities to zone more appropriately for their share of regional housing needs and in certain circumstances require by-right development on identified sites. Site analysis must also include additional justification for being chosen, particularly for sites identified to address lower income needs.

No Net Loss Zoning
SB 166 (2017)
Requires cities to identify additional low-income housing sites in their Housing Element when market- rate housing is developed on a site currently identified for low-income housing.

Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing
AB 686 (2017)
Housing Elements must contain an Assessment of Fair Housing, consistent with the federal Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Final Rule. The AFFH sections must include a summary of fair housing issues in the jurisdiction; a summary of fair housing data including contributing factors to fair housing issues; analysis of Housing Element sites in relation to AFFH; and an AFFH program that includes meaningful action.

Accessory Dwelling Units and
Junior Accessory Dwelling Units
AB 494 (2017), SB 229 (2017), AB
68 (2019), AB 881 (2019), AB 587
(2019), SB 13 (2019), AB 670
(2019), AB 671 (2019), AB 3182
(2020)
The State enacted legislation in both 2017 and 2019 to further assist and support the development of ADUs, including "by right" approval for one-bedroom units less than 850 square feet and two-bedroom units less than 1,000 square feet. and Junior ADUs less than 500 square feet.

Density Bonus
AB 1763 (2019), AB 2345 (2020)
Permits 100% affordable projects to be built denser and taller through three modifications to current Density Bonus Law. AB 2345 creates additional incentives and also requires the annual progress report to include if density bonuses have been granted.

Housing Crisis Act of 2019
SB 330 (2019)
Seeks to boost homebuilding by expediting approvals for housing development, including application processing times. SB 339 also prevents jurisdictions from decreasing a site's housing capacity through tools such as downzoning if that would preclude a jurisdiction from meeting its RHNA targets. Also, any project that includes demolition of housing units must replace or exceed that number of units. Any demolished units occupied by low-income households must be replaced with new units that are affordable to that same income level.
11 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Housing Bills Bill Overview
Surplus Land for Affordable
Housing
SB 1486 (2019), AB 1255 (2019)
Expands definition of surplus land and puts additional restrictions on the disposal of surplus land.

Jurisdictions must include information about surplus lands in the Housing Element and Annual Progress Reports. A central
inventory of surplus lands also must be submitted to HCD.

Emergency and Transitional
Housing Act
AB 139 (2019)
Amends assessment method to show site capacity, including using the most up-to-date point-in-time count. Additionally, the bill modifies parking requirement for emergency shelters. The Housing Element must include all of this information as well as analysis of the jurisdiction's special needs populations.

Supportive Housing Streamlined
Approval
AB 2162 (2018)
Requires supportive housing to be a use by right and eliminates parking if close to transit.

Safety Element Changes
SB 1035 (2018), SB 99 (2019), SB
747 (2019)
Updates requirements for the General Plan Safety Element including expanded information on environmental hazards facing jurisdictions and analysis of emergency evacuation routes. These updates must occur at the same time as the Housing Element updates.

C. Relation to Other General Plan Elements
The City of Newark's General Plan is comprised of the following eleven Chapters: 1) Introduction; 2) Planning Framework; 3) Land Use; 4) Transportation; 5) Housing; 6) Economic Development; 7) Conservation and Sustainability; 8) Parks, Recreation, and Open Space; 9) Environmental Hazards (to be renamed Safety Element); 10) Health and Wellness; and 12) Community Services and Facilities. Except for the Housing Element which was updated to be consistent with other elements, the other Newark General Plan Elements were adopted by the Newark City Council on December 12, 2013. State law requires that the General Plan be internally consistent. The Housing Element is consistent with Goals and Policies of the other elements of the General Plan.

The City will ensure consistency between the Housing Element and the other General Plan elements so that policies introduced in one element are consistent with other elements.

Whenever any element of the General Plan is amended in the future, the Housing Element will be reviewed and modified, if necessary, to ensure continued consistency between elements. 12 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
General Plan and Housing Element Consistency
The City of Newark’s General Plan, adopted in 2013, is the city’s long term vision for the growth and development. There are a number of elements that are interconnected with the goals and policies of the Housing Element: The Land Use Element, Transportation Element, Economic Development Element, and the Health and Wellness Element.

The Land Use Element seeks to encourage redevelopment and promote infill in strategic areas to create new pedestrian oriented, high-density, mixed-use, and transit-oriented development, especially around the proposed Dumbarton Rail station and Old Town neighborhood. The Land Use Element seeks to ensure that the design of new development is responsive to existing residential neighborhoods and community character. The Land Use Element’s policies and actions encourage new housing opportunities for all residents, through increasing ADU production and inclusionary zoning, to co-locate services, parks and recreation to increase access to residential opportunities.

The Transportation Element reinforces elements of the Land Use Element through the emphasis on high density, mixed use housing development in proximity to public transportation. The element also looks at the addressing parking requirements for housing to ensure the number of parking spaces is reflective to the use, resident type and location.

The Economic Development Element is focused on the revitalization of the NewPark Mall area, reducing commuter times through jobs housing balance, and ensuring that new development has a positive economic impact for the city.

The Health and Wellness Element looks at connecting land use planning with the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and general community health through increasing access to healthy foods. This year a new chapter will be added to the Health and Wellness Element, this chapter will work to:
● Reduce pollution exposure and improve air quality
● Promote access to public facilities
● Promote access to healthy foods
● Promote safe and sanitary homes
● Promote physical activity
● Promote civic engagement
Upon adoption, this Housing Element will be incorporated into the 2013 General Plan, updating the existing Housing Element. This Housing Element was prepared to maintain internal consistency with other elements of the General Plan. In addition, State law requires that other General Plan elements be reviewed and/or modified upon adoption of the Housing Element.

Senate Bill (SB) 1035 requires the safety element to be revised upon update of the Housing Element to include new information on fire hazards, flood hazards, and climate adaptation and 13 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
resilience strategies. The City will be updating the Environmental Hazards Element (to be renamed the Safety Element) in conjunction with the 2023-2031 Housing Element update. The City will maintain consistency between the Housing Element and the other General Plan elements so that policies introduced in one element are consistent with other elements.

D. Community Engagement
The City of Newark maintains an ongoing commitment to providing meaningful community engagement in partnership with community based organizations and in collaboration with other city departments in order to reach all segments of the population.Through a multi-pronged and multi-lingual approach, City staff worked to provide opportunities for community engagement over the course of the Housing Element update process.

Findings from the Community Engagement process were used to inform Newark’s Fair Housing Assessment and the goals, policies, and programs of the Housing Element update. See Section 3 (Affirmatively Furthering fair Housing) and 6 (Goals, Policies, & Programs) for more information.

Public Comment from HCD review process
During the HCD Review process, the City received comment letters from East Bay for Everyone, Save the Bay, Greenbelt Alliance and the Planning Commission and the public. Comments and responses received during the comment period focused on making adjustments to parking to better facilitate affordable housing development, programs to increase missing middle housing, aligning housing with active transportation investments and concern about housing development in the floodplain areas of the city. Comment letters and responses can be found in Appendix D.

Outreach Methods Utilized:

Social Media
The City and consultants utilized social media promotion for pop up events, promoting the website and a housing survey through Facebook. Content was posted on Facebook pages for the City of Newark, Newark Unified School District, Promotores, and Newark Recreation and Community Services.

Posters and Flyers
In addition to social media, the city used more traditional forms of communication, including the distribution of posters and flyers. Posters were distributed and posted in a variety of public places throughout the city, including parks, community centers, and other public buildings, local 14 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
businesses and with faith-based communities. Posters and flyers were translated into Spanish, Simplified Chinese, Vietnamese and Tagalog in order to reach a broad spectrum of the community.

Places the city posted:
● Newark Public Library
● Mel Nunes Skate Park
● NewBark Dog Park
● Restaurants in partnership with community groups
● Senior Center
● Silliman Community Activity Center
● Newark Community Center and childcare center
Flyers were shared at popular and frequented sites in the community and distributed at in-person community events. The flyers had a QR code that connected residents directly to the website and housing survey.

Website
The city also created a unique, dedicated stand-alone website that is translatable in three languages, and also touches on issues of environmental justice. The website is the hub for the community to access information on the housing element update and opportunities for engagement including in-person events, email updates, and our survey.

In Person Engagement: Meeting The Community Where They Are The city conducted in person community engagement in a variety of locations and events around the city. They engaged with residents at Family Day in the Park on April 9, 2022, spent time connecting with folks at the Newark Public Library on a busy Saturday, visited the senior center for Bingo, and Tri City food pantry mobile pop up. These provided an opportunity for city staff to answer questions, and encourage residents to take part in the housing survey.

One On One Interviews and Listening Sessions
The city conducted one-on-one interviews with staff from the Housing Consortium of the East Bay (HCEB), an organization that creates inclusive communities for individuals with developmental disabilities or other special needs, and a member of the Newark Parent leadership team with Newark Unified School district. We gained insight and guidance into the needs of families and those with developmental disabilities.

Meeting with a member of the Newark Parent leadership team, the city heard there needs to be more affordable housing, as families are being displaced, or forced to live in hotels on a short-term basis. The member shared that households are kept out of the rental market due to unattainable 15 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
income requirements, and they cited the need for rent control in order to make housing more attainable. There is a need to have more homeownership opportunities that are attainable to a larger demographic. The lack of stable housing and internet access places these children at a disadvantage both educationally, mentally and physically. Increasing access to enrichment and after school activities at the Silliman Center was seen as a beneficial element for the city to develop in conjunction with affordable housing.

Survey
From March 15th through April 30th 2022, 342 people participated in the City of Newark’s online community conversation about housing issues and opportunities in Newark. 300 of those responses were in English, 38 in Spanish and 4 in Chinese.

Participants were invited to answer a series of 22 questions covering housing experience and preference, environmental justice and demographic information. The survey was hosted on the SurveyMonkey platform accessible via the city’s webpage.

The survey was distributed and advertised in multilingual materials through various platforms to reach as broad of a cross section of the community as possible. It was promoted through the social media pages of the City of Newark, Newark Recreation and Community Services, Newark Police Department, and Newark Unified School District. It was also listed in print newsletters that were sent to all Newark residents, the Clark W. Redeker Newark Senior Center email list, and the Alameda County Health Department Developmental Disabilities council list. To reach those lacking internet access, we conducted in-person outreach at the city’s Family Day in the Park event and the Newark Library where residents and workers could take our survey on paper or an iPad.

We also utilized our partnerships with local organizations to share our survey with special needs populations. We worked in partnership with the group Promotores to reach the Latino community.

We also reached out to nonprofit organizations that support people experiencing and escaping from domestic violence, and transitioning from homelessness, to share the survey with them. With the intention of connecting with families, we reached out to the Newark Unified School District parent leadership committees, and was able to gain valuable insight into the needs of families in the city.

Essential insight from the survey is that quality of life, in addition to increasing housing affordability and homeownership opportunities for Newark residents is of great importance and concern. For the full survey questions and responses, see Appendix B. 16 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Example survey page Example flyer
WHAT WE HEARD Residents are very concerned about housing affordability 53% of respondents to the English language survey are very concerned about housing affordability. 87% of respondents in the Spanish language survey are very concerned about housing affordability.

The three biggest issues to address for housing affordability:

1. More homeownership opportunities, especially affordable homeownership for first time homebuyers

2. More affordable rental opportunities

3. Low cost home improvements for seniors and low income households The most urgent affordable housing needs are: housing on both ends of the spectrum. Housing for large families as well as for smaller households.

1. Housing for families: Large and intergenerational. Housing for single parents was brought up in comments repeatedly throughout the survey

2. Housing for smaller households

3. Housing for low income and underserved households

4. Housing for seniors
17 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
WHAT WE HEARD Housing prices have risen, making housing unaffordable to many ● 40% of respondents are in housing that is not affordable to them ● 17% of respondents are in housing that they can afford but does not meet their needs ● 43% in housing they can afford and like
WHAT WE HEARD Not everyone feels that they live in a neighborhood of opportunity What would make your neighborhood feel like it has more opportunity?

1. City infrastructure that supports physical activity, including sidewalks, bike lanes, parks, and rec centers

2. Affordable, safe, and healthy housing choices

3. Educational opportunities that are academically and culturally supportive WHAT WE HEARD People are interested in a variety of housing types Residents were most interested in low scale housing types. Backyard cottages were the most favorable housing type. Cottage clusters and Townhomes were similarly favored housing types, while small to mid-size multifamily housing and multi-family buildings downtown were the least favored.

Who We Heard From
There were 342 overall participants, 300 of which responded in English, 38 in Spanish and 4 in Chinese.

There were five demographic questions, including the survey respondent’s connection to Newark, living situation, age and race. This information helped us understand if participants were representative of the city’s general population and helped us refine subsequent outreach and engagement to improve representation.

In summary, most participants identified as White (31%), followed by Hispanic/Latino (24%) and Asian/Asian American (18%). While nearly half were between the ages of 30 and 49, the remaining were split between people aged 20 to 29 (3%), 50 to 69 (21%), and over 70 (5%). The majority of respondents live in Newark (71%) and in a single family home (57%), and nearly half are homeowners (49%).

Community Meeting
The City held an online community meeting with 50 attendees on June 22 2022, to share with the community the findings from the survey and obtain general feedback on proposed goals and 18 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
policies that we had developed in response to research and survey results. We advertised the meeting through email communication to local organizations, posters in laundromats and grocery stores such as 99 Ranch that are located in low-income neighborhoods with a majority of BIPOC community members, as well as on social media sites for the Newark Public Library, the parents of NUSD, community organizations such as the Promotores, and the City of Newark. The meeting provided simultaneous translation in both Mandarin Chinese and Spanish, with small break out groups to help residents feel comfortable discussing their thoughts.

WHAT WE HEARD Newark needs to plan for climate change
● Making Newark the green city by the bay: Incorporating and increasing access to public parks, preserving existing ecologically sensitive land, and increasing tree planting to combat increased heat
● Building for energy efficiency: requiring solar panels on homes, insulation, and water conservation
● Increasing access to transportation options: increasing bus access, and building bike lanes to support active transportation with bikes and scooters. ● Building a walkable city: planning housing close to existing amenities such as schools, parks and grocery stores for walkability
WHAT WE HEARD Residents want to stay in their communities, and right now it’s challenging, with many facing displacement
● Supportive resources: Residents, documented and undocumented, need more support and increased access to housing resources and tenant protections “We all deserve housing”
● Innovative programs: Seniors on a fixed income need more support to remain in their homes and communities
“Developing a shared housing program with othersthat need a room to rent, connectseniors with single people who need affordable housing. Helpsseniors on limited incomes” ● Protect tenants: The city needs programs to combat gentrification such as protections from rapid increases in rent
“Rentsincrease but our incomes do not. The median income isreally very high for Newark,so you have a lot of people who need housing at the low and very low incomes.” 19 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
● Build + preserve homes: More affordable housing is needed for a variety of income levels and housing types. Families, and those transitioning out of homelessness are especially in need.
“It is very hard to move people who have been homelessinto permanent housing, we need more optionsfor those that are on SSI and extremely low incomes” – Director of Second Chance Public Communication for the Draft Housing Element
Newark released the Draft Housing Element for Public Review for 30 days on February 24th, 2023 to March 27th, 2023. The greater Newark community was made aware of the public review and comment period through a variety of channels, including social media, email, the website and a community meeting.

Social media outreach was conducted multiple times a week, with bilingual posts in English and Spanish connecting residents with information about the housing element update such as the release of the draft for comment and the community meeting.

City staff sent out an email announcement that the housing element is available for public comment to 16 community based organizations that are representative of the ethnic and linguistic diversity of Newark. Other organizations included the Alameda County coalition for disability, Def plus, and the domestic violence shelter. Working with the Newark Unified School District, Newark sent out a bilingual community meeting invite over Peachjar, sending the message to parents and caregivers district wide. City staff engaged with the Spanish speaking community, meeting with the local Promotoras group and providing a translated summary of the housing element in Spanish on the website.

Newark hosted a virtual community meeting, the evening of March 22nd, 2023. The meeting provided Spanish and American Sign Language translation to ensure the attendees would be able to participate fully. City staff got the word out through email, social media posts on city and public library sites, and bilingual posters in key locations such as community center, library and laundry mat to reach those without access to the internet.

The website continues to be a source of information for updates on community meetings and Housing Element timelines. A recording providing the public with an overview of the housing element update, how to access and review the draft, the draft goals and a highlight of some of the proposed programs was posted to walk community members through the process.

Detailed Public Comments are provided as Appendix D below. 20 NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
SECTION 2 HOUSING NEEDS
The Housing Needs Assessment analysis of housing and population characteristics, housing needs for vulnerable population groups, as well as the cities growth and employment, to provide the foundation for the development of the goals, policies and programs to meet the future and current needs of the residents.

This section pulls from various sources, primary data sources were compiled by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) in 2021. ABAG utilized the US Census, American Community Survey (ACS), the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), California Department of Finance (DOF), California Employment Development Department (EDD). If possible, data was updated to most recent available data and local sources were utilized.

SUMMARY
● Population – Generally, the population of the Bay Area continues to grow because of natural growth and because the strong economy draws new residents to the region. The population of Newark increased by 15.3% from 2000 to 2020, which is above the growth rate of the Bay Area
● Age – In 2019, Newark’s youth population under the age of 18 was 10,015 and senior population 65 and older was 6,038. These age groups represent 21.2% and 12.8%, respectively, of Newark’s population.
● Race/Ethnicity – In 2020, 23.7% of Newark’s population was White while 3.9% was African American, 33.9% was Asian, and 34.8% was Latinx. People of color in Newark comprise a proportion above the overall proportion in the Bay Area as a whole. 1 ● Employment – Newark residents most commonly work in the Manufacturing, Wholesale & Transportation industry. From January 2010 to January 2021, the unemployment rate in Newark decreased by 3.7 percentage points. Since 2010, the number of jobs located in the jurisdiction has increased by 4,650 (29.9%). Additionally, the jobs-household ratio in Newark has increased from 1.33 in 2002 to 1.49 jobs per household in 2018. 1 The Census Bureau’s American Community Survey accounts for ethnic origin separate from racial identity. The numbers reported here use an accounting of both such that the racial categories are shown exclusive of Latinx status, to allow for an accounting of the Latinx population regardless of racial identity. The term Hispanic has historically been used to describe people from numerous Central American, South American, and Caribbean countries. In recent years, the term Latino or Latinx has become preferred. This report generally uses Latinx, but occasionally when discussing US Census data, we use Hispanic or Non-Hispanic, to clearly link to the data source.

HOUSING NEEDS 21

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
● Number of Homes – The number of new homes built in the Bay Area has not kept pace with the demand, resulting in longer commutes, increasing prices, and exacerbating issues of displacement and homelessness. The number of homes in Newark increased, 11.2% from 2010 to 2020, which is above the growth rate for Alameda County and above the growth rate of the region’s housing stock during this time period. ● Home Prices – A diversity of homes at all income levels creates opportunities for all Newark residents to live and thrive in the community.
○ Ownership – The largest proportion of homes had a value in the range of $750k-$1M in 2019. Home prices increased by 133.9% from 2010 to 2020. ○ Rental Prices – The typical contract rent for an apartment in Newark was $2,110 in 2019. Rental prices increased by 61.1% from 2009 to 2019. To rent a typical apartment without cost burden, a household would need to make $84,720 per year.
2 ○ Housing Type – It is important to have a variety of housing types to meet the needs of a community today and in the future. In 2020, 69.6% of homes in Newark were single family detached, 9.5% were single family attached, 4.4% were small multifamily (2-4 units), and 16.5% were medium or large multifamily (5+ units).

Between 2010 and 2020, the number of single- family units increased more than multi-family units. Generally, in Newark, the share of the housing stock that is detached single family homes is above that of other jurisdictions in the region. ● Cost Burden – The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development considers housing to be affordable for a household if the household spends less than 30% of its income on housing costs. A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30% of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50% of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” In Newark, 19.2% of households spend 30%-50% of their income on housing, while 12.4% of households are severely cost burdened and use the majority of their income for housing. ● Neighborhood – 9.7% of residents in Newark live in neighborhoods identified as “Highest Resource” or “High Resource” areas by State-commissioned research, while 11.0% of residents live in areas identified by this research as “Low Resource” or “High Segregation and Poverty” areas. These neighborhood designations are based on a range of indicators covering areas such as education, poverty, proximity to jobs and economic opportunities, low pollution levels, and other factors.
3 3 For more information on the “opportunity area” categories developed by HCD and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, see this website: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp. The degree to which different jurisdictions and neighborhoods have access to opportunity will likely need to be analyzed as part of new Housing 2 Note that contract rents may differ significantly from, and often being lower than, current listing prices.

HOUSING NEEDS 22

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
● Special Housing Needs – Some population groups may have special housing needs that require specific program responses, and these groups may experience barriers to accessing stable housing due to their specific housing circumstances. In Newark, 7.6% of residents have a disability of any kind and may require accessible housing. Additionally, 18.7% of Newark households are larger households with five or more people, who likely need larger housing units with three bedrooms or more. 11.8% of households are female-headed families, which are often at greater risk of housing insecurity.

A. Population Growth and Trends
In recent decades, Newark’s population has seen rapid growth, with an increase of 15.3 percent from 2000 to 2020; this rate is above that of the region as a whole, at 14.8 percent. In 2020, the population of Newark was estimated to be 48,966 (see Table 2-1). From 1990 to 2000, the population increased by 12.2 percent, while it increased by just 0.2 percent during the first decade of the 2000s. In the most recent decade, the population increased by 15 percent. The population of Newark makes up three percent of the population in Alameda County.

Table 2-1: Population Growth Trends
Geography 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Newark 37,861 39,681 42,471 43,522 42,573 44,371 48,966 Alameda
County
1,276,702 1,344,157 1,443,939 1,498,963 1,510,271 1,613,528 1,670,834 Bay Area 6,020,147 6,381,961 6,784,348 7,073,912 7,150,739 7,595,694 7,790,537 Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series
Age
In recent years the population of youth has declined slightly with continued growth in those 55 and over. In 2019, Newark’s youth population under the age of 18 was 10,015 and the senior population 65 and older was 6,038. These age groups represent 21.2 percent and 12.8 percent of Newark’s population. Figure 2-1 shows slight increases in population in the 25-34 age group, and the 55 to 64+ age group. The increase in senior population can possibly be attributed to the establishment of a new affordable senior housing development. Community members have shown a preference for more walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods that are close to work, schools, parks, and amenities. The majority of seniors prefer to stay in their homes and communities, known as aging-in-place. Yet many live on fixed incomes and may have mobility issues as they age, which Element requirements related to affirmatively furthering fair housing. ABAG/MTC will be providing jurisdictions with technical assistance on this topic this summer, following the release of additional guidance from HCD.

HOUSING NEEDS 23

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
require supportive services. Similar financial and mobility obstacles exist for many of Newark’s households with special needs. Younger generations are less likely to own homes and have less savings than previous generations; they are more likely to live alone and delay marriage. Yet, many are growing their families, reflected by a higher percentage of families with children in Newark versus the County and Bay Area, and therefore may be in greater need of support when purchasing their first home. Coupled with increasing housing prices, it is more difficult for younger generations to rent or purchase a home than it is for current residents. For these reasons, Newark residents consider the three biggest issues to address housing affordability as: (1) more homeownership opportunities, especially for first time homebuyers; (2) more affordable rental opportunities; and (3) low cost home improvements for seniors and low income households. We therefore must address how to support our seniors as they get older so they can stay in their homes and communities, and make sure young people and households with special needs, new families, and our workers can find housing that is affordable and accessible.

Figure 2-1: Population by Age, 2000 to 2019
Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 Year Data, 2015-2019, Table B01001 HOUSING NEEDS 24

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Race & Ethnicity
Since 2000, the percentage of residents in Newark identifying as White has decreased – and at the same time, the percentage of residents of all other races and ethnicities has increased – by 18.6 percentage points, with the 2019 population standing at 11,168 (see Table 2-2). In absolute terms, the Asian / API, Non-Hispanic population increased the most while the White, Non-Hispanic population decreased the most. In 2020, 23.7 percent of Newark’s population was White while four percent was African American, 33.9 percent was Asian, and 34.8 percent was Latinx. People of color in Newark comprise a proportion above the overall proportion in the Bay Area as a whole. 4 When planning for housing, we need to consider a variety of housing needs—like larger homes for multi- generational families or those with more children—and how to create opportunities for everyone to access quality, affordable housing near schools, transit, jobs, and services.

Past exclusionary practices have prevented people of color from purchasing homes, living in certain neighborhoods, and building wealth over time. As a result, they are more likely to experience poverty, housing insecurity, displacement, and homelessness. And while many of our communities are very diverse, we are still contending with segregation and a lack of equitable opportunities. To help prevent displacement due to gentrification and to create a future where it is possible for everyone to find the housing they need, it will be important to plan for a variety of housing types and affordability options in all neighborhoods.

Table 2-2: Population by Race 2000 to 2019
Year
American Indian
or Alaska Native
Asian / API
Black or African
American
White
Other Race or
Multiple Races
Hispanic or
Latinx
2000 148 9,329 1,639 17,103 128 12,145
2010 95 12,005 1,908 11,726 1,845 14,994
2019 130 16,002 1,818 11,168 1,661 16,392
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001 4 The Census Bureau’s American Community Survey accounts for ethnic origin separate from racial identity.

The numbers reported here use an accounting of both such that the racial categories are shown exclusive of Latino status, to allow for an accounting of the Latinx population regardless of racial identity. The term Hispanic has historically been used to describe people from numerous Central American, South American, and Caribbean countries. In recent years, the term Latino or Latinx has become preferred. This report generally uses Latino, but occasionally when discussing US Census data, we use Hispanic or Non-Hispanic, to clearly link to the data source.

HOUSING NEEDS 25

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Employment Characteristics
By 2050 the number of jobs in South Alameda County will increase to 221,000, 19% ofthe projected growth for the County
5 In Newark there are 17,935 employed residents, and 17,168 jobs
6 - the ratio of jobs to resident workers is 0.96; Newark is a net exporter of workers. Despite the overall job growth expected in the county, 92 percent of Newark residents work outside of the City, with a greater number today employed in the peninsula and Silicon Valley.

Figure 2-2 shows the balance when comparing jobs to workers, broken down by different wage groups, offering additional insight into local dynamics. A community may offer employment for relatively low- income workers but have relatively few housing options for those workers - or conversely, it may house residents who are low wage workers but offer few employment opportunities for them. Such relationships can potentially contribute to an unbalanced demand for housing in particular price categories. A relative surplus of jobs relative to residents in a given wage category suggests the need to import those workers, while conversely, surpluses of workers in a wage group relative to jobs means the community will export those workers to other jurisdictions.

Newark has more low-wage jobsthan low-wage residents(where low-wage refers to jobs paying less than $25,000). At the other end of the wage spectrum, the city has more high-wage residents than high-wage jobs(where high-wage refers to jobs paying more than $75,000). In addition to the inflow of workers, our population is growing naturally, meaning more people are living longer while our children are growing up and moving out into homes of their own. All of this impacts housing demand.
6Employed residentsin a jurisdiction is counted by place of residence (they may work elsewhere) while jobsin a jurisdiction are counted by place of work (they may live elsewhere). The jobs may differ from those reported abode as the source for the time series is from administrative data, while the cross-sectional data is from a survey.
5 Plan Bay Area 2050 Projected Growth Pattern.

HOUSING NEEDS 26

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 2-2: Wage or Works by Place of Residence and Work, by Income, 2015- 2019 Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 Year Data, 2015-2019, Table B08119, B08519 HOUSING NEEDS 27

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
B. Housing Tenure
The 2020 Decennial Census estimates a total of 15, 371 housing units in Newark, with 14,946 as occupied housing units . Of these occupied housing units, 10,185 or 68 percent were owner occupied and 4,761 or 32 percent were renter occupied, compared to approximately 47 percent of Alameda County households that rent and 44 percent of Bay Area households.

Housing Stock Characteristics
This section examines housing stock in Newark from age, condition, type to understand current and emerging needs and analyzing vacancy and cost to understand the affordability.

Housing Age and Type
Housing in Newark was primarily built before 1980, with 53 percent built from 1960 to 1979 (see Figure 2-3). In 2020, 70 percent of homes in Newark were single family detached, 9.5 percent were single family attached, four percent were small multifamily (2-4 units), and 16.5 percent were medium or large multifamily (5+ units). Between 2010 and 2020, the number of singlefamily units increased more than multi-family units. Generally, in Newark, the share of the housing stock that is detached single family homes is above that of other jurisdictions in the region. With 10,385 single family homes in 2020 and 659 two to four unit homes, there is opportunity for Newark to support the increase of missing middle housing types. Programs such as SB9 can further support these efforts, as well as program H2.8 Zoning for Missing Middle Housing.

HOUSING NEEDS 28

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 2-3: Housing Age
Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 Year Data, 2015-2019: Table B25034 HOUSING NEEDS 29

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 2-3: Number and Type of Housing Units in Alameda County 2022

POPULATION HOUSING UNITS
City Household
Total
Housing
Units
Single Family
Detached
Single Attached Two to Four Five Plus Mobile Homes Occupied Vacancy
Rate
Persons per
Household
# % # % # % # % # %
Alameda 75,677 33,524 13,993 41.7% 3,482 10.4% 6,003 17.9% 9,920 29.6% 126 0.4% 31,473 6.1% 2.40 Albany 18,450 7,946 4,864 61.2% 277 3.5% 954 12.0% 1,823 22.9% 28 0.4% 7,545 5.0% 2.45 Berkeley 105,151 52,921 21,534 40.7% 2,128 4.0% 10,307 19.5% 18,730 35.4% 221 0.4% 48,377 8.6% 2.17 Dublin 68,482 24,977 13,331 53.4% 3,524 14.1% 812 3.3% 7,254 29.0% 56 0.2% 24,040 3.8% 2.85 Emeryville 12,396 7,656 424 5.5% 406 5.3% 766 10.0% 6,023 78.7% 36 0.5% 7,025 8.2% 1.76 Fremont 227,195 79,749 44,781 56.2% 10,210 12.8% 2,718 3.4% 21,314 47.6% 725 0.9% 76,507 4.1% 2.97 Hayward 156,757 52,870 27,328 51.7% 5,599 10.6% 3,063 5.8% 14,476 53.0% 2,403 4.5% 50,794 3.9% 3.09 Livermore 85,444 33,087 22,536 68.1% 3,218 9.7% 1,652 5.0% 5,140 22.8% 541 1.6% 31,968 3.4% 2.67 Newark 47,029 15,811 11,040 69.8% 1,457 9.2% 688 4.4% 2,626 23.8% 0 0.0% 15,329 3.0% 3.07 Oakland 414,325 183,729 75,322 41.0% 7,115 3.9% 33,457 18.2% 67,272 89.3% 562 0.3% 171,880 6.4% 2.41 Piedmont 10,973 3,964 3,679 92.8% 68 1.7% 138 3.5% 78 2.1% 0 0.0% 3,846 3.0% 2.85 Pleasanton 76,830 29,750 18,004 60.5% 2,858 9.6% 1,687 5.7% 6,806 37.8% 395 1.3% 28,581 3.9% 2.69 San Leandro 87,506 32,952 19,659 59.7% 2,008 6.1% 1,952 5.9% 8,436 42.9% 898 2.7% 31,851 3.3% 2.75 Union City 67,434 21,947 13,762 62.7% 2,856 13.0% 821 3.7% 3,489 25.4% 1,019 4.6% 21,467 2.2% 3.14 Source: California Department of Finance, City/County Population Estimates, E5, 2022 HOUSING NEEDS 30

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Housing Cost and Vacancy
Housing Costs and Vacancy have a pronounced effect on residents' ability to find housing that is affordable , that fits their needs, and be able to purchase a home, allowing them to build equity and stability in the community. Newark has experienced increasing housing costs over the past decade.

The Zillow Home Value Index shows home prices $ 542,000 in 2013, to more than double that in 2022, with an average home value of $1,169,000. Coupled with low vacancy rates of three percent, Newark residents face numerous housing challenges. In relation to other cities in Alameda County, Newark provides fewer housing options, but has a similar percentage of housing types as Union City, and fewer five plus units than Fremont. Only Newark and Piedmont do not have any mobile homes.

In relation to Alameda County and the Bay Area, Newark has a lower percentage of vacancies, with a 3 percent total vacancy rate( Table 2-3) 14 % of rental units are vacant, in comparison to Alameda County at 24 % and the Bay Area at 26% ( Figure 2-8). The largest vacancies are for units that are for sale at 23% and for seasonal use at 30%. Taking into account the increase in housing prices over the last 10 years, with a significant spike in 2018, brings ownership costs to over $900,00, the large vacancy rates for homes sales correlates. Throughout community engagement, community members echoed the data to share that housing costs are too high and unattainable for current residents. In response, programs such as H2.2 an Accessory Dwelling Unit program to incentivise and support the increased development of ADU production, Program H2.6 to Work in Partnership with Newark Unified School District to find creative ways to utilize school properties, Program H2.7 the Affordable housing fund to support non profit developers in developing affordable housing, H4.4 the Small Sites program supports the purchase of small scale multi family housing by affordable housing organizations and H5.1 First Time Homebuyer Assistance. As seen in Figure 2-7, BIPOC communities have lower rates of home ownership, and programs such as H5.1 will focus on supporting those populations.

HOUSING NEEDS 31

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 2-4: Newark Zillow Home Value Index, 2013 -2022
The ZHVI is a smoothed, seasonally adjusted measure of the typical home value and market changes across a given region and housing type. The ZHVI reflects the typical value for homes in the 35th to 65th percentile range. The ZHVI includes all owner-occupied housing units, including both single-family homes and condominiums.

Source: Zillow Home Value Index (ZHCI) 2013-2022
HOUSING NEEDS 32

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 2-5: Home Values of Owner Occupied Units, 2015-2019 Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 Year Data, 2015-2019, Table B25075 Rental Cost and Affordability
With the recent increase in rents in the Bay Area, affordable housing has become much harder for lower- and moderate-income households to find. This rent burden is an important issue for many households. In Newark 44 percent of rents are from $2,000 to $3,000 dollars per month from the 2021 American Community Survey. Conversely, only 17 percent of residents pay between $500 and $1,500 dollars per month. An indicator of the few choices available for deed restricted affordable housing in the City, which is consistent with what we have heard from community members. This is a slight change from 2019, with a reduction of those paying $1,00 to $2,500 (see Table 2-4), and a sharp increase in those paying $3,000 dollars or more, from 7 percent in 2019 to 20 percent in 2021. The percentage of those paying $500 to $1,000 dollars per month doubled from 3 percent to 6 percent, potentially tied to new affordable senior housing developments.

Newark, in relation to Alameda County and the Bay Area, has an average of 24 percent of residents paying from $2,000 to $3,000 dollars in rent, a higher percentage than both Alameda and the Bay Area with an average of 14 percent (Figure 2-6). In Newark 3 percent of residents were paying $500 to $1,000 dollars per month in cash rent, significantly fewer in comparison to Alameda County at 12 percent and the Bay Area at 10 percent. This wide discrepancy could be attributed to the lack of deed restricted affordable housing, an abundance of single family homes, HOUSING NEEDS 33

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
and general housing pressure from high wage earners of Silicon Valley. Table 2-5 shows most recent rents show a general increase in rents from the previous years, with housing for two and three bedrooms seeing the largest increases. With some of the largest family sizes in Alameda County, this places extreme pressure on larger families looking for housing. Housing for large families is one of the key populations the city is focusing on for new housing through their Affordable Housing Action Plan. Programs such as H 2.1 and H2.2 will open up new housing opportunities for residents. H2.7 provides funding for affordable housing developments in Newark.

Figure 2-6: Rents for Renter Occupied Units in Newark, Alameda County, and the Bay Area, 2015- 2019 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25056 HOUSING NEEDS 34

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 2-4: Newark Cash Rent, 2021
Rent Percent Population
Less than $500 per month 5% 220
$500 to $1,000 per month 6% 270
$1,000 to $1,500 6% 280
$1,550 to $2,000 18% 799
$2,000 to $2,500 22% 979
$2,500 to $3,000 22% 958
$3,000 or more 20% 860
Total with cash rent 100% 4,366
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2017- 2021), Table B25056 Table 2-5: Newark Rents, 2023
Unit Average Rent Year over year change
Studio $1,600 +$200
One Bedroom $2,300 +$55
Two Bedroom $2,900 +$299
Three Bedroom $3,750 +$314
Four Bedroom + $4,950 +$133
Source :Zillow.com, accessed June 21st, 2023
HOUSING NEEDS 35

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 2-7: Housing Tenure by Race, 2015- 2919
Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 Year Data, 2015-2019, Table B25003 (A-1) Vacancy Rate
Figure 2-8: Vacant Units By Type, 2015- 2019
Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 Year Data, 2015-2019, Table B25004 HOUSING NEEDS 36

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Overpayment and Overcrowding
Overall, many residents are paying too much for housing, while many others have been priced out entirely. If a household spends more than 30 percent of its monthly income on housing, it is considered cost-burdened. If it spends more than 50 percent, it is considered severely cost-burdened. In Newark, 12 percent of households spend 50 percent or more of their income on housing, while 19 percent spend between 30 to 50 percent. However, these rates vary greatly across income and race. Of those who are extremely low income—making 30 percent or less of the area median income (AMI)— 365 renter households, or 51 percent, spend more than half of their income on housing, as do extremely low-income owners at a slightly lower number of 255 households
7 . Figure 2-9 shows that renters are more likely to be cost burdened, with twice the number of renters (30%) spending more than 30 percent of their income on housing compared to 16 percent of homeowners, and 14 percent of renters are severely cost burdened. This leaves them with little to meet other basic needs, such as food and healthcare. Since low-income residents and communities of color are the most cost burdened, they are at the highest risk for eviction, displacement, and homelessness. Through the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, Newark will be able to support the development of affordable housing throughout the city, with a focus on special populations such as seniors and large families.

Overcrowding is defined by the US Census as households with 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens). Units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. Newark residents are experiencing both overcrowding and severe overcrowding. Table 2-6 shows Newark with 9 percent of the population living in overcrowded conditions, and three percent in severely overcrowded households.

Figure 2-9: Cost Burdened Households, Renters and Homeowners, 2015- 2019 US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 year data, 2015-2019, Table B25070, B25091 7 Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2015-2019 release HOUSING NEEDS 37

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 2-10: Low Income Cost Burdened Households, Renters and Homeowners, 2015- 2019 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2015-2019 release. Note: For this figure, the definition of cost burdened isspending more than 30% of income on housing.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2015-2019 release
Table 2-6 Overcrowding by Regional Population, 2013-2017 Geography

1.00 occupants per
room or less

1.01 to 1.50
occupants per
room

1.50 occupants per
room or more
Newark 88% 9% 3%
Alameda County 92% 5% 3%
Bay Area 93% 4% 3%
Source: Housing and Urban Development, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, ACS Tabulation. 2013-2017 HOUSING NEEDS 38

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 2-11: Overcrowding by Tenure and Severity, 2013- 2017 Source: Housing and Urban Development, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, ACS Tabulation. 2013-2017 Substandard Housing Units
High housing costs can often result in households, particularly renters, living in substandard conditions to afford housing. Through public comment and mapping of code enforcement reports, there is a high concentration of substandard housing conditions in the Mirabeau and Old Town/ Central neighborhoods from 2018 to the present, some of the oldest housing stock in the city. US Census data shows that a small number of homeowners and renter households experience substandard housing with .3 percent having substandard kitchens. That would translate to 42 homeowners and 37 rental units. Homeowners reported 0.1 percent of homes without adequate plumbing, or 12 homes. There were no rental units reported. Due to the fact that over 50 percent of Newark’s housing stock was constructed before 1980, there is potential for other buildings in need of rehabilitation in the near future, and Newark will continue to offer and expand upon home maintenance programs for low and moderate income residents, with a focus on informing residents in the Mirabeau Park and Old Town/ Central Newark neighborhoods. The city has identified 40 units that could use rehabilitation and repair. The existing rehabilitation program has supported about 10 homes per year and with the addition of programs such as H1.1 Housing Rehabilitation and Repair, supporting homeowners with repairs, and H1.2 Citywide inspection program, which will inspect rental properties to ensure safe and healthy living conditions for all will help in addressing these needs and support even more households.

HOUSING NEEDS 39

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 2-7: Substandard Housing Units, 2015-2019
Building Amenity Owner Renter
Percentage
Kitchen 0.3% 0.3%
Plumbing 0.1% 0.0%
Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 Year Data, 2015-2019, Table B25053, B25043, B25049 Subsidized Housing Units at Risk
Currently Newark has a total of 274 low income subsidized housing units (Table 2-8), owned by non profit housing developers. Due to the ownership structure of the housing units, the California Housing Partnership finds these units are at low risk of conversion to market rate housing in the next ten years. Newark Station Seniors, Newark Gardens l and Newark Gardens ll are senior housing developments in Newark that comprise the total number of subsidized housing units.

Table 2-8: Subsidized Affordable Housing Units at Risk of Conversion to Market Rate 2020 Geography Low Moderate High Very High
Total Assisted
Units in Database
Newark 274 0 0 0 274
Alameda County 23,040 167 189 106 23,502
Bay Area 110,177 3,375 1,854 1,053 116,459
Source: Universe: HUD, Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), USDA, and CalHFA projects. Subsidized or assisted developmentsthat do not have one of the aforementioned financing sources may not be included.

HOUSING NEEDS 40

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
C. Housing Needs for Special Needs Populations
Seniors
Seniors in Newark are a growing population, as long time residents continue to age and the city adds more affordable senior rental housing. As of the 2020 US Census, there are 6,005 Seniors in Newark. Seniors in Newark overwhelmingly are home owners at every income level, with low income seniors having the highest percentage of renters at 37 percent. 8 Low income seniors
experience higher rates of cost burden then moderate and above moderate income counterparts.

Figure 2-12 shows that 37 percent of very low income seniors are cost burdened with 22 percent extremely cost burdened.

Figure 2-12: Senior Households by Income and Tenure, 2013- 2017 Source: Housing and Urban Development, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2013-2017 8 Source: US Department of Housing and Urban Development. Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS Tabulation, 2013-2017 release
HOUSING NEEDS 41

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 2-13: Cost Burdened Rates by Income Level, Seniors, 2013- 2017 Source: Housing and Urban Development, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2013-2017 Available affordable housing for seniors in Newark includes: Newark Gardens, Newark Gardens 2 , Newark Station, and Timber Senior Housing is under construction with an anticipated completion later this year. As the senior population continues to grow, there will be increased need for housing that is accessible, affordable to those on fixed incomes and allows residents to age in place. In addition to increased types of housing options, seniors need support with the maintenance of their existing homes and their age and spaces that are accessible. Programs to address the growing senior population are program H1.1 Financial assistance with home repair, the adoption of H2.4 Universal Design Ordinance, and program H4.5 will develop a Shared Housing Partnership.

Disability
People with disabilities often face additional housing challenges. Encompassing a broad group of individuals living with a variety of physical, cognitive and sensory impairments, many people with disabilities live on fixed incomes and often need accessible designed housing to live more independent lives. In Newark, eight percent of the population has a disability of any kind, with the majority being ambulatory (Table 2-9). Due to housing challenges of affordability, accessibility and HOUSING NEEDS 42

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
discrimination, 87 percent
9 of people with disabilities live with family members in Newark.

Partnering with local organizations that serve people with disabilities will support Newark in developing more housing options to meet the diverse needs of this population. Through community engagement we have connected with organizations providing resources and support to those with disabilities: Deaf Plus, Housing Consortium of the East Bay, and Alameda County Public Health Disability Council. Program H4.7 will identify housing opportunities for those with Developmental disabilities, and program H2.4 for a Universal Design Ordinance.

Table 2-9: Disability by Type, 2015-2019
Persons with Disability Percentage
Total percentage of people with Disabilities 8%
With an ambulatory difficulty 4%
With an independent living difficulty 3%
With a hearing difficulty 3%
With a cognitive difficulty 2%
With a self-care difficulty 2%
With a vision difficulty 1%
Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 Year Data, 2015-2019, Table B18102, B18103, B18104, Table B18105, Table B18105, B18107
People Experiencing Homelessness
People experiencing homelessness have steadily increased in Alameda County since 2017, with 9,747 sheltered and unsheltered people at the most recent point in time count on February 22, 2022. The city of Newark has a documented reduction of people experiencing homelessness, from 89 in 2019, to 58 sheltered and unsheltered people in 2022. The point in time count found a total of 32 unsheltered individuals, with 34 percent, or 11 people, living in a tent, with 8 living outside and 7 in a RV. Fewer people were found living in their car, at 6 people or 19 percent. It is no surprise that the largest number of people outside of shelters are living in tents, as the locations with the highest concentrations of people experiencing homelessness are in the undeveloped areas along highway 84, in the Eucalyptus grove, and along the 880. These sites are all concentrated in the Mirabeau and Mayhews Landing areas, in the northern portion of the city due 9 Source: California Department of Developmental Services, Consumer Count by California Zip Code and Residence Type (2020).

HOUSING NEEDS 43

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
to the proximity of open space for tents along the freeway.

Although Newark has a significantly lower number of people experiencing homelessness than neighboring jurisdictions, housing and homeless support is the most prevalent service request for Newark callers to the countywide 2-1-1 referral service, representing about 42% of all service requests. Newark residents are seeking referrals for low cost rental listings, rent payment and deposit assistance, supportive and transitional housing, emergency shelter, among other services (Eden I&R Referral Service, January 2020 through March 2022).

Currently Second Chance provides transitional housing for those experiencing homelessness in Newark. The facility has 32 beds, with the shelter at 81 % capacity on the point in time count. In conversation with John Balentine, Executive Director of Second Chance, he shared that as an organization, they budget funds for transportation, providing bus passes and having a van to transport residents if public transportation is not sufficient.

The city has engaged in a number of actions to address homelessness in Newark. There is a partnership with the Fremont Family Resource Center to provide support to Newark households at risk of becoming homeless, and the city was awarded a HomeKey grant to convert the Towne Place Suites extended stay hotel into 124 supportive, affordable residential units known as Cedar Community Apartments. The Housing Navigation Center in Fremont has prioritized space for those experiencing homelessness from the greater Tri City area. The 2021 Housing Navigation Center Annual report showed 8 percent or 6 Newark residents were supported. The City also partners with the city of Fremont to provide access for personal hygiene, with a mobile unit coming to Newark once a week for showers and laundry.

Utilizing American Rescue Plan Act funding, the city is working to establish a local family resource center in the Old Town/ Bayside neighborhood. This resource center would provide an initial point of access to any residents in need of social services. Some services could be accessed directly at the center through third party social service providers or referrals could be made to other agencies,and a space for the Promotores, a local organization for the Latino Community. Most recently the city has created a Homelessness Committee with members from various City departments to develop a cohesive plan to address homelessness and have launched a Human Resources webpage, connecting the community with resources for people experiencing homelessness such as housing, transportation. and food pantries around the city.

The city has developed a number of programs in response to the needs of people experiencing homelessness identified : Program H2.5 will continue to build upon the work the city has undertaken to develop a local response to homelessness. Program H2.10, makes changes to increase uptake of Single Room Occupancy or (SROs), an affordable housing type, Program H4.10, identifies zoning changes for special needs housing, and Program H4.8 connects residents with foreclosure assistance. The following is a list of agencies operating support services, emergency shelters, and transitional and supportive housing in Newark and the surrounding area:

HOUSING NEEDS 44

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
● Viola Blythe Community Services Center, Newark. Viola Blythe provides services for Children, men, women and families in immediate need can use the services and programs of the Viola Blythe Community Service Center. No fees are charged for any services provided. Some services include food distribution, baby food and formula, clothing, children’s shoe fund, and referrals to other agencies.
● Clean Start Mobile Hygiene Unit. For someone experiencing homelessness, keeping yourself and your clothes clean can be incredibly challenging, and can greatly impact your ability to get and keep a job, or simply participate in society. To meet this need, the City of Fremont, City of Newark, and several community partners developed the Clean Start Mobile Hygiene Program to provide much-needed shower and laundry services to our homeless neighbors.This mobile hygiene van travels between Fremont, Newark and Union City each week.
● Centro de Servicios, Union City. Centro de Servicios has assisted more than 800 families and individuals every month since its inception in 1974. This nonprofit corporation is a major service provider for the homeless population in Alameda County’s Tri-City area. The center provides basic necessities, such as food, clothing, and blankets as well as referrals, counseling, job listings, and workshops to its clients. Recently celebrating 40 years of operations, Centro de Servicios serves over 1,300 families per month, out of multiple locations. Staff estimates that they assist at least 20-50 homeless or at-risk clients from Union City per week. Most (80 percent) of these clients are Latino. Many live in substandard housing, in their cars, or at local parks and campgrounds. Staff makes referrals to nearby shelters, especially Sunrise Village in Fremont and Second Chance in Newark. ● Second Chance Addiction Recovery. Second Chance is a counseling and recovery agency that operates five outpatient centers in addition to a short-term emergency shelter. They have locations in Newark, Hayward, Phoenix, and the Tri-City area. The emergency shelter has 30 beds for single men, women, and for families. Addiction recovery services are provided on-site and there is not typically a waiting list to receive treatment and recovery services.
● Abode Services (formerly known as Tri-City Homeless Coalition), Fremont. Abode Services operates nearly 60 primary programs across six counties and has experienced dramatic growth in response to the increasing need for affordable housing and services for homeless people. Abode Services works to provide housing and services to homeless people in the community as they work to help people remain stably housed and live as independently as possible. In 2021 they served 14,700 adults and children across their programs. In Alameda and Santa Clara Counties, Abode offers three main types of services:
emergency shelter and street outreach services, supportive housing for formerly homeless families and individuals, and supportive services, such as mental health services and employment support. They provide extensive services to Tri-City residents, including permanent supportive housing, emergency shelter and services at Sunrise Village Emergency Shelter in Fremont, and social and health services though the HOPE Project Mobile Health Clinic. Their programs serve a wide variety of people, including families with HOUSING NEEDS 45

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
children, at risk youth exiting foster care, veterans and their families, and people who are chronically homeless. In 2021, 5,542 participants throughout Alameda County received support.
● Safe Alternatives to Violent Environments (SAVE). SAVE is a non-profit community-based organization founded in 1976 to address domestic violence. They provide supportive services, advocacy and education, and a 25-bed safe house for families fleeing abuse. From 2020 to 2021, 1,265 participants received critical services from SAVE. SAVE also provided shelter to 98 women and children and provided rent subsidies and ongoing case management to 60 families in the Housing First Program.

Large Households
Large Families are considered to have 5 or more people, bringing about the need for larger housing units with three bedrooms or more. Figure 2-13 shows Newark has a larger percentage of families with 3 or more people than Alameda County and the Bay Area, with 38 percent of households with 3 or more, and 19 percent of households with five or more people. While Newark has a large inventory of single family homes, the cost of rent and ownership place many of these homes beyond reach for families. Families also face costs such as child care, increased transportation and medical care that further reduce their housing budget allowance. The pace of construction of multifamily and affordable units has not kept pace with that of market rate single family homes in Newark. Program H5.2 Affordable Housing Development Programs work to increase the number of affordable housing constructed in the city. Newark’s Affordable Housing Action Plan has identified large families as a community of focus for new housing needs.

HOUSING NEEDS 46

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 2-14: Households by Household Size, 2015- 2019
Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 Year Data, 2015-2019, Table B11016 Female Headed Household
Government Code Section 65583(a)(7) identifies families with female heads of households as a group that may have special housing needs and requires the City to analyze the housing needs of these households. Female-headed households are households led by a single female with one or more children under the age of 18 at home. In Newark, 11 percent of households are female-headed families, which are often at greater risk of housing insecurity. A greater number of single parent headed households are renters, with 67 percent of married households owning homes, compared to 16 percent of female headed households (Figure 2-15). Female headed households have a significantly higher vulnerability to poverty, 22.8 percent of female-headed households with children fall below the Federal Poverty Line, while 5.7 percent of female-headed households without children live in poverty (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B17012 ). As Female headed households face challenges of familial housing discrimination, limited income due to wage discrimination against women makes this population have higher rates of poverty and vulnerability to being housing cost burdened.

HOUSING NEEDS 47

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 2-15: Household Type, 2015- 2019
Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 Year Data, 2015-2019, Table B11001 HOUSING NEEDS 48

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 2-16: Household Type by Tenure, 2015- 2019
Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 Year Data, 2015-2019, Table B25011 Existing housing need for extremely low-income households Residents with extremely low incomes, less than 30% of the Area Median Income, face extreme housing challenges due to fixed or low incomes, credit, disability, family structure and access to affordable housing. In Newark, 58% of households make more than 100% of the Area Median Income (AMI), compared to 10% making less than 30% of AMI, which is considered extremely low-income (see Figure 2-17). In Newark, renters are disproportionately experiencing cost burden, with 30 percent of renters cost burdened and 14 percent spending more than 50 percent of their income on housing (Figure 2-9) . Regionally, more than half of all households make more than 100% AMI, while 15% make less than 30% AMI. In Alameda County, 30% AMI is the equivalent to the annual income of $34,850 for a family of four. Many households with multiple wage earners – including food service workers, full-time students, teachers, farmworkers and healthcare professionals – can fall into lower AMI categories due to relatively stagnant wages in many industries.

To estimate the projected housing need for extremely low-income households, 50 percent of Newark’s 464 very low-income RHNA units are assumed to serve extremely low-income households. Based on this methodology, the City has a projected need of 232 units for extremely HOUSING NEEDS 49

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
low-income households over the 2023-2031 Housing Element planning period. More than half of this allocation will be provided through the Cedar Creek Apartments, which is already in the development pipeline and has received $6M in funding support from the City’s Affordable Housing Impact Fee Fund. Additional proposed programs to support the housing needs for this population include Program H5.2 Affordable Housing Development Programs work to increase the number of affordable housing constructed in the city.

Figure 2-17: Households by Household Income Level, 2013-2017 Source: Housing and Urban Development, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, 2013-2017 Farmworkers
The number of farmworkers living in Newark has declined over the years, with the student population at 57 students for the 2019-2020 school year. The previous years saw 79 students for 2017-2018 and 72 for the 2018 to 2019 school year. Table 3-12 shows the trends for both Alameda county and the greater Bay Area see a similar decline in the migrant farmworker student population. Generally, the number of farmworkers living in Alameda county has been declining since 2012, with fewer than 400 residents working in the industry in a permanent position. It is important to recognize that farmworkers could be under-counted by the census due to their HOUSING NEEDS 50

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
migrant nature. Farming and farmworkers are a significant element of the state's economy, but play less of a role in the Bay Area. Due to lower wages, language barriers, and inconsistent work, farmworkers can have difficulty securing housing, and for these reasons could experience overcrowding and substandard housing conditions. To support these populations, program H2.6 Work in Partnership with Newark Unified School District to ensure that housing resources are reaching families that need them and and Program H5.2 Affordable Housing Development Programs work to increase the number of affordable housing constructed in the city.

HOUSING NEEDS 51

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
SECTION 3 AFFIRMATIVELY

FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
A. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Historic and current land use policies and planning play a key role in the ability of individuals and families to live in neighborhoods with opportunity, including academically and culturally supportive schools, a wide variety of living wage jobs, and convenient access to transit and services. In response to continued housing discrimination, which prohibits discrimination regarding the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status, and disability status — people within protected classes continue to encounter limits in housing choice and mobility. In 2018, the California State Legislature passed Assembly Bill (AB) 686 to expand upon the fair housing requirements and protections outlined in the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA); and, protect the requirement to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) as published in the 2015 U.S. Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HUD) Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule. California’s Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) defines AFFH as taking meaningful actions to explicitly address, combat, and reverse disparities resulting from past patterns of segregation to foster more inclusive communities. As part of this, housing elements are required to include the following components:
● Inclusive and Equitable Outreach: Housing elements must make an effort to equitably include all community stakeholders in the housing element participation process. ● Assessment of Fair Housing: All housing elements must include an assessment of fair housing. This assessment should include an analysis of the following four fair housing issues: integration and segregation patterns and trends, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risk.
● Analysis of Sites Inventory: Local jurisdictions must evaluate and address how particular sites available for housing development will meet the needs of households at all income levels. The housing element must analyze and conclude whether the identified sites improve or exacerbate conditions for fair housing.
● Identification of Contributing Factors: Based on findings from the previous steps, housing elements must identify, evaluate, and prioritize the contributing factors related to fair housing issues.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 52

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
● Goals and Meaningful Actions to AFFH: Local jurisdictions must adopt fair housing goals and actions that are significant, meaningful, and sufficient to overcome identified patterns of segregation and affirmatively further fair housing. The housing element should include metrics and milestones for evaluating progress and fair housing results.

B. History of the Land and People
The land that is now Newark is the aboriginal homeland to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe, Ohlone, Confederated Villages of Lisjan and Tamien Nation. Throughout the period of European colonization, aboriginal tribes were removed from their lands and in some circumstances moved into mission settlements, such as the Mission San José, and subjected to religious conversion practices and forced labor. In the Early 20th century Newark was still primarily marshland and waterways leading into the San Francisco Bay. Land speculation brought investors to the area and Newark became home to a dairy farm and tourism from around the county for picnicking and entertainment. Over time a railroad connection was established south to Santa Cruz and North to Alameda and industry followed. Incorporated as a city in 1955, Newark has been the home to steel foundries, manufacturing, and a large and successful solar evaporation of salt production that rivaled the entire Bay Area. Newark’s development and land use was divided, with manufacturing isolated to the western portion of the city. The residential portion consisted of single family homes built during the post war building boom that were accessible to white families only through government backed low interest loans provided by the Federal Housing Administration. As manufacturing moved out of Newark in the 1970’s and 1980’s, Newark has transitioned to an economy of technology and education. The transition has also transformed the city from primarily White to one with a majority of residents from Asia and Latin America.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 53

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Ann Marie Sayers, Ruth Orta, Corrina Gould and Caleen Sisk at Living On Ohlone Land, Photo by Christopher McLeod
Although Newark has no redlining maps or racially restrictive covenants on file, de facto discrimination has shaped access to housing historically and into the present day. From discrimination in governmental lending for single family homes, to the real estate industry and personal prejudice, Newark’s growth as a city coincided with unregulated racial discrimination in housing during the 1950s and 1960’s. Through oral history accounts of Jean Ficklen, founder of Afro-American Cultural & Historical Society and first African American teacher in Newark, we learn of the discrimination her family faced in finding housing in the Bay Area as an African American family in the 1960’s. Ms. Ficklen and her family were looking for housing closer to her husband’s employment at the Lockheed Missile and Space Center in Sunnyvale, California, a 54 mile commute one way to Richmond where they lived. They found a home in Hayward that they liked, and after meeting with the realtor, were set to move to a house there. The day before they were scheduled to move, the house was no longer available to them. They were offered a house to rent in Newark but were asked not to tell who rented it to them. Soon after they moved to the neighborhood, for sale signs went up, typical of the times of neighborhood blockbusting fueled by fear and discrimination (J.Ficklen, Personal communication, January 21, 2021).

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 54

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
C. Summary of Fair Housing Need
Fair housing
● A lack of affordable housing for residents for sale and rent is one of the largest fair housing issues Newark faces. Due to decades-long reduction in federal funding for affordable housing production, and a lack of affordable housing production at the city level, there is a shortage of housing at prices that meet the needs of current and future residents. ● Disability and race are the highest reported instances of discrimination in Newark over the past five years. In 2020-2021 Echo Housing saw 10 cases of reported discrimination based on disability and 4 cases in National origin. The city heard from residents, specifically the Latinx community that there are significant challenges to accessing housing. A report from El Tiempano found that women and undocumented residents faced the most challenges, specific issues faced by residents were:
○ Difficulty of providing documentation when many undocumented immigrants are paid under the table or are not named on rental leases
○ Challenges accessing information digitally
○ Complicated/confusing applications without assistance readily available Segregation and Integration
● There is a significant level of segregation between Latinx and White residents with an index of .229 or 22.9%. Meaning that 22 percent of Latinx or white residents would need to move to address this. Due to the fact that the Latinx community is 30 percent of the population in Newark, this indicates a significant level of segregation between Latinx and White residents in Newark, slightly higher than segregation at the regional level. ● Asian residents are the most isolated at 0.451, meaning the average Asian residentlives in a neighborhood thatis 45.1% Asian. Asian residents also have the highest percentage (36.7%) of residents making more than 100 percent of area median income. ● Other ethnicities in Newark have a higher likelihood of interacting with people outside their race. White residents have seen the greatest reduction in isolation, from 43 percent in 2000 to 27 percentin 2020.

Access to Opportunities
● Overall, Newark consists of two census tracts that are considered high resource areas (NewPark Place and Birch Grove) while the remaining six tracts (Lake- Rosemont, Mirabeau Park, Mayhews Landing, Gateway/Bayshore, Old Town and Central Newark) are considered moderate resource areas.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 55

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
● The City’s high resource areas have both dominant and secondary populations that are either White or Asian. In NewPark Place, nearly 51% of the population is Asian and 23% is White. In Birch Grove, 35% is White while nearly 29% is Asian. ● Five out of six of the City’s moderate resource areas have dominant populations that are Hispanic/Latinx, ranging from almost 34% in Mayhews Landing to nearly 53% in Old Town/Central Newark. In the remaining moderate resource area, Lake-Rosemont, 40% of the population is White, making it the dominant population while nearly 29% is Hispanic/Latinx.
● There are large disparities in environmental outcomes in Newark, with low outcomes in central Newark and a portion of the Old Town area that is also home to a majority of lower income and Hispanic/Latinx residents.

Disparate Housing Needs
Overcrowding
BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and People of Color) populations are the most cost burdened and experience disproportionate rates of overcrowding. Central Newark in the Old Town area has 9 percent of households experiencing overcrowded housing, with 5 percent of households experiencing extreme overcrowding in the Northwest corner of the city. As shown in Figure 3-2, these two areas are predominantly occupied by communities of color, with 80 to 100 percent of residents in the Old Town area. Mixed race residents face the highest rates at 33 percent, followed by Hispanic/Latinx (30%) and Indigenous residents at 22 percent.

Cost Burdened
Newark’s low and moderate income populations and renters experience the highest levels of cost burden. BIPOC communities, Black (41%), Indigenous (46%), Multi Racial (46%), and Latinx (47%) residents are the highest cost burdened, and most vulnerable to displacement, overcrowding and homelessness. Asian and White residents are the least cost burdened at 27 percent and 21 percent respectively. Renters are more likely to be cost burdened, with twice the number of renters (30%) spending more than 30 percent of their income on housing compared to 16 percent of homeowners.

Families
Households with children face additional challenges accessing housing that meets their needs for both size and cost. Housing survey results conducted from March 15th through April 30th 2022, found that when asked what are the most urgent housing needs at this time, 50 percent responded that housing for families was the greatest need. There was a special interest in housing for single AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 56

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
parents, as female-headed households make up 17 percent of all households and 22.8 percent of female-headed households with children fall below the Federal Poverty Line.

People Experiencing Homelessness
Through community engagement we have been alerted to the high number of residents experiencing homelessness that are finding shelter in local motels that are not reflected in point in time counts. Homelessness in Newark affects all racial and ethnic groups, although not equally.

There is a significant population of families experiencing homelessness, with about 5% of all students In Newark, which further indicates the lack of affordable housing. Notably, about 96 percent of homeless students in Newark are students of color, with over 167 of these students being Hispanic or Latino. While NUSD has only a small number of Pacific Islander students (98 students), about 28 percent of them are homeless.

D. Fair Housing Assessment
Regional Barriers to Fair Housing
The following is a summary of key barriers to housing in Alameda county, compiled by Alameda County, in the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice in January of 2020. ● Across the County, segregation has increased between White residents and BIPOC communities within the last decade, with White residents comprising the majority of homeowners but only approximately a third of the County’s population. ● BIPOC households continue to have disproportionate levels of housing discrimination as renters and in the housing market. Overall, the rate of mortgage approvals has gone up in the last seven years, but the disparities in the rate of approval across race and ethnicity has stayed relatively the same. Black applicants continue to have the lowest approval rate at

59.1 percent and Hispanic applicants the second lowest at 61.5 percent compared to White applicants at 70 percent.
● BIPOC communities are displaced residents are being displaced from areas with a traditionally large population and have less access to proficient schools, jobs, and environmental health.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 57

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
● The average home sales prices have increased from approximately $300,000 to nearly $900,000 in less than 20 years (unadjusted for inflation). ● Wages have not kept up with rent increases, currently the wage needed to rent an average housing unit in the County is $44.79 an hour or $93,000 a year. Median rents have risen an average of $1,000 (unadjusted for inflation) since 2010, representing an increase of 55 percent in a 9-year period.
● Homelessness has increased by 42 percent since 2017.
● BIPOC households, especially black and Hispanic/ Latinx households, have the highest rate of disproportionate housing needs, which includes having incomplete kitchen facilities, incomplete plumbing facilities, more than 1 person per room, and households with a cost burden greater than 30 percent.
● Based on community feedback, Housing Choice Voucher holders and those with disabilities often find it difficult to find an appropriate housing unit. Some find it difficult to find an appropriately sized unit that will take their voucher and others experience that the vouchers will not cover the rent of an appropriately sized unit. ● Disability, race, and familial status are the most common bases of housing discrimination complaints forwarded to the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and the office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity.

Fair Housing Outreach Capacity and Enforcement
Fair housing complaints can be used as an indicator to identify characteristics of households experiencing discrimination in housing. Pursuant to the California Fair Employment and Housing Act [Government Code Section 12921 (a)], the opportunity to seek, obtain, and hold housing cannot be determined by an individual’s “race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, veteran or military status, genetic information, or any other basis prohibited by Section 51 of the Civil Code.” Fair housing issues that may arise in any jurisdiction include but are not limited to:
● Housing design that makes a dwelling unit inaccessible to an individual with a disability; ● Discrimination against an individual based on race, national origin, familial status, disability, religion, sex, or other characteristic when renting or selling a housing unit; and ● Disproportionate housing needs including cost burden, overcrowding, substandard housing, and risk of displacement.

The following are organizations at the state and county level that provide resources and support for fair housing and eviction defense.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 58

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
East Bay Community Law Center (EBCLC): EBCLC’s Housing Program focuses on defending eviction lawsuits brought against low-income tenants, as well as enforcement of local rent and eviction control ordinances. The program emphasizes defense of long-term tenancies to preserve the value of rent-controlled units. EBCLC also prioritizes subsidized tenancies such as those in Section 8 and conventional public housing programs, as well as on behalf of tenants with disabilities.

Housing and Economic Rights Advocates (HERA): HERA is a California statewide, not-for-profit legal service and advocacy organization dedicated to helping Californians — particularly those most vulnerable — build a safe, sound financial future, free of discrimination and economic abuses, in all aspects of household financial concerns. They provide free legal services, consumer workshops, training for professionals and community organizing support, create innovative solutions and engage in policy work locally, statewide and nationally.

Housing Equality Law Project(HELP): HELP seeks to expand legal protections in fair housing through advocacy, leadership training, education and outreach, and enforcement of anti-discrimination laws.

Newark works with ECHO Housing for fair housing enforcement. ECHO provides fair housing counseling and education, tenant/landlord counseling and mediation, and other housing-related programs. To address the needs of Limited English Proficient speakers, ECHO provides services and classes in Spanish, has online information available in multiple languages, and has access to interpretation and translation services. ECHO programs include:
● Fair housing counseling, investigation, education, and enforcement ● Tenant/landlord counseling and mediation
● Rental Assistance Program
● Home Seeking Services
● Shared Housing Counseling & Placement
● Homebuyer Education Workshops
ECHO Housing has compiled fair housing complaints in Newark that align with those at the county level, with the majority regarding race and disability. In Newark, disability has the highest share of complaints filed from 2016 to 2021 at 27, with race at 16 complaints. City staff conducted one on one interviews with affordable housing providers. Through communication with Darin Lounds on April 29th, 2022, Executive Director of the Housing Consortium of the East Bay, he shared that many people with disabilities are well educated in the process, which can make it appear there are a larger number of instances of discrimination in comparison with other types of discrimination.

El Timpano is a non profit, community based organization in Alameda County that provides access AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 59

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
to information for Spanish and Mayan speaking communities through a text based SMS platform.

They conducted an in depth investigation on the barriers that residents are experiencing accessing housing resources during COVID-19. They found that women and undocumented residents faced the most challenges, with specific issues faced by residents were:
● Difficulty of providing documentation when many undocumented immigrants are paid under the table or are not named on rental leases,
● Challenges accessing information digitally
● Complicated/confusing applications without assistance readily available Through communication through text and phone interviews, the organization found that changes that would be most impactful in supporting increased access would be less documentation-heavy requirements, help with the application process over the phone or in person, more promotion and support in Spanish, and a shorter application process.

Table 3-1: Newark Fair Housing Complaints, 2016-2021
Fiscal Year Race
National
Origin
Disability
Familial
Status
Marital
Status
Religion Sex
Source of
Income
Age Other TOTAL
2016-2017 10 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
2017-2018 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
2018-2019 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
2019-2020 1 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
2020-2021 0 4 10 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 14
Source: ECHO Housing
Table 3-2: Fair Housing Complaints Forwarded to Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Alameda County, January 2017- June 2020
Complainttype
2017-2021
Total
2017 2018 2019 2020 Cases % of Total
Color 1 1 1 0 3 1.5%
Disability 32 26 28 15 101 49.8%
Familial Status 10 5 3 2 20 9.9%
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 60

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Complainttype
2017-2021
Total
2017 2018 2019 2020 Cases % of Total
National Origin 4 4 0 1 9 4.4%
Hispanic Origin 2 2 0 0 4 2.0%
Race 7 9 5 2 23 11.3%
Asian 0 1 0 0 1 0.5%
Black 5 4 5 2 16 7.9%
Black and White 0 1 0 0 1 0.5%
Native American 1 1 0 0 2 1.0%
White 1 2 0 0 3 1.5%
Religion 1 2 2 0 5 2.5%
Retaliation 7 9 8 1 25 12.3%
Sex 7 5 5 0 17 8.4%
Total Cases 69 61 52 21 203 100%
HUD Note: Percents do not add up to 100 due to cases containing multiple bases of discrimination.

Local Knowledge on Capacity and Enforcement
Four key issues in the capacity and enforcement of fair housing have been identified in the Alameda County Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing document, and by the Executive Director of ECHO Housing:

1. Inadequate funding and organizational capacity are the primary limitations for improving and expanding upon existing fair housing enforcement. Recividng funding from a couple jurisdictions in the County is insufficient.

2. Limited sources of funding and HUD capping allocation amounts of Community Development Block Grants for fair housing activities limits the participating jurisdictions from being able to utilize more of these funds for fair housing work.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 61

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING

3. Reduction in the number of fair housing organizations and activities in the region has taken place, with at least two fair housing agencies in the East Bay have closed their doors.

4. A lack of affordable housing supply due to significant decreases in funding from the federal government since 2008. Guidance from HCD suggests a connection between fair housing complaints and that the lack of affordable housing that is needed is affordable to persons on public assistance, accessible housing for persons with disabilities, and senior citizens, single parent households and large families. Although local tax funding has been approved in select jurisdictions, a large funding shortcoming remains.

The Alameda County Collaborative, an ad-hoc group of housing program professionals working for local Alameda County jurisdictions, held a panel with representatives from community-based organizations (CBOs) on April 25, 2022. The participating CBOs’ clientele included members of protected classes, including immigrants and non-English speakers; households with special needs, including persons with disabilities and seniors; and persons who are experiencing fair housing issues. This document synthesizes key points the CBOs presented.

Community-Based Organizations identified key barriers and obstacles thatthey and their clients face related to fair housing, including:
● Insufficient access to information due to language/technology barriers (particularly for immigrant communities and seniors); fear/distrust of the system; and difficulty understanding rights/resources
● Complex, inflexible application requirements for housing resources that may vary between jurisdictions, exclude certain people (e.g., undocumented, formerly ● incarcerated), or be difficult to meet
● Communication between CBOs and property owners is difficult to navigate, requires individual relationships with each location
● Overall cost of housing (most CBOs’ clients fall under the 30% AMI) and need for tenant protections
The CBOs recommend these strategies to strengthen outreach efforts:
● Meet people where they are—engage with existing outreach channels ● Partner with school districts to distribute information, as well as any civic organizations such as libraries, religious institutions, medical services ● “Train the trainer” approach to educate existing service providers on housing rights and referrals for their clients
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 62

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
● Provide materials appropriate for audience (e.g., physical flyers for seniors; video/audio content for Mam speakers)
Solutions that panelists recommended for housing projects to better serve their clients:
● Identify onsite supportive services that are appropriate for residents early in process ● Early and sustained relationships between service providers and properties, especially relative to preparing eligible residents for the document/application needs for housing ● Renters’ protection and long-term rental subsidies, particularly for households under 30% AMI
● Greater flexibility in application process (make it easier for CBOs and their clients to navigate, remove barriers for undocumented people)
Through housing survey responses and small group conversations in community meetings, The city has constantly heard from Newark residents and community organizations that there is both not enough affordable housing at levels accessible for those earning lower wages, as well as access to housing resources and application requirements for housing that make accessing housing out of reach.

Segregation and Integration Patterns
Segregation Patterns in the Bay Area
Across the San Francisco Bay Area, White residents and above moderate-income residents are significantly more segregated from other racial and income groups . The highest levels of racial segregation occur between the Black and white populations. The analysis completed for this report indicates that the amount of racial segregation both within Bay Area cities and across jurisdictions in the region has decreased since the year 2000. This finding is consistent with recent research from the Othering and Belonging Institute at UC Berkeley, which concluded that “although 7 of the 9 Bay Area counties were more segregated in 2020 than they were in either 1980 or 1990, racial residential segregation in the region appears to have peaked around the year 2000 and has generally declined since.” However, compared to cities in other parts of California, Bay Area jurisdictions have more neighborhood level segregation between residents from different racial groups. Additionally, there is also more racial segregation between Bay Area cities compared to other regions in the state.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 63

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Segregation is the separation of different demographic groups into different geographic locations or communities, meaning that groups are unevenly distributed across geographies. The city looked at two spatial forms of segregation: neighborhood level segregation within a local jurisdiction and city level segregation between jurisdictions in the Bay Area.

Neighborhood level segregation: Segregation of race and income groups can occur from neighborhood to neighborhood within a city.

City level segregation: Race and income divides also occur between jurisdictions in a region.

Newark and Regional Segregation
To understand how Newark is connected to the total segregation of the Bay Area, one can look at the difference in the racial composition of a jurisdiction compared to the racial composition of the region as a whole. The racial demographics in Newark for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020 can be found in Table 3-3 below. The table also provides the racial composition of the nine-county Bay Area. As of 2020, Newark has a lower share of white residents than the Bay Area as a whole, a higher share of Latinx residents, a lower share of Black residents, and a significantly higher share of Asian/Pacific Islander residents.

Latinx residents are primarily in close proximity to major highways and arterial roads such as Thornton Avenue, with White and Asian populations predominantly living to the North and South of Newark. The highest non white populations at 80 to 100 percent are concentrated along Thornton Ave in Old Town.

Table 3-3: Population by Racial Group, Newark and the Region, 2000 to 2020 Race Newark Bay Area
2000 2010 2020 2020
Asian/Pacific Islander 21.1% 28.2% 42.6% 28.2%
Black/African American 3.9% 4.5% 3.1% 5.6%
Latinx 28.6% 35.2% 30.2% 24.4%
Other or Multiple Races 6.2% 4.6% 5.3% 5.9%
White 40.3% 27.5% 18.8% 35.8%
Source: Universe: Population. Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 isfrom U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010, Table P4. Data for 2000 is standardized to 2010 censustract geographies and isfrom U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 64

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-1: Predominant Racial Groups in Newark
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

Race and Ethnicity
Asian and Hispanic/Latinx populations have grown significantly over the past 20 years to become the majority populations, with decreasing Black and White populations. The Asian population in Newark is multi-ethnic, with the largest being Chinese (10.1 %), followed by Filipino (9.6%) and Asian Indian (8.9%).

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 65

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 3-4: Race and Ethnicity of Newark Residents, 2000 to 2020 Year
American Indian
or Alaska Native,
Non-Hispanic
Asian / API,
Non-Hispanic
Black or
African
American,
Non-Hispanic
White,
Non-Hispanic
Other Race or
Multiple Races,
Non-Hispanic
Hispanic or
Latinx
2000 148 9,329 1,639 17,103 128 12,145
2010 95 12,005 1,908 11,726 1,845 14,994
2020 107 17,315 1,534 10,629 1,822 15,975
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Figure 3-2: Racial Demographics of Newark, 2018
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 66

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Dissimilarity Index
Dissimilarity Index Guidance for Cities with Small Racial Group Populations The analysis conducted for this report suggests that dissimilarity index values are unreliable for a population group if that group represents approximately less than 5% of the jurisdiction’s total population.

If a jurisdiction has a very small population of a racial group, this indicates that segregation between the jurisdiction and the region (inter-city segregation) is likely to be an important feature of the jurisdiction’s segregation patterns.

Table 3-5 below provides the dissimilarity index values indicating the level of segregation in Newark between white residents and residents who are Black, Latinx, or Asian/Pacific Islander.

The table also provides the dissimilarity index between white residents and all residents of color in the jurisdiction, and all dissimilarity index values are shown across three time periods (2000, 2010, and 2020).

In Newark, the highest segregation is between Black and White residents (see Table 3-5).

Newark’s Black/white dissimilarity index of 0.244 means that 24.4 percent of Black or White residents would need to move to a different neighborhood to create perfect integration between Black residents and white residents. However, this dissimilarity index value is not a reliable data point due to small population size. See callout box above for more information. Latinx residents have rates of segregation between White residents with an index of .229 or 22.9 percent. Due to the fact that the Latinx community is 30 percent of the population in Newark, this indicates a significant level of segregation between Latinx and White residents in Newark, slightly higher than segregation at the regional level.

Table 3-5: Dissimilarity Index Between Racial Groups, 2000 to 2020 Race Newark Bay Area
2000 2010 2020 2020
Asian/Pacific Islander vs. White 0.183 0.170 0.192 0.185 Black/African American vs. White 0.180* 0.204* 0.244* 0.244 Latinx vs. White 0.286 0.230 0.229 0.207
People of Color vs. White 0.204 0.173 0.169 0.168
Universe: Population. Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 isfrom U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010, Table P4. Data for 2000 isstandardized to AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 67

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
2010 censustract geographies and isfrom U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004. Note: If a number is marked with an asterisk (*), it indicatesthat the index is based on a racial group making up lessthan 5 percent of the jurisdiction population, leading to unreliable numbers.

Isolation Index
Within the City of Newark the most isolated racial group is Asian residents. Newark’s isolation index of 0.451 for Asian residents means that the average Asian resident lives in a neighborhood that is 45.1% Asian. Other racial groups are less isolated, meaning they may be more likely to encounter other racial groups in their neighborhoods. The isolation index values for all racial groups in Newark for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020 can be found in Table 3-6 below. Among all racial groups in this jurisdiction, the white population’s isolation index has changed the most over time, becoming less isolated from other racial groups between the years 2000 and 2020.

Table 3-6: Isolation Index for Newark and the Bay Area, 2000 to 2020 Race Newark Bay Area Average
2000 2010 2020 2020
Asian/Pacific Islander 0.236 0.307 0.451 0.245
Black/African American .041 0.048 0.032 0.053
Latinx 0.331 0.386 0.334 0.251
White 0.431 0.297 0.207 0.491
Universe: Population. Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 isfrom U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010, Table P4. Data for 2000 isstandardized to 2010 censustract geographies and isfrom U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

Income status
There are fewer very low and extremely low income households in Newark than Alameda County and the Bay Area, and with slightly higher percentages of moderate and above moderate income households than Alameda County and the Bay Area. Low income households at 50-80 percent area median income are relatively equal across geography at 12.6 percent for Newark, Alameda County (11.6 percent) and the Bay Area (13 percent). In Newark, low income households are concentrated in the central portion of the city, with the highest concentrations found along Thorton avenue in the Old Town area. Figure 3-4 shows income by race in Newark. The areas with 50 percent or greater of low to moderate income populations also have the highest concentrations of BIPOC residents. Higher income residents are found outside of Central Newark, as seen in Figure 3-5. While the majority of Newark is single family housing, Central Newark is where older housing stock is found along a major arterial road, with lower rents as a result. The majority of very AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 68

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
low and low income residents are Black, Hispanic/ Latino and Asian/ Pacific Islander. Figure 3-4 shows these populations are approximately 67 percent of the population for very low incomes and 68 percent for low income. For moderate and above moderate income populations, the demographics shift sharply to a greater percentage of White residents (44 percent) for moderate income and above moderate income White residents (36 percent) and Asian and Pacific Islander residents (37 percent) make up the larger percentage of residents in these income categories.

Asian and Pacific Islanders have comprised a large percentage of both the lowest and highest income categories. Although the Censuses data combines the groups, we know from other research that Pacific Islander students in Newark Unified School District have high levels of homelessness.

Figure 3-3: Household Income levels for Newark, Alameda County and the Bay Area, 2013- 2017 Source: US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy. ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 69

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-4: Income by Race and Ethnicity, 2013- 2017
Source: US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy. ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 70

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-5: Median Household Income, 2015- 2019
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 71

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-6: Low to Moderate Income Households and Percent Non-White Population, 2018 Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

Family Status
Newark has the largest household size in Alameda County. According to the County of Alameda’s Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (2020), there is a higher percentage of families with children in Alameda County as a whole compared to other family types, but the overall proportion of families with children has decreased by 6 percent from 1990 to 2017.

According to the 2021 ACS 5 year data, there are 9,693 children under the age of 18 in Newark, with the majority, 7,546 in married couple households. Figure 3-22 Shows 80 percent and higher of married couples with children are found in the north east, north west and south east corners of the city. These areas include Lake-Rosemont, a moderate opportunity neighborhood of single family homes, NewPark Place and Sanctuary Village, a newer single family housing development and an area identified as high opportunity. The neighborhood to the South East surrounding Lincoln Elementary school is an older single family neighborhood with smaller single story homes.

Central Newark has 60 to 80 percent of married couple households with children. This area also AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 72

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
has more civic and commercial uses. Only one area in North central Newark has a concentration of single mother households from 20 to 40 percent. The majority of the city is 20 percent or below.

This is an area with older single family housing stock and a recently closed elementary school.

Disability
As seen in Figure 3-60, there is no concentration of residents with a disability in Newark. The majority of residents with a physical disability are seniors, and are primarily related to ambulatory movement. Through community engagement, especially with the senior community, there is a strong interest in shared housing and accessory dwelling units in order to remain in their communities. City is proposing programs such as H2.2 Accessory Dwelling Unit incentive program, H4.5, connecting residentings to existing shared housing programs and H4.7, Increasing housing opportunities for those with developmental disabilities.

E. Racially and/or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of
Poverty + Affluence
Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAP) are neighborhoods in which there are both racial concentrations and high poverty rates. HUD’s definition of a R/ECAP is:
● A census tract that has a non-white population of 50 percent or more (majority-minority) or, for non-urban areas, 20 percent, AND a poverty rate of 40 percent or more; OR ● A census tract that has a non-white population of 50 percent or more (majority-minority) AND the poverty rate is three times the average tract poverty rate for the county, whichever is lower. Households within R/ECAP tracts frequently represent the most disadvantaged households within a community and often face a multitude of housing challenges. R/ECAPs are meant to identify where residents may have historically faced discrimination and continue to be challenged by limited economic opportunity. While there are several R/ECAPs in Alameda County, the majority are concentrated in the City of Oakland with a few in Berkeley, one in Hayward, and one in the unincorporated county (see Figure 3-7). No R/ECAPs were identified in Newark.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 73

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-7: Area of High Segregation and Poverty, 2021
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

Racially and/or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs) are neighborhoods in which there are both high concentrations of non-Hispanic white households and high household income rates.

HCD has not yet established one standard methodology for determining RCAAs in California, but for the purpose of this analysis an RCAA is defined as a census tract with: 1) an average total AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 74

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
White population that is 1.25 times higher than the average total White population in the Bay Area region and 2) a median household income of $141,996 or higher (1.5 times higher than the Bay Area AMI in 2019). Based on this methodology, there are RCAAs throughout the eastern county spanning from Dublin, Livermore, and the unincorporated eastern county up through Castro Valley and Contra Costa County area. There are also RCAAs in the City of Alameda and Oakland. There are no RCAAs within Newark based on this methodology.

Although Newark does not have areas that have been identified as Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence through this methodology, there are areas of concentrated affluence in Newark, where residents are making more than $141,000, but do not have the levels of white population to identify as an area of Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Area of Influence.

F. Disparities in Access to Opportunity
Historically, and into the present day, affordable housing in the United States has been disproportionately developed in BIPOC neighborhoods that have been disinvested with high poverty rates, thereby reinforcing the concentration of poverty and racial segregation in low opportunity and low resource areas. Several agencies, including HUD and HCD, in coordination with the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC), have developed methodologies to assess and measure geographic access to opportunity in areas throughout California. For this assessment, the opportunity indices prepared by HUD and HCD/TCAC are used to analyze access to opportunity in the City of Newark. Access to opportunity is measured by access to healthy neighborhoods, education, employment, and transportation. At the county level, Alameda county is close to equal in the percentage of the county that is high resourced (36%) and the percentage that is low resource (39%). Figure 3-8 shows the distribution of opportunity at the regional level. A large portion of the county is classified as low to moderate opportunity. Higher opportunity areas are found in Berkeley, Alameda, San Leandro, and Fremont. Figure 3-9 shows the composite opportunity areas in Newark. The majority of the city is identified as moderate and high resource, with no low resource areas or areas of high segregation and poverty. Through a community housing survey conducted by the city, residents were asked if they feel their neighborhood has opportunities for you and your family, 18 percent said no and 28 percent said somewhat. When asked what would make it feel that there was more opportunity the top three responses were:

1. City infrastructure that supports physical activity, including sidewalks, bike lanes, parks, and rec centers

2. Affordable, safe, and healthy housing choices

3. Educational opportunities that are academically and culturally supportive “I think increasing accessreally hasto do with increasing the supply first and putting affordable housing in AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 75

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
high resource areas and near public transit as well asretail.” Figure 3-10 shows the distribution of opportunity areas by race. Asian residents comprise the majority of the residents in the high resource areas at 63.8 percent, followed by White residents (16%), and Hispanic/ Latinx (11.5%). Low resourced or high segregation and poverty areas are primarily populated by Hispanic/ Latinx (39.7%) and Asian (38.3%) residents. Moderate resource areas are representative of the population with 36.9 percent of Hispanic/ Latinx residents, Asian residents (29.7%) and African American (3.5%).

HUD Opportunity Index HUD’s opportunity indices compare data indicators by race and ethnicity, for households below the poverty line, between jurisdictions, and for the region overall. The indices include the following:

Table 3-7: Domains and List of Indicators for Opportunity Maps, 2021 Domain Indicators
Environmental CalEnviroScreen 4.0 from pollution burdens and socio economic factors are indicators
Economic Poverty, Adult education, Employment, Job proximity, Median home value
Education Math proficiency, Reading proficiency, High School graduation rates, Student poverty rates
Poverty and Racial
Segregation
Poverty: tracts with at least 30 percent of population under federal poverty line Racial Segregation: Overrepresentation of people of color relative to the county (i.e., Tracts with a racial location quotient higher than 1.25 for Black, Hispanic, Asian, or all people of color in comparison to the county) Source: CA Fair Housing Task Force, Methodology for TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps, December 2021.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 76

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-8: Distribution of TCAC Opportunity Areas in the San Francisco Bay Area, 2022 Source: CA Tax Credit Allocation Committee, 2022
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 77

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-9: Composite of Opportunity Areas in Newark, 2022 Source: CA Tax Credit Allocation Committee, 2022
Figure 3-10: Percentage of Residents in Low, Moderate and High Resourced Areas by Race, 2015- 2019 AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 78

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Highest Resourced Area
Source: CA Tax Credit Allocation Committee / California Housing and Community Development (HCD),Opportunity Maps(2020); U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Table B03002 Economic Opportunity and Jobs proximity Index
The TCAC/HCD Economic Opportunity map measures economic opportunity through poverty, levels of adult education, employment, proximity to employment, and median home values. The majority of Newark has an economic score of less than .25 and .25 to .50, indicating less than positive economic opportunity. The southern corner of the city has higher economic opportunity with a score of .50 - .75. The area has a predominant Asian population and a median income greater than 125,000.

Newark has a close proximity to jobs in the eastern portion of the city, close to Silicon Valley. Areas in the northern portion of the city are furthest from jobs, although in the future the south west portion of the city will potentially have access to regional transportation through the creation of AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 79

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
the Dumbarton rail line. Economic opportunity was not cited though community engagement as a concern. Newark has a relatively low unemployment rate of 3.5 percent, but does have a larger percentage of residents leaving the city for work, than remaining in the city.

Figure 3-11: Jobs Proximity Index Composite, 2014-2017
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 80

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-12: Economic Opportunity Score, 2021
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

Environmental Opportunity
Exposure to a variety of environmental pollutants causes detrimental effects on human health, especially for children. The environmental opportunity score looks at 12 indicators to determine the level of environmental health of a community. The score is created through the consideration of both the pollution burden of exposure, and the population characteristics of an area. Newark has a mixed classification of environmental impacts, with portions of the city identified as having more positive environmental outcomes and others with less.

As a whole, Newark has fine particulate matter rates of 7.2 micrometers, which are higher than the World Health Organization guideline of 5 micrometers, but lower than the US EPA standard of 12 micrometers. These levels can be attributed to industrial outputs, diesel exhaust from major arterials, and two freeways that border Newark. From December 1, 2019 - November 30, 2020, AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 81

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Aclima collated data showing particulate samples of 8.7 micrometers along Thornton Avenue. The CalEnviroScreen score ranks census tracks from 1 to 100, with 100 being the highest percentile of communities disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution and with population characteristics that make them more sensitive to pollution. Figure 3-13 shows the patchwork distribution of outcomes, with the lowest environmental outcomes in central Newark and a portion of the Old Town area that is also home to a majority of BIPOC and low income residents.

The census tract is 47 percent Hispanic / Latinx, Asian (26.6%) and African American (4.1%) residents. This area has an overall pollution burden percentile of 61 and 76th percentile for asthma, while areas with higher environmental outcomes are in the Northwestern corner of the city. Long-term exposure may increase the risk of respiratory disease, heart disease, decreased lung function, premature birth, and reduced life expectancy. For Newark, with a high percentage of families with children in the city, addressing environmental issues is vital to addressing environmental justice.

According to an analysis conducted by ESA towards the preparation of an Environmental Justice Element in Newark, the following are major indicators of environmental contamination:

1. Ozone Concentrations,

2. PM 2.5 Concentrations

3. Diesel PM Emissions

4. Drinking-Water Contaminants

5. Pesticide Use

6. Toxic Releases from Facilities

7. Traffic Density

8. Cleanup Sites

9. Groundwater Threats

10. Hazardous Waste Generators and
Facilities

11. Impaired Water Bodies

12. Solid Waste Sites and Facilities
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 82

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-13: Environmental Opportunity Score, 2021
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 83

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-14: CalEnviroScreen and Non-White Population, 2021 and 2018 Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

Education
Equitable access to culturally relevant and engaging educational opportunities is foundational in increasing opportunities for all residents. Newark Unified school district has 11 schools in total, with 2 of its eight elementary schools either closed within the past year or scheduled to close in following the 2022 school year. The school board is making the choice to close schools in response to a 6 million dollar budget shortfall, due to declining enrollment.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 84

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-15: Newark School Enrollment, 2017-2022
Source: Data collected by the California Department of Education (CDE) through the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS)
The racial and ethnic makeup of the district is highly diverse, with Hispanic/Latinx students comprising the majority of the population at 51.9 percent, followed by Asian at 16.8 percent, White at 10 percent and Filipino at 8.9 percent . Figure 3-16 goes into detail of the full district breakdown.

Figure 3-16: Race and Ethnicity of Newark Unified School District, 2020-2021 School Year AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 85

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Source: Data collected by the California Department of Education (CDE) through the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS).

Students in the Newark Unified school district have a comparable percentage of students qualifying for free or reduced lunch as Alameda County, at 40.5 percent and 40.7 percent respectively. Both are below the state average at 57.8 percent. Within the district there is a wide range of students that qualify for free and reduced lunch. The California Department of Education district level data for the 2021 to 2022 school year finds Shilling Elementary with the highest percentage of students that qualify for free or reduced lunch at 60 percent, followed by Musick Elementary at 57 percent, one of the schools that is slated to be closed for the 2022-2023 school year, with students distributed among other schools. Schools with the lowest levels of students qualifying for free or reduced lunch are John F Kenedy Elementary school at 23 percent, and Birch Grove Intermediate and Primary schools at 28 and 30 percent respectively.

Table 3-8: Selected District Level Data - 0161234--Newark Unified for the year 2021-2022 School Free or Reduced Price Meals
Non-public non-sectarian schools 3 (42.9%)
August Schilling Elementary 227 (59.9%)
Birch Grove Intermediate 118 (28.0%)
Birch Grove Primary 108 (30.0%)
Bridgepoint High (Continuation) 29 (46.8%)
Coyote Hills Elementary 260 (50.0%)
Crossroads High (Alternative) 70 (43.2%)
E. L. Musick Elementary 101 (57.4%)
John F. Kennedy Elementary 92 (23.0%)
Lincoln Elementary 174 (46.8%)
Newark Junior High 280 (41.2%)
Newark Memorial High 632 (38.7%)
District Total: 2,094 (40.5%)
County Total: 87,363 (40.7%)
State Totals: 3,404,572 (57.8%)
Source: California Department of Education, 2022
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 86

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
The city asked residents through the housing survey what would need to change to feel that their neighborhood is high in opportunity, and residents identified education as one of the top three things. Educational opportunity is measured by Math and Reading Proficiency, High School Graduation Rate, Student Poverty, High Segregation and Poverty. Overall according to the HCD AFFH Data viewer, the majority of Newark has lower than average education opportunities. The one area of Newark that has more positive educational outcomes is near Birch Grove Primary school. The elementary schools have similar performance levels on state indicators, which indicates the role of student poverty in the classification. We recognize that although measures of achievement such as test scores and levels of poverty are indicators, it is difficult to fully measure what a school means for a community. When Graham Elementary was threatened with closure, the primarily Latinx school community rallied together to share what the school community means to them to the school board in hopes of evading closure. Ultimately the school was combined with Snow elementary to form a new school, Coyote Hills Elementary.

Figure 3-17: Educational Opportunity Index, 2021
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 87

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Transportation Access and Cost
To better understand housing affordability, it is important to look at transportation costs associated with a location. Figure 3-19 shows the combined housing and transportation costs in Newark. Due to Newark being low density and auto oriented, with a lack of high frequency public transportation options, the majority of households spend more than 45% of their income on housing and transportation. Only 4 percent of households have combined costs less than 30% of income. Newark has no neighborhoods identified as location efficient, with housing that is close to jobs and services, with a number of transportation options. Due to this fact, 49 percent of residents spend 45 to 54 percent of their income on housing, with 23 percent spending 54 to 66 percent.

Currently, Newark is served by Alameda County Transit (AC Transit) bus service. Public transportation is accessible on major arterials such as Newark Blvd, Ceder, and Thorton. Unlike neighboring Union City and Fremont, there is no BART station in Newark, although a number of bus routes do connect with the Fremont BART station. Public transit options are more accessible in the northern portion of the city, with the addition of three school bus lines from AC Transit during the school year to Newark Memorial High School. Residents in our community meeting expressed the desire for more options beyond the personal automobile such as increased bus service and infrastructure for biking to reduce traffic congestion and be responsive to climate change. Newark’s Pedestrian and Bicycle Master plan outlines a number of improvements, such as protected bike lanes, pedestrian overpass for train tracks and an increase in the number of bike lanes.
“Housing close to walkable parks and transit. Also need more transit options.” – Community comment AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 88

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-18: Alameda County Transit Bus Stops and Proposed Transit Stations, 2022 Source: AC Transit, adapted by Community Planning Collaborative, 2022 AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 89

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-19: Housing and Transportation Costs as a Percentage of Income Source: The Center for Neighborhood Technology’s Housing and Transportation (H+T®) Affordability Index, G. Disproportionate Housing Needs for Low-income
Households and Protected Classes
Familial Status
The Fair Housing Act (FHA) bans discrimination based on certain protected classes, including "familial status," which refers to the presence of at least one child under 18 years old. Under the FHA, familial status discrimination occurs when a landlord, property manager, real estate agent, or property owner treats someone differently because they have a family with one or more individuals who are under 18 years of age. A “family” also includes people who are pregnant and people who are in the process of securing legal custody of a person under 18 years of age, including a family that is in the process of adopting a child, or foster parents. All families with children are protected by the FHA against familial status discrimination, including single-parent households and same-sex couples with children. Rules that unreasonably restrict children or limit the ability of children to use their housing or the common facilities at the property may violate the FHA. Moreover, enforcing certain rules only against families with children may also violate the FHA. The following are the types of conduct that may violate the FHA:

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 90

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
● Refusing to rent, sell, or negotiate with a family because the family has one or more children under 18 years of age.
● Advertising a preference for households without children or otherwise discouraging such families.
● Telling an individual or family no unit is available even though a unit is in fact available. ● Forcing families into housing units that are larger than necessary. ● Designating certain floors or buildings for families with children, or encouraging families with children to reside in particular areas.
● Charging additional rent, security deposit, or fees because a household has children under 18 years of age.

Figure 3-20: Percentage of Households With Children Under 18 Years of Age, 2015- 2019 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Table B11005 Newark has many family households with an average family size of 3.61 people (ACS 2016-2020).

The city has 37 percent of households with a child under 18 years of age. This rate is higher than both Alameda County (32%) and the Bay Area (30.5%). Although discrimination based upon family status has not been reported in Newark, it has been reported at the county level. Households with children face additional challenges accessing housing that meets their needs for both size and cost.

Survey results found that when asked what are the most urgent housing needs at this time, 50 percent responded that housing for families was the greatest need.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 91

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-21: Family Structures in Newark, 2015- 2019
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Table S1101 “I would love to see more housing programs accessible for families currently in Newark” – Community Member
Households headed by one person are often at greater risk of housing insecurity, particularly female headed households, who may be supporting children or a family with only one income. In Newark, the largest proportion of households are Married-Couple Family Households at 75% of total, while Female Headed Households make up 17 percent of all family households and male headed comprise 8 percent. Throughout engagement with the community, the city has heard from residents that housing for families, and single parents in particular is a high need. "I’m an inside wireman electrician for 26 years. I cannot afford to buy a home in thistown as a single father of 2. $2million per home isridiculously high. I am a critical worker, not just essential, and cannot afford to stay with these house prices."
Female-headed households with children may face particular housing challenges, with pervasive gender inequality resulting in lower wages for women. Moreover, the added need for childcare can make finding a home that is affordable even more challenging.

Figure 3-24 shows In Newark, 22.8% of female-headed households with children fall below the Federal Poverty Line, while 5.7% of female-headed households without children live in poverty (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B17012 ).

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 92

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-22: Percent of Married Couples with Children, 2015- 2019 Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

Figure 3-23: Percent of Children in a Female Headed Household, 2015- 2019 Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 93

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-24: Poverty Levels of Female Headed Households in Newark, 2015- 2019 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Table B17012 Household Size
Figure 3-25: Comparison of Household Size for Owners and Renters in Alameda County and Newark, 2015- 2019
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Table CP04, Comparative AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 94

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Housing Characteristics
Seniors
The senior population in Newark has increased significantly since 2010, with a 47 percent increase, compared with a 39 percent increase from Alameda county. This could partially be attributed to the construction of Newark Station, a 75 unit building completed in 2019. Figure 3-27, shows seniors in Newark are overwhelmingly home owners at all income levels, with seniors at the lowest income level having the highest percentage of renters at 37 percent. Housing needs change as we move through life, and due to seniors living on fixed incomes in smaller households, Newark needs housing types and programs to support seniors to age in place and remain in their community.
“Developing a shared housing program with othersthat need a room to rent, connectseniors with single people who need affordable housing. Helpsseniors on limited incomes” – Community meeting comment
Figure 3-26: Increase of Senior Population, 2010 to 2019 Source: American Community Survey 2015- 2019, 5-Year Estimate AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 95

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-27: Seniors Income Level, Owners and Renters, 2015 -2019 Source: American Community Survey 2015- 2019, 5-Year Estimate Disability Status
The U.S. Census Bureau defines disability as one of the following: hearing difficulty, vision difficulty, cognitive difficulty, ambulatory difficulty, self-care difficulty, and independent living difficulty. In Newark 3,561 residents over the age of 5 had a disability in 2018. This group equates to approximately 8 percent of the non-institutionalized population over age five in the City, which is slightly lower than the county (10 percent) and lower than the Bay Area (11 percent). Figure 3-28 shows the population of persons with a disability by age in the City. At the local level, seniors in Newark have the highest rates of disability of all age groups at 52 percent. Ambulatory difficulty and independent living were the highest for seniors at 23 and 22 percent, followed by hearing difficulty (13%). African Americans have significantly higher rates of disability compared to other racial and ethnic groups in the city at 22 percent, followed by White residents at 13 percent. Those living with a disability often have specialized housing needs due to living on a fixed or limited incomes, physical or intellectual disabilities or increased health care costs. This points toward a need for housing that incorporates universal design, is integrated within the community, in close proximity to public transportation, and supports seniors to age in place.

In conversation with Darin Lounds, executive director of the Housing Development Consortium of the East Bay, he shared a number of ways that the city of Newark can support inclusive housing options for people with developmental disabilities:

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 96

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
● Work with tax credit developers in larger multi families, to have a percentage devoted to people with disabilities. It is key for jurisdictions to work with developers when they are proposing new developments.
● Transit lines are most important. Only 10% of the demographic own a vehicle. Parking needs are more of a commercial need to provide services, less of a residential need. ● Discrimination: when property owners hear the income is SSI or disability, or someone with visible disability, they form assumptions about their ability to maintain a home. The regional center helps people to live in the community, they have a circle of support. ● Maximum integration is key, not just a big building with one demographic Table 3-9: Residents With A Disability, Newark and Region, 2015- 2019 Geography No disability With a disability Percentage
Newark 43,583 3,561 8%
Alameda County 1,496,381 151,368 10%
Bay Area 6,919,762 735,533 11%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year estimate 2015-2019. Table B18101 Figure 3-28: Disability Status By Age, 2016- 2020
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Table S1810 AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 97

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-29: Newark Senior Population with Disability, 65 years and Older, 2016- 2020 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Disability Characteristics, Table S1810
Figure 3-30: Disability Status by Race, 2016- 2020
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Disability Characteristics, Table S1810
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 98

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Cost Burden and Overpayment
From 2010-2019, Newark has experienced large increases in both rental and homeownership costs. Two-bedroom rents increased by 45 percent, while two-bedroom home prices have increased by 122 percent (Costar, 2010 and 2019 American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, Redfin). The growth in housing costs has outpaced the growth in income leading to large numbers of households cost burdened and experiencing homelessness.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development considers housing to be affordable for a household if the household spends less than 30% of its income on housing costs. A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30% of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50% of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” In Newark, 44 percent of households spend 30%-50% of their income on housing, while 14 percent of households are severely cost burdened and use the majority of their income for housing. Over time, households have become increasingly cost burdened, with a 20 percent increase from 2010 to 2019. Figure 3-31 shows how households in Newark are cost burdened by income. While residents are cost burdened and severely cost burdened at all income levels, residents making below 50 percent area median income experience the highest levels. Fifty-seven percent of residents earning up to 30 percent of the area median income are severely cost burdened, with 22 percent spending 30 to 50 percent of their income on housing. Homeowners Median income households are still finding themselves costburden with 60 percent of households making 50 to 80 percent of median income are cost burdened.

Figure 3-33 shows that renters are more likely to be cost burdened, with twice the number of renters (30%) spending more than 30 percent of their income on housing compared to 16 percent of homeowners, and 14 percent of renters are severely cost burdened. This places renters at a greater risk of living in overcrowded housing, displacement and homelessness.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 99

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-31: Cost Burden Renter Households in Newark Over Time, 2015- 2019 Source: American Community Survey 2015-2019, 5-Year Estimate Figure 3-32: Cost Burdened by Income, 2013- 2017
Source: US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy. ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 100

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-33: Cost Burdened Households, Renters and Homeowners, 2015- 2019 US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 year data, 2015-2019, Table B25070, B25091 Figure 3-34: Overpayment by Renters, 2015- 2019
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 101

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-35: Overpayment by Homeowners, 2015- 2019
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

Cost Burdened Households by Race
Residents who are cost burdened in Newark are disproportionately experienced by some ethnic groups more than others. Figure 3-36 exhibits the changing demographics of being cost burdened in Newark. Black (41%), Indigenous (46%), Multi Racial (46%), and Latinx (47%) residents are the highest cost burdened, and most vulnerable to displacement, overcrowding and homelessness.

Asian and White residents are the least cost burdened at 27 percent and 21 percent respectively.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 102

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-36: Cost Burdened Residents by Race, 2013-2017 Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release Note: Hispanic category is not exclusive of other categories.

Overcrowding
An overcrowded household is defined as having more than one person per room, with severe overcrowding with more than 1.5 people sharing a room. Often immigrant communities, low income families and renter-occupied households are more likely to experience household overcrowding. Referred to as "doubling up"—living with family members or friends for economic reasons—is the most commonly reported living situation for families and individuals before experiencing homelessness.
10 Renters in Newark are more likely to live in overcrowded conditions than homeowners. Figure 3-37 shows renters experience overcrowding at 3 times the rate as homeowners at 18 percent, and severe overcrowding at 9 percent.

Central Newark in the Old Town area has 9 percent of households experiencing overcrowded housing, with 5 percent of households experiencing extreme overcrowding in the Northwest corner of the city. As shown in Figure 3-39, these two areas are predominantly occupied by communities of color, with 80 to 100 percent of residents in the Old Town area. Mixed race residents face the highest rates at 33 percent, followed by Hispanic/ Latinx (30%) and Indigenous residents at 22 percent. The Old Town Neighborhood specific plan has zoning changes that 10 Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project, California Department of Public Health, Percent of Household Overcrowding, 2017
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 103

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
remove constraints to the production of affordable housing. The upcoming development in the Old Town neighborhood by Satellite Affordable Housing, will provide 56 units of affordable housing, a quarter are 3 bedrooms specifically for large families. “Familiesthat are doubled up, tripled up can really use some programsthat help them find more suitable accommodationsin the community they want to stay in”
— Community meeting breakoutsession comment
Figure 3-37: Percent of Owner and Renter Households Living in Crowded Conditions, 2013- 2017 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), ACS Tabulation 2013-2017
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 104

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-38: Overcrowding by Race and Ethnicity, 2015- 2019 Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5 year data, 2015-2019, Table B25014 Figure 3-39: Overcrowding and Severe Overcrowding in Newark and Non-White Population, 2015- 2019 and 2018
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 105

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Housing Choice Vouchers and Subsidized Housing Developments Newark has seen minimal development of subsidized housing, with three subsidized senior housing developments in the city, and a fourth subsidized senior housing development under construction with 79 units. The use of housing choice vouchers is low in Newark, with the majority of the city seeing a 5 to 15 percent use, and the remainder with 5 percent or less. Table 3-10 details the current subsidized housing in Newark. The city has 274 low income units at a low risk of conversion, with no units at the moderate, high and very high income brackets. The majority of subsidized housing in Newark is found in moderate resource areas, with one development in a low resource designated area
Table 3-10: Housing Units at Risk of Conversion, 2022
Name Address
Affordable
Units
Total
Units
Active
Program(s)
Risk
Level
2021 TCAC/HCD
Opportunity Map
Designation
Newark Station
Seniors
37433 Willow
Street,
Newark
74 75 LIHTC Low Low resource
Rosemont aka
Newark Gardens I
35300 Cedar
Blvd, Newark
150 150 HUD Low Moderate resource
Newark Gardens II
35322 Cedar
Blvd, Newark
50 50 HUD Low Moderate resource
Source: California Housing Partnership, 2022
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 106

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-40: Subsidized Housing and Housing Choice Vouchers, 2021 Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

Rates of Homeownership
Homeownership in the United States has functioned as the key to generational wealth. Due to historic discrimination from the federal government, the real estate industry, BIPOC communities have lower homeownership rates in comparison to White residents. Addressing disparities between races in rates of homeownership is one way to address historic discrimination and access to wealth, furthering fair housing work. Newark has higher rates of homeownership at 69 percent, than Alameda County (54%) and the Bay Area (56%). Figure 3-42 shows homeowners in Newark are predominantly identified as White and Asian, with the lowest rates of homeownership being found with Indigenous, Black and Hispanic or Latinx residents. This corresponds with rates of acceptance for mortgages. Figure 3-43 shows that White and Asian residents have the highest rate of loan approval with Indigenous and Hispanic/ Latinx residents having the highest rates of application denied.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 107

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-41: Housing Tenure in Newark, 2015- 2019
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5 year data, 2015-2019, Table B25003 Figure 3-42: Rates of Homeownership by Race, 2015- 2019 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5 year data, 2015-2019, Table B25003 AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 108

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Mortgage Loan Access/Rates of Denial Loan Access/Rates of Denial Figure 3-43: Mortgage Applications and Acceptance by Race, 2018-2019 Source: Federal Financial Institutions Examination Councils(FFIEC) Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Loan/ Application register Files
Substandard Housing
Concern over increased risk of displacement due to code enforcement violations has prompted a look at how substandard housing is addressed in communities. The majority of the community’s housing stock is older than 40 years old, which can increase the need for repairs. Oftentimes it is low income renters and homeowners that will be living in substandard housing conditions. While rates of substandard housing, including housing without kitchen or bathroom facilities, is less than one percent, these units could be underreported. As described in section 2 of the housing needs assessment, the neighborhoods of Mirabeau and Old Town / Central Newark through code enforcement data show significant need of rehabilitation. Currently Newark is responsive to code enforcement reports of housing in need of repair, and is planning to develop a new system for addressing code violations that reduce the risk of housing being removed from the market.

Program H1.2 outlines how the city will develop a rental inspection program that will provide a structured process for property owners to address code violations. There will be a process of reinspection, and the creation of an online reporting process for tenants. Program H1.1 Programs for housing repair and rehabilitation works to expand upon the existing program, to incorporate targeted outreach to identified neighborhoods of need.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 109

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
People Experiencing Homelessness
The City has provided continuous support for regional efforts to end homelessness, such as the Alameda County EveryOne Home Program, which prioritizes supportive housing. Newark adopted a resolution declaring a shelter crisis, and authorized the City’s participation in the Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP).

People experiencing homelessness have steadily increased at the county level since 2017, with 9,747 sheltered and unsheltered people at the most recent point in time count on February 22, 2022. The city of Newark has a documented reduction from 89 people experiencing homelessness in 2019, to 58 people in 2022. Data from a 2021 Newark Police Department report provides an overview of unsheltered persons in Newark including known encampments:
● Eucalyptus Grove (Highway 84, north of Jarvis Avenue) ● Highway 84 Eastbound off-ramp to Newark Boulevard
● Residence Inn hotel area (near the off-ramp)
● Sycamore Street at the Union Pacific railroad tracks
● Thornton Avenue at Interstate 880
● Home Depot and surrounding businesses parking lot
Housing and homeless support is the most prevalent service request for Newark callers to the countywide 2-1-1 referral service, representing about 42% of all service requests. Newark residents are seeking referrals for low cost rental listings, rent payment and deposit assistance, supportive and transitional housing, emergency shelter, among other services (Eden I&R Referral Service, January 2020 through March 2022). Currently Second Chance provides transitional housing for those experiencing homelessness in Newark. The facility has 32 beds, with the shelter at 81 % capacity on the point in time count. The city has engaged in a number of actions to address homelessness in Newark. There is a partnership with the Fremont Family Resource Center to provide support to Newark households at risk of becoming homeless, and has been awarded a HomeKey grant to convert the Towne Place Suites extended stay hotel into 124 supportive, affordable residential units known as Cedar Community Apartments. Most recently the city has created a Homelessness Committee with members from various City departments to develop a cohesive plan to address homelessness.

Through community engagement, the city has been alerted to the high number of residents experiencing homelessness that are finding shelter in local motels. The challenge with this is that these populations are uncounted, so while the city does not have a full sense of how many individuals and families are there, through communication with parent liaisons with the Newark Unified School district and from a community member experiencing homelessness that those residing in the hotels hold jobs outside of the home, but due to a variety of issues such as the cost of housing, requirements such as three times the income, and credit scores, these community members are kept from accessing stable housing.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 110

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Although the documented number of people experiencing homelessness in Newark is low, there are high rates of racial disparity compared to the population of Newark and Alameda County as a whole. As exhibited in Figure 3-46, although the African American population in Newark is 3 percent, they make up 27 percent of the population experiencing homelessness. The Latinx population of Newark is almost equal to that of those experiencing homelessness at 31 percent.

White residents have the highest rate of residents experiencing homelessness at 58%, with their portion of the population in Newark at 29 percent.

Figure 3-44: Total Count of People Experiencing Homelessness For The Point In Time Count On February 22, 2022
Source: 2022 Point in Time Count. Everyone Count, February 22, 2022.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 111

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-45: Unsheltered Individuals in Newark and Alameda County, 2022 Source: 2022 Point in Time Count. Everyone Count, February 22nd 2022.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 112

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-46: Sheltered Individuals by Race, 2022
Source: 2022 Point in Time Count. Everyone Count, February 22nd 2022.

Access to affordable, stable housing is foundational for children and their families to be healthy - mentally and physically and support student success in school. Over the past few years the pandemic has amplified the disparities in housing, and with learning transferring online, many students did not have the resources to make that transition. Although schools have returned to in-person teaching, the number of families that are still struggling to access resources and affordable housing are high.

In Newark, the student population experiencing homelessness totaled 300 during the 2019-20 school year and increased by 9 percent since the 2016-17 school year. By comparison, Alameda County has seen a 18.7 percent decrease in the population of students experiencing homelessness since the 2016-17 school year, and the Bay Area population of students experiencing homelessness decreased by eight percent. During the 2019-2020 school year, there were still some 13,718 students experiencing homelessness throughout the region, adding undue burdens on learning and thriving, with the potential for longer term negative effects.

The number of students in Newark experiencing homelessness in 2019 represents 10.5 percent of the Alameda County total and two percent ofthe Bay Area total.

In the most recent school year (2021-22), NUSD had 251 students that were homeless (about 5% of all students), which further indicates the lack of affordable housing. Notably, about 96 percent of homeless students in Newark are students of color, with over 167 of these students being Hispanic or Latino. While NUSD has only a small number of Pacific Islander students (98 students), AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 113

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
about 10.8 percent of them are homeless (Source: California Department of Education (ED-Data).

Table 3-11: Students in Local Public Schools Experiencing Homelessness, 2016 to 2020 Academic Year Newark Alameda County Bay Area
2016-17 275 3,531 14,990
2017-18 236 3,309 15,142
2018-19 192 3,182 15,427
2019-20 300 2,870 13,718
Universe: Total number of unduplicated primary and short-term enrollments within the academic year (July 1 to June 30), public schools. Notes: The California Department of Education considersstudentsto be homelessif they are unsheltered, living in temporary sheltersfor people experiencing homelessness, living in hotels/motels, or temporarily doubled up and sharing the housing of other persons due to the loss of housing or economic hardship. The data used for thistable was obtained at the schoolsite level, matched to a file containing school locations, geocoded and assigned to jurisdiction, and finally summarized by geography. Source: California Department of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), Cumulative Enrollment Data (Academic Years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020). Thistable isincluded in the Data Packet Workbook as Table HOMELS-05.

Farmworkers
The number of farmworkers living in Newark has declined over the years, with the student population at 57 students for the 2019-2020 school year. The previous years saw 79 students for 2017-2018 and 72 for the 2018 to 2019 school year. Table 3-12 shows the trends for both Alameda county and the greater Bay Area see a similar decline in the migrant farmworker student population. Generally, the number of farmworkers living in Alameda county has been declining since 2012, with fewer than 400 residents working in the industry in a permanent position. It is important to recognize that farmworkers could be under-counted by the census due to their migrant nature. Farming and farmworkers are a significant element of the state's economy, but play less of a role in the Bay Area. Due to lower wages, language barriers, and inconsistent work, farmworkers can have difficulty securing housing, and for these reasons could experience overcrowding and substandard housing conditions.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 114

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 3-12: Migrant Farmworker Student Population, 2016 to 2020 Geography 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-2020
Newark 75 79 72 57
Alameda County 874 1,037 785 790
Bay Area 4, 630 4,607 4,075 3,976
Source: California Department of education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data system, Cumulative Enrollment Data (Academic Years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020) Figure 3-47: Permanent and Seasonal Farmworkers at the County Level, 2022 to 2017 Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Census of Farmworkers(2002,2007,2012,2017), Table 7: Hired Farm Labor.

Note: Farm workers are considered seasonal if they work on a farm lessthan 150 days a year, while farm workers who work on a farm more than 150 days are considered to be permanent workersfor that farm.

Gentrification and Displacement
“It isreally sad to see what is happening to our little old town of Newark. I moved here back in 1995 to raise my family. It was a small town and where I wanted to raise my family. My children are NUSD and now currently in college. The Tech Giants have moved into our backyards causing GENTRIFICATION raising rentsthat our families can't afford. Forcing them to leave and forsome to become homeless sleeping in their cars with school-aged children. Also the high number of Homeless on ourstreets with mental health issues on the corners of all freewaysintersections. How isit that we all live in one-million-dollar houses and see all this around us? This breaks my heart we need to see more affordable housing, rent control, good schools with proper equal education for all of ourstudentsin our community.

All the tech giants use these Big Charter busesto send their employeesto Facebook, Google, and Yahoo.

Newark should start charging them a fee so that we can have funds available to provide free tutoring for school-aged studentsstruggling in math.” – Newark Resident AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 115

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Defining Sensitive Communities: (Urban Displacement Project, 2020) Communities sensitive to displacement were measured through a number of indicators.

Neighborhoods with a high proportion of residents vulnerable to displacement in the case of rising housing costs, and market-based displacement pressures present in and/or near the community.

Communities were designated sensitive if they currently have populations vulnerable to displacement in the event of increased redevelopment and drastic shifts in housing cost.

Vulnerability includes metrics for the share of very low income residents, share of renters, share of people of color, and share of very low income households (50% AMI or below) that are severely rent burdened (spending 50% of income on rent). Market-based displacement pressures include percent change in rent between 2012-2017 above county median rent increases.

The City of Newark has grown its job base by 37% since 2010, significantly outpacing the County’s job growth, which was also strong. While the City has a higher share of job growth in high-paying industries compared to the County, over 40% of the City’s job growth still came from lower wage industries paying less than $75,000 a year. Currently, residents are unable to find housing at a cost and requirements accessible to them, which has led to residents finding shelter in motels. Concern around gentrification is a consistent narrative from residents, many of whom find themselves unable to find housing in a city they have grown up in, and have community connections. “Programas de vivienda que combaten la gentrificación.” (Housing programsthat combat gentrification) – Community Meeting Comment
Figure 3-49 shows areas in Newark that are vulnerable to gentrification and displacement, according to the 2017 study from the Urban Displacement Project, University of California, Berkeley. The area corresponds to a majority of BIPOC populations with an average of 82 percent non white, specifically Hispanic/ Latinx communities, cost burdened and overcrowded households.

The city of Newark has a number of redevelopment projects underway in the Old Town Area, Bayside, and ParkPlace. These projects are working to add more housing to the city through the redevelopment of industrial land into a walkable neighborhood close to commuter rail, repurpose an aging shopping mall, and revitalize a historic district.

Old Town
Old Town is the historic commercial district of Newark that has experienced disinvestment over the years. The neighborhood has a history of a variety of housing types and businesses, with a number of food manufacturing and local restaurants. The Old Town Specific plan looks to revitalize the neighborhood, making it more pedestrian friendly and implement zoning changes to bring higher density housing and mixed use buildings into the neighborhood.

The area has lower rents than the surrounding areas of the city, and is home to a predominantly AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 116

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Hispanic/ Latinx population of residents and associated small businesses (fig 3-49). The neighborhood has the highest level of low income residents, with 53 percent of renters cost burdened.

With improvements to the Dumbarton transportation corridor, connecting Newark and the surrounding area to Silicon Valley, this will open up the area for increased development pressure that could result in displacement of existing residents and small businesses.

Bayside Newark
Bayside Newark is a 200-acre planned neighborhood on land previously used for industrial production and manufacturing. The city is implementing a specific plan for a walkable neighborhood with a variety of housing types, recreational open space, and everyday services adjacent to the future Dumbarton rail line. Although there was no residential or small business in the planning area, it is still important to note the impact that the commuter rail line and the inclusion of hundreds of new market rate housing units will have on the demographics of the city.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 117

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-48: Map of Plan and Dumbarton Corridor, 2010
Source: Dahlin Group, 2010
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 118

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-49: Areas in Newark Vulnerable to Displacement and Percentage of Communities of Color, 2018 and 2022
Source: HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 119

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Displacement From Environmental Hazards
Environmental hazards can cause both physical and social vulnerabilities specifically in low income, disabled, and BIPOC communities. Many communities and households face social vulnerabilities that are intensified during the short- and long-term recovery period after a disaster.

Access to information, housing, and social services are disrupted during and after a disaster, straining local housing markets and service providers. Due to the lack of affordable housing due to a mismatch between housing costs and income, communities are vulnerable to local shocks such as a natural disaster. For households that were struggling to find and/or maintain affordable housing before a major event, resulting in displacement of residents and an increase in homelessness.

These events also compromise the ability for residents with disabilities to find accessible temporary shelter.

Newark is susceptible to multiple major types of environmental hazards that are visible through the Association of Bay Area Governments Hazard Viewer: Flooding due to sea level rise, tsunamis, and earthquakes. Figure 3-50 of the FEMA flood map shows extreme flooding at the 100 year flood line, engulfing much of the southern portion of the city. At the 500 year flood level, the flooding will move well into established housing, schools and commercial establishments. Flooding most significantly affects areas that are identified as high in opportunity currently, but also encroaches on areas in the city that have been identified as vulnerable to displacement through the Urban Displacement Project.

With Newark being in close proximity to the Hayward fault line, there is the possibility of severe shaking in the event of an earthquake. Residents in our community survey cited multi-year drought as their greatest environmental concern at 52 percent, followed by flooding and sea level rise (44%) and earthquakes (35%). In our community meeting, concern about development in sensitive areas was highlighted, especially ensuring that vulnerable residents are aware of the environmental hazards in their neighborhood.
“Restrict or limit construction of new development in zones or overlay areasthat have been identified or designated as hazardous areasto avoid or minimize impactsto coastal resources and property from sea level rise impacts.” – Community meeting comment
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 120

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-50: 100 Year and 500 Year Flooding Projections for the City of Newark Source: Association of Bay Area Governments Hazard Viewer AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 121

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
H. AFFH Analysis of Sites
State law, Government Code Section 65583(c)(10), requires the sites analysis to be analyzed with respect to AFFH to ensure that affordable housing is dispersed equitably throughout the City rather than concentrated in areas of high segregation and poverty or low resource areas that have historically been underserved. By comparing the sites inventory to the fair housing indicators in this assessment, this section analyzes whether the sites included in the 2023-2031 Housing Element sites inventory improve or exacerbate patterns of segregation, fair housing conditions, and access to opportunity throughout the City.

Newark was allocated a total of 1,874 new housing units to plan for during the Sixth Cycle Housing Element planning period. This RHNA allocation includes 464 very low-, 268 low-, 318 moderate-, and 824 above moderate-income units. Using data and research from the HCD AFFH Data and Mapping Tool 1.0, Table 3-13 presents the housing unit capacity and existing conditions as they relate to indicators of fair housing analyzed in this assessment for each census tract in the city. For more information about the indicators, refer to the local assessment discussed previously in this chapter. The census tracts and sites inventory are mapped and shown in Figure 3-51.

Newark has several physical constraints that present challenges in developing the sites inventory and planning for future growth. These constraints include sensitive wetland habitat and flood plains along the western city boundary and limited vacant land. Because of these constraints, sites included in the 2023-2031 Housing Element inventory are largely located in specific plan areas that are redeveloping existing shopping malls and former industrial lands, with several additional sites located in the Old Town/ Central area.

Newark is a racially and ethnically diverse city, with higher levels of segregation than neighboring jurisdictions such as Union City. As shown in the Table 3-13 BIPOC residents are the majority of the population in all census tracts. Residents identifying as Hispanic/ Latinx compose the largest segments of the population in census tract 4443.02 (Bayside/ Old Town), and census tract 4444 (Old Town/ Central Newark). The sites inventory provides some opportunity to balance the distribution of the various racial/ethnic groups in the city as well as access to opportunity, as sites at all income levels are found in areas with high opportunity and lower predominance of Hispanic/ Latino populations. The sites in NewPark Place, Birchwood, Bayside /Old Town, and Old Town/Central Newark open up opportunities to diversify the area through income and race/ethnicity. Although there are no sites included in the inventory in the northern neighborhoods of the city (Lake-Rosemont, Mirabeau, and Mayhews Landing), proposed programs will work to address the concentration in specific neighborhoods and open up single family neighborhoods to new missing middle housing types identified through community engagement as filling a crucial need for large and small households throughout the city.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 122

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-51: Housing Sites for the RHNA 6th Cycle
Source: Community Planning Collaborative, 2023.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 123

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 3-13: Distribution of Housing Capacity by Census Tract with AFFH Indicators RHNA Capacity
AFFH Indicators
Integration and Segregation
Access to
Opportunity
Displacement
Risk
Census
Tract
Neighborhood
Total
Households
Owner
Households
Renter
Households
Lower Moderate
Above
Moderat
e
Median
Household
Income
AMI less
than 50%
AMI
50 -
80%
AMI 80
- 100%
AMI
greate
r than
100%
Hispanic /
Latino
Non-White
Population
Disability
Rate
Resource
Designation
Overcrowding
Rate
4441
LakeRosemont
2,573 2,162 411 0 0 0 $116,812 20% 8% 10% 62% 28% 74% 10% Moderate
Resource
0%
4442
Mirabeau
Park
1,887 1,484 403 0 0 9 $126,028 14% 12% 9% 64% 35% 81% 7% Moderate
Resource
2%
4443.01
Mayhews
Landing
1,189 862 327 0 0 0 $121,156 11% 6% 12% 72% 38% 76% 8%
Moderate
Resource
2%
4443.02
Bayside/ Old
Town
1,500 762 738 70 21 649 $105,188 24% 12% 13% 51% 66% 89% 6% Moderate
Resource
6%
4444
Old Town /
Central
Newark
1,519 848 671 201 44 120 $93,094 19% 13% 19% 49% 59% 86% 8% Moderate
Resource
0%
4445
Old Town /
Central
Newark
2,025 879 1,146 118 42 36 $109,441 16% 14% 9% 60% 21% 88% 7% Moderate
Resource
5%
4446.01 Birch Grove 1,779 1,543 236 155 1 296 $139,119 9% 11% 4% 76% 18% 84% 7% High
Resource
0%
4446.02
NewPark
Place
1,575 1,129 446 178 18 536 $128,229 14% 5% 8% 74% 11% 90% 5% High
Resource
0%
Source: Community Planning Collaborative, City of Newark. HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 124

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Potential Effects of Segregation and Integration
Race and Ethnicity
In Newark, neighborhoods are predominantly Hispanic/ Latinx. Lake-Rosemont and Birch Grove Neighborhoods are the only neighborhoods in the city where White residents have a slim or sizable gap. The NewPark Place and Sanctuary West areas throughout the city have a predominantly Asian population (composed of a mix of different ethnicities). Generally, the sites inventory will provide some opportunity to balance the distribution of the various racial/ethnic groups in the city. As described above, Hispanic/ Latinx residents are the most segregated group and Asian residents are the most isolated compared to other groups. The sites inventory will not exacerbate segregation by race and ethnicity in Newark due to the high numbers of housing sites in areas that are predominantly Hispanic/ Latinx and Asian, providing new opportunities for housing mobility in the city.

Using the residential sites identified in the site inventory, we look to understand how new housing will impact segregation and integration of race, ethnicity and income level. Figure 3-52 shows the majority of identified sites are concentrated in the areas with a predominantly Latinx/Hispanic population. These areas correspond with the Old Town specific plan, that increases zoning to encourage investment in affordable housing and the transit oriented nature of Bayside Newark. In the Birchwood area, with the highest median incomes in the city, two housing projects, one the Timber Affordable senior housing project and the second, the E-Z 8 Motel site will provide 184 low and moderate income homes, and opportunities for those of other races with lower incomes in an area that has a slim white majority. The redevelopment of NewPark Mall, within the NewPark Place area, will provide 174 low and moderate income units in a high resource neighborhood with a predominantly Asian population. While the increase in above moderate income housing in areas that are predominantly low and moderate income will increase the diversity of incomes and increased investment in the area, it can also lead to higher rents for the surrounding households, and displacement. In response to the concentration of housing opportunity sites located in the central and southern portions of the city, Newark will be implementing a number of programs to expand housing development and housing choice for multiple incomes throughout the city.

Programs include: Program H2.1 SB9 and SB10 ordinance as well as H2.8 Zoning for Missing Middle Housing, H2.2 to reduce constraints and expand accessibility for ADU production, in order to achieve a greater geographic diversity of housing type and location. Program H2.6 looks at public school sites in Newark as locations for affordable housing to district employees, and has the potential to both provide affordable family sized housing and increase access to opportunities throughout the city.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 125

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-52: Sites by Racial Predominance, 2010
Source: Adapted by Community Planning Collaborative, 2022. HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

Income
Newark has a population with a high median income, with 50% of residents making more than 100 percent of the median income. Despite this, there is still a large population of residents who are low income, with 10 percent of residents making less than 30 percent of the median income and 13 percent with moderate incomes. Through a variety of programs, the City is working to increase the development of housing for all income types, including housing for those with extremely low incomes, seniors, large families and those with moderate incomes. The Housing Element includes programs to establish development standards that facilitate missing middle housing that is affordable to middle-income households in single-family neighborhoods (Program H2.8) and promoting the development of ADUs throughout the city (Program H2.2).

Fifty percent of sites (2,075 units) are located within the NewParkPlace and the areas, which have a median income of $139,000. The NewParkPlace developments have 28 percent of the total low income units, the largest number of low income units in the city, along with the largest percentage AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 126

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
of above moderate units at 58 percent. Although the lower income sites are distributed amongst The Old Town/ Central, Bayside, Birch Grove and NewParkPlace areas, these census tracts have a range of median incomes between $93,094 to $1390,111, and accounts for 91 percent of the lower-income capacity, 84 percent of the moderate-income capacity, and a majority (2,291 units) of the above-moderate income capacity. The sites in the Bayside /Old Town area are zoned for a variety of housing options to be built, with the greatest capacity of low and moderate income sites which will in turn help to diversify income levels in the area. Table 3-14 show that 23 percent of the lower-income sites are in census tracts with incomes below $93,000. This is driven by the capacity on sites in the Old Town/ Central area along Thornton Boulevard and works to ensure that housing is affordable to existing residents in order to support them to stay in place as investments come to the area. The sites inventory for all other income levels (i.e., lower-income sites, moderate income sites, mixed income sites, and pipeline projects) will not have a significant impact on patterns of segregation and integration by the remaining fair housing indicators including familial status and disability status due the even distribution of those populations in the City.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 127

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-53: Site Distribution by Median Income, 2015- 2019 Source: Adapted by Community Planning Collaborative, 2022. HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 128

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 3-14: Site Distribution by Median Income, 2015- 2019 Census
Tract
Neighborhood
Lower
income
Moderate
income
Above
Moderate
Total Units
units % units % units %
unit
s
%
Median
Household
Income
AMI less
than 50%
AMI 50
- 80%
AMI 80
- 100%
AMI
greater
than
100%
4441
LakeRosemont
0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% $ 116,812 20% 8% 10% 62%
4442 Mirabeau Park 0 0% 0 0% 9 0.5% 9 0.4% $ 126,028 14% 12% 9% 64% 4443.01
Mayhews
Landing
0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% $ 121,156 11% 6% 12% 72%
4443.02
Gateway /
Bayshore/ old
Town
70 10% 21 17% 649 39% 740 30% $ 105,188 24% 12% 13% 51% 4444
Old Town /
Central
Newark
201 28% 44 35% 120 7% 365 15% $ 93,094 19% 13% 19% 49%
4445
Old Town /
Central
Newark
118 16% 42 33% 36 2% 196 8% $ 109,441 16% 14% 9% 60%
4446.01 Birch Grove 155 21% 1 1% 296 18% 452 18% $ 139,119 9% 11% 4% 76% 4446.02 NewPark Place 178 25% 18 14% 536 33% 732 29% $ 128,229 14% 5% 8% 74% Source: Community Planning Collaborative, 2023.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 129

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-54: Site Distribution By Percent of Low and Moderate Income Residents, 2015- 2019 Source: Adapted by Community Planning Collaborative, 2022. HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

Potential Effects on Access to Opportunity
According to 2022 TCAC data, Newark is a mix of moderate and high resource areas. The Birchwood, NewParkPlace areas comprise Newark’s high resource areas, while the rest of the city is considered moderate resource areas, as highlighted in Figure 3-56. Newark does not have any low resource areas, areas of high segregation, or highest resource areas.

A percentage breakdown of proposed and sites zoned for housing by resource area in Figure 3-56 shows that 46 percent of low income units are located in high resource areas. A significant percentage of planned and proposed moderate income housing, 85 percent, are located in moderate resource areas as are 54 percent for low income units. For the most part, both low and above moderate housing are relatively evenly distributed across moderate and high resource areas. While a high percentage of moderate units are planned and proposed for moderate resource areas, this figure does not take into account the additional units expected from missing AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 130

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
middle and ADU programs which will be prioritized for high resource areas.

In the higher resource areas there is a mix of housing both in the pipeline for development and sites identified for new housing. Pipeline projects include site 9, Cedar Community Apartments, a HomeKey project that provides 124 units of housing for those with extremely low incomes. The focus will be on providing housing for those that are homeless and those at risk of homelessness, with 11 units reserved for veterans that have experienced homelessness. The redevelopment of NewPark Mall consists of two mixed income projects providing housing for very low, low and moderate income households, and one pipeline project serving those with above moderate incomes. Pipeline and housing opportunity sites in the Birchwood and NewPark Place areas will provide 352 units of low and moderate income housing in high opportunity areas. By providing housing opportunities for very low, low and moderate income households in high resourced areas the city is addressing the need to expand housing choices available to those looking for affordable housing close to shopping, parks, transportation and quality schools and support vulnerable populations.

Newark is making targeted investments in the Old Town/ Bayside area, with active transportation infrastructure improvements connected to the Old Town Specific Plan and the Bicycle master plan, and supporting small businesses and community members through facade improvement grants for small businesses in the Old Town area and the construction of a family resource center. See the chapter on transportation and the Public Realm for more details on city lead investments. These investments will provide needed improvements in an area that is lower income than surrounding areas.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 131

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Environmental Outcomes
Figure 3-55: Site Distribution by CalEnviroScreen Percentile Score, 2021 Source: Adapted by Community Planning Collaborative, 2023. HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool and CalEnviroScreen Data
CalEnviroScreen is a mapping tool that helps identify California communities that are most affected by many sources of pollution, and where people are often especially vulnerable to pollution’s effects. The tool uses environmental, health, and socioeconomic information to produce scores at the census tract level and is indexed allowed for cross community comparison.

Tracts with high scores experience a much higher pollution burden than areas with low scores.

As displayed in Figure 3-55 above, sites identified by Newark as being suitable for accommodating lower-income RHNA housing during the planning period are located in areas with low to very-low levels of environmental risk. Both planned and proposed projects and sites zoned for housing are in areas with a relatively low incidence of environmental contamination per CalEnviroScreen.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 132

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Environmental Quality
Bayside Newark
This project area includes 233 acres of land that historically has contained various industrial, manufacturing, chemical processing and salt production facilities since the early twentieth century. Due to the history of industrial use on the site, the city has remediated portions of the site. One form of contamination was a groundwater plume that exists in shallow groundwater beneath portions of the Plan area. The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is directing mitigation of this groundwater plume in collaboration with the Alameda County Water District (ACWD). Some properties within the Specific Plan area also contain soil impacted hazardous substances. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is directing the remediation of impacted soils at these properties.

The specific plan includes neighborhood focused retail, new infrastructure to support new residential and commercial development, new parks and the Bayside Trail, as well as new residential units in a variety of sizes and types.

Old Town Specific Plan Area
Central Newark and sites within the Old Town Specific Plan are at high risk of exposure to particulates from diesel fuel. In an effort to increase health equity in the area, and create a safer environment for walking and biking, the city will conduct a truck route study in 2023, looking to remove semi trucks from using Thornton avenue in the old town district.

Transportation and the Public Realm
Through public participation, pedestrian improvements and access to public transportation have been consistent themes that are associated with opportunity for a variety of populations, as well as being conscientious of climate change and the environment.

Figure 3-57 shows the distribution of housing sites and bus routes in Newark. We have heard from the disability community that having affordable housing in close proximity to transit is important for their community. There is also an understanding that transportation can be a significant expense, to providing housing in close proximity to transportation, new developments can lessen the cost burden and support more sustainable development.

In 2017 Newark City Council approved the Pedestrian and Bicycle master plan, in order to prioritize and implement infrastructure improvements and educational/enforcement programs that will improve the biking and walking environment in Newark. The following is an overview of pedestrian and bicycle improvements to be undertaken during the Housing Element cycle:

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 133

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
● Cherry street will be improved by a class 4 separated bike lane from Central Ave to Stevenson blvd.
● The Central ave overpass, with an estimated completion in 2025, will eliminate railroad grade crossing for pedestrians, creating a separated crossing at Sycamore and Filbert, make it easier for pedestrians to cross safety, and the addition of new bike lanes ● In Old Town, with an estimated completion date of 2025 there will be bike and pedestrian improvements: a road diet, widened sidewalks, bike lines where there are none, high visibility crosswalks.
● The Bay Trail will be extended through the Bayside Newark development ● The city has received grant funding to add sidewalks and for the development of a cycle track on Thornton ave, between Gateway blvd and Hickory street, to improve access to the wildlife refuge. This will add bike lanes to the west side to make it safer to access the wildlife refuge. Estimated project completion will be in 2029. ● Grant funding to install the rapid fire beacons where the residents have expressed concerns over safe crossing, especially for students. One is planned for Old Town at Mulberry street, and near the Bayshore district on Enterprise drive.

Through area specific plans, Newark is investing in their public realm through pedestrian improvements for active transportation and pedestrian safety through more human scale streets.

The Old Town Specific plan will be directing infrastructure investments in the form of streetscape improvements, such as wider sidewalks, bike lanes, high visibility crosswalks and traffic calming.

Through the Old Town Area, Thornton Avenue will be reduced to slow traffic and increase space for walking and biking. Public art and new gathering spaces will support placemaking efforts to celebrate Newark past and present.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 134

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 3-15: Sites along transit lines and High or Moderate Opportunity Areas, 2022 Housing Site
Specific Plan Area and / or
Opportunity area Pedestrian Improvements
14 High Resource (NewPark
Place)
5, 6, 7, 13, 17, 22 High Resource (Birchwood)
8, 9, 16, 19, 21, 28
Moderate Resource (Old
Town)
Changes will be made to Thornton Ave to facilitate
safer walking and biking in the area. There will be
traffic calming measures, bike lanes and wider
sidewalks.
10, 15, 20, 21, 24, 25
Moderate Resource (Old
Town / Central Newark)
Source: Tax Credit Allocation Committee, 2022, ACTrans 2022, City of Newark Figure 3-56: Percentage of Housing Units by Resource Opportunity Area, 2022 Source: Tax Credit Allocation Committee, 2022, Community Planning Collaborative Sites Analysis AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 135

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-57: Site Distribution by Resource Level and Transportation Access, 2022 Source: Adapted by Community Planning Collaborative, 2022. HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool Potential Effects On Disproportionate Housing Needs
As previously mentioned, Newark has a large portion of residents that have housing needs that make them vulnerable to displacement due to being cost burdened, large families, female headed households or a senior. As highlighted in Figure 3-59 the areas vulnerable to displacement also correspond with portions of the city with BIPOC populations above 80%, specifically Hispanic / Latinx residents. The areas that are vulnerable to displacement in the Old Town, Bayside area also have higher rates of cost burden. With a focus on increasing affordable housing opportunities in the Old Town/ Central area, 57 percent of sites are for lower income households, as well as sites identified as mixed income developments will provide housing options that will support community members ability to remain in their neighborhoods.

The city is planning to develop and implement a number of policies and programs to support residents to stay in place such as a local preference policy, program H4.2 a community/tenant AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 136

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
opportunity to purchase act, and program H4.1 Develop Anti Displacement programs for the Old Town area.

Figure 3-58 Distribution of Sites by Rates of Cost burdened, 2015- 2019 Source: Adapted by Community Planning Collaborative, 2022. HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

Cost Burdened Households
● 30% of housing sites are affordable for very low, low and moderate income households and are distributed throughout the city.
● Recognizing the role that access to transportation plays, 25 percent of housing units are along existing bus lines and are affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 137

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-59: Distribution of Sites by Displacement Risk and Percent BIPOC population, 2017 and 2018 Source: Adapted by Community Planning Collaborative, 2022. HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

People with Disabilities
Residents with disabilities in Newark are a lower percentage then the county at 8 percent, and are equally distributed throughout the city. Through conversation with the executive director of the Housing Consortium of the East Bay, he identified important aspects of housing development for those with physician and developmental disabilities. Having housing in close proximity to public transit to connect with jobs and services is key, as only 10 percent of the demographic owns a car.

In Newark, major transit lines run along Thornton Ave, Central Ave and Sycamore street. Housing sites are well positioned to be within a half mile walking distance of transit as shown in Figure 3-57. With The majority of sites centrally located near parks, libraries and transit, new housing in Newark will be accessible to those with limited mobility. Fifty two percent of housing sites along existing transit routes are to be affordable to those with very low, low and moderate incomes, yielding an expected total of 754 units.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 138

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 3-60: Housing Sites Vis-a-Vis Disability Status, 2015- 2019 Source: Adapted by Community Planning Collaborative, 2022. HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 139

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
I. Contributing Factors and Meaningful Actions
The City of Newark has a significant Asian and Hispanic/Latinx population, a large number of families, and few affordable rental and home ownership opportunities available for residents. A history of housing discrimination and disinvestment have brought uneven opportunity and quality of life for BIPOC residents. Housing pressures from workers in Silicon Valley are increasing housing costs for long term residents. The city is constrained by ecologically sensitive marshlands of the San Francisco Bay, and is vulnerable to flooding and sea level rise, which plays a key role in planning for growth in a sustainable manner.

There is an urgent need for affordable housing, especially for families and seniors. There is a high percentage of students experiencing homelessness, single parent households in poverty, and multigenerational families - all with disparate housing needs. Old town and Central Newark have low environmental outcomes, due to pollution from industrial and truck traffic that disproportionately affects children and seniors.

Newark’s BIPOC community are disproportionately cost burdened renters, who face increasing rents with few protections. Many residents shared the challenge of finding affordable rental housing, and the desire for stability and the opportunity to build wealth through homeownership.

The city is committed to furthering fair housing in Newark and has identified the contributing factors, and policies and programs to implement in order to increase access to opportunity and affordable housing options in the city, especially for those communities most vulnerable to gentrification and displacement.

Mobility Strategies Removing barriers to housing in areas of opportunity and strategically enhancing access.

PROGRAM H2.8: Zoning for Missing Middle Housing Types.

PROGRAM H5.1: First-Time Homebuyer Assistance
PROGRAM H7.1: Develop training programs in collaboration with Alameda County Housing Authority for property owners to understand the housing choice voucher program
PROGRAM H4.6: Support tenant stability though minimum lease terms and relocation assistance
PROGRAM H4.8: Connect Residents with Foreclosure Assistance PROGRAM H7.4: Affirmatively Market Affordable Housing
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 140

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
New Housing Choices in Areas of Opportunity Promoting housing supply, choices and affordability in areas of high opportunity and outside of areas of concentrated poverty
PROGRAM H2.1: Encourage New Housing options in areas of the city close to services such as parks, schools and grocery stores.

PROGRAM H2.2: Accessory Dwelling Unit program
PROGRAM H2.6: Work in Partnership with Newark Unified School District to develop new housing
PROGRAM H2.7: Affordable housing development fund.

PROGRAM H2.8: Zoning for Missing Middle Housing types
PROGRAM H2.10: Single Room Occupancy Housing
PROGRAM H4.5: With community partners, connect residents to existing shared housing programs
PROGRAM H5.2: Affordable Housing Development Programs
PROGRAM H5.6: Affordable Housing Overlay Zone
PROGRAM H5.3: Public Lands for dedicated affordable housing.

PROGRAM H2.3: A Community Plan for the 4 Corners Area
Place Based Strategies (Amenities, Economic Development) Conserving and improving assets in areas of lower opportunity and concentrated poverty such as targeted investment in neighborhood revitalization, preserving or rehabilitating existing affordable housing, improving infrastructure, schools, employment, parks, transportation and other community amenities.

PROGRAM H1.1: Housing Rehabilitation and Repair Programs.

PROGRAM H2.9: Area Specific Plans
PROGRAM H4.1: Develop anti displacement programs for the Old-Town Newark Specific Plan area
PROGRAM H6.3: Cool Roofs for cool homes
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 141

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Anti Displacement Strategies + Tenant Protection (Fair Housing Outreach and Enforcement) strategies that protects residents in areas of lower or moderate opportunity and concentrated poverty and preserves housing choices and affordability
PROGRAM H1.2: Develop a citywide rental inspection program to maintain high quality housing throughout the city
PROGRAM H4.2: Develop a Tenant/Community Opportunity to Purchase Policy PROGRAM H4.3: Develop a Just Cause Eviction Ordinance
PROGRAM H4.4: Small Sites Program
PROGRAM H4.9: No Net Loss of Units
PROGRAM H5.1: First-Time Home Buyer Assistance
PROGRAM H7.2: Partner with community organizations to ensure that community members have access to tenant rights information and Fair Housing in multiple languages
PROGRAM H7.3: Work with Newark Unified school district to distribute housing resources to families enrolled in the district
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 142

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 3-16: Summary of Contributing Factors and Actions Regarding Housing Issues in Newark Fair Housing Identified Issue Contributing Factor
Prioritization and
Geographic target Meaningful actions
Population of children and
families experiencing
homelessness.

Lack of available rental housing
that is affordable to those making
at or below the median income.

There is no affordable housing
available for rent and for those
transitioning out of homelessness.

HIGH.

City wide with a
focus in supporting
the students in
schools in the Old
Town/ Central area
● Develop a strong working relationship and partnership with the Newark Unified School district to increase access to resources to families in the District. PROGRAM H7.3
● Build more housing for low and extremely low income residents and those transitioning from and experiencing homelessness.

PROGRAM H2.7
● Prioritize publicly owned land for affordable housing development. PROGRAM H5.3
● Implement an affordable housing overlay zone to incentivize the construction of affordable housing for very low, low, and moderate income households in targeted areas. PROGRAM
H5.6
● Develop a local response to support people experiencing homelessness, with specific attention to the racial disparities and large population of youth and families. PROGRAM H2.5; PROGRAM H7.3
● Support Tenants through minimum lease terms and relocation assistance. PROGRAM H4.6
● Work with partners to develop scattered sites for shared housing utilizing funding sources such as Project Home Key.

PROGRAM H4.11
Ineffective outreach and
access to information for
renters and property
owners,those with limited
English, lack of existing
knowledge of resources, or
limited time
Resources for renters are not
easily accessible currently. Those
with limited English language, lack
of access to a personal computer
and or internet connection need
additional support and resources
tailored to their needs. Landlords
need training to better understand
laws and regulations
HIGH
Citywide with a
focus on supporting
the significant
Hispanic/ Latinx
and Asian
populations in the
Old Town / Central
area
● Partner with a local non profit to co produce tenants rights materials and support systems for communities that have not been equitably served by existing resources and processes.

PROGRAM H7.2
● Update the city website to make housing resources easier to access for populations that have limited English. PROGRAM H7.2; PROGRAM H7.3; PROGRAM H7.4
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 143

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Fair Housing Identified Issue Contributing Factor
Prioritization and
Geographic target Meaningful actions
Significant negative
environmental outcomes for
existing low income BIPOC
communities & increased
risk of climate related
displacement
Due to high levels of air pollution
from freeway pollution and truck
traffic on Thornton Avenue, and
high levels of cost burden
residents, the majority of Newark
has less positive environmental
outcomes.

MEDIUM
Focus on the
Bayside/Old Town
● Flood Risk Disclosure for New Development. As a significant portion of Newark falls within the 100 and 500 year flood plain, ensuring that development is built in response to climate change. PROGRAM H6.4
Displacement pressure for
BIPOC communities. Large
cost burden BIPOC
community and a low
inventory of affordable
rental homes for all
segments ofthe population
Due to close proximity to Silicon
Valley, the housing market has
become more attractive to those
working in the tech industries in
the area. As rents continue to
increase, residents with incomes
at or below the median income are
not able to find rentals they can
afford.

HIGH
Focus on areas
identified as
vulnerable to
displacement such
as the Old
Town/Central,
Bayside areas and
renters around the
city
● Increasing renter support by developing and implementing a Just Cause Eviction Ordinance, to ensure that renters clearly know their rights. PROGRAM H4.3
● Developing a Local Preference policy to support housing that prioritizes those residents currently living in Newark. POLICY H4.1
● Developing a community / tenant opportunity to purchase ordinance. PROGRAM H4.2
● Develop an anti displacement plan for the Old Town/ Central Newark areas. PROGRAM H4.1
● Support tenant stability though minimum lease terms and relocation assistance. PROGRAM: H4.6
● Develop a city wide rental inspection program. PROGRAM H1.2
Lack of affordable rental
homes for all segments ofthe
population, with protected
classes being the most
affected. A large number of
single parentfamilies in
Newark in poverty
Newark’s housing stock is
primarily composed of market rate
single family homes for ownership
or rent. The most recent
subsidized housing constructed
was the first built in the city in over
20 years, and currently all
subsidized housing is for seniors.

HIGH
Citywide focus on
new housing on
Newark Unified
school district sites,
and a focus on
missing middle
housing types in the
Birch Grove, Lakes,
Mirabeau, and
● Develop an Affordable Housing NOFA to encourage affordable housing developers to locate projects in the city for high need populations. POLICY H5.5
● Develop a program for the development of low and moderate income Accessory Dwelling Units in the city, with the intention of increasing housing options for public service workers and residents that are in need of affordable housing such as single parents. PROGRAM H5.5
● Update the inclusionary zoning policy to include home AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 144

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Fair Housing Identified Issue Contributing Factor
Prioritization and
Geographic target Meaningful actions
Mayhews Landing
neighborhoods.
ownership opportunities, encourage more on site affordable units and ensure affordability requirements will address those at residents at low incomes
● Generate local funds for affordable housing production and programming through an affordable housing fee program.

PROGRAM H5.2
● In collaboration with a non profit organization, implement a shared housing program in Newark. PROGRAM H4.5
● Work in partnership with the Newark Unified School District to plan for affordable housing production and build upon the existing partnership between the City of Newark and Newark Unified School District to bring forward implementable plans for affordable housing school owned properties. PROGRAM H2.6
● Develop new housing options in established neighborhoods of the city close to services such as parks, schools and grocery stores. PROGRAM H2.1
Low homeownership levels
for Black, Indigenous and
Hispanic/ Latinx residents
History of housing discrimination
in Newark as well as mortgage
lending discrimination has led to a
lack of access to home ownership
opportunities for Black,
Indigenous and HIspanic/ Latinx
residents.

MODERATE
Focus on supporting
BIPOC residents, as
part ofthe Newark
Affordable Housing
Action Plan work
● Develop a below market rate homeownership program in
partnership with a non profit organization to expand home ownership for first time homebuyers and BIPOC community members. PROGRAM H5.1
● Connect residents to foreclosure assistance, With a focus on Hispanic/Latinx, Indigenous and Black residents. PROGRAM H4.8
Disproportionate access to
opportunity across the city.

Areas with low access to
opportunity are primarily in
areas with high proportion of
Hispanic/ Latinx, Asian and
Older areas of the city such as Old
Town have seen a lack of
investment over the years in the
historic commercial and
residential district and private
investment has gone into newer
HIGH
Programs and
policies focused in
the Old Town/
Central Newark
area. Family sized
● Develop new affordable homes in opportunity areas
throughout the city, close to parks, schools and public transportation. PROGRAM H2.1
● Invest in improving the infrastructure and affordable housing opportunities in Old Town and Bayside neighborhoods in
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 145

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Fair Housing Identified Issue Contributing Factor
Prioritization and
Geographic target Meaningful actions
Indigenous residents
High segregation of Hispanic
/ Latinx population
developments. Due to the
disinvestment, the area has
supported lower rents than the
surrounding neighborhoods,
supporting a primarily BIPOC
neighborhood of residents.
housing and
pedestrian
improvements are
planned/in process
Newark through the Old Town specific plan, to create areas of high opportunity where residents currently reside. PROGRAM H2.9
● Open up single family zoning in larger portions of the city for low scale “missing middle housing” types such as courtyard housing that were identified in the housing survey. PROGRAM H2.8
● Update inclusionary zoning policy to ensure new affordable homes are built on site, with no in lieu fee option
● Accessory Dwelling Unit program to support the development of new housing distributed throughout the city and with 25 percent in high opportunity neighborhoods. PROGRAM H2.3 ● Develop an Anti Displacement program for the Old
Town/Central areas, PROGRAM H4.1
● Develop a program for the preservation of unsubsidized affordable housing in the city, especially in areas of high displacement risk. PROGRAM H4.4
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING 146

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
SECTION 4 HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
State housing law requires the City to review both governmental and non-governmental constraints to the maintenance and production of housing for all income levels. Examples of such constraints include development standards, local processing and permit procedures, development fees, construction costs, and compliance with various State laws to facilitate housing for lower-income and special needs households. State law requires the local governments to take action through their Housing Element to “address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing including housing for all income levels and housing for persons with disabilities,” (Government Code Section 65583(c) (3)). A thorough understanding of the potential constraints to development can help to create appropriate policy responses
A. Governmental Constraints
Government regulations can potentially constrain the supply of housing available in a community if those regulations limit opportunities to develop housing, impose requirements that unnecessarily increase the cost to develop housing, or overcomplicate the development process for developers. State law requires that housing elements contain an analysis of the governmental constraints on housing maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels including special needs households and persons with disabilities (Government Code, Section 65583(a) (4)). Potential constraints to housing include land use controls, development processing procedures and fees, impact fees, on- and off-site improvement requirements, and building and housing codes and enforcement. This section discusses these standards and assesses whether any serve as a constraint to affordable housing development in Newark.

Land Use
The City of Newark controls the location, type, density, and scale of new development through the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and various specific plans.

General Plan
Every jurisdiction in California is required to prepare a comprehensive, long-term General Plan to guide decision making. Newark’s General Plan, adopted in 2013, sets forth the City’s vision, goals, and policies to shape development of the city. The updated plan created new opportunities for residential and mixed-use development throughout the city and has subsequently been supplemented by Specific Plans (described below) that further set forth plans and policies to HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 147

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
accommodate a range of housing types in key priority growth areas to create inclusive housing opportunities for Newark residents. These new residential development opportunities are reflected in the increased capacity of the Housing Element sites inventory. The Land Use Element of the General Plan has five land use designations that allow for residential use as follows:

Table 4-1: General Plan Land Use Designations
Land Use
Designation
Housing Capacity General Uses
Low Density
Residential
Less than 8.7 units
per net acre
This designation is intended for single-family residential development on lots larger than 5,000 square feet. It corresponds to most of Newark’s residential neighborhoods. Multiple zoning districts apply within Low Density Residential areas to distinguish areas with different minimum lot sizes. Other compatible uses, such as schools, childcare centers, parks, and religious facilities may also be located in areas with this designation, subject to appropriate permitting requirements.

Low-Medium
Density
Residential

8.7 to 15 units per
net acre
This designation is intended for small lot single-family homes, zero lot line and patio homes, mobile home parks, and other areas characterized by a mix of older single-family homes and small multi-unit buildings.

These areas have the basic characteristics of single-family neighborhoods, such as front and rear yards, driveways, and garages, but have smaller lots and a wider variety of housing types. Densities in areas with this designation range from 8.7 to 15 units per net acre, but the higher end of this range (e.g. from 11 to 15 units per acre) will only be allowed on properties which have their primary access on an arterial or collector street and which are found to be compatible with the character and intensity of residential development in the immediate area. Other compatible uses, such as schools, childcare centers, parks, and religious facilities may be located in all areas with this designation, subject to appropriate permitting requirements.

Medium
Density
Residential
14 to 30 units per
net acre
This designation is intended for garden apartments and condominiums, townhomes, row houses, 4 to 8 plexes, and older areas that contain a mix of multi-family and single-family homes within this density range. These areas tend to be multi-family in character but retain some of the characteristics of suburban neighborhoods such as landscaped yards, off-street parking, common open space, and low building heights.

Densities in areas with this designation range from 14 to 30 units per net acre, but the higher end of this range (e.g. from 22 to 30 units per acre) will only be allowed on properties which have their primary access on an arterial or collector street and which are found to be compatible with the character and intensity of residential development in the immediate area.

Additionally, to ensure that land with this designation is used as efficiently as possible, a minimum density standard of 14 units per net acre applies. Other compatible uses, such as schools, childcare centers, parks, and religious facilities may also be located in areas with this designation, subject to appropriate permitting requirements.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 148

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Land Use
Designation
Housing Capacity General Uses
High Density
Residential
25 to 60 units per
net acre
This designation is intended for apartment and condominium complexes that are generally three stories or more. On larger parcels with this designation, common open space and other shared amenities are typically provided. Structured (or basement level/ podium) parking is also common. Densities range from 25 to 60 units per acre, corresponding to site area allowances of 725 to 1,450 square feet of lot area per each dwelling unit. To ensure that land with this designation is used as efficiently as possible, a minimum density standard of 25 units per net acre applies. Other compatible uses, such as schools, childcare centers, parks, and religious facilities may also be located in areas with this designation, subject to appropriate permitting requirements.

Commercial
Mixed-Use
30 to 60 units per
net acre.

FAR of 0.5 to 2.0
This designation supports a combination of office, residential, and retail use, with an emphasis on specialty commercial uses such as antique stores, boutiques, galleries, cafes, and restaurants. Development standards should foster a walkable, pedestrian-oriented character that emphasizes a fine-grained building scale and streetscape. Structures that are entirely residential or entirely commercial are both permitted, but the optimal development form on larger sites would include housing located above ground level retail shops or services. This designation is used in Old Town Newark, where it recognizes the historic scale, lot pattern, and context of this district. Floor area ratios (FARs) are generally in the range of 0.5 to 2.0. The actual intensity of development on any given site is dictated by a number of factors, including height limits, parking and landscaping requirements, and site size and dimensions.

Multiple zoning districts apply in this designation, with one zone focused on ground floor retail uses and the other allowing more diverse ground floor uses, such as offices and housing.

Regional
Commercial
Greater than 30
units per acre.

FAR of 0.2 to 4.0
This designation supports the largest and most complete shopping facilities in the city. The emphasis is on a broad array of goods and services, including department stores, retail shops, restaurants, entertainment facilities, and similar uses which draw patrons from throughout Newark and the surrounding region. This designation is applied to NewPark Mall and some of the commercial areas on the Mall’s perimeter. Uses such as hotels and corporate office buildings are acceptable in areas with this designation. Housing at densities greater than 30 units per acre may be included in Regional Commercial areas if such housing is a component of a large-scale planned development which is primarily oriented around regional retail commercial uses. FARs are generally in the range of 0.2 to 4.0. The actual intensity of development on any given site is dictated by a number of factors, including height limits, parking and landscaping requirements, and site size and dimensions.

Source: City of Newark General Plan, 2013
HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 149

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Zoning
The City’s zoning and development regulations establish permitted and conditionally permitted uses within each zone and standards which dictate how much development can occur on a given parcel of land such as minimum and maximum densities, height, setbacks, and lot coverage. The City Zoning Ordinance is adopted as Title 17 of the Municipal Code. Title 17, as well as all the other titles that comprise the Newark Municipal Code, are easily accessible on the city’s website at www.newark.org.

The current zoning ordinance includes four residential zoning districts (RS Residential Single Family, RL Residential Low Density, RM Residential Medium Density, RH Residential High Density, and two mixed-use/commercial districts that allow for residential development (CMU Commercial Mixed Use, RC Regional Commercial). These “base” zoning districts are supported by combining districts or “overlay” districts, including the Form Based Code Overlay District, Planned Development and Old Town Newark Overlay District (Table 4-2).

As shown in Table 4-1, the current zoning districts which permit multifamily housing provide a base density range of 30-60 DU/A with the exception of the RC zone, which permits higher densities. In practice, projects in Newark such as the Newpark Place Phase 1A have significantly exceeded these base densities.

Development Standards
Residential development standards established in the Zoning Ordinance are designed to provide orderly development of the City and to protect and promote the health, safety, and welfare of local residents and to implement the policies of the General Plan. An analysis of the residential standards, shown in Table 4-2, shows that Newark’s development standards (prior to the adoption of the zoning amendment required by Program H3.6) are typical for Bay Area communities and are not a constraint to the development of housing. These standards are intended to balance the need for predictable, orderly development with the need to allow the maximum possible residential density. Through program H2.12, the City will address potential barriers to residential development at all density levels through regular review and if necessary, amend the relevant development standards.

Minimum Lot Area
In the RS district, the vast majority of residential development during the planning period is anticipated to occur through ADUs and SB 9 Urban Lot Splits and Urban Housing Developments. These development types are not required to observe minimum lot size requirements for the underlying zoning district. The minimum lot sizes for the RS district HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 150

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
range from 6,000 to 10,000 square feet depending on the zoning designation which correlates to the development patterns of the surrounding subdivisions. The minimum lot sizes for the RM and RH districts, 6,000 square feet, do not affect the development potential of multi-family developments which allow multiple units to be constructed on a single parcel. The minimum lot size for CMU is 20,000 square feet which could be considered a constraint since many of the CMU parcels abutting Thornton Avenue are less than half an acre which would require lot consolidation in order to facilitate redevelopment. The City will investigate this possible constraint as part of Program H2.12 Setbacks
In the RS district, the vast majority of residential development during the planning period is anticipated to occur through ADUs and SB 9 Urban Lot Splits and Urban Housing Developments.

These development types are not required to observe setback requirements for the underlying zoning district. As a program of the Housing Element, a local SB 9 ordinance will be prepared to provide specific development standards for SB 9 projects. A standard residential subdivision in an RS district would not be constrained from achieving maximum density by setback requirements.

As shown in the Table 4-2, front setbacks decrease from 20 feet in RL to 15 feet in RM and RH districts, Street side setbacks decrease from 10 feet in RL to 8 feet, and rear setbacks decrease from 15 feet to 10 feet. CMU and RC districts can be developed to the lot line, but have setbacks imposed if they are adjacent to RS districts or a lot which is developed with a single family residence. The City’s setbacks are typical for a community of its size and development patterns and are not considered barriers to achieving maximum density.

Height
Height limitations are intended to allow projects to achieve the maximum allowable density, while also being responsive to community character. In the RS district, the height limit is 30 feet which allows for the construction of typical two-story homes. In the RM and RH districts, heights greater than 35 feet and up to 75 and 100 feet respectively are permitted with a Minor Use Permit, which may be granted at the discretion of the Community Development Director without a public hearing. In practice, these height limits are reasonable to allow the maximum density and range of product types that are typical in these zones. However, the requirement for an MUP may still be a constraint to development, so Program H2.12 includes the objective of removing this barrier. In the RL, RM, and RH districts, the height limits are 35, 75, and 100 feet respectively, which allow for the construction of three-story townhomes up to multi-story apartments or condominiums in the upper range.

Planned and proposed projects included in the Element generally do not reach the maximum allowable heights for their respective zoning districts but still achieve considerable residential densities. The proposed SAHA development, zoned RH, shows that heights are not a barrier in HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 151

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
achieving maximum densities since the project has a height of 60 feet and achieves a density of 105 dwelling units per acre. Waymark Homes, a proposed three-story attached townhome development which is zoned RM, reaches a height of 37 feet and a density of 22 dwelling units per acre, which is the maximum for the district.

The districts that provide the highest densities for residential development also provide for the highest maximum heights, including the RC district which is 250 feet and the CMU district which is 60 feet or 75 feet within the Old Town Newark Specific Plan area. According to an analysis of the CMU zone, currently only one parcel is outside of the Old Town Specific Plan area and is subject to the 60-foot height limit. While few parcels are zoned CMU in Newark, the 60-foot height limit could potentially be a barrier to reaching maximum allowable densities, especially if the City decides to use this zoning in future locations. The City will review this concern (Program H2.12) and provide flexibility as needed to make maximum densities achievable.

In order to be responsive to community character, the City has scaled height restrictions if the parcel is adjacent to a less intensive zone district. However, this restriction only applies to the area of the parcel which is within 20 feet of the less intensive district, including setbacks, therefore it is not considered a barrier to achieving maximum density. As with other development standards described in this section, height limits and any associated city processes will be continually evaluated during the course of the planning period per Program H2.12.

Lot Coverage
Maximum lot coverage standards vary from 50 percent in RS and RL districts to 55% in RM and RH districts. Lot coverage increases in the RM district to 65% for development within the Old Town Specific Plan area. The CMU and RC districts have no maximum standards. These standards are typical in many Bay Area communities and in Newark have not been perceived as a barrier to development and achieving maximum densities.

Parking
Because off-street parking often requires large amounts of land and structured parking is expensive to build, parking requirements are one of the development standards that can most negatively impact the feasibility of new housing development. Compared to many neighboring jurisdictions, Newark currently has somewhat higher parking requirements for most housing types than neighboring jurisdictions. For multifamily housing, Newark has higher requirements for studio and one-bedroom units than Fremont, as well as higher requirements for covered parking.

Although Newark and Fremont have the same guest parking requirement of 0.5 spaces per unit, Fremont does not have the same requirements for covered parking, and removes minimum parking requirements entirely in areas near transit. Additionally Newark requires one space per unit to be located in a garage, a requirement that can significantly increase the cost of development.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 152

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Senior housing. Although it has been found that seniors do not have the same rates of driving, Newark has higher parking requirements than neighboring Union City and Fremont, at one space per unit.

ADUs. Union City does not list a parking requirement for ADU’s, but Newark has a higher parking requirement than Fremont, which has no parking requirements at all for ADU and JADU units.

Because Newark has higher parking requirements for multi-family, senior housing and accessory dwelling units this Housing Element update provides an opportunity for significant changes in parking requirements such as removing parking minimums and aligning requirements to be more in line with neighboring jurisdictions. Although the City complies with State density bonus parking standards upon request, the City’s parking requirements can be a potential constraint on the production of housing in some cases. In order to address this constraint, the City will implement Program H3.5 and will commit to developing new, lower parking standards to facilitate residential development, particularly on sites identified for the development of lower-income housing. This will also include a reduction of required guest parking from 0.5 to 0.25 spaces per unit.

Open Space Requirements
Newark has open space square footage requirements per unit in the RL, RM, RH and CMU and RC districts which are 400, 300, 200, 50, and 50 square feet respectively. The required open space is the product of the number of units multiplied by required square footage. Required open space consists of two types: common and private. This is no minimum private open space requirement.

Common open space must be a minimum of 50% of the required open space, but may be more, up to 100% of the requirement. Within the Old Town Specific Plan area, the RM district only requires 100 square feet of open space per unit. The open space requirements in the RL and RM districts may be considered high and have the potential to limit densities. Through Program H2.12, the City will review and revise the open space requirements as necessary including adjustments to the minimum area and dimensional requirements, as well as to provide more flexibility for open space types, location, and usability.

Minimum Commercial Component in Mixed Use Zones
Parcels within the CMU zone that have frontages on Newark Blvd. and Thornton Ave. between the Union Pacific Railroad and Olive Street are required to have nonresidential uses that occupy no less than 15% of the gross lot area on their ground floors. Ground non-residential use is also a requirement for all development in the RC district. The intent of this standard is to promote walkable and vibrant mixed-use neighborhoods with a strong sense of place, however the standard is a potential barrier since recent development in Newark has been predominantly residential. Outside of these major commercial corridors, 100% residential projects are permitted.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 153

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 4-2: Residential Development Standards, Newark 2022 Zoning
District
Minimum Lot
Area (sq. ft.)
Max Units Per
Acre
Minimum
Lot Width
(ft.)
Minimum/
Maximum
Setbacks (ft)
Maximum Main
Building
Coverage (%)
Maximum
Height(ft.)
Required
Open Space
Per Unit(sq.
ft.)
RS
RS-6,000:
6,000;
RS-7,000:
7,000;
RS-8,000:
8,000;
RS-10,000:
10,000

8.7 RS-6,000:
60;
RS-7,000:
65;
RS-8,000:
70;
RS-10,000:
80 Front: 20
Interior Side: 5
Street Side: 10
Rear: 20
50 30 n/a
RL
6,000; 3,000
for Single unit
dwelling,
detached
11, up to 15 with
CUP depending
on street
classification
60 Front: 20
Interior Side: 5
Street Side: 10
Rear: 15
50 35 400
RM 6,000
22; up to 30 with
CUP depending
on street
classification, 50
within the Old
Town Specific
Plan area
60 Front: 15
Interior Side: 5
Street Side: 8
Rear: 10
55, 65 within the
Old Town Specific
Plan area
75 (over 35
requires a MUP),
48 within the Old
Town Specific
Plan area, 35
within 20 ft. of an
RS or RL District
300; 100
within the Old
Town Specific
Plan area
RH 6,000 60 60
Front: 15
Interior Side: 5
Street Side: 8
Rear: 10
55 100 (over 35
requires a MUP);
35 within 20 ft. of
an RS or RL
district
200
HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 154

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Zoning
District
Minimum Lot
Area (sq. ft.)
Max Units Per
Acre
Minimum
Lot Width
(ft.)
Minimum/
Maximum
Setbacks (ft)
Maximum Main
Building
Coverage (%)
Maximum
Height(ft.)
Required
Open Space
Per Unit(sq.
ft.)
CMU 20,000
60, 100 within
the Old Town
Newark Specific
Plan area
100
Front: 0, max. of 10
Interior Side: 0, 20
abutting a RS
district or any lot
developed with a
single family
residence
Street Side: 0, max
of 10.

Rear: 0, 10 abutting
a RS district or any
lot developed with a
single family
residence
n/a
60; 75 within the
Old Town Specific
Plan area; 48
within 20 ft of an
RM District
boundary, 35
within 20 ft. of an
RS or RL District
boundary
50 RC 20,000 120 100
Front: 0
Interior Side: 0
Street Side: 0
Rear: 0
n/a 250 50
Source: City of Newark Zoning Ordinance, 2022
HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 155

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
An analysis of the residential standards, shown in Table 4-2, indicates that these requirements overall are not a constraint to the development of housing.

Specific Plans
The City has four (4) adopted specific plans which have significantly increased the City’s capacity to accommodate new housing development through the coming Housing Element update period and beyond. These plans are expected to guide new housing development during the timeframe of the 2023-2031 Housing Element and are described in more detail below.

Bayside Newark Specific Plan, Adopted July 2021
The Bayside Newark Specific Plan, formerly known as The Dumbarton Transit-Oriented Development (TOD), provides the framework for a proposed new neighborhood that will provide a broad range of new housing, retail and business opportunities in Western Newark, centered around the proposed Dunbarton Commuter Rail station.

This project area includes 233 acres of land that has contained various industrial, manufacturing, chemical processing and salt production facilities since the early twentieth century. The plan steers the development of a contemporary version of a pedestrian oriented neighborhood where housing, recreation, neighborhood retail center and employment opportunities are integrated and connected via pedestrian and bicycle networks. The community would include shops, parks and open space amenities, including a bayside trail. Approximately 8% of the area is designated as low density residential, 33% for medium density residential, 29% for medium/high residential, and 2% for high density residential.

In the proposed design, higher densities of residential development-such as condos-would be located within a quarter-mile radius of the transit station, medium densities-such as townhomes-are located slightly further, and single family dwellings are located farthest from the station. Retail stores and shops are concentrated near the transit station at the intersection of Willow Street and Enterprise Blvd. Higher density housing would be adjacent to the retail area and the transit station. Neighborhood parks would be located within the residential areas and a larger community park would be included. Blocks are generally short and pedestrian-oriented. The street circulation network of streets will have one travel lane in each direction and will utilize traffic calming measures such as bike lanes in both directions, on street parking, and single lane roundabouts with the goal of prioritizing active transportation. The plan has a unit cap of 2,500.

Old Town Specific Plan, Adopted September 2021
The Old Town Specific Plan addresses a 76-acre area which encompasses Thornton Avenue spanning seven blocks from Elm Street to Cherry Street, and residential parcels north and south of the commercial corridor. The plan seeks to develop this corridor into a mixed-use area that accommodates a range of housing types, retail and service businesses, expanded public spaces, and mobility improvement. The Old Town Specific Plan does not allow single unit dwellings, HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 156

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
requires densities between 30 and 100 dwelling units per acre, and height maximums of up 75 feet (48 feet within 20 feet of a RM district and 35 feet within 20 feet of an RS or RL district). The plan also requires ground floor retail commercial uses on projects that front Newark Boulevard and Thornton Avenue between The Union Pacific Railroad Tracks and Olive Street.

Through zoning amendments, streetscape improvements, and public and private investments, the plan envisions Old Town Newark as a revitalized mixed-use neighborhood with a strong sense of place, thriving retail and commercial businesses, a range of housing choices for existing and future residents, a streetscape that prioritizes bicyclists and pedestrians, and public spaces. The plan’s grand visions are matched by clear realistic steps for implementation of long-standing goals for revitalization and provide steps to maintain the existing housing stock and avoid displacement of existing residents and businesses.

NewPark Place Specific Plan
The NewPark Place Specific Plan (Plan), adopted in 2018 and implemented as revised in 2021, provides a comprehensive planning and development implementation strategy for a 125-acre area in the southeastern portion of the city adjacent to I-880 which includes the existing NewPark Mall retail center (mall), the parking facilities that surround it, and commercial uses on the perimeter of the center.

The Plan’s vision is to transform the Greater NewPark Mall area into a vibrant urban place through thoughtful land use design, which includes mixed-income residential areas, retail and dining opportunities, community venues, a movie theater, inviting pedestrian-oriented streets and public spaces, and enhanced sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and transit facilities. Creating a premier Bay Area and local destination will re-power the regional retail uses within the mall itself as a vital economic engine for the city. Higher-density multifamily housing across types and affordability levels will comprise the predominant land use type in this reconfigured and revitalized area.

The Plan includes guidance in the form of plans, policies, development standards, and design guidelines and serves as an extension of the general plan making it both a policy and regulatory document. To achieve the development vision for the Greater NewPark Mall area, the Plan contains a framework that is flexible in land use types, development standards, and design guidelines. In collaboration with the city, the developer project sponsor will work within this framework to deliver project designs and programs with desired uses, development form, mobility improvements, and public amenities that create a unique “sense of place”.

The plan is anticipated to build out over an approximate 20-year timeframe, with a total capacity of 1,519 multifamily residential units. The Mixed Use I area (where Phases A through D are located and highlighted in this Element) is expected to redevelop first based on the expressed interest of the property owner/developer. Diverse affordable housing will be an important component of the overall unit mix in the plan area, with at minimum 6 percent of units being affordable to very-low income households, 3 percent to low-income households and 3 percent to moderate-income households per City Council Resolution 10,184.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 157

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
The plan calls for building heights between 30 and 200 feet, with a preferred minimum of 60 feet.

The residential densities must be within a minimum of 60 dwelling units to the acre and a maximum of 160 dwelling units per acre, which can be accommodated within the overall plan development area under the Specific Plan’s development standards. Building heights are currently constrained by the lack of adequate emergency response infrastructure Newark and the surrounding communities to safely respond to emergencies on high rise buildings. Because of this, the current plan shows densities on the lower edge of the spectrum.

Southwest Newark Residential and Recreational Project (Area 3 and 4 Specific Plan) This is the largest area proposed for future development in Newark, comprising 856 acres in the area bordered by Mowry Avenue on the west, Stevenson Boulevard on the east, Cherry Street on the north, and Mowry Slough on the south. The Union Pacific Railroad bisects the area. Most of the land is vacant, although the area near the end of Mowry Avenue includes an auto-dismantling yard. The remainder of this area has been disked and graded for agricultural use since the early 1900s.

A Specific Plan was adopted in 2010 and 2015 (Newark Specific Plan - Area 3 and 4 of the General Plan). The Plan calls for the development of housing, a major recreational facility such as an 18-hole golf course, and the dedication of conservation open space on some of the low-lying areas south of the railroad tracks. Areas 3 and 4 contain sub areas where development would be focused.

Area 3, Sub Area B has been developed with 386 single-family residential units; construction was substantially complete by early 2021. This sub area, on land facing Cherry Street just east of Ohlone College, has been developed with a three acre community park, as well as a possible future elementary school on a six acre parcel.

A residential project within Area 3, Sub Area C and Area 4, Sub Area B was approved by City Council in November 2019. This project would include 469 detached single-family homes, open space, new utility infrastructure, and roadways, including a new connecting roadway at the existing terminus of Stevenson Boulevard to the project area. A substantial number of homes are expected to be constructed within the period of the Housing Element.

The City is currently considering a development application for 203 detached single-family homes within Area 4, Sub Area D on a parcel which contain an automobile dismantling yard with retail sales. Entitlements have not been granted as of the publication of the Housing Element.

Once the proposed project within Area 4, Sub Area D has been considered and a final decision has been made, the city may take action to retire the plan in a manner consistent with applicable laws and conforming to previously adopted agreements and approved entitlements.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 158

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Zoning for a Diversity of Housing Types
Housing Element Law (Government Code Section 65583(c) (1) and 65583.2(c)) requires that local governments analyze the availability of sites that will “facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobile homes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room occupancy units (SROs), emergency shelters, and transitional housing.” This section discusses relevant regulations that govern the development of the types of housing listed above as required by Government Code Section 65583(a) (3). Table 4-3 summarizes the permitted housing types by zone.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 159

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 4-3: Housing Types Permitted by Zone, Newark 2022 Land Use RS RL RM RH CMU RC
Accessory Dwelling Units Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Single-Unit, Detached Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted - - Single-Unit, Attached - Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted 11 -
Two-Unit Dwelling - Permitted Permitted Permitted -
Multi-Unit Development - Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted 12 Conditional Use
Permit
Required
19 Manufactured/Mobile Home - - - - - -
Employee Housing (6 or
fewer persons)
- - - - - -
Residential Care Facilities (6
or fewer persons)
Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted -
Residential Care Facilities (7
or more persons)
- Minor Use
Permit Required
Minor Use
Permit Required
Minor Use
Permit Required
- -
Family Day Care (Group
Residential)
- - Minor Use
Permit Required
Minor Use
Permit Required
Minor Use
Permit Required
-
Family Day Care (Large) Minor Use
Permit Required
Minor Use
Permit Required
Minor Use
Permit Required
Minor Use
Permit Required
- -
Family Day Care (Small) Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted - 12 Not allowed on the ground floor. Residential units shall be intended to support retail commercial uses of the project. 11 Single-Unit Dwelling, Attached uses are not permitted in the Old Town Newark Specific Plan area. Residential uses are not allowed on the ground floor along Newark Boulevard frontage and Thornton Avenue frontage, between the Union Pacific Railroad tracks and Olive Street.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 160

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Land Use RS RL RM RH CMU RC
Single-Room Occupancy
Units
- - -
Conditional Use
Permit Required
Conditional Use
Permit Required
-
Emergency Shelters
- - Minor Permit
Required
Permitted _ -
Supportive Housing Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted - Transitional Housing Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted - Source: City of Newark Zoning Ordinance, 2022
HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 161

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Multifamily Housing
As shown in Table 4-3, multifamily housing is permitted throughout the City of Newark in all RL, RM, RH and CMU zones. Multifamily housing is also permitted in RC zones with a conditional use permit.

Manufactured Housing and Mobile Homes
State law limits the extent to which cities and counties can regulate the installation of manufactured homes, including mobile homes. Government Code Section 65852.3 requires that cities allow installation of certified manufactured homes on foundation systems on lots zoned for conventional single-family residences. This section and Government Code Section 65852.4 generally require that manufactured homes be subject to the same land use regulations as conventional homes. Government Code Section 65852.7 deems mobile home parks to be a permitted use in all areas planned and zoned for residential use. The City of Newark permits manufactured and factory-built housing in designated residential zoning districts. Because of the high cost of land, manufactured housing is not commonly placed on private property, except perhaps as caretaker residences within industrial districts. There are currently no mobile home parks or manufactured housing in Newark. Pursuant to State law, any site that can be developed for site-built residential development is also available for the development of factory-built (manufactured) housing or for mobile homes. There are no specific restrictions upon the development of manufactured housing or mobile home parks within the Newark Municipal Code or General Plan.

Housing for Farmworkers
The provisions of Section 17020 (et seq.) of the California Health and Safety Code relating to employee housing and labor camps supersede any ordinance or regulations enacted by local governments. Such housing is allowed in all jurisdictions in California pursuant to the regulations set forth in Section 17020. Section 17021.5(b) states, for example:
“Any employee housing providing accommodations for six or fewer employees shall be deemed a single-family structure with a residential land use designation for the purposes of this section. For the purpose of all local ordinances, employee housing shall not be included within the definition of a boarding house, rooming house, hotel, dormitory, or other similar term that implies that the employee housing is a business run for profit or differs in any other way from a family dwelling. No conditional use permit, zoning variance, or other zoning clearance shall be required of employee housing that serves six or fewer employees that is not required of a family dwelling of the same type in the same zone.”
Section 17021.6, concerning farmworker housing, states that:
“No conditional use permit, zoning variance, or other zoning clearance shall be required of this employee housing [consisting of no more than 36 beds in a group quarters or 12 units] that is not required of any other agricultural activity in the same zone.” HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 162

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Emergency Shelters, Transitional Housing, and Supportive Housing Emergency Shelters
The California Health and Safety Code (Section 50801[e]) defines an emergency shelter as “housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of six months or less by a homeless person. No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay.”
Pursuant to State housing law (California Government Code Sections 65582, 65583, and 65589.5), jurisdictions must identify at least one zone where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a conditional use permit or other discretionary permit. The identified zone must have sufficient capacity to accommodate the shelter need, and at a minimum provide capacity for at least one year-round shelter. Permit processing, development standards, and management standards for emergency shelters must be objective and facilitate the development of, or conversion to, emergency shelters. Emergency shelters “may only be subject to those development and management standards that apply to residential or commercial development within the same zone” along with a list of exceptions that may be made.

Assembly Bill 139, passed in 2019, revised State housing element law by requiring that emergency shelters only be required to provide sufficient parking to accommodate all staff working in the emergency shelter, provided that the standards do not require more parking for emergency shelters than other residential or commercial uses within the same zone.

Emergency shelters are permitted by right in the Residential High Density, Public Facility, Transit Station, and Park zones and with a Minor Use Permit in the Residential Medium Density zone.

In Newark emergency shelters are subject to the following development standards:
● Location. Emergency shelters shall be located at least three hundred feet from another emergency shelter.
● Number of Residents. No more than fifty clients may be present on the premises at any one time.
● Length of Occupancy. Occupancy by an individual or family may not exceed sixty days.

Extensions up to a total stay of one hundred eighty days may be provided if no alternative housing is available, upon determination by the director. ● Common Area. The shelter shall provide at least ten square feet per bed of public or communal gathering space, exclusive of hallways.
● Parking Reduction. The director may reduce the number of on-site parking spaces required by Section 17.23.040, Required Parking Spaces, where a shelter is located on a bus route, or other evidence is provided to indicate that less parking will be needed. The shelter shall, however, provide at least one space for each staff member who will be on duty when residents are present, and at least one space for residents. ● Lighting and Illumination. The shelter shall provide outdoor lighting sufficient to provide illumination and clear visibility to all outdoor areas, with minimal shadows or light leaving HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 163

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
the property. The lighting shall be stationary, directed away from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way, and of intensity compatible with the neighborhood. ● Outdoor Activities. All functions associated with the shelter, except for children's play areas, outdoor recreation areas, and parking shall take place within the building proposed to house the shelter. There shall be no space for clients to congregate in front of the building, and there shall be no outdoor public telephones. ● Designated Smoking Area. The shelter shall provide a designated smoking area, preferably outside, that is not visible from public rights-of-way. ● Noise. The use shall be conducted in conformance with the noise standards set forth for multifamily housing in the noise element of the general plan. ● Supervision. On-site management shall be provided any time that clients are present at the shelter.
● Management and Security Plan. The operator of the shelter shall submit a management and security plan for approval by the director. The plan shall address issues identified by the director, including emergencies, transportation, client supervision, security, client services, staffing, and good neighbor issues.

Newark’s standards for emergency shelter facilities comply with the allowances made for standards set forth under Government Code Section 65583(a)(4)(A). The shelter size of 50 beds provides sufficient space for the identified need and flexibility for parking requirements show that the current zoning is not a constraint for development.

Zoning for Emergency Shelters
As described in Chapter 2, Needs Assessment, the 2022 point-in-time count identified 32 unsheltered homeless individuals in Newark, a reduction from the 2019 estimate of 89 people. As described above, emergency shelters are permitted by right in the Residential High Density, Public Facility, Transit Station, and Park zones. In Newark, there are many parcels owned by the City that are zoned as Public Facility and Park and one site that is zoned as Residential High Density.

Collectively, the sites in these zones could be developed with shelter beds needed to accommodate the 2022 demand and reported in the 2022 Point In Time count. Below are some of the sites that could be developed with an emergency shelter.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 164

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 4-4: Potential Sites for Emergency Shelters in Newark, 2022 APN Description
Total
Acreage
Estimated
developable
Acreage
92A-1045-13-11 Civic Center Park 5 acres 3.1 acres
92A-1036-11-1 Civic Center, Old Library Site 5.1 acres 0.75 acres 92-150-12-3;
92-150-15-1
Ash Street Park, Senior Center and adjacent site 1.4 acres 1.1 acres 92-148-14-1 Ash Street Park, Former Head Start Site 0.69 acres 0.5 acres Total 12.19
acres

5.45 acres
Source: City of Newark, 2023
In 2023, Newark initiated a facilities master plan effort to assess all city-owned buildings, including the buildings listed in Table 4-4. The facilities master plan will provide an assessment of each building and the costs to either maintain, improve, or replace each building. Existing and new uses will be considered as part of this effort. The master plan is expected to be completed in 2024.

All of the sites identified in Table 4-4 are centrally located, close to bus routes, community centers and other services that support those experiencing homelessness with access to food and community organizations providing supportive resources.

None of these sites have existing structures intended to be used as shelters. Any shelters to be constructed on these sites will be appropriate for human habitability, consistent with the Minimum Habitability Standards for Shelter and Housing Policy published by HCD’s Emergency Solutions Grant Program.

Transitional and Supportive Housing
Transitional housing is designed to assist homeless individuals and families in moving beyond emergency shelter and into permanent housing by helping people develop independent living skills through the provision of supportive services. Permanent supportive housing is housing that is linked to services that assist residents in maintaining housing, improving health, and maximizing ability to live and work in the community.

Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583 and Section 65651, transitional and supportive housing types are required to be treated as residential uses and subject only to those restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone. Furthermore, per recent changes in State law (AB 2162), the City must also allow 100 percent affordable projects by right where multi-family and mixed-use development is permitted if the project includes 25 percent, or 12 units of, supportive housing.

The Zoning Ordinance allows supportive and transitional housing in all residential districts and in HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 165

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
all zones that allow multifamily and mixed-use development including nonresidential zones, per Government Code Sections 65583 and 65650. No additional parking is required beyond what is required for the residential housing type. While parking requirements can be a constraint, program H3.5 Parking Standards Update will address parking to encourage housing development.

Employee Housing
Consistent with Health and Safety Code Sections 17021.5 and 17021.6, employee housing is permitted by right in every residential zone, including single family zones.

Low Barrier Navigation Centers
Assembly Bill 101, passed in 2019, requires that a low barrier navigation center be a use permitted by right in mixed-use zones and nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses if it meets specified requirements. AB 101 defines “low barrier navigation center” as a housing first, lowbarrier, service-enriched shelter focused on moving people into permanent housing that provides temporary living facilities while case managers connect individuals experiencing homelessness to income, public benefits, health services, shelter, and housing.

For a navigation center to be considered “low barrier”, its operation should incorporate best practices to reduce barriers to entry, which may include, but is not limited to, the following:
● Permitting the presence of partners if it is not a population-specific site, such as for survivors of domestic violence or sexual assault, women, or youth ● Pets
● Ability to store possessions
● Providing privacy, such as private rooms or partitions around beds in a dormitory setting or in larger rooms with multiple beds
Accessory Dwelling Units
An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) is an additional self-contained living unit, either attached to or detached from the primary residential unit on a single lot, also referred to as a secondary dwelling unit. The unit is required to include cooking, sleeping, full sanitation facilities, and separate, exterior entrance. ADUs are an important source of affordable housing since they can be constructed relatively cheaply and have no associated land costs. They can also provide supplemental income to the homeowner, allowing them to remain in their homes or moderate-income families to afford houses.

Recognizing that ADUs are part of the solution for addressing the statewide affordable housing shortage, California lawmakers have passed several bills in recent years to facilitate the development of ADUs. To encourage establishment of ADUs, State law requires cities and counties to either adopt an ordinance based on standards set out in the law authorizing ADUs in residentially-zoned areas, or where no ordinance has been adopted, to allow ADUs on lots zoned for single family or multifamily use that contain an existing single-family unit subject to ministerial approval (“by right”) if they meet standards set out by law.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 166

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
In Newark, ADUs are permitted within all single family, multifamily, and mixed-use residential districts. JADUs are a specific type of ADU that is no more than 500 square feet and built entirely within an existing single-unit or duplex dwelling residence. ADUs and JADUs are subject to the following criteria:
● On lots with an existing or proposed single-family dwelling, one ADU and up to one JADU is allowed per parcel. An ADU can be either attached or detached to the primary residence but JADUs must be constructed entirely within the walls of an existing primary residence. ● ADUs may be allowed within existing portions of a multifamily or mixed-use development that are not used as livable space. At least one attached ADU or up to two detached ADUs may be provided per lot.
● ADUs must be between 150 and 1,000 square feet in floor area. Each unit shall, at minimum, include a full bathroom including shower and/or bathtub, a sleeping area, permanent cooking facilities, and a separate, exterior entrance. ● The total lot coverage for all buildings shall not exceed the allowable lot coverage for the zoning district except that such a ratio shall not prohibit an 800 square foot ADU meeting the maximum height and minimum setback requirements.
● ADUs and JADUs may not be sold separately from the primary residence but may be rented separately. ADUs and JADUs may not be used for short-term rentals (less than 30 days).
● For properties with JADUs, the primary residence must be owner-occupied, but the owner may reside in either the JADU or the primary residence. This owner-occupancy requirement does not apply to primary residences owned by a public agency, land trust, or non-profit housing organization.
● Studio ADUs shall not be required to provide parking. Any number of bedrooms require one parking space with limited exceptions such as within a half mile of public transit. When an existing garage, carport or covered parking structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction of an ADU or converted into an ADU, the parking spaces shall not be required to be replaced.
● The ADU must meet specified objective design standards related to building facades and materials, windows and glazing, roof form and detailing, and entryway features. ADUs are prohibited from having exterior stairways or balconies.

The City will comply with state law until the updated existing Accessory Dwelling unit ordinance is in compliance with state law. Newark will make further amendments to the ordinance, as necessary, to remain consistent with State law and reflect local needs. The parking requirement for an ADU with one bedroom or more, can be a constraint on development. Program H2.2 works to develop tools to support uptake of accessory dwelling units production in Newark and make changes in parking requirements, in collaboration with Alameda County.

Single-Room Occupancy Units
Extremely low-income households typically comprise persons with very low incomes and special HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 167

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
housing needs, including, but not limited to, seniors, people with disabilities, and at risk of homelessness. AB 2634 (Lieber 2006) requires the quantification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs of extremely low-income households. Housing Elements must also identify zoning to encourage and facilitate supportive housing and single-room occupancy units.

Single-room occupancy (SRO) units can provide affordable private housing for lower-income individuals, seniors, low-income working people,and persons with disabilities. An SRO unit is usually small, between 200 to 350 square feet. These units can also serve as an entry point into the housing market for formerly homeless people. The current Zoning Code provisions for SROs limit the potential for SROs in Newark through the requirement of a conditional use permit. The required parking of 0.5 spaces per unit is not seen as a constraint and is comparable to neighboring jurisdictions. The Housing Element includes a program to define SROs as a separate use, expand the zones where SROs are permitted by right, and ensure development standards, including parking, facilitate the development of SROs. Through community engagement, we heard there is a housing need for housing for small households. Program H2.10 expands the zones where single room occupancy is permitted by right, and prioritizes development along transit routes to support access to employment and other services.

Senate Bill 9 Subdivisions
Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) became effective January 1, 2022. The bill mandates local jurisdictions to ministerially approved two unit developments and urban lot splits within a single-family residential zone, without discretionary review or hearing, if the proposed development meets certain requirements. For SB 9 developments, the City may apply objective zoning, subdivision, and design standards. Include reference to policy for bringing the city in compliance with SB (included in Plan below).

Constraints on Development for People with Disabilities Residential Care Facilities and Other Zoning Provisions for Persons with Disabilities Small Community Care Facilities
Health and Safety Code Sections 1267.8, 1566.3, and 1568.08 require local governments to treat licensed group homes and residential care facilities with six or fewer residents no differently than other by-right single-family housing uses. “Six or fewer persons” does not include the operator, the operator’s family, or persons employed as staff. Local agencies must allow these licensed residential care facilities in any area zoned for residential use and may not require licensed residential care facilities for six or fewer persons to obtain conditional use permits or variances that are not required of other family dwellings. In Newark, these facilities are permitted in all residential zoning districts and the CMU zone.

Large Community Care Facilities
Due to the unique characteristics of large community care facilities (serving more than six HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 168

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
persons), most jurisdictions require a use permit to ensure neighborhood compatibility in the siting of these facilities. In Newark, large community care facilities are permitted with a minor use permit in all residential zoning districts.

Currently, unless specifically allowed pursuant to a Use Permit approval, residential care facilities serving seven or more persons shall be located on a lot with frontage on an arterial and at least 300 feet from any other residential care facility, day care center, or large family day care home serving seven or more persons. The Housing Element includes program H4.10, an implementation program to permit community care facilities for more than six persons as a permitted use in all zones where other residential uses are permitted subject to the same requirements of other residential uses of the same type in the same zone.

Reasonable Accommodation
State and Federal laws prohibit housing discrimination against persons with disabilities in land use practices and decisions, such as applying special requirements that limit the ability of disabled individuals to live in the residence of their choice. Both the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act direct local governments to make reasonable accommodations (i.e., modifications or exceptions) in their zoning laws and other land use regulations when such accommodations may be necessary to afford persons with disabilities an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. For example, it may be reasonable to accommodate requests from persons with disabilities to waive a setback requirement or other standard of the Zoning Ordinance to ensure that homes are accessible for the mobility impaired. Whether a particular modification is reasonable depends on the circumstances.

The City adopted an ordinance in 2016 establishing the process for allowing flexibility within the zoning code for reasonable accommodation of access for the disabled.

The ordinance includes:
● Clear rules, policies, and procedures to promote equal access to housing and comply with fair housing and disability laws including but not limited to identifying who may request a reasonable accommodation (i.e., persons with disabilities, family members, landlords, etc.) timeframes for decision-making, and provisions for flexibility in the various land-use, zoning, or building regulations that may otherwise constrain housing for persons with disabilities. Chapter 17.37 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance outlines the process for requesting a waiver to any zoning regulation to allow improvements to an existing building in order to provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. ● Regularly monitoring the implementation of the jurisdiction’s ordinances, codes, policies, and procedures to ensure they comply with the “reasonable accommodation” for disabled provisions and fair housing laws.
● Reduced parking requirements for projects serving seniors and persons with disabilities (The Zoning Ordinance was revised in 2018 reducing parking requirements to 0.5 spaces per unit, inclusive of guest parking).

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 169

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
The applicable findings for reasonable accommodation requests are provided in NMC 17.37 (Waivers):

A. The waiver is necessary due to the physical characteristics of the property and the proposed use or structure or other circumstances, including, but not limited to, topography, noise exposure, irregular property boundaries, or other unusual circumstance.

B. There are no alternatives to the requested waiver that could provide an equivalent level of benefit to the applicant with less potential detriment to surrounding owners and occupants or to the general public.

C. The granting of the requested waiver would not be detrimental to the health or safety of the public or the occupants of the property or result in a change in land use or density that would be inconsistent with the requirements of this title.

D. If the waiver requested is to provide reasonable accommodation pursuant to state or federal law, in addition to any other findings that this chapter requires, the decision-maker must also make the following findings:
a. That the housing or other property which is the subject of the request for reasonable accommodation will be used by an individual or organization entitled to protection;
b. If the request for accommodation is to provide fair access to housing, that the request for accommodation is necessary to make specific housing available to an individual protected under state or federal law;
c. That the conditions imposed, if any, are necessary to further a compelling public interest and represent the least restrictive means of furthering that interest; and d. That denial of the requested minor exception or waiver would impose a substantial burden on religious exercise or would conflict with any state or federal statute requiring reasonable accommodation to provide access to housing.

Overall, the findings are not atypical for California jurisdictions that impose findings for reasonable accommodation projects and are generally consistent with State law.

Definition of Family
There are a number of State and Federal rules that govern the definition of family, including the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, the California Fair Housing and Employment Act, the California Supreme Court case City of Santa Barbara v. Adamson (1980), and the California Constitution privacy clauses. The laws for families have a few primary purposes: to protect people with disabilities, to protect non-traditional families, and to protect privacy. According to HCD and Mental Housing Advocacy Services there are three major points to consider when writing a definition of family:
● Jurisdictions may not distinguish between related and unrelated individuals. ● The definition may not impose a numerical limit on the number of persons in a family. ● Land use restrictions for licensed group homes for six or fewer individuals must be the same as those for single families.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 170

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
The Newark Municipal Code defines “Family” as follows:
“One or more persons living together in a single dwelling unit, with common access to, and common use of, all living and eating areas and all areas and facilities for the preparation and storage of food; who share living expenses, including rent or mortgage payments, food costs and utilities, and who maintain a single mortgage, lease, or rental agreement for all members of the household.”
This definition is consistent with the best practices for a definition of “Family” and does not add any new government constraints.

Site Development Review
Government policies and ordinances regulating development affect the availability and cost of new housing. Land use controls have the greatest direct impact, but development approval procedures, permit fees, building code requirements, and the permit processing time can affect housing costs as well. This section addresses the relationship of development fees, processes, and standards to the production of housing.

Figure 4-1: Development Review Process
The development review process illustrated above is generally consistent across the city’s zone districts and planning application types. The municipal code provides the “Level of Review Authority” for various application types:

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 171

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 4-5: Level of Review Authority, Selected Decision Types Type of Decision Advisory Body Decision Maker Appeal Body Minor Use Permit N/A Community
Development Director
Planning
Commission
Conditional Use Permit Community
Development Director
Planning Commission City Council
Variance Community
Development Director
Planning Commission City Council
Amendments Planning Commission City Council Superior Court Planned Development
Districts
Planning Commission City Council Superior Court
Design Review N/A Community
Development Director
or Planning Commission
Planning
Commission or City
Council
Discretionary Findings and Criteria
As provided in the municipal code, planning applications for city review and decisions that are not “ministerial” (such as building permits) include findings for approval that must be made in the affirmative in order for the Decision Maker to approve a project. The following are the applicable findings and criteria for discretionary applications in Newark:

Minor Use Permit for a Temporary Use (NMC 17.26.260):

A. The proposed use will not unreasonably affect adjacent properties, their owners and occupants, or the surrounding neighborhood, and will not in any other way constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the area of such use or to the general welfare of the city; and
B. The proposed use will not unreasonably interfere with pedestrian or vehicular traffic or circulation in the area surrounding the proposed use, and will not create a demand for additional parking that cannot be safely and efficiently accommodated by existing parking areas.

Conditional Use Permit (NMC 17.35.060):

A. The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of this title and all other titles of the Municipal Code; B. The proposed use is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan; C. The proposed use will not be adverse to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the community, nor detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements; D. Tax revenue generated by the development will exceed the city's cost of the service HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 172

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
demand as a result of the development or a compelling community benefit will be provided.

E. The proposed use complies with any design or development standards applicable to the zoning district or the use in question unless waived or modified pursuant to the provisions of this title;
F. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed activity are compatible with the existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses in the vicinity; and
G. The site is physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of use being proposed, including access, utilities, and the absence of physical constraints.

Variance (NMC 17.36.040):

A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved that do not apply generally to property in the vicinity and identical zoning district, and that the granting of a variance will not constitute a granting of a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on the property in the vicinity and identical zone district;
B. The granting of the application is necessary to prevent a physical hardship which is not of the applicant's own actions or the actions of a predecessor in interest; C. The granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience; and
D. The granting of the variance will be consistent with the general purposes and objectives of this title, any applicable specific plans, and of the general plan.

Amendments (Zoning Map and Text, NMC 17.39.080):

A. The amendment is consistent with the general plan;
B. Any change in district boundaries is necessary to achieve the balance of land uses desired by the city, consistent with the general plan, and to increase the inventory of land within a given zoning district; and
C. The amendment will promote the growth of the city in an orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare.

Planned Development Districts (NMC 17.12.060):

A. The proposed development is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan, including the density and intensity limitations that apply; B. Adequate transportation facilities and public services exist or will be provided in accord with the conditions of development plan approval, to serve the proposed development; and the approval of the proposed development will not result in a reduction of traffic levels of service or public services so as to be a detriment to public health, safety, or welfare; C. The proposed development will not have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding land uses and will be compatible with the existing and planned land use character of the surrounding area;
HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 173

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
D. The development generally complies with applicable adopted design guidelines; and E. The proposed development is demonstratively superior to the development that could occur under the standards applicable to the underlying base district, and will achieve superior community design, environmental preservation and/or substantial public benefit.

Design Review (NMC 17.34.060):

A. The overall design of the project including its scale, massing, site plan, exterior design, and landscaping will enhance the appearance and features of the project site and surrounding natural and built environment.

B. The project design is appropriate to the function of the project and will provide an attractive and comfortable environment for occupants, visitors, and the general community.

C. Project details, materials, signage and landscaping, are internally consistent, fully integrated with one another, and used in a manner that is visually consistent with the proposed architectural design.

D. The design of streetscapes, including street trees, lighting, and pedestrian furniture, is consistent with the intended character of the area.

E. Parking areas are designed and developed to buffer surrounding land uses; compliment pedestrian-oriented development; enhance the environmental quality of the site, including minimizing stormwater run-off and the heat-island effect; and achieve a safe, efficient, and harmonious development.

F. Lighting and lighting fixtures are designed to complement buildings, be of appropriate scale, provide adequate light over walkways and parking areas to create a sense of pedestrian safety, and avoid creating glare.

G. Landscaping is designed to be compatible with and enhance the architectural character and features of the buildings on site, and help relate the building to the surrounding landscape.

Overall, the findings provided above are not atypical for California jurisdictions that impose findings and criteria for discretionary projects and are generally consistent with State law.

Conditional Use Permit Finding D, “Tax revenue generated by the development will exceed the city's cost of the service demand as a result of the development or a compelling community benefit will be provided.” is somewhat unique in that the city seeks to offset city costs associated with new commercial uses with increased tax revenue. This finding is typically applicable to projects and new uses that are not subject to Development Impact Fees. This does not generally apply to new residential projects, in that Housing Impact Fees or construction of new affordable units offset the costs associated with this development.

As described below, the city is undertaking an effort to create objective design standards that provide certainty and clarity in terms of design review, and that would be consistent with State laws and requirements that limit a jurisdictions ability to enforce design standards that may be interpreted as discretionary.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 174

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Objective Design Standards
The City currently relies on a combination of objective and subjective design standards and guidelines to review and regulate the design of most housing projects. However, the State of California continues to enact new laws that require streamlined housing approval by establishing a by-right, ministerial approval process for multifamily residential development. Key to ministerial approval is the replacement of subjective design guidelines with objective standards.

The intent of Objective Design Standards is to provide applicants and developers with a clear understanding of the City’s expectations for mixed-use and multi-family residential project design.

Objective design standards are written as requirements, rather than guidelines; therefore, all mixed- use and multi-family residential projects applying under Housing Accountability Act (HAA) protections shall comply with each standard. Importantly, objective design standards regulate site and structure design only. Projects must also comply with all applicable building permit requirements, zoning code requirements, and development standards such as height, setbacks, lot coverage, etc.

To accommodate the requirements of State law, the City is developing a thorough set of objective design standards to govern the development of multi-family housing, including certain mixed-use projects. The City anticipates adoption of the new Objective Design Standards in 2025 per Program H3.2.

The objective design review standards supplement the objective development standards (e.g. height limit, lot coverage, setback, etc.) defined in each zoning district. In combination, the two sets of standards (design and development) provide for a streamlined and efficient project review process by ensuring that applicants know and understand the city’s requirements and ensuring that the project review and approval process is objective, efficient, and consistent.

Permit Processing Times
The minimum amount of time for processing permits is established by requirements for environmental review, public notice, and by the meetings of the Planning Commission and City Council. While there is little room for processing permits any faster than the City already does, the current practice of automatic review of some Planning Commission permit decisions by the City Council does add several weeks to the total permit processing time. Ultimately, the maximum amount of time for processing residential development permits is set by State law (California Government Code 65920 et. seq.). Some of the average times have increased due to infill complexity and extra notification of State requirements.

Table 4-6 summarizes the average time required to process development permits. The processing time needed to obtain development permits and required approvals varies depending on the scope of the project. Smaller projects typically require less time than larger projects. The City strives to keep its permit procedures streamlined and processing times minimal.

The amount of time between the completion of the review and the issuance of a Building Permit is HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 175

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
determined by the speed at which the applicant is able to make any necessary corrections to the Construction Drawings and resubmit for approval and Building Permit.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 176

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 4-6: Average Permit Processing Time, Newark, 2022 Permit Process Decision Type Level of Review Permit Types Timeframe Accessory Dwelling
Unit Process
Ministerial
(by-right)
Discretionary
Staff
Staff
Building permits for projects that comply with applicable building, zoning, and development regulations
Single Family Design Review permits for projects involving a second story addition for an ADU that is taller than 16 feet
1 to 3 months
2 to 5 months
Ministerial By-Right Ministerial
(by-right)
Staff Building permits for projects that comply with applicable building, zoning, and development regulations; parcel maps; and lot line adjustments
2 to 5 months
Discretionary
By-Right
Discretionary Staff Includes design review permits, minor use permits, and sign permits 3 to 5 months Discretionary
(Hearing officer if
Applicable)
Discretionary Hearing officer Includes variances, certain site development permits, and certain conditional use permits. Site development permits are required when development is proposed on Environmentally Sensitive Lands and for large multifamily developments on consolidated lots. Conditional use permits are required when development is proposed that is subject to supplemental conditions identified in the Municipal Code 4 to 9 months
Discretionary
(Planning
Commission)
Discretionary Planning
Commission
Includes certain minor use permits, conditional use permits, variances, and certain design review permits
6 to 9 months
Discretionary (City
Council)
Discretionary Planning
Commission
Recommendation
and City Council
approval
Includes tentative maps, condominium conversion maps, easement vacations, public right-of-way vacations, rezoning, land use plan and specific plan amendments, and planned development permits. Planned development permits are not required for residential development but are an option for large residential developments to allow greater flexibility than standard zoning.
9 to 18
months
Source: City of Newark, 2022
HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 177

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Senate Bill 35
Senate Bill (SB) 35, passed in 2017, requires jurisdictions that have not approved enough housing units to meet their RHNA to provide a streamlined, ministerial entitlement process for housing developments that incorporate affordable housing. In order for applicants to take advantage of SB 35, per Government Code Section 65913.4 (10)(b)(1)(a)(et seq.) they need to submit a Notice of Intent and jurisdictions need to give Native American tribes an opportunity for consultation.

The City processes SB 35 applications consistent with Senate Bill 35. The City will also establish a written policy or procedure and other guidance as appropriate to specify the Senate Bill (SB) 35 streamlining approval process and standards for eligible projects, as set forth under California Government Code Section 65913.4. The City has included Program H3.1 to prepare and publish administrative procedures for the processing of housing developments eligible for streamlined review pursuant to SB 35.

Senate Bill 330
Senate Bill 330 (SB 330), Housing Crisis Act of 2019, prohibits cities and counties from enacting a development policy, standard, or condition that would impose or enforce design standards that are not objective design standards on or after January 1, 2020 [Government Code Section 663300 (b)(C)]. The bill also established specific requirements and limitations on development application procedures.

The City of Newark permitting process is consistent with Senate Bill 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019. Consistent with SB 330, housing developments for which a preliminary application is submitted that complies with applicable General Plan and zoning standards are subject only to the development standards and fees that were applicable at the time of submittal. This applies to all projects unless the project square footage or unit count changes by more than 20 percent after the preliminary application is submitted.

Submittal of a SB 330 preliminary application allows a developer to provide a specific subset of information on the proposed housing development before providing the full amount of information required by the local government for a housing development application. Submittal of the preliminary application secures the applicable development standards and fees adopted at that time. The project is considered vested, and all fees and standards are frozen, unless the project changes substantially. The City has an SB 330 preliminary application form.

Permit Fees and Exactions
Housing construction imposes short- and long-term costs on communities. Short-term costs include the cost of providing planning services and inspections. New residential developments can also result in significant long-term costs relating to the maintenance and improvement of infrastructure, facilities, parks, and streets. To offset these community costs, jurisdictions collect various fees from developers.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 178

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
This model is comparable to surrounding jurisdictions, such as Fremont, Union City, Hayward. Fees depend on the complexity of the project. Example of fees. Table 4-7 shows planning fees commonly required for development based on level of review. Newark’s planning fees are comparable to surrounding jurisdictions and do not present a constraint to the construction of housing.

Table 4-7: Permit Fees, Newark, Fiscal Year 2022-2023
Planning Fee Schedule
Application Type Fee/ Cost
Preliminary Review
Preliminary Review $800 per review, first and second
reviews; $900 for subsequent reviews
Preliminary Review for new single-family unit or second story addition to single-family unit, and administrative use permits No fee.

Site Development Review
Administrative Site Development Review a. Small Residential Projects (e.g. single detached accessory structure or balcony) $100
Large Residential Projects (e.g. second-story additions, multiple accessory structures)
$1,500
Commercial/Industrial Projects $1,500
Use Permit
Minor Use Permit $100
Conditional Use Permit, Residential $2,600
Subdivision
Tentative Parcel Map $2,000 + $60 per lot
Tentative Tract Map (including condominiums) $3,500 + $75 per lot Variance
Variance, Residential $1,400
Amendments
Zoning Text Amendment $4,300
Zoning Map Amendment $4,300
General Plan Amendment $,300
Specific Plan Amendment $4,300
Extensions
HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 179

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Planning Fee Schedule
Application Type Fee/ Cost
Discretionary Permits/Variances $800
Environmental Review
CEQA Exemption $400
Negative Declaration, (ND) $1,800
Negative Declaration, Mitigated (MND) $1,800
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Deposit
Other
Planned Unit Development $3,200
Source: City of Newark, 2023
Development Impact Fees
The City also collects impact fees to cover the costs of providing the necessary services and infrastructure related to new development projects. Since the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, local governments in California have come to rely increasingly on impact and connection fees to finance infrastructure. Newark charges several fees on residential development at the building permit stage, as shown in Table 4-7. The estimated City development impact fees for a single family four-bedroom, two-bathroom house of 2,600 square feet are approximately $77,629.

There are significant cost savings for multifamily residential development, as development impact fees are estimated at $36,724 per unit of a hypothetical 10-unit multi-family development (averaging 850 square feet per unit), and $35,052 per unit of a 100-unit multi-family development (averaging 750 square feet per unit).

Table 4-8: Residential Development Impact Fees, Newark, Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Fee Cost
Estimated Fees
Single Family
Unit
Small Multi-Family
(per unit)
Large Multi-Family
(per unit)
Citywide Development Fees (Community Development Department) Parks $28,185 $20,293 $20,293
Public Safety $3,891 $2,335 $2,335
Community
Service/Facilities
$2,606 $1,303 $1,303
Transportation $5,607 $3,476 $3,476
HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 180

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Fee Cost
Estimated Fees
Single Family
Unit
Small Multi-Family
(per unit)
Large Multi-Family
(per unit)
Housing $37,070 $9,047 $7,375
Artin Public Spaces $270 $270 $270
Source: City of Newark, 2022
Total Estimated Fees
Newark recently prepared estimates of total fees of example projects to assess total estimated fees (Planning, Building, and Impact fees). The example projects include development of one single-family residence, a small multi-family project of 10-units on one building and a 100-unit project on two acres of land. The result of the estimates are:
● Single Family: $124,246
● Multi-family large: $4,344,915 for a 100-unit project on two acres, or $43,449 per unit ● Multi-family small: $604,453 for a 10-unit project in one building, or $60,445.35 per unit The estimate indicates that it is significantly less expensive in terms of city fees for multifamily development as compared to single-family development.

When the City implements Program H2.1, H2.8, H2.10 and H4.10, the City will ensure that fees for Missing Middle and SRO housing types will be set at levels in line with current permit and impact fees for multifamily.

City fees associated with development and described above are easily accessible on the city’s website: www.newark.org.

Available Infrastructure
With all sites identified for planned housing development already served by utilities, and requirements in place for infrastructure improvements for all new development, infrastructure does not pose a constraint on development of those sites within the eight-year planning period.

On- and Off-Site Improvements
The City requires certain public improvements for residential subdivisions. In 1977 the City adopted these standards to ensure that minimum levels of design and construction quality are maintained and adequate levels of street and facility improvements are provided.

Title 16.16 of the Municipal Code describes the public improvements that must be agreed to prior to acceptance and approval of the final subdivision map, as follows:
● Grading and surfacing of all streets, public ways and bicycle paths within the subdivision HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 181

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
that lie between the boundary of the subdivision and the centerline of proposed or existing streets, public ways, and bicycle paths fronting, backing or siding to the subdivision; ● Providing such domestic water supply and fire hydrants as may be necessary for fire protection and protection of the public health;
● Providing such storm drain and flood control works as necessary for the public convenience and safety;
● Providing a sanitary sewer system and connection to an existing sewage disposal system; ● Constructing curb, gutter, sidewalk, tie-in paving, and replacement of inadequate existing pavement on streets where the subdivision adjoins existing streets; ● Constructing other structures necessary to the use of streets, highways, bicycle paths, public ways and the drainage thereof;
● Providing for street name signs and their installation; ● Providing for the cost of street trees and their planting and one-year maintenance on streets, bicycle paths and public ways;
● Providing underground utilities as follows:
○ All existing overhead utility distribution facilities (including but not limited to electric, communication, and cable television lines) within the subdivision that lie between the boundary of the subdivision and the centerline of proposed or existing streets fronting, backing or siding the subdivision shall be undergrounded, ○ All on-site and off-site utility distribution facilities (including but not limited to electric, communication, and cable television lines) to be installed shall be placed underground, except as follows: Equipment appurtenant to underground facilities such as surface-mounted transformers, pedestal-mounted terminal boxes and meter cabinets, and concealed ducts; Metal poles supporting street lights. ○ The city council may grant variances for the provision of underground utilities in certain circumstances.
● Providing street light facilities on all streets, paths, and other pedestrian or vehicular ways proposed for development. The subdivider shall make all necessary arrangements with the utility company and pay all costs for providing underground service; ● Construction of the improvement across any storm drain channel, Hetch-Hetchy right-of-way or other public facility adjacent to the subdivision.

The City’s on- and off-site development standards have been in place since 1977, and do not represent a constraint to the development of housing. In addition to public improvement standards, the Municipal Code has specific standards for residential streets and parking as described below.

Residential Streets
The City of Newark Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 12.04 requires standard improvements for streets. These requirements were originally adopted in 1963. Depending on the type of project, it enforces standard improvements including street paving, curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. All required improvements must be constructed and installed in accordance with City specifications and design. As a primarily built-out community, most new development in the city does not require HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 182

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
building out new streets. These requirements are similar to other jurisdictions and do not represent a constraint to the development of housing.

The City has not received feedback to date that offsite requirements in Newark, whether imposed by the City or other agencies/utilities, are extraordinary or onerous. As an example, the off-site improvements for Site 7 (Timber Senior Housing) include approximately $2 million for paving, concrete work, signage, landscaping, irrigation, furnishings,and planters. Off-site dry and wet utility costs are approximately $1 million. These costs represent approximately 4% of the total project cost of almost $70 million (not including land acquisition).

Water and Wastewater
Housing Element housing opportunity sites listed in this Housing Element (see Appendix C) are already served by utilities, with existing infrastructure in place. The Alameda County Water District (ACWD) and the Union Sanitary District (USD) are the sole providers of potable and reclaimed water, and wastewater conveyance and treatment, in Newark. ACWD and USD has current and planned capacity to accommodate the RHNA for water and wastewater. ACWD and USD have provided water assessments for a number of the sites and has determined that adequate water supplies exist to accommodate Newark’s current and projected water needs, including the RHNA. Solid waste, recycling, and organics collection are managed through a franchise agreement with Republic Services.

To minimize infiltration of ground water into the sewer system and provide modern, efficient utilities and services, new development proposals in Newark typically replace or upgrade the on-site sewer, storm drain, and water lines following the guidance and requirements of ACWD and USD. Each project is evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine the extent of replacements and upgrades. Therefore it is difficult to assess a water and wastewater replacement/upgrade cost factor across the city. However, as mentioned earlier, housing element sites are located in areas already served by water and wastewater utilities, so the installation of new service lines is typically not a cost factor.

Priority for Water and Sewer
Per Chapter 727, Statues of 2004 (SB 1087), upon completion of an amended or adopted Housing Element, a local government is responsible for immediately distributing a copy of the element to area water and sewer providers. In addition, water and sewer providers must grant priority for service allocations to proposed developments that include housing units affordable to lower-income households. Chapter 727 was enacted to improve the effectiveness of the law in facilitating housing development for lower-income families and workers.

To comply with SB 1087, upon adoption, the City of Newark will immediately forward its adopted Housing Element to ACWD and USD its water and wastewater providers to grant priority for service allocations to proposed developments that include units affordable to lower- income households.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 183

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Available Dry Utilities
Dry utilities, including electricity and telephone service, are available to all areas within the City.

Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) serves Newark for electrical service. Newark customers may also consider East Bay Community Energy (EBCE) for electrical service. In 2018, the County of Alameda and 11 of its cities launched EBCE as a not-for-profit public agency that governs this Community Choice Energy service. The Joint Power Agency expanded in 2021. The cities currently served are: Albany, Berkeley, Dublin, Emeryville, Fremont, Hayward, Livermore, Newark, Oakland, Piedmont, Pleasanton, San Leandro, Tracy, and Union City. EBCE offers a competitive, reliable energy service provider alternative to the Newark community. Similar to the discussion above, new development proposals in Newark are generally required to typically replace or upgrade the electrical service following the guidance and requirements of PG&E. Each project is evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine the extent of replacements and upgrades.

Therefore it is difficult to assess dry utilities cost factor across the city. However, as mentioned earlier, housing element sites are located in areas already served by dry utilities, so the installation of new service lines is typically not a cost factor.

Opportunities for Energy Conservation
The City of Newark has adopted a wide range of policies and programs to facilitate energy efficiency in residential development. Taken as a whole, the City’s policies and programs form a comprehensive approach to energy efficiency in residential development.

Parking
Because off-street parking often requires large amounts of land, parking requirements are one of the development standards that can most negatively impact housing development. The cost of land associated with parking, in addition to the costs of construction, paving, and maintenance, drive up the overall cost of development, requiring more funds to assist in the development of affordable housing. Parking standards in some jurisdictions have been arbitrarily established and do not necessarily represent the needs of the people living in the developments. This is especially true for senior and affordable housing developments where occupants are less likely to require more than one parking space.

The city of Newark overall has higher parking requirements than neighboring jurisdictions, Union City and Fremont. For multifamily housing, Newark has higher requirements for studio and one bedroom units than Fremont, as well as higher requirements for covered parking. Although Newark and Fremont have the same guest requirements of 0 .5 spaces per unit, Fremont does not have the same requirements for covered parking. One space per unit must be in a garage in Newark in comparison to Fremont, a requirement that can significantly increase the cost of development. Union City has the lowest guest parking requirement of 0 .25 spaces for multi family housing.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 184

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Although it has been found that seniors do not have the same rates of driving, Newark has the highest parking requirements of all three cities for senior housing, at one space per unit.

Union City does not list a parking requirement for ADU’s, but Newark has a higher parking requirement than Fremont, which has no parking requirements at all for ADU and JADU units.

Because Newark has higher parking requirements for multi-family, senior housing and accessory dwelling units, there is opportunity for significant changes in parking requirements such as removing parking minimums and aligning requirements to be more in line with neighboring jurisdictions, responsive to construction costs and the lack of substantial off street parking for seniors. Although the City complies with State density bonus parking standards upon request, the City’s parking requirements can be a hindrance on the production of housing. In response, the city will conduct a parking study Program H3.5, to develop new parking standards to align with neighboring jurisdictions.

Table 4-9: Off-Street Parking Requirements, Newark, 2021 Residential Use Required Units Covered Parking Requirement Single-Unit
Dwelling,
Attached or
Detached
2 per unit Must be within a garage
Two-Unit
Dwelling

1.5 per studio or one-bedroom unit. 2 per unit
with two or more bedrooms.
1 Guest space per unit
One space per unit must be within a
garage
Multi-Unit
Building

1.5 per studio or one-bedroom unit. 2 per unit
with two or more bedrooms.

Guest parking: .5 space per unit.

Projects located outside a radius of 100 feet
of RS and RL districts, or separated by an
arterial street from single family homes, or
with driveway aprons, or located within a
Specific Plan shall require 1 space plus .25 per
unit
Old Town Specific Plan Area: Minimum of

1.25 per unit; maximum of 2 per unit. No
additional guest parking required.

Ten or fewer dwelling units: One
space per unit must be within a
garage
More than ten dwelling units: One
space per unit must be covered
Guest parking shall be clearly
marked as reserved for guests and
available with unrestricted access
Accessory
Dwelling Unit
No off street parking required for studio units, 1 off street parking space required per unit regardless of number of bedrooms. Off street parking requirement is waived if within a half mile of a transit stop, and other instances. To see the entire list see municipal code section 17.26.040.C.8.

Supportive
Housing
None beyond what is required for the Residential Housing Type Transitional
Housing
None beyond what is required for the Residential Housing Type HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 185

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Residential Use Required Units Covered Parking Requirement Senior Housing 1 per unit, plus .25 per unit for guest parking Residential Care
Facility (7 or more
persons)
1 for every 3 beds
Residential Care
Facilities (Less
than 7 persons)
None beyond what is required for the Residential Housing Type Family Day Care
(Small)
None beyond what is required for the Residential Housing Type Family Day Care
(Large)
1 for each nonresident employee plus an area for loading and unloading children plus parking required for the residential use
Group Residential 1 for each employee plus 1 for each guest room or every two beds, whichever is greater
Old Town Specific Plan Area: 0.25 per bedroom
Single Room
Occupancy Units

0.5 per unit
Emergency
Shelter
1 per family room, 0.35 per individual bed, plus 1 for each employee Source: City of Newark, 2022
State density bonus law (Government Code Section 65915) imposes statewide parking standards that a jurisdiction must grant upon request from a developer of an affordable housing project that qualifies for a density bonus. The parking standards are summarized in Table 4-9. When local parking requirements are higher, the statewide parking standards supersede the local requirements. The developer may request these parking standards even if they do not request the density bonus. These numbers are the total number of parking spaces including guest parking and accessible parking.

Open Space Requirements
The City has a policy in the General Plan that sets parkland standards. For multifamily housing, the open space requirement ranges from 100 square feet per unit for RM in the Old Town District, to 200 square feet per unit in RH, 300 square feet per unit in RM, and 400 square feet per unit in RL.

Open space requirements in the mixed-use and commercial districts where housing is allowed (CMU and RC) are at 50 square feet per unit. Overall, these standards are the same or lower than the requirements of Newark’s closest neighbors. These standards are typical of many jurisdictions in the Bay Area and would not significantly reduce the affordability of multifamily housing units.

Further, the City has not received developer feedback that its open space requirements are excessive or a barrier to feasibility.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 186

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Density Bonus Regulations
State law (California Government Code, section 65915-65918) requires cities and counties to approve density bonuses for housing developments that contain specified percentages of affordable housing units or units restricted to occupancy by seniors. A density bonus is the allocation of development rights that allows a parcel to accommodate additional square footage or additional residential units beyond the maximum for which the parcel is zoned. Projects that qualify for a density bonus are also eligible for reduced parking standards and additional concessions, or incentives. Upon the developer's request the City must also allow the parking standards shown above in Table 4-6. The legislature has made frequent changes to State density bonus law over the years, including AB 1763, which significantly increased density bonus provisions for 100 percent affordable projects.

Building Codes and Enforcement
Building codes and their enforcement influence the style, quality, size, and costs of residential development. Such codes can increase the cost of housing and impact the feasibility of rehabilitating older properties that must be upgraded to current code standards. In this manner building codes and their enforcement can act as a constraint on the supply of housing and its affordability.

Building and housing codes establish minimum standards and specifications for structural soundness, safety, and occupancy. State housing law requires cities and counties to adopt minimum housing standards based on model industry codes. In addition to meeting the requirements of State housing law, local governments enforce other State requirements for fire safety, noise insulation, soils reports, earthquake protection, energy conservation, and access for people with physical disabilities. The enforcement of building and housing codes for all homes is per the minimum standards and requirements set forth in the codes listed in the City’s building code. Standards for rehabilitation are no more rigorous than those contained in the California Health and Safety Codes and Uniform Building Codes.

On October 13, 2022, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 539, repealing and replacing certain chapters of Title 15 (Buildings and Construction) to adopt by reference, with modifications to address local conditions, the 2022 editions of the California Building Standards Code (CBSC) and related codes. Ordinance No. 539 includes local amendments to the California Administrative Code, California Building Code, California Plumbing Code, California Electrical Code, California Residential Code, California Mechanical Code, and California Fire Code. The adopted Title 15 including local amendments is provided on the city’s website, www.newark.org. The local amendments adopted with Ordinance No. 539 do not increase requirements above standards.

Generally, the local amendments provide clarifications and consistency with other sections of the Newark Municipal Code. The city does not have a REACH code. In addition, local amendments were made to provide consistency with fire protection, alarms, and detection system requirements of the Alameda County Fire Department, the agency that provides contract fire HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 187

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
protection services in Newark.

Building codes and their enforcement can increase the cost of housing and impact the feasibility of rehabilitating older properties that must be upgraded to existing code standards. In this way building codes and their enforcement can act as a constraint on the amount of housing and its affordability. However, the codes enforced by Newark are similar to other cities in the region and are necessary to promote the minimum standards of safety and accessibility to housing.

Therefore, the codes are not considered to be an undue constraint on housing investment or development.

In some cases, energy conservation requirements may increase construction costs and, therefore, the initial sales prices and cost of rent. However, these increased costs are often offset by the longterm reductions in the utility’s component of housing operation costs. Accessibility modifications may also increase initial sales prices and rents but will help address the housing needs of the elderly and people with disabilities.

Code Enforcement
The Building Division is responsible for enforcing both state and City regulations governing maintenance of all buildings and property. The Community Development Department is responsible for code enforcement activities through the Community Preservation Division. The purpose of code enforcement of housing in need of rehabilitation is to ensure the safety of the City’s residents; without basic living standards being met, life and safety are threatened. The city does have a code enforcement division to address health and safety concerns in the community.

Currently, the City operates on a complaint-based system to respond to code enforcement needs.

The Community Preservation Division will respond to complaints and investigate violations to ensure compliance with the City’s Municipal Code. In 2021, the city expanded the number of full-time employees by hiring a code enforcement manager to oversee existing efforts and create proactive code enforcement services, which would include the rental inspection and landlord registration program identified in Program H1.2.

State of California, Article 34
Article 34 of the State Constitution requires local jurisdictions to obtain voter approval for specified “low rent” housing projects that involve certain types of public agency participation.

Generally, a project is subject to Article 34 if more than 49 percent of its units will be rented to low-income persons. If a project is subject to Article 34, it will require an approval from the local electorate. This can constrain the production of affordable housing, since the process to seek ballot approval for affordable housing projects can be costly and time consuming, with no guarantee of success.

Local jurisdictions typically place a measure or referendum on the local ballot that seeks authority to develop a certain number of low-income units during a given period of time. If the electorate approves general parameters for certain types of affordable housing development, the local HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 188

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
jurisdiction will be able to move more quickly in response to housing opportunities that fall within those parameters.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 189

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
B. Non-Governmental Constraints
The availability and cost of housing is strongly influenced by market forces over which local governments have little or no control. Nonetheless, State law requires that housing elements contain a general assessment of these constraints, which can serve as the basis for actions to offset their effects. This section describes primary non-governmental constraints to the development of new housing in Newark.

Availability of Financing
The availability of financing is a critical factor that can influence the cost and supply of housing.

There are generally two types of financing used in the housing market: (1) capital used for initial site preparation and construction; and (2) capital used to finance the purchase of units by homeowners and investors. Financing is largely impacted by interest rates. Small fluctuations in interest rates can dramatically influence the ability to qualify for a loan. Mortgage interest rates have a large influence over the affordability of housing. Higher interest rates increase a homebuyer’s monthly payment and decrease the range of housing that a household can afford.

Lower interest rates result in a lower cost and lower monthly payments for the homebuyer.

Because interest rates are determined by national policies and economic conditions, there is little that local governments can do to affect these rates. Jurisdictions can, however, offer interest rate write-downs to extend home purchase opportunities to lower-income households. In addition, government-insured loan programs may be available to reduce mortgage down-payment requirements.

The cost of borrowing money to finance the construction of housing or to purchase a house affects the amount of affordably priced housing in Newark. Lower initial rates are available with graduated payment mortgages, adjustable rate mortgages, and buy-down mortgages. Variable interest rate mortgages on affordable homes may increase to the point where the interest rate exceeds the cost of living adjustments, which is a constraint on affordability. Although rates are currently low, they can change significantly and substantially impact the affordability of housing stock. Fluctuating interest rates can eliminate many potential homebuyers from the housing market or render a housing project infeasible that could have been successfully developed or marketed at lower interest rates. Housing prices in Newark are unaffordable for lower-, moderate-, and even some above moderate- income households, even with the lower interest rates. The primary constraint on homeownership in Newark is not the availability of financing, but the cost of housing, of which is unaffordable to many households.

Financing for both construction and long-term mortgages is generally available in Alameda County subject to normal underwriting standards, though rates have increased markedly throughout 2022. A more critical impediment to homeownership involves both the affordability of the housing stock and the ability of potential buyers to fulfill down payment requirements. Conventional home loans typically require 5 to 20 percent of the sales price as a down payment, which is the largest HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 190

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
constraint to first-time homebuyers. This indicates a need for flexible loan programs and a method to bridge the gap between the down payment and a potential homeowner’s available funds. The availability of financing for developers under current economic conditions may also pose a constraint on development outside of the City’s control.

According to the Alameda Board of Realtors, there is no evidence of “redlining” of any Alameda neighborhood by the financial community. The City provides Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding for counseling for individual clients regarding fair housing rights and responsibilities and to disseminate education and information materials. Households receive intensive counseling, and legal and/or agency referral for cases involving discrimination against families, racial or religious minorities, and individuals with disabilities.

Land Costs
As with most built out Bay Area communities, the high cost of land is a constraint to the production of affordable housing in Newark. There are very few vacant parcels zoned for residential development left in the city and it is rare for vacant residential land to be listed for sale.

Based on a review of land for sale in Fremont, Union City, and Hayward, land prices for land zoned to accommodate multifamily projects range from $5M to $15M per acre depending on locational amenities, density, and other factors. In addition to market sales prices, there can be other costs associated with the acquisition of land including the cost of holding the property throughout the development process. Developers in Newark also face added expenses associated with the demolition and removal of existing structures or remediation of contaminated soil.

Construction Costs
In addition to the high cost of land, construction costs can also act as a constraint to the production of new housing, particularly in the Bay Area. The cost of construction depends primarily on the cost of materials and labor, which are influenced by market demand. The cost of construction will also depend on the type of unit being built and on the quality of product being produced. The cost of labor is based on a number of factors, including housing demand, the number of contractors in the area, and the unionization of workers. The construction cost of housing affects the affordability of new housing and may be considered a constraint to affordable housing in Alameda County and throughout the Bay Area.

Both material and labor costs have increased substantially in recent years. Supply chain issues during the Covid-19 pandemic are partly responsible for recent material cost increases, and a shortage in the construction labor market is adding significantly to the cost of producing housing.

According to a 2020 report by the Terner Center, hard construction costs for multifamily projects in California rose by 25 percent over the course of a decade, from an average of $177 per square foot in 2008-2009 to $222 per square foot in 2018. Cost increases were even greater in the Bay Area, increasing by 119 percent and reaching more than $380 per square foot in 2018.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 191

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Construction costs vary widely according to the type of development. According to the Terner Center report, Type I projects, which are typically over 5-7 stories and constructed with steel and concrete, cost an average of $65 more per square foot than other types of construction, like Type V (i.e., wood frame floors over a concrete platform). Type I projects are more likely to be found in infill locations where zoning allows higher density construction.

Affordable housing projects also cost more on average than market-rate and mixed-affordability projects. The 2020 Terner Center report found that affordable projects cost $48 more per square foot on average compared to market-rate and mixed affordability projects. Some of the added costs for affordable housing are because many affordable housing developers are required to pay “prevailing wages.”
A reduction in construction costs can be brought about in several ways. A reduction in amenities and quality of building materials in new homes (still above the minimum acceptability for health, safety, and adequate performance) may result in lower sales prices. State housing law provides that local building departments can authorize the use of materials and construction methods if the proposed design is found to be satisfactory and the materials or methods are at least equivalent to that prescribed by the applicable building codes.

In addition, prefabricated, factory-built housing may provide lower-priced products by reducing labor and material costs. As the number of units built at one time increases, savings in construction costs over the entire development are generally realized as a result of an economy of scale, particularly when combined with density bonus provisions.

C. Environmental Constraints
Environmental issues affect the amount, location, and timing of new residential development in Newark. Sites in Newark are susceptible to a variety of environmental constraints including sea level rise and flooding, seismic hazards, sensitive ecological areas, and hazardous materials.

Geologic Hazards
Geologic Hazards are associated with earthquakes that can bring about risks such as ground shaking, landslides and tsunamis. Newark sits two miles west of the Hayward fault, and due to this proximity, ground shaking levels would be higher in the southern and western portions of the city.

Ground shaking is measured on a scale ranging from I to X (the Modified Mercalli Scale) with shaking levels ranging from imperceptible to very violent. Most of the developed portions of Newark would experience “very strong” ground shaking (level VIII) in a 6.7 Hayward Fault earthquake, but some parts of the city would experience “violent” ground shaking (level IX).

The city has a sandy loam soil type that is prone to liquefaction. The city of Newark could experience seismic shaking levels with the potential to cause liquefaction in areas where groundwater is generally shallower than 30 feet. Based on data provided by the California HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 192

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Geological Survey, the entire city is considered a liquefaction hazard zone.

Flooding and Sea Level Rise Due to Climate Change
Flooding can have devastating effects on property and residents and impact water quality in Newark housing element housing opportunity sites in Newark may be affected by flooding and sea-level rise. Newark falls within both 100 and 500 year flood zones as well as being affected by sea level rise. The 100 year flood zone covers areas 3 and 4 as well as a number of sites in the Bayside Newark specific plan area. The 500 year flood plain is found further into established residential areas of the city.

The area with the most vulnerability to sea level rise will be in the southern portion of the city, adjacent to the San Francisco Bay. Sea level rise not only affects housing, but other infrastructure such as roads, water and sewer infrastructure.

The City’s Municipal Code sets standards to minimize flood hazard risks, including anchoring and flood-proofing and a requirement that the lowest floor, including basements, is at or above the 100-year flood elevation. Development within the 100-year flood zone is limited, with requirements for building at least 1 foot above the flood elevation. The City requires non-residential development to be elevated at least 8 feet above mean high tide and 11.25 feet for residential development
Hazardous Materials
Hazardous materials regulations, which are codified in Titles 8, 22, and 26 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), and their enabling legislation set forth in Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code, were established at the state level to ensure compliance with federal regulations to reduce the risk to human health and the environment from the routine use of hazardous substances. These regulations must be implemented, as appropriate, and are monitored by the state (e.g., Cal OSHA in the workplace or the DTSC for hazardous waste) and/or local jurisdictions.

As with many infill urban locations, many of the housing element housing opportunity sites in Newark are on former industrial or commercial properties. These properties typically have environmental issues related to the prior use. The city of Newark has a high number of existing sites with hazardous materials, a legacy of their industrial land use.

Despite their historical use, all of the housing element sites are either already remediated of their hazardous materials and ready for residential use or are in the process of being remediated of hazardous materials to allow for residential use pursuant to approved plans by the appropriate regulatory agency.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 193

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Sensitive Ecological Areas
The southwest portion of Newark contains a number of riparian areas, transitional areas between the water and land that support periodic flooding and habitat. They are typically vegetated with lush growths of grasses, shrubs, and trees that are tolerant of periodic flooding and have sediments that are rich in nutrients and organic matter. Riparian areas are found in Site 2, Sanctuary West, also referred to as specific planning area 3 and 4.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS 194

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
SECTION 5 HOUSING RESOURCES
Key resources in Newark to address housing needs include housing sites (see Appendix C below), financial resources, administrative resources and non-profit resources. In addition to a robust inventory of sites available for housing development during the Housing Element planning period, the City is also implementing an ambitious affordable housing work plan 13 which includes the
provision of regular financial assistance to nonprofit sponsors of affordable housing through a regular “Notice of Funding Availability” (NOFA) process. Leveraging the City’s affordable housing impact fee fund, the City will continue to deploy substantial financial resources to support affordable housing production during the planning period. In addition, the City will implement policies to streamline affordable housing approvals and continue to partner with developers of affordable housing as detailed in the following section, Housing Plan.

A. Available Sites For Housing
The most important resource for meeting Newark’s future housing needs is a sufficient supply of land zoned for housing and with supportive infrastructure and pro-housing policies and programs.

As shown in Appendix C, the City has developed a robust inventory of sites to accommodate its 6th cycle RHNA of 1,874. Combining planned and proposed projects that are already in the development pipeline with vacant and non-vacant sites that are zoned for housing and already permit housing to be developed without additional changes to the Zoning code, the sites in Appendix C have the potential to accommodate 2,854 units, representing over 150 percent of the City’s RHNA. This includes sites to accommodate all of the City’s lower-income housing needs for the 6yh cycle in addition to a significant buffer.

Sites included in the City’s 6th cycle inventory are described in detail in Appendix C and displayed below in Figure 5-1.

The sites selected for this Housing Element have also been selected to achieve the following major policy objectives:

Access to Opportunity: The sites work to expand access to opportunity by siting 46 percent of affordable units in areas identified as high opportunity by the Tax Credit Allocation Committee.

Connecting Housing and Transit: Priority Development areas plan to connect new housing with regional and local transportation options in existing and new walkable communities; 29 percent of new housing sites are located within two Priority Development Areas in Newark which are the Dunbarton TOD (now known as Bayside Newark) and the Old Town Mixed Use Area.

Neighborhood Revitalization: Through the implementation of the NewPark Place Specific Plan, the former Newpark Mall will transform into a mixed-use neighborhood, with 1,519 new housing 13 Newark Affordable Housing Work Plan
HOUSING RESOURCES 195

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
units, including new homes for low and moderate incomes. Pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure improvements will also be developed through a multiphased redevelopment. Similar revitalization efforts are reflected in the sites identified in Newark’s other key specific plan areas in the Old Town area and Bayside Newark.

HOUSING RESOURCES 196

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure 5-1: Housing Sites for the RHNA 6th Cycle
Source: City of Newark; Planning Collaborative, 2023.

HOUSING RESOURCES 197

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
B. City Financial Resources
Along with housing, financial resources are critical for meeting Newark’s future housing needs.

These include funding and financing programs to provide gap funding for affordable multifamily housing programs, loan and grant programs for first time homebuyers, and home rehabilitation grant and loan programs. The major sources of funding for affordable housing at the Federal and State levels are constrained and highly competitive, and in this context local funding sources for affordable housing are increasingly critical.

Key resources at Newark’s disposal include HUD HOME and CDBG funds, allocated to ongoing housing programs through a process overseen by the City’s Community Development Advisory Committee (CDAC). As noted elsewhere in this Housing Element, the most important source of funding support for new affordable housing production in Newark is the City’s Affordable Housing Impact Fee fund, which has collected upwards of $35M in recent years. $19M of this fund has been allocated by the City to support three affordable housing developments which are included in the City’s development pipeline: 1) $2.8M for the entitled but not yet built Timber Street Senior Apartments sponsored by Eden Housing; $4.5M for the Cedar Community Apartments; and 2) $12M awarded to Satellite Affordable Housing Associates to support the development of a new 56-unit development on three underutilized sites that will be assembled. The City retains a balance in June of 2023 of 23,450,000 million in the Affordable Housing Impact Fee fund. The City anticipates issuing regular funding NOFAs to continue to partner with nonprofit sponsors of affordable housing.

The ability of the City to effectively deploy these local financial resources is also critical to the community’s ability to leverage other sources of funding from Federal, State, regional and private sources. An important recent example of this is the award last year of $38.2M in State of California Project Homekey funding for the Cedar Community Apartments; this was one of the largest allocations of funding received by any jurisdiction in California for the recent funding round.

C. Other City and Partner Agency Resources
Housing Programs in Newark are administered by the City’s Community Development Department. The Department works actively to partner with residents, housing providers and other public agencies to facilitate housing production, preservation and rehabilitation in Newark.

Additional key resources provided by partner agencies include:
● Alameda County 2-1-1. 2-1-1 is a free, non-emergency, confidential service that provides easy access to housing information and critical health and human services. ● Alameda County Housing Authority. The Housing Authority administers programs throughout the County including portable
HOUSING RESOURCES 198

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
● Section 8 vouchers for eligible Newark Households. The authority also provides information on housing resources, housing assistance, rental assistance, affordable land and housing, and public housing.
● Alameda County Housing Portal. This portal, which is under development, will provide a central location for affordable housing rentals and information, county-wide. Support for multiple languages is available. www.housing.acgov.org
● COVID-19 Renter Assistance. AC-Housing Secure is a program that offers assistance with unpaid back rent. Renters and landlords are encouraged to apply. There is a high demand for assistance, but additional program funds have been requested. Applicants will not be asked about their citizenship. Proof of citizenship is not required. Support for multiple languages is available. www.ac-housingsecure.org
● ECHO Housing. ECHO Housing provides fair housing services and tenant/landlord counseling and mediation to Newark residents. Renters who believe they have been discriminated against or who need assistance for a dispute with their landlord can contact ECHO at (510) 581-9380. www.echofairhousing.org
● Fremont Family Resource Center. The Fremont FRC is a welcoming place where families and individuals are nurtured, encouraged, and provided quality services to build on their own strengths to help themselves and others. Fremont FRC serves the entire Newark community, as well as Union City and Fremont.
● AC Boost Down Payment Program. AC Boost provides financial assistance to middle-income working households to purchase a home in Alameda County. The program offers shared appreciation loans to first-time homebuyers who live in, work in, or have been displaced from Alameda County. AC Boost is funded by Alameda County Measure A1 and administered by nonprofit organization Hello Housing. www.acboost.org ● Alameda County Healthy Homes. Alameda County has programs and funding opportunities to promote healthy and safe homes. Grants are available for minor home repairs, including the removal of lead hazards. These programs are available to qualified Newark households. www.achhd.org
● Renew Alameda County. Renew Alameda County helps homeowners make renovations necessary to stay, grow, and thrive in their homes. Renew AC is administered by Alameda County with funding provided by the Measure A1 Housing Bond. The program is operated by Habitat for Humanity East Bay/Silicon Valley. www.renewac.org ● Urban County Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program. The Alameda County Urban County Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program ("EMAP") is intended to provide financial relief for lower income homeowners living in the Alameda County communities (including Newark) who have experienced a loss of income resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. www.heraca.org/emap
HOUSING RESOURCES 199

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
SECTION 6 HOUSING PLAN
A. Evaluation of Accomplishments Under Adopted
Housing Element
The City of Newark has developed and implemented various programs and policies to address its housing needs during the previous housing element’s planning period (2015 to 2023). The following table provides a detailed program-by-program review of progress and performance. This information will help ensure that the updated element for 2023 to 2031 builds on success, responds to lessons learned, and positions us to better achieve our community’s housing needs and priorities.

During the 5
th Cycle, the City put in place new policies to help fund and create new affordable housing into the future such as creating a comprehensive affordable housing work plan that will invest 80% of its Housing Impact Fee funds; financing affordable housing production that supports those at risk of or experiencing homelessness; and applying for state, county, regional, and federal funds to construct affordable housing for low income and special needs households. The City also laid the groundwork for future housing and envisioned transit-oriented development (TOD) by producing an Old Town Development Strategy and rezoning its Dumbarton TOD site. It adopted a Specific Plan for Old Town with recommendations and actions to add up to 400 residential units to the planned area and one for Dumbarton TOD that has resulted in the approval or construction of approximately 828 units.

Additionally, the City of Newark has led the way in establishing new policies and programs to affirmatively further fair housing and support communities with special housing needs in obtaining access to housing. The City built a 75-unit affordable complex with universal design features (Newark Station Senior Apartments) and has approved plans for a 79-unit 100% senior housing development with deep levels of affordability (Timber Street Senior Housing). It has modified its building code to require universal design to be applied to both private and public housing and approved 180 units with universal design. Newark has also adopted an Ordinance establishing a process that allows flexibility within the zoning code for reasonable accommodation of access for the disabled and is prepared to adopt a fair housing ordinance for the sixth housing element cycle.

HOUSING PLAN 200

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table 6-1: Review of Policies and Programs of 5th Housing Element Cycle Program 5
th Cycle Activity Summary Status for 6th Cycle

1. Work with Lower
Income Housing
Developers and
Prioritize Funding
The City worked with nonprofit and for-profit housing developers and organizations to support efforts to create new housing for seniors, people with disabilities, formerly homeless people, households with moderate incomes or below, especially including extremely low income households, and other special needs populations. The City developed a comprehensive affordable housing work plan to engage developers and prioritized funding for housing for people with special needs and very low income people. As provided in the work plan, Newark will invest up to 40% of its Housing Impact Fee fund balance (or approximately $12 million) for funding a NOFA to incentivize affordable housing development. In addition, Newark will invest an additional 40% of the Housing Impact Fee fund balance for site acquisition meant to facilitate affordable housing development. Consistent with the City Council-approved Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Affordable Housing Work Plan, in June 2022, the City of Newark invited developers of affordable rental housing to submit applications for funding assistance under a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). A total of approximately $12 million was made available from the City’s Affordable Housing Impact Fee Fund. The City received one response from Satellite Affordable Housing Associates (SAHA) requesting $12,000,000 of funding from the City’s housing impact fee fund g to construct a 57-unit multifamily apartment building at 6347-6375 Thornton Avenue that would meet the need for family-sized units. On January 19, 2023, the Community Development Advisory Committee on January 19, 2023 reviewed the proposal against the NOFA selection criteria and recommended approval. On March 23, 2023, the City Council reviewed and approved the proposed funding decision as well as authorized the City Manager to execute the Affordable Housing Loan Agreement and all related loan documents to effectuate the approval of the funding award. SAHA will complete the acquisition of the subject properties in April. After conducting community outreach, SAHA expects to submit their formal entitlement application in Summer 2023. In 2021, the City approved plans for “Timber Street Senior Housing”, a 79-unit 100% senior housing development, to be built by Eden Housing. The location of the project was rezoned from Limited Industrial District to Medium Residential Density to revitalize the area from a light industrial and warehouse space to a walkable residential neighborhood. A minimum of 20% of the units would have rents restricted at 60% AMI and the remaining units would have rents restricted at no more than 80% AMI. The final AMI unit allocations have not been formally established, but Eden Housing anticipates that most units would have affordability levels deeper than 80% AMI.

Ongoing. The City will retain this
program and expand it by creating
additional programs to
supplement it. It will conduct
focused outreach to Housing
providers annually throughout the
6 th Cycle.

HOUSING PLAN 201

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Program 5
th Cycle Activity Summary Status for 6th Cycle
The City granted two incentives/concessions (parking and setbacks) and three waivers (lot coverage, landscaped area, open space) to help facilitate the project and residential density.

The entitlements for the project were approved on 10/28/2021 and are expected to be constructed in 2023.
● City staff worked with Adobe Services on a Homekey project to convert an existing hotel to supportive housing, which consists of a total of 125 units (1 unit for the on-site manager and 124 units for rent permanent affordable housing). The breakdown of the 124 units for rent permanent affordable housing is 60 units for chronically homeless households and 64 units for households at risk of homelessness; all of which would be for extremely low-income households. On 9/22/2022, the City Council approved a Resolution (Resolution No. 11408) Project Homekey Standard Agreement which includes $38.2 million Homekey grant funds and $6 million City funds. A building permit for the tenant improvement for the project has been issued on 12/22/2022.

2. Support Regional
Homeless Initiatives
The City has provided continuous support for regional efforts to end homelessness, such as the Alameda County EveryOne Home Program, which prioritizes supportive housing. The City adopted a resolution declaring a shelter crisis in the City of Newark and authorized the City’s participation in the Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP). It further authorized the City Manager (or his designee) to execute all applications and agreements related to HEAP and other State and County funding sources for homeless populations (Resolution No. 10867 on December 13, 2018). The City of Newark partnered with the City of Fremont’s Continuum of Care program to allocate its $229,000 of HEAP funding. The funding was mainly used to provide:
● Expanded Warm Center hours;
● Expanded “Homeless Navigation” services;
● Development of a site for the safe parking of recreational vehicles and vans; ● offering time limited housing subsidies
The City also took definite action to set aside affordable housing funds for projects through the HomeKey grant program, an effort to provide affordable housing in existing hotels and buildings to low-income households and those experiencing or at-risk of homelessness. In early 2022, the City Council authorized City staff to apply to the State’s HomeKey grant program for a grant of up to $39 million and allocated $1.5 million of American Recovery Plan Act (ARPA) funds, as well as $6 Ongoing. The City will retain this
program into the next Cycle.

HOUSING PLAN 202

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Program 5
th Cycle Activity Summary Status for 6th Cycle
million from the City’s Housing Impact Fee fund to acquire Towne Place Suites Hotel with Abode Services and Allied Housing. The Town Places Suites project would convert an extended-stay hotel into 124 permanent, supportive affordable residential units known as Cedar Community Apartments.

Additionally, the City has taken on a variety of other initiatives to address issues of homelessness.

The Police Department conducts a more in-depth count of its homeless population on a regular basis. The City partners with Caltrans and Alameda County Human Services Agency to address homeless encampments on public property, and with the Fremont Family Resource Center to provide support to Newark households at risk of becoming homeless. It has also created a Homelessness Committee with members from various City departments to coordinate actions and responses to homelessness in the community.

In May 2022, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, along with City Councils throughout Alameda County, endorsed the Home Together 2026 Strategic Community Plan. The Plan is a five-year strategic initiative that centers racial equity, and identifies the strategies, activities, and resources needed to dramatically reduce homelessness in Alameda County. The City will continue to participate in the Home Together 2026 plan to address issues at the local and regional levels.

City adopted a resolution declaring a shelter crisis in the City of Newark and authorized the City of Newark's participation in the Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP); and further authorized the City Manager or his designee to execute all applications and agreements related to HEAP and other State and County funding sources for homeless populations. Resolution No. 10867 on December 13, 2018.
● The City Council approved a Resolution (Resolution No. 11408) Project Homekey Standard Agreement which includes $38.2 million Homekey grant funds and $6 million City funds on 9/22/2022 for the conversion of an existing hotel to supportive housing Homekey project.
● On 5/12/2022, City Council adopted a Resolution (Resolution No. 11,341) for Home Together, a county-wide initiative (Home Together 2026) to address homelessness.

HOUSING PLAN 203

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Program 5
th Cycle Activity Summary Status for 6th Cycle

3. Continue Repair and
Rehabilitation Program
Each year, a portion of Newark’s CDBG funds is dedicated to the Housing Repair and Rehabilitation Program according to a formula approved by the Alameda County Urban County jurisdictions. The City entered into an agreement with the County of Alameda for participation in the CDBG Program for FY20-21 and the Community Development Advisory Committee made recommendation to the City Council for the use of Jurisdiction Improvement funds for ADA compliance needs at Music Park and Civic Center park on February 18, 2020.

Overall, the minor repair program has been very successful in the past. However, the home repairs in 2020 and 2021 were slightly lower than expected due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Conversations with county staff revealed that many homeowners were hesitant to allow contractors into their homes during the last two years out of fear of COVID-19 transmission.

Nonetheless, the City of Newark has funded 49 projects in the current 5 th Cycle.

In discussion with the Alameda County HCD staff, there is no plan to change or substitute the program with any other during FY22-23. The City will continue to participate in the program and will increase community awareness of the program through various city communications tools.

Through its continued participation, the City is expected to meet and likely exceed its goal of funding 65 projects by the end of the cycle.

Ongoing. Assuming continued
CDBG funding, the City will
continue to participate in the
program.

4. Civic Center
Replacement
Staff and consultants prepared a Newark Civic Center feasibility study (completed in June 2016) that assessed the facility needs for a new civic center. The study, informed by two City Council work sessions and a community meeting, included a brief description of locations throughout Newark that were considered for the new civic center. Ultimately, the feasibility analysis focused on the current civic center site as the location for the new civic center. There was no discussion of HE Program 4 as it related to the civic center site, and no discussion of affordable housing as a possible use of the site. The new civic center, which includes city hall, a police building, and library was completed in 2021. Additional analysis would be required to assess the feasibility for affordable housing on remaining city-owned portions of the site. The site retains the Residential High-Density zoning designation and Public-Institutional general plan land use.

Not completed. Affordable
housing was ultimately not
considered as a land use during
the civic center replacement
feasibility study. Replacement of
the civic center was the only
projectthat was considered.

5. Old Town
Development Strategy
The City completed an Old Town Development Strategy in 2017 to facilitate the development of higher density housing in subareas N, M, and O of the Old Town area, with the goal of yielding 228 higher density housing units by 2022. In 2019, two community meetings were held (March 13 and Completed. The City will work to
further the recommendations of
the Old Town Newark Specific
HOUSING PLAN 204

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Program 5
th Cycle Activity Summary Status for 6th Cycle
June 26) followed by a Joint Work Session on December 12 th
to develop the Old Town Newark
Specific Plan. The City was granted a Planning Grant Program award of $160,000 for the preparation of this plan.

In 2021, the City adopted the Specific Plan, which includes a feasibility analysis of sites within the area as well as various policies and strategies that are targeted at reducing barriers to housing in the area. For example, Policy LU-1 focuses on zoning amendments that strategically increase density in certain areas. Policy LU-16 revises zoning regulations to revise parking design standards and reduce the parking demands per unit, thus making units more affordable. Policy INF-1 & INF-2 recommend infrastructure improvements which increase water and sewer capacity which are needed to increase residential density in the area. Additional recommendations included as part of the plan are to reduce or eliminate development impact fees and require inclusionary affordable housing. Overall, the Plan recommendations and actions will add up to 400 residential units to the planned area, far exceeding the goal of 228 units.

Plan within the next few years to
advance development.

6. Fair Housing
Programs
The City signed an Inter-Governmental Collaboration Agreement for the Completion of the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice for Community Development Block Grant Program on March 14, 2019 (Resolution No. 10,904). The Analysis of Impediments (AI) was completed in January 2020. To achieve the AI Metric and Milestone for Activity 1.c to “advocate for local federal/state laws that would improve fair housing protections for those experiencing barriers to accessing housing”, the City of Newark’s CDD will develop and adopt a fair housing ordinance by FY 2023 for consideration by the City Council. This ordinance will clarify and publicize the prohibition against discrimination in housing and will assist the implementation of Federal Fair Housing regulations. As part of the ordinance, the City will either refer or respond to fair housing complaints.

Ongoing programs and initiatives
as documented in Section 3:

AFFH.

7. Housing Accessible to
the Disabled
The City has made it a priority to provide housing that is accessible to disabled people, who comprise 7.6% of the population in Newark, through universal design requirements. Pursuant to the Health and Safety code, HCD has specified that the Building Standards Commission provide documentation of these requirements in the California Building Code. Chapter 11A of the building code outlines the City’s accessibility requirements for private housing, including a mandate for adaptable design in all ground floor units that was established in 2013, while Chapter 11B outlines Ongoing. The City will continue to
use Chapter 11A and 11B as an
effective method to increase
housing accessibility.

HOUSING PLAN 205

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Program 5
th Cycle Activity Summary Status for 6th Cycle
the requirements for public housing. During this 5th Cycle of Housing Elements, the City has approved 180 units with universal design.

In 2018, the Newark Station Senior Apartments was built with universal design features. This complex, which can house 75 families, was the first affordable apartment community to be built in the City of Newark in at least 25 years.

8. Seek Funds for
Affordable Housing
The City applied for state, county, regional, and federal funds to construct housing for low income and special needs households as well as funding to provide infrastructure that supports housing development. For instance, the City applied for the Alameda County Measure A-1 Bond Competitive grant for $6.5 million. An investment of those funds will go to the Timber Street Senior Housing mentioned in Program 1.

In addition, the City has raised money through impact fees from market-rate housing development per the Affordable Housing fee program adopted by Council in 2014. This ordinance is codified in Chapter 17.18 of the Municipal Code. The fee is based on square footage of the project: $21.52 per square foot of floor area is charged for the first 1,000 square feet and $8.62 per square foot is charged for floor area above 1,000 square feet, excluding garages, carports or common areas. To date, approximately, $24 million in impact fees have been deposited in the Affordable Impact Fee Fund to support projects or programs that preserve and/or increase the supply of affordable housing in Newark.

Ongoing. The City will evaluate
funding each year and apply for
funding as appropriate.

9. Adopt Reasonable
Accommodation
Ordinance
The City adopted an Ordinance in 2016 establishing the process for allowing flexibility within the zoning code for reasonable accommodation of access for the disabled.

The ordinance includes:
● Clear rules, policies, and procedures to promote equal access to housing and comply with fair housing and disability laws including but not limited to identifying who may request a reasonable accommodation (i.e., persons with disabilities, family members, landlords, etc.), timeframes for decision-making, and provisions for flexibility in the various land-use, zoning, or building regulations that may otherwise constrain housing for persons with disabilities. Chapter 17.37 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance outlines the process for Ongoing.

HOUSING PLAN 206

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Program 5
th Cycle Activity Summary Status for 6th Cycle
requesting a waiver to any zoning regulation to allow improvements to an existing building in order to provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. ● Regularly monitoring the implementation of the jurisdiction’s ordinances, codes, policies, and procedures to ensure they comply with the “reasonable accommodation” for disabled provisions and fair housing laws.
● Reduced parking requirements for projects serving seniors and persons with disabilities (The Zoning Ordinance was revised in 2018 reducing parking requirements to 0.5 spaces per unit, inclusive of guest parking).

10. Rezone Dumbarton
TOD
Development in the Dumbarton Transit Oriented Development (Site Q) is governed by a Specific Plan which has numerous requirements and amenities. The Specific Plan supports and controls development within the 200-acre area, promoting a comprehensive development plan to encourage the creation of a livable community designed for compatible neighborhoods with connectivity to parks, open space, the future Transit Station, and commercial services. These important project elements are assured concurrent with the rezoning application.

Most of the Specific Plan has been built-out or is under construction. Construction activities include the previously approved residential uses, streets, sidewalks, landscaping, utilities, and open spaces. The Specific Plan limited residential development to 2,500 units for the entire Specific Plan area. To date, approximately 1,836 units have been approved or constructed.

In February 2021, staff provided City Council with an overview of the rezoning activities within the Dumbarton TOD, now known as Bayside TOD. The Bayside TOD developer has summarized development of approved projects, the development that was anticipated in the Specific Plan, and the development table including the current project under review, FMC Willow.

Completed. The Bayside TOD
area will be built out in phases,
with plans for the last site to be
entitled before the end of 2023.

HOUSING PLAN 207

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
B. Housing Plan: Goals, Objectives, Policies, and
Programs
This Chapter pulls from what the city has learned from extensive community engagement and data, to develop seven goals to further affordable housing production and housing mobility, increase opportunity and protect residents from displacement. The programs have an implementation timeline of immediate (0-3 years) mid term, (3 to 5 years), long term (5-8 years) and ongoing programs. The city will track program progress through the identification of responsible department and performance metrics through the 6th cycle.

IMMEDIATE: 2023-2025
MID TERM: 2026-2028
LONG TERM: 2029-2031
ONGOING: This is an existing policy or program that will be continue to be implemented GOALS
GOAL H1: Preserve and Improve Existing Housing
POLICY H1: Leverage local funds to supplement county, state and federal funding to support the maintenance, rehabilitation and preservation of existing rental and ownership housing.

GOAL H2: Facilitate the Development of More Homes for
More People
Supporting the development of housing that is affordable and accessible to allsegments of the community.

POLICY H2.1: Create opportunities for new housing for moderate income households through zoning adjustments to promote missing middle housing types such as courtyard housing, duplex and small multi family homes.

POLICY H2.2: Second Units. Recognize second units (also known as Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and in-law apartments) as an important part of Newark’s housing supply and continue to allow such units, subject to parking, ownership, and size HOUSING PLAN 208

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
standards that are consistent with State law. [ongoing] POLICY H2.3: Promote and facilitate new affordable housing partnerships with various organizations with different housing needs that include but are not limited to the following:
● Community serving nonprofits
● Newark Unified School District
● Community college districts
POLICY H2.4: Work with community partners and property owners to revisit a community visioning plan for the Four Corners neighborhood/community commercial area.

POLICY H2.5: Support programs aimed at housing vulnerable and special needs populations.

Monitor the need for housing for seniors across all income groups and for various levels of care, and support programs and incentives that encourage the development of a variety of age-friendly housing options.

POLICY H2.6: Develop and adopt a Universal Design Ordinance to ensure new construction is accessible to residents in all phases of life and regardless of their physical abilities.

POLICY H2.7: Update the existing Reasonable Accommodation requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and adopt [Ongoing]
POLICY H2.8: Support regional homeless initiatives and develop robust and equitable local responses to people experiencing homelessness.[Ongoing] POLICY H2.9: Increase housing for large households as stated in the Affordable Housing Work Plan (which may be amended from time-to-time). Large households are defined as those with five or more people. The city will review existing site development regulations and design guidelines to ensure that the city is not unintentionally restricting housing designs that meet the needs of extended, multigenerational, and/or large families such as 2 + bedroom units, to reduce overcrowding and assist in maintaining the affordability of existing housing stock.

POLICY H2.10: Evaluate annual housing production targets to ensure the city is meeting the RHNA goals.

GOAL H3: Reduce and Remove Constraints to Affordable
Housing Development
Removing barriersto developing affordable housing is key in meeting the goal of providing housing that is accessible to all residents, regardless of income and responsive to the unique ecological and natural environment of the city.

HOUSING PLAN 209

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
POLICY H3.1: Allow By-Right Approval of Projects with 20 Percent Affordable Units on “Reused” Sites. Pursuant to AB 1397, amend the Zoning Ordinance to require by-right approval of housing development that includes 20 percent of the units as housing affordable to lower-income households, on sites being used to meet the 6th Cycle RHNA that represent “reuse sites” previously identified in the 4th and 5th Cycles Housing Element, and on sites that are subject to a text amendment to accommodate the lower-income RHNA.

POLICY H3.2: Increase certainty of entitlement procedures and accessibility to resource information for developers. Prepare a comprehensive set of guidelines and associated process diagram for all of the city’s processes and fees related to residential development generally and affordable housing specifically.

POLICY H3.3: Ensure there is a sufficient supply of multifamily and single-family zoned land to meet the housing needs identified in the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).

GOAL H4: Help People Stay in Their Homes and Communities POLICY H4.1: Develop programs that support homeowners and tenants remain in their homes and communities with a focus on low and moderate income residents and BIPOC households.

POLICY H4.2: Preservation of unsubsidized affordable units. Many low income residents depend on unsubsidized housing at below market rates, which is vulnerable to investment and speculation. Work with nonprofit organizations that may acquire at-risk projects to extend affordability of existing unsubsidized affordable housing for lower-income households. These policies aim to prevent displacement of low-income BIPOC communities, long-term renters, and other marginalized residents by preserving currently affordable housing and creating pathways for permanent affordability.

POLICY H4.3: Sites Acquisition for affordable housing. The city will proactively work to identify opportunities for partnering with other local public sector agencies and private landowners to acquire sites for affordable housing, as well as to seek creative ways of partnering with developers to include affordable units in market-rate projects.

GOAL H5: Increase Access to Affordable Housing
POLICY H5.1: Continue to generate funding for affordable housing and seek additional funding opportunities as they arise.

POLICY H5.2: Bring home ownership within reach for Newark residents. Develop a BMR HOUSING PLAN 210

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
homeownership program, and down payment assistance programs, with a focus on first time home buyers.

POLICY H5.3: Prioritize the use of City-owned property for affordable housing prior to other uses (if the sites are feasible and appropriate for housing), and prioritize housing for extremely low income households.

POLICY H5.4: Amend the existing Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to require on-site production of units rather than allowing the payment of an in-lieu or impact fee to support increased access to affordable housing opportunities across the city and in high opportunity areas.

POLICY H5.5: Develop an affordable notice of funding availability (NOFA) that will be released regularly to incentivize new developments consistent with the City’s goals of increasing affordable housing opportunities for residents that are families, low income seniors, and residents with disabilities.

GOAL H6: Enhance Quality of Life,Equity, and Environmental Justice
POLICY H6.1: Identify the various existing and potential funding sources for infrastructure / public facility needs, including local, State, and Federal money.

POLICY H6.2: Urban Centers. Implement existing specific plans for NewPark Place and Old Town, creating locations in Newark which are more urban and pedestrian-oriented in character than they are today. These areas will be transformed over time into mixed-use centers with retail, office, civic, and higher density housing uses. [Ongoing policy]
POLICY H6.3: Land use and transportation policy that encourages active transportation and transit oriented development. Make land use and transportation decisions that reduce emissions, including promotion of walking and bicycling, improvements to public transportation, and a jobs-housing balance that reduces vehicle commute miles.

POLICY H6.4: In partnership with local non profits and city departments, work to promote energy efficiency and wise water use in new and existing residential buildings in order to reduce energy costs, provide quality and resilient housing, improve building comfort, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

POLICY H6.5: Allow and encourage green building practices and energy efficient construction, such as Cross Laminated Timber buildings, solar installations, and electrification of buildings.

POLICY H6.6: Urban Heat Island Effect. Develop standards and requirements for municipal HOUSING PLAN 211

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
projects that can incorporate natural cooling techniques to reduce the urban heat island effect.

POLICY H6.7: Residential Development in the FloodPlain. Limit development within low-lying areas at high risk from flooding. Require any new residential development, including streets and other surface improvements, to be constructed above the 100-year flood elevation.

GOAL H7: Further Fair Housing Throughout the City
POLICY H7.1: Improve awareness, access, and use of education, training, complaint investigation, mediation services of the fair housing service provider, particularly in areas sensitive to displacement, low-income, racial/ethnic concentration, disability or other fair housing considerations.

POLICY H7.2: Promote affirmative marketing in affordable housing programs to enable mobility among low-income residents and BIPOC residents in areas of poverty and segregated neighborhoods.

POLICY H7.3: Address barriers to renting and increase tenant support. Low income households and people experiencing homelessness face obstacles that prevent them from accessing housing that is affordable to them.

PROGRAMS
PROGRAM H1.1: Housing Rehabilitation and Repair Programs Continue partnership with Alameda County's housing rehabilitation and minor home repair programs, Renew Alameda County, and contracting with Rebuilding Together Oakland East Bay.

Encourage participation in these programs by Newark property owners for the maintenance of local rental homes and homeowners. The City shall continue to apply for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds on an annual basis. The City shall give high priority for the expenditure of a portion of CDBG funds for housing rehabilitation, and directly contract with the County to administer the housing rehabilitation services. The City shall also use HOME funds, as available and appropriate, to support housing rehabilitation for lower-income households.

Quantified Objective: The City plans to support 13 households per year with home rehabilitation. The city will facilitate place-based revitalization by focusing on lower-income households with rehabilitation programs and promoting availability of programs in areas with a high concentration of housing in need of rehabilitation and repair, such as the Old Town and Mirabeau Park areas.

HOUSING PLAN 212

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: ONGOING: Continuation of existing program
Funding Source(s): HOME and CDBG funds as available
PROGRAM H1.2: Develop citywide rental inspection program to maintain high quality housing throughout the city.

Rental Inspection Program / Landlord Registration. The Rental Inspection Program enhances the quality of rental properties and thereby the quality of life for tenants throughout the City and ensures that all rental properties are maintained in accordance with City standards. City inspectors inspect rental properties for code violations and will issue corrective reports with recommendations for improvements to property owners/landlords and tenants. The property owner will be expected to have the property reinspected to ensure the repairs have been made.

Examples of reportable issues include: roof leaks, unsafe fire conditions, mold, unsafe stairs and lead based hazards per AB 838.

Quantified Objective: Update Newark’s Community preservation and nuisance abatement ordinance to create a proactive citywide rental inspection program, and develop an online reporting system for tenants to report substandard housing conditions. Support 12 rental units in improved condition per year.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Program developed by June 30, 2024 Funding Source(s): Affordable housing fund, Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H2.1: Develop new housing options in areas of the city close to services such as parks, schools and grocery stores, with existing infrastructure.

Missing middle housing will provide for an increase in housing choice in established single family neighborhoods, enabling more moderate income homes within walking distance to schools and parks. SB 9 requires ministerial approval of housing developments containing no more than two residential units on lots zoned for single family residences. Adopted simultaneously with SB 9, SB 10 provides for SB 10 allows local agencies to adopt ordinances to permit up to 10 dwelling units on any parcel, at a height specified in the ordinance, if the parcel is within a transit-rich area or urban infill site. Implementing SB 9 and SB 10 ordinances, along with pursuing Program H2.8:

HOUSING PLAN 213

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Zoning for Missing Middle Housing Types, will provide additional opportunities for new housing in a variety of neighborhood types throughout the city.

Quantified Objective: Draft and implement SB 9 and SB 10 ordinances to provide additional opportunities for missing middle housing. Review the City’s Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance and implement updates as needed to provide clarity and facilitate housing development under SB 9. These include adopting updated definitions, use regulations, development standards, and ministerial processes. Production and affordability will be monitored every two years and alternative actions will be implemented if necessary to meet the RHNA. In coordination with research being conducted at the State level, pursue opportunities to incentivize and provide funding assistance for homeowners to provide affordable units under SB 9 to further housing opportunities and more affordable homeownership options in high opportunity areas.

Develop and implement the City’s SB 9 Ordinance to expand the housing supply in single-family zones by allowing for lot splits, cottage housing developments, triplexes and duplexes. 120 moderate income SB 9 units developed during the housing element cycle, with a focus on expanding housing opportunity in neighborhoods in the northern portion of the city.

Through programs such as H3.2, Objective Design Standards and H3.5, Parking standards update and study, the city will be able to ensure that development standards, including parking and open space requirements, are not a constraint to development.

Adopt an SB 10 Ordinance to allow up to 10 units to be developed on smaller residential parcels throughout the City, with a goal to produce 80 units of missing middle housing, targeting 75% of these units in neighborhoods in the northern portions of the city, including Lake-Rosemont, Mirabeau, and Mayhews Landing Neighborhoods.

The quantified objective for Missing Middle for Programs H2.1 and H2.8 is a total of 200 units.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Ordinance developed by June 30, 2025 Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund Missing Middle Housing
House-scale buildings with multiple units in walkable neighborhoods. These building types, such as duplexes, fourplexes, cottage courts, and backyard cottages (accessory dwelling units), provide HOUSING PLAN 214

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
diverse housing options and support locally-serving retail and public transportation options.

PROGRAM H2.2: Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Program.

Develop tools to support uptake of accessory dwelling units production in Newark, in collaboration with Alameda County. Newark will comply with state law until the updated existing Accessory Dwelling unit ordinance is in compliance with state law.

Accessory Dwelling UnitIncentive Program. Develop a program to incentivize construction of ADUs that are deed-restricted for very low, low, and moderate income households.

Quantified Objective: ● Increase viability and uptake of accessory dwelling units though through a multi pronged approach. Develop an ADU calculator to be available for Newark residents, pre approved plans, and increase community outreach, in partnership with Alameda County.
● Work to develop a series of incentives and a low interest loan program (if feasible in collaboration with Alameda County) to bring more ADU production for affordable rental housing to the city, specifically in areas that are identified as high in opportunity by the Tax Credit Allocation Committee.
● Per SB 897, Increase height limits for detached accessory dwelling units on a lot with an existing multifamily or multistory building to 18 feet and 25 feet if the unit is attached to a primary dwelling. ● Per AB 345, Accessory Dwelling units built or developed by non profit entities to be sold separately from the primary residence to a qualified buyer.
● Remove parking requirements.
● Revise ordinance to comply with state law.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Alameda County Timeline: IMMEDIATE: ADU Community outreach to begin in 2024, pre approved plans to be finalized by 2025. The Alameda County ADU Resource website will function as a resource for community members interested in constructing an ADU. The site currently includes an ADU calculator and in the future will include a how to handbook and instructional videos. The City will revise its ADU ordinance to comply with state law in 2024.

MID-TERM: Accessory Dwelling Unit Incentive Program developed by June 30, 2026, with the goal of 144 very low, low and moderate income units with 25% in high opportunity areas, and 160 total units constructed HOUSING PLAN 215

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
during the housing element period.

Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund, Housing Impact Fee Fund PROGRAM H2.3: Facilitate market-rate and affordable
housing and promote neighborhood revitalization in the
Four Corners area through increased mixed use
development and walkability.

Quantified Objective: Creation of a community guided plan for the Four Corners area (in between Lake-Rosemont and Mirabeau Neighborhoods), to bring housing and local retail to the area. The plan will consist of community engagement, with the objective of developing community-led decision making around housing, commercial space and public infrastructure improvements. As a key element of the community guided Four Corners area plan, the city will incorporate the Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) development policies and requirements as a portion of the Four Corners area is within a transit priority area. The Four Corners area is zoned for community commercial, which does not allow for residential development by right, but housing may be considered as a component of planned developments within these areas in the event a shopping center is reused. The regulations provided in AB2011 are available to property owners, to facilitate the redevelopment of older underutilized strip malls in the Four Corners area.

For example, per state law AB2011, 4.5 acres of underutilized land can be developed with mixed income housing at 80 dwelling units per acre due to being within 0.5 miles of the proposed Ardenwood rail stop as part of the South Bay Connect rail realignment project.

The community-guided plan will include zoning and site development standards that will incentivize the development of multi-unit housing, with a target of 360 units on existing commercial properties in the Four Corners area. As part of the plan, the City will establish or modify development standards to facilitate maximum densities.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Community outreach in 2024, MID TERM: neighborhood plan developed by June 30, 2025, rezoning completed by December 31, 2025
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund HOUSING PLAN 216

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
PROGRAM H2.4: Universal Design Ordinance.

This program supports residential development that incorporates Universal Design features to meet the needs of as many users as possible. The intent is to reduce the potential for occupants to be displaced from their homes due to a disability, to allow those persons to visit neighboring dwelling units, and to increase the number of accessible dwelling units in the local housing supply that meet long term housing needs by creating a process that facilitates this type of accessible design.

Quantified Objective: Develop a Universal Design ordinance for new construction of single family, accessory dwelling units, duplex and building 20 units or larger.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Building Division Timeline: MID-TERM: Program developed by June 30, 2025
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H2.5: Develop a local response to support people experiencing homelessness.

Develop a local response to support people experiencing homelessness, with specific attention to the racial disparities and large population of youth and families.

Quantified Objective: The City of Newark adopted a resolution endorsing the Alameda County Home Together 2026 Implementation Plan to address homelessness.

Newark is preparing a local homelessness plan intended to be consistent with the Home Together 2026 Plan, which will further the objectives of the County plan. The City will maintain a city webpage to (www.newark.org/residents/homelessness) provide a connection to resources for those at risk of, or experiencing homelessness. The City has responded to homelessness needs by proactively partnering with an affordable housing developer and services provider to create and support 124 units of housing for homeless households and people at risk of becoming homeless.

To develop this plan, the City shall work with the appropriate homeless agencies, community stakeholders, and faith-based organizations to identify new strategies, funding, and opportunities to provide new emergency shelter and transitional housing options and address the needs of 40 unsheltered persons (in addition to the completed 124-unit HomeKey project) annually in need of emergency shelter or temporary housing.

HOUSING PLAN 217

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department/City Manager’s office Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Homelessness plan developed by the end of 2024 Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund
PROGRAM H2.6: Work in Partnership with the Newark Unified School District
Work in partnership with the Newark Unified School District to plan for affordable housing production and build upon the existing partnership between the City of Newark and Newark Unified School District Liaison Committee. Collaborate to bring forward cohesive and implementable plans for District owned properties, and expand the accessibility of housing resources for families, educators and staff in the district. This program will also expand housing opportunities throughout the city, into high opportunity, predominantly single family neighborhoods.

Quantified Objective: Develop a strategy in collaboration with the Newark Unified school district and the community on a long term development plan and funding for the redevelopment of school district owned sites.

AB 2295 supports housing development on property owned by a local educational agency for teachers and staff on both active and vacant district owned properties. AB2295 establishes minimum standards for development, including a minimum of 10 units, deed restricted for affordability for 55 years and be offered to district teachers and staff. The units are required to be for low and moderate income households, with thirty percent of units required to be for very low incomes. The development standards are 35 feet, with a minimum density of 30 dwelling units per acre.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Manager’s office, Newark City Council, Newark Unified School District
Timeline: MID-TERM: Program developed by end of year, 2025 Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H2.7: Affordable Housing Development Fund
The city will provide financing for affordable housing construction of at least 343 lower-income units. They are sites 13,11,9 on the sites inventory. The housing will serve very low to moderate income households, with an emphasis on young families, key workers (teachers, first responders, etc.), individuals and families at risk of homelessness, people with disabilities and other special HOUSING PLAN 218

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
housing needs, and low-income senior citizens.
● SAHA Development: 6347-6375 Thornton Avenue
New construction with a total of 56 very low income units, with one on site management unit. 16 units are 3 bedroom units that are suitable for larger families, a housing priority for the city of Newark. The site is located along Thornton Ave, in a moderate resource area as defined by TCAC.
● 37660 Timber Street: Timber Senior Housing
New construction of 78 very low and low income housing units for seniors. The site is located in an area identified as a moderate resource area. The development is close to transit and services – less than a quarter of a mile to a bus station with easy access to downtown Newark and the Fremont and Union City BART stations. Near the site is a retail plaza with restaurants, dentists and optometry offices. The NewPark Mall is a five minute bus ride away and Newark Civic Center is less than a mile from Timber Street. The project is being funded by measure A funds, and a significant contribution from the city of Newark from the affordable housing fund. Construction is slated to begin in 2022. ● Cedar Community Apartments at Towne Place Suites, Project Home Key development As a Project Home Key development, the Cedar community apartments are the reuse of an existing extended stay hotel. The development will result in 124 supportive units affordable to extremely low-income households, with 12 units set aside for veterans and one manager's unit. Cedar Community Apartments is located in an area identified as high resource by TCAC in close proximity to schools, shopping and the Silliman Activity and Family Aquatic Center.

Quantified Objective: Support the development of at least 343 lower-income units.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Council Timeline: Ongoing
Funding Source(s): Affordable Housing Impact Fee Fund, Alameda County Measure A1, Home Key Grant Funds, Launch Initiative
PROGRAM H2.8: Zoning for Missing Middle Housing Types.

Along with the implementation of SB 9 and SB 10 through Program H2.1, the City shall review and amend the Zoning Code and applicable design guidelines to encourage and promote a mix of dwelling types and sizes, specifically missing middle-density housing types (e.g. courtyard housing, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes) to create housing for middle- and moderate-income households and increase the availability of affordable housing in a range of sizes to reduce displacement risk for residents living in overcrowded units or overpaying for housing.

HOUSING PLAN 219

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Quantified Objective: To remove constraints and better encourage small multi-family developments in the RS, RL, and RM zoning districts, particularly in the northeast area of the city, including Lake-Rosemont, Mirabeau, and Mayhews Landing neighborhoods, zoning text amendments will be implemented.

Within 12 months of Housing Element Adoption, staff shall recommend a specific proposal to the city council for consideration and adoption to increase baseline density to at least 15 dwelling units to the acre in key high opportunity areas in RL zones. Recommendations would include amendments to zoning, appropriate development standards to facilitate maximum densities including but not limited to: eliminating minimum lot size requirements, reducing setbacks, and eliminating minimum unit size requirements. In addition, the city will adopt a development standard waiver system for cases when development standards may preclude development to the maximum allowable density. The City shall evaluate the effectiveness of meeting missing middle housing targets of these strategies in 2027, including but not limited to further increasing development intensity in RL zones within the following year to achieve more inclusive neighborhoods throughout the City.

Zoning text amendments to may include, but are not limited to:
● Minimum Lot Size: 5,000 square feet for all building types. ● Minimum Lot Width: 50 feet for all building types.
● Parking Requirements: Parking requirements include a minimum of 1 space per unit for a multifamily dwelling outside the specific plan areas and mixed-use zones, Remove requirements for covered parking spaces, allow parking to be located within required setbacks, and remove guest parking requirements. ● Open Space Requirements: Review 400 square foot/unit
requirement in RL zoning districts.
● Study feasible densities, identify sites, corridors, and neighborhoods for intensification. Develop a strategy to increase allowable densities to at least 15 du/ac, housing choices and affordability in RL and high opportunity areas with a target of 200 moderate-income units in the planning period (as noted in Program H2.1)
Zoning text amendments will be implemented to support the overall strategy to encourage small, multi-family developments.

The City shall evaluate the effectiveness of meeting missing middle housing targets of these strategies by 2027, including but not limited to further increasing development intensity in single family zones within the following year, to achieve more inclusive neighborhoods throughout the City.

HOUSING PLAN 220

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Council Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Community engagement and zoning changes by December 31, 2024
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund HOUSING PLAN 221

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
PROGRAM H2.9: Area Specific Plans
NewPark Place Specific Plan The multi phase redevelopment of a shopping mall, will bring new mixed-use residential development to the area. The City worked closely with Brookfield on entitlements for Phase A, with plans for new mixed income housing and a Costco. Subsequent phases will include additional residential development, small scale retail and pedestrian infrastructure such as bike lanes and human scaled streets.

Though Phase A entitlements have now expired, the City will continue to partner with the developer to implement the Newpark Place Specific Plan to meet the affordable housing goals of the City of Newark.

The original entitled project included a total of 319 units, 29 of which would be affordable (4 very low, 9 low, and 16 moderate). The project included 3,700 square feet of ground floor retail, 12,900 square feet of amenities (such as a bike shop, club room, co-work space, and fitness center), a pool courtyard, and enclosed parking. Along Alpenrose Drive, the structures was planned to be six stories, with five residential levels over ground floor retail and amenities.

Old Town Specific Plan The Old Town Newark Specific Plan, adopted September 23rd 2021, sets forth a community informed plan to support public and private investments in the historic neighborhood. The planning area is envisioned as a mixed-use area that accommodates a range of housing types, retail and service business, expanded public spaces, and mobility improvements. To anticipate this development, this Specific Plan:
• Refines zoning regulations to align with market conditions and balance community desires for form and massing
• Develops programs to support investment in the community and continued affordability for people who live and work in the community today
• Identifies streetscape improvements for Thornton Avenue • Provides scenarios and prototypes for how future development could build out in the Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) and Residential Medium (RM) Zoning designations Zoning Amendments: Modifies zoning standards in the Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) and Residential Medium (RM) districts to align development standards, use requirements, and design standards with current market conditions and building types.

Streetscape Improvements: Identifies a streetscape plan for Thornton Avenue as a catalyst for neighborhood revitalization and investment of new housing. The streetscape plan will complement improvements in the private realm and create a safe destination for residents and visitors, whether on bike, foot, or in a vehicle.

Bayside Newark A Transit Oriented Development community to be built next to the proposed Dumbarton Commuter Rail station. Due to the proximity of high capacity transit, this area is also a HOUSING PLAN 222

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
priority development area for Newark.

On 9/22/22, The City of Newark approved land use modifications proposed by Lennar Home Builder, FMC Corporation, and Integral Communities within the FMC Willow and Grand Park portion of the Bayside Newark Specific Plan area. The proposed modifications would redevelop the 22.1-acre site into a 370-unit multi-family community including 279 townhouse units, a

1.6-acre mixed-use area with 3,600 sq. ft. of retail, club room, fitness center, and 90 affordable units (plus 1 manager unit) within a 6-story building, a 5-acre community park (Grand Park), and a 1,485 sq. ft. community building, along with approx. 1.8 acres set aside for the future Dumbarton transit station.

The South Site of the project, known as “FMC Willow South”, (Grand Park, PA 3, and PA 4) would include a 1,485 square foot community building, 123 multifamily units, and 92 townhomes for a total of 215 units. The 123 units would be UA Split (multifamily), and 92 would be UA Towns (townhomes). The UA Stacks would have 5 floorplans ranging from 1,696 square feet to 2,015 square feet. The UA Splits would have a standard option with 4 floorplans ranging from 1,307 square feet to 2,108 square feet and a 4-story option with 4 floorplans ranging from 1,307 square feet to 2,422 square feet. The homes would be 3-5 stories high.

Quantified Objective: 1,594 total units for the three specific plan areas. 147 very low, 101 low, 82 moderate and 1,263 above moderate units.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE, MID- and LONG-TERM: Development underway and though 2031
Funding Source(s): Development within Area Specific Plans are privately financed.

Community Development Maintenance Fund
PROGRAM H2.10: Single Room Occupancy Housing
In order to expand the housing options in Newark, the city will support a wider variety of housing types that would be accessible for low-income working people, retirees, people receiving disability payments and newcomers to the area. Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units provide small units for a single person, with shared amenities such as kitchens or bathrooms. Along with commitments in Program H4.10: Zoning Ordinance Amendments for Special Needs Housing, the City shall update the zoning code to facilitate the development of more SROs and small units.

Quantified Objective: In order to support an increase in this housing type in the city, SROs will be permitted use in Residential Medium Density, Commercial Mixed Use and Residential High Density, with a priority for SRO development to occur along transit corridors. Review and update existing development standards (Chapter 17.26.230), including parking requirements, to ensure HOUSING PLAN 223

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
they are not a barrier to the development of SROs. City fees for SRO projects will remain in line with fees for multifamily projects.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: updates to land use regulations in zoning code by early 2024. SRO development standards and fee requirements to be reviewed and updated as necessary by December 2024.

Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H2.11: Catalyze the development of small sites
through a lot consolidation incentive program
The city commits to continuing improvement, evaluation, and adjustment of programs during the housing element cycle to ensure quantified objectives are being met.

Quantified Objective: Implement a lot consolidation incentive program to catalyze development on small sites. The program would include deferring fees specifically for consolidation, expediting permit processing, providing flexible development standards such as setback requirements, reduced parking or increased heights, committing resources for development of affordable housing on small sites, and/or increasing allowable density or lot coverage.

In addition, the city will adopt a development standard waiver system for cases when city requirements may preclude development on small sites.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: MID-TERM: Review and implement in mid 2025
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H2.12: Ensure maximum residential densities are achievable
The city commits to annually review, and amend as necessary, the Municipal Code to ensure that maximum allowable densities are achievable on sites zoned for housing.

Quantified Objective: Review, and amend as necessary, city requirements and development standards in all zones that allow residential development to ensure that maximum densities are achievable. This includes those standards and requirements related to maximum units per building, maximum building HOUSING PLAN 224

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
coverage, required open space per unit, minimum lot area, setbacks, height limits, parking (also see Program H3.5) and limits on allowable densities. Specifically, remove the MUP requirement for buildings over 35 feet in the RM and RH zones and review whether the 60-foot height limit in the CMU zone (outside of the Old Town Specific Plan area) is a constraint on development and make needed changes, or allowing for flexibility to achieve maximum allowable densities.

The analysis will consider impacts on cost, supply, housing choice, affordability, timing, approval certainty and ability to achieve maximum densities and include programs to address identified constraints.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: City will initially review city requirements and development standards in 2024 and on an annual basis thereafter, and amend the appropriate requirements and standards as necessary to the Municipal Code.

Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H3.1: Streamline Ministerial Approval Permit
Procedures
The City will review and update its approval processes to ensure it accommodates streamlined applications, pursuant to Senate Bill 35.

Quantified Objective: Prepare and publish administrative procedures by 2024 for the processing of housing developments eligible for streamlined review pursuant to SB 35.

Assign a staff member to support the streamlined development review process. This staff person will be a point of contact for affordable housing developers that will work to create a clear and streamlined process.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: MID-TERM: Prepare and publish new procedures by 2024, assign staff as necessary to achieve the objective by June 30, 2026
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H3.2: Develop objective design standards for single family and multi family developments and infill housing.

HOUSING PLAN 225

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Identify parking standards, setbacks and height standards to facilitate development that is responsive to fluctuating costs and results in high quality design.

Quantified Objective: Develop new objective design standards that result in designs that reflect the needs of the community while supporting new developments that are responsive to local ecological conditions and climate change while reducing development costs where applicable.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: MID-TERM: Ordinance and zoning changes implemented by June 30, 2024
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H3.3: Assess and update impact fees
Assess and update impact fees as required to ensure that it is in line with neighboring jurisdictions and not a hindrance to development.

Quantified Objective: The city will undergo a comprehensive impact fee study to assess and update the impact fee structure to reflect the needs of the community and ensure fee structure is in line with neighboring jurisdictions. ● Currently the policy in the Old Town Specific Plan area is to temporarily reduce fees to encourage development.
● The city will provide a fee waiver for senior and housing for people with disabilities
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department/Finance Department Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Study would be part of the Affordable Housing work plan.

Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H3.4: Adjust zoning to allow mixed use in current Commercial zones
In order to align zoning with planned development areas and associated policies of developing pedestrian friendly, walkable neighborhoods, the city proposes to utilize State laws SB6 and AB 2011 to encourage residential and mixed use developments in current commercial zones. A project proposed under SB 6 may be either a 100-percent residential project or a mixed-use project where at least 50 percent of the square footage is dedicated to residential uses. SB 6 projects are not exempt from CEQA but need not provide any affordable housing. SB 6 projects are required to pay prevailing wages and utilize a "skilled and trained workforce." Although there HOUSING PLAN 226

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
is a possibility that including commercial space in a mixed use development could be viewed as a constraint, the community and City Council are interested in mixed use, walkable environments that support a variety of uses.

Quantified Objective: Amend the City's Neighborhood Commercial and Community Commercial zones and land use code to create objective standards for mixed-uses and facilitate the redevelopment of commercial sites to mixed-use.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Program developed by June 30, 2025 Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H3.5: Parking standards update and study
Parking can be a significant portion of the cost of developing new housing. Research and develop new parking standards for residential developments that align with neighboring jurisdictions and are reflective of the community needs and development costs. Although the Dumbarton rail project is proposed for Newark, there is no firm timeline for its development. Due to limited frequent public transportation in the city, many residents are car dependent in order to access employment and other basic needs which reflects the extent of parking reductions.

Quantified Objective: Update the Zoning Ordinance to encourage infill development, including housing for persons with disabilities, senior housing, accessory dwelling units. Engage with the development community to discuss changes to parking minimums. Identify and implement parking requirement reductions in NMC 17.23.50, eliminating parking minimums for ADUs, and/or unbundled parking from the dwelling unit for large housing projects. Revised parking changes include:
● Senior Parking: Reduce from 1 space per unit to .5 spaces per unit ● Remove parking requirements for ADUs
● Two Unit Dwelling : Remove the guest parking requirement ● Multi Unit Dwelling:
○ Reduce covered parking requirement to 0.5 spaces per unit ○ Reduce guest parking to 0.25 spaces per unit
○ Reduce overall parking requirement for studios and one bedrooms to 1 space per unit.
○ Reduce 2-plus bedroom requirement to 1.5 spaces per unit with 0.25 spaces for guest parking.

Provide more opportunities for alternatives to individual automobile such as:
● CAR SHARING
HOUSING PLAN 227

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
One stall reduction for each stall dedicated and designated for use by a locally-operating car sharing program, such as Zipcar. ● ON-STREET PARKING CREDIT
One-half stall reduction for each new public, on-street parking stall provided as part of a project (through the installation of angled or perpendicular spaces with bulb-outs and curbs or other methods).
● BICYCLE PARKING CREDIT
One stall reduction for every five, non-required bicycle parking spaces provided on the site (beyond the standard requirements.

Analyze and revise as necessary existing standards for SROs, small multifamily (Missing Middle), and shared parking.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Parking requirement updates in zoning code by mid 2025 Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H3.6: By-Right Approval of Projects with 20
Percent Affordable Units on “Reused” Sites.

Pursuant to AB 1397, amend the Zoning Ordinance to require by-right approval of housing development that includes 20 percent of the units as housing affordable to lower-income households, on sites being used to meet the 6th Cycle RHNA that represent “reuse sites” previously identified in the 4th and 5th Cycles Housing Element. The nine sites listed in Table 6-2 will be adjusted by text amendment to accommodate the lower income RHNA as needed.

Table 6-2: Assessors Parcels Numbers Subject to AB 139, 2022 Site Number Assessor Parcel Number
8 92-30-16-2; 92-30-15-2; 92-30-17-2; 92-30-14-3; 92-30-18-4 9 92-31-15; 92-31-16-2
15 92A-900-1-2
16 92-29-13; 92-29-19-2; 92-29-18-2; 92-29-17-2; 92-29-16-2;92-51-2-3; 92-29-20-2; 92-51-5-3
17 92A-2125-17
92A-2125-11-2’ 92A-2125-13
18 92A-2585-32
19 92-50-13
HOUSING PLAN 228

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Site Number Assessor Parcel Number
21 92-255-11
22 92A-2375-32
23 92-131-3; 92-131-2-4; 92-131-1-9
Quantified Objective: 602 total units, 304 very low and low income units, 67 moderate income units and 231 above moderate income units.

Responsible Agency: Newark City Council, Community Development Department, Planning Commission
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Text amendment within one year of Housing Element Adoption
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H4.1: Develop Anti-Displacement Programs for the Old-Town Newark Specific Plan Area.

Quantified Objective: Apply local preference ordinance to new residential development in the Old Town area. Convene an Old Town community working group composed of residents, youth and business owners in the neighborhood.

This group will work with staff to develop neighborhood priorities for an anti displacement program for the Old Town Newark Specific Plan area that supports community residents and small businesses to stay in place.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Local preference policy, 2024. MID-TERM: Anti displacement implementation program developed by June 30, 2026 Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H4.2: Develop a Tenant/Community Opportunity to Purchase Policy
Develop programs to support renters stay in their homes and create opportunities for home ownership through a Tenant Opportunity to Purchase or Community Opportunity to Purchase (COPA and TOPA). A TOPA/COPA policy can also facilitate homeownership for tenants by creating limited equity housing cooperatives or other ownership models, enabling increased HOUSING PLAN 229

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
wealth-building opportunities for BIPOC communities who have historically been denied access to homeownership.

Work with community members, community-based, mission-driven entities, housing providers, real estate professionals, and other relevant stakeholders to review best practices and lessons learned to develop a report with recommendations for the implementation of a small sites program and COPA / TOPA policy in the City of Newark.

Quantified Objective: The recommendations will include a framework for an ordinance, administrative and supportive policies, program process and design, community engagement plan, and identification of costs and funding sources for implementation.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: MID-TERM: COPA and TOPA ordinance and program developed by June 30, 2026
Funding Source(s): HOME funds
PROGRAM H4.3: Develop a Just Cause Eviction Ordinance
Just Cause ordinances prohibit landlords from ending a tenancy or evicting a tenant without a specific reason.

Quantified Objective: Develop and implement a just cause eviction ordinance for the city to cover tenants under state law when AB 1482 expires in 2029. Support 15 low income residents per year to stay in their homes.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Council Timeline: MID-TERM: Program developed by June 30, 2025
Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund
PROGRAM H4.4: Small Sites Program
Develop a small sites funding funding program that enables nonprofit housing providers to acquire market-rate multifamily properties that are less than 25 units and convert these buildings to affordable housing.

Quantified Objective: Develop an RFP for small sites program. Recipients of funding from the Small Sites Program sign a 55-year regulatory agreement that governs the income limits for tenants and rents that can be charged. The program will HOUSING PLAN 230

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
focus on the Old Town/ Central area, identified as vulnerable to displacement, and with higher concentrations of low income residents.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: MID-TERM: Program developed by June 30, 2027
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H4.5: Connect Residents to Existing Shared
Housing Programs
With community partners, connect residents to existing shared housing programs to support those in need of affordable housing and seniors in need of additional income to remain in their homes.

Quantified Objective: Work to connect 20 residents per year to existing shared housing resource programs through non profit partners for Newark such as the Home Match program.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Program implemented by June 30, 2025 Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund
PROGRAM H4.6: Support Tenant Stability Though Minimum
Lease Terms and Relocation Assistance.

Quantified Objective: Develop an ordinance outlining minimum lease terms and relocation assistance for renters
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Program developed by June 30, 2024 Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund
PROGRAM H4.7: Identify Housing Opportunities For Those
With Developmental Disabilities
HOUSING PLAN 231

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Work with community partners such as the Housing Consortium of the East Bay, to identify scattered smaller parcels that would be suitable for affordable housing, and the inclusion of units in larger housing developments for those with developmental disabilities.

Quantified Objective: 20 units to increase housing opportunities for those with developmental disabilities in Newark.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Coordination with housing developers and community partners by June 30, 2024
Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund
PROGRAM H4.8: Connect Residents with Foreclosure
assistance.

Quantified Objective: Connect residents with existing foreclosure prevention resources for Alameda County to stem the displacement of 20 low and moderate income residents. With a focus on Hispanic/ Latinx, Indigenous and Black residents.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Program support by June 30, 2024
Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund
PROGRAM H4.9: No Net Loss of Units
To facilitate place-based revitalization for households at risk of displacement due to new development, the City will require replacement housing units subject to the requirements of Government Code, Section 65915, subdivision (c)(3), when any new development (residential, mixed use, or nonresidential) occurs on a site that has been occupied by or restricted for the use of lower income households at any time during the previous five years. This requirement applies to non-vacant sites and vacant sites with previous residential uses that have been vacated or demolished.

Quantified Objective: Replace any of the units if (a) they are planned to be demolished for purposes of building new housing, and (b) they are determined to be occupied by low income residents.

HOUSING PLAN 232

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department,
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: The replacement requirement will be implemented immediately and applied as applications on identified sites are received and processed.

Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H4.10: Zoning Ordinance Amendments for Special
Needs Housing
The City of Newark, through its Zoning Ordinance, provides opportunities for special needs housing, including uses such as Group Residential, Residential Care Facilities, Single Room Occupancies, Supportive Housing, and Transitional Housing, and Emergency Shelters. However, the locations where these uses are allowed are limited. Along with commitments in Program H2.10, the City shall prepare and adopt the following amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to allow housing for special needs groups consistent with State law:
● Allow “low barrier navigation center” developments by right in mixed-use zones and nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses, consistent with Government Code Section 65662.
● Allow for the by-right approval of 100 percent affordable developments that include a percentage of supportive housing units, either 25 percent or 12 units, whichever is greater, to be allowed without a conditional use permit or other discretionary review in all zoning districts where multifamily and mixed-use development is permitted, consistent with Government Code Section 65651(a).
● Ensure the identified zone has available sites with capacity to accommodate at least 32 shelter beds, using the methodology outlined in Government Code section 65583 subdivision (a)(4), and that the identified zones have sites located near amenities and services that serve people experiencing homelessness, which may include health care, transportation, retail, employment, and social services. ● Allow large Residential Care Facilities for 7 or more people as a permitted use in the Residential Low Density, Residential Medium Density, and Residential High Density zones.

The facilities are subject to the same requirements as other residential uses of the same type in these zones.
● Expand the zones where single-room occupancy units (SROs) are a permitted use to RM, RH, and CMU districts.
● Allow employee and farmworker housing consistent with California Health and Safety Code Section 17021.5(b) Section 17021.6.
● Revise the definition of “emergency shelter” to include other interim interventions, including but not limited to, navigation centers, bridge housing, and respite or recuperative care, per Government Code 65583. The City will also confirm zones utilized for emergency shelters allow residential uses, confirm they have sufficient capacity and proximity to HOUSING PLAN 233

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
services based on statutory formulas and review to ensure that the appropriate development standards are in place to encourage the development of emergency shelters. ● Revise the City’s definition of “Family” in the municipal code to remove provisions requiring shared living expenses or maintaining a single lease or rental agreement. ● Review and revise the City’s reasonable accommodation procedure to eliminate constraints for persons with disabilities, particularly the finding (a) that requires the request to be necessary “… due to the physical characteristics of the property and the proposed use or structure or other circumstances, including, but not limited to, topography, noise exposure, irregular property boundaries, or other unusual circumstance.”
Quantified Objective: Ensure compliance with State law
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Zoning amendments completed by October 26, 2024, including zoning related to emergency shelters within one year of adoption.

Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund HOUSING PLAN 234

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
PROGRAM H4.11: Scattered Site Housing for Persons
Experiencing Homelessness
As funds become available, the City shall partner with other Alameda County cities and organizations like Bay Area Community Services (BACS) and Abode Housing to apply for funds to support the acquisition and conversion of single-family homes and hotels/motels to supportive shared housing for people experiencing homelessness. If the project is awarded funds and a partner organization acquires a property in Newark, the City will record a 55-year regulatory agreement against the subject property restricting the rents for extremely low-income households and establishing property maintenance and management standards. Staff will work with partners and the other participating cities to refine the program goals and secure matching funding from Alameda County HOME Consortium.

Quantified Objective: Conversion of a Homekey-funded hotel containing 124 units for households experiencing homelessness and households at risk of homelessness was completed in 2023. Through a scattered-sites program, purchase 1-2 single-family properties in partnership with nonprofits utilizing available funds to provide extremely low-income housing units for persons experiencing homelessness, with a goal of identifying the majority of sites in high resource census tracts.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: Homekey-funded hotel conversion will be complete in 2023.

Scattered-site program compete in 2025-2026, subject to the availability of federal, state and local funding e.

Funding Source(s): Federal, state, and local funding sources, including Lanterman Act funds or Project Homekey.

PROGRAM H5.1: First-Time Homebuyer Assistance
Bring home ownership within reach for Newark residents. Develop a BMR homeownership program, and down payment assistance programs, with a focus on first time home buyers and BIPOC residents with low home ownership rates. The City will participate in the Alameda County Housing & Community Development Department Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) and Down Payment Assistance (DPA) programs to provide down payment assistance to expand homeownership opportunities in Newark. Down payment assistance funds provided by the County may be used to leverage monies from other grants to provide additional assistance with the intent to make homeownership more attainable for families.

Quantified Objective: The city will target an average of four households for down payment HOUSING PLAN 235

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
assistance each year, with a focus on recruitment of moderate income BIPOC households.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Program developed by June 30, 2024 as part of the Affordable Housing work plan
Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund, potentially CDBG funds.

PROGRAM H5.2: Affordable Housing Development Programs
Resolution 10184 to ensure an adequate amount of affordable housing through three programs.

1. Percentage of Affordable Units to mitigate the effects of new development. The city utilizes a percentage of units for very low, low and moderate income units to be included in the development of new housing.

2. Density Bonus Law. The city will offer developers the opportunity to utilize the state density Density Bonus ( Section 17.19) for an increase in housing units affordable to very low, low and moderate income households or seniors. Concessions are also available under the density bonus law such as reduced parking standards and setbacks, and allowing tandem or uncovered parking.

3. Affordable Housing fee program. This ordinance is codified in Chapter 17.18 of the Municipal Code. The fee is based on square footage of the project: The fee is calculated per square foot for floor area above 1,000 square feet, excluding garages, carports or common areas.

Quantified Objective: 778 housing units over the period of the Housing Element. 326 very low, 326 low income units, 126 moderate units
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Council Timeline: Ongoing from existing program
Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund
PROGRAM H5.3: Public Lands for dedicated affordable
housing.

The city, in compliance with the Surplus Land Act will develop and implement programs and policies to further Increase the utilization of public land for affordable housing with particular emphasis in high resource and gentrifying areas to support housing mobility and anti displacement efforts.

HOUSING PLAN 236

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Quantified Objective: 1. Rezone PF (Public Facility) zoned land to allow affordable housing as a permitted use, by-right.

2. Rezone publicly owned land, from Single Family to Mid rise Residential for the development of 20 new housing units targeted for disabled, single parent and low and moderate income households.

3. Develop a public land framework / policy that enables a coordinated interagency approach to public land reuse.

4. Maintain long-term ownership of public sites to ensure permanent affordability and long-term financial benefits.

5. Work with the school district to reuse excess and underutilized school sites and meet the needs of the local education workforce for the creation of 50 new units of housing for low and moderate income households.

6. Consider interim uses of public sites that can provide amenities to the community (e.g., housing for those experiencing homelessness, art installations and non profit art spaces)

7. The City shall also continue to monitor the status of available land owned by other public agencies and actively work with developers that may wish to develop such properties for affordable housing.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Public land framework developed by June 30, 2025, rezonings to occur by December 31, 2025
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H5.4: Affordable Housing Overlay Zone
Develop an affordable housing overlay zone to incentivize the construction of affordable housing for very low, low, and moderate income households in targeted areas.

Quantified Objective: Work to develop a series of incentives such as reduced parking requirements, and fast tracked permitting to bring increased production of affordable rental housing to the Four Corners area and other high opportunity areas of the city.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: MID-TERM: Program developed by June 30, 2026
Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund
HOUSING PLAN 237

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
PROGRAM H6.1: In Response to Multi-Year Drought Conditions, Support a Community Reduction of Local Water Usage
Quantified Objective: Develop a city wide water wise garden challenge, partner with local non profit organizations and city departments to support the transformation yards and medians with drought tolerant plants. Update municipal code to incorporate language on drought resistant landscaping.

Responsible Agency: Public Works Department, Community Development Department Timeline: MID-TERM: Program developed by June 30, 2026
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H6.2: Encourage Water Utilities to Participate in BayREN’s Water Upgrades $ave Program
In order to make water efficiency improvements available to residents at little-to-no up-front cost.

Provide information to residents on incentives for energy efficiency and electrification from organizations such as PG&E, BayREN, and others.

Quantified Objective: Provide information in citywide mailings twice a year and post on City of Newark website and social media outlets.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Public Works Department Timeline: MID-TERM: Program developed by June 30, 2025
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H6.3: Cool Roofs for Cool Homes
In response to increased urban heat events, work to ensure that homes are incorporating designs to support cooler interiors.

Quantified Objective: Amend the City’s building ordinance to exceed Title 24 standards by requiring cool roofs for all new or replacement roofs.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Public Works Department Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Program developed by June 30, 2025 HOUSING PLAN 238

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H6.4: Flood Risk Disclosure for New Development As a significant portion of Newark falls within the 100 and 500 year flood plain, ensuring that development is built in response to climate change.

Quantified Objective: Require developments in the flooding and other high-risk inundation areas to disclose flood risks and identify appropriate flood mitigation actions for incorporation into project design.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Public Works Department Timeline: MID-TERM: Program developed by June 30, 2025
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H7.1: Training for Voucher Program and Landlord Responsibilities
Develop training programs in collaboration with Alameda County Housing Authority for property owners to understand the housing choice voucher program and landlord responsibilities.

Quantified Objective: Hold two workshops annually for rental property owners/managers Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: MID-TERM: Program developed by June 30, 2025
Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund
PROGRAM H7.2: Increase City Access, and Partner With
Community Organizations To Ensure That Community
Members Have Access To Tenant Rights Information and
Fair Housing In Multiple Languages.

Expand education and outreach on fair housing laws and source of income discrimination to landlords, property owners with accessory dwelling units, and property owners seeking building permits for rental properties.

HOUSING PLAN 239

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Quantified Objective: ● Cocreation of tenants rights information in collaboration with local community organizations made accessible in culturally relevant ways and in a variety of formats such as videos, flyers, social media and public workshops.
● The city is working to install and implement the community development information module on the city’s website. The city expects to have this operational by the end of 2023 or early 2024.

The City has launched a service called “TextMyGov” which is a streamlined way to interact with community members on various topics and services. Users can send questions or concerns via text on mobile devices. Responses are provided via a return text with links to additional information and city services. Users can also register to receive push notifications via text on various city topics such as general city affairs (in English and Spanish), City Council meetings, and community events.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: IMMEDIATE: Program implemented by June 30, 2024 Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund
PROGRAM H7.3: Work with Newark Unified School District to Distribute Housing Resources
Work with Newark Unified School District to distribute housing resources to families enrolled in the district per state law AB27 that directs schools, including charter schools to identify homeless children and youth, requires annual staff training, and mandatory website postings of resources.

Quantified Objective: Information on housing resources and general family support resources for district families distributed through multiple sources to increase accessibility and that families are connected with housing resources for those experiencing homelessness. Translated into relevant languages for families in Newark. An example would be information published on the website.

Responsible Agency: City of Newark Homeless Committee, Newark Unified School District Timeline: MID-TERM: Program developed by June 30, 2025
Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund
HOUSING PLAN 240

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
PROGRAM H7.4: Affirmatively Market Affordable Housing
Affirmatively market affordable housing rental and for sale units, through the online affordable housing listing portals such as the Alameda Housing Portal, Doorway and elsewhere, to underrepresented groups such as people with disabilities, extremely low income households and BIPOC households.

Quantified Objective: Information on housing resources and general family support resources for district families distributed through multiple sources to increase accessibility and that families are connected with housing resources for those experiencing homelessness. Translated into relevant languages for families in Newark. An example would be information published on the website.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City of Newark Homeless Committee, Newark Unified School District
Timeline: MID-TERM: Program developed by June 30, 2025
Funding Source(s): Housing Impact Fee Fund
PROGRAM H7.5: Monitor housing programs through a
mid-cycle review
The city commits to continuing improvement, evaluation, and adjustment of programs during the housing element cycle to ensure quantified objectives are being met.

Quantified Objective: Review quantified objectives for housing construction, rehabilitation, and conservation
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: MID-TERM: Programs reviewed by end of 2026
Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund PROGRAM H7.6: Monitor annual progress towards meeting the City’s RHNA goals
The city commits to continuing improvement, evaluation, and adjustment of programs during the HOUSING PLAN 241

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
housing element cycle to ensure progress is being made toward the City’s RHNA goals.

Quantified Objective: Monitor housing sites, residential development and future development potential, and programs annually. Survey property owners of sites in the sites inventory to stay current on the project viability and development climate. Report findings through the Annual Progress Report. Make adjustments to programs as needed.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeline: ANNUALLY: The city will evaluate planned, approved and pending projects for progress toward completion every other year and if necessary, take alternative actions (e.g., additional sites or rezoning) within one year.

Funding Source(s): Community Development Maintenance Fund HOUSING PLAN 242

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Quantified Objectives
One of the requirements of State law (California Government Code Section 65583[b]) is that the Housing Element contain quantified objectives for the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing. State law recognizes that the total housing needs identified by a community may exceed available resources and the community’s ability to satisfy this need. Under these circumstances, the quantified objectives need not be identical to the total housing needs.

The quantified objectives shown in Table 6-3 represent targets. They are estimates based on experience, anticipated funding levels, and housing market conditions. The quantified objectives are not designed to be minimum requirements. The quantified objectives are based largely upon implementation programs that have measurable outcomes. However, the Housing Element contains several policies and implementation programs that reduce barriers and create opportunities for affordable housing. These policies and programs are essential to meeting the City’s housing needs but are more qualitative and difficult to quantify.

Table 6-3: List of Quantified Objectives for the 2023 to 2031 Planning Period Action Very Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate
Total
RHNA 464 268 318 824 1,874
New Construction
Pipeline Projects 274 66 26 891 1,257
Program H2.1 and H2.8 Missing Middle 200 200
Program H2.2 Accessory Dwelling Units 48 48 48 16 160
Rehabilitation
Program H1.1 Housing Rehabilitation and
Repair
14 34 34 34 102
Program H1.2 Rental Inspection and Repair 32 32 32 96
Conservation, Preservation, + Assistance
Program H4.3 Tenant Protections 50 40 30 120
Program H4.8 and H5.1 First Time Home
Buyer and Foreclosure
10 14 24
Program H4.7 Disability 10 10 20
Program H4.5 Shared Housing 80 80 160
Source: City of Newark, 2023
14 Community Development Block Grant Status Report. April 5, 2023. An average of 9 units per year in a 10 year period.

HOUSING PLAN 243

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING

APPENDIX A HOUSING NEEDS
APPENDIX A HOUSING NEEDS A-1
1 HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT:

NEWARK
ABAG/MTC Staff and Baird + Driskell Community Planning
2021-04-02
2 0.1 Table of content

0.1 Table of content.................................................................................................... 2

0.2 List of figures ....................................................................................................... 3

0.3 List of tables ........................................................................................................ 3 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 5 2 Summary of Key Facts .................................................................................................. 6 3 Looking to the Future: Regional Housing Needs .................................................................. 9

3.1 Regional Housing Needs Determination......................................................................... 9

3.2 Regional Housing Needs Allocation .............................................................................. 9 4 Population, Employment and Household Characteristics ..................................................... 11

4.1 Population ..........................................................................................................11

4.2 Age...................................................................................................................12

4.3 Race and Ethnicity ................................................................................................14

4.4 Employment Trends ...............................................................................................15

4.4.1 Balance of Jobs and Workers...............................................................................15

4.4.2 Sector Composition ..........................................................................................19

4.4.3 Unemployment ...............................................................................................20

4.5 Extremely Low-Income Households.............................................................................21

4.6 Tenure...............................................................................................................25

4.7 Displacement .......................................................................................................29 5 Housing Stock Characteristics ...................................................................................... 31

5.1 Housing Types, Year Built, Vacancy, and Permits............................................................31

5.2 Assisted Housing Developments At-Risk of Conversion......................................................34

5.3 Substandard Housing..............................................................................................35

5.4 Home and Rent Values............................................................................................36

5.5 Overpayment and Overcrowding ................................................................................39 6 Special Housing Needs................................................................................................ 48

6.1 Large Households ..................................................................................................48

6.2 Female-Headed Households......................................................................................49

6.3 Seniors...............................................................................................................51

6.4 People with Disabilities ..........................................................................................52

6.5 Homelessness.......................................................................................................54

6.6 Farmworkers .......................................................................................................59

6.7 Non-English Speakers .............................................................................................60 3 0.2 List of figures
Figure 1: Population Growth Trends .......................................................................................12 Figure 2: Population by Age, 2000-2019...................................................................................13 Figure 3: Senior and Youth Population by Race ..........................................................................14 Figure 4: Population by Race, 2000-2019 .................................................................................15 Figure 5: Jobs in a Jurisdiction .............................................................................................16 Figure 6: Workers by Earnings, by Jurisdiction as Place of Work and Place of Residence.........................17 Figure 7: Jobs-Worker Ratios, By Wage Group ...........................................................................18 Figure 8: Jobs-Household Ratio .............................................................................................19 Figure 9: Resident Employment by Industry ..............................................................................20 Figure 10: Unemployment Rate.............................................................................................21 Figure 11: Households by Household Income Level......................................................................23 Figure 12: Household Income Level by Tenure ...........................................................................24 Figure 13: Poverty Status by Race..........................................................................................25 Figure 14: Housing Tenure...................................................................................................26 Figure 15: Housing Tenure by Race of Householder .....................................................................27 Figure 16: Housing Tenure by Age..........................................................................................28 Figure 17: Housing Tenure by Housing Type ..............................................................................29 Figure 18: Households by Displacement Risk and Tenure...............................................................30 Figure 19: Housing Type Trends ............................................................................................31 Figure 20: Housing Units by Year Structure Built ........................................................................32 Figure 21: Vacant Units by Type............................................................................................33 Figure 22: Substandard Housing Issues.....................................................................................36 Figure 23: Home Values of Owner-Occupied Units.......................................................................37 Figure 24: Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI)...............................................................................37 Figure 25: Contract Rents for Renter-Occupied Units...................................................................38 Figure 26: Median Contract Rent ...........................................................................................39 Figure 27: Cost Burden by Tenure ..........................................................................................40 Figure 28: Cost Burden by Income Level ..................................................................................41 Figure 29: Cost Burden by Race.............................................................................................42 Figure 30: Cost Burden by Household Size ................................................................................43 Figure 31: Cost-Burdened Senior Households by Income Level ........................................................44 Figure 32: Overcrowding by Tenure and Severity ........................................................................45 Figure 33: Overcrowding by Income Level and Severity ................................................................46 Figure 34: Overcrowding by Race...........................................................................................47 Figure 35: Household Size by Tenure ......................................................................................48 Figure 36: Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms .......................................................................49 Figure 37: Household Type ..................................................................................................50 Figure 38: Female-Headed Households by Poverty Status ..............................................................51 Figure 39: Senior Households by Income and Tenure....................................................................52 Figure 40: Disability by Type ................................................................................................53 Figure 41: Homelessness by Household Type and Shelter Status, Alameda County ................................55 Figure 42: Racial Group Share of General and Homeless Populations, Alameda County ..........................56 Figure 43: Latinx Share of General and Homeless Populations, Alameda County...................................57 Figure 44: Characteristics for the Population Experiencing Homelessness, Alameda County.....................58 Figure 45: Farm Operations and Farm Labor by County, Alameda County...........................................60 Figure 46: Population with Limited English Proficiency.................................................................61

0.3 List of tables
4 Table 1: Illustrative Regional Housing Needs Allocation from Draft Methodology ..................................10 Table 2: Population Growth Trends ........................................................................................11 Table 3: Housing Permitting.................................................................................................33 Table 4: Assisted Units at Risk of Conversion.............................................................................34 Table 5: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Age ..........................................................54 Table 6: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Residence...................................................54 Table 7: Students in Local Public Schools Experiencing Homelessness ...............................................59 Table 8: Migrant Worker Student Population .............................................................................59 5 1 INTRODUCTION
The Bay Area continues to see growth in both population and jobs, which means more housing of various types and sizes is needed to ensure that residents across all income levels, ages, and abilities have a place to call home. While the number of people drawn to the region over the past 30 years has steadily increased, housing production has stalled, contributing to the housing shortage that communities are experiencing today. In many cities, this has resulted in residents being priced out, increased traffic congestion caused by longer commutes, and fewer people across incomes being able to purchase homes or meet surging rents.

The 2023-2031 Housing Element Update provides a roadmap for how to meet our growth and housing challenges. Required by the state, the Housing Element identifies what the existing housing conditions and community needs are, reiterates goals, and creates a plan for more housing. The Housing Element is an integral part of the General Plan, which guides the policies of Newark. 6 2 SUMMARY OF KEY FACTS
• Population – Generally, the population of the Bay Area continues to grow because of natural growth and because the strong economy draws new residents to the region. The population of Newark increased by 15.3% from 2000 to 2020, which is above the growth rate of the Bay Area. • Age – In 2019, Newark’s youth population under the age of 18 was 10,015 and senior population 65 and older was 6,038. These age groups represent 21.2% and 12.8%, respectively, of Newark’s population.
• Race/Ethnicity – In 2020, 23.7% of Newark’s population was White while 3.9% was African American, 33.9% was Asian, and 34.8% was Latinx. People of color in Newark comprise a proportion above the overall proportion in the Bay Area as a whole.1 • Employment – Newark residents most commonly work in the Manufacturing, Wholesale & Transportation industry. From January 2010 to January 2021, the unemployment rate in Newark decreased by 3.7 percentage points. Since 2010, the number of jobs located in the jurisdiction increased by 4,650 (29.9%). Additionally, the jobs-household ratio in Newark has increased from 1.33 in 2002 to 1.49 jobs per household in 2018. • Number of Homes – The number of new homes built in the Bay Area has not kept pace with the demand, resulting in longer commutes, increasing prices, and exacerbating issues of displacement and homelessness. The number of homes in Newark increased, 11.2% from 2010 to 2020, which is above the growth rate for Alameda County and above the growth rate of the region’s housing stock during this time period.
• Home Prices – A diversity of homes at all income levels creates opportunities for all Newark residents to live and thrive in the community.
– Ownership The largest proportion of homes had a value in the range of $750k-$1M in 2019. Home prices increased by 133.9% from 2010 to 2020. – Rental Prices – The typical contract rent for an apartment in Newark was $2,110 in 2019. Rental prices increased by 61.1% from 2009 to 2019. To rent a typical apartment without cost burden, a household would need to make $84,720 per year.2 • Housing Type – It is important to have a variety of housing types to meet the needs of a community today and in the future. In 2020, 69.6% of homes in Newark were single family detached, 9.5% were single family attached, 4.4% were small multifamily (2-4 units), and 16.5% were medium or large multifamily (5+ units). Between 2010 and 2020, the number of singlefamily units increased more than multi-family units. Generally, in Newark, the share of the

1 The Census Bureau’s American Community Survey accounts for ethnic origin separate from racial identity. The numbers reported here use an accounting of both such that the racial categories are shown exclusive of Latinx status, to allow for an accounting of the Latinx population regardless of racial identity. The term Hispanic has historically been used to describe people from numerous Central American, South American, and Caribbean countries. In recent years, the term Latino or Latinx has become preferred. This report generally uses Latinx, but occasionally when discussing US Census data, we use Hispanic or Non-Hispanic, to clearly link to the data source. 2 Note that contract rents may differ significantly from, and often being lower than, current listing prices. 7 housing stock that is detached single family homes is above that of other jurisdictions in the region.
• Cost Burden – The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development considers housing to be affordable for a household if the household spends less than 30% of its income on housing costs.

A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30% of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50% of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” In Newark, 19.2% of households spend 30%-50% of their income on housing, while 12.4% of households are severely cost burden and use the majority of their income for housing.
• Displacement/Gentrification – According to research from The University of California, Berkeley, 0.0% of households in Newark live in neighborhoods that are susceptible to or experiencing displacement, and 0.0% live in areas at risk of or undergoing gentrification. 31.8% of households in Newark live in neighborhoods where low-income households are likely excluded due to prohibitive housing costs. There are various ways to address displacement including ensuring new housing at all income levels is built. • Neighborhood – 9.7% of residents in Newark live in neighborhoods identified as “Highest Resource” or “High Resource” areas by State-commissioned research, while 11.0% of residents live in areas identified by this research as “Low Resource” or “High Segregation and Poverty” areas. These neighborhood designations are based on a range of indicators covering areas such as education, poverty, proximity to jobs and economic opportunities, low pollution levels, and other factors.3
• Special Housing Needs – Some population groups may have special housing needs that require specific program responses, and these groups may experience barriers to accessing stable housing due to their specific housing circumstances. In Newark, 7.6% of residents have a disability of any kind and may require accessible housing. Additionally, 18.7% of Newark households are larger households with five or more people, who likely need larger housing units with three bedrooms or more. 11.8% of households are female-headed families, which are often at greater risk of housing insecurity.

Note on Data
Many of the tables in this report are sourced from data from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey or U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Comprehensive Housing
Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, both of which are samples and as such, are subject to sampling variability. This means that data is an estimate, and that other estimates could be possible if another set of respondents had been reached. We use the five-year release to get a

3 For more information on the “opportunity area” categories developed by HCD and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, see this website: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp. The degree to which different jurisdictions and neighborhoods have access to opportunity will likely need to be analyzed as part of new Housing Element requirements related to affirmatively furthering fair housing. ABAG/MTC will be providing jurisdictions with technical assistance on this topic this summer, following the release of additional guidance from HCD.
8 larger data pool to minimize this “margin of error” but particularly for the smaller cities, the data will be based on fewer responses, and the information should be interpreted accordingly.

Additionally, there may be instances where there is no data available for a jurisdiction for particular data point, or where a value is 0 and the automatically generated text cannot perform a calculation. In these cases, the automatically generated text is “NODATA.” Staff should reword these sentences before using them in the context of the Housing Element or other documents.

Note on Figures
Any figure that does not specify geography in the figure name represents data for Newark.
9 3 LOOKING TO THE FUTURE: REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS

3.1 Regional Housing Needs Determination
The Plan Bay Area 20504 Final Blueprint forecasts that the nine-county Bay Area will add 1.4 million new households between 2015 and 2050. For the eight-year time frame covered by this Housing Element Update, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has identified the region’s housing need as 441,176 units. The total number of housing units assigned by HCD is separated into four income categories that cover housing types for all income levels, from very low-income households to market rate housing.5 This calculation, known as the Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND), is based on population projections produced by the California Department of Finance as well as adjustments that incorporate the region’s existing housing need. The adjustments result from recent legislation requiring HCD to apply additional adjustment factors to the baseline growth projection from California Department of Finance, in order for the regions to get closer to healthy housing markets. To this end, adjustments focus on the region’s vacancy rate, level of overcrowding and the share of cost burdened households, and seek to bring the region more in line with comparable ones.6 These new laws governing the methodology for how HCD calculates the RHND resulted in a significantly higher number of housing units for which the Bay Area must plan compared to previous RHNA cycles.

3.2 Regional Housing Needs Allocation
A starting point for the Housing Element Update process for every California jurisdiction is the Regional Housing Needs Allocation or RHNA – the share of the RHND assigned to each jurisdiction by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). State Housing Element Law requires ABAG to develop a methodology that calculates the number of housing units assigned to each city and county and distributes each jurisdiction’s housing unit allocation among four affordability levels. For this RHNA cycle, the RHND increased by 135%, from 187,990 to 441,776. For more information on the RHNA process this cycle, see ABAG’s website: https://abag.ca.gov/our-work/housing/rhna-regional-housing-needsallocation Almost all jurisdictions in the Bay Area are likely to receive a larger RHNA this cycle compared to the last cycle, primarily due to changes in state law that led to a considerably higher RHND compared to previous cycles.

In January 2021, ABAG adopted a Draft RHNA Methodology, which is currently being reviewed by HCD.

For Newark, the proposed RHNA to be planned for this cycle is 1,874 units, a slated increase from the last cycle. Please note that the previously stated figures are merely illustrative, as ABAG has yet to issue Final RHNA allocations. The Final RHNA allocations that local jurisdictions will use for their

4 Plan Bay Area 2050 is a long-range plan charting the course for the future of the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area. It covers four key issues: the economy, the environment, housing and transportation 5 HCD divides the RHND into the following four income categories:

Very Low-income: 0-50% of Area Median Income
Low-income: 50-80% of Area Median Income
Moderate-income: 80-120% of Area Median Income
Above Moderate-income: 120% or more of Area Median Income 6 For more information on HCD’s RHND calculation for the Bay Area, see this letter sent to ABAG from HCD on June 9, 2020: https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/docs/abagrhna-final060920(r).pdf 10 Housing Elements will be released at the end of 2021. The potential allocation that Newark would receive from the Draft RHNA Methodology is broken down by income category as follows:

Table 1: Illustrative Regional Housing Needs Allocation from Draft Methodology Income Group Newark
Units
Alameda
County Units
Bay Area
Units
Newark
Percent
Alameda
County
Percent
Bay Area
Percent
Very Low Income
(<50% of AMI) 464 23606 114442 24.8% 26.5% 25.9%
Low Income (50%-
80% of AMI) 268 13591 65892 14.3% 15.3% 14.9%
Moderate Income
(80%-120% of AMI) 318 14438 72712 17.0% 16.2% 16.5%
Above Moderate
Income (>120% of
AMI)
824 37362 188130 44.0% 42.0% 42.6%
Total 1874 88997 441176 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments Methodology and tentative numbers were approved by ABAG’s Executive board on January 21, 2021 (Resolution No. 02-2021). The numbers were submitted for review to California Housing and Community Development in February 2021, after which an appeals process will take place during the Summer and Fall of 2021.

THESE NUMBERS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED PRELIMINARY AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE PER HCD REVIEW 11 4 POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSEHOLD

CHARACTERISTICS

4.1 Population
The Bay Area is the fifth-largest metropolitan area in the nation and has seen a steady increase in population since 1990, except for a dip during the Great Recession. Many cities in the region have experienced significant growth in jobs and population. While these trends have led to a corresponding increase in demand for housing across the region, the regional production of housing has largely not kept pace with job and population growth. Since 2000, Newark’s population has increased by 15.3%; this rate is above that of the region as a whole, at 14.8%. In Newark, roughly 9.5% of its population moved during the past year, a number 3.9 percentage points smaller than the regional rate of 13.4%.

Table 2: Population Growth Trends
Geography 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Newark 37861 39681 42471 43522 42573 44371 48966
Alameda County 1276702 1344157 1443939 1498963 1510271 1613528 1670834 Bay Area 6020147 6381961 6784348 7073912 7150739 7595694 7790537 Universe: Total population
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series
For more years of data, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-01.

In 2020, the population of Newark was estimated to be 48,966 (see Table 2). From 1990 to 2000, the population increased by 12.2%, while it increased by 0.2% during the first decade of the 2000s. In the most recent decade, the population increased by 15.0%. The population of Newark makes up 2.9% of Alameda County.7

7 To compare the rate of growth across various geographic scales, Figure 1 shows population for the jurisdiction, county, and region indexed to the population in the year 1990. This means that the data points represent the population growth (i.e. percent change) in each of these geographies relative to their populations in 1990. 12 Figure 1: Population Growth Trends
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series Note: The data shown on the graph represents population for the jurisdiction, county, and region indexed to the population in the first year shown. The data points represent the relative population growth in each of these geographies relative to their populations in that year.

For some jurisdictions, a break may appear at the end of each decade (1999, 2009) as estimates are compared to census counts.

DOF uses the decennial census to benchmark subsequent population estimates.

For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-01.

4.2 Age
The distribution of age groups in a city shapes what types of housing the community may need in the near future. An increase in the older population may mean there is a developing need for more senior housing options, while higher numbers of children and young families can point to the need for more family housing options and related services. There has also been a move by many to age-in-place or downsize to stay within their communities, which can mean more multifamily and accessible units are also needed.

In Newark, the median age in 2000 was 32.2; by 2019, this figure had increased, landing at around 37 years. More specifically, the population of those under 14 has decreased since 2010, while the 65-andover population has increased (see Figure 2). 13 Figure 2: Population by Age, 2000-2019
Universe: Total population
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-04.

Looking at the senior and youth population by race can add an additional layer of understanding, as families and seniors of color are even more likely to experience challenges finding affordable housing.

People of color8 make up 51.4% of seniors and 73.8% of youth under 18 (see Figure 3).

8 Here, we count all non-white racial groups
14 Figure 3: Senior and Youth Population by Race
Universe: Total population
Notes: In the sources for this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity, and an overlapping category of Hispanic / non-Hispanic groups has not been shown to avoid double counting in the stacked bar chart.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-G) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table SEN-02.

4.3 Race and Ethnicity
Understanding the racial makeup of a city and region is important for designing and implementing effective housing policies and programs. These patterns are shaped by both market factors and government actions, such as exclusionary zoning, discriminatory lending practices and displacement that has occurred over time and continues to impact communities of color today9. Since 2000, the percentage of residents in Newark identifying as White has decreased – and by the same token the percentage of residents of all other races and ethnicities has increased – by 18.6 percentage points, with the 2019 population standing at 11,168 (see Figure 4). In absolute terms, the Asian / API, NonHispanic population increased the most while the White, Non-Hispanic population decreased the most.

9 See, for example, Rothstein, R. (2017). The color of law : a forgotten history of how our government segregated America. New York, NY & London, UK: Liveright Publishing. 15 Figure 4: Population by Race, 2000-2019
Universe: Total population
Notes: Data for 2019 represents 2015-2019 ACS estimates. The Census Bureau defines Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity separate from racial categories. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015- 2019), Table B03002
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-02.

4.4 Employment Trends

4.4.1 Balance of Jobs and Workers
A city houses employed residents who either work in the community where they live or work elsewhere in the region. Conversely, a city may have job sites that employ residents from the same city, but more often employ workers commuting from outside of it. Smaller cities typically will have more employed residents than jobs there and export workers, while larger cities tend to have a surplus of jobs and import workers. To some extent the regional transportation system is set up for this flow of workers to the region’s core job centers. At the same time, as the housing affordability crisis has illustrated, local imbalances may be severe, where local jobs and worker populations are out of sync at a sub-regional scale.

One measure of this is the relationship between workers and jobs. A city with a surplus of workers “exports” workers to other parts of the region, while a city with a surplus of jobs must conversely “import” them. Between 2002 and 2018, the number of jobs in Newark increased by 15.3% (see Figure 5).
16 Figure 5: Jobs in a Jurisdiction
Universe: Jobs from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, state and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment Notes: The data is tabulated by place of work, regardless of where a worker lives. The source data is provided at the census block level. These are crosswalked to jurisdictions and summarized.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files, 2002-2018 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-11.

There are 17,935 employed residents, and 17,168 jobs10 in Newark - the ratio of jobs to resident workers is 0.96; Newark is a net exporter of workers.

Figure 6 shows the balance when comparing jobs to workers, broken down by different wage groups, offering additional insight into local dynamics. A community may offer employment for relatively lowincome workers but have relatively few housing options for those workers - or conversely, it may house residents who are low wage workers but offer few employment opportunities for them. Such relationships may cast extra light on potentially pent-up demand for housing in particular price categories. A relative surplus of jobs relative to residents in a given wage category suggests the need to import those workers, while conversely, surpluses of workers in a wage group relative to jobs means the community will export those workers to other jurisdictions. Such flows are not inherently bad, though over time, sub-regional imbalances may appear. Newark has more low-wage jobs than low-wage residents (where low-wage refers to jobs paying less than $25,000). At the other end of the wage

10 Employed residents in a jurisdiction is counted by place of residence (they may work elsewhere) while jobs in a jurisdiction are counted by place of work (they may live elsewhere). The jobs may differ from those reported in Figure 5 as the source for the time series is from administrative data, while the cross-sectional data is from a survey.
17 spectrum, the city has more high-wage residents than high-wage jobs (where high-wage refers to jobs paying more than $75,000) (see Figure 6).
11 Figure 6: Workers by Earnings, by Jurisdiction as Place of Work and Place of Residence
Universe: Workers 16 years and over with earnings
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data 2015-2019, B08119, B08519 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-10.

Figure 7 shows the balance of a jurisdiction’s resident workers to the jobs located there for different wage groups as a ratio instead - a value of 1 means that a city has the same number of jobs in a wage group as it has resident workers - in principle, a balance. Values above 1 indicate a jurisdiction will need to import workers for jobs in a given wage group. At the regional scale, this ratio is 1.04 jobs for each worker, implying a modest import of workers from outside the region (see Figure 7).

11 The source table is top-coded at $75,000, precluding more fine grained analysis at the higher end of the wage spectrum.
18 Figure 7: Jobs-Worker Ratios, By Wage Group
Universe: Jobs in a jurisdiction from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, state and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment Notes: The ratio compares job counts by wage group from two tabulations of LEHD data: Counts by place of work relative to counts by place of residence. See text for details.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files (Jobs); Residence Area Characteristics (RAC) files (Employed Residents), 2010-2018 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-14.

Such balances between jobs and workers may directly influence the housing demand in a community.

New jobs may draw new residents, and when there is high demand for housing relative to supply, many workers may be unable to afford to live where they work, particularly where job growth has been in relatively lower wage jobs. This dynamic not only means many workers will need to prepare for long commutes and time spent on the road, but in the aggregate it contributes to traffic congestion and time lost for all road users.

If there are more jobs than employed residents, it means a city is relatively jobs-rich, typically also with a high jobs to household ratio. Thus bringing housing into the measure, the jobs-household ratio in Newark has increased from 1.33 in 2002, to 1.49 jobs per household in 2018 (see Figure 8). 19 Figure 8: Jobs-Household Ratio
Universe: Jobs in a jurisdiction from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, state and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment; households in a jurisdiction Notes: The data is tabulated by place of work, regardless of where a worker lives. The source data is provided at the census block level. These are crosswalked to jurisdictions and summarized. The ratio compares place of work wage and salary jobs with households, or occupied housing units. A similar measure is the ratio of jobs to housing units. However, this jobs-household ratio serves to compare the number of jobs in a jurisdiction to the number of housing units that are actually occupied. The difference between a jurisdiction’s jobs-housing ratio and jobs-household ratio will be most pronounced in jurisdictions with high vacancy rates, a high rate of units used for seasonal use, or a high rate of units used as short-term rentals.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files (Jobs), 2002-2018; California Department of Finance, E-5 (Households) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-13.

4.4.2 Sector Composition
In terms of sectoral composition, the largest industry in which Newark residents work is Manufacturing, Wholesale & Transportation, and the largest sector in which Alameda residents work is Health & Educational Services (see Figure 9). For the Bay Area as a whole, the Health & Educational Services industry employs the most workers.
20 Figure 9: Resident Employment by Industry
Universe: Civilian employed population age 16 years and over Notes: The data displayed shows the industries in which jurisdiction residents work, regardless of the location where those residents are employed (whether within the jurisdiction or not). Categories are derived from the following source tables:

Agriculture & Natural Resources: C24030_003E, C24030_030E; Construction: C24030_006E, C24030_033E; Manufacturing, Wholesale & Transportation: C24030_007E, C24030_034E, C24030_008E, C24030_035E, C24030_010E, C24030_037E; Retail:

C24030_009E, C24030_036E; Information: C24030_013E, C24030_040E; Financial & Professional Services: C24030_014E, C24030_041E, C24030_017E, C24030_044E; Health & Educational Services: C24030_021E, C24030_024E, C24030_048E, C24030_051E; Other: C24030_027E, C24030_054E, C24030_028E, C24030_055E Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table C24030 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-06.

4.4.3 Unemployment
In Newark, there was a 3.7 percentage point decrease in the unemployment rate between January 2010 and January 2021. Jurisdictions through the region experienced a sharp rise in unemployment in 2020 due to impacts related to the COVID-19 pandemic, though with a general improvement and recovery in the later months of 2020.
21 Figure 10: Unemployment Rate
Universe: Civilian noninstitutional population ages 16 and older Notes: Unemployment rates for the jurisdiction level is derived from larger-geography estimates. This method assumes that the rates of change in employment and unemployment are exactly the same in each sub-county area as at the county level. If this assumption is not true for a specific sub-county area, then the estimates for that area may not be representative of the current economic conditions. Since this assumption is untested, caution should be employed when using these data. Only not seasonallyadjusted labor force (unemployment rates) data are developed for cities and CDPs.

Source: California Employment Development Department, Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS), Sub-county areas monthly updates, 2010-2021.

For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-15.

4.5 Extremely Low-Income Households
Despite the economic and job growth experienced throughout the region since 1990, the income gap has continued to widen. California is one of the most economically unequal states in the nation, and the Bay Area has the highest income inequality between high- and low-income households in the state12.

In Newark, 57.5% of households make more than 100% of the Area Median Income (AMI)13, compared to

10.3% making less than 30% of AMI, which is considered extremely low-income (see Figure 11).

12 Bohn, S.et al. 2020. Income Inequality and Economic Opportunity in California. Public Policy Institute of California.
13 Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located. Households making between 80 and 120 percent of the AMI are moderate-income, those making 50 to 80 percent are low-income, those making 30 to 50 22 Regionally, more than half of all households make more than 100% AMI, while 15% make less than 30% AMI. In Alameda County, 30% AMI is the equivalent to the annual income of $34,850 for a family of four.

Many households with multiple wage earners – including food service workers, full-time students, teachers, farmworkers and healthcare professionals – can fall into lower AMI categories due to relatively stagnant wages in many industries.

Note on Estimating the Projected Number of Extremely Low-Income Households Local jurisdictions are required to provide an estimate for their projected extremely low-income households in their Housing Elements. HCD’s official Housing Element guidance notes that jurisdictions can use their RHNA for very low-income households (those making 0-50% AMI) to calculate their projected extremely low-income households. For more information, visit HCD’s Building Blocks page on Extremely Low-Income Housing Needs.

This document does not contain the required data point of projected extremely low-income households, as Bay Area jurisdictions have not yet received their final RHNA numbers. Once Newark receives its 6th Cycle RHNA, staff can estimate the projected extremely low-income households using one of the following three methodologies:

Option A: Assume that 59.8% of Newark’s very low-income RHNA is for extremely low-income households.

According to HCD’s Regional Housing Need Determination for the Bay Area, 15.5% of the region’s housing need is for 0-30% AMI households while 25.9% is for 0-50% AMI households. Therefore, extremely low-income housing need represents 59.8% of the region’s very low-income housing need, as 15.5 divided by 25.9 is 59.8%. This option aligns with HCD’s guidance to use U.S. Census data to calculate the percentage of very low-income RHNA that qualifies for extremely low-income households, as HCD uses U.S. Census data to calculate the Regional Housing Need Determination.

Option B: Assume that 55.2% of Newark’s very low-income RHNA is for extremely low-income households.

According to the data shown below (Figure 11), 2,508 of Newark’s households are 0-50% AMI while 1,384 are extremely low-income. Therefore, extremely low-income households represent 55.2% of households who are 0-50% AMI, as 1,384 divided by 2,508 is 55.2%. This option aligns with HCD’s guidance to use U.S. Census data to calculate the percentage of very low-income RHNA that qualifies for extremely low-income households, as the information in Figure 11 represents a tabulation of Census Bureau Data.

Option C: Assume that 50% of Newark’s very low-income RHNA is for extremely low-income households.

HCD’s guidance notes that instead of using use U.S. Census data to calculate the percentage of very low-income RHNA that qualifies for extremely low-income households, local jurisdictions can presume that 50% of their RHNA for very low-income households qualifies for extremely low-income households.

percent are very low-income, and those making less than 30 percent are extremely low-income. This is then adjusted for household size.
23 Figure 11: Households by Household Income Level
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located. The data that is reported for the Bay Area is not based on a regional AMI but instead refers to the regional total of households in an income group relative to the AMI for the county where that household is located. Local jurisdictions are required to provide an estimate for their projected extremely low-income households (0-30% AMI) in their Housing Elements. HCD’s official Housing Element guidance notes that jurisdictions can use their RHNA for very low-income households (those making 0-50% AMI) to calculate their projected extremely low-income households. As Bay Area jurisdictions have not yet received their final RHNA numbers, this document does not contain the required data point of projected extremely low-income households. The report portion of the housing data needs packet contains more specific guidance for how local staff can calculate an estimate for projected extremely low-income households once jurisdictions receive their 6th cycle RHNA numbers.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table ELI-01.

Throughout the region, there are disparities between the incomes of homeowners and renters.

Typically, the number of low-income renters greatly outpaces the amount of housing available that is affordable for these households.

In Newark, the largest proportion of renters falls in the Greater than 100% of AMI income group, while the largest proportion of homeowners are found in the Greater than 100% of AMI group (see Figure 12). 24 Figure 12: Household Income Level by Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-21.

Currently, people of color are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability as a result of federal and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to white residents.14 These economic disparities also leave communities of color at higher risk for housing insecurity, displacement or homelessness. In Newark, Black or African American (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents experience the highest rates of poverty, followed by American Indian or Alaska Native (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents (see Figure 13).

14 Moore, E., Montojo, N. and Mauri, N., 2019. Roots, Race & Place: A History of Racially Exclusionary Housing the San Francisco Bay Area. Hass Institute.
25 Figure 13: Poverty Status by Race
Universe: Population for whom poverty status is determined Notes: The Census Bureau uses a federally defined poverty threshold that remains constant throughout the country and does not correspond to Area Median Income. For this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. However, data for the white racial group is also reported for white householders who are not Hispanic/Latinx. Since residents who identify as white and Hispanic/Latinx may have very different experiences within the housing market and the economy from those who identify as white and non-Hispanic/Latinx, data for multiple white sub-groups are reported here. The racial/ethnic groups reported in this table are not all mutually exclusive. Therefore, the data should not be summed as the sum exceeds the population for whom poverty status is determined for this jurisdiction. However, all groups labelled “Hispanic and Non-Hispanic” are mutually exclusive, and the sum of the data for these groups is equivalent to the population for whom poverty status is determined.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B17001(A-I) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table ELI-03.

4.6 Tenure
The number of residents who own their homes compared to those who rent their homes can help identify the level of housing insecurity – ability for individuals to stay in their homes – in a city and region. Generally, renters may be displaced more quickly if prices increase. In Newark there are a total of 14,047 housing units, and fewer residents rent than own their homes: 31.2% versus 68.8% (see Figure 14). By comparison, 46.5% of households in Alameda County are renters, while 44% of Bay Area households rent their homes.
26 Figure 14: Housing Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25003 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-16.

Homeownership rates often vary considerably across race/ethnicity in the Bay Area and throughout the country. These disparities not only reflect differences in income and wealth but also stem from federal, state, and local policies that limited access to homeownership for communities of color while facilitating homebuying for white residents. While many of these policies, such as redlining, have been formally disbanded, the impacts of race-based policy are still evident across Bay Area communities.15 In Newark, 54.1% of Black households owned their homes, while homeownership rates were 74.5% for Asian households, 54.1% for Latinx households, and 77.1% for White households. Notably, recent changes to state law require local jurisdictions to examine these dynamics and other fair housing issues when updating their Housing Elements.

15 See, for example, Rothstein, R. (2017). The color of law : a forgotten history of how our government segregated America. New York, NY & London, UK: Liveright Publishing. 27 Figure 15: Housing Tenure by Race of Householder
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: For this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. However, data for the white racial group is also reported for white householders who are not Hispanic/Latinx. Since residents who identify as white and Hispanic/Latinx may have very different experiences within the housing market and the economy from those who identify as white and non-Hispanic/Latinx, data for multiple white sub-groups are reported here. The racial/ethnic groups reported in this table are not all mutually exclusive. Therefore, the data should not be summed as the sum exceeds the total number of occupied housing units for this jurisdiction. However, all groups labelled “Hispanic and Non-Hispanic” are mutually exclusive, and the sum of the data for these groups is equivalent to the total number of occupied housing units.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25003(A-I) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-20.

The age of residents who rent or own their home can also signal the housing challenges a community is experiencing. Younger households tend to rent and may struggle to buy a first home in the Bay Area due to high housing costs. At the same time, senior homeowners seeking to downsize may have limited options in an expensive housing market.

In Newark, 43.6% of householders between the ages of 25 and 44 are renters, while 13.5% of householders over 65 are (see Figure 16).
28 Figure 16: Housing Tenure by Age
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25007 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-18.

In many cities, homeownership rates for households in single-family homes are substantially higher than the rates for households in multi-family housing. In Newark, 82.3% of households in detached single-family homes are homeowners, while 22.7% of households in multi-family housing are homeowners (see Figure 17).
29 Figure 17: Housing Tenure by Housing Type
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25032 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-22.

4.7 Displacement
Because of increasing housing prices, displacement is a major concern in the Bay Area. Displacement has the most severe impacts on low- and moderate-income residents. When individuals or families are forced to leave their homes and communities, they also lose their support network.

The University of California, Berkeley has mapped all neighborhoods in the Bay area, identifying their risk for gentrification. They find that in Newark, 0.0% of households live in neighborhoods that are susceptible to or experiencing displacement and 0.0% live in neighborhoods at risk of or undergoing gentrification.

Equally important, some neighborhoods in the Bay Area do not have housing appropriate for a broad section of the workforce. UC Berkeley estimates that 31.8% of households in Newark live in neighborhoods where low-income households are likely to be excluded due to prohibitive housing costs.16

16 More information about this gentrification and displacement data is available at the Urban Displacement Project’s webpage: https://www.urbandisplacement.org/. Specifically, one can learn more about the different gentrification/displacement typologies shown in Figure 18 at this link:
https://www.urbandisplacement.org/sites/default/files/typology_sheet_2018_0.png. Additionally, one can view maps that show which typologies correspond to which parts of a jurisdiction here:
https://www.urbandisplacement.org/san-francisco/sf-bay-area-gentrification-and-displacement 30 Figure 18: Households by Displacement Risk and Tenure Universe: Households
Notes: Displacement data is available at the census tract level. Staff aggregated tracts up to jurisdiction level using census 2010 population weights, assigning a tract to jurisdiction in proportion to block level population weights. Total household count may differ slightly from counts in other tables sourced from jurisdiction level sources. Categories are combined as follows for simplicity: At risk of or Experiencing Exclusion: At Risk of Becoming Exclusive; Becoming Exclusive; Stable/Advanced Exclusive At risk of or Experiencing Gentrification: At Risk of Gentrification; Early/Ongoing Gentrification; Advanced Gentrification Stable Moderate/Mixed Income: Stable Moderate/Mixed Income Susceptible to or Experiencing Displacement: LowIncome/Susceptible to Displacement; Ongoing Displacement Other: High Student Population; Unavailable or Unreliable Data Source: Urban Displacement Project for classification, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25003 for tenure.

For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-25. 31 5 HOUSING STOCK CHARACTERISTICS

5.1 Housing Types, Year Built, Vacancy, and Permits
In recent years, most housing produced in the region and across the state consisted of single-family homes and larger multi-unit buildings. However, some households are increasingly interested in “missing middle housing” – including duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, cottage clusters and accessory dwelling units (ADUs). These housing types may open up more options across incomes and tenure, from young households seeking homeownership options to seniors looking to downsize and age-in-place.

The housing stock of Newark in 2020 was made up of 69.6% single family detached homes, 9.5% single family attached homes, 4.4% multifamily homes with 2 to 4 units, 16.5% multifamily homes with 5 or more units, and 0.0% mobile homes (see Figure 19). In Newark, the housing type that experienced the most growth between 2010 and 2020 was Single-Family Home: Detached.

Figure 19: Housing Type Trends
Universe: Housing units
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-01.

Production has not kept up with housing demand for several decades in the Bay Area, as the total number of units built and available has not yet come close to meeting the population and job growth experienced throughout the region. In Newark, the largest proportion of the housing stock was built 1960 to 1979, with 7,737 units constructed during this period (see Figure 20). Since 2010, 4.9% of the current housing stock was built, which is 713 units.
32 Figure 20: Housing Units by Year Structure Built
Universe: Housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25034 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-04.

Vacant units make up 3.5% of the overall housing stock in Newark. The rental vacancy stands at 2.6%, while the ownership vacancy rate is 1.7%. Of the vacant units, the most common type of vacancy is For Seasonal, Recreational, Or Occasional Use (see Figure 21).17 Throughout the Bay Area, vacancies make up 2.6% of the total housing units, with homes listed for rent; units used for recreational or occasional use, and units not otherwise classified (other vacant) making up the majority of vacancies. The Census Bureau classifies a unit as vacant if no one is occupying it when census interviewers are conducting the American Community Survey or Decennial Census. Vacant units classified as “for recreational or occasional use” are those that are held for shortterm periods of use throughout the year. Accordingly, vacation rentals and short-term rentals like AirBnB are likely to fall in this category. The Census Bureau classifies units as “other vacant” if they are vacant due to foreclosure, personal/family reasons, legal proceedings, repairs/renovations, abandonment, preparation for being rented or sold, or vacant for an extended absence for reasons such as a work assignment, military duty, or incarceration.18 In a region with a thriving economy and housing market like the Bay Area, units being renovated/repaired and prepared for rental or sale are likely to represent a large portion of the “other vacant” category. Additionally, the need for seismic retrofitting

17 The vacancy rates by tenure is for a smaller universe than the total vacancy rate first reported, which in principle includes the full stock (3.5%). The vacancy by tenure counts are rates relative to the rental stock (occupied and vacant) and ownership stock (occupied and vacant) - but exclude a a significant number of vacancy categories, including the numerically significant other vacant. 18 For more information, see pages 3 through 6 of this list of definitions prepared by the Census Bureau:
https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/definitions.pdf.
33 in older housing stock could also influence the proportion of “other vacant” units in some jurisdictions.19
Figure 21: Vacant Units by Type
Universe: Vacant housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25004 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-03.

Between 2015 and 2019, 829 housing units were issued permits in Newark. 95.7% of permits issued in Newark were for above moderate-income housing, 4.3% were for moderate-income housing, and 0.0% were for low- or very low-income housing (see Table 3).

Table 3: Housing Permitting
Income Group value
Above Moderate Income Permits 793
Moderate Income Permits 36
Low Income Permits 0
Very Low Income Permits 0
Universe: Housing permits issued between 2015 and 2019
Notes: HCD uses the following definitions for the four income categories: Very Low Income: units affordable to households making less than 50% of the Area Median Income for the county in which the jurisdiction is located. Low Income: units affordable to households making between 50% and 80% of the Area Median Income for the county in which the jurisdiction is located. Moderate Income: units affordable to households making between 80% and 120% of the Area Median Income for the

19 See Dow, P. (2018). Unpacking the Growth in San Francisco’s Vacant Housing Stock: Client Report for the San Francisco Planning Department. University of California, Berkeley. 34 county in which the jurisdiction is located. Above Moderate Income: units affordable to households making above 120% of the Area Median Income for the county in which the jurisdiction is located.

Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), 5th Cycle Annual Progress Report Permit Summary (2020)
This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table HSG-11.

5.2 Assisted Housing Developments At-Risk of Conversion While there is an immense need to produce new affordable housing units, ensuring that the existing affordable housing stock remains affordable is equally important. Additionally, it is typically faster and less expensive to preserve currently affordable units that are at risk of converting to market-rate than it is to build new affordable housing.

The data in the table below comes from the California Housing Partnership’s Preservation Database, the state’s most comprehensive source of information on subsidized affordable housing at risk of losing its affordable status and converting to market-rate housing. However, this database does not include all deed-restricted affordable units in the state, so there may be at-risk assisted units in a jurisdiction that are not captured in this data table. There are 274 assisted units in Newark in the Preservation Database. Of these units, 0.0% are at High Risk or Very High Risk of conversion.20 Note on At-Risk Assisted Housing Developments
HCD requires that Housing Elements list the assisted housing developments at risk of converting to market-rate uses. For more information on the specific properties that are at Moderate Risk, High Risk, or Very High Risk of conversion, local jurisdiction staff should contact Danielle Mazzella, Preservation & Data Manager at the California Housing Partnership, at [email protected].

Table 4: Assisted Units at Risk of Conversion
Income Newark Alameda County Bay Area
Low 274 23040 110177
Moderate 0 167 3375
High 0 189 1854
Very High 0 106 1053
Total Assisted Units in Database 274 23502 116459
Universe: HUD, Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), USDA, and CalHFA projects. Subsidized or assisted developments that do not have one of the aforementioned financing sources may not be included.

20 California Housing Partnership uses the following categories for assisted housing developments in its database:

Very-High Risk: affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate within the next year that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer.

High Risk: affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in the next 1-5 years that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer.

Moderate Risk: affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in the next 5-10 years that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer.

Low Risk: affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in 10+ years and/or are owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer.
35 Notes: While California Housing Partnership’s Preservation Database is the state’s most comprehensive source of information on subsidized affordable housing at risk of losing its affordable status and converting to market-rate housing, this database does not include all deed-restricted affordable units in the state. Consequently, there may be at-risk assisted units in a jurisdiction that are not captured in this data table. Per HCD guidance, local jurisdictions must also list the specific affordable housing developments at-risk of converting to market rate uses. This document provides aggregate numbers of at-risk units for each jurisdiction, but local planning staff should contact Danielle Mazzella with the California Housing Partnership at [email protected] to obtain a list of affordable properties that fall under this designation. California Housing Partnership uses the following categories for assisted housing developments in its database: Very-High Risk: affordable homes that are atrisk of converting to market rate within the next year that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer. High Risk: affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in the next 1-5 years that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer. Moderate Risk: affordable homes that are at-risk of converting to market rate in the next 5-10 years that do not have a known overlapping subsidy that would extend affordability and are not owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer. Low Risk: affordable homes that are atrisk of converting to market rate in 10+ years and/or are owned by a large/stable non-profit, mission-driven developer.

Source: California Housing Partnership, Preservation Database (2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table RISK-01.

5.3 Substandard Housing
Housing costs in the region are among the highest in the country, which could result in households, particularly renters, needing to live in substandard conditions in order to afford housing. Generally, there is limited data on the extent of substandard housing issues in a community. However, the Census Bureau data included in the graph below gives a sense of some of the substandard conditions that may be present in Newark. For example, 0.3% of renters in Newark reported lacking a kitchen and 0.0% of renters lack plumbing, compared to 0.3% of owners who lack a kitchen and 0.1% of owners who lack plumbing.

Note on Substandard Housing
HCD requires Housing Elements to estimate the number of units in need of rehabilitation and replacement. As a data source for housing units in need of rehabilitation and replacement is not available for all jurisdictions in the region, ABAG was not able to provide this required data point in this document. To produce an estimate of housing needs in need of rehabilitation and replacement, staff can supplement the data below on substandard housing issues with additional local information from code enforcement, recent windshield surveys of properties, building department data, knowledgeable builders/developers in the community, or nonprofit housing developers or organizations. For more information, visit HCD’s Building Blocks page on Housing Stock Characteristics. 36 Figure 22: Substandard Housing Issues
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Per HCD guidance, this data should be supplemented by local estimates of units needing to be rehabilitated or replaced based on recent windshield surveys, local building department data, knowledgeable builders/developers in the community, or nonprofit housing developers or organizations.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25053, Table B25043, Table B25049 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-06.

5.4 Home and Rent Values
Home prices reflect a complex mix of supply and demand factors, including an area’s demographic profile, labor market, prevailing wages and job outlook, coupled with land and construction costs. In the Bay Area, the costs of housing have long been among the highest in the nation. The typical home value in Newark was estimated at $978,600 by December of 2020, per data from Zillow. The largest proportion of homes were valued between $750k-$1M (see Figure 23). By comparison, the typical home value is $951,380 in Alameda County and $1,077,230 the Bay Area, with the largest share of units valued $500k-$750k.

The region’s home values have increased steadily since 2000, besides a decrease during the Great Recession. The rise in home prices has been especially steep since 2012, with the median home value in the Bay Area nearly doubling during this time. Since 2001, the typical home value has increased 165.8% in Newark from $368,220 to $978,600. This change is above the change in Alameda County, and above the change for the region (see Figure 24).
37 Figure 23: Home Values of Owner-Occupied Units
Universe: Owner-occupied units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25075 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-07.

Figure 24: Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI)
Universe: Owner-occupied housing units
Notes: Zillow describes the ZHVI as a smoothed, seasonally adjusted measure of the typical home value and market changes across a given region and housing type. The ZHVI reflects the typical value for homes in the 35th to 65th percentile range. The 38 ZHVI includes all owner-occupied housing units, including both single-family homes and condominiums. More information on the ZHVI is available from Zillow. The regional estimate is a household-weighted average of county-level ZHVI files, where household counts are yearly estimates from DOF’s E-5 series For unincorporated areas, the value is a population weighted average of unincorporated communities in the county matched to census-designated population counts.

Source: Zillow, Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI)
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-08.

Similar to home values, rents have also increased dramatically across the Bay Area in recent years.

Many renters have been priced out, evicted or displaced, particularly communities of color. Residents finding themselves in one of these situations may have had to choose between commuting long distances to their jobs and schools or moving out of the region, and sometimes, out of the state.

In Newark, the largest proportion of rental units rented in the Rent $2000-$2500 category, totaling

26.8%, followed by 25.6% of units renting in the Rent $1500-$2000 category (see Figure 25). Looking beyond the city, the largest share of units is in the rent for $1500-$2000 category.

Figure 25: Contract Rents for Renter-Occupied Units
Universe: Renter-occupied housing units paying cash rent Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25056 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-09.

Since 2009, the median rent has increased by 61.1% in Newark, from $1,510 to $2,110 per month (see Figure 26). In Alameda County, the median rent has increased 36.0%, from $1,240 to $1,690. The median rent in the region has increased significantly during this time from $1,200 to $1,850, a 54% increase.21

21 While the data on home values shown in Figure 24 comes from Zillow, Zillow does not have data on rent prices available for most Bay Area jurisdictions. To have a more comprehensive dataset on rental data for the region, the rent data in this document comes from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, which may not fully 39 Figure 26: Median Contract Rent
Universe: Renter-occupied housing units paying cash rent Notes: For unincorporated areas, median is calculated using distribution in B25056.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data releases, starting with 2005-2009 through 2015-2019, B25058, B25056 (for unincorporated areas). County and regional counts are weighted averages of jurisdiction median using B25003 rental unit counts from the relevant year.

For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-10.

5.5 Overpayment and Overcrowding
A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30% of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50% of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” Low-income residents are the most impacted by high housing costs and experience the highest rates of cost burden. Spending such large portions of their income on housing puts low-income households at higher risk of displacement, eviction, or homelessness.

reflect current rents. Local jurisdiction staff may want to supplement the data on rents with local realtor data or other sources for rent data that are more current than Census Bureau data. 40 Figure 27: Cost Burden by Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25070, B25091 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-06.

Renters are often more cost-burdened than owners. While the housing market has resulted in home prices increasing dramatically, homeowners often have mortgages with fixed rates, whereas renters are more likely to be impacted by market increases. When looking at the cost burden across tenure in Newark, 29.7% of renters spend 30% to 50% of their income on housing compared to 16.2% of those that own (see Figure 27). Additionally, 14.1% of renters spend 50% or more of their income on housing, while 7.6% of owners are severely cost-burdened.

In Newark, 12.4% of households spend 50% or more of their income on housing, while 19.2% spend 30% to 50%. However, these rates vary greatly across income categories (see Figure 28). For example, 56.6% of Newark households making less than 30% of AMI spend the majority of their income on housing. For Newark residents making more than 100% of AMI, just 0.8% are severely cost-burdened, and 89.0% of those making more than 100% of AMI spend less than 30% of their income on housing. 41 Figure 28: Cost Burden by Income Level
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-05.

Currently, people of color are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability as a result of federal and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to white residents. As a result, they often pay a greater percentage of their income on housing, and in turn, are at a greater risk of housing insecurity.

American Indian or Alaska Native, Non-Hispanic residents are the most cost burdened with 46.2% spending 30% to 50% of their income on housing, and Hispanic or Latinx residents are the most severely cost burdened with 22.1% spending more than 50% of their income on housing (see Figure 29). 42 Figure 29: Cost Burden by Race
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-08.

Large family households often have special housing needs due to a lack of adequately sized affordable housing available. The higher costs required for homes with multiple bedrooms can result in larger families experiencing a disproportionate cost burden than the rest of the population and can increase the risk of housing insecurity.

In Newark, 22.3% of large family households experience a cost burden of 30%-50%, while 13.4% of households spend more than half of their income on housing. Some 18.5% of all other households have a cost burden of 30%-50%, with 12.1% of households spending more than 50% of their income on housing (see Figure 30).
43 Figure 30: Cost Burden by Household Size
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-09.

When cost-burdened seniors are no longer able to make house payments or pay rents, displacement from their homes can occur, putting further stress on the local rental market or forcing residents out of the community they call home. Understanding how seniors might be cost-burdened is of particular importance due to their special housing needs, particularly for low-income seniors. 21.8% of seniors making less than 30% of AMI are spending the majority of their income on housing. For seniors making more than 100% of AMI, 89.3% are not cost-burdened and spend less than 30% of their income on housing (see Figure 31).
44 Figure 31: Cost-Burdened Senior Households by Income Level Universe: Senior households
Notes: For the purposes of this graph, senior households are those with a householder who is aged 62 or older. Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San JoseSunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table SEN-03.

Overcrowding occurs when the number of people living in a household is greater than the home was designed to hold. There are several different standards for defining overcrowding, but this report uses the Census Bureau definition, which is more than one occupant per room (not including bathrooms or kitchens). Additionally, the Census Bureau considers units with more than 1.5 occupants per room to be severely overcrowded.

Overcrowding is often related to the cost of housing and can occur when demand in a city or region is high. In many cities, overcrowding is seen more amongst those that are renting, with multiple households sharing a unit to make it possible to stay in their communities. In Newark, 9.3% of households that rent are severely overcrowded (more than 1.5 occupants per room), compared to 0.6% of households that own (see Figure 32). In Newark, 17.7% of renters experience moderate overcrowding (1 to 1.5 occupants per room), compared to 4.9% for those own. 45 Figure 32: Overcrowding by Tenure and Severity
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-01.

Overcrowding often disproportionately impacts low-income households. 3.6% of very low-income households (below 50% AMI) experience severe overcrowding, while 1.4% of households above 100% experience this level of overcrowding (see Figure 33).
46 Figure 33: Overcrowding by Income Level and Severity Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-04.

Communities of color are more likely to experience overcrowding similar to how they are more likely to experience poverty, financial instability, and housing insecurity. People of color tend to experience overcrowding at higher rates than White residents. In Newark, the racial group with the largest overcrowding rate is Other Race or Multiple Races (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) (see Figure 34) 47 Figure 34: Overcrowding by Race
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. For this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. However, data for the white racial group is also reported for white householders who are not Hispanic/Latinx. Since residents who identify as white and Hispanic/Latinx may have very different experiences within the housing market and the economy from those who identify as white and nonHispanic/Latinx, data for multiple white sub-groups are reported here. The racial/ethnic groups reported in this table are not all mutually exclusive. Therefore, the data should not be summed as the sum exceeds the total number of occupied housing units for this jurisdiction. However, all groups labelled “Hispanic and Non-Hispanic” are mutually exclusive, and the sum of the data for these groups is equivalent to the total number of occupied housing units.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25014 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-03. 48 6 SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS

6.1 Large Households
Large households often have different housing needs than smaller households. If a city’s rental housing stock does not include larger apartments, large households who rent could end up living in overcrowded conditions. In Newark, for large households with 5 or more persons, most units (57.4%) are owner occupied (see Figure 35). In 2017, 17.4% of large households were very low-income, earning less than 50% of the area median income (AMI).

Figure 35: Household Size by Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25009 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table LGFEM-01.

The unit sizes available in a community affect the household sizes that can access that community.

Large families are generally served by housing units with 3 or more bedrooms, of which there are 10,345 units in Newark. Among these large units with 3 or more bedrooms, 17.4% are owner-occupied and 82.6% are renter occupied (see Figure 36).
49 Figure 36: Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms
Universe: Housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25042 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-05.

6.2 Female-Headed Households
Households headed by one person are often at greater risk of housing insecurity, particularly femaleheaded households, who may be supporting children or a family with only one income. In Newark, the largest proportion of households is Married-couple Family Households at 63.0% of total, while FemaleHeaded Households make up 11.8% of all households. 50 Figure 37: Household Type
Universe: Households
Notes: For data from the Census Bureau, a “family household” is a household where two or more people are related by birth, marriage, or adoption. “Non-family households” are households of one person living alone, as well as households where none of the people are related to each other.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B11001 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-23.

Female-headed households with children may face particular housing challenges, with pervasive gender inequality resulting in lower wages for women. Moreover, the added need for childcare can make finding a home that is affordable more challenging.

In Newark, 22.8% of female-headed households with children fall below the Federal Poverty Line, while

5.7% of female-headed households without children live in poverty (see Figure 38). 51 Figure 38: Female-Headed Households by Poverty Status Universe: Female Households
Notes: The Census Bureau uses a federally defined poverty threshold that remains constant throughout the country and does not correspond to Area Median Income.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B17012 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table LGFEM-05.

6.3 Seniors
Senior households often experience a combination of factors that can make accessing or keeping affordable housing a challenge. They often live on fixed incomes and are more likely to have disabilities, chronic health conditions and/or reduced mobility.

Seniors who rent may be at even greater risk for housing challenges than those who own, due to income differences between these groups. The largest proportion of senior households who rent make 0%-30% of AMI, while the largest proportion of senior households who are homeowners falls in the income group Greater than 100% of AMI (see Figure 39).
52 Figure 39: Senior Households by Income and Tenure
Universe: Senior households
Notes: For the purposes of this graph, senior households are those with a householder who is aged 62 or older. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San JoseSunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table SEN-01.

6.4 People with Disabilities
People with disabilities face additional housing challenges. Encompassing a broad group of individuals living with a variety of physical, cognitive and sensory impairments, many people with disabilities live on fixed incomes and are in need of specialized care, yet often rely on family members for assistance due to the high cost of care.

When it comes to housing, people with disabilities are not only in need of affordable housing but accessibly designed housing, which offers greater mobility and opportunity for independence.

Unfortunately, the need typically outweighs what is available, particularly in a housing market with such high demand. People with disabilities are at a high risk for housing insecurity, homelessness and institutionalization, particularly when they lose aging caregivers. Figure 40 shows the rates at which different disabilities are present among residents of Newark. Overall, 7.6% of people in Newark have a disability of any kind.22

22 These disabilities are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one disability. These counts should not be summed.
53 Figure 40: Disability by Type
Universe: Civilian noninstitutionalized population 18 years and over Notes: These disabilities are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one disability. These counts should not be summed. The Census Bureau provides the following definitions for these disability types:

Hearing difficulty: deaf or has serious difficulty hearing. Vision difficulty: blind or has serious difficulty seeing even with glasses. Cognitive difficulty: has serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions. Ambulatory difficulty: has serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs. Self-care difficulty: has difficulty dressing or bathing. Independent living difficulty:
has difficulty doing errands alone such as visiting a doctor’s office or shopping.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B18102, Table B18103, Table B18104, Table B18105, Table B18106, Table B18107.

For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table DISAB-01.

State law also requires Housing Elements to examine the housing needs of people with developmental disabilities. Developmental disabilities are defined as severe, chronic, and attributed to a mental or physical impairment that begins before a person turns 18 years old. This can include Down’s Syndrome, autism, epilepsy, cerebral palsy, and mild to severe mental retardation. Some people with developmental disabilities are unable to work, rely on Supplemental Security Income, and live with family members. In addition to their specific housing needs, they are at increased risk of housing insecurity after an aging parent or family member is no longer able to care for them.23 In Newark, of the population with a developmental disability, children under the age of 18 make up

56.3%, while adults account for 43.7%.

23 For more information or data on developmental disabilities in your jurisdiction, contact the Golden Gate Regional Center for Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo Counties; the North Bay Regional Center for Napa, Solano and Sonoma Counties; the Regional Center for the East Bay for Alameda and Contra Costa Counties; or the San Andreas Regional Center for Santa Clara County.
54 Table 5: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Age Age Group value
Age Under 18 156
Age 18+ 121
Universe: Population with developmental disabilities
Notes: The California Department of Developmental Services is responsible for overseeing the coordination and delivery of services to more than 330,000 Californians with developmental disabilities including cerebral palsy, intellectual disability, Down syndrome, autism, epilepsy, and related conditions. The California Department of Developmental Services provides ZIP code level counts. To get jurisdiction-level estimates, ZIP code counts were crosswalked to jurisdictions using census block population counts from Census 2010 SF1 to determine the share of a ZIP code to assign to a given jurisdiction.

Source: California Department of Developmental Services, Consumer Count by California ZIP Code and Age Group (2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table DISAB-04.

The most common living arrangement for individuals with disabilities in Newark is the home of parent /family /guardian.

Table 6: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Residence Residence Type value
Home of Parent /Family /Guardian 244
Community Care Facility 20
Independent /Supported Living 12
Foster /Family Home 5
Other 0
Intermediate Care Facility 0
Universe: Population with developmental disabilities
Notes: The California Department of Developmental Services is responsible for overseeing the coordination and delivery of services to more than 330,000 Californians with developmental disabilities including cerebral palsy, intellectual disability, Down syndrome, autism, epilepsy, and related conditions. The California Department of Developmental Services provides ZIP code level counts. To get jurisdiction-level estimates, ZIP code counts were crosswalked to jurisdictions using census block population counts from Census 2010 SF1 to determine the share of a ZIP code to assign to a given jurisdiction.

Source: California Department of Developmental Services, Consumer Count by California ZIP Code and Residence Type (2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table DISAB-05.

6.5 Homelessness
Homelessness remains an urgent challenge in many communities across the state, reflecting a range of social, economic, and psychological factors. Rising housing costs result in increased risks of community members experiencing homelessness. Far too many residents who have found themselves housing insecure have ended up unhoused or homeless in recent years, either temporarily or longer term.

Addressing the specific housing needs for the unhoused population remains a priority throughout the region, particularly since homelessness is disproportionately experienced by people of color, people with disabilities, those struggling with addiction and those dealing with traumatic life circumstances. In Alameda County, the most common type of household experiencing homelessness is those without children in their care. Among households experiencing homelessness that do not have children, 84.0% are unsheltered. Of homeless households with children, most are sheltered in emergency shelter (see Figure 41).
55 Figure 41: Homelessness by Household Type and Shelter Status, Alameda County Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019)
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-01.

People of color are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability as a result of federal and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to white residents. Consequently, people of color are often disproportionately impacted by homelessness, particularly Black residents of the Bay Area. In Alameda County, Black or African American (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents represent the largest proportion of residents experiencing homelessness and account for 47.3% of the homeless population, while making up 10.6% of the overall population (see Figure 42).
56 Figure 42: Racial Group Share of General and Homeless Populations, Alameda County
Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness. HUD does not disaggregate racial demographic data by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity for people experiencing homelessness. Instead, HUD reports data on Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity for people experiencing homelessness in a separate table.

Accordingly, the racial group data listed here includes both Hispanic/Latinx and non-Hispanic/Latinx individuals.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019); U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-I) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-02.

In Alameda, Latinx residents represent 17.3% of the population experiencing homelessness, while Latinx residents comprise 22.5% of the general population (see Figure 43). 57 Figure 43: Latinx Share of General and Homeless Populations, Alameda County Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness. The data from HUD on Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity for individuals experiencing homelessness does not specify racial group identity. Accordingly, individuals in either ethnic group identity category (Hispanic/Latinx or non-Hispanic/Latinx) could be of any racial background.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019); U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-I) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-03.

Many of those experiencing homelessness are dealing with severe issues – including mental illness, substance abuse and domestic violence – that are potentially life threatening and require additional assistance. In Alameda County, homeless individuals are commonly challenged by severe mental illness, with 2,590 reporting this condition (see Figure 12). Of those, some 78.3% are unsheltered, further adding to the challenge of handling the issue.

Note on Homelessness Data
Notably all the data on homelessness provided above is for the entire county. This data comes from the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Point in Time count, which is the most comprehensive publicly available data source on people experiencing homelessness. HUD only provides this data at the countylevel and not for specific jurisdictions. However, Housing Element law requires local jurisdictions to estimate or count of the daily average number of people lacking shelter. Therefore, staff will need to supplement the data in this document with additional local data on the number of people experiencing homelessness. If staff do not have estimates of people experiencing homelessness in their jurisdiction readily available, HCD recommends contacting local service providers such as continuum-of-care providers, local homeless shelter and service providers, food 58 programs, operators of transitional housing programs, local drug and alcohol program service providers, and county mental health and social service departments.24
Figure 44: Characteristics for the Population Experiencing Homelessness, Alameda County
Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness. These challenges/characteristics are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one challenge/characteristic. These counts should not be summed.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019)
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-04.

In Newark, the student population experiencing homelessness totaled 300 during the 2019-20 school year and increased by 9.1% since the 2016-17 school year. By comparison, Alameda County has seen a

18.7% decrease in the population of students experiencing homelessness since the 2016-17 school year, and the Bay Area population of students experiencing homelessness decreased by 8.5%. During the 2019-2020 school year, there were still some 13,718 students experiencing homelessness throughout the region, adding undue burdens on learning and thriving, with the potential for longer term negative effects.

The number of students in Newark experiencing homelessness in 2019 represents 10.5% of the Alameda County total and 2.2% of the Bay Area total.

24 For more information, see HCD’s Building Blocks webpage for People Experiencing Homelessness:
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-blocks/housing-needs/people-experiencinghomelessness.shtml 59 Table 7: Students in Local Public Schools Experiencing Homelessness AcademicYear Newark Alameda County Bay Area
2016-17 275 3531 14990
2017-18 236 3309 15142
2018-19 192 3182 15427
2019-20 300 2870 13718
Universe: Total number of unduplicated primary and short-term enrollments within the academic year (July 1 to June 30), public schools
Notes: The California Department of Education considers students to be homeless if they are unsheltered, living in temporary shelters for people experiencing homelessness, living in hotels/motels, or temporarily doubled up and sharing the housing of other persons due to the loss of housing or economic hardship. The data used for this table was obtained at the school site level, matched to a file containing school locations, geocoded and assigned to jurisdiction, and finally summarized by geography.

Source: California Department of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), Cumulative Enrollment Data (Academic Years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table HOMELS-05.

6.6 Farmworkers
Across the state, housing for farmworkers has been recognized as an important and unique concern.

Farmworkers generally receive wages that are considerably lower than other jobs and may have temporary housing needs. Finding decent and affordable housing can be challenging, particularly in the current housing market.

In Newark, the migrant worker student population totaled 72 during the 2019-20 school year and has decreased by 24.0% since the 2016-17 school year. The trend for the region for the past few years has been a decline of 2.4% in the number of migrant worker students since the 2016-17 school year. The change at the county level is a 9.6% decrease in the number of migrant worker students since the 2016- 17 school year.

Table 8: Migrant Worker Student Population
AcademicYear Newark Alameda County Bay Area
2016-17 75 874 4630
2017-18 79 1037 4607
2018-19 72 785 4075
2019-20 57 790 3976
Universe: Total number of unduplicated primary and short-term enrollments within the academic year (July 1 to June 30), public schools
Notes: The data used for this table was obtained at the school site level, matched to a file containing school locations, geocoded and assigned to jurisdiction, and finally summarized by geography.

Source: California Department of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), Cumulative Enrollment Data (Academic Years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table FARM-01. 60 According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Census of Farmworkers, the number of permanent farm workers in Alameda County has decreased since 2002, totaling 305 in 2017, while the number of seasonal farm workers has decreased, totaling 288 in 2017 (see Figure 45).

Figure 45: Farm Operations and Farm Labor by County, Alameda County Universe: Hired farm workers (including direct hires and agricultural service workers who are often hired through labor contractors)
Notes: Farm workers are considered seasonal if they work on a farm less than 150 days in a year, while farm workers who work on a farm more than 150 days are considered to be permanent workers for that farm.

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Census of Farmworkers (2002, 2007, 2012, 2017), Table 7: Hired Farm Labor For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table FARM-02.

6.7 Non-English Speakers
California has long been an immigration gateway to the United States, which means that many languages are spoken throughout the Bay Area. Since learning a new language is universally challenging, it is not uncommon for residents who have immigrated to the United States to have limited English proficiency. This limit can lead to additional disparities if there is a disruption in housing, such as an eviction, because residents might not be aware of their rights or they might be wary to engage due to immigration status concerns. In Newark, 6.7% of residents 5 years and older identify as speaking English not well or not at all, which is below the proportion for Alameda County.

Throughout the region the proportion of residents 5 years and older with limited English proficiency is 8%.
61 Figure 46: Population with Limited English Proficiency Universe: Population 5 years and over
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B16005 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table AFFH-03.

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING

APPENDIX B PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

AND INPUT SUMMARY
From March 15th through April 30th, 342 people participated in the City of Newark’s online community conversation about housing issues and opportunities in Newark. 300 of those responses were in English, 38 in Spanish and 4 in Chinese.

Participants were invited to answer a series of 22 questions covering housing experience and preference, environmental justice and demographic information. The survey was hosted on the SurveyMonkey platform accessible via the city’s webpage.

The survey was distributed and advertised in multilingual materials through various platforms to reach as broad of a cross section of the community as possible. It was promoted through social media, print newsletters, email lists to special populations (e.g., seniors, individuals with developmental disabilities), in-person events, and outreach to partner organizations. Our partner organizations were able to extend our reach to the Latinx community, people experiencing and escaping from domestic violence, individuals transitioning from homelessness, and families in the Newark Unified School District.

Essential insights from the survey are that quality of life, in addition to increasing housing affordability and homeownership opportunities for Newark residents, is of great importance and concern.

Approach to Analyses
The following is a summary of responses to each survey question broken down by answer choice.

Response Count signifies the number of selections made for a particular answer choice while Respondent Percent signifies the number of respondents who chose the answer choice out of the total number of survey respondents (i.e., 342 people), including the 38 Spanish responses and 4 Chinese responses.

Note: For multi-select questions, the respondent percentages may reflect more than one selection by a single individual rather than all unique responses. Additionally, please keep in mind that for these questions the response count will not sum to the number of respondents who answered the question.

APPENDIX B PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND INPUT SUMMARY B-1

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Q1. How concerned are you about the availability of affordable housing in Newark?
Answer Choices Response Count Respondent % (out of 342) Very concerned 182 53%
Somewhat concerned 76 22%
Not that concerned 44 13%
Not at all concerned 35 10%
No opinion/ not sure 4 1%
Number of Respondents 341 100%
Q2. As we look to improve housing opportunities in Newark, which of the following do you think are the three biggest issues we need to address? Answer Choices
Response Count
(multi-select)
Respondent %
(out of 342)
We need more homeownership opportunities
especially for first time homeowners
226 66%
We need more affordable rental opportunities 140 41%
We need to encourage more housing types
(apartments, accessory dwelling Units,
duplexes/triplexes)
93 27%
We need more opportunities for those that are
unhoused or in danger of being unhoused
96 28%
We need stronger protections for renters
(minimum lease terms, relocation benefits)
44 13%
We need low cost home improvement programs for
seniors and those on limited incomes
135 39%
Other (please specify) 60 18%
Number of Respondents 319 93%
APPENDIX B PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND INPUT SUMMARY B-2

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Q3. Thinking about the cost of housing from one year ago … Answer Choices
Response
Count
Respondent %
(out of 342)
It is much less expensive to find a home 8 2%
Somewhat less expensive 6 2%
About the same 22 6%
Somewhat more expensive 73 21%
Much more expensive 188 55%
Does not apply/don't know 10 3%
Number of Respondents 307 90%
Q4. Based on the definition of “affordable” housing as being housing that takes 30% or less of your income to pay for it, how would you describe your current housing situation?
Answer Choices Response Count
Respondent %
(out of 342)
I’m in a home I like at a price I can afford 136 40%
I’m in a home I like but it’s taking more than
30% of my income to be here
97 28%
I’m in a home I can afford, but it’s not a place
I like or meets my needs
54 16%
I’m in a home I can’t afford, and don’t like 28 8%
Number of Respondents 315 92%
APPENDIX B PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND INPUT SUMMARY B-3

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Q5. If you’re not happy with your current housing situation, what would make it better? (Check all that apply.)
Answer Choices
Response Count
(multi-select)
Respondent %
(out of 342)
I need a home with more space 106 31%
I would like to live in a different neighborhood 44 13% I rent, but would like to own my own home 86 25%
I need a place that is more accessible due to disabilities 14 4% I need a home with fewer housemates or roommates 24 7%
I like my home, but need to pay less 67 20%
I’m happy with my current housing situation 113 33%
Number of Respondents 299 87%
Q6. Of the following five options, which three do you think are the most urgent affordable housing needs in Newark at this time? Answer Choices
Response Count
(multi-select)
Respondent %
(out of 342)
Housing for families - larger units with more bedrooms for all families, especially multigenerational or large families 171 50%
Housing for smaller households - smaller units or housing types for young adults and couples starting out, single households, students and seniors looking to downsize
148 43%
Housing for seniors - specific developments for seniors, including housing with supportive services
112 33%
Housing for people with special needs - greater accessibility and supportive services for those with disabilities
47 14%
Housing for those experiencing homelessness - transitional housing and permanent supportive housing
82 24%
Housing for low-income and underserved households – subsidized housing
119 35%
Other (please specify) 30 9%
Number of Respondents 298 87%
APPENDIX B PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND INPUT SUMMARY B-4

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Q7. Thinking about the future of your neighborhood, what gives you optimism?
The survey received more than 200 responses to this question which were categorized and summarized in part in the community engagement summary included in this Housing Element.

Q8. Do you see your neighborhood as a place of opportunity for yourself and/or your family?
Answer Choices
Response
Count
Respondent %
(out of 342)
Yes 121 35%
No 60 18%
Somewhat 96 28%
Number of Respondents 277 81%
Q9. If you didn’t answer yes to the previous question, what are three of the most pressing issues that would need to change to feel like there is more opportunity? (Please select up to three)
Answer Choices
Response Count
(multi-select)
Respondent %
(out of 342)
Pollution from vehicles on neighborhood streets and freeways 55 16% Healthy food and grocery stores close to home or work 71 21% City infrastructure and facilities that support physical activity, including sidewalks, bicycle lanes, parks, and recreation centers 112 33%
Air or chemical pollution from industrial businesses and activities.
52 15%
Easy to access health care facilities 35 10%
Affordable, safe, and healthy housing conditions 106 31% Educational opportunities that are academically and culturally supportive
86 25%
Number of Respondents 219 64%
APPENDIX B PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND INPUT SUMMARY B-5

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Q10. The city could do a variety of things to create more housing affordability. of the following six options, which three do you think are the most promising or worth doing? (Please choose 3)
Answer Choices
Response Count
(multi-select)
Respondent %
(out of 342)
Create incentives for building affordable housing 120 35% Reduce the cost of building all housing, but especially affordable housing through lower fees and faster approvals
113 33%
Allow for a larger variety of housing through the city 93 27% Use city-owned land for affordable housing 94 27%
Use city funds to get more state, federal and private funding for affordable housing (through the city’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund)
117 34%
Enact policies such as inclusionary zoning that allow for a portion of affordable units in each development
96 28%
Number of Respondents 260 76%
Q11. What kind of housing would you like to see more of? (Check all that apply.)
Answer Choices Response Count(multi-select) Respondent % (out of 342) Backyard cottages 125 37%
Duplexes, triplexes and fourplex 86 25%
Cottage clusters 106 31%
Townhomes 104 30%
Small to mid-size multifamily 77 23%
Multifamily buildings downtown 75 22%
Number of Respondents 252 74%
APPENDIX B PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND INPUT SUMMARY B-6

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Q12. Where in Newark would you like to see more housing? (Please select all that apply)
Answer Choices
Response Count
(multi-select)
Respondent %
(out of 342)
Old Town (Thornton Ave between Cherry Street and Ash Street) 141 41% Bayside Newark (formerly known as The Dumbarton
Transit-Oriented Development, near Willow Street and Enterprise Drive)
99 29%
NewPark Place area (Newpark Mall Road and Cedar Blvd) 156 46% Other (please specify) 46 13%
Number of Respondents 248 73%
Q13. Which hazards, both natural and human, do you think are most important for Newark to address? (Please choose three)
Answer Choices
Response Count
(multi-select)
Respondent %
(out of 342)
None of the above 8 2%
Wildfires 53 15%
More frequent and intense heat waves 87 25%
Earthquakes 119 35%
Multi-year drought 179 52%
Sea-level rise and related flooding 150 44%
Hazardous materials spills 70 20%
Other (please specify) 32 9%
Number of Respondents 264 77%
APPENDIX B PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND INPUT SUMMARY B-7

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Q14. How concerned are you about the impact of sea level rise, bringing the possibility of increased flooding to the lower-lying communities of Newark?
Answer Choices
Response
Count
Respondent %
(out of 342)
Very concerned about the impact flooding will have on lower-lying communities
100 29%
Somewhat concerned about the impact flooding will have on these communities
92 27%
Not really concerned about it 50 15%
No opinion, don’t have enough information 26 8%
Number of Respondents 268 78%
Q15. Are there pollution and environmental issues you are concerned about in your neighborhood or larger community? (If so, please check all that apply.)
Answer Choices
Response Count
(multi-select)
Respondent %
(out of 342)
Issues related to car and truck traffic: Noise, air pollution 126 37% Issues connected to industry in the area: air pollution, dangerous fumes, dumping of chemicals
121 35%
Poor quality drinking water 81 24%
Trash in public spaces, vacant lots, graffiti 168 49%
Other (please specify) 29 8%
Number of Respondents 250 73%
APPENDIX B PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND INPUT SUMMARY B-8

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Q16. What is your connection to Newark? (Please select all that apply.) Answer Choices
Response Count
(multi-select)
Respondent %
(out of 342)
Live here 242 71%
Work here 51 15%
Go to school here 40 12%
Have a business here 15 4%
Have family or grew up here (but do not live here) 23 7% Interested in Newark housing issues (but do not live here) 10 3% Number of Respondents 255 75%
Q17. Currently I live…
Answer Choices Response Count Respondent % (out of 342) In a home or condo I own 168 49%
In a home or apartment I rent 72 21%
In an unstable/unhoused situation 3 1%
Prefer not to say 11 3%
Number of Respondents 254 74%
Q18. How would you describe your home?
Answer Choices Response Count Respondent % (out of 342) A single family home 196 57%
A multi-family home such as a duplex or
apartment building
53 15%
A mobile or manufactured home 1 0.3%
Other (please specify) 7 2%
Number of Respondents 250 73%
APPENDIX B PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND INPUT SUMMARY B-9

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Q19. What is your age?
Answer Choices Response Count Respondent % (out of 342) Under 19 1 0.3%
20-29 9 3%
30-49 153 45%
50-69 72 21%
70+ 18 5%
Number of Respondents 253 74%
Q20. What is your race and/or ethnicity? (Check all that apply.) Answer Choices Response Count(multi-select) Respondent % (out of 342) American Indian or Alaskan Native 8 2%
Asian or Asian American 63 18%
Black or African American 3 1%
Hispanic or Latino 82 24%
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 8 2%
White or Caucasian 107 31%
Other (please specify) 10 3%
Number of Respondents 241 70%
APPENDIX B PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND INPUT SUMMARY B-10

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Q21. We would love for you to be involved in this process. If you have not attended public meetings in the past, please share what is keeping you from attending. (Please check all that apply.)
Answer Choices
Response Count
(multi-select)
Respondent %
(out of 342)
I have difficulty understanding what is being said in English 18 5% I don't have the time to attend – too busy with work and/ or family 102 30%
I need child care to attend 25 7%
I don’t feel that my opinions are heard and taken into
consideration 88 26%
The time and /or day of the week meetings are held makes it difficult for me to attend 47 14%
Other (please specify) 52 15%
Number of Respondents 200 58%
Q22. and let us know if there’s anything else you want to tell us:

The city received more than 200 comments which were categorized and used to inform policies and programs reflected in this document.

APPENDIX B PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND INPUT SUMMARY B-11

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING

APPENDIX C HOUSING SITES

INVENTORY
Introduction
A Housing Element must include an inventory of available land that is appropriately zoned and suitable for housing development to accommodate a jurisdiction’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) as required by State law. This inventory for the City of Newark focuses on residential sites that are currently in the development pipeline, or vacant and non-vacant sites that can be made available for housing development affordable at varying income levels. This Appendix summarizes the evaluation of potential housing sites, and the adequacy of sites to meet development capacities to accommodate the City’s regional housing needs for the 2023-2031 planning period.

California law (Government Code Sections 65583 (a)(3)) requires that the Housing Element contain an inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites and non-vacant (i.e., underutilized) sites having potential for development. State law also requires an analysis of the relationship to zoning and services to these sites as well as identifying sites throughout the community, in a manner that is consistent with its duty to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH).

The analysis presented in this Appendix demonstrates that there is an adequate supply of suitable land to accommodate the City’s housing allocation of 1,874 units, plus a surplus of 980 units to act as a “buffer” if sites develop to non-residential or at different affordability levels than assumed in the sites inventory. This section is organized by the following topics:
● Summary of Newark’s projected housing needs by AMI level ● Capacity to Accommodate RHNA
● Sites selection process, including a description of the methodology and evaluation of site criteria, realistic unit capacity, and sites to accommodate varied income levels ● Evaluation of sites in meeting AFFH requirements
● Individual site profiles
Projected Housing Needs
A key component of any Housing Element Update is identifying adequate sites to address the jurisdiction’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) determines state-wide projected housing needs and allocates new housing unit target numbers to regional councils of government (COGs). State law (California Government Code Section 65584) provides for COGs to then prepare and adopt plans APPENDIX C HOUSING SITES C-1

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
that assign a “fair share” of the region’s housing needs to each city and county. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is the COG that determines fair-share portions of state allocations for Newark. .

The City’s RHNA requirements for the 2023-2031 Housing Element projection period are summarized in Table C- 1 below. For the 2023-2031 Housing Element planning period, the City of Newark is required to plan to accommodate the development of at least 1,874 housing units. This includes 464 units for very low-income households, 268 units for low-income households, 318 units for moderate-income households, and 824 units for above moderate-income households.

Housing Needs for Extremely Low-Income Households
Although the RHNA does not include allocations for extremely low-income households, Housing Element Law requires that jurisdictions estimate the need for housing units affordable to extremely low-income households and plan to accommodate this need. Extremely low-income households are those with incomes less than 30% of area median income. In Alameda County, 30% of the AMI is the equivalent to an annual income of $42,850 for a family of four. Households with extremely low incomes have a variety of housing situations and needs. For example, most families and individuals receiving public assistance, such as supplemental security insurance (SSI) or disability insurance, are considered extremely low-income households. Many households with multiple wage earners – including food service workers, full-time students, teachers, farmworkers, and healthcare professionals – can also fall into lower AMI categories due to relatively stagnant wages in these industries.

HCD’s official Housing Element guidance notes that jurisdictions can use their RHNA for very low-income households (those making zero to 50 percent AMI) to calculate their projected need for extremely low-income households. HCD provides three methodologies for estimating this need: 1) allocate the percentage of very low-income need to extremely low-income households based on the ABAG region’s proportion; 2) allocate the percentage of very low-income need to extremely low -income households based on the current proportion for Newark; 3) assume that 50 percent of Newark’s very low-income RHNA is for extremely low-income households. To estimate the projected housing need for extremely low-income households, 50 percent of Newark’s 464 very low-income RHNA units are assumed to serve extremely low-income households. Based on this methodology, the City has a projected need of 232 units for extremely low-income households over the 2023-2031 Housing Element planning period. More than half of this allocation will be provided through the Cedar Creek Apartments, which is already in the development pipeline and has received $6M in funding support from the City’s Affordable Housing Impact Fee Fund.

APPENDIX C HOUSING SITES C-2

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Capacity to Accommodate RHNA
The total realistic development capacity of all sites in the land inventory is detailed in Table C-1 below which lists all consolidated sites in the sites inventory and total residential capacity against the City’s 6th cycle RHNA. The total realistic capacity shown is 2,854 units, which exceeds the net target of 1,874 units the City is required to plan to accommodate for its RHNA, and also supplements that allocation by providing a significant buffer representing more than 100 percent of the required RHNA for all income levels; this includes a 13 percent buffer for very low-income units and 10 percent for low-income units. HCD recommends that jurisdictions provide a 15 to 30 percent buffer beyond the minimum RHNA target to comply with the “no net loss” provisions of State Housing Element Law that require the jurisdiction to maintain sufficient capacity to accommodate its RHNA for the duration of the planning period at every income level. In addition to considering the aggregate number of units that the sites can accommodate, it is necessary to consider the potential for sites to accommodate housing that is affordable to all income levels, in accordance with the RHNA allocations, as discussed in the “Evaluation of Sites to Accommodate Varied Income Levels” .

Each of the two primary project types, Pipeline Projects and Sites Zoned for Housing, are presented in Table C-1 below and described in further detail in the Sites Selection section. As shown in Table C-1, the number of units from Pipeline Projects represents 67 percent of the city’s RHNA, including 59 percent of Newark’s RHNA for very low-income (VLI) housing. Though these Pipeline units do not fulfill the RHNA allocation at every income level, this demonstrates there are sufficient sites for the City’s RHNA and provides strong evidence there is residential developer interest and economic feasibility for housing development on the types of sites, including non-vacant sites, identified in this inventory. Table C-2 lists the APNs and acreage for all sites zoned for housing.

The following map shows the distribution of sites throughout the City of Newark with an inset for the boundary of the Old Town Specific Plan. Parcels indicated in yellow are active project sites (pipeline projects) while sites indicated in red are sites zoned for housing, or locations whose zoning and land use will support new housing. The map also shows three specific plan areas: Old Town Specific Plan, Bayside Newark, and NewPark Place Specific Plan. The site numbers match data in the following tables which show unit counts and the more detailed summary sheets found later in this document.

APPENDIX C HOUSING SITES C-3

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Figure C-1: Housing Sites for the RHNA 6th Cycle
Source: Adapted by Community Planning Collaborative, 2023 APPENDIX C HOUSING SITES C-4

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Table C-1: City of Newark Sites Inventory
Site Name
Income Level
Total Units
Very Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate
Planned and Proposed Projects (Also known as pipeline projects are sites 1 through 13) 1 Bridgeway / Gateway
(under construction)
0 0 0 134 134
2 FMC Willow - North (Parcel C)
(entitled)
47 23 21 64 155
3 FMC Willow - South
(entitled)
0 0 0 215 215
4 Harbor Pointe
(under construction)
0 0 0 192 192
5 Cedar Homes- 38478 Cedar Boulevard
(entitled)
0 0 0 118 118
6 Cedar Community Apts.
(complete)
124 0 0 1 125
7 Timber St. Senior Living
(entitled)
39 39 1 0 79
8 Lepakshi Homes - Building A, 6781 Thornton
Ave.
(active application)
0 0 0 60 60
9 Lepakshi Homes - Building B, 6781 Thornton
Ave.
(active application)
8 4 3 13 28
10 SAHA Development- 6347 -6375 Thornton
Ave.
(active application)
56 0 1 0 57
11 Mulberry Residential 36952 Mulberry Street
(entitled)
0 0 0 8 8
12 Bain Ave. & Magnolia St. - 37280 Magnolia
Street
(under construction)
0 0 0 10 10
13 Waymark Homes - Cedar Blvd (entitled) 0 0 0 76 76
Subtotal Planned and Proposed 274 66 26 891 1,257
Sites Zoned for Housing (Vacant and Nonvacant sites are sites 14 through 28) APPENDIX C HOUSING SITES C-5

NEWARK GENERAL PLAN HOUSING
Site Name
Income Level
Total Units
Very Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate
14 NewPark Place (Phases A to D) 36 18 18 535 607
15 Grocery Outlet Shopping Center 27 26 0 0 53
16 Thornton Ave. Sites (within Old Town
Specific Plan boundary)
41 41 40 40 162
17 Cedar Blvd. and Timber St. Industrial Sites 0 0 0 61 61 18 E-Z 8 Motel 39 38 0 0 77
19 Cherry Plaza 15 15 0 0 30
20 Thornton Ave. Sites (outside of Old Town
Specific Plan boundary)
18 18 18 17 71
21 Sycamore St. Vacant Lot 25 25 24 0 74
22 Cedar Blvd. Public Storage Sites 0 0 0 41 41
23 Filbert Villas - 37243 & 37257 Filbert St.
(expired entitlement)
0 0 0 16 16
24 Filbert Ave. Sites 0 0 0 7 7
25 Mayhews Place - 36589 Newark Boulevard
(expired entitlement)
0 0 0 9 9
26 Locust St. & Railroad - 37093 Locust St.
(expired entitlement)
0 0 0 6 6
27 Fahmy Homes - 37503 & 37511 Cherry
Street (expired entitlement)
0 0 0 6 6
28 Neighborhood Infill Lots 0 0 0 17 17
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) 48 48 48 16 160
Middle Housing Units 0 0 200 0 200
Subtotal Sites Zoned for Housing 249 229 348 771 1,597
Total Capacity 523 295 374 1,662 2,854
Newark RHNA 464 268 318 824 1,874
Surplus % 113% 110% 118% 202% 152%
Surplus Units 59 27 56 838 980
Source: City of Newark; Community Planning Collaborative, 2023.