Ontario City Council
March 1, 2022

MU-1= Downtown Mixed-Use; LUA-1 = Euclid Avenue Entertainment; LUA-2N = Arts; LUA-3 = Holt Boulevard; LUA-4 = Civic Center; MU-2 = East Holt Mixed-Use, MU-11 = Euclid/Francis Mixed-Use Industrial Zoning Districts:

BP = Business Park; IL = Light Industrial; IG = General Industrial; IH = Heavy Industrial Overlays and Specialized Use Zoning Districts
AG = Agriculture Overlay; CIV = Civic; MHP = Mobile Home Park 1 Mobile Homes/Manufactured Homes are treated as single-family homes and permitted by right anywhere single-family homes are permitted. 1870
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-156 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
1871
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-157
Single- and Multiple-Family Housing
The City permits single-family and multiple-family housing types as by-right uses in their respective zoning districts. The City allows a multitude of single-family housing land uses to encourage a variety of design and allow for small-lot and/or infill development. Traditional single-family housing is permitted by right in the most zoning districts (AR-2, RE-2, RE-4, LDR-5, MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25, HDR-45, LUA-1, LUA-3, and AG), followed by single-family dwellings on small lots (RE4, LDR-5, MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25, HDR-45, LUA-1, LUA-3, and MU2). Single-family dwellings, alley-loaded, and single-family dwellings, clustered, are allowed by right in the same zoning districts: MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25, HDR-45, LUA-1, LUA-3, and MU-2. Small-lot infill subdivisions are allowed by right in the MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25, HDR-45, LUA-1, LUA-2N, LUA-3, and MU-2 zoning districts. Flexibility in residential subdivision design can also be achieved through a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay District that conditionally permits a range of housing types in every residential zone. The PUD is a tool to encourage and facilitate innovative design, variety, and flexibility in housing products that would otherwise not be allowed in other zoning districts. Under a PUD, the City may permit attached and detached single-family residences, townhomes, and zero lot line and any other type of housing product permitted by the regulations of the underlying zone.

Multiple-family housing is permitted by right in medium- and highdensity residential zones (MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25, and HDR-45) and mixed-use zones (LUA-1, LUA-2, LUA-3, LUA-4, MU-2, and MU-11).

Mixed-Use
Residential mixed-use projects are projects containing single-family and/or multiple-family dwellings constructed in conjunction with a variety of complementary commercial land uses—such as office, retail, public, or entertainment—in the same building or site as an integrated development that has both significant functional interrelationships and a coherent physical design. Mixed-use can be vertically integrated or horizontally placed (side by side). Mixed-use developments are permitted by right in the LUA-1, LUA-2N, LUA-3, LUA-4, MU-2, and MU-11 zoning districts and conditionally permitted in the CN and CC zoning districts. The 2050 Policy Plan established 12 Mixed-Use land use designations to support the development vision in important corridors within the city, creating focal points for community activity and identity and to integrate transit. While not all 12 mixed-use land use designations have a corresponding zoning district, the Downtown Mixed-Use zoning districts (MU-1 and subdistricts LUA-1, LUA-2N, LUA-2S, LUA-3, and LUA-4) support the Downtown Mixed-Use designation, the MU-2 supports the East Holt Mixed-Use designation, and MU-11 supports the 1872
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-158 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Euclid/Francis Mixed-Use designation, integrating more opportunities for housing in these neighborhoods.

Mobile Homes and Manufactured Housing
Mobile homes or manufactured housing offer an affordable housing option to many low- and moderate-income households. California Government Code Section 65852.3 requires cities to treat certified mobile homes (manufactured homes) on a permanent foundation for permanent occupancy the same as single-family dwellings. They may not be excluded from lots zoned for single-family dwellings and are subject to the same rules as site-built homes, except for certain architectural requirements. Further, a city may not require an administrative permit, planning or development process, or requirement that is not imposed on a conventional single-family dwelling.

The City allows, by right, factory-built housing in all zones permitting single-family dwellings. Factory-built housing on residential lots not constructed within a mobile home park must conform to the same development standards applied to site-built homes with regards to setbacks, parking, placement, and other standards, but have additional specific architectural requirements related to exterior finish and roofing material to blend factory-built housing with site-built housing. Mobile home units may also be used as rental accessory dwelling units (ADUs) subject to certain construction standards (e.g., National Mobile Home Construction and Safety Standards of 1974), and architectural requirements. These standards do not impose a constraint on the placement of mobile homes or unreasonable cost burdens on mobile homeowners since new factory-built homes normally comply with the City’s requirements with little or no modification.

Mobile homes are allowed by right in the Mobile Home Park (MHP) zone constructed as mobile home parks, permitting 5.1 to 8.0 du/ac. According to the 2021 Department of Finance numbers, an estimated 2,175 mobile homes are located in the city.

Accessory Dwelling Units
ADUs (second units) are defined in the Development Code (see Section

5.03.010) as an ancillary dwelling unit providing complete independent living facilities for one household located on a parcel with the primary single-unit dwelling that houses a separate household. As of January 2022, the City was drafting an updated ordinance which will clarify that ADUs are allowed on lots zoned for single-family residences with a proposed or existing single- family residence on the lot (Program 20). An ADU may be within the same structure as the primary unit, in an attached structure, or in a separate structure on the same parcel. State legislation 1873
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-159
requires jurisdictions to allow ADUs that meet certain standards by right anywhere that single-family or multifamily uses are allowed. Junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs), that is, smaller units located entirely within an existing single-family primary unit, are also allowed under state law.

Ontario permits ADUs by right in all zoning districts where single-family and multiple-family residential is permitted, including mixed-use zoning districts, subject to the provisions of the Development Code Section

5.03.010. Ontario allows detached and attached ADUs up to 800 square feet for a studio or one bedroom and 1,000 square feet for a unit with two or more bedrooms. ADUs are permitted through an approved ministerial ADU permit, although some conversions or detached ADUs only require an approved building permit.

The City adopted updates to the ADU ordinance as a part of the development Code update in 2020 to comply with State law. During the planning period, the City will implement the ADU ordinance and update it to comply with any new State requirements (Program 20). Additionally, the City will explore initiatives to promote ADU development as an affordable housing option, including considering establishing a loan program for homeowners for ADUs, market ADU guidance materials, and create frequently-asked-questions webpage for ADUs on the City’s website (Program 27).

4.5 Special-Needs Housing
State law requires that housing elements analyze the needs of certain groups of households that have special housing needs. Furthermore, state and federal fair housing laws are designed to ensure that persons and families with special housing needs (e.g., disabled people [including those with developmental disabilities], homeless people, etc.) have adequate access to a full range of housing opportunities. An important component of meeting this challenge is to ensure that adequate housing opportunities are permitted in the community.

Table 4-8 summarizes the types of special-needs housing allowed in each zoning district in Ontario and whether the type of housing is permitted by right or conditionally permitted. Where a land use is not expressly permitted, the use is considered prohibited by the Municipal Code. 1874
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-160 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 4-8
Special-Needs Housing Permitted by Zoning District
Special-Needs Uses Residential
Zoning Districts
Professional and Commercial
Zoning Districts Mixed-Use Zoning Districts Industrial Zoning Districts Specialized Use
and Overlay
Zoning Districts
Additional
Regulations
(Development
Code
References)
AR-2 & RE-2
RE-4 & LDR-5
MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25
HDR-45
CS
CNCCCR
CCS
OL
OH
MU-1
MU-2
MU-11
BP
IP
IL
IG
IH
AG
CIV
MHP
LUA-1
LUA-2N
LUA-2S
LUA-3LUA-4
Senior Citizen Housing -- -- P P -- -- C -- -- -- -- P -- -- P P -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Section 5.03.360 Continuing Care Retirement
Communities
6 or fewer clients
*P *P *P *P -- -- -- -- -- -- -- *P *P *P *P *P *P -- -- -- -- -- *P -- -- Continuing Care Retirement
Communities More than 6 clients -- -- C C -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- C Assisted Living Facilities for the
Elderly
6 or fewer clients
*P *P *P *P -- -- -- -- -- -- -- *P *P *P *P *P *P -- -- -- -- -- *P -- -- Section 5.03.110 Assisted Living Facilities for the
Elderly
More than 6 clients
-- -- C C -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- C Section 5.03.105 Nursing Care Facilities -- -- -- -- -- -- C C -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- C Residential Intellectual and
Development Disability, Mental
Health, and Substance Abuse
Facilities
6 or fewer clients
*P *P *P *P -- -- -- -- -- -- -- *P *P *P *P *P *P -- -- -- -- -- *P -- -- Residential Intellectual and
Development Disability, Mental
Health, and Substance Abuse
Facilities
More than 6 clients
-- -- C C -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- C Other Residential Care Facilities
6 or fewer clients *P *P *P *P -- -- -- -- -- -- -- *P *P *P *P *P *P -- -- -- -- -- *P -- -- Section 5.03.345 1875
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-161
Special-Needs Uses Residential
Zoning Districts
Professional and Commercial
Zoning Districts Mixed-Use Zoning Districts Industrial Zoning Districts Specialized Use
and Overlay
Zoning Districts
Additional
Regulations
(Development
Code
References)
AR-2 & RE-2
RE-4 & LDR-5
MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25
HDR-45
CS
CNCCCR
CCS
OL
OH
MU-1
MU-2
MU-11
BP
IP
IL
IG
IH
AG
CIV
MHP
LUA-1
LUA-2N
LUA-2S
LUA-3LUA-4
Other Residential Care Facilities
More than 6 clients -- -- C C -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- C Boarding, Lodging, and Rooming
Houses A A A C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- A -- A Section 5.03.080 Single-Room Occupancy (SRO)
Facilities -- -- -- C -- -- C -- C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Section 5.03.360 Emergency Shelters -- -- C -- -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- P C C -- C C Section 5.03.405 Supportive Housing P P P -- -- -- C -- -- -- -- C -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- P C -- -- C -- Section 5.03.405 Transitional Housing P P P P -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- P C C -- C P Section 5.03.405 Transitional Living Centers -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- C -- -- -- -- -- C C C -- -- -- Section 5.03.405 Low-Barrier Navigation Centers1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Employee (Farmworker) Housing -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- P -- -- Section 5.03.177 Source: City of Ontario, 2021.
1 Low-Barrier Navigation Centers are addressed by Program 20. *Allowed only in conjunction with an existing single-family residence.

P=Permitted Use C=Conditionally Permitted Use A=Administratively Permitted Use -- = Prohibited Residential Zoning Districts:

AR-2 = Residential-Agricultural 0-2; RE-2 = Rural Estate 0-2; RE-4 = Residential Estate 2-4; LDR-5 = Low-Density Residential 2-5; MDR-11 = Low-Medium-Density Residential 5-11; MDR-11 = Low-Medium-Density Residential 11-18; MDR-25 = Low-Medium-Density Residential 18-25; HDR-45 = High-Density Residential 25-45 Commercial Zoning Districts:

CS = Corner Store; CN = Commercial Neighborhood; CC = Community Commercial; CR = Regional Commercial; CCS = Convention Center Support Commercial; OL = Low Intensity Office; OH = High Intensity Office Mixed-Use Zoning Districts:

MU-1= Downtown Mixed-Use; LUA-1 = Euclid Avenue Entertainment; LUA-2N = Arts; LUA-3 = Holt Boulevard; LUA-4 = Civic Center; MU-2 = East Holt Mixed-Use, MU-11 = Euclid/Francis Mixed-Use Industrial Zoning Districts:

BP = Business Park; IL = Light Industrial; IG = General Industrial; IH = Heavy Industrial Overlays and Specialized Use Zoning Districts
AG = Agriculture Overlay; CIV = Civic; MHP = Mobile Home Park 1876
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-162 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Senior Housing
The Development Code contains regulations that encourage the production or location of a continuum of housing suitable for seniors. The intent of these ordinances is to ensure that seniors have the ability to remain in Ontario throughout their lives regardless of medical condition.

The major types of senior housing facilities are summarized below. • Senior Citizen Housing Development. Senior citizen housing developments are designed to meet the physical and social needs of seniors consistent with the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. The City permits by right senior citizen housing developments in the MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25, HDR-45, LUA1, LUA-3, and LUA-4 zones and conditionally permits senior housing in the CC zone and offers significant incentives for new senior housing. Applications for senior citizen housing developments are reviewed based on their proximity to
frequently-serviced public transit, parks and open space, medical facilities, libraries, and pharmacies. Additionally, senior citizen housing developments must provide high-speed internet, a service coordinator to assist with activities of daily living, and an exercise facility.
• Nursing Care Facilities (Convalescent Homes [Hospital], Rest Home, or Rehabilitation Facility). Nursing care facilities are lodging and care facilities for those who are convalescing, invalids, or aged persons, in which surgery is not performed and primary treatment given in hospitals is not provided. These uses are permitted conditionally in the CC, CR, OH, and MHP zones. • Residential Care Facilities. As discussed in later sections, the City also allows state-licensed community care facilities and residential care facilities for the elderly, further categorized in the Development Code Table 5.02-1 (Land Use Matrix) as Continuing Care Retirement Communities and Assisted Living Facilities for the Elderly. Community Care Facilities, including those that serve seniors, comply with the Community Care Facilities Act and are discussed below within the Community Care Facilities section.

The City has excellent examples of facilities offering CoC options for seniors. Inland Christian Home, a nonprofit provider of health and retirement care services for the elderly, has four facilities that provide accommodations for seniors. These include independent living, memory care, assisted living, and skilled nursing facilities.
1877
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-163
Community Care Facilities
The Welfare and Institutions Code (Lanterman-Petris Act) and the Health and Safety Code (Community Care Facilities Act) declare that it is the policy of the state that people with a wide variety of disabilities are entitled to live in normal residential settings. The Health and Safety Code (California Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly Act) also extends this protection to elderly persons. State law sets forth regulations and guidelines for care facilities that preempt or limit many local regulations.

Facilities covered under these acts include:
• Residential care facility
• Adult day program
• Therapeutic day services facility
• Foster family agency or home
• Small family home
• Social rehabilitation facility
• Community treatment facility
• Full-service adoption agency
• Noncustodial adoption agency
• Transitional shelter care facility
• Transitional housing placement facility
• Residential care facility for the elderly (Continuing Care Retirement Communities and Assisted Living Facilities for the Elderly)
• Alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility (Residential Mental Health and Substance Abuse Facilities) • Congregate care facility
The Health and Safety Code (Section 1500 et seq.) requires that licensed community care facilities serving six or fewer persons be (1) treated the same as a residential use; (2) allowed by right in all residential zones; and (3) treated the same with respect to regulations, fees, taxes, and permit processes as other residential uses in the same zone. The Health and Safety Code extends this protection to residential care facilities for the elderly (Section 1569.84 et seq.), to alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or 1878
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-164 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
treatment facilities (Section 11834.22 et seq.), and to congregate care facilities (Section 1267.16 et seq.), all of which serve no more than six clients.

As required by Health and Safety Code Section 1569.84 et seq., community care facilities serving six or fewer people are allowed by right in the residential zoning districts and the LUA-1, LUA-2N, LUA-2S, LUA3, MU-2, MU-11, and the AG zoning districts. Licensed community care facilities are also subject to the same development standards, fees, taxes, and permitting processes as other similar residential uses in the same zone. Large facilities (seven or more persons) are conditionally permitted in the MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25, HDR-45, MU-11, and MHP zoning districts. To expand the use of care facilities for seven or more persons, the City has included Program 20 to explore amending provisions in the Municipal Code to allow state-licensed residential care facilities for seven or more persons only subject to those restrictions that apply to residential uses in the same zone or otherwise amending the Municipal Code to make it easier to locate a state-licensed residential care facility for seven or more persons in the city. Residential care facilities would still be subject to state licensing.

Boarding, Lodging, or Rooming House
In contrast to community care facilities licensed by the State of California, boarding, lodging, and rooming houses are non-licensed facilities. This category refers to a residence or dwelling other than a hotel wherein one or more rooms with or without individual or group cooking facilities are rented, leased, or subleased to individuals under separate agreements, either written or oral.

Unlike licensed community care facilities, cities can regulate such boarding, lodging, and rooming houses that are not used as transitional or supportive housing. “A city may prohibit, limit or regulate the operation of a boarding house or rooming house business in a singlefamily home located in a low-density residential (R-1) zone, where boarding house is defined as a residence or dwelling, other than a hotel, wherein three or more rooms, with or without individual or group cooking facilities are: rented to individuals under separate rental agreements or lease in order to preserve the residential character of the neighborhood” (86 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 30 (2003)). The City permits boarding, lodging, or rooming houses in the AR-2, RE-2, RE-4, LDR-5, MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25, AG, and MHP zoning districts with an approved administrative use permit and the HDR-45 zoning district with a conditional use permit.
1879
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-165
Boarding, lodging, or rooming houses have, at times, been a source of concern that they be operated in a manner compatible with residential neighborhoods. To that end, the City Municipal Code requires that such homes cannot be occupied by more than one federal, state, or youth authority parolee. Moreover, all such homes shall require boarders to sign a “Crime-Free Lease Addendum” to their rental or lease agreement. In Program 20, the City commits to reviewing and removing this restriction to prevent discrimination based on criminal history (see California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 12264-12271). The Municipal Code limits providing accommodations to a maximum occupancy of six individuals, excluding a resident owner, agent, or manager. The operator may seek relief from the strict application of this provision by submitting a request for reasonable accommodation pursuant to Section 4.02.035 (Fair Housing and Reasonable Accommodation).

Single-Room Occupancy
The City permits single-room occupancy (SRO) uses within the community. The Development Code defines SRO uses as a cluster of five or more dwelling units on one property for weekly or longer tenancy and providing sleeping and living facilities for one or two persons within the unit, in which sanitary facilities are also normally provided and cooking facilities may be provided within each unit or shared by multiple units.

SROs are conditionally permitted in three zones (HDR-45, CC, and CCS).

To secure a conditional use permit, a comprehensive management plan must be submitted with the application. The operator must submit a plan that includes the company or agency responsible for resident selection, day-to-day maintenance of the facility, proposed security arrangements, and background information and references about the proposed management company or agency. Moreover, SROs may not be located within 500 feet of any school for children, church, daycare facility, or other existing SRO facility. SRO units are an important source of affordable housing for extremely low-income households. In Programs 20 and 32, the City commits to addressing the needs of extremely lowincome households, including expanding affordable housing opportunities. As a part of this effort, the City will explore amending the Development Code to reduce location constraints for SRO facilities and permitting SROs through a ministerial process rather than requiring a conditional use permit or administrative use permit.

Housing for Homeless People
In recognition of the homeless population in Ontario, and with the desire to act affirmatively to address the issue, the City entered into an agreement with Mercy House to implement a CoC. Under the CoC, Mercy House operates a homeless intake center, transitional housing, and 1880
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-166 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
permanent affordable housing, including housing with supportive services. Regulations were subsequently adopted to facilitate the completion and implementation of the CoC.

Emergency Shelters
The California Health and Safety Code (Section 50801) 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 households may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay.”
California Government Code Section 65583(a)(4) states that every jurisdiction must identify a zone or zones where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a conditional use or other discretionary permit. The identified zone or zones must include sufficient capacity to accommodate the need for an emergency shelter as identified in the housing element, and each jurisdiction must identify a zone or zones to accommodate at least one year-round shelter. Adequate sites can include sites with existing buildings that can be converted to emergency shelters to accommodate the need for emergency shelters.

The Development Code permits an emergency shelter by right in the IL zone and conditionally permits an emergency shelter in the MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25, CC, LUA-3, IG, and IH zones. Emergency shelters are also permitted by right in the Emergency Shelter Overlay, subject to the base zone standards and consistent with California Government Code Section 65583(4)(A).

The overlay zone is an approximately 500-foot-deep area on the north side of Mission Boulevard and bounded by Benson Avenue on the west and Magnolia Avenue on the east. The overlay area is suitable for emergency shelters since it is near two transit routes (Mission Boulevard and Mountain Avenue) and services, such as a grocery store. The overlay zone comprises 36 acres of land, of which, 0.4 acres are vacant (additionally, the area has 38 parcels, 4 of which are vacant). Many of the parcels in the proposed overlay district are underutilized, providing many opportunities for developing new facilities or reusing or converting underutilized buildings into one or more shelters. The overlay zone contains five properties that have transient lodging that might be suitable for conversion to an emergency shelter, should one be warranted in the community. Figure 4-1 provides a map for the location of the Emergency Shelter Overlay.
1881
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-167
Figure 4-1 Emergency Shelter Overlay
1882
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-168 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
The City has objective development and management standards that are designed to encourage and facilitate the development of emergency shelters:
• The maximum length of stay for an Emergency Shelter client shall be six months.
• On-site management shall be provided during the hours that the Emergency Shelter is in operation.
• On-site security shall be provided during the hours that the Emergency Shelter is in operation.
• No more than 20 client/tenant beds shall be allowed within any Emergency Shelter.
• An intake waiting area equal to a minimum of 10 square feet for each client/tenant bed shall be provided.
• The exterior of the intake waiting areas shall be screened from public view by a six-foot-high decorative masonry block wall and appropriate landscaping.
• A storage area for use by clients/tenants shall be provided at a rate of seven square feet for each client/tenant bed.
• A storage area is not required to be provided adjacent to the respective client/tenant bed.
• An emergency shelter shall provide lavatory, toilet, and shower facilities adequate for the number of clients/tenants served; however, a minimum of one such facility shall be provided for each 15 client/tenant beds.

Program 20 commits the City to reviewing these standards and revising as needed to be consistent with California Government Code Section 65583(a)(4), including establishing sufficient parking requirements to accommodate all staff working in the emergency shelter.

Transitional and Supportive Housing
Consistent with Health and Safety Code Section 50675.14(b)(2), the City defines supportive housing as “housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community.” Target population refers to persons, including persons with disabilities, youth, and families experiencing homelessness. Transitional housing is intended 1883
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-169
as a middle point between emergency shelters and permanent housing, providing shelter up to two years, in an environment of security and support, which is designed to help residents progress toward selfsufficiency.

Transitional housing and supportive housing must be permitted as a residential use and only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone (Government Code Section 65583(a)(5)). The City permits transitional housing by right in residential zoning districts and IL and MHP zones, and conditionally permits transitional housing in CC, IG, IH, and CIV zones. Supportive housing is permitted by right in all residential zones, except HDR-45, and is permitted by right in IL zones. Supportive housing is conditionally permitted in CC, LUA-1, LUA-3, IG, and CIV zones. Currently, transitional housing and supportive housing are not permitted in all mixed-use zoning districts (LUA-2N, LUA-2S, MU-2, and MU-11) that permit residential uses, and supportive housing is not permitted in the HDR-45 zoning district. To comply with Government Code Section 65583(a)(5), the City has included Program 20 to amend the Development Code to permit transitional housing and supportive housing in all zoning districts that permit residential uses, including mixed-use and nonresidential zoning districts, subject only to the same regulations as similar uses in the same zone.

Low-Barrier Navigation Centers
California Government Code Section 65662 requires that the development of Low-Barrier Navigation Centers be developed as a use by right in zones where mixed-uses are allowed or in nonresidential zones that permit multifamily 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 are 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.

Currently, the City does not recognize low-barrier navigation centers as a permitted use. Program 20 has been included to comply with Government Code Sections 65660-65662.
1884
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-170 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Farmworker Housing
The City has established an Agricultural Overlay District (AG overlay), which covers the entire Ontario Ranch area. The intent of the Agricultural Overlay District is to allow for the continuation of agricultural uses on an interim basis until such time as a specific plan is proposed for urbanized uses. The Agricultural Overlay District is designed to limit land use activity to uses compatible with and supportive of agricultural uses.

The Health and Safety Code (Section 17021.6) declares that each city must permit and encourage the development and use of sufficient numbers and types of employee housing facilities commensurate with local needs.

Section 17021.5 requires that employee housing providing accommodations for six or fewer employees shall be deemed a singlefamily structure with a residential land use designation, treated as a residential use of property, and that the use not be subject to any regulations or fees not otherwise required of a single-family residence within the same zone. For facilities with 7 to 12 units or spaces, the use shall be considered an agricultural use, subject only to regulations applied to any agricultural use in the same zone, and the permitted occupancy may include employees who do not work on the property where the employee housing is located. Section 17021.8 requires a streamlined, ministerial application process for qualifying agricultural employee housing on land designated as Agricultural (AG) in the City’s Policy Plan. While the City no longer has any areas designated as AG, it has included Program 20 to review Development Code Section 5.03.177 to fully comply with the requirements of the Employment Housing Act, including Sections 17021.5, 17021.6, and 17021.8.

The Municipal Code allows for the following uses to provide housing for farmworkers:
• Employee (Farmworker) Housing. Employee housing for
farmworkers is only permitted in the AG overlay, where it is allowed by right. Consistent with Section 17021.5 of the Health and Safety Code, the City deems farmworker dwelling units providing accommodations for six or fewer employees, or for one employee and their respective household, a single-family structure. Farmworker dwelling units for six or fewer occupants are permitted by right in the AG overlay and all zoning districts that allow single-family dwellings, subject to the same development standards for single-family dwellings. A
farmworker housing complex consisting of up to 36 beds in a group quarter, or 12 units or spaces designed for use by a single family or household, is deemed an agricultural use. The City does not require farmworker housing to be on the same site as the qualifying agricultural operation where the farmworkers are 1885
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-171
employed, but does require a minimum lot size of 10 acres for farmworker housing.
• Caretaker’s Quarters. Caretaker’s quarters are designed to accommodate employees living on-site to provide security and surveillance, including agricultural operations in the AG overlay.

The unit size is restricted to no more than 600 square feet and is limited to one bedroom. These uses are permitted by right in the AG overlay and conditionally permitted in the CN, CC, CR, CCS, OH, BP, IL, IG, and IH zones.
• Accessory Residential Structures (Guest House). Guest houses are permitted by right in all residential zones, LUA-1, LUA-2N, LUA3, and the AG overlay. Guest houses cannot exceed 650 square feet, only one is permitted per lot containing a single-family dwelling, and quarters are reserved for temporary use (period not exceeding 90 days) of the residents of the property, their nonpaying guests, family, or persons employed on the residence.

Guest houses shall not be rented.

Agricultural employment is relatively minor in the community, and the type of agricultural work is year-round and not migrant labor. Ontario’s primary agricultural industry is dairy, which is highly automated and generally family-owned and operated. Some dairy farms employ farmworkers to assist with the daily operations, but the use of technology, automation, and family labor has minimized the need for additional farmworkers. Dairy work is relatively constant, and employees, who are often family members, live on-site. Today, many dairy farms have two or more dwellings to accommodate the owner/operator and several key employees.

4.6 Housing for People with Disabilities
California Government Code Section 65583 requires that the housing element analyze potential and actual constraints on the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities and demonstrate local efforts to remove governmental constraints that hinder the locality from meeting the need for housing for persons with disabilities (California Government Code, Section 65583(a)(4)). As part of the required constraints program, the element must include programs that remove constraints or provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for persons with disabilities (California Government Code, Section 65583(c)(3)). This section addresses these requirements. 1886
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-172 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Allowance of Land Uses
State law requires group homes serving six or fewer persons to be (1) treated the same as any residential use; (2) allowed by right in all residential zones; and (3) subject to the same standards, fees, taxes, and permitting procedures as those imposed on the same type of housing in the same zone. These laws ensure that housing opportunities are available for people with disabilities and that such uses are not discriminated against. The City currently permits such uses by right in all residential zones. To expand the use of care facilities for any number of occupants, the City has included Program 20 to explore amending provisions in the Municipal Code to allow state-licensed residential care facilities for seven or more persons only subject to those restrictions that apply to residential uses in the same zone. Residential care facilities would still be subject to state licensing.

State law requires local governments to identify adequate sites, development standards, and a permitting process to facilitate and encourage the development of emergency shelters and transitional housing.

New Construction/Building Codes
Cities that use federal funds must, in all new construction and substantial rehabilitation projects, ensure that at least 5 percent of the units are accessible to persons with mobility impairments and another 2 percent are accessible to persons with hearing or visual impairments. Multiplefamily housing must be built so that (1) the public and common-use portions of such units are readily accessible and usable by persons with disabilities, (2) doors allowing passage into and within such units can accommodate wheelchairs, and (3) all units contain adaptive design features.

The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) also recommends, but does not require, that all design, construction, and alterations incorporate, wherever practical, the concept of visitability. This recommendation is in addition to requirements of Section 504 and the Fair Housing Act. Recommended construction practices include wide openings for bathrooms and interior doorways and at least one accessible means of egress/ingress per unit. The City enforces federal and state accessibility laws through the building plan check and permit process.
1887
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-173
Rehabilitation of Units
In an older community with many homes built prior to the development of modern accessibility standards for people with disabilities, allowing the retrofit of homes for people with disabilities is an important issue.

Federal law requires that substantial rehabilitation projects using federal funds set aside units for disabled people, and HUD encourages visitability standards. Providing options for rehabilitating housing to modern accessibility standards allows people to live in an independent housing arrangement.

To accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities, the City allows property owners to install features that accommodate a disability (e.g., ramp to the front door) without the need to apply for a variance. The City allows retrofit of a residential structure upon submittal of plans and the payment of a normal building plan check and permit issuance fee.

Definition of Family
Fair housing laws prohibit restrictive definitions of family that discriminate against households based on the number, personal characteristics, or the relationship of occupants to one another.

The City’s Development Code defines a “family” as a group of individuals not necessarily related by blood, marriage, adoption, or guardianship living together in a dwelling unit as a single housekeeping unit under a common housekeeping management plan based on an intentionally structured relationship providing organization and stability. A “household” is defined as a family 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 serving of food within the dwelling unit.

Consistent with state law, the City’s family definition states “One or more persons living together in a dwelling unit, with common access to, and common use of all living, kitchen, and eating areas within the dwelling unit.”
Spacing and Concentration
The City abides by the spacing and concentration limits set forth by the California Department of Social Services with respect to residential care facilities. The only spacing concentration is for SRO hotels, which shall not be located within 500 feet of any public or private school for children under 18, church, child daycare facility, or other existing SRO facility. The City has included Program 20 to explore amending the Development Code to reduce location constraints for SRO facilities and permitting 1888
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-174 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
SROs through a ministerial process rather than requiring a conditional use permit or administrative use permit.

Development Standards
To facilitate the construction of housing for people with disabilities, including seniors, builders can seek specific development incentives. For instance, the City allows density increases specific to senior citizen housing with affordable units to lower-income seniors. The Development Code allows reduced parking requirements of one space per unit.

Boarding and rooming houses have similarly lower standards than other residential uses. Senior citizen housing developments are evaluated based on proximity to essential services, including public transit with frequent service, community centers and/or parks, medical facilities, and pharmacies, among others. Additionally, senior citizen housing developments can determine parking on a project-by-project basis, providing as low as 0.25 parking spaces per rental dwelling unit. While residential care facilities with six or less clients are only subject to development standards for residential uses permitted in the zoning district consistent with Health and Safety Code Section 1500 et seq., large residential care facilities are required to have only 0.5 parking space per unit. The City will seek to amend the Development Code to allow statelicensed residential care facilities for seven or more persons only subject to those restrictions that apply to residential uses in the same zone through Program 20. Further modifications can be sought through administrative exceptions and reasonable accommodation process, detailed below.

Reasonable Accommodation
The federal Fair Housing Act and California Fair Employment and Housing Act impose an affirmative duty on local governments to make reasonable accommodation when such accommodation may be necessary to afford disabled persons an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.

In 2006, the City adopted Ordinance No. 2837 to allow reasonable accommodations from certain land use, permitting, and building codes.

The ordinance set up a process to evaluate requests for reasonable accommodations related to specific applications of the zoning law to allow for full use and enjoyment of a dwelling and to authorize the application of exceptions to the zoning law, if warranted, to comply with state and federal fair housing law. Application for reasonable accommodation shall be made pursuant to the provisions listed for an administrative exception.
1889
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-175
With respect to the approval process, the applicant must file an application and pay an administrative fee of $376. Public notice requirements shall be pursuant to the provisions listed for a homeowner variance. The Zoning Administrator may approve, deny, or conditionally approve the request. The Zoning Administrator must issue administrative variance findings to approve such a request. A determination to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a request shall be based on the following:
• The persons who will use the subject property are protected under federal and state fair housing laws.
• The requested exception is necessary to make specific housing available to a person who will occupy the subject property and who is protected under federal and state fair housing laws. • The requested exception will not impose an undue financial or administrative burden upon the City.
• The requested exception will comply with all applicable Building and Fire Codes and will not result in a fundamental alteration of the planning, zoning, and development laws and procedures of the City.

If the project is deemed to be of significant controversy, the matter may be referred to the Planning Commission. All decisions made on the matter may be appealed to the City Council.

In summary, the City of Ontario continues to ensure that people of all abilities have opportunities to find housing in the community.

4.7 Development Standards
The Development Code provides specific residential development standards that determine building height, density, setbacks, parking, etc.

These standards are made available to the public online on the City’s website. Residential development standards are designed to promote a more livable environment, with adequate yards, height restrictions and setbacks to ensure privacy from adjacent homes, and minimum unit sizes to ensure adequate living areas for families.
1890
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-176 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Conventional Residential Development
The following tables describe the development standards in Ontario, such as density ranges, lot standards, open space requirements, and building standards, for the multiple types of residential development Ontario supports: Traditional Single-Family (Table 4-9), Small Lot Traditional Single-Family (Table 4-10), Small Lot Alley-loaded Single-Family (Table 4-11), Cluster Single-Family (Table 4-12), and Multifamily Residential (Table 4-13). The following discussion analyzes the City’s development standards as they apply to different types of housing.

Detached single-family residential accounts for nearly 60 percent of Ontario’s total housing units (Table 2-10). To encourage flexibility in single-family residential subdivision design, higher-density, and use of unconventional, small, and/or infill lots, the City provides development standards for a range of single-family development models. The conventional residential development, called traditional single-family residential, consists of the construction of one or more single-family (detached) dwellings and is permitted in all residential zones. Traditional single-family residential has lower maximum lot coverage and higher setbacks, leading to lower lot utilization than the other single-family use types. Small lot traditional, small lot alley-loaded, and cluster singlefamily residential development consist of two or more detached dwelling units per lot, allowing for higher density and lot utilization. 1891
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-177
Table 4-9
Traditional Single-Family Residential Development Standards Development Standards
Residential Zones
AR-2 RE-2 RE-4 LDR-5 MDR-11 MDR-18 MDR-25 HDR-45
Density1,2,3
Density Ranges 0-2.0 0-2.0 2.1-4.0 2.1-5.0 5.1-11 11.1-18 18.1-25 25.1-45 Lot Standards
Maximum Lot Coverage 30% 40% 40% 50% 60% 60% 60% 60%
Minimum Lot Size (sf)4 18,000 10,000 10,000 7,200 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Average Lot Size -- 18,000 -- 8,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 Min. Lot Dimensions4
Width (Interior)
Width (Corner Lots)
Width (Cul-de-Sac)
At front property line
At front building setback
Depth
100
120
40 70
135
70 80
40 70
100
70 80
40 70
100
60 65
40 60
75 60
65 40
40 100
60 65
40 40
100
60 65
40 40
100
60 65
40 40
100
Open Space
Min Setback from Street and Alley Property Lines
Freeways
Arterial Streets (front)5,6
Collector & Local
Front
Front garage other
Street side
Street rear (1st floor)
Street rear (2nd/3rd floor)
Front Rear Alleys
1st floor
2nd/3rd floor
Garage entry
Garage other
20 30
30 30
30 30
30 10
20 5
10 20
30 30
30 30
30 30
10 20
5 10
20 30
30 30
30 30
30 10
20 5
10 20
30 20
10 10
10 20
10 20
5 10
20 30
20 10
10 10
20 10
20 5
10 20
30 20
10 10
10 20
10 20
5 10
20 30
20 10
10 10
20 10
20 5
10 20
30 20
10 10
10 20
10 20
5 10
Minimum Setback from Interior Property Lines
Front side property lines7
Rear side property lines (1st floor)
Rear side property lines (2nd/3rd floor)
Rear side property lines (patio covers)
10 25
25 25
10 25
25 25
5 10
20 10
5 10
20 10
5 10
20 10
5 10
20 10
5 10
20 10
5 10
20 10
Landscaping Area Required
The front yard and any street side yard of a conventional or small lot single-family project site, and all parkway areas that abut the site, shall be fully landscaped and provided with an underground automatic irrigation system
1892
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-178 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 4-9
Traditional Single-Family Residential Development Standards Development Standards
Residential Zones
AR-2 RE-2 RE-4 LDR-5 MDR-11 MDR-18 MDR-25 HDR-45
Building Standards
Maximum Units/Building N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Maximum Height (ft). 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35
Source: City of Ontario Development Code, 2021.

1. A density bonus and other incentives pursuant to Government Code Sections 65915 through 65918 may be granted by the Approving Authority.

2. Lots with a maximum density calculation of less than one dwelling shall be allowed the construction of one dwelling unit.

3. A residentially zoned lot shall be developed at no less than the minimum number of dwelling units allowed within the specified density range for the applicable zoning district, except that if, as a result of the configuration/design of a lot, the minimum residential density cannot be achieved, the lot may be developed with a maximum of one dwelling unit.

4. An existing lot of record that is substandard as to minimum “lot” area and/or dimension(s) shall be granted all development rights of the zoning district in which it is located.

5. On a lot having a street adjacent rear property line (arterial, collector, and local streets only), for the purpose of wall placement, each wall shall be setback a minimum of 5 feet behind the street property line to allow for landscaping beyond any required parkway landscaping.

6. Refer to Collector and Local Streets standards for street side and rear setbacks.

7. When vehicle parking is provided at the rear of a lot (whether within a garage or carport, or uncovered) that does not have alley access, a minimum 10-foot interior side building setback, which is clear of meters and mechanical equipment, shall be provided to ensure clear vehicular access to the rear of the lot. 1893
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-179
Table 4-10
Small-Lot Traditional Single-Family Residential Development Standards Development Standards
Residential Zones
AR-21 RE-21 RE-41 LDR-5 MDR-11 MDR-18 MDR-25 HDR-45
Density2,3,4
Density Ranges N/A N/A N/A 2.1-5.0 5.1-11 11.1-18 18.1-25 25.1-45 Minimum Project Area N/A N/A N/A 1 acre 1 acre 1 acre 1 acre 1 acre Lot Standards
Maximum Lot Coverage N/A N/A N/A 55% 60% 70% 70% 70%
Minimum Lot Size (sf)5
Interior Lot
Corner Lot
N/A N/A N/A 4,000
4,500
4,000
4,500
2,800
3,200
2,800
3,200
2,800
3,200
Min. Lot Dimensions5
Width (Interior)
Width (Corner Lots)
Depth
N/A N/A N/A 40
45 75
40 45
75 35
40 70
35 40
70 35
40 70
Open Space
Min Setback from Street and Alley
Property Lines6
Freeways
Arterial Streets (front)7
Collector & Local
Street Front (living area)
Street Front (garage entry)
Street Front (garage other)
Street Side8
Street rear (1st floor)8
Street rear (2nd/3rd floor)8
Street rear (garage entry)8
Street rear (garage other – 1st
floor only)8
Street rear (patio cover)8
Front Rear Alleys9
1st floor
2nd/3rd floor

N/A N/A N/A
20 30
14 18
10 10
10 15
18 5
5 5
10 20
30 14
18 10
10 10
15 18
5 5
5 10
20 30
14 18
10 10
10 15
18 5
5 5
10 20
30 14
18 10
10 10
15 18
5 5
5 10
20 30
14 18
10 10
10 15
18 5
5 5
10 Minimum Setback from Interior
Property Lines
From side property lines
From rear property lines10
N/A N/A N/A 5/4 5/4 5/4 5/4 5/4
1894
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-180 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 4-10
Small-Lot Traditional Single-Family Residential Development Standards Development Standards
Residential Zones
AR-21 RE-21 RE-41 LDR-5 MDR-11 MDR-18 MDR-25 HDR-45
Living area
Garage – 1st floor only
Patio covers to side or rear
10 5
5 10
5 5
10 5
5 10
5 5
10 5
5 Landscaping Area Required
The front yard and any street side yard of a conventional or small lot single-family project site, and all parkway areas that abut the site, shall be fully landscaped and provided with an underground automatic irrigation system
Building Standards
Maximum Height (ft). 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35
Source: City of Ontario Development Code, 2021.
1 Small Lot Traditional Single-Family Residential Development is not a permitted use type in the AR-2 and RE-2 zoning districts. 2 A density bonus and other incentives pursuant to Government Code Sections 65915 through 65918 may be granted by the Approving Authority. 3 Lots with a maximum density calculation of less than one dwelling shall be allowed the construction of one dwelling unit. 4 A residentially zoned lot shall be developed at no less than the minimum number of dwelling units allowed within the specified density range for the applicable zoning district, except that if, as a result of the configuration/design of a lot, the minimum residential density cannot be achieved, the lot may be developed with a maximum of one dwelling unit.
5 An existing lot of record that is substandard as to minimum “project” area and/or dimension(s) shall be permitted the development rights of the zone in which it is located, except that the maximum density shall be limited to the minimum allowed within the density range. 6 The minimum setback from private streets shall be measured from a line running parallel to the street, which is located 12 feet behind face-of-curb (a.k.a., “parkway”).
7 Refer to Collector and Local Streets standards for street side and rear setbacks. 8 On a lot having a street adjacent side or rear property line, for the purpose of wall placement, each wall shall be setback a minimum of 5 feet behind the street property line to allow for landscaping beyond any required parkway landscaping. 9 For side alley conditions, refer to the Interior Property Lines standards. 10 The interior side property line setback may be reduced to 4 feet if the setback area is combined with the side setback area of the adjacent property to create a single minimum 8-foot-wide outdoor use area clear of walls, thereby allowing a minimum 8–foot-wide side-to-side building separation. 1895
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-181
Table 4-11
Small-Lot Alley-loaded Single-Family Residential Development Standards Development Standards
Residential Zones
AR-21 RE-21 RE-41 LDR-5 MDR-11 MDR-18 MDR-25 HDR-45
Density2,3,4
Density Ranges N/A N/A N/A 2.1-5.0 5.1-11 11.1-18 18.1-25 25.1-45 Minimum Project Area2 N/A N/A N/A 1 acre 1 acre 1 acre 1 acre 1 acre Minimum Project Dimensions2
Width
Depth
N/A N/A N/A 200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
Lot Standards
Maximum Lot Coverage N/A N/A N/A 55% 60% 70% 70% 70%
Min. Lot Size
Width (Interior)
Width (Corner Lots)
Depth
N/A N/A N/A 40
45 75
40 45
75 35
40 70
35 40
70 35
40 70
Open Space
Min Setback from Street Property Lines5
Freeways
Arterial Streets6
Collector & Local6
Front
Street side
Street rear

N/A N/A N/A
20 30
10 10
15 20
30 10
10 15
20 30
10 10
15 20
30 10
10 15
20 30
10 10
15 Minimum Setback from Project Boundary
Property Lines7
Project Boundaries
Side
Rear
Patio Cover
N/A N/A N/A 10
5/4
10 5
10 5/4
10 5
10 5/4
10 5
10 5/4
10 5
10 5/4
10 5
Minimum Setback from Private Drive5
Living area
Porch (single-story)
Garage entry
Garage other (side/rear)

N/A N/A N/A
10 6
18 10
10 6
18 10
10 6
18 10
10 6
18 10
10 6
18 10
Minimum Setback from Private
Lanes/Alleyways
Living area
Garage
N/A N/A N/A 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 10
5 Minimum Setback from Parking Spaces N/A N/A N/A 10 10 10 10 10 Landscaping Area Required The front yard and any street side yard of a conventional or small lot single-family project site, and all parkway areas that abut the site, shall be fully landscaped and provided with an underground automatic irrigation system
1896
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-182 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 4-11
Small-Lot Alley-loaded Single-Family Residential Development Standards Development Standards
Residential Zones
AR-21 RE-21 RE-41 LDR-5 MDR-11 MDR-18 MDR-25 HDR-45
Building Standards
Minimum Separations Between Buildings
Dwelling Front to Front
Dwelling Front to Side
Dwelling Side to Side7
Dwelling Rear to Rear
Garage to Garage7
Entry to entry
Entry to side
Side to side
Side to rear

N/A N/A N/A
25 20
10/8
20 30
30 10/8
10/8
25 20
10/8
20 30
30 10/8
10/8
25 20
10/8
20 30
30 10/8
10/8
25 20
10/8
20 30
30 10/8
10/8
25 20
10/8
20 30
30 10/8
10/8
Maximum Height (ft). 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35
Source: City of Ontario Development Code, 2021.
1 Small-Lot Alley-Loaded Single-Family Residential Development is not a permitted use type in the AR-2, RE-2, and RE-4 zoning districts. 2 A density bonus and other incentives pursuant to Government Code Sections 65915 through 65918 may be granted by the Approving Authority. 3 Lots with a maximum density calculation of less than one dwelling shall be allowed the construction of one dwelling unit. 4 A residentially zoned lot shall be developed at no less than the minimum number of dwelling units allowed within the specified density range for the applicable zoning district, except that if, as a result of the configuration/design of a lot, the minimum residential density cannot be achieved, the lot may be developed with a maximum of one dwelling unit.
5 The minimum setback from private streets shall be measured from a line running parallel to the street, which is located 12 feet behind face-of-curb (a.k.a., “parkway”). 6 On lot having a street-adjacent side or rear property line, for the purpose of wall placement, each wall shall be setback a minimum of 5 feet behind the street property line to allow for landscaping beyond any required parkway landscaping. 7 The interior side property line setback may be reduced to 4 feet if the setback area is combined with the side setback area of the adjacent property to create a single minimum 8-foot-wide outdoor use area clear of walls, thereby allowing a minimum 8–foot-wide side-to-side building separation. 1897
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-183
Table 4-12
Cluster Single-Family Residential Development Standards Development Standards
Residential Zones
AR-21 RE-21 RE-41 LDR-5 MDR-11 MDR-18 MDR-25 HDR-45
Density2,3,4
Density Ranges N/A N/A N/A 2.1-5.0 5.1-11 11.1-18 18.1-25 25.1-45 Minimum Project Area2 N/A N/A N/A 1 acre 1 acre 1 acre 1 acre 1 acre Minimum Project Dimensions2
Width
Depth
N/A N/A N/A 200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
Lot Standards
Maximum Lot Coverage N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Minimum Lot Size N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Minimum Lot Dimensions N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Open Space
Minimum Setback from Public
Street Property Lines5
Freeways
Arterial Streets6
Collector and Local Streets6
Front
Street side
Street rear

N/A N/A N/A
20 30
20 10
15 20
30 20
10 15
20 30
20 10
15 20
30 20
10 15
20 30
20 10
15 Minimum Setback from Interior
Property Lines7
Project Boundaries
Sides
Rear
Patio Cover
N/A N/A N/A 10
4 4
4 10
4 4
4 10
4 4
4 10
4 4
4 10
4 4
4 Minimum Setback from Private
Drive5
Living area
Porch (single-story)
Garage entry
Garage other
N/A N/A N/A 10
5 <5 or >18
10 10
5 <5 or >18
10 10
5 <5 or >18
10 10
5 <5 or >18
10 10
5 <5 or >18
10 Minimum Setback from Private
Lanes/Alleyways
Living area
Porch (single story)
Garage
N/A N/A N/A 5
5 5
5 5
5 5
5 5
5 5
5 5
5 5
1898
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-184 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 4-12
Cluster Single-Family Residential Development Standards Development Standards
Residential Zones
AR-21 RE-21 RE-41 LDR-5 MDR-11 MDR-18 MDR-25 HDR-45
Minimum Setback from Parking
Spaces
Living area
Porch (single story)
Garage
N/A N/A N/A 10
8 5
10 8
5 10
8 5
10 8
5 10
8 5
Landscaping Area Required
The entirety of a cluster single-family or multiple-family project site, including street parkway and median areas that abut the project site, which is not otherwise devoted to building area and paving, shall be fully landscaped and provided with an underground automatic irrigation system, Building Standards
Minimum Separations Between
Buildings
Dwelling Front to Front
Dwelling Front to Side7
Dwelling Side to Side7
Dwelling Rear to Rear
Garage to Garage7
Entry to entry
Entry to side
Side to side
Side to rear

N/A N/A N/A
30 14
8 8
30 30
8 8
30 14
8 8
30 30
8 8
30 14
8 8
30 30
8 8
30 14
8 8
30 30
8 8
30 14
8 8
30 30
8 8
Maximum Height (ft). 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35
Source: City of Ontario Development Code, 2021.
1 Cluster Single-Family Residential Development is not a permitted use type in the AR-2, RE-2, and RE-4 zoning districts. 2 A density bonus and other incentives pursuant to Government Code Sections 65915 through 65918 may be granted by the Approving Authority. 3 Lots with a maximum-density calculation of less than one dwelling shall be allowed the construction of one dwelling unit. 4 A residentially zoned lot shall be developed at no less than the minimum number of dwelling units allowed within the specified density range for the applicable zoning district, except that if, as a result of the configuration/design of a lot, the minimum residential density cannot be achieved, the lot may be developed with a maximum of one dwelling unit.
5 The minimum setback from private streets shall be measured from a line running parallel to the street, which is located 12 feet behind face-of-curb (a.k.a., “parkway”).
6 On a lot having a street-adjacent side or rear property line, for the purpose of wall placement, each wall shall be setback a minimum of 5 feet behind the street property line to allow for landscaping beyond any required parkway landscaping. 7 The interior side property line setback may be combined with the side setback area of the adjacent property to create a single minimum 8-foot-wide outdoor use area clear of walls, which is defined in the project CC&Rs. 1899
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-185
Table 4-13
Multifamily Residential Development Standards
Development Standards
Residential Zones
AR-21 RE-21 RE-41 LDR-51 MDR-11 MDR-18 MDR-25 HDR-45
Density2,3,4,5
Density Ranges N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.1-11 11.1-18 18.1-25 25.1-45 Minimum Project Area2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 10,000 sf 10,000 sf 10,000 sf 1 acre Minimum Project Dimensions2
Width
Depth
N/A N/A N/A N/A 100
100
100
100
100
100
180
200
Lot Standards
Maximum Project Coverage N/A N/A N/A N/A 60% 60% 60% 100% Minimum Lot Size N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Minimum Lot Dimensions N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Open Space
Minimum Setback from Public
Street Property Lines6,7
Freeways
Arterial Streets
Collector and Local Streets
N/A N/A N/A N/A 20
30 20
20 30
20 10
10 10
10 10
10 Minimum Setback from Interior
Project Boundary Property
Lines8
N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 5 5 5
Minimum Setback from Public
Alley Property Line N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 5 5 5
Minimum Setback from Private
Drives/Alleyways (from edge of
drive aisle)
Living area
Garage and other nonhabitable structures
N/A N/A N/A N/A 15
5 15
5 15
5 15
5 Minimum Setback from Parking
Spaces or Drive Aisle to Wall or
Fence
N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 5 5 5
Landscaping Area Required
The entirety of a cluster single-family or multiple-family project site, including street parkway and median areas that abut the project site, which is not otherwise devoted to building area and paving, shall be fully landscaped and provided with an underground automatic irrigation system 1900
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-186 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Building Standards
Minimum Separations Between
Buildings
Dwelling Front to Front
Less than 2 stories
Greater than 3 stories
Dwelling Front to Side7
Less than 2 stories
Greater than 3 stories
Dwelling Side to Side7
Less than 2 stories
Greater than 3 stories
Dwelling Rear to Rear
Less than 2 stories
Greater than 3 stories
Dwelling Side to Rear
Dwelling Rear to Rear
Garage to Garage7
Entry to entry
Entry to side
Side to side
Side to rear

N/A N/A N/A N/A
25 30
25 30
25 30
10 15
15 20
30 30
10 10
25 30
25 30
25 30
10 15
15 20
30 30
10 10
25 30
25 30
25 30
10 15
15 20
30 30
10 10
25 30
25 30
25 30
10 15
15 20
30 30
10 10
Maximum Height (ft). N/A N/A N/A N/A 35 45 60 75
Source: City of Ontario Development Code, 2021.
1 Multifamily Residential is not a permitted use type in the AR-2, RE-2, RE-4, and LDR-5 zoning districts. 2 An existing lot of record that is substandard as to minimum “project” area and/or dimension(s), shall be permitted all of the development rights of the zone in which it is located, except that the maximum density shall be limited to the minimum number of dwelling units allowed within the specified density range for the applicable zoning district.
3 A density bonus and other incentives pursuant to Government Code Sections 65915 through 65918 may be granted by the Approving Authority. 4 Lots with a maximum density calculation of less than 1.00 may be developed with one dwelling unit. 5 A residentially zoned lot shall be developed at no less than the minimum number of dwelling units allowed within the specified density range for the applicable zoning district, except that If, as a result of the configuration/design of a lot, the minimum residential density cannot be achieved, the lot may be developed with a maximum of one dwelling unit.
6 A health risk assessment shall be required for multiple-family development projects located within close proximity to a freeway, as determined by the Zoning Administrator.
7 The minimum setback from private streets shall be measured from a line running parallel to the street, which is located 12 feet behind face-of-curb (a.k.a., “parkway”).
8 A dwelling having the primary entry facing onto an interior property line shall maintain a minimum 10-foot setback from the corresponding interior property line.
1901
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-187
Mixed-Use Development
The City of Ontario actively encourages and facilitates the planning and production of mixed-use housing, vertically and horizontally integrated.

Mixed-Use developments contain buildings or structures with a variety of complementary uses, such as residential, office, manufacturing, retail, public, or entertainment, in an integrated development project that has significant functional interrelationships and a coherent physical design.

As part of The Ontario Plan, prepared in 2010, the City revised its Policy Plan land use designations, most notably expanding the Mixed-Use category to include area-specific designations to create focal points for community activity and identity and facilitate the use of transit. Three of the Policy Plan Mixed-Use designations have corresponding mixed-use zoning districts, shown in Table 4-14. Currently, mixed-use projects can be found along the Interstate (I-) 10 corridor, in the historic Downtown area, and in the newly developing Ontario Ranch area.

The development standards for the Downtown Mixed-Use Area (MU-1) and East Holt Mixed-Use Area (MU-2) rely on a PUD created by the developer at the time of project submittal. The City has the opportunity to develop an area plan or form-based code for the Downtown MixedUse Area that would establish development standards or guidelines. The Euclid/Francis Mixed-Use Area (MU-11) uses the same development standards as the MDR-25 zoning district. The Ontario Airport Metro Center area and Ontario Ranch are required to have specific plans. The maximum density indicated in Table 4-14 is derived from the Policy Plan and in some cases has a higher density than is permitted by current zoning. In these areas, specific plans are required, so development standards would be altered to conform to the permitted density in the Policy Plan through the specific plan process (Program 20). Where there are discrepancies, the City has included a program to amend the Development Code to increase the density to match the corresponding Policy Plan land use designation.
1902
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-188 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 4-14
Mixed-Use Development Standards
Development Standards
Mixed-Use Zones
MU-11
Downtown Mixed-Use Area
MU-2
East Holt Mixed-Use Area
MU-11
Euclid / Francis Mixed-Use Area
Density Ranges 25.1 – 40 du/ac 14.1 – 40.0 du/ac 14.1 – 25.02 Assumed Maximum Build Out for Mixed-Use Area –
Residential Density3
Dwelling units/acre
Maximum Units
60% of the area at 35 du/ac
2,365
25% of the area at 30 du/ac
428
50% of the area at 30 du/ac
156
Floor Area Ratio (Non-residential)
Commercial-retail
Commercial-office

2.0 2.0

1.0 2.0

1.04 Development Standards2
Minimum Setback from Public Street Property Lines5,6
Freeways
Arterial Streets
Collector and Local Streets
Governed by planned development
regulations or future City area plan or
form-based code
Governed by planned development
regulations
10 10
10 Minimum Setback from Interior Project Boundary
Property Lines7 5
Minimum Setback from Public Alley Property Line 5
Minimum Setback from Private Drives/Alleyways (from
edge of drive aisle)
Living area
Garage and other non-habitable structures
15 5
Minimum Setback from Parking Spaces or Drive Aisle
to Wall or Fence 5
1903
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-189
Table 4-14
Mixed-Use Development Standards
Development Standards
Mixed-Use Zones
MU-11
Downtown Mixed-Use Area
MU-2
East Holt Mixed-Use Area
MU-11
Euclid / Francis Mixed-Use Area
Landscaping
The entirety of a multiple-family project site,
including street parkway and median areas that
abut the project site, which is not otherwise devoted
to building area and paving, shall be fully
landscaped and provided with an underground
automatic irrigation system
Maximum Height (feet)
Governed by planned development
regulations or future City area plan or
form-based code
Governed by planned development
regulations 45 feet
Source: City of Ontario Development Code, June 2021.
1 MU-1 includes sub-zoning districts LUA-1, LUA – 2N, LUA-2S, LUA-3, LUA-4; however, residential mixed-use development is not permitted in the LUA-2S and LUA-4 zones. 2 Within the MU-11 zoning district, residential development shall be allowed pursuant to the standards of the HDR-25 zoning district. 3 Within each Mixed-Use Zoning District, the number of dwelling units allotted shall not exceed the number of units prescribed by the Exhibit LU– 03 (Future Buildout) of the Policy Plan 4 Nonresidential development shall be allowed pursuant to the requirements of the CN zoning district. 5 A health risk assessment shall be required for multiple-family development projects within close proximity to a freeway, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. 6 The minimum setback from private streets shall be measured from a line running parallel to the street, which is located 12 feet behind face-of-curb (a.k.a., “parkway”). 7 A dwelling having the primary entry facing onto an interior property line shall maintain a minimum 10-foot setback from the corresponding interior property line. 1904
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-190 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Residential density is often equated with the affordability of housing. For zoning districts primarily permitting single-family residential, the City allows a maximum density of two units per acre in the AR-2 and RE-2 zones, four units per acre in the RE-4 zone, and five units per acre in the LDR-5 zone. For zones intended for multifamily residential, the City permits a maximum density of 11 units in the MDR-11 zone, 18 in the MDR-18 zone, 25 in the MDR-25 zone, and 45 in the MDR-45 zone. The MDR-45 zoning district allows the highest density of zones permitting residential uses, including the mixed-use zoning districts. Recognizing the importance of a variety of densities to facilitate and encourage a range in types and prices of housing, the City offers three key ways to receive additional density increases.
• Planned Unit Development (PUD). In an effort to secure a fuller realization of the Policy Plan component of The Ontario Plan, particularly the Exhibit LU-3, Future Buildout, than would result from strict application of the zoning district regulations, developers can submit PUDs to achieve higher density. MixedUse developments in the MU-1 and MU-2 zoning districts require a PUD, leading to establishing development standards on a project-by-project basis, including density standards. The City is currently updating objective design standards to reduce the necessity of PUDs. PUDs require approval by the City Council pursuant to California Government Code Section 65850 based on the following findings of approval:
- The proposed PUD, or amendment thereto, is consistent with the goals, policies, plans, and exhibits of the Vision, Policy Plan, and City Council Priorities components of The Ontario Plan.
- The proposed PUD, or amendment thereto, would not be
detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare of the city.
- In the case of an application affecting specific property(ies), the proposed PUD, or amendment thereto, will not adversely affect the harmonious relationship with adjacent properties and land uses.
- In the case of an application affecting specific property(ies), the subject site is physically suitable, including, but not limited to, parcel size, shape, access, and availability of utilities, for the request and anticipated development.
1905
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-191
- The proposed PUD is superior to that which could be obtained through the application of the Development Code or a specific plan.
• Senior Citizen Housing Development. The City allows a base density of 25 units per acre for the CC and MU-1 zones, and are subject to the maximum density for the respective residential zoning districts that senior citizen housing developments are permitted in (i.e., MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25, and MDR-45).

Qualifying senior citizen housing development projects are eligible for a density bonus pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65915 through 65918, permitting a 20-percent density bonus for qualified projects.
• State Density Bonus. In compliance with California Government Code Section 65915, the City allows qualified residential projects to receive a density bonus plus appropriate development incentives when the residential project sets aside the required number of units for affordable housing. Density bonuses are also allowed for senior housing (described in greater detail above). The City processes applications for density bonuses following the City’s procedure for Development Agreements, requiring City Council approval unless one or more of the following findings is established:
- The concession or incentive is not required to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 50052.5, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in California Government Code Section 659159(c). - The concession or incentive would have a specific adverse impact, as defined in Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(2), upon public health and safety or the physical environment, or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households.
- The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law.

Assembly Bills (ABs) 2753, 2372, 1763, 1227, and 2345 were passed in 2018, 2019, and 2020 and revised density bonus law to provide additional benefits for qualifying projects. To ensure the City’s development requirements are consistent with recent state law, the City will review Sections 6.01.010(H) and 5.03.360 of the Development Code for 1906
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-192 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
compliance with ABs 2753, 2372, 1227, 1763, and 2345 and to provide requirements within the Development Code sections (Program 20).

Parking Standards
In an urban environment, parking standards are critical to prevent traffic congestion caused by a shortage of parking spaces and the loading and unloading of trucks on public streets to result in maximum efficiency, protect the public safety, provide for the special needs of the physically handicapped, and where appropriate, insulate surrounding land uses from their impact.

City parking standards are also designed to ensure that sufficient on-site spaces are available to accommodate vehicle ownership rates of residents (which is typically more than 2 cars per homeowner and an average of 1.9 vehicles for renters), the needs of the business community, and the rate of overcrowding. Table 4-15 summarizes the common parking standards for residential uses, and the following text describes potential reductions of standards.

Table 4-15
Parking Standards for Housing
Housing Types Requirement
Traditional Single-Family (one per lot) 2 spaces within enclosed garage Small Lot and Common Interest
Developments
2 resident spaces per dwelling within a garage, plus, 0.2 guest/visitor spaces per dwelling. Guest parking spaces may be provided on-street, immediately adjacent to the development boundary, if available. A minimum of 2 guest spaces shall be provided regardless of the number of dwellings proposed.

Multiple-Family1
Resident Parking Spaces:

Studio: 1.5 spaces per dwelling, including one space in a garage or carport; One-Bedroom: 1.75 spaces per dwelling, including one space in a garage or carport; Two-Bedrooms: 2.0 spaces per dwelling, including one space in a garage or carport; and Three or more Bedrooms: 2.5 spaces per dwelling, including one space in a garage or carport Guest Parking Spaces:

Portion of dwellings < 50: 0.25 spaces per dwelling;
Portion of 50 to 100 dwellings: 0.20 spaces per dwelling; Portion of dwellings > 100: 0.17 spaces per dwelling; and A minimum of 3 guest spaces shall be provided for developments consisting of more than 8 dwellings.

Mobile Home Park1
Resident Parking Spaces:
2 spaces per unit, tandem allowed
Guest Parking Spaces:

Portion of dwellings < 50: 0.25 spaces per dwelling;
Portion of 50 to 100 dwellings: 0.20 spaces per dwelling; Portion of dwellings > 100: 0.17 spaces per dwelling; and A minimum of 3 guest spaces shall be provided for developments consisting of more than 8 dwellings.

ADUs1,2 Generally, 1 space per unit
Residential Care 7+ clients 0.5 spaces per bed; plus, one space per employee or staff 1907
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-193
Table 4-15
Parking Standards for Housing
Housing Types Requirement
SRO
Resident Parking Spaces:

One resident space per room; plus, 2 spaces for the resident manager Guest Parking Spaces:

Portion of dwellings < 50: 0.25 spaces per dwelling;
Portion of 50 to 100 dwellings: 0.20 spaces per dwelling; Portion of dwellings > 100: 0.17 spaces per dwelling; and A minimum of 3 guest spaces shall be provided for developments consisting of more than 8 dwellings.

Boarding, Lodging, or Rooming House One space per sleeping room; however, provide no fewer than one space per 2 beds Senior Citizen Housing Development3
Income Qualified
Market Rate Development
Resident Parking Spaces:

0.7 resident space per dwelling
Guest Parking Spaces:

Portion of dwellings < 50: 0.25 spaces per dwelling;
Portion of 50 to 100 dwellings: 0.20 spaces per dwelling; Portion of dwellings > 100: 0.17 spaces per dwelling; and A minimum of 3 guest spaces shall be provided for developments consisting of more than 8 dwellings.

Resident Parking Spaces:

One resident space per dwelling
Guest Parking Spaces:

Portion of dwellings < 50: 0.25 spaces per dwelling;
Portion of 50 to 100 dwellings: 0.20 spaces per dwelling; Portion of dwellings > 100: 0.17 spaces per dwelling; and A minimum of 3 guest spaces shall be provided for developments consisting of more than 8 dwellings.

Transitional Shelter/Housing Determined by the Zoning Administrator or Approval Authority Nursing Care Facilities Determined by the Zoning Administrator or Approval Authority Source: City of Ontario Development Code, June 2021
1 Tandem parking may be used to satisfy the minimum resident parking requirement for mobile home parks and ADUs and satisfy unenclosed on-site parking for multifamily projects.
2 ADUs are not required to provide parking in the following situations:
- The ADU is within one-half mile walking distance of public transit - The ADU is within an architecturally and historically significant historic district. - The ADU is part of the proposed or existing primary residence, or an accessory structure. - When on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the ADU. - When there is an established car-share vehicle stop located within one block of the ADU. 3 The number of parking spaces required to be provided for senior citizen housing developments may be as low as 0.25 spaces per rental dwelling unit and as high as 1.0 space per for-sale dwelling unit. The actual ratio shall be determined at the time of project approval for the use and shall be based on a parking demand study to be prepared by a qualified traffic consultant or engineer. Of the parking spaces provided, 10 percent shall be designated as parking for the physically impaired. 1908
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-194 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
The Approval Authority may reduce the number of required parking spaces if an applicant is able to provide evidence to substantiate: (1) shared parking (if multiple users use the same joint-parking facilities when operations for the respective uses are not normally conducted during the same hours or when peak use differs); or (2) low demand (when demonstrated via a parking analysis that the use will not use the required number of spaces because of the nature of the specific use or manner in which the use is conducted). The Approval Authority may require a parking analysis to prove either circumstance.

In the Downtown Civic Center, a focus area for revitalization of the City’s historic downtown, permits 1.2 spaces/bedroom for residential condominiums, inclusive of guest parking. Developers are encouraged to use a mix of standard and tandem spaces to achieve the required number of parking spaces; however, compact and tandem spaces can each only comprise 20 percent of the total spaces and require the Planning Director to approve a parking study. The City has adopted a flexible parking approach to facilitate revitalization of the city’s historic Downtown through a mix of housing types and prices. The Downtown Parking Model continues to provide flexible parking requirements for multiplefamily, mixed-use development, adaptive reuse, and live-work within the Downtown. The model considers parking supply, shared parking, and peak or non-peak demand from any combination of 30 land uses.

Downtown parking standards are now performance-based rather than based on a prescriptive standard.

Open Space
The City of Ontario values the incorporation of an appropriate amount and quality of open space in residential projects, particularly higherdensity housing. Ensuring an adequate amount of open space enhances higher-density residential projects by providing appropriate levels of privacy, provides green infrastructure that reduces runoff, softens concrete hardscape and beautifies residential projects, improves the value of the property, and creates a more desirable living environment for residents. The City’s open space standards are shown in Table 4-16. 1909
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-195
Table 4-16
Open Space Standards for Housing
Housing Lot Coverage
Open Space
Private Common
Single-Family - Small Lot
Traditional, Small Lot Alley
Loaded, and Cluster
Development Projects1
20% for all zoning
districts permitting
use types
Contiguous private
open space area for
each ground-level
dwelling unit that is
225 square feet
Remaining area after
Private Open Space
per unit shall be used
toward Common
Open Space
Multifamily and Mixed-Use
Development Projects1 (sf/unit)
Zoning Districts:

MDR-11 & MDR-18
MDR-25
HDR-45
500
400
310
200
150
60 300
250
250
Mobile Home Park Same as the
underlying zone None specified 300 square feet per pad
Senior Citizen Housing
Development
Based on the development standards applicable to residential uses in the underlying zone
Source: City of Ontario Development Code, June 2021
1 Open space requirements only apply to residential development projects consisting of more than three dwelling units.

The Subdivision Chapter of the Development Code provides additional detail on the appropriate types of private and common open space for multiple-family projects. For instance, common open space does not include driveways, sidewalks, parking areas, or service areas, but may include playgrounds, lawn areas, swimming pools, tennis and sport courts, and other outdoor recreational facilities. Private open space typically is accessible only to occupants of a particular unit and often consists of a fenced yard, fenced patio, or balcony. In addition to projectspecific requirements, residential developers must also contribute to the City’s goal of providing 3 acres of parks per 1,000 residents through payment of a park impact fee. The ratio is higher in Ontario Ranch, where developers are required to provide 2 acres of park space per 1,000 residents.

The City’s zoning allows a variance or administrative exception process, where needed, to provide relief from typical residential development standards that preclude the full enjoyment and use of residential property. However, to obtain density bonus allowances, open space requirements must be met. The variance and administrative exception process is more fully described below.
1910
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-196 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Variance Process
The City has established a variance and administrative exception process to facilitate the resolution of practical difficulties or unnecessary physical hardships that may arise due to the size, shape, or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon, or from geographic, topographic, or other physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity.

The two primary means of obtaining additional flexibility in residential development standards are:
• Administrative Exception. The City may grant an administrative exception of up to 10 percent from any numerical development standard set forth in the Development Code, except for standards for floor-area ratios and residential density. The Zoning Administrator is empowered to approve the exception.
• Variance. Variances may be granted for the following
development requirements: landscaping, screening, site area, site dimensions, yards and projections into yards, heights of structures, distances between buildings, open space, off-street parking, and loading. The Planning Commission can grant the request after a public hearing.

The Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator, as applicable, may grant a variance or administrative exception provided that the following findings can be made:

1. Special property circumstances and literal interpretation and enforcement of the code would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the City’s Development Code or Policy Plan.

2. Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties classified in the same zoning district.

3. Approval of the administrative exception/variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations of other properties classified in the same zoning district.

4. Exceptional/extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site involved or to the intended use of the property do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone.
1911
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-197

5. Granting of the administrative exception/variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity.

4.8 Building Codes and Subdivision Improvements
The City implements and enforces building codes, property maintenance standards, subdivision improvement requirements, and other municipal codes to ensure quality housing and neighborhoods for residents.

Although building codes and subdivision improvement requirements do raise construction costs, the public interest is best served when buildings adhere to proper construction and engineering practices and neighborhoods have appropriate infrastructure suitable to their design.

Building Codes
Every three years, the State of California adopts new codes that contain the latest advances in construction practices and engineering concepts.

The California Building Standards Commission adopts the California Building Codes based on “model” codes produced by professional organizations. Local agencies must adopt these codes, but may make amendments to address geological, climatic, or topographical conditions provided the modifications are no less restrictive than the state standards.

The new state codes incorporate, by reference, the Model Codes published by the International Code Council (ICC), which recently consolidated multiple regional codes into a single set of codes applicable throughout the United States. The City has adopted the most recent building codes to reflect the latest advances in construction technology and building practices. The following codes are currently being implemented:
• 2019 California Building Code/2018 International Building Code • 2019 California Residential Code/2018 International Residential Code
• 2019 California Electrical Code/2017 National Electrical Code • 2019 California Mechanical Code/2018 Uniform Mechanical Code • 2019 California Plumbing Code/2018 Uniform Plumbing Code • 2019 California Energy Code
• 2019 California Historical Building Code
• 2019 California Green Buildings Standards Code
• 2019 California Fire Code/2018 International Fire Code 1912
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-198 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
According to the local building official, the City has made some minor modifications to the building codes. Local amendments are minimal and related to administrative procedures. Such amendments do not materially increase the cost of residential construction and are similar to the amendments adopted in jurisdictions throughout the county. The City has not imposed any building codes other than those mentioned previously.

Therefore, the new building codes do not present a potential or actual constraint to the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing.

Subdivision Requirements
The City Subdivision Code requires that all new residential developments incorporate a standard set of subdivision requirements and infrastructure improvements to the property in compliance with City specifications and applicable Policy Plan or Specific Plan provisions. This requirement ensures that the subdivision is served by an adequate level of services that contribute to the long-term sustainability of the development.

The type and dimensions of subdivision improvements depend on a number of factors, including topography, density and intensity of development, project size, and other factors. The following list indicates typical infrastructure improvements that are required in subdivisions:
• Dedication of the ultimate street right-of-way if not currently existing at its ultimate width. Most local streets are a 60-foot rightof-way. Arterial streets start at 88-foot rights-of-way. • Installation of paving, curb, gutter, and sidewalk along the street frontage at the ultimate right-of-way location.
• Installation of streetlights, street trees, fire hydrants, and other needed improvements across the property frontage.
• Undergrounding of all overhead telephone, cable, and electrical lines (less than 34 kilovolts), in accordance with City ordinances. • Extension and/or installation of existing underground dry utilities needed to serve the development project (such as gas, telephone, cable, and electrical).
• Extension/installation/relocation of wet utilities (sewer, water, storm drain) needed to serve the site, if any. If no storm drain system exists to serve the site, on-site retention would be required. 1913
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-199
• Payment of Development Impact Fees (DIF). These fees are used to fund expansions to public facilities and improvements, such as water, sewer, parks, fire and police, transportation systems, and other improvements. Developers may be eligible for DIF credit if they are installing master-planned facilities to serve their sites.

4.9 Permit Approval Process
The City uses a standard development review process to ensure that residential projects are of high-quality construction and design. The time frame for processing proposals depends on the complexity of the project, the need for legislative action, and environmental review.

The City’s General Plan specifies minimum densities. The City does not approve projects with densities less than those prescribed in the General Plan.

The typical length of time between receiving approval for a housing development and submittal of an application for building permits is four to six months; for small lot developments it is typically less than 45 days.

Applicants have 10 days to file an appeal of a Planning Commission decision to the City Council, however the time frame between a Planning Commission hearing and City Council appeal hearing is 30 to 60 days.

There is also a Pre-Application Review process with Planning staff, engineering and utilities to identify any issues and concurrence on land use and density. Required CEQA analysis and outdated infrastructure and/or lack of infrastructure has been cited by developers as a hinderance.

The Development Advisory Board is made up of citywide staff in order to provide a one‐stop design team review of infrastructure, site design, product types and confirm conditions of approval in support of accelerating the project discretionary review process and provide the applicant the opportunity to collaborate on shared solutions. The process front loads the vetting of the project, which helps to reduce delays once the project is before the Planning Commission and City Council.

Table 4-17 and the following text describe the steps to process proposals for residential development.
• Initial Project Submittal. The first step in the development review process is the initial submittal of the development application to either the Building Department (for a single-family home) or the Planning Department (for more than two dwellings on a lot or more than four dwellings in total). The initial submittal may be preceded by an initial consultation with the Planning or 1914
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-200 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Building Department as requested by the applicant to determine appropriate submittal requirements.
• Development Plan Review. The Building or Planning Department then routes the application to affected departments for their review and comment. The purpose of the review is to ensure that new development or expansion of existing uses or structures occurs in a manner consistent with the Policy Plan and the objectives and standards of the Development Code, and that reasonable conditions are placed on the project to maintain public health, safety, and welfare.
• Design Review. While the project is reviewed by the affected City departments, the Planning Department conducts design review.

Design review is intended to ensure that the proposed
architectural treatment of new buildings and structures, including landscaping, open space, and signs, is consistent with the objective and illustrative design guidelines contained in the Development Code and expectations of the City. If the property is designated in a historic area of the community, additional reviews may be required consistent with state and local law.
• Environmental Review. City staff initiates the environmental review process to the extent required by the project. Most standard infill development projects require an initial study and negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In some cases, an environmental impact report is required for sensitive projects or for specific plans. In these cases, the developer pays a standard fee for the required type of environmental review. The completion of the environmental review is timed to coincide with the
forwarding of the application to the Planning Commission. • Development Advisory Board (DAB). The DAB meets to review the project and its conformance with the previous conditions, the Development Code, Municipal Code, and other requirements of the City. The DAB may review the site in relation to location of buildings on adjoining sites, any physical constraint identified on the site, the characteristics of the area in which the site is located, the degree to which the proposed development will complement or improve the quality of development in the vicinity of the proposed project, and the extent to which adverse impacts to surrounding properties will be minimized.
1915
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-201
The DAB has the authority to hear and decide on development plan review applications, substantial modifications to previously approved development plan review applications, environmental assessments associated with any of the above applications, and tentative maps. The DAB may also make recommendations as to the need for variances, conditional use permits, specific plans, etc.

Once the review is completed, the DAB makes recommendations to the Planning Commission for appropriate action. To ensure a timely review, the members of the DAB are the same individuals who conducted the initial review of the application.
• Planning Commission Action. Planning Commission action is required for single-family tracts, multiple-family projects, specific plans, etc. In most cases, the Planning Commission does not act as a Design Review Board, unless a significant project is proposed or the applicant is appealing recommendations of the Development Advisory Board. The Planning Commission typically approves recommendations of the DAB but may require modifications.

Table 4-17
Permit Processing Procedures
Processing Steps
Residential Products
Time Frame Four or Fewer
Housing Units
Five or More
Housing Units*
Submit Initial Application Required Required ---
Design Review N/A Required Concurrent with
project processing Environmental Clearance N/A Required City Review & Modifications Required Required 30 to 60 days Developer Makes Modifications Required Required 30 to 60 days Development Advisory Board N/A Required 30 days
Planning Commission Action N/A Required 30 days
Building Permits Issued Required Required Over the counter Total 2 to 3 months 5 to 6 months
Source: City of Ontario, 202112.
* Also applies to more than two units on a single lot
1916
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-202 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
• Approval Findings and Decision. A Development Plan shall be acted upon by the Approving Authority based on the information provided in the submitted application, evidence presented in the Planning Department’s written report, and testimony provided during the public hearing, only after considering and clearly establishing all of the following findings and giving supporting reasons for each finding. The application shall be denied if one or more of the following findings cannot be clearly established. - The proposed development at the proposed location is
consistent with the goals, policies, plans, and exhibits of the Vision, Policy Plan, and City Council Priorities components of The Ontario Plan;
- The proposed development is compatible with those on
adjoining sites in relation to location of buildings, with particular attention to privacy, views, any physical constraint identified on the site and the characteristics of the area in which the site is located;
- The proposed development will complement and/or improve on the quality of existing development in the vicinity of the project and the minimum safeguards necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare have been required of the proposed project;
- The proposed development is consistent with the
development standards and design guidelines set forth in the Development Code, or applicable specific plan or PUD.

The City is charged with the responsibility of ensuring that residential projects are decent, safe, and well-designed. While the permit approval process adds to the length of time required to process applications, it does not add any unduly constraints on the development of housing.

The City has not received residential development applications proposing to develop housing at a density lower than the minimum density permitted.

In an effort to streamline affordable housing projects, the City is including Program 22 to comply with the requirements of Senate Bill (SB) 35 by establishing a written policy or procedure and other guidance as appropriate to specify the SB 35 (2017) streamlining approval process and standards for eligible projects, as set forth under Government Code Section 65913.4.
1917
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-203
Design Review
Design review is a critical component of Ontario’s overall housing strategy. Poor quality design, in the long term, leads to the premature deterioration of housing, a decline in the quality of neighborhoods, and resident opposition or “NIMBYism” (“not in my backyard” mentality).

However, to achieve the City’s housing goals, providing a level of certainty to the development community is important. Developers need to know how to design their projects and neighborhoods to meet City expectations and avoid adverse public opinion and project denials.

Recognizing the need to balance the City’s housing goals, neighborhood stabilization, and revitalization goals, the City adopted Residential Design Guidelines in 2006. The guidelines provide guidance, objective standards, and graphics to illustrate the preferred and discouraged methods of planning, neighborhood design, and construction.

Topics include:
• Developments and Subdivisions. Include mixed-use housing, walkable neighborhoods, street networks, and open spaces. • Open Space and Landscaping. Include common open space, common recreation facilities, pathways, parks, and trails. • Lots and Buildings. Include size and dimensions, model variety, building orientation, garage placement, and fences and walls. • Building Design. Include building types, massing and roof form, garage design, accessory structures, and architectural details.

The Development Advisory Board conducts design review for residential projects exceeding four units. To ensure the process does not unduly lengthen the time period for project approval, design review is conducted concurrently with project review. The majority of multiple-family projects are approved within five to six months of project submittal, which includes the processing of environmental documentation. This process allows approvals to be secured without a public hearing.

For large projects requiring more design creativity, the City has adopted a PUD ordinance or Planned Residential Development Overlay to provide for more flexibility in design. This strategy was successfully employed for six blocks in the Downtown. The City also adopted a performance-based parking model that allows parking requirements to be based on the demand for parking rather than traditional, more rigid standards. This process has resulted in hundreds of new homes in Downtown Ontario.
1918
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-204 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022

4.10 Regulations Affecting Housing Supply
The City does not regulate short-term rentals and does not have inclusionary housing regulations. No other ordinances or regulatory tools in the city affect the cost and supply of housing.

4.11 Energy Conservation Opportunities
Rising energy costs, dependence on fossil fuels, and increasing evidence of the adverse impacts of global warming have provoked the need in California and nationwide to improve energy-management strategies.

Buildings use 76 percent of all electricity generated in the United States for their operation and generate 40 percent of carbon dioxide, a major component of greenhouse gases (GHGs), which are primarily responsible for global climate change. How we design, build, and operate buildings thus has profound implications for energy use and resulting global warming.

Although the State of California has long supported energy conservation, recent state laws have been enacted to combat GHG emissions and increase energy independence. In 2006, the State Legislature adopted AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which created the first comprehensive, state regulatory program to reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. SB 1368 bars California energy providers from entering into long-term contracts with high-polluting power generators in an effort to encourage the development of the state’s renewable energy portfolio.

Promoting energy conservation has become a consistent theme in regulations, green building practices, and general business operations.

For Ontario, opportunities abound to promote energy-efficient practices in the siting, design, construction, and renovation of housing stock. These practices not only respond to regulatory requirements but also can generate significant community, environmental, and economic benefits.

In 2018, the City received a Transformative Climate Communities grant for its Ontario Together project, which included a wide range of workforce development, displacement avoidance, and community engagement strategies as well as sustainability projects. These projects included a Rooftop Solar Project, which will install 700 kilowatts of solar power on affordable multifamily developments and single-family homes and will provide paid solar installation internships to grow the renewable energy workforce. The project also intends to plant 365 street trees, which can reduce energy costs to adjacent buildings. As of April 2021, 360 street trees had been planted and 24 solar photovoltaic systems had been installed.
1919
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-205
Neighborhood Design
Energy management is rarely a driving consideration for local, land use decision-making authorities. In fact, most land use frameworks—general plans, specific plans, zoning ordinances—do not provide sufficient language for these authorities to require developers to incorporate energy-efficient site planning. The Subdivision Map Act makes references to providing passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities, but no prescriptive guidance is provided. Accordingly, such site planning is often the result of individual developers who recognize the economic and marketing value of an energy-efficient community design.

Strategies to reduce energy demand begin with efficient site planning.

Sizing and configuring lots to maximize a building’s solar orientation (east–west alignment for southern exposure) facilitates optimal use of passive heating and cooling techniques. Infill development reduces potential energy costs of new infrastructure needed to service the site.

Placing housing near jobs, services, and other amenities reduces energy consumption related to transportation. Other design strategies with beneficial energy implications include narrowing street widths to reduce the urban heat island effect, installing broad-canopied trees for shade, and clustering compact development to reduce automobile use.

Building Design
Title 24, Part 6, California Energy Efficiency Standards, requires all residential construction to meet minimum energy conservation standards through either a prescriptive or performance-based approach. The former approach requires each individual component of a building to meet an identified minimum energy requirement. The performance-based approach, on the other hand, allows developers to choose a range of measures, which, in totality, meet specified energy-conservation targets.

With either of these options, mandatory components must still be installed, such as minimum insulation; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC); and efficient water heating equipment.

In addition to California’s Title 24 standards, all residential projects are subject to meeting the state building codes, which also include energy conservation standards. The California Building Standards Commission adopted the California Building Codes in 2008 based on “model” codes produced and updated periodically by various professional organizations. The City of Ontario has adopted these standards, which apply to all new residential buildings constructed after January 1, 2010.

The City of Ontario enforces Title 24 as the primary means for ensuring new housing incorporates the latest energy-efficient technologies. 1920
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-206 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Green Standards Design
In 2010, California’s Building Standards Commission adopted the California Green Building Code (CALGreen), making California the first state to adopt a uniform green building code. The City of Ontario has adopted the minimum standards of CALGreen to ensure energy efficiency, water conservation, material conservation and resource efficiency, and environmental quality are considered in all new buildings.

The building industry has developed different “green” building programs. The Building Industry Association sponsors a voluntary program called Green Builder. The program focuses on energy efficiency, water conservation, wood conservation, advanced ventilation, and waste diversion. Certified homes incorporate water-efficient landscaping and fixtures, use high-efficiency insulation and ventilation systems, contain environmentally sound building materials, initiate waste-reduction methods during construction, and exceed Title 24 Building Code energy standards by 15 percent.

Other green building programs have also been sponsored by other agencies. The United States Green Building Council (USGBC) sponsors another building certification program called Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). The LEED program is a national rating system for green buildings that focuses on commercial and multiplefamily residential projects. The USGBC reviews projects for conformance based on various efficiency, sustainability, materials quality, and design factors, and then issues certifications based on points achieved. 1921
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-207

5. RESOURCES

5.1 Housing Resources
This section describes the land resources within Ontario that are available to address the City's existing and future housing needs, including its share of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA).

Regional Housing Needs
The regional housing needs mandate requires every local government in California to plan for its “fair share” of the region's existing and future housing needs. The California Legislature has stated that housing availability is of vital statewide importance, as is the early attainment of decent housing and a suitable living environment for every Californian.

State law, therefore, requires the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to develop housing needs projections for every region in California. As directed by state law, HCD estimates each region’s existing and future needs every eight years; each eight-year period is called a housing cycle. For Ontario and the rest of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) region, the upcoming housing cycle (the 6th cycle) plans for projected housing needs between 2021 and 2029.

For the 6th cycle, the SCAG region has been allocated more than 1.3 million housing units to be planned for by 2029. This estimate is 300 percent higher than the approximately 400,000 units required in the previous housing planning period (the 5th cycle, which covered 2013- 2021). The large regional allocation results from underproduction of housing, rapidly increasing housing prices and rents, and increasing levels of housing overpayment among residents. As a result, local governments across the region must plan to accommodate an unprecedented increase in housing goals.

SCAG is responsible for dividing the 1.3-million-unit target between each of the 191 jurisdictions in the region. Under state law, SCAG must consider specific planning factors in allocating the required housing units between jurisdictions, but it can develop a tailored model for the region.

SCAG’s model for the 6th cycle considers the availability of land, adequacy of infrastructure and services, market demand for housing, fair housing, availability of employment and transit, local population growth estimates, and many other housing and planning considerations; the model, however, weights opportunities to promote fair housing, proximity to employment, and transit accessibility more heavily than other factors, so jurisdictions that were closer to jobs centers, had a lower concentration of poverty, and had more access to transit opportunities 1922
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-208 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
were generally allocated more units than those with poor jobs access and no public transit.

In Ontario, the RHNA goal has nearly doubled since the last Housing Element planning period. For the 2013-2021 planning period, Ontario's RHNA was 10,861 units; the allocation increased 92 percent to 20,854 units for the 2021-2029 period. Within this goal, the City must plan for housing production at three different income levels: lower-income housing (includes extremely low, very low, and low income), moderateincome, and above moderate-income. Table 5-1 summarizes the City’s 2021–2029 RHNA. Ontario is required to set aside sufficient land, adopt programs, and provide funding (to the extent feasible) to facilitate and encourage housing production commensurate with that need.

Table 5-1
Ontario Regional Housing Need Allocation, 2021–2029
Lower
Income
Moderate
Income
Above
Moderate
Income
Total
Capacity
RHNA Need 8,926 3,329 8,599 20,854
Source: SCAG, 2021.

California law holds local governments responsible for planning for their share of the region’ housing needs and ensuring that housing is planned commensurate with the total assigned need for each affordability category. However, state law does not require a city to build housing; that is the responsibility of the building industry. Local governments can obtain credit toward meeting their RHNA target in four ways:
• Housing Production. Housing units built and occupied (received a certificate of occupancy) on or after June 30, 2021, when the projection period for the 6th cycle RHNA begins.
• Planned Production. Housing units proposed for construction that are likely to be approved and built during the planning period, from July 2021 to October 2029.
• Available Land. Designation of vacant and underutilized sites with zoning, development standards, services, and public facilities in place so housing can be built.
• Alternative Credits. Qualified projects that involve the rehabilitation, preservation, and conversion of non-affordable units to affordable units, subject to conditions.
1923
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-209
The City’s housing strategies use the first three options. The following section describes how the City will address its housing planning and production goals for the 2021-2029 RHNA.

Relationship of Zoning and Density to Housing Affordability This section describes the suitability of residential development standards, namely allowed density and zoning districts, for facilitating housing affordable to different income levels.

Zoning and density standards are correlated to the affordability of housing. In general, higher-density housing projects, like apartment buildings, are more affordable than lower-density projects, like singlefamily homes. While other factors such as location, the size of the units, and quality of the finish materials also contribute to a project’s ultimate affordability, the state has determined that density and zoning standards are suitable proxies for identifying the potential affordability level of a site.

The following sections describe the density thresholds identified for each income category and the current zoning districts that allow the identified densities.

Lower Income
Density
Housing element law requires jurisdictions to provide a requisite analysis showing that zones identified for lower-income households provide sufficient density to encourage such development. The law provides two options for preparing the analysis: (1) describe market demand and trends, financial feasibility, and recent development experience; (2) utilize default density standards deemed adequate to meet the appropriate zoning test. According to state law, the default density standard for Ontario is 30 dwelling units per acre. In 2019 and 2020, two 100-percent affordable housing projects were built in Ontario with densities between 25 and 30 dwelling units per acre:
• Vista Verde. Completed in 20202021. Consists of 101 affordable units (lower incomelower-income); built at a density of 26 dwelling units per acre.
• Emporia Place I. Completed in 20192020. Consists of 74 affordable units (lower incomelower-income); built at a density of 26.7 dwelling units per acre.
1924
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-210 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Therefore, for the 2021-2029 planning period, the City has determined that the default density adequately demonstrates its capacity to accommodate the lower-income RHNA.

Zoning
Under the current development standards, residential development within the following zoning districts allows for densities of 30 dwelling units per acre or more.
• Mixed-Use (MU-1) – 20–75 dwelling units per acre
• Mixed-Use (MU-2) – 14-40 dwelling units per acre
- The City’s Development Code allows for stand-alone
multifamily residential projects in mixed-use districts. • Planned Unit Development (PUDs) – 25–75 dwelling units per acre
• High-Density Residential (HDR-45) – 25.1–45 dwelling units per acre
The City’s rezoning program (Program 13) will also create an affordable housing overlay that expands the land use categories that can accommodate at least 30 dwelling units per acre, exempt projects south of Riverside Drive with at least 25 20 percent of units affordable to lower -incomes from specific plan requirements if no specific plan exists, and revises existing specific plans to allow at least 30 dwelling units per acre on identified sites. Each of these changes will play a key role in fulfilling the City’s lower-income RHNA.

Moderate Income
Density
Typically, medium to medium-high multiple-family zoning districts are suitable for facilitating the construction of housing affordable to moderate-income households. To determine the densities needed to accommodate moderate-income housing, nearly 2,000 properties sold or listed on the MLS between September 2020 and September 2021 were analyzed. Of the 2,000 records analyzed, 66 were newer construction (built after 2017) townhomes or condos, most of which were built at densities between 8 and 18 dwelling units per acre. Of those, 10 properties sold for less than $410,000, the moderate-income threshold, indicating the densities were sufficient to produce moderate-income housing. These sales included four new construction homes in the New Haven master1925 City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-211
planned community (two two-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units), where projects are typically 18 units per acre or less.

In recognition of increasing home prices, however, the City has determined that a higher density of 25 units per acre would be more conducive to creating moderate-income housing. In support of this, the Cities of Chino, Fontana, and Rancho Cucamonga indicate that masterplanned communities with densities up to 25 dwelling units per acre offer homes that are affordable to moderate-income households. Therefore, the City’s land inventory will focus on sites that allow for 25 or more dwelling units per acre to fulfill its moderate-income allocation.

Zoning
The same zoning districts identified as suitable for lower-income housing are suitable for moderate-income housing, as well as the following:
• Medium-Density Residential (MDR-25) – 18.1 – 25 dwelling units per acre
• Specific Plan (SP) – Sites designated as SP, where no specific plan exists, can facilitate moderate-income housing if the
corresponding Policy Plan designation allows densities up to 25 dwelling units per acre. Such Policy Plan designations include:
- Medium-Density Residential (MDR) – 11 to 25 dwelling units per acre
- Mixed-Use (MU) – current and proposed designations for various mixed-use areas allow a range of densities with maximums ranging from 25 to 125 dwelling units per acre.

Above Moderate Income
Density and Zoning
The planned residential development projects in the city (see Table 5-2) include a mix of housing types at various densities. Most, however, are anticipated to develop at market rates that are affordable to abovemoderate-income households. Therefore, it is assumed that any density and any residentially zoned land can support the development of abovemoderate housing.

Housing Production and Planned Production
This section details residential development projects that have been approved, or are very near approval by the City and will complete constructed during the 6th housing cycle. currently in the pipeline. 1926
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-212 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
The City of Ontario has several approved or expects to approve several residential projects that are anticipated to be built andwill receive their certificate of occupancy or final inspection on or after June 30, 2021during the 6th cycle. Most of these projects are already under construction, as noted in Table 5-2. As allowed under state housing element law, these approved and pending residential projects will be eligible for credit toward the 6th cycle RHNA.

As described here and listed in Table 5-2, housing pipeline projects represent a mix of residential types, price points, and affordability levels. • Mix of Housing Types. A broad range of housing products is in the development pipeline, including single-family residential projects, condominiums, townhomes, clustered and motor court homes, and apartment projects. Proposed projects are located on vacant land throughout the city, within existing residential neighborhoods, in underutilized mixed-use areas, and on undeveloped land south of Riverside Drive and east of the Cucamonga Channel (the Channel), where the area is
transitioning from agricultural uses to residential communities. • Project affordability. A project’s affordability is based on the type of residential product approved/entitled in the community and the market sales price or rent charged for recently built projects in the city.
• Mix of Vacant and Underused Sites. Similar to the land inventory discussed later, proposed projects are situated on a combination of vacant and underused sites. Many included the subdivision of large lots or the development of a range of products, including multifamily housing, on large lots over 10 acres in size. Further, prior projects that have been built in the city have been within underutilized lots.
• Mix of Housing Locations. The City has approved proposals or issued a certificate of occupancy after July 1, 2021, to develop 1,6502,111 units, most of which are currently under construction and expected to receive a certificate of occupancy during the 6th cycle. While the greatest volume of housing development is in the area south of Riverside Drive and east of the Channel, projects have also been approved in the downtown area, along commercial corridors like Holt Boulevard, within the mixed-use areas along the Interstate (I-) 10 corridor, and scattered throughout established neighborhoods.
1927
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-213
Only projects that have been approvedissued a building permit or are expected to receive a building permit in the near term for development are included in the pipeline projections. Several more projects have been entitled, and many additional complex projects are currently under review that would add thousands of additional more units to the city, but these have not been included. Table 5-2, therefore, represents a conservative estimate of the planned projects.
1928
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-214 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 5-2
Residential Projects in the Pipeline
ID Project Name Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) Type* Total Units
Affordability
Status**
Lower Mod. Above
Mod.
1 Misc. Projects Downtown 104837612, 104839431 SF 2 - - 2 UC 2 Misc. Projects Between
Mission Blvd and
Riverside Dr
104955121, 105034106, 105034162,
104931214, 104953154
SF &
ADU 5 - - 5 UC
3 West Holt Multi-family 101055106 MF 6 - - 6 UC
4 Mission & Palmetto 101138204 MF 68 - - 68 PC
5 890 South Magnolia 101137115-16 MF 49 - - 49 EN
6 Meredith 11031152, -53 MF 464925 - - 464925 UC
7 Piemonte 21020440 MF 22 - - 22 UC
8 Esperanza
21830203-04, 21830301-17, 21830326-57,
21832201-04, 21832312-33, 21832362-65,
21858501-27, 21858638-41, 21872301-11,
21872339-40, 21872349, 21872401-40,
21872442
SF 200 - - 200 UC
9 Rich-Haven
21801602-03, 21816115, 21826229-30,
21826235-37, 21826239 SF 60 - - 60 UC
21801601, 21801604-05, 21809303,
21816115, 21821102, 21826206-07,
21839303-04, 21839308-09
MF 271 - - 271 UC
10 Subarea 29
107339105-17, 107339129-35, 107339209-
12, 107339243-53, 107340214-26,
107340228-30, 107340244-47, 21801501-05,
21801507-16, 21801529-47, 21801549-54,
21801562-64, 21827123, 21833153-54,
21867448-50, 21899125-33, 21899221-27,
21899232-53, 21899331-32, 21899334-42,
21899405-10, 21899477-84, 107339118,
107339126-28, 107339213-15
SF 325 - - 325 UC
11 The Avenue 21865227 SF 11 - - 11 UC
12 West Haven 21815111, 21815138 SF 129 - - 129 UC
13 Harlow Ln 107339216-27, 107340231-38 SF 20 - - 20 UC 14 Hazel St 107340110-27 SF 18 - - 18 UC
TOTAL - 2,111 - - 2,111 -
Source: City of Ontario, 2021.

Notes: The projects included in the table include permits that have been issued but not completed and certificates of occupancy issued on or after 6/30/2021. There are also several projects currently under review that are not included in this table. * SF = Single-Family, MF = Multifamily
** UC = Under Construction, PC = Currently in Plan Check, EN = Entitlement has been approved and project is expected to submit plans in near-term 1929
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-215
Ontario’s 2021-2029 RHNA includes 8,599 units for the above-moderate incomemoderate-income allocation (Table 5-1). As shown in Table 5-2, pipeline the majority of projects are currently under construction. The two projects that are not under construction include:
• Mission & Palmetto, which is currently in plan check and expected to be issued a building permit and commence construction by 2023.
• 890 South Magnolia, which is fully entitled, and it expected to be issued a building permit and commence construction before 2024.

Projects that are currently under construction and those that will begin construction before 2024 are expected to complete construction and received a certificate of occupancy well before the close of 6th cycle.

Therefore, these projects can address 1,6502,111 units of the abovemoderate allocation.

The remainder of this chapter will focus on key strategies that the City will undertake to address the remainder of the above-moderate allocation as well as the lower- and moderate-income RHNA.
2021-2029 RHNA Strategies
While the prior section listed residential projects approved for development in the city, this section describes additional strategies proposed to address the remaining RHNA for the 2021-2029 Housing Element.

Housing Opportunity Areas
The City is required to identify available sites to accommodate its 2021– 2029 RHNA. An analysis of the city's available land and existing zoning districts showed that there was not enough land zoned at the correct densities to facilitate the development of enough housing affordable to lower- and moderate-income households to fulfill the RHNA and a rezoning program (Program 13) was needed. The City evaluated all of its land resources for suitability to develop at densities suitable to lower- and moderate-income housing and developed strategies and programs to meet its obligation. A description and analysis of the sites identified, including the sites' suitability for residential development, suitability to accommodate lower-income housing, realistic capacity, and allocation of units by RHNA income category is included in this section. Applicable programs are discussed as applicable throughout.
1930
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-216 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
A detailed list of each site by Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) is included in Appendix B.

Identification of Sites Housing Opportunity Areas
The analysis identified 233 parcels, divided into 10 areas Housing Opportunity Areas in which housing growth can be accommodated after the City implements its rezoning program (Program 13),. These Opportunity Areas are further grouped into six key strategies, and illustrated in Figure 5-1, Housing Opportunity Areas,. Housing Opportunity Areas are grouped based on similarities in site suitability, sites ability to accommodate the lower-income RHNA requirements, realistic capacity adjustments, and distribution of units by RHNA income category. In addition to the Opportunity Areas, the City used accessory dwelling units (ADUs) as the seventh strategy to fulfill the RHNA. The sites identified in the Opportunity Areas further the City’s housing goals and align with regional transportation plans by placing higher-density housing along future transit routes. The RHNA strategies also consider fair and equitable housing goals, development feasibility, and proximity to amenities such as grocery stores, open space, and jobs, environmental constraints, and infrastructure availability. To ensure that the identified sites are suitable for the development of affordable housing within the 6th Cycle, and to promote such development the City has also identified several programs, outlined in the Chapter 9., These programs are intended to work in concert with the sites inventory to facilitate housing development. Programs that specifically relate to the City's sites inventory include Programs 8, 10-11, 13, and 15.

A detailed list of each site by Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) is included in Appendix B.

Figure 5-1 shows the identified sites categorized into 10 Housing Opportunity Areas and six strategies based on their location within the city. Figures 5-2 to 5-11 show detailed maps of sites within each Opportunity Area.
1931
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-217
Figure 5-1 Housing Opportunity Areas
1932
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-218 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Strategies
Strategies 1-6, reflect the City's sites inventory. Discussions of each strategy comprise the City's sites analysis. The discussions analyze the suitability of sites, sites to accommodate lower-income RHNA requirements, realistic capacity, and units by RHNA income level for each strategy. Proposed programs (contained in Chapter 9) that help to demonstrate site suitability, zoning adequacy, ability to accommodate lower-income housing, or are necessary to comply with housing element law are also referenced as applicable.

Following the sites analysis (strategies 1-6), strategy 7 includes a discussion demonstrating realistic ADU development potential within the city and the determination of ADU affordability levels.

Sites Analysis
The City has divided its sites analysis including the suitability of sites, sites to accommodate lower-income RHNA, realistic capacity, and units by RHNA income category by strategy.

Analyzing Suitability of Sites
Under each strategy, theThe following items will be addressed, as described and applicable, under each strategy:
• Infrastructure Availability. Analysis assessing infrastructure availability is included for every strategy. Strategy 6, where infrastructure is still in development, outlines planned infrastructure development, and describes the City's strategy to account for the development to necessary systems. Program 11 discusses infrastructure development in the Western Ontario Ranch, where Opportunity Areas under strategy 6 are located. • Consistency with Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.

Detailed analysis of how identified sites affirmatively further fair housing opportunities is included in Chapter 3, so this topic is not addressed in this chapter.
• RHNA Income Category. A description specifying which portion of the realistic capacity is suitable to accommodate lower, moderate, and above moderate households, and a discussion of why the City identified sites within each opportunity area as those best suited to accommodate the lower-income RHNA (based on HCD Best Practices).
1933
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-219
• Environmental Constraints. Analysis assessing environmental constraints is included for every strategy. Additional analysis is provided for strategy 6, where mapping of potential hazards identified 26 parcels where groundwater levels may be shallow enough to risk potential liquefaction. Program 11 addresses development in the Ontario Ranch, where strategy 6 Opportunity Areas are located.

Analyzing Sites to Accommodate Lower-Income RHNA, Realistic Capacity, and RHNA Income Category
Because the City's RHNA obligation is large, its land resources are finite, its parcel sizes are defined, and vacant land is scarce, the City's inventory of suitable sites includes 233 parcels. The existing conditions, market trends, and types of anticipated development vary dramatically between different parts of the city, but there are many similarities between sites in proximity to one another. To better describe the unique considerations for the 233 parcels, the City has divided its sites analysis including discussions of site suitability, zoning adequacy, and capacity assessment by strategy, in the following section (Strategies). The following items will be addressed, as applicable, under each strategy:
• Inclusion in Previous Housing Element. Eighteen nonvacant parcels in the City's land inventory were included the previous housing element. To encourage redevelopment on these sites, state law requires that the City allow by-right development of housing projects with at least 20 percent of units affordable to lower-income households. To meet this requirement, these sites are subject to Program 15, as discussed under strategies 1 and 2 (recycled sites are only located in the Downtown and West Holt Housing Opportunity Areas).
• Zoning. Many of the identified sites are not currently zoned for the correct densities to support the affordability levels by the City.

These sites will be included in the City rezoning program (Program 13). Rezoning is required for strategies 1-4, and strategy

6. A detailed description of current and proposed zoning for specific sites in each Housing Opportunity Area is discussed under the applicable strategy. The proposed zoning changes are also tabulated by APN in Appendix B.
• Size of Sites. Analysis assessing the suitability of sites is included for every strategy. Strategies 1, 2, 5, and 6 (where sites less than 0.5 acres or greater than 10 acres are identified) also provide sufficient evidence demonstrating that the identified sites are suitable to accommodate housing for lower-income households. Programs to facilitate affordable development on these sites, including Programs 8, 10, 11, and 13 are discussed under each strategy. 1934
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-220 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
• Underutilized (Nonvacant) Sites. Underutilized (nonvacant) sites are identified in strategies 1-4, and strategy 6. Analysis for each strategy includes a discussion of existing uses, availability of sites, and feasibility of development. A discussion of Citywide trends and market conditions is included in the next section, while additional information about market trends specific to the strategy has been added to the discussion under strategies 5 and

6. Examples of projects demonstrating the potential for the sites to accommodate the lower-income RHNA are included under the discussion of strategy-specific market trends (strategies 5-6), Size of Site, and Feasibility of Development for each strategy or Opportunity Area as applicable. Finally, development potential on sites were confirmed through discussions with property owners, home building groups, developers and affordable housing developers.

In addition to the items described above, the sites analysis includes description of the following topics:
• Realistic Capacity. A detailed analysis demonstrating the realistic capacity on each site.
• RHNA Income Category. A breakdown of units identified to meet RHNA obligation by income category.

Underutilized Sites
The City has included non-vacant sites in its land inventory to meet a significant portion of its regional housing need. These sites are underutilized, and many are located in the undeveloped area south of Riverside Drive and east of the Cucamonga Channel, where the primary use is agricultural; other underutilized sites, like those located in the Downtown area, along Holt Boulevard, and at the old Cardenas market, are parking lots or aging and underused commercial properties that are suitable for residential development and are ready to turn over; finally, the land inventory includes the parking lots and several out parcels around the Ontario Mills Mall, reflecting a national trend of repositioning shopping centers as mixed-use communities.

While the city has seen immense growth in the past few decades, the City is continuously expanding the opportunity for new housing development in response to market demand, developer interest, and state housing law.

Interest from property owners and local developers is very high, and projects at densities of 50+ units per acre were recently approved. In 2021, it was estimated that building applications under review would add more than 5,000 dwelling units to the city. Several of the approved projects and projects under review include high-density apartments and condos. This 1935
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-221
indicates a strong market for higher-density housing products in the inland empire.

To demonstrate a realistic capacity throughout its inventory, but particularly on the underutilized sites, the City calculated the total housing capacity on each site using a realistic density below the maximum allowed by the current or proposed zoning.

Citywide Market Trends
The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly changed the way that people shop, work, travel, and use their homes. By forcing the closure of many businesses and forcing many businesses to allow employees to work from home, COVID-19 has created economic impacts that will live on long after the pandemic subsides. These impacts are reasonably expected to affect market demand for development throughout the 6th Cycle. This section summarizes the findings expected to impact the development feasibility during the 2021-2029 cycle.

RETAIL
• Increasing retail vacancies from permanent closure of retail stores, services, dining, and entertainment businesses
• Hastened shift from in-store to online retail will lengthen the recovery period for retail
• Long term, household growth will support faster recovery and experience-oriented retail districts may ameliorate competition from online retail
• Weak to no demand for new retail development (3 to 5 year minimum)
OFFICE
• Shift to more work-from-home will lead office-based businesses to downsize as office leases come up for renewal over the next several years
• Could take five to ten years for office vacancies to peak and then recover to healthy levels
• Not clear yet if medical office and commercial office space for retail services will be as hard hit as the broader office market, but may suffer from pandemic-related permanent business closures • Weak to no demand for new office development for five to ten years; once development demand returns, smaller office
footprints likely to result in slower growth in office development over the long term
1936
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-222 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022

LODGING AND HOSPITALITY
• Business travel virtually ceased at height of pandemic • Business travel is the most profitable segment in hospitality and is key to the hospitality market in Ontario
• Recovery in hospitality tends to lag overall economic recovery • Business travel may never return to pre-pandemic levels as technology for internet-based meetings improve and become more commonplace
• Market demand would have supported new hotels prior to the pandemic but will now take several years or longer for market demand to recover

RESIDENTIAL
• Residential market has remained strong during the pandemic • US and California have underbuilt housing since the 2008–09 recession, so continued market strength expected
• However, rising mortgage delinquencies and potential for rental evictions after protections expire are serious complications that could disrupt the housing market in the short term, or longer, depending on the government’s response
• For now, residential market demand is strong and expected to remain strong for the foreseeable future

INDUSTRIAL
• The industrial market has remained strong during the pandemic with historic low vacancy rates
• Market driven by warehousing demand, which has ripple effects on manufacturing and other industrial uses
• There is not enough land area in Southern California planned and zoned for industrial uses to meet the long-term potential for industrial development
• The market will continue to support additional industrial development for the foreseeable future
1937
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-223
Strategy 1: Downtown Housing Opportunity Area

OPPORTUNITY AREA
The City developed the Downtown District Plan, as described in Program 8, which provides opportunities for high-density, market-rate, and affordable housing in the Euclid Avenue Entertainment District and Holt Boulevard District. Projects pending funding, such as like the Emporia II affordable housing development, Pprojects under review, such as the Hutton C-Block Mixed-Use development that will bring ground-floor commercial with high-density housing and structured parking to the heart of downtown, and recently completed projects, such as the Emporia I affordable housing project (completed 2020), embody the vision for housing in the downtown.

The City has identified two sites in addition to the pipeline projects for inclusion in the land inventory, as shown in Figure 5-2.

Figure 5-2 Downtown Housing Opportunity Area

SUITABILITY OF SITES
Infrastructure Availability
Downtown is well-served by infrastructure. The City is also working to build OntarioNet, a new fiber-optic internet service throughout the city.

The first fiber lines serving Ontario have already been installed in the areas around downtown.,
RHNA Income Category
Using the metrics described above, tThe Downtown Opportunity Area was determined to be suitable for lower-income households based on proximity to transit, access to existing and planned jobs and amenities, access to grocery stores, proximity to available infrastructure and utilities, and because there are no known requirements for environmental mitigation:

Emporia
1 2
1938
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-224 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
• Proximity to transit. All sites in this Opportunity Area are within a 1/4 mile walk of the new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) stop that is planned by the San Bernardino County Transit Authority
(SBCTA) along Holt Boulevard. This BRT route is funded and expected to be operational in 2023.
• Access to existing and planned jobs and ammenities. It is estimated that Downtown Ontario is currently home to more than 6,500 jobs, and the Downtown District Plan, described under Program 11, includes incentives to increase that number through development streamlining tools such as an expansion of the administrative use permit (AUP) program, and through economic development
efforts, such as bringing structured parking to the area and focused outreach to desired employment-generating users. • Access to grocery stores. All sites in this Opportunity Area are within a 1/2 mile walk of an existing grocery store (Stater Brothers at 646 W. Holt Blvd. and Cardenas Markets at 720 E. Holt Blvd.). • Proximity to infrastructure and utilities. As noted under infrastructure availability, this area is well-served, and these sites will benefit from innovative technology the City is piloting in the downtown.
• Environmental mitigation. As noted under Environmental Constraints, and discussed under Existing Use, there are no known natural or man-made environmental development
concerns that would require mitigation.

To provide conservative estimates, however, only 50 percent of the identified capacity (described under Realistic Capacity) was considered suitable to accommodate lower-income housing, while the balance was considered suitable for moderate-income housing (detailed under Units by RHNA Income Category).has a total housing capacity of 40 units, half of which (20 units) have the capacity to accommodate lower-income housing. The balance (20 units) is presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to moderate-income households.

Environmental Constraints
and tThere are no environmental constraints limiting development potential.

ANALYSIS OF SITES TO ACCOMMODATE LOWER-INCOME RHNA
The City has identified two sites in addition to the pipeline projects for inclusion in the land inventory, as shown in Figure 5-2. 1939
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-225
Figure 5-2 Downtown Housing Opportunity Area
The two sites identified in this area, numbered in Figure 5-2, are described below.

The first site, adjacent to 1. SWC D Street, & Palm Avenue • Inclusion in Previous Housing Element
The two parcels associated with site were included in the City’s last housing element. In compliance with Assembly Bill (AB) 1397, by-right development will be allowed for any residential project that provides for at least 20 percent of units affordable to lowerincome households as described in Program 15. • Zoning
The site is currently is zoned for HDR-45, which allows up to 45 dwelling units per acre, satisfying the default density requirements for lower-income housing.
• Size of Site
This site consists of two adjoining parcels (0.5 and 0.7 acres in size), so no sites smaller than 0.5 acres are included. • This Existing Use
Both parcels site isare currently occupied by an underutilized parking lots. While the parking divisions do not follow lot lines, one lot serves the utilities building to the east, while the other functions as auxiliary parking play area for the church complex to the north. Both lots, however, are under different ownership than the uses they currently serve. These parcels were identified in the inventory because parking lots provide a unique opportunity for redevelopment; limited demolition is necessary, so developers can often afford to pay higher land costs.

Emporia
1 2
1940
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-226 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
• Availability of Sites
The City is not aware of any parking or other leases that would preclude development of these sites for affordable housing within the 6th cycle. In addition, the City is reducing requirements for this type of single-use parking in the downtown through regulatory changes in how the City determines where parking for projects can be accommodated, which would reduce the need for these uses. Further, the City has had informal conversations with property owners. While they do not currently have plans to redevelop, redevelopment of these sites for as residential uses, including potential lower-income housing during the 6th cycle is feasible.
• Feasibility of Development.

The identified parcels as well as the uses they currently serve are all located within Phase I or Phase II of the Downtown District Plan (Phase I adopted in 2020, Phase II expected adoption in 2023), described under Program 8. Among other actions, the City has already developed a performance-based Downtown Parking
Model that promotes a "park once" strategy and considers timeof-use of different land uses to minimize the amount of parking required to serve homes, businesses, and other uses in the area, and to create a pedestrian-oriented hub. As a result of these changes, uses in this area will require less single-use parking, such as that provided on the identified site.

In addition to the reduced demand for the current use, there is strong interest demand for new residential projects. There are 4 residential projects currently under consideration in the downtown area. Affordable housing has also proven viable on infill sites like the identified parcels in the downtown area. There is one recently completed (2020) affordable housing project (Emporia I), and one proposed affordable housing project (Emporia II, applying for funding in 2022), that were developed on infill properties in the downtown core. There are no other known limitations to development of this site for residential uses or affordable housing within the 6th cycle. , which was included in the City’s last housing element. In compliance with Assembly Bill (AB) 1397, by-right development will be allowed for any residential project that provides for at least 20 percent of units affordable to lower-income households as described in Program

15. For conservative estimates, the realistic density used to determine the total housing capacity of the site is 25 units per acre. 1941
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-227

2. NWC Holt Boulevard & Miramonte Avenue
• Inclusion in Previous Housing Element.

These parcels were not included in prior housing elements. • The second site, along Holt Boulevard, Zoning
The site is currently designated zoned for as Neighborhood Commercial (CN), but it will be part of the City's rezoning program (Program 13) with a proposed designation of MU-1, which allows up to 75 dwelling units per acre and is suitable for lower-income housing.
• Size of Site
This site consists of 3 parcels which combined cover 0.5 acres. To facilitate the consolidation of these lots and promote
redevelopment, the City will implement a lot consolidation ordinance, as described in Program 10. Because this lot is along Holt Boulevard and within the Downtown Opportunity Area, it will benefit from the provisions of both Programs 8 and 10. • This Existing Use
The entirety of this site includes three parcels with consistent ownership, and it is currently operating as a used car sales lot. Car lots provide a unique opportunity for redevelopment because limited demolition is necessary; as a result, developers can often afford to pay higher land costs. Furthermore, this lot is currently occupied by an independent car sales operation, so strategic decisions by major corporations would not be necessary. The housing plan also includes a program to encourage lot
consolidation along Holt Boulevard
• Availability of Sites
Typical commercial properties are leased on three- to five-year terms. It is unlikely this site would have lease terms longer than industry standards. In addition, uses that occupy lower-rent properties, like small-scale independent used car sales, are historically phased out as land values rise to the point where property owners can realize higher profits through either redevelopment or sale of the property. Given the current market conditions (described above), which show a strong demand for residential, rezoning this property from commercial only (CN) to mixed use (MU-1) and allowing for residential only development, as proposed, will increase the current value of the property and encourage owners to consider alternative uses, like residential. 1942
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-228 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
The City contacted property owners regarding the proposed land uses changes. Several property owners reached out to discuss changes with the City and none indicated that housing
development was not feasible.
• Feasibility of Development
This property is within Phase II of the Downtown District Plan – which promotes park once strategies, and it is adjacent to a planned bus rapid transit (BRT) line on Holt Boulevard that is already funded, and expected to be operational in 2023. Both of these conditions reduce the parking burden of the site, reducing the costs and design challenges associated with accommodating parking on smaller housing sites. Discussions with National Core, the affordable housing developer who constructed and operates the Vista Verde affordable housing project on East Holt Boulevard (completed 2021), indicated that they have developed affordable projects on sites as small as 0.5 acres. The provisions of both (Programs 8 and 10) are intended to encourage development and enable affordable housing on this site. and facilitate the development of housing affordable to lower-income residents.

REALISTIC CAPACITY
To account for potential non-residential development, only 60 percent of the total land area was assumed suitable for housing. In addition, a realistic density of 35 dwelling units per acre was used to determine the total housing capacity. To determine the realistic capacity on these sites, the City identified a realistic density below the maximum, and applied an additional reduction factor to sites with a mixed-use designation to account for potential non-residential uses. A summary of the assumptions and realistic capacity is included in Table 5-3, and detailed descriptions of the adjustment factors applied to sites within each zoning designation is provided after the table.
1943
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-229
Table 5-3
Strategy 1: Realistic Capacity
Zoning
(after
rezoning)
Number
of
Parcels
Acres*
(Net)
Max
Density
(du/ac)
Max
Capacity
(units*)
Adjustment
Factors**
Final
Realistic
Capacity
(units*)
Opportunity Area: Downtown
HDR-45 2 1.2 45 54 53.3% 29
MU-1 3 0.5 75 39 28% 11
TOTAL 5 1.7 92 40
Source: City of Ontario, 2022.
*Acres and units have been rounded.
**See Adjustment Factor below for a detailed description of the adjustment factors applied to each group of sites.

Adjustment Factors
• HDR-45
Description:
- Size of site: 2 parcels (consolidated), 1.2 acres
- Allowable density: 25-45 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (50 percent)
- Existing Use: Parking Lot (see Existing Use under "Site Specific Information" above)
- Infrastructure availability: Yes, no constraints
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. No Adjustment Site size reflects net acreage.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. No Adjustment
The HDR-45 zone is a residential district, intended for 100 percent residential projects. For this reason, 100 percent of the site area was considered viable for residential
development, and no reduction factor was applied.
1944
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-230 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
- Typical Densities. 53.3 Percent Adjustment
For conservative estimates, the realisticminimum density of the zone, 25 dwelling units per acre, was used to
determine the total housing capacity of the site is 25 units per acre. 25 dwelling units per acre is 53.3 percent of the maximum density allowed.
- Infrastructure Availability. No Adjustment
Not applicable, no constraint
- Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraint
Total Capacity Adjustments: (1)x(1)x(.533)x(1)x(1) = 53.3 percent • MU-1
Description:
- Size of site: 3 parcels (consolidated), 0.5 acres
- Allowable density: 25-75 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (50 percent)
- Existing Use: Used car sales (see Existing Use under "Site Specific Information" above)
- Infrastructure availability: Yes, no constraints
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. No Adjustment Site size reflects net acreage.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. 60 Percent Adjustment This mixed-use designation allows for 100 percent
residential uses, mixed use projects, and 100 percent nonresidential uses. Recent and proposed development in the district includes a mix of all three types of projects, including the following residential and mixed use projects:

The Hutton C-Block development is a mixed-use project
with commercial uses on the ground floor, structured
parking, and multi-family housing on upper floors. The
1945
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-231
Palmer West project is 100 percent residential. Two
affordable projects, Emporia I, completed in 2020, and
Emporia II, which is entitled and expected to start
construction in 2022 if funding applications are successful, are also examples of 100 percent residential projects in this district, and illustrated that the zoning can support
affordable projects. To account for potential nonresidential uses, an adjustment factor of 60 percent was applied. This estimate generally reflects the mix of project types the City anticipates based on recent applications for development in the MU-1 zone.
- Typical Densities. 46.7 Percent Adjustment
The downtown mixed-use category allows residential
densities between 25 and 75 dwelling units per acre. A
realistic density on the lower end of the allowed range, 35 dwelling units per acre, was used to determine the total capacity in this zoning district. Recent entitlements in excess of 40 dwelling units per acres have been issued in this district. Projects include the Hutton C-Block
development (60 dwelling units per acre), and the Palmer West multi-family project (47 dwelling units per acre).

Affordable projects in the City, like the Emporia I
development (completed in 2020), was built at a slightly lower density (26 dwelling units per acre), but there are several examples of recent affordable projects outside the City that are built at or above 35 dwelling units per acre including, Clark Commons (36 du/ac), affordable family
apartments in Buena Park, completed in 2019.

Accordingly, 35 dwelling units per acre will provide
realistic capacity estimates. Thirty-five dwelling units per acre is 46.7 percent of the maximum density allowed.
- Infrastructure Availability. No Adjustment
Not applicable, no constraint
- Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraint
Total Capacity Adjustments: (1)x(.600)x(.467)x(1)x(1)=28 percent

UNITS BY RHNA INCOME CATEGORY
On both sites, only 50 percent of the total final realistic capacity was estimated to have the potential to accommodate lower incomes, as shown in Table 5-4.
1946
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-232 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 5-4
Strategy 1: Units by Income Category
Zoning
(after
rezoning)
Number of
Parcels
Acres*
(Net)
Units by RHNA Income Category Final Realistic
Lower Capacity (units*)
(units*)
Moderate
(units*)
Above Moderate
(units*)
Opportunity Area: Downtown
HDR-45 2 1.2 15 14 - 29
MU-1 3 0.5 5 6 - 11
TOTAL 5 1.7 20 20 - 40
Source: City of Ontario, 2022.
*Acres and units have been rounded.

Using the metrics described above, the Downtown Opportunity Area has a total housing capacity of 40 units, half of which (20 units) have the capacity to accommodate lower-income housing. The balance (20 units) is presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to moderate-income households.

Strategy 2: Holt Boulevard Opportunity Areas (West and East)

OPPORTUNITY AREAS
Holt Boulevard is one of the city’s original thoroughfares, extending through Ontario and connecting to neighboring communities. It is also an important regional transit corridor. This strategy includes two Opportunity Areas, West Holt Boulevard and East Holt Boulevard.

Existing bus lines along Holt Boulevard report some of the highest ridership rates in San Bernardino County. In addition, the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) plans to provide new bus rapid transit (BRT) service along Holt Boulevard as part of the West Valley Connector Project. Those portions of the project that will serve Holt Boulevard are funded and scheduled for operation in 2023.

SUITABILITY OF SITES
Infrastructure Availability
Like Downtown, Holt Boulevard is well-served by infrastructure.

RHNA Income Category
These sites were determined to be suitable for lower-income households based on proximity to transit, access to grocery stores, proximity to available infrastructure and utilities, and because there are no known requirements for environmental mitigation, as discussed below. 1947
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-233
• Proximity to transit. Holt Boulevard has long been an important transit corridor in the city. Existing bus lines along Holt Boulevard report some of the highest ridership rates in San Bernardino County. In addition, the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) plans to provide new bus rapid transit (BRT) service along Holt Boulevard as part of the West Valley Connector Project. Those portions of the project that will serve Holt Boulevard are funded and scheduled for operation in 2023. - West Holt Boulevard. Approximately 70 percent of the land area identified for lower- and moderate-income housing along West Holt Boulevard is within a 5-minute walk of a planned BRT stop; 100 percent of sites are within a 10-minute walk of a planned BRT stop.
• Access to grocery stores.
- West Holt Boulevard. Approximately half of the acreage identified in this Opportunity Area are within a 1/2 mile walk of an existing grocery store (Superior Grocers at 815 W. Holt Blvd.).
- East Holt Boulevard. Sites 1-9, as noted on Figure 5-4, East Holt Housing Opportunity Area, are within a 1/2 mile walk of an existing grocery store (Cardenas Markets at 720 E. Holt Blvd.).
• Proximity to infrastructure and utilities. As noted under infrastructure availability, this area is well-served, and these sites will benefit from innovative technology the City is piloting in the downtown.
• Environmental mitigation. As noted under Environmental Constraints, and discussed under Existing Use, there are no known natural or man-made environmental development
concerns that would require mitigation.

To provide conservative estimates, however, only 50 percent of the identified capacity (described under Realistic Capacity) was considered suitable to accommodate lower-income housing, while the balance was considered suitable for moderate-income housing (detailed under Units by RHNA Income Category).

Environmental Constraints
The development in these areas would constitute urban infill projects on already disturbed land, so there are no environmental constraints limiting development potential.
1948
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-234 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022

ANALYSIS OF SITES TO ACCOMMODATE LOWER-INCOME RHNA
West Holt Boulevard
The City has identified 36 parcels (18.3 acres) along West Holt Boulevard for inclusion in the land inventory, as shown in Figure 5-3 and described below.

Figure 5-3 West Holt Housing Opportunity Area
• Inclusion in Previous Housing Element
Several of these parcels were also included in the City’s prior housing element (see a detailed list by APN in Appendix B and Program 15). To further encourage residential development on parcels listed in the last housing element and to comply with AB 1397, by-right development will be allowed for any residential project that includes at least 20 percent of units affordable to lower-income households, as described in Program 15.
• These sites were used to meet the City’s moderate-income RHNA in the prior housing element. Like other sites reused from the prior element, by-right development will be allowed for any residential project that includes at least 20 percent of units affordable to lower-income households as described in Program 15.Zoning - Sites with Adequate Zoning. There are 27 parcels (12.8 acres) within the Opportunity Area currently zoned as HDR-45,
which satisfies the default density requirements for lowerincome housing and is sufficient to support moderate-income housing as well.
- Proposed Rezoning. Two parcels (1.5 acres), currently zoned as Community Commercial (CC), are part of the City’s rezoning program (Program 13). The City proposes changing the
designation to MU-2 with an Affordable Housing Overlay
1949
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-235
(described in Program 13), which will allow a density range of 20-40 dwelling units per acre and is suitable for lower- and moderate-income housing.

Five parcels (4.0 acres) are currently zoned as MDR-25. These will be included in the City’s rezoning program (Program 13) with a proposed designation of HDR-45, which allows up to 45 dwelling units per acre and is suitable for both lower- and moderate-income housing.
• Sites along West Holt Boulevard were identified based on proximity to transit, potential for redevelopment, and current zoning.
• Approximately 70 percent of the land area identified for lowerand moderate-income housing along West Holt Boulevard is within a 5-minute walk of a planned BRT stop; 100 percent of sites are within a 10-minute walk of a planned BRT stop.
• Size of Sites
While parcels smaller than 0.5 acres have been identified throughout West Holt Boulevard, such parcels were only included in the sites inventory if they maintained consistent ownership with an adjacent parcel and together the parcels were greater than

0.5 acres. Adjacent parcels with consistent ownership often function as a single site. As described in Program 10, the City plans to adopt an ordinance to encourage site consolidation.
• Existing Use
Existing uses include parking lots (2 consolidated sites, 1.4 acres), aging commercial properties including, (retail/service
commercial (4 consolidated sites, 2.8 acres), and diningmaterials suppliers and related parking areas (2 consolidated sites, 2.1 acres), automotive uses (2 sites, 1.0 acres)establishments), and used car sales lots (11 sites, 10.5 acres). These commercial properties are underperforming underutilized and surrounded by residential uses.

The identified parking lots are associated with an established restaurant. While the restaurant is not expected to turn over this cycle, the parking areas are large, and the restaurant would still retain a large parking area that was not included in the inventory.

The consolidated sites (4 parcels total) are adjacent and could be further consolidated to enable redevelopment. The City discussed general growth opportunities with property owners, who do not currently have plans to redevelop, but development could occur 1950
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-236 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
during the 6th cycle. Program 10 encourages lot consolidation as described above.

The retail/service commercial properties identified in the inventory were selected because of the age of the buildings and the current mix of uses. The 4 consolidated sites are comprised of 7 parcels with structures built between 1950 and 1960. The typical lifespan of a commercial building is 30 years. The structures on the identified sites range in age from 60 to 70 years. As structures age, systems need to be updated and hazardous materials common in construction when these buildings were constructed, like asbestos and lead paint need to be abated, increasing the cost of upkeep.

As these costs increase, cost-effective revenue generation declines.

When buildings no longer produce cost-effect revenue, they have reached the end of their useful life, and properties (and property owners) are typically ready for redevelopment. Tenants in these structures include liquor stores, a party supply store, an independent furniture store, a custom glass and mirror supplier, appliance repair, and a beauty school. Existing tenants along West Holt BoulevardAll are also small independent usesbusinesses, so redevelopment of these properties would not require strategic decisions by major corporations.

Other commercial uses include a nursery, a building material supplier, tire sales and automotive services. The nursey and building materials supplier operate largely outdoors and have very few supporting structures. If these properties were to redevelopment, these uses would be easier to relocate as tenant improvements are minimum. The tire sales and automotive uses also occupy structure built in the 1970s, that are now reaching the end of their useful lives.

Car sales lots, currently occupy more than half of the acreage identified in the sites inventory. on the other hand, These uses are largely undeveloped, which means the cost and effort required to transition to residential uses are reduced as less site preparation will be necessary.
• Availability of Sites
In general, typical commercial properties are leased on three- to five-year terms. It is unlikely that existing tenants in this area would have lease terms longer than industry standards. In addition, uses that occupy lower-rent properties, like those included in the land inventory along West Holt, are historically phased out of urban areas as land values rise to the point where property owners can realize higher profits through either 1951
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-237
redevelopment or sale of the property. Given the current market conditions (described above), which show a strong demand for residential, an increased appetite for higher-density projects. The City has reached out to property owners in this area. While none have current plans for housing development, those who
responded would consider introducing housing or affordable housing should the opportunity arisemany were interested in potential lot consolidation, indicating the redevelopment is feasible within the 6th cycle. Car sales lots, on the other hand, are largely undeveloped, which means the cost and effort required to transition to residential uses are reduced as less site preparation will be necessary.
• Feasibility of Development
Sites along West Holt Boulevard were identified based on proximity to transit, potential for redevelopment, and current zoning.

There is a growing interest in residential development in this area.

The Roosevelt Tower Apartments, located at 549 West Holt Boulevard, is currently in entitlements, but construction of the 59- unit apartment building is expected to begin in 2022. While this project indicates there is an appetite for housing development in this part of the city, examples from the larger region illustrate how underutilized sites, similar to those identified along West Holt, are being redeveloped with affordable housing, demonstrating the potential for affordable housing on the identified sites.

Affordable housing projects throughout the region have started to look to smaller underutilized parking lots and aging commercial sites for opportunities to develop affordable housing in areas that are well served by transit and infrastructure, like the sites identified along West Holt Boulevard. Recent examples include the Heroes Landing affordable housing project in Santa Ana, CA, which transformed an underutilized parking lot on a 1.5-acre site into 75 units for permanent supportive housing. Also in Santa Ana, the Tiny Tim Plaza affordable housing project that is currently under construction turned an aging strip commercial center into 51 units of affordable family housing and communityserving commercial uses.

Existing tenants along West Holt Boulevard are also small independent uses, so redevelopment of these properties would not require strategic decisions by major corporations.
1952
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-238 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
There are 27 parcels (12.8 acres) within the Opportunity Area currently zoned as HDR-45, which satisfies the default density requirements for lower-income housing and is sufficient to support moderate-income housing as well. Several of these parcels were also included in the City’s prior housing element (see a detailed list by APN in Appendix B). To further encourage residential development on parcels listed in the last housing element and to comply with AB 1397, by-right development will be allowed for any residential project that includes at least 20 percent of units affordable to lower-income households, as described in Program 15.

Two parcels (1.5 acres), currently zoned as Community Commercial (CC), are part of the City’s rezoning program (Program 13). The City proposes changing the designation to MU-2 with an Affordable Housing Overlay (described in Program 13), which will allow a density range of 20-40 dwelling units per acre and is suitable for lower- and moderate-income housing.

Five parcels (4.0 acres) are currently zoned as MDR-25. These will be included in the City’s rezoning program (Program 13) with a proposed designation of HDR-45, which allows up to 45 dwelling units per acre and is suitable for both lower- and moderate-income housing. These sites were used to meet the City’s moderate-income RHNA in the prior housing element. Like other sites reused from the prior element, by-right development will be allowed for any residential project that includes at least 20 percent of units affordable to lower-income households as described in Program 15.All but two sites located in the East Holt Opportunity Area have an existing or proposed designation of HDR-45.

The HDR-45 zoning designation allows for multifamily residential projects by-right and densities up to 45 dwelling units per acre. To ensure conservative estimates, however, a realistic density of 25 dwelling units per acre is used.

On the two sites with a proposed designation of MU-2, 75 percent of the total land area is assumed suitable for housing to account for the potential development of non-residential uses while also recognizing that 100- percent residential projects are allowed in the zone. Additionally, a realistic density of 30 dwelling units per acre is used to determine the total housing capacity.

On all sites, only 50 percent of the total realistic capacity was estimated to have the potential to accommodate lower incomes.

Using the metrics described above, the West Holt Opportunity Area has a total housing capacity of 454 units, half of which (227 units) have the capacity to accommodate lower-income housing. The balance (227 units) is presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to moderate-income households.
1953
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-239
East Holt Boulevard
The City has identified 21 parcels (22.2 acres) for inclusion in the land inventory, as shown in Figure 5-4 and described below.

Figure 5-4 East Holt Housing Opportunity Area
• Inclusion in Previous Housing Element.

These parcels were not included in prior housing elements. • Zoning
- Sites with Adequate Zoning. Of those, fFive vacant parcels (5.1 acres) and Eleven underutilized parcels (11.2 acres) are zoned MU-2, which allows 14-40 dwelling units per acre, a density sufficient to support the development of lower- and moderateincome housing without rezoning. The balance of the sites identified in the Opportunity Area (11 parcels, 11.2 acres) are currently underutilized and designated as MU-2. Because the current zoning designation allows sufficient density (14-40 dwelling units per acre), redevelopment of these sites could accommodate housing affordable to lower- and moderateincome households without rezoning. - Proposed Rezoning. The remaining fFour vacant parcels (5.9 acres) are currently zoned for Business Park (BP) and will be included in the City’s rezoning program (Program 13), with a proposed designation of MU-2-AH (mixed-use with an
Affordable Housing Overlay, (described in Program 13)., whichThis designation will allow a density range of 20-40 dwelling units per acre and is suitable to support lower- and moderate-income housing.

Vista Verde
1 2 3 4
5 6 7-9 10 11
1954
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-240 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
• Size of Sites
There are no sites smaller than 0.5 acres or larger than 10 acres identified within the East Holt Opportunity Area.
• Existing Use
Nine parcels (11 acres) within the Opportunity Area are currently vacant. Vacant sites are shaded in Figure 5-4, but no numerical value is assigned to Vacant sites.

Eleven parcels (11.2 acres) are underutilized sites. The potential for redevelopment on each non-vacant site, numbered by parcel in Figure 5-4, is described below.
1-2. Between Campus Avenue and Allyn Avenue, two
parcels (1.5 acres) are identified to have the potential for redevelopment. The first is a used car sales lot,
which has potential for redevelopment because of the
low existing floor-area ratio (FAR) (very small
building and large parking area) and the age of the
building. The demolition required for redevelopment
would be minimal. Adjacent to this is a parcel (0.91
acres) where service commercial uses, including a
laundromat and automotive shop, have been
identified as candidates for redevelopment due to the
age of the buildings (50+ years old) nearing the end of a typical lifespan for commercial buildings. Tenants on both sites are independent operators, so
redevelopment of these properties would not require
strategic decisions by major corporations.

3. Traveling east on Holt Boulevard, another parcel (0.90 acres), just east of the Allyn Avenue intersection, has also been identified to have the potential for
redevelopment due to the low existing FAR (large
parking area and small building), the age of the
structure (48 years old), and because an independent
retail use occupies the site.
4-6. Continuing east on Holt Boulevard, on the other side of three vacant sites included in the inventory, sit three parcels (4.5 acres), with potential for redevelopment
due to low existing FAR, the age of existing structures, and because the sites are currently used by an
independent automotive parts retailer and an
independent automotive repair shop, which often
produce noise, odors, and other nuisances that are
1955
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-241
incompatible with residential uses. butThese sites,
however are adjacent to several residential uses border the auto-centric servicesproperties. Converting these
sites to housing would improve the land use
compatibility for surrounding neighborhoods and
mobile home parksadjacent residents.
7-9. Further east along Holt Boulevard, three sites (1.8 acres) are identified as candidates for redevelopment.

The first two properties include an unused parking lot
and a boarded-up, vacant building that once
functioned as a church. These sites were identified for potential redevelopment because of the age of the
structure (nearly 100 years old), the poor state of repair of the building, and because the two sites are not
currently being used. An automotive repair shop
occupies the third parcel, but ; it was identified as a candidate for redevelopment because it is adjacent to
residential uses, which can cause nuisance issues, and
has a low existing FAR.
10-11. East of the Grove Avenue intersection sits two sites (2.4 acres), each with an existing motel. These sites were
identified because both are older, underperforming,
budget motels that could be converted into permanent
supportive housing or demolished and rebuilt with
housing affordable to lower- and moderate-income
households.
• Availability of Sites
In general, typical commercial properties are leased on three- to five-year terms. It is unlikely that existing tenants in this area would have lease terms longer than industry standards. In addition, uses that occupy lower-rent properties, like those included in the land inventory along East Holt, are historically phased out of urban areas as land values rise to the point where property owners can realize higher profits through either redevelopment or sale of the property. Given the current market conditions (described above), which show a strong demand for residential, and increased appetite for higher-density projects.

The City reached out to several property owners in this area.

While none have current plans for housing development, those who responded would consider introducing housing or
affordable housing should the opportunity arise, the primary concern property owners indicated was smaller lot sizes, which 1956
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-242 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
the City is working to mitigate through the provisions of program 10, including adoption of a lot consolidation ordinance to encourage and enable development of affordable housing. • Feasibility of Development
Like West Holt Boulevard, sites along East Holt Boulevard were identified based on proximity to transit, potential for redevelopment, and current zoning.

Approximately half of the land areasites identified for lower- and moderate-income housing in the West East Holt Boulevard Opportunity Area is are within a 5-minute walk of a planned BRT stop; 100 percent of sites are within a 10-minute walk of a planned BRT stop.

There is a growing interest in residential development in this area.

This is evidenced by the Vista Verde affordable housing project, completed in 2021, which was developed in the MU-2 district along East Holt Boulevard as a 100-percent affordable housing project, demonstrating that this zone and area can support affordable housing. In addition to this project, a new market-rate project is proposed at 1001 E Holt Blvd. 1001 E Holt Blvd. is currently in entitlements, but construction of the 42-unit apartment building is expected to begin in 2022 or 2023.

Examples from the larger region further illustrate how nonvacant sites, similar to those identified along West Holt, are being redeveloped with affordable housing, demonstrating the potential for affordable housing on the nonvacant sites.

Affordable housing projects throughout the region have started to look to smaller underutilized parking lots and aging commercial sites for opportunities to develop affordable housing in areas that are well served by transit and infrastructure, like the sites identified along West Holt Boulevard. Recent examples include the Heroes Landing affordable housing project in Santa Ana, CA, which transformed an underutilized parking lot on a 1.5-acre site into 75 units for permanent supportive housing. Also in Santa Ana, the Tiny Tim Plaza affordable housing project that is currently under construction turned an aging strip commercial center into 51 units of affordable family housing and communityserving commercial uses.

Nine parcels (11 acres) within the Opportunity Area are currently vacant. Of those, five parcels (5.1 acres) are zoned MU-2, which allows 14-40 dwelling units per acre, a density sufficient to support the development of lower- and moderate-income
1957
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-243
housing. This is evidenced by the Vista Verde affordable housing project, which was developed in the MU-2 district along East Holt Boulevard as a 100-percent affordable housing project,
demonstrating that this zone and area can support affordable housing. The remaining four vacant parcels (5.9 acres) are zoned for Business Park (BP) and will be included in the City’s rezoning program (Program 13), with a proposed designation of MU-2 with an Affordable Housing Overlay (described in Program 13), which will allow a density range of 20-40 dwelling units per acre.

The balance of the sites identified in the Opportunity Area (11 parcels, 11.2 acres) are currently underutilized and designated as MU-2. Because the current zoning designation allows sufficient density (14-40 dwelling units per acre), redevelopment of these sites could accommodate housing affordable to lower- and moderate-income households without rezoning. The potential for redevelopment on each non-vacant site, numbered by parcel in Figure 5-4, is described below.
1-2. Between Campus Avenue and Allyn Avenue, two parcels (1.5 acres) are identified to have the potential for redevelopment.

The first is a used car sales lot, which has potential for redevelopment because of the low existing floor-area ratio (FAR) (very small building and large parking area) and the age of the building. The demolition required for redevelopment would be minimal. Adjacent to this is a parcel (0.91 acres) where service commercial uses, including a laundromat and automotive shop, have been identified as candidates for redevelopment due to the age of the buildings (50+ years old) nearing the end of a typical lifespan for commercial buildings. Tenants on both sites are independent operators, so redevelopment of these properties would not require strategic decisions by major corporations.

3. Traveling east on Holt Boulevard, another parcel (0.90 acres), just east of the Allyn Avenue intersection, has also been identified to have the potential for redevelopment due to the low existing FAR (large parking area and small building), the age of the structure (48 years old), and because an independent retail use occupies the site.
4-6. Continuing east on Holt Boulevard, on the other side of three vacant sites included in the inventory, sit three parcels (4.5 acres), with potential for redevelopment due to low existing FAR, the age of existing structures, and because the sites are currently used by an independent automotive parts retailer and an independent automotive repair shop, but residential uses border the auto-centric services. Converting these sites to housing would 1958
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-244 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
improve the land use compatibility for surrounding
neighborhoods and mobile home parks.
7-9. Further east along Holt Boulevard, three sites (1.8 acres) are identified as candidates for redevelopment. The first two properties include an unused parking lot and a boarded-up church. These sites were identified for potential redevelopment because of the age of the structure (nearly 100 years old), the poor state of repair of the building, and because the two sites are not currently being used. An automotive repair shop occupies the third parcel, but it was identified as a candidate for
redevelopment because it is adjacent to residential uses and has a low existing FAR.
10-11. East of the Grove Avenue intersection sits two sites (2.4 acres), each with an existing motel. These sites were identified because both are older, underperforming, budget motels that could be converted into permanent supportive housing or demolished and rebuilt with housing affordable to lower- and moderate-income households. All but two sites located in the East Holt Opportunity Area have an existing or proposed designation of HDR-45. The HDR-45 zoning designation allows for
multifamily residential projects by-right and densities up to 45 dwelling units per acre. To ensure conservative estimates, however, a realistic density of 25 dwelling units per acre is used.

On the two sites with a proposed designation of MU-2, 75 percent of the total land area is assumed suitable for housing to account for the potential development of non-residential uses while also recognizing that 100-percent residential projects are allowed in the zone. Additionally, a realistic density of 30 dwelling units per acre is used to determine the total housing capacity.

On all sites, only 50 percent of the total realistic capacity was estimated to have the potential to accommodate lower incomes.

ALL OF THE SITES IN THE EAST HOLT OPPORTUNITY AREA HAVE EITHER AN EXISTING OR PROPOSED DESIGNATION OF MU-2. THE MU-2 ZONING DESIGNATION ALLOWS FOR 100-PERCENT

RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS, BUT IT ALSO PROVIDES FOR VARIOUS
NON-RESIDENTIAL USES. TO ACCOUNT FOR THE POTENTIAL

DEVELOPMENT OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE IDENTIFIED
SITES, 75 PERCENT OF THE LAND AREA FOR EACH SITE IS
CONSIDERED IN ESTIMATING THE TOTAL HOUSING CAPACITY.

SEVENTY-FIVE PERCENT IS ESTIMATED BECAUSE 100-PERCENT

RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS ARE ALLOWED BY THE ZONE, AND

RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS IN THE AREA DO NOT TYPICALLY INCLUDE NON-RESIDENTIAL USES AS WELL. REALISTIC CAPACITY
1959
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-245
To determine the realistic capacity on these sites, the City identified a realistic density below the maximum, and applied an additional reduction factor to sites with a mixed-use designation to account for potential non-residential uses. A summary of the assumptions and realistic capacity is included in Table 5-5, and detailed descriptions of the adjustment factors applied to sites within each zoning designation is provided after the table.

Table 5-5
Strategy 2: Realistic Capacity
Zoning
(after rezoning)
Number of
Parcels
Acres*
(Net)
Max Density
(du/ac)
Max Capacity
(units*)
Adjustment
Factors**
Final Realistic
Capacity
(units*)
Opportunity Area: West Holt
HDR-45 32 16.9 45 759 53.3% 422
MU-2-AH 2 1.5 40 58 56.3% 32
Opportunity Area: East Holt
MU-2 16 16.3 40 650 56.3% 366
MU-2-AH 4 5.9 40 237 56.3% 134
TOTAL 54 40.5 1,705 954
Source: City of Ontario, 2022.
*Acres and units have been rounded.
**See Adjustment Factor below for a detailed description of the adjustment factors applied to each group of sites.

Adjustment Factors
• HDR-45
Description:
- Number and size of sites: 21 sites after consolidation of 32 parcels, 16.9 acres
- Allowable density: 25-45 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (50 percent)
- Existing Use: Parking lots, aging retail, building materials supply, automotive services, auto sales, commercial
services (see Existing Use under "Site Specific Information" above for details)
- Infrastructure availability: Yes, no constraints
- Environmental constraints: None known
1960
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-246 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. No Adjustment Site size reflects net acreage.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. No Adjustment
The HDR-45 zone is a residential district, intended for 100 percent residential projects. For this reason, 100 percent of the site area was considered viable for residential
development, and no reduction factor was applied.
- Typical Densities. 53.3 Percent Adjustment
For conservative estimates, the minimum density of the
zone, 25 dwelling units per acre, was used to determine the total housing capacity. 25 dwelling units per acre is 53.3 percent of the maximum density allowed.
- Infrastructure Availability. No Adjustment
Not applicable, no constraint
- Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraint
Total Capacity Adjustments: (1)x(1)x(.533)x(1)x(1) = 53.3 percent • MU-2 and MU-2-AH
Description:
- Number and size of sites: 20 sites after consolidation of 22 parcels, 23.7 acres
- Allowable density:
o MU-2: 14-40 dwelling units per acre
o MU-2-AH: 20-40 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (50 percent)
- Existing Use: Vacant (9 parcels, 6.6 acres), auto parts store, automotive services, open storage, aging motels, small
convenience store in aging building on largely vacant lot, vacant church and parking area, Used car sales (see
Existing Use under "Site Specific Information" above)
- Infrastructure availability: Yes, no constraints
1961
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-247
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. No Adjustment Site size reflects net acreage.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. 75 Percent Adjustment This mixed-use designation allows for 100 percent
residential uses, mixed use projects, and 100 percent nonresidential uses. Recent and proposed development in the district includes a mix of all three types of projects, including the following residential and mixed use projects:
1001 E. Holt Blvd. is a mixed-use project with commercial and residential uses. The Roosevelt Tower Apartments is 100 percent residential. Vista Verde Affordable Housing, completed in 2021, is also 100 percent residential, and it illustrates that the MU-2 zoning district can support
affordable projects. To account for potential nonresidential uses, a reduction factor of 25 percent was applied. This estimate generally reflects the mix of project types the City anticipates on the identified properties based on recent applications and zoning changes. The
remaining 25 percent of land on identified sites is assumed to be for non-residential uses. This estimate generally reflects the mix of project types the City anticipates based on recent applications for development in the MU-2 zone. - Typical Densities. 75 Percent Adjustment
The Holt Boulevard mixed-use category (MU-2) allows
residential densities between 14 and 40 dwelling units per acre. Mixed-use sites that are part of the rezoning program are also within the affordable housing overlay (MU-2-AH), which will raise the minimum density, (densities between 20 and 40 dwelling units per acre are allowed). A realistic density on the middle of the allowed range, 30 dwelling units per acre, was deemed realistic to determine the total capacity in these zoning districts. Recent and proposed projects in mixed-use areas along Holt Boulevard support this density including, the Roosevelt Tower Apartments, located at 549 West Holt Boulevard (72 dwelling units per acre), and 1001 E. Holt Blvd., a mixed-use multi-family project (35 dwelling units per acre). Accordingly, 30
dwelling units per acre will provide a realistic capacity estimate.
1962
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-248 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
- Infrastructure Availability. No Adjustment
Not applicable, no constraint
- Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraint
Total Capacity Adjustments: (1)x(.750)x(.750)x(1)x(1)=56.3 percent

UNITS BY RHNA INCOME CATEGORY
To further ensure conservative estimates, a realistic density of 30 dwelling units per acre is factored into the total housing capacity of 499 units. Of those,only 50 percent of the final realistic capacity unitsin both Opportunity areas was estimated to have the potential to accommodate slower incomes, as shown in Table 5-6.

Table 5-6
Strategy 2: Units by Income Category
Zoning
(after rezoning)
Number of
Parcels
Acres*
(Net)
Units by RHNA Income Category Final Realistic
Lower Capacity (units*) (units*)Moderate
(units*)
Above Moderate
(units*)
Opportunity Area: West Holt
HDR-45 32 16.9 211 211 - 422
MU-2-AH 2 1.5 16 16 - 32
Opportunity Area: East Holt
MU-2 16 16.3 183 183 - 366
MU-2-AH 4 5.9 67 67 - 134
TOTAL 54 40.5 477 477 - 954
Source: City of Ontario, 2022.
*Acres and units have been rounded.
(250 units) have the capacity to accommodate lower-income housing, while the remaining half (249 units) are presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to moderate-income households.Using the metrics described above, the West Holt Opportunity Area has a total housing capacity of 454 units, half of which (227 units) have the capacity to accommodate lower-income housing. The balance (227 units) is presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to moderate-income households.Strategy 3: Old Cardenas Market Housing Opportunity Area
1963
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-249

OPPORTUNITY AREA
The Old Cardenas Market site consists of three parcels (3.5 acres) that front Euclid Avenue, as shown in Figure 5-5 and described below.

Figure 5-5 Old Cardenas Market Housing Opportunity Area

SUITABILITY OF SITES
Infrastructure Availability
Like Downtown and Holt Boulevard, this site is well-served by infrastructure, and.

RHNA Income Category
The Downtown Opportunity Area was determined to be suitable for lower-income households based on proximity to transit, access to existing jobs, access to grocery stores, proximity to available infrastructure and utilities, and because there are no known requirements for environmental mitigation:
• Proximity to transit. The sites in this Opportunity Area are along an existing Omnitrans bus route (Route 83), which runs the length of Euclid Avenue. SBCTA has also planned a new BRT route along Euclid Avenue, which will serve the site once it is operational. • Access to existing and planned jobs. The site is just a little over 1 mile from the established industrial employment zone, which begins east of Campus Avenue.
• Access to grocery stores. All sites in this Opportunity Area are within a 1/4 mile walk of an existing grocery store (Cardenas Markets at 1850 S. Euclid Ave.).
• Proximity to infrastructure and utilities. As noted under infrastructure availability, this area is well-served, and these sites will benefit from innovative technology the City is piloting in the downtown.
1964
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-250 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
• Environmental mitigation. As noted under Environmental Constraints, and discussed under Existing Use, there are no known natural or man-made environmental development
concerns that would require mitigation.

To provide conservative estimates, however, only 50 percent of the identified capacity (described under Realistic Capacity) was considered suitable to accommodate lower-income housing, while the balance was considered suitable for moderate-income housing (detailed under Units by RHNA Income Category).

Environmental Constraints
tThere are no environmental constraints limiting development potential.

Figure 5-5 Old Cardenas Market Housing Opportunity Area

ANALYSIS OF SITES TO ACCOMMODATE LOWER-INCOME RHNA
All Sites
• Inclusion in Previous Housing Element
These parcels were not included in prior housing elements. • Zoning
All three parcels are currently zoned CN but will be included in the City’s rezoning program. The two vacant parcels are proposed to change to HDR-45, while the Cardenas Market is proposed as a mixed-use designation that allows for a density range of 20-30+ dwelling units per acre.
1965
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-251
• Size of Sites
There are no sites smaller than 0.5 acres or larger than 10 acres identified within the Old Cardenas Market Opportunity Area. • Existing Use
The site includes an unused the parking lot behind the a gas station, the a vacant building that previously housed Cardenas Market and its parking area that is not currently in use, and the vacant lot north of the market.
• Availability of Sites
The nonvacant sites within this Opportunity Area are not currently used. The building is vacant and parking lots are empty.

The owner of the property is interested in redevelopment, and the City has discussed introducing residential used to help facilitate development of the site with the owner. The property owner is interested in redeveloping the shuttered site and is interested in the introduction of residential including the potential to include affordable units, but there are no plans to redevelop at this time. • Feasibility of Development
These sites are classic infill lots along a commercial corridor that could be built out in a similar manner to the Vista Verde affordable housing project, completed in 2021, which was located along Holt Boulevard, another busy commercial corridor in the City, and the Emporia I affordable housing project, completed in 2020, which was located in the southern portion of the downtown district.

Like Downtown and Holt Boulevard, this site is well-served by infrastructure, and there are no environmental constraints limiting development potential.

All three parcels are currently zoned CN but will be included in the City’s rezoning program. The two vacant parcels are proposed to change to HDR-45, while the Cardenas Market is proposed as a mixed-use designation that allows for a density range of 20-30+ dwelling units per acre.

REALISTIC CAPACITY
To determine the realistic capacity on these sites, the City identified a realistic density below the maximum, and applied an additional reduction factor to sites with a mixed-use designation to account for potential non-residential uses. A summary of the assumptions and 1966
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-252 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
realistic capacity is included in Table 5-7, and detailed descriptions of the adjustment factors applied to sites within each zoning designation is provided after the table.

Table 5-7
Strategy 3: Realistic Capacity
Zoning
(after rezoning)
Number of
Parcels
Acres*
(Net)
Max Density
(du/ac)
Max Capacity
(units*)
Adjustment
Factors**
Final Realistic
Capacity
(units*)
Opportunity Area: Old Cardenas Market
HDR-45 2 1.3 45 59 53.3% 32
MU*** 1 2.2 75 167 20% 33
TOTAL 3 3.5 224 65
Source: City of Ontario, 2022.
*Acres and units have been rounded.
**See Adjustment Factor below for a detailed description of the adjustment factors applied to each group of sites
***A new mixed-use zoning district will be established per Program 13.

Adjustment Factors
• HDR-45
Description:
- Number and size of sites: 1 site after consolidation of 2 parcels, 1.3 acres
- Allowable density: 25-45 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (50 percent)
- Existing Use: Vacant
- Infrastructure availability: Yes, no constraints
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. No Adjustment Site size reflects net acreage.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. No Adjustment
The HDR-45 zone is a residential district, intended for 100 percent residential projects. For this reason, 100 percent of 1967
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-253
the site area was considered viable for residential
development, and no reduction factor was applied.
- Typical Densities. 53.3 Percent Adjustment
For conservative estimates, the minimum density of the
zone, 25 dwelling units per acre, was used to determine the total housing capacity. 25 dwelling units per acre is 53.3 percent of the maximum density allowed.
- Infrastructure Availability. No Adjustment
Not applicable, no constraint
- Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraint
Total Capacity Adjustments: (1)x(1)x(.533)x(1)x(1) = 53.3 percent • MU (new)
Description:
- Number and size of sites: 1 parcel, 2.2 acres
- Allowable density: 20-75 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (50 percent)
- Existing Use: Vacant building, former grocery store that has already relocated and associated parking lot (see
Existing Use under "Site Specific Information" above)
- Infrastructure availability: Yes, no constraints
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. No Adjustment Site size reflects net acreage.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. 50 Percent Adjustment This mixed-use designation will allow for 100 percent
residential uses, mixed use projects, and 100 percent nonresidential uses, consistent with the City's existing mixeduse districts. Recent and proposed development in existing mixed-use areas include a mix of all three types of projects, 1968
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-254 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
including the following residential and mixed-use
projects: 1001 E. Holt Blvd. is a mixed-use project with commercial and residential uses. The Roosevelt Tower
Apartments is 100 percent residential. Vista Verde
Affordable Housing, completed in 2021, and the Emporia
I Affordable Housing project (completed in 2020) are also 100 percent residential, and they illustrate that the mixeduse zoning can support affordable projects. To account for potential non-residential uses, a reduction factor of 50 percent was applied. This estimate generally reflects the mix of project types the City anticipates based on
discussions with the property owner. The remaining 50
percent of land on identified sites is assumed to be for nonresidential uses. - Typical Densities. 40 Percent Adjustment
The new mixed-use designation that will be created under Program 13, will allow residential densities between 20 and 75 dwelling units per acre. A realistic density on the lower end of the allowed range, 30 dwelling units per acre, was deemed realistic to determine the total capacity in this new zoning district. Recent and proposed projects in
existing mixed-use areas downtown and along Holt
Boulevard support this density including, the Roosevelt Tower Apartments, located at 549 West Holt Boulevard (72 dwelling units per acre), and 1001 E. Holt Blvd., a mixeduse multi-family project (35 dwelling units per acre).

Accordingly, the City feels 30 dwelling units per acre will provide a realistic capacity estimate. Thirty dwelling units per acre is 40 percent of the maximum density allowed.
- Infrastructure Availability. No Adjustment
Not applicable, no constraint
- Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraint
Total Capacity Adjustments: (1)x(.50)x(.40)x(1)x(1)=20 percent Parcels with the proposed HDR-designation estimated capacity using a realistic density of 25 dwelling units per acre.

The mixed-use parcel will allow the gas station and a quick-serve restaurant currently operating to remain while also facilitating redevelopment of the site. In acknowledgment of competing nonresidential demands on the land, housing is only estimated on 50 percent 1969
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-255
of the site. Additionally, a realistic density of 30 dwelling units per acre is applied to determine the total housing capacity.

On all sites, only 50 percent of the total realistic capacity was estimated to have the potential to accommodate lower incomes.

UNITS BY RHNA INCOME CATEGORY
Using the metrics described above, the Old Cardenas Market Opportunity Area has a total capacity of 65 units. To further ensure conservative estimates, Oonly half (33 units) of the final realistic capacity was estimated to have the potential to accommodate lower incomes, as shown in Table 5-8.have the capacity to accommodate lower-income housing. The remaining 32 units are presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to moderate-income households.

Table 5-8
Strategy 3: Units by Income Category
Zoning
(after rezoning)
Number of
Parcels
Acres*
(Net)
Units by RHNA Income Category Final Realistic
Lower Capacity (units*)
(units*)
Moderate
(units*)
Above Moderate
(units*)
Opportunity Area: Old Cardenas Market
HDR-45 2 1.3 16 16 - 32
MU** 1 2.2 17 16 - 33
TOTAL 3 3.5 33 32 - 65
Source: City of Ontario, 2022.
*Acres and units have been rounded.
**A new mixed-use zoning district will be established per Program 13.

Strategy 4: Ontario Center Specific Plan Housing Opportunity Area

OPPORTUNITY AREA
The Ontario Center Specific Plan offers a variety of commercial, retail, entertainment, light industrial, and office uses, as well as a mix of housing opportunities, and outlines a detailed infrastructure plan for the area.

Originally adopted in 1981, the Specific Plan has been amended numerous times, including the addition of the Piemonte Overlay in 2006.

The most recent amendment was adopted in 2017.

Since mMuch of the Specific Plan area has already been developed, but the remaining vacant parcels are prime candidates for development.

After conversations with property owners and developers, the City identified four vacant parcels (16.5 acres), where no specific projects have been proposed, as potential sites for lower- and moderate-income housing development, as shown in Figure 5-6.
1970
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-256 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Figure 5-6 Ontario Center Specific Plan Housing
Opportunity Area

SUITABILITY OF SITES
Infrastructure Availability
tThe necessary backbone infrastructure to support housing development is already in place. The remaining vacant parcels are prime candidates for development, and
RHNA Income Category
The Ontario Center Specific Plan Opportunity Area was determined to be suitable for lower-income households based on proximity to transit, access to existing jobs and amenities, access to planned grocery stores, proximity to available infrastructure and utilities, and because there are no known requirements for environmental mitigation:
• Proximity to transit. The sites in this Opportunity Area are within a 1/4 mile walk of an existing Omnitrans bus route (Route 81), which follows Concourse Street in a loop around the Toyota Arena and fronts all sites identified in this Opportunity area. • Access to existing and planned jobs. The sites in this Opportunity Area are within one of the most employment-rich areas of the City.

Sites are surrounded by mid-rise office buildings and the Toyota Arena. The Ontario Mills Mall and Ontario International Airport are both a short transit ride (on a direct line) or bike ride away. • Access to planned grocery store. All sites in this Opportunity Area are within a 1/4 mile walk of a planned grocery store on the vacant lot on the southeast corner of Fourth Street and Haven Avenue.
1 2
3 4
1971
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-257
• Proximity to infrastructure and utilities. As noted under infrastructure availability, this area is served by existing infrastructure and utilities.
• Environmental mitigation. As noted under Environmental Constraints, there are no known natural or man-made
environmental development concerns that would require
mitigation.

To provide conservative estimates, however, only 50 percent of the identified capacity (described under Realistic Capacity) was considered suitable to accommodate lower-income housing, while the balance was considered suitable for moderate-income housing (detailed under Units by RHNA Income Category).

Environmental Constraints
nNo environmental constraints limit development potential on these sites.

After conversations with property owners and developers, the City identified four vacant parcels (16.5 acres) as potential sites for lower- and moderate-income housing development, as shown in Figure 5-6.

Figure 5-6 Ontario Center Specific Plan Housing Opportunity Area

ANALYSIS OF SITES TO ACCOMMODATE LOWER-INCOME RHNA
All Sites
• Inclusion in Previous Housing Element
These parcels were not included in prior housing elements. 1 2
3 4
1972
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-258 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
• Zoning
The zoning designation for all sites is Specific Plan (SP). The adopted plan is the Ontario Center Specific Plan. Two of the housing sites (3.6 acres) are regulated by the Piemonte Overlay, while the remaining sites (12.9 acres) are regulated by the Ontario Center Specific Plan base document. The Specific Plan does not establish density standards, so the Policy Plan densities would prevail. The Policy Plan allows for densities between 20 and 125 dwelling units per acre, which is sufficient to support lower- and moderate-income housing.
• Size of Sites
There are no sites smaller than 0.5 acres or larger than 10 acres identified within the Opportunity Area.
• Existing Use.

All four sites identified in this area are vacant.

REALISTIC CAPACITY
To determine the realistic capacity on these sites, the City identified the realistic capacity on each site based on the unbuilt entitlement and applied an additional reduction factor to sites that allow a mix of residential and non-residential to account for potential non-residential development. A summary of the realistic capacity, based on the remaining entitlement, is included in Table 5-9, and detailed descriptions of how realistic capacity and reduction factors were calculated is provided after the table.

Table 5-9
Strategy 4: Realistic Capacity
Zoning
(after rezoning)
Number of
Parcels
Acres*
(Net)
Max
Density
(du/ac)
Max Capacity
(units*)
Adjustment
Factors**
Final Realistic
Capacity
(units*)
Opportunity Area: Ontario Center Specific Plan
Piemonte:

Office w/ Res 2 3.6 125*** 450*** 24.5% 110
Urban
Commercial 2 12.9 125*** 1,613*** 12% 193
Total 4 16.5 2,063 303
Source: City of Ontario, 2022.
*Acres and units have been rounded.
**See Adjustment Factor below for a detailed description of the adjustment factors applied to each group of sites
*** Density is not defined in the specific plan, so Policy Plan density would prevail. The Policy Plan allows densities between 20 and 125 dwelling units per acre.
1973
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-259
Adjustment Factors
• Piemonte: Office w/ Residential Allowed
Description:
- Number and size of sites: 2 sites, 2 parcels, 3.6 acres - Allowable density: Density is not defined in the specific plan, so Policy Plan density would prevail. The Policy Plan allows densities between 20 and 125 dwelling units per acre.
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (50 percent)
- Existing Use: Vacant
- Infrastructure availability: Yes, no constraints
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. No Adjustment Site size reflects net acreage.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. 50 Percent Adjustment Because this land use category allows for non-residential development, a 50 percent adjustment factor was applied to account potential development of non-residential uses.
- Typical Densities. 48.9 Percent Adjustment
An assessment of the housing capacity and potential
affordability for each site, numbered by parcel in Figure 5-6, is described below. 1-2. Two of the housing sites (3.6 acres) These sites are regulated by the Piemonte Overlay. In
Piemonte, both sites are designated as Office with Residential Development Allowed in the Piemonte Overlay area within the Ontario Center Specific Plan. While the Piemonte Overlay does not specify allowable densities, it plans for 791 new units, 220 new units on the two sites. of which could be developed on the two identified housing sites. If 220 units were to develop across the 3.6 acres, the resulting density would be 61 dwelling units per acre. The difference between the maximum capacity and number of units entitled under the specific plan result in a 48.9 percent adjustment factor. , which is sufficient to facilitate the development of lower- and moderate-income housing. Only half of the potential buildout, 110 total units, 1974
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-260 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
were projected for housing on these sites. Of those, 55 units were estimated to be affordable to lower-income households, and 55 were counted toward the moderate-income RHNA.
- Infrastructure Availability. No Adjustment
Not applicable, no constraint
- Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraint
Total Capacity Adjustments: (1)x(1)x(.50)x(.489)x(1) = 24.5 percent • Urban Commercial
Description:
- Number and size of sites: 2 sites, 2 parcels, 12.9 acres - Allowable density: Density is not defined in the specific plan, so Policy Plan density would prevail. The Policy Plan allows densities between 20 and 125 dwelling units per acre.
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (50 percent)
- Existing Use: Vacant
- Infrastructure availability: Yes, no constraints
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. No Adjustment Site size reflects net acreage.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. 83.2 Percent Adjustment The remaining two sites (12.9 acres) are governed by the Ontario Center Specific Plan (OCSP). Both sites are designated as Urban Commercial in the Ontario Center Specific Plan, which allows for a mix of tourist-related commercial uses, high- and medium-rise office buildings,
entertainment/recreation clusters, and high-density
residential uses above the ground floor. Discussion with developers, who have submitted plans for the development of high-density housing near the Toyota Arena (just north and east of these sites) indicate that 100 percent residential 1975
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-261
development is much more likely than any type of office development. Recent market trends due to the COVID-19
pandemic support this, as vacancies in existing office
buildings will need to be filled before the market can support additional office uses. Similar sentiments hold true for tourism and entertainment uses, as much of the demand for those types of facilities is proposed in the areas around the Toyota Arena. As such, 39,000 square feet of the remaining entitled development capacity was reserved for non-residential uses on these two sites. This accounts for 16.8 percent of the remaining development potential, the inverse of the
adjustment factor (83.2 percent) applied.
- Typical Densities. 14.4 Percent Adjustment
While the specific plan does not specify allowable densities, it does specify maximum height. Tthe sites are included in planning area 11, where the maximum building height of 95 feet is regulated only by the height limits set by the Ontario International Airport. Housing products with densities above 60 dwelling units per acre are regularly developed under similar zoning standards, indicating the types of projects that could develop under the specific plan would meet the density thresholds necessary to facilitate the development of lowerand moderate-income housing.

In addition to height, Tthe specific plan entitled a specific amount of development. The specific plan regulates the
maximum capacity for Urban Commercial uses based on
building square footage rather than dwelling units. As such, the City uses the methodology described below to translate the remaining allowable square footage permitted under the
current specific plan into an approximate number of units.

Planning area 11 allows a total of 592,700 square feet; it is estimated that 360,455 square feet have already been
developed, leaving 232,245 square feet of developable
building area. To convert the remaining square footage into potential housing units, the City assumes the residential component would include a range of unit sizes with an
average size of 1,000 square feet, inclusive of common areas, which yields a remaining development capacity of 232 units.

Using this factor and reserving approximately 39,000 square feet for ground-floor uses, a total of 193 units are estimated as the total realistic capacity of the two sites.
1976
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-262 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
- Infrastructure Availability. No Adjustment
Not applicable, no constraint
- Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraint
Total Capacity Adjustments: (1)x(.832)x(.144)x(1)x(1)=12.0 percent

UNITS BY RHNA INCOME CATEGORY
To further ensure conservative estimates, only half of the final realistic capacity was estimated to have the potential to accommodate lower incomes, as shown in Table 5-10.

Table 5-10
Strategy 4: Units by Income Category
Zoning
(after rezoning)
Number of
Parcels
Acres*
(Net)
Units by RHNA Income Category Final Realistic
Lower Capacity (units*)
(units*)
Moderate
(units*)
Above Moderate
(units*)
Opportunity Area: Ontario Center Specific Plan
Piemonte:

Office w/
Res
2 3.6 55 55 - 110
Urban
Commercial 2 12.9 96 97 - 193
Total 4 16.5 151 152 - 303
Source: City of Ontario, 2022.
*Acres and units have been rounded.

Of those, 55 units were estimated to be affordable to lower-income households, and 55 were counted toward the moderate-income RHNA.Of the 193 units, 96 are estimated to be affordable to lower-income households, and 97 are estimated to be affordable to moderate-income households.

Strategy 5: The Mills Housing Opportunity Area

OPPORTUNITY AREA
The Ontario Mills Mall and surrounding areas are governed by The California Commerce Center North Specific Plan (The Mills). The specific plan was originally authored in 1992 and has not been amended since.

The document envisioned a regional commercial center focused on valueoriented retail and jobs creation that would capitalize on the proximity to the freeways and serve as a local landmark. The Mills has largely achieved this vision, and it remains a high-performing retail hub today (2021), but the economic outlook for retail and office uses in 2021 is vastly different than it was in 1992.
1977
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-263

ONTARIO MILLS MARKET TRENDS
Current trends in the redevelopment of retail centers began with the introduction of online retail, which is currently capturing 20 percent of every retail dollar spent in the US economy. Recent industry reports (Barclay’s Bank in October 2020 and Coresight Research in July 2020) find that the current number of retailers will likely be substantially reduced by 2030, with predictions by Coresight that online retail will account for 40 percent of retail sales by 2030. The COVID-19 pandemic has only accelerated the past trends. As retail stores opt to relocate or retail properties become due for major reinvestments/improvements, property owners find few retailers looking to replace existing tenants or find greater value in developing new residential uses. The demand for office space is likewise expected to remain stagnant through the 2021-2029 planning period as more office workers choose to work from home in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

While retail uses, in general, are in decline, the Ontario Mills Mallremains a high-performing shopping center. It is anticipated that much of the existing retail square footage within the mall itself will remain through 2029, the physical configuration of the mall may be reshaped, consistent with current trends in mall redevelopment, while leaving spaces for parking areas and outparcels to will intensify with residential uses, and several of the out parcels will redevelop with new uses as existing restaurants, movie theaters, and retailers consolidate locations, relocate, or otherwise reconsider their physical footprint. The City's economic development department is in frequent contact with mall operators and property owners, and there are no known limitations, such as parking lease agreements that could limit redevelopment during the 6th cycle.

Successful shopping center redevelopment efforts, like the Bella Terra Mall in Huntington Beach, show high-performing malls successfully repositioning tenants in new configurations that introduceing residential uses while retaining and improving their commercial cores.

In addition to this, the Mills area already has the necessary infrastructure in place to support housing development, and no environmental constraints will preclude housing production.

Considering these current market trends, the City has identified the parking areas and several out parcels around the Ontario Mills Mall as potential redevelopment sites suitable for housing, as shown in Figure 5-

7. 1978
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-264 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Figure 5-7 The Mills Housing Opportunity Area

SUITABILITY OF SITES
Infrastructure Availability
In addition to this, tThe Mills area already has the necessary infrastructure in place to support housing development., and no environmental constraints will preclude housing production.

RHNA Income Category
The Ontario Mills Opportunity Area was determined to be suitable for lower-income households based on proximity to transit, access to existing and planned jobs and amenities, access to grocery stores, proximity to available infrastructure and utilities, and because there are no known requirements for environmental mitigation:
• Proximity to transit. The sites in this Opportunity Area are within a 1/4 mile walk of an existing Omnitrans bus route (Route 81), which stops at the Ontario Mills Mall.
• Access to existing and planned jobs. The sites in this Opportunity Area are within one of the most employment-rich areas of the City.

The mid-rise office buildings, the Toyota Arena, and the Ontario International Airport are all a short transit ride (on a direct line) or bike ride away.
• Access to grocery store. Sites in this Opportunity Area are across Milliken Avenue from Target and Sam's Club.
• Proximity to infrastructure and utilities. As noted under infrastructure availability, this area is served by existing infrastructure and utilities.
1979
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-265
• Environmental mitigation. As noted under Environmental Constraints, there are no known natural or man-made
environmental development concerns that would require
mitigation.

To provide conservative estimates, however, only 50 percent of the identified capacity (described under Realistic Capacity) was considered suitable to accommodate lower-income housing, while 25 percent was considered suitable for moderate-income housing and 25 percent were considered suitable for above moderate-income (detailed under Units by RHNA Income Category).

Environmental Constraints
There are no known environmental constraints that would preclude housing production.

Figure 5-7 The Mills Housing Opportunity Area

ANALYSIS OF SITES TO ACCOMMODATE LOWER-INCOME RHNA
All Sites
• Inclusion in Previous Housing Element
These parcels were not included in prior housing elements. • Zoning
These sites are currently zoned for Specific Plan (SP) and uses are regulated by The California Commerce Center North Specific Plan, described previously in this section. The existing specific plan, as adopted, does not allow for residential uses, but the City’s Policy Plan (which serves as the General Plan and was, last updated in 2010), provides for housing in this area with a density range of 25 to 85 dwelling units per acre. This range would provide sufficient density to allow for the development of housing 1980
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-266 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
affordable to lower- and moderate-income households. In addition to establishing the density range, the Policy Plan sets a maximum of 437 units in its buildout table LU-03. As part of its rezoning program (Program 13), the City will amend the specific plan and update the Policy Plan. The specific plan will allow uses and densities consistent with the existing Policy Plan. The City will likewise update the Policy Plan to increase the residential development maximum in the Ontario Mills Mixed-Use area, and it will amend the specific plan consistent with the Policy Plan. • Size of Sites
AB 1397 requires additional justification to include parcels larger than 10 acres in the sites inventory for lower-income housing.

Four of the parcels identified in this area (145.0 acres) are larger than 10 acres. This includes one of the parcels around the Mall itself (96.34 acres), two parcels that house movie theaters (18.6 acres and 14.6 acres), and a big-box retail center (15.4 acres). These sites were included in the inventory despite their size because of current market trends in Malls, retail uses, and movie theaters, as discussed under Citywide Market Trends and Market Trends Specific to Strategy 5.

The City has included these sites becauseThe mall site was not considered an impediment to redevelopment because larger sites with consistent ownership typically create fewer barriers to the introduction of housing in mall redevelopment projects than smaller sites with many competing landowner interests.

Redevelopment efforts for the Westminster Mall, in Westminster, CA, for example, have involved a considerable planning effort to balance the various interests of many disparate property owners.

Further, proposed redevelopment plans for malls such as Main Place Mall in Santa Ana, CA, incorporate larger parcels.

The City reached out to National Core, an affordable housing developer with experience in Ontario and the Inland subregion to discuss developing affordable housing on the mall site as well as sites such as the retail and theater outparcels that are larger than 10 acres. National Core indicated that larger parcels, such as these, allow for lower densities (avoiding higher construction costs) and can accommodate a greater number of units that can be more efficient to operate. Larger projects, if they can be done over multiple phases, can also be easier to finance and construct. In support of these points, they provided two examples of affordable housing projects they developed on larger sites:
1981
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-267
- Crestview Terrace (formerly Waterman Gardens in San
Bernardino): A 184-unit affordable project, completed in 2021 that involved a group of large parcels, including a 23-acre parcel and three other parcels, for an overall project site size of total of just over 37 acres.
- Mission Cove (in Oceanside): A multi-phase mixed-use project with 288 affordable units and 10,500 square feet of retail space on a 14.5-acre parcel. The final phase was completed in 2018.

These projects indicate that larger sites can provide efficiencies of scale for affordable housing development. The Mission Cove project occupies a similar parcel size to the theater and retail parcels, and it includes a retail component. The Mission Cove project was also developed in three phases (90 units in Phase I, 60 units in Phase II, and 138 units in Phase III), which could allow for flexibility in design and greater variety in the mix of uses if there is demand for commercial components on these sites.
• Existing Use
Existing uses include the Ontario Mills Mall and parking area (108.3 acres), 2 movie theaters (33.3 acres), 1 big box retail complex (15.4 acres), 3 parcels with automotive uses (2.7 acres), and 21 outparcels that currently house retail (18.5 acres) and dining (17.4 acres) establishments.
• Availability of Sites
As discussed under Strategy 5 Market Trends, the demand for retail space is dwindling as people change the way they shop, dine, and spend their leisure time. As these changes continue to impact the retail landscape, the properties identified include aging centers, vacant buildings, and others that may be ready to reposition during the 6th cycle. While the owners of the properties identified do not currently have plans to reposition these sites, the City maintains on-going conversations with developers, and the City has reached out to property owners about potential land use changes. In general, owners are open to the possibility of introducing residential uses in the future. Developers also indicate interest in repositioning this area.

There are no known parking leases or other restrictions that would limit redevelopment of the parking area and outparcels identified. 1982
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-268 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
• Feasibility of Development
As described under Strategy 5 Market Trends, mall
redevelopment, retail repositioning, and theater downsizing, are national trends that are expected to impact uses in and around the Ontario Mills Mall.

Several mall redevelopment efforts are already underway in the region. Projects like the Westminster Mall in Westminster, CA, Mainplace Mall in Santa Ana, CA, and the South Bay Galleria in Redondo Beach, CA, are all in the process of repositioning an indoor mall that was built for a different time to include a mix of commercial and residential uses. All these examples also propose affordable housing components, indicating that mall
redevelopment projects offer a unique opportunity to introduce affordable housing into high-resource areas that are also highly accessible and well-served by infrastructure and transit.

Redevelopment trends are not limited to retail uses. Movie theaters nationwide had already begun to see a cull in U.S. locations prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. The impacts of the COVID-19 closures, however, further eroded the industry, leaving opportunities for downsizing and redevelopment of existing theater sites. Because this is a trend seen nationally that is expected to expand, recent examples from other states are relevant. In 2020, Loudon County, VA board of supervisors approved the
redevelopment of an 11-acre Regal Cinema complex (built in 1996) as a 166-unit multi-family development. Additional projects like this are expected throughout the country as the long-term impacts of COVID-19 are fully appreciated.

REALISTIC CAPACITY
To determine the realistic capacity on these sites, the City identified a realistic density below the maximum, and applied an additional reduction factor to account for the ongoing operation of existing nonresidential uses. A summary of the assumptions and realistic capacity is included in Table 5-11, and detailed descriptions of the adjustment factors applied to sites within each zoning designation is provided after the table. 1983
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-269
Table 5-11
Strategy 5: Realistic Capacity
Zoning***
(after rezoning)
Number of
Parcels Acres* Max Density
(du/ac)
Max Capacity
(units*)
Adjustment
Factors**
Final Realistic
Capacity
(units*)
Opportunity Area: Ontario Mills
Ontario Mills Mall
SP 9 122.9 85 10,449 18.8% 1,967
Large Outparcels
SP 4 41.1 85 3,494 18.8% 657
Small Outparcels
SP 22 31.5 85 2,678 18.8% 504
Total 35 195.5 16,620 3,128
Source: City of Ontario, 2022.
*Acres and units have been rounded.
**See Adjustment Factor below for a detailed description of the adjustment factors applied to each group of sites.
***Per Program 13, the Specific Plan will be updated to allow residential uses at densities consistent with the existing Policy Plan (25-85 du/ac)
Adjustment Factors
• SP (Ontario Mills Mall)
Description:
- Size of site: 9 parcels, 122.9 acres
- Allowable density: 25-85 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (25 percent),
Above Moderate incomeModerate-income (25 percent)
- Existing Use: Ontario Mills Mall and Parking Area (see Existing Use under "Site Specific Information" above)
- Infrastructure availability: Yes, no constraints
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. 55 PercentAdjustment Redevelopment is only anticipated in the parking areas
around the mall during the 6th Cycle. The net acreage of the parking area is approximately 73.75 acres, or 60 percent of the 1984
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-270 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
total area. It is anticipated that additional acreage will be necessary for drive aisles, sidewalks, and other public areas.

An additional 5 percent was reserved to account for these uses.

The total adjustment factor applied is 55 percent.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. 72.7 Percent Adjustment Revisions to the Specific Plan will allow for 100 percent residential uses, mixed use projects, and 100 percent nonresidential uses, consistent with the City's Policy Plan designation. While most of the commercial activity on these sites is expected to remain concentrated in the mall itself during the 6th Cycle. However, 27.3 percent of the site was reserved to account for potential non-residential uses, and portions of the parking area that may not fully develop during the 6th Cycle, the inverse of which, 72.7 percent, represents the reduction factor applied This estimate generally reflects the mix of project types, and anticipated timing of development the City anticipates based on recent applications for
development of new residential units in areas around the Toyota Arena, which provides the closest comparison in terms of character of development expected.
- Typical Densities. 47.1 Percent Adjustment
The existing specific plan will be amended to allow residential uses consistent with the proposed Policy Plan designation, as noted under Program 13. The proposed Policy Plan
designation allows residential densities between 25 and 85 dwelling units per acre. A realistic density on in the middle of the allowed range, 40 dwelling units per acre, was deemed realistic to determine the total capacity in these areas based on proposed realistic densities in other similar development projects.

As noted under "Market Trends" above, mall redevelopment projects are an emerging trend that is expected to expand during the 6th Cycle in response to the accelerated changes in the way people shop in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

To determine the realistic density, the City looked to planned redevelopment projects, like Main Place Mall in Santa Ana, California, where the recently adopted specific plan includes a phased redevelopment plan in which the parking areas
around the Mall would be developed first, as is expected for the Mills sites during the 6th Cycle. The Main Place Mall plan allowed densities up to 90 dwelling units per acre, similar to what will be allowed at the Ontario Mills. The plan for Main Place Mall also estimated a likely density of 39 dwelling units 1985
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-271
per acre across all sites where residential uses were
anticipated. Consistent with this estimation, the City has assumed a realistic density of 40 dwelling units per acres across all sites where residential uses are anticipated. Forty dwelling units per acre is 47.1 percent of the maximum density allowed.
- Infrastructure Availability. No Adjustment
Not applicable, no constraint
- Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraint
Total Capacity Adjustments: (.55)x(.727)x(.471)x(1)x(1)=18.8 percent • SP (Large outparcels)
Description:
- Size of site: 3 sites, 4 parcels, 41.1 acres
- Allowable density: 25-85 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (25 percent),
Above Moderate incomeModerate-income (25 percent)
- Existing Use: Regal Cinema, Big Box retail and parking area (see Existing Use under "Site Specific Information" above) - Infrastructure availability: Yes, no constraints
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. 95 PercentAdjustment Upon redevelopment of the sites, it is anticipated that additional acreage will be necessary for drive aisles,
sidewalks, and other public areas. Five percent of the land area was reserved to account for these uses. The total adjustment factor applied is 95 percent.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. 42.1 Percent Adjustment Revisions to the Specific Plan will allow for 100 percent residential uses, mixed use projects, and 100 percent nonresidential uses, consistent with the City's Policy Plan 1986
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-272 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
designation. While current trends, market demands and
examples of theater redevelopment projects (see "Site Specific Information" above) generally support projects on larger sites that are 85 percent or more residential, the adjustment factor further reduces the anticipated realistic capacity by half again to account for the potential for higher non-residential footprints and phased development over the larger sites. The adjustment factor for realistic residential capacity is 42.1 Percent (.85x.495=.421). This estimate generally reflects the mix of project types, and anticipated timing of development the City anticipates based on recent applications for
development of new residential units in areas around the Toyota Arena, and within the Meredith Mixed-Use area,
which provide the closest comparison in terms of character of development expected.
- Typical Densities. 47.1 Percent Adjustment
The existing specific plan will be amended to allow residential uses consistent with the proposed Policy Plan designation, as noted under Program 13. The proposed Policy Plan
designation allows residential densities between 25 and 85 dwelling units per acre. A realistic density on in the middle of the allowed range, 40 dwelling units per acre, was deemed realistic to determine the total capacity in these areas. It is anticipated that similar densities can be supported on large outparcels as can be achieved in the Mall parking areas (see the typical densities Capacity Factor for the Ontario Mills Mall for additional information). Forty dwelling units per acre is

47.1 percent of the maximum density allowed.
- Infrastructure Availability. No Adjustment
Not applicable, no constraint
- Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraint
Total Capacity Adjustments: (.95)x(.421)x(.471)x(1)x(1)=18.8 percent • SP (Small outparcels)
Description:
- Size of site: 22 sites, 22 parcels, 31.5 acres
- Allowable density: 25-85 dwelling units per acre
1987
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-273
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (25 percent),
Above Moderate incomeModerate-income (25 percent)
- Existing Use: Restaurant/dining, strip retail, standalone retail, automotive services (see Existing Use under "Site Specific Information" above)
- Infrastructure availability: Yes, no constraints
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. 98 PercentAdjustment Upon redevelopment of the sites, it is anticipated that a minimal amount of additional acreage will be necessary for internal circulation and other public areas. These smaller sites are generally served by external, established roadways, so onsite improvements will be minimal. Two percent of the land area was reserved to account for these uses. The total
adjustment factor applied is 98 percent.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. 40.8 Percent Adjustment Revisions to the Specific Plan will allow for 100 percent residential uses, mixed use projects, and 100 percent nonresidential uses, consistent with the City's Policy Plan designation. While current trends, market demands generally support projects on smaller lots that are either 100 percent residential or 100 percent commercial. It is not expected that all of the identified sites will transition to residential uses, only that they each have potential to transition. Accordingly, only

40.8 percent of the land area within the smaller outparcels is expected to transition to residential uses during the 6th cycle.

Market conditions support the transition of retail sites to residential properties, and other plans for mall redevelopment propose residential uses on a higher portion of the outlying land, so a 40.8 percent transition of identified properties is a conservative estimate intended to account for those likely to transition during the 6th Cycle. The adjustment factor for realistic residential capacity is 40.8 Percent. This estimate generally reflects the mix of project types, and anticipated timing of development the City anticipates based on proposed retail and mall redevelopment projects outside of the City. 1988
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-274 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
- Typical Densities. 47.1 Percent Adjustment
The existing specific plan will be amended to allow residential uses consistent with the proposed Policy Plan designation, as noted under Program 13. The proposed Policy Plan
designation allows residential densities between 25 and 85 dwelling units per acre. A realistic density on in the middle of the allowed range, 40 dwelling units per acre, was deemed realistic to determine the total capacity in these areas. It is anticipated that similar densities can be supported on large outparcels as can be achieved in the Mall parking areas (see the typical densities Capacity Factor for the Ontario Mills Mall for additional information). Forty dwelling units per acre is

47.1 percent of the maximum density allowed.
- Infrastructure Availability. No Adjustment
Not applicable, no constraint
- Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraint
Total Capacity Adjustments: (.98)x(.408)x(.471)x(1)x(1)=18.8 percent There are 35 parcels (195.5 acres) identified for redevelopment.

Collectively, this area could yield up to 16,620 units if the entirety were to develop at the maximum density of 85 dwelling units per acre.

However, the City’s housing strategy recognizes that many retail properties are expected to remain, with development occurring primarily in the parking areas and on several out parcels. As such, only 40 percent of the land area for each site (78.2 acres total) is estimated as suitable for housing, and a realistic density of 40 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the total development potential of 3,128 units.

AB 1397 requires additional justification to include parcels larger than 10 acres in the sites inventory for lower-income housing. Four of the parcels identified in this area (145.0 acres) are larger than 10 acres. The City has included these sites because larger sites with consistent ownership typically create fewer barriers to the introduction of housing in mall redevelopment projects than smaller sites with many competing landowner interests. Redevelopment efforts for the Westminster Mall, in Westminster, CA, for example, have involved a considerable planning effort to balance the various interests of many disparate property owners.

Further, proposed redevelopment plans for malls such as Main Place Mall in Santa Ana, CA, incorporate larger parcels.
1989
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-275

UNITS BY RHNA INCOME CATEGORY
To further ensure conservative estimates, only half of the final realistic capacity was estimated to have the potential to accommodate lower incomes, as shown in Table 5-12.

Table 5-12
Strategy 5: Units by Income Category
Zoning
(after rezoning)
Number of
Parcels Acres*
Units by RHNA Income Category Final Realistic
Lower Capacity (units*) (units*)Moderate
(units*)
Above Moderate
(units*)
Opportunity Area: Ontario Center Specific Plan
Ontario Mills Mall
SP 9 122.9 983 492 492 1,967
Large Outparcels
SP 4 41.1 329 164 164 657
Small Outparcels
SP 22 31.5 252 126 126 504
Total 35 195.5 1,564 782 782 3,128
Source: City of Ontario, 2022.
*Acres and units have been rounded.

Only 50 percent of units (1,564) have the capacity to accommodate lowerincome housing, while the balance is presumed to be split between moderate-income (782 units) and above moderate-income (782 units).

Strategy 6: The Ontario Ranch Housing Opportunity Area

OPPORTUNITY AREAS
The western Ontario Ranch, defined as the area south of Riverside Drive and west of the Cucamonga Channel is largely undeveloped and represents one of the few remaining greenfield opportunities in the Inland Empire. Upon annexation in 1997, the City envisioned the area as an extension of the existing urban fabric. Residential neighborhoods would be balanced by mixed-use, commercial, and public places and organized around a regional-scale park. Twenty-five years later, that vision has begun to take shape with new development east of the Channel. Over the 2021-2029 planning period, development is expected to spread to the western side of the Channel as the infrastructure becomes available. The City’s housing strategies for this area promote the creation of mixed-income communities in the areas west of the Channelin the western Ontario Ranch and while also considering address the development constraints associated with greenfield development. 1990
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-276 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Because this area is so large, but sites have many similarities, general information, relevant to all sites outlined in this strategy is provided first, following by site-specific analysis that is divided into four Opportunity Areas according to the City's vision for the future of each area.

ONTARIO RANCH MARKET TRENDS
The Ontario Ranch has been planned as a new community, providing a mix of new homes, new employment centers, and new retail opportunities linked by a large regional park and a network of smaller, local parks since the area was annexed by the City in 1997. In 2010, the City refined this vision as part of a comprehensive update to the Policy Plan, but the general intent to create a robust, complete community remained unchanged.

In the wake of the Great Recession following the 2010 update to the Policy Plan, the area saw little growth, and the existing agricultural uses continued operation under the City's Agricultural overlay zone, which was intended to allow ongoing agricultural uses until the market was able to support the conversion of properties to residential, retail, and employment uses envisioned to create a complete community. As the homebuilding market recovered, developer interest increased, and the City worked with developers to bring backbone infrastructure to the eastern portions of the Ontario Ranch (areas east of the Cucamonga Channel). The first backbone services were completed in 2014 and expanded from there. Development of residential and industrial uses grew from the available trunk lines, and has rapidly increased at pace with market demand, as discussed under Citywide Market Trends. The sites identified under strategy 6 include those that are closest to expanding infrastructure, and therefore most likely to develop during the 6th cycle, consistent with trends seen on the eastern side of the Ontario Ranch. Sites that are not expected to be served before 2028 have not been included in the sites inventory.

In 2020, it was estimated that 1,292 units were sold in the eastern Ontario Ranch, earning it the distinction of the region's top-selling masterplanned community by John Burns Real Estate, and it ranked no. 5 nationally. In 2021, the eastern Ontario Ranch retained the top spot, with an estimated 1,011 units sold. Homebuilders attributed the reduction in units sales between 2020 and 2021 to delays related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and did not expect the trend to continue.

The western Ontario Ranch, is similarly situated to the eastern portions of the Ontario Ranch, but backbone infrastructure has not previously been available. As infrastructure is introduced, beginning in 2022, development in the western Ranch is expected to follow a similar trajectory to that of the eastern areas with aggressive development of residential areas to meet market demands.
1991
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-277
Reflective of the increasing demand for new homes, developers throughout the eastern Ontario Ranch have approached the City to increase the densities allowed throughout the area. The City has not received any requests to reduce the number of units that could be built.

While the eastern Ranch does not include housing affordable to lowerincome households, master-planned communities outside of the city incorporated lower-income housing, demonstrating that new communities, such as those envisioned for the Opportunity Areas grouped under Sstrategy 6 are able to support housing affordable to lower-income households. The Great Park Neighborhoods in Irvine, CA, for example, facilitated the development of several different affordable housing projects at a range of densities including, Montaira senior apartments, which were completed in 2020 and built at a density of 32 dwelling units per acre, and Luminaira and Espaira at Parasol Park, which were built on a 10.7 acre site that was divided to create two 5.35 acre-sites and completed in 2017.

SUITABILITY OF SITES
Infrastructure Availability
Backbone infrastructure serving the area west of the Channel is planned.

In 2020 and 2021, several large industrial projects were approved, and additional projects are under review along the city’s southern border between Merrill and Eucalyptus Avenues. These projects are bringing water and sewer infrastructure to this portion of the city. The initial trunk line, expected to develop in 2022, will travel along Merrill Avenue between Euclid and Walker Avenues. From there, additional sewer lines are planned to extend north along Euclid, Bon View, Grove, and Walker Avenues, with the southern-most sites expected to be first served.

Extension of the city’s backbone water infrastructure is also planned throughout the western part of the Ranch in conjunction with the approved industrial projects. Water lines, with an anticipated installation date of 2022, will serve the approved industrial projects and introduce backbone infrastructure throughout the area west of the Channel. While water lines will be installed more extensively throughout the area, service is generally anticipated to follow the extension of the sewer lines, as the backbone sewer infrastructure is more complicated and costly to install.

Similarly, new roadways, recycled water lines, storm drains, and dry utilities are expected to expand at pace with the sewer infrastructure as new development is established.

The sites selected and assumptions applied were developed after discussions with the Ontario Metropolitan Utilities Company (OMUC), taking into consideration the cost and phasing needed to ensure that 1992
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-278 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
housing could be developed and served by infrastructure during the 2021-2029 planning period. The following timeline for infrastructure availability was determined possible, given current plans, the rate of development on the eastern side of the Ontario Ranch, where infrastructure was introduced during the 5th housing cycle.

Infrastructure phasing is generally expected to expand from the Merrill Avenue trunk line north as follows:
• 1 to 3 years. Merrill Ave to the southern-most Southern California Edison (SCE) easement
• 3 to 5 years. The southern-most SCE easement to Schaefer Avenue and Areas adjacent to Euclid Avenue immediately north of Schaefer Avenue
• 4 to 6 years. Schaefer Ave (except on Euclid Ave) to Riverside Drive and areas along Euclid Avenue north of the site adjacent to Schaefer Avenue
The City’s housing strategy accounts for the need to extend infrastructure throughout the area by applying an adjustment reduction factor based on the distance of sites from the initial trunk line and estimated timeline for infrastructure availability. The applicable reduction adjustment factors for are detailed under each Opportunity Area are detailed under the "Realistic Capacity" section.

RHNA Income Category
The Ontario Ranch Area was determined to be suitable for lower-income households based on proximity to transit, access to existing and planned jobs and amenities, access to grocery stores, proximity to available infrastructure and utilities, and because there are no known requirements for environmental mitigation:
• Proximity to transit.
- Great Park Corridor. Sites that comprise the Great Park Corridor Opportunity Area were identified based on
proximity to open space and transit, potential for
redevelopment, and infrastructure availability. The Great Park Corridor was identified for higher-density housing development because of its proximity to planned open space, which furthers the City’s fair housing goals, and because SBCTA has plans to expand a BRT route along Edison
Avenue/Ontario Ranch Road. There are no existing bus stops in this area because current uses are primarily agricultural, and there are not currently enough residents, jobs, or leisure activities to entice riders to exit or alight in this area. While locations for future potential BRT stops will be determined 1993
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-279
according to how development occurs, with stops near centers of population, commerce, or recreationhave not yet been identified, rapid transit stops are typically located one-half mile to one mile apart. The City currently envisions (subject to coordination with SBCTA) future transit stops placed at Euclid, Bon View, Grove, Walker, and Vineyard Avenues,
each approximately half a mile apart. In that case, roughly 55 percent of the land area identified in the Great Park Corridor Opportunity Area will be within a 5-minute walk of a BRT; nearly 100 percent of the sites will fall within a 10-minute walk of the same BRT stops.
- Grove Corridor. The sites along the Grove Corridor were identified for higher-density housing development for several reasons, including planning objectives like activating the street and enhancing transit options, development potential, and infrastructure availability. Bringing a higher
concentration of mixed-income residents to the corridor will create energy on the street, distinguishing Grove Avenue as an important community connector. The influx of new residents will also make the corridor a prime candidate for expanded bus service, improving transit options for residents and strengthening the connection between north and south
Ontario.
- Euclid Corridor. SBCTA has plans to expand a BRT route along Euclid Avenue. While potential BRT stops have not yet been identified, because most of the identified sites are undeveloped, rapid transit stops are typically one-half mile to one mile apart. If future transit stops are placed at Riverside Drive, and halfway between Chino and Schaefer Avenues
approximately three-quarters of a mile apart, 54 percent of the land area identified in the Euclid Corridor Opportunity Area will be within a 5-minute walk of a BRT; nearly 100 percent of the sites will fall within a 10-minute walk of the same BRT stops.
• Access to planned jobs. Between Merrill Avenue and Eucalyptus Avenue, several large industrial and logistics projects have been approved by the City. These projects will brings thousands of jobs to the western Ontario Ranch, and are within a transit or bike ride from most of the sites identified in Opportunity Areas grouped under this Strategy. In addition to these approved employment generators, the mixed-use areas within the Great Park Corridor are envisioned as employment hubs for the western Ontario Ranch. By 2050, the City projects there could be as many as 8,000 1994
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-280 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
new jobs accommodated in the portions of these areas reserved for nonresidential uses, as described under the Realistic Capacity Adjustment Factors for Mixed-Use Great Park (MU-GP) and Mixed-Use Eucalyptus / Chino Airport (MU-EU). These new jobs would be within walking distance of many of the sites identified in the Great Park Corridor, and within an easy transit or bike ride of all sites grouped under this Strategy.
• Planned to infrastructure and utilities. As noted under Infrastructure Availability, infrastructure in this area is planned and expected to expand during the 6th cycle, making development feasible for the first time. The timing for the expansion of services is reflected in the how the realistic capacity is divided between RHNA
affordability levels on each site.

The percent of the realistic capacity estimated as suitable for lower-income units is directly related to the anticipated timing for infrastructure expansion. The percentage of capacity identified as suitable to accommodate lower-income housing decreases on sites farther away from Merrill Avenue, the southern-most street in the western Ontario Ranch, where the initial sewer trunk line is anticipated to complete construction in 2022 (see Infrastructure Availability for more details). Sites closest to Merrill Avenue are reflect a mix of affordability in line with the City's policy promoting mixed-income communities, while sites farther north anticipate that an increasing amount of above-moderate housing will help to offset the costs associated with infrastructure expansion. The realistic capacity is divided by affordability level as follows:
• Great Park Corridor
- South of SCE easement (Infrastructure in 1-3 years)
Lower-income (50 percent), Moderate-income (25
percent), Above moderate-income (25 percent)
- North of SCE easement (Infrastructure in 3-5 years)
Lower-income (40 percent), Above moderate-income (60
percent)
• Grove Corridor
- South of Schaefer Avenue (Infrastructure in 3-5 years) Lower-income (40 percent), Above moderate-income (60
percent)
- North of Schaefer Avenue (Infrastructure in 4-6 years) Lower-income (25 percent), Above moderate-income (75
percent)
• Euclid Corridor
1995
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-281
- South of Schaefer Avenue (Infrastructure in 3-5 years) Lower-income (40 percent), Above moderate-income (60
percent)
- North of Schaefer Avenue (Infrastructure in 4-6 years) Lower-income (25 percent), Above moderate-income (75
percent)
• Vineyard Corridor/Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan
- Whole Area (Infrastructure in 4-6 years)
Lower-income (25 percent), Above moderate-income
(75 percent)
These assumptions, as well as the units associated with each income category is detailed under Units by RHNA Income
Category.
• Environmental mitigation.
- Grove Corridor. As noted under Environmental Constraints, there are no known natural or man-made environmental
development concerns that would require mitigation.
- Euclid Corridor. As noted under Environmental Constraints, there are no known natural or man-made environmental
development concerns that would require mitigation.
- Vineyard Corridor / Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan. As noted under Environmental Constraints, there are no known natural or man-made environmental development concerns that
would require mitigation.

Environmental Constraints
The sites identified in this portion of the city have no topographical, slope, flood, or fire hazards. A smallPortions of approximately 26 parcels portion of sites in the Great Park Corridor is are estimated to have ground water levels that could make the area vulnerable to liquefaction. This is determined based on the historic presence of artesian wells on these sites, and it does not indicate a known impediment to development, only a potential vulnerability that must be analyzed through geotechnical evaluation of individual sites at the time of development. The City is currently working on several infrastructure projects within area identified, including the development of Merrill and Eucalyptus Avenue as well as the establishment of the sewer trunk line along Merrill Avenue.

As part of the planning process for these improvements the City conducted geotechnical analysis, and the City's Engineering department confirmed that there are no known liquefaction issues that would limit development or increase the cost of development in these areas. 1996
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-282 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
All projects in the City are required to meet the standards of the Uniform Building Code, which includes provisions The California Building Code provides standards on soils and foundations to ensure new development mitigates the risks of liquefaction zones. Projects within the liquefaction zone are under development. projects are built to established safety standards.

ANALYSIS OF SITES TO ACCOMMODATE LOWER-INCOME RHNA
All Sites
The following analysis of zoning and size of sites is applicable to all Opportunity Areas grouped under this strategy.
• Inclusion in Previous Housing Element
No parcels within Opportunity Areas grouped under Strategy 6 were included in prior housing elements.
• Zoning
The current zoning throughout the area west of the Channel is Specific Plan with an Agriculture Overlay (SP-AG).

The Agriculture Overlay District allows for existing agricultural uses to continue operation on an interim basis until development, consistent with the Policy Plan and zoning district, is slated to occur.

The SP district is intended to accommodate the adoption of specific plans that are consistent with the Policy Plan, but the zoning district itself does not set any density or intensity standards when no specific plan exists. With a few exceptions, most parcels in this part of the city are not yet affected by an existing specific plan. However, the Policy Plan specifies land uses and densities throughout the city, including this areathe western Ontario Ranch. Because both the zoning districtCity development code and state law require consistency between the City’s Policy Plan and zoning, any proposed specific plan must be consistent with the Policy Plan land uses. Therefore, the City's housing strategies use Policy Plan land use categories, including density standards, to estimate the development capacity and affordability potential for sites throughout this portion of the city.

The City’s strategy for this area encouragesreflects the City's policy promoting the creation of new mixed-income communities and the integration of affordable housing with new development.

As To further encourage mixed-income developmentpart of this effort and affordable housing, the City will create an Affordable 1997
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-283
Housing Overlay (AH) Zone. The overlay, described in Program 13, will be applied to all parcels identified in the land inventory south of Riverside Drivein Strategy 6 Opportunity Areas. It willThe AH overlay zone will:
- eEstablish a minimum density of 20 dwelling units per acre, - Provides incentives to develop two tiers of affordable housing. o Tier 1. The first tier would apply to housing projects with at least 20% of units affordable to lower incomes. Projects in this tier would no longer be required to develop a new specific plan under the AH Overlay. Instead, the developer could apply the development standards for a zone that
implements the current or proposed Policy Plan
designation.
o Tier 2. The second tier would apply to projects and provide special standards for affordable housing projects where at least 25 percent of the proposed units are affordable to lower-income households. Tier 2 projects would be subject to the same provisions as Tier 1, butProvisions for
affordable projects would exempt them from the specific plan requirement on parcels that are not already affected by a specific plan. Instead, the developer could apply the development standards for a zone that implements the
current or proposed Policy Plan designation. In addition, the overlay would increase the maximum density for
parcels with a Policy Plan designation of Medium-Density Residential (MDR) from 25 to 30 dwelling units per acre if the project provided 25 percent of units at a rate affordable to lower-income households. The higher density allowed
would effectively increase the base density of the
designation and would be applied prior to any state
density bonus provisions.

With these changes, any site in the Affordable Housing Overlay District with a Policy Plan designation of MDR or Mixed-Use, the Policy Plan designations that allows at least 30 dwelling units per acre (including MDR, as revised) will satisfy the default density requirements and be considered suitable for the development of lower-income housing.
• Size of Sites
- Small Sites. In addition, pParcels smaller than half an acre are excluded without adding further justification that would 1998
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-284 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
otherwise be required by state law enacted through AB1397.

Such small sites are insignificant in terms of number (of parcels) and total acreage. All such parcels are only excluded due to size, and none of the parcels would inhibit the
development of any parcels listed in the inventory (most are owned by the same owners and would be developed along
with larger adjacent parcels).
- Large Sites. AB1397 requires additional justification to include parcels larger than 10 acres in the sites inventory for lowerincome housing. The City has included these sites larger than 10 acreas in the western Ontario Ranch because Ontario has ample recent evidence of large greenfield sites developing as housing. Areas east of the Channel had nearly identical parcel patterns to those in this area. Many properties to the east have already been subdivided and developed as housing, and the undeveloped land east of the Channel is expected to develop likewise. Other large urban greenfield projects, such as Irvine’s Great Park neighborhood, reflect the same pattern of subdividing larger parcels to create mixed-income
communities. Several of the communities in Irvine's Great Park neighborhood include multifamily affordable housing, indicating that this process can produce opportunities for lower-income housing. The Affordable Housing Overlay
District that will be applied to all parcels in the Opportunity Area (Program 13) also provides incentives to promote
housing affordable to lower-income households.

The City also reached out to National Core, an affordable housing developer with experience in Ontario and the Inland subregion to discuss developing affordable housing on sites such as the retail and theater outparcels that are larger than 10 acres. National Core indicated that larger parcels, such as these, allow for lower densities (avoiding higher construction costs) and can accommodate a greater number of units that can be more efficient to operate. Larger projects, if they can be done over multiple phases, can also be easier to finance and construct. In support of these points, they provided two examples of affordable housing projects they developed on larger sites:
o Crestview Terrace (formerly Waterman Gardens in San
Bernardino): A 184-unit affordable project, completed in 2021 that involved a group of large parcels, including a 23- acre parcel and three other parcels, for an overall project site size of total of just over 37 acres.
1999
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-285
o Mission Cove (in Oceanside): A multi-phase mixed-use
project with 288 affordable units and 10,500 square feet of retail space on a 14.5-acre parcel. The final phase was completed in 2018.

These projects indicate that larger sites can provide efficiencies of scale for affordable housing development. Crestview
Terrace shows that projects as large and 37 acres and parcels larger than 20 acres in size can facilitate the development of affordable housing. The largest site within the 4 Opportunity Areas grouped under this strategy is 36.5 acres. The secondlargest site is 26.7 acres. Because the largest sites in this area are similar in size to those that comprised the Crestview Terrace affordable housing project, the larger sites in this area are suitable for the development of affordable housing.

Great Park Corridor
Envisioned as the organizing element for new development and imagined as a focal point for the region, the Ontario Great Park is planned to encompass approximately 340 acres between Campus and Haven Avenues, with its western leg terminating in the Great Park Corridor Housing Opportunity Area. Sites that comprise the Great Park Corridor Opportunity Area were identified based on proximity to open space and transit, potential for redevelopment, and infrastructure availability. The extent of the Opportunity AreaThe sites identified in this area are shown in Figure 5-8 and described in the text that follows.

Figure 5-8 Great Park Corridor Housing Opportunity Area • Ten of the parcels identified in this area (183.4 acres) are larger than 10 acres.Zoning – Great Park Corridor
As previously discusseddescribed under Zoning for all sites, allthe sites in this area are currently zoned SP-AG, , but no specific plan has been adopted, and they will be rezoned to SP-AG-AH for inclusion in the Affordable Housing Overlay District (described 2000
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-286 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
under Program 13). The Overlay will establish a minimum density of 20 du/ac, and allow the Policy Plan designation to govern the maximum densities for each site. The Agriculture Overlay District will remain in place until the parcel is ready for development consistent with the Policy Plan and Affordable Housing Overlay District. Property owners and developers alike have expressed interest in redeveloping this area, so existing agricultural operations are not expected to limit development potential.

In addition, Policy Plan land use categories are used to establish each site’s capacity and affordability potential.

The City is also proposing to update its Policy Plan land uses as described in Program 13. Sites in this area would have Policy Plan designations of Medium Density Residential (MDR) and MixedUse (MU). MDR will allow a range of 20-30 du/ac for projects with at least 25 percent of units affordable to lower incomes, and a range of 20-25 du/ac for all other projects. Two different MU areas are proposed in this opportunity area, Mixed-Use
Eucalyptus/Chino Airport (MU-EU) allowing 20-45 du/ac and Mixed-Use Great Park (MU-GP) 20-65 du/ac respectively. With the Policy Plan and zoning changes noted in Program 13, all sites identified support densities necessary to facilitate lower- and moderate-income housing development.
• Size of Sites – Great Park Corridor
Ten of the parcels identified in this area (183.4 acres) are larger than 10 acres. As discussed at Size of Sites for all sites, large sites in the Ontario Ranch provide unique opportunities for the development of affordable housing projects and are considered feasible and realistic.

As discussed at Size of Sites for all sites, parcels smaller than 0.5 acres have been excluded from the land inventory, but are not expected to impede development on adjacent sites in any way. • Existing Use
SeveralThe majority of these sites continue to house the agricultural operations that once dominated this portion of Ontario(67 parcels, 561.7 acres), but many sites have already begun to transition to interim uses such as truck parking and open storage (6 parcels, 19.9 acres), and services caterings to the logistics industry, such as a truck wash (2 parcels, 9.25 acres).

Finally, 2 parcels are vacant (9.7 acres).
2001
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-287
On the parcels currently used for agricultural operations, Tthere are approximately 28 existing farm homes that were built in conjunction with other agricultural structures spread across the 600 acres.

These aging farmhouses are largely vacant or owner-occupied.

These homes do not provide established affordable housing, and they are not currently occupied by lower-income households, as shown on Figure 3-14, the median income in this area is among the highest in the City with incomes between $87,100 and $125,000 annually. Further, development of the identified sites would only occur after the land was voluntarily vacated and sold or redeveloped. As seen in areas that have recently developed to the east of the Cucamonga Channels, owners who opt to sell or redevelop their properties typically see very large profits and would be able to secure market-rate replacement housing without assistance. The 28 existing homes are projected to be replaced by more than 13,000 homes (more than 465 times the current stock).

Due to the extremely low density of housing and the nature of development anticipated, the existing residential uses are not expected to impede development potential. Land with very similar conditions to the sites identified in this area has recently developed on the eastern side of the Cucamonga Channel, forming new residential neighborhoods. The same trend is expected to continue westward as infrastructure expands.

No other existing uses are expected to impede development. • Availability of Sites
The City has planned to phase out agricultural uses in this area since annexation in 1997, but insufficient infrastructure limited what could be achieved.

As previously described under infrastructure availability, a sewer trunk line and water lines are expected to be completed in 2022. All but one parcel in this opportunity area is located between south of the southern-most Southern California Electric (SCE) easement, where infrastructure could expand in 1 to 3 years. The parcel north of the SCE easement is expected to have access to infrastructure in 3-5 years.

The sites that comprise the Great Park Opportunity Area are located across Eucalyptus Avenue from the industrial projects that are bringing infrastructure to the area, so this Opportunity Area will have the earliest access to water, sewer, and other utilities. 2002
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-288 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
As backbone infrastructure becomes available, development is likely to occur rapidly, as seen in recent years on the eastern side of the Channel. This assertion is informed by conversations with property owners, an on-going dialogue with home building advocacy groups, and regular inquiries from developers interested in this area of the City.
• Feasibility of Development
As described under Strategy 6 Market Trends, the recent development activity in the eastern Ontario Ranch reflects the pattern of development that is expected to occur in the western Ontario Ranch once the infrastructure is in place.

The anticipated timing of infrastructure expansion paired with high interest of both developers and property owners in redeveloping this area as discussed under Suitability of Sites and Availability of Sites, indicates that development is not only feasible, but very likely to occur once infrastructure is available.

Strategy 6 Market Trends illuminates the aggressive development climate that has already manifested in the eastern side of the Ontario Ranch and references other new communities that included affordable housing. The discussion of Size of Sites for all sites also provides examples of affordable housing projects that have developed on larger greenfield sites. Together, these illustrate that the sites within this opportunity are suitable for lower-income housing.

The identified sites have also been carefully reviewed to eliminate those areas where housing development is not suitable, and to reduce the number of units that were considered suitable for lower-income households in areas where costs, such as infrastructure expansion fees are anticipated.

Sites that comprise the Great Park Corridor Opportunity Area were identified based on proximity to open space and transit, potential for redevelopment, and infrastructure availability.

The Great Park Corridor was identified for higher-density housing development because of its proximity to planned open space, which furthers the City’s fair housing goals, and because SBCTA has plans to expand a BRT route along Edison Avenue/Ontario Ranch Road.

While potential BRT stops have not yet been identified, rapid transit stops are typically located one-half mile to one mile apart. The City currently envisions (subject to coordination with SBCTA) future transit stops placed at Euclid, Bon View, Grove, Walker, and Vineyard Avenues, each approximately half a mile apart. In that case, roughly 55 percent of the land area identified in the Great Park 2003
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-289
Corridor Opportunity Area will be within a 5-minute walk of a BRT; nearly 100 percent of the sites will fall within a 10-minute walk of the same BRT stops. The Opportunity Area consists ofA total of 77 parcels (600.6 acres) that areare identified as suitable for housing development. Areas that fall within Chino Airport safety zones 1-4, where residential development is limited, have been excluded.

Parcels where the property owner or developer has already approached the City with development proposals have also been excluded. In addition, parcels smaller than half an acre are excluded without adding further justification that would otherwise be required by state law enacted through AB1397. Such small sites are insignificant in terms of number (of parcels) and total acreage. All such parcels are only excluded due to size, and none of the parcels would inhibit the development of any parcels listed in the inventory (most are owned by the same owners and would be developed along with larger adjacent parcels). Finally, parcels with multiple Policy Plan land use designations have been divided, so only those acreage associated with those portions of the parcel deemed suitable for housing development are included. Housing capacity assumptions have been adjusted to reflect only the portion of the parcel included in the inventory.

Housing capacity assumptions have been adjusted to reflect only the portion of the parcel included in the inventory.Several of these sites continue to house the agricultural operations that once dominated this portion of Ontario, but many sites have already begun to transition to interim uses such as truck parking and open storage.

There are approximately 28 existing homes that were built in conjunction with other agricultural structures spread across the 600 acres. Due to the extremely low density of housing and the nature of development anticipated, the existing residential uses are not expected to impede development potential. Land with very similar conditions to the sites identified in this area has recently developed on the eastern side of the Cucamonga Channel, forming new residential neighborhoods. The same trend is expected to continue westward as infrastructure expands.

AB1397 requires additional justification to include parcels larger than 10 acres in the sites inventory for lower-income housing. Ten of the parcels identified in this area (183.4 acres) are larger than 10 acres. The City has included these sites because Ontario has ample recent evidence of large greenfield sites developing as housing. Areas east of the Channel had nearly identical parcel patterns to those in this area. Many properties to the east have already been subdivided and developed as housing, and the undeveloped land east of the Channel is expected to develop likewise. Other large urban greenfield projects, such as Irvine’s Great Park neighborhood, reflect the same pattern of 2004
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-290 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
subdividing larger parcels to create mixed-income communities.

Several of the communities in Irvine's Great Park neighborhood include multifamily affordable housing, indicating that this process can produce opportunities for lower-income housing. The Affordable Housing Overlay District that will be applied to all parcels in the Opportunity Area (Program 13) also provides incentives to promote housing affordable to lower-income households. The sites that comprise the Great Park Opportunity Area are located across Eucalyptus Avenue from the industrial projects that are bringing infrastructure to the area, so this Opportunity Area will have the earliest access to water, sewer, and other utilities.

To account for the need to extend infrastructure and to address the nine larger parcels, only 50 percent of the realistic development capacity in this area is estimated to be affordable to lower-income households. The balance of the capacity is split between moderate-income housing and above moderate-income housing. It is assumed that the above moderate-income housing will help create integrated mixedincome communities and combine with non-residential uses to help finance any necessary subdivision and expansion of infrastructure.

As previously discussed, all sites in this area are currently zoned SP-AG, and they will be rezoned to SP-AG-AH for inclusion in the Affordable Housing Overlay District (Program 13). The Agriculture Overlay District will remain in place until the parcel is ready for development consistent with the Policy Plan and Affordable Housing Overlay District. Property owners and developers alike have expressed interest in redeveloping this area, so existing agricultural operations are not expected to limit development potential.

In addition, Policy Plan land use categories are used to establish each site’s capacity and affordability potential.

Forty-one sites (299.4 acres) are currently classified as MDR in the Policy Plan, which will be amended to allow up to 30 dwelling units per acre if at least 25 percent of units are affordable to lower incomes, consistent with the Affordable Housing Overlay District. Projects that do not have housing affordable to lowerincome households and projects that include less than 25 percent of affordable units will be subject to a maximum density of 25 units per acre. To account for the development of circulation, sidewalks, and other site requirements, the realistic density of 22 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the maximum capacity on all MDR sites.

Eight sites (81.7 acres) are proposed to be classified as Mixed-Use Eucalyptus / Chino Airport Overlay (MU-EU). This land use category is envisioned to accommodate employee-intensive office, entertainment facilities, live/work, and supporting retail uses in a campus environment designed to leverage proximity to the park and maintain compatibility with surrounding residential areas. Standalone and mixed-use residential is also permitted outside of the Chino Airport safety zone. As previously discussed, sites within the Chino Airport safety zones 1-4 are not included in the Opportunity Area. This land use category allows residential 2005
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-291
development with a density range of 25 to 45 dwelling units per acre, which is sufficient to facilitate the development of lower- and moderate-income housing. To account for potential non-residential development, only 40 percent of the land area on each site is estimated to have residential potential. A realistic density of 35 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the total housing capacity on each site.

Twenty-nine parcels (219.5 acres) are proposed to be classified as Mixed-Use Great Park (currently called the NMC West Mixed-Use Area). Areas with this land use classification accommodate a vertical and horizontal mixture of commercial, office, entertainment, and residential uses, all connecting to the Great Park in a pedestrian-oriented atmosphere. These mixed-use areas are envisioned as low-rise (3-5 stories) with some mid-rise (5-10 stories) near the intersection of Euclid and Edison/Ontario Ranch Road. The land use category allows densities up to 65 dwelling units per acre, which is sufficient to facilitate the development of lowerand moderate-income housing. To account for non-residential development, 70 percent of the land area on each site is estimated to have residential potential.

Seventy percent is estimated because similar large mixed-use areas on the eastern side of the Channel have developed as primarily residential, and several developers have approached the City with plans to reduce the size of commercial areas in existing specific plans east of the Channel. A realistic density of 35 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the total housing capacity on each site.

Using the metrics described above, the Great Park Corridor Opportunity Area has a total capacity of 13,080 new units, 6,509 of which have the capacity to accommodate lower-income housing, 3,286 are presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to moderate-income households, and 3,286 are presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to above moderate-income households.

Grove Corridor
The Grove Corridor Opportunity Area extends along Grove Avenue north from the Great Park Corridor Opportunity Area and terminating at Riverside Drive. The corridor provides a vital connection between southern Ontario and the city's existing urban fabric. This area is envisioned as a mixed-income residential district with a mixed-use activity node at Chino Avenue and a new community park near Riverside Drive. The sites along the Grove Corridor were identified for higherdensity housing development for several reasons, including planning objectives like activating the street and enhancing transit options, development potential, and infrastructure availability. Housing within the Opportunity Area will benefit from proximity to the Great Park and the new community park. The extents of the Opportunity Area are shown in Figure 5-9 and described below.
2006
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-292 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Figure 5-9 Grove Corridor Housing Opportunity Area
• Zoning – Grove Corridor
All sites are currently zoned for Specific Plan all sites in this area are currently zoned SP-AG, and they will be rezoned to SP-AGAH for inclusion in the Affordable Housing Overlay District (Program 13). The AH Overlay will be applied to all sites. It will establish a minimum density of 20 du/ac and allow the Policy Plan designation to govern the maximum densities.

As previously discussed, the Agriculture Overlay District will remain in place until the parcel is ready for development consistent with the Policy Plan and Affordable Housing Overlay District. Property owners and developers alike have expressed interest in redeveloping this area, so existing agricultural operations are not expected to limit development potential.

The City is also proposing to update its Policy Plan land uses as described in Program 13. Sites in this area will have Policy Plan designations of MDR and Mixed-Use. MDR will allow a range of 20-30 du/ac for projects with at least 25 percent of units affordable to lower incomes, and a range of 20-25 du/ac for all other projects.

The Mixed Use area (Mixed-Use Grove), at the intersection of Grove and Chino Avenues is envisioned as a low-rise (three to five stories) mixture of retail and residential uses that will create identity and place along the corridor and serve the surrounding residents. The Mixed Use Area will allow 20-65 du/ac. With the changes outlined in Program 13, all sites identified support densities necessary to facilitate lower- and moderate-income housing development.

There are 21 parcels (150.8 acres) currently or proposed to be classified as MDR in the Policy Plan. Four parcels (36 acres) are proposed to be classified as Mixed-Use Grove in the Policy Plan. 2007
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-293
• Site Size – Grove Corridor
No sites in this opportunity area are smaller than 0.5 acres or larger than 10 acres.
• Existing Use
The Opportunity Area consists of 25 parcels (186.8 acres) that are identified as suitable for housing development. Like the Great Park Corridor, severalthe majority of these sites continue to house the agricultural operations (16 parcels, 130.6 acres) that once dominated this portion of Ontario. Several sites have also already begun to transition to interim uses such as building supply sales/storage, truck parking and open storage (8 parcels, 46.7 acres). Finally, there is 1 vacant parcel (9.5 acres) that has already shuttered former agricultural operations.

On the agricultural parcels, Tthere are approximately six existing farm homes that were built in conjunction withto serve the agricultural operations.

These aging farmhouses are largely vacant or owner-occupied.

These homes do not provide established affordable housing, and they are not currently occupied by lower-income households, as shown on Figure 3-14, the median income in this area is between $55,000 and $125,000 annually. Further, development of the identified sites would only occur after the land was voluntarily vacated and sold or redeveloped by the owner occupants of the property. As seen in areas that have recently developed to the east of the Cucamonga Channels, owners who opt to sell or redevelop their properties typically see very large profits and would be able to secure replacement housing without assistance. The six existing homes are projected to be replaced by more than 4,100 homes (more than 685 times the current stock).

Because of the extremely low density of housing and the anticipated type of development, the existing residential uses are not expected to impede development potential. Land with very similar conditions to the sites identified in this area has recently developed on the eastern side of the Cucamonga Channel, forming new residential neighborhoods. The same trend is expected to continue westwardin this area as infrastructure expands.

No existing uses are expected to impede development of housing. 2008
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-294 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
• Availability of Sites
Similar to the Great Park Corridor, the City has planned to phase out agricultural uses in this area since annexation in 1997, but insufficient infrastructure limited what could be achieved.

As described under Infrastructure Availability, sewer and water service is expected to extend north from the new trunk line on Merrill Avenue (estimated completion in 2022) north along Grove Avenue, with the southern-most sites expected to be first served.

Based on discussion with OMUC, the sites in this area are expected to have service in two phases:
- Between Southern SCE easement and Schaefer Avenue: 3 to 5 years
- Between Schaefer Avenue and Riverside Drive: 4 to 6 years As backbone infrastructure becomes available, development is likely to occur rapidly, as seen in recent years on the eastern side of the Channel. This assertion is informed by conversations with property owners eager to develop, by an on-going dialogue with home building advocacy groups, and by regular inquiries from developers interested in this area of the City.

One of the planned sewer lines will travel along Grove Avenue.

As service is expanded from the south, the properties identified in this Opportunity Area will have prime access to expanded infrastructure.
• Feasibility of Development
As with the Great Park Corridor, the anticipated timing of infrastructure expansion paired with heightened interest of both developers and property owners, described under Availability of Sites, indicates that development is not only feasible, but very likely to occur once backbone infrastructure is in place.

Strategy 6 Market Trends illuminates the aggressive development climate that has already manifested in the eastern side of the Ontario Ranch and references other new communities that included affordable housing. The discussion of Size of Sites for all sites also provides examples of affordable housing projects that have developed on larger greenfield sites. Together, these illustrate that the sites within this opportunity are suitable for lower-income housing.
2009
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-295
Parcels with multiple Policy Plan land use designations have been divided, so only those portions of the parcel deemed suitable for housing development are included. As discussed later under this strategy (see "Realistic Capacity" and Units by RHNA Income Category), housing capacity assumptions have been adjusted to reflect only the portion of the parcel included in the inventory. The timing for the availability of infrastructure has been factored into the capacity estimates for all sites in this area, and the City's policy, promoting the creation of mixed-income neighborhoods is reflected in how the RHNA allocation is divided by income category for these sites. The sites along the Grove Corridor were identified for higher-density housing development for several reasons, including planning objectives like activating the street and enhancing transit options, development potential, and infrastructure availability.

Bringing a higher concentration of mixed-income residents to the corridor will create energy on the street, distinguishing Grove Avenue as an important community connector. The influx of new residents will also make the corridor a prime candidate for expanded bus service, improving transit options for residents and strengthening the connection between north and south Ontario.

The Opportunity Area consists of 25 parcels (186.8 acres) that are identified as suitable for housing development. Like the Great Park Corridor, several of these sites continue to house the agricultural operations that once dominated this portion of Ontario. Several sites have also already begun to transition to interim uses such as truck parking and open storage. There are approximately six existing homes that were built in conjunction with agricultural operations. Because of the extremely low density of housing and the anticipated type of development, the existing residential uses are not expected to impede development potential. Land with very similar conditions to the sites identified in this area has recently developed on the eastern side of the Cucamonga Channel, forming new residential neighborhoods.

The same trend is expected to continue westward as infrastructure expands.

One of the planned sewer lines will travel along Grove Avenue. As service is expanded from the south, the properties identified in this Opportunity Area will have prime access to expanded infrastructure.

To account for the need to extend infrastructure and to address the greater distance from the planned trunk line and other facilities, the percentage of units estimated to be affordable to lower-income households is reduced based on distance from Merrill Avenue and the estimated timing within the planning period when infrastructure is expected to be available. The corridor is divided into two sections.

South of Schaefer Avenue. In this area, OMUC estimated that utilities could be available in three to five years, depending on the rate of development. In recognition of the reduced time during the planning period when development is expected to be 2010
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-296 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
feasible, only 40 percent of the realistic development capacity is estimated as affordable to lower incomes.

North of Schaefer Avenue. In this area, OMUC estimated that utilities could be available in four to six years, depending on the rate of development. In recognition of the reduced time during the planning period when development will be feasible, only 25 percent of the realistic development capacity is estimated as affordable to lower incomes.

Throughout the Opportunity Area, the housing capacity that is not counted toward the City’s lower-income RHNA is estimated to facilitate the development of above moderate-income housing. It is assumed that the above moderate-income housing will not only help to create integrated mixed-income communities but will also help to finance the expansion of infrastructure.

As previously discussed, all sites in this area are currently zoned SP-AG, and they will be rezoned to SP-AG-AH for inclusion in the Affordable Housing Overlay District (Program 13). The Agriculture Overlay District will remain in place until the parcel is ready for development consistent with the Policy Plan and Affordable Housing Overlay District. Property owners and developers alike have expressed interest in redeveloping this area, so existing agricultural operations are not expected to limit development potential.

In addition, Policy Plan land use categories are used to establish each site’s capacity and affordability potential.

There are20-21 parcels (150.8 acres) currently or proposed to be classified as MDR in the Policy Plan. The definition for MDR will be amended to allow up to 30 dwelling units per acre if at least 25 percent of units are affordable to lower incomes, consistent with the Affordable Housing Overlay District. Projects that do not have housing affordable to lower incomes and projects that include less than 25 percent of affordable units will be subject to a maximum density of 25 units per acre. To account for the development of circulation, sidewalks, and other site requirements, the realistic density of 22 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the maximum capacity on all MDR sites.

Four parcels (36 acres) are proposed to be classified as Mixed-Use Grove in the Policy Plan. This activity center is envisioned as a low-rise (three to five stories) mixture of retail and residential uses that will create identity and place along the corridor and serve the surrounding residents. The land use category allows densities up to 65 dwelling units per acre, which is sufficient to facilitate the development of lower- and moderate-income housing. To account for nonresidential development, only 65 percent of the land area on each site is estimated to have residential potential. A realistic density of 35 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the total housing capacity on each site.

Using the metrics described previously, the Grove Corridor Opportunity Area has a total capacity of 4,130 new units, 1,152 of which have the capacity to accommodate lower-income housing, and 2,978 units are presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to above moderate-income households.
2011
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-297
Euclid Corridor
The Euclid Corridor Opportunity Area includes the parcels on the city’s western border along Euclid Avenue between Schaefer Avenue and Riverside Drive. The sites along the Euclid Corridor were identified for higher-density housing development to complement the multifamily housing across the street in Chino, fulfill regional transit goals, and because of their development potential as well as infrastructure availability. The extents of the Opportunity Area are shown in Figure 5- 10 and described in the text that follows.

Figure 5-10 Euclid Corridor Housing Opportunity Area
• Zoning – Euclid Corridor
All sites are currently zoned for Specific Plan all sites in this area are currently zoned SP-AG, and they will be rezoned to SP-AGAH for inclusion in the Affordable Housing Overlay District (Program 13). The AH Overlay will be applied to all sites. It will establish a minimum density of 20 du/ac and allow the Policy Plan designation to govern the maximum densities.

As previously discussed, the Agriculture Overlay District will remain in place until the parcel is ready for development consistent with the Policy Plan and Affordable Housing Overlay District. Property owners and developers alike have expressed interest in redeveloping this area, so existing agricultural operations are not expected to limit development potential.

The City is also proposing to update its Policy Plan land uses as described in Program 13. Sites in this area would have policy plan designations of MDR and Mixed-Use. MDR will allow a range of 20-30 du/ac for projects with at least 25 percent of units affordable to lower -incomes, and a range of 20-25 du/ac for all other projects. Mixed Use is proposed on one parcel at the intersection of Euclid Avenue and Riverside Drive. The proposed Mixed-Use designation would allow 20-75 du/ac. With the changes outlined 2012
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-298 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
in Program 13, all sites identified support densities necessary to facilitate lower- and moderate-income housing development. • Size of Sites – Euclid Corridor
AB 1397 requires additional justification to include parcels larger than 10 acres in the sites inventory for lower-income housing. Five of the parcels identified in this area (68.3 acres) are larger than 10 acres. As discussed under Size of Sites for all sites, large sites in the Ontario Ranch provide unique opportunities for the
development of affordable housing projects, and are not considered an impediment to affordable housing, but could rather been seen as an asset.

As discussed under Size of Sites for all sites, parcels smaller than

0.5 acres have been excluded from the land inventory, but are not expected to impede development on adjacent sites in any way.

The City has included these sites because Ontario has ample recent evidence of large greenfield sites developing with residential uses. Areas east of the Channel had nearly identical parcel patterns to those in this area. Many properties to the east have already been subdivided and developed as housing. The remaining undeveloped land east of the Channel is expected to develop likewise. Other large urban greenfield projects, such as Irvine’s Great Park neighborhood, reflect the same pattern of subdividing larger parcels to create mixed-income communities.

Several of the communities in Irvine’s Great Park neighborhood include multifamily affordable housing, indicating that this process can produce opportunities for lower-income housing. The Affordable Housing Overlay District that will be applied to all parcels in the Opportunity Area (Program 13) also provides incentives to promote housing affordable to lower-income households. The development of the Euclid Corridor Opportunity Area is expected to mirror the trends already established on the eastern side of the Channel, with infrastructure availability determining where projects will develop first.
• The sites along the Euclid Corridor were identified for higherdensity housing development to complement the multifamily housing across the street in Chino, fulfill regional transit goals, and because of their development potential as well as
infrastructure availability.
• SBCTA has plans to expand a BRT route along Euclid Avenue.

While potential BRT stops have not yet been identified, rapid transit stops are typically one-half mile to one mile apart. If future transit stops are placed at Riverside Drive, and halfway between 2013
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-299
Chino and Schaefer Avenues approximately three-quarters of a mile apart, 54 percent of the land area identified in the Euclid Corridor Opportunity Area will be within a 5-minute walk of a BRT; nearly 100 percent of the sites will fall within a 10-minute walk of the same BRT stops.
• Existing Use
The Opportunity Area includes 22 parcels (132.2 acres) that are identified as suitable for housing development. Two parcels (10.3 acres) are vacant. Eighteen parcels (110.0 acres) continue to house the agricultural operations that once dominated this portion of Ontario. One parcel (8.8 acres) is principally occupied by the parking area that serves the nearby swap meet and livestock sales yard (neither the swap meet nor the livestock sales yard are included in the inventory). The final three parcels (3.1 acres) are underutilized commercial sites fronting Euclid Avenue. These sites were identified for redevelopment because they consist of small buildings operated by independent tenants, and they are surrounded by agricultural and vacant land. It is anticipated that these properties will redevelop concurrent with the rest of the Opportunity Area. The City has been in contact with property owners in this area, and there are no objections tothe potential redevelopment of the identified sites with housing, including affordable options is feasible in the 6th cycle.

On the agricultural parcels, Tthere are approximately 12 existing farm homes that were built primarily in conjunction withto serve agricultural operations.

As in the Great Park and Grove Corridors, these aging farmhouses are largely vacant or owner-occupied. These homes do not provide established affordable housing, and they are not currently occupied by lower-income households, as shown on Figure 3-14, the median income in this area is among the highest in the City with incomes between $87,100 and $125,000 annually. Further, development of the identified sites would only occur after the land was voluntarily vacated and sold or redeveloped by the owner occupants. As seen in areas that have recently developed to the east of the Cucamonga Channel, owners who opt to sell or redevelop their properties typically see very large profits and would be able to secure replacement housing without assistance.

The 12 existing homes are projected to be replaced by more than 2,900 homes (nearly 250 times the current stock).
2014
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-300 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Because of the extremely low density of housing and the anticipated type of development, the existing residential uses are not expected to impede development potential. Land with very similar conditions to the sites identified in this area has recently developed on the eastern side of the Cucamonga Channel. • Availability of Sites
As in the Great Park and Grove Corridors, the City has planned to phase out agricultural uses in this area since annexation in 1997, but insufficient infrastructure limited what could be achieved.

As previously described under infrastructure availability, sewer and water service is expected to extend north from the new trunk line on Merrill Avenue (estimated completion in 2022) north along Euclid Avenue, with the southern-most sites expected to be first served. Based on discussion with OMUC, the sites in this area are expected to have service during the two phases of expansion:
- Adjacent to Schafer Avenue: 3-5 years
- Between Schaefer Avenue and Riverside Drive: 4 to 6 years It is estimated that the seven parcels closest to Schaefer Avenue could have access to infrastructure in 3 to 5 years, earlier than other sites in this Opportunity Area, because the City is changing the land uses immediately south of the Opportunity Area (between Schaefer Avenue and the Great Park Opportunity Area) to allow light industrial, business park, and logistics facilities.

These types of operations are in extremely high demand, so it is anticipated that the development of such facilities would bring infrastructure to the southern portions of the Opportunity Area earlier in the planning period than would otherwise occur. In response to property owner and developer interest, the City is changing the land use immediately south of the Opportunity Area (between Schaefer Avenue and the Great Park Opportunity Area) to allow light industrial, business park, and logistics facilities.

Because land for these types of operations is in extremely high demand, it is anticipated that the development of such facilities will bring infrastructure to the Opportunity Area earlier in the planning period than would occur if the area were designated for residential. It is estimated that the seven parcels closest to Schaefer Avenue could have access to infrastructure in three to five years.

As backbone infrastructure becomes available, development is likely to occur rapidly, as seen in recent years on the eastern side of the Channel. This assertion is informed by conversations with property owners eager to develop, by an on-going dialogue with 2015
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-301
home building advocacy groups, and by regular inquiries from developers interested in this area of the City.
• Feasibility of Development
As with the Great Park Corridor, the anticipated timing of infrastructure expansion paired with heightened interest of both developers and property owners, described under "Availability of Sites" indicates that development is not only feasible, but very likely to occur once backbone infrastructure is in place.

Strategy 6 Market Trends illuminates the aggressive development climate that has already manifested in the eastern side of the Ontario Ranch and references other new communities that included affordable housing. The discussion of Size of Sites for all sites also provides examples of affordable housing projects that have developed on larger greenfield sites. Together, these illustrate that the sites within this opportunity are suitable for lower-income housing.

Parcels with multiple Policy Plan land use designations have been divided, so only those portions of the parcel deemed suitable for housing development are included. As discussed later under this strategy (see "Realistic Capacity" and Units by RHNA Income Category), housing capacity assumptions have been adjusted to reflect only the portion of the parcel included in the inventory. The timing for the availability of infrastructure has been factored into the affordability estimates for all sites in this area, and the City's policy, promoting the creation of mixed-income neighborhoods is reflected in how the RHNA allocation is divided by income category for these sites.

AB 1397 requires additional justification to include parcels larger than 10 acres in the sites inventory for lower-income housing. Five of the parcels identified in this area (68.3 acres) are larger than 10 acres. The City has included these sites because Ontario has ample recent evidence of large greenfield sites developing with residential uses. Areas east of the Channel had nearly identical parcel patterns to those in this area. Many properties to the east have already been subdivided and developed as housing. The remaining undeveloped land east of the Channel is expected to develop likewise. Other large urban greenfield projects, such as Irvine’s Great Park neighborhood, reflect the same pattern of subdividing larger parcels to create mixed-income communities. Several of the communities in Irvine’s Great Park neighborhood include multifamily affordable housing, indicating that this process can produce opportunities for lower-income housing. The Affordable Housing Overlay District that will be applied to all parcels in the Opportunity Area (Program 13) also provides incentives to promote housing affordable to lowerincome households. The development of the Euclid Corridor Opportunity Area is 2016
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-302 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
expected to mirror the trends already established on the eastern side of the Channel, with infrastructure availability determining where projects will develop first.

The Euclid Corridor was identified as suitable for development during the 2021- 2029 planning period because one of the planned sewer lines will travel along Euclid Avenue. As service is expanded from the south, the properties identified will have prime access to expanded infrastructure.

To account for the need to extend infrastructure and to address the distance from the planned trunk line and other facilities, the percentage of units estimated to be affordable to lower-income households is reduced based on distance from Merrill Avenue, and the time in the planning period when infrastructure is expected to be available. The corridor is divided into two sections.

Adjacent to Schaefer Avenue. In response to property owner and developer interest, the City is changing the land use immediately south of the Opportunity Area (between Schaefer Avenue and the Great Park Opportunity Area) to allow light industrial, business park, and logistics facilities. Because land for these types of operations is in extremely high demand, it is anticipated that the development of such facilities will bring infrastructure to the Opportunity Area earlier in the planning period than would occur if the area were designated for residential. It is estimated that the seven parcels closest to Schaefer Avenue could have access to infrastructure in three to five years. In recognition of the reduced time during the planning period when development will be feasible, 40 percent of the realistic development capacity is estimated as affordable to lower incomes.

North to Riverside Drive. For the remaining sites in the Opportunity Area, a more conservative estimate of four to six years, depending on the rate of development, is assumed. In recognition of the reduced time during the planning period when development will be feasible, only 25 percent of the realistic development capacity is estimated as affordable to lower incomes.

Throughout the Opportunity Area, the housing capacity that is not counted toward the City’s lower-income RHNA is estimated to facilitate the development of above moderate-income housing. It is assumed that the above moderate-income housing will not only help to create integrated mixed-income communities but will also help to finance the expansion of infrastructure.

As previously discussed, all sites in this area are currently zoned SP-AG, and they will be rezoned to SP-AG-AH for inclusion in the Affordable Housing Overlay District (Program 13). The Agriculture Overlay District will remain in place until the parcel is ready for development consistent with the Policy Plan and Affordable Housing Overlay District. Property owners and developers alike have expressed interest in redeveloping this area, so existing agricultural operations are not expected to limit development potential.

In addition, Policy Plan land use categories are used to establish each site’s capacity and affordability potential.
2017
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-303
There are 21 parcels (117.2 acres) currently or proposed to be classified as MDR in the Policy Plan. The definition for MDR will be amended to allow up to 30 dwelling units per acre if at least 25 percent of units are affordable to lower incomes, consistent with the Affordable Housing Overlay District. Projects that do not have housing affordable to lower incomes and projects that include less than 25 percent of affordable units will be subject to a maximum density of 25 units per acre. To account for the development of circulation, sidewalks, and other site requirements, the realistic density of 22 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the maximum capacity on all MDR sites.

One parcel (15 acres) is proposed to be classified as Mixed-Use Neighborhood Activity Hub (MU-NH) in the Policy Plan. This activity center is envisioned as a low-rise (three to five stories) mixture of retail and residential uses that will create identity and place along the corridor and serve the surrounding residents. The land use category allows densities up to 75 dwelling units per acre, which is sufficient to facilitate the development of lower- and moderate-income housing. To account for non-residential development, 75 percent of the land area on the site is estimated to have residential potential. Seventy-five percent is estimated because recent projects in mixed-use areas on the eastern side of the Channel have developed as primarily residential, and several developers have approached the City with plans to reduce the size of commercial areas in existing specific plans east of the Channel. In addition, a realistic density of 35 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the total housing capacity on the site.

Using the metrics described, the Euclid Corridor Opportunity Area has a total capacity of 2,960 new units, 731 of which have the capacity to accommodate housing affordable to lower-income households, and 2,229 units are presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to above moderate-income households.

Vineyard Corridor / Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan
The Vineyard Corridor / Armstrong Ranch Opportunity Area includes the parcels on either side of Vineyard Avenue between Chino Avenue and Riverside Drive. The sites along Vineyard Avenue were identified as "overflow" sites to help the City maintain a large inventory of potential sites as development occurs throughout the planning period. The extents of the Opportunity Area are shown in Figure 5-11 and described in the text that follows.
2018
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-304 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Figure 5-11 Vineyard Corridor / Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan Housing Opportunity Area
• Size of Sites – Vineyard Corridor/Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan No sites in this opportunity area are smaller than 0.5 acres or larger than 10 acres.
• Zoning – Vineyard Corridor/Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan The three sitesparcels (28.2 acres) on the western side of Vineyard Avenue are currently zoned SP-AG. They will be rezoned to SPAG-AH for inclusion in the Affordable Housing Overlay District (Program 13). The Agriculture Overlay District will remain in place until the parcel is ready for development consistent with the Policy Plan and Affordable Housing Overlay District. Property owners and developers alike have expressed interest in
redeveloping this area, so existing agricultural operations are not expected to limit development potential.

The four sitesparcels (36.2 acres) on the eastern side of Vineyard Avenue are governed by the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan. The City will update the Specific Plan as part of its rezoning program (Program 13) to allow a minimum of 20 dwelling units per acre and maximum of at least 30 or more dwelling units per acre on the sites included in the Opportunity Area.

As backbone infrastructure becomes available, development is likely to occur rapidly, as seen in recent years on the eastern side of the Channel. This assertion is informed by conversations with property owners eager to develop, by an on-going dialogue with home building advocacy groups, and by regular inquiries from developers interested in this area of the City.
2019
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-305
• The sites along Vineyard Avenue were identified as "overflow" sites to help the City maintain a large inventory of potential sites as development occurs throughout the planning period.
• Existing Use
The Opportunity Area includes seven parcels (64.3 acres), all of which are currently used for agricultural purposes. Land with very similar conditions to the sites identified in this area has recently developed on the eastern side of the Cucamonga Channel.
• Availability of Sites
As in the other Opportunity Areas that comprise this strategy, the City has planned to phase out agricultural uses in this area since annexation in 1997, but insufficient infrastructure limited what could be achieved.

As previously described under infrastructure availability, sewer and water service is expected to extend north from the new trunk line on Merrill Avenue (estimated completion in 2022) north along Euclid, Bon View, Grove, and Walker Avenues, with the southernmost sites expected to be first served. Based on discussion with OMUC, the sites in this area are expected to have service during the final phases of expansion:
- Between Schaefer Avenue and Riverside Drive: 4 to 6 years Discussions with the development community show that there is substantial interest in developing these sites when infrastructure is available.
• Feasibility of Development
Discussions with the development community show that there is substantial interest in developing these sites when infrastructure is available. These sites were identified after discussions with property owners and developers interested in intensifying these area.

The greatest deterrent to the development of these sites is the availability of infrastructure, which may be available in four to six years, depending on the rate of development. In recognition of the reduced time during the planning period when development will be feasible, only 25 percent of the realistic development capacity is estimated as affordable to lower -incomes, while the remaining housing capacity is estimated to facilitate the development of 2020
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-306 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
above moderate-income housing. It is assumed that the above moderate-income housing will not only help to create an integrated mixed-income community but will also help to finance the expansion of infrastructure.

The three sites (28.2 acres) on the western side of Vineyard Avenue are currently zoned SP-AG. They will be rezoned to SP-AG-AH for inclusion in the Affordable Housing Overlay District (Program 13). The Agriculture Overlay District will remain in place until the parcel is ready for development consistent with the Policy Plan and Affordable Housing Overlay District. Property owners and developers alike have expressed interest in redeveloping this area, so existing agricultural operations are not expected to limit development potential.

REALISTIC CAPICITY
To determine the realistic capacity on these sites, the City identified a realistic density below the maximum, and applied an additional reduction factor to sites with a mixed-use designation to account for potential non-residential uses. A summary of the assumptions and realistic capacity is included in Table 5-5, and detailed descriptions of the adjustment factors applied to sites within each zoning designation is provided after the table.
2021
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-307
Table 5-13
Strategy 6: Realistic Capacity
Zoning/Policy
Plan
(after rezoning)
Number of
Parcels Acres* Max Density
(du/ac)
Max Capacity
(units*)
Adjustment
Factor**
Final Realistic
Capacity
(units*)
Opportunity Area: Great Park Corridor
SP-AG-AH / MDR 42 299.4 30 8,983 73.3% 6,568
SP-AG-AH / MU-EU 8 81.7 45 3,677 31.1% 1,142
SP-AG-AH / MU-GP 29 219.5 65 14,264 37.7% 5,370
Opportunity Area: Grove Corridor
SP-AG-AH / MDR 22 150.8 30 4,524 73.3% 3,315
SP-AG-AH / MU-GR 4 36.0 65 2,339 35.0% 815
Opportunity Area: Euclid Corridor
SP-AG-AH / MDR 23 117.2 30 3,517 73.3% 2,567
SP-AG-AH / MU-ER 1 15.0 75 1,124 35.0% 393
Opportunity Area: Vineyard Corridor / Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan SP-AG-AH / MDR 7 64.3 30 1,930 73.3% 1,416
TOTAL 136.0 983.9 25,773 21,586
Source: City of Ontario, 2022.
*Acres and units have been rounded.
**See Adjustment Factor below for a detailed description of the adjustment factors applied to each group of sites.

Adjustment Factors
• SP-AG-AH / MDR (Great Park, Grove, and Euclid Corridors, and Vineyard Corridor/Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan)
Description:
- Number and size of sites: 94 parcels, 631.8 acres
- Allowable density: 20-30 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: varies based on location of site relative to planned infrastructure expansion.
o Great Park Corridor – Infrastructure in 1-3 years. Lower incomeLower-income (50 percent), Moderate
incomeModerate-income (25 percent), Above moderate
incomeAbove moderate-income (25 percent)
2022
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-308 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
o 1 parcel in Great Park Corridor, Southern portions of Grove Corridor & Euclid Corridors - Infrastructure in 3-5 years.

Lower incomeLower-income (40 percent), Above
moderate incomeAbove moderate-income (60 percent)
o Northern portions of Grove Corridor & Euclid Corridor, all of Vineyard Corridor/ Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan -
Infrastructure in 3-5 years. Lower incomeLower-income (25 percent), Above moderate incomeAbove moderateincome (75 percent) - Existing Use: Agriculture, Open Storage, Building Supplies sales/storage
- Infrastructure availability: Planned, RHNA affordability distribution accounts for phasing of infrastructure
- Environmental constraints: Unconfirmed liquefaction
potential on 7 parcels (44.8 acres), as discussed under Strategy Six "Environmental Constraints," recent projects within the area that has high water levels, have not required mitigation so no adjustment has been provided.

Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. 95 PercentAdjustment Portions of parcels that were not deemed appropriate for residential development (due to presence of a utility easement, designation as a future park, or other factor that would preclude residential development) are not included in the acreage estimates within the land inventory. As such, the factor applied here is intended to account for the portion of each site that will be dedicated to internal circulation, sidewalks, and other public areas. Five percent of the land area has been reserved to account for these uses. The total
adjustment factor applied is 95 percent.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. No Adjustment
The SP-AG-AH zone, with a Policy Plan designation of MDR is intended for 100 percent residential projects. For this reason, 100 percent of the site area was considered viable for
residential development, and no reduction factor was applied. - Typical Densities. 77.1 Percent Adjustment
Project applications and requests for specific plan
amendments in the eastern Ontario Ranch, have continuously requested higher and higher densities to meet current market demand. Specific plans that were originally imagined as 2023
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-309
primarily single-family homes have repositioned to include a greater variety of higher density options. Examples of recently completed homes that are similar to what would be expected in the MDR areas of western Ontario Ranch include motor court and row town products, both of which have been built at densities between 22 and 25 dwelling units per acre in the eastern Ontario Ranch. The City also looked at the densities of recent affordable projects in the northern part of the city (Vista Verde, completed in 2021, and Emporia I, completed in 2020), which were built at densities of 26 and 27 dwelling units per acre, to provide a more conservative estimate while also estimating a high enough density to realize cost savings, a realistic density of 23 dwelling units per acre was used to estimate realistic capacity. Twenty-three dwelling units per acre is 77.1 percent of the maximum density allowed.

In addition to the adjustment factor, 34 existing units (19 in the Great Park Corridor, 3 in the Grove Corridor, 12 in the Euclid Corridor) within the MDR designation (as previously
discussed under "Site-Specific Information") have been
removed from the realistic capacity to ensure estimates focus on growth rather than replacement.
- Infrastructure Availability. Adjustments made to affordability distribution
As previously discussed, infrastructure availability will enable development of the western Ontario Ranch to occur in a
pattern similar to that of the eastern Ranch. Infrastructure is expected to expand south to north as development occurs. Part of the funding for expansion of the infrastructure system will come from investments by market-rate developers. With the current strong demand for residential uses, it is not anticipated that the availability of infrastructure will limit the number of units that can and will be built on each site, only the timing for when those sites will be able to develop and the potential affordability levels. To account for this, and in recognition of the need to offset costs for infrastructure expansion, the percent of the realistic capacity estimated as suitable for lowerincome units decreases as you move north from Merrill Avenue, where the initial trunk line is anticipated to complete construction in 2022. The areas farthest from Merrill Avenue anticipate the lowest percentage of affordable units, with the balance expected to be above-moderate incomemoderateincome. It is expected that above-moderate housing will help to offset the costs associated with infrastructure expansion. 2024
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-310 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
The realistic capacity is divided by affordability level as follows:
o Great Park Corridor (Infrastructure in 1-3 years)
Lower incomeLower-income (50 percent), Moderate
incomeModerate-income (25 percent), Above moderate
incomeAbove moderate-income (25 percent)
o 1 parcel in Great Park Corridor, Southern portions of Grove & Euclid Corridors (Infrastructure in 3-5 years)
Lower incomeLower-income (40 percent), Above
moderate incomeAbove moderate-income (60 percent)
o Northern portions of Grove Corridor & Euclid Corridor, all of Vineyard Corridor/ Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan (Infrastructure in 3-5 years)
Lower incomeLower-income (25 percent), Above
moderate incomeAbove moderate-income (75 percent)
The results of this distribution are recorded in Table 5-14. - Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
As discussed under Strategy Six "Environmental Constraints," there is unconfirmed liquefaction potential on 7 MDR parcels (44.8 acres) in the Great Park Corridor. However, geotechnical studies for recent projects within the zone have not identified any specific risks, and additional mitigation has not been required, soils and groundwater levels are assumed to be similar throughout of the zone, so adjustment was not
considered necessary.

Total Capacity Adjustments: (.95)x(1)x(.771)x(1)x(1) = 73.3 percentForty-one sites (299.4 acres) are currently classified as MDR in the Policy Plan, which will be amended to allow up to 30 dwelling units per acre if at least 25 percent of units are affordable to lower incomes, consistent with the Affordable Housing Overlay District. Projects that do not have housing affordable to lower-income households and projects that include less than 25 percent of affordable units will be subject to a maximum density of 25 units per acre. To account for the development of circulation, sidewalks, and other site requirements, the realistic density of 22 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the maximum capacity on all MDR sites. 2025
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-311
• SP-AG-AH / MU-EU (Great Park Corridor)
Description:
- Number and size of sites: 8 parcels, 81.7 acres
- Allowable density: 25-45 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (25 percent),
Above-Moderate incomeModerate-income (25 percent)
- Existing Use: Agriculture
- Infrastructure availability: Planned, RHNA affordability distribution accounts for phasing of infrastructure
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. 31.1 Percent Adjustment Portions of parcels that were not deemed appropriate for residential development (due to presence of a utility easement, designation as a future park, or other factor that would preclude residential development) are not included in the acreage estimates within the land inventory. As such, the factor applied here represents the portion of each site that will be dedicated internal circulation, sidewalks, and other public areas. Five percent of the land area has been reserved to account for these uses. The total adjustment factor applied is 95 percent.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. 42.1 Percent Adjustment This mixed-use area will allow for 100 percent residential uses, mixed use projects, and 100 percent non-residential uses. This is a new land use in the City that will allow for some lowimpact, small scale, light industrial uses as well as commercial and residential projects. Market demand for both residential and light industrial uses is high. An adjustment factor of 42.1 percent has been applied to account for potential nonresidential development on these sites. This estimate generally reflects the mix of project types the City anticipates based on conversations with developers and property owners.
2026
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-312 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
- Typical Densities. 77.8 Percent Adjustment
This mixed-use designation allows residential densities between 25 and 45 dwelling units per acre. A realistic density in the middle of the allowed range, 35 dwelling units per acre, was deemed realistic to determine the total capacity on these sites. This was based on projects developed in other areas of the city with a similar characteristic to the City's vision for affordable housing in this area, including the 1001 E. Holt Blvd., a mixed-use multi-family project (35 dwelling units per acre), and based on affordable projects outside of the City, like the Adams Avenue Affordable Housing Community in
Murrieta, CA, will complete adoption hearings in 2022 and is proposed at a density of 32 dwelling units per acre over a 6.22 acre site. Accordingly, 35 dwelling units per acre will provide a realistic capacity estimate for units on these sites. Thirty-five dwelling units per acre is 77.8 percent of the maximum density allowed on the site.

In addition to the adjustment factor, 2 existing units in the Great Park Corridor with a designation of MU-EU (as
previously discussed under "Site-Specific Information") have been removed from the realistic capacity to ensure estimates focus on growth rather than replacement.
- Infrastructure Availability. Adjustments made to affordability distribution
As previously discussed, infrastructure availability will enable development of the western Ontario Ranch to occur in a
pattern similar to that of the eastern Ranch. Infrastructure is expected to expand south to north as development occurs. Part of the funding for expansion of the infrastructure system will come from investments by market-rate developers. With the current strong demand for residential uses, it is not anticipated that the availability of infrastructure will limit the number of units that can and will be built on each site, only the timing for when those sites will be able to develop and the potential affordability levels. To account for this, and in recognition of the need to offset costs for infrastructure expansion, the percent of the realistic capacity estimated as suitable for lowerincome units decreases as you move north from Merrill Avenue, where the initial trunk line is anticipated to complete construction in 2022. The areas farthest from Merrill Avenue anticipate the lowest percentage of affordable units, with the balance expected to be above-moderate incomemoderateincome. It is expected that above-moderate housing will help to offset the costs associated with infrastructure expansion. 2027
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-313
The realistic capacity is divided by affordability level as follows:
o Great Park Corridor – Infrastructure in 1-3 years. Lower incomeLower-income (50 percent), Moderate
incomeModerate-income (25 percent), Above moderate
incomeAbove moderate-income (25 percent)
The results of this distribution are recorded in Table 5-14. - Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraints
Total Capacity Adjustments: (.95)x(.421)x(.778)x(1)x(1)=31.1percent Eight sites (81.7 acres) are proposed to be classified as Mixed-Use Eucalyptus / Chino Airport Overlay (MU-EU). This land use category is envisioned to accommodate employee-intensive office, entertainment facilities, live/work, and supporting retail uses in a campus environment designed to leverage proximity to the park and maintain compatibility with surrounding residential areas.

Stand-alone and mixed-use residential is also permitted outside of the Chino Airport safety zone. As previously discussed, sites within the Chino Airport safety zones 1-4 are not included in the Opportunity Area. This land use category allows residential development with a density range of 25 to 45 dwelling units per acre, which is sufficient to facilitate the development of lower- and moderate-income housing. To account for potential nonresidential development, only 40 percent of the land area on each site is estimated to have residential potential. A realistic density of 35 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the total housing capacity on each site.
• SP-AG-AH / MU-GP (Great Park Corridor)
Description:
- Number and size of sites: 29 parcels, 219.5 acres
- Allowable density: 20-65 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (50
percent), Moderate incomeModerate-income (25 percent),
Above-Moderate incomeModerate-income (25 percent)
- Existing Use: Agriculture, Open Storage, Truck Wash, Vacant Site with Concrete Pad and Fence
2028
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-314 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
- Infrastructure availability: Planned, RHNA affordability distribution accounts for phasing of infrastructure
- Environmental constraints: Unconfirmed liquefaction
potential on 19 parcels (137.7 acres), as discussed under Strategy 6, "Environmental Constraints," recent projects within the area that potentially has high water levels, have not required mitigation so no adjustment has been provided.

Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. 95 PercentAdjustment Portions of parcels that were not deemed appropriate for residential development (due to presence of a utility easement, designation as a future park, or other factor that would preclude residential development) are not included in the acreage estimates within the land inventory. As such, the factor applied here represents the portion of each site that will be dedicated internal circulation, sidewalks, and other public areas. Five percent of the land area has been reserved to account for these uses. The total adjustment factor applied is 95 percent.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. 73.7 Percent Adjustment This mixed-use designation (currently called MU-NMC West, but a name change is proposed) allows for 100 percent
residential uses, mixed use projects, and 100 percent nonresidential uses. This is land use is envisioned as the southwestern activity center for citizens of Ontario with bot vertical and horizontal mixed-use development that connects to the Great Park. To determine the amount of mixed-use land area that is expected to develop for residential uses, the City looked at trends in the eastern Ontario Ranch, where
developers have consistently approached the City to reduce the commercial footprint within the adopted specific plan. The City also examined the mix of uses built or otherwise in the pipeline in the area designated as Mixed-Use NMC East in the Policy Plan, which was envisioned for a similar use as the MUGP designation. In the Mixed-Use NMC East areas the mix of uses is approximately 75 percent residential. Consistent with these trends, approximately 73.7 percent of the area is expected to develop for residential purposes, while the balance is reserved for non-residential uses. The total adjustment factor applied is 73.7 percent.
2029
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-315
- Typical Densities. 53.8 Percent Adjustment
This mixed-use designation allows residential densities between 20 and 65 dwelling units per acre. A realistic density at the lower end of the allowed range, 35 dwelling units per acre, was deemed realistic to determine the total capacity on these sites. This was based on projects developed in other areas of the city with a similar characteristic to the City's vision for affordable housing in this area, including the 1001 E. Holt Blvd., a mixed-use multi-family project (35 dwelling units per acre), and based on affordable projects outside of the City, like the Adams Avenue Affordable Housing Community in
Murrieta, CA, will complete adoption hearings in 2022 and is proposed at a density of 32 dwelling units per acre over a 6.22 acre site. Accordingly, 35 dwelling units per acre will provide a realistic capacity estimate for units on these sites. Thirty-five dwelling units per acre is 53.8 percent of the maximum density allowed on the site.

In addition to the adjustment factor, 7 existing units in the Great Park Corridor with a designation of MU-GP (as
previously discussed under "Site-Specific Information") have been removed from the realistic capacity to ensure estimates focus on growth rather than replacement.
- Infrastructure Availability. Adjustments made to affordability level estimates rather than capacity
As previously discussed, infrastructure availability will enable development of the western Ontario Ranch to occur in a
pattern similar to that of the eastern Ranch. Infrastructure is expected to expand south to north as development occurs. Part of the funding for expansion of the infrastructure system will come from investments by market-rate developers. With the current strong demand for residential uses, it is not anticipated that the availability of infrastructure will limit the number of units that can and will be built on each site, only the timing for when those sites will be able to develop and the potential affordability levels. To account for this, and in recognition of the need to offset costs for infrastructure expansion, the percent of the realistic capacity estimated as suitable for lowerincome units decreases for sites farther away from Merrill Avenue, where the initial trunk line is anticipated to complete construction in 2022. The areas farthest from Merrill Avenue anticipate the lowest percentage of affordable units, with the balance expected to be above-moderate incomemoderateincome. It is expected that above-moderate housing will help to offset the costs associated with infrastructure expansion. 2030
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-316 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
The realistic capacity is therefore divided by affordability level as follows:
o Great Park Corridor – Infrastructure in 1-3 years. Lower incomeLower-income (50 percent), Moderate
incomeModerate-income (25 percent), Above moderate
incomeAbove moderate-income (25 percent)
The results of this distribution are recorded in Table 5-14. - Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
As discussed under Strategy Six "Environmental Constraints," there is unconfirmed liquefaction potential on 19 MU-GP parcels (137.7 acres) in the Great Park Corridor. However, geotechnical studies for recent projects within the zone have not identified any specific risks, and additional mitigation has not been required, soils and groundwater levels are assumed to be similar throughout of the zone, so adjustment was not considered necessary.

Total Capacity Adjustments: (.95)x(.737)x(.538)x(1)x(1)=37.7percent Twenty-nine parcels (219.5 acres) are proposed to be classified as Mixed-Use Great Park (currently called the NMC West Mixed-Use Area). Areas with this land use classification accommodate a vertical and horizontal mixture of commercial, office,
entertainment, and residential uses, all connecting to the Great Park in a pedestrian-oriented atmosphere. These mixed-use areas are envisioned as low-rise (3-5 stories) with some mid-rise (5-10 stories) near the intersection of Euclid and Edison/Ontario Ranch Road. The land use category allows densities up to 65 dwelling units per acre, which is sufficient to facilitate the development of lower- and moderate-income housing. To account for nonresidential development, 70 percent of the land area on each site is estimated to have residential potential. Seventy percent is estimated because similar large mixed-use areas on the eastern side of the Channel have developed as primarily residential, and several developers have approached the City with plans to reduce the size of commercial areas in existing specific plans east of the Channel. A realistic density of 35 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the total housing capacity on each site.
• SP-AG-AH / MU-GR (Grove Corridor)
Description:
- Number and size of sites: 4 parcels, 36 acres
2031
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-317
- Allowable density: 20-65 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (25
percent), Above-Moderate incomeModerate-income (75
percent)
- Existing Use: Agriculture
- Infrastructure availability: Planned, RHNA affordability distribution accounts for phasing of infrastructure
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. 95 PercentAdjustment Portions of parcels that were not deemed appropriate for residential development (due to presence of a utility easement, designation as a future park, or other factor that would preclude residential development) are not included in the acreage estimates within the land inventory. As such, the factor applied here represents the portion of each site that will be dedicated internal circulation, sidewalks, and other public areas. Five percent of the land area has been reserved to account for these uses. The total adjustment factor applied is 95 percent.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. 68.4 Percent Adjustment This mixed-use designation (currently called MU-NMC West, but a name change is proposed) allows for 100 percent
residential uses, mixed use projects, and 100 percent nonresidential uses. This is land use is envisioned as the southwestern activity center for citizens of Ontario with bot vertical and horizontal mixed-use development that connects to the Great Park. To determine the amount of mixed-use land area that is expected to develop for residential uses, the City looked at trends in the eastern Ontario Ranch, where
developers have consistently approached the City to reduce the commercial footprint within the adopted specific plan. The City also examined the mix of uses built or otherwise in the pipeline in the area designated as Mixed-Use NMC East in the Policy Plan, which was envisioned for a similar use as the MUGP designation. In the Mixed-Use NMC East areas the mix of uses is approximately 75 percent residential. Because the City would like to encourage a greater mix of uses on these sites to serve as a neighborhood center for central Ontario Ranch, a smaller percent of the area, approximately 68.4 percent of the 2032
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-318 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
area is expected to develop for residential purposes, while the balance is reserved for non-residential uses. The total adjustment factor applied is 68.4 percent.
- Typical Densities. 53.8 Percent Adjustment
This mixed-use designation allows residential densities between 20 and 65 dwelling units per acre. A realistic density at the lower end of the allowed range, 35 dwelling units per acre, was deemed realistic to determine the total capacity on these sites. This was based on projects developed in other areas of the city with a similar characteristic to the City's vision for affordable housing in this area, including the 1001 E. Holt Blvd., a mixed-use multi-family project (35 dwelling units per acre), and based on affordable projects outside of the City, like the Adams Avenue Affordable Housing Community in
Murrieta, CA, will complete adoption hearings in 2022 and is proposed at a density of 32 dwelling units per acre over a 6.22 acre site. Accordingly, 35 dwelling units per acre will provide a realistic capacity estimate for units on these sites. Thirty-five dwelling units per acre is 53.8 percent of the maximum density allowed on the site.

In addition to the adjustment factor, 3 existing units in the Grove Corridor with a designation of MU-GR (as previously discussed under "Site-Specific Information") have been
removed from the realistic capacity to ensure estimates focus on growth rather than replacement.
- Infrastructure Availability. Adjustments made to affordability level estimates rather than capacity
As previously discussed, infrastructure availability will enable development of the western Ontario Ranch to occur in a
pattern similar to that of the eastern Ranch. Infrastructure is expected to expand south to north as development occurs. Part of the funding for expansion of the infrastructure system will come from investments by market-rate developers. With the current strong demand for residential uses, it is not anticipated that the availability of infrastructure will limit the number of units that can and will be built on each site, only the timing for when those sites will be able to develop and the potential affordability levels. To account for this, and in recognition of the need to offset costs for infrastructure expansion, the percent of the realistic capacity estimated as suitable for lowerincome units decreases as you move north from Merrill Avenue, where the initial trunk line is anticipated to complete construction in 2022. The areas farthest from Merrill Avenue 2033
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-319
anticipate the lowest percentage of affordable units, with the balance expected to be above-moderate incomemoderateincome. It is expected that above-moderate housing will help to offset the costs associated with infrastructure expansion.

The realistic capacity is divided by affordability level as follows:
o Grove Corridor (north of Schaefer Avenue)- Infrastructure in 4- 6 years. Lower incomeLower-income (25 percent), Above
moderate incomeAbove moderate-income (75 percent)
The results of this distribution are recorded in Table 5-14. - Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraints.

Total Capacity Adjustments: (.95)x(.68.4)x(.538)x(1)x(1)=35.0percent • SP-AG-AH / MU-ER (Euclid Corridor)
Description:
- Number and size of sites: 1 parcel, 15.0 acres
- Allowable density: 25-75 dwelling units per acre
- RHNA affordability: Lower incomeLower-income (25
percent), Above-Moderate incomeModerate-income (75
percent)
- Existing Use: Agriculture
- Infrastructure availability: Planned, RHNA affordability distribution accounts for phasing of infrastructure
- Environmental constraints: None known
Capacity Factors:
- Land Use Controls and Site Improvements. 95 PercentAdjustment Portions of parcels that were not deemed appropriate for residential development (due to presence of a utility easement, designation as a future park, or other factor that would preclude residential development) are not included in the acreage estimates within the land inventory. As such, the factor applied here represents the portion of each site that will be dedicated internal circulation, sidewalks, and other public areas. Five percent of the land area has been reserved to 2034
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-320 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
account for these uses. The total adjustment factor applied is 95 percent.
- Realistic Residential Capacity. 78.9 Percent Adjustment This mixed-use designation (currently called MU-NMC West, but a name change is proposed) allows for 100 percent
residential uses, mixed use projects, and 100 percent nonresidential uses. This is land use is envisioned as the southwestern activity center for citizens of Ontario with bot vertical and horizontal mixed-use development that connects to the Great Park. To determine the amount of mixed-use land area that is expected to develop for residential uses, the City looked at trends in the eastern Ontario Ranch, where
developers have consistently approached the City to reduce the commercial footprint within the adopted specific plan. The City also examined the mix of uses built or otherwise in the pipeline in the area designated as Mixed-Use NMC East in the Policy Plan, which was envisioned for a similar use as the MUGP designation. In the Mixed-Use NMC East areas the mix of uses is approximately 75 percent residential. Because the location of this site is directly across the street from a successful neighborhood shopping center, it is expected that a smaller amount of retail and other nonresidential uses will be viable, while residential uses will remain in high demand.

Consistent with these trends, approximately 78.9 percent of the area is expected to develop for residential purposes, while the balance is reserved for non-residential uses. The total adjustment factor applied is 78.9 percent.
- Typical Densities. 46.7 Percent Adjustment
This mixed-use designation allows residential densities between 20 and 75 dwelling units per acre. A realistic density at the lower end of the allowed range, 35 dwelling units per acre, was deemed realistic to determine the total capacity on these sites. This was based on projects developed in other areas of the city with a similar characteristic to the City's vision for affordable housing in this area, including the 1001 E. Holt Blvd., a mixed-use multi-family project (35 dwelling units per acre), and based on affordable projects outside of the City, like the Adams Avenue Affordable Housing Community in
Murrieta, CA, which will complete adoption hearings in 2022 and is proposed at a density of 32 dwelling units per acre over a 6.22 acre site. Accordingly, 35 dwelling units per acre will provide a realistic capacity estimate for units on these sites.

Thirty-five dwelling units per acre is 53.8 percent of the maximum density allowed on the site.
2035
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-321
- Infrastructure Availability. Adjustments made to affordability level estimates rather than capacity
As previously discussed, infrastructure availability will enable development of the western Ontario Ranch to occur in a
pattern similar to that of the eastern Ranch. Infrastructure is expected to expand south to north as development occurs. Part of the funding for expansion of the infrastructure system will come from investments by market-rate developers. With the current strong demand for residential uses, it is not anticipated that the availability of infrastructure will limit the number of units that can and will be built on each site, only the timing for when those sites will be able to develop and the potential affordability levels. To account for this, and in recognition of the need to offset costs for infrastructure expansion, the percent of the realistic capacity estimated as suitable for lowerincome units decreases as you move north from Merrill Avenue, where the initial trunk line is anticipated to complete construction in 2022. The areas farthest from Merrill Avenue anticipate the lowest percentage of affordable units, with the balance expected to be above-moderate incomemoderateincome. It is expected that above-moderate housing will help to offset the costs associated with infrastructure expansion.

The realistic capacity is divided by affordability level as follows:
o Euclid Corridor (north of sites adjacent to Schaefer Avenue)- Infrastructure in 4-6 years. Lower incomeLower-income (25 percent), Above moderate incomeAbove moderateincome (75 percent) The results of this distribution are recorded in Table 5-14. - Environmental Constraints. No Adjustment
No known site constraints.

Total Capacity Adjustments: (.95)x(.789)x(.467)x(1)x(1)=35.0percent Using the metrics described above, the Great Park Corridor Opportunity Area has a total capacity of 13,080 new units, 6,509 of which have the capacity to accommodate lower-income housing, 3,286 are presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to moderate-income households, and 3,286 are presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to above moderate-income households.

UNITS BY RHNA INCOME CATEGORY
As discussed in previous section, infrastructure availability will enable development of the western Ontario Ranch to occur in a pattern similar 2036
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-322 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
to that of the eastern Ranch. Infrastructure is expected to expand south to the north as development occurs. Part of the funding for expansion of the infrastructure system will come from investments by market-rate developers. With the current strong demand for residential uses, it is not anticipated that the availability of infrastructure will limit the number of units that can and will be built on each site, only the timing for when those sites will be able to develop and the affordability of resulting units. To account for this, and in recognition of the need to offset costs for infrastructure expansion, the percent of the realistic capacity estimated as suitable for lower-income units decreases on sites farther away from Merrill Avenue, the southern-most street in the western Ontario Ranch, where the initial trunk line is anticipated to complete construction in 2022.

The areas farthest from Merrill Avenue anticipate the lowest percentage of affordable units, with the balance expected to be above-moderate incomemoderate-income. It is expected that above-moderate housing will help to offset the costs associated with infrastructure expansion. The realistic capacity is divided by affordability level as follows:
• Great Park Corridor
- South of SCE easement (Infrastructure in 1-3 years)
Lower incomeLower-income (50 percent), Moderate
incomeModerate-income (25 percent), Above moderate
incomeAbove moderate-income (25 percent)
- North of SCE easement (Infrastructure in 3-5 years)
Lower incomeLower-income (40 percent), Above moderate
incomeAbove moderate-income (60 percent)
• Grove Corridor
- South of Schaefer Avenue (Infrastructure in 3-5 years) Lower incomeLower-income (40 percent), Above moderate
incomeAbove moderate-income (60 percent)
- North of Schaefer Avenue (Infrastructure in 4-6 years) Lower incomeLower-income (25 percent), Above moderate
incomeAbove moderate-income (75 percent)
• Euclid Corridor
- South of Schaefer Avenue (Infrastructure in 3-5 years) Lower incomeLower-income (40 percent), Above moderate
incomeAbove moderate-income (60 percent)
- North of Schaefer Avenue (Infrastructure in 4-6 years) Lower incomeLower-income (25 percent), Above moderate
incomeAbove moderate-income (75 percent)
2037
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-323
• Vineyard Corridor/Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan
- Whole Area (Infrastructure in 4-6 years)
Lower incomeLower-income (25 percent), Above moderate
incomeAbove moderate-income (75 percent)
Table 5-14
Strategy 6: Units by Income Category
Zoning/Policy Plan
(after rezoning)
Number of
Parcels Acres*
Units by RHNA Income Category Final Realistic
Capacity
(units*)
Lower
(units*)
Moderate
(units*)
Above Moderate
(units*)
Opportunity Area: Great Park Corridor
South of SCE Easement
SP-AG-AH / MDR 42 299.4 3,257 1,604 1,707 6,568
South of SCE Easement 41 291.6 3,190 1,604 1,604 6,397
North of SCE Easement 1 7.8 68 - 103 171
SP-AG-AH / MU-EU1 8 81.7 570 286 286 1,142
SP-AG-AH / MU-GP1 29 219.5 2,681 1,344 1,344 5,370
Opportunity Area: Grove Corridor
SP-AG-AH / MDR 22 150.8 1,003 - 2,312 3,315
South of Schaefer Ave 8 53.2 468 - 702 1,169
North of Schaefer Ave 14 97.7 535 - 1,610 2,145
SP-AG-AH / MU-GR 4 36.0 202 - 614 815
Opportunity Area: Euclid Corridor
SP-AG-AH / MDR 23 117.2 633 - 1,934 2,567
Adj. to Schaefer Ave 8 53.2 169 - 513 1,169
North of sites adj. to Schaefer
A
14 97.7 464 - 1,421 2,145
SP-AG-AH / MU-ER 1 15.0 98 - 295 393
Opportunity Area: Vineyard Corridor / Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan SP-AG-AH / MDR 7 64.3 354 - 1,062 1,416
TOTAL 136 983.9 8,798 3,234 9,553 21,586
Source: City of Ontario, 2022.
*Acres and units have been rounded.

Notes:
1 All MU-EU and MU-GP parcels are south of the SCE easements. 2 All MU-GR parcels are north of Schaefer Avenue.
3 All MU-ER parcels are north of sites adjacent to Schaefer Avenue.

To account for the need to extend infrastructure and to address the nine larger parcels, only 50 percent of the realistic development capacity in this area is estimated to be affordable to lower-income households. The balance of the capacity is split between moderate-income housing and above moderate-income housing. It is assumed that the above moderate2038 City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-324 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
income housing will help create integrated mixed-income communities and combine with non-residential uses to help finance any necessary subdivision and expansion of infrastructure.

To account for the need to extend infrastructure and to address the greater distance from the planned trunk line and other facilities, the percentage of units estimated to be affordable to lower-income households is reduced based on distance from Merrill Avenue and the estimated timing within the planning period when infrastructure is expected to be available. The corridor is divided into two sections.

South of Schaefer Avenue. In this area, OMUC estimated that utilities could be available in three to five years, depending on the rate of development. In recognition of the reduced time during the planning period when development is expected to be feasible, only 40 percent of the realistic development capacity is estimated as affordable to lower incomes.

North of Schaefer Avenue. In this area, OMUC estimated that utilities could be available in four to six years, depending on the rate of development. In recognition of the reduced time during the planning period when development will be feasible, only 25 percent of the realistic development capacity is estimated as affordable to lower incomes.

Throughout the Opportunity Area, the housing capacity that is not counted toward the City’s lower-income RHNA is estimated to facilitate the development of above moderate-income housing. It is assumed that the above moderate-income housing will not only help to create integrated mixed-income communities but will also help to finance the expansion of infrastructure.

As previously discussed, all sites in this area are currently zoned SP-AG, and they will be rezoned to SP-AG-AH for inclusion in the Affordable Housing Overlay District (Program 13). The Agriculture Overlay District will remain in place until the parcel is ready for development consistent with the Policy Plan and Affordable Housing Overlay District. Property owners and developers alike have expressed interest in redeveloping this area, so existing agricultural operations are not expected to limit development potential.

In addition, Policy Plan land use categories are used to establish each site’s capacity and affordability potential.

There are20-21 parcels (150.8 acres) currently or proposed to be classified as MDR in the Policy Plan. The definition for MDR will be amended to allow up to 30 dwelling units per acre if at least 25 percent of units are affordable to lower incomes, consistent with the Affordable Housing 2039
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-325
Overlay District. Projects that do not have housing affordable to lower incomes and projects that include less than 25 percent of affordable units will be subject to a maximum density of 25 units per acre. To account for the development of circulation, sidewalks, and other site requirements, the realistic density of 22 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the maximum capacity on all MDR sites.

Four parcels (36 acres) are proposed to be classified as Mixed-Use Grove in the Policy Plan. This activity center is envisioned as a low-rise (three to five stories) mixture of retail and residential uses that will create identity and place along the corridor and serve the surrounding residents. The land use category allows densities up to 65 dwelling units per acre, which is sufficient to facilitate the development of lower- and moderate-income housing. To account for non-residential development, only 65 percent of the land area on each site is estimated to have residential potential. A realistic density of 35 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the total housing capacity on each site.

Using the metrics described previously, the Grove Corridor Opportunity Area has a total capacity of 4,130 new units, 1,152 of which have the capacity to accommodate lower-income housing, and 2,978 units are presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to above moderateincome households.

The Euclid Corridor was identified as suitable for development during the 2021-2029 planning period because one of the planned sewer lines will travel along Euclid Avenue. As service is expanded from the south, the properties identified will have prime access to expanded infrastructure.

To account for the need to extend infrastructure and to address the distance from the planned trunk line and other facilities, the percentage of units estimated to be affordable to lower-income households is reduced based on distance from Merrill Avenue, and the time in the planning period when infrastructure is expected to be available. The corridor is divided into two sections.

Adjacent to Schaefer Avenue.In recognition of the reduced time during the planning period when development will be feasible, 40 percent of the realistic development capacity is estimated as affordable to lower incomes.

North to Riverside Drive. For the remaining sites in the Opportunity Area, a more conservative estimate of four to six years, depending on the rate of development, is assumed. In recognition of the reduced time during the planning period when development will be feasible, only 25 percent of the realistic development capacity is estimated as affordable to lower incomes. 2040
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-326 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Throughout the Opportunity Area, the housing capacity that is not counted toward the City’s lower-income RHNA is estimated to facilitate the development of above moderate-income housing. It is assumed that the above moderate-income housing will not only help to create integrated mixed-income communities but will also help to finance the expansion of infrastructure.

As previously discussed, all sites in this area are currently zoned SP-AG, and they will be rezoned to SP-AG-AH for inclusion in the Affordable Housing Overlay District (Program 13). The Agriculture Overlay District will remain in place until the parcel is ready for development consistent with the Policy Plan and Affordable Housing Overlay District. Property owners and developers alike have expressed interest in redeveloping this area, so existing agricultural operations are not expected to limit development potential.

In addition, Policy Plan land use categories are used to establish each site’s capacity and affordability potential.

There are 21 parcels (117.2 acres) currently or proposed to be classified as MDR in the Policy Plan. The definition for MDR will be amended to allow up to 30 dwelling units per acre if at least 25 percent of units are affordable to lower incomes, consistent with the Affordable Housing Overlay District. Projects that do not have housing affordable to lower incomes and projects that include less than 25 percent of affordable units will be subject to a maximum density of 25 units per acre. To account for the development of circulation, sidewalks, and other site requirements, the realistic density of 22 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the maximum capacity on all MDR sites.

One parcel (15 acres) is proposed to be classified as Mixed-Use Neighborhood Activity Hub (MU-NH) in the Policy Plan. This activity center is envisioned as a low-rise (three to five stories) mixture of retail and residential uses that will create identity and place along the corridor and serve the surrounding residents. The land use category allows densities up to 75 dwelling units per acre, which is sufficient to facilitate the development of lower- and moderate-income housing. To account for non-residential development, 75 percent of the land area on the site is estimated to have residential potential. Seventy-five percent is estimated because recent projects in mixed-use areas on the eastern side of the Channel have developed as primarily residential, and several developers have approached the City with plans to reduce the size of commercial areas in existing specific plans east of the Channel. In addition, a realistic density of 35 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the total housing capacity on the site.
2041
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-327
Using the metrics described, the Euclid Corridor Opportunity Area has a total capacity of 2,960 new units, 731 of which have the capacity to accommodate housing affordable to lower-income households, and 2,229 units are presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to above moderate-income households.

In addition, Policy Plan land use categories are used to establish each site’s capacity and affordability potential.

The sites are proposed to be re-classified as MDR in the Policy Plan. As previously noted, the definition for MDR will also be amended to allow up to 30 dwelling units per acre if at least 25 percent of units are affordable to lower incomes, consistent with the Affordable Housing Overlay District. Projects that do not have housing affordable to lower incomes and projects that include less than 25 percent of affordable units, will be subject to a maximum density of 25 units per acre. To account for the development of circulation, sidewalks, and other site requirements, the realistic density of 22 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the maximum capacity on all MDR sites.

The four sites (36.2 acres) on the eastern side of Vineyard Avenue are governed by the Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan. The City will update the Specific Plan as part of its rezoning program (Program 13) to allow at least 30 dwelling units per acre on the sites included in the Opportunity Area.

To account for the development of circulation, sidewalks, and other site requirements, the realistic density of 22 dwelling units per acre is used to establish the maximum capacity on these sites.

Using the metrics described, the Vineyard Corridor/Armstrong Ranch Opportunity Area has a total capacity of 1,416 new units, 354 of which have the capacity to accommodate lower-income housing, and 1,062 units are presumed to have capacity for housing affordable to above moderateincome households.

Strategy 7: Accessory Dwelling Units
Accessory dwellings are a part of the strategy for meeting the City’s share of its RHNA for housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households. Ontario has many single-family homes on lots that would allow space to build an ADU.

State law has been amended to facilitate and encourage the production of accessory dwellings. In 2016, AB 2299 and SB 1069 required cities to revise their zoning code to conform to the new ADU law. In 2019, SB 68, AB 881, and SB 13 further amended California Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22, and Health and Safety Code Section 17980.12 pertaining to local regulations for ADUs. In January 2020, the City Council enacted 2042
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-328 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Ordinance 3175 to incorporate recent changes to state law with respect to ADUs.

Ontario has seen an influx in ADU applications, increasing from just 30 units permitted in 2019 to 69 permits issued in 2020. Based on past and current trends, the City expects that 120 to 360 ADUs will be built during the Housing Element period of 2021-2029.

The affordability for ADUs built in Ontario is based on SCAG’s ADU survey and affordability assumptions for San Bernardino County.

Applying those affordability assumptions to Ontario and the range of production estimates, the City can expect the production of 69 to 207 lower-income ADUs over the Housing Element period. Table 5-3 15 includes the summary of ADU projection estimates by affordability level.

To encourage this level of production, the Housing Plan proposes a program to incentivize the production of ADUs (Program 27).

Table 5-315
Accessory Dwelling Unit Projections, 2021–2029
Household Income
Category
Percent of ADUs
Projected1
Range of ADU Estimates
Conservative Trend2 Maximum Trend3
Lower 57.5% 69 207
Moderate 34.8% 42 125
Above Moderate 7.7% 9 28
ADUS Projected (2021-2029) 120 360
Source: City of Ontario, 2021.

Notes:

1. The methodology for the affordability distribution of ADUs can be accessed online at:
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/adu_affordability_analysis_120120v2.pdf?1606868527

2. The conservative trend assumes 15 dwelling units will be built per year. This estimate is based on half of the reduced number of permits issued in 2019.

3. The maximum trend assumes 45 dwelling units will be built per year. This estimate is based on the average of the permits issued in 2019 and 2020.

Summary of Capacity to Accommodate RHNA Allocation
Table 5-4 16summarizes the City’s strategy to achieve its 2021-2029 RHNA. It is recognized, however, that these strategies are deemed conservative–the City expects that additional residential and mixed-use projects will occur within specific plan areas and on underutilized sites throughout the city. The City's RHNA strategy reflects the City's policy to support the creation of mixed-income communities by assuming a mix of lower- and moderate-income housing on identified sites in established neighborhoods and a mix of lower-, moderate-, and above moderateincome housing in areas where there is no existing residential component. 2043
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-329
The following provides a high-level summary of the City's RHNA strategies.
• Above moderate-income. In addition to the capacity identified in pipeline projects and the analysis of strategies, the City has entitled additional capacity for several thousand homes that have not been credited toward the RHNA. Areas with development potential that are not included in the inventory include entitled specific plans, the downtown mixed-use district, and mixed-use areas along the I-10 corridor. Several specific plans were also recently amended to allow more housing at higher densities, a trend the City expects to continue. There is sufficient capacity to accommodate the above moderate-income housing requirement of the RHNA.
• Moderate-income. Prior sections contained an analysis of the strategies that will be used to accommodate the moderate- and lower-income RHNA. Sites and densities were demonstrated to be sufficient to accommodate housing affordable to moderateincome households. • Lower-income. Prior sections contained an analysis of the strategies that will be used to accommodate the lower-income RHNA. Sites and densities were demonstrated to be sufficient to accommodate affordable housing. In addition, specific programs were shown for each strategy that would encourage and facilitate housing production and that would also remove any potential constraints to development.
2044
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-330 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 5-416
Availability of Land to Meet RHNA, 2021–2029
Site Area Lower
Income
Moderate
Income
Above
Moderate
Income
Total Final
Reaslistic
Capacity
2021–2029 RHNA 8,926 3,329 8,599 20,854
Project Credits - - (1,6502,111) (1,6502,111)
Remainder 8,926 3,239 6,949488 19,20418,73
4 Strategies
#1 Downtown 20 20 - 40
#2 West Holt 227 227 - 454
East Holt 250 249 - 499
#3 Old Cardenas Market 33 32 - 65
#4 Ontario Center Specific Plan 151 152 - 303
#5 Ontario Mills Specific Plan 1,564 782 782 3,128
#6
Great Park Corridor 6,509508 3,286235 3,286337 13,081080 Grove Corridor 1,152205 - 2,978926 4,1301
Euclid Corridor 731 - 2,229 2,960
Vineyard Corridor / Armstrong
Ranch Specific Plan 354 - 1,062 1,416
#7 Accessory Dwelling Units 69 42 9 120
Total Capacity 11,060112 4,790740 10,346345 26,196197
Surplus / Buffer 2,134186
(24%)
1,461 411
(424%)
3,397 857
(405%)
6,9927,454
(364%)
RHNA met RHNA met RHNA met RHNA met
Source: City of Ontario, 2021.

5.2 Administrative and Financial Resources
Funding Sources for Affordable Housing
The City’s local housing programs are supported through federal funding and state funding programs that assist first-time homebuyers, build affordable housing, and help special-needs groups, such as seniors and large households, as listed in Table 5-175. In most cases, other entities, including for-profit and nonprofit developers, apply for funds or other program benefits. For example, developers apply directly for Section 202 grants. In general, the City relies on the private sector to develop new affordable units.
2045
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-331
Table 5-175
Federal and State Housing Funding Programs
Program Name Description Eligible Activities
Federal Funding Programs
Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) Program
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) awards CDBG annually to entitlement jurisdictions and states for general activities, including housing and economic development activities. HUD also offers various other programs that can be used by the City and nonprofit and for-profit agencies for the preservation of low-income housing units, such as Section 202 and Section 108 loan guarantees.

The annual appropriation for CDBG is split between states and local jurisdictions called “entitlement communities.” Acquisition
Rehabilitation
Homebuyer Assistance
Economic Development Assistance
Homeless Assistance
Public Services
Infrastructure
Replacement
HOME Investment Partnerships
Program
The Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) was created under the Cranston Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act enacted in November 1990. HOME funds are awarded annually as formula grants to participating jurisdictions. HUD establishes Home Investment Trust Funds for each grantee, providing a line of credit that the jurisdiction may draw upon as needed. The program’s flexibility allows states and local governments to use HOME funds for grants, direct loans, loan guarantees, or other forms of credit enhancement or rental assistance or security deposits.

Acquisition
Rehabilitation
Homebuyer Assistance
Rental Assistance
Housing Choice Voucher (HCV)
Rental Assistance (Section 8) Provides rental assistance payments to owners of market-rate properties on behalf of very low-income tenants. Rental Assistance Section 811
Provides grants to nonprofit developers of supportive housing for disabled persons. The grants may be used to construct or rehabilitate group homes, independent living facilities, and intermediate care facilities. The grants may also have a rental assistance component.

Acquisition
Rehabilitation
New Construction
Rental Assistance
Section 203(k) Provides fixed-rate, low-interest loans to organizations wishing to acquire and rehabilitate property.

Land Acquisition
Rehabilitation
Refinancing of Existing Debt
Section 202 Grants to private nonprofit developers of supportive housing for very low-income seniors. New Construction 2046
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-332 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 5-175
Federal and State Housing Funding Programs
Program Name Description Eligible Activities
Low-Income Housing Tax Credits
(LIHTC)
In 1986, Congress created the federal LIHTC program to encourage private investment in the acquisition, rehabilitation, and construction of low-income rental housing. Because high housing costs in California make it difficult, even with federal credits, to produce affordable rental housing, the California legislature created a state low-income housing tax credit program to supplement the federal credit. The state credit is essentially identical to the federal credit, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee allocates both, and state credits are only available to projects receiving federal credits. Twenty percent of federal credits are reserved for rural areas and 10 percent for nonprofit sponsors. To compete for the credit, rental housing developments have to reserve units at affordable rents to households at or below 46 percent of area median income. The targeted units must be reserved for the target population for 55 years.

New Construction
Mortgage Credit Certificate Program Offers income tax credits to first-time homebuyers. The County distributes the credits. Homebuyer Assistance Supportive Housing Program (SHP) Offers grants to agencies who offer supportive housing and services to the homeless.

Transitional Housing
Housing for Disabled Persons
Supportive Housing
Support Services
Community Reinvestment Act
The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), enacted by Congress in 1977, is intended to encourage depository institutions to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate, including low- and moderateincome neighborhoods, consistent with safe and sound banking operations. The CRA requires that each insured depository institution’s record in helping meet the credit needs of its entire community be evaluated periodically.

That record is taken into account in considering an institution’s application for deposit facilities, including mergers and acquisitions.

New Construction
Rehabilitation
Acquisition
Support Services
Supportive Housing
Homebuyer Assistance
Emergency Solutions Grant Awards grants to nonprofits for the provision of shelter support services. Support Services Emergency Solutions Grant-CARES
(ESG-CV)
One-time funding for programs targeted to homeless or those at-risk for housing to prepare for, respond to, or prevent impacts of the coronavirus pandemic.

Support Services (Homeless Facilities
and Program)
Multifamily Housing Program (MHP) Provides loans for new construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of affordable rental housing. Payments on the loans are deferred for a specified period of time.

New Construction
Rehabilitation
Preservation
CalHOME Provides grants to local governments and nonprofit agencies for homebuyer assistance, rehabilitation, and new construction. The agency also finances acquisition, rehabilitation, and replacement of manufactured homes.

Homebuyer Assistance
Rehabilitation
New Construction
2047
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-333
Table 5-175
Federal and State Housing Funding Programs
Program Name Description Eligible Activities
California Self-Help Housing
Program Provides grants for the administration of mutual self-help housing projects.

Homebuyer Assistance
New Construction
Administrative Costs
Emergency Housing and Assistance
Program Provides grants to support emergency housing.

Shelters
Transitional Housing
Affordable Housing and Sustainable
Communities Program Provides funding to support infill development projects with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. New Construction Rehabilitation
Veterans Housing and Homeless
Prevention Program
Provides funding to buy, construct, rehabilitate or preserve affordable multifamily housing for veterans and their families.

Acquisition
Construction
Rehabilitation
Preservation
Senate Bill 2 – Building Jobs and
Homes Act
Provides planning grant funding to jurisdictions for plans and process improvements that will help to accelerate housing production.

Technical Assistance
Planning Document Updates
Local Early Action Planning (LEAP)
Grants
The (LEAP grants program provides over-the-counter grants complemented with technical assistance to local governments for the preparation and adoption of planning documents, and process improvements that:

Accelerate housing production.

Facilitate compliance to implement the sixth-cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment.

Housing element updates
Updates to zoning, plans or procedures to
increase/accelerate housing production
Pre-approved
architectural and
site plans
Establishing State-defined Pro-housing
policies
See complete list in LEAP program
materials
No Place Like Home Through a County application process, provides loans to acquire, develop, preserve, or rehabilitate permanent supportive housing facilities. Permanent Supportive Housing Infrastructure Infill Grant Provides gap financing for infrastructure improvements necessary to support the development of affordable infill housing. Infrastructure Improvements
2048
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-334 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 5-175
Federal and State Housing Funding Programs
Program Name Description Eligible Activities
Local Housing Trust Fund Program Provides matching grants to funds provided by Local Housing Trust Funds.

Site Acquisition
Site Development
Homebuyer Assistance
Transitional Housing
Emergency Shelter
Multifamily Housing
Transit-Oriented Development
Program Supports the development of affordable multifamily rental housing near transit stations through low-interest loans.

New Construction
Rehabilitation
Infrastructure Improvements
State Funding Programs
Affordable Housing Partnership
Program (AHPP) Provides lower interest rate CalHFA loans to homebuyers who receive local secondary financing. Homebuyer Assistance Self-Help Builder Assistance
Program
Provides lower interest rate CalHFA loans to owner-builders who participate in mutual self-help housing projects.

Also provides site acquisition, development financing, and construction financing for self-help projects.

Homebuyer Assistance
Site Acquisition
Site Development
Home Construction
California Housing Assistance
Program
Provides 3% silent second loans in conjunction with 97% CalHFA first loans to give eligible homebuyers 100% financing. Homebuyer Assistance
Extra-Credit Teacher Program Provides $7,500 silent second loan with forgivable interest in conjunction with lower-interest-rate CalHFA first loans to assist eligible teachers in buying homes. Homebuyer Assistance Housing Enabled by Local
Partnerships
Provides 3% interest rate loans, with repayment terms up to 10 years, to local government entities for locally determined affordable housing priorities. Wide Range of Eligible Activities Predevelopment Loan Program
The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) administers the program, which provides funds to pay the initial costs of developing affordable housing developments. Priority is given to applications with matching financing from local agencies or federal programs.

Pre-development
Multifamily Housing Program
HCD conducts the acquisition and rehabilitation component of the Multifamily Housing Program to acquire and rehabilitate existing affordable rental housing. Priority is given to projects currently subject to regulatory restrictions that may be terminated. Assistance is provided through low-interest construction and permanent loans. Eligible applicants include local government agencies, private nonprofit organizations, and for-profit organizations.

Rental Acquisition
Rental Rehabilitation
Transitional Housing Program for
Emancipated Foster/Probation
Youth (THP-Plus)
This program provides funds for housing and services for persons who need support services for transition-age youth.

Supportive Housing
Foster Care
2049
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-335
Table 5-175
Federal and State Housing Funding Programs
Program Name Description Eligible Activities
Special-Needs Housing Program Allows local governments to use Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funds to finance the development of permanent supportive rental housing.

New Construction
Supportive Housing
Home Mortgage Purchase Program CalHFA sells bonds to raise funds for providing below-market-rate loans to qualifying first-time homebuyers. Homebuyer Assistance 2050
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-336 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Housing Choice Vouchers
The federal government provides approximately $3 million to the Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino to administer the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program. These funds are used to maintain the affordability of publicly subsidized affordable housing projects in Ontario. This allocation includes funding for approximately 501 Housing Choice Vouchers, and the Family Self-Sufficiency Program.

Within Ontario, the approximate number of HCVs have been available:
496 in 2016, 422 in 2017, 527 in 2018, 676 in 2019, and 747 in 2020. As of July 2021, there are 773 vouchers in use for the City of Ontario. This includes 735 in traditional voucher programs and 38 in special voucher programs, such as the Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing. The waitlists, which are for the entire County of San Bernardino remain closed as of July 2021. In March 2021, there were 20,382 tenant-based households on the waitlist and 60,744 total households on the waitlist. (See Programs 23, 25, 27, and 31)
Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
The federal government provides funds for a range of housing and community development activities, including acquisition and disposition of real estate or property, public facilities and improvements, relocation, rehabilitation and construction of housing, homeownership assistance, and demolition activities. In addition, these funds can be used to acquire or subsidize at-risk units. The City of Ontario received approximately $1.8 million in funding in 2019–2020.
(See Programs 3, 4, 6, 9, 27, 31, and 33)
HOME Partnership
Ontario received approximately $666,000 in 2019–2020 in federal HOME funds. HOME funds can be used for activities that promote affordable rental housing and lower-income homeownership, including building acquisition, new construction, reconstruction, moderate or substantial rehabilitation, first-time homebuyer assistance, and tenant-based assistance, as well as the preservation of affordable housing. (See Programs 1, 3, 4, 24, 27, 32, and 33)
2051
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-337
Transformative Climate Communities
Ontario received funding through the Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) grant program from the State of California ($33.2 million) for a variety of project types, including housing. The TCC housing component included gap funding of approximately $14 million for the development of a 101-unit affordable housing project known as Vista Verde. The construction of the Vista Verde Apartments begun on June 17, 2019, and was completed in March 2021. Within the project area, 24 solar photovoltaic (PV) systems were installed on the single-family homes, providing approximately 31 kilowatts (kw) in renewable energy capacity. Of the 101 units, 11 will be rented to households making below 30 percent of the area median income (AMI), 37 units will be rented to households at 50 percent AMI, and 42 units will be rented out to households at 60 percent AMI. The affordable housing units will be made available through a lottery process. Applicants who already work and live in Ontario will be given preference.
(See Programs 8 and 10)
Permanent Local Housing Allocation
Ontario received funds that will be used for housing programs and homeless programs. The City is planning to use a portion of the Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) funds for first-time homebuyer programs in conjunction with reuse funds on hand from the CalHome and BEGIN programs formerly offered. Programs are currently in design development to determine income targeting and benefits. (See Program 24)
2052
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-338 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022

6. PROGRAM EVALUATION
The 2021–2029 Housing Element sets forth goals, policies, and programs to address the community’s housing needs. An important step in developing the City’s housing strategy is the evaluation of the prior Housing Element in meeting the community’s housing needs. This section evaluates progress in meeting the objectives of the 2013–2021 Housing Element.

6.1 2013–2021 Housing Element Goals
The 2013–2021 Housing Element defined four general goals to guide the allocation of financial, administrative, and land resources in Ontario.

These broad goals and quantified objectives are summarized here. • Goal 1: Encourage a diverse supply of housing types to accommodate a variety of incomes and lifestyles, support household and job growth, and facilitate mobility.
• Goal 2: Provide housing opportunities to meet the needs of residents, be affordable to all economic segments, and meet the City’s share of the region’s need for housing.
• Goal 3: Promote and encourage housing opportunity for all, regardless of age, race, sex, ethnicity, ancestry, national origin, marital status, physical condition, or family size.
• Goal 4: Promote and encourage the rehabilitation of deteriorated units and the conservation of the currently sound housing stock.

6.2 2013–2021 Special Housing Needs Summary of
Accomplishments
California Government Code Section 65588 requires that local governments review the effectiveness of the housing element goals, policies, and related actions to meet the community’s special housing needs. Special needs are those associated with specific demographic or occupational groups that call for specific program responses, such as preservation of single-room occupancy hotels or the development of units with larger bedroom counts. The statute specifically requires analysis of the special housing needs of people who are elderly or disabled (including developmental disabilities), female-headed households, large families, farmworkers, and people experiencing homelessness. These special-needs groups often spend a disproportionate amount of their income to secure safe and decent housing and are sometimes subject to discrimination based on their specific needs or circumstances. 2053
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-339
As shown in Table 6-1, Review of Previous Housing Element, the 2013 - 2021 Housing Element included several programs that addressed the community’s special housing needs. Some of the accomplishments are highlighted below:
• In partnership with the Housing Authority of San Bernardino County, the approximate number of Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) that were used by Ontario residents are: 496 in 2016, 422 in 2017, 527 in 2018, 676 in 2019, and 747 in 2020.
• In 2020, City staff worked with the National Foundation of Affordable housing to assist with the rehabilitation and preservation of the Ontario Townhouses project including an extension of the Project Based Vouchers (PBV) contract for an additional 20 years.
• From 2016-2020, the city’s Homeless Continuum of Care implemented programming for homeless residents through
Mercy House providing basic needs and services to 4,662 clients.

During Fiscal Year 2019-20, funding for the street outreach team was increased from 10 hours per month to 40 hours per week to better deliver services designed to house persons experiencing homelessness.
• The City has provided a range of supportive services for seniors.

Between 2013 and 2020, 182 seniors were assisted with fair housing issues, 1,008 seniors were assisted with landlord/tenant mediation, 1,964 seniors were assisted with supportive services, two seniors received housing rehab grants, nine seniors received tenant-based rental assistance, and 782 units of affordable housing units were restricted for seniors.
• The City worked with two different developers on affordable housing developments that were completed in Fiscal Year 2020-21 - Emporia Place (75 units) and Vista Verde (101 units). These two new developments provide family housing for extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households.
• From 2016-2020, the City, in conjunction with Mercy House Living Centers, implemented the HOME Tenant-Based Rental Assistance program to provide rental assistance for chronically homeless individuals and families through rental assistance subsidies, security deposits, and utility deposits.
2054
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-340 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete Neighborhoods and Housing

1. Code Enforcement
Code compliance is an important tool to ensure that
the value, character, and quality of neighborhoods,
property, and housing are well maintained. Listed
below are the programs implemented by the Code
Enforcement program specifically designed to improve
the quality of Ontario neighborhoods and eliminate
health and safety related to building conditions:
• General Code Enforcement: The City utilizes
an interdepartmental approach for inspecting
properties for compliance with state and local
regulations regarding the condition and
maintenance of residential buildings and
properties. If deficiencies are found, the
property owner is notified of the code
deficiency and compliance measures required,
and the property owner is granted a period of
time to correct the matter. To facilitate timely
compliance, City staff direct the property
owners to City–administered rehabilitation
loans and/or other nonprofit housing loan
programs, where available.
• Community Improvement Team: This team
has been specifically designed to proactively
implement an intensive code compliance
program to address serious code violations
within focus areas. As part of this team
approach, various City departments work
together to bring a myriad of resources to the
focus area to arrest neighborhood decline and
improve the living conditions within the area.
• Systematic Health and Safety Inspection
Program: The program is designed to ensure
the quality of the rental stock and reduce
substandard building conditions. Through this
program, all rental housing units over seven
Objectives: Continue code enforcement using
a progressive approach of voluntary
compliance, citations, and court action if
needed. Continue to apply for funding.

Responsible Agencies: Housing and
Neighborhood Improvement, Police, Fire,
Economic Development, Building, and
Planning Departments
Funding: CDBG, HOME, ORA, and CalHOME
funds
Timing: Ongoing, inspect properties annually
The Community Improvement Team completed the
following:

Inspections: 5,305 in 2016, 4,646 in 2017, 5,201 in 2018, 5,283 in 2019, and 3,878 in 2020
Cases closed: 2,076 in 2016, 2,166 in 2017, 1,925 in
2018, 2,145 in 2019, and 1,607 in 2020.

The Rental Inspection Program completed the following:

Inspections: 4,018 in 2016, 7,477 in 2017, 6,948 in 2018, 5,134 in 2019, and 1,372 in 2020.

Abated violations: 1,963 in 2016, 4,190 in 2017, 5,960 in 2018, 4,083 in 2019, and 317 in 2020.

The COVID-19 crisis severely hindered Community
Improvement Department activities in 2020.

Continue
2055
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-341
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete years old are inspected on a four-year
schedule unless it is necessary to inspect
more frequently due to substandard
conditions.
• Abandoned and Distressed Property Program
and Foreclosure Opportunities Response
Team (FORT) Program: These programs were
established to protect Ontario neighborhoods
from becoming blighted through the lack of
adequate maintenance and security of
abandoned and distressed properties.

2. Quiet Home
Residential neighborhoods located directly west of
Ontario International Airport experience high noise
levels. In the early 1990s, the Federal Aviation
Administration, City of Los Angeles, and City of
Ontario created a program to improve the quality of
life in noise-impacted neighborhoods and
community/airport compatibility. Eligible homes are
outfitted with sound insulation to reduce the interior
noise levels to 45db CNEL. The second component
consists of the voluntary acquisition of eligible
properties and reuse of properties in a manner
compatible with the airport.

Eligibility is restricted to properties located within the noise contour map. Currently, the Los Angeles World
Airport is updating the Part 150 Study, which may
impact the eligibility area. The study is anticipated to be completed within 2014–2015.

Objectives: Continue to implement program.

Responsible Agencies: Ontario Housing
Authority
Funding: Federal Aviation Administration, Los
Angeles World Airport
Timing: Ongoing
Since the program began in 1994, 1,599 units have been
insulated and 256 properties were acquired. The program has sold 30 parcels for future airport-compatible
development.

The program was terminated in September 2015 because
of updated noise exposure maps (NEM) eligibility noise
contour, which eliminated funding for the program.

Delete – program no longer
exists, and the noise contours
have been modified in such a
way that there is not a
qualifying area for the funding
from the Federal Aviation
Administration.

3. Historic Preservation
Known as the Original Model Colony, Ontario is rich in
local history. The City operates a comprehensive
historic preservation program. It is a certified local
government, a designation that signifies that the City’s program meets state and federal historic preservation
standards. The City has six historic districts and is
surveying nine additional areas for the potential of
Objectives: Continue to implement program.

Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
Funding: General Fund, state and federal
grants
Timing: Ongoing
As of 2020, 7 properties on the Ontario Register were
reviewed for historic significance, 4 were removed, and 3 received a Tier Determination. Of the 3 properties that received a Tier Determination, 2 received Local Landmark designation, and 1 received a Local Historic District
designation. Additionally, 1 Mills Act Contract
(preservation agreement) was approved, and 6 contracts
of the Annual Mills Act were completed. Staff continues to Continue
2056
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-342 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete historic district designation. It encourages historic
preservation efforts through Mills Act contracts,
surveys of potentially historic structures, and an
adaptive reuse program (for the Emporia District and
Downtown). The City also implements an awardwinning web-based historical resource management system that catalogs local historical resources and
eventually offers interface capacities for the public to search the database.
implement design review for historic properties and as of 2018, completed 237 projects for design review.

Staff participated in or coordinated the following
community outreach activities: Model Colony Awards
program, Historic Plaque program, Historic Preservation Month Photo Contest, development of an ESRI Storymap
geographically displaying photographs and information for local historical points of interest, Ontario
Showcase/Heritage Celebration, and the Ontario Festival of the Arts.

4. Housing Rehabilitation Loan and Grants
When funding is available, the City offers housing
rehabilitation loans and grants to qualified
homeowners. Due to the State elimination of
redevelopment funding and recent federal funding
cutbacks, the City of Ontario is not currently able to
provide owner-occupied rehabilitation programs.

Should funding become available, the City will reestablish this program and provide associated quantified objectives.

Objectives: Continue to implement program,
as funding is available.

Responsible Agencies: Housing Department
Funding: CDBG, HOME, CalHOME
Timing: Ongoing
The City of Ontario designed the Community Improvement
Code Abatement Loan Program. In 2019 and 2020, no
homes were rehabilitated through this program.

Under implementation of the CIT Homeowner Occupied
Rehabilitation Loan Program, no homes were rehabilitated from 2016 to 2020.

Under implementation of the CIT Emergency Grant
Program, the following number of homeowners received
assistance: 1 in 2016, 1 in 2017, and 0 from 2018-2020.

The City’s largest housing rehabilitation program, the
CARES Program, continues to remain on hold. Funding
for this program had been provided through the Ontario
Redevelopment Agency’s Low- and Moderate-Income
Housing Fund (LMIHF). To date, no replacement funding
has been identified and secured.

Using Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
funds, the City designed the Conservation Home
Improvement Program (CHIP Loan). The program was
launched in June 2020 to assist homeowners with exterior home improvements. As of July 2021, two loans were
approved, with construction in progress and another two homeowners were proceeding through the eligibility
process.

Modify to only include
Conservation Home
Improvement (CHIP) Loan
Program
2057
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-343
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete

5. CARES
The City of Ontario implements the comprehensive
CARES Neighborhood Revitalization Program within
selected focus neighborhoods. The components of
this comprehensive, multiagency program include
code enforcement, arterial street improvement, relief
program, exterior improvement program, and sidewalk
or safe routes to school program. The program seeks
to stabilize neighborhoods through a comprehensive
approach to building community. The program has
several components:
• Single-Family Improvement Loans. The City
offers two low-interest deferred loan programs
for homeowners (with a one- to five-year
deferment) to make exterior improvements to
their home.
• Neighborhood Improvements. The City
improves streets (e.g., resurfacing, replacing
curb and gutter, improving sidewalks and
drainage), plants trees and greenways, and
enforces codes.

Objectives: Continue program
implementation, as funding is available.

Responsible Agencies: Housing and
Neighborhood Revitalization Agency
Funding: CDBG, HOME, General Fund
Timing: Ongoing
As of July 2021, the program is on hold. This program was previously funded with LMIHF, HOME, and General
Funds. However, limited availability of funding during the 5th cycle planning period hindered the City’s ability to implement this program.

Continue and modify – City will
seek funding to continue this
program and restructure it as
needed.

6. Neighborhood Plans
Ontario’s neighborhoods define the sense of identity
and community for residents, the quality of life
experienced, and the image and role of Ontario. The
City currently implements many programs to improve
neighborhoods. However, the City has identified a
need to foster a stronger sense of neighborhood
identity in the community. While this goal is being
achieved in CDBG-eligible areas (CARES program)
and in historic areas, efforts need to be expanded to
other neighborhoods. During the planning period, the
City will begin a public outreach effort to solicit input from neighborhood leaders and residents as to
particular needs and goals. This process may result in
the establishment of ongoing dialog with the City,
Objectives: Designate focus neighborhoods,
outreach plan and process, and initiate survey
efforts. Evaluate the potential of creating
neighborhood improvement plans.

Responsible Agencies: Planning Department,
Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization
Agency
Funding: General Fund
Timing: Ongoing
The primary Neighborhood Planning programs
implemented from 2016 to 2020 include the HEAL Zone
and Transformative Climate Communities (TCC), Zoning
Consistency Program, and Active Transportation Program
(ATP).

Through the HEAL Zone and TCC programs, feedback
from community leaders helped inform decision makers on policy and capital improvements. In 2020, over 6,000
people were invited to a variety of virtual workshops from topics including urban forestry to affordable housing and solar installation. Over four stakeholder meetings were attended through zoom.

The Zoning Consistency program was completed in 2018.

A total of 552 properties were rezoned to either be
consistent with existing residential uses or be more
Continue and modify to include
that the City will continue to
work on a Multimodal
Transportation Center (MTC)
Needs Assessment and Siting
Criteria project. This
assessment will assist in
determining the optimum
location for an MTC on or near
the Ontario International
Airport connecting future
modes of transportation,
including light-rail
opportunities.
2058
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-344 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete neighborhood organizations, or the preparation of
neighborhood improvement plans.
compatible with adjacent residential development by
limiting uses. Members of a local community garden
helped to develop language for a new Urban Agriculture
section of the Development Code that went into effect
January 2016.

The City received funding for infrastructure improvements as part of the ATP Cycle 1, Cycle 2, and Cycle 3. The ATP Cycle 1 and Cycle 2 were completed with improvements to pedestrian safety and access around Euclid, Bon View,
Corona, Vineyard, and El Camino Elementary Schools. As
part of ATP Cycle 3, design and right-of-way (ROW)
acquisition was completed for the area around Sultana
Elementary and De Anza Middle School.

Additionally, the City acquired the Systemic Safety
Analysis Report Program (SAARP) Caltrans Grant to
examine how to incorporate improved pedestrian, biking, and transit opportunities along the Euclid Avenue corridor.

The City also received a GoHuman demonstration grant
through the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG) to provide an opportunity for public input to pedestrian and bicycle improvements being
considered in downtown.

As part of the Active Transportation Master Plan,
community outreach and most of the walk audits around
public schools was completed. The City continues to move forward on the Multimodal Transportation Center Needs
Assessment and Siting Criteria project that began in 2019 that will centralize multimodal options for residents and employees of and visitors to Ontario.

The City is also in the process of updating the City Parks Master Plan and initiated a city-wide parks survey in 2020.

As of July 2021, the City anticipates that the City Council will adopt the Master Plan soon.
2059
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-345
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete

7. Neighborhood Stabilization
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act of 2010 provided an additional $1 billion for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) that
was originally established under the Housing and
Economic Recovery Act of 2008. HUD awarded grants
to 270 states and selected local governments to
mitigate the negative impact of the nation’s economic
decline and housing market collapse and to stabilize
and revitalize communities/areas hit the hardest. The
City of Ontario was provided an allocation of $1,872,
853 in NSP3 funds. The City will utilize these funds (1) to acquire, rehabilitate, and resell single-family homes; (2) to acquire and rehabilitate multiple-family
properties; (3) to provide financial assistance; (4) to establish land banks; (5) to demolish blighted
structures; (6) to redevelop demolished or vacant
properties; and (7) for administration (capped at 10
percent).

Objectives: Designate focus neighborhoods,
outreach plan and process, and initiate survey
efforts. Evaluate the potential of creating
neighborhood improvement plans.

Responsible Agencies: Housing and
Neighborhood Revitalization Agency
Funding: Federal NSP3 funds
Timing: Ongoing
Federal NSP3 funds were exhausted in 2013 and all NSP
grant funding was closed out in 2018.

In 2019, the City Council approved the Neighborhood
Preservation Strategy Plan, which designated four focus neighborhoods: Downtown, Nocta, Mission-Mountain, and
Fourth-Grove.

Modify to switch from federal
NSP to implementing Ontario’s
2019 Neighborhood
Preservation Strategy Plan

8. Community-Oriented Policing
The City of Ontario Police Department uses CDBG
funds to implement a community-oriented policing
program in designated low- and moderate-income
neighborhoods. This partnership involves working with
community leaders, businesses, and property owners
to address neighborhood issues including code
enforcement, crime-free multi-family housing, safe and
clean streets, and school interventions. With respect
to housing, the Police Department implements the
Crime-Free Multifamily Housing Program to control
and eliminate crime in apartment buildings. Under this
program, the Police Department will provide training to apartment owners, conduct a property inspection to
identify and eliminate potential crime hazards, and
certify properties where the owner signs a written
agreement and commitment to maintain the program.

Objectives: Continue implementation of COPs
program; coordinate marketing efforts with the
new Quadrennial Inspection Program.

Responsible Agencies: Housing and
Neighborhood Revitalization Agency, Code
Enforcement, and Police Department
Funding: General Fund, CDBG
Timing: Ongoing
The Community Engagement Team takes a pro-active
approach by partnering with building and property owners to prevent, deter, and solve crimes. The Crime-Free
Housing and Trespassing program completed the
following activities:
• In 2016, Code Enforcement presented the
Systematic Rental Inspection Program at the
Multifamily Crime-Free Training for apartment
complex property owners and managers.
• In 2018, 80 apartment buildings and 8 businesses
were enrolled in the Crime-Free Housing and
Trespassing program. 280 individuals were served
with trespassing forms.
• In 2019, two Crime-Free Multi-Housing classes were
hosted by the Ontario Police Department. A total of
13 properties are enrolled in the Crime-Free MultiHousing Program. A total of 16 properties are enrolled in the Trespassing Enforcement Program
ContinueDelete
2060
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-346 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete and 527 individuals were served with forbidden
trespass forms.
• In 2020, no Crime-Free Multi-Housing classes were
hosted due to COVID-19. A total of 13 properties are
enrolled in the Crime-Free Multi-Housing Program. A
total of 16 properties are enrolled in the Trespassing
Enforcement Program and 427 individuals were
served with forbidden trespass forms.

Additionally, during inspections, on-site improvements are identified under the concept of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED). In 2019 and 2020, the
Community Engagement Team prepared 3
comprehensive CPTED reports for businesses in the city.

These reports outlined positive aspects of the businesses, challenges, and recommendations for improvement.

Housing Supply and Diversity

9. Downtown Plan
Ontario’s Downtown covers 12 blocks along Euclid
Boulevard. In 1983, the City adopted the Center City
Redevelopment Project area to encourage
development of a high-intensity, multiuse central
business district and surrounding neighborhoods that
maximize the productivity of commercial areas and
housing opportunities. The $200 million Town Center
Square project will provide a mix of housing,
educational, retail, office, and government uses that
will stimulate the renewal of Downtown. Although the
General Plan redesignates a majority of the area for
new housing and mixed uses, a comprehensive
planning process is necessary to ensure the sensitive
integration of new housing, commercial uses, open
space, pedestrian paths, and transportation into the
fabric of Downtown.

Objectives: Create a Downtown Plan to
facilitate new mixed-use and residential
development; continue to acquire property
and assemble sites to facilitate new housing.

Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
Funding: General Fund, Tax Increment
Timing: 2015
The objective of the downtown planning effort is to
facilitate new mixed-use and residential development and continue to acquire property and assemble sites to
facilitate new housing.

To facilitate new development and establish new
businesses within the downtown area, the HEART
(Historic Euclid Avenue Revitalization Team) Initiative was established in 2015. Through improved transit and
placemaking efforts that integrate arts and culture, the HEART Initiative is creating an environment that attracts new housing, improves existing housing, and encourages
a mix of uses and activities.

A strategic plan to diversify land uses and improve mobility and connectivity in the downtown area was approved in
2020.

In 2020, new affordable housing development was
completed, including a 100% affordable (low and very low income) 101-unit transit-oriented development (TOD)
project on Virginia/Holt and 100% affordable (low and very low income) 75-unit project on Vine/Holt. A 153-unit
Continue
2061
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-347
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete mixed-use development was in the entitlement phase at
the end of 2020. As of July 2021, the City was continuing to review and the project had not been approved by the
Planning Commission.

The Downtown Plan area is included in a $35 million
Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) Grant
awarded to the City to increase prosperity and improve
transportation and housing within a disadvantaged
community. The TCC program includes affordable
housing, active transportation improvements, mobility hub, urban greening, carbon farm, solar photovoltaic, and
transit improvements. This grant is a collaborative effort with public and community-based organizations. Projects in the Downtown include the planting of approximately 300 right-of-way trees and development of the Vista Verde
101-unit Affordable Housing project.

10. Mountain and Euclid Corridors
Euclid Avenue and Mountain Avenue extend the entire
length of Ontario. In recent years, developers have
expressed interest in building residential and
commercial projects along these corridors. Mountain
Avenue has had numerous senior and affordable
housing projects built adjacent or near to the corridor, and developers have begun to show interest in Euclid
Avenue. Both corridors have commercial property that
is proposed for redesignation as residential. To
facilitate corridor development, the City will
redesignate properties along Euclid Avenue and
Mountain Avenue for medium- and high-density
residential development as shown on the Official Land
Use Plan (LU-01). The City will also develop a lotconsolidation ordinance to incentivize the assemblage of parcels. Incentives may include fee modifications,
flexibility in design, expedited permit processing, or
others.

Objectives: Redesignate corridors for
medium- and high-density residential uses
and develop a lot consolidation ordinance to
facilitate the assemblage of lots into larger
parcels.

Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
Funding: General Fund
Timing: Summer 2014
All sites on the Housing Element Available Land Inventory along corridors Euclid Avenue and Mountain Avenue have
been rezoned to medium-density residential, high-density residential, or mixed-use designations, and are consistent with the General Plan.

The City continues to monitor the on-going status of
development in the Euclid Avenue and Mountain Avenue
corridors.

Modify to reflect that rezoning
was completed. Continue lot
consolidation ordinance. Add
that the City will continue to
monitor the ongoing status of
development in the Euclid
Avenue and Mountain Avenue
corridors.
2062
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-348 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete

11. Holt Boulevard
Holt Boulevard is one of the original corridors
paralleling the railroad and extending through Ontario
and neighboring communities. With the development
and success of commercial uses fronting the
freeways, the commercial viability of Holt Boulevard
has gradually eroded, leaving a significant number of
underutilized uses on small parcels. The General Plan
has declared Holt Boulevard as a focus area for mixed
uses, both perpendicular to Mountain Avenue, at the
base of Downtown, and in the East Holt Boulevard
Study Area. To stimulate investment in these areas,
the City will adopt a lot consolidation ordinance and
incentives to encourage the recycling of land to
residential uses. The City will also explore the use of density incentives to encourage mixed-use
development, offering higher densities for quality
projects of a certain size.

Objectives: Redesignate Holt Boulevard for
high-density residential and mixed uses, and
develop a lot consolidation ordinance to
facilitate the assemblage of lots into larger
parcels.

Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
Funding: General Fund
Timing: 2015
All sites on the Housing Element Available Land Inventory along the Holt Boulevard corridor have been rezoned to
accommodate higher densities.

The City continues to monitor the on-going status of
development in the Holt Boulevard area.

Modify to reflect that rezoning
was completed. Continue lot
consolidation ordinance. Add
that the City will continue to
monitor the ongoing status of
development in the Holt
Boulevard area.

12. New Model Colony
The New Model Colony covers 8,200 acres of the
former San Bernardino Agricultural Preserve. This
area is intended to provide a range of housing
opportunities for the city’s emerging regional and
national employment centers. Buildout of this area is
contingent on completion of infrastructure, approval of specific plans, and cancellation of Williamson Act
contracts. The City has entered into an agreement
with a consortium to fund $430 million in infrastructure serving the eastern New Model Colony. Many specific
plans for this area have been approved. Some of the
original Williamson Act contracts will also expire
during the planning period. The General Plan has
designated much of the area for medium- and highdensity residential and mixed use. Although development is not expected to occur during the
planning period, the City will continue to process
specific plan applications and work with developers to
Objectives: Continue to review, approve, and
implement plans to develop the New Model
Colony.

Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
Funding: General Fund
Timing: Ongoing
New Model Colony is now known as Ontario Ranch. City
staff continues to review and process applications for
development in Ontario Ranch. Within Ontario Ranch, the following number of permits for new single-family and
multifamily homes were issued: 482 in 2016, 762 in 2017, 1,063 in 2018, 1,398 in 2019, and 864 in 2020.

Completion of infrastructure, approval of specific plans, and cancellation of the Williamson Act contracts remain ongoing as of July 2021. The City continues to coordinate with developers on planned developments.

Continue and modify to update
name to Ontario Ranch.
2063
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-349
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete address outstanding issues, in particular the financing of infrastructure in the western New Model Colony.

13. Downtown Core Catalyst Project
The City of Ontario has embarked on a strategy for a
large-scale undertaking that would act as the catalyst
for the resurgence of Downtown Ontario. The City of
Ontario was awarded one of only 13 prestigious
Catalyst awards from the State of California in 2010
for efforts to revitalize downtowns through this
strategy. Upon completion of all of the activities
included in the Downtown Core Catalyst, 519 housing
units will be developed.

Objectives: Continue to implement the
programs identified in the Downtown Core
Catalyst Project as funding is available.

Responsible Agencies: Housing and
Neighborhood Revitalization Agency
Funding: State and federal
Timing: By 2018
The Catalyst program was completed in 2017. During the
Catalyst program, 375 of the anticipated 519 housing units were completed in the Downtown area and the City met all data collection and monitoring requirements of the
program. This program did not provide funding for
development or program implementation and with the loss of redevelopment funds, the remainder of the planned
development was unable to be completed during the
project term.

Delete

14. Design Review
The City implements a design review program to
ensure quality housing, maintain property values,
stabilize neighborhoods, and improve quality of life.

For standard projects, the City’s Residential Design
Guidelines provide objective standards and graphics
to illustrate the preferred methods of planning,
neighborhood design, and construction for
subdivisions, open space and landscaping, lots and
buildings, architecture, and other aspects. For certain infill projects in the Downtown or other focus areas of the community, the City may adopt a PUD ordinance
or Planned Residential Development Overlay to
provide for more flexibility in design. Specific plans
provide another means to address the design of largescale projects. The General Plan includes a Community Design Element that provides unifying and
broader principles of community design.

Objectives: Continue to implement design
review process.

Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
Funding: General Fund
Timing: Ongoing
City staff continues to implement a design review process.

The City is in the process of updating its The Ontario Plan, including the Policy Plan. The update includes Objective Design and Development Standards for single-family
residential, multifamily residential, and mixed-use
developments.

Continue and modify to refer to
Objective Design and
Development Standards that
are being developed with the
General Plan Update that is
currently in process as of July
2021. Update program name
to “Senate Bill 2
Implementation”
2064
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-350 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete

15. Green Building
Green building means creating structures and using
materials that are environmentally responsible and
resource efficient, considering a building’s entire life cycle. To reduce per capita energy use, the City will
promote conservation and renewable energy
generation techniques in public facilities and private
development. The City will require new construction to
reduce energy demand by incorporating building and
site design strategies. Conservation will be the priority strategy for renovation of existing facilities. The
General Plan also includes land planning strategies
that impact energy demand reduction, including
narrowing street widths, installing broad-canopied
trees for shade, and clustering compact development
to reduce automobile use.

Objectives:
• Promote green building practices in the
private sector and explore point-of-sale
energy retrofits for residences.
• Renewable energy incentive and energy
efficiency programs.
• Develop a citywide 20-year energy plan.
• Support pilot development project as a
net-zero-energy community and
formulate solar site orientation
guidelines.

Responsible Agencies:

Planning/Building/Public Works
Funding: General Fund
Timing: Ongoing
The City continues to encourage opportunities in the
private sector for point-of-sale retro-fits. The City is in the process of updating its General Plan, including the section on energy discussion. The City continued to trend towards the target of 30% greenhouse gas reduction below Year
2020 business as usual by Year 2020. The City is actively participating in the TCC Ontario Shines Program that has resulted in over 24 low-income solar installations.

Overall, City consumption of potable water has been
reduced by 21% through a combination of water use
reduction, transition to recycled water irrigation systems, and drought-tolerant landscaping.

The City is continuing to reduce emissions through
participation in GGRF Cal Fire Grant that provided
additional planting of 150 tress acting as a carbon sink and supporting reductions in the heat island effect.

Continue

16. Land Monitoring Program to Meet the RHNA
The City is in the process of updating the
Development Code for consistency with the Land Use
designations of The Ontario Plan. This program will
implement a land monitoring program to ensure that
the City has enough land to meet its Regional Housing
Needs Allocation, through out the planning period.

The City has identified 83 acres to be rezoned to allow development to occur at a density of 25–45 dwelling
units per acre. This program will ensure that the
proposed sites are rezoned to appropriate densities
and identify additional sites to be rezoned if any of the proposed sites cannot be rezoned.

All rezoned sites will permit owner-occupied and rental multi-family developments by right and will not require a conditional use permit, a planned unit development
permit, or any other discretionary review. All sites will accommodate a minimum of 20 units per acre and at
least 16 units per site, per state law requirements. In addition, the City will ensure that at least 50% of its Objectives: Ensure there is a sufficient supply
of multi-family zoned land to meet the housing
needs identified in the Regional Housing
Needs Allocation.

Responsible Agencies: Planning
Funding: General Fund
Timing: Within the first three years of the
planning period.

The Development Code was updated for consistency with
Land Use Designations in 2018 or 2019.

The rezoning required to meet the 5th cycle Regional
Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) was completed.

Between 2015 and 2018, 83 acres were rezoned to allow
25-45 units per acre to meet all of the lower-income RHNA shortfall requirements, based on the following:
• PZC15‐002, 1200 parcels:
- Planning Commission approval October 27,
2015
- City Council approval first reading November
17, 2015; second reading December 1, 2015
• PZC15‐003, parcels on Mountain Ave. between
Benson Ave. and San Antonio Ave. (known number):
- Planning Commission approval December 22,
2015
Continue and update, include
No-Net Loss and, if necessary,
another rezone program.
2065
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-351
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete lower- income RHNA shortfall is accommodated on
sites designated for exclusively residential uses.
- City Council approval first reading February 2,
2016; second reading February 16, 2016
• PZC16‐001, 881 parcels:
- Planning Commission approval March 22, 2016
- City Council approval first reading May 3, 2016;
second reading May17, 2016
• PZC16‐004, 525 parcels:
- Planning Commission approval January 24,
2017
- City Council approval first reading March 7,
2017; second reading March 21, 2017
• PZC17‐001, 800 parcels:
- Planning Commission approval January 23,
2018
o City Council approval first reading March
6, 2018; second reading March 20, 2018
City staff monitors entitlement applications to ensure that the Available Land Inventory is maintained and verifies that development of identified sites complies with the
minimum density indicated in the Available Land Inventory or identifies alternate sites to meet the City's RHNA
needs. Safeguards have been incorporated into the City's Discretionary Permit Application, which includes an
affidavit regarding compliance with the Available Land
Inventory.

Governmental Regulations/Constraints

17. Incentives
The City of Ontario offers several different types of
incentives to facilitate housing production, including:
• Financial Incentives: The City makes available
financial incentives that meet certain criteria. For
instance, impact fee reductions are allowed for
Objectives: Offer financial and regulatory
incentives for residential projects that meet
City housing and affordable housing goals.

Responsible Agencies: Housing and
Neighborhood Revitalization Agency
Funding: General Fund
The City continues to offer financial incentives for
affordable housing projects where feasible and as funding is available. Incentives were used at Vista Verde and
Emporia. Vista Verde Apartments were completed in 2021
and consist of 101 units of family housing for households with incomes ranging up to 60 percent of area median
income. The City assisted the development with over $23 Continue
2066
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-352 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete projects built in the Downtown. The City is
financially assisting a variety of nonprofit
organizations to provide senior housing, housing
for homeless people, and other services.

Density bonuses allowed for qualified projects
work as a financial incentive by increasing the
revenue stream of projects. The City also has
established its Community Housing
Development Organization (CHDO) program to
leverage the nonprofit sector resources with
available HOME CHDO funding. The intent of
the CHDO funding is to work with nonprofit
CHDOs to help preserve, enhance, and improve
existing neighborhoods through acquisition,
rehabilitation, and/or new housing construction
activities. Finally, the City continues to grant lowcost leases (e.g., $1 per year leases) to qualified organizations to provide senior housing and
homeless housing. These types of financial
incentives will be provided to allow the City to
meet its community development and housing
objectives.
• Regulatory Incentives: The regulatory
incentive program is intended to realize
improved value, a rich palette of amenities,
landmarks, and identifiable places. While the
underlying land use designations still apply, the
City may offer various incentives through a
discretionary permit. Special incentives may be
granted for mixed-use developments, residential
infill projects near transit facilities, the
replacement of underperforming commercial
uses with new residential use, the improvement
and/or intensification of existing, mid-block
residential uses, or lot consolidation and
development of desired projects. The menu of
incentives may include density transfers,
modifications in development standards,
increased residential density, and other
Timing: Ongoing and at least annual outreach
to developers of affordable housing, including
non-profit.
million in multifamily housing bonds and $14,729,325 from the TCC grant program. The project is located within CA Opportunity Zone. The City provided streamlined
permitting for solar systems. Emporia Place Phase I was completed in 2019 and consists of (75 units of family
housing for households with incomes ranging up to 60
percent of area median income). The City assisted the
development with $15,675,000 in a Housing Authority Gap Loan and $19,471,038 in Tax Credit Equity.

For other projects where developers declined incentives, they cited prevailing wage requirements as the reason.

Housing incentives have also been included in the
comprehensive Development Code update, which was
adopted in 2016.The City is planning to add an overlay to further increase allowable densities to offset concerns from the development community.
2067
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-353
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete incentives to be negotiated on a case-by-case
basis.

18. Land Acquisition
Land acquisition for residential development is
perhaps one of the greatest challenges to creating
affordable housing. Over the past five years, the City
of Ontario has seen increasing land prices. To
facilitate the development of affordable housing, the
City has actively purchased land and made it available
at a low cost (typically a $1 per year lease) to
affordable housing developers and nonprofit agencies
to create affordable senior housing, emergency
shelters, affordable attached ownership projects, and
other affordable housing projects. As situations merit
and projects are proposed that meet the City’s
housing goals and the public interest, the City of
Ontario will continue to acquire residential land that
can be leased or sold at below-market rates for the
production of affordable housing.

Objectives: Continue to approve financial
incentives for residential projects that meet
City housing and affordable housing goals.

Responsible Agencies: Ontario Housing
Authority
Funding: General Fund, NSP3, and other
funding as available
Timing: Ongoing
City staff continues to implement programs as funds
become available.

The City has acquired some sites for affordable housing development and then sold those properties to qualified affordable housing developers, including sites for Emporia Place Phase I, Emporia Place Phase II, and Vista Verde.

Emporia I: Land Sold: $3,375,000. Completed in 2019
• 75 Units:
- 8 extremely low income units (30% of AMI)
- 12 very low income units (40% of AMI)
- 30 very low income units (50% of AMI)
- 24 low income units (60% of AMI)
Emporia II: Working with Related to secure tax credits in upcoming application cycle (March 2022)
Vista Verde: Land Sold: $2,420,000. Completed in 2021
• 101 Units
- 21 extremely low income units (30% of AMI)
- 37 very low income units (50% of AMI)
- 42 low income units (60% of AMI)
Continue

19. Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Within an established suburban fabric, there are
considerable challenges to creating affordable
housing. As development standards and lot standards
change over time, it is not uncommon to have
irregularly shaped and nonconforming parcels that are
simply not conducive to redevelopment. The City has
adopted a Planned Unit Development Ordinance that
permits a variety of housing types in every residential zone. The City may conditionally permit attached and
detached single-family residences, town homes, patio
Objectives: Continue to utilize the PUD to
create tailored development standards to
facilitate new housing.

Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
Funding: General Fund
Timing: Ongoing, 2010
The PUD continues to be a viable tool to implement new
multifamily housing. Building permits for multifamily homes by year include 2 in 2014, 0 in 2015, 98 in 2016, 81 in 2017, 246 in 2018, 458 in 2019, and 188 in 2020, for a
total of 1,173.

Continue
2068
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-354 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete homes, zero lot line, and any other type of housing
product permitted by the regulations of the underlying
zone. The PUD is a tool that has been successfully
used for Town Square to encourage and facilitate
innovative design, variety, and flexibility in the types of housing products, including the provision of affordable housing, that would otherwise not be allowed or
possible through standards in the underlying zoning
districts.

20. Mixed-Use and High-Density Residential Zone
and Standards
The General Plan directs significant housing growth to
mixed-use areas. These areas include the Downtown,
Euclid Avenue, the I-10 Corridor, the New Model
Colony, and Holt Boulevard. These mixed-use areas
each have a distinct mix of land uses and density
ranges (see Policy Plan Land Use Exhibit LU-11, Land
Use Designation Summary Table). To facilitate the
development of quality housing and exemplary design,
the City will create mixed-use zoning and
development standards allowing up to 125 units per
acre and a high-density residential zone and
standards allowing 25 to 45 units per acre. The
parameters of the ordinance have yet to be designed;
however, the intent of the ordinance is to facilitate
high-density housing. In both these zones, highdensity residential and mixed use will be allowed by right.

Objectives: Develop new mixed-use and highdensity residential development zone and standards to implement the General Plan.

Allow residential uses by right in both zones.

Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
Funding: General Fund
Timing: 2014
New General Plan land use designations were adopted in
2010. The 2016 comprehensive update to the
Development Code implements the General Plan land use
designations and allows residential uses by right within the High-Density Residential and Mixed-Use zones. The City
continues its efforts in processing zone changes to bring alignment with the adopted General Plan. In 2020, no
additional parcels were rezoned to High-Density
Residential or Mixed-Use zones.

Continue and modify to refer to
Objective Design and
Development Standards that
are being developed with the
General Plan Update that is
currently in process, as of July
2021.
2069
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-355
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete Housing Assistance

21. Public Housing
The Housing Authority of the County of San
Bernardino administers the Housing Voucher rental
program for the City of Ontario. Funded by the US
Department of Housing and Urban Development, the
Housing Voucher program extends rental subsidies to
very low-income households by offering the tenant a
voucher that pays the difference between the current
fair market rent (FMR) established by the Housing
Authority and 30 percent of the tenant’s income. A
tenant has the option to choose housing that costs
more than the FMR, if the tenant pays the extra rent
above the payment standard. The Housing Authority
also implements the scattered site program, Family
Self-Sufficiency program, Section 8 project-based
assistance, and HUD-assisted multiple-family housing
units. This program serves up to 600 individuals and
families in the City of Ontario.

Objectives: Continue to assist up to 600
households under the public housing program
and seek additional vouchers as available.

Responsible Agencies: Housing Authority of
the County of San Bernardino
Funding: US Department of Housing and
Urban Development
Timing: Ongoing
Public housing programs in Ontario are administered
through the Housing Authority of the County of San
Bernardino (HACSB). Within Ontario, the approximate
number of Housing Choice Vouchers have been available:
496 in 2016, 422 in 2017, 527 in 2018, 676 in 2019, and 747 in 2020.

Continue, add mobility
objectives and commitment to
facilitating the movement of
voucher holders to areas of
high opportunity and
resources.

22. Homeownership
The City has a broad-based homeownership program
for residents. The City uses a combination of funds
(BEGIN, HOME, CalHome, and other available
funding) to provide down payment assistance to
homebuyers seeking to purchase homes in Ontario.

The City of Ontario also works in conjunction with
Neighborhood Partnership Housing Services (NPHS),
a nonprofit organization, and the Inland Fair Housing
and Mediation Board (IFHMB) to further the City’s
homeownership goals through homebuyer education,
counseling, and down payment assistance.

Objectives: Implement down payment
assistance programs citywide.

Responsible Agencies: Housing and
Neighborhood Revitalization
Funding: HCD, BEGIN, CalHOME
Timing: Ongoing
In 2016, the City secured $1 million in CalHome Mortgage Assistance Program funds to offer down payment
assistance to qualified low-income families, assisting a total of one household. The CalHome Mortgage
Assistance program ended in 2017. City staff continue
tracking the use of loan funds paid off in a reuse account for use on eligible projects.

The City is planning to use a portion of the Permanent
Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) funds for first-time
homebuyer programs in conjunction with reuse funds on
hand from the CalHome and BEGIN programs formerly
offered. Programs are currently in design development to determine income targeting and benefits.

Continue and modify
2070
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-356 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete

23. Preservation of At-Risk Housing
The City maintains more than 1,500 units of rental
housing affordable to seniors, families, and individuals earning lower incomes. The City is committed to
preserving its stock of affordable housing, some of
which is at risk of conversion and/or needs significant renovation and improvement. The City remains
committed to preserving its affordable housing and will monitor the status of the affordable housing projects,
provide technical assistance, and consider appropriate
actions should these projects be at imminent risk of
conversion.

Objectives: Monitor the status of at-risk
projects and, if they are at imminent risk of
conversion, provide technical assistance
and/or financial assistance to preserve the
properties as deemed feasible.

Responsible Agencies: Ontario Housing
Authority
Funding: Federal government
Timing: Ongoing
The 2013-2021 Housing Element reported the existence
of one development with affordable units that were at risk of converting to market rate within 10 years of the start of the planning period. That development, the Ontario
Townhouses project, a project-based Section 8 voucher
property, was preserved in 2020. City staff worked with the National Foundation for Affordable Housing to assist with the rehabilitation of the Ontario Townhouses project, a project-based Section 8 voucher property, including an
extension of the Project Based Vouchers (PBV) contract
for an additional 20 years. The project was completed
during early 2020.

As of September 2021, there are a total of 3,539 assisted, multifamily rental units in the city, of which, 460 units were “at-risk” of conversion to market rate. To address the
preservation of public housing for very low- and lowincome persons, the City maintains contact with owners of at-risk units as the use restriction expiration date
approaches to communicate with the owner the
importance of the units to the supply of affordable housing in Ontario, as well as its desire to preserve the units as affordable. The City will make every effort in using local incentives that can be offered to property owners to
preserve any at-risk units.

Continue

24. Jack Galvin Accord
The City of Ontario has more than 2,100 mobile
homes, which provide affordable market-rate housing
for lower-income families, seniors, and individuals. In 1990, the City Council adopted an ordinance to
regulate mobile home space rents but later repealed
that ordinance per state law. Subsequently, in working
with mobile home park owners and tenants, the City
drafted the Jack Galvin Mobile Home Park Accord,
which was accepted by park owners. The accord
places limits on the allowable increases based on the
Consumer Price Index; allows for additional
adjustments for changes utilities, taxes, and capital
improvements; provides a process for requesting rent
Objectives: Continue to implement the Jack
Galvin Accord and monitor the effectiveness
of the accord.

Responsible Agencies: Housing and
Neighborhood Revitalization
Funding: General Fund
Timing: Ongoing
City staff administered the Accord that covers 1,697
mobile home units in 10 mobile home parks throughout
Ontario. City staff distributed the annual rent adjustments allowed as part of the Accord and designed to limit rental increases within the participating mobile home parks. The Accord was approved for a 5-year extension on November
15, 2019, with an expiration date of January 5, 2025.

Continue
2071
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-357
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete reductions for service reductions; and allows for rent
adjustments for resale. The term of the agreement
was adopted in 1999, and per extensions continues in
effect today. The City will continue to implement and
enforce this ordinance.

Special-Needs Housing

25. Fair Housing
Ontario is committed to furthering fair housing
opportunities so that people in all walks of life have
the opportunity to find suitable housing in the
community. To that end, the City contracts with a fair
housing service provider to provide landlord/tenant
education, conduct testing of the rental and ownership
market, and investigate and mediate housing
complaints where needed. The City periodically
prepares the required federal planning reports,
including the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing
Choice (AI), to document the City’s progress in
improving and maintaining fair housing opportunities.

As part of the AI update, the City will review its
Municipal Code, local government regulations, and
other practices such as the definition of a family.

Recommendations will be made to eliminate potential
constraints and further fair housing in Ontario.

Objectives:
• Continue to contract with local fair
housing providers to provide
educational, outreach, advocacy, and
mediation services.
• Conduct AI concurrently with the
development of the Consolidated Plan,
and review and change potential
impediments, including the definition of
a family.
• Provide fair housing information at City
Hall, the Ontario Senior Center, and the
Ontario Housing Authority.

Responsible Agencies: Ontario Housing
Authority
Funding: CDBG
Timing: Ongoing
The City of Ontario has worked in conjunction with the
Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board to affirmatively further fair housing opportunities in this community. The Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board “actively
supports and promotes freedom of residence through
education, advocacy, and litigation to the end that all persons have the opportunity to secure the housing they desire and can afford, without regard to their race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, familial status, marital status, disability, ancestry, age, source of income or other characteristics protected by law.” The
definition of the family has been updated to one or more persons living together in a dwelling unit, with common access to, and common use of all living, kitchen, and
eating areas within the dwelling unit. In addition, the City has provided fair housing information at City Hall, the Ontario Senior Center, and the Ontario Housing Authority.

Continue and update to
comply with Assembly Bill 686.

Modify to remove reference to
definition of family.

26. Homeless Continuum of Care
The City implements a Homeless Services Continuum
of Care to prevent homelessness and assist people in
becoming self-sufficient. Working together with
homeless service providers, the City has developed a
full-service homeless continuum of care consisting of
a homeless outreach service center, transitional
housing, permanent housing, and supportive housing
services. The City funds other programs that assist
homeless people utilizing Emergency Solutions Grant
funds.

Objectives: Continue to fund Mercy House to
implement the Continuum of Care program for
homeless residents and other programs as
funding is available.

Responsible Agencies: Housing and
Neighborhood Revitalization
Funding: Federal funds and private financing
Timing: Ongoing
The City's Continuum of Care implements programming
for homeless residents.

The Mercy House Ontario Access Center has provided
basic needs and services to the following number of
(unduplicated) clients: 1,385 in 2016, 1,041 in 2017, 809 in 2018, 683 in 2019, and 744 in 2020.

The Assisi House and Aftercare Services Program has
provided transitional housing and aftercare services to the following number of (unduplicated) clients: 47 in 2016, 59 in 2017, 38 in 2018, 59 in 2019, and 50 in 2020.

Continue
2072
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-358 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete The City also actively participates in regional
homeless efforts, including the Interagency Council on
Homelessness, which is a countywide effort of
governmental and nonprofit organizations working to
end homelessness within the County of San
Bernardino.

HOME Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) has
provided tenant-based rental assistance to the following number of households: 15 in 2016, 17 in 2017, 23 in 2018, 25 in 2019, and 34 in 2020.

Through HUD’s Supportive Housing Program, Project
Gateway has helped secure permanent housing with
wrap-around services for chronically homeless individuals with disabilities and their families. The following number of households have been served: 13 in 2016, 12 in 2017, 12 in 2018, 12 in 2019, and 13 in 2020.

In cooperation with Ontario Housing Authority, Mercy
House, and Mercy House CHDO, a total of 76 permanent
housing units continue to be provided for priority
occupancy to participants in the CoC.

Ontario has created new programs to assist in the delivery of services designed to house persons experiencing
homelessness within the city.
• In Fiscal Year 2019-20, the funding for the street
outreach team was increased from 10 hours per
month to 40 hours per week.
• The Extreme Weather Motel Voucher Program
assisted 11 persons with a total of 58 bed nights in
2019, and 14 persons in 2020. The Program was
adapted to begin the COVID-19 motel voucher
program in March 2020, serving 57 households from
March 2020 to September 2020. The Emergency
Motel Voucher Program was implemented in
November 2020 to provide shelter to unhoused
individuals and families. During Fiscal Year 2020-21,
92 households were served by the Emergency Motel
Voucher Program. All individuals assisted are
provided with the opportunity for case management
focused on connecting the individuals to housing.
• The LMIHF Utility Assistance Program assists
persons experiencing homelessness with $0 income
to participate in the existing HOME TBRA program
operated as part of the CoC. This program was
2073
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-359
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete canceled in March 2020 in an effort to focus
resources on housing unsheltered persons during
the COVID-19 pandemic.
• The City partnered with a local school district to
identify homeless families and assist these families
with rental subsidies through the HOME TBRA
Program.
• The City facilitated monthly meetings with Ontario
focused homeless providers and governmental
agencies to coordinate services to transition
individuals/families from homelessness into a stable
housing program.
• The COVID-19 Rapid Re-Housing Program finds
housing solutions for persons at-risk of
homelessness during the pandemic. During 2020, 2
households received assistance.

27. Senior Housing
The City is actively working with nonprofit housing
groups to build senior housing projects in the
community. In addition to facilitating housing
construction, the City also provides a range of
supportive services for seniors. These include fair
housing services, housing rehabilitation grants,
preservation of subsidized senior housing, low-cost
transportation services, and a range of other services
tailored to meet the unique needs of Ontario’s senior
population.

Objectives: Continue to provide a full range of
housing support services.

Responsible Agencies: Housing and
Neighborhood Revitalization
Funding: State and federal funds
Timing: Ongoing
The City continues to monitor 762 units of affordable
senior housing. The City continued to work with non-profit housing groups to build senior housing projects in the
community. The City provided a range of supportive
services for seniors. Between 2013 and 2020, 182 seniors were assisted with fair housing issues, 1,008 seniors were assisted with landlord/tenant mediation, 1,964 seniors
were assisted with support services, 2 seniors received housing rehab grants, 9 seniors received tenant-based
rental assistance, and 782 units of affordable housing
were restricted for seniors.

Continue

28. Housing for People with Disabilities
The City enforces state and federal accessibility laws
to facilitate the improvement of housing for disabled
people. The City also prepares a Transition Plan to
comply with state and federal accessibility laws. The
City has adopted a reasonable accommodation
process and administratively allows modifications to
land use, building codes, and the permitting process
to facilitate the reasonable accommodations without
going through a standard variance process. However,
Objectives:
• Continue to assist with the development
of housing for persons with disabilities,
including those with developmental
disabilities.
• Update the definition of family to comply
with state law.

Responsible Agencies: Building and Planning
Department
The City enforces state and federal accessibility laws to facilitate the improvement of housing for persons with
disabilities and encourages reasonable accessibility
accommodations. The definition of the family has been
updated to one or more persons living together in a
dwelling unit, with common access to, and common use of all living, kitchen, and eating areas within the dwelling unit.

The City’s Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA)
Program has served 17 disabled households since
inception in 2014. For the next cycle, the definition of a Continue and modify to
remove reference to definition
of family. Add reference to
Inland Regional Center.
2074
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-360 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete given the large number of people with disabilities, the growing need for housing opportunities, and changing
legal context for housing planning, additional efforts
are needed. Many homes were built before the advent
of modern accessibility standards and thus many
homes remain inaccessible to people with disabilities
and persons with developmental disabilities. To
address this issue, the City will evaluate the feasibility and appropriateness of modifying building standards
to encourage visitability concepts in new housing.

Additionally, to ensure compliance with state law, the
City will update its definition of “family” to state “One or more persons living together in a dwelling unit, with common access to, and common use of all living,
kitchen, and eating areas within the dwelling unit.”
Funding: General Fund
Timing: Ongoing, update the definition of
family within one year of adoption of the
Housing Element.
family will be changed to one or more persons living
together in a dwelling unit, with common access to, and common use of all living, kitchen, and eating areas within the dwelling unit. This program will continue to assist with the development of housing for persons with disabilities, including those with developmental disabilities.

29. Family Housing
Ontario has a large number of family households,
specifically large families with five or more members.

The City has a multifaceted program for increasing
and maintaining the supply of family housing. The
Housing Authority of San Bernardino County allocates
housing choice vouchers to lower-income families in
Ontario, many of whom are large families. Another key
effort is the City’s program to acquire, rehabilitate, and preserve existing affordable housing units that
accommodate families and large families. Over the
past five years, the City and the Housing Authority
have preserved the vast majority of publicly
subsidized affordable units for families. Finally, the
City funds through its Community Development Block
Program programs such as child care, after-school
programs, food programs, and other services targeted
for lower-income households, including large families.

Objectives: Continue program
implementation.

Responsible Agencies: Housing and
Neighborhood Revitalization, Housing
Authority of the County of San Bernardino
Funding: General Fund, CDBG
Timing: Ongoing
The City continues to monitor 1,228 units of affordable family housing. In addition, Ontario worked with two
different developers to construct two affordable housing developments with construction that were completed
during Fiscal Year 2020-21 - Emporia Place (75 units) and Vista Verde (101 units). These two new developments will provide for extremely low-, very low-, and low-income units for families.

Continue
2075
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-361
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete

30. Extremely Low-Income Households
The City offers programs to address the housing
needs of extremely low-income (ELI) households. As
funding is available, the City provides a number of
incentives to encourage the production of ELI housing.

The City offers fee reductions for ELI housing,
supports grant applications to increase the supply of
affordable housing, works with nonprofit organizations
to build affordable housing, and provides land
writedowns.

Objectives:
• Work with nonprofits and/or for-profit
developers to build housing for ELI
households through supporting grants
and funding applications.
• Offer fee reductions and land
writedowns for new affordable housing
for low-income, very low-income, and
ELI households.

Responsible Agencies: Planning Department,
Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization
Funding: CDBG, HOME, federal and state
grants
Timing: Annually
The City continues to provide housing assistance to
extremely low-income households.

The City has restricted the following number of housing units for extremely low-income occupants: 12 in 2016, 12 in 2017, 12 in 2018, 20 in 2019, and 20 in 2020.

Under implementation of Project Gateway, the following
number of housing units were occupied by extremely lowincome households: 8 in 2016, 10 in 2017, 10 in 2018, 6 in 2019, and 13 in 2020.

The HOME Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) has
assisted the following total number of households: 9 in 2016, 11 in 2017, 14 in 2018, 13 in 2019, and 34 in 2020.

The CoC Permanent Housing (excluding Project Gateway
and HOME TBRA) has assisted the following number of
households: 6 in 2016, 6 in 2017, 6 in 2018, 2 in 2019, and 2 in 2020.

The Assisi House and Aftercare Services program has
served the following number of (unduplicated) persons: 47 persons in 2016, 29 in 2017, 38 in 2018, 59 in 2019, and 50 in 2020.

The Ontario Access Center has served the following
number of (unduplicated) persons: 1,385 in 2016, 1,039 in 2017, 808 in 2018, 683 in 2019, and 744 in 2020.

Foothill Family Shelter has assisted the following number of (unduplicated) persons: 12 in 2016, 26 in 2017, and 7 in 2018.

Services for Victims of Domestic Violence and Their
Children has assisted the following number of
(unduplicated) persons: 54 in 2016, 25 in 2017, 74 in
2018, 52 in 2019, and 86 in 2020.

The Family Stabilization Program at SOVA Program
Center has assisted the following number of
Continue
2076
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-362 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Table 6-1
Review of Previous Housing Element
Program Implementation Result/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete (unduplicated) persons: 2,444 in 2016, 2,589 in 2017,
2,503 in 2018, 1,890 in 2019, and 2,776 in 2020.

Fair Housing services has assisted the following number of (unduplicated) households: 101 in 2016, 71 in 2017,
106 in 2018, 105 in 2019, and 126 in 2020.

Landlord-Tenant Mediation services has assisted the
following number of (unduplicated) households: 863 in
2016, 740 in 2017, 718 in 2018, 539 in 2019, and 892 in 2020.

Senior Services has assisted the following number of
(unduplicated) persons: 142 in 2016, 133 in 2017, 166 in 2018, 122 in 2019, and 157 in 2020.

Child Care Subsidies has assisted the following number of (unduplicated) persons: 18 in 2016, 17 in 2017, 6 in 2018, 14 in 2019, and 56 in 2020.

31. Special-Needs Housing
In implementing affordable housing programs, the City
will work with housing providers to ensure that special housing needs are addressed for seniors, large
families, female-headed households, single-parent
households with children, persons with disabilities and developmental disabilities, homeless individuals and
families, and farmworker families. The City will seek to meet these special housing needs through a
combination of regulatory incentives, zoning
standards, new housing construction programs,
housing rehabilitation, homebuyer assistance
programs, and supportive services programs. In
addition, the City may seek funding under the federal
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS,
California Child Care Facilities Finance Program, and
other state and federal programs designated
specifically for special needs groups such as seniors,
persons with disabilities, and persons at risk for
homelessness.

Objectives: Collaborate with affordable
housing developers and secure funding, if
feasible, to assist with the development of
special needs housing projects.

Responsible Agencies: Planning Department,
Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization
Funding: CDBG, HOME, federal and state
grants
Timing: Annually
In conjunction with public agencies and community
organizations, the following number of Supportive Housing Program project-based vouchers are available each year
for chronically homeless with disabilities and their families:
12 in 2016, 12 in 2017, 12 in 2018, 12 in 2019, and 13 in 2020.

The City, in conjunction with Mercy House Living Centers, implemented the HOME Tenant-Based Rental Assistance
to provide rental assistance and assistance with security deposits and utility deposits to chronically homeless
individuals and households. Each year, the following
number of homeless households have received
assistance for permanent housing: 15 in 2016, 17 in 2017, 23 in 2018, 25 in 2019, and 34 in 2020.

The City continues to pursue funding under the federal
Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS, California Child Care Facilities Finance Program, and other state
and federal programs designated specifically for specialneeds groups such as seniors, persons with disabilities, and persons at risk for homelessness.

Continue
2077
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-363

7. HOUSING ELEMENT OUTREACH
The City of Ontario conducted a housing element outreach program that included a combination of public meetings, consultations, and surveys.

See also description of outreach, as related to the AFH in section 3. The Public Review Draft Housing Element was released October 14, 2021. It was discussed at a Planning Commission meeting, which was open to the public, on December 20, 2021. There were no comments received from the public. Commissioners asked clarifying questions and expressed support for the Housing Element.

7.1 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan
The community outreach process for the preparation of the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan and 2020-2021 One-Year Action Plan offered numerous opportunities for public input, comment, and review. The City hosted and coordinated a public hearing, three community forums, resident surveying, and stakeholder consultations. The culmination of public input provided the City with priority areas to help address housing needs and homelessness.

Public Outreach
A public hearing was held on February 3, 2020, to provide the public an overview of the process and components of a Consolidated Plan and for the public to submit comments and input on the Community Needs Assessment Survey. Bilingual staff was available for translation. Display advertisements and legal advertisements to promote the public hearing were published on January 9 and January 17, 2020, in the local newspaper Inland Valley Daily.

Three community forums were held on February 19, 2020, at Veterans Memorial Park Community Center, February 25, 2020, at Dorothy Quesada Community Center, and February 28, 2020, at De Anza Park Community and Teen Center. Residents were provided with the Community Needs Assessment Survey and information about the Consolidated Plan. Attendees were invited to participate in an engagement activity where residents selected their highest priority in select categories among activities eligible for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME, and Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funding.

The City held a community fair on February 29, 2020, with over 500 residents in attendance. At the Housing department booth, attendees were invited to complete the Community Needs Assessment Survey and 2078
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-364 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
participate in the engagement activity presented at the community forums.

Stakeholder Consultations
The City consulted with 18 stakeholder groups representing public and private entities, service providers, or community organizations. Table 7- 1 provides more information on the stakeholder consultation process, including the type of stakeholder, specific housing topics discussed, and anticipated outcomes of the consultation.

Table 7-1
Stakeholder Consultations
Agency/Group/
Organization
What section of the 2020-2024
Consolidated Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
How was the Stakeholder consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination? Ontario Housing
Authority
Housing Need Assessment
Public Housing Needs
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination in providing affordable housing.

Neighborhood
Partnership Housing
Services, Inc.

Housing Need Assessment
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination with first-time homebuyer and owner-occupied rehabilitation loan programs, and other programs and services relating to homebuyer education, financial literacy, and homeowner assistance.

AOF/Golden State
Community
Development Corp.

Housing Need Assessment
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination with a possible Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO).

Mercy Housing
Living Centers
Homelessness Strategy
Homeless Needs – Chronically homeless
Homeless Needs - Families with children
Homelessness Needs - Veterans
Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination in providing homeless services and permanent supportive housing.

Inland Fair Housing
and Mediation Board
Housing Need Assessment
Non-Homeless Special Needs
Fair Housing Strategy
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination in providing increased services for senior citizens, fair housing services, landlord/tenant mediation services, fair housing education, testing, and enforcement, first-time homebuyer education, and financial literacy programs.

County of San
Bernardino Office of
Homeless Services
Homelessness Strategy
Homeless Needs – Chronically homeless
Homeless Needs - Families with children
Homelessness Needs - Veterans
Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination in providing homeless services in the region, HMIS services, Continuum of Care coordination, and coordinated assessment system.

Ontario-Montclair
YMCA
Non-Housing Community
Development Strategy
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination of childcare for affordable housing residents.

Ontario-Montclair
School District
Homeless Needs - Families with
children
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Identification and coordination of services for homeless families within the school district. 2079
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-365
Table 7-1
Stakeholder Consultations
Agency/Group/
Organization
What section of the 2020-2024
Consolidated Plan was addressed by
Consultation?
How was the Stakeholder consulted and what are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination? Ontario Senior
Center Non-Homeless Special Needs
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings. Coordination of Homeowner Energy Assistance Program (HEAP) services and social services for senior residents within affordable senior housing projects.

Rolling Start, Inc. Non-Homeless Special Needs
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination of Section 504 outreach and identifying potential participants for affirmative marketing outreach for affordable housing units.

San Bernardino
County Department
of Behavioral Health
Housing Need Assessment
Homelessness Strategy
Homeless Needs – Chronically homeless
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination of Project Gateway (Shelter Plus Care vouchers) and proactively working together to secure additional resources to serve Ontario residents.

Foothill AIDS Project Housing Need Assessment
Homelessness Strategy
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination and identification of potential participants for affirmative marketing outreach for affordable housing units.

County of San
Bernardino Children
and Family Services
Non-Housing Community
Development Strategy
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination for potential bridge housing resources.

Inland Valley Hope
Partners
Homelessness Strategy
Homeless Needs – Chronically homeless
Homeless Needs - Families with children
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination in providing services for the homeless and those at-risk of homelessness and identification of potential participants for affirmative marketing outreach for affordable housing units.

House of Ruth, Inc. Homelessness Strategy
Homeless Needs - Families with children
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination of providing services for victims of domestic violence and potential identification of participants for affirmative marketing outreach for affordable housing units.

State of California
Housing and
Community
Development
Housing Need Assessment
The City reviews all possible leveraging resources and will investigate opportunities to use various programs that will fund identified community needs (Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC), Veteran Housing and Homeless Prevention (VHHP), Emergency Housing and Assistance Program Capital Development (EHAP-CD), and others). Actively support efforts to create permanent affordable housing funding sources.

Foothill Family
Shelter
Homelessness Strategy
Homeless Needs - Families with children
Invited to participate in community meetings/public hearings and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Coordination in providing homeless services, transitional housing, and identification of potential participants for affirmative marketing outreach for affordable housing units.

Housing Authority of
the County of San
Bernardino
Public Housing Needs
Requested review of public housing needs section and a copy of the executive summary was provided for feedback and comments. Implement permanent supportive housing programs and work together to secure state and federal resources for the region.
2080
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-366 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Summary of Priority Needs
The Community Needs Assessment Survey, in concert with the feedback at meetings and consultations, highlight the City’s clear and detailed need for investment in affordable housing for both owner-occupied and renteroccupied households, programs for homeless persons, and homelessness prevention. Table 7-2 summarizes the city’s housing needs, including level of priority, identified throughout the outreach process.

Table 7-2
Summary of Priority Needs
Need Priority
Level Description Basis for Priority Level
Affordable housingrental assistance High
Housing Choice Vouchers (Section 8) extend rental
subsidies to very low-income households by offering
the tenant a voucher that pays the difference
between the current fair-market rent (FMR)
established by the Housing Authority and 30 percent
of the tenant’s income.

Rental assistance programs are a high priority
because they are a way to meet the pressing need for
affordable housing. (See Program 23.)
Affordable housingproduction of new units High
Projects to produce new affordable housing units
may be targeted to owner-occupied or renteroccupied housing types.

Production of new units is a high priority because they are a way to meet the pressing need for affordable
housing. (See Programs 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, and 32)
Affordable housingrehab of existing units Medium
Rehabilitation of existing units could be targeted to
owner-occupied or renter-occupied households. The
programs would preserve the existing housing stock.

Rehab of existing units is important because
preservation and maintenance are critical to maintain
quality housing conditions. Nearly 60% of existing
units were built prior to 1979, indicating a potential
need for rehab. (See Programs 1, 3, 31, and 33)
Affordable housing –
acquisition of existing units High
The acquisition or preservation of existing units may
assist in creating new affordable housing units or
ensuring the continued affordability of units
preserved.

Acquisition of existing units is a high priority because they are a cost-effective way to meet the pressing
need for affordable housing (See Programs 16, 17,
and 25, and 26)
Homelessness- outreach High
The City has developed a Continuum of Care in
Ontario that serves all segments of the homeless
population and those at risk of homelessness.

Outreach programs provide basic needs to homeless
individuals and families and also provide appropriate
referrals to services needed by specific populations,
such as those with chronic substance abuse, victims
of domestic violence, veterans, and persons with
HIV/AIDS.

Outreach services are a high priority because they
can provide the necessary first step toward the goal of transitioning someone from homelessness to stable
housing.
(See Programs 27, 28, 32 and 33)
Homelessnessemergency/
transitional shelter
High
The City has developed a Continuum of Care in
Ontario that serves all segments of the homeless
population and those at risk of homelessness.

Emergency shelter and transitional housing
programs provide temporary housing for homeless
individuals and families.

An emergency/transitional shelter is a high priority
because it can provide a temporary roof as someone
works toward the goal of transitioning from
homelessness to stable, permanent housing.
(See Programs 17, 20, 27, 28, and 33)
Homelessnessrapid re-housing High
The City has developed a Continuum of Care in
Ontario that serves all segments of the homeless
population and those at risk of homelessness.

Rapid re-housing is a high priority because it can
provide a temporary roof as someone works toward
the goal of transitioning from homelessness to stable,
permanent housing. Ontario will continue to work with
its partners at the Housing Authority for the County of San Bernardino and the County of San Bernardino
2081
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-367
Table 7-2
Summary of Priority Needs
Need Priority
Level Description Basis for Priority Level
Rapid re-housing programs provide a needed
resource to quickly move those living on the streets
or in shelters into permanent housing.

Department of Behavioral Health to provide rapid rehousing services. (See Programs 17, 20, 27, 28, and 33)
Homelessness- prevention High
The City has developed a Continuum of Care in
Ontario that serves all segments of the homeless
population and those at risk of homelessness.

Prevention services can often be the link to keep a
household in their current housing and diminish the
growth of the homeless population.

Services that keep someone who is at risk of
becoming homeless in their home is a high priority
because it meets a pressing need and is more costeffective than providing housing for someone once they’ve become homeless.
(See Programs 17, 20, 27, 28, and 33)
Assessment of Fair Housing
The City of Ontario’s outreach process for the Consolidation Plan also included outreach for fair housing. A broad array of outreach was conducted, such as community forums, focus groups, and public hearings to ensure that the analysis contained in the Fair Housing Assessment truly reflects conditions in a community and that the goals and strategies are targeted and feasible.

Stakeholder Consultations and Surveys
In preparation of the Fair Housing Assessment, the City reached out to a wide array of stakeholders to hear directly about fair housing issues affecting residents. Stakeholders included Spanish-speaking groups, tenants, homeowners, fair housing organizations, civil rights and advocacy groups, organizations serving people with disabilities (including physical disabilities and people with HIV/AIDs), organizations serving domestic violence survivors, social services providers, and homeless providers. All community meetings had translation services available in Spanish. In addition, all meetings were held in locations accessible to people with mobility issues.

Fair housing surveys were conducted in-person both in English and Spanish at the community meetings and community fair. The majority of respondents were members of protected classes. Of the 73 respondents, 21 found housing discrimination to be an issue in Ontario, and 14 directly experienced discrimination. Survey respondents cited race as the reason for discrimination, followed by color, familial status, national origin, and disability.
2082
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-368 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Contributing Factors to Fair Housing Issues
The 2020 Assessment of Fair Housing Choice identified the following contributing factors to fair housing issues:
• Lack of meaningful language access for individuals with limited English proficiency (See Programs 24 and 27)
• Lack of affordable housing in moderate- and high-resource areas of the city (See Programs 13 and 23)
• Lack of investment/community revitalization strategies in lowresource areas of the city (See Programs 4, 10, and 27) • Availability of rentals that accept HCV in moderate- and highresource areas of the city (See Program 23 and 31) • Displacement of residents in moderate- and/or high-resource areas of the city because of economic pressure (See Programs 23, 27, and 32)
• Concentration of affordable housing in low-resource areas of the city (See Programs 13 and 23)
• Lack of access to opportunity due to high housing cost (See Programs 11 and 27)
• Instances of private discrimination (See Programs 20 and 27) • Lack of accessible affordable housing appropriate for persons with disabilities (See Programs 3, 27, 30, and 33)
• Availability of affordable housing units in a range of sizes (See Programs 23 and 31)
• Age of housing stock in northwest area of the city (See Programs 1, 3, 16, 31, and 33)
• Cost of home repairs (See Programs 1, 3, 16, 29, 31, and 33) • Availability of affordable housing in the form of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs) (See Programs 20, 27)
• Lack of meaningful language access for individuals with limited English proficiency to learn about rehabilitation options (Program 27)
2083
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-369
• Lack of investment/community revitalization strategies in lowresource areas of the city that would improve health outcomes for residents (See Programs 1, 4, 6, 10, and 27)
• Lack of investment/community revitalization strategies in lowresource areas of the City to improve economic outcomes for residents (See Programs 1, 4, 6, 10, and 27 )
Fair Housing Goals and Priorities
The following goals and strategies will serve as an effective basis for affirmatively furthering fair housing by reducing patterns of segregation, mitigating displacement, addressing disproportionate housing needs, and increasing access to opportunity for members of protected classes.

Goal 1: Increase the supply of affordable housing in high opportunity areas.

Ontario has a significant portion of its residents who are rent-burdened and facing severe housing problems. Additionally, publicly supported affordable housing accounts for slightly less than 3 percent of the total housing stock, and Ontario and its environs are experiencing rapidly rising housing costs. Members of protected classes, particularly Hispanic and Black residents, experience these problems most acutely. These indicate a need to expand the supply of affordable housing. The following strategies address Goal 1.
• Explore the creation of new funding sources of affordable housing.
• Using best practices from other jurisdictions, explore policies and programs that increase the supply of affordable housing, such as linkage fees, inclusionary housing, public land set-aside, community land trusts, transit-oriented development, expedited permitting and review, and reduced building permit fees for nonprofit developers.
• Explore opportunities to provide low-interest loans to singlefamily homeowners and grants to homeowners with household incomes of up to 120 percent of the Area Median Income to develop ADUs with affordability restriction on their property. • Align zoning codes to conform to recent California affordable housing legislation.
(See Programs 1, 6, 16, 24, and 27)
2084
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-370 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Goal 2: Increase community integration for persons with disabilities.

There is a lack of permanent supportive housing for non-elderly persons with disabilities in Ontario. By prioritizing HOME funding for such projects, which should ideally set aside 10 to 25 percent of units for persons with disabilities who need supportive services, the City can help make development proposals more competitive for Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) and Mental Health Services Act assistance. The following strategy addresses Goal 2.
• Prioritize HOME funding for developments that include permanent supportive housing for non-elderly persons with disabilities.
(See Programs 3, 16, 27, and 33)
Goal 3: Ensure equal access to housing for persons with protected characteristics, who are disproportionately likely to be lower-income and to experience homelessness.

Although California law provides strong legal tools to combat source of income discrimination, some landlords violate these laws, as they do housing discrimination laws more generally. Targeted education efforts would help to reduce the incidence of unlawful source of income discrimination. Attendees at community stakeholder meetings were unaware that landlords are required to accept vouchers and third-party checks and would benefit from fair housing education. The following strategies address Goal 3.
• Conduct fair housing training for landlords and tenants on California’s Source of Income Discrimination protections to reduce the number of voucher holders turned away.
(See Program 23 and 27)
Homelessness
The 2020 San Bernardino County Homeless Count identified 102 homeless persons residing in Ontario, including 74 persons unsheltered and 28 homeless individuals living in emergency shelters or transitional housing.
2085
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-371

7.2 Neighborhood Preservation Strategy Plan
In 2019, the City developed the Neighborhood Preservation Strategy Plan (NPSP) to focus on improving the overall quality of life in neighborhoods and develop a nexus between the conditions of the neighborhood and the solutions to improve it. The NPSP focused on four target neighborhoods where the NPSP could significantly address neighborhood conditions:

Downtown, Nocta, Mission-Mountain, and Fourth-Grove
neighborhoods. Each of these neighborhoods were identified based on demographics, land use data, and Community Improvement active cases, including outcomes from Systematic Health and Safety Inspection Program inspections, select My Ontario app reports, and calls for police service data. In reviewing the base conditions of these neighborhoods, the City determined that:
• All target neighborhoods have a lower median income than the city as a whole.
• Three of the four target neighborhoods have a higher proportion of renter-occupied households than owner-occupied households. • The majority of the target neighborhoods have both renteroccupied and owner-occupied households that are experiencing housing cost burden at a rate higher than the city as a whole, where households are paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing costs.
• Two of the four target neighborhoods have a higher proportion of housing stock built prior to 1980 than the city as a whole. • My Ontario App has the highest number of reports for debris in the public right-of-way among all reports evaluated for all four target neighborhoods.

To strengthen and improve quality of life in the four target neighborhoods, the City identified six strategic components to address over a three-year span: community engagement, neighborhood fairs, new resident marketing initiatives, establishment of the Neighborhood Action Team, evaluation of opportunities for affordable homeownership, and evaluation of community resources and infrastructure.

Strengthening community engagement is a primary objective of the NPSP. Community engagement strengthening efforts can be divided into three main components: capitalizing on existing community outreach and engagement, creating new events for engagement opportunities, and non-event based ongoing engagement in a variety of mediums. To accomplish this, the City will undertake the following actions. 2086
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-372 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
• The Community Improvement Department will work in
collaboration with the Neighborhood Action Team to identify existing events, workshops, and meetings that impact the four target neighborhoods. These include Integrated Waste quarterly clean-up days, Ontario Night Out, Neighborhood Watch
meetings, Crime-Free Multi-Housing meetings, Community Life and Culture events (Culture Fest, Arts Festival, etc.), Downtown Strategic Plan workshops, and Community Health Workers
monthly community engagement forums.
• One neighborhood fair is planned to be held annually within targeted neighborhoods. This event will bring together various City, County, and School District agencies, along with business owners, the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, the Ontario Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and community organizations for a oneday event designed to bring services and information to the residents within their neighborhood.
• The City will purchase and fund a new mobile recreation program, including the purchase of a customized vehicle, related supplies, and staffing for 1,500 hours of operation per year. • The City will develop an initial community survey that will be distributed at workshops, meetings, and engagement events to residents within the target neighborhoods to identify the opinions and needs of those residents, with the purpose of developing more focused engagement and programs/projects within each target neighborhood.
(See Program 6)
Neighborhood fairs are a key strategy to educate neighborhood residents about city programs available to them, develop relationships between the City and residents, and obtain feedback from residents through day-of activities and surveys. The City will hold at least one “block-party” style neighborhood fair over the course of the three years. The City will partner with other public sector agencies that impact community life within the target neighborhoods, such as San Bernardino County Department of Public Health, San Bernardino County Workforce Development Department, Ontario-Montclair School District, and Chaffey Joint Union School District, private local business owners, including the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, Ontario Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and community organizations and non-profit agencies that work in the community, such as Habitat for Humanity, Neighborhood Partnership Housing Services, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board, Neighborhood Partnership Housing Services, Rotary Club, and Kiwanis.
2087
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-373
(See Program 6)
The Neighborhood Action Team is the implementing entity for this strategy. The core team will include staff members from Housing Department, Community Improvement Department, Ontario Police Department, Community Life and Culture, Public Works, Ontario Municipal Utilities Company, Information Technology, Management Services, Ontario Fire Department, San Bernardino County Department of Public Health, Ontario-Montclair School District, and Chaffey Joint Union School District. In addition to the monthly meetings and solutions or other options to address “flash point” properties or blocks, the Neighborhood Action Team will implement community clean-up programs to address property maintenance issues within the targeted neighborhoods. These include Property Clean-Up Programs, Neighbors Helping Neighbors Program, and Community Clean-Up Days. (See Program 6)
An important component of this strategy will be identifying possible means to create opportunities to expand homeownership within the target neighborhoods and throughout Ontario. Housing Department staff, along with strategic community partners, have evaluated homeownership models, from down-payment assistance programs to innovative in-fill development opportunities that would promote more affordable homeowner housing. Each target neighborhood has undeveloped land that may be suitable for housing and during the course of the strategy, undeveloped lots will be evaluated to determine possible housing options for affordable homeownership. Homeownership models may include small-lot development and community land trusts. In addition, opportunities for funding down-payment assistance loans to assist lower-income households purchase their first home from the State of California or other federal resources will be explored to develop new homeownership assistance programs. To educate residents of the four target neighborhoods of tools available through the city, the NPSP includes developing educational material to distribute to new homeowners and renters within the target neighborhoods. Again, this will be a multi-agency effort to provide residents with information that would be helpful to new residents in the community.

The final component of the NPSP will be to implement a small commercial façade improvement program within Downtown Ontario. (See Program 6)
2088
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-374 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022

8. HOUSING GOALS AND POLICIES
The City of Ontario aspires to be the premier city of the Inland Empire.

Building from the Ontario International Airport, the Ontario Ranch, the City’s rich cultural and historic heritage, and transportation and economic assets, the City seeks to define a prosperous future through design. How we design our housing, neighborhoods, and community, and how we provide public services are critical to the achievement of that vision.

The City’s vision is underpinned by four principles supporting Ontario as a unified and prosperous community:
• A dynamic balance that enables our community to confront the continued dynamic growth of the region and technological change with confidence and a sense of opportunity.
• A prosperous economy that sustains the reality of prosperity across our entire community that positively impacts all the people of Ontario.
• Distinctive development that integrates our varied and diverse focal points, districts, villages, and neighborhoods to provide a feeling of coherence without sacrificing uniqueness.
• Recognized leadership in local governance that stimulates excellence and serves to unify the people.

The Housing Element plays a critical role in achieving this vision.

Housing Ontario residents and the workforce, creating quality neighborhoods of distinctive design, assisting residents with special needs, and responsibly accommodating growth and community development are fundamental to achieving the City’s long-term vision of prosperity.

The Housing Plan sets forth goals and policies to achieve this end. This includes goals and policies for housing and neighborhood quality, housing diversity and supply, removal of governmental constraints, housing assistance, and special needs. Within this framework, this chapter proposes both existing and new programs to implement these goals and policies.

Table 8-1 at the end of the chapter lists the programs, key planning objectives, funding sources, implementing agency, time frame for implementation, and quantified program objectives, where feasible. 2089
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-375
Goal 1: Neighborhoods and Housing
Ontario’s neighborhoods determine our quality of life and reflect the value we place in our community. Neighborhoods differ in lot sizes, housing types, history, purpose, and environment. Whether rural residential, suburban, historic, or urban, Ontario’s neighborhoods should provide a nurturing environment for all residents to enjoy their lives.

Residential neighborhoods should provide quality housing, ample parks and recreational opportunities, tree-lined streets and sidewalks for walking, safety and security, and public facilities and services.

As an established community, Ontario is committed to improving its older neighborhoods. This goal may be achieved through redevelopment, housing rehabilitation, code enforcement, and neighborhood improvement projects. Ontario will facilitate the development of new neighborhoods consistent with their unique purpose, such as the Ontario Ranch, the Ontario Airport Metro Center, and other areas. Taken together, Ontario is committed to creating and strengthening neighborhoods to promote a high quality of life for residents.

Goal H1: Stable neighborhoods of quality housing, ample community services and public facilities, well-maintained infrastructure, and public safety that foster a positive sense of identity.

Policies
H1-1 Housing Rehabilitation. We support the rehabilitation, maintenance, and improvement of single-family, multiplefamily, and mobile homes through code compliance, removal of blight where necessary, and provision of
rehabilitation assistance where feasible.

H1-2 Neighborhood Conditions. We direct efforts to improve the long-term sustainability of neighborhoods through
comprehensive planning, provision of neighborhood
amenities, rehabilitation and maintenance of housing, and community building efforts.

H1-3 Community Amenities. We shall provide adequate public services, infrastructure, open space, parking and traffic management, pedestrian, bicycle, and equestrian routes, and public safety for neighborhoods consistent with City master plans and neighborhood plans.
2090
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-376 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
H1-4 Historical Preservation. We support the preservation and enhancement of residential structures, properties, street designs, lot configurations, and other reminders of
Ontario’s past that are considered to be local historical or cultural resources.

H1-5 Neighborhood Identity. We strengthen neighborhood
identity through creating parks and recreational outlets, sponsoring neighborhood events, and encouraging
resident participation in the planning and improvement of their neighborhoods.

Goal 2: Housing Supply and Diversity
Bolstered by its International Airport, burgeoning employment sector, the Ontario Ranch, and unparalleled transportation access, Ontario aspires to be the urban center of the Inland Empire. Housing diversity is critical to achieving this goal. Ontario is committed to ensuring the provision of the widest range of housing choices for the varied lifestyles of its residents and future workforce. This includes single-family and multiple-family housing, mixed- and multi-use housing, senior housing, live-work units, and other types of housing opportunities.

Housing production is to be encouraged in a responsible manner that furthers citywide and neighborhood goals. New housing will be creatively designed, sustainable, and accessible. Residential and mixeduse growth is strategically directed to the Downtown, corridors, Ontario Airport Metro Center area, Ontario Ranch, and other areas. By encouraging an adequate supply and diversity of housing, Ontario will accommodate its changing housing needs, support economic prosperity, foster an inclusive community, and become the urban center of the Inland Empire.

Goal H2: Diversity of types of quality housing that are affordable to a range of household income levels, accommodate
changing demographics, and support and reinforce the
economic sustainability of Ontario.

Policies
H2-1 Corridor Housing. We revitalize transportation corridors by encouraging the production of higher-density
residential and mixed uses that are architecturally,
functionally, and aesthetically suited to corridors.
2091
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-377
H2-2 Historic Downtown. We foster a vibrant historic
downtown by facilitating a wide range of housing types
and affordability levels for households of all ages, housing preferences, and income levels.

H2-3 Ontario Airport Metro Center. We foster a vibrant, urban, intense, and highly amenitized community in the Ontario Airport Metro Center area through a mix of residential, entertainment, retail, and office-oriented uses.

H2-4 Ontario Ranch. We support a premier lifestyle community in the Ontario Ranch, distinguished by diverse housing, highest design quality, and cohesive and highly amenitized neighborhoods.

H2-5 Housing Design. We require architectural excellence through adherence to City design guidelines, thoughtful site planning, environmentally sustainable practices, and other best practices.

H2-6 Infill Development. We support the revitalization of neighborhoods through the construction of higher-density residential developments on underutilized residential and commercial sites.

Goal 3: Governmental Regulations
The City is committed to facilitating and encouraging the production, maintenance, and improvement of housing in a responsible manner; however, various factors may limit the City’s ability to address its housing needs, such as governmental regulations or environmental considerations. Market factors may also affect the feasibility of building housing or the affordability of housing in the community. Moreover, housing goals may at times conflict with the need to promote other important City goals, including open space or the provision of jobs for the region.

Whereas City land use policy and municipal codes provide a regulatory framework for addressing housing, existing regulations cannot address every situation. To facilitate the type of development desired and to realize the greatest community benefits, the City’s regulatory framework must be flexible and incentive based. The development review process must be time sensitive, predictable, and thorough. The review process must support long-term community benefits, rather than just short-term gain. Finally, the regulatory framework must contain a broad range of incentives to stimulate desired development and private investment and realize the community features that improve quality of life. 2092
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-378 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Goal H3: A City regulatory environment that balances the need for creativity and excellence in residential design, flexibility and predictability in the project approval process, and the provision of an adequate supply and prices of
housing.

Policies
H3-1 Incentives. We maintain incentive programs that can be offered to projects that provide benefits to the community such as exceptional design quality, economic advantages, environmental sustainability, or other benefits that would otherwise be unrealized.

H3-2 Flexible Standards. We allow flexibility in the application of residential and mixed-use development standards to
gain benefits such as exceptional design quality, economic advantages, sustainability, or other benefits that would otherwise be unrealized.

H3-3 Development Review. We maintain a residential
development review process that provides certainty and
transparency for project stakeholders and the public, yet allows for the appropriate review to facilitate quality housing development.

H3-4 Financial Incentives. We consider financial incentives to facilitate and encourage the production, rehabilitation, or improvement of housing, or the provision of services where such activity furthers housing and community-wide goals.

Goal 4: Housing Assistance
Ontario recognizes the importance of an adequate supply of affordable housing and its importance to the quality of life of residents. Residential developments in the Ontario Ranch and Ontario Airport Metro Center area will provide quality housing opportunities to attract and retain Ontario’s workforce and support citywide economic development goals.

Lower- and moderate-income residents will require homeownership and rental assistance to secure and maintain housing.

Housing prices and rents in Ontario and across the region continue to lead to lower homeownership rates, longer commutes, increased traffic congestion, higher cost burdens, and overcrowding in neighborhoods.

Working with partners and the state and federal governments, the City of Ontario is committed to providing a range of housing types and prices affordable to all economic segments of the city and assisting residents and 2093
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-379
the workforce to secure and maintain housing that is affordable and appropriate to their needs.

Goal H4: Increased opportunities for low- and moderate-income households and families to afford and maintain quality
ownership and rental housing opportunities, including
move-up opportunities. Inclusive communities, racial
equity, fair housing choice, and access to opportunity.

Policies
H4-1 Preservation of Affordable Apartments. We strive to facilitate the preservation of the affordability of publicly assisted apartments for lower-income households through financial assistance, technical assistance, rehabilitation, and collaborative partnerships.

H4-2 Homeownership Opportunities. We increase and expand homeownership rates for lower- and moderate-income
households by offering financial assistance, low-interest loans, and educational resources, and by working in
collaboration with partnerships.

H4-3 Rental Assistance. We support the provision of rental assistance for individuals and families earning extremely low, very low, and low income with funding from the state and federal government.

H4-4 Mixed-Income Housing. We encourage the integration of affordable housing in the Ontario Ranch, Ontario Airport Metro Center area, and existing neighborhoods.

H4-5 Collaborative Partnerships. We support collaborative partnerships of nonprofit organizations, affordable
housing developers, major employers, and for-profit
developers to produce affordable housing.

H4-6 Fair Housing. We further fair housing by prohibiting discrimination in the housing market, lifting barriers that restrict access to housing, and providing education,
support, and enforcement services to address
discriminatory practices.
2094
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-380 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Goal 5: Special Needs
The City is home to a large number of people with special housing needs.

These special needs may be related to occupation, income, family characteristics, disability, veteran status, or other characteristics. Special needs groups include, but are not limited to, seniors, large families with children, people with disabilities, single-parent families, college students, veterans, and people who are homeless. Though each group is markedly different, they share the challenge of finding suitable and affordable housing.

Ontario aspires to be the premier city the Inland Empire. As such, the city’s population will become increasingly diverse, with people of many cultures, backgrounds, family types, ages, and experiences. The housing needs of Ontario’s residents will be equally diverse. Recognizing the contributions of this diversity to the community, Ontario has the opportunity to demonstrate leadership in addressing the housing and support needs of all residents. Ontario is thus committed to creating a community that allows people to live in the city for their entire life, regardless of their special needs.

Goal H5: A full range of housing types and community services that meet the special housing needs for all individuals and families in Ontario, regardless of income level, age, or other status.

Policies
H5-1 Senior Housing. We support the development of accessible and affordable senior housing and provide financial
assistance for seniors to maintain and improve their homes.

H5-2 Family Housing. We support the development of larger rental apartments that are appropriate for families with children, including, as feasible, the provision of services, recreation, and other amenities.

H5-3 Disabled People. We increase the supply of permanent, affordable, and accessible housing for people with
disabilities, and provide assistance to allow them to
maintain and improve their homes.

H5-4 Homeless People. We partner with nonprofit partners to provide emergency shelters, transitional housing,
permanent supportive housing, and supportive services for people who are homeless.
2095
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-381
H5-5 Supportive Services. We financially support organizations, as feasible, that provide support services that meet the needs of those with special needs and further the greatest level of independence.

H5-6 Partnerships. We collaborate with nonprofit organizations, private developers, employers, government agencies, and other interested parties to develop affordable housing and provide support services.
2096
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-382 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022

9. HOUSING PROGRAMS

9.1 Neighborhoods and Housing

1. Code Enforcement
Code compliance is an important tool to ensure that the value, character, and quality of neighborhoods, property, and housing are well maintained. Listed below are the programs implemented by the Code Enforcement program specifically designed to improve the quality of Ontario neighborhoods and eliminate health and safety related to building conditions:
• General Code Enforcement: The City uses an interdepartmental approach for inspecting properties for compliance with state and local regulations regarding the condition and maintenance of residential buildings and properties. If deficiencies are found, the property owner is notified of the code deficiency and compliance measures required, and the property owner is granted a period of time to correct the matter. To facilitate timely compliance, City staff direct the property owners to City–administered
rehabilitation loans and/or other nonprofit housing loan programs, where available.
• Community Improvement Team: This team has been specifically designed to proactively implement an intensive code compliance program to address serious code violations within focus areas. As part of this team approach, various City departments work together to bring a myriad of resources to the focus area to arrest neighborhood decline and improve the living conditions within the area.
• Systematic Health and Safety Inspection Program: The program is designed to ensure the quality of the rental stock and reduce substandard building conditions. Through this program, all rental housing units over seven years old are inspected on a four-year schedule unless it is necessary to inspect more frequently due to substandard conditions.
• Abandoned and Distressed Property Program and Foreclosure Opportunities Response Team (FORT) Program: These programs were established to protect Ontario neighborhoods from
becoming blighted through the lack of adequate maintenance and security of abandoned and distressed properties.
2097
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-383
The City will focus efforts throughout the city, with a particular emphasis on areas to the north and northwest of the Ontario International Airport.

Implementation
• Objectives: Continue code enforcement using a progressive approach of voluntary compliance, citations, and court action if needed. Continue to apply for funding. Prevent the displacement of 60 lower income households due to the conservation of their housing through property maintenance, at least 75 percent in northwest Ontario (Figures 2-2 and 3-1).
• Responsible Agencies: Housing and Neighborhood Preservation Departments, Police, Fire, Economic Development, Building, and Planning Departments.
• Funding: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME, and CalHOME funds.
• Timing: Ongoing; inspect properties annually.

2. Historic Preservation
Known as the Original Model Colony, Ontario is rich in local history. The City operates a comprehensive historic preservation program. It is a certified local government, a designation that signifies that the City’s program meets state and federal historic preservation standards. The City has eight historic districts and is surveying nine additional areas for the potential of historic district designation. It encourages historic preservation efforts through Mills Act contracts, surveys of potentially historic structures, and an adaptive reuse program (for the Emporia District and Downtown).

Implementation
• Objectives: Continue to implement program.
• Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
• Funding: General Fund, state and federal grants
• Timing: Ongoing

3. Housing Rehabilitation Loan and Grants
When funding is available, the City offers housing rehabilitation loans and grants to qualified homeowners to pay for accessibility improvements, emergency repairs, home renovations, and other services that improve the homes and lives of Ontario residents, including seniors 2098
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-384 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
and persons with disabilities. The City launched the Conservation Home Improvement Program (CHIP) loan in 2020 with Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding provided through the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). CHIP offers rehabilitation loans to qualifying owner-occupied households to make energy and/or water conservation improvements to the exterior of properties. As of 2021, the City approved two CHIP loans that have progressed to construction and are reviewing two additional applications. The City will continue to implement CHIP as funding is available and seek apply for other sources of funding, including Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) and CalHome funds to support rehabilitation loans and grant programs. To encourage participation, the City will continue to provide information on its website.

Once community events resume, the City will market the programs in person, particularly to the four target neighborhoods shown in Figure 2-

2. Materials to promote the rehabilitation loans and grant programs will be offered in English and Spanish to reduce language barriers.

Implementation
• Objectives: Support 9030 rehabilitated units through CHIP and/or future rehabilitation programs, at least 75 percent of assisted rehabilitations will be in the Fourth and Grove, Downtown, Nocta and Mission-Mountain neighborhoods in
northwest Ontario.
• Responsible Agencies: Housing Department
• Funding: CDBG, HOME, CalHOME
• Timing: Ongoing

4. CARES
The City of Ontario has previously implemented the comprehensive CARES Neighborhood Revitalization Program within selected focus neighborhoods. The components of this comprehensive, multi-agency program have included code enforcement, arterial street improvement, relief program, exterior improvement program, and sidewalk or safe routes to school program. The program sought to stabilize neighborhoods through a comprehensive approach to building community. The program is currently on hold because of limited availability of funds. The City will seek funding opportunities to continue the program and restructure it as needed, depending on the requirements of the funding program. If funding can be secured to continue the CARES program, the City will focus efforts throughout the city, with a particular emphasis on areas to the north and northwest of the Ontario International Airport. While the 2099
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-385
City continues to look for funding opportunities to reengage the broader CARES Neighborhood Revitalization Program, some project objectives have continued under other funding sources. Using CDBG funds the City has developed the Conservation Home Improvement Program (see Program 3), designed to enable income qualified homeowners to make energy and water conservation improvements to their properties. The City also uses CDBG to fund the Community Improvement Team, a division of the Community Improvement Department tasked with implementing an intensive code compliance program (see Program 1) committed to reducing blight in eligible neighborhoods. Finally, the City continues to use CDBG funding to partially fund slurry seal and alley pavement improvement projects. Upon securing future funding, the City will be able to tie these existing efforts into the more comprehensive CARES Neighborhood Revitalization Program.

Implementation
• Objectives: Seek funding to continue program implementation, as funding is available, and restructure as needed.
• Responsible Agencies: Housing and Neighborhood Preservation Departments Funding: CDBG, HOME, General Fund
• Timing: OngoingThe City will evaluate funding opportunities on a quarterly basis. If funds for the CARES Neighborhood
Revitalization Program remain unavailable as of summer 2024, the City will identify other funding programs and submit applications to fund the activities specified in this program.

5. Neighborhood Plans
Ontario’s neighborhoods define the sense of identity and community for residents, the quality of life experienced, and the image and role of Ontario. The City currently implements many programs to improve neighborhoods; however; the City has identified a need to foster a stronger sense of neighborhood identity in the community. While this goal is being achieved in CDBG-eligible areas (CARES program) and in historic areas, efforts need to be expanded to other neighborhoods.

During the planning periodBy summer 2023, the City will begin a public outreach effort to solicit input from neighborhood leaders and residents as to particular needs and goals. This process may result in the establishment of ongoing dialog with the City, neighborhood organizations, or the preparation of neighborhood improvement plans.

In addition, the City will continue the Multimodal Transportation Center (MTC) Needs Assessment and Siting Criteria project. This assessment will assist in determining the optimum location for an MTC on or near 2100
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-386 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
the Ontario International Airport connecting future modes of transportation, including light-rail opportunities.

Implementation
• Objectives: Designate focus neighborhoods, outreach plan and process, and initiate survey efforts. Evaluate the potential of creating neighborhood improvement plans. Encourage
participation from residents from areas of concentrated poverty. • Responsible Agencies: Planning, Housing, and Community Improvement Departments.
• Funding: General Fund
• Timing: Ongoing. To foster a stronger sense of neighborhood identity in neighborhoods that have not had recent planning efforts, conduct public outreach effort to solicit input from neighborhood leaders and residents. Initiate outreach by summer 2023.

6. Neighborhood Stabilization
In July 2019, the City adopted the Neighborhood Preservation Strategy Plan (NPSP) to develop community partnerships between the City, its residents, business owners, community organizations, and neighborhoods. The NPSP identified four initial target neighborhoods (Downtown, Nocta, Mission-Mountain, Fourth Grove) based on baseline demographic information related to economic, education, housing, languages, and families that will be the focus of the NPSP efforts. The NPSP has been designed to meet objectives over a three-year span within the four target neighborhoods. Components of the strategy include community engagement, neighborhood fairs, new resident marketing initiatives, establishment of the Neighborhood Action Team, evaluation of opportunities for affordable homeownership, and evaluation of community resources and infrastructure. Implementation
Objectives: The City will Iimplement the key components of the NPSP to strengthen the four target neighborhoods, improving neighborhood conditions and resident quality of life: community engagement, neighborhood fairs, neighborhood action team, homeownership opportunities, community education materials, and economic development activities. Fair housing objectives under Program 27 will support the implementation of the NPSP.

The Housing and Community Improvement Departments will report on the progress of the NPSP at the end of each fiscal year for the life of the program.
2101
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-387
Community Engagement: The Housing and Community Improvement Departments will collaborate with the Neighborhood Action team to attend existing events in the target neighborhoods (e.g., Integrated Waste quarterly clean-up days, Ontario Night Out, Neighborhood Watch meetings, Crime-Free Multi-Housing meetings, Community Life and Culture events [Culture Fest, Arts Festival, etc.], Downtown Strategic Plan workshops, Community Health Workers monthly community engagement forums). The City will develop an ongoing community engagement plan through distributing an initial community survey in the first year that will inform focused engagement plan, programs, and projects within each of the target neighborhoods.

Neighborhood Fairs: Conduct at least one neighborhood fair each year over the three-year term of the NPSP.

Neighborhood Action Team: The Neighborhood Action Team will be composed of staff from Housing and Community Improvement Departments, Ontario Police Department, Community Life and Culture, Public Works, Ontario Municipal Utilities Company, Information Technology, Administrative Services, Ontario Fire Department, San Bernardino County Department of Public Health, Ontario-Montclair School District, and Chaffey Joint Union School District. The Neighborhood Action Team will meet monthly to evaluate upcoming planned community engagement opportunities, discuss partnerships and updates, and strategize solutions for the target neighborhoods. The Neighborhood Action Team will also implement community clean-up programs, including the Property Clean-Up Program (grant fund program with up to $3,000 per property for exterior improvements), Neighbors Helping Neighbors Program (partnership opportunity with local housing nonprofits and community volunteer groups), and Community Clean-Up Days (a minimum of two clean-up days per program year).

Homeownership Opportunities: Housing Department staff will evaluate homeownership model programs to promote homeownership in each of the target neighborhoods. Homeownership models may include small-lot development, community land trusts, and opportunities for funding down payment assistance loans.

Community Education Materials: Housing and Community
Improvement Department staff will develop a packet of materials (available physically and online through the City’s website) to be distributed to new homeowners and renters within the target neighborhoods. In addition to resident information packages, develop a business user’s guide to inform local business owners of Ontario Municipal Code and Ontario Development Code requirements. The business user’s guide would be developed in coordination with the 2102
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-388 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Economic Development Agency, the Community Development Agency, and Ontario Municipal Utilities Company.

Economic Development Activities: For the initial year of NPSP, the Housing and Economic Development Agency will implement a small commercial façade program for qualifying businesses within the 100-600 blocks of North Euclid Avenue. The commercial façade program will support four businesses.

Implementation
• Objectives: The Housing and Community Improvement
Departments will collaborate with the Neighborhood Action team to attend existing events in the target neighborhoods, with an average of four per month. At least one neighborhood fair each year. Neighborhood Action Team will meet monthly. Assisting at least 20 households with first-time homebuyer loans (see also Program 25). Support four businesses with the commercial façade program. See also quantified objectives under Program 27. • Responsible Agencies: Housing and Community Improvement Departments, Economic Development Agency
• Funding: CDBG
• Timing: Within three years of Housing Element adoptionAttend neighborhood meetings monthly. Distribute an initial community survey by January 2023. Develop ongoing community
engagement plan by January 2024. Begin meetings of the
Neighborhood Action Team by summer 2022. Develop
informational materials for new homeowners and renters and business owners by summer 2024.

9.2 7. Community-Oriented Policing
The City of Ontario Police Department uses CDBG funds to implement a community-oriented policing program in designated low- and moderateincome neighborhoods. This partnership involves working with community leaders, businesses, and property owners to address neighborhood issues, including code enforcement, crime-free multifamily housing, safe and clean streets, and school interventions.

With respect to housing, the Police Department implements the CrimeFree Multifamily Housing Program to control and eliminate crime in apartment buildings. Under this program, the Police Department will provide training to apartment owners, conduct a property inspection to identify and eliminate potential crime hazards, and certify properties 2103
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-389
where the owner signs a written agreement and commitment to maintain the program.

Implementation
• Objectives: Continue implementation of Community-Oriented Policing (COPs) program; coordinate marketing efforts with the new Quadrennial Inspection Program.
• Responsible Agencies: Housing and Community Improvement Departments, and Ontario Police Department
• Funding: General Fund, CDBG
• Timing: Ongoi

9.2 Housing Supply and Diversity

7. Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
The City shall promote accessory dwelling units (including junior accessory dwelling units) (ADUs/JADUs) as an affordable housing option in high-resource areas and an economic mobility opportunity in Ontario through the following actions. The cumulative impact of these strategies would exceed the conservative estimate of 120 units to achieve 360 ADUs in the planning period, with at least one third of the units (180) available as affordable housing to lower income households. • Consider a program to waive, reduce, or defer connection or impact fees for ADUs that agree to affordability covenants for a set period of time. The City will consider options in 2026 and implement programs as necessary by 2027.
• Continue to provide information such as Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) on the City’s website. Expand information on the City’s website to provide educational materials and additional guidance, including permitting procedures and construction resources. Update the information provided on the City’s website to include by December 2022, ensuring information is provided in multiple languages (including Spanish).
• Assess the feasibility of establishing a loan program to help homeowners finance the construction of ADUs. The City shall consider incentives to encourage homeowners to deed restrict ADUs for lower-income households. The City will consider qualification requirements for income-restricted ADUs
2104
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-390 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
appropriately address Ontario residents’ housing needs to identify barriers to qualifying (e.g., proof of residency, income levels, employment record, credit history, etc). The City will consider options in 2026 and implement programs as necessary by 2027.
• Actively market ADU guidance and materials in areas with high access to resources to encourage the development of new affordable housing in areas of opportunity as a strategy to enhance mobility and reduce displacement of low-income households seeking affordable housing options. support property owners interested in building ADUs and JADUs to increase the overall housing stock in residential zones and to promote this housing type as a more affordable housing alternative. During the Housing Element planning period, the ordinance will be updated as appropriate in compliance with state law and adjusted as issues arise and new best practices develop. Some of the features of the program will include:
- Receive technical assistance through SCAG to evaluate permitting practices for ADUs and JADUs and implement
improvements
- Online application process with staff intake for quality control - Maintain and develop materials for better applicant guidance, as needed
- Provide consistent staff training and support
- Look for all opportunities to provide certainty earlier in the process
- Reduce steps and shorten timeframes, and
- Continue to watch the prefabricated housing market,
including companies that produce 3D-printed homes,
repurposed shipping containers, and modular construction in order to integrate new ideas into the permitting process as appropriate.
• Develop and implement a monitoring program. The program will track ADU approvals and affordability. The City will use this monitoring program to track progress in ADU development and adjust or expand the focus of its education and outreach efforts through the 2021-2029 planning period. The City will evaluate ADU production and affordability two years into the planning 2105
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-391
period (2023) and if it is determined these units are not meeting the lower-income housing need, the City will consider other housing sites that are available to accommodate the unmet portion of the lower-income RHNA.

See also Program 27 Fair Housing.

Implementation
• Objectives: A cumulative impact of these strategies that exceeds the conservative estimate of 120 units to achieve 360 ADUs in the planning period, with at least one third of the units (180) available as affordable housing to lower income households.
• Responsible Agencies: Housing and Planning Departments and Ontario Housing Authority
• Funding: General Fund, CDBG
• Timing: Consider fee waiver and loan programs in 2026 and implement programs as necessary by 2027. Continue to provide and update program information on the City’s website
throughout the planning period, in English and Spanish. Actively market ADU program throughout the planning period.

Implement monitoring - evaluate ADU production and
affordability two years into the planning period (2023).

8. Downtown Plan
Ontario’s Downtown covers 12 blocks along Euclid Boulevard. The City developed a Downtown District Plan that encompasses four downtown districts that create sub-zones within the Mixed-Use (MU-1) zoning district: Euclid Avenue Entertainment District (LUA-1), Arts District North and South (LUA-2S and LUA-2N), Holt Boulevard District (LUA3), and Civic Center District (LUA-4). The Downtown District Plan vision provides opportunities for high-density, market-rate and affordable housing in the Euclid Avenue Entertainment District and Holt Boulevard District, offering convenient access to downtown amenities, local commercial centers, public services, open space, and public transportation. The Downtown Plan area is included in a $35 million Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) Grant awarded to the City to increase prosperity and improve transportation and housing within a disadvantaged community. The TCC program includes affordable housing, active transportation improvements, mobility hub, urban greening, carbon farm, solar photovoltaic, and transit improvements.

This grant is a collaborative effort with public and community-based organizations.
2106
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-392 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Implementation
• Objectives: Adopt the Downtown District Plan to facilitate new mixed-use and residential development; continue to acquire property and assemble sites to facilitate new housing.
• Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
• Funding: General Fund, Tax Increment, Transformative Climate Communities (TCC)
• Timing: Within one year of Housing Element adoption

9. Mountain and Euclid Corridors
Euclid Avenue and Mountain Avenue extend the entire length of Ontario.

In recent years, developers have expressed interest in building residential and commercial projects along these corridors. Mountain Avenue has had numerous senior and affordable housing projects built adjacent to or near the corridor, and developers have begun to show interest in Euclid Avenue. Both corridors have commercial property that is proposed for redesignation as residential. To facilitate corridor development, the City previously rezoned properties along Euclid Avenue and Mountain Avenue for medium- and high-density residential development, as shown on the Official Land Use Plan (LU-01). During the planning period, the City will develop a lot-consolidation ordinance to incentivize the assemblage of parcels. Incentives may include fee modifications, flexibility in design, expedited permit processing, or others. The City will continue to monitor the ongoing status of development in the Euclid Avenue and Mountain Avenue corridors.

Implementation
• Objectives: Develop a lot consolidation ordinance to facilitate the assemblage of lots into larger parcels. with up to three assemblages anticipated during the planning period in the Euclid Avenue and Mountain Avenue corridors. Continue to monitor the ongoing status of development in the Euclid Avenue and
Mountain Avenue corridors.
• Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
• Funding: General Fund
• Timing: Within two years of Housing Element adoption, ongoing monitoring of development
2107
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-393

10. Holt Boulevard
Holt Boulevard is one of the original corridors paralleling the railroad and extending through Ontario and neighboring communities. With the development and success of commercial uses fronting the freeways, the commercial viability of Holt Boulevard has gradually eroded, leaving a significant number of underutilized uses on small parcels. The Policy Plan has declared Holt Boulevard as a focus area for mixed uses, both perpendicular to Mountain Avenue, at the base of Downtown, and in the East Holt Boulevard Study Area. Sites along Holt Boulevard have been previously rezoned to accommodate higher densities. To stimulate investment in these areas, the City will adopt a lot consolidation ordinance and incentives to encourage the recycling of land to residential uses. The City will continue to monitor the ongoing status of development in the Holt Boulevard area. The Holt Boulevard area is included in a $35 million Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) grant awarded to the City to increase prosperity and improve transportation and housing within a disadvantaged community. The TCC program includes affordable housing, active transportation improvements, mobility hub, urban greening, carbon farm, solar photovoltaic, and transit improvements. This grant is a collaborative effort with public and community-based organizations and includes the development of the 101-unit Vista Verde Affordable Housing project.

Implementation
• Objectives: Develop a lot consolidation ordinance to facilitate the assemblage of lots into larger parcels, with up to five assemblages anticipated during the planning period in the Holt Boulevard area. Continue to monitor the ongoing status of development in the Holt Boulevard area.
• Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
• Funding: General Fund
• Timing: Within two years of Housing Element adoption, ongoing monitoring of development

11. Ontario Ranch
Ontario Ranch covers 8,200 acres of the former San Bernardino Agricultural Preserve. This area is intended to provide a range of housing opportunities for the City’s emerging regional and national employment centers. Buildout of this area is contingent on completion of infrastructure, approval of specific plans, and cancellation of Williamson Act contracts. The City has entered into an agreement with a consortium to fund $430 million in infrastructure serving the eastern Ontario Ranch. 2108
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-394 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
The initial sewer trunk line, expected to develop in 2022, will travel along Merrill Avenue between Euclid and Walker Avenues. From there, additional sewer lines are planned to extend north along Euclid, Bon View, Grove, and Walker Avenues, with the southern-most sites expected to be first served. Infrastructure is expected to expand south to north as development occurs.

The City will monitor the timing of the provision of infrastructure. to ensure that infrastructure is being provided pursuant to these assumptions so that housing can be developed early in the planning period. The City will amend the sites inventory or rezone additional sites should infrastructure not be provided pursuant to the timeframes stated. (See also Program 14. Land Monitoring Program to Meet the RHNA.) Many specific plans for this area have been approved. Some of the original Williamson Act contracts will also expire during the planning period. The Policy Plan has designated much of the area for medium- and high-density residential and mixed-use. Within western Ontario Ranch (largely undeveloped), the Policy Plan lays groundwork to promote a mixed-income community, with low-density, medium-density, highdensity, and mixed-use well integrated with one another. Ontario Ranch offers important opportunity to integrate housing affordable to all income levels, especially lower-income households. The City will continue to process specific plan applications and work with developers to address outstanding issues, in particular the financing of infrastructure in western Ontario Ranch. In addition, the City will meet with potential developers to explore opportunities to integrate affordable housing in new developments.

Implementation
• Objectives: Continue to review, approve, and implement plans to develop Ontario Ranch, and meet with potential developers to encourage the development of affordable housing.
• Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
•
• Funding: General Fund
• Timing: OngoingBased on discussions with the Ontario Municipal Utilities Company (OMUC), with consideration of the cost, market conditions, and phasing needed to expand infrastructure, the City anticipates that infrastructure is likely to be available as follows:
2109
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-395
- Merrill Ave to the southern SCE (Southern California Edison) easement: 2023-2025
- Southern SCE easement to Schaefer Ave: 2025-2027
- Schaefer Ave to Riverside Drive: 2026-2028

12. Green Building
Green building means creating structures and using materials that are environmentally responsible and resource efficient, considering a building’s entire life cycle. To reduce per-capita energy use, the City will promote conservation and renewable energy generation techniques in public facilities and private development. The City will require new construction to reduce energy demand by incorporating building and site design strategies. Conservation will be the priority strategy for renovation of existing facilities. The Policy Plan also includes land planning strategies that impact energy demand reduction, including narrowing street widths, installing broad-canopied trees for shade, and clustering compact development to reduce automobile use.

Implementation
• Objectives:
- Promote green building practices in the private sector and explore point-of-sale energy retrofits for residences.
- Renewable energy incentive and energy-efficiency programs. - Develop a citywide 20-year energy plan.
- Support pilot development project as a net-zero-energy community and formulate solar site orientation guidelines. • Responsible Agencies: Planning Department, Building
Department, Public Works
• Funding: General Fund
• Timing: Ongoing
2110
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-396 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022

13. 2021–2029 Regional Housing Need
To meet state law requirements (California Government Code Sections 65583(c)(1)(A) and 65583(c)(1)(B)) to address the 2021-2029 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and to ensure a sufficient selection of sites are available for higher-density development, the City shall amend the Policy Plan and the Development Code, as needed, to provide adequate sites for 8,333 lower-income units and 2,735 moderate-income units (11,068 total units). The City will increase maximum density to at least 30 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) on a minimum of 270-370 acres depending on the mix of densities employed. Sites for lower-income units must allow at least 30 du/ac and are subject to the requirements of California Government Code Section 65583.2(h), including allowing owner-occupied and rental multifamily housing “by right” without discretionary review if 20 percent or more of the units in a project proposed on the site are affordable to those with lower incomes. The sites rezoned to accommodate lower-income RHNA must be able to accommodate a minimum of 16 units per site. At least half (50 percent) of the sites rezoned to accommodate lower-income RHNA shall be designated/zoned for residential uses only, except that all of the very low- and low-income housing need may be accommodated on sites designated for mixed uses if those sites allow 100-percent residential use and require that residential uses occupy 50 percent of the total floor area of a mixed-use project. The applications can be subject to design review as long as the project does not trigger the California Environmental Quality Act review process.

An Affordable Housing Overlay zone will be created and applied to those sites proposed to change from another zone to MU-2 in the East and West Holt Corridors to all parcels in the sites inventory that are zoned MU-2 along Holt Boulevard and parcels identified in the sites inventory in the area Ontario Ranch, south of Riverside Drive. The Overlay establishes a minimum density of 20 dwelling units per acre for all development regardless of affordability status and provides for special standards for affordable housing projects where at least 25% of proposed units are restricted for lower income households, includingin the Ontario Ranch.

In the Ontario Ranch, the AH Overlay provides incentives to develop two tiers of affordable housing.
• Tier 1. The first tier would include housing projects with at least 20% of units affordable to lower incomes. Projects in this tier would no longer be required to develop a new specific plan under the AH Overlay.
• Tier 2. The second tier would include projects with at least 25% of units dedicated as affordable to lower incomes via deed restriction 2111
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-397
or another long-term legal mechanism. Tier 2 projects would be subject to the same provisions as Tier 1, but the maximum density allowed on properties within the AH Overlay and designated as MDR on the Official Land Use Plan (Exhibit LU-01) of the Policy Plan component of The Ontario Plan would increase from 25 to 30 dwelling units per acre.

Projects developing without a specific plan would be allowed to develop according to the Policy Plan designation. Sites designated as MDR in the Policy Plan would be allowed to develop according to MDR-25 zoning standards, if the project qualifies as Tier 2, and it cannot achieve a density of 30 du/ac under MDR-25 standards, HDR-45 zoning standards may be used instead. Sites designated as MU in the Policy Plan may be developed in accordance with a comparable existing zoning implementation tool that allows for the density and/or intensity permitted by the Policy Plan.

To ensure that these incentives are primarily used as a means to promote the development of affordable housing, the AH Overlay would also require projects choosing to develop without a specific plan to calculate the minimum density over the entirety of the project site (or the portion of the project site that is located within the AH Overlay, if the project area also includes properties that are not within the AH Overlay).:
• No specific plan shall be required unless the parcels are already affected by an adopted specific plan
• The project can apply the development standards for the zone that implements the current or proposed Policy Plan designation • For parcels with a Policy Plan designation of MDR, the maximum density shall increase from 25 to 30 units per acre (before application of state density bonus provisions)
• For mixed-use projects, at least 75 percent of the project area must be dedicated to residential uses, and densities shall be consistent with the applicable Policy Plan designation.

The following specific plans will be updated to require properties within these Specific Plan areas that are also included in the sites inventory include a minimum density of 20 du/ac and allow at least 30 du/ac:
• The Ontario Mills Specific Plan
• The Armstrong Ranch Specific Plan
The City will also update the policy plan designations and associated tables as necessary to reflectconsistent with the proposed zoning changes, the intent of the overlay zone, and the changes to the specific plans. 2112
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-398 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
Implementation
• Objectives: Accommodate Ontario’s share of the 2021-2029 RHNA.
• Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
• Funding: General Fund
• Timing: Specific sites will be rezoned prior to February 12, 2025

14. Land Monitoring Program to Meet the RHNA
The City is in the process of updating the Development Code for consistency with the Land Use designations of its Policy Plan. This program will implement a land monitoring program to ensure that the city has enough land to meet its RHNA throughout the planning period.

California Government Code Section 65863 stipulates that a jurisdiction must ensure that its Housing Element inventory can accommodate its share of the RHNA by income level throughout the planning period. If a jurisdiction approves a housing project at a lower density or with fewer units by income category than identified in the Housing Element, it must quantify at the time of approval the remaining unmet housing need at each income level and determine whether there is sufficient capacity to meet that need. If not, the city must “identify and make available” additional adequate sites to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of housing need by income level within 180 days of approving the reduceddensity project. The City will evaluate residential development proposals for consistency with goals and policies of the Policy Plan and the 2021- 2029 Housing Element sites inventory and make written findings that the density reduction is consistent with the Policy Plan and that the remaining sites identified in the Housing Element are adequate to accommodate the RHNA by income level. If a proposed reduction of residential density will result in the residential sites inventory failing to accommodate the RHNA by income level, the City will identify and make available additional adequate sites to accommodate its share of housing need by income level within 180 days of approving the reduced-density project. (See also monitoring of infrastructure provision timing in Program 11. Ontario Ranch.)
2113
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-399
Implementation
• Objectives: Ensure there is a sufficient supply of multifamily zoned land to meet the housing needs identified in the RHNA. • Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
• Funding: General Fund
• Timing: Throughout the 2021-2029 planning period.

15. Residential By-Right for Developments with 20-Percent Affordable To comply with Assembly Bill (AB) 1397, sites with Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) listed in Table 9-1-in the land inventory in this 6th cycle Housing Element shall be allowed to be developed for residential use byright, in accordance with Government Code Section 65583.2(c). This byright (without discretionary review) requirement is only for housing developments in which at least 20 percent of the units are affordable to lower-income households. The application of the requirement should not be used to further constrain the development of housing. As such, housing developments that do not contain the requisite 20 percent would still be allowed to be developed according to the underlying (base) zoning.

Table 9-1
Assessor’s Parcel Numbers
104857602 104857601 101050176 101054306 101055234 101055233 101055232 101052217 101052206 101054301 101054327 101054304 101054305 101055216 101054302 101054313 101054314 101055237 104860414 104860415 101049116 101049102 101049103 101050207 Implementation
• Objectives: Comply with California Government Code Section 65583.2(c)
• Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
• Funding: General Fund
• Timing: Continuously during the planning period.
2114
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-400 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022

9.3 Governmental Constraints

16. Incentives
The City of Ontario offers several different types of incentives to facilitate housing production, including:
• Financial Incentives: The City makes available financial incentives that meet certain criteria. For instance, impact fee reductions are allowed for projects built in the Downtown. The City is financially assisting a variety of nonprofit organizations to provide senior housing, housing for homeless people, and other services. Density bonuses allowed for qualified projects work as a financial incentive by increasing the revenue stream of projects.

The City also has established its Community Housing
Development Organization (CHDO) program to leverage the nonprofit sector resources with available HOME CHDO funding.

The intent of the CHDO funding is to work with nonprofit CHDOs to help preserve, enhance, and improve existing neighborhoods through acquisition, rehabilitation, and/or new housing construction activities. Finally, the City continues to grant lowcost leases (e.g., $1 per-year leases) to qualified organizations to provide senior housing and homeless housing. These types of financial incentives will be provided to allow the City to meet its community development and housing objectives.
• Regulatory Incentives: The regulatory incentive program is intended to realize improved value, a rich palette of amenities, landmarks, and identifiable places. While the underlying land use designations still apply, the City may offer various incentives through a discretionary permit. Special incentives may be granted for mixed-use developments; residential infill projects near transit facilities; the replacement of underperforming commercial uses with new residential uses; the improvement and/or
intensification of existing, mid-block residential uses; or lot consolidation and development of desired projects. The menu of incentives may include density transfers, modifications in development standards, increased residential density, and other incentives to be negotiated on a case-by-case basis.

Implementation
• Objectives: Offer financial and regulatory incentives for residential projects that meet City housing and affordable housing goals. Facilitate the acquisition of 30 existing, abandoned homes to convert to affordable housing in the Fourth and Grove, 2115
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-401
Downtown, Nocta and Mission-Mountain neighborhoods in
northwest Ontario.
• Responsible Agencies: Housing Department
• Funding: General Fund
• Timing: Ongoing and at least annual outreach to developers of affordable housing, including nonprofit.

17. Land Acquisition
Land acquisition for residential development is perhaps one of the greatest challenges to creating affordable housing. Over the past five years, the City of Ontario has seen increasing land prices. To facilitate the development of affordable housing, the City has actively purchased land and made it available at a low cost (typically a $1 per-year lease) to affordable housing developers and nonprofit agencies to create affordable senior housing, emergency shelters, affordable attached ownership projects, and other affordable housing projects. As situations merit and projects are proposed that meet the City’s housing goals and the public interest, the City will continue to acquire residential land that can be leased or sold at below-market rates for the production of affordable housing.

Implementation
• Objectives: Continue to approve financial incentives for residential projects that meet City housing and affordable housing goals. Facilitate the acquisition of 30 existing, abandoned homes to convert to affordable housing in the Fourth and Grove, Downtown, Nocta and Mission-Mountain neighborhoods in
northwest Ontario.
• Responsible Agencies: Ontario Housing Authority and Housing Department
• Funding: General Fund, and other funding as available • Timing: Ongoing

18. Planned Unit Development
Within an established suburban fabric, there are considerable challenges to creating affordable housing. As development standards and lot standards change over time, it is not uncommon to have irregularly shaped and nonconforming parcels that are simply not conducive to redevelopment. The City has adopted a Planned Unit Development 2116
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-402 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
(PUD) Ordinance that permits a variety of housing types in every residential zone. The City may conditionally permit attached and detached single-family residences, town homes, patio homes, zero lot line, and any other type of housing product permitted by the regulations of the underlying zone. The PUD is a tool that has been successfully used for Town Square to encourage and facilitate innovative design, variety, and flexibility in the types of housing products, including the provision of affordable housing, that would otherwise not be allowed or possible through standards in the underlying zoning districts.

Implementation
• Objectives: Continue to use the PUD Ordinance to create tailored development standards to facilitate new housing.
• Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
• Funding: General Fund
• Timing: Ongoing

19. Mixed-Use and High-Density Residential Zone and Standards The Policy Plan directs significant housing growth to mixed-use areas.

These areas include the Downtown, Euclid Avenue, the Interstate (I-) 10 Corridor, Ontario Ranch, and Holt Boulevard. These mixed-use areas each have a distinct mix of land uses and density ranges (see Policy Plan Land Use Exhibit LU-11, Land Use Designation Summary Table). The City will continue its efforts in processing Development Code changes to align with the updated Policy Plan following the Ontario Plan update, which is in progress as of 2021. This includes reviewing the Euclid Francis Mixed-Use Area land use designation that has an assumed build-out of 156 units based on 50 percent of the area developed at 30 du/ac, which exceeds the allowed density range for the corresponding zoning district, Mixed Use-11 (allows a maximum of 25 units per acre). Additionally, as a part of The Ontario Plan, the City will develop Objective Design and Development Standards for multifamily residential and mixed-use developments to replace subjective standards/policies as required by California Government Code Section 65589 (see Program 21, Senate Bill 2 Implementation).

Implementation
• Objectives: Process necessary changes to the Development Code to ensure consistency with land use designations for mixed-use and multifamily residential in the updated Policy Plan, including adopting Objective Design and Development Standards with The Ontario Plan.
2117
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-403
• Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
• Funding: General Fund
• Timing: Complete by December 31, 2023

20. Development Code Amendments
To comply with state law, address identified constraints to residential development and remove barriers to housing for special-needs groups, including, but not limited to, low-, very low-, and extremely low-income households, the City will amend its Development Code, as described herein:
• Density Bonuses. Within two years of Housing Element
adoption, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915 et seq., amend the Development Code to update the density bonus ordinance to address recent updates to state law. If additional changes to state law occur during the planning period, the density bonus ordinance will be updated to comply with those changes. • Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). The City adopted updates to the ADU ordinance as a part of the Development Code update in 2020 to comply with state law. In late 2021, City staff initiated drafting another update to the City’s ADU ordinance to comply with State law. It will allow ADUs to be created on lots zoned for single-family residences with a proposed or existing single- family residence on the lot. It will be scheduled for Planning Commission review in March 2022 and City Council approval in April 2022.

During the planning period, the City will implement the ADU ordinance and update it to comply with any new state
requirements. (See also Program 7 ADUs)
• Specific Plan Requirements. The City will amend its
Development Code to eliminate the Specific Plan requirement in the Ontario Ranch for residential development projects that include a minimum of 25-percent affordable units.
• Transitional and Supportive Housing. Allow transitional and supportive housing as a residential use in all zones allowing residential uses, subject only to those restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone and without any discretionary action. Additionally, permit supportive housing by right in any nonresidential or mixed-use zone that permits multifamily (AB 2162, Government Code Section
65583(c)(3)).
2118
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-404 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
• Employee Housing. Treat employee housing that serves six or fewer persons as a single-family structure and permitted in the same manner as other single-family structures of the same type in the same zone (Health and Safety Code Section 17021.5). The Development Code will also be amended to treat employee housing consisting of no more than 12 units or 36 beds as an agricultural use and permitted in the same manner as other agricultural uses in the same zone (Section 17021.6) in zones where agricultural uses are permitted, specifically removing minimum lot size of 10 acres. Review Development Code for compliance with Section 17021.8, which requires a streamlined ministerial process for qualifying agricultural employee housing on land designated as Agricultural in the City’s Policy Plan. • Single-Room Occupancy Units. Allow single-room occupancy (SRO) housing in one or more zones without a use permit or administrative use permit, as other residential uses are regulated in the City’s Development Code (Government Code Section 65583(c)(1)). Review location requirements for SRO facilities to expand affordable housing opportunities for extremely lowincome households. • Emergency Shelter Parking. The City’s zoning permits an emergency shelter by right in the IL zone and conditionally permits an emergency shelter in the MDR-11, MDR-18, MDR-25, CC, LUA-3, IG, and IH zones. Emergency shelters are also permitted by right in the Emergency Shelter Overlay, subject to the base zone standards and consistent with Government Code Section 65583(4)(A). The City will review and revise parking requirements for emergency shelters to ensure that parking standards are sufficient to accommodate all staff, provided standards do not require more parking for emergency shelters than other residential or commercial uses within the same zone, per California Government Code Section 65583(a)(4).
• Low-Barrier Navigation Centers. Allow low-barrier navigation centers, a type of emergency shelter with wrap-around services, by right in zones that allow for mixed-use and nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses, per California Government Code Section 65662.
• Residential Care Facilities. Define residential care facilities.

Allow for residential care facilities with seven or more persons and subject them to the same restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone.
2119
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022 H-405
• Boarding, Lodging, and Rooming Houses. Review and amend Development Code standards for Boarding, Lodging, or Rooming House to remove the restrictions that the homes cannot be occupied by more than one federal, state, or youth authority parolee and add requirement that homes shall be required to sign a “Crime-Free Lease Addendum” to their rental or lease
agreement, in order to prevent discrimination based on criminal history, complying with California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 12264-12271.

Implementation
• Objectives: Comply with state law, address identified constraints to residential development, and remove barriers to housing for special-needs groups
• Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
• Funding: General Fund
• Timing: Within two years of Housing Element adoption, evaluation of potential constraints ongoing

21. Senate Bill 2 Implementation
As a part of the City’s Senate Bill (SB) 2 grant workplan, the City plans to develop Objective Design and Development Standards (ODDS) for residential projects: mixed use, multifamily, and single-family developments. As the City’s current Development Code does not have standards for Mixed-Use areas and detached developments at multifamily densities, the project will include developing comprehensive numerical development standards for these uses, such as setbacks, building heights, lot coverage, etc. This will also include the elimination of subjective development standards/policies, which shall be replaced with objective design standards, as required by Government Code Section 65589.

The City will review existing standards and guidelines in the Development Code, Downtown Design Guidelines, and applicable Specific Plans that incorporate residential development and assess the potentially needed amendments to create ODDS for all types of housing development. The City will also prepare a compliance checklist and style sheet for applicants to provide a clear list of minimum design requirements and architectural examples to illustrate design requirements.

Implementation
2120
City of Ontario Policy Plan
Housing Element Technical Report
H-406 Adoption Draft October 2021January 2022
• Objectives: Complete tasks associated with SB 2 grant workplan, including preparing and adopting ODDS to replace subjective standards/policies for all types of residential development, and making supplemental compliance checklist and style sheet available for applicant use.
• Responsible Agencies: Planning Department
• Funding: SB 2
• Timing: Complete by December 31, 2023