Orange City Council
February 14, 2023

CITY OF ORANGE
2023 LOCAL APPOINTMENTS LIST
Pursuant to Government Code Section § 54972, the following Local Appointments List is posted on an annual basis by December 31. The list contains names and terms of office for appointments to all regular Boards, Commissions, and Committees which are appointed by the City Council.

Note: The names on this list are subject to change based on term expirations and resignations that occur during the year. Further information regarding these vacancies may be obtained by calling the City Clerk’s Office at (714) 744-5500 or visiting the City’s website: www.cityoforange.org.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM COMMITTEE
Qualifications: The CDBG Program Committee shall consist of five (5) members whose primary residence is in the City of Orange. Members should show an interest in and have knowledge of housing and community development issues, especially as they relate to affordable housing and public service for residents of low and moderate income. (Qualifications per Resolution No. 11387) Form 700 required and AB1234 Ethics Education & AB1661 Sexual Harassment Avoidance Training certificates required
Terms of Office: The term of office shall be for two (2) years.* Meetings: Meetings are held as necessary during the CDBG funding cycle (November-April).

Name Appointed/Reappointed Term Expiration Date
Jonathan St. Clair 6-8-2021/4-13-2022 6-30-2024
Kim Le 6-8-2021 6-30-2023
Connie Benson 6-8-2021 6-30-2023
VACANT 6-30-2024
VACANT

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
Qualifications: The Committee shall consist of five (5) members whose primary residence or primary place of employment is in the City. Committee members shall be qualified to analyze and interpret architectural and site planning information, including, but not limited to, licensed landscape architects, architects, urban planners, engineers and licensed general contractors. At least two members shall have professional experience in urban planning, architectural history or historic preservation and possess a general knowledge of architecture in the Old Towne Historic District. (Qualifications per Resolution No. 11387; duties are set forth in Section 17.08.020 of the Orange Municipal Code) Form 700 and AB1234 Ethics Education & AB1661 Sexual Harassment Avoidance Training certificates required
Terms of Office: The term of office shall be for four (4) years.* Meetings: Meetings are held on the first and third Wednesdays of each month at 5:30 p.m. (Resolution 9643)
Name Appointed/Reappointed Term Expiration Date
Carol Fox 1-10-2012/2-9-2021 6-30-2024
Robert Imboden 4-10-2012/2-9-2021 6-30-2024
Anne McDermott 3-10-2015/2-9-2021 6-30-2023
Mary Anne Skorpanich 8-8-2017/2-9-2021 6-30-2025
Jerico Farfan 7-13-2021 6-30-2025
480

INVESTMENT AND AUDIT COMMITTEE
Qualifications:. The Committee shall consist of five (5) members: the City Treasurer and four citizen representatives. The citizen representatives must reside or be permanently employed in the City of Orange. In addition, they must meet at least one of the following criteria: (a) have the designation of Certified Public Accountant (CPA) or other business-related experience; and/or (b) have substantial education and demonstrated managerial experience [of no less than five years] in one or more of the following areas: investment banking, investment brokerage and sales, investment management, financial management and planning, or commercial banking. The City Council shall endeavor to ensure that there is at least one citizen representative that meets the qualifications of criteria (a) above, and one citizen representative that meets the qualifications of criteria (b) above. (Qualifications and duties pursuant to Resolution No. 11387) Form 700 required and AB1234 Ethics Education & AB1661 Sexual Harassment Avoidance Training certificates required
Terms of Office: The term of office shall be for two (2) years.* Meetings: Meetings are held quarterly on the fourth Wednesday of January, April, July, and October at 3:00 pm.

Name Appointed/Reappointed Term Expiration Date
Mark Mittmann 7-12-2022 6-30-2024
Jordan Prell 7-12-2022 6-30-2023***
Jeff Grampp 8-9-2022 6-30-2024
Aaron Christensen 8-9-2022 6-30-2023***
***Pursuant to Resolution No. 11387, two of the four citizen representatives shall be appointed to a one-year term initially and then two years thereafter.

ORANGE PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Qualifications: The Board shall consist of five (5) members whose primary residence is in the City of Orange. Trustees shall have an understanding and appreciation of the role of the public library in the community and in a democracy. Trustees should be library users and should value books and information delivery. (Education Code 18910)
Form 700 required and AB1234 Ethics Education & AB1661 Sexual Harassment Avoidance Training certificates required
Terms of Office: The term of office shall be for three (3) years (Education Code 18911).* Meetings: Meetings are typically held on the third Monday of each month at 3:30 p.m. (Determined at its June annual meeting per Board of Trustees By-Laws.) Name Appointed/Reappointed Term Expiration Date
Rebecca Martinez 1-12-2016/2-9-2021/5-10-2022** 6-30-2025 Susie Huber 7-14-2020 6-30-2023
Peggy Calvert 3-13-2018/2-9-2021 6-30-2024
VACANT 6-30-2026
Katie Montgomery 4-12-2022 6-30-2025
**Reappointed in 2021 for term serving 2019-2022
481

PARK PLANNING AND COMMUNITY EVENTS COMMISSION
Qualifications: The Commission shall consist of seven (7) members who shall have their primary residence in the City of Orange. Commissioners shall have knowledge of sports complexes and/or park development, and knowledge of City-sponsored events. (Qualifications per Resolution No. 11387; duties are set forth in Chapter 2.60 of the Orange Municipal Code) Form 700 required and AB1234 Ethics Education & AB1661 Sexual Harassment Avoidance Training certificates required
Terms of Office: The term of office shall be for four (4) years (OMC 2.60.030).* Meetings: Meetings are held on the fourth Wednesdays of January, April, July, and October at 5:30 p.m. (Resolution No. 11355)
Name Appointed/Reappointed Term Expiration Date
Eva Perez 6-8-2021 6-30-2025
Chrissy Vaughn 6-8-2021 6-30-2025
Adam Litwin 6-8-2021 6-30-2025
Eugene Fields 6-8-2021 6-30-2025
Steve Freeman 7-13-2021 6-30-2025
Mike Rouse 7-13-2021 6-30-2025
Christopher Ahlswede 6-14-2022 6-30-2026

PLANNING COMMISSION
Qualifications: The Commission shall consist of five (5) members who shall have their primary residence in the City of Orange. Commission members shall have general knowledge of land use and development. (Qualifications per Resolution 11387; duties are set forth in Section 17.08.020 of the Orange Municipal Code)
Form 700 required (pursuant to California Government Code Section 87200) AB1234 Ethics Education & AB1661 Sexual Harassment Avoidance Training certificates required Terms of Office: The term of office shall be for four (4) years (OMC 2.64.020).* Meetings: Meetings are held on the first and third Mondays of each month at 7:00 p.m. (OMC

2.64.040)
Name Appointed/Reappointed Term Expiration Date
Ernie Glasgow 7-14-2015/2-9-2021 6-30-2023
David Simpson 9-8-2015/2-9-2021 6-30-2023
David Vazquez 2-12-2019/4-12-2022 6-30-2026
Rick Martinez 1-8-2019/4-12-2022 6-30-2026
Jonathan Trapesonian 8-10-2021 6-30-2023 (term to fill vacancy) 482

TRAFFIC COMMISSION
Qualifications: The Commission shall consist of five (5) members who shall have their primary residence in the City of Orange. Members review matters of traffic and transportation planning, requests for speed limit increase or decreases, complaints concerning traffic safety conditions, and other general duties as set forth in Chapter 10.06 of the Orange Municipal Code. City Traffic Commission duties are considered as advisory to the City Council. (Qualifications per Resolution No. 11387)
Form 700 and AB1234 Ethics Education & AB1661 Sexual Harassment Avoidance Training certificates required
Terms of Office: The term of office shall be for four (4) years (OMC 10.06.020).* Meetings: Meetings are held bi-monthly on the second Wednesday of even numbered months at 5:30 p.m. (Resolution 11388)
Name Appointed/Reappointed Term Expiration Date
Adam Feliz 3-10-2015/2-9-2021 6-30-2023
Christian Vaughan 5-10-2011/2-9-2021 6-30-2023
Larry Dick 1-12-2016/2-9-2021 6-30-2024
A.J. Ricci 6-8-2021 6-30-2025
VACANT
*Per OMC Chapter 2.55.010, members of boards, commissions and committees may serve no more than 12 consecutive years on the board, commission or committee to which they are appointed. No member of a board, commission, or committee who has served 12 consecutive years shall be eligible for reappointment to the same board, commission or committee prior to the passage of a two-year interval.

Revised 1/24/2023
483
Community Development Block Grant Program Committee
Member Feb 17, 2022 Mar 17, 2022 Aug 16, 2022 TOTALS
Connie Benson P P P 100.0%
Kim Le P P P 100.0%
Janice Mickelson-Weilmuenster P P X 100.0% (resigned 3/21/22) Fernando Rico P P n/a 100.0% (term expired 6/30/22)
Jonathan Saint Clair P P P 100.0%

Present: 5 5 3 100.0%

Absent: 0 0 0 0.0%
Excused: 0 0 0 0.0%
* P = Present
* A = Absent
* E = Excused
* C = Canceled
X = no longer serving on committee
City of Orange - Attendance Report - 2022
484
Design Review Committee
Member 1/5 1/19 2/2 2/16 3/2 3/16 4/6 4/20 5/4 5/18 6/1 6/15 7/6 7/7 7/20 8/3 8/17 9/8 9/21 10/5 10/19 11/2 11/16 12/7 12/21 TOTALS Carol Fox E E C P P P P E P P C P C P E P A P E P P P P P P 72.73% Robert Imboden P P C P P P P P P E C P C P P P P P P P P P P P P 95.45% Anne McDermott P P C P P P P P P P C P C P P P P P P P P P P P P 100.0% Mary Anne Skorpanich P P C P P P P P P P C P C E A P P P E P P P P P P 86.36% Jerico Farfan E P C P P P P E P P C E C E P P P E P P P P E E P 68.18%

Present: 3 4 0 5 5 5 5 3 5 4 0 4 0 3 3 5 4 4 3 5 5 5 4 4 5 88.57%

Absent: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.9% Excused: 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 9.52% * P = Present
* A = Absent
* E = Excused
* C = Canceled
City of Orange - Attendance Report - 2022
485
Orange Public Library Board of Trustees
Member 1/24 2/28 3/21 4/18 5/16 6/20 7/18 8/15 9/19 10/17 11/21 12/19 TOTALS Rebecca Martinez P P P P P P P P P E P C 90.90%
Susie Huber P P P P P E P P P P E C 81.82%
Peggy Calvert P E P P E P E P P P P C 72.73%
Joseph Valencia P P E E P P E P X X X C 62.5% (resigned 8/15/22) Katie Montgomery n/a n/a n/a P A P P P P P P C 87.5% (appointed 4/12/22)

Present: 4 3 3 4 3 4 3 5 4 3 3 0 88.64%

Absent: 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.27%
Excused: 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 9.09%
* P = Present
* A = Absent
* E = Excused
* C = Canceled
X= no longer serving on Board
City of Orange - Attendance Report - 2022
486
Park Planning and Community Events Commission
Member Jan 26, 2022 Apr 27, 2022 Jul 27, 2022 Jul 28, 2022 Oct 26, 2022 Nov 01, 2022 TOTALS Eva Perez P P C P C A 75.0%
Chrissy Vaughn P P C A C A 50.0%
Adam Litwin P P C P C P 100.0%
Eugene Fields P P C P C P 100.0%
Steve Freeman P P C P C P 100.0%
Mike Rouse P P C A C A 50.0%
Christopher H Ahlswede n/a n/a C P C P 100.0% (appointed 6/14/22)

Present: 6 6 0 5 0 4 80.77%

Absent: 0 0 0 2 0 3 19.23%
Excused: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0%
* P = Present
* A = Absent
* E = Excused
* C = Canceled
City of Orange - Attendance Report - 2022
487
Planning Commission
Member 1/3 1/17 2/7 2/23 3/7 3/21 4/4 4/18 5/2 5/16 6/6 6/20 7/6 7/18 8/1 8/15 9/7 9/19 10/3 10/17 11/7 11/21 12/5 12/19 TOTALS Dave Simpson P C C P P E P C P P P P C C P C E P P A P C P C 81.25% Ernest Glasgow P C C P P P P C P P P P C C P C P P P P P C P C 100.0% Rick Martinez P C C P P P P C E P P P C C P C P P P A P C P C 87.50% David Vazquez P C C A P P P C P P P E C C P C P P P P P C P C 87.50% Jonathan Trapesonian P C C P E P P C P E P P C C P C A P E P P C P C 75.0%

Present: 5 0 0 4 4 4 5 0 4 4 5 4 0 0 5 0 3 5 4 3 5 0 5 0 90.79%

Absent: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 5.26% Excused: 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.95% * P = Present
* A = Absent
* E = Excused
* C = Canceled
City of Orange - Attendance Report - 2022
488
Traffic Commission
Member Jan 12, 2022 Feb 09, 2022 Mar 09, 2022 Apr 13, 2022 May 12, 2022 Jun 08, 2022 Aug 10, 2022 Oct 12, 2022 TOTALS Adam Feliz C P P C P C C P 100.0%
Christian Vaughan C P P C E C C P 75.0%
Larry Dick C P P C P C C P 100.0%
AJ Ricci C P P C P C C P 100.0%
Jim Beil C P P C P C n/a n/a 100.0% (term expired 6/30/22)

Present: 0 5 5 0 4 0 0 4 100.0%

Absent: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0%
Excused: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0%
* P = Present
* A = Absent
* E = Excused
* C = Canceled
City of Orange - Attendance Report - 2022
489
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 6.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0088
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Mary E. Binning, City Attorney

1. SUBJECT
Adoption of Resolution No. 11432 setting the membership number, qualifications and related information for City boards, committees and commissions.

2. SUMMARY
The proposed Resolution would increase the number of members of each specified board, committee and commission to seven members, and set the qualifications for membership, compensation and meeting dates for all City Council-created boards, committees and commissions.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Adopt Resolution No. 11432. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange rescinding Resolution Nos. 10229, 11387, 11388, 11355 and 11409 and establishing the number of members, qualifications for membership, purpose, compensation and meetings for specified City boards, committees and commissions.

2. Direct the City Clerk to post a Notice of Vacancy of any newly-created positions pursuant to the Maddy Act.

3. Direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance amending the Orange Municipal Code to delete the requirement for a school district representative on the Traffic Commission, along with other applicable revisions.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
The two new Design Review Committee positions would be paid $50 per meeting and the two new Planning Commission positions would be paid $60 per meeting, potentially costing an additional total of $220 per month.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 4: Provide outstanding public service
a: Obtain, implement, and evaluate public input into our services and programs.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
The boards, committees and commissions created by the City Council have historically consisted of five members. With the increase in City Council membership to seven, the City Council has expressed a desire to effect a commensurate increase in all board, committee and commission membership to seven. The Park Planning and Community Events Commission was created recently City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™490
Item #: 6.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0088
membership to seven. The Park Planning and Community Events Commission was created recently and provides for seven members.

Over the years, the board, committee and commission qualifications, meeting dates, and other descriptions have been adopted by separate Resolutions of the City Council. The proposed Resolution consolidates all information regarding Council-created boards, committees and commissions into one Resolution. The Library Board of Trustees is not a Council-created board and its membership is governed by Education Code section 18910. Membership on the Library Board is set by statute at five members and may not be increased. The proposed Resolution covers only those bodies created by the City Council.

One item of note is the current requirement in Orange Municipal Code (OMC) section 10.06.010 that one member of the City Traffic Commission be a “school district representative.” In recent memory, this qualification has not been applied and no school district representative has served on the Traffic Commission. It is the recommendation of staff that this requirement be deleted from the OMC. It remains the prerogative of the City Council to appoint a school district representative; however, it will no longer be a requirement.

The City Attorney’s Office has prepared a separate “clean up” ordinance amending those provisions in the OMC relating to the number of members on the Traffic Commission, DRC and Planning Commission. The proposed ordinance will, at the direction of the City Council, also delete the requirement that one member of the Traffic Commission be a school district representative. Because that ordinance contains amendments to Title 17 (Zoning Code), a recommendation from the Planning Commission to the City Council is required. That recommendation is expected to come before the City Council at the March 14 meeting.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Resolution No. 11432
City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™491
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 6.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0088
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Mary E. Binning, City Attorney

1. SUBJECT
Adoption of Resolution No. 11432 setting the membership number, qualifications and related information for City boards, committees and commissions.

2. SUMMARY
The proposed Resolution would increase the number of members of each specified board, committee and commission to seven members, and set the qualifications for membership, compensation and meeting dates for all City Council-created boards, committees and commissions.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Adopt Resolution No. 11432. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange rescinding Resolution Nos. 10229, 11387, 11388, 11355 and 11409 and establishing the number of members, qualifications for membership, purpose, compensation and meetings for specified City boards, committees and commissions.

2. Direct the City Clerk to post a Notice of Vacancy of any newly-created positions pursuant to the Maddy Act.

3. Direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance amending the Orange Municipal Code to delete the requirement for a school district representative on the Traffic Commission, along with other applicable revisions.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
The two new Design Review Committee positions would be paid $50 per meeting and the two new Planning Commission positions would be paid $60 per meeting, potentially costing an additional total of $220 per month.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 4: Provide outstanding public service
a: Obtain, implement, and evaluate public input into our services and programs.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
The boards, committees and commissions created by the City Council have historically consisted of five members. With the increase in City Council membership to seven, the City Council has expressed a desire to effect a commensurate increase in all board, committee and commission membership to seven. The Park Planning and Community Events Commission was created recently City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™492
Item #: 6.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0088
membership to seven. The Park Planning and Community Events Commission was created recently and provides for seven members.

Over the years, the board, committee and commission qualifications, meeting dates, and other descriptions have been adopted by separate Resolutions of the City Council. The proposed Resolution consolidates all information regarding Council-created boards, committees and commissions into one Resolution. The Library Board of Trustees is not a Council-created board and its membership is governed by Education Code section 18910. Membership on the Library Board is set by statute at five members and may not be increased. The proposed Resolution covers only those bodies created by the City Council.

One item of note is the current requirement in Orange Municipal Code (OMC) section 10.06.010 that one member of the City Traffic Commission be a “school district representative.” In recent memory, this qualification has not been applied and no school district representative has served on the Traffic Commission. It is the recommendation of staff that this requirement be deleted from the OMC. It remains the prerogative of the City Council to appoint a school district representative; however, it will no longer be a requirement.

The City Attorney’s Office has prepared a separate “clean up” ordinance amending those provisions in the OMC relating to the number of members on the Traffic Commission, DRC and Planning Commission. The proposed ordinance will, at the direction of the City Council, also delete the requirement that one member of the Traffic Commission be a school district representative. Because that ordinance contains amendments to Title 17 (Zoning Code), a recommendation from the Planning Commission to the City Council is required. That recommendation is expected to come before the City Council at the March 14 meeting.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· Resolution No. 11432
City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™493
RESOLUTION NO. 11432

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ORANGE RESCINDING RESOLUTION
NOS. 10229, 11387, 11388, 11355 AND 11409 AND

ESTABLISHING THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS,

QUALIFICATIONS FOR MEMBERSHIP, PURPOSE,

COMPENSATION AND MEETINGS FOR

SPECIFIED CITY BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND
COMMISSIONS.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orange creates boards, committees, and commissions and appoints members thereof to assist in carrying out of the City’s business and to further the public interest; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution Nos. 10229, 11387, 11388, 11355 and 11409 the City Council established criteria and meeting times for such various boards, committees and commissions; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to revise and update the number of members and membership criteria for appointment of members to such boards, committees, and commissions to allow for increased participation by interested members of the public, and establish their meeting schedules; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires for each member of the City Council to have the opportunity to present the Mayor with a nomination to each board, committee and commission for submittal to the entire City Council for approval.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orange as follows:

1. That Resolution Nos. 10229, 11387, 11388, 11355 and 11409 are hereby repealed in their entirety.

2. That the number of members of each board, committee and commission as set forth in Exhibit A shall be seven members and that the qualification for membership and compensation shall be as described therein.

3. That in order to be considered for appointment to specified City Council created boards, committees or commissions, an applicant must meet the qualifications stated in Exhibit A and, pursuant to Orange Municipal Code Section 2.55.020, must meet these qualifications at all times while serving as a member of such board, committee or commission.

4. That the City Clerk is directed to post notice of the availability of any newly-created vacant position on the City website and as otherwise required by law. 494
2 ADOPTED this ____ day of ____________________, 2023
Daniel R. Slater, Mayor, City of Orange
ATTEST:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF ORANGE )

CITY OF ORANGE )
I, PAMELA COLEMAN, City Clerk of the City of Orange, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 2023 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
495
Exhibit A

EXHIBIT A

QUALIFICATIONS FOR CITY COUNCIL CREATED

BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS

1. Community Development Block Grant Program Committee
 Number: The Committee shall consist of seven members.  Qualifications: Members shall have their primary residence in the City.

Members shall show an interest in and knowledge of housing and community development issues, especially as they relate to affordable housing and public service for residents of low and moderate income.  Purpose: To provide a public engagement process in the allocation of CDBG funds as required by 24 C.F.R. Part 91.105
 Duties: As set forth in the CDBG Program Policies and Procedures Manual maintained by the City.
 Compensation: None.
 Meeting Dates: As determined by City staff.

2. Design Review Committee
 Number: The Committee shall consist of seven members.  Qualifications: Members shall have their primary residence or primary place of employment in the City. Members shall be qualified to analyze and interpret architectural and site planning information, and shall include, but not be limited to, licensed landscape architects, architects, urban planners, engineers and licensed general contractors. At least two members shall have professional experience in urban planning, architectural history or historic preservation and possess a general knowledge of architecture in the City’s Historic Districts.
 Purpose: As set forth in Section 17.08.020.D of the Orange Municipal Code.  Duties: As set forth in Section 17.08.020.D of the Orange Municipal Code.  Compensation: $50 per meeting attended with a maximum of $200 per month.
 Meeting Dates: The 1st and 3rd Wednesday of each month convening at 5:30 p.m. If such date is a legal holiday observed by the City, the meeting shall be held the following day.

3. Investment and Audit Committee
 Number: The Committee shall consist of seven members: the City Treasurer and six representatives from the public.
 Term: Two years.
 Qualifications: Members shall have their primary residence or primary place of employment in the City. In addition, they must meet at least one of the following criteria: (a) have the designation of Certified Public Accountant (CPA) or other business-related experience; and/or (b) have 496
Exhibit A

substantial education and demonstrated managerial experience of no less than five years in one or more of the following areas: investment banking, investment brokerage and sales, investment management, financial management and planning, or commercial banking. The qualifications of the applicants for the public representatives will be reviewed by the City Manager, the Finance Director, and an outside expert in finance, investments, or auditing who shall submit qualified applicants to the Mayor and City Council. The City Council shall endeavor to ensure that there is at least one citizen representative that meets the qualifications of criteria (a) above, and one citizen representative that meets the qualifications of criteria (b) above. No member of the Committee shall be financially interested in any contract, or otherwise conduct any business with any member of the City Council, the City Manager, the Finance Director, the City Treasurer, or the City or any of its agencies, either on an individual basis or as a partner, major shareholder, member, or employee of any firm.
 Purpose: The primary purpose of the Committee is to assist the City Council in discharging its responsibility for the overall stewardship of the City’s financial affairs, including determining that the City’s investments are consistent with the City’s investment policy’s principal objectives of safety first, liquidity second, and total rate of return third. The Committee reports to and acts as an advisory body to the City Council, and augments management’s accountability to the City Council. The Committee shall act solely as an advisory body and shall not exercise decision-making authority, nor shall it be involved in day-to-day financial and accounting operations of the City. The Committee shall not make, or direct City staff to make, any particular Investment, purchase any particular investment products, or do business with any particular investment companies, brokers, or advisors.  Duties: The Committee’s duties are to:
o Select the independent financial auditor for the financial statement audit;
o Monitor the progress and evaluate the results of the financial statement audit;
o Ensure the prompt and effective remedy of any control weaknesses and legal compliance violations identified in the course of the financial statement audit;
o Serve as a direct communications link between the City Council and the independent auditor;
o Monitor the adequacy of the City’s internal control structure on an ongoing basis, such as cash disbursements, cash receipting, treasury transactions, etc., as examined by the internal audit function and the independent financial auditor;
o Review results of contract compliance audits and financial statement reviews conducted by the City’s internal audit function, such as trash contracts, internal controls, and revenue audits; o Review results of compliance audits and reviews conducted by outside agencies, such as Department of Transportation grants, M2 497
Exhibit A

funds for the Senior Mobility program and the Ground Emergency Medical Transport (GEMT) supplemental reimbursement program; o Review the City’s Investment Policy annually and recommend revisions as necessary;
o Review the Treasurer’s Report as defined by the State of California Government Code Section 53646 to ensure conformance with the City’s Statement of Investment Policy and review related factors such as risk, diversification, and maturity;
o Provide advice regarding potential investment, potential investment strategies, and suitability of pools such as the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF);
o Provide written recommendations to the City Council;
o Maintain minutes of the Committee proceedings and report to the City Council quarterly.
 Compensation: None.
 Meeting Dates: Quarterly and additional meetings as needed on dates determined by City staff.

4. Park Planning and Community Events Commission
 Number: The Commission shall consist of seven members.  Qualifications: Members shall have their primary residence in the City.

Members shall have knowledge of sports complexes and/or park development, and knowledge of City-sponsored events.
 Purpose: As set forth in Chapter 2.60 of the Orange Municipal Code.  Duties: As set forth in Chapter 2.60 of the Orange Municipal Code.  Compensation: None.
 Meeting Dates: The 4th Wednesday of January, April, July, and October, convening at 5:30 p.m. If such date is a legal holiday observed by the City, the meeting shall be held the following day.

5. Planning Commission
 Number: The Commission shall consist of seven members.  Qualifications: Members shall have their primary residence in the City.

Members shall have general knowledge of land use and development.  Purpose: As set forth in Section 17.08.020.B
 Duties: Duties are set forth in Section 17.08.020 of the Orange Municipal Code.
 Compensation: $60 per meeting attended with a maximum of $240 per month.
 Meeting Dates: The 1st and 3rd Monday of each month convening at 7:00 p.m. If such date is a legal holiday observed by the City, the meeting shall be held the following Thursday.
498
Exhibit A

6. Traffic Commission
 Number: The Commission shall consist of seven members.  Qualifications: Members shall have their primary residence in the City. One member shall be submitted by the Orange Unified School District to the Mayor for appointment. The Chief of Police or designee and the City Traffic Engineer or designee, shall be non-voting members of the Commission.  Purpose: As set forth in Chapter 10.06 of the Orange Municipal Code.  Duties: As set forth in Chapter 10.06 of the Orange Municipal Code.  Compensation: None. Reimbursement for incidental expenses allowed.  Meeting Dates: The 2nd Wednesday of February, April, June, August, October and December, convening at 5:30 p.m. If such date is a legal holiday observed by the City, the meeting shall be held the following day. 499
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 6.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0102
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Pamela Coleman, City Clerk

1. SUBJECT
Accept resignation of Jonathan Trapesonian from the Planning Commission.

2. SUMMARY
Commissioner Trapesonian has notified the City Clerk that he will be moving and will no longer have his primary residence in the City of Orange. He submitted a letter of resignation effective February 24, 2023.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Accept the resignation of Commissioner Jonathan Trapesonian effective February 24, 2023, and direct the City Clerk to post a Notice of Vacancy pursuant to the Maddy Act.

4. ATTACHMENTS
· Letter of resignation
City of Orange Page 1 of 1 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™500
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 6.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0102
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Pamela Coleman, City Clerk

1. SUBJECT
Accept resignation of Jonathan Trapesonian from the Planning Commission.

2. SUMMARY
Commissioner Trapesonian has notified the City Clerk that he will be moving and will no longer have his primary residence in the City of Orange. He submitted a letter of resignation effective February 24, 2023.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Accept the resignation of Commissioner Jonathan Trapesonian effective February 24, 2023, and direct the City Clerk to post a Notice of Vacancy pursuant to the Maddy Act.

4. ATTACHMENTS
· Letter of resignation
City of Orange Page 1 of 1 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™501
502
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 6.4. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0093
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Pamela Coleman, City Clerk

1. SUBJECT
Consider the removal of Commissioners Mike Rouse and Chrissy Vaughn from the Park Planning and Community Events Commission.

2. SUMMARY
Pursuant to Orange Municipal Code 2.55.010, “members of boards, commissions, and committees serve at the pleasure of the City Council. Unless otherwise provided for in law, any member of a board, commission, or committee may be removed at any time, with or without cause, by a majority vote of all the members of the City Council.”
Commissioner Chrissy Vaughn was appointed to the Park Planning and Community Events Commission on June 8, 2021. Commissioner Vaughn’s current term ends on June 30, 2025.

Commissioner Mike Rouse was appointed on July 13, 2021. Commissioner Rouse’s current term ends on June 30, 2025.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Consider Mayor Slater’s recommendation to remove Commissioner Mike Rouse and Commissioner Chrissy Vaughn from the Park Planning and Community Events Commission, and direct the City Clerk to post a Notice of Vacancy for both positions pursuant to the Maddy Act.

4. ATTACHMENTS
· OMC 2.55.010 Removal of Members
City of Orange Page 1 of 1 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™503
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 6.4. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0093
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Pamela Coleman, City Clerk

1. SUBJECT
Consider the removal of Commissioners Mike Rouse and Chrissy Vaughn from the Park Planning and Community Events Commission.

2. SUMMARY
Pursuant to Orange Municipal Code 2.55.010, “members of boards, commissions, and committees serve at the pleasure of the City Council. Unless otherwise provided for in law, any member of a board, commission, or committee may be removed at any time, with or without cause, by a majority vote of all the members of the City Council.”
Commissioner Chrissy Vaughn was appointed to the Park Planning and Community Events Commission on June 8, 2021. Commissioner Vaughn’s current term ends on June 30, 2025.

Commissioner Mike Rouse was appointed on July 13, 2021. Commissioner Rouse’s current term ends on June 30, 2025.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Consider Mayor Slater’s recommendation to remove Commissioner Mike Rouse and Commissioner Chrissy Vaughn from the Park Planning and Community Events Commission, and direct the City Clerk to post a Notice of Vacancy for both positions pursuant to the Maddy Act.

4. ATTACHMENTS
· OMC 2.55.010 Removal of Members
City of Orange Page 1 of 1 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™504
Orange, California Municipal Code
Title 2 ADMINISTRATION AND PERSONNEL
Chapter 2.55 BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES—GENERAL PROVISIONS

2.55.010 Removal of Members.

A. Members of boards, commissions and committees serve at the pleasure of the City Council. Unless otherwise provided for in law, any member of a board, commission or committee may be removed at any time, with or without cause, by a majority vote of all the members of the City Council.

B. Effective May 14, 2002, members of boards, commissions and committees may serve no more than twelve (12) consecutive years on the board, commission or committee to which they are appointed. No member of a board, commission or committee who has served twelve (12) consecutive years shall be eligible for reappointment to the same board, commission or committee prior to the passage of a two-year interval. (Ord. 11-02)
Contact:

City Clerk: 714-744-5500
Published by Quality Code Publishing, Seattle, WA. By using this site, you agree to the terms of use. 505
506
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.1. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0077
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager

1. SUBJECT
Employment Agreement with City Attorney Mary E. Binning.

2. SUMMARY
Pursuant to Resolution No. 11410, or as superseded, the City Council determines the City Attorney’s compensation and benefits. The proposed Employment Agreement with City Attorney Mary E.

Binning provides for a six month term effective January 15, 2023 thru July 14, 2023.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve Employment Agreement with City Attorney Mary E. Binning.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
The Agreement provides for a monthly salary of $22,750.00 plus benefits, as outlined in the Executive/Senior Management Resolution No. 11410, or as superseded.

Funds are budgeted and available as follows: General Fund (100) will pay 90% of the expenses related to this Agreement, with 5% from Self Insurance - Workers’ Compensation (730), and the other 5% from Self Insurance - Liability (740).

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 4: Provide outstanding public service
e: Attract, retain and develop quality employees dedicated to public service.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
The City hired Ms. Binning in March 1998 where she served as Assistant City Attorney until December 2000 and was rehired with the City as a Senior Assistant City Attorney in March 2019.

Ms. Binning offers nearly 30 years of municipal and private law experience.

In recognition of Ms. Binning’s significant experience, the City shall provide 80 hours of Administrative Leave, 22.5 hours of Floating Holiday Leave, and a modification to the Sick Leave Payout Program (from 50% to 75% of unused sick leave hours) upon retirement.

Applicable rules and regulations for Executive Directors within Resolution No. 11410, and the Orange Municipal Code, as superseded, govern all other benefits or terms of employment.

7. ATTACHMENTS
City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™507
Item #: 7.1. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0077
· Employment Agreement
City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™508
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.1. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0077
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager

1. SUBJECT
Employment Agreement with City Attorney Mary E. Binning.

2. SUMMARY
Pursuant to Resolution No. 11410, or as superseded, the City Council determines the City Attorney’s compensation and benefits. The proposed Employment Agreement with City Attorney Mary E.

Binning provides for a six month term effective January 15, 2023 thru July 14, 2023.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve Employment Agreement with City Attorney Mary E. Binning.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
The Agreement provides for a monthly salary of $22,750.00 plus benefits, as outlined in the Executive/Senior Management Resolution No. 11410, or as superseded.

Funds are budgeted and available as follows: General Fund (100) will pay 90% of the expenses related to this Agreement, with 5% from Self Insurance - Workers’ Compensation (730), and the other 5% from Self Insurance - Liability (740).

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 4: Provide outstanding public service
e: Attract, retain and develop quality employees dedicated to public service.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
The City hired Ms. Binning in March 1998 where she served as Assistant City Attorney until December 2000 and was rehired with the City as a Senior Assistant City Attorney in March 2019.

Ms. Binning offers nearly 30 years of municipal and private law experience.

In recognition of Ms. Binning’s significant experience, the City shall provide 80 hours of Administrative Leave, 22.5 hours of Floating Holiday Leave, and a modification to the Sick Leave Payout Program (from 50% to 75% of unused sick leave hours) upon retirement.

Applicable rules and regulations for Executive Directors within Resolution No. 11410, and the Orange Municipal Code, as superseded, govern all other benefits or terms of employment.

7. ATTACHMENTS
City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™509
Item #: 7.1. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0077
· Employment Agreement
City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™510

CITY OF ORANGE

AGREEMENT FOR EMPLOYMENT

OF CITY ATTORNEY
THIS AGREEMENT FOR EMPLOYMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into effective January 15, 2023 (“Effective Date”), by and between the City of Orange, a municipal corporation (“City”) and Mary E. Binning, an individual. In consideration of the respective and mutual covenants hereinafter contained and made, and subject to all the terms and conditions hereof, the parties agree as follows:

1. The City Council of the City hereby appoints Mary E. Binning as the City Attorney of the City (hereafter “City Attorney”), with a term from the Effective Date through July 14, 2023 (“Term”), unless otherwise extended or terminated as herein provided.

2. Mary E. Binning desires to perform the duties of City Attorney for the City and hereby accepts such appointment under the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

3. Compensation
Upon the Effective Date of this Agreement, the salary of City Attorney is established at TwentyTwo Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty and 00/100 Dollars ($22,750.00) per month and shall be paid in the same manner and at the same times as other salaries in the City are paid. During the Term of this Agreement, if any across-the-board salary increases are approved for Non-Safety Executive Management listed in Appendix “A” to Resolution No. 11410 or as such Resolution may be superseded, then City Attorney shall be entitled to the same percentage increase.

4. Benefits
a. In addition to any benefits provided in this Agreement, City Attorney shall receive those benefits and be governed by all applicable rules and regulations related to those benefits provided for Executive Management listed in Exhibit “A” to Resolution No. 11410 or as such Resolution may be superseded; provided that it is understood that City Attorney shall pay the Miscellaneous Member Contributions to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) at the same level and in the same manner as Executive Management, as provided in Resolution No. 11410 or as such Resolution may be superseded.
511
2 b. Upon appointment with City, City Attorney shall be provided with:
(1) 80 hours of Administrative Leave without proration; and (2) 22.5 hours of Floating Holiday leave without proration.

5. Modification to Sick Leave Payout.
a. With respect to City Attorney, Section 21.D.8(e) of the Top Management Resolution contained in Resolution No. 11410 or as such Resolution may be superseded (Leaves of Absence – Sick Leave – Sick Leave Payout Program), shall be modified as follows:

Upon retirement from employment with the City and entering the CalPERS as a retired annuitant, City Attorney shall receive pay for 75% of all unused sick leave hours. The cash value of this unused sick leave payout will be deposited into City Attorney’s Retirement Health Savings Plan account, as described in Section 24.C of Resolution No. 11410 or as such Resolution may be superseded.
b. With respect to City Attorney, Section 24.C.3 of the Top Management Resolution contained in Resolution No. 11410 or as such Resolution may be superseded (Retirement – Retirement Health Savings Plan), shall be modified as follows:

The full cash value of City Attorney’s unused sick leave payout upon retirement from City service (i.e., 75% of all unused sick leave) and entering CalPERS as a retired annuitant.

6. Termination
a. Termination. City reserves the right to terminate this Agreement for any reason prior to July 14, 2023, by providing City Attorney written notice of its election to terminate, including any statement of cause, and an opportunity for a hearing as set forth in Orange Municipal Code (“OMC”) Section 2.22.010, as it may be amended. Notwithstanding any provision in OMC Section 2.22.010 to the contrary, a majority of the then-elected City Council is required to approve such termination. Such termination shall be effective as set forth in the notice of election to terminate, but in no event sooner than the time required for notice and any requested hearing. 512
3 b. Severance. Except as otherwise provided herein, in the event City Attorney is terminated prior to July 14, 2023, City is obligated to pay City Attorney full salary as set forth in Section 3 of this Agreement or as it may be later amended, and health benefits, for three months after the date of termination. The total salary severance amount shall be payable no later than thirty (30) days following the date of termination, or as otherwise agreed by both parties. This severance amount shall only be payable provided that City Attorney has executed a release, waiving any rights, claims, or any other actions arising out of termination of this Agreement in a form acceptable to the City Council. c. Cause. Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, in the event City Attorney is terminated for cause, City Attorney shall forfeit any and all severance payments described in Section 6.b of this Agreement. In addition to other grounds, the following shall also be considered grounds for termination for cause:
(1) Performance of outside business interests that conflict directly with the activities and duties as City Attorney, but not including educational or professional training programs conducted by City Attorney whether for personal financial gain or not; (2) Refusal to take or subscribe any oath or affirmation required by law; (3) Conviction of a felony or conviction of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude (a conviction following a plea of nolo contendre is deemed a conviction).

7. City Attorney shall notify the Mayor and City Council in writing of any unexpected absence from Orange County in excess of nine (9) regular business hours. City Attorney shall provide a telephone number(s) where she can be reached during such absences. Said notices shall designate an Acting City Attorney who shall be authorized to perform the duties and responsibilities of City Attorney in her absence.

8. In the event City Attorney voluntarily resigns her position with the City before expiration of the Term of this Agreement or any extension thereof, she shall give the City Council thirty (30) days’ written notice, unless the parties otherwise agree. In the event of voluntary resignation or expiration of this Agreement, City Attorney is not entitled to the severance payment described in Section 6.b of this Agreement.

9. This Agreement may only be amended in writing, signed by both parties. 513
4 10. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and no promises or representations not included in this Agreement shall have any force or effect. Each party agrees that they have engaged in arms-length bargaining and have been provided the opportunity to have the Agreement reviewed by an attorney of their choice.

11. Neither party may assign the performance of this Agreement.

12. If any provision or portion hereof is held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall be deemed severable, shall not be affected and shall remain in full force and effect, and the City Council and City Attorney shall be deemed to have intended to enter into this Agreement even absent such provision or portion hereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement to be effective on the date and year first above written.

DATE OF EXECUTION: CITY OF ORANGE, a municipal corporation, Daniel R. Slater, Mayor
ATTEST:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk
DATE OF EXECUTION: MARY E. BINNING, an individual
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Nathalie Adourian
Senior Assistant City Attorney
514
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0089
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Monica Espinoza, Human Resources Director

1. SUBJECT
A follow-up report on healthcare and retirement benefit options for elected City Councilmembers.

2. SUMMARY
Additional analysis on healthcare and retirement benefit options for elected City Councilmembers, and an assessment of permissible options for Councilmembers.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Provide direction to staff regarding healthcare and retirement benefits for elected City Councilmembers and direct staff to incorporate any decisions into a future Orange Municipal Code (OMC) Ordinance amendment, California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) contract amendment, and a Section 125 premium only plan document, if applicable.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
The total expenditure for this proposal is estimated at $96,500 per year and will be funded through General Fund (100). Cost may be less based on the number of Councilmembers who elect to decline healthcare and retirement benefit(s). The costing projections for both employer and employee are attached.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 2: Be a fiscally healthy community
a: Expend fiscal resources responsibly.

Goal 4: Provide outstanding public service
e: Attract, retain and develop quality employees dedicated to public service.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
At the January 23rd special meeting of the City Council, staff presented options that included Health Benefits, Life Insurance, and Pension/Retirement. Staff requested additional time to further research details of the City’s Section 125 Employer Cafeteria Plan. Details of the analysis and findings are included for Council consideration:

Health Benefits
In a Section 125 Cafeteria Plan, employees must be permitted to choose among at least one taxable benefit and one qualified benefit. Within the City’s Employer plan, the only taxable benefit that is City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™515
Item #: 7.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0089
benefit and one qualified benefit. Within the City’s Employer plan, the only taxable benefit that is available is a taxable waiver or “cash in lieu” amount for benefitted employees who waive medical insurance or do not use their entire monthly health benefits allotment.

Government Code 36516(a)(2)(D) which sets the maximum compensation of $600 payable to Councilmembers precludes receiving any “cash in lieu” benefit and the Internal Revenue Code Section 125(d)(2)(A) precludes any deferred compensation option. As such, neither payment of a waiver amount as “cash in lieu” nor placement of the waiver amount into deferred compensation for Councilmembers is permissible.

It is permissible, however, for Council to elect to offer healthcare benefits to Councilmembers on a premium only plan basis. This is allowed under both the Government Code and the Internal Revenue Code. Offering health benefits to Councilmembers on a premium only basis could entail covering the full cost of single-party health benefits of any combination of medical, dental, and/or vision as selected by Councilmembers, with no option of a taxable waiver or “cash in lieu” amount.

Pension/Retirement Plan
At the January 23rd special meeting of the City Council, staff noted Council’s desire to pursue CalPERS membership for City Councilmembers, which is a defined benefit plan that would exempt City Councilmembers from mandatory Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax.

To restate CalPERS membership costing information, Councilmembers who elect to receive the $600 per month compensation would be required to pay the CalPERS employee contribution amount based on their membership status (i.e., Classic members or New members), currently 8% or 6.75% respectively. For Councilmembers receiving the $600 per month compensation, this would amount to a $48.00 monthly paycheck deduction for Classic CalPERS members, or a $40.50 monthly deduction for New CalPERS members. The CalPERS employer contribution amount per Councilmember would be 11.53%, which amounts to $69.17 per month per Councilmember to be paid for by the City. These CalPERS percentages and costs are subject to change each fiscal year. To confirm, Councilmembers who waive the $600 per month compensation would not gain CalPERS membership.

Pursuant to Council direction, city staff may need to amend the OMC, the City’s employer contract with CalPERS, and create a Section 125 premium only plan document. Following these amendments, staff’s recommendation is to incorporate the agreed upon terms into a future independent Resolution for City Council.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· 2023 Monthly Premium Rates
· Council Benefits Costing Projections
City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™516
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0089
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Monica Espinoza, Human Resources Director

1. SUBJECT
A follow-up report on healthcare and retirement benefit options for elected City Councilmembers.

2. SUMMARY
Additional analysis on healthcare and retirement benefit options for elected City Councilmembers, and an assessment of permissible options for Councilmembers.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Provide direction to staff regarding healthcare and retirement benefits for elected City Councilmembers and direct staff to incorporate any decisions into a future Orange Municipal Code (OMC) Ordinance amendment, California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) contract amendment, and a Section 125 premium only plan document, if applicable.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
The total expenditure for this proposal is estimated at $96,500 per year and will be funded through General Fund (100). Cost may be less based on the number of Councilmembers who elect to decline healthcare and retirement benefit(s). The costing projections for both employer and employee are attached.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 2: Be a fiscally healthy community
a: Expend fiscal resources responsibly.

Goal 4: Provide outstanding public service
e: Attract, retain and develop quality employees dedicated to public service.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
At the January 23rd special meeting of the City Council, staff presented options that included Health Benefits, Life Insurance, and Pension/Retirement. Staff requested additional time to further research details of the City’s Section 125 Employer Cafeteria Plan. Details of the analysis and findings are included for Council consideration:

Health Benefits
In a Section 125 Cafeteria Plan, employees must be permitted to choose among at least one taxable benefit and one qualified benefit. Within the City’s Employer plan, the only taxable benefit that is City of Orange Page 1 of 2 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™517
Item #: 7.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0089
benefit and one qualified benefit. Within the City’s Employer plan, the only taxable benefit that is available is a taxable waiver or “cash in lieu” amount for benefitted employees who waive medical insurance or do not use their entire monthly health benefits allotment.

Government Code 36516(a)(2)(D) which sets the maximum compensation of $600 payable to Councilmembers precludes receiving any “cash in lieu” benefit and the Internal Revenue Code Section 125(d)(2)(A) precludes any deferred compensation option. As such, neither payment of a waiver amount as “cash in lieu” nor placement of the waiver amount into deferred compensation for Councilmembers is permissible.

It is permissible, however, for Council to elect to offer healthcare benefits to Councilmembers on a premium only plan basis. This is allowed under both the Government Code and the Internal Revenue Code. Offering health benefits to Councilmembers on a premium only basis could entail covering the full cost of single-party health benefits of any combination of medical, dental, and/or vision as selected by Councilmembers, with no option of a taxable waiver or “cash in lieu” amount.

Pension/Retirement Plan
At the January 23rd special meeting of the City Council, staff noted Council’s desire to pursue CalPERS membership for City Councilmembers, which is a defined benefit plan that would exempt City Councilmembers from mandatory Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax.

To restate CalPERS membership costing information, Councilmembers who elect to receive the $600 per month compensation would be required to pay the CalPERS employee contribution amount based on their membership status (i.e., Classic members or New members), currently 8% or 6.75% respectively. For Councilmembers receiving the $600 per month compensation, this would amount to a $48.00 monthly paycheck deduction for Classic CalPERS members, or a $40.50 monthly deduction for New CalPERS members. The CalPERS employer contribution amount per Councilmember would be 11.53%, which amounts to $69.17 per month per Councilmember to be paid for by the City. These CalPERS percentages and costs are subject to change each fiscal year. To confirm, Councilmembers who waive the $600 per month compensation would not gain CalPERS membership.

Pursuant to Council direction, city staff may need to amend the OMC, the City’s employer contract with CalPERS, and create a Section 125 premium only plan document. Following these amendments, staff’s recommendation is to incorporate the agreed upon terms into a future independent Resolution for City Council.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· 2023 Monthly Premium Rates
· Council Benefits Costing Projections
City of Orange Page 2 of 2 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™518
City of Orange
2023 Monthly Premium Rates – Region 2
Orange County and San Diego County
Medical HMO Plans
2023 Monthly Premium Rates
Single 2-Party Family
Anthem Select $ 765.38 $ 1,530.74 $ 1,989.96
Anthem Traditional $ 935.12 $ 1,870.24 $ 2,431.32
Blue Shield Access+ $ 842.62 $ 1,685.22 $ 2,190.80
Blue Shield Trio $ 760.72 $ 1,521.42 $ 1,977.86
Health Net Salud y Mas $ 698.92 $ 1,397.82 $ 1,817.18
Health Net Smart Care $ 834.66 $ 1,669.30 $ 2,170.10
Kaiser $ 756.22 $ 1,512.42 $ 1,966.16
UnitedHealthcare Alliance $ 793.64 $ 1,587.26 $ 2,063.44 UnitedHealthcare Harmony $ 781.58 $ 1,563.16 $ 2,032.12 Medical PPO Plans
2023 Monthly Premium Rates
Single 2-Party Family
PERS Platinum $ 1,014.80 $ 2,029.60 $ 2,638.48
PERS Gold $ 695.94 $ 1,391.86 $ 1,809.42
Dental Plans
2023 Monthly Premium Rates
Single 2-Party Family
Delta Care - HMO $ 21.30 $ 35.18 $ 52.02
Delta Dental - PPO $ 54.50 $ 109.00 $ 155.00
Vision Plans
2023 Monthly Premium Rates
Single 2-Party Family
EyeMed $ 5.60 $ 10.62 $ 15.56
VSP $ 9.70 $ 15.06 $ 23.90
519
Annual Cost Annual Cost Annual Cost
per Councilmember to City of Orange to Councilmember
Health Benefits $ 12,948 $ 90,636 $ -
CalPERS - New Member
Employee Contribution 6.75% 486 486
Employer Contribution 11.53% 830 5,811
CalPERS - Classic Member
Employee Contribution 8.00% 576 576
Employer Contribution 11.53% 830 5,811
$ 96,447
Council Benefits Costing Projections
Total annual cost to City of
Orange based on the value of
the highest priced Medical,
Dental, and Vision Plans
520
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Susan Galvan, Assistant City Manager

1. SUBJECT
Status of Fiscal Year 2022-23 budget and preliminary projections for Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget preparation.

2. SUMMARY
This mid-year report provides an update of the Fiscal Year 2022-23 budget. In addition, this report also presents a brief review of the Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget, which is currently being prepared.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive and file report, and approve the following in one motion:

1. Authorize the transfer of $950,000 from the General Fund (100) unreserved fund balance to Worker’s Compensation Fund (730) unreserved fund balance.

2. Authorize the transfer of $720,000 from the following unreserved fund balances to the Equipment Expense Fund (710) unreserved fund balance:
$566,946 General Fund (100)
$120,719 Water Fund (600)
$ 32,335 Sewer Fund (220)

3. Authorize the appropriation of $340,000 from the unreserved fund balance of the General Fund (100) to expenditure account number 100.0000.51670.30200, Other Professional and Consulting Services - 517 W Struck Transition.

4. Authorize the appropriation of $90,000 from the unreserved fund balance of the General Fund (100) to expenditure account number 100.5013.51670.00000, Plan Check Consulting.

5. Authorize the appropriation of $720,000 from the unreserved fund balance of the Fleet Maintenance Fund (710) to expenditure account number 710.5023.53,720.00000, Fuel Allocation.

6. Authorize the appropriation of $250,000 from the unreserved fund balance of the Capital Project Fund (500) to expenditure account number 500.5032.56100.16302, Minor Traffic Devices.

7. Authorize the appropriation of $70,000 from the unreserved fund balance of the Community Development Block Grant Fund (310) to expenditure account number 310.9645.51770.30200, CDBG Project - 517 W Struck Transition.

8. Authorize the appropriation of $50,000 from the Worker’s Compensation Fund (730) unreserved fund balance to expenditure account number 730.0312.52233.00000, Self-Insured City of Orange Page 1 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™521
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
unreserved fund balance to expenditure account number 730.0312.52233.00000, Self-Insured Workers Comp.

9. Authorize the appropriation of $29,924 from unreserved fund balance of Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (921) into the following expenditure account numbers:
$10,000 921.6041.50002.00000, Regular Misc Salaries
$19,924 921.6041.51670.00000, Other Prof. and Consulting Services

10. Authorize the appropriation of $80,971 from the unreserved fund balance of the respective funds into the following expenditure account numbers for project 12222, Other Maintenance Items for the 800 MHZ Communication System:
$38,866 120.4011.53670.12222
$28,340 120.3011.53670.12222
$5,668 600.8041.53670.12222
$2,429 100.7001.53670.12222
$2,429 270.5021.53670.12222
$1,619 220.5022.53670.12222
$810 100.6001.53670.12222
$810 710.5023.53670.12222

11. Adopt Resolution No. 11434. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange Amending Resolution No. 11425 between the City of Orange and Orange Management Association.

12. Adopt Resolution No. 11435. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange rescinding Resolution No. 11424 and amending the citywide pay schedule in accordance with the requirements of California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 570.5.

13.Authorize the following changes to the City’s Schedule of Positions:
a. Authorize the Assistant City Manager position in the City Manager’s Office. b. Eliminate the Internal Audit Manager position in the City Manager’s Office. c. Reclassify the Assistant City Manager position to a Community Services Director in the Community Services Department.
d. Reclassify the Assistant City Manager position to a Finance Director in the Finance Department.
e. Reclassify the part-time Administrative Specialist position to a part-time benefitted Administrative Assistant position in the City Clerk’s office. f. Reclassify two Parks and Facilities Attendant positions to two Parks Maintenance Worker I positions in the Community Services Department. g. Reclassify the part-time Recreation Coordinator to a full-time Recreation Coordinator position in the Community Services Department.
h. Authorize the Assistant Recreation Coordinator position in the Community Services Department.
i. Reclassify the Payroll Technician to a Senior Payroll Specialist in the Finance Department.
j. Authorize the Permit Technician position in the Community Development Department.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
Sufficient funds are available in the unreserved fund balances of the respective funds to support the requested appropriations. Approval of the recommended actions will result in the following City of Orange Page 2 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™522
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
appropriations:

Action Amount From To
1 $950,000 General Fund Workers Compensation Fund
2 566,946 General Fund Equipment Expense Fund
3 340,000 General Fund 517 W Struck Transition
4 90,000 General Fund Plan Check Consulting
10 3,239 General Fund 800 MHZ Radio Maintenance
$1,950,185 TOTAL GENERAL FUND
2 $120,719 Water Fund Equipment Expense Fund
2 32,335 Sewer Fund Equipment Expense Fund
5 720,000 Equipment Expense Fund Gasoline and Diesel Fuel 6 250,000 Capital Projects Fund CIP - Minor Traffic Devices 7 70,000 CDBG Fund CDBG - 517 W Struck Transition
8 50,000 Workers Comp Fund Self-Insured Workers Comp
9 29,924 Low and Moderate Income
Housing Asset Fund
Affordable Housing Consulting
10 67,206 Proposition 172 Fund 800 MHZ Radio Maintenance 10 5,668 Water Fund 800 MHZ Radio Maintenance
10 2,429 Gas Tax Maintenance Fund 800 MHZ Radio Maintenance 10 1,619 Sewer Fund 800 MHZ Radio Maintenance
10 810 Fleet Maintenance Fund 800 MHZ Radio Maintenance $1,350,710 TOTAL OTHER FUNDS

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 2: Be a fiscally healthy community
b: Analyze future fiscal needs and potential revenue opportunities.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
FISCAL YEAR 2022-23 (FY 23) UPDATE
Review of General Fund Revenues and Expenditures
Based on current trends and analysis, the total General Fund revenues for FY 23 are estimated to be $137.6 million, $5.8 million above budget. While staff anticipates an overall revenue increase over budget, as the economy is signaling the early signs of a recession, the City continues to take a conservative approach in budgeting for revenues.

Sales tax, currently our largest source of General Fund revenue, is anticipated to be about $2.7 million over the budgeted amount of $50.1 million, mostly attributed to the heightened prices in the fuel sector. Building and construction activity is continuing to perform positively, generating more sale receipts. Also, as we have seen in recent years, online shopping allocations from the county tax pool will continue to bring in additional revenue.

Property tax, our second largest source of General Fund revenue, is anticipated to be $51.2 million, $590,000 over the budget. Annual increases in assessed property values and more property tax increment distributed from the County of Orange for the Successor Agency are projected to contribute to higher property tax receipts. In addition, property tax in lieu of motor vehicle license City of Orange Page 3 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™523
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
fees are expected to be above budget as this revenue is tied to property tax growth.

At mid-year, $31.7 million in General Fund revenues had been received, reflecting 24% of the budget, less than normal due to the timing of revenue receipts. Sales tax receipts provided $10.5 million by the end of the second quarter while property tax provided $6.7 million. Staff expects to receive a larger portion of sales tax and property tax receipts in the second half of the year, due to the timing of allocations.

Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) is expected to be $5.1 million, at its budgeted estimate. Last year, business and leisure travel increased with more lenient Federal and State travel mandates but have now slowed due to the inflation of general consumer goods and less spending power. Based on current trends, other revenue sources such as licenses and permits, fines and forfeitures, and fees for services, are expected to continue towards a positive trend. Miscellaneous revenues are anticipated at $2.3 million, $1.3 million more than the budget. The majority of this increase is contributed by reimbursements from the Office of Emergency Services for costs incurred by the City through its assistance in statewide wildland firefighting efforts.

Expenditures in the General Fund are currently within target range, with all departments on pace to meet (but not exceed) their target expenditures for FY 23. Unlike revenue, which fluctuates from external factors, expenditures are consistent and remain relatively steady throughout the fiscal year.

Currently, the combined total adjusted appropriation for FY 23 is $133.8 million, an increase from $130.3 million due to approved budget adjustments. The actual amount expended and encumbered through December 31, 2022 is $61.3 million, 45.9% of the total annual expenditure appropriation.

Spending remains fairly constant, and departments continue to do a good job scrutinizing their budgets to provide more with less. As has been the result for the past several years, the General Fund historically ends each fiscal year with savings in expenditures, and we presume through our initial analysis that we will stay slightly below target appropriations.

Attached to this staff report is the Mid-Year Report of the General Fund, which details and illustrates total revenue received, and expenditures by department and category.

Transfers to Internal Service Funds
Transfers provide funding to those areas having either limited resources and/or a specific need in the immediate future, as well as replenishing reserves according to the City’s reserve policy. Staff recommends a transfer from the General Fund unreserved fund balance to the Worker’s Compensation Fund in the amount of $950,000 and to the Equipment Expense Fund in the amount of $566,946.

All other funds have met the City’s reserve policy minimum and do not require additional transfers from the General Fund.

Budget Adjustments
Along with the budget approval, carryover appropriations and encumbrances added approximately $1.8 million to the budget. To date, Council has authorized an additional $1.7 million in budget adjustments to the General Fund, which includes grants with corresponding revenue, Strike Team reimbursements, and contractual services.

City of Orange Page 4 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™524
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
The following additional budget adjustments to the FY 23 budget are recommended:
· Organizational Structure Changes: Due to modifications in department organizational structures and increases with level of duties with certain employees, salary ranges and classifications are proposed to be updated to be commensurate with the reassignment and level of work for certain departments as follows:

City Manager - In response to City Council’s request to return to the historical structure in this office, the proposed changes include properly aligning the duties of the Assistant City Manager with the corresponding areas of oversight. This change would entail restoring the Community Services and Finance Director positions in their respective departments; and concurrently reinstating the Assistant City Manager position to the City Manager’s office. Some savings are realized by consolidating the duties of the Internal Audit Division into the Finance Department. While there is no additional appropriation necessary for the current fiscal year, the net increase for future years is $80,000, funded mostly from General Fund, supplemented by the Water Fund and Information Systems Fund.

City Clerk - The City Clerk’s office currently offers passport services which are greatly utilized by the Orange community and surrounding areas. The upgrade of a 19-hour Administrative Specialist position to a benefited 20-hour Administrative Assistant position will ensure this important program remains successfully staffed. The anticipated cost of this staff change is $11,000, mostly attributed to benefits.

Community Development - With the addition of the Short Term Rental program in FY 21, there is a need for a more robust response to neighborhood complaints regarding lack of compliance with the City‘s ordinance. With the addition of a Permit Technician position, Code Enforcement will be able to respond quickly to complaints and determine if violations or permit revocation are warranted. The increase of $29,100 in FY 23 and $78,000 in FY 24 will be offset by Transient Occupancy Taxes collected through the Short Term Rental program.

Community Services - The Community Services department manages the operations and monitoring of facility and field use permits on evenings and weekends, requiring specialized staff assistance to ensure basic park maintenance issues are addressed and provide customer service to patrons during these times. In an effort to invigorate the program and ensure staff can be hired and retained, the reclassification of two of the part-time Park and Facility Attendant positions to two part-time Parks Maintenance Worker I positions, as well as the addition of an Assistant Recreation Coordinator, will mitigate concerns related to staffing turnover and program effectiveness. With current savings from vacancies, there is no additional appropriation necessary for the current fiscal year, the net increase for future years is $95,000.

Additionally, the reclassification of a part-time Recreation Coordinator to a full-time Recreation Coordinator will support the Council-driven implementation of a revitalized special events program, which includes a Movies in the Park series and modifying existing events such as the Concerts in the Park series. The increase for future years will be approximately $15,000 to fund the upgraded position. The total future cost for the combined staff changes is $110,000.

Finance - The Payroll Division has continued to feel the impact of increasing City of Orange Page 5 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™525
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
Finance - The Payroll Division has continued to feel the impact of increasing regulations and reporting requirements from CalPERS, the IRS, and the State of California. In addition, applying these regulations to everyday processes demands enhanced procedures in the bi-weekly payroll cycle. To address the increasing workload, succession planning, and to continue to provide virtually error-free payroll processing to our employees, the position of Payroll Technician will be upgraded to Senior Payroll Specialist. While there is no additional appropriation necessary for the current fiscal year, the increase for future years is $9,000. The cost of the upgraded positions will be funded primarily through the General Fund. · Fleet Services Gasoline Adjustment: Due to the unanticipated rise in gasoline prices this past year, the City’s allocation for gasoline and diesel fuel will not be sufficient to cover the annual cost. An additional appropriation of $720,000 will cover the City's fuel expenses through this fiscal year. Since this expense is usually contributed to from a variety of funds and activities, transfers from the General Fund (100), Sewer Fund (220) and Water Fund (600) are necessary.
· Affordable Housing Consulting Services: Affordable housing project proposals are not always received prior to budget preparation and are not accounted for during budget adoption.

An appropriation of $29,924 from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (921) will cover the cost of City staff and consulting services related to affordable housing projects funded with former Redevelopment Agency funds.
· Minor Traffic Devices: Due to unanticipated increases in the need for minor traffic related devices such as lighting, undergrounding, and wiring, staff is requesting $250,000 of additional funding from the Capital Projects Fund (500).
· Workers Compensation: Due to the unanticipated increase of the DE-9 payroll figures that are used to calculate the City’s premium obligation for workers compensation, staff is requesting $50,000 of additional funding from the Workers Compensation Fund (730). · Plan Check Consulting: Due to increased demand and the need to meet plan check deadlines, the Building Division is requesting additional support in plan check consulting services, estimated at $90,000 from the General Fund (100) through the end of this fiscal year. · 517 W Struck Transition Plan: Per a federal court order, the City continues to provide services for the unhoused population at the 517 W Struck site. Funding is available in the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act funding to cover $70,000 of the program’s cost, reimbursing many of the support services and resources provided at the site. While non-General Fund sources have contributed to this program, staff has identified expenses in the amount of $340,000 that are not eligible to be funded with grant or supplemental funding and require using General Fund monies to cover the cost. These expenses include security services, site improvements, food coordination, fencing, and parking-related expense.
· 800 MHZ Communications System: The 800 MHZ Communications System is administered by the Orange County Sheriffs Department. It was recently projected to cost more than was budgeted when invoices were received after the start of the fiscal year. Therefore, $80,971 is recommended to be appropriated from various funds including the General Fund, Proposition City of Orange Page 6 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™526
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
172 Fund, Sewer Fund, Gas Tax Fund, Water Fund, and Equipment Replacement Fund.

Water and Sewer Fund Fiscal Update
Typically, an update is provided on the Water and Sewer funds in this mid-year budget report.

However, staff will be presenting a rate study at a future City Council meeting and the report will include the status of these funds as well as future projections and overall health of these utility programs.

Early Look At Fiscal Year 2023-24 And Beyond
Our initial analysis suggests the General Fund revenue estimate for FY 24 will be approximately $133.5 million, with expenditure estimates at $133 million. Sales tax revenue is projected to be $52 million, property taxes are anticipated to be $51.5 million, and TOT (Transient Occupancy Tax) is estimated to be $5 million. Expenditures are proposed to increase, mainly due to continued increases in contractual obligations as well as the rising cost of materials due to inflation.

For FY 24, revenues are expected to plateau mostly due to projections for lower sales tax and TOT revenues. Despite these trends, we anticipate Property Tax revenues to remain trending upwards.

Departments will continue to remain vigilant in spending prudently. A more detailed analysis of revenues and expenditures, along with budget balancing strategies, will be discussed at an upcoming Budget Study Session.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· General Fund - Mid Year Report Ending 12/31/22
· Resolution No. 11434
· Resolution No. 11435
City of Orange Page 7 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™527
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Susan Galvan, Assistant City Manager

1. SUBJECT
Status of Fiscal Year 2022-23 budget and preliminary projections for Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget preparation.

2. SUMMARY
This mid-year report provides an update of the Fiscal Year 2022-23 budget. In addition, this report also presents a brief review of the Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget, which is currently being prepared.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive and file report, and approve in one motion the following:

1. Authorize the transfer of $950,000 from the General Fund (100) unreserved fund balance to Worker’s Compensation Fund (730) unreserved fund balance.

2. Authorize the transfer of $720,000 from the following unreserved fund balances to the Equipment Expense Fund (710) unreserved fund balance:
$566,946 General Fund (100)
$120,719 Water Fund (600)
$ 32,335 Sewer Fund (220)

3. Authorize the appropriation of $340,000 from the unreserved fund balance of the General Fund (100) to expenditure account number 100.0000.51670.30200, Other Professional and Consulting Services - 517 W Struck Transition.

4. Authorize the appropriation of $90,000 from the unreserved fund balance of the General Fund (100) to expenditure account number 100.5013.51670.00000, Plan Check Consulting.

5. Authorize the appropriation of $720,000 from the unreserved fund balance of the Fleet Maintenance Fund (710) to expenditure account number 710.5023.53,720.00000, Fuel Allocation.

6. Authorize the appropriation of $250,000 from the unreserved fund balance of the Capital Project Fund (500) to expenditure account number 500.5032.56100.16302, Minor Traffic Devices.

7. Authorize the appropriation of $70,000 from the unreserved fund balance of the Community Development Block Grant Fund (310) to expenditure account number 310.9645.51770.30200, CDBG Project - 517 W Struck Transition.

8. Authorize the appropriation of $50,000 from the Worker’s Compensation Fund (730) unreserved fund balance to expenditure account number 730.0312.52233.00000, Self-Insured City of Orange Page 1 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™528
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
unreserved fund balance to expenditure account number 730.0312.52233.00000, Self-Insured Workers Comp.

9. Authorize the appropriation of $29,924 from unreserved fund balance of Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (921) into the following expenditure account numbers:
$10,000 921.6041.50002.00000, Regular Misc Salaries
$19,924 921.6041.51670.00000, Other Prof. and Consulting Services

10. Authorize the appropriation of $80,971 from the unreserved fund balance of the respective funds into the following expenditure account numbers for project 12222, Other Maintenance Items for the 800 MHZ Communication System:
$38,866 120.4011.53670.12222
$28,340 120.3011.53670.12222
$5,668 600.8041.53670.12222
$2,429 100.7001.53670.12222
$2,429 270.5021.53670.12222
$1,619 220.5022.53670.12222
$810 100.6001.53670.12222
$810 710.5023.53670.12222

11. Adopt Resolution No. 11434. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange Amending Resolution No. 11425 between the City of Orange and Orange Management Association.

12. Adopt Resolution No. 11435. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange rescinding Resolution No. 11424 and amending the citywide pay schedule in accordance with the requirements of California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 570.5.

13.Authorize the following changes to the City’s Schedule of Positions:
a. Authorize the Assistant City Manager position in the City Manager’s Office. b. Eliminate the Internal Audit Manager position in the City Manager’s Office. c. Reclassify the Assistant City Manager position to a Community Services Director in the Community Services Department.
d. Reclassify the Assistant City Manager position to a Finance Director in the Finance Department.
e. Reclassify the part-time Administrative Specialist position to a part-time benefitted Administrative Assistant position in the City Clerk’s office. f. Reclassify two Parks and Facilities Attendant positions to two Parks Maintenance Worker I positions in the Community Services Department. g. Reclassify the part-time Recreation Coordinator to a full-time Recreation Coordinator position in the Community Services Department.
h. Authorize the Assistant Recreation Coordinator position in the Community Services Department.
i. Reclassify the Payroll Technician to a Senior Payroll Specialist in the Finance Department.
j. Authorize the Permit Technician position in the Community Development Department.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
Sufficient funds are available in the unreserved fund balances of the respective funds to support the requested appropriations. Approval of the recommended actions will result in the following City of Orange Page 2 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™529
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
appropriations:

Action Amount From To
1 $950,000 General Fund Workers Compensation Fund
2 566,946 General Fund Equipment Expense Fund
3 340,000 General Fund 517 W Struck Transition
4 90,000 General Fund Plan Check Consulting
10 3,239 General Fund 800 MHZ Radio Maintenance
$1,950,185 TOTAL GENERAL FUND
2 $120,719 Water Fund Equipment Expense Fund
2 32,335 Sewer Fund Equipment Expense Fund
5 720,000 Equipment Expense Fund Gasoline and Diesel Fuel 6 250,000 Capital Projects Fund CIP - Minor Traffic Devices 7 70,000 CDBG Fund CDBG - 517 W Struck Transition
8 50,000 Workers Comp Fund Self-Insured Workers Comp
9 29,924 Low and Moderate Income
Housing Asset Fund
Affordable Housing Consulting
10 67,206 Proposition 172 Fund 800 MHZ Radio Maintenance 10 5,668 Water Fund 800 MHZ Radio Maintenance
10 2,429 Gas Tax Maintenance Fund 800 MHZ Radio Maintenance 10 1,619 Sewer Fund 800 MHZ Radio Maintenance
10 810 Fleet Maintenance Fund 800 MHZ Radio Maintenance $1,350,710 TOTAL OTHER FUNDS

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 2: Be a fiscally healthy community
b: Analyze future fiscal needs and potential revenue opportunities.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
FISCAL YEAR 2022-23 (FY 23) UPDATE
Review of General Fund Revenues and Expenditures
Based on current trends and analysis, the total General Fund revenues for FY 23 are estimated to be $137.6 million, $5.8 million above budget. While staff anticipates an overall revenue increase over budget, as the economy is signaling the early signs of a recession, the City continues to take a conservative approach in budgeting for revenues.

Sales tax, currently our largest source of General Fund revenue, is anticipated to be about $2.7 million over the budgeted amount of $50.1 million, mostly attributed to the heightened prices in the fuel sector. Building and construction activity is continuing to perform positively, generating more sale receipts. Also, as we have seen in recent years, online shopping allocations from the county tax pool will continue to bring in additional revenue.

Property tax, our second largest source of General Fund revenue, is anticipated to be $51.2 million, $590,000 over the budget. Annual increases in assessed property values and more property tax increment distributed from the County of Orange for the Successor Agency are projected to contribute to higher property tax receipts. In addition, property tax in lieu of motor vehicle license City of Orange Page 3 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™530
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
fees are expected to be above budget as this revenue is tied to property tax growth.

At mid-year, $31.7 million in General Fund revenues had been received, reflecting 24% of the budget, less than normal due to the timing of revenue receipts. Sales tax receipts provided $10.5 million by the end of the second quarter while property tax provided $6.7 million. Staff expects to receive a larger portion of sales tax and property tax receipts in the second half of the year, due to the timing of allocations.

Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) is expected to be $5.1 million, at its budgeted estimate. Last year, business and leisure travel increased with more lenient Federal and State travel mandates but have now slowed due to the inflation of general consumer goods and less spending power. Based on current trends, other revenue sources such as licenses and permits, fines and forfeitures, and fees for services, are expected to continue towards a positive trend. Miscellaneous revenues are anticipated at $2.3 million, $1.3 million more than the budget. The majority of this increase is contributed by reimbursements from the Office of Emergency Services for costs incurred by the City through its assistance in statewide wildland firefighting efforts.

Expenditures in the General Fund are currently within target range, with all departments on pace to meet (but not exceed) their target expenditures for FY 23. Unlike revenue, which fluctuates from external factors, expenditures are consistent and remain relatively steady throughout the fiscal year.

Currently, the combined total adjusted appropriation for FY 23 is $133.8 million, an increase from $130.3 million due to approved budget adjustments. The actual amount expended and encumbered through December 31, 2022 is $61.3 million, 45.9% of the total annual expenditure appropriation.

Spending remains fairly constant, and departments continue to do a good job scrutinizing their budgets to provide more with less. As has been the result for the past several years, the General Fund historically ends each fiscal year with savings in expenditures, and we presume through our initial analysis that we will stay slightly below target appropriations.

Attached to this staff report is the Mid-Year Report of the General Fund, which details and illustrates total revenue received, and expenditures by department and category.

Transfers to Internal Service Funds
Transfers provide funding to those areas having either limited resources and/or a specific need in the immediate future, as well as replenishing reserves according to the City’s reserve policy. Staff recommends a transfer from the General Fund unreserved fund balance to the Worker’s Compensation Fund in the amount of $950,000 and to the Equipment Expense Fund in the amount of $566,946.

All other funds have met the City’s reserve policy minimum and do not require additional transfers from the General Fund.

Budget Adjustments
Along with the budget approval, carryover appropriations and encumbrances added approximately $1.8 million to the budget. To date, Council has authorized an additional $1.7 million in budget adjustments to the General Fund, which includes grants with corresponding revenue, Strike Team reimbursements, and contractual services.

City of Orange Page 4 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™531
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
The following additional budget adjustments to the FY 23 budget are recommended:
· Organizational Structure Changes: Due to modifications in department organizational structures and increases with level of duties with certain employees, salary ranges and classifications are proposed to be updated to be commensurate with the reassignment and level of work for certain departments as follows:

City Manager - In response to City Council’s request to return to the historical structure in this office, the proposed changes include properly aligning the duties of the Assistant City Manager with the corresponding areas of oversight. This change would entail restoring the Community Services and Finance Director positions in their respective departments; and concurrently reinstating the Assistant City Manager position to the City Manager’s office. Some savings are realized by consolidating the duties of the Internal Audit Division into the Finance Department. While there is no additional appropriation necessary for the current fiscal year, the net increase for future years is $80,000, funded mostly from General Fund, supplemented by the Water Fund and Information Systems Fund.

City Clerk - The City Clerk’s office currently offers passport services which are greatly utilized by the Orange community and surrounding areas. The upgrade of a 19-hour Administrative Specialist position to a benefited 20-hour Administrative Assistant position will ensure this important program remains successfully staffed. The anticipated cost of this staff change is $11,000, mostly attributed to benefits.

Community Development - With the addition of the Short Term Rental program in FY 21, there is a need for a more robust response to neighborhood complaints regarding lack of compliance with the City‘s ordinance. With the addition of a Permit Technician position, Code Enforcement will be able to respond quickly to complaints and determine if violations or permit revocation are warranted. The increase of $29,100 in FY 23 and $78,000 in FY 24 will be offset by Transient Occupancy Taxes collected through the Short Term Rental program.

Community Services - The Community Services department manages the operations and monitoring of facility and field use permits on evenings and weekends, requiring specialized staff assistance to ensure basic park maintenance issues are addressed and provide customer service to patrons during these times. In an effort to invigorate the program and ensure staff can be hired and retained, the reclassification of two of the part-time Park and Facility Attendant positions to two part-time Parks Maintenance Worker I positions, as well as the addition of an Assistant Recreation Coordinator, will mitigate concerns related to staffing turnover and program effectiveness. With current savings from vacancies, there is no additional appropriation necessary for the current fiscal year, the net increase for future years is $95,000.

Additionally, the reclassification of a part-time Recreation Coordinator to a full-time Recreation Coordinator will support the Council-driven implementation of a revitalized special events program, which includes a Movies in the Park series and modifying existing events such as the Concerts in the Park series. The increase for future years will be approximately $15,000 to fund the upgraded position. The total future cost for the combined staff changes is $110,000.

Finance - The Payroll Division has continued to feel the impact of increasing City of Orange Page 5 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™532
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
Finance - The Payroll Division has continued to feel the impact of increasing regulations and reporting requirements from CalPERS, the IRS, and the State of California. In addition, applying these regulations to everyday processes demands enhanced procedures in the bi-weekly payroll cycle. To address the increasing workload, succession planning, and to continue to provide virtually error-free payroll processing to our employees, the position of Payroll Technician will be upgraded to Senior Payroll Specialist. While there is no additional appropriation necessary for the current fiscal year, the increase for future years is $9,000. The cost of the upgraded positions will be funded primarily through the General Fund. · Fleet Services Gasoline Adjustment: Due to the unanticipated rise in gasoline prices this past year, the City’s allocation for gasoline and diesel fuel will not be sufficient to cover the annual cost. An additional appropriation of $720,000 will cover the City's fuel expenses through this fiscal year. Since this expense is usually contributed to from a variety of funds and activities, transfers from the General Fund (100), Sewer Fund (220) and Water Fund (600) are necessary.
· Affordable Housing Consulting Services: Affordable housing project proposals are not always received prior to budget preparation and are not accounted for during budget adoption.

An appropriation of $29,924 from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (921) will cover the cost of City staff and consulting services related to affordable housing projects funded with former Redevelopment Agency funds.
· Minor Traffic Devices: Due to unanticipated increases in the need for minor traffic related devices such as lighting, undergrounding, and wiring, staff is requesting $250,000 of additional funding from the Capital Projects Fund (500).
· Workers Compensation: Due to the unanticipated increase of the DE-9 payroll figures that are used to calculate the City’s premium obligation for workers compensation, staff is requesting $50,000 of additional funding from the Workers Compensation Fund (730). · Plan Check Consulting: Due to increased demand and the need to meet plan check deadlines, the Building Division is requesting additional support in plan check consulting services, estimated at $90,000 from the General Fund (100) through the end of this fiscal year. · 517 W Struck Transition Plan: Per a federal court order, the City continues to provide services for the unhoused population at the 517 W Struck site. Funding is available in the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act funding to cover $70,000 of the program’s cost, reimbursing many of the support services and resources provided at the site. While non-General Fund sources have contributed to this program, staff has identified expenses in the amount of $340,000 that are not eligible to be funded with grant or supplemental funding and require using General Fund monies to cover the cost. These expenses include security services, site improvements, food coordination, fencing, and parking-related expense.
· 800 MHZ Communications System: The 800 MHZ Communications System is administered by the Orange County Sheriffs Department. It was recently projected to cost more than was budgeted when invoices were received after the start of the fiscal year. Therefore, $80,971 is recommended to be appropriated from various funds including the General Fund, Proposition City of Orange Page 6 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™533
Item #: 7.3. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0090
172 Fund, Sewer Fund, Gas Tax Fund, Water Fund, and Equipment Replacement Fund.

Water and Sewer Fund Fiscal Update
Typically, an update is provided on the Water and Sewer funds in this mid-year budget report.

However, staff will be presenting a rate study at a future City Council meeting and the report will include the status of these funds as well as future projections and overall health of these utility programs.

Early Look At Fiscal Year 2023-24 And Beyond
Our initial analysis suggests the General Fund revenue estimate for FY 24 will be approximately $133.5 million, with expenditure estimates at $133 million. Sales tax revenue is projected to be $52 million, property taxes are anticipated to be $51.5 million, and TOT (Transient Occupancy Tax) is estimated to be $5 million. Expenditures are proposed to increase, mainly due to continued increases in contractual obligations as well as the rising cost of materials due to inflation.

For FY 24, revenues are expected to plateau mostly due to projections for lower sales tax and TOT revenues. Despite these trends, we anticipate Property Tax revenues to remain trending upwards.

Departments will continue to remain vigilant in spending prudently. A more detailed analysis of revenues and expenditures, along with budget balancing strategies, will be discussed at an upcoming Budget Study Session.

7. ATTACHMENTS
· General Fund - Mid Year Report Ending 12/31/22
· Resolution No. 11434
· Resolution No. 11435
City of Orange Page 7 of 7 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™534
Actual 2022-23
Estimate YTD thru 12/31 Actual v. %
2022-23 2022-23 Estimates RECEIVED
Revenues:

Sales Tax 50,098,773 10,497,029 39,601,744 21.0%
Property Tax 50,611,117 6,701,994 43,909,123 13.2%
Transient Occupancy Tax 5,090,000 2,310,762 2,779,238 45.4% Other Taxes 900,000 352,844 547,156 39.2%
Franchises 2,641,702 380,501 2,261,201 14.4%
Licenses & Permits 6,163,360 3,950,404 2,212,956 64.1%
Fines & Penalties 2,130,000 652,343 1,477,657 30.6%
Use of Money & Property 1,609,544 803,096 806,448 49.9% Revenue from Other Agencies 1,700,000 1,147,938 552,062 67.5% Fees for Services 5,306,479 2,663,419 2,643,060 50.2%
Miscellaneous Revenues 950,000 2,214,167 (1,264,167) 233.1% Inter Fund Revenue 3,531,732 - 3,531,732 0.0%
TOTAL REVENUE $ 130,732,707 $ 31,674,497 $ 99,058,210 24.2% Funding Sources
General Fund - Mid-Year Report Ending 12/31/22
Revenues
535
Expended Encumbrance
Appropriation Thru 12/31 Thru 12/31 Unencumbered % Budget Expenditures: 2022-23 2022-23 2022-23 Balance Exp. & Encum.

Non Departmental 2,216,789 959,356 754,961 502,472 77.3% City Council 14,652 10,980 - 3,672 74.9%
City Manager 1,810,410 847,329 141,680 821,400 54.6%
City Attorney 1,562,347 595,767.10 211,747 754,833 51.7% City Clerk 923,463 312,631 - 610,832 33.9%
Finance Department 3,671,244 1,487,523 23,354 2,160,366 41.2% Human Resources 1,895,812 843,991 42,182 1,009,639 46.7% Library Services 6,168,408 2,233,397 137,696 3,797,315 38.4% Fire 35,569,079 15,590,158 802,908 19,176,013 46.1%
Police 57,827,115 23,107,306 661,812 34,057,997 41.1%
Public Works 11,074,553 3,819,183 1,287,452 5,967,918 46.1% Community Development 4,075,762 1,296,058 238,552 2,541,152 37.7% Community Services 10,740,217 4,253,387 1,670,161 4,816,669 55.2% Vacancy Savings (3,797,373) - - (3,797,373) 0.0%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 133,752,478 $ 55,357,067 $ 5,972,506 $ 72,422,905 45.9% Appropriation Expended Encumbrance Unencumbered % Budget Expenditures: 2022-23 2022-23 2022-23 Balance Exp. & Encum.

Salaries and Benefits 93,166,338 48,111,972 - 45,054,366 51.6% Contractual Services 14,886,555 5,761,510 5,257,324 3,867,720 74.0% Miscellaneous Expenditures 480,754 220,709 4,902 255,144 46.9% Materials and Supplies 1,270,980 1,138,800 562,287 (430,107) 133.8% Debt Service 1,715,400 - - 1,715,400 0.0%
Capital Outlay 665,657 122,173 147,993 395,491 40.6%
Internal Service Costs 21,566,794 1,903 - 21,564,891 0.0% TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 133,752,478 $ 55,357,067 $ 5,972,506 $ 72,422,905 45.9% General Fund - Mid-Year Report Ending 12/31/22
Expenditures
Funding Sources
536
RESOLUTION NO. 11434

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF ORANGE AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 11425 BETWEEN THE

CITY OF ORANGE AND THE ORANGE
MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION.

WHEREAS, the City of Orange (“City”) and the Orange Management Association (“OMA”) have an existing labor contract (i.e., “Memorandum of Understanding” or “MOU”) in effect through December 31, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the Senior Payroll Specialist classification is being proposed by City staff effective February 26, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the classification of Senior Payroll Specialist needs to be established with a commensurate salary range within the OMA MOU; and
WHEREAS, the salary range for the Senior Payroll Specialist classification must be authorized by the City Council and published by the City in order for the salary range to be considered pension-reportable, pursuant to CalPERS law; and WHEREAS, the City and OMA have met and conferred in accordance with the requirements of the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orange that the attached OMA salary table effective January 1, 2023 is amended, effective February 26, 2023, with the new classification of Senior Payroll Specialist incorporated by reference as Appendix A.

ADOPTED this ____ day of ____________________, 2023
Daniel R. Slater, Mayor, City of Orange
ATTEST:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
537
2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF ORANGE )

CITY OF ORANGE )
I, PAMELA COLEMAN, City Clerk of the City of Orange, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 2023 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
Attachment: Appendix A
538

APPENDIX A

ORANGE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION

MONTHLY SALARY RANGES
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2023

3.0% Across the Board Salary Increase

CLASSIFICATION TITLE RANGE STEP
A
STEP
B
STEP
C
STEP
D
STEP
E
STEP
F
Building Inspection Supervisor 590 6764 7109 7470 7852 8253 8673 Code Compliance Supervisor 590 6764 7109 7470 7852 8253 8673 Construction Inspection Supervisor 579 6403 6729 7073 7433 7812 8211 Development Project Manager 591 6797 7145 7508 7891 8294 8717 Digital Marketing Coordinator 565 5971 6275 6596 6931 7285 7657 Environmental Program Manager 643 8810 9261 9731 10228 10750 11298 Equipment Maintenance Supervisor 589 6730 7074 7433 7813 8212 8630 Facilities Maintenance Supervisor 579 6403 6729 7073 7433 7812 8211 Finance Coordinator 566 6001 6307 6629 6966 7322 7695
Finance Supervisor 586 6630 6969 7324 7697 8090 8503
Historic Preservation Planner 614 7624 8014 8421 8851 9302 9776 Information Technology Specialist 565 5971 6275 6596 6931 7285 7657 Information Technology Supervisor 590 6764 7109 7470 7852 8253 8673 Landscape Coordinator 591 6797 7145 7508 7891 8294 8717 Legal Assistant 538 5219 5485 5765 6059 6368 6692
Library Manager I 594 6900 7253 7621 8010 8419 8848
Library Manager II 604 7253 7624 8011 8420 8850 9300
Library Tech & Support Services Mgr. 604 7253 7624 8011 8420 8850 9300 Parks Maintenance Supervisor 579 6403 6729 7073 7433 7812 8211 Payroll Specialist 558 5766 6060 6369 6694 7035 7394
Permit Supervisor 579 6403 6729 7073 7433 7812 8211
Project Development Coordinator 591 6797 7145 7508 7891 8294 8717 Public Works Maintenance Supervisor 579 6403 6729 7073 7433 7812 8211 Real Property Agent 614 7624 8014 8421 8851 9302 9776
Recreation Services Supervisor 584 6564 6899 7251 7621 8009 8418 Senior Accountant 582 6499 6831 7179 7545 7930 8335
Senior Buyer 566 6001 6307 6629 6966 7322 7695
Senior Civil Engineer 643 8810 9261 9731 10228 10750 11298 Senior Contract Administrator 611 7510 7895 8296 8719 9164 9631 Senior Fire Inspection Specialist 600 7110 7473 7853 8254 8675 9116 Senior GIS Analyst 634 8423 8854 9304 9779 10278 10802
Senior Landscape Coordinator 611 7510 7895 8296 8719 9164 9631 Senior Legal Assistant 558 5766 6060 6369 6694 7035 7394 539
4 APPENDIX A (CONTINUED)

ORANGE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION

MONTHLY SALARY RANGES

CLASSIFICATION TITLE RANGE STEP
A
STEP
B
STEP
C
STEP
D
STEP
E
STEP
F
Senior Payroll Specialist
1 568 6061 6370 6695 7036 7395 7772
Senior Plan Check Engineer 614 7624 8014 8421 8851 9302 9776 Senior Planner 614 7624 8014 8421 8851 9302 9776
Senior Water Quality Inspector 579 6403 6729 7073 7433 7812 8211 Traffic Operations Superintendent 599 7074 7436 7814 8213 8632 9071 Tree Services Coordinator 569 6091 6402 6728 7072 7432 7811 Water Maintenance Supervisor 579 6403 6729 7073 7433 7812 8211 Water Quality Inspector 559 5795 6090 6401 6727 7070 7431

1. Classification of Senior Payroll Specialist was established effective February 26, 2023, pursuant to Resolution No. 11434.
540
RESOLUTION NO. 11435

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ORANGE RESCINDING RESOLUTION
NO. 11424 AND AMENDING THE CITYWIDE PAY

SCHEDULE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

REQUIREMENTS OF CALIFORNIA CODE OF
REGULATIONS, TITLE 2, SECTION 570.5
WHEREAS, the City of Orange (“City”) contracts with the California Public Employees’ Retirement System to provide retirement benefits for its employees; and WHEREAS, per California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 570.5 (“Regulation 570.5”), the amount of “compensation earnable” pursuant to the Government Code is limited to the payrate listed on a pay schedule that meets certain requirements; and WHEREAS, the attached Citywide Pay Schedules meet the following requirements of Regulation 570.5: (1) are duly approved and adopted by the employer’s governing body in accordance with requirements of applicable public meeting laws; (2) identify the position title of every employee; (3) show the pay rate for each position; (4) indicate the time base for each pay rate; (5) are posted at the office of the employer or immediately accessible for public review during normal business hours or posted on the employer’s internet website; (6) indicate an effective date and date of any revisions; (7) are retained by the employer and available for public inspection for a period not less than five years; and (8) do not reference another document in lieu of disclosing the pay rate; and
WHEREAS, on February 14, 2023, the City Council approved the Agreement for Employment for the City Attorney. Effective upon the execution of the agreement, the salary of the City Attorney classification changed to $22,750.00 per month. This salary adjustment has been incorporated into the attached Salary Schedule effective January 15, 2023 (Appendix A); and WHEREAS, on February 14, 2023, the City Council approved Resolution No. 11434, which added the classification of Senior Payroll Specialist to the Orange Management Association with an effective date of February 26, 2023. This classification addition has been incorporated into the attached Salary Schedule dated February 26, 2023 (Appendix B).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orange that Resolution No. 11424 is hereby rescinded and the attached revised Citywide Pay Schedules contained in Appendix A and B are approved and incorporated.

ADOPTED this ____ day of ____________________, 2023
Daniel R. Slater, Mayor, City of Orange
ATTEST:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
541
2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF ORANGE )

CITY OF ORANGE )
I, PAMELA COLEMAN, City Clerk of the City of Orange, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 2023 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
Attachments: Appendix A – Citywide Pay Schedule – January 15, 2023 Appendix B – Citywide Pay Schedule – February 26, 2023
542
3 543
4 544
5 545
6 546
7 547
8 548
9 549
10 550
11 551
12 552
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.1. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0028
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Jeffrey Adams, Interim Community Development Director

1. SUBJECT
Appeal No. 0561-22; an appeal of Planning Commission decision upholding Design Review Committee approval of Design Review No. 5077-22; a proposal to construct a new 1,102 square foot duplex unit with an attached 227 square foot garage at the rear of an existing single-family dwelling on a property zoned Duplex Residential at 529 S. Grand Street.

2. SUMMARY
On October 5, 2022, the Design Review Committee approved Design Review No. 5077-22, a request to construct a new 1,102 square foot duplex unit with an attached 227 square foot garage (1,329 square feet total) at the rear yard of an existing single-family dwelling that is a contributor to the Old Towne Historic District. The approval was appealed to the Planning Commission on October 20, 2022. The Planning Commission upheld the approval on December 5, 2022. The Planning Commission action was appealed to the City Council on December 16, 2022.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
The City Council shall consider the record and such additional evidence as may be offered and may affirm, reverse, or modify, in whole or in part, the action that was appealed. Staff will return to the Council at a subsequent meeting with a Resolution reflecting the action taken.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 3: Enhance and promote quality of life in the community c: Support and enhance attractive, diverse living environments.

Goal 5: Recognize, promote, and preserve Orange's rich heritage b: Expand and strengthen processes and practices related to protection and cultural resources.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
On October 15, 2022, the Design Review Committee approved Design Review No. 5077-22, a request to construct a new unit at the rear of a property developed with a historic single-family residence, resulting in a duplex development condition. The 1,102 sq. ft. single-story unit would have three bedrooms and two bathrooms with a 227 sq. ft. attached one-car garage (1,329 sq. ft. total area). Site improvements include driveway modifications as well as the creation of a patio and an City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™553
Item #: 9.1. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0028
additional uncovered parking space.

The proposed project would increase the existing floor area ratio (FAR) at the property from 0.17 to

0.30. Other adjacent properties in the vicinity with contributing buildings have FARs that range between 0.29 to 0.44. Even with the increase in FAR, the property would continue to have one of the lowest in its vicinity.

The new unit has been designed to be subordinate and compatible with the existing historic residence at the property. The Design Review Committee (DRC) found the project to be in conformance with the Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne Orange and Secretary of Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Detailed information about the project features is included in Attachments 3 and 9 to this report.

Appeal of DRC Action
The DRC approval was appealed to the Planning Commission on October 20, 2022 by Councilwoman Arianna Barrios (Appeal No. 0560-22). The grounds for that appeal are presented in Attachment 7. The Planning Commission upheld the DRC approval on December 5, 2022.

Appeal of Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission action was appealed to the City Council on December 16, 2022, by the Old Towne Preservation Association. The grounds for the appeal are as follows, including the website link to State Office of Historic Preservation reference information about CEQA exemptions:
1) Project is not exempt from CEQA. City Staff Report cites the exemption “per State CEQA Guideline 15303”, but does not consider the exceptions pertaining to the exemption:
<https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21728>:
“Categorical exemptions are identified by the State Resources agency and are defined the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR Section 15300-15331). Unlike statutory exemptions, categorical exemptions are not allowed to be used for projects that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource (14 CCR Section 15300.2(f)). Therefore, lead agencies must first determine if the project has the potential tom impact historical resources and if those impacts could be adverse prior to determining if a categorical exemption may be utilized for any given project.” Section 15300.2 - Exceptions
(b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant [515 S. Grand St. and 529 S. Grand St. projects should also be considered together, as they will have cumulative impacts on the historic resource] (f) Historical resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource. - From the City’s “City of Orange Local CEQA Guidelines” document, page 18:
“CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(1) “Substantial adverse changes in the significance of a historical resource means physical demolition, destruction, relation or alteration of the resource, or its immediate surroundings [i.e., setting] such that the significance of an historical resource would be materially impaired.

Click or tap here to enter text.

7. ATTACHMENTS
City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™554
Item #: 9.1. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0028
· Attachment 1 Appeal No. 0561-22
· Attachment 2 Vicinity Map
· Attachment 3 Project Plans with Site Photos
· Attachment 4 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 34-22 · Attachment 5 Draft Planning Commission Minutes, December 5, 2022 · Attachment 6 Planning Commission Staff Report, December 5, 2022 · Attachment 7 Appeal No. 0560-22
· Attachment 8 Design Review Committee Minutes, October 5, 2022 · Attachment 9 Design Review Committee Staff Report, October 5, 2022 City of Orange Page 3 of 3 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™555
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.1. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0028
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Jeffrey Adams, Interim Community Development Director

1. SUBJECT
Appeal No. 0561-22; an appeal of Planning Commission decision upholding Design Review Committee approval of Design Review No. 5077-22; a proposal to construct a new 1,102 square foot duplex unit with an attached 227 square foot garage at the rear of an existing single-family dwelling on a property zoned Duplex Residential at 529 S. Grand Street.

2. SUMMARY
On October 5, 2022, the Design Review Committee approved Design Review No. 5077-22, a request to construct a new 1,102 square foot duplex unit with an attached 227 square foot garage (1,329 square feet total) at the rear yard of an existing single-family dwelling that is a contributor to the Old Towne Historic District. The approval was appealed to the Planning Commission on October 20, 2022. The Planning Commission upheld the approval on December 5, 2022. The Planning Commission action was appealed to the City Council on December 16, 2022.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
The City Council shall consider the record and such additional evidence as may be offered and may affirm, reverse, or modify, in whole or in part, the action that was appealed. Staff will return to the Council at a subsequent meeting with a Resolution reflecting the action taken.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 3: Enhance and promote quality of life in the community c: Support and enhance attractive, diverse living environments.

Goal 5: Recognize, promote, and preserve Orange's rich heritage b: Expand and strengthen processes and practices related to protection and cultural resources.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
On October 15, 2022, the Design Review Committee approved Design Review No. 5077-22, a request to construct a new unit at the rear of a property developed with a historic single-family residence, resulting in a duplex development condition. The 1,102 sq. ft. single-story unit would have three bedrooms and two bathrooms with a 227 sq. ft. attached one-car garage (1,329 sq. ft. total area). Site improvements include driveway modifications as well as the creation of a patio and an City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™556
Item #: 9.1. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0028
additional uncovered parking space.

The proposed project would increase the existing floor area ratio (FAR) at the property from 0.17 to

0.30. Other adjacent properties in the vicinity with contributing buildings have FARs that range between 0.29 to 0.44. Even with the increase in FAR, the property would continue to have one of the lowest in its vicinity.

The new unit has been designed to be subordinate and compatible with the existing historic residence at the property. The Design Review Committee (DRC) found the project to be in conformance with the Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne Orange and Secretary of Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Detailed information about the project features is included in Attachments 3 and 9 to this report.

Appeal of DRC Action
The DRC approval was appealed to the Planning Commission on October 20, 2022 by Councilwoman Arianna Barrios (Appeal No. 0560-22). The grounds for that appeal are presented in Attachment 7. The Planning Commission upheld the DRC approval on December 5, 2022.

Appeal of Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission action was appealed to the City Council on December 16, 2022, by the Old Towne Preservation Association. The grounds for the appeal are as follows, including the website link to State Office of Historic Preservation reference information about CEQA exemptions:
1) Project is not exempt from CEQA. City Staff Report cites the exemption “per State CEQA Guideline 15303”, but does not consider the exceptions pertaining to the exemption:
<https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21728>:
“Categorical exemptions are identified by the State Resources agency and are defined the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR Section 15300-15331). Unlike statutory exemptions, categorical exemptions are not allowed to be used for projects that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource (14 CCR Section 15300.2(f)). Therefore, lead agencies must first determine if the project has the potential tom impact historical resources and if those impacts could be adverse prior to determining if a categorical exemption may be utilized for any given project.” Section 15300.2 - Exceptions
(b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant [515 S. Grand St. and 529 S. Grand St. projects should also be considered together, as they will have cumulative impacts on the historic resource] (f) Historical resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource. - From the City’s “City of Orange Local CEQA Guidelines” document, page 18:
“CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(1) “Substantial adverse changes in the significance of a historical resource means physical demolition, destruction, relation or alteration of the resource, or its immediate surroundings [i.e., setting] such that the significance of an historical resource would be materially impaired.

Click or tap here to enter text.

7. ATTACHMENTS
City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™557
Item #: 9.1. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0028
· Attachment 1 Appeal No. 0561-22
· Attachment 2 Vicinity Map
· Attachment 3 Project Plans with Site Photos
· Attachment 4 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 34-22 · Attachment 5 Draft Planning Commission Minutes, December 5, 2022 · Attachment 6 Planning Commission Staff Report, December 5, 2022 · Attachment 7 Appeal No. 0560-22
· Attachment 8 Design Review Committee Minutes, October 5, 2022 · Attachment 9 Design Review Committee Staff Report, October 5, 2022 City of Orange Page 3 of 3 Printed on 2/9/2023
powered by Legistar™558
559
560
Vicinity Map
Design Review No. 5077-22
South Grand Street Second Unit
529 S. Grand Street

City of Orange
Community Development Department
ORANGE = CONTRIBUTING HISTORIC RESOURCE
YELLOW = NON-CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE
BLUE DOT = HISTORIC OBJECT
561
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln 529 South Grand Street
Existing Site Plan, Proposed Site Plan and Project Information A-1
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln New Second Unit A-1
529 S. Grand Street, Orange CA 92866
145 S. Olive Street
Orange, CA 92866
714.639.3958
***ARCHITECT'S FAX***
#Contact E-mail Printed on 8/1/2022
(E) 320 SF
Garage
(E) 320 sq ft
2 Car Garage
(E) 17'-11 3/4"
(E) 15'-3"
(E) 27'-4"

1.01 1.02

1.05 1.06

1.07 1.07

1.07 1.08

1.08 1.08

1.14 1.14

1.06 1.06

1.03 1.18

1.04 150'
150'
75'75'
S. Grand Street
(E) 1,560 SF
4 Bed / 2 Bath
Main Residence
(Not In Scope)
(E) 320 sq ft
2 Car Garage
11'-6"
19'-2"
11'
9' 2'
97'-3"
227 SF
Proposed
Garage
Proposed 1,329 SF
(Including Garage)
3-Bed / 2-Bath
Second Unit

1.01 1.02

1.07 1.07

1.07 1.08

1.08 1.08

1.09 1.11

1.14 1.14

1.06 1.06

1.15 1.03

1.16 1.17

1.17 1.19

1.18 150'
150'
75'75'
S. Grand Street
(E) 1,560 SF
4 Bed / 2 Bath
Main Residence
(Not In Scope)
Sheet Index
A-1
A-2
A-3
A-4
A-5
A-6
A-7
A-8
Existing Site Plan, Proposed Site Plan and Project Information Proposed Floor Plan
Proposed Roof Plan
Proposed Exterior Elevations
Proposed Exterior Elevations
Exterior Details
Perspective Renderings
Existing Site Photos
Site Plan Keynotes

1.01 (E) Fence to remain

1.02 (E) Fruit tree to remain.

1.03 (E) Main residence not in scope.

1.04 Extent of proposed scope of work.

1.05 (E) Property line.

1.06 (E) Main residence roof overhang shown dashed.

1.07 (E) Tree to remain, protect in place.

1.08 (E) Concrete to remain, protect in place.

1.09 Proposed concrete driveway up to garage and exterior parking.

1.11 Proposed concrete walkway providing access to second unit.

1.14 (E) Landscaping to remain.

1.15 Proposed concrete backyard patio.

1.16 Proposed residence roof overhang shown dashed.

1.17 Area represents 350 sq. ft. of required open space for each unit.

1.18 (E) Property line.

1.19 Dashed line represents uncovered parking space.
1 SCALE: 1" = 10'
Existing Site Plan
2 SCALE: 1" = 10'
Proposed Site Plan
Project Site: 529 S. Grand
Street, Orange, CA 92866
505 S Grand
St. / 324 E.

La Veta Ave.
515 S Grand St.
529 S Grand St.
504/512 S
Grand St.
(NonHistoric
Property)
520 S Grand St.
528 S Grand St.
(Non-Historic
Property)
536 S
Grand St.
552 S
Grand St.

Vicinity F.A.R. Analysis
(Including proposed FAR for 515 S. Grand St. Info gathered from assessors parcel maps, google earth & MLS websites)
S Grand St.
545 S Grand St.

Address Lot Area Bldg Area FAR
505 S. Grand St. 8,610 SF 3,410 SF .40
515 S. Grand St. 7,140 SF 2,139 SF .29
520 S. Grand St. 6,700 SF 3,020 SF .45
529 S. Grand St. 11,250SF 3,209 SF .29
536 S. Grand St. 3,400 SF 1,502 SF .44
545 S. Grand St. 11,250SF 3,702 SF .33
552 S. Grand St. 5,982 SF 1,950 SF .33
Vicinity Map
Project Information
OWNER: Mike and Alison Vukovich
529 S. Grand Street
Orange, CA 92866
PH: 949.295.6755
APPLICANT: DSEA, Inc.
143 S. Olive St. Orange 92868 CA
PH: 714.639.3958
Contact: William Dunstan
[email protected]
PROJECT ADDRESS: 529 S. Grand Street, Orange CA 92866
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

This project involves the construction of a second unit in the rear of the property. The 1,329 SF unit will be a 1 story slab on grade structure with a 4:12 sloped roof to be subordinate to the existing residence and will have 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms with an attached 227SF 1 car garage. A second uncovered parking space is proposed adjacent to the new garage. Minor site improvements consisting of a revised concrete driveway area and a rear concrete patio are proposed. No other landscaping is proposed, the existing grass lawn will be maintained and repaired after construction. The existing residence is not in the scope of work.

APN#: 390-103-25
ZONE: R-2-6
EXISTING LOT AREA: 11,250 sq.ft.

PROPOSED USE: No change to existing use
OCCUPANCY GROUP: R3
CONSTRUCTION TYPE: VB (Fully-Sprinklered)
PARKING: (1) On-Site parking spaces
(1) Enclosed garage parking spaces
STORIES: (E) (1) Story
Proposed Second Unit: (1) Story
EXISTING AREA: (E) Residence 1,560 sq.ft.
(E) Garage 320 sq.ft.

Total 1,880 sq.ft.

PROPOSED AREA: Proposed Second Unit 1,329 sq.ft.
(E) Residence 1,560 sq.ft.
(E) Garage 320 sq.ft.

Total 3,209 sq.ft.

OPEN SPACE: 700 sq.ft. = 700 sq.ft. required for 2 units FLOOR / AREA RATIO: 3,209 sq.ft. / 11,250 sq.ft.= .29 (.70 MAX for R-2-6) 562
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln 529 South Grand Street
Proposed Floor Plan
A-2
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln New Second Unit A-2
529 S. Grand Street, Orange CA 92866
145 S. Olive Street
Orange, CA 92866
714.639.3958
***ARCHITECT'S FAX***
#Contact E-mail Printed on 8/1/2022
W-03
D-12
D-07
D-09
D-01
W-01
W-01
W-01
W-01
D-03
W-01 W-01 W-01 W-01
W-02
D-02
D-04
D-06
D-05
D-08
D-11
D-10
D-13
W-01 W-01
DW
REF
W
D
(E) 320 sq ft
2 Car Garage
19'-2" 17'-6 1/2" 11'-1 1/2" 15'-3"
2'-3" 26'-5" 15'-3" 11'
26'-5 1/2" 24'-6 1/2" 12'-6" 11'-6"
2'-3" 6'-10 1/2" 21'-1/2" 6'-10 1/2"
1 A-5
2 A-5
1 A-4
2 A-4
3 A-5

2.00 2.00

2.01 2.02

2.02 2.03

2.03 2.04

2.04 2.05

2.05 2.06
Dining/Kitchen
11'x12'-6"
1-Car Garage
10'x20'
Interior Clear
Master Closet
6'-6"x5'-3"
Master Bath
6'-6"x8'-1"
Master
Bedroom
10'-9"x12'
Bedroom #2
10'x11'
Bedroom #1
10'x11'
Closet #2
3'-6"x5'-1"
Bathroom #2
5'x10'-4"
Closet #1
3'-6"x5'-7"
Living
14-9"'x16'
D D
C C
B B
3 3
2 2
1 1
A A
1'
(E)
1'
(E)
(E) 1,560 SF
4 Bed / 2 Bath
Main Residence
(Not In Scope)

DOOR SCHEDULE
MARK
D-01
D-02
D-03
D-04
D-05
D-06
D-07
D-08
D-09
D-10
D-11
D-12
D-13

LOCATION WIDTH
3'
2'-8 1/2"
2'-6"
2'-6"
2'-6"
2'-6"
2'-6"
2'-4"
4'-6"
2'-4"
2'-4"
8'
3'
HEIGHT
6'-8"
6'-8"
6'-8"
6'-8"
6'-8"
6'-8"
6'-8"
6'-8"
6'-8"
6'-8"
6'-8"
7'
6'-8"

TYPE NOTES

WINDOW SCHEDULE
ID
W-01
W-01
W-02
W-03
WIDTH
2'-6"
2'-6"
2'
3'
HEIGHT
4'
4'-6"
3'
1'-6"

TYPE MATERIAL NOTES
##
##
Non-rated ext. wall assembly. 5" horizontal lapped siding o/ 1/2" plywood o/ 2x4 wood studs @ 16"o.c. w/ R-13 batt insul. w/ 5/8"gyp. bd @ int., use WR gyp bd. @ bathroom.

Refer to elevations for finish information.

Non-rated int. wall assembly. 2x4 wood studs @ 16"o.c.
w/ sound insul. w/ 1/2"gyp. bd. both sides, use W.R. gyp. bd. at bathroom. Refer to elevations for finish information.

Window. Refer to Window Schedule for more information.

Door. Refer to Door Schedule for more information.

Standard 120V Duplex receptacle. Mount at 16" A.F.F. to centerline U.O.N.
120V Weatherproof duplex receptacle with ground fault
circuit interruptor protection. Mount at 16" A.F.F. to
centerline U.O.N.

Standard 120V Quadplex receptacle. Mount at 16" A.F.F.
to centerline U.O.N.

Computer data line. Mount at 16" A.F.F. to centerline
U.O.N.

Telephone line. Mount at 16" A.F.F. to centerline U.O.N.

T.V. cable. Mount at 16" A.F.F. to centerline U.O.N.

Floor Plan Keynotes

2.00 Extents of roof overhang above.

2.01 Washer and dryer attachments.

2.02 Bathroom double sink.

2.03 Floor mounted toilet.

2.04 2'-10"x5' shower.

2.05 Refrigerator

2.06 Double basin sink.
1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
Proposed Floor Plan
Double hung Wood
Double hung
Sliding
Living Room
Kitchen
Bedroom #1
Bedroom #2
Closet #2
Master Bedroom
Bathroom #2
Laundry
Master Closet
Master Bath
Garage
Closet #1
Solid Core Wood
Solid Core Wood
Wood
Wood
Wood
Wood
Wood
Wood
Wood
Wood
Wood
Wood
Wood
Upper Half Glass Lite in Door
Sectional Wood Rollup Door
Floor Plan Legend
Wood
Wood
Wood
Double hung
Garage
Full Glass Sidelites along Door
563
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln 529 South Grand Street
Proposed Roof Plan
A-3
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln New Second Unit A-3
529 S. Grand Street, Orange CA 92866
145 S. Olive Street
Orange, CA 92866
714.639.3958
***ARCHITECT'S FAX***
#Contact E-mail Printed on 8/1/2022
1 A-5
2 A-5
1 A-4
2 A-4
3 A-5

3.01 3.02

3.02 ROOF SLOPE
4:12 ROOF SLOPE
4:12
ROOF SLOPE 4:12 ROOF SLOPE 4:12
ROOF SLOPE 5:12

ROOF SLOPE
6:12 ROOF SLOPE
6:12

ROOF SLOPE
4:12 ROOF SLOPE
4:12

ROOF SLOPE
3:12 ROOF SLOPE
3:12
Ridge
Valley
Ridge
Ridge
Valley
Rake
Rake
Rake
Rake
Eave
Eave Eave
Eave
Eave
D D
C C
B B
3 3
2 2
1 1
A A
Main Residence
Roof Plan Keynotes

3.01 Proposed class 'A' comp. asphalt shingles to match (E) main residence.

3.02 (E) Roofing to remain, protect in place.
1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
Proposed Roof Plan
564
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln 529 South Grand Street
Proposed Exterior Elevations
A-4
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln New Second Unit A-4
529 S. Grand Street, Orange CA 92866
145 S. Olive Street
Orange, CA 92866
714.639.3958
***ARCHITECT'S FAX***
#Contact E-mail Printed on 8/1/2022
3 2 1

5.01 5.00

5.05 5.08

5.06 Finish Floor
+2"
Top Plate
+8'-2"
T.O. Roof
+13'-3"
(E)
Garage
(E) Main Residence
Second Unit
(E) Finish Floor
+1'-6"
(E) T.O. Roof
+17'-1 1/2"

5.02 D C B A

5.05 5.01

5.00 Finish Floor
+2"
Top Plate
+8'-2"
T.O. Roof
+13'-3"
(E) Garage
(E) Main Residence

5.02 Exterior Elevation Keynotes

5.00 Fiber cement lapped plank siding w/ 5" exposure.

5.01 Proposed class 'A' comp. asphalt shingles to match (E) main residence.

5.02 2"x8" fascia board over roof eave and rake.

5.05 Wood trim around single hung window. Extend profiled head trim beyond jamb on both sides, typ.

5.06 6x wood column paint to match horizontal wood siding.

5.08 Gable roof vent. Equally spaced vertical 2x wood trim boards over bug screen similar to (E) main residence.
1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
North Exterior Elevation
2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
East Exterior Elevation
Note: Paint color to be determined by owner.

Note: Paint color to be determined by owner.
565
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln 529 South Grand Street
Proposed Exterior Elevations
A-5
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln New Second Unit A-5
529 S. Grand Street, Orange CA 92866
145 S. Olive Street
Orange, CA 92866
714.639.3958
***ARCHITECT'S FAX***
#Contact E-mail Printed on 8/1/2022
1 2 3

5.05 5.02 5.01

5.00 5.09
Finish Floor
+2"
Top Plate
+8'-2"
T.O. Roof
+13'-3"
(E) Main Residence
Second Unit
(E) Finish Floor
+1'-6"
(E) T.O. Roof
+17'-1 1/2"

A B C D

5.10 5.00

5.06 Finish Floor
+2"
Top Plate
+8'-2"
T.O. Roof
+13'-3"
Second Unit

5.01 Finish Floor
+2"
Top Plate
+8'-2"
T.O. Roof
+13'-3"
(E) T.O. Roof
+17'-1 1/2"
(E) Main Residence
Exterior Elevation Keynotes

5.00 Fiber cement lapped plank siding w/ 5" exposure.

5.01 Proposed class 'A' comp. asphalt shingles to match (E) main residence.

5.02 2"x8" fascia board over roof eave and rake.

5.05 Wood trim around single hung window. Extend profiled head trim beyond jamb on both sides, typ.

5.06 6x wood column paint to match horizontal wood siding.

5.09 8'x7' Sectional roll up garage with carriage panel door.

5.10 3'x6'-9" Front door with 1'x6'-9" flanking sidelites. 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
South Exterior Elevation
2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
West Exterior Elevation
3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
West Exterior Elevation Including Main Residence
Note: Paint color to be determined by owner.

Note: Paint color to be determined by owner.
566
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln 529 South Grand Street
Exterior Details
A-6
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln New Second Unit A-6
529 S. Grand Street, Orange CA 92866
145 S. Olive Street
Orange, CA 92866
714.639.3958
***ARCHITECT'S FAX***
#Contact E-mail Printed on 8/1/2022
6" Min.
2'-6" Roof Overhang
Asphalt shingles to match (E) residence, use class 'B' min.

Install per manufacturer's req's and per ICC-ESR 1475
#30 Roofing felt o/ plywood. Lap o/ flashing.
1x T&G Wood decking o/ plywood
20GA G.I. flashing w/ 1/2"
hemmed edge. paint to
match fascia
2x6 Pressure treated
rafter to match (E).

Paint.
5" Horiz. wood siding o/
plywood to match (E).
1x Cont. wood trim between rafters, notch for siding
2'-6" Roof Overhang
2 1/16"
20GA G.I. flashing w/1/2" hemmed
edge. Paint to match rake rafter.
5" Horiz. wood siding o/ 15#
bldg. paper o/ plywood
Asphalt shingles to match (E) residence
o/ #30 roofing felt o/ plywood, Use Class 'B'
min. Install per manufacturer's req's and per
ICC-ESR 1475
1x Cont. trim, notch for siding
1x T&G Wood decking to match
(E) Residence
2x Wood studs laid flat, lapped o/
3 trusses min.
2x Barge board, paint to match
existing.
1/2" 1"
1/2" 1/2"
Kerfed wood door frame
Paint to match (E) residence.

Cont. weatherstrip
at door frame.
1x int. wood trim
1x3 wood trim, notched for siding.

Paint.

Cont. bead of sealant @ siding
Bldg. paper behind trim
5" Horiz. wood siding o/ bldg. paper
o/ plywood.
(2) 2x wood studs
@ jamb
R-13 Batt insul.
@ ext. wall
Wood door per
Door Schedule

INTERIOR EXTERIOR
3" 1"
1x3 Wood trim w/ painted finish.

Notch for siding. Align w/ jamb
trim both sides.

Bldg. paper, extend under trim
5" Horiz. wood siding o/ bldg. paper
o/ plywood
1x Int. trim at sill w/
painted finish
Double sill plate
at window
Casement window per window
schedule on sheet A-2
Batt insul. at ext. wall
Stool window trim
w/ painted finish
Shaped wood sill trim. Align sill w/
edge of jamb trim both sides

INTERIOR EXTERIOR
1/2" 1/2"
20GA G.I. flashing w/ 1/2" hemmed edge
1x Profiled wood trim w/ painted finish to match (E).

Wood double hung window. Refer to
Window Schedule
1x Int. wood trim
Bldg. paper, Lap o/ flashing
Header. Refer to Structural drawings
Bldg. paper. behind trim & flashing
Horiz. wood siding o/ (2) layers
bldg. paper o/ plywood sheathing
6'-9" R.O. VERIFY

INTERIOR EXTERIOR
1/2" 1/2"
1/2"
Header per
Structural drawings
1x Interior wood trim
Lap bldg. paper o/ flashing.
20GA G.I. flashing w/ 1/2"
hemmed edge.
1x Ext. profiled wood trim
to match (E). Paint.

Kerfed wood door frame
Paint.

Cont. weatherstrip
at door.

Wood door per
Door Schedule
Horiz. wood siding
o/ (2) layers bldg. paper o/
plywood sheathing

EXTERIOR
6'-9" R.O. VERIFY

INTERIOR
1 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0"
Roof Eave Detail
2 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0"
Rake Detail 4 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0"Exterior Door/Window Jamb Detail 6 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0"
Window Sill Detail
3 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0"
Window Head Detail
5 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0"
Door Head Detail (Jamb Sim.)

5.09 Roll up garage door
with carriage door.

Fiber cement
Fiber cement
Fiber cement
Fiber cement lapped
plank siding w/ 5"
exposure.

Fiber cement lapped
plank siding w/ 5"
exposure.

Fiber cement lapped
plank siding w/ 5"
exposure.

Horiz. wood siding o/ bldg. paper o/
plywood w/ 5" exposure.
1 1
Horiz. wood siding o/
bldg. paper o/ plywood
w/ 5" exposure.

Horiz. wood siding o/
bldg. paper o/ plywood
w/ 5" exposure.

Horiz. wood siding o/
bldg. paper o/ plywood
w/ 5" exposure.

Horiz. wood siding o/
bldg. paper o/ plywood
w/ 5" exposure.

Horiz. wood siding o/ bldg.
paper o/ plywood w/ 5"
exposure.
single
Wood single hung window.

Refer to window schedule.
567
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln 529 South Grand Street
Perspective Renderings
A-7
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln New Second Unit A-7
529 S. Grand Street, Orange CA 92866
145 S. Olive Street
Orange, CA 92866
714.639.3958
***ARCHITECT'S FAX***
#Contact E-mail Printed on 8/1/2022
5 SCALE: 1:0.80
View from Northwest Looking Southeast
3 SCALE: 1:0.80
View from South Looking North
6 SCALE: 1:0.80
View from Northeast Looking Southwest
4 SCALE: 1:0.80
View from North Looking South
1 SCALE: 1:0.80
View from Northwest Looking East 2 SCALE: 1:0.80View from Southwest Looking Northeast 568
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln 529 South Grand Street
Existing Site Photos
A-8
Plotted on 8/1/2022 at 8:24 AM P:\807 Vukovich 529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU\807 BIM-CAD Files\807 ArchiCAD Models\529 S Grand Street Second Unit & ADU ALT TA.pln New Second Unit A-8
529 S. Grand Street, Orange CA 92866
145 S. Olive Street
Orange, CA 92866
714.639.3958
***ARCHITECT'S FAX***
#Contact E-mail Printed on 8/1/2022
Northwest Street View Main Residence Entry Street View Main Residence Driveway Southwest View Main Residence Driveway Southeast View Southeast Garage View Northwest Backyard View 569
570
571
572
573
City of Orange
Planning Commission
December 05, 2022

MINUTES - DRAFT
The Planning Commission of the City of Orange, California convened on December 05, 2022, at 7:00 p.m. in a Regular Meeting in the Council Chamber, 300 E. Chapman Avenue, Orange, California.

1. OPENING/CALL TO ORDER
Chair Vazquez called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

1.1 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Martinez led the flag salute.

1.2 ROLL CALL

Present: Glasgow, Simpson, Martinez, Trapesonian, and Vazquez

Absent: None

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Public Speaker:

Alan Kinkaid spoke in opposition to the proposed Kornerstone-Palmyra Cemetery.

3. CONSENT CALENDAR

3.1. Approval of meeting minutes of the Planning Commission of the City of Orange for the November 7, 2022 Regular Meeting.

ACTION: Approved minutes as presented.

Approval of the Consent Calendar
A motion was made by Commissioner Martinez and seconded by Chair Vazquez to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion carried by the following vote:

Ayes: Glasgow, Simpson, Martinez, Trapesonian, and Vazquez Noes: None

Absent: None

4. ASSISTANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REPORTS
None.

574
Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 5, 2022

5. COMMISSION BUSINESS

5.1. Appeal No. 0560-22; an appeal of Design Review Committee approval of Design Review No. 5077-22 allowing construction of a new duplex unit at 529 S. Grand Street
Public Speakers:

The following spoke in support of the project: Doug Ely, Architect; Alison Vukovich, Applicant; and Tom Aldrich, Designer.

The following spoke in opposition to the project: Tony Trabucco, Linda Maxwell Jordan, John Goode, Tara Klasna, Annalisa Goode, Tim McCormack, Diana Zdenek, Patty Ricci, Brian Lochrie, and Arianna Barrios.

The Commissioners discussed the following:
· Impact on the Historic District
· Zoning history
· CEQA Exemptions and Classification
· The floor area of the living space
A motion was made by Vice Chair Glasgow, Seconded by Commissioner Simpson to deny Appeal No. 0560-22; an appeal of Design Review Committee approval of Design Review No. 5077-22 allowing construction of a new duplex unit at 529 S. Grand Street.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Ayes: Glasgow, Simpson, Trapesonian, and Vazquez
Noes: Martinez

Absent: None

5.2. Appeal No. 559-22, AMAROK (Sunbelt Rentals)
Public Speaker:

Keith Kaneko, applicant, spoke on behalf of the project.

The Commissioners discussed the following:
· Height of fence
· Basis for the Community Development Director denial
· Separation between fences
· Existing barbed wire
A motion was made by Commissioner Simpson, seconded by Vice Chair Glasgow, to approve Appeal No. 559-22 with the following conditions:
1) 12-inch minimum for the spacing between the existing fence 2) Changing condition from 10ft to 8ft
3) Removal of existing barbed wire
The motion carried by the following vote:

Ayes: Glasgow, Simpson, Martinez, Trapesonian, and Vazquez Noes: None

Absent: None
RECESS: The Planning Commission recessed at 7:19 p.m. and reconvened at 7:29 p.m. with all Members present.

575
Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 5, 2022

6. NEW HEARINGS

6.1. Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit No. 3187-22, Pitfire Pizza, 1623 W. Katella Avenue, Suite 102 and CEQA exemption finding.

Chair Vazquez opened the public hearing.

Public Speakers:

The following spoke on behalf of the project:

Moni Dosanjh, Applicant; and Jeff Goodman; CEO.

Sergeant Chris Moten of the Orange Police Department spoke about the Police Department's concern about off-sale condition.

Chair Vazquez closed the public hearing.

The Commissioners discussed the following:
· ABC License type in relation to the other restaurants in chain · Alcohol sales to-go
· Menu options in relation to type of alcohol sales
· Alcohol beverages being offered at reduced rates only in combination with non-alcohol beverages and food items
· Means of alcohol service
· Control of alcohol on patio and potential for gates
A motion was made by Vice Chair Glasgow, seconded by Commissioner Martinez to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 31-22 entitled: A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Orange approving Conditional Use Permit No. 3187-22, for a State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control Type 47 License (On Sale General - Eating Place) at a proposed restaurant and expanded patio located at 1623 W. Katella Avenue, Suite 102 with the deletion of Conditions 23 and 33, and modifications to Conditions 14,18, and 30 as follows:
#14: The sale of beer, wine, or spirits for consumption off the premises excluding the outdoor patio shall be allowed with the prior approval of the Community Development Director and Police Department.
#18: On Saturday and Sunday the hours of operation may begin at 9:00am. The hours as otherwise proposed may remain the same.

The following condition was added:
#30 Patio gates shall have panic hardware on them with alarms to sound if anyone exits through them
Ayes: Glasgow, Simpson, Martinez, Trapesonian, and Vazquez Noes: None

Absent: None

576
Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 5, 2022

6.2. Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit No. 3126-20, Design Review No. 5016-20, and Minor Site Plan Review No. 1020-20, In-N-Out Burger and CEQA exemption finding.

Commissioner Trapesonian recused himself from Item 6.2 due to a potential conflict with employment and left the meeting at 10:02 p.m.

Chair Vazquez opened the public hearing.

Public Speakers:

The following spoke on behalf of the project:

Katie Sanchez, Applicant.

Charles Gates spoke in opposition.

Chair Vazquez closed the public hearing.

The Commissioners discussed the following:
· Location of drive-thru ordering speaker
· Advance mobile ordering reference in Condition 26
· On-Site parking and queuing
· Surrender of conditional use permit for El Torito alcohol sales · Air scrubbers on kitchen venting
· On-site parking lot security
· Nighttime parking lot activities
· Intersection improvements at the City Drive and City Boulevard · Surrendering of El Torito ABC License for alcohol sales · Hours of operation
A motion was made by Chair Vazquez and seconded by Commissioner Martinez to adopt Resolution No. PC 32-22 with modification of condition 26, deleting the reference to advance ordering at the end of the condition, and the addition of the following condition:
• Surrender of existing Type 47 ABC License
Resolution No. PC 32-22. A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Orange approving Conditional Use Permit No. 3126-20, Design Review No. 5016-20, and Minor Site Plan Review No. 1020-20 to construct a new fast-food drive-through restaurant with associated site improvements located at 3520 The City Way East.

The motion carried by the following vote:

Ayes: Glasgow, Simpson, Martinez, and Vazquez
Noes: None

Absent: None
Recused: Trapesonian

577
Planning Commission Minutes - Draft December 5, 2022

7. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m.

The next Regular Planning Commission Meeting will be held on Thursday, January 5, 2022 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber.

Anna Pehoushek
Assistant Community Development Director

578
Agenda Item
Planning Commission
Item #: 5.1. 12/5/2022 File #: 22-0673
TO: Chair and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director

1. SUBJECT
Appeal No. 0560-22; an appeal of Design Review Committee approval of Design Review No. 5077- 22 allowing construction of a new duplex unit at 529 S. Grand Street

2. SUMMARY
On October 15, 2022 the Design Review Committee approved Design Review No. 5077-22, a request to construct a new 1,556 square foot duplex unit at the rear yard of an existing single-family dwelling that is a contributor to the Old Towne Historic District. The approval was appealed to the Planning Commission on October 20, 2022 by Arianna Barrios.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
The Planning Commission shall consider the record and such additional evidence as may be offered and may affirm, reverse, or modify, in whole or in part, the action that was appealed. Staff will return to the Commission at a subsequent meeting with a Resolution reflecting the action taken.

4. AUTHORIZING GUIDELINES
Orange Municipal Code (OMC) Section 17.08.050.A authorizes any action taken by the Design Review Committee to be appealed to the Planning Commission. OMC Section 17.08.050.E authorizes the Planning Commission to conduct a hearing and take action on such appeals.

5. PROJECT BACKGROUND
The proposed project was continued by the Design Review Committee on September 21, 2022 for re -noticing and reviewed and approved on October 5, 2022 subject to conditions of approval.

Applicant: William Dunstan, DSEA, Inc.

Property Owner Michael & Alison Vukovich
Property Location 529 S. Grand Street
Existing General Plan Land
Use Element Designation
Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR)
Existing Zoning Classification Residential Duplex (R-2-6) Old Towne Yes
Specific Plan/PC No
Site Size 11,250 sq. ft.

Circulation S. Grand Street is a local street.

Existing Conditions The subject property consists of an existing historic single-family residence and historic garage
Surrounding Land Uses and
Zoning
The subject property is located on the east side of S. Grand Street in the Nutwood Tract residential neighborhood of the Old Towne Historic District, between E. La Veta Avenue and E.

City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 12/1/2022
powered by Legistar™579
Item #: 5.1. 12/5/2022 File #: 22-0673
p()
Old Towne Yes
Specific Plan/PC No
Site Size 11,250 sq. ft.

Circulation S. Grand Street is a local street.

Existing Conditions The subject property consists of an existing historic single-family residence and historic garage
Surrounding Land Uses and
Zoning
The subject property is located on the east side of S. Grand Street in the Nutwood Tract residential neighborhood of the Old Towne Historic District, between E. La Veta Avenue and E.

Toluca Avenue. The 500 block of S. Grand Street is comprised of lots developed as single-family and multi-unit properties zoned Residential Duplex (R-2-6). Most neighboring properties are also considered contributors to the Old Towne Historic District.

Previous
Applications/Entitlements
None

6. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project involves the construction of a new unit at the rear of a property developed with a single family residence, resulting in a duplex development condition. The 1,329 sq. ft. 1-story unit would have three bedrooms and two bathrooms with a 227 sq. ft. attached one-car garage (1,556 sq. ft. total area).

The new unit has been designed to be subordinate and compatible with the existing historic residence at the property. Elements that match the historic residence including asphalt roof shingles and wood trim around single-hung wood windows. It is differentiated from the original residence by its roof pitch and reduced height, use of horizontal fiber cement lapped plank siding with 5-inch exposure to match the profile of the historic wood siding on the existing residence, and modified attic vent style. The new attached one-car garage with a sectional roll-up carriage panel door further distinguishes it from the historic structure.

The proposed project would increase the existing floor area ratio (FAR) at the property from 0.17 to

0.30. Other adjacent properties in the vicinity with contributing buildings have FARs that range between 0.29 to 0.44. Even with the increase in FAR, the property would continue to have one of the smallest in its vicinity.

A second uncovered parking space is proposed adjacent to the new garage. Minor site improvements consisting of a revised concrete driveway area and a rear concrete patio are proposed. No other landscaping is proposed and the existing grass lawn will be maintained and repaired after construction. No changes are proposed to the existing residence and garage.

7. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
An appeal of the Design Review Committee approval of the project was filed by Arianna Barrios on October 20, 2022. The grounds for the appeal are as follows:

Based on evidence presented at the hearing and testimony from the public, the following required findings for approval cannot be met:
1) The project does not conform to the Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 12/1/2022
powered by Legistar™580
Item #: 5.1. 12/5/2022 File #: 22-0673
1) The project does not conform to the Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne because
i. The mass and scale of the project are not compatible with the existing building. The new building should be subordinate to the main structure but it is not. ii. The location of the new building does not fit with the historic pattern of development in Old Towne and the view from adjoining neighbors will negatively impact the historic district.
iii. Acccessory structures should be of a utilitarian design but the proposed building is a smaller replica of the main house.
2) The project does not conform with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the same reasons.
3) The project negatively impacts community aesthetics. 4) The project does not preserve or enhance existing neighborhood character and aesthetics and negatively impacts them.
5) The CEQA exemption should not be applied because the project is in a sensitive historic district, could cause a substantial change in a historic resource, doesn’t meet the design standards, and necessitates further CEQA review.

8. PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice was provided to 115 owners and tenants within 400 feet of the project on or before November 23, 2022, and the site was posted with a notice on or before that date.

9. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Categorical Exemption: The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guideline 15303 (Class 3 - New Construction), because it consists of construction of a new duplex residential unit resulting in a total number of units below the maximum allowable in the Low Medium Density Residential General Plan land use designation (6-15 dwelling units per acre) and Duplex Residential (R-2-6) zoning district, and is in an area where public facilities and services are available.

10. ADVISORY BOARD ACTION
None required.

11. ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 Appeal No. 0560-22
Attachment 2 Vicinity Map
Attachment 3 Project Plans
Attachment 4 Design Review Committee Minutes, October 5, 2022 Attachment 5 Design Review Committee Staff Report, October 5, 2022 City of Orange Page 3 of 3 Printed on 12/1/2022
powered by Legistar™581
582
583
584
Agenda Item
Design Review Committee
Item #: 4.1. 10/5/2022 File #: 22-0550
TO: Chair and Members of the Design Review Committee
FROM: Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director

1. SUBJECT
Design Review No. 5077-22 - 529 S. Grand Street Duplex Unit. (Continued from September 21, 2022.)

2. SUMMARY
Final determination by the Design Review Committee.

The applicant proposes to construct a new 1,556 square foot duplex unit at the rear yard of an existing single-family dwelling. The existing dwelling is a contributor to the Old Towne Historic District.

The item was continued by the Design Review Committee at the September 21st meeting to October 5, 2022 for re-noticing.

3. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Applicants: William Dunstan, DSEA, Inc.

Owner: Michael & Alison Vukovich
Property Location: 529 S. Grand Street
General Plan Designation: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) Zoning Classification: Residential Duplex (R-2-6)
Existing Development: The subject property consists of an existing single-family residence and garage
Associated Application: None
Previous DRC Project Review: September 21, 2022

4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project includes the construction of a new unit at the rear of a property developed with a single family residence, resulting in a duplex development condition. The 1,329 sq. ft. 1-story unit would have three bedrooms and two bathrooms with a 227 sq. ft. attached one-car garage (1,556 sq. ft. total area).

The new unit has been designed to be subordinate and compatible with the existing contributing single-family residence at the property. The unit is proposed to have horizontal fiber cement lapped plank siding with 5-inch exposure similar to the profile of the historic wood siding on the existing City of Orange Page 1 of 5 Printed on 9/29/2022
powered by Legistar™585
Item #: 4.1. 10/5/2022 File #: 22-0550
plank siding with 5-inch exposure similar to the profile of the historic wood siding on the existing residence, asphalt roof shingles matching the existing residence, and wood trim around single-hung wood windows that also reflect the existing residence. The new attached one-car garage would have a sectional roll-up carriage panel door.

The proposed project would increase the existing floor area ratio (FAR) at the property from 0.17 to

0.30. Other adjacent properties in the vicinity with contributing buildings have FARs that range between 0.29 to 0.44. Even with the increase in FAR, the property would continue to have one of the smallest in its vicinity.

A second uncovered parking space is proposed adjacent to the new garage. Minor site improvements consisting of a revised concrete driveway area and a rear concrete patio are proposed. No other landscaping is proposed and the existing grass lawn will be maintained and repaired after construction. No changes are proposed to the existing residence and garage.

5. EXISTING SITE
The subject property is a contributing resource to the National Register-listed Old Towne Historic District (Attachment 4). The one-story 1,560 sq. ft. Craftsman-style residence was constructed in 1916. The property also contains a historic detached 320 sq. ft. garage that appears in a 1922 Sanborn map.

6. EXISTING AREA CONTEXT
The subject property is located on the east side of S. Grand Street in the Nutwood Tract residential neighborhood of the Old Towne Historic District, between E. La Veta Avenue and E. Toluca Avenue.

The 500 block of S. Grand Street is comprised of lots developed as single-family and multi-unit properties zoned Residential Duplex (R-2-6). Most neighboring properties are also considered contributors to the Old Towne Historic District.

7. ANALYSIS AND STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
Issue 1: Size of Second Unit
The total area for the existing main residence and garage is 1,910 sq. ft. Existing floor area ratio (FAR) for the property is 0.17, which is a lower FAR than currently exists on most surrounding properties. The Vicinity FAR Analysis on Sheet A-1 of the project drawings (Attachment 3) shows a comparison of nearby FARs that range from 0.29 to 0.44. The proposed unit would add 1,556 sq. ft. of development to the site, for a new overall total of 3,466 sq. ft. and FAR of 0.30. The maximum allowable FAR for a property zoned R-2-6 is 0.70. The FAR for the subject property is well below the allowable maximum, and would also still be generally lower than that of most of the surrounding properties as shown in the FAR analysis.

The proposed unit appears appropriate in size and scale and would be minimally visible from the street. The second unit is one story and lower in height than the existing residence. Although most of the second unit would not be readily visible from the street, a portion projects north of the main residence. There is an existing fence that extends from the northwest corner of the main residence to the north property line that will remain and help obscure the new unit. Its development would not impair the integrity of the historic streetscape nor the surrounding historic district.

Issue 2: Proposed Siding
The applicant is proposing a fiber cement siding for the proposed second unit and stated preference over wood as there will be no exposed nails that need maintenance, paint color would last longer, and there would be no warping or deterioration like wood siding. The applicant also expressed a City of Orange Page 2 of 5 Printed on 9/29/2022
powered by Legistar™586
Item #: 4.1. 10/5/2022 File #: 22-0550
and there would be no warping or deterioration like wood siding. The applicant also expressed a desire to use fiber cement siding due to cost and maintenance considerations associated with wood siding. The Historic Preservation Design Standards encourage use of traditional building materials for new construction, but allow for consideration of alternates to traditional materials if that material is compatible with the design and appearance of historic features on similar contributing buildings in the District. Staff is seeking confirmation from the DRC on the use of the proposed fiber cement siding as an alternative to wood siding. Should the DRC prefer the use of wood siding, staff recommends the addition of a condition of approval to reflect that determination.

8. ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION
None. The scope of this project does not involve a review or recommendation from the City’s Staff Review Committee.

9. PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice was provided to 83 owners and tenants within 400 feet of the project on or before September 26, 2022, and the site was posted with a notice on or before that date.

10. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Categorical Exemption: The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guideline 15303 (Class 3 - New Construction), because it consists of construction of a new duplex residential unit resulting in a total number of units below the maximum allowable in the Low Medium Density Residential General Plan land use designation (6-15 dwelling units per acre) and Duplex Residential (R-2-6) zoning district, and is in an area where public facilities and services are available.

11. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUIRED FINDINGS
Findings for DRC applications come from four sources:
· The Orange Municipal Code
· The Infill Residential Design Guidelines
· The Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne (commonly referred to the Old Towne Design Standards or OTDS)
· Orange Eichler Design Standards (or OEDS)
The Findings are applied as appropriate to each project. Based on the following Findings and statements in support of such Findings, staff recommends the DRC approve the project with recommended conditions.
· In the Old Towne Historic District, the proposed work conforms to the prescriptive standards and design criteria referenced and/or recommended by the DRC or other reviewing body for the project (OMC 17.10.070.G.1).

The proposed project is in conformance with the Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne, which are the prescriptive design criteria for projects within the Old Towne Historic District. The second unit is compatible with the mass, scale, and setbacks of the existing building, and the roof forms are consistent with the surrounding houses in the neighborhood.

The second unit would be minimally visible from the street and will not affect the appearance of the historic district. Traditional building materials in the windows are used and compatible with the historic district. The new unit is subtly differentiated from the original primary residence by its slab on grade construction, fiber cement siding, and vertical gable roof vent City of Orange Page 3 of 5 Printed on 9/29/2022
powered by Legistar™587
Item #: 4.1. 10/5/2022 File #: 22-0550
detail.
· In any National Register Historic District, the proposed work complies with the Secretary of the Interior’s standards and guidelines (OMC 17.10.07.G.2).

Projects located in the Old Towne Historic District must comply with the Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne. As described above, the proposed work conforms with these design standards.
· The project design upholds community aesthetics through the use of an internally consistent, integrated design theme and is consistent with all adopted specific plans, applicable design standards, and their required findings (OMC 17.10.07.G.3).

Projects located in the Old Towne Historic District must comply with the Historic Preservation Design Standards for Old Towne. As described above, the proposed work conforms with these design standards. The architecture, scale and massing of the proposed unit facilitates the integration of the new unit with the original residence and overall site. The roof forms, fenestration, and materials are also compatible with the historic residence and garage. The project is not located in a specific plan area.
· For infill residential development, as specified in the City of Orange Infill Residential Design Guidelines, the new structure(s) or addition are compatible with the scale, massing, orientation, and articulation of the surrounding development and will preserve or enhance existing neighborhood character (OMC 17.10.07.G.4).

The new duplex unit is minimally visible from the street and is compatible with the scale of surrounding development. It is subordinate to the existing historic building and would continue to maintain a generally low FAR for the property compared to the adjacent buildings in the vicinity. The scale and massing of the structure, combined with the roof plan and fenestration are consistent with surrounding neighborhood character.

12. CONDITIONS
The approval of this project is subject to the following conditions:

1. This project is approved as a precise plan. All work shall conform in substance and be maintained in general conformance with the plans (attached to the staff report dated October 5, 2022 and in the project case file), including modifications required by the conditions of approval, and as recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee. Any changes from the approved plans shall be subject to subsequent review and approval by the Design Review Committee.

2. After any application has been approved, if changes are proposed regarding the location or alteration of any use or structure, a changed plan may be submitted to the Community Development Director for approval. If the Community Development Director determines that the proposed change complies with the provisions and the spirit and intent of the approval action, and that the action would have been the same for the changed plan as for the approved plan, the Community Development Director may approve the changed plan without requiring a new public meeting.

3. The applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its officers, agents and employees from any and all liability or claims that may be brought against the City arising out City of Orange Page 4 of 5 Printed on 9/29/2022
powered by Legistar™588
Item #: 4.1. 10/5/2022 File #: 22-0550
of its approval of this permit, save and except that caused by the City’s active negligence.

4. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, including all City regulations.

Violation of any of those laws in connection with the use may be cause for revocation of this permit.

5. The final approved conditions of approval shall be reprinted on the first or second page of the construction documents when submitting to the Building Division for the plan check process.

6. Construction permits shall be obtained for all future construction work, as required by the City of Orange, Public Works Department’s Building Division. Failure to obtain the required building permits will be cause for revocation of this permit.

7. If not utilized, project approval expires 24 months from the approval date. Extensions of time may be granted in accordance with OMC Section 17.08.060.

13. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
· Attachment 2 - Letter of Explanation
· Attachment 3 - Project Plans with Site Photos
· Attachment 4 - DRP Form
· Attachment 5 - Color and Material Board (to be presented at DRC meeting) City of Orange Page 5 of 5 Printed on 9/29/2022
powered by Legistar™589
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0107
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Jeffrey Adams, Interim Community Development Director

1. SUBJECT
Continued Public Hearing to consider General Plan Amendment No. 2022-0001; City of Orange 2021 -2029 Housing Element Update and finding of CEQA exemption. (Continued from February 10, 2023)

2. SUMMARY
A request to adopt the revised 2021-2029 General Plan Housing Element in accordance with State law. The updated Housing Element replaces the 2014-2021 Housing Element in its entirety. The updated Housing Element identifies and analyzes existing and projected housing needs, plans for the long-term provision of housing for a variety of household income levels, and articulates the City’s official policies for the preservation, conservation, improvement, and production of housing within the City. The City Council adopted the Housing Element on February 8, 2022. The document has been revised to address comments made by the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development on the originally adopted document and must be re-adopted for final submittal to the State.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt Resolution No. 11431. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange approving General Plan Amendment No. 2022-0001 adopting the City of Orange 2021-2029 General Plan Housing Element.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 3: Enhance and promote quality of life in the community c. Support and enhance attractive, diverse living environments.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
The Housing Element is one of the chapters or “elements” of the City’s General Plan required by State law, establishing the City’s official policies related to housing. Pursuant to state law, it is also required to plan to accommodate new housing development consistent with the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation.

The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has an established 8- City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 2/10/2023
powered by Legistar™590
Item #: 9.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0107
The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has an established 8- year Housing Element update cycle, with the present cycle encompassing the 2021-2029 timeframe (commonly referred to as the “6th Cycle”). The content of the Housing Element addresses state requirements as detailed in Attachment 8. The Housing Plan (Section 4) of the Housing Element update (Attachment 3) establishes four central goals supported by 34 policy actions to address the City’s housing needs. These goals include:
· Providing high quality housing stock and neighborhoods · Accommodating all income levels of the City’s RHNA allocation · Ensuring maintenance, preservation, and development of housing · Providing equal housing opportunities for all
Through implementation of the policy actions and the identification of candidate housing sites within the adequate sites analysis, the Housing Element demonstrates that the City is providing substantive opportunities and making a good-faith effort to address the housing needs of the community consistent with State law.

The City Council adopted the 2021-2029 Housing Element update on February 8, 2022. That document identifies and analyzes the existing and projected housing needs of the Orange community and articulates the City’s policy actions for the preservation, conservation, improvement, and production of housing units in the city. Detailed information about the Housing Element process, content and RHNA are outlined in Attachment 8 and Appendix C of the Housing Element update (Attachment 3).

7. ANALYSIS AND STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
Staff submitted the adopted Housing Element to HCD for certification in February 2022. Upon review of the document, HCD identified certain content that did not entirely meet State Housing Element guidelines and requirements, and warranted further refinement in order to certify the document (find in compliance with state requirements). Areas of comment and document revisions are as follows:
· Homeless support services
· Accessory dwelling units
· Affirmatively furthering fair housing
· Integration and segregation of disadvantaged populations · Development review process and timeframes
· Viability of opportunity sites
· Community outreach
· Measurable and meaningful outcomes for Policy Actions Staff and the City’s consultant have worked with HCD to craft responses that have now received informal approval from HCD. Upon Council re-adoption of the revised document HCD has informally indicated that the City will receive state certification. A matrix of comments and City responses is provided in Attachment 4 to this report. The revised document with changes incorporated is provided as Attachment 3.

City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 2/10/2023
powered by Legistar™591
Item #: 9.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0107

8. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Housing Element update is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as follows: (i) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (Common Sense Exemption) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed 2021- 2029 Housing Element Update would have a significant effect on the environment; (ii) no property rezoning is needed to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation, and potential residential development densities have already been analyzed and mitigated in an earlier Environmental Impact Report (the Program Environmental Impact Report prepared for the 2010 Comprehensive General Plan Update, State Clearinghouse No. 2006031117); and (iii) pursuant to Guideline 15283, CEQA does not apply to Regional Housing Needs determinations made by a city.

For these reasons, no further CEQA documentation is required.

9. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 Resolution No. 11431
· Attachment 2 HCD Compliance Letter, January 27, 2023
· Attachment 3 Revised Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update · Attachment 4 HCD Comments and Response Matrix
· Attachment 5 Resolution No. 11378, February 8, 2022
· Attachment 6 City Council Staff Report and Minutes, February 8, 2022 · Attachment 7 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 01-22 · Attachment 8 Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes, January 3, 2022 City of Orange Page 3 of 3 Printed on 2/10/2023
powered by Legistar™592
Agenda Item
City Council
Item #: 9.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0107
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THRU: Tom Kisela, Interim City Manager
FROM: Jeffrey Adams, Interim Community Development Director

1. SUBJECT
Continued Public Hearing to consider General Plan Amendment No. 2022-0001; City of Orange 2021 -2029 Housing Element Update and finding of CEQA exemption. (Continued from February 10, 2023)

2. SUMMARY
A request to adopt the revised 2021-2029 General Plan Housing Element in accordance with State law. The updated Housing Element replaces the 2014-2021 Housing Element in its entirety. The updated Housing Element identifies and analyzes existing and projected housing needs, plans for the long-term provision of housing for a variety of household income levels, and articulates the City’s official policies for the preservation, conservation, improvement, and production of housing within the City. The City Council adopted the Housing Element on February 8, 2022. The document has been revised to address comments made by the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development on the originally adopted document and must be re-adopted for final submittal to the State.

3. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt Resolution No. 11431. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Orange approving General Plan Amendment No. 2022-0001 adopting the City of Orange 2021-2029 General Plan Housing Element.

4. FISCAL IMPACT
None.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
Goal 3: Enhance and promote quality of life in the community c. Support and enhance attractive, diverse living environments.

6. DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND
The Housing Element is one of the chapters or “elements” of the City’s General Plan required by State law, establishing the City’s official policies related to housing. Pursuant to state law, it is also required to plan to accommodate new housing development consistent with the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation.

The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has an established 8- City of Orange Page 1 of 3 Printed on 2/10/2023
powered by Legistar™593
Item #: 9.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0107
The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has an established 8- year Housing Element update cycle, with the present cycle encompassing the 2021-2029 timeframe (commonly referred to as the “6th Cycle”). The content of the Housing Element addresses state requirements as detailed in Attachment 8. The Housing Plan (Section 4) of the Housing Element update (Attachment 3) establishes four central goals supported by 34 policy actions to address the City’s housing needs. These goals include:
· Providing high quality housing stock and neighborhoods · Accommodating all income levels of the City’s RHNA allocation · Ensuring maintenance, preservation, and development of housing · Providing equal housing opportunities for all
Through implementation of the policy actions and the identification of candidate housing sites within the adequate sites analysis, the Housing Element demonstrates that the City is providing substantive opportunities and making a good-faith effort to address the housing needs of the community consistent with State law.

The City Council adopted the 2021-2029 Housing Element update on February 8, 2022. That document identifies and analyzes the existing and projected housing needs of the Orange community and articulates the City’s policy actions for the preservation, conservation, improvement, and production of housing units in the city. Detailed information about the Housing Element process, content and RHNA are outlined in Attachment 8 and Appendix C of the Housing Element update (Attachment 3).

7. ANALYSIS AND STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
Staff submitted the adopted Housing Element to HCD for certification in February 2022. Upon review of the document, HCD identified certain content that did not entirely meet State Housing Element guidelines and requirements, and warranted further refinement in order to certify the document (find in compliance with state requirements). Areas of comment and document revisions are as follows:
· Homeless support services
· Accessory dwelling units
· Affirmatively furthering fair housing
· Integration and segregation of disadvantaged populations · Development review process and timeframes
· Viability of opportunity sites
· Community outreach
· Measurable and meaningful outcomes for Policy Actions Staff and the City’s consultant have worked with HCD to craft responses that have now received informal approval from HCD. Upon Council re-adoption of the revised document HCD has informally indicated that the City will receive state certification. A matrix of comments and City responses is provided in Attachment 4 to this report. The revised document with changes incorporated is provided as Attachment 3.

City of Orange Page 2 of 3 Printed on 2/10/2023
powered by Legistar™594
Item #: 9.2. 2/14/2023 File #: 23-0107

8. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Housing Element update is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as follows: (i) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (Common Sense Exemption) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed 2021- 2029 Housing Element Update would have a significant effect on the environment; (ii) no property rezoning is needed to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation, and potential residential development densities have already been analyzed and mitigated in an earlier Environmental Impact Report (the Program Environmental Impact Report prepared for the 2010 Comprehensive General Plan Update, State Clearinghouse No. 2006031117); and (iii) pursuant to Guideline 15283, CEQA does not apply to Regional Housing Needs determinations made by a city.

For these reasons, no further CEQA documentation is required.

9. ATTACHMENTS
· Attachment 1 Resolution No. 11431
· Attachment 2 HCD Compliance Letter, January 27, 2023
· Attachment 3 Revised Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update · Attachment 4 HCD Comments and Response Matrix
· Attachment 5 Resolution No. 11378, February 8, 2022
· Attachment 6 City Council Staff Report and Minutes, February 8, 2022 · Attachment 7 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 01-22 · Attachment 8 Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes, January 3, 2022 City of Orange Page 3 of 3 Printed on 2/10/2023
powered by Legistar™595
RESOLUTION NO. 11431

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF ORANGE APPROVING
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2022-0001
ADOPTING THE CITY OF ORANGE 2021-2029
GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT.

APPLICANT: CITY OF ORANGE
WHEREAS, the Housing Element is one of the chapters of the City’s General Plan required by State law; and
WHEREAS, the California Government Code requires cities to review and update their Housing Elements according to a schedule set forth by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD); and
WHEREAS, the City previously adopted its 2014-2021 General Plan Housing Element in January 2014 and received HCD certification thereof; and WHEREAS, the City desires to update its Housing Element to ensure that it accurately reflects the City’s housing policy and addresses community needs; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared the 2021-2029 Housing Element as an update to its previously approved Housing Element, in compliance with State law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted one duly advertised public hearing on January 3, 2022, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support of or opposition to the 2021-2029 Housing Element update, and unanimously recommended approval thereof to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted one duly advertised public hearing on February 8, 2022, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support of or opposition to the 2021-2029 Housing Element update, and approved it by a unanimous vote; and WHEREAS, the adopted 2021-2029 Housing Element update was submitted to HCD in February 2022 for certification, but was found by HCD to need refinement in focused areas of content in order to achieve compliance with requirements; and WHEREAS, the City has subsequently worked closely with HCD to prepare revisions to the document, which revisions have been determined to be satisfactory by HCD. 596
Resolution No. 11431 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves General Plan Amendment No. 2022-0001, adopting the 2021-2029 General Plan Housing Element attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A and directs staff to implement the policy action programs identified in the 2021-2029 Housing Element.

SECTION 1 – FINDINGS

1. The General Plan Housing Element meets the requirements of the California Government Code.

The Housing Element contains a housing needs assessment, resources and constraints analysis, review of past performance, housing policy actions, adequate sites analysis, and fair housing analysis, consistent with State requirements. The content of the Housing Element addresses comments provided by the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) on the City’s 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element. Following City adoption of the 2021-2029 Housing Element, a copy will be submitted to HCD for final certification.

2. The Housing Element is generally consistent with the goals and policies stated within all other elements of the City’s General Plan.

The Housing Element is consistent with the City’s land use plan and is consistent with the goals and policies of the remaining elements of the General Plan.

3. The Housing Element advances the State’s housing goal of “decent housing and a suitable living environment for all members of the community.”
The Housing Element contains a needs assessment documenting housing needs in the Orange community and establishes policy actions to meet those needs through the preservation, conservation, improvement and production of housing units in Orange. The housing policy actions aim to provide opportunities for production of new housing units for all income levels, further fair housing, and also address housing for special needs groups including seniors and large families. As such, City adoption of the Housing Element and implementation of the housing policy actions advances the State’s housing goal of providing “decent housing and a suitable living environment for all members of the community.” SECTION 2 – ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Housing Element update is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as follows: (i) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (Common Sense Exemption) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed 2021- 2029 Housing Element Update would have a significant effect on the environment; (ii) no property re-zoning is needed to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation, and potential residential development densities have already been analyzed and mitigated in an earlier Environmental Impact Report (the Program Environmental Impact Report prepared for the 2010 Comprehensive General Plan Update, State Clearinghouse No. 2006031117); and (iii) pursuant to 597
Resolution No. 11431 3
Guideline 15283, CEQA does not apply to Regional Housing Needs determinations made by a city. For these reasons, no further CEQA documentation is required.

ADOPTED this 14th day of February 2023.

Daniel R. Slater, Mayor, City of Orange
ATTEST:

Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF ORANGE )

CITY OF ORANGE )
I, PAMELA COLEMAN, City Clerk of the City of Orange, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the 14th day of February 2023 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
_______________________________________
Pamela Coleman, City Clerk, City of Orange
Attachment: Exhibit A – 2021-2029 General Plan Housing Element 598
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
January 27, 2023
Rob Houston, City Manager
City of Orange
300 E. Chapman Ave.

Orange, CA 92866
Dear Rob Houston:

RE: City of Orange 6th Cycle (2021-2029) Revised Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting the City of Orange’s (City) revised draft housing element received for review on November 28, 2022, along with revisions received on January 12, 2023, and January 18, 2023. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (b), the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review. Our review was facilitated by a conversation on January 18, 2023, with Principal Planner at City of Orange, Chad Ortlieb, and consultants, Nick Chen and Ines Galmiche. In addition, HCD considered comments from Elder Law & Disability Rights Center and Public Law Center pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (c).

The revised draft element, incorporating the revisions submitted, meets the statutory requirements described in HCD’s April 12, 2022, review. The housing element will comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gov. Code) when it is adopted, submitted to and approved by HCD, in accordance with Government Code section 65585.

Public participation in the development, adoption and implementation of the housing element is essential to effective housing planning. Throughout the housing element process, the City must continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available while considering and incorporating comments where appropriate. Please be aware, any revisions to the element must be posted on the local government’s website and to email a link to all individuals and organizations that have previously requested notices relating to the local government’s housing element at least seven days before submitting to HCD.

Several federal, state, and regional funding programs consider housing element compliance as an eligibility or ranking criteria. For example, the CalTrans Senate Bill (SB) 1 Sustainable Communities grant; the Strategic Growth Council and HCD’s 599
Rob Houston, City Manager

Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities programs; and HCD’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reporting requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the City will meet housing element requirements for these and other funding sources.

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

HCD appreciates the hard work and dedication of Chad Ortlieb, Nick Chen, and Ines Galmiche in preparation of the City’s housing element and looks forward to receiving the City’s adopted housing element. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Mashal Ayobi, of our staff, at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Paul McDougall
Senior Program Manager
600

City of Orange
6th Cycle Housing Element Update
(2021-2029)
ADOPTED FEBRUARY 2022

601

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
A. Role of the Housing Element .............................................................................................................. 1-2 B. State Policy and Authorization ............................................................................................................ 1-2

1. Background .................................................................................................................................... 1-2

2. State Requirements ....................................................................................................................... 1-2

3. Regional Housing Needs Assessment ........................................................................................... 1-4

4. Relationship to Other General Plan Elements ............................................................................... 1-5

5. Public Participation ......................................................................................................................... 1-6

6. Data Sources.................................................................................................................................. 1-6

7. Housing Element Organization ...................................................................................................... 1-7 SECTION 2: COMMUNITY PROFILE
A. Population Characteristics .................................................................................................................. 2-2

1. Population Growth .......................................................................................................................... 2-2

2. Age Characteristics ........................................................................................................................ 2-3

3. Race/Ethnicity Characteristics ....................................................................................................... 2-4 B. Economic Characteristics ................................................................................................................... 2-6

1. Employment and Wage Scale ........................................................................................................ 2-7 C. Household Characteristics ................................................................................................................ 2-10

1. Household Type and Size ............................................................................................................ 2-10

2. Household Income ....................................................................................................................... 2-12 D. Housing Problems ............................................................................................................................. 2-15

1. Overcrowding ............................................................................................................................... 2-16

2. Overpayment (Cost Burden) In Relationship to Income .............................................................. 2-18 E. Special Needs Groups ...................................................................................................................... 2-19

1. Seniors ......................................................................................................................................... 2-20

2. Persons with Physical and Developmental Disabilities ................................................................ 2-21

3. Large Households ........................................................................................................................ 2-24

4. Single-Parent Households ........................................................................................................... 2-25

5. Farmworkers ................................................................................................................................ 2-26

6. Extremely Low-income Households and Poverty Status ............................................................. 2-26

7. Persons Experiencing Homelessness ......................................................................................... 2-28

8. Students ....................................................................................................................................... 2-33 F. Housing Stock Characteristics .......................................................................................................... 2-33

1. Housing Growth ........................................................................................................................... 2-33

2. Housing Type ............................................................................................................................... 2-34

3. Housing Availability and Tenure................................................................................................... 2-35

4. Housing Age and Condition ......................................................................................................... 2-37

5. Housing Costs and Affordability ................................................................................................... 2-37 SECTION 3: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS, RESOURCES, AND FAIR HOUSING Housing Constraints ................................................................................................................................ 3-2 A. Nongovernmental Constraints ............................................................................................................ 3-2

1. Land Costs and Construction Costs .............................................................................................. 3-2

2. Availability of Financing .................................................................................................................. 3-3

3. Economic Constraints .................................................................................................................... 3-5 B. Governmental Constraints .................................................................................................................. 3-5 602

1. Land Use Controls ......................................................................................................................... 3-6

2. State Density Bonus Law ............................................................................................................... 3-8

3. Residential Development Standards ............................................................................................ 3-12

4. Planned Unit Developments ......................................................................................................... 3-19

5. Local Ordinances ......................................................................................................................... 3-20

6. Variety of Housing Types Permitted ............................................................................................ 3-22

7. Housing for Persons with Disabilities ........................................................................................... 3-33

8. Development Fees ....................................................................................................................... 3-35

9. On-/Off-Site Improvements .......................................................................................................... 3-40

10. Building Codes and Enforcement ................................................................................................ 3-41

11. Local Processing and Permit Procedures .................................................................................... 3-41

12. State Policies and Regulations .................................................................................................... 3-47 C. Infrastructure Constraints ................................................................................................................. 3-47

1. Dry Utilities ................................................................................................................................... 3-47

2. Water Supply and Wastewater Capacity ..................................................................................... 3-48

3. Fire and Emergency Services ...................................................................................................... 3-49

4. Police Services ............................................................................................................................. 3-50 D. Environmental Constraints ............................................................................................................... 3-51

1. Geologic and Seismic Hazards .................................................................................................... 3-51

2. Flooding ........................................................................................................................................ 3-51 Housing Resources ............................................................................................................................... 3-52 E. Regional Housing Needs Allocation ................................................................................................. 3-52

1. Residential Sites Inventory ........................................................................................................... 3-52

2. Above Moderate and Moderate Income Sites .............................................................................. 3-52

3. Sites Suitable for Lower Income Housing .................................................................................... 3-53

4. Development of Non-Vacant Sites and Converting to Residential Uses ..................................... 3-56 F. Financial Resources ......................................................................................................................... 3-62

1. Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher ............................................................................................. 3-62

2. Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) ......................................................................... 3-62

3. HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) ....................................................................... 3-63 G. Energy Conservation ........................................................................................................................ 3-63 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) .................................................................................... 3-64 H. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing ............................................................................................... 3-64 I. Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................................... 3-64

1. Fair Housing Issues ..................................................................................................................... 3-64

2. Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach Capacity ..................................................................... 3-65

3. Fair Housing Laws……………………………………………………………………………………....3-67 J. Analysis of Federal, State, and Local Data and Local Knowledge ................................................... 3-69

1. Integration and Segregation Patterns and Trends ....................................................................... 3-69

2. Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAP) ................................................. 3-73

3. Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAA) ................................................. 3-75

4. Disparities in Access to Opportunity ............................................................................................ 3-81

5. Discussion of Disproportionate Housing Needs ......................................................................... 3-101

6. Displacement Risk ..................................................................................................................... 3-113

7. Local Knowledge and Data Relating to Fair Housing ................................................................ 3-121

8. Assessment of Contributing Factors to Fair Housing Issues in Orange .................................... 3-122 K. Analysis of Sites Pursuant to AB 686 ............................................................................................. 3-124 L. Analysis of Fair Housing Priorities and Goals ................................................................................ 3-134 603
SECTION 4: HOUSING PLAN
A. Housing Goals .................................................................................................................................... 4-2 B. Housing Policy Actions ....................................................................................................................... 4-3 C. Summary of Quantified Objectives ................................................................................................... 4-19

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Review of Past Performance
Appendix B: Candidate Sites Analysis
Appendix C: Summary of Community Engagement
Appendix D: Glossary of Housing Terms
604
Section 1: Introduction
605

Section 1: Introduction 1-2
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Introduction
A. Role of the Housing Element
The Housing Element is one of the seven state mandated Elements of the City of Orange General Plan. The Housing Element analyzes and identifies the City’s existing and projected housing needs and contains a detailed outline and work program of the City’s goals, policies, quantified objectives, and programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing for a sustainable future. The Housing Element identifies available candidate housing sites and establishes the City’s official housing policies and programs to accommodate its fair share of the regional housing need as determined by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). It also addresses maintenance and expansion of the housing supply to accommodate households currently living and expected to live in Orange.

B. State Policy and Authorization

1. Background
As a mandated chapter of the Orange General Plan, the Housing Element must meet all applicable requirements of existing state law when updated. Goals, programs and policies, and quantified objectives within the Housing Element consistent with state law are implemented within the housing cycle timeline to ensure the City accomplishes the identified actions.

2. State Requirements
California State Housing Element Law (California Government Code Article 10.6) establishes the requirements for the Housing Element. California Government Code Section 65580 requires that local governments review and revise the Housing Element of their comprehensive General Plans not less than once every eight years.

The California Legislature has adopted an overall housing goal for the State to ensure every resident has a decent home and suitable living environment. Section 65580 of the California Government Code states:
a. The availability of housing is of vital statewide importance, and the early attainment of decent housing and a suitable living environment for every Californian, including farmworkers, is a priority of the highest order.
b. The early attainment of this goal requires cooperative participation of government and the private sector in an effort to expand housing opportunities and accommodate the housing needs of Californians in all economic levels.
c. The provisions of housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households requires the cooperation of all levels of the government.
d. Local and State governments have a responsibility to use the powers vested in them to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make adequate provision for housing needs of all economic segments of the community. The Legislature recognizes that in carrying out this responsibility, each local government also has the responsibility to consider economic, 606

Section 1: Introduction 1-3
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
environmental, and fiscal factors and community goals set forth in the general plan and to cooperate with other local governments and the state in addressing regional housing needs.

Table 1-1 summarizes State Housing Element requirements and identifies the location in this document where these requirements are addressed.

Table 1-1: Housing Element Requirements
Housing Element Requirement(s) Gov. Code Section Reference in Housing Element
Analysis of employment trends. Section 65583.a Section 2.B.1 Projection and quantification of existing and projected housing needs for all income groups. Section 65583.a Section 3.E Analysis and documentation of the City’s housing
characteristics, including cost for housing compared to ability to pay, overcrowding, and housing condition.

Section 65583.a Section 2.C, D, F
An inventory of land suitable for residential development including vacant sites and sites having redevelopment
potential.

Section 65583.a Section 3.E.1, 2, 3
Analysis of existing and potential governmental
constraints upon the maintenance, improvement or
development of housing for all income levels.

Section 65583.a Section 3.B
Analysis of existing and potential nongovernmental
(private sector) constraints upon
maintenance, improvement or development of
housing for all income levels.

Section 65583.a Section 3.A
Analysis concerning the needs of the homeless. Section 65583.a Section 2.E.7 Analysis of special housing needs: handicapped,
elderly, large families, farm workers, and female-headed households.

Section 65583.a Section 2.E
Analysis of opportunities for energy conservation
with respect to residential development. Section 65583.a Section 3.G Identification of Publicly Assisted Housing
Developments. Section 65583.a Section 3.J.5
Identification of Units at Risk of Conversion to
Market Rate Housing. Section 65583.a Section 3.J.5
Identification of the City’s goal relative to the
maintenance, improvement, and development of
housing.

Section 65583.a Section 4
Analysis of quantified objectives and policies
relative to the maintenance, improvement, and
development of housing.

Section 65583.b Section 4
Identification of adequate sites that will be made
available through appropriate action with
required public services and facilities for a variety
of housing types for all income levels.

Section 65583.c(1) Appendix B
Identification of strategies to assist in the
development of adequate housing to meet the Section 65583.c(2) Section 3.E.1, 2, 3 607

Section 1: Introduction 1-4
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 1-1: Housing Element Requirements
Housing Element Requirement(s) Gov. Code Section Reference in Housing Element
needs of low and moderate-income households.

Description of the Public Participation Program in
the formulation of Housing Element Goals, Policies,
and Programs.

Section 65583.d Appendix C
Description of the Regional Housing Needs
Assessment (RHNA) prepared by the Southern
California Association of Governments.

Section 65583.e Section 3.E.1
Analysis of Fair Housing, including Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. Section 8899.50 Section 3.H, I, J, K, L
Review of the effectiveness of the past Element,
including the City’s accomplishments during the
previous planning period.

Section 65583.f Appendix A
Source: State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development.

The State of California began requiring in 1969 that all local governments plan for housing needs through Housing Elements within each jurisdiction’s General Plan. Housing Elements must be updated every eight years – this timeframe is also referred to as a cycle. This Housing Element is part of the 6th Cycle for 2021 to 2029.

Orange’s Housing Element was last adopted in January 2014 for the State’s 5th Housing Element cycle for the 2014-2021 planning period. Housing Elements are updated on eight year cycles, with each region across the state having the same start and end time. The 6th Cycle Housing Element, for the 2021-2029 planning period, is part of the new update cycle for jurisdictions within the SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments) region to allow for synchronization with the Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). The Element sets forth an 8-year strategy to address the City’s identified housing needs, including specific implementing programs and activities.

Multiple amendments have been made to Housing Element law since the adoption of the City’s 5th Cycle Housing Element. These amendments and subsequent, new housing laws change the required analysis, reporting and policies contained in the Housing Element. The updated Housing Element complies with these amendments to state housing law and all other federal, state, and local requirements.

3. Regional Housing Needs Assessment
Section 65583 of the California Government Code sets forth the specific content requirements of a jurisdiction’s housing element. These requirements include obligations on the part of local jurisdictions to provide their “fair share” of regional housing needs. Local governments and Councils of Governments (COGs) are required to determine existing and future housing need and the allocation of this need must be approved by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Orange is located in the SCAG regional planning area (but is not a member of SCAG). SCAG is the COG responsible for preparing the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for all jurisdictions within the SCAG region in coordination with HCD.
608

Section 1: Introduction 1-5
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
The RHNA allocation provides requirements for housing at all income levels within the community. The allocation is divided up between very low, low, moderate, and above moderate-income categories. Specific housing types and densities are generally associated with providing housing for each income category; the Housing Element must allow for the required number of units to be built throughout the City by facilitating and promoting certain housing types.

HCD established the planning period for the current RHNA from October 15, 2021 to October 15, 2029. For the 2021-2029 planning period the City is allocated a total of 3,927 units, including 1,064 units affordable to very low-income households, 603 units affordable to low-income, 676 units affordable to moderateincome, and 1,584 units affordable to above-moderate income households.

4. Relationship to Other General Plan Elements
The Housing Element is one Chapter of the City of Orange General Plan. The goals, policies, actions, and programs described in the Housing Element relate to, and are consistent with, the other Elements of the Orange General Plan. The City’s Housing Element focuses on programs and policies that support the preservation, improvement, and development of housing to meet the existing and projected future housing needs of its population.

The Housing Element supports and reinforces development policies contained in the Land Use Element, most recently amended in 2015. The Land Use Element establishes the location, type, intensity, and distribution of land uses throughout the City, and defines these land uses build-out potential. By designating residential development, the Land Use Element identifies limits for densities and types of housing units constructed in the City. The Land Use Element identifies lands designated for a range of other land uses, including employment-generating uses, open space, and public uses. The presence and potential for jobs affects the current and future local demand for housing at the various income levels in the City.

The Circulation and Mobility Element of the General Plan relates to the Housing Element. The Transportation Element establishes policies for a balanced circulation system in the City. Consequently, the Housing Element must include policies and incentives that consider the types of infrastructure essential for residential housing units in addition to mitigating the effects of growth in the City.

The Economic Development Element of the General Plan also relates to the Housing Element. The Economic Development Element establishes policies for preserving and maintaining a diverse economic base and increasing employment opportunities. The Housing Element correlates to the Economic Development Element as it must consider housing for the City’s current and future workforce, as well as include policies and incentives that support housing for all economic segments of the community.

The Housing Element has been reviewed for consistency with the City’s other General Plan Elements, and the policies and programs in the Housing Element’s policies and programs are consistent with the other Elements. As portions of the General Plan may be amended in the future, the Housing Element will be reviewed to ensure internal consistency is maintained.
609

Section 1: Introduction 1-6
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft

5. Public Participation
Section 65583 of the Government Code states that, "The local government shall make diligent effort to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element, and the program shall describe this effort." Meaningful community participation is also required in connection with the City's Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH). A discussion of citizen participation is provided below.

As part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update process, the City of Orange has conducted extensive public outreach activities beginning in 2019. These recent outreach efforts included workshops, stakeholder meetings, digital media, an online survey, and public noticing. Project materials, including summaries from community workshops and public meetings, notices, and draft public review documents are available on the City’s website: https://www.cityoforange.org/290/Current-Projects.

Outreach for the 6th Cycle Housing Element to the community, includes the following actions:
 Housing Element Update webpage with all housing materials and information, located at https://www.cityoforange.org/290/Current-Projects
 Virtual Community Workshops with recordings available on the webpage  Online Community Survey available from October 12, 2020 to December 1, 2020.

As required by Government Code Section 65585(b)(2), all written comments regarding the Housing Element made by the public have previously been provided to each member of the City Council.

Appendix C contains a summary of all public comments regarding the Housing Element received by the City during the update process.

6. Data Sources
The data used for the completion of this Housing Element comes from a variety of sources. These include, but are not limited to:
 2000 and 2010 Census
 American Community Survey
 Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing (AI)  Point-in-Time Homeless Census by the Regional Task Force on the Homeless, 2019  Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) lending data
 California Department of Economic Development
 California Employment Development Division Occupational Wage data, 2020  Department of Housing and Urban Development, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), 2013-2017
The data sources represent the best data available at the time this Housing Element Update was prepared.

The original source documents contain the assumptions and methods used to compile the data. 610

Section 1: Introduction 1-7
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft

7. Housing Element Organization
This Housing Element represents the City’s policy program for the 2021-2029 6th Planning Period. The Housing Element is comprised of the following Chapters:

Chapter 1: Introduction contains as summary of the content, organization, and statutory considerations of the Housing Element;
Chapter 2: Community Profile contains an analysis of the City’s population, household and employment base, and the characteristics of the housing stock;
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints and Resources examining governmental and non-governmental constraints on production, maintenance, and affordability of housing and provides a summary of housing resources, including sites identification and funding and financial considerations; Chapter 4: Policy Plan addresses Orange’s identified housing needs, including housing goals, policies, and programs.

Appendices provides various appendices with supplementary background resources including:
 Appendix A – Review of Past Performance of 5th Cycle Housing Element Programs  Appendix B – Adequate Sites Analysis
 Appendix C – Community Engagement Summary
 Appendix D – Glossary of Housing Terms
611
Section 2: Community Profile

612
Section 2: Community Profile 2-2
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
City of Orange Community Profile
The Community Profile for the City of Orange provides an overview of the City’s housing and population conditions. The community profile serves as a foundational component for the Housing Element’s policies by describing and assessing contributing factors and characteristics that influence the supply and demand for housing in Orange. Specifically, the community profile describes population, employment, economics and household characteristics in Orange. Special Needs groups and housing stock characteristics are also described.

The data in this community profile has been collected using the most current available sources from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census, 2013-2019 American Community Survey, the California Department of Finance, the California Employment Development Department, the California Department of Education and other real estate market data.

A. Population Characteristics
Population characteristics influence current and future housing demand in a community. Population growth, age compositions and race/ethnicity influence the type and extent of housing needed and the ability of the local population to afford housing costs. The following section describes and analyzes various population characteristics and local trends.

1. Population Growth
Table 2-1 displays actual and projected populations for the City of Orange and surrounding cities from 2000 to 2040. The 2010 U.S. Census reported a population of 136,416 persons in the City of Orange. This is a nearly six percent increase from the 2000 population. Orange’s rate of population increase between 2000 to 2010 is slightly lower than nearby cities Yorba Linda and Fullerton which both saw about a seven percent increase. Orange experienced a larger rate of population growth than Anaheim, Garden Grove and Santa Ana.

The SCAG Final Growth Forecast Report (2016-2040) bases population, economic and housing forecasts off U.S. Census data, projecting forecasted data through 2040. This data, shown in Table 1, forecast an 8,300- person population increase from 2020 to 2035 and another 1,600 person increase from 2035 to 2040. The City of Orange is estimated to experience an additional 10.5 percent growth in population from 2012 to 2040. The County of Orange, Fullerton, and Yorba Linda are forecast to experience over 16 percent growth rate, while Garden Grove and Santa Ana are forecast less than five percent growth through 2040. The City of Orange’s growth forecast indicates steady population growth through 2040.

613
Section 2: Community Profile 2-3
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft

2. Age Characteristics
A community’s age composition is an important factor when evaluating housing needs because housing demand is often determined by the preferences of certain age groups. For example, young adults and seniors generally favor apartments, low to moderate-cost condominiums, and smaller or more affordable single-family units because they tend to live on smaller or fixed incomes and have smaller families. Middleaged persons between 35 and 65, makes up the largest portion of home buyers and represents the greatest market demand for moderate and higher cost apartments and condominiums because they generally have higher incomes and larger families to accommodate. As the population ages and moves through different stages of life, housing needs must also be adjusted.

Figure 2-1: Age Distribution in Orange
Source: United States Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010; American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Under 5 5 to 19 20 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 64 65 and Above 2000 8681 28610 30288 21604 26377 12409
2010 8681 28553 31365 19491 33698 14628
2019 8473 26322 34670 17705 35641 17076
Percent Change -2.4% -8.0% 14.5% -18.0% 35.1% 37.6%
0 5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
Table 2-1: Population Growth, 2000-2040
Jurisdictions
Population Percent Change
2000
Actual
2010
Actual
2012
Estimated
2020
Projected
2035
Projected
2040
Projected
1990-
2010
2012-
2040
Anaheim 328,014 336,265 345,300 358,600 382,000 403,400 2.5% 16.8% Fullerton 126,003 135,161 138,000 145,700 158,300 160,500 7.3% 16.3% Yorba Linda 59,918 64,234 66,200 69,300 70,400 70,500 7.2% 6.5% Orange 128,821 136,416 138,500 143,100 151,400 153,000 5.9% 10.5% Santa Ana 337,977 324,528 329,200 340,600 343,400 343,100 -4.0% 4.2% Garden Grove 165,196 170,883 172,900 176,100 178,400 178,200 3.4% 3.1% County of Orange 2,846,289 3,010,232 3,071,600 3,271,100 3,431,200 3,461,500 2.5% 16.8% Represents an estimate from the SCAG 2016-2040 Final Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction.

Sources: Bureau of the Census (2000-2010) and SCAG 2016-2040 Final Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction (2012). 614
Section 2: Community Profile 2-4
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 2-1 shows age composition in the City of Orange from 2000 to 2019 with the percent change over that period. Persons aged 65 and above experienced the largest growth at 37.6 percent. Persons aged 45 to 64 also experienced a large increase at 35.1 percent. Adults between 35 and 44 years experienced the greatest decrease at 18 percent.

Overall, the City of Orange shows a trend towards an aging population with steady population increases in persons over the age of 45 and a decreasing population of persons aged 19 and younger. An increasing aging population may require changes in housing needs including housing types, amenities, and access to specialized services.

Table 2-2 displays estimated 2019 American Community Survey age distribution for Orange, the County of Orange, and nearby cities. Orange’s largest population is between 20 to 44 years of age (37.5 percent). The population is comprised of 25.6 percent people ages 45 to 64 years and 12.2 percent ages 65 and over. 2019 age distribution estimates are similar to surrounding cities. The largest population group for cities shown in Table 2-2, excluding Yorba Linda, are persons age 20 to 44.

Table 2-2: Age Distribution Estimates, 2019
Jurisdiction Under 18 20 to 44 45 to 64 65 years +
Anaheim 24.0% 37.4% 24.3% 11.6%
Fullerton 21.8% 37.0% 24.9% 13.3%
Yorba Linda 23.1% 26.0% 31.1% 18.0%
Orange 21.3% 37.5% 25.6% 12.2%
Santa Ana 26.9% 39.2% 22.1% 9.0%
Garden Grove 21.4% 34.3% 27.5% 14.3%
County of Orange 22.2% 34.1% 26.7% 14.4%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

3. Race/Ethnicity Characteristics
Racial and ethnic composition may influence housing due to varying household characteristics, income levels, and cultural backgrounds that may affect housing needs, housing choice and housing types. Cultural influences may influence preference for specific types of housing and locational factors.

Figure 2-2 displays 2019 racial and ethnic composition for the City of Orange compared to the County of Orange. Figure 2-2 shows majority of the population was White in the City and County. The next largest population in the City of Orange was Asian. Represented racial groups in Orange include 72 percent identifying as White, 1.7 percent identifying as Black, and 11.8 percent identifying as Asian. Those who identify as American Indian/Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander represent the smallest percentages of the population; both combined add up to under one percent of the population. About 39 percent of all races in Orange identify as Hispanic or Latino. 615
Section 2: Community Profile 2-5
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 2-2: Racial Ethnic Composition, 2019
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Table 2-3 compares racial and ethnic data for Orange and nearby cities. In all nearby cities, the largest population was White. The City of Orange has the second largest White population at 72 percent after Yorba Linda. The Cities of Anaheim and Fullerton both have larger Black populations than Orange with about one percent more. The Asian population of Orange is 8 percent below the County’s regional percentage, and similarly to Santa Ana, it represents the lowest amount of the surrounding cities. All the cities in this area, as well as the County of Orange, have American Indian/Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander populations that represent less than one percent of the total populations.

Table 2-3: Racial/Ethnic Composition by Jurisdiction, 2019 Jurisdiction White Black
American
Indian
and
Alaska
Native
Asian
Native
Hawaiian
or Other
Pacific
Islander
Some
Other
Race
Two or
More
Races

Hispanic
or Latino
Origin (1)
Anaheim 66.42% 2.70% 0.51% 16.82% 0.42% 9.87% 3.26% 54.28% Fullerton 58.29% 2.49% 0.38% 24.28% 0.28% 9.19% 5.09% 37.14% Yorba
Linda 72.24% 1.37% 0.12% 20.71% 0.11% 1.52% 3.93% 16.46% Orange 72.0% 1.7% 0.4% 11.8% 0.4% 10.1% 3.5% 38.9%
Santa Ana 40.15% 1.14% 0.55% 11.76% 0.28% 44.06% 2.05% 76.76% Garden
Grove 40.28% 1.01% 0.50% 41.20% 0.33% 14.36% 2.32% 36.36% County of
Orange 61.0% 1.8% 0.5% 20.5% 0.3% 11.9% 4.1% 34.1%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Note: (1) Persons of Hispanic or Latino Origin is an ethnicity that may be included in other racial groups.

White Black
American
Indian and
Alaska
Native
Asian
Native
Hawaiian
or Other
Pacific
Islander
Some
Other Race
Two or
More
Races
Hispanic or
Latino
Orange 72.0% 1.7% 0.4% 11.8% 0.4% 10.1% 3.5% 38.9%
County of Orange 61.0% 1.8% 0.5% 20.5% 0.3% 11.9% 4.1% 34.1% 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
616
Section 2: Community Profile 2-6
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
The Census and the 2019 ACS report changes in Orange’s racial and ethnic demographics from 2000 to 2019, as shown in Table 2-4. From 2000 to 2010, the White population decreased by about five percent and the American Indian and Alaska Native population decreased from 0.8 percent to 0.7 percent (12.5 percent overall decrease). During this same period other racial groups experienced significant increases.

The Asian population increased from 9.3 percent in 2000 to 11.3 percent in 2010 (21.5 percent increase).

The Black population experienced no population change. Persons identifying as Hispanic or Latino increased by 18.3 percent between 2000 and 2010.

Between 2010 and 2019, the White population increased by 7.3 percent, representing 72 percent of Orange’s population. The Black population experienced a 6.3 percent increase. Decreases were experienced by the American Indian and Alaska Native, Some Other Race, and Two or More Races populations. The Asian population showed a 4.4. percent increase from 2010-2019. Persons identifying as Hispanic or Latino experienced a 2.1 percent increase from 2010 to 2019.

Table 2-4: Changes in Racial/Ethnic Composition Between 2000 - 2019 Race/Ethnicity 2000 2010 2019
Percent
Change 2000
to 2010
Percent
Change 2010
to 2019
White 70.5% 67.1% 72.0% -4.8% 7.3%
Black 1.6% 1.6% 1.7% 0.0% 6.3%
American Indian and
Alaska Native 0.8% 0.7% 0.4% -12.5% -42.9%
Asian 9.3% 11.3% 11.8% 21.5% 4.4%
Native Hawaiian or
Other Pacific Islander 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 50.0% 33.3%
Some Other Race 13.8% 15.1% 10.1% 9.4% -33.1%
Two or More Races 3.8% 4.0% 3.5% 5.3% -12.5%
Hispanic or Latino 32.2% 38.1% 38.9% 18.3% 2.1%
Source: United States Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010 and American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

B. Economic Characteristics
Analysis of economic characteristics provides valuable data about a community’s accessibility to the housing market and financial restraints related to housing needs. These may include income associated with different types of employment and number of workers contributing to the household. To properly evaluate the balance between jobs and housing, employment characteristics should be considered. Local employment growth or decline is linked to local housing demand 617
Section 2: Community Profile 2-7
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft

1. Employment and Wage Scale
The SCAG Growth Forecast Report estimates employment growth for the City of Orange and nearby cities.

Table 2-5 shows that from 2012 to 2040 the City of Orange is forecast to gain 11,200 jobs, a 12.1 percent increase. Nearby cities such as Garden Grove and Yorba Linda forecast similar growth increases (12.6 percent and 13.5 percent respectively). Other cities, such as Anaheim and Fullerton are projected much higher employment growth, at 38.1 percent in Anaheim and 54.8 percent in Fullerton.

Table 2-1 shows a forecasted 14,500-person population growth in Orange from 2012 to 2040. Given this anticipated growth, local job availability is important to allow residents the option to live and work in the same city. Just as employment opportunities may encourage households to move to Orange, a variety of available housing options may also encourage households to seek employment in the City.

Table 2-5: Employment Growth Trends, 2010-2050
Jurisdiction 2012 2020 2035 2040
% Change
2012-2040
Numeric Change
2012-2040
Anaheim 177,900 207,000 236,000 245,600 38.1% 67,700
Fullerton 60,800 78,000 91,600 94,100 54.8% 33,300
Yorba Linda 15,600 16,800 17,600 17,700 13.5% 2,100
Orange 94,100 100,700 104,700 105,500 12.1% 11,400
Santa Ana 154,800 160,600 165,200 166,000 7.2% 11,200
Garden Grove 51,700 56,600 58,200 58,200 12.6% 6,500
County of Orange 1,526,500 1,730,400 1,870,500 1,898,900 24.4% 372,400 Source: SCAG 2016-2040 Final Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction (2012).

Analyzing employment sectors helps in understanding growth changes, income and wages, access to different housing types, and overall housing demand. The City of Orange is a generally moderate-income community with a slightly higher than average median income compared to the County of Orange (see Table 2-13). Employment industry types associated with these income ranges include persons employed in education, professional, health care, and management industries (Table 2-6).

Table 2-6 displays the 2010 and 2019 ACS data for employment by sector in the City of Orange. In 2010, a majority of the working population was employed in education services, health care, and social assistance industries (18.5 percent). Professional, scientific, management, and administrative services, retail trade and manufacturing were the next largest employment sectors in Orange in 2010. In 2019, Education services, health care and social assistance jobs remained the largest employers in the City, reaching 22.6 percent, representing a 30.2 percent increase from 2010. Professional, scientific, management, and administrative services remained the second largest employment sector. However, these industries experienced an overall decrease of 0.5 percent. Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation, and food services experienced the largest growth rate, increasing from 8.6 percent in 2010 to 10.7 percent in 2019, a 32.8 percent increase.
618
Section 2: Community Profile 2-8
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 2-6: Employment in Orange by Sector, 2010 - 2019
Industry Sector
2010 2019 Percent
Change
2010-
2017
# of
employed
persons
% of City
Employment
# of employed
persons
% of City
Employment
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and
hunting, and mining 488 0.7% 321 0.5% -34.22%
Construction 5,617 8.5% 5331 7.6% -5.09%
Manufacturing 7,736 11.7% 7809 11.1% 0.94%
Wholesale trade 2,692 4.1% 2056 2.9% -23.63%
Retail trade 6,852 10.3% 6656 9.4% -2.86%
Transportation and warehousing, and
utilities 1,779 2.7% 2394 3.4% 34.57%
Information 1,385 2.1% 1423 2.0% 2.74%
Finance and insurance, and real
estate and rental leasing 6,281 9.5% 5958 8.4% -5.14%
Professional, scientific, management,
and administrative services 9,454 14.3% 9407 13.3% -0.50% Education services, health care, and
social assistance 12,269 18.5% 15973 22.6% 30.19%
Arts, entertainment, recreation,
accommodation, and food services 5,681 8.6% 7542 10.7% 32.76% Other services (except public
administration) 3,890 5.9% 3348 4.7% -13.93%
Public Administration 2,216 3.3% 2303 3.3% 3.93%
Total 66,340 100% 70,521 100% 6.30%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2010 and 2019.

Analyzing the unemployment rate contributes to understanding housing affordability and needs, as well as projected needs. According to the ACS survey data, (Table 2-7) Orange experienced a 4.4 percent unemployment rate, similarly to the County’s. Yorba Linda was the only city nearby that had a lower unemployment rate than Orange, with other cities’ rates ranging from 6.5 percent in Fullerton to 4.5 percent in Garden Grove.

Table 2-7: Unemployment Rates, 2019
Jurisdiction Unemployment rate*
Anaheim 5.2%
Fullerton 6.5%
Yorba Linda 3.6%
Orange 4.4%
Santa Ana 5.1%
Garden Grove 4.5%
County of Orange 4.6%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019. *Population 16 years and over
619
Section 2: Community Profile 2-9
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 2-8 displays the 2019 average annual wage for occupations compile by the California Employment Development Department (EDD) for the Orange County Metropolitan Statistical Area. Professional and health services occupations, including management, legal services, healthcare practitioners and technical, architecture and engineering, and computer or mathematical services, were among the highest paying professions in the region. Additionally, occupations such as life, physical and social sciences and business or financial operations offer above median income pay. Educational occupations offer just below median income pay, and, referring to table 2-6 are the most common occupation in the City of Orange.

Table 2-8: Mean Salary by Occupation in Orange County, 2019 Occupation Salary
Management $124,158
Legal $111,887
Healthcare Practitioners and Technical $92,080
Architecture and Engineering $91,796
Computer and Mathematical $91,533
Life, Physical and Social Sciences $82,951
Business and Financial Operations $72,759
Education, Training and Library $60,130
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports and Media $55,157
Construction and Extraction $58,307
Protective Services $38,388
Community and Social Service $51,921
Installation, Maintenance and Repair $52,114
Sales $34,774
Office and Administration Support $42,964
Production $35,768
Transportation and Material Moving $31,774
Healthcare Support $30,171
Building, Grounds Cleaning, and Maintenance $31,603
Personal Care and Service $29,613
Farming, Fishing and Forestry $31,978
Food Preparation and Serving Related $27,895
Source: California Employment Development Division, Occupational Wage data, 2019.
620
Section 2: Community Profile 2-10
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
C. Household Characteristics
A household is defined by the U.S. Census Bureau as all persons who occupy a housing unit. This may include single persons living alone, families related through marriage, blood or adoption, domestic partnerships and unrelated individuals living together. Nursing facilities, residential care facilities, dormitories, and other group living are not considered housing units, and the persons living within them are not considered a household.

Analysis of household characteristics assists in understanding growth and determining housing needs of a community. Income and affordability are best measured at the household level, including special needs of certain groups. These may include large families, single parent households, or low and extremely lowincome households.

1. Household Type and Size
Table 2-9 displays 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) household characteristics data for Orange and nearby cities. The ACS reported 43,075 households in the City of Orange in 2019. Of this total, 56 percent were married-couple family households, comparable to nearby cities with the exception of Yorba Linda which reported a significantly higher percent (71.3 percent). Compared to nearby cities, Orange had a slightly smaller percent of female headed households with no spouse present (11.9 percent). Non-family households made up 26.8 percent of all households in Orange, generally higher than nearby cities.

Table 2-9: Household Characteristics, 2019
Jurisdiction
MarriedCouple
Family
Households
% of Total
Households
Female
Householder,
No Spouse
Present
% of Total
Households
Non-Family
Household
% of Total
Households
Total
Households
Anaheim 52,747 51.90% 15,889 15.60% 26,539 26.10% 101,658 Fullerton 23,855 52.10% 5,588 12.20% 13,818 30.20% 45,814 Yorba Linda 16,142 71.30% 1,687 7.40% 3,907 17.30% 22,649 Orange 24,227 56.20% 5,114 11.90% 11,555 26.80% 43,075
Santa Ana 42,486 55.40% 13,137 17.10% 14,031 18.30% 76,624 Garden
Grove 26,255 55.00% 7,074 14.80% 10,396 21.80% 47,761
County of
Orange 569,260 24.90% 119,719 11.50% 293,481 28.30% 1,037,492 Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Figure 2-3 depicts household composition in the City of Orange, including data for households with the householder age 65 or older. As previously noted in Table 2-9, Orange has a relatively low percentage of female householders with no spouse present, and even lower percentage of male householders with no spouse present (5.1 percent). A majority of Orange households are married couple families and 22.6 percent of all households have a householder of 65 years and over. 621
Section 2: Community Profile 2-11
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 2-3: Orange Household Characteristics in Percent, 2019 Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Table 2-10 shows changes in household characteristics from 2000 to 2019. From 2000 to 2019, the City of Orange experienced a 5.2 percent increase in total households. Of those households in 2000, about 57 percent were married-couple family households. Married-couple family households decrease to about 56.2 percent in 2019. The percent of households with a householder 65 years and over increased by about 36.9 percent from 2000 to 2019. Additionally, the percent of female headed households with no spouse present increased from 4,743 persons in 2000 to 5,114 persons in 2019 (a 7.8 percent increase).

Table 2-10: Changes in Household Characteristics, 2000-2019 2000 Percent 2010 Percent 2019 Percent
Married-couple
Family
Households
23,375 57.1% 23,572 54.4% 24,227 56.2%
Female
Household, No
Spouse Present
4,743 11.6% 5,260 12.1% 5,114 11.9%
Non-Family
Household 10,762 26.3% 12,111 27.9% 11,555 26.8%
Householder 65
Years and Over 7,125 17.4% 8,682 20.0% 9,753 22.6%
Total
Households 40,930 100.0% 43,367 100.0% 43,075 100.0%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2017.

The SCAG 2012 to 2040 Final Growth Forecast estimates expected growth in the in the City of Orange and surrounding cities, shown below in Table 2-11. From 2012 to 2040 Orange is forecast to experience steady household growth, totaling 13.1 percent by 2040. Orange’s household growth forecast is about 2 percent Married-couple
Family Households
Male Householder,
No Spouse Present
Female
Householder, No
Spouse Present
Non-Family
Household
Householder Age
65 or Above
Orange 56.2% 5.1% 11.9% 26.8% 22.6%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
622
Section 2: Community Profile 2-12
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
below that of the County, but has a higher forecasted growth than Yorba Linda, Santa Ana, and Garden Grove. Anaheim and Fullerton have households growth forecasts greater than Orange by 10.5 percent and

8.2 percent (respectively).

Table 2-11: Household Growth Forecasts, 2012-2040
Jurisdiction 2012 2020 2035 2040 Percent Change
2012 - 2040
Anaheim 99,200 104,600 114,100 122,600 23.6%
Fullerton 45,500 48,800 54,300 55,200 21.3%
Yorba Linda 21,900 22,900 23,300 23,400 6.8%
Orange 43,600 45,300 48,500 49,300 13.1%
Santa Ana 73,300 76,600 77,700 78,000 6.4%
Garden Grove 46,200 47,300 48,000 48,200 4.3%
County of
Orange 999,500 1,074,700 1,135,300 1,152,300 15.3%
Source: SCAG 2016-2040 Final Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction (2012).

Table 2-11 displays average household size in Orange and nearby cities in 2019. The County of Orange has an average household size of 3.05 in 2019, slightly smaller compared to Orange’s average household size of 3.18. The Cities of Santa Ana and Garden Grove have larger average household sizes of 4.32 and 3.6 respectively. Orange’s average household is in the mid-range compared to surrounding cities.

Table 2-11: Average Household Size
Jurisdiction Average Persons
per Household
Anaheim 3.41
Fullerton 3.02
Yorba Linda 2.78
Orange 3.18
Santa Ana 4.32
Garden Grove 3.60
County of Orange 3.05
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year
Estimates, 2019.

2. Household Income
Household income is directly connected to affordability. As household income increases, the ability to afford higher priced housing units increases. This may include access to larger sized units and/or ability to move from rental to ownership opportunities. However, as household income decreases, households will likely utilize a disproportionate amount of their income toward housing costs. This may influence incidences of overcrowding and substandard living conditions.
623
Section 2: Community Profile 2-13
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
The California State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has identified the following income categories based on the Area Median Income (AMI) of Orange County;  Very Low-income: households earning between 0 and 50 percent of the AMI  Low-income: households earning between 51 percent and 80 percent of the AMI  Moderate Income: households earning between 81 percent and 120 percent of the AMI  Above Moderate Income: households earning over 120 percent of the AMI State law also defines extremely low-income as households earning 30 percent or less of the AMI and are considered a subset of the very low-income category. Combined, the extremely low, very low, and lowincome groups are referred to as lower income.1

Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) estimates based on 2006-2017 American Community Survey (ACS) data are shown in Table 2-12. Households exhibit a near even split between renters and owners in Orange. There was a higher percentage of renters in the extremely low-income category, and a greater percentage of owners in the moderate- or above-moderate income level than renters. In 2017, a little over half of households had a moderate or above moderate income. Just under 20 percent of those household were in the low-income category. The very low and extremely low-income categories constitute about 24 percent of total households.

Table 2-12: Households by Income Category, 2017
Income Category (% of County
AMI) Owner Percent Renter Percent Total Percent
Extremely Low (30% AMI or less) 1,570 3.7% 3,920 9.2% 5,490 12.9% Very Low (31 to 50% AMI) 2,015 4.7% 2,975 7.0% 4,990 11.7% Low (51 to 80% AMI) 3,855 9.0% 4,550 10.7% 8,405 19.7%
Moderate or Above Moderate
(over 80% AMI)
16,835 39.5% 6,905 16.2% 23,740 55.7%
Total 24,280 57.0% 18,345 43.0% 42,625 100.0%
Source: Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), 2012- 2017.

Figure 2-4 shows median household income by cities in Orange County in 2019. The median household income for the Orange County was $90,234, the City of Orange had a slightly higher median household income of $91,793.
1 Federal housing and community development programs typically assist households with incomes up to 80 percent of the AMI and use different terminology. For example, the Federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program refers households with incomes between 51 and 80 percent AMI as moderate income (compared to low-income based on State definition). 624
Section 2: Community Profile 2-14
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 2-4: Median Household Income by City, 2019
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Table 2-13 displays Orange and nearby cities’ median incomes and the percent above or below the county median income. As displayed in Figure 2-4, the City of Orange has a slightly higher median income than the County. Orange’s median household income was two percent higher than the County. The City of Orange and Yorba Linda had median incomes higher than the county.

Table 2-13: Median Household Income by Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction Median Income
Percent
Above/Below
Regional Median
Anaheim 71,763 -25.7%
Fullerton 79,978 -12.8%
Yorba Linda 129,995 30.6%
Orange 91,793 1.7%
Santa Ana 66,145 -36.4%
Garden Grove 69,278 -30.2%
County of Orange 90,234 --
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

71,763
79,978
129,995
91,793
66,145 69,278
90,234
90,234
$-
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
$140,000
Anaheim Fullerton Yorba Linda Orange Santa Ana Garden Grove Median Income Orange County Median Income
625
Section 2: Community Profile 2-15
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 2-5 displays income distribution in Orange. According to Figure 2-5, persons who make more than $50,000 per year have higher percentages than those who make less than $50,000 per year. Those who made over $150,000 composed the largest individual income category at 25.8 percent. Overall, majority of employed persons in the City of Orange fall into the moderate to above moderate-income categories, specifically, with higher percentages making over $100,000 per year.

Figure 2-5: Orange Income Distribution
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

D. Housing Problems
The CHAS developed by the Census Bureau for HUD reports housing needs data by income level for different types of households in Orange. The most recent available CHAS data for Orange was published in August 2020 and was based on 2006-2017 ACS data. Housing problems considered by CHAS include:
 Units with physical defects (lacking complete kitchen or bathroom);  Overcrowded conditions (housing units with more than one person per room);  Housing cost burdens, including utilities, exceeding 30 percent of gross income; or  Severe housing cost burdens, including utilities, exceeding 50 percent of gross income.

The types of housing problems identified in CHAS data vary according to household income, type, and tenure (Table 2-14). These include:
 In general, owner-occupied households had a lower level of housing problems (30.6 percent) than renter-occupied households (58.4 percent).
 Approximately 13.5 percent of owner-occupied households report having a severe housing problem, whereas almost 39.6 percent of renters reported a severe housing problem. The four severe housing problems are: incomplete kitchen facilities, incomplete plumbing facilities, more than 1.5 persons per room, and cost burden greater than 50%.  Overall, 42.6 percent of all households reported at least one housing problem and 24.7 percent of all households reported at least one severe housing problem.

Less
than
$5,000
$5,000
to
$9,999
$10,000
to
$14,999
$15,000
to
$19,999
$20,000
to
$24,999
$25,000
to
$34,999
$35,000
to
$49,999
$50,000
to
$74,999
$75,000
to
$99,999
$100,000
to
$149,999
$150,000 or more Orange 2.3% 1.5% 2.5% 2.3% 2.8% 5.4% 8.9% 16.1% 12.8% 19.7% 25.8% 0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
626
Section 2: Community Profile 2-16
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 2-14: Housing Assistance Needs of Lower Income Households Housing Problem
Overview*
Owner Renter Total
Households Percent Households Percent Households Percent Household has at least 1 of
4 Housing Problems 7,420 30.6% 10,720 58.4% 18,140 42.6% Household has none of 4
Housing Problems 16,670 68.7% 7,365 40.1% 24,035 56.4%
Cost Burden not available,
no other problems 190 0.8% 260 1.4% 450 1.1%
Total 24,280 57% 18,345 43% 42,625 100%
Severe Housing Problem
Overview**
Owner Renter Total
Households Percent Households Percent Households Percent Household has at least 1 of
4 Severe Housing
Problems
3,270 13.5% 7,260 39.6% 10,530 24.7%
Household has none of 4
Severe Housing Problems 20,820 85.7% 10,825 59% 31,645 74.2% Cost Burden not available,
no other problems 190 0.8% 260 1.4% 450 1.1%
Total 24,280 57% 18,345 43% 42,625 100%
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) 2012-2017.
* The four housing problems are: incomplete kitchen facilities, incomplete plumbing facilities, more than 1 person per room, and cost burden greater than 30%.
** The four severe housing problems are: incomplete kitchen facilities, incomplete plumbing facilities, more than 1.5 persons per room, and cost burden greater than 50%.

1. Overcrowding
“Overcrowding” is generally defined as a housing unit occupied by more than one person per room in housing unit (including living room and dining rooms, but excluding hallways, kitchen, and bathrooms). An overcrowding can be caused by lack of affordable housing (which forces more than one household to live together) and/or a lack of available, adequately sized housing units. Overcrowding is an indicator of inadequate supply of affordable housing, especially for large families.

Overcrowded and severely overcrowded households contribute to faster rates of deterioration due to more intensive use of individual housing units. The faster rates of deterioration are caused by excessive wear and tear, and the potential cumulative effect of overburdening infrastructure systems and exceeding service capacities. Furthermore, overcrowding in neighborhoods contributes to overall declines in social cohesion and environmental quality. Such decline can often spread geographically from housing units to neighborhoods and impact the overall quality of life and the economic vitality of a community. 627
Section 2: Community Profile 2-17
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 2-15: Overcrowding by Tenure in Orange
Housing
Unit
Tenure
Overcrowded Housing Units
(1.0 to 1.50 persons/room)
Severely Overcrowded Housing
Units
(>1.51 persons/room)
Total Overcrowded Occupied
Housing Units
Number of
Units
Percent of
Total Occupied
Housing Units
Number of
Units
Percent of
Total Occupied
Housing Units
Number of
Units
Percent of
Total Occupied
Housing Units
Owner
Occupied 356 0.83% 180 0.42% 536 1.24%
Renter
Occupied 1825 4.24% 814 1.89% 2639 6.13%
Total 2181 5.06% 994 2.31% 3175 7.37%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Table 2-15 displays incidents of overcrowding in the City of Orange. These data show that overcrowding disproportionately affects renters, with just over six percent of renter-occupied units overcrowded compared to 1.2 percent of owner-occupied units.

As shown in Table 2-16, renters were the primary group affected by overcrowding in nearby cities. In Santa Ana about 22 percent of all occupied units were overcrowded, renters-occupied units, compared to about 8 percent of owner-occupied units, a nearly tripled increase. In comparison to the City of Orange, Yorba Linda had the lowest percentage of overcrowded units for both renter and owner-occupied units showing under one percent overcrowding. Overall, the County of Orange shows under ten percent overcrowding, as well as predominantly renter-occupied overcrowded units.

Table 2-16: Overcrowded Housing Units by Tenure
Jurisdiction
Owner Occupied Overcrowded Units
(>1.0 persons/room)
Renter Occupied Overcrowded Units
(>1.0 persons/room)
Number of Units Percent of Total
Occupied Units Number of Units Percent of Total Occupied Units Anaheim 3018 2.97% 13370 13.15%
Fullerton 866 1.89% 3523 7.69%
Yorba Linda 143 0.63% 192 0.85%
Orange 536 1.24% 2639 6.13%
Santa Ana 6103 7.96% 16839 21.98%
Garden Grove 2261 4.73% 4838 10.13%
County of Orange 21886 2.11% 69796 6.73%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019. 628
Section 2: Community Profile 2-18
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft

2. Overpayment (Cost Burden) In Relationship to Income
State and federal guidelines indicate that a household paying more than 30 percent of its income for housing is overpaying. Overpayment for housing can create an imbalance in a household’s overall budget.

Evaluating incidents of overpayment can influence the supply and demand of housing.

Per the Department Housing and Urban Development CHAS report (2012-2016), shown below in Table 2- 17, over half of households in Orange experience some type of cost burden or housing overpayment.

Households with an income less than or equal to 30 percent the County Area Median Income (AMI) experienced cost burdened at a higher overall percentage (19.1 percent). The data shows that as income increases, households are less likely to experience a cost burden. For example, households with an income of 80 percent of the AMI to 100 percent, made up just 10.9 percent of all households and just about 4.2 percent of households with a cost burden. Additionally, households with an income of 100 percent or above the AMI who experienced a housing cost burden made up 44.8 percent of all households and about five percent of households experiencing a cost burden. Overall, lower income renters were disproportionately affected by cost burdens; the data shows that for each income category.

Table 2-17: Summary of Housing Overpayment
Income by Cost
Burden
Owner Renter
Cost
Burden
> 30%
% of Tot.

HH (1)
Cost
Burden >
50%
% of
Tot. HH
Cost
Burden >
30%
% of Tot.

HH
Cost
Burden >
50%
% of
Tot. HH
Household Income
is less-than or =
30% AMI (2)
1,015 2.4% 770 1.8% 3,325 7.8% 3,025 7.1%
Household Income
>30% to less-than
or = 50% AMI
1,210 2.8% 830 1.9% 2,615 6.1% 1,315 3.1%
Household Income
>50% to less-than
or = 80% AMI
2,115 5.0% 705 1.7% 2,490 5.8% 515 1.2%
Household Income
>80% to less-than
or = 100% AMI
935 2.2% 285 0.7% 530 1.2% 40 0.1%
Household Income
>100% AMI 1,670 3.9% 110 0.3% 345 0.8% 0 0.0%
Total 6,945 16.3% 2,700 6.3% 9,305 21.8% 4,895 11.5%
Source: Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy 2012-2017.

Notes: (1) % of tot. HH = Percent of Total Households in Orange (2) AMI = Area Median Income, this is calculated by HUD for each jurisdiction, to determine Fair Market Rents (FMRs) and income limits for HUD programs. AMI will not necessarily be the same as other calculations of median incomes (such as a simple Census number), due to a series of adjustments that are made.
* Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities).

For owners, housing cost is "select monthly owner costs", which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes.
629
Section 2: Community Profile 2-19
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
E. Special Needs Groups
State law identifies certain households that historically have more difficulty in finding adequate and affordable housing due to special needs. Special needs populations include seniors, persons with disabilities, female-headed households, large households, and farmworkers. Many persons within these special needs groups often have lower than average incomes because of their special needs.

Special needs may be related to a person’s employment and income, family characteristics, disability and household characteristics, or other factors. Consequently, certain residents in Orange may experience higher incidences of housing overpayment (cost burden), overcrowding, or other housing problems.

Special needs groups required to be analyzed in the Housing Element include the elderly, persons with physical and developmental disabilities, persons experiencing homelessness, single parents, large households, and farmworkers (Table 2-18). Many of these special needs groups overlap, for example, many farmworkers are migrant workers, and many elderly people have a self-care limitation of some type.

Table 2-18: Special Needs Groups in Orange
Special Needs Group Count Percent of Total
Households
Percent of Total
Population
Senior Headed
Households 9,753 households 22.6% --
Households with
Seniors (65 years and
over)
11,736
households 27.2% --
Seniors Living Alone 3,569 households 8.3% --
Persons with
Disabilities 10,974 persons -- 8.1%
Large Households (5
or more persons per
household)
5,946 households 13.8% --
Single-Parent
Households 3,053 households 7.1% --
Single-Parent, Female
Headed Households
with Children (under
18 years)
2,234 households 5.2% --
People Living in
Poverty 16,142 persons -- 12.1%
Farmworkers* 305 persons -- 0.4%
Homeless** 341 persons -- 0.2%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019; Orange County Point in Time Count, Everyone Counts Report 2019.
* Farmworker data is taken of the population 16 years and over, not total population. ** The Everyone Counts report is updated annually, therefore the most recent data is from 2019, and there is no percentage of total population available. 630
Section 2: Community Profile 2-20
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft

1. Seniors
The senior population, generally defined as persons aged 65 years or older, traditionally have limited or fixed incomes, experience higher average health care costs, commonly have mobility and self-care limitations, are transit dependent, and live alone. Unique housing needs for the senior population include affordable housing, supportive housing (such as managed care facilities), group homes, and housing with a service component.

Incomes of many seniors often creates difficulty in finding affordable housing. Table 2-19 shows that 17,076 persons were age 65 and over in Orange in 2019, a total of 12.2 percent of the total population. This percentage is lower compared to neighboring cities and the region as a whole; the highest being 18 percent in Yorba Linda and the lowest being 9 percent in Santa Ana.

Table 2-19: Persons Age 65 and Over
Jurisdiction Population
Count Percent
Anaheim 40,694 11.6%
Fullerton 18,561 13.3%
Yorba Linda 12,165 18%
Orange 17,076 12.2%
Santa Ana 29,918 9%
Garden Grove 24,700 14.3%
County of Orange 455,105 14.4%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Seniors also have varying housing needs, specifically those who are living alone. Figure 2-6 below displays housing characteristics for seniors living alone in Orange using 2019 ACS data. The data above shows that there is a total of 17,076 seniors living in the City, of those seniors, majority live in family households (about 72 percent). For seniors who live in non-family households, about 2 percent lived with non-relatives, 6.6 percent were Male householders who lived alone, and 14.3 percent were female households who lived alone. Additionally, about 2 percent of the population over 65 years of age lived in group quarters.

The City currently has eight total affordable housing developments for senior residents, as provided in Table 3-33b. This includes 192 deed-restricted affordable units ranging from one- to three-bedroom units. This Housing Element’s Section 4: Housing Plan includes Housing Policy Action 2D which establishes regulatory incentives to develop senior housing that may include independent living options and/or assisted living with on-site services and memory care facilities.

In addition, the City partners with the Orange Elderly Services, Inc. non-profit community-based organization to provide services (activities, events, meals, and transportation) to residents at the Orange Senior Center. The Senior Transportation Program is offered by the Orange Senior Center to subsidize taxi travels for seniors over 60 years of age to/from medical appointment, pharmacy, grocery store, or the Orange Senior Center.

631
Section 2: Community Profile 2-21
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 2-6: Household Characteristics, Percent of Population Aged 65 Years+ Source: American Community Survey, 5 Year Estimates, 2019.

In addition to overpayment problems faced by seniors, seniors have a higher incident of disabilities. In 2019, the American Community Survey reported 5,019 seniors having a disability. The most common reported disabilities were ambulatory disabilities, independent living disabilities and hearing disabilities.

2. Persons with Physical and Developmental Disabilities Physical and developmental disabilities may limit a person’s barrier-free access to traditionally designed housing units. Physical and/or developmental disabilities may influence a person’s ability to earn income, restrict mobility, or create self-care limitations. Lower income persons with disabilities commonly require housing assistance and services. Housing needs for disabled persons can be compounded by limitations imposed by building designs. Accessibility and transportation considerations and location factors can affect the cost and availability of housing. Special needs households with wheelchair-bound or semi-ambulatory individuals require American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance and specific accommodations such as ramps, holding bars, special bathroom designs, wider doorways, lower cabinets, elevators, and other interior and exterior design features.

Housing opportunities for persons with disabilities can be addressed through the provision of affordable, barrier-free housing. Rehabilitation assistance can be targeted toward renters and homeowners with disabilities for unit modification to improve accessibility.

The 2019 ACS identifies six disability types: hearing disability, vision disability, cognitive disability, ambulatory disability, self-care disability and independent living disability. The Census and the ACS provide clarifying questions to determine persons with disabilities and differentiate disabilities within the In Family Households: 72.1%
Male Living alone 6.6%
Femaile Living alone 14.3%
In Group Quarters 2.8%
Living with Non Relatives 2.2%

72.1%

6.6%

14.3%

2.8% 2.2%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
632
Section 2: Community Profile 2-22
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
population. The ACS defines a disability as a report of one of the six disabilities identified by the following questions:
 Hearing Disability: Is this person deaf or does he/she have serious difficulty hearing?  Visual Disability: Is this person blind or do they have serious difficulty seeing even when wearing glasses?
 Cognitive Difficulty: Because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition, does this person have serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions?  Ambulatory Difficulty: Does this person have serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs?  Independent Living Difficulty: Because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition, does this person have difficulty doing errands alone such as visiting a doctor’s office or shopping? According to the 2019 ACS, about eight percent of Orange’s population reported a disability. Of that eight percent, ambulatory difficulty represented the highest at 48.9 percent of persons reporting a disability (Table 2-20). Hearing and self-care disabilities totaled about 54.3 percent of the population with a disability, cognitive disabilities represented 39.1 percent and independent living difficulties represent 38.4 percent.

Table 2-20 also shows that persons age 65 or over had the highest percentage of disabilities.

Table 2-20: Disability Status
Disability Type
Under age
18 with a
Disability
Ages 18 to
64 with a
Disability
65 years
and Over
with a
Disability
Total
Percent of
Population
with
Disability
Percent of
Total
Population
Population
with a Hearing
Difficulty
182 985 1,999 3,166 28.9% 2.30%
Population
with a Vision
Difficulty
95 717 722 1,534 14.0% 1.10%
Population
with a
Cognitive
Difficulty
526 2,323 1,437 4,286 39.1% 4.20%
Population
with an
Ambulatory
Difficulty
204 1,926 3,236 5,366 48.9% 4.20%
Population
with a Self-care
Difficulty
293 864 1,633 2,790 25.4% 2%
Population
with an
independent
Living Difficulty
-- 1,811 2,399 4,210 38.4% 4.00%
Total 718 5,237 5,019 10,974* -- 8%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019. *This number may not reflect persons who have more than one reported disability. 633
Section 2: Community Profile 2-23
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
State law requires Housing Elements discuss housing needs for persons with developmental disabilities. As defined by federal law, a “developmental disability” means severe, chronic disability in an individual that:
 Is attributable to a mental or physical impairment or combination of mental and physical impairments;
 Is manifested before the individual attains age 22;
 Is likely to continue indefinitely;
 Results in substantial functional limitations in three or more of the following areas of major life activity: a) self-care; b) receptive and expressive language; c) learning; d) mobility; e) self-direction; f) capacity for independent living; or g) economic self- sufficiency; and  Reflects the individual’s need for a combination and sequence of special, interdisciplinary, or generic services, individualized supports, or other forms of assistance that are of lifelong or extended duration and are individually planned and coordinated.

According to the U.S. Administration on Developmental Disabilities, an accepted estimate of the percentage of the population that can be defined as developmentally disabled is 1.5 percent. This equates to 2,104 persons in the City of Orange with developmental disabilities, based on the 2017 America Community Survey.

Per Section 4512 of the Welfare and Institutions Code a "developmental disability" means a disability that originates before an individual attains age 18 years, continues, or can be expected to continue, indefinitely, and constitutes a substantial disability for that individual which includes intellectual disability, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and autism. This term also includes disabling conditions found to be closely related to intellectual disability or to require treatment like that required for individuals with intellectual disability but shall not include other handicapping conditions that are solely physical in nature.

As of November 2019, The State Department of Developmental Services (DDS) provides community-based services to approximately 331,999 persons with developmental disabilities and their families through a statewide system of 21 regional centers, four developmental centers, and two community-based facilities.

According to DDS, for fiscal year 2017 to 2018, the Regional Center for Orange County offered five Home and Community-Based Service centers including, the Anaheim Adult Day Cat Inc., Goodwill of Orange County, Hi Hopes Identity Discovery Foundation, Inc., Mayfair Adult Day Care, and Vocational Visions. As of June 2018, the Orange County Regional Center served 22,352 persons with developmental disabilities.

Sixty-five percent of the persons served by the OCRC were male. Persons from 0-2 years of age compromised 22 percent of OCRC’s clients, 41 percent of persons served were 3-21 years the largest age group served. The majority of the persons served (about 35 percent) were White, about 32 percent reported Hispanic, 15 percent reported Other, 14 percent reported Asian and persons who reported Black, Filipino, Native American and Polynesian each totaled under four percent.

Many people with developmental disabilities live and work independently within conventional housing environments. Individuals with more severe developmental disabilities may require a group living environment where supervision is provided. The most severely affected individuals may require an institutional environment where medical attention and physical therapy are provided. Because developmental disabilities exist before adulthood, the first issue in supportive housing for persons with 634
Section 2: Community Profile 2-24
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
developmental disabilities is the transition from the person’s living situation as a child to an appropriate level of independence as an adult.

There are several housing types appropriate for people living with a development disability: rent subsidized homes, licensed and unlicensed single-family homes, inclusionary housing, Section 8 vouchers, special programs for home purchase, HUD housing, and SB 962 (veterans) homes. The design of housingaccessibility modifications, the proximity to services and transit, and the availability of group living opportunities represent some of the types of considerations that are important in serving the needs of this group. Incorporating ‘barrier-free’ design in all, new multi-family housing (as required by California and Federal Fair Housing laws) is especially important to provide the widest range of choices for residents with disabilities. Special consideration should also be given to the affordability of housing, as people with disabilities may be living on a fixed income.

Section 4: Housing Plan of this Housing Element includes Housing Policy Action 4E which establishes the City’s support of persons with developmental disabilities to live in integrated community settings. Housing Policy Action 4F also includes an amendment to the City’s Municipal Code to be compliant with State law as it relates to zoning requirements of residential care facilities serving seven of more persons.

3. Large Households
Large households are defined as those consisting of five or more members. Large households typically have a limited supply of locally available, adequately sized and affordable housing units. It is common for lower income large households to reside in smaller units with an inadequate number of bedrooms. This frequently results in overcrowded conditions and can contribute to faster rates of deterioration.

Availability of large households is a greater challenge for renters, because multi-family rental units are typically physically smaller than single-family ownership units. While apartment complexes offering two and three bedrooms are common, apartments with four or more bedrooms are rare. Large households generally experience overcrowded conditions compared to smaller households. Additionally, throughout the region single-family homes with higher bedroom counts, whether rental or ownership units, are rarely affordable to lower income households.

Table 2-21 displays the American Community Survey’s 2019 data for Large Households broken down by tenure. According to the data large households made up 13.8 percent of all households in the City. Among the large households, five-person households were most common (7.99 percent) and six and seven-person households were both just over five percent. When divided up by tenure, the data shows that renter and owner-occupied large households had similar percentages.

Table 2-21: Large Households (by Tenure)
Household Size Owner Renter Total
Households Percent Households Percent Households Percent 5-Person Household 1,924 4.47% 1,516 3.52% 3,440 7.99%
6-person household 601 1.40% 882 2.05% 1,483 3.44%
7-or-more person
Households 472 1.10% 551 1.28% 1,023 2.37%
Total 2,997 6.96% 2,949 6.85% 5,946 13.80%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019. 635
Section 2: Community Profile 2-25
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
According to the American Community Survey’s 2019 data, there are approximately 21,564 total housing units with 6 or more bedrooms. Large housing units with 6 or more bedrooms represent half of the City’s existing housing stock.

In addition, Section 4: Housing Plan of this Housing Element includes Housing Policy Action 2C which establishes the City’s continued outreach to private and non-profit housing developers to encourage the development of rental and for-sale housing units for larger families.

4. Single-Parent Households
Single-parent households often require special consideration and assistance due to their greater need for affordable and accessible day care, health care, and other supportive services. Many female-headed households with children are susceptible to having lower incomes than similar two-parent households.

Single, female mothers may face social marginalization pressures that can limit their occupational choices and income earning potential, housing options and access to supportive services.

Table 2-22 displays data breakdown of single parent households in Orange. In total, single parent households make up 7.1 percent of total households. Of the single parent households in Orange, 819 were male headed with no spouse present and the remaining 2,234 were female headed with no spouse present.

Overall, nearly a quarter of single parent households were living below the poverty line (22 percent).

Table 2-22: Single Parent Households
Jurisdiction
Single ParentMale, No
Spouse Present
Single ParentFemale, No
Spouse Present
Single Parent
Households
Living in Poverty
Single Parent
Households
Percent of Total
Households
Orange 819 2,234 671 3,053 7.1%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

The City of Orange provides a number of community programs and resources for children which may assist single-parent households. The City of Orange, in partnership with the Youth Centers of Orange, offers afterschool enrichment for children Kindergarten to 8th Grade. This after-school program includes group activities, homework help, a nutritional program, and a special focus on Character Development for a nominal fee. All scheduled programs are in conjunction with the OUSD academic calendar. After-school recreation programs are offered throughout the community at El Camino Real Park, Grijalva Park, and Killefer Park. The Teen Action Committee (T.A.C.) also offers activities and community projects for teens entering the 7th grade through 15 years of age.

Other community organizations and schools that provide resources for children in the City include:
 Youth Centers of Orange
 St. John’s Lutheran School District
 Orange Unified School District
 Covenant Christian School
 Oakridge Private School
636
Section 2: Community Profile 2-26
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft

5. Farmworkers
Farmworkers are defined as persons whose primary incomes are earned through seasonal agricultural work. Farmworkers have special housing needs because they earn lower incomes than many other workers and move throughout the year from one harvest location to the next.

The United States Department of Agriculture, National Agriculture Statistics provides data on hired farm labor across the United States. The data is compiled at both a State and County level. Within Orange County, a total of 99 farms reportedly hired 1,772 workers in 2017. Permanent workers, those who work 150 days or more, represent the largest category of workers with 1,106 workers (62 percent). A total of 666 workers (38 percent) are considered seasonal and work less than 150 days. Orange County reported 340 migrant workers (19 percent) with full time hired labor in 2017. In addition, the County reported 176 unpaid workers.

The 2019 ACS data reported that there were 5,407 persons employed in natural resources, construction, and maintenances occupations; of those, 205 persons were employed in the farming, fishing, and forestry industries. Because of the low percentage of persons employed in the agriculture and farming industries, the City of Orange does not provide specific housing for this population.

Section 4: Housing Plan of this Housing Element includes Housing Policy Action 4I which will result in an update to the City’s Municipal Code to comply with the provisions for farmworker housing set forth in the Employee Housing Act.

6. Extremely Low-income Households and Poverty Status
The 2013-2017 CHAS data identifies 8,410 low-income households and 4,990 very low-income households.

Very low-income households are those households that earn 50 percent or less of the median family income (MFI) for Orange County. Extremely low-income households are those households which earn less than 30 percent of the MFI. There are approximately 5,490 extremely low-income households in Orange (renters and owners). Table 2-23 below, includes data characterizing affordability and cost burden for various income groups.

According the 2019 ACS, 16,142 persons were reported to be living in poverty, about 12.1 percent of the population. Figure 2-7 below displays the percent on persons living in poverty by race or ethnicity and Hispanic or Latino origin, based on own race/ethnicity. The majority of persons living in poverty in Orange reported Hispanic or Latino (16.2 percent), Two or More Races (15.6 percent), and Some Other Race (13.9 percent). About 12 percent of person who reported White also reported living in poverty, and the Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander population reported under five percent of persons living in poverty.

637
Section 2: Community Profile 2-27
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 2-23: Housing Problems for All Households (by Tenure) Income Category Income by Housing
Problem
Owner Households
Household has at
least 1 of 4 Housing
Problems
Household has none
of 4 Housing
Problems
Cost Burden not
available, no
other Housing
Problem
Extremely LowIncome Household Income is
less-than or = 30% 1,025 355 190
Very Low-Income
Household Income >30%
to less-than or = 50%
AMI
1,215 800 --
Low-Income
Household Income >50%
to less-than or = 80%
AMI
2,205 1,655 --
Moderate-Income
Household Income >80%
to less-than or = 100%
AMI
1,060 1,300 --
Above ModerateIncome Household Income
>100% AMI 1,920 12,560 --
Total 7,420 16,670 190
Income Category Income by Housing
Problem
Renter Households
Household has at
least 1 of 4 Housing
Problems
Household has none
of 4 Housing
Problems
Cost Burden not
available, no
other Housing
Problem
Extremely LowIncome Household Income is
less-than or = 30% 3,355 305 260
Very Low-Income
Household Income >30%
to less-than or = 50%
AMI
2,695 280 --
Low-Income
Household Income >50%
to less-than or = 80%
AMI
3,220 1,330 --
Moderate-Income
Household Income >80%
to less-than or = 100%
AMI
775 1,520 --
Above ModerateIncome Household Income
>100% AMI 680 3,930 --
Total 10,720 7,365 260
Total Households (Owner and Renter) 18,140 24,035 450
Source: Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) 2013-2017.
* The four housing problems are: incomplete kitchen facilities, incomplete plumbing facilities, more than 1 person per room, and cost burden greater than 30%.
** The four severe housing problems are: incomplete kitchen facilities, incomplete plumbing facilities, more than 1.5 persons per room, and cost burden greater than 50%.

Note: AMI = Area Median Income, this is the median family income calculated by HUD for each jurisdiction, to determine Fair Market Rents (FMRs) and income limits for HUD programs. AMI will not necessarily be the same as other calculations of median incomes (such as a simple Census number), due to a series of adjustments that are made. 638
Section 2: Community Profile 2-28
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 2-7: Percent below Poverty Level, by Race and Hispanic or Latino Origin Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Note: The chart reports percentage of own population who are reported to have incomes below poverty level.

The City currently has 34 total affordable housing developments, as detailed in Table 3-33b. This includes 1,524 deed-restricted affordable units ranging from studios to three-bedroom units available for lowerincome households, seniors, and workforce housing. This Housing Element’s Section 4: Housing Plan includes a number of Housing Policy Actions which promote the development of affordable housing units throughout the City as well as resources for households in need.

7. Persons Experiencing Homelessness
Throughout the country and Orange County region, homelessness has become an increasingly important issue. Factors contributing to the rise in homelessness include, increased unemployment and underemployment, a lack of housing affordable to lower and moderate-income persons (especially extremely low-income households), reductions in public subsidies to the poor, and the deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill.

State law mandates that municipalities address the special needs of homeless persons within their city’s boundaries. The following provides an updated description and new changes for “homelessness” as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD):
 People who are living in a place not meant for human habitation, in emergency shelter, in transitional housing, or are exiting an institution where they temporarily resided. The only significant change from existing practice is that people are now considered homeless if they are exiting an institution where they resided for up to 90 days (it was previously 30 days) and are in shelter or a place not meant for human habitation immediately prior to entering that institution.

12.3%

9.1%

6.8%

9.8%

4.3%

13.9%

15.6%

16.2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
White Black American
Indian and
Alaska Native
Asian Native
Hawaiian and
Other Pacific
Islander
Some Other
Race
Two or More
Races
Hispanic or
Latino
639
Section 2: Community Profile 2-29
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
 People who are losing their primary nighttime residence, which may include a motel or hotel or a doubled-up situation, within 14 days and lack resources or support networks to remain in housing.

HUD had previously allowed people who were being displaced within 7 days to be considered homeless. The proposed regulation also describes specific documentation requirements for this category.
 Families with children or unaccompanied youth who are unstably housed and likely to continue in that state. This is a new category of homelessness, and it applies to families with children or unaccompanied youth who have not had a lease or ownership interest in a housing unit in the last 60 or more days, have had two or more moves in the last 60 days, and who are likely to continue to be unstably housed because of disability or multiple barriers to employment.  People who are fleeing or attempting to flee domestic violence, have no other residence, and lack the resources or support networks to obtain other permanent housing. This category is similar to the current practice regarding people who are fleeing domestic violence.

This definition does not include persons living in substandard housing (unless it has been officially condemned); persons living in overcrowded housing (for example, doubled up with others); persons being discharged from mental health facilities (unless the person was homeless when entering and is considered to be homeless at discharge); or persons who may be at risk of homelessness (for example, living temporarily with family or friends.)
The Point in Time Count is conducted by the County of Orange in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development guidelines. The count provides information on where homeless individuals are in the County. Over 1,000 volunteers across the County counted 6,860 individuals experiencing homelessness; of those, 2,899 were sheltered and 3,961 were unsheltered. The 2019 Count was conducted in April of 2019 and individual city results are shown in Table 2-24a. Santa Ana had the largest homeless population of the North Orange County cities and about 20 percent more than the City of Orange. Orange’s homeless population totaled 341 and five percent of the County’s total homeless population count. According to the Point in Time Count results, Orange County saw a 121 percent increase in the number of emergency shelter beds from 2017 to 2019, an increase in 1,390 beds in total.

Additionally, Table 2-24b shows the 2022 Count results – including a reduction of persons experiencing homelessness of about 27 percent since 2019 (a reduction of 91 persons experiencing homelessness). In comparison, the County as a whole also saw a decrease by about 17 percent (1,142 persons).

According to the County’s Point in Time Count, persons experiencing homelessness included 110 unsheltered families (152 adults and 244 children). Approximately half of families experiencing homelessness became unsheltered for the first time during the past 12 months and over 60 percent were living in a vehicle. A total of 275 transitional age youth were counted as experiencing homelessness countywide and about half identified as Hispanic or Latino. Approximately 12 percent of transitional age youth experiencing homelessness are chronically homeless compared to just under half of all adults experiencing homelessness. A total of 612 seniors and 311 veterans were counted countywide. Black or African American individuals and families represent just 2 percent of the County’s population, according to the U.S. Census Bureau; however, Black or African American individuals and families represented 8.41 percent of unsheltered homelessness and 15 percent of sheltered homelessness. Hispanic or Latino families 640
Section 2: Community Profile 2-30
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
were also overrepresented in the count and represented 57 percent of unsheltered homelessness and 49.8 percent of sheltered homelessness in the County.

Table 2-24a: Homeless Count by Jurisdiction (2019)
Jurisdiction Unsheltered Sheltered Total % of County
Anaheim 694 508 1,202 17.5%
Fullerton 308 165 472 6.8%
Yorba Linda 1 0 1 0.01%
Orange 193 148 341 5.0%
Santa Ana 830 939 1,769 25.8%
Garden Grove 163 62 225 3.3%
County of Orange 3,961 2,899 6,860 100%
Source: Orange County Point in Time Count, Everyone Counts Report 2019.

Table 2-24b: Homeless Count by Jurisdiction (2022)
Jurisdiction Unsheltered Sheltered Total % of County % Change 2019-2022
Anaheim 485 589 1,074 18.8% -10.6%
Fullerton 202 70 272 4.8% -42.4%
Yorba Linda 4 0 4 0.1% 300.0%
Orange 134 116 250 4.4% -26.7%
Santa Ana 508 482 990 17.3% -44.0%
Garden Grove 278 113 391 6.8% 73.8%
County of Orange 3,057 2,661 5,718 100.0% -16.6%
Source: Orange County Point in Time Count, Everyone Counts Report 2022.

Partnerships and Initiatives
In collaboration with a number of neighboring Orange County cities, the City of Orange participates in the North Services Planning Area (SPA) partnership. The North SPA Partnership is a joint collaboration that includes two full-service Navigation Centers to provide help to the region’s homeless – the Buena Park Center and the Placentia Center will provide homeless individuals a total of 250 beds, health resources, job skill training, and the ability to reconnect with lost family. These facilities join the two shelters already built by the City of Anaheim, which house another 326 beds.

In addition to participating in the North SPA, Orange has undertaken several other initiatives over the past few years to address local homelessness issue; including partnering with HomeAid of Orange County to develop the Orange Family Care Center. The Orange Family Care Center specializes in serving the needs of families who are experiencing homelessness and has over 55 beds.

The Orange Police Department’s Homeless Engagement, Assistance & Resource Team (HEART) program has been operating since 2013. HEART Officers engage daily with local homeless individuals, working with them one-on-one to help facilitate their re-entry back into mainstream society. The Police Department also 641
Section 2: Community Profile 2-31
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
assists in providing resources and assistance through collaborations with local community organizations and agencies such as:
 Orange County Homeless Services, Orange County Health Care Agency, Orange County Shelter Programs - The County of Orange coordinates a comprehensive regional Continuum of Care (CoC) strategy that includes the participation of all thirty-four cities in Orange County, County Agencies, the County’s homeless housing and service providers, and other community groups (including nonprofits, local governmental agencies, faith-based organizations, the homeless and formerly homeless, interested business leaders, schools, and many other stakeholders) to identify the gaps and unmet needs of the County’s homeless. In addition to organizing, delivering and reporting on housing and services for people who are experiencing homelessness, CoCs are required to complete a Point-In-Time (PIT) count of unsheltered homeless at least once every two years & sheltered annually during the last ten days in January. Data from the one-night PIT count and the longitudinal data collected by the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) are the primary sources used to measure the progress in meeting the national strategic goal of preventing and ending homelessness. The County also contracts to operate shelter programs in the County, including Bridges at Kraemer Place, Cold Weather Shelter in Santa Ana, and Yale Navigation Center.  Food Pantries by Waste Not OC – Second Harvest Food Bank of Orange County and Community Action Partnership of Orange County Food Bank collect food and distribute it to those in need throughout the community.
 Lutheran Social Services - Located in the city of Fullerton, LSS Orange County, serves more than 200 families and individuals per month with emergency and social services. LSS Orange County offers a weekly food pantry and senior grocery program, clothing, hygiene packs, emergency vouchers for hotel, bus, gas and utilities motel/hotel vouchers. Clients are able to receive housing assistance, in depth case management and ongoing support while they navigate to a more stable situation. They also provide specialized counseling and supportive services for women that have been victims of crime.
 Homeless Intervention Services of OC (HIS-OC) – HIS-OC runs four programs that assist people who are homeless or at risk of being homeless – 1) Transitional housing program, 2) Combining Housing Education and Skills for Students (CHESS) Program, 3) Home Share OC, 4) Housing Connection Program.
 Pathways of Hope Food Pantry - Pathways of Hope leads community efforts to end homelessness in North Orange County. Through different types of housing programs – including shelter, rapid rehousing, permanent supportive housing, and prevention – the agency assists in addressing homelessness for hundreds of community members and neighbors in need each year.  Saint Andrew’s Episcopal Church – Saint Andrew’s provides a range of community services such as - free dinner every Friday night to over 100 people, offering Friday dinner guests with the opportunity to select clean clothes, collecting canned food for the Pathways of Hope food pantry, providing foster children at Orangewood Children’s Home with jeans, blankets, and toiletries, providing diapers, pajamas, and other essential needs for homeless families served by Project Hope, maintaining an urban garden for three local food banks, and assisting women seeking refuge from abusive relationships.
 Seventh Day Adventist Church – Providing food bags, clothing, small appliances, and toiletries.  The Storehouse – Providing hot meals and Thursday evenings and a food pantry weekly. 642
Section 2: Community Profile 2-32
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
 Southlands Church – Southlands distributes food to families in need on the last Saturday of even months.
 Christ Cathedral – Providing kitchen and food pantries.  Southwest Community Center - Providing the basic needs of food, clothing, shelter, household items, referral services and other support services to the homeless, low-income, and economically disadvantaged in an effort to enable them to become or retain self-sufficiency.  Someone Care Soup Kitchen - Providing a daily nutritional meal to homeless, unemployed, working poor families, senior citizens, the unemployed or under-employed, the mentally and physically challenged and children. The Soup Kitchen provides meals seven days per week at the facility in Orange County.
 Welcome Home Ministry - WelcomeHomeOC is the first housing assistance program tailored to Orange County property owners as well as qualified families, Veterans, foster youth, and seniors in need of permanent housing. Every aspect of this program to end homelessness provides greater ease and control, while treating landlords as equal partners and maximizing opportunities for all.  We Care of Los Alamitos - WE CARE is a non-profit organization that pools the resources of the community to meet the emergency needs of families and individuals such as rental assistance, utility assistance, therapy services, food, personal care items, and more. WE CARE of Los Alamitos is a family support center sponsored by local churches, community groups, corporations and concerned citizens.

The HUB OC
The City had previously relied on Mary’s Kitchen to provide food, resources, showers, laundry, and other resources for persons experiencing homelessness. The City ended its license agreement with the nonprofit in 2021 due to rising crime and safety concerns. To replace the soup kitchen, as of June 2022, the City set up a new hub of homelessness services which was mandated by a federal judge in May 2022 through May 2023. “The HUB OC” oversees continuum of care services on behalf of the City of Orange and manages rental facilities including laundry machines, portable showers, hand washing stations, and portable restrooms to help with personal hygiene – in an effort to reduce the transmission of COVID-19. The HUB OC manages the recruiting, training, and mobilizing the team of volunteers from local churches and the community to help meet the needs of homeless residents in partnership with the City of Orange, the HEART team, and LOVE Orange. A summary of services provided by the HUB OC is listed below:
 Provide initial contact with homeless individuals for intake information;  Coordinate with the HEART team for entry into Coordinated Entry System (CES) and Homeless Management Information System (HMIS);
 Coordinate efforts with local non-profits to recruit volunteers;  Provide training to volunteers as listed below:
o Manage and provide homeless individuals with referrals to shelters o Distribute hygiene supplies to homeless individuals
o Manage the on-site hygiene resources that include laundry, showers, wash stations, and restrooms
o Manage and provide homeless individuals with access to phone charging stations o Provide homeless individuals with referrals to mental, medical, vision, dental, and health care services;
643
Section 2: Community Profile 2-33
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
o Provide homeless individuals with referrals to veterinary care services o Provide homeless individuals with referrals to COVID-19 vaccines o Provide homeless individuals with referrals to clothes providers including resources from Full Circle
o Provide homeless individuals with voucher assistance and referrals to bus or other modes of transportation
o Provide the children of homeless individuals with referrals to free after school care through the Youth Centers of Orange
The goal of the HRC in the long run is to continue to offer the same services it does now, but adjust meals to a more nutritional, medical, and supplemental based service. Current services such as showers and laundry will continue to be offered and will encourage the clients to attend a class, workshop, or other empowering services offered at the site through one of its partners or volunteers. Currently, the HUB OC has over 40 partners and is continuously seeking out additional partners to expand services and resources for the homeless community at no additional cost. The HUB OC develops it partnerships by reaching out to schools, non-profits, and local businesses and donors directly and sharing the mission and vision of the HRC with the goal of receiving continuous or one-time financial or in-kind donations. Partnerships are also developed through word of mouth from volunteers and current partner organizations already providing services at the site. If the outreach results in a long-term partnership, the HUB OC will create agreements for the service or donation to be provided at no-cost at the HRC, including those services already being offered.

The HRC has already started to secure partnerships for the classes, workshops, and other empowering services it will offer at the site in the long-term. Examples include:
 Work Program focused on creating healthy work ethics and facilitating project participation throughout the City to develop workforce skills;
 Classes on health care for individuals living on the streets by nurses from local state university.  Support classes for mothers including lactation and birthing that will also offer essential items that can be purchased using EBT and WIC onsite;
 Resume building and application assistance by professionals and volunteers in our community;  Drug and addiction programs through Celebrate Recovery/AA that offers video and workbook curriculum, sponsors, and success chips;
 Men’s and Women's support groups for holistic well-being;  Associate Degree Program through a local college that clients will be able to complete at the HRC through the use of donated computers;
 Nutritional courses by a food scientist;
 Outreach courses for volunteers and local businesses wanting to understand the difficulties of the homeless population and discover ways in which they can help.

Investments
The City is amending the 2019 Action Plan to appropriate $1,108,070 in Community Development Block Grant funds from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act for the Homeless Outreach Program. The Homeless Outreach Program will conduct outreach to the homeless population in Orange 644
Section 2: Community Profile 2-34
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
and refer them to homeless-related services including case management and housing navigation centers.

The program will complement the homeless outreach efforts undertaken by the HEART and Bike Teams.

Section 4: Housing Plan of this Housing Element includes Housing Policy Action 4B establishing the City’s continued support of local and inter-jurisdictional efforts to reduce temporary and chronic homelessness.

Additionally, the City plans to distribute HOME-ARP funds in accordance with the priority needs identified in its need assessment and gap analysis. Consistent with the needs of the homeless community, the City will distribute approximately 95% of the funds to The HUB OC to serve the needs of the homeless on a reimbursement basis. The balance of the funds (5%) will be used for administration purposes.

The City will enter into a new subrecipient agreement with the HUB OC to fund its operation until the funds are fully exhausted. In order to more efficiently and effectively provide services, the HRC will move from its temporary location on the sidewalk of Struck Avenue to the site of where the previous homeless service provider was located. The City will be relocating a mobile office unit to the newly renovated site that will provide continuum of care providers space to meet with clients and allow for more privacy, a need expressed by service providers at the HRC.

Once the HOME-ARP funds are exhausted, the HRC is planning to modify the current operations of the site as part of the long-term plan to avoid interruption in services and reduce operational costs. The HUB endeavors to work strategically with partners in the local and global communities and organizations to provide services free of charge and is working to acquire donations for resources. Additionally, partnerships are being developed in order to offer classes and workshops at the site to help clients towards long term employment and housing stability. The HUB and the City will work collaboratively to seek grant funding to continue the ongoing operation of the facility.

8. Students
There are multiple colleges and universities located in and around the City of Orange, including Chapman University, California State University Fullerton, and Santiago Canyon College. According to the 2019 ACS,

38.8 percent of Orange’s population was enrolled in college or graduate school. Of those between ages 18 and 24 enrolled in a college program, 66 percent are female. Housing may be provided on campus, but students often seek alternate housing options within the same City. Considering the number of students enrolled in school – over 10,000 at Chapman University – students contribute an important segment of the population. Students can be low-income and may be affected by a lack of affordable housing options, especially within easy commuting distances from campus. Students may seek shared housing situations to lower expenses contributing to overcrowding. The access to affordable housing may influence a student’s choice to stay or leave after graduating, which can in turn affect the region’s economy. College students offer specialized skills that contribute to the health of the local economy. A lack of affordable housing may contribute to their departure and the City’s loss of additional participation in the labor force.

Section 4: Housing Plan of this Housing Element includes Housing Policy Action 2I establishing the City coordination with Chapman University to respond to housing needs of students in the City and encouraging the development of on-campus housing.
645
Section 2: Community Profile 2-35
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
F. Housing Stock Characteristics
Housing needs for a community are determined by characteristics of the housing stock, including growth, type, availability and tenure, age and condition, housing costs, and affordability. This section details the housing stock characteristics of Orange and identifies how the current housing stock meets the needs of its current and future residents.

1. Housing Growth
According to the 2010, 2015, and 2019 ACS, the Orange housing stock grew from 44,217 to 44,229 (Table 2-25). The ACS data provides estimates based on the U.S. Census and surveys and may therefore not reflect the exact unit count of jurisdictions. Through 2019, Orange’s housing grew by about 1 percent. The County of Orange grew 5.5 percent between 2010 and 2019; 4 percent more than the City of Orange. The housing stock growth for Orange from 2010 to 2019 is comparable to surrounding cities, except for Yorba Linda and Garden Grove, where most experienced an increase of about 1 percent. Yorba Linda experienced the largest housing unit increase at 8.1 percent and Orange experienced the lowest growth.

Table 2-25: Housing Unit Growth Trends by Jurisdiction, 2010-2019 Jurisdiction 2010 2015 2019
Percent
Change 2010
to 2015
Percent
Change 2015
to 2019
Anaheim 105,050 104,812 106,708 -0.23% 1.81%
Fullerton 47,956 47,319 48,120 -1.33% 1.69%
Yorba Linda 21,665 22,592 23,452 4.28% 3.81%
Orange 44,217 44,229 44,664 0.03% 0.98%
Santa Ana 77,796 77,192 79,024 -0.78% 2.37%
Garden Grove 47,454 48,385 49,061 1.96% 1.40%
County of Orange 1,042,254 1,064,642 1,100,449 2.15% 3.36% Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimate, 2010, 2015, 2019.

2. Housing Type
Table 2-26 provides of the Orange housing stock by type in comparison to the County of Orange. Per the 2019 ACS, single-family detached housing units are the most common type of housing in both the City of Orange and the County (54.9 percent and 50.6 percent, respectively). Multi-family housing units made up

33.1 percent of units in the City and just over 34 percent in the County. Additionally, mobile homes made up under three percent of housing units in both the City and the County.

Table 2-26: Total Housing Units by Type
Jurisdiction Single- Family
Detached
Single-Family
Attached Multi-Family Mobile Homes Total Units1
Orange 54.9% 9.6% 33.1% 2.4% 44,664
County of
Orange 50.6% 12.3% 34.3% 2.7% 1,100,449
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019. 1Note: The data shows the percent of total units in structure. 646
Section 2: Community Profile 2-36
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft

3. Housing Availability and Tenure
Housing tenure and vacancy rates generally influence the supply and cost of housing. Housing tenure defines if a unit is owner-occupied or renter occupied. The tenure characteristics in a community can indicate affordability, household stability, and availability of unit types. Tenure distribution may correlate with household income, composition, and age of the householder.

In 2019, Orange’s occupied housing included a higher percentage of renter occupied units at 55.8 percent.

The majority of owners resided in single-family detached units, whereas the majority of renters resided in multi-family units. Just 6.9 percent of multi-family homes were occupied by owners and about 21 percent single family units were occupied by renters. Mobile homes were more likely to be occupied by owners (2.9 percent) whereas 2 percent were occupied by renters.

Table 2-27: Occupied Housing Units by Type and Tenure
Tenure
SingleFamily
Detached
SingleFamily
Attached
MultiFamily Mobile
Homes
Total
Occupied
Units1
Owner
Occupied 80.1% 10.0% 6.9% 2.9% 24,939
Renter
Occupied 21.1% 9.1% 67.9% 2.0% 18,136
Total 54.9% 9.6% 33.1% 2.4% 44,664
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019. 1Note: The data shows the percent of total occupied units.

A shown in Table 2-28, owner-occupied households and renter-occupied households were about the same average size, a common trend in nearby cities. Owner-occupied households in Orange had a slightly smaller household size than renters (3 and 3.2, respectively). Overall, in the County of Orange, owner households were smaller than renter households. Of the nearby cities, the average household sizes stayed below 3.6 persons, with the exception of Santa Ana where the average household size was 4.3 persons.

Table 2-28: Average Household Size by Tenure
Jurisdiction Owner Occupied
Household Size
Renter Occupied
Household Size
Average
Household Size
Anaheim 3.38 3.41 3.39
Fullerton 2.93 3.02 2.97
Yorba Linda 3.02 2.78 2.98
Orange 3 3.18 3.08
Santa Ana 4.25 4.32 4.28
Garden Grove 3.57 3.6 3.58
County of Orange 2.98 3.05 3.01
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Vacancy rates indicate the degree of available choice. High vacancy rates usually indicate low demand and/or high supply conditions in the housing market. Too high of a vacancy rate can be difficult for owners trying to sell or rent. Low vacancy rates usually indicate high demand and/or low supply conditions in the 647
Section 2: Community Profile 2-37
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
housing market. Too low of a vacancy rate can force prices up and make it more difficult for lower and moderate-income households to find housing. Vacancy rates of between two to three percent are usually considered healthy for single-family or ownership housing, and rates of five to six percent are usually considered healthy for multi-family or rental housing.

The data displayed in Figure 2-8 shows that Orange has a vacancy rate of 3.6 percent, a generally healthy rate and comparable to many surrounding communities. Orange’s vacancy rate is lower than the County’s rate by 2.1 percent.

Figure 2-8: Vacant Rate by Jurisdiction
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Table 2-30 below displays a breakdown of vacancy types for units in Orange. Units currently available for rent have the highest vacancy count at 673 units. In 2019 there were 117 rented but unoccupied units and 94 sold but unoccupied units. There were zero units available for migrant workers and 226 units available for sale in 2019.

Table 2-30: Vacant Housing Units by Type
Type of Housing Estimate Percent
For rent 673 42.4%
Rented, not occupied 117 7.4%
For sale only 226 14.2%
Sold, not occupied 94 5.9%
For seasonal, recreational or occasional use 77 4.8%
For migrant workers 0 0.0%
Other vacant 402 25.3%
Total 1,589 100%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Orange
County Anaheim Fullerton GardenGrove Orange Santa Ana Yorba Linda Vacancy Rate 5.7% 4.7% 4.8% 2.6% 3.6% 3.0% 3.4%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%
648
Section 2: Community Profile 2-38
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft

4. Housing Age and Condition
Housing age can be an indicator of housing condition within a community. For example, housing that is over 30 years old is typically in need of some major rehabilitation, such as a new roof, foundation, plumbing, etc. Many federal and state programs also use the age of housing as one factor in determining housing rehabilitation needs.

According to the data displayed in Figure 2-9, there was a housing stock boom from 1960 to 1979 that resulted in the creation of 47 percent of Orange’s housing units. Between 1950 and 1959, a smaller number of homes were built (14.6 percent) and another 11.6 percent from 1980 to 1989. Overall, a large percentage of homes were built during the mid to late 20th century. Only about 9.5 percent units in Orange were built after 2000 and one percent in 2014 or later. A large proportion of older housing could indicate that most of the City’s housing stock could require major rehabilitation. This proportion may also be a reflection of the large number of units which are located in the City’s four historic districts. These units were built prior to 1940 and up until the 1960s. Historic structures are protected and maintained and would not fall into the category of older units needing rehabilitation.

Figure 2-9: Housing Stock Age

Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

5. Housing Costs and Affordability
Housing costs reflect the supply and demand of housing in a community. This section summarizes the cost and affordability of the housing stock to the City of Orange’s residents.

Table 2-31 show the median home value in Orange was $665,000 in 2019. Homes in Orange were comparable to the median cost of a home in the County and were less expensive than homes in Yorba Linda ($878,800) or the County as a whole ($694,200). Homes in the City of Orange were valued slightly higher than homes in Santa, Anaheim and Garden Grove.

Built 1939
or earlier
Built 1940
to 1949
Built 1950
to 1959
Built 1960
to 1969
Built 1970
to 1979
Built 1980
to 1989
Built 1990
to 1999
Built 2000
to 2009
Built 2010
to 2013
Built 2014
or later
Orange 5.5% 1.8% 14.6% 24.2% 22.9% 11.6% 9.9% 7.1% 1.3% 1.1% 0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
649
Section 2: Community Profile 2-39
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 2-31: Median Home Value by Community
Jurisdiction Median Home Value
Anaheim $583,700
Fullerton $660,300
Yorba Linda $878,800
Orange $665,000
Santa Ana $501,400
Garden Grove $561,600
County of Orange $694,200
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Table 2-32 shows that between 2017 and 2020 rent for a one-bedroom unit in Orange increased by 4.8 percent from $1,819 to $1,906. Two-bedroom rentals saw the highest percent change from 2017 to 2020 at five percent and 3-bedroom units experienced a 3.5 percent increase in cost. There is no data available for 4-bedroom rentals in 2020, but from 2017 to 2019 the cost of rent increased by 2.9 percent.

Table 2-32: Average Monthly Rental Rates, 2017-2020
Unit Type
January 2017
Average
Monthly Rent
January 2018
Average
Rent/Sq. Foot
January 2019
Average
Monthly Rent
January 2020
Average
Monthly Rent
Percent Change
from 2017 to
2020
1 Bedroom $1,819 $1,919 $1,941 $1,906 4.8%
2 bedrooms $2,237 $2,279 $2,321 $2,349 5.0%
3 Bedrooms $2,722 $2,738 $2,767 $2,816 3.5%
4+ Bedrooms $2,943 $2,989 $3,000 -- 2.9%*
Source: Zillow, Orange Rentals Zillow Rent Index, accessed May 2020. *Percent Change from 2019 to 2019, 2020 rental data not available.

Housing affordability can be inferred by comparing the cost of renting or owning a home in the City with the maximum affordable housing costs for households at different income levels. Taken together, this information can generally show who can afford what size and type of housing, as well as indicate the type of households most likely to experience overcrowding and overpayment.

HUD conducts annual household income surveys nationwide to determine a household’s eligibility for federal housing assistance. Based on this survey, HCD developed income limits using on the AMI to determine the maximum affordable price by households in the upper range of their respective income category. Households in the lower end of each category can afford less by comparison than those at the upper end. The maximum affordable home and rental prices for residents in Orange County are shown in Table 2-33 and Table 2-34.

The data shows the maximum amount that a household can pay for housing each month without incurring a cost burden (overpayment). This amount can be compared to current housing asking prices (Table 2-31) and market rental rates (Table 2-32) to determine what types of housing opportunities a household can afford.
650
Section 2: Community Profile 2-40
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Extremely Low-income Households
Extremely low-income households earn less than 30 percent of the County AMI – up to $26,950 for a oneperson household and up to $41,550 for a five-person household in 2020. Extremely low-income households cannot afford market-rate rental or ownership housing in Orange without assuming a substantial cost burden.

Very Low-income Households
Very low-income households earn between 31 percent and 50 percent of the County AMI – up to $44,580 for a one-person household and up to $69,200 for a five-person household in 2020. A very low-income household can generally afford homes priced between $183,000 and $259,000, adjusting for household size. A very low-income household at the maximum income limit can afford to pay approximately $1,121 to $1,730 in monthly rent, depending on household size. Given the high cost of housing in Orange, persons or households of very low-income could not afford to rent or purchase a home in the City.

Low-income Households
Low-income households earn between 51 percent and 80 percent of the County’s AMI - up to $71,750 for a one-person household and up to $110,650 for a five-person household in 2020. The affordable home price for a low-income household at the maximum income limit ranges from $308,500 to $452,000.

Ownership housing would not be affordable to low-income households. A one-person low-income household could afford to pay up to $1,794 in rent per month and a five-person low-income household could afford to pay as much as $2,766. Low-income households in Orange would not be able to find adequately sized affordable apartment units (Table 32).

Moderate income Households
Persons and households of moderate income earn between 81 percent and 120 percent of the County’s AMI – up to $133,500, depending on household size in 2020. The maximum affordable home price for a moderate-income household is $377,000 for a one-person household and $558,600 for a five-person family. Moderate income households in Orange would not be able to purchase a home in the City. The maximum affordable rent payment for moderate income households is between $2,163 and $3,338 per month. Appropriately sized market-rate rental housing is generally affordable to households in this income group.

651
Section 2: Community Profile 2-41
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 2-33: Affordable Monthly Housing Cost for Renters in Orange County, 2020 Annual Income Rent Utilities
Total Affordable
Monthly Housing
Cost
Extremely Low-Income (30% of AMI)
1-Person $26,950 $556 $118.00 $674
2-Person $30,800 $619 $151.00 $770
3-Person $34,650 $669 $197.00 $866
4-Person $38,450 $718 $243.00 $961
5-Person $41,550 $750 $289.00 $1,039
Very Low-Income (50% of AMI)
1-Person $44,850 $1,003 $118.00 $1,121
2-Person $51,250 $1,130 $151.00 $1,281
3-Person $57,650 $1,244 $197.00 $1,441
4-Person $64,050 $1,358 $243.00 $1,601
5-Person $69,200 $1,441 $289.00 $1,730
Low-Income (80% AMI)
1-Person $71,750 $1,676 $118.00 $1,794
2-Person $82,000 $1,899 $151.00 $2,050
3-Person $92,250 $2,109 $197.00 $2,306
4-Person $102,450 $2,318 $243.00 $2,561
5-Person $110,650 $2,477 $289.00 $2,766
Moderate-Income (120% AMI)
1-Person $86,500 $2,045 $118.00 $2,163
2-Person $98,900 $2,322 $151.00 $2,473
3-Person $111,250 $2,584 $197.00 $2,781
4-Person $123,600 $2,847 $243.00 $3,090
5-Person $133,500 $3,049 $289.00 $3,338
Source: Orange County Housing Authority, 2020 Utility Allowance Schedule and California Department of Housing and Community Development, 2020 Income Limits and Kimley Horn and Associates Assumptions: 2020 HCD income limits; 30% gross household income as affordable housing cost; 15% of monthly affordable cost for taxes and insurance; 10% down payment; and 4.5% interest rate for a 30- year fixed-rate mortgage loan. Utilities based on Orange County Utility Allowance.

1. Utilities includes basic electric, water, sewer/trash, refrigerator, and stove.

652
Section 2: Community Profile 2-42
2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 2-34: Affordable Monthly Housing Cost for Homeowners in Orange County, 2020 Annual Income Mortgage Utilities Tax and
Insurance
Total
Affordable
Monthly
Housing Cost
Affordable
Purchase Price
Extremely Low-Income (30% of AMI)
1-Person $26,950 $455 $118 $101 $674 $99,990
2-Person $30,800 $504 $151 $116 $770 $110,500
3-Person $34,650 $539 $197 $130 $866 $118,000
4-Person $38,450 $574 $243 $144 $961 $125,800
5-Person $41,550 $594 $289 $156 $1,039 $130,200
Very Low-Income (50% of AMI)
1-Person $44,850 $835 $118 $168 $1,121 $183,000
2-Person $51,250 $938 $151 $192 $1,281 $205,500
3-Person $57,650 $1,028 $197 $216 $1,441 $225,400
4-Person $64,050 $1,118 $243 $240 $1,601 $245,000
5-Person $69,200 $1,182 $289 $260 $1,730 $259,000
Low-Income (80% AMI)
1-Person $71,750 $1,407 $118 $269 $1,794 $308,500
2-Person $82,000 $1,592 $151 $308 $2,050 $349,100
3-Person $92,250 $1,763 $197 $346 $2,306 $386,500
4-Person $102,450 $1,934 $243 $384 $2,561 $424,000
5-Person $110,650 $2,062 $289 $415 $2,766 $452,000
Moderate-Income (120% AMI)
1-Person $86,500 $1,720 $118 $324 $2,163 $377,000
2-Person $98,900 $1,951 $151 $371 $2,473 $427,800
3-Person $111,250 $2,167 $197 $417 $2,781 $475,000
4-Person $123,600 $2,384 $243 $464 $3,090 $522,700
5-Person $133,500 $2,548 $289 $501 $3,338 $558,600
Source: Orange County Housing Authority, 2020 Utility Allowance Schedule and California Department of Housing and Community Development, 2020 Income Limits and Kimley Horn and Associates Assumptions: 2020 HCD income limits; 30% gross household income as affordable housing cost; 15% of monthly affordable cost for taxes and insurance; 10% down payment; and

4.5% interest rate for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage loan. Utilities based on Orange County Utility Allowance.

1. Utilities includes basic electric, water, sewer/trash, refrigerator, and stove. 653
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources,
and Fair Housing
654
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-2 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Housing Constraints
As common in many communities, a variety of constraints affect the provisions and opportunities for adequate housing in the City of Orange. Housing constraints consist of both governmental constraints, including but not limited to development standards and building codes, land use controls, and permitting processes; as well as, nongovernmental or market constraints, including but not limited to land costs, construction costs, and availability of finances. Combined, these factors create barriers to availability and affordability of new housing, especially for lower and moderate-income households.

A. Nongovernmental Constraints
Nongovernmental constraints largely affect the cost of housing in the City of Orange and can produce barriers to housing production and affordability. These constraints include the availability and cost of land for residential development, the demand for housing, financing and lending, construction costs, and the availability of labor, which can make it expensive for developers to build any housing, and especially affordable housing. The following highlights the primary market factors that affect the production of housing in Orange.

Land Costs and Construction Costs
Construction costs vary widely according to the type of development, with multi-family housing generally less expensive to construct than single-family homes. However, there is wide variation within each construction type, depending on the size of the unit and the number and quality of amenities provided.

An indicator of construction costs is Building Valuation Data compiled by the International Code Council (ICC). The ICC provides estimates for the average cost of labor and materials for typical Type VA woodframe housing. Estimates are based on “good-quality” construction, providing for materials and fixtures well above the minimum required by state and local building codes. In February 2020, the ICC estimated that the average per square-foot cost for good-quality housing was approximately $117.40 for multifamily housing and $130.04 for single-family homes. Construction costs for custom homes and units with extra amenities, run even higher. Although construction costs are a significant portion of the overall development cost, they are consistent throughout the region and, especially when considering land costs, are not considered a major constraint to housing production in Orange.

Land costs can also pose a significant constraint to the development of affordable and middle-income housing and represents a significant cost component in residential development. Land costs may vary depending on whether the site is vacant or has an existing use that must be removed. Similarly, site constraints such as environmental issues (e.g., steep slopes, soil stability, seismic hazards, flooding) can also be factored into the cost of land. A quick May 2020 web search for lots for sale in the City of Orange returned three lots for sale ranging in size from 0.65 acres at $620,000 to 1.14 acres at $790,000. Based current prices of for sale lots, the vacant lots cost an estimated average price per square foot of $21 or an estimated cost of $700,000 for about one acre.
655
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-3 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Availability of Financing
The availability of financing in a community depends on a number of factors, including the type of lending institutions active in a community, lending practices, rates and fees charged, laws and regulations governing financial institutions, and equal access to such loans. Additionally, availability of financing affects a person’s ability to purchase or improve a home. Under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), lending institutions are required to disclose information on the disposition of loan applications and the income, gender, and race of loan applicants. The primary concern in a review of lending activity is to determine whether home financing is available to residents of a community. The data presented in this section include the disposition of loan applications submitted to financial institutions for home purchase, home improvement, and refinancing in Orange.

Table 3-1 below displays the disposition of loan applications for the County of Orange, per the 2019 Home Mortgage Discloser Act report from the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. According to the data, applicants in the 120 percent median income or more had the highest rates of loans approved. Of that category, applicants who reported White had the highest percentage of approval and the number of applications. Applicants in the less than 50 percent of the MSA/MD median income categories were showed higher percentages of denied loans than loans originated. According to the data, applicants who reported white were, on average, more likely to be approved for a loan than another race or ethnicity.

The Given the relatively high rates of approval for home purchase, improvement, and refinance loans, home financing is generally available and not considered to be a significant constraint to the provision and maintenance of housing in Orange.

656
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-4 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Table 3-1: Disposition of Loan Applications by Race/Ethnicity– Anaheim-Santa Ana-Irvine MSA/MD Applications by Race/Ethnicity Percent
Approved
Percent
Denied
Percent
Other
Total
(Count)
LESS THAN 50% OF MSA/MD MEDIAN
American Indian and Alaska Native 26.2% 52.3% 23.1% 65
Asian 33.9% 42.5% 26.7% 1,382
Black or African American 41.6% 33.7% 25.8% 89
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 25.0% 44.2% 30.8% 52 White 45.6% 31.2% 26.1% 5,240
Hispanic or Latino 37.9% 38.2% 26.8% 1,566
50-79% OF MSA/MD MEDIAN
American Indian and Alaska Native 38.1% 34.0% 29.9% 97
Asian 53.3% 25.3% 29.4% 3,153
Black or African American 43.4% 19.1% 41.4% 152
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 49.4% 39.8% 16.9% 83 White 54.5% 23.3% 27.6% 8,677
Hispanic or Latino 47.6% 27.7% 29.3% 3,245
80-99% OF MSA/MD MEDIAN
American Indian and Alaska Native 51.4% 25.7% 31.4% 35
Asian 59.5% 19.2% 29.3% 1,495
Black or African American 52.9% 22.1% 30.9% 68
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 43.5% 13.0% 43.5% 23 White 61.9% 17.2% 26.1% 3,873
Hispanic or Latino 54.0% 21.4% 29.1% 1,347
100-119% OF MSA/MD MEDIAN
American Indian and Alaska Native 48.9% 22.7% 29.5% 88
Asian 62.3% 15.6% 28.8% 4,820
Black or African American 55.6% 20.1% 28.6% 234
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 49.4% 27.6% 31.0% 87 White 66.2% 13.8% 25.1% 12,607
Hispanic or Latino 60.8% 16.4% 26.8% 3,398
120% OR MORE OF MSA/MD MEDIAN
American Indian and Alaska Native 59.2% 13.0% 32.0% 169 Asian 62.8% 12.9% 29.0% 17,800
Black or African American 57.7% 17.3% 27.2% 624
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 64.2% 11.4% 26.8% 254 White 68.3% 11.3% 24.9% 49,811
Hispanic or Latino 64.6% 13.3% 26.7% 6,095
Source: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Disposition of loan applications, by Ethnicity/Race of applicant, 2019.

657
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-5 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Economic Constraints
Market forces on the economy and the trickle-down effects on the construction industry can act as a barrier to housing construction and especially to affordable housing construction. It is estimated that housing price growth will continue in the city and the region for the foreseeable future.

A 2020 California Association of Realtors (CAR) report found that:
 Single-family homes on the market in Orange County experienced a nine percent year to year increase and cost an average of $880,000 in February 2020  This was almost $300,000 higher than the State median home price in the same month ($579,770).

According to the CAR First Time Buyer Housing Affordability Index:
 From 2018 to 2019 the median value of a single-family home in Orange County was $703,800  This estimates monthly payments (including taxes and insurance) of about $3,630,  Which requiring an average qualifying income of $108,900.

Additionally, single-family homes and cost of living in Orange was reported slightly higher than the State median housing and living costs. According to April 2020 data from Zillow:
 The median cost of a single-family home on the market in Orange is $731,260.  Home values in the City have gone up 3.5 percent over the past year (2019-2020) and Zillow predicts they will fall -1.2 percent within the next year.  The same report found that in January of 2020 the median list price per square foot in Orange is $395, which is lower than the County of Orange average of $441.

Orange’s single-family home value index ($757,000) has been on a steady rise since early 2019, however, according to March 2020 data, they are expected to dip slightly (estimated $752,000) in 2021. The cost of land and home prices in Orange are considered a potential constraint to the development of and access to housing, particularly the development of and access to affordable housing.

B. Governmental Constraints
In addition to market constraints, local policies and regulations also affect the price and availability of housing and the provision of affordable housing. For example, State and Federal regulations affect the availability of land for housing and the cost of housing production, making it difficult to meet the demand for affordable housing and limiting supply in a region. Regulations related to environmental protection, building codes, and other topics have significant, often adverse, impacts on housing cost and availability.

While the City of Orange has no control over State and Federal Laws that affect housing, local laws including land use controls, site improvement requirements, fees and exactions, permit processing procedures, and other factors can constrain the maintenance, development, and improvement of housing and create barriers to housing.

658
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-6 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Land Use Controls
In the State of California, cities are required to prepare a comprehensive, long term General Plan to guide future development. The Land Use Element of the General Plan establishes land uses and density of development within the City of Orange. The Land Use Element sets forth policies and regulations for guiding local development. These policies, together with existing zoning regulations, establish the amount and distribution of land to be allocated for different uses within the City. The Land Use Element of the General Plan identifies the following residential categories and their existing allowed densities:
 Estate Low Density Residential (ESTR) – 0 - 2.0 dwelling units per acre  Low Density Residential (LDR) – 2.1 - 6.0 dwelling units per acre  Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) – 6.1 - 15.0 dwelling units per acre  Medium Density Residential (MDR) 15.1 - 24.0 dwelling units per acre In addition to residential categories, Orange also allows residential uses in mixed use zones and senior housing in commercial and public institution zones with a conditional use permit (CUP). the General Plan provides three designations for mixed-use activity centers. All of these designations promote creative mixes of commercial retail, office, housing, civic, and entertainment uses that vary in composition and intensity based upon location, accessibility, and the surrounding development context. Mixed Use designations that allow residential uses include the following:
 Neighborhood Mixed-use (NMX) – Max. 24 dwelling units per acre  Old Towne Mixed-Use (OTMX) 15 – Max. 15 dwelling units per acre  Old Towne Mixed Use (OTMX) 24 – Max. 24 dwelling units per acre  Old Towne Mixed Use Spoke – 6.0 - 15.0 dwelling units per acre  Urban Mixed Use (UMX) – 30.0 - 60.0 dwelling units per acre Senior housing is permitted in the C2 and C3 commercial zone districts. Residential uses within these districts do not have a maximum dwelling units per acre. The total number of units is determined by the maximum FAR, height, and story requirements.

These categories accommodate development of a wide range of housing types in Orange. Furthermore, maintaining the existing residential categories is important for ensuring compatibility between new and existing housing. The City’s Land use controls, development standards and regulations are available for review by the public online in the City of Orange Municipal and Development code.

Historic Districts
The City Council has determined that the spirit, character and history of the City, State, and Nation are reflected in the historic structures, improvements, natural features, sites, and areas of significance located within the City, and that in the face of ever-increasing pressures of modernization, cultural historic resources and historic districts located within the City are threatened with alteration, removal or demolition. The City believes these structures and districts represent the City's unique historical, social and cultural foundations, and historic districts aim to preserve the structures as living parts of community 659
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-7 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
life and development in order to build a greater understanding of the City's past and to give future generations the opportunity to appreciate, understand and enjoy the City's rich heritage.

Currently, four districts have been established that cover historic residences. These are the Old Towne District, Fairhills Eichler Tract, Fairhaven Eichler Tract, and Fairmeadow Eichler Tract. New districts may be established provided an application, which complies with the zoning amendment procedure for a change in zoning district, is submitted and the district meets criteria established in Title 17 Chapter

17.15.050 of the City’s Municipal Code. Any district designated historic includes additional regulations and uses over base zoning of an area to encourage historic preservation and complementary new development. To promote orderly development and preservation within historic districts the following standards and their amendments shall apply: the Historic Preservation Design Standards, the Santa Fe Depot Specific Plan, the Orange Eichler Design Standards, the General Plan's Historic Preservation Element, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.

Flood Plain Overlay
The Flood Plain overlay districts (FP-1 and FP-2) are intended to be applied to those areas of the City which, under present conditions, are subject to periodic flooding and the hazards associated with flooding. The objectives of the flood plain districts shall be:
 To prevent loss of life and property and to minimize economic loss caused by flood flows;  To establish criteria for land management and use in flood prone areas consistent with criteria promulgated by the Federal Insurance Administration for the purpose of providing flood insurance eligibility for property owners
 To prohibit encroachments, new construction, or other improvements or development that would obstruct the flow of floodwaters within a regulatory floodway; and  To regulate and control uses below the elevation of the design flood flow with the remainder of the flood plain.

Single Story Overlay Zone
The Single Story (A) overlay is established to maintain the character of existing single-story residential neighborhoods by limiting building height to one story. The height of all buildings within the Single Story Overlay District shall be limited to one story or 20 feet, whichever is less. All other development standards applicable to the underlying district and not in conflict with this section will apply. The following residential districts are subject to the Single-Story Overlay, R1-6 (A), R-2-6 (A), and R-3(A). The Single Story Overlay is established in limited locations and is not a widespread requirement, it is therefore not considered a constraint to the development of housing in Orange.

Parking Overlay
The Parking (P) Overlay District is established to allow residentially zoned properties to be used to provide off-street parking facilities for adjacent land uses. The Parking overlay is applied only to residential properties and only when it can be demonstrated that the use of the residential lot for parking purposes will not adversely affect the surrounding residential neighborhood. The Parking Overlay may be a 660
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-8 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
constraint to the development of housing, as it permits the use of nonresidential projects (parking) on residentially zoned properties. The Parking Overlay applies to one residential block in the City of Orange and is therefore not considered a constraint or barrier to the development of housing.

State Density Bonus Law
Density bonuses are another way to increase the number of dwelling units otherwise allowed in a residentially zoned area. The City’s Zoning Ordinance identifies the purpose of the Density Bonus Ordinance is to grant a density bonus and regulatory concessions and incentives to a developer of a housing development, child care facilities, or for the donation of land for housing, where the developer agrees to construct a specified percentage of housing for lower income households, very low-income households, moderate income households or qualifying residents. Title 17 Chapter 15 of the City’s municipal code outlines all regulatory requirements and standards for projects eligible for Density Bonus.

Density bonuses are available to five categories of housing developments, all are detailed below.

Effective January 1, 2021, California State Assembly Bill 2345 amends the Density Bonus Law to expand and enhance development incentives for projects with affordable and senior housing components. AB 2345 amends the Density Bonus Law to increase the maximum density bonus from 35 percent to 50 percent. To be eligible for the maximum bonus, a project must set aside at least (i) 15 percent of total units for very low income households, (ii) 24 percent of total units for low income households, or (iii) 44 percent of for-sale units for moderate income households. Levels of bonus density between 35 percent and 50 percent are granted on a sliding scale. The City’s currently adopted Density Bonus Ordinance is no longer consistent with State law and must be amended to comply with new statutory requirement.

Section 4: Housing Plan outlines the City’s plan to maintain compliance with State legislation.

Affordable Housing
The City’s Municipal Code follows State density bonus standards, processes and requirements for proposed affordable housing projects or units. All housing developments consisting of five or more dwelling units (excluding any units permitted by the density bonus awarded pursuant to Chapter 15 of the Zoning Ordinance) are eligible for one density bonus (calculations detailed in Table 3-2) and concessions and incentives.

These required percentages of affordable units apply only to the housing development without any density bonus units, not the entire housing development. For example, assume that a one hundred (100) unit housing development is entitled to a twenty (20) percent density bonus, giving a total of one hundred twenty (120) units. To qualify for the twenty (20) percent density bonus, the housing development need only provide five units affordable to very low-income households (five percent of one hundred (100)) or ten units affordable to lower income households (ten percent of one hundred (100)).

Senior Citizen Housing Development or Mobile home Park
The City’s Municipal Code follows State density bonus standards, processes and requirements for Senior Housing developments. A senior citizen housing development or a mobile home park are eligible for 661
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-9 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
a density bonus, as calculated in Table 3-2 below, even if none of the units are affordable.

The density bonus for a senior citizen housing development or a mobile home park is permitted in geographic areas of the housing development other than the areas where the qualifying resident or mobile home units are located.

Donations of Land
The City’s Municipal Code follows density bonus standards, processes and requirements for donations of land. An applicant for a tentative tract map, parcel map, or other residential development approval, who donates land to the City in accordance with this subsection, shall be entitled to a density bonus for the entire housing development, as calculated in Table 3-2 below, provided the parcel is large enough to accommodate at least ten percent of the market rate units at densities suitable for housing affordable to very low-income households.

In other words, a five hundred (500) unit market rate housing development is eligible to receive a density bonus by donating land zoned at densities that can accommodate, and are suitable for, fifty (50) units of housing affordable to very low-income households.

Eligibility for Increase Density Bonus
An applicant shall be eligible for the increased density bonus described in this subsection if all of the following conditions are met:
 The applicant donates and transfers the land no later than the date of approval of the final subdivision map, parcel map or residential development application.  The land being transferred has all permits and approvals, other than building permits necessary for the development of housing units affordable to very low-income households.  The developable acreage and zoning classification of the land being transferred are sufficient to permit construction of units affordable to very low-income households in an amount not less than ten percent of the number of residential units of the proposed housing development.  The transferred land is at least one acre in size or of sufficient size to permit development of at least forty (40) units, has the appropriate General Plan designation, is appropriately zoned for development as affordable housing, and is or will be served by adequate public facilities and infrastructure. The land shall have appropriate zoning and development standards to make the development of the units affordable to very low-income households feasible. No later than the date of approval of the final tract map, parcel map, or of the residential development, the transferred land shall have all of the permits and approvals, other than building permits, necessary for the development of the units affordable to very low income households on the transferred land, except that the City may subject the proposed housing development to subsequent design review to the extent authorized by subdivision "(i)" of Section 65583.2 of the California Government Code if the design is not reviewed by the City prior to the time of transfer.  The land is transferred to the City or to a housing developer approved by the City. The City may require the applicant to identify and transfer the land to the developer. 662
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-10 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
 The transferred land shall be within the boundary of the proposed housing development or, if the City agrees, within one-quarter mile of the boundary of the proposed housing development.  The transferred land and the affordable units shall be subject to a Density Bonus Housing Agreement ensuring continued affordability of the affordable units, which Density Bonus Housing Agreement (or a memorandum thereof) shall be recorded in the Official Records of the County of Orange prior to final map approval or, where a map is not being processed, prior to the issuance of building permits for such affordable units.

Condominium Conversions
The City’s Municipal Code follows State density bonus standards, processes and requirements for condo conversions. A condominium conversion is eligible for either:
 A density bonus of twenty-five (25) percent over the number of apartments to be provided within the existing structure or structures proposed for conversion (meaning that additional units must be added on the site either by subdividing existing units or adding units on the site), or  Other incentives of equivalent financial value
The City may place such reasonable conditions on the granting of a density bonus or other incentives of equivalent financial value as it finds appropriate, including, but not limited to, conditions which assure continued affordability of units to subsequent purchases who are lower income households or moderateincome households.

Calculations for Density Bonus
For the purpose of calculating the amount of the density bonus, an applicant requesting a density bonus shall elect whether the density bonus shall be awarded on the basis of the particular affordability category. The amount of the density bonus is calculated as show in Table 3-2 below. The amount of the density bonus to which the applicant is entitled shall vary according to the amount by which the percentage of affordable units exceeds the percentage.

Additionally, all density calculations resulting in fractions shall be rounded up to the next whole number.

For example, a housing development with 102 units, ten percent of which are affordable to lower income households, is entitled to 21 bonus units. The number of affordable units must also be rounded up. In a 102-unit housing development, an applicant would need to provide eleven units to meet the ten percent requirement. If they so choose, the applicant may elect to accept a lesser percentage of density bonus.

663
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-11 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Table 3-2: Density Bonus Calculations1
Affordable Units or
Category
Minimum %
Units in
Category
Bonus Granted
Additional Bonus
for each 1%
increase in
Affordable Units in
category
% Units in category
required for
Maximum 35%
Bonus
Very Low Income 5% 20% 2.5% 11%
Lower Income 10% 20% 1.5% 20%
Moderate Income
(ownership only) 10% 5% 1% 40%
Senior Citizen Housing
Development or Mobile
home Park (no affordable
units required)
Entire
development 20% No sliding scale provided —
Land Donation for VeryLow Income Housing 0% of market
rate units 15% 1% 30%
Condominium Conversion
– Moderate Income 33% 25% — —
Condominium Conversion
– Lower Income 15% 25% — —
Child Care Facilities —
Sq. ft. in day
care center
— —
Notes:
(1) This table reflects the current Orange Municipal Code. The City of Orange defaults to State law regarding Density Bonus calculations and requirements.

Source: City of Orange, Municipal Code accessed May 4, 2020.

Concessions and Incentives
The City’s Municipal Code also permits the request of additional incentives and concessions; types of permitted requests are detailed below.

In addition to an increase in units, a development eligible for a density bonus is also eligible for three types of regulatory concessions as follow, (a) concessions and incentives, (b) waivers and reductions, and (c) reduced parking standards. An applicant for a density bonus may submit to the City a proposal for one to three concessions and incentives depending upon the percentage of affordable units provided.

Waivers and Reductions
In addition to requesting concessions and incentives, an applicant for a density bonus may submit to the City a proposal for the waiver or reduction of an unlimited number of development standards that would otherwise preclude or inhibit construction of a housing development with the density bonus and concessions and incentives to which the housing development is entitled and that are needed to make the housing development economically feasible. Waivers and reductions may also be requested by any applicant requesting a density bonus for a senior citizen housing development, a mobile home park, a condominium conversion or a childcare facility.
664
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-12 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Reduced Parking Standards
Upon the request of an applicant for a housing development that qualifies for a density bonus because it is a senior housing development or provides affordable units, the City must reduce the required parking for the entire housing development, including the market rate units, to the following:
 Zero to one bedroom, one on-site parking space
 Two to three bedrooms, two on-site parking spaces
 Four or more bedrooms, two and one-half on-site parking spaces Additional and in detail standards, requirements, review processes and application information for projects which qualify for density bonus can be found in the City’s Municipal Code.

Residential Development Standards
The City of Orange Zoning establishes sixteen residential districts to provide a range of housing types and lifestyles. The Zoning Ordinance also contains provisions to establish use regulations and development standards, which are intended to create the highest quality residential development, minimize land use conflicts, encourage the rehabilitation and maintenance of residential neighborhoods and implement the goals of the City's General Plan. The standards for the districts are shown in Table 3-3 and are available on the City’s website. The districts are as follows:
 R1-5 (Single-Family Residential) - A single-family residential district with a minimum lot area of five thousand (5,000) square feet. The R1-5 district is created to implement the East Orange General Plan where policies have been established to ensure functional and attractive singlefamily neighborhoods.  R1-6 Single-Family Residential) - A single-family residential district with a minimum lot area of six thousand (6,000) square feet.
 R1-7 (Single-Family Residential) - A single-family residential district with a minimum lot area of seven thousand (7,000) square feet.
 R1-8 (Single-Family Residential) - A single-family residential district with a minimum lot area of eight thousand (8,000) square feet.
 R1-10 (Single Family Residential) - A single family residential district with a minimum lot area of ten thousand (10,000) square feet.
 R1-12 (Single-Family Residential) - A single-family residential district with a minimum lot area of twelve thousand (12,000) square feet.
 R1-15 (Single-Family Residential) - A single-family residential district with a minimum lot area of fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet.
 R1-20 (Single-Family Residential) - A single-family residential district with a minimum lot area of twenty thousand (20,000) square feet.
 R1-40 (Single-Family Residential) - A single-family residential district with a minimum lot area of one acre (forty-three thousand five hundred sixty (43,560) square feet).  R1-R (Single-Family Residential) - A single-family rural residential district with a minimum lot area of two and one-half acres (one hundred eight thousand nine hundred (108,900) square feet). The purpose of this district is to allow for low density rural residential use in a manner which will 665
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-13 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
eliminate or minimize modifications to significant riparian habitat, oak woodlands and prominent landforms located within the areas encompassed by this land use designation.  R2-6 (Duplex Residential) - A residential district that provides opportunities for duplex development on lots containing a minimum area of six thousand (6,000) square feet. This district recognizes the need to provide multiple-family housing in the form of duplexes, detached dwellings, or small apartment buildings.
 R2-7 (Duplex Residential) - A residential district that allows duplex housing on lots containing a minimum area of seven thousand (7,000) square feet.
 R2-8 (Duplex Residential) - A residential district that allows duplex housing on lots containing a minimum lot area of eight thousand (8,000) square feet.  R-3 (Multiple-Family Residential) - A multiple-family residential district which allows apartments, condominiums, and townhomes. The purpose is to provide a minimum of ground area coverage and a maximum of open space within higher density developments.  R-4 (Multiple-Family Residential) - A multiple-family residential district which allows apartments, condominiums, and townhomes.
 MH (Mobile Home Residential) - A mobile home district which allows for the preservation and construction of mobile home parks. The district recognizes the need to provide the unique setting and services of a mobile home park.

Table 3-3 below displays the development standards for each of the above zones, which permit residential development. Title 17, Chapter 14 outlines the complete development standards for residential uses in the City of Orange.

Table 3-3: Residential Development Standards in Orange - Dimensions District
Dimensions Min. Yard Setbacks (ft) Construction Standards Min. Lot
Size (sf)
Min. Lot
Frontage
(ft)
Min. Lot
Depth (ft) Front Side Rear Max. Height* Max. FAR
Min.

Usable
Open
Space (sf)
R1-5 5,000 50 90 Bld-15,
Gar-20 v.21
(v.2) 32’ – 2
stories
Based on
bldg. 875
R1-6 6,000 60 100 20 51 201 32’ – 2
stories1
(4) 900
R1-7 7,000 60 100 20 51 201 32’ – 2
stories (4) 950
R1-8 8,000 60 100 20 51 201 32’ – 2
stories (4) 1,000
R1-10 10,000 80 100 20 51 201 32’ – 2
stories (4) 1,000
R1-12 12,000 80 100 20 51 201 32’ – 2
stories (4) 1,000
R1-15 15,000 80 100 20 51 201 32’ – 2
stories (4) 1,200
666
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-14 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Table 3-3: Residential Development Standards in Orange - Dimensions District
Dimensions Min. Yard Setbacks (ft) Construction Standards Min. Lot
Size (sf)
Min. Lot
Frontage
(ft)
Min. Lot
Depth (ft) Front Side Rear Max. Height* Max. FAR
Min.

Usable
Open
Space (sf)
R1-20 20,000 100 100 20 51 201 32’ – 2
stories (4) 1,500
R1-40 43,560 100 100 20 51 201 32’ – 2
stories 0.40 FAR 2,000
R1-R 108,900 100 100 20 51 201 32’ – 2
stories 0.40 FAR 2,000
R2-6 6,000 60 N/R 152 5
1 101 32’ – 2
stories1 0.70 FAR 350/unit
R2-7 7,000 60 N/R 15 51 101 32’ – 2
stories 0.70 FAR 350/unit
R2-8 8,000 60 N/R 15 51 101 32’ – 2
stories 0.70 FAR 350/unit
R-3
7,000
Interior,
8,000
Corner
70 Interior,
80 Corner
100 152 51 10 32’ – 2
stories1
45%: 2-
story
55%: 1-
story
250/unit
R-4
6,000
Interior,
7,000
Corner
60 Interior,
70 Corner
N/R 10(z) 51 10 32’ – 2
stories1 60% 150/unit
MH N/R N/R N/R (3) (3)
75% of
MH
Space
200 sf
space1 MH (3)
OTMU155 10,000 N/R 50 (6) (6) 06 32’ – 2
stories 0.6 N/R
OTMU15 10,000 N/R 50 (6) 06
06 32’ – 2
stories 0.5 -1.0 N/R
OTMU24 10,000 N/R 50 (6) 06
06 32’ – 2
stories 1.0 -1.5 N/R
NMU-24 40,000 N/R 100 10 06
06 45’ – 3
stories 1.0-1.5 N/R
UMU 40,000 N/R 50 10 06 06 45’ – 3
stories 1.5 - 3.0 N/R
OP 7,000 N/R 70 -- 7 --
7 --
7 32’ – 2
stories 0.5 N/R
CP/C1 40,000 100 N/R -- 7 --
7 --
7 32’ – 2
stories 1.0 N/R
CTR 40,000 100 N/R -- 7 --
7 --
7 32’ – 2
stories 1.0 -- 7
667
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-15 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Table 3-3: Residential Development Standards in Orange - Dimensions District
Dimensions Min. Yard Setbacks (ft) Construction Standards Min. Lot
Size (sf)
Min. Lot
Frontage
(ft)
Min. Lot
Depth (ft) Front Side Rear Max. Height* Max. FAR
Min.

Usable
Open
Space (sf)
C2 40,000 100 N/R -- 7 --
7 --
7 32’ – 2
stories 1.0 -- 7
C3 40,000 100 N/R -- 7 --
7 --
7 32’ – 2
stories 1.0 -- 7
PI 6,000 N/R N/R 101 0 0 32’ – 2
stories1 2.0 N/R
FAR= Floor Area Ratio
(*) Feet or Stories whichever is less
N/R = No Requirement
Notes:

1. Additional exceptions or requirements apply and can be found in Chapter 17.40. of the City’s Municipal Code.

2. All buildings located within the Old Towne residential quadrants shall have a minimum front yard setback of 20 feet.

3. Mobile Home Requirements vary based on Chapter 17.14 of the City’s Municipal Code.

4. Floor area ratio (FAR) shall vary according to lot area per the table below.

5. Additional exceptions or requirements apply and can be found in Chapter 17.18. of the City’s Municipal Code.

6. Specific requirements and additional exceptions or requirements apply and can be found in Chapter 17.19 of the City’s Municipal Code.

7. Senior housing developed in commercial zones is subject to NMU development standards.

Lot Area in Square
Feet
Maximum
FAR
<10,000 0.60
10,000—39,999 0.50
>40,000 0.40

668
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-16 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Yard Requirements
Yards shall provide for light and air, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, emergency access, and general aesthetic improvements. Minimum yard requirements vary among the residential districts. The primary purposes of imposing yard requirements to ensure adequate air and light between properties, to ensure adequate on-site access and circulation, to provide opportunities for private open space areas (yards), and to separate uses between properties to minimize conflicts and potential life/safety hazards. Yard requirements are generally tied to lot size, meaning smaller lots have lower minimum setbacks, and larger lots require larger “yards.” While it is possible that setback requirements may inhibit maximum density from being realized in some cases, there is enough flexibility in the current ordinances that setback requirements do not constitute a significant constraint on residential development. Setback requirements have been considered in the City's calculation of realistic site capacity.

Lot Coverage and FAR
Lot coverage and floor area ratio (FAR) standards are intended to control bulk, mass, and intensity of a use. Lot coverage limits a building’s footprint and is defined as the percentage between the ground floor area of building(s) and the net area of a lot. FAR limits the total usable floor area and is expressed as a ratio between the bulk floor area of building(s) and gross lot area. Floor area ratio is a supplementary device that under some conditions improves upon (but does not necessarily replace) the traditional means of relating bulk of building to land, to other buildings in the vicinity, and to public facilities. It permits variable dimensions within an over-all volume limit and it offers a way of predicting the ratio of persons to a unit of land in office building districts of high land use intensity.

In the residential-only zones maximum floor area ration ranges depending on desired density and requirements. For example, in the R1-6 through R1-20 districts maximum lot coverage ranges depending on the size of the lot area. For a lot are of less than 10,000 square feet, the FAR is 0.60, meaning that the building area may not be larger than 6,000 square feet. However, in districts aiming to achieve higher densities such as the R2-6 district maximum FAR increases to 0.07, allowing for more building coverage, accompanied by a small square footage requirement per unit (6,000 sf) providing for the potential of higher density developments. As applied to residential development, these standards may only limit the size of dwelling units, and do not limit the number of units, which is an expression of density (that is, zoning). FAR, combined with height limitations, can potentially prevent maximum density from being achieved in certain cases.

In evaluating recent residential projects within the City, lot coverage and FAR do not typically pose constraints to development at the maximum density.

Maximum Building Height
Maximum building height standard are often in place to maintain community compatibility for new and proposed developments. In the City of Orange, the maximum allowable building height for residential zones is 32 feet or two stories and defaults the lesser of the two. However, greater height than the height limit established for a district or additional height and stories for habitable space in the R-3 and R-4 669
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-17 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
districts, may be considered by a Conditional Use Permit before the Planning Commission. In reviewing such a request, the Commission shall consider:
 Siting buildings or structures so as to achieve greater usable open space area than could be achieved with two story construction.
 Siting buildings or structures so as to consider shadows, solar orientation, and noise impacts, as well as respecting the terrain.
 Designing and/or screening all roof-top mechanical and electrical equipment as an integral part of the building design.
 Illustrating a design compatibility with both the existing and desired character of the surrounding area and uses.

Usable Open Space
The City’s Zoning Code defines Usable Open Space as an open area or an indoor or outdoor recreational facility which is designed and intended to be used for outdoor living and/or recreation. Open space provides areas for recreation and activity, it promotes the health of the community, green relief and urban cooling within a development. The City requires that all residential developments in the R-l, R-2, R-3, R-4 and Mixed Use zone districts shall provide a landscaped, unified, and usable open recreational and leisure area. For multifamily developments, each unit is required to have at least one area of private usable open space accessible directly from the living area of the unit, in the form of a fenced yard or patio, a deck or balcony. The City’s open space requirements are not an undue constraint to the development of housing and often provide the necessary outdoor/open space resources for future residents.

Parking Standards
In addition to the development standards identified in Table 3-4, Orange requires all spaces to be covered spaces for single family dwellings and a certain number of enclosed spaces for duplex and multifamily apartments as well as an additional space for all accessory living units. Guest parking is also required for multi-family housing at a ratio of 0.2 spaces for every unit. The City of Orange Zoning code provides additional direction for parking standards and regulation, such as additional standards for supportive and transitional housing. The City of Orange complies with density bonus parking rates established by the State for projects that meet density bonus requirements.

670
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-18 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Table 3-4: Parking Requirements for Residential Uses
Unit Type Number of Spaces Required
Single-family
Dwelling
2 enclosed garage spaces/unit up to 4 bedrooms.

For 5 or more bedrooms, 1 additional enclosed space.

For PUDs, units with 3 or more bedrooms must provide an additional 1.5 guest parking spaces per dwelling unit.

One unenclosed parking space must be provided in excess of the code parking requirement for the existing residential use and no parking spaces are required for an accessory dwelling unit in any of the following instances:
 The accessory dwelling unit is located within one-half mile of public transit.  The accessory dwelling unit is located within an architecturally and historically significant district.
 The accessory dwelling unit is part of the existing primary residence or an existing accessory structure.
 When on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the accessory dwelling unit.
 When there is a car share vehicle located within one block of the accessory dwelling unit.

Duplex, Duplex
Residential 2 parking spaces per unit, one of which shall be in an enclosed garage.

Multifamily
Residential (3 units
or more)*
Development Size—3 units to 50 units Development Size—51+ Units Unenclosed resident
parking is provided
(e.g. parking
structure, surface
parking lots,
carports):

If enclosed resident
parking is provided:

If unenclosed resident
parking is provided
(e.g. parking
structure(s), surface
parking lots,
carports):

If enclosed resident
parking is provided:

Studio* 1.3 spaces/unit 1.4 spaces/unit 1.2 spaces/unit 1.4 spaces/unit One Bedroom* 1.8 spaces/unit 1.9 spaces/unit 1.7 spaces/unit 1.9 spaces/unit Two Bedroom* 2.3 spaces/unit 2.3 spaces/unit 2.0 spaces/unit 2.3 spaces/unit Three Bedrooms* 2.6 spaces/unit 2.6 spaces/unit 2.4 spaces/unit 2.6 spaces/unit Each add’l bedroom
above three*

0.4 spaces/bedroom/unit

0.5 spaces/bedroom/unit

0.3 spaces/bedroom/unit

0.5 spaces/bedroom/unit
Boarding house, bed
and breakfast inns 1 space/rentable room, plus any other additional spaces required by the underlying zone Supportive Housing,
Transitional Housing
For Transitional Housing or Supportive Housing configured as group quarters (i.e. where beds are provided in individual rooms, but kitchen and/or bathroom facilities are shared), 1 space per bed, plus one space per onsite staff person.

Emergency Shelter
Parking 1 space per six beds, plus one space per staff person.

Student Housing 0.5 space/student resident, plus 1 space/each resident staff person Trailer park, mobile
home park
2 spaces/unit, (1 of which is covered, at least 2 sides of the carport shall be at a minimum 50% open and unobstructed)
1 guest space/3 trailers or mobile homes must be easily accessible and distinguishable guest parking. Tandem parking is permitted for the mobile home.

Source: City of Orange, Municipal Code, accessed May 4, 2020. 671
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-19 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Table 3-4: Parking Requirements for Residential Uses
Unit Type Number of Spaces Required
* Of the above requirements a minimum of one must be covered and a minimum of 0.2 spaces per unit shall (with a minimum of two guest spaces in a multifamily development) be provided as easily accessible and distinguishable guest parking in addition to the required parking for each unit.

Typically, the cost associated with garage parking construction can be viewed as a constraint to affordable housing development, particularly for multi-family housing. However, the City’s parking regulations are not a significant constraint because the number of required parking spaces for duplexes and multi-family projects varies by the number of bedrooms. Furthermore, affordable housing projects that qualify for a density bonus can request application for additional incentives which can be provided in the form of reduction of parking requirements. While off-street parking standards can affect planned residential density, especially for small lots and in-fill areas, this potential constraint is mitigated by the incentives and flexible standards described above.

Planned Unit Developments
The Planned Unit Development (PUD) is established to provide an alternative to standard residential development wherein the existing General Plan densities are preserved but flexibility is provided by allowing the clustering of units and combining of open space, recreation areas and roadways under common ownership. In order to qualify for a PUD, the following findings must be made by the reviewing body to justify the approval:
 The project conforms to the General Plan in regard to land use designation and density.  The project utilizes creative and imaginative planning and design features to create a quality living environment, equal to or better than what might be accomplished under the base zone designation.
 The project preserves unique physical, topographical or environmental features, where applicable.

A Conditional Use Permit before the Planning Commission and City Council is required for the establishment of a PUD. Additionally, a PUD must be adopted by Ordinance and indicated on the zoning map by the base zoning designation and the Conditional Use Permit number applicable to that PUD. A Planned Unit Developments may be located in any zone district zoned for residential use. The City plans to develop a Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance and Design Guidelines to increase the feasibility of residential developments.

Development Standards
The City of Orange Municipal Code (Title 17 Chapter 17.16.060) establishes development standards for all PUDs. The reviewing body for a PUD may require more stringent standards to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses, quality of life for future residents and protection of public health, safety, and general welfare.
672
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-20 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Table 3-5: PUD, Development Standards
Type Standards/Requirements
Density
The total number of dwelling units permitted shall not exceed the number allowed by the General Plan. In establishing the density, the reviewing body shall consider compatibility with surrounding land uses and densities on adjacent parcels.

Building
Height
The underlying zone district shall govern the maximum permitted building heights for all structures within a PUD.

Building
Separation
Number
of
Structures
Front/Any Other Building Wall All Other
Configurations
Minimum Distance
Between Principal and
Accessory Structure
One N/A N/A 6 feet
Two to
Four 15 feet 8 feet 6 feet
Five or
More
25 feet from view allowing windows in any adjacent
structure. 15 feet minimum between solid facing walls,
or when windows are located on only one facing wall.
6 feet
Setback from
Public Right
of Way
All structures (including walls or fences exceeding 42″ in height) shall be setback a minimum of 20 feet from a public right-of-way. The required setback area shall be landscaped.

Project Area
Boundary
Setback
All habitable structures shall be set back a minimum of ten feet from any project boundary not abutting a street. Buffer of trees or hedges shall be provided as appropriate to ensure compatibility with adjacent uses.

Interior
Street
Setbacks
All structures shall be set back a minimum of ten feet from any interior street. Garage door openings shall be set back a minimum of 20 feet from any interior street, unless one additional parking space is provided for all units containing garages with driveways less than 20 feet in length. Such space must be conveniently located to the units.

Local Ordinances
Growth Management Measures
Growth management measures are techniques used by a government to regulate the rate, amount and type of development. Growth management measures allow cities to grow responsibly and orderly, however, if overly restricted can produce constraints to the development of housing, including accessible and affordable housing.

The Growth Management Element, a part of the City of Orange’s General Plan, intends to mandate growth and development in Orange be based on the City’s ability to meet the requirements of the Orange County voter-approved Revised Traffic Improvements and Growth Management Ordinance, Measure M. The Growth Management Element applies to all new development within Orange; however, the City may consider future project exemptions to encourage the development of affordable housing.

In 1990, Orange County voters approved Measure M authorizing a half-cent retail sales tax increase for a period of 20 years effective April 1,1991. County voters approved the renewal of Measure M, extending the tax increase through 2031. Revenue generated by Measure M is returned to local jurisdictions for use on local and regional transportation improvements and maintenance projects. To qualify for this revenue, 673
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-21 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
each jurisdiction must comply with the Countywide Traffic Improvement and Growth Management Program; requirements include:
 Adoption of a Growth Management Element that includes:
o Traffic LOS standards,
o A development mitigation program; and
o A development phasing and annual monitoring program.
 Participation in interjurisdictional planning forums.  Development of a 7-year CIP.
 Addressing housing options and job opportunities and,  Adoption of a Transportation Demand Management Ordinance.

Implementation of the Growth Management Element is incorporated throughout the City’s established development review and monitoring process where possible. Specific goals and policies addressed in the Growth Management Element, that may be considered a constraint to the development of housing include the following:
 Policy 1.1: Establish LOS D as the level of service standard for traffic circulation within the City for both roadway segments and peak-hour signalized intersection movements.  Policy 1.3: Ensure completion of transportation improvements as agreed upon by the City and developer prior to completion of a development project.  Policy 1.4: Continue to collect transportation impact fees for improvements within the City boundaries and work with adjacent jurisdictions to determine that an appropriate level of transportation impact fees are maintained within the established County GMAs.  Policy 1.10: Apply traffic calming measures, where appropriate, to residential neighborhoods affected by cut-through traffic in accordance with the City’s Residential Neighborhood Traffic Management Program.

The policies mentioned above, include measures to maintain traffic level of service when new developments are established, measures to ensure traffic improvements are made and fees are collected from developers, and traffic calming measures in residential area. The mentioned policies produce potential financial constraints on new developments through implementing potential infrastructure updates and fees to reduce congestion in Orange. While the policy may produce potential financial constraints, they ensure the existing fees are collected, and provide for a reasonable level of infrastructure maintenance in the City. The measure also states, the City may consider exemptions for affordable housing developments. Since adoption, Measure M has not proven to be a constraint on development and the City has continued to successfully receive and process applications for residential projects at all income levels.

Short Term Rental (STR) Ordinance
The City of Orange defines a short term rental as the rental of a residential unit for 30 days or less. As established by Ordinance No. 05-21 (adopted on May 11, 2021) any owner of a property in a zone that allows residential uses, except in mobile home parks, who wishes to rent all or a portion of a property for 674
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-22 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
a period of 30 days or less is required to obtain a short term rental permit, business license, and proof of liability insurance.

Short term rentals must have a minimum 300 foot buffer between one-another, as measured from property line to property line. In addition, a maximum of two occupants are permitted and must stay for a minimum of two nights. Off-street parking is required on the property. The City provides information and short term rental permitting conditions online for interested homeowners.

Short term rentals may pose a constraint to housing access and may hinder the City from meeting its RHNA allocation; however, the City of Orange’s permitting process allows for the monitoring of short term rentals to avoid potential conflicts. Therefore, the City’s Short Term Rental Ordinance is not considered a constraint to housing.

Variety of Housing Types Permitted
Housing Element law specifies that jurisdictions must identify adequate sites to be made available through appropriate zoning and development standards to encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels. Table 3-6 below summarizes the City’s zoning provisions for various types of housing, as provided in the City’s Municipal Code available online. Permitted, conditional, and prohibited residential uses are indicated as follows:
 P = Permitted use.
 C = Conditional use permit required.
 - = Not permitted.
 A = Accessory use.
 * = Use subject to special provisions contained in the Master Land Use Chapter of the City’s Zoning Code.
 + = Use subject to conditional use permit regulations.  # = Use subject to special provisions contained in the Residential Chapter of the City’s Zoning Code.
675
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-23 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 3-6: Permitted Residential Uses by Zone
Zoning Residential Zones Commercial Zones Mixed Use Zones Industrial Zones Agricultural
Open Space Zones
Pub.

Inst.

Zone
Overlay
Zones
Sand &
Gravel
Zones
Accessory dwelling unit
(detached and
attached)
A/
P*/
C+
A/
P*/
C+
A/
P*/
C+
A/
P*/
C+
A/
P*/
C+
A/
P*/
C+
A/
P*/
C+
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bed and breakfast inn - - - C+ C+ C+ - C+ C+ - C+ - - C+ C+ C+ - - - - - - - - - - - Boarding and lodging
houses
- - - - C C - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Caretaker
residence/caretaker
mobile home
- - - - - - - A* A* A* A* A* - - - - - - A* A* A* A* - A* - - A* Condominiums - - - P* P* P* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Congregate care
(assisted living) home
health facility (6 or
fewer persons)
P* P* P* P* P* P* P* - - - - - - - - - P P - - - - - - - - - Convalescent facility,
skilled nursing facility
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - P P - - - - - - - - -
Convalescent hospital - - - - C C - C C C C C - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Conversion of multifamily units
(condominium
conversion)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - P* P* P* P* P* - - - - - - - - - Duplex - - - P* P* P* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Fraternity, sorority - - - - C C - C - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 676
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-24 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Guest house - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A - - - - - - Home for elderly, or
mentally, or physically
disabled persons (6 or
fewer persons)
P* P* P* P* P* P* P* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Homeless shelter - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - P* P* - - - - - - - Hotels - - - - - - - - C+ C+ C+ C+ P C+ C+ C+ C+ C+ - - - - - - - - - Motels - - - - - - - - C+ C+ C+ C+ P - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Housing related to
church, college or
hospital
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A* - - -
Live/work units - - - - - - - - - - - - - P* P* P* P* P* - - - - - - - - - Mixed
use development
- - - - - - - - - - - - P* P* P* P* P* - - - - - - - - - Mobile home park C C C C C C C - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mobile home,
modular, or
manufactured housing
unit with permanent
foundation
P P P P P P P - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C+ -
Mobile home,
modular, or
manufactured housing
unit without
permanent foundation
- - - - - - P - - - - - - - - - - - P* P* - - - - - C+ - Multi-family housing as
a stand alone
development not in
conjunction with a
mixed
use development
- - - - - - - - - - - - - P* P* P* P* P* - - - - - - - - - 677
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-25 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Multi-family housing in
conjunction with a
mixed
use development
- - - - - - - - - - - - - P* P* P* P* P* - - - - - - - - - Multiple-family
dwelling
- - - P* P* P* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Planned unit
developments
C+ C+ C+ C+ C+ C+ - - - - - - - C+ C+ C+ C+ C+ - - - - - - - - - Residential structure - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C - Rest home - - - C C - C C C C C - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sanitarium - - - - C C - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C - - - - - - Senior citizen housing
development
- - - - C+ C+ - C+ C+ C+ C+ C+ - C+ C+ C+ C+ C+ - - - - - - - - - Senior housing P P P P P P P C+ C+ C+ C+ C+ - P P P P P - - - - - - - - - Single-family dwelling P# P P P P P - P - - - - - P* P* P* - - - - P - - - - - - Single-family dwelling
(Created pursuant to
SB 9)
P* P* P* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sober living facility P* P* P* P* P* P* P* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Supportive housing (6
or fewer persons)
P* P* P* P* P* P* P* - - - - - - P* P* P* - - - - - - - A* - - - Supportive housing (7
or more persons)
- - - - C+ C+ - - - - - - - P* P* P* - - - - - - - A* - - - Transitional housing (6
or fewer persons)
P* P* P* P* P* P* P* - - - - - - P* P* P* - - - - - - - A* - - - Transitional housing (7
or more persons)
- - - - C+ C+ - - - - - - - P* P* P* - - - - - - - A* - - - 678
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-26 2021-2029 Housing Element Update – Draft
Farmworker housing
(3)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Emergency Shelters (2) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Single-Room
Occupancy (3)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Low-Barrier Navigation
Housing (3)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Notes:
(1) Permitted as an accessory to an allowed use
(2) Emergency shelters permitted within the M1 and M2 zones. Emergency Shelters fall under “Homeless Shelters” within the City’s Municipal Code currently. (3) These uses do not currently exist within the City’s Municipal Code. Programs have been added within the Housing Plan section to address Municipal Code amendments for each. The following programs address Farmworker Housing (Program 4H), Emergency Shelters (Program 4F), Single Room Occupancy (Program 4G), and Low-Barrier Navigation Centers (Program 4F).

Source: City of Orange, Zoning Ordinance, accessed April 2020. 679
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-27 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Housing types are defined in the Orange Municipal Code as follows:

Single-family
An attached or detached building not to contain more than one kitchen wherein the occupants of the dwelling unit are living and functioning together as a single housekeeping unit, meaning that they have established ties and familiarity with each other, jointly use common areas, interact with each other, share meals, household activities, expenses and responsibilities, membership in the single housekeeping unit is fairly stable as opposed to transient, and members have some control over who becomes a member of the single housekeeping unit. The City of Orange allows single family dwelling in the R1-5, R1-6, R-15 to R1-20, R-140, R1-R, R2-6 to R2-8, R-3, and R-4 zoning districts, as well as an accessory in the City’s Mixed Use zoning districts.

Duplex
Any attached or detached building containing two dwelling units wherein the occupants of each individual dwelling unit are living and functioning together as a single housekeeping unit, meaning that they have established ties and familiarity with each other, jointly use common areas, interact with each other, share meals, household activities, expenses and responsibilities, membership in the single housekeeping unit is fairly stable as opposed to transient, and members have some control over who becomes a member of the single housekeeping unit. The City of Orange allows duplexes in the R2-6-R2-8, R-3, R-4, and MH districts with special provisions contained in the Master Land Use Chapter of the City’s Zoning Code.

Multi-family
Any structure designed for human habitation that has been divided into two or more legally created independent living quarters. Currently, Multi-family housing is permitted with special provisions in all Mixed-Use Districts (either part of a mixed-use development or as a stand-alone use), and in the R2-6 to R2-8, R-3 and R-4 districts as stand-alone developments.

Condominium
A building or group of buildings owned on a proportional basis with a specific benefit of ownership being the right to occupy an individual unit located within the structures. Condominiums are permitted in the R2-6-R28, R-3 and R-4 zones as an accessory use to a permitted use.

Communal Housing
For nonfamily groups with common kitchen and dining facilities but without medical, psychiatric or other care including boardinghouses, lodging houses, dormitories, fraternity/sorority houses, communes, and religious homes. Communal Housing is written as fraternity or sorority and is permitted with conditions in the R-3 and R-4 districts.

Residential/Mixed Use Buildings
The development of a tract of land or building or structure with two or more different uses such as, but not limited to, residential, office, manufacturing, retail, public, or entertainment, in a compact urban form. 680
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-28 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
The City recognizes both Horizontal Mixed-Use and Vertical Mixed-Use. Currently, five Mixed-Use districts exist in the City and allow for a range of housing types. Within Mixed Use zones, housing is permitted as part of mixed use development or as a stand-alone product.

Congregate (Community) Care Facilities
Any facility, place or building where non-medical care and supervision are provided for six or fewer persons (does not include the licensee or members of the licensee's family or persons employed as facility staff). Congregate care facilities are permitted with special requirements in all of the residential districts.

However, per California State law, care facilities for six or fewer persons must be permitted under the same standards as ordinary residential uses.

Boarding/Lodging Houses
A residence or dwelling, other than a hotel, wherein three or more rooms are rented under three or more separate written or oral rental agreements, leases or subleases or combination thereof, whether or not the owner, agent or rental manager resides within the residence. Boarding and Lodging Houses are permitted conditionally in the R-3 and R-4 zones.

Farmworker Housing
The City of Orange currently does not have specific definitions or requirements for farmworker housing.

Convalescent Facility/Hospital
A use providing bed care and in-patient services for persons requiring regular medical attention, and persons aged or infirm unable to care for themselves, excluding surgical or emergency medical services.

A Convalescent Hospital is a facility providing long-term nursing, dietary and other medical services to convalescents or invalids but not providing surgery or primary treatments such as are customarily provided in a hospital. A convalescent hospital must be licensed by the State as such.

Senior Housing and Senior Housing Development
Housing intended and operated for occupancy by persons 55 years of age or older that also meet the following criteria:
 At least 80 percent of the units must have at least one occupant who is 55 years of age or older; and
 The facility or community must publish and adhere to policies and procedures that demonstrate the intent to operate as "55 or older" housing; and
 The facility or community must comply with HUD's regulatory requirements for age verification of residents.

Senior Housing Development is defined the City’s Code as a residential development developed, substantially rehabilitated, or substantially renovated for, qualifying residents that has at least 35 dwelling units and otherwise meets the requirements of Section 51.3 of the California Civil Code. 681
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-29 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
The City of Orange permits Senior Housing in all Residential and Mixed-Use districts and conditionally permits it in all Commercial districts. Senior Housing Developments are conditionally permitted in the R3 and R-4 Residential districts, all Mixed-Use districts and OP, CP/C1, CTR, C2, C3 Commercial districts.

Mobile Homes/Manufactured Housing and Mobile Home Parks The Orange Municipal code defines Mobile/Manufactured Homes as a structure designed for human habitation and for being moved on a street or highway under permit. Mobile home includes a manufactured home but, except as provided in subdivision (b) of Section 798.3 of the California Vehicle Code for certain specified trailers and recreational vehicles, does not include a recreational vehicle or a commercial coach or commercial modular. A Mobile home Park is defined as any area or tract of land where two or more lots are rented or leased, held out for rent or lease, or were formerly held out for rent or lease and later converted to a subdivision, cooperative, condominium, or other form of resident ownership, to accommodate manufactured homes or mobile homes used for human habitation. Mobile homes with a permanent foundation are currently permitted in all residential districts and mobile homes without a permanent foundation are only permitted in the MH district.

Guest House
The City of Orange defines Guest Houses as any rented or leased room which is used or designed to provide sleeping accommodations for one or more guests in apartments, hotels, motels, private clubs, lodges, and fraternal organizations. Guest Houses are permitted and considered an accessory use in the Agriculture District.

Accessory Dwelling Units
An attached or detached permanent residential dwelling unit that provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons and is located on a lot with a proposed or existing primary residence.

An ADU shall be accessory to the primary residence. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation on the same parcel as the single-family or multifamily dwelling is or will be situated and shall include a common living area. The kitchen and common living area shall be of sufficient size to accommodate at least one person per bedroom. An ADU has the attributes of a private residence and not a boarding house or dormitory, e.g. shall not have microwaves, sinks and/or refrigerators in each bedroom; shall not have exterior access to each 2 bedrooms; shall not advertise individual rooms. An accessory dwelling unit also includes the following:

1. An efficiency unit, as provided under Health and Safety Code Section 17958.1; and

2. A manufactured home, as provided under Health and Safety Code Section 18007.

ADUs are limited to properties zoned to allow single-family or multifamily dwellings when the property includes a proposed or existing primary residence in the form of a single-family or multifamily dwelling.

Properties zoned to allow residential uses exclusively as an accessory use, or as a use that is not permanent long-term housing, shall not be eligible for an ADU or JADU unless the property is exclusively developed with a primary, legal-nonconforming, long-term, permanent residential use. JADUs are limited to properties zoned to allow single-family dwellings when the property includes a proposed or existing 682
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-30 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
primary residence in the form of a single-family dwelling. ADUs and JADUs shall be an accessory use only, as defined herein. JADUs shall be located in a portion of a proposed or existing primary residence in the form of a single-family dwelling.

A program is included in the Section 4: Housing Plan to update the Municipal Code to permit ADUs and JADUs in zones which allow residential uses and to update the Section 17.13.030 Permitted Uses table to clarify where ADUs and JADUs are permitted in compliance with State law.

Live/Work Uses
Live/work units are structures or spaces within structures that are used jointly for commercial and residential purposes. Allowed uses include:
 The nonresidential component of a live/work unit shall only be a nonresidential use allowed within a mixed-use zoning district, except that certain uses are determined to be not appropriate within a residential environment and are therefore prohibited as provided below.  The residential component of a live/work unit shall only be a residential use allowed within a mixed-use zoning district.

Additional regulations and standards can be found in the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 17.19.100.

Homeless Shelter
A building that provides immediate and short-term overnight sleeping accommodations for homeless persons or families, with limited onsite supporting services. No person or family may be denied shelter at this facility due to the inability to pay. Temporary shelters established in response to an emergency or disaster (such as flood, fire or cold-weather occurrences), or temporary shelters ancillary to a church use do not fall within this definition. Notwithstanding, these uses shall comply with Federal, State and local regulations as applicable. Homeless Shelters are permitted in the M1 and M2 Industrial districts. The City currently has approximately 967 parcels zoned as M1 and M2 totaling about 968 acres. Of these, approximately 44 parcels over approximately 30.5 acres are currently vacant or underutilized. Homeless shelters are permitted to be developed on both vacant and nonvacant M1 and M2 parcels, with the potential for rehabilitation of existing structures.

These sites are located within close proximity to a number of public transportation stops, including bus routes 153, 59, 42, 46, 50, and 53. Homeless shelters are currently subject to the development standards of the underlying zoning district and the following requirements as established in Section 14.13.040 of the City’s Municipal Code (as of adoption of the 2021-2029 Housing Element):
 Homeless shelters shall be located at least five hundred (500) feet from any residential use or residentially-zoned property, public or private park, or public or private kindergarten through 12th grade curriculum school, as measured from the closest property line. In addition, homeless shelters shall be located at least two hundred seventy-five (275) feet from any other homeless shelter, as measured from the closest property line. Homeless shelters shall be located within ½- mile of a transit stop. As these siting requirements fall outside the scope of allowable standards relating to siting of homeless/emergency shelters per Government Code section 65583, 683
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-31 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
subdivision (a)(4)(A), the City has included Housing Policy Action 4J in the Housing Plan to ensure compliance with State law.
 Overnight occupancy shall be limited to one bed per seventy (70) square feet of sleeping area and shall be in accordance with Building Code requirements. Maximum occupancy per facility shall be limited to one hundred fifty (150) beds or fewer. For purposes of determining maximum occupancy, one shelter client per bed is assumed.
 Services and facilities shall be provided for homeless shelters as follows o A client intake and waiting area shall be provided and shall be adequately sized to accommodate waiting clients. The intake area may be indoors or outdoors. If outdoors, the location shall not be adjacent to the public right-of-way, shall be visually screened, and shall provide protection from the sun/rain.
o The facility shall provide a sleeping area, and separate restrooms and showers for males and females. A minimum of one restroom and one shower for every twenty (20) clients shall be provided, and shall comply with Building Code requirements. o Other on-site services that are permitted include: laundry facilities; kitchen, food preparation, and dining areas; storage areas to secure client belongings; a private area for providing referral services to assist shelter clients in entering programs aimed at obtaining permanent shelter and income; other similar services for homeless clients, as determined by the Community Development Director.
 Prior to occupancy, a written operational plan for the facility shall be submitted to the Community Development Director for approval. If site plan review and/or design review applies, then the operational plan should be submitted and reviewed concurrently with those applications. The operational plan shall contain and comply with the requirements identified in the Section

14.13.040 of the City’s Municipal Code.
 Exterior security lighting shall be provided. Building lighting shall comply with the City's Building Security Ordinance No. 7-79, Section 15.52.090J.2. Parking lots shall be lit in compliance with Section 15.52.090J.3.
 Required Off-street Parking and Bike Racks. One parking space per six beds, plus one space per staff person. Parking stalls shall be striped and bike racks shall be provided as specified in Chapter

17.34.  The facility shall comply with all other laws, rules and regulations that apply, including building and fire codes and shall be subject to City inspections prior to operational plan approval. In addition, the City may inspect the facility at any time for compliance with the facility's operational plan and other applicable laws and standards.
 Minor Site Plan Review Required. Minor site plan review is required if the project meets the criteria established in Section 17.10.060.D or E. The Community Development Director's discretion in requiring conditions of approval and approving homeless shelters under minor site plan review is limited to ensuring that the site plan complies with applicable site design-related standards.
 Design Review Required. Design review is required if the project meets the criteria established in Section 17.10.070. DRC's discretion in requiring conditions of approval and approving homeless 684
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-32 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
shelters is limited to ensuring compliance with applicable design-related standards and guidelines.

Transitional Housing and Supportive Housing
Transitional Housing is defined to be buildings configured as rental housing developments occupied by the state-defined "target population," but operated under program requirements that call for termination of assistance and recirculation of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at some predetermined future point in time, which shall be no less than six months. Transitional housing programs typically have specific criteria/thresholds for participation, include onsite staff and supportive services, and facilitate movement of tenants to permanent housing within two years.

Supportive Housing is defined to be buildings configured as rental housing developments with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the state-defined "target population," and that is linked to on- 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. (Ref:

Health and Safety Code § 50675.14(b)) Supportive housing is intended to be permanent housing and is typically rented under legal lease agreements. Typically, on- or off-site supportive services are offered to tenants, but participation is not required to maintain tenancy.

Target population is defined as persons or families who are "homeless," or who are "homeless youth," or persons who are homeless with a disability as that term is defined in State and Federal law.

The City of Orange permits Supportive and Transitional Housing for six persons or fewer in all residential districts. Transitional and Supportive Housing for seven or more persons is conditionally permitted in the R-3 and R-4 districts.

Farmworker Housing
Farmworkers are considered a special needs interest group by HCD. Farmworkers are traditionally defined as people whose primary incomes are earned through permanent or seasonal agricultural labor.

Farmworkers are generally considered to have special housing needs due to their limited income and the often-unstable nature of their employment. In addition, farmworker households tend to have high rates of poverty, live disproportionately in housing that is in the poorest condition, have extremely high rates of overcrowding, and have low homeownership rates. There is a total of 1,772 farmworkers in the County of Orange. Though few may reside in the City of Orange, the City must consider the housing needs of this community. The City of Orange Municipal Code does not explicitly define Farmworker Housing or outline it as a permitted use in residential or nonresidential zones. Section 4: Housing Plan outlines the City’s strategy to update the Municipal Code in accordance with state legislation.

Low Barrier Navigation Centers
AB 101 states that “The Legislature finds and declares that Low Barrier Navigation Center developments are essential tools for alleviating the homelessness crisis -.” Low Barrier Navigation Centers are defined as 685
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-33 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
a Housing First, low-barrier, service-enriched shelter focused on moving people into permanent housing that provides temporary living facilities while case managers connect individuals experiencing homelessness to income, public benefits, health services, shelter, and housing. Low Barrier Navigation Centers are required as a use by right in areas zoned for mixed uses and nonresidential zones permitting multi-unit uses if it meets specified requirements. The City has approved 6 Low Barrier Navigation Centers since 2012. Additionally, the City provides financial support for operation of the North County navigation centers in Buena Park and Placentia.

The City of Orange’s Municipal Code does not address Low Barrier Navigations Centers by definition.

Program 4F is included to ensure the City’s development standards allow Low Barrier Navigation Centers by-right in all zones that permit mixed-uses and non-residential uses. Section 4 outlines the City’s strategy to update the Municipal Code in accordance with state legislation.

Emergency Shelters
State Law existing law authorizes a political subdivision to allow persons unable to obtain housing to occupy designated public facilities, as defined, during the period of a shelter crisis. Existing law provides that certain state and local laws, regulations, and ordinances are suspended during a shelter crisis, to the extent that strict compliance would in any way prevent, hinder, or delay the mitigation of the effects of the shelter crisis. The City of Orange permits Emergency shelters in the M1 and M2 zoning districts.

Single-Room Occupancy
As required in California Government Code Section 65583(c)(1), the City of Orange must identify sites which facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including single-room occupancy. Currently, the City of Orange does not identify single-room occupancy units as a permitted use in the Municipal code, a program is included In Section 4 to address this.

As defined by HUD, single-room occupancy units can provide affordable housing options for single persons living alone, young professionals, persons looking to transition into permanent housing or seniors looking to age in place in the community. Per HUD regulation, the unit must contain either food preparation or sanitary facilities (and may contain both) if the project consists of new construction, conversion of nonresidential space, or reconstruction.

Housing for Persons with Disabilities
Both the Federal Fair Housing Amendment Act (FHAA) and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act direct require governments to make reasonable accommodations (that is, modifications or exceptions) in their zoning laws and other land use regulations to afford disabled persons an equal opportunity to housing. State law also requires cities to analyze potential and actual constraints to the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities.

The Housing Element Update must also include programs that remove constraints or provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for persons with disabilities. The analysis of constraints must 686
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-34 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
touch upon each of three general categories: 1) zoning/land use; 2) permit and processing procedures; and 3) building codes and other factors, including design, location and discrimination, which could limit the availability of housing for disabled persons.

Reasonable Accommodation
Persons with mobility disabilities may require modifications to their living quarters such as access ramps, wider doors and hallways, larger bathrooms, and lowered countertops. The City enforces the California Building Standards Code which provides flexibility in the design of housing for persons with disabilities.

Both the Federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act require local governments to make reasonable accommodations in their zoning laws and other land use regulations and practices when such accommodations are necessary to afford disabled persons with an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.

Reasonable accommodation in the land use and zoning context means providing individuals with disabilities or developers of housing for people with disabilities, flexibility in the application of land use and zoning and building regulations, policies, practices and procedures, or even waiving certain requirements, when it is necessary to eliminate barriers to housing opportunities. For example, it may be reasonable to accommodate requests from persons with disabilities to waive a setback requirement or other standard of the Zoning Ordinance to ensure that homes are accessible for the mobility impaired.

Whether a particular modification is reasonable depends on the circumstances.

The City of Orange has a Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance (17.10.045) which provides a procedure and sets standards for disabled persons seeking a reasonable accommodation in the provision of housing and is intended to comply with federal and state fair housing laws. A reasonable accommodation is defined as relief from the strict application of the City's zoning and land use regulations, policies, and practices when such an accommodation is found to be reasonably necessary to provide an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. An accommodation is not reasonable if: (1) it will fundamentally alter the City's zoning scheme or program; (2) the benefits provided by the accommodation are outweighed by the costs and administrative burden created; or (3) it would create a direct threat to the health and safety of other individuals or physical damage to the property of others.

Any person with a disability, their authorized written representative, or a developer or provider of housing for individuals with a disability may submit a request for a reasonable accommodation. A reasonable accommodation may be approved only for the benefit of one or more individuals with a disability. An application for a reasonable accommodation shall be made on a form provided by the Planning Department and the applicable processing fee (administrative adjustment fee shall apply to determinations of the Director) paid. The application shall include, but not necessarily be limited to the following information:
 Documentation that the applicant is: an individual with a disability; applying on behalf of one or more individuals with a disability; or a developer or provider of housing for one or more individuals with a disability.
687
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-35 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
 The specific exception or modification to the zoning code section, policy or practice that is being requested.
 An explanation that the accommodation requested is necessary to provide one or more individuals with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy the dwelling.  Any other information that the Director reasonably concludes is necessary to determine whether the findings required by this Chapter can be made.

Occupancy Standards
Currently, the Zoning Ordinance defines a “family” as “One or more persons related by blood or legal status or persons not so related who are functioning as a family or single-housekeeping unit, meaning that they have established ties and familiarity with each other, jointly use common areas, interact with each other, share meals, household activities, expenses and responsibilities, membership in the family is fairly stable as opposed to transient and members have some control over who becomes a member of the family.”
California law requires local governments to treat licensed group homes and residential care facilities with six or fewer residents no differently than other by-right single-family housing uses. “Six or fewer persons” does not include the operator, the operator’s family or persons employed as staff. The City must allow these licensed residential care facilities in any area zoned for residential use and may not require licensed residential care facilities for six or less to obtain conditional use permits or variances that are not required of other family dwellings. Currently, the City permits, with special requirements, congregate care facilities in all residential zones, however, the City’s definition of family and restrictions which accompany permitting care facilities in residential zones may produce potential constraints in providing access to care facilities or housing opportunities and may not be in compliance with State law. Section 4 of this Housing Element includes a Housing Policy Action to address the City’s code language and update the term “Family” for compliance with state law.

Development Fees
Residential developers are subject to a variety of fees and exactions to process permits and provide necessary services and facilities as allowed by State law. In general, these development fees can be a constraint to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing because the additional cost borne by developers contributes to overall increased housing unit cost. However, the fees are necessary to maintain adequate planning services and other public services and facilities in the City. The current fee schedule became effective July 1, 2021 and is summarized in Table 3-7 and available on the City’s website.

Under the fee schedule, the City recovers a portion but not all of the City’s administrative costs for processing development applications. The City’s Development Impact fees, effective July 1, 2019 and remain in effect Until June 30, 2020, are summarized in Table 3-8.

The development fees associated with each project is dependent on the housing type, density, intensity of use, and location. In addition to these direct fees, the total cost of entitlement processing is contingent on the project meeting the City’s policies and standards, as well as the project applicant submitting 688
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-36 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
necessary documents and plans in a timely manner. An applicant may also request to have fees waived by the City Council.

The estimated total development and impact fees for a typical single-family residential project, assuming it is not part of a subdivision and is consistent with existing city policies and regulations, can range from $22,090 to $27,090. Estimated total development and impact fees for a typical multi-family residential project with ten units, assuming it is consistent with existing city policies and regulations range from $81,913 to $86,913.

These estimates are illustrative in nature and that actual costs are contingent upon unique circumstance inherent in individual development project applications. Considering the cost of land in Orange, and the International Code Council (ICC) estimates for cost of labor and materials, the combined costs of permits and fees range from approximately 3.79% percent to 4.65% percent of the direct cost of development for a single-family residential project and 1.62% percent to 1.72% percent for a multi-family residential project. Direct costs do not include, landscaping, connection fees, on/off-site improvements, shell construction or amenities, therefore the percentage of development and impact fees charged by the City may be smaller if all direct and indirect costs are included.

Table 3-7: Planning and Land Use Fees (2021 Fee Schedule) Type Fee Type Fee
Sober Living Permit Fee $2,079.00 Major Site Plan Review $15,000.00 Mills Act Program Original
Application Fee $1,000.00 Tentative Tract Map $2,000.00 Mills Act Program
Inspection/ Annual Report $30.00 Zone Change Applications $10,000.00 Zone Clearance, Over the
Counter Review $41.00 Negative Declaration $6,000.00
Staff research, information
requests - per hour $116.00 Mitigation Monitoring $3,000.00 Temporary Use Permit
(recurring) $369.00 General Plan Amendment $10,000.00
Temporary Use Permit (nonrecurring uses) $791.00 Environmental Impact Report $10,000.00 Zoning Verification Letter $316.00 Appeals to City Council or Planning Commission $1,000.00
Administrative Design
Review $500.00
Planning Commission
Modification to CUP, Major
Site Plan or Variance
$3,000.00
Design Review, Historic
Districts Residential $1,500.00 Minor Site Plan Review - Staff $1,000.00 Signs and Sign Programs $500.00 Pre-Application Review $500.00 Design Review, Outside
Historic Districts $1,500.00 Administrative Adjustments $1,000.00 CUP / Variance - Zoning $3,000.00 Time Extension $1,000.00 689
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-37 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 3-7: Planning and Land Use Fees (2021 Fee Schedule) Type Fee Type Fee
CUP / Variance - Planning
Commission $3,000.00
Source: City of Orange, Master Schedule of Fees, Updated 7/1/2021.

Table 3-8: Engineering and Development Services Fees (2021 Fee Schedule) Type Fee Type Fee
Lot Line Adjustment $1,956.00 Utility Lateral for house connection on residential streets $760.00
Certificate of Compliance $1,956.00 Fire Service Connection $1,444.00 Certificate of Correction / Amended
Map $1,956.00 Flood Zone Written Notice $268.00
Process Grading Application $225.00 Street Addressing $583.00 Encroachment Permits Summary Abandonment $1,416.00
Process Encroachment Application $201.00 Full Abandonment $1,416.00 Driveways - non-arterial $416.00 Quit Claims $1,416.00
Driveways - arterial $873.00 Simple Research & CD Prep $152.00 Sidewalk $404.00 Map Sheets $118.00
Street work / Trench Repair Sewer Frontage Charges - per l.f. $128.00 0-100 feet $697.00 Tract Development $10,000.00
101-300 feet $988.00 Tract or Parcel Map (Map Only) $2,000.00 301-500 feet $1,586.00
Non-Priority Water Quality
Management Plan (WQMP)
Review
$500.00
501-1000 feet $2,275.00
Priority Water Quality
Management Plan (WQMP)
Review
$1,000.00
1,001-1,500 feet $2,838.00 Grading Plan Review & Inspection $3,000.00 1,501-2,000 feet $3,307.00
Large Encroachment Projects or
Street work / Trenchwork 2,001 ft.
or greater
$5,000.00
Minor Encroachment Permit $289.00 Extensive Research $500.00 Source: City of Orange, Master Schedule of Fees, Updated 7/1/2021.

Development Impact Fees
In addition to City fees charged at the time building permits are issued, developers are required to pay a number of impact fees (shown in Table 3.9), including the following.

Transportation System Improvement Programs Fee
The Transportation System Improvement Programs Fee provides for the construction of the traffic circulation system improvements identified by the City Council and made necessary by increased transportation demands in the City. The fees charged are dependent on geographic locations and the fees 690
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-38 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
collected for pre-identified improvements must be used in the respective geographic regions. Regions (geographic indicators) include the following:
 Area A – Bound by Chapman to the north, Town and Country Road to the south, Flower Street to the west, and Montgomery Place to the East
 Area B – Bound by the Santa Ana River to the north and northwest, reaching Lewis Street to the west, bound by State Route 55 to the east, and State Route 22 to the south.  Area C – Bound by the north Orange border adjacent to the City of Anaheim to the north, east Orange border to the east, Fairhaven Avenue to the south, and State Route 55 to the west.

Fees based on the geographic regions above are displayed in Table 3-9.

Table 3-9: Transportation System Improvement Program Fees (Residential Only) Development Type Area A Fee Area B Fee Area C Fee
Single-Family; Condo & Townhome
Residential (per unit)
$817.00 $1,445.00 $804.00
Residential – Apartments (per unit) $712.00 $1,015.00 $564.00 Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency (Zone B – 55 to Weir Canyon Road) Development Type Fee
Single Family Dwelling (per unit) $1,260.72
Multi-Family, Apts. /Condos (per unit) $867.88
Source: City of Orange Development Fee Schedule, July 1, 2021.

Capital Facilities Capacity Charges (Residential)
Capital Facilities Capacity charges are categorized housing type (single-family and multi-family) and number of bedrooms per unit. The base charges for residential developments are displayed in Table 3-10.

Table 3-10: Capital Facilities Capacity Charges (Residential) Single Family Residential Base Charge
5+ Bedrooms $6,395.00
4 Bedrooms $5,475.00
3 Bedrooms $4,601.00
2 Bedrooms $3,727.00
1 Bedroom $2,852.00
Multi-Family Residential Base Charge
4+ Bedrooms $4,969.00
3 Bedrooms $4,095.00
2 Bedrooms $3,221.00
1 Bedroom $2,300.00
Studio $1,472.00
Source: City of Orange Development Fee Schedule, July 1, 2019.

Historically, where a single-family unit has an accessory dwelling structure/unit that connect to the sewer, the non-residential average demand base rate of $2,078.00 per 1,000 square feet has applied. As of May 691
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-39 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
21, 2021, the Orange County Sewer District (OCSD) is not collecting sewer fees for ADUs smaller than 1,200 square feet. The maximum size for an ADU permitted by the City of Orange’s ordinance is 1,000 square feet, so sewer fees currently do not apply to ADUs within the City of Orange.

Additionally, live/work units will be charges at both the residential rate for the living quarters and at the nonresidential rate for the work portion square footage. The City continues to evaluate these fees. These are subject to change and the City will provide updated fees to the public if they change.

Park Infill Fee and Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fee
Park Dedication and In-lieu fees are required for residential subdivision developments only and Park Dedication and In-lieu Fees provide for residential development projects to finance the cost of park facilities and improvements required by new residential development. The fees are described below in Table 3-11.

Table 3-11: Park Dedication and In-Lieu Fees (Residential) District 1 District 2
Density Classification
(Dwelling Units/Gross Acre)
Density Classification
(Dwelling Units/Gross Acre)
< or equal to 6 du/ga $7,994.00/unit < or equal to 6 du/ga $8,894.00/unit > 6 to < or equal to 15 du/ga $9,434.00/unit > 6 to < or equal to 15 du/ga $10,469.00/unit >15 du/ga $9,506.00/unit >15 du/ga $10,546.00/unit
Source: City of Orange Development Fee Schedule, July 1, 2019.

Public Service Development Impact Fees
Additional Public Service Impact Fees include library facilities impact fees, fire and police protection impact fees and school impact fees. The library facilitates development impact fee provides for new library facilities and other capital acquisition costs required, incrementally, by new residential development within the City. According to the Annual Financial Report for development impact fees for the fiscal year 2018 to 2019, the library facilities impact fee provided a total of $294,662 in revenue.

Table 3-12: Library Facilities Development Impact Fees (Residential) Citywide
Density Classification (Dwelling Units/Gross Acre)
< or equal to 6 du/ga $742.52/unit
> 6 to < or equal to 15 du/ga $769.30/unit
>15 du/ga $642.71/unit
Source: City of Orange Development Fee Schedule, July 1, 2019.

692
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-40 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 3-13: Fire and Police Protection Facility Fee (Residential) Land Use Fee
Detached Residential $1,200.00/unit
Attached Residential $601.00/unit
College University Dorm $971.00/unit
Group Congregate Units $2,306.00/unit
Commercial Lodging $955.00/unit
Single Family Dwelling $354.89/unit
Source: City of Orange Development Fee Schedule, July 1, 2019.

Code and Fee Transparency
California Government Code Section 659401(a)(1) requires that every city or county make information regarding development processing applications, regulations, and fees readily available to the public. All such information is readily available to potential applicants, property owners, and the general public on the City of Orange website. The website is regularly maintained, and information is updated as needed.

On-/Off-Site Improvements
Site improvements in the City consist of those typically associated with development for on-site improvements (fronting streets, curbs, gutters, sewer/water, and sidewalks), and off-site improvements (drainage, parks, traffic, schools, and sewer/water). Residential developments utilize the following standards for local streets found in the 2010 General Plan Circulation and Mobility Element:
 Collector Streets- 66 feet right of way (46 feet pavement width)  Secondary Arterial Highways- 86 feet right of way (70 feet pavement width)  Primary Arterial Highways- 100 feet right of way (84 feet pavement width)  Major Arterial Highways- 120 feet right of way (104 feet pavement width)  Principal Arterial Highways and Smart Streets- 134 to 144 feet right of way (118 feet  pavement width)
Payment in Lieu of Making Public Infrastructure Improvements Normally, the owner, lessee or agent of the property will post the required security for the public infrastructure improvements, obtain the building permit and then proceed with making the improvements as the construction project for which the building permit was issued progresses. When the construction project is completed, and the improvements are done and accepted by the City, the security is then released. There is an exception to this procedure, however, which requires full payment of the estimated cost of the improvements instead.

The Director of Public Works may require full payment of the estimated cost of the public infrastructure improvements when he has determined that the safe and orderly development of the adjacent street can be accomplished best when the public infrastructure improvements for more than just one lot are made or when allowing individual owners to make the public infrastructure improvements as single lots are developed may create unsafe traffic, drainage or other problems. 693
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-41 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
In that case, the owner, lessee or agent of the property shall make full payment of the estimated cost of the improvements to the City, which payment shall be maintained in a separate fund. When the improvements can be made safely, the City will cause the improvements to be made, financed in whole or in part with the money received from the various owners who have contributed to that fund. When an owner, lessee or agent of the property pays the estimated cost of improvements in full, he or his heirs, assigns and successors in interest to the property shall not be required to make additional payments to accomplish the same improvements.

Building Codes and Enforcement
The City of Orange’s construction codes are based upon the California Code of Regulations, Title 24 (Building, Plumbing, Mechanical, Electrical and Housing Codes) and are considered to be the minimum necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare of the City’s residents. In compliance with State law, the California Building Standards Code is revised and updated every three (3) years. The newest edition of the California Building Standards Code is the 2019 edition with an effective date of January 1, 2020. The City of Orange is required by State law to enforce the new code.

All existing approved tract plans will expire and become null and void at 180 days from the date of enforcement (January 1, 2020) for the new 2019 California Codes, which will be July 1, 2020, or unless otherwise expired in accordance with other provisions of the codes. All tract plans will need to be updated to comply with the new 2019 CBSC and submitted for a new plan check. The Chief Building Official may extend the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days on request by the applicant showing circumstances beyond control of the applicant that prevented action from being taken (January 1, 2020). No building permit application shall be extended more than once (CBC Section 106.4.4).

Code enforcement is conducted by the City and is based on systematic enforcement in areas of concern and on a complaint basis throughout the city. The Code Compliance Division of the Community Development Department works with property owners and renters to assist in meeting state health and safety codes. The Code Compliance Division investigates complaints regarding violations of the Orange Municipal Codes. The City’s caseload is complaint-based, and deals with issues such as inoperable vehicles, poor property maintenance, debris accumulation, and inappropriate storage of vehicles or materials with the intention and goal of working with the community to help resolve issues through voluntary compliance.

Local Processing and Permit Procedures
The processing time for entitlement applications and permits varies in Orange based upon the scope and type of project and the applicant’s compliance with the City’s ordinances and completeness of applications. Certain types of applications/permits are discretionary and require a public hearing, while others are processed administratively. For a typical single-family residence, permit processing time can take around 3-5 months for staff-level review of Administrative Design Review and around 3 months for Building plan check and permit issuance. For a typical multi-family project on a site that has a General Plan 694
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-42 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Land Use and Zoning that allow multi-family developments, Planning review and entitlement can take around 6 to 8 months and 5 to 6 months for Building plan check and permit issuance. The process for projects requiring administrative review is outlined below. The following lists out the permitting process and review periods:

1. Application submitted;

2. Staff Review Committee provides comments or application deemed complete (30 days or less);

3. Staff Review Committee reviews response to comments, if applicable (30 days or less);

4. Design review Committee meeting scheduled and staff report prepared. Oversight is limited to confirmation objective design standards for applicable projects under State law (30 days or less);

5. Planning Commission meeting scheduled, staff report and resolution prepared. Oversight is limited to confirmation of objective design standards for applicable projects under State law (30 days or less);

6. Building plan check submittal – may occur at-risk subsequent to Design Review Committee meeting or sooner if authorized by the Community Development Director; followed by,

7. Staff review of building plans and corrections provided (20 working days or less per submittal/resubmittal).

Given the review period for each step of the review process is in compliance with State law requirements, the City’s permit review process is not found to be a constraint to the development of housing, nor does it impact the cost of development.

Development Agreements
The Community Development Director shall prescribe the form of each application, notice and documents provided for or required under this chapter for the preparation, processing and implementation of development agreements. The following sections outlines the process for development agreements within the City. Projects within Orange do not frequently involve development agreements.

Filing and Review of Application
The application and proposed development agreement are forwarded to the Community Development Director and a staff review committee as designated by the City Manager. The Director and staff then review the application and determine the additional requirements necessary to complete the agreement.

The Director may reject the application if it is not completed in the manner required by this chapter. After receiving the required information, the Director prepares a staff report which analyzes the proposed development and contains a recommendation as to whether or not the development agreement proposed, or in an amended form, would be consistent with the general plan or any applicable specific plan.

Notice of Intention
Upon completion of the staff report, in addition to any other notice required by law, the Director gives notice of intention to consider adoption of a development agreement. The notice shall contain:
 The time and place of the public hearing before the Planning Commission; 695
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-43 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
 A general explanation of the development agreement, including a general description of the property proposed to be developed.

Hearing and Recommendation of Planning Commission and Decision by City Council The Planning Commission must make its recommendation to the City Council in writing within thirty (30) days of the public hearing. After the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the City Council completes the public hearing and considers any recommendation of the Planning Commission, the Council may accept, modify, or deny the proposed development agreement. The development agreement may not be approved unless the City Council finds that the development agreement is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan.

Site Plan Review
The site plan review process provides a process to review development projects to ensure that projects reflect the highest quality of land planning and design, that projects conform to City development standards, that new projects are compatible with surrounding development and neighborhoods in terms of scale, style and construction materials, that on and off-site circulation is adequate to support the project; that City services are adequate and available, and to ensure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement and protection of the environment. Site plan review is a common step in entitlement of residential development projects.

Site plan review is required for the following:
 Any new use of previously vacant land
 New construction
 Rehabilitation or expansion of existing structures in all zones  It is not required for single family residence or rehabilitation of existing single-family residence In addition to project review for compliance with the development standards of the underlying zoning district and other applicable ordinance provisions, site plan review will include review of those development qualities which are not subject to precise definition in the regulations of each zone. The following criteria are listed to illustrate the issues to be considered by the Community Development Director and/or Planning Commission in project review and determination:
 Compatibility of the project with surrounding development and neighborhoods  Building/Site planning issues
 Circulation/Traffic safety, on and off-Site
 City Services
 Environmental Protection - All projects shall be evaluated in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
The following findings may be made after site plan review:
 That the project design is compatible with surrounding development and neighborhoods. 696
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-44 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
 That the project conforms to City development standards and any applicable special design guidelines or specific plan requirements.
 That the project provides for safe and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation, both onand off-site.  That City services are available and adequate to serve the project.  That the project has been designed to fully mitigate or substantially minimize adverse environmental effects.

Design Review
The design review process provides a means of reviewing development projects to ensure that these projects are compatible with community aesthetics including architectural design, massing and scale, context, color palette, signage and landscaping. The design review process serves a primary role in the implementation of adopted design standards. The City's design objective is to enhance the community character and identity of the City by promoting diversity, creativity and cohesiveness in the development of property, building structures, site relationships and landscape through quality design. Design review is required for all projects listed below:
 Development projects requiring Planning Commission or City Council approval  Any project requiring major site plan review.
 All projects within Old Towne or other historic districts as established, except where otherwise exempted by adopted design standards and/or adopted specific plan  External remodeling of commercial, industrial, institutional and large scale multiple family developments, except where otherwise exempted by City codes, including adopted design standards and/or adopted specific plans.
 Projects subject to Minor Site Plan Review that also involve exterior remodeling of residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional development that is visible from the public right-of-way.

The design review requires projects have an internally consistent, integrated design theme which is reflected in the following elements:
 Architectural Features
o The architectural features shall reflect a similar design style or period. o Creative building elements and identifying features should be used to create a high quality project with visual interest and an architectural style.  Landscape
o The type, size and location of landscape materials shall support the projects overall design concept.
o Landscaping shall not obstruct visibility of required addressing, nor shall it obstruct the vision of motorists or pedestrians in proximity to the site. o Landscape areas shall be provided in and around parking lots to break up the appearance of large expanses of hardscape.
 Signage
697
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-45 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
o All signage shall be compatible with the building(s) design, scale, colors, materials and lighting.
 Secondary Functional and Accessory Features.
o Trash receptacles, storage and loading areas, transformers and mechanical equipment shall be screened in a manner which is architecturally compatible with the principal building(s).

The administrative design review process is established to allow for a simplified review process for specific types of new development, exterior building alterations, and sign modifications which the City anticipates will not adversely affect surrounding properties. The following types of projects are eligible for Administrative Design Review:
 Projects subject to Minor Site Plan Review that also involve exterior remodeling of residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional development that is not visible from the public right-ofway.  Projects that involve exterior remodeling of an individual free-standing commercial, industrial, or institutional building on an individual parcel that is not part of a larger center or campus, including changes in exterior building material, roof form, and window or door openings.  Infill residential development as specified in the City of Orange Infill Residential Design Guidelines.  Modifications to existing sign programs that involve changes in color, font style, height, width, method of illumination or sign area that are otherwise in compliance with the provisions of Section 17.36.

The Design Review Committee makes a recommendation or final determination as authorized by Section

17.08.020(D) of the Orange Zoning Ordinance to approve, approve with conditions or deny a project at a public meeting. The reviewing body shall make findings for all projects based upon design criteria stated above. A specific finding shall be made for projects as follows:
 In the Old Town Historic District, the proposed work conforms to the prescriptive standards and design criteria referenced and/or recommended by the Design Review Committee or other reviewing body for the project.
 In any National Register Historic District, the proposed work complies with the Secretary of the Interior's standards and guidelines.
 The project design upholds community aesthetics through the use of an internally consistent, integrated design theme and is consistent with all adopted specific plans, applicable design standards and their required findings.
 For infill residential development, as specified in the City of Orange infill residential design guidelines, the new structure(s) or addition are compatible with the scale, massing, orientation, and articulation of the surrounding development and will preserve or enhance existing neighborhood character.
698
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-46 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
The City has analyzed the required findings listed above applicable to residential project for problematic or potential unclear language which may present a constraint to the development of housing. The City a streamlined set of findings for both the Site Plan Review and Design Review processes and the processes and expectations are clearly outlined. Furthermore, the City conducts pre-application meetings with applicants to walk through the entitlement process and explain the required findings. City Staff has printed and online materials to give guidance on how to navigate the entitlement process for residential projects and is available during business hours at the counter to provide assistance. City Staff communicates expectations to applicants so that they may be fully aware of the requirements and findings which need to be met for different types of residential projects. Within the planning period, the City has not denied any projects on the basis of not being able to meet the current findings for either Site Plan Review or Design Review.

While the current findings and processes do not present a constraint, the City has included Housing Policy Actions 2E and 2L in Section 4: Housing Plan to evaluate processing procedures and review the feasibility of additional regulatory relief – such as adopting objective development standards.

Senate Bill 35
California Senate Bill 35 (SB 35), codified at Government Code Section 65913.41, was signed on September 29, 2017, and became effective January 1, 2018. SB 35 will automatically sunset on January 1, 2026 (Section 65913.4(m)). The intent of SB 35 is to expedite and facilitate construction of affordable housing. SB 35 applies to cities and counties that have not made sufficient progress toward meeting their affordable housing goals for above moderate- and lower-income levels as mandated by the State. In an effort to meet the affordable housing goals, SB 35 requires cities and counties to streamline the review and approval of certain qualifying affordable housing projects through a ministerial process.

A project must meet the following criteria to be eligible for SB 35 approval:
 A multifamily housing development (at least two residential units) in an urbanized area, an urban cluster, or on a legal parcel(s) within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster;
 Located where 75% of the perimeter of the site is developed;  Zoned or designated by the general plan for residential or mixed use residential, with at least two-thirds of the square footage of the development designated for residential use;  In a location where the locality’s share of regional housing needs have not be satisfied by building permits previously issued;
 One that includes affordable housing in accordance with SB 35 requirements; and  Consistent with the local government’s objective zoning and design review standards.

A project does not qualify for SB 35 streamline processing if:
 A coastal zone, conservation lands, or habitat for protected species;  Prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance;
 Wetlands or lands under conservation easement;
 A very high fire hazard severity zone;
 Hazardous waste site;
699
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-47 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
 Earthquake fault zone;
 Flood plain or floodway;
 Lands identified for conservation in an adopted natural community conservation plan;  Habitat for protected species;
 Land under conservation easement;
 A site with existing multi-family housing that has been occupied by tenants in the last ten years or is subject to rent control;
 A site with existing affordable housing; or
 The development would require the demolition of a historic structure.

According to HCD’s 2021 SB 35 Statewide Determination Summary, the City of Orange has not made sufficient progress towards its Lower Income RHNA and is therefore subject to streamlined ministerial approval process (SB 35 (Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017) streamlining) for proposed developments with at least 50 percent affordability. The City is subject to streamlined ministerial approval review for proposed developments with at least 50 percent affordability.

State Policies and Regulations
State policies and regulations may also serve to constrain housing development in local communities.

Environmental Protection
State regulations require environmental review of proposed discretionary projects (e.g., subdivision maps, use permits, etc.). Costs resulting from fees charged by local government and private consultants needed to complete the environmental analysis, and from delays caused by the mandated public review periods, are also added to the cost of housing. However, the presence of these regulations helps preserve the environment and ensure environmental safety to Orange residents.

C. Infrastructure Constraints
Another factor that could constrain new residential construction is the requirement and cost to provide adequate infrastructure (major and local streets; water and sewer lines; and street lighting) needed to serve new residential development. In most cases, where new infrastructure is required, it is funded by the developer and then dedicated to the City, which is then responsible for its maintenance. Because the cost of these facilities is generally borne by developers, it increases the cost of new construction, with much of that increased cost often “passed on” in as part of home rental or sales rates.

Dry Utilities
Dry utilities are the installation of the electric, telephone, TV, internet, and gas in a community. Of the utilities, the City must plan to provide the necessary resources, such as electric and gas, to new housing units.

Dry utilities in Orange are serviced by contracted private agencies, including Southern California Edison Company, Southern California Gas Company, AT&T, Time Warner Cable and Cox Communications Orange County.
700
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-48 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Electricity
Southern California Edison (SCE), an independently owned utility, provides electrical power service to the Orange planning area. SCE distributes electricity purchased through the California Power Exchange, which is the electricity marketplace for about 80 percent of California’s electricity customers. SCE is regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and includes 50,000 square miles of SCE service area across Central, Coastal, and Southern California.

In order to meet future energy needs, SCE has developed several energy-efficiency programs for residential, non-residential, new construction, and low-income subscribers. These include rebate and cash incentive programs for completion of energy-efficiency projects in residences and businesses, providing energy-efficient solutions for new developments as well as programs that aid low-income customers to purchase energy-efficient refrigerators and outdoor lighting. The City supports these strategies by SCE to encourage energy conservation, and applies the Green Building Code.1 Natural Gas
The Southern California Gas Company (The Gas Company) supplies natural gas to both businesses and residents within the Orange planning area. The SoCal Gas 2020 utility report projects total gas demand to decline at an annual rate of 1 percent from 2020-2035. From 2020-2035, residential demand is expected to decline from 230 Bcf to 198 Bcf. The decline is approximately 1 percent per year, on average. The decline is due to declining use per meter—primarily driven by very aggressive energy efficiency goals and associated programs— offsetting new meter growth.2
SoCalGas engages in several energy efficiency and conservation programs designed to help customers identify and implement ways to benefit environmentally and financially from energy efficiency investments. Programs administered by SoCalGas include services that help customers evaluate their energy efficiency options and adopt recommended solutions, as well as simple equipment-retrofit improvements, such as rebates for new hot water heaters.

Water Supply and Wastewater Capacity
The Water Division of the City of Orange’s Public Works Department is responsible for providing a clean, safe, potable water supply to the City of Orange. The Division designs, constructs, and maintains wells, water lines, booster pumps, and reservoirs that serve the residents and businesses with water for domestic use and for fire protection.

Water Supply
According to the City’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the City of Orange obtains approximately 75 percent of its water from ground water sources via 12 active wells. The ground water basin is managed by the Orange County Water District. The City of Orange also imports water from 1 City of Orange Infrastructure Chapter, General Plan.
2 SoCal Gas 2020 California Gas report, Prepared in Compliance with California Public Utilities Commission Decision D .95-01-039
701
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-49 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
the Colorado River and Northern California from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) through the Municipal Water District of Orange County.

Historically, local groundwater has been the cheapest and most reliable source of supply for the City. The City currently relies on approximately 20,623 acres feet per year (AFY) of groundwater from the OC Basin.

The City supplements its local groundwater with imported water purchased from Metropolitan through MWDOC. Imported water represents approximately 30 percent of the City’s total water supply.

Supply Reliability
The City’s UWMP assesses the reliability of water service to customers under normal, dry, and multiple dry water years. The City depends on a combination of imported and local supplies to meet its water demands and has taken multiple steps to ensure it has adequate supplies. Increased residential and commercial development of can augment the reliability of the imported water system. There are various factors that may impact reliability of supplies such as legal, environmental, water quality and climatic which are discussed below. The water supplies are projected to meet full-service demands; Metropolitan’s 2015 UWMP finds that Metropolitan is able to meet, full-service demands of its member agencies starting 2020 through 2040 during normal years, single dry year, and multiple dry years.

The City meters all service customer connections and bills its customers bi-monthly based on water consumption. The City has a meter replacement and calibration program and plans to implement radio read metering.

Wastewater Capacity
The City operates and maintains 308 miles of local sewer collection pipes that feed into the Orange County Sanitation District's (OCSD) trunk sewer system to convey wastewater to OCSD's treatment plants. OCSD has an extensive system of gravity flow sewers, pump stations, and pressurized sewers. OCSD’s Plant No. 1 in Fountain Valley has a capacity of 320 million gallons per day (MGD) and Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach has a capacity of 312 MGD. Both plants share a common ocean outfall, but Plant No. 1 currently provides all of its secondary treated wastewater to OCWD’s Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) for beneficial reuse.

Fire and Emergency Services
The City of Orange’s Fire Department aims to prevent or minimize the loss of life, damage to the environment, and loss of property from fire, medical emergencies, and hazardous conditions. Beyond fire suppression, public safety, and emergency medical services, the department offers a Fire Explorer program, smoke detector installation, and public education.

Fire Prevention
The first priority of the Fire Prevention Section of the Orange City Fire Department is to prevent loss of life and property, and to prevent damage to the environment. The second goal is to build safety into buildings and processes, in order to contain or limit the spread of a potential emergency. 702
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-50 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
The activities of the Fire Prevention Section can be classed into 1) Environmental Safety and 2) Fire and Life Safety. Environmental Safety encompasses vegetation management, hazardous materials disclosure, and underground storage tanks. Fire and Life Safety includes planning and development, annual occupancy inspections, special events permitting, and fire cause investigation.

In addition to responding to urban fires, the department also responds to wildfire and provides education and safety plans for the community in the event of a wildfire.

Emergency Operations
The Emergency Operation Section prepares for and responds to emergencies of all types. In addition to planning and training for emergency responses, the Section also works to ensure sufficient facilities, fire vehicles, equipment and other infrastructure are acquired and maintained before they are needed for emergency incidents.

Three battalion chiefs report to the Operations Deputy Chief. They command three shifts of 35 emergency responders who are on duty around the clock. The battalion chiefs spend the bulk of their time working on special projects to plan for emergencies. All three battalion chiefs lead departmental committees and other efforts related to emergency preparedness and response.

According the Departments annual reports, in 2018, Orange City Fire Department responded to over 15,500 calls for service for the third year running and responded to over 16,000 for 2019. The departments have an extensive network, and preparedness, therefore, it is not anticipated that any new fire or emergency facilities would be required as a result of new development. Additionally, any new developments would be provided full services by one of the department’s eight districts with a station.

Police Services
The City of Orange Police Department is in charge of police services for all areas within the City boundary.

The department’s jurisdiction covers nearly 27 square miles and is bordered by Santa Ana, Garden Grove, Anaheim, Tustin, and unincorporated County areas. The Police Department handles a variety of public services through different divisions. The department’s mission is to perform law enforcement duties with innovative leadership, accountable to the residents of Orange, in order to ensure their safety and improve the quality of life in a diverse community. The Supportive Services Division provides personnel, training, fiscal affairs, crime prevention, and facility maintenance functions.

The Investigative Services Division investigates and prepares cases for a successful prosecution by the Orange County District Attorney's Office. Each unit focuses on specific types of crimes. The Field Services Division consists of uniformed personnel who are primary responders when the department receives calls for service. There are several specialized units, including the Bike Team, Canine Unit, Homeless Engagement Assistance and Resource Team (HEART), SWAT Team, and Traffic Bureau. 703
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-51 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
The department has an extensive network, and preparedness, therefore, it is not anticipated that any new police facilities would be required as a result of new development. Any new developments would be provided full services in any part of Orange.

D. Environmental Constraints
Geologic and Seismic Hazards
The most significant environmental hazards that may affect land use in Orange are seismic and geologic hazards. Earthquakes and their related effects have the greatest potential to affect a large portion of the population. Other geologic hazards such as landslides and ground subsidence could have more localized effects. The combination of sound planning practices and continued public education will minimize risks to the community from seismic and geologic hazards, and will protect the health, safety, and welfare of Orange residents.

Flooding
Portions of Orange are susceptible to flood events from either a major storm or a dam failure resulting from a significant earthquake. Dams are present along Santiago Creek at two locations: Villa Park Dam and Santiago Dam (Irvine Lake). Both are located in the foothills of east Orange. Peters Canyon Dam is located within Peters Canyon about two miles west of Irvine Lake. Unlike Santiago Creek, which flows generally northwest, Peters Canyon drains to the south in this area. Prado Dam is located in Corona, approximately seven miles northeast of the eastern portions of the planning area. Areas downstream from these dams, including large areas within the City of Orange, have high potential for inundation in the unlikely event of catastrophic dam failure (maps showing dam inundation areas are available for public review at the Community Development Department). These dams and their reservoirs prevent periodic flooding that would be expected to occur in a natural setting. Recognizing and preparing for floods allows the community to avoid associated dangers.
704
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-52 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Housing Resources
E. Regional Housing Needs Allocation
This section of the Housing Element provides an overview of the resources available to the City to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).

Residential Sites Inventory
Appendix B of the Housing Element includes the required site analysis and site information for the parcels identified to accommodate the City’s RHNA need through the 2021-2029 planning period. The following discussions summarize the City’s site inventory, including the City’s past experience in redeveloping nonvacant sites and sites within non-residential zones. Sites with these characteristics comprise the majority of Orange’s site analysis strategy.

The City of Orange has identified sites currently zoned for residential and mixed-use which can accommodate its 6th cycle RHNA need.

Above Moderate and Moderate Income Sites
For the 2021-2029 planning period, the City’s RHNA allocation is 677 for moderate income units and 1,588 for above moderate-income units. The City anticipates the ability to meet the moderate and above moderate income housing unit need through a mixture of existing residentially zoned areas as well as some of the mixed use areas within the community. Furthermore, approximately 103 accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are anticipated to be developed within the moderate and above moderate income RHNA categories.

ANALYSIS OF THE CITY’S EXISTING CAPACITY AND ZONING
The Housing Element must demonstrate the City’s ability to accommodate the RHNA either through production or the availability of properly zoned land that can accommodate additional growth. The City of Orange is able to accommodate all of its moderate and above moderate income RHNA need through available land with existing zoning classifications that permit residential as a primary use, as well as through the anticipated development of accessory dwelling units.

Appendix B in this document contains a list and description of the sites designated to meet the City’s moderate and above-moderate need. Table 3-14 below summarizes the capacity of the sites by current zoning classification which can accommodate 732 moderate income and 1,777 above moderate-income dwelling units. In conjunction with ADU development, these amounts exceed the City’s 2021-2029 RHNA allocation as shown in Table 3-17.
705
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-53 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 3-14: Residential Capacity for Moderate and Above Moderate Income Sites Max Density
du/acre
Reasonable
Density
du/acre
Number of
Parcels Acreage Potential Units
Above Moderate Income Sites
R-1-7 8 6 2 13.57 81
UMU 60 55 15 40.88 1,696
Subtotal -- -- 17 54.45 1,777
Moderate Income Sites
NMU-24 24 16.3 9 7.28 114
UMU 60 55 4 14.92 618
Subtotal -- -- 13 22.20 732
Total -- -- 56 76.64 2,509

REASONABLE CAPACITY ASSUMPTIONS
This section describes the methodology developed to determine the site capacity for the moderate and above moderate-income sites. Reasonable capacity for sites identified to meet the City’s above moderate need was calculated based on a number of factors, including site size, existing zoning requirements, and the maximum density achievable for projects within all residential and mixed-use zones. Based on the analysis conducted, it was determined that the identified sites within the existing R-1-7, NMU-24, and UMU zones and projected ADU production could accommodate the City’s moderate and above moderate income RHNA need without any changes to the existing zoning.

Reasonable capacity for sites identified to meet the City’s moderate need was calculated based on the same methodology described above, however the methodology assumed development of sites at reasonable density assumptions (identified in Table 3-14 above) consistent with the City’s Land Use Element. These densities are below the maximum density permitted in each zone and provide a conservative estimate on potential development yield on the identified sites.

Potential constraints, to the extent they are known, such as environmentally sensitive areas and steep slopes were considered and deductions made where those factors decreased the net buildable area of a parcel. Additionally, existing units on non-vacant parcels were analyzed to determine the number of existing units currently on the parcel. Replacement of existing units was included as a factor within the City’s analysis and existing residential units were factored out of the anticipated development yield.

Sites Suitable for Lower Income Housing
The City of Orange has a RHNA need of 1,067 very-low income units and 604 low-income units. The City has identified mixed-use zoned parcels that permit development at up to 60 dwelling units per acre which can accommodate 1,522 dwelling units. The City also anticipates the development of 217 affordable ADUs based on the methodology described in this section. This is in excess of the City’s 1,671 unit low and verylow RHNA need by 68 units, or an additional 4 percent. As demonstrated in this section, the City of Orange 706
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-54 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
has the capacity to accommodate their RHNA need and believes based on past performance of developing affordable projects that this is an appropriate buffer should some sites not develop as anticipated. In addition, the City has made conservative unit yield assumptions, including:
 An assumption that projects within the Urban Mixed Use (UMU) zone, which is anticipated to accommodate the City’s lower income RHNA need, will develop at 55 dwelling units per acre.

Projects in this zone are permitted up to 60 dwelling units per acre and may go higher if they incorporate density bonus provisions.
 An assumption that only 25 percent of units included within a project will develop at the affordable levels. While it is likely that not all projects will develop with a 25 percent affordable component, the City has a history of building 100 percent affordable projects which can offset a potential deficit.

Orange is a primarily built out City with little available vacant land that can be developed for residential uses. Where possible, the City has identified vacant land and included those parcels within the sites inventory located in Appendix B. As shown in Table 3-15, all of the City’s lower income RHNA need is anticipated to be accommodated within the UMU zone, which can accommodate development at up to 60 dwelling units per acre. Table 3-18, shown later in this section, describes recent residential projects developed in the UMU zone, including the use prior to developing for housing and a project analysis which shows why these types of projects are good comparative examples of the types of residential the City anticipates in this zone during the 6th cycle planning period.

The very-low and low-income sites inventory within Appendix B describes each of these sites, with information provided per the HCD required data tables. Dwelling unit yield for each of the parcels within this inventory were analyzed to determine a net parcel size based on the City’s established definition of net acreage and known physical and environmental constraints.

Non-vacant sites designated to meet the very-low and low-income RHNA need that have been identified in a previous Housing Element and vacant sites designated to meet the very-low and low-income RHNA need that have been identified in two previous housing elements will also be required to permit ‘by-right’ approval for any project with 20 percent low income housing that does not involve a subdivision per State law. This is described in Program 2L within the Housing Plan.

Table 3-15: Residential Capacity for Very Low- and Low-Income Sites Max Density Reasonable
Density Number of Parcels Acreage Potential Units
Urban Mixed
Use (UMU) 60 55 36 56.25 1,522
Total -- -- 36 56.25 1,522

EXISTING OR PLANNED POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
The City of Orange has several mixed-use districts oriented towards introducing residential uses into historically commercial/office/industrial areas of the community at higher densities than the single-family neighborhoods found throughout the city. The Urban Mixed Use (UMU) zone was established to provide 707
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-55 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
urban, high-intensity, regionally-oriented activity centers. Per the City’s zoning code, residential development is allowed, either as part of a mixed use project or as a freestanding use. Convenient transit access, innovative housing options, and pedestrian-oriented design are key considerations for development within the UMU zone. Permitted densities within this zone range from 30-60 du/ac, well above the default density for Orange.

REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION
Future Housing Needs
Future housing need refers to the share of the regional housing need that has been allocated to the City.

HCD supplies a regional housing goal number to the SCAG. SCAG is then mandated to allocate a portion of the overall housing units for the region to each city and county jurisdictions in the region through a RHNA Plan. In allocating the region’s future housing needs to jurisdictions, SCAG is required to take the following factors into consideration pursuant to Section 65584 of the State Government Code:
 Market demand for housing;
 Employment opportunities;
 Availability of suitable sites and public facilities;  Commuting patterns;
 Type and tenure of housing;
 Loss of units in assisted housing developments;
 Over-concentration of lower income households; and
 Geological and topographical constraints.

SCAG adopted its RHNA in March 2021. This RHNA covers an 8-year planning period (starting in 2021) and addresses housing issues that are related to future growth in the region. The RHNA allocates to each city and county a “fair share” of the region’s projected housing needs by household income group. The major goal of the RHNA is to assure a fair distribution of housing among cities and counties within the Orange County region.

The City of Orange’s share of the SCAG regional growth allocation is 3,936 new units for the current planning period (2021-2029). Table 3-16, Housing Needs for 2021-2029, indicates the City’s RHNA need for the stated planning period.

Table 3-16: City of Orange Housing Needs for 2021-2029
Income Category (% of County AMI) Number of Units Percent Extremely Low (30% or less) 534
Very Low (31 to 50%)1 1,067 27.1%
Low (51 to 80%) 604 15.3%
Moderate (81% to 120%) 677 17.2%
Above Moderate (Over 120%) 1,588 40.4%
Total 3,936 100.0%
708
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-56 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Note 1: Pursuant to AB 2634, local jurisdictions are also required to project the housing needs of extremely low income households (0-30% AMI). In estimating the number of extremely low income households, a jurisdiction can use 50% of the very low income allocation or apportion the very low income figure based on Census data.

Source: Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation, SCAG, 2021

ADEQUACY OF SITES FOR RHNA
The City of Orange has a total 2021-2029 RHNA allocation of 3,936 units as show in Table 3-17. The Housing Element update lists sites, including accessory dwelling units, that can accommodate approximately 4,352 additional units, 416 units in excess of the required 3,936 units. As described in this section, the City believes that due to recent State legislation and local efforts to promote accessory dwelling unit production, the City can realistically anticipate the development of 320 ADUs within the 8- year planning period. Overall, the City has adequate capacity to accommodate its 2021-2029 RHNA with a five percent buffer in excess of the City’s very-lower income RHNA need and a 2 percent buffer in excess of the City’s lower income RHNA. The City of Orange believes that due to the realistic assumptions outlined in this section, this buffer will be adequate to accommodate sites within the inventory that may not develop at the anticipated affordability level.

Table 3-17: Summary of RHNA Status and Sites Inventory
Extremely Low/
Very Low
Income
Units*
Low Income
Units
Moderate
Income
Units
Above
Moderate
Income
Units
Total
2021-2029 RHNA 1,067 604 677 1,588 3,936
RHNA Credit (Units Built) -- -- -- -- --
Total RHNA Obligations 1,067 604 677 1,588 3,936
Sites Available
Residential Zones 0 0 0 81 81
NMU-24 16 4 114 0 134
Urban Mixed Use (UMU) 1,025 478 618 1,696 3,817
Total Potential Capacity Based on
Existing GP and Zoning 1,041 482 732 1,777 4,032
Accessory Dwelling Unit Production 80 137 96 7 320
Total Sites Available 1,121 619 828 1,784 4,352
Sites Surplus +54 +15 +151 +196 +416
Note: *Extremely Low Income is calculated as 50% of the City’s Very Low Income RHNA need.

Development of Non-Vacant Sites and Converting to Residential Uses The City has designated primarily non-vacant sites to meet their lower income 6th Cycle RHNA need, as well as a portion of the moderate and above moderate need. The City is reliant on infill development on non-vacant parcels to meet its RHNA need. Parcels designated to meet the two remaining categories (very low and low-income) are on mixed-use zoned parcels within the UMU zone. These parcels have a mixture of existing uses, which are described in detail in Appendix B. 709
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-57 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
State law requires that the City analyze:
 the extent to which existing uses may constitute an impediment to the future residential development within the planning period,
 the City’s past experience with converting existing uses to higher density residential uses,  current market demand for the existing use,
 analysis of leases that would prevent redevelopment of the site,  development trends,
 market conditions, and
 regulations or incentives to encourage redevelopment.

Past Experience Developing Non-Vacant Sites for Residential Uses The following approved projects illustrate the viability of developing non-vacant, non-residentially zoned sites within Orange. These projects are all zoned Urban Mixed Use (UMU) consistent with the projects identified within the City’s sites analysis to meet the lower income RHNA need. The UMU zone is intended to promote an urban, high-intensity mixed-use area with integrated commercial retail/office, high-density housing, and civic uses. This zone permits residential development at up to 60 dwelling units per acre, though the City has assumed development at 50 dwelling units per acre for the analysis.

The projects below were developed with a mixture of uses and the square footage of non-residential uses has been provided where available.

Table 3-18: Example Development of Non-Vacant Sites for Residential Uses Project Address/
APN
Dwelling
Units Zoning Use Prior to Redevelopment Project Analysis 3537 The City Way/
23106137 334 UMU
Surface parking lot
for medical, hotel
and office
buildings.

AMLI Apartments. 4-story wrap
apartment project developed at 60
du/ac. The project was completed in
2017 and achieved the maximum density.

Developed directly adjacent to the
Outlets at Orange
1110 Town and
Country Road/
39062102
260 UMU
Vacant lot
adjacent to an
existing office
tower
(underdeveloped
office tower Phase
II)
Eleven10 Apartments. 5-story podium
apartment project developed at 60
du/ac. Project site is adjacent to existing
office and commercial uses. The project
was completed in 2018 and achieved the
maximum density. The project was
developed as horizontal mixed-use with
existing office uses.
1055 Town and
Country Road/
04121405
262 UMU
Surface parking lot
for existing office
building.

Cameo Apartments. 5-story apartment
project developed at 44 du/ac. Recently
completed in 2020. The project was
developed as horizontal mixed-use with
existing office uses.
1725 W. Katella/
27530106 94 UMU
Low-rise light
industrial/office
Branch West (aka Garrison Apartments).

Apartment building is a podium product
involving a development agreement to
710
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-58 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 3-18: Example Development of Non-Vacant Sites for Residential Uses Project Address/
APN
Dwelling
Units Zoning Use Prior to Redevelopment Project Analysis building with
surface parking lot
allow a transfer of development rights
from an adjacent City water well site to
exceed the General Plan’s maximum 60
du/acre density. Final certificate of
occupancy pending.
702-1078 Town and
Country Road/
04121305
709 (635
Apartments
& 74
Townhomes)
UMU
Low-rise office
park with surface
parking lot
Fairfield Apartments and Tri-Point
Townhomes. Developed at 60 du/ac.

Apartments are developed in two
separate buildings; one with 295 units and
the other with 358 units. Both apartment
buildings wrap multi-level parking
structures. The project is currently under
construction.

These projects demonstrate that there is a recent history of successfully developing residential units within the Urban Mixed Use zones in Orange. Three of the five projects shown developed at the maximum density permitted of 60 dwelling units per acre while one developed above that density at 85 du/ac. While these horizontal mixed use projects were originally proposed at densities lower than permitted, the City averages the density over the entire horizontal mixed use site in order to accommodate the residential infill. Additionally, the City requires access easements for parking and emergency access in perpetuity in order to justify the properties as integrated mixed use sites. Based on the size of the parcel that is created for the residential component of these projects, all mixed use projects exceed the allowable density. The remaining project developed under the maximum density at 44 dwelling units per acre due to retaining existing office uses onsite. A workforce housing study determined that all of the sample projects shown in Table 3-18 were affordable at the moderate income level.

To accommodate the potential for a lower number of residential units due to a mixture of uses onsite, the City has made assumptions within the sites analysis which base development production on a 48 dwelling units per acre density as described previously in this appendix. This is a conservative estimate as the examples show that most projects developed in the UMU zone do so at or above the maximum density due to the City’s actions to address development constraints. The Housing Plan section outlines actions the City will take to promote the development of affordable units within the mixed used areas.

Existing Uses on Candidate Sites
Table B-3 shows the existing uses on each of the candidate sites identified to meet Orange’s low and verylow income RHNA need. These sites range from commercial and office to underutilized surface parking lots. Where it is known that there are either temporarily or permanently closed or actively for lease/sale sites, this has been indicated within the individual parcel analysis.

The City is continuing to outreach to property owners of the identified candidate sites and the development community to collect letters of interest in residential development. Letters received are included within Appendix A.
711
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-59 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Lease Analysis
Existing lease agreements on infill and non-vacant properties present a potential impediment that may prevent residential development within the planning period. State law requires the City to consider lease terms in evaluating the use of non-vacant sites, however the City does not have access to private party lease agreements or other contractual agreements amongst private parties. As part of the sites analysis for very-low and low-income sites, the City notified property owners whose properties were identified as part of the sites analysis. As the City is not proposing to rezone or change the zoning on properties, this notification was purely informative to let property owners know why their parcel was identified and gather feedback.

Regulatory Incentives
The City of Orange does not currently have any regulatory incentives aimed at the development of lower income housing. Density bonus is a Statewide program which provides concessions to developers who propose a certain percentage of affordable units as part of their project. By right, developers who meet any level of density bonus requirements are permitted additional density and a lowered parking ratio.

Additional concessions may be available depending on the type of project, such as lowered requirements for certain development standards such as FAR, open space, or others.

The City has created Programs 2B and 2G which are written to address actions the City will take which may promote development of affordable housing.

Current Market Demand for Existing Uses
The areas within Orange identified as the most likely to redevelop at densities suitable for lower income housing are primarily in areas with existing commercial and office uses. Due to the pandemic, these markets have seen a large decrease in demand as companies shrink their physical footprint, introduce flexibility to workers through work from home options, or hasten the transition to a focus on virtual sales.

A November 2020 report by HughesMarino3 on the Orange County commercial real estate market and the impacts of COVID-19 showed a 34 percent increase in sublease office space from a year ago. Sublease inventory occurs at cheaper rents and shorter terms than typical leases and indicates a hesitancy on the part of office space users. The report goes on to say that “many office tenants that have had leases expire since the pandemic started have not renewed their leases and have elected to operate until post-COVID without any office space, essentially foregoing having any significant office space until they can reassess their needs in the post pandemic reality. Further, many office tenants with lease expirations in the next six months are also choosing not to renew their lease for the same reason. This is more common for smaller companies with 50 or fewer employees that are working fully remote and have determined that eliminating the expense of office space is to their benefit. This has caused an uptick in Orange County office space availability, where the availability of office space in the county has gone up from 3 https://hughesmarino.com/orange-county/blog/2020/11/10/who-is-hurting-who-is-thriving-inorange-county-commercial-real-estate/ 712
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-60 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
approximately 17.6M square feet last year to about 24M square feet today—a 36 percent increase.” This trend is reflected throughout southern California with many employers having developed the infrastructure to work primarily remotely.

Additionally, the 2021 Emerging Trends in Real Estate Report4, prepared by PwC and the Urban Land Institute (ULI), discusses the decline in demand for retail space that has been occurring far before COVID19 hit. The report sites greater debt among millennials and Gen X along with a shift to online sales.

Further, the report states that “retailers announced more than 5,800 closures in 2018, jumping to over 9,300 in 2019. Rising retail bankruptcies account for only part of the story. Of greater importance, retail chains are downsizing their store counts and closing underperforming stores…” This all points to a need to diversify traditionally retail corridors and other areas by bringing in new users who can help to revitalize retail uses.

Development Trends
In addition to commercial office and smaller retail centers, the City has identified sites in and around The Outlets at Orange property, which is zoned UMU and permits residential development, as sites with the potential to redevelop for residential uses.

The Outlets at Orange located in the Uptown Orange area of the city is a 57 acre outdoor mall with approximately 860,000 square feet of commercial uses, including restaurants, shops and entertainment uses surrounded by concentrated medical and office activity. As the dynamic of retail changes, there is a push towards creating lifestyle centers with a mixture of using, including higher density residential uses to draw in more potential buyers and locate them on-site. While the Outlets is a well-performing retail center, in recent years multi-family residential projects have been constructed or entitled on surrounding infill sites, incrementally having the resulting effect of a horizontal mixed-use urban district.

The following regional malls within Orange County, which have similar development characteristics to the Outlets at Orange, have completed planning and entitlement efforts to permit residential uses.  MainPlace Mall, Santa Ana, CA – In 2019, MainPlace Mall completed a Specific Plan which permits the development of up to 1,900 residential units at densities up to 90 dwelling units per acre.

Anticipated development also includes up to 400 hotel rooms, a total of 1,400,000 square feet of commercial uses, and up to 750,00 square feet of office space. MainPlace Mall is smaller than the Outlets at Orange at approximately 49 acres. The two malls are roughly 1.5 miles apart in adjacent cities. These malls share the following characteristics:
o Location and local/regional context. The two malls are roughly 1.5 miles apart. Both malls serve a market area that is close to freeways for regional access and provide needed housing at an easily accessible location.
4 https://www.pwc.com/us/en/asset-management/real-estate/assets/pwc-emerging-trends-in-realestate-2021.pdf 713
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-61 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
o Existing Character. MainPlace and The Outlets are both surrounded primarily by surface parking lots with opportunity for redevelopment.
 Westminster Mall, Westminster, CA – The City of Westminster is currently working with property owners on the Westminster Mall Specific Plan which is anticipated to provide guidelines for mixed commercial, professional office, hotel, and residential development (which would vary in housing type and affordability). A maximum of 3,000 dwelling units, 425 hotel rooms, 1.2 million square feet of non-residential uses (retail and office), and a maximum height of 10 stories are being analyzed as part of the project’s EIR.5 These malls share the following characteristics:
o Location/local market. Westminster Mall is located directly adjacent to I-405 and in close proximity to Beach Boulevard and a number of job-creating uses. Similarly, the Outlets at Orange are at the intersection of two major freeways (I-5 and SR-22) and in close proximity to job creating use corridors along Main Street and Chapman Avenue. o Character. Westminster Mall is surrounded by parking, most of which remains largely unused. This parking could be easily accommodated within a structure as is planned in the specific plan.
 Village at Laguna Hills, Laguna Hills, CA – In 2016, Laguna Hills Mall began a transformation to add approximately 1,500 residential units, 150 hotel rooms, and 465,000 square feet of office to the existing mall. A portion of the units have been constructed to date. These malls share the following characteristics:
o Character. Similar to the Outlets, Laguna Hills Mall is a partially outdoor mall/lifestyle center with parking completely surrounding commercial uses. Both malls are directly adjacent to large job creating uses in the form of major medical centers. o Location. Laguna Hills Mall is directly adjacent to the I-5 freeway and regionally serving.

Similarly, the Outlets at Orange are at the intersection of two major freeways (I-5 and SR22).

Multi-family housing development that has occurred on parking lot sites within the City of Orange has been successful, including multiple apartment buildings directly west of the Outlets. While there were three infill housing projects approved in the vicinity of the Outlets, also infill on surface parking lots, it is the City’s understanding that the projects did not move forward due to economic uncertainties due to the pandemic. The City is optimistic that these projects will come back in some form in the future. The mall ownership has also indicated that it is contemplating future housing integration into its site as the housing the did get built has proven to be a positive addition to their patron mix. The Outlets property remains an ideal location for future housing opportunities as malls become mixed-use, walkable lifestyle centers with a focus on the synergy between residential, commercial, and office uses.

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT PRODUCTION
One of the proposed methods for meeting the City’s moderate and above moderate RHNA is through the promotion and development of ADUs. A number of State Assembly and Senate Bills were passed in 2019 and 2020 that promote and remove barriers that may inhibit the development of ADUs within 5 https://www.westminster-ca.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=1568 714
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-62 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
communities. These bills, as well as other significant legislation relating to ADUs creates a development environment that is likely to increase the number of ADUs developed within Orange over the 2021-2029 planning period. Orange, with a large proportion of single-family residential properties (many on larger lots), is well-oriented for the development of ADUs.

The City saw an increase in ADU approvals in 2020. The City had 27 ADUs approved for development between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020, an 170 percent increase from the 10 ADUs the City permitted in 2019. HCD guidance states that ADUs may be calculated based on the City’s production since January 1, 2018. In 2018 and 2019, the City of Orange approved 15 and 10 ADUs respectively. The City of Orange has determined based on past performance and HCDs approved methodology that it is appropriate to anticipate the development of 40 accessory dwelling units per year from 2021 to 2029 for a total of 320 ADUs.

F. Financial Resources
Providing an adequate supply of decent and affordable housing requires funding from various sources, the City has access to the following finding sources.

Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher
The Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program is a Federal government program to assist very lowincome families, the elderly, and the disabled with rent subsidy payments in privately owned rental housing units. Section 8 participants are able to choose any housing that meets the requirements of the program and are not limited to units located within subsidized housing projects. They typically pay 30 to 40 percent of their income for rent and utilities. The Orange County Housing Authority currently administers Section 8 Housing Choice vouchers within the City of Orange. The City’s goal is to assist 483 households each year.

Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program provides annual grants on a formula basis to cities to develop viable urban communities by providing a suitable living environments and by expanding economic opportunities, principally for low- and moderate-income persons (up to 80 percent AMI).

CDBG funds can be used for a wide array of activities, including:
 Housing rehabilitation;
 Lead-based paint screening and abatement;
 Acquisition of buildings and land;
 Construction or rehabilitation of public facilities and infrastructure, and:
 Public services for low income households and those with special needs. 715
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-63 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME)
The HOME program provides federal funds for the development and rehabilitation of affordable rental and ownership housing for households with incomes not exceeding 80 percent of area median income.

The program gives local governments the flexibility to fund a wide range of affordable housing activities through housing partnerships with private industry and non-profit organizations. HOME funds can be used for activities that promote affordable rental housing and homeownership by low income households.

The City of Orange receives HOME funds from HUD annually. The City qualifies as an entitlement jurisdiction and the Community Development Departments serves as the grantee to administer CDBG and HOME funds in accordance with the pertaining statutory and regulatory requirements. Table 3-19 below identifies the funding allocated to different services and persons assisted, based on the City’s 2015-20 Consolidated Plan. Additionally the City is utilizing HOME funds to assist in development of the Corp Yard Housing Project.

Table 3-19: 2015-20 HOME and CDBG Allocation
2015-2020 Goal Name
and Category
CDBG and HOME Funds Goals (Persons Assisted) 2015-2018
Accomplishments
Affordable Housing $1.5 million 1,800 1,349
Homeless $61,000 30 12
Public Facilities $4.1 million 57,870 12,651
Public Services $845,000 231,800 230,698
G. Energy Conservation
The primary uses of energy in urban areas are for transportation lighting, water heating, and space heating and cooling. The high cost of energy demands that efforts be taken to reduce or minimize the overall level of urban energy consumption. Energy conservation is important in preserving non-renewable fuels to ensure that these resources are available for use by future generations. There are also a number of benefits associated with energy conservation including improved air quality and lower energy costs.

The City of Orange is collaborating with Southern California Edison and SoCalGas through the North Orange County Cities Energy Partnership (NOCC) to help the City achieve its energy reductions goals.

716
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-64 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
H. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
All Housing Elements due on or after January 1, 2021 must contain an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) consistent with the core elements of the analysis required by the federal Affirmatively Further Fair Housing Final Rule of July 16, 2015.

Under State law, affirmatively further fair housing means “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combatting discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. These characteristics can include, but are not limited to race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familiar status, or disability.

The Draft Regional Analysis of Impediments (AI) to Fair Housing Choice for FY 2020-25 was made available for public review and finalized on May 5, 2020. The Fair Housing Council of Orange County works under the direction of a volunteer board of directors and staff to fulfill a mission of protecting the quality of life in Orange County by ensuring equal access to housing opportunities, fostering diversity and preserving dignity and human rights. The agency is a HUD Approved Housing Counseling Agency and provides oneon-one education, mediation, and counseling for individuals and families throughout the Orange County region.

The AI identifies impediments that may prevent equal housing access and develops solutions to mitigate or remove such impediments. Orange’s 6th Cycle Housing Element references analysis from the regional FY 2020-2025 AI in order to identify potential impediments to housing that are specific to Orange. The City also completed its FY 2020-24 Consolidated Plan, as an entitlement city for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding, which identifies housing problems within the community, specifically among low and very-low income households. Fair housing is identified as a priority within the Consolidated Plan.

I. Needs Assessment
The AI contains a Countywide analysis of demographic, housing, and specifically fair housing issues for all of the cities in Orange County, including Orange. The City's demographic and income profile, household and housing characteristics, housing cost and availability, and special needs populations were discussed in the previous Section 2: Community Profile.

Fair Housing Issues
As a part of the development of the FY 2020-25 AI and in order to ensure that the analysis accurately reflected the conditions in the community, extensive outreach and testing was done, including interviews, community meetings, focus groups and workshops and public hearings. In order to gather input and participation, the County reached out to tenants, landlords, homeowners, fair housing organizations, civil 717
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-65 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
rights and advocacy organizations, legal services provers, social services providers, housing developers, and industry groups to hear directly about fair housing issues affecting residents of Orange County.

Public hearings and City Council meetings were held throughout the County during the Spring. Due to the prohibition of gatherings because of COVID-19, hearings and meetings were held remotely. All community meetings had translation services available if requested in Spanish and Vietnamese. Public hearings and City Council meetings were held throughout the County during the Spring. Due to the prohibition of gatherings due to COVID, hearings and meetings were held remotely.

The City does not regularly conduct fair housing testing; however the regional AI identified the following fair housing issues in the City:
 Educational Opportunities: The City of Orange struggled with educational opportunity, all with scores in the 30s to 40s on a scale of 100 for the composite education index, signifying low opportunity and resources. This analysis is explained in more detail in this section relating to disparities in access to opportunity.
 Environmental Opportunities: Orange City in one of the least environmentally healthy, with index scores in the 20s on a scale of 100 for the environmental opportunity index, signifying low opportunity and resources.
 Economic Opportunities: The City of Orange has relatively large disparities by protected class groups, where Hispanic residents have significantly lower access to economic opportunity (economic access includes job access and opportunity, and other economic upward mobility opportunities) than other racial/ethnic groups.
 Regional Opportunity, Place: The City of Orange has two of census tracts which have low resources and access to opportunities for upward mobility of residents. Specifically, these areas have low opportunity for housing and civic life resources. These census tracts do not provide appropriate or sufficient housing access for current residents and therefore create fair housing barriers.

Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach Capacity
City of Orange
Currently, the Fair Housing Foundation (FHF) provides fair housing services to the City of Orange. This includes offering fair housing counseling and landlord/tenant mediation services which are available for tenants, realtors, apartment owners and managers, lending institutions and other interested parties.

Specifically, the FHF promotes services and educational activities via social media, twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and online. FHF uses USPS Door-to-Door service to reach the community directly. Through the USPS website they are able search for neighborhoods/zip codes, filters target customers by specific demographics such as age, household size, and income, etc. FHF targets lower income areas, and the Postal Service carrier delivers FHF information mailers to every address while delivering the day's mail.

Additionally, the FHF mails flyers to local public departments such as library, city hall, and community organizations they have built relationships with. The City of Orange annually allocates $24,522 in CDBG 718
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-66 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
funds for the Fair Housing Foundation in an effort to assist an estimated 150 families and to perform the following services, at no cost:
 Responding to discrimination inquiries and complaints, documenting and investigating discrimination complaints, and resolving or mediating discrimination complaints  A comprehensive, extensive and viable education and outreach program, including:
o Fair Housing Workshop
o Certificate Management Training
o Walk-In Clinics
o Rental Housing Counseling Workshop
o Community presentations, staff training, and workshops o Community events, booths, networking, etc.
 Landlord and tenant counseling on responsibilities and rights  Rental counseling
In FY 2019 the Fair Housing Foundation provided services to 161 residents of the City of Orange. The Fair Housing Foundations offers regular walk-in counseling sessions, in addition to resources fairs, informational workshops (accessible in multiple languages), landlord and tenant workshops, and other outreach efforts. The City has confirmed with the Fair Housing Foundation that there are no current lawsuits, enforcement actions, settlements, or judgments related to fair housing or civil rights as of the adoption of this document. Furthermore, the City of Orange has no active cases relating to fair housing issues.

As part of the FY 2020-25 Consolidated Plan for Orange, the City has set an annual goal of assisting 150 families or households with fair housing issues, within the five-year period this equates to a goal of 750 families or households. Orange has also set a goal of retaining a Fair Housing provider to promote fair housing education and outreach within the community. HUD maintains a record of all housing discrimination complaints filed in local jurisdictions. These grievances can be filed on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, religion, familial status and retaliation. In 2019, 16 fair housing complaints were filed involving housing discrimination in the City of Orange.

Orange County
The Fair Housing Council of Orange County (FHCOC), a private non-profit fair housing group, is under contract to the County to administer a wide variety of fair housing services to residents of Orange County.

The FHCOC provides the following services to Orange County residents:
 Serving as a fair housing resource for the region, including implementation of an affirmative fair housing marketing plan, testing, and complaint verification;  Responding to all citizen complaints regarding violation of fair housing laws;  Providing tenant-landlord counseling to all inquiring citizens;  Promoting community awareness of tenant-landlord rights and responsibilities;  Reporting monthly on complaint processing;
 Providing fair housing education to residents, County staff, community organizations, agencies, and service providers;
719
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-67 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
 Increasing the supply of affordable housing in high opportunity areas;  Preventing displacement of low- and moderate-income residents, seniors, and people with disabilities;
 Increasing community integration for persons with disabilities;  Ensuring equal access to housing for persons with protected characteristics, who are disproportionately likely to be lower-income and to experience homelessness; and  Expanding access to opportunities for protected classes.

During the 2015-2019 reporting period, the FHCOC staff regionally received 363 allegations of housing discrimination and opened 179 cases where the allegations seemed sufficiently meritorious to warrant further investigation and/or action. FHCOC held 32 training sessions for rental property owners/managers and also presented 16 fair housing seminars and 70 general fair housing workshops.

The FHCOC ensures that the City’s fair housing practices are consistent with State law and that residents have the tools and resources they need to address fair housing issues appropriately. The City relies on the FHCOC to track, monitor, and investigate fair housing cases as well as hold training sessions for property owners/managers.

Housing Element Update Outreach
Additionally, as a part of the Housing Element update the City hosted of variety of workshops and other engagement opportunities to gather input on housing needs, challenges, opportunities, and other feedback regarding housing in Orange. The City’s outreach strategies and summaries of all events and surveys is available for review in Appendix C of this Housing Element.

Throughout the outreach and engagement process the City identified the following key themes:
 Community participants are interested in mixed use opportunities in Orange.  Community participants opined an overall lack of affordable housing options in the City.  Community participants would like to see and have more housing information and educational resources about housing opportunities and programs.
 Community participants opined transit centers and mixed-use areas as having the most potential for new housing opportunities.
 Community participants opined a lack of information about housing resources and an overall lack of housing availability were primary concerns they would like the City to focus on mitigating.

The themes identified above informed the direction of the data analysis for the Housing Element, as well as areas of focus for the Fair Housing analysis and the development of the Housing Plan (Section 4).

Fair Housing Laws
The following lists State and local fair housing laws and specifies how the City complies:

State
 California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA): The City continues to implement and update programs that promote fair and equal access to housing. The City continues to review standards 720
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-68 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
and requirements that may constrain equal access to housing and the development of affordable housing.
 Government Code section 65008: The City continues to implement programs that encourage affordable housing development. Policy Actions 2B, 2G, 2M, 4A, are programs in the City that comply with the State’s requirement for fair review of affordable housing development.  Government Code section 8899.50: The City implements programs and actions in compliance with State law that affirmatively furthers fair housing. As detailed in in this Section 3, the City administers programs to promote equal housing access and affordable resources.  Government Code section 11135: The City promotes state-funded programs, such as the FirstTime Homebuyer Loan Program, on the City’s website and at the public counter. The City continues to implement and encourages programs that promote full and equal access to all programs and activities.
 Density Bonus Law: The City establishes regulations for implementing the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance. The City provides incentives to developers to produce affordable housing to very lowincome households, low-income households, moderate-income households, senior citizens, transitional foster youth, disabled veterans, and persons experiencing homelessness, as well as for the development of childcare facilities. Section 3.B.2 details the City’s compliance with the State Density Bonus Law.
 Housing Accountability Act: The City implements programs such as fee incentives, funding, and review of zoning procedures to facilitate and encourage housing development.  No-Net-Loss law: Section 4: Housing Plan, and Appendix B: Candidate Sites Analysis, details how the City maintains adequate sites to accommodate all income categories for RHNA.  Excessive Subdivision standards: The City continues to update its zoning code, waive certain development fees, and offer incentive packages to facilitate housing development.  Limits on growth controls: The City identifies sites by income category in Appendix B: Candidate Sites Analysis, to meet the City’s RHNA. None of the sites identified as part of the analysis have known constraints.
 Housing Element Law: The City identifies and includes an analysis of existing and projected housing needs and a statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, financial resources, and scheduled programs.

Local
 Local Ordinances: The City has a number of local ordinances that establishes procedures for rezoning, development permit processing, affordable housing fees, and other programs that encourage fair housing practices.
 Housing Plan Programs: Section 4: Housing Plan details the City’s goals, policies, programs, and objectives. The City addresses the need for additional housing opportunities, remove constraints to affordable housing, improving the existing housing stock, and provide equal opportunities for current and future residents of Orange.

721
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-69 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
J. Analysis of Federal, State, and Local Data and Local Knowledge Integration and Segregation Patterns and Trends
The dissimilarity index is the most commonly used measure of segregation between two groups, reflecting their relative distributions across neighborhoods (as defined by census tracts). The index represents the percentage of the minority group that would have to move to new neighborhoods to achieve perfect integration of that group. An index score can range in value from 0 percent, indicating complete integration, to 100 percent, indicating complete segregation. An index number above 60 is considered to show high similarity and a segregated community.

It is important to note that segregation is a complex topic, difficult to generalize, and is influenced by many factors. Individual choices can be a cause of segregation, with some residents choosing to live among people of their own race or ethnic group. For instance, recent immigrants often depend on nearby relatives, friends, and ethnic institutions to help them adjust to a new country.6 Alternatively, when white residents leave neighborhoods that become more diverse, those neighborhoods can become segregated.

Other factors, including housing market dynamics, availability of lending to different ethnic groups, availability of affordable housing, and discrimination can also cause residential segregation.

Figure 3-1 shows the dissimilarity between each if the identified race and ethnic groups and Orange’s White population. The higher scores indicate higher levels of segregation among those racial and ethnic group. According to the data, there are highest dissimilarity rates among the Native Hawaiian and those who identified as Hispanic. Specifically, 45.8 percent of the Native Hawaiian population in Orange would need to move into predominantly White neighborhoods for perfect integration and 46.3 percent of persons who identified as Hispanic in Orange would need to move into predominantly White neighborhoods for perfect integration.

Additionally, Figure 3-2 and 3-3 show the City’s Diversity Index for 2010 and 2018. In 2010, the City had low diversity towards the center and in the eastern region. By 2018 diversity had increased throughout the City and predominantly in areas that previously had lower diversity. Areas of lower diversity still exist towards the City’s eastern region and the center, but the City shows a diversifying trend.

6 Allen, James P. and Turner, Eugene. “Changing Faces, Changing Places: Mapping Southern California”. California State University, Northridge, (2002).
722
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-70 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 3-1: Dissimilarity Index with Whites – Orange
Source: Census Scope, Social Science Data Analysis Network, *Not Hispanic or Latino

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Black*
American Indian*
Asian*
Native Hawaiian*
Other*
Two or More Races*
Hispanic
Black* American
Indian* Asian*
Native
Hawaiian
* Other*
Two or
More
Races*
Hispanic
Dissimilarity Index with Whites 39.2 33.6 30.6 45.8 45.3 18.9 46.3 723
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-71 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 3-2: Diversity Index, Orange (2010)

Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 724
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-72 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 3-3: Diversity Index, Orange (2018)

Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 725
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-73 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAP) To assist communities in identifying racially/ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs), HUD has developed a census tract-based definition of R/ECAPs. The definition involves a racial/ethnic concentration threshold and a poverty test. The racial/ethnic concentration threshold is straightforward:

RECAPs must have a non-white population of 50 percent or more. Regarding the poverty threshold, Wilson (1980) defines neighborhoods of extreme poverty as census tracts with 40 percent or more of individuals living at or below the poverty line. Because overall poverty levels are substantially lower in many parts of the country, HUD supplements this with an alternate criterion. Thus, a neighborhood can be a RECAP if it has a poverty rate that exceeds 40 percent or is three or more times the average tract poverty rate for the metropolitan/micropolitan area, whichever threshold is lower.

Location of residence can have a substantial effect on mental and physical health, education opportunities, and economic opportunities. Urban areas that are more residentially segregated by race and income tend to have lower levels of upward economic mobility than other areas. Research has found that racial inequality is thus amplified by residential segregation.7 However, these areas may also provide different opportunities, such as ethnic enclaves providing proximity to centers of cultural significance, or business, social networks and communities to help immigrants preserve cultural identify and establish themselves in new places. Overall, it is important to study and identify these areas in order to understand patterns of segregation and poverty in a City. The 2020 AI performed an analysis of R/ECAPs within Orange County and found four R/ECAPs, none of which were found in Orange. Figure 3-4 below displays the results of the analysis.
7 Orange County, Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, April 2020 DRAFT. 726
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-74 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 3-4: Low Poverty Index with Race/Ethnicity and R/ECAPs, Orange Source: HUD Affirmitaevly Furthering Fair Housing Data and Mapping Tool, Data Versions: AFFHT0006, July 10, 2020 727
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-75 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAA) The City has gathered demographic information regarding race/ethnicity concentration and income distribution in the City. The racial and ethnic makeup of the various neighborhoods are of critical importance in the formation of the City’s voting districts and the City has engaged a demographer to plot the racial and ethnic concentrations in the City based on the 2020 census. The 2020 census provides the most up to date statistics upon which to base the RCAA analysis. In addition, the 2012-2016 American Community Survey (ACS) provides additional data measured at the census track level covering such areas as social characteristics, economic characteristics, and housing characteristics.

An RCAA has been variously defined as a census tract in which 80 to 90 percent or more of the population is White and has a median income of at least $125,000. The nationwide RCAA analysis identifies the following:
 RCAA tracts have more than twice the median household income of the average tract in their metro area.
 Poverty rates in RCAAs are significantly lower and are, on average about 20 percent of a typical tract.
 RCAAs tracts are more income homogenous than a typical tract.  The average RCAA is about 57 percent affluent.
 The typical RCAA tract has a rate of affluence 3.2 times that of a typical tract.

Figure 3-5 shows census tracts with a majority White population. As the figure shows, the City has higher gaps between the White population and other Races on the east side. A number of census tracts report majority White populations between 67 and 77 percent. Most candidate housing sites identified as part of the Sites Analysis are located in areas without a gap between the Non-White and White populations.

Figure 3-6 shows the breakdown on median income throughout the City. A number of census tracts in the eastern and southern region of the City report a median income greater than $125,000. When overlayed with a majority White population, six block groups are identified as RCAAs. These are detailed in Table 3-

20. No candidate housing sites are identified within RCAAs.

Table 3-20: RCAAs by Block Group
Block Group Percent Population White Median Income
Block Group 3, Census Tract 219.17 77% $172,969
Block Group 2, Census Tract 219.17 77% $143,333
Block Group 2, Census Tract 756.05 67.7% $177,593
Block Group 5, Census Tract 756.05 67.7% $134,116
Block Group 4, Census Tract 756.04 74% $128,063
Block Group 5, Census Tract 756.04 74% $149,762
Regional Context
Orange County 61% $90,234
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer; American Community Survey, 5- Year Estimates, 2019
728
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-76 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 3-5: White Majority Population, Orange
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 729
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-77 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 3-6: Median Income by Block Group, Orange (2019)

Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 730
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-78 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Additionally, Table 3-21 below shows local and regional context for the median household income of White households compared to all households.

Table 3-21: Median Household Income by Race
Race
Orange Orange County
Median Income Percent of
Population Median Income Percent of Population
White $92,4891 72% $94,0821 61%
All Households $91,793 -- $90,234 --

1. Median household income in the past 12 months (in 2019 inflation-adjusted dollars).

Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Figure 3-7 shows the City’s current (as of February 2022) voting districts (1 through 6), formed in accordance with the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (CVRA) and approved by the Orange County Superior Court. The CVRA does not take income levels into account in forming voting districts. As of the time of adoption of this Housing Element, the City is in the process of redrawing the six districts based on the results of the 2020 census.

Table 3-22 shows the City’s current (as of February 2022) ethnic and income makeup in voting districts 1 through 6
Figure 3-7: City of Orange Voting Districts
Source: City of Orange
731
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-79 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Table 3-22: City of Orange Demographics by Voting District Total
Population
Voting Districts
1 2 3 4 5 6
Race and Ethnicity
White 55,395 12,177 5,458 9,704 10,381 6,421 11,263
Hispanic 57,728 9,274 13,816 8,843 6,448 13,377 5,970
Black 4,062 872 1,120 636 470 573 391
Asian 22,066 3,128 3,796 3,731 4,814 2,390 4,207
Native 4,505 877 945 681 573 889 540
Pacific Islander 988 231 181 161 127 158 130
Total 140,191 25,715 24,162 23,096 22,305 22,829 22,084 Household Income
Up to $25K 4,904 1,363 1,104 697 434 841 465
$25K to $50K 6,084 1,088 1,171 995 839 1,103 888
$50K to $75K 6,863 1,615 1,503 985 854 890 1,016
$75K to $200K 19,511 3,401 2,620 3,752 2,993 2,817 3,929 $200K plus 5,858 687 313 934 1,704 739 1,480
Total 140,191 25,715 24,162 23,096 22,305 22,829 22,084 Source: City of Orange
Figure 3-8 shows the median income for the City of Orange by Block Group in 2014. Block groups towards the center of the City and to the south and east are shown to have incomes between $80,000 and $100,000. In comparison to 2019 (Figure 3-6), the City now has more areas of high incomes over $125,000 and some patches of incomes between $30,000 and $55,000. The areas including lower incomes in 2019 are largely made up of industrial and commercial uses, and some residential neighborhoods. Overall, the City is showing trends of increased household incomes.
732
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-80 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 3-8: Median Income by Block Group, Orange (2014)

Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 733
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-81 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Disparities in Access to Opportunity
Regional Opportunity Index (ROI)
The UC Davis Center for Regional Change and Rabobank partnered to develop the Regional Opportunity Index (ROI) intended to help communities understand local social and economic opportunities. The goal of the ROI is to help target resources and policies toward people and places with the greatest need to foster thriving communities. The ROI incorporates both “people” and “place components, integrating economic, infrastructure, environmental, and social indicators into a comprehensive assessment of the factors driving opportunity.”
“People” is a relative measure of people's assets in education, the economy, housing, mobility/transportation, health/environment, and civic life as follows:
 Education Opportunity: Assesses people’s relative success in gaining educational assets, in the form of a higher education, elementary school achievement, and regular elementary school attendance.
 Economic Opportunity: Measures the relative economic well-being of the people in a community, in the form of employment and income level.
 Housing Opportunity: Measures the relative residential stability of a community, in the form of homeownership and housing costs.
 Mobility/Transportation Opportunity: Contains indicators that assess a community’s relative opportunities for overcoming rural isolation.
 Health/Environment Opportunity: Measures the relative health outcomes of the people within a community, in the form of infant and teen health and general health.  Civic Life Opportunity: A relative social and political engagement of an area, in the form of households that speak English and voter turnout.
“Place” is a relative measure of an area's assets in education, the economy, housing, mobility/transportation, health/environment, and civic life.  Education Opportunity: Assesses a census tract's relative ability to provide educational opportunity, in the form of high-quality schools that meet the basic educational and social needs of the population.
 Economic Opportunity: Measures the relative economic climate of a community, in the form of access to employment and business climate.
 Housing Opportunity: Measures relative availability of housing in a community, in the form of housing sufficiency and housing affordability.
 Health/Environment Opportunity: A relative measure of how well communities meet the health needs of their constituents, in the form of access to health care and other health-related environments.
 Civic Life Opportunity: Measures the relative social and political stability of an area, in the form of neighborhood stability (living in same residence for one year) and US citizenship As shown in Figures 3-6 and 3-7 below, the City is a mix of low and moderate resource to high resource depending on the census tract. Figure 3-6 displays the data for level or range of assets a population has, 734
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-82 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
by census tract. The figure shows that while most people in Orange have high opportunity based on employment, economics, education, housing and civic life, there are four census tracts which show low opportunity. Census Tract A (762.04) shows high levels of access to mobility and transportation; however, it shows low civic life, health and environment, housing, economic and educational assets of this population. Census Tract B (761.01) also shows low civic life, low housing and moderately low educational assets; however, Census Tract B population has high health, high mobility, and economic assets. Census Tract C (759.02) shows similar stats with low civic life housing and educational assets of the population but higher health, mobility/transportation, and economic opportunities. Census Tract D (759.01) aligns with Census Tract A, its population has primarily high access to mobility and transportation options with low resources or assets for civic life health, housing, economics, and education.

Figure 3-7 below displays the level or range of opportunity that a census track can provide the population.

The figure shows that majority of the census tracts in the City are high or very high resources, with the exception of two census tracts which are considered low resources opportunity. Census Tract A shows that that area provides high economic or job opportunity and high education al opportunities, however this area shows low civic life, low health and environment and low housing opportunities or resources.

Additionally, Census Tract C shows moderate economic or job opportunity and high educational resources and opportunity however, similar to Census Tract A it shows low resource and opportunities for civic life, health and environment and housing. Increasing housing opportunities in the City can supplement the areas where residents have access to transportation, economic opportunity and jobs, and education but no stable or affordable housing options. In doing so, increased housing creates a more balanced community with more asset and resource opportunity for residents.

In both Figures 3-9 and 3-10, Census Tract A has the lowest opportunity levels. In comparison to demographic data, the area reports the following information:
 68.8 percent Hispanic population
 20-30 percent population whose income in the past 12 months is below the poverty line  50-75 percent low to moderate income population
 Over 20 percent overcrowded households
As such, Housing Policy Action 4A is included in Section 4: Housing Plan to affirmatively further fair housing and improve access to resources and housing in Census Tract A and across the City. Additionally, a number of sites have been identified within this Census Tract as part of the candidate sites analysis due to availability of land and potential for future development. The development of new, affordable housing units in this area may help to provide accessible housing to the residents of the area without resulting in displacement. In addition, new development may also result in additional resources and community services to existing residents of the area – ultimately resulting in improved conditions and diversity. 735
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-83 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 3-9: Regional Opportunity Index: People, 2014
Source: UC Davis Center for Regional Change and Rabobank, 2014. 736
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 3-84 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft
Figure 3-10: Regional Opportunity Index: Place, 2014
Source: UC Davis Center for Regional Change and Rabobank, 2014. 737
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-85
Additionally, Table 3-23 and Figure 3-11 below display the data for Regional Opportunity Index for the City of Orange overall compared to the State of California. The data shows the following key findings:
 The City of Orange has a higher percentage of college educated adults age 25 or older, but a lower percentage of UC/CSU eligibility among high school graduates. High school graduation rates are higher in Orange, but the City has lower percentages of math and English proficiency. The elementary school truancy rate in Orange is 20 percent lower than that of the State.  Economic opportunities are high in the City of Orange compared to the State. There are high employment rates with a higher minimum basic income. The City also has a high availability of quality jobs.
 Housing opportunities in Orange and the State are fairly similar – both have the same cost burden of 52%. Orange has a homeownership rate of 53%, and housing adequacy is rated slightly lower than the State at 89%.
 Orange residents have relatively high access to mobility with greater access to vehicles and internet, but they do have slightly longer commutes than residents across the State.  Environmental and health indicators in the City of Orange are good. Infant health, prenatal care, and access to health care is rated higher than across the State, and teenage birth rates and years of life lost are lower in the City.
 The City has very similar rates of civic life participation as the State.

738
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-86
Table 3-23: Opportunity Indicators - Orange and California ROI Indicator Orange Villa Park Anaheim Santa Ana California Education People
College Educated Adults – Percentage of adults (age 25
and over) who have completed a post-secondary
certificate/degree.
40% 63% 29% 16% 38%
Math Proficiency – Percentage of 4th graders who scored proficient or above on the English Language Arts portion of California’s Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) test.
66% 87% 69% 72% 70%
English Proficiency – Percentage of 4th graders who
scored proficient or above on the math portion of
California’s Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR)
test.
62% 89% 60% 54% 65%
Elementary Truancy – Percentage of students who have
missed more than 30 minutes of instruction without an
excuse at least three times during the school year.
4% 3% 16% 8% 24%
Place
High School Graduation Rate – Percentage of 9th grade
cohort that graduated from high school 4 years later. 93% 93% 86% 88% 83% UC/CSU Eligibility – Percentage of high school graduates who completed UC/CSU a-g course requirements. 38% 39% 38% 43% 41% Teacher Experience – Percentage of teachers at the
three closest public elementary schools with more than 5 years of teaching experience and at least one year of
education beyond a BA.
52% 61% 67% 54% 36%
High School Discipline Rate – Percentage of high school students in the school district who were suspended or
expelled.
5% 5% 4% 6% 6% Economic
People
Employment Rate – Percentage of adults age 20-64
employed. 91% 90% 90% 91% 89%
Minimum Basic Income – Percentage of people with
income over 200% of the federal poverty level. 69% 90% 59% 46% 64% Place
Job Availability – Number of jobs per 1,000 people,
within a 5-mile radius. 1,014.28 1086.14 787.52 1090.41 701.75 Job Quality – Percentage of jobs that are in high-paying industries, within a 5-mile radius. 41% 41% 38% 45% 40% Job Growth – Percentage 1-year change in the number of
jobs, within a 5-mile radius. 3% 4% 2% 2% 3%
Bank Accessibility – Number of banks and credit unions
per 1000 people, within a 5-mile radius. 0.21 0.27 0.2 0.24 0.24 Housing People
Home Ownership – Percentage of housing units owned
by their occupants. 53% 93% 47% 47% 55%
Housing Cost Burden – Percentage of households paying
less than 30% of household income on housing costs. 52% 63% 46% 45% 52% Place
Housing Adequacy – Percentage of households with no
more than 1 occupant per room. 89% 99% 81% 66% 91%
739
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-87
Table 3-23: Opportunity Indicators - Orange and California ROI Indicator Orange Villa Park Anaheim Santa Ana California Housing Affordability – Ratio of median income of census tract to median value of dwellings in census tract. 0.15 0.16 0.15 0.19 0.19 Mobility People
Vehicle Availability – Percentage of households with at least 1 vehicle, or 1 vehicle per worker. 90% 99% 85% 81% 86% Commute Time – Percentage of workers whose
commute time is less than 30 minutes. 65% 68% 58% 65% 60% Internet Access – Number of households per 1,000 with
high-speed internet. 4.88 5 4.42 4.17 4 Health/Environmental Place
Infant Health – Percentage of births at or above healthy weight, or 2500 grams/5.5 pounds. 96% 98% 95% 95% 95%
Birth to Teens – Percentage of all births to teens. 6% 0% 8% 11% 7% Years of Life Lost – Years of potential life lost. 25.62 20.35 26.38 26.29 29.84 Place
Air Quality – Annual mean concentration of PM2.5. 11.46 11.72 11.77 10.49 10.01 Prenatal Care – Percentage of mothers who received
prenatal care in first trimester. 90% 90% 87% 86% 83%
Access to Supermarket – Percentage who live within 0.5
miles (urban) or 10 miles (rural) of supermarket. 43% 20% 58% 75% 53% Health Care Availability – Number of providers of basic medical services per 1,000 population within 5 mile
radius

2.29 2.96 1.58 2.49 1.76 Civic Life
People
Voting Rates – Percentage of citizen, voting age
population that voted the 2010 general election. 31% 55% 25% 26% 31% English Speakers – Percentage of population age 18-64
that speaks only English or speaks English "well" or "very well".
88% 95% 81% 66% 88%
Place
US Citizenship – Percentage of adults who are U.S.
citizens. 82% 96% 73% 58% 83%
Neighborhood Stability – Percentage of citizens, over age 1, who live in the same residence as the previous year. 84% 90% 85% 88% 85% Source: UC Davis Center for Regional Change and Rabobank, 2014.

740
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-88
Figure 3-11: Regional Opportunity Index, Orange and California Source: UC Davis Center for Regional Change and Rabobank, 2014.

As Orange is considered a high opportunity region, the City is committed to implementing policies and programs to encourage new housing opportunities for existing and future residents. Section 4: Housing Plan identifies the strategies the City will explore in order to provide opportunity and housing for persons within the Orange/Orange County region.

0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
Orange Average Statewide Average
741
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-89
California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) Opportunity Area Map HCD together with the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee established the California Fair Housing Task Force to provide research, evidence-based policy recommendations, and other strategic recommendations to HCD and other related state agencies/departments to further the fair housing goals (as defined by HCD). The Task force developed the TCAC/HCD opportunity Area Maps to understand how public and private resources are spatially distributed. The Task force defines opportunities as pathways to better lives, including health, education, and employment. Overall, opportunity maps are intended to display which areas, according to research, offer low-income children and adults the best chance at economic advancement, high educational attainment, and good physical and mental health.

According to the Task Force’s methodology, the tool allocates the 20 percent of the tracts in each region with the highest relative index scores to the “Highest Resource” designation and the next 20 percent to the “High Resource” designation. Each region then ends up with 40 percent of its total tracts as “Highest” or “High” resource. These two categories are intended to help State decision-makers identify tracts within each region that the research suggests low-income families are most likely to thrive, and where they typically do not have the option to live—but might, if given the choice. Figure 3-12 below geographically displays data results for the City of Orange. Overall, the City is considered low to moderate resource, with the exception of some high resource areas to the southeast and northeast. The City’s west side is considered low resources, similar to surrounding jurisdictions such as Anaheim and Santa Ana. Given the extent of the City’s low and moderate resource areas, lower income and moderate income candidate housing sites have been identified in areas of low to moderate resources. The potential development of affordable housing units and mixed-use developments in these areas may create opportunities for additional resources to the existing community.
742
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-90
Figure 3-12: TCAC Opportunity Areas, Orange
Source: California
Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 743
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-91
For many households, access to neighborhoods with higher levels of opportunity can be more difficult due to discrimination and when there may not be a sufficient range and supply of housing in such neighborhoods. In addition, the continuing legacy of discrimination and segregation can impact the availability of quality infrastructure, educational resources, environmental protections, and economic drivers, all of which can create disparities in access to opportunity.

Opportunity Areas – Education
The TCAC/HCD Opportunity Area Maps include education data, as illustrated in Figure 3-13. This data represents opportunity levels based on the following four factors:
 Math proficiency – Percentage of 4th graders who meet or exceed math proficiency standards.  Reading proficiency – Percentage of 4th graders who meet or exceed literacy standards.  High school graduation rates – Percentage of high school cohort that graduated on time.  Student poverty rate – Percentage of students not receiving free or reduced-price lunch.

Figure 3-13 shows areas of less positive education outcomes in the City’s center and western half. Areas of more positive education outcomes exist the west of the City.

Title I was established to provide all children with the opportunity to receive a fair, equitable, and high quality education as well as to help close the achievement gaps. Title I uses federal monies that are supplemental, meaning outside the general fund to help meet the needs of low-achieving students in the highest-poverty schools. Schools that qualify for these funds deliver supplemental services through a comprehensive school-wide plan required by the law. The main goal is to close the achievement gap and equalize education for all students. Within Orange Unified School District there are 13 Title I Elementary Schools, 2 Title I Middle Schools, and one Title I high School:
 California Elementary
 Cambridge Elementary
 Esplanade Elementary
 Fairhaven Elementary
 Handy Elementary
 Jordan Elementary
 Lampson Elementary
 Palmyra Elementary
 Prospect Elementary
 Sycamore Elementary
 Taft Elementary
 West Orange Elementary
 Community Day School (Targeted Title
I)
 Portola Middle School
 Yorba Middle School
 Orange High School

744
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-92
Figure 3-13: TCAC Education Opportunity Areas, Orange
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 745
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-93
Opportunity Areas – Economy
The TCAC/HCD Opportunity Area Maps include economic data, as illustrated in Figure 3-14. This data represents opportunity levels based on the following five factors:
 Poverty – Percent of population with income above 200 percent of federal poverty line.  Adult Education – Percent of adults with a bachelor's degree or above.  Employment – Percent of adults aged 20-64 who are employed in the civilian labor force or in the armed forces.
 Job Proximity – Number of jobs filled by workers with less than a Bachelor of Arts degree that fall within a given radius (determined by the typical commute distance of low-wage workers in each region) of each census tract population-weighted centroid.  Median Home Value - Value of owner-occupied units.

Figure 3-14 shows economic opportunity scores for Orange and the surrounding region. As illustrated, the City has fairly moderate to high positive economic outcome areas, with some areas of less positive outcomes to the north west and center of the City.

746
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-94
Figure 3-14: TCAC Economy Opportunity Areas, Orange
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 747
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-95
HUD developed the opportunity indicators to help inform communities about disparities in access to opportunity, the scores are based on nationally available data sources and assess resident’s access to key opportunity assets in the City. Table 3-24 provides the index scores (ranging from zero to 100) for the following opportunity indicator indices:
 Low Poverty Index: The low poverty index captures poverty in a given neighborhood. The poverty rate is determined at the census tract level. The higher the score, the less exposure to poverty in a neighborhood.
 School Proficiency Index: The school proficiency index uses school-level data on the performance of 4th grade students on state exams to describe which neighborhoods have high-performing elementary schools nearby and which are near lower performing elementary schools. The higher the score, the higher the school system quality is in a neighborhood.  Labor Market Engagement Index: The labor market engagement index provides a summary description of the relative intensity of labor market engagement and human capital in a neighborhood. This is based upon the level of employment, labor force participation, and educational attainment in a census tract. The higher the score, the higher the labor force participation and human capital in a neighborhood.
 Transit Trips Index: This index is based on estimates of transit trips taken by a family that meets the following description: a three-person single-parent family with income at 50 percent of the median income for renters for the region (i.e. the Core-Based Statistical Area (CBSA). The higher the transit trips index, the more likely residents in that neighborhood utilize public transit.  Low Transportation Cost Index: This index is based on estimates of transportation costs for a family that meets the following description: a three-person single-parent family with income at 50 percent of the median income for renters for the region/CBSA. The higher the index, the lower the cost of transportation in that neighborhood.
 Jobs Proximity Index: The jobs proximity index quantifies the accessibility of a given residential neighborhood as a function of its distance to all job locations within a region/CBSA, with larger employment centers weighted more heavily. The higher the index value, the better the access to employment opportunities for residents in a neighborhood.  Environmental Health Index: The environmental health index summarizes potential exposure to harmful toxins at a neighborhood level. The higher the index value, the less exposure to toxins harmful to human health. Therefore, the higher the value, the better the environmental quality of a neighborhood, where a neighborhood is a census block-group.

Table 3-24 below displays the opportunity indices by race and ethnicity for persons in Orange. According to the data, there is low poverty among the population of Orange, with the exception of the population who identified as black, with the lowest poverty score at 32.85. Additionally, the access to quality education system is moderate among all racial/ethnic groups (each group has an opportunity index score above 45 but not surpassing 65). The data shows the following:
 The City offers moderate labor and economic opportunity as well as sufficient access to transportation.
748
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-96
 Transportation is considered affordable among all race and ethnic groups in the City (all scoring above 70).
 Very low environmental health index scores, meaning there is high exposure to harmful pollutants for all race and ethnic groups in the City. Each group has a score below 15, indicating poor environmental quality across the City, this can be due in part to high levels of traffic, proximity to industrial development or other natural environmental risks.

Table 3-24: Opportunity Indicators by Race/Ethnicity in the City of Orange (Orange, CA
CDBG)
Jurisdiction
Low
Poverty
Index
School
Proficiency
Index
Labor
Market
Index
Transit
Index
Low
Transportation
Cost Index
Jobs
Proximity
Index
Environmental
Health Index
Total Population
White, NonHispanic 59.85 60.76 61.19 87.39 72.03 69.31 10.04 Black, NonHispanic 52.12 48.57 51.47 89.40 77.99 78.41 8.77 Hispanic 48.30 50.65 52.77 88.89 76.83 76.42 9.01
Asian or
Pacific
Islander,
Non-Hispanic

59.06 58.78 59.94 87.51 72.50 67.82 9.94
Native
American,
Non-Hispanic

54.37 55.48 56.10 88.33 74.75 73.95 9.39
Population below federal poverty line
White, NonHispanic 57.04 52.92 58.45 89.18 76.75 78.49 9.16 Black, NonHispanic 32.85 42.16 41.19 83.58 78.05 89.55 9.52 Hispanic 45.47 53.35 53.02 89.09 76.93 73.57 9.08
Asian or
Pacific
Islander,
Non-Hispanic

52.82 43.86 48.07 89.57 79.90 81.30 8.42
Native
American,
Non-Hispanic

64.21 51.31 53.78 90.52 79.37 86.78 8.55
Source: Department of Housing and Urban Development, Fair Housing Maps, Accessed March 2021.

Access to Transit
Transit explores metrics that reveal the social and economic impact of transit, specifically looking at connectivity, access to jobs, and frequency of service. According to the data provided, Orange scored a

5.1 AllTransit performance score, illustrating a moderate combination of trips per week and number of jobs accessible that enable a moderate number of people to take transit to work. In comparison to neighboring cities – Santa Ana scored a 6.6, Anaheim scored a 4.9, Villa Park scored a 1.4, and Tustin 749
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-97
scored a 4.8. Access to transportation increases both the economic and environmental/health opportunities. Additionally, AllTransit provides the following data for Orange transportation:
 99% of jobs are located within ½ of transit.
 78,470 customer households have access to a business within a 30-minute transit commute.  3.35% of workers walk to work and 0.96% bike to work
 There are no households within a ½ miles of high frequency transit.  On average, there are 5 transit routes within ½ of a block group on average.

Table 3-25: Opportunity Indicator – Transit
Jurisdiction
AllTransit
Performance
Score
Transit Trips
Per Week
within 1/2 Mile
Jobs Accessible
in 30-min trip
Commuters Who
Use Transit
Transit Routes
within 1/2 Mile
Orange 5.1 775 224,776 2.9% 5
Orange
County 4.2 528 172,595 2.28% 4
Source: AllTransit Fact Sheet, Orange, 2022.

Figure 3-15: AllTransit Performance Score – Orange
Source: AllTransit Fact Sheet, 2021.
750
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-98
Environmental Burdens
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) developed a screening methodology to help identify California communities disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution called the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviro Screen). In addition to environmental factors (pollutant exposure, groundwater threats, toxic sites, and hazardous materials exposure) and sensitive receptors (seniors, children, persons with asthma, and low birth weight infants), CalEnviro Screen also takes into consideration socioeconomic factors. These factors include educational attainment, linguistic isolation, poverty, and unemployment. Research has shown a heightened vulnerability of people of color and lower socioeconomic status to environmental pollutants.

Figure 3-16 below displays mapped results for the CalEnviro Screen in Orange and the Orange County region. The map shows that Orange is made up of mostly moderate to low percentile census tract – reflecting a community that is not overly burdened by environmental factors.

Table 3-26 and 3-27 below identifies the CalEnviro Screen scores for the highest and lowest scoring census tracts in Orange, respectively. Table 3-26 shows the City’s most environmentally burdened census tract (CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile: 76) which has a population made up of 79.8 percent Hispanic, 9.5 percent White, 6.4 percent Asian American, 2.2 percent Native American, 1.3 percent Other, and 0.8 percent African American. Table 3-27 shows the City’s least environmentally burdened census tract (CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile: 7) which has a population made up of 71.8 percent White, 20 percent Hispanic, 5.4 percent Asian American, and 2.5 precent Other.

751
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-99
Table 3-26: CalEnviro Screen 4.0 – Highest Scoring Census Tract (6059076204) Pollutant Percentile* Health Risk/Burden Percentile*
Ozone 54 Asthma 30
Particulate Matter 2.5 83 Low Birth Weight 12
Diesel Particulate Matter 74 Cardiovascular Rate 34
Pesticides 20 Education 90
Toxic Releases 99 Linguistic Isolation 79
Traffic 37 Poverty 77
Drinking Water 55 Unemployment 47
Cleanup Sites 99 Housing Burden 68
Groundwater Threats 70
Hazardous Waste 99
Impaired Waters 0
Solid Waste 93
*Percentile derived using a weighted scoring system to determine average pollution burden/ socioeconomic scores relative to other census tracts.

Source: CalEnviro Screen 4.0 Map Tool. Accessed May 23, 2022.

Table 3-27: CalEnviro Screen 4.0 – Highest Scoring Census Tract (6059075808) Pollutant Percentile* Health Risk/Burden Percentile*
Ozone 58 Asthma 10
Particulate Matter 2.5 69 Low Birth Weight 1
Diesel Particulate Matter 68 Cardiovascular Rate 6
Pesticides 1 Education 15
Toxic Releases 88 Linguistic Isolation 6
Traffic 87 Poverty 29
Drinking Water 55 Unemployment 28
Cleanup Sites 44 Housing Burden 3
Groundwater Threats 50
Hazardous Waste 10
Impaired Waters 0
Solid Waste 76
*Percentile derived using a weighted scoring system to determine average pollution burden/ socioeconomic scores relative to other census tracts.

Source: CalEnviro Screen 4.0 Map Tool. Accessed May 23, 2022.

752
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-100
Figure 3-16: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 – Orange

Source: AllTransit Fact Sheet, 2021.
753
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-101
Discussion of Disproportionate Housing Needs
The analysis of disproportionate housing needs within Orange evaluated existing housing need, need of the future housing population, and units within the community at-risk of converting to market-rate.

Future Growth Need
The City’s future growth need is based on the RHNA production of 1,067 very low and 604 low income units within the 2021-2029 planning period. Appendix B of this Housing Element shows the City’s ability to meet its 2021-2029 RHNA need at all income levels. This demonstrates the City’s ability to accommodate the anticipated future affordable housing needs of the community.

Existing Need
As described in Section 3.F.1 of this Housing Element, the Orange County Housing Authority administers Section 8 Housing Choice vouchers within the City of Orange. Additionally, the City currently has a 206 household waitlist to receive Section 8 Housing Choice vouchers.

Housing Needs in Orange
A variety of factors affect housing needs for different households. Most commonly, disability, household income and households’ characteristics shape the type and size of housing units needed, as well as accessibility based on existing units in a City. Tables 3-28 through 3-35 displayed data for demographic characteristics of Orange, as compared to the County of Orange and the State of California. Additional detailed analysis of the Orange community demographics is outlined in Chapter 2: Community Profile of this Housing Element.

Table 3-28 displays the data for persons with disabilities in the City, County, and State. Overall, about 10 percent of the California population reported having at least one disability. In the City, about 8 percent of persons reported at least one disability. The County reported a slightly higher percentage than the City and the City at 8.5 percent. Of the 8 percent Orange residents who reported a disability, the majority were independent living and ambulatory difficulties, which could be tied to the City’s senior population. Ease of reasonable accommodation procedures and opportunity for accessible housing can provide increased housing security for the population with disabilities.

Figure 3-17 and 3-18 show the trend and propensity for persons having at least one disability throughout Orange. Between 2014 and 2019, the City has decreased in the census tracts reporting 10 to 20 percent of the population having at least one disability. Based on the two figures, the data may indicate a move towards neighborhoods north of the City.
754
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-102
Table 3-28: Population by Disability Type, Compared by Geography, 2019 Disability City of Orange County of Orange California
Total with a Disability 8.1% 8.5% 10.6%
Hearing Difficulty 2.3% 2.5% 2.9%
Vision Difficulty 1.1% 1.5% 2%
Cognitive Difficulty 3.4% 3.4% 4.3%
Ambulatory Difficulty 4.2% 4.5% 5.8%
Self-care Difficulty 2.2% 2.2% 2.6%
Independent Living 4.0% 4.3% 5.5%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

755
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-103
Figure 3-17: Population with a Disability, Orange (2014) Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 756
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-104
Figure 3-18: Population with a Disability, Orange (2019) Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 757
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-105
Table 3-29 displays household type and income data for the State, County and City. Overall, the City has a larger percentage of family households than the County and State; this includes family households, married-couple family households, and those with children. Of the three jurisdictions, the State has the largest percentage of non-family households at approximately 2 percent more than Orange County and about 6 percent more than the City. The City has a higher percentage of households with at least one senior over the age of 60 as compared to the state (29.2 percent) but a lower percentage than the County (39.9 percent).

Table 3-29: Population by Familial Status, Compared by Geography, 2019 Familial Status City of Orange
County of Orange California
Total Households 43,075 1,037,492 13,044,266
Family Households 73.1% 71.7% 68.7%
Married-Couple Family
Households

56.2% 54.9% 49.8%
With Children 23.7% 30.9% 34%
Non-Family Households 26.8% 28.3% 31.3%
Households with one or more
people 60 years+

37.8% 39.9% 29.2%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates. 2019 Regarding household income, the City had a higher median household income than the County and State in 2019 ($91,793). As Table 3-30 shows, majority of the City’s households are higher earning; in total 45 percent (nearly half of the City’s households) earn $100,000 or more. In the state, nearly 38 percent of households earn $100,000 or more and 45.2 percent in the County of Orange. Just under 26 percent of City residents earn less than $50,000 annually, compared to 27 percent and 34 percent for the County and State, respectively.

Table 3-30: Households by Income, Compared by Geography, 2019 Households Income City of Orange
County of Orange California
Less than $10,000 3.7% 4.2% 4.8%
$10,000-$14,999 2.5% 2.7% 4.1%
$15,000-$24,999 5.1% 5.6% 7.5%
$25,000-$34,999 5.4% 6.0% 7.5%
$35,000-$49,999 8.9% 8.8% 10.5%
$50,000-$74,999 16.1% 14.6% 15.5%
$75,000-$99,999 12.8% 12.8% 12.4%
$100,000-$149,999 19.7% 18.6% 16.6%
$150,000-$199,999 12.2% 11.1% 8.9%
$200,000 or More 13.5% 15.5% 12.2%
Median Income $91,793 $90,234 $75,235
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019 758
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-106
Figure 3-19 shows the percentage of married-couple households living throughout the City of Orange and neighboring communities. As the figure shows, married-couple households increase towards the east and decrease towards the west. The lowest percentages of married-couple households are surrounding the downtown Orange and Outlets at Orange areas. Figure 3-20 shows a similar trend for households with children living in married-couple family households.

Figure 3-21 shows children living in female households without a spouse present. The majority of the City has lower percentages, except for a few census tracts reporting 20 to 40 percent of children living in female-headed households. These few census tracts overlap with those that report lower percentages of married-couple family households.

Figure 3-22 shows the City of Orange has very little single-occupancy households. As is the trend with most neighboring communities, all census tracts in the City report less than 20 percent persons over 18 years of age in households living alone.

759
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-107
Figure 3-19: Married-Couple Households, Orange
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 760
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-108
Figure 3-20: Children in Married-Couple Households, Orange Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 761
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-109
Figure 3-21: Children in Female-Headed Households, Orange Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 762
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-110
Figure 3-22: Persons Living Alone, Orange
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development – AFFH Data Viewer 763
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-111
Table 3-31 displays data for households experiencing overpayment or cost burden in the State, County and City. Housing Cost burden has a number of consequences for a household, mainly displacement from their existing living situation creating limited access essential goods and often employment by potentially increasing commute times. Overall, the percentage of households that experience a cost burden greater than 30 percent is similar amongst the City, County, and State with all three reporting about 20 percent.

The City has a slightly lower percentage of households that have a high cost burden over 50 percent (17.8 percent in the City, compared to about 19 percent in the County and State). Increased opportunity for affordable housing and housing assistance funds help to prevent cost burden on households.

Table 3-31: Households by Overpayment, Compared by Geography Overpayment/Cost Burden City of Orange County of Orange California Cost Burden > 30% 20.3% 21.2% 20.67%
Cost Burden > 50% 17.8% 19.3% 19.4%
Cost Burden Not Available 1.1% 1.4% 1.4%
Source: Consolidated Planning/CHAS Data, 2013- 2017.

Table 3-32 displays data for household tenure (owner vs. renter) for the State, County and City.

Homeownership is a crucial foundation for helping families with low incomes build strength, stability and independence. The opportunity for transition into the homebuyer’s market is important for persons and households in different communities, homeownership allows for increased stability and opportunity to age in place. Table 3-32 shows that the City has a comparable rate of homeownership to the County and a slightly lower ownership rate that the State.

Additionally, Table 3-33 displays data for overcrowding in the State, County and City. Overcrowding is defined as between 1.01 and 1.5 persons per room in a household, and severe overcrowding is defined as more than 1.51 persons per room. Overcrowding often occurs when nonfamily members combine incomes to live in one households, such as college students and roommates, it also occurs when there is not enough size appropriate housing options for large or multigenerational families. The City experiences low rates of overcrowding in comparison to the County and the State. According to the data, overcrowding occurs more frequently in renter households rather than owner households. In Orange, owner households that are severely overcrowded represent 0.7 percent of all households, while severely overcrowded renter households represent 4.5 percent, a trend similar in the County and State.

Table 3-32: Households by Tenure, Compared by Geography, 2019 Household Tenure City of Orange
County of Orange California
Owner Households 57.9% 57.4% 66.0%
Renter Households 42.1% 42.6% 34.0%
Total Occupied Housing Units 43,075 1,037,492 13,044,266 Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

764
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-112
Table 3-33: Households by Overcrowding, Compared by Geography Overcrowding and Tenure City of Orange County of Orange California Owner Households
Overcrowded 1.4% 2.6% 1.6%
Severely Overcrowded 0.7% 1.0% 0.6%
Renter Households
Overcrowded 10.1% 9.8% 3.6%
Severely Overcrowded 4.5% 6.0% 2.4%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Housing Stock in Orange
Table 3-34 displays comparative housing stock data for the State, County and City. Table 3-34 below shows data for occupied housing units by type. A variety of housing stock provides increased opportunity in communities for different size and households types. The majority of housing stock in Orange is classified as one-unit, detached housing, or single-family housing. Just under 13 percent of Orange homes include 20 or more units, referred to as multi-family housing. In comparison to the County Orange has a greater amount of single-family homes, and an overall smaller number multi-family housing (2 or more units).

Table 3-34: Occupied Housing Units by Type, Compared by Geography Housing Unit Type City of Orange
County of Orange California
1, detached 54.9% 50.6% 57.7%
1, attached 9.6% 12.3% 7.0%
2 units 3.0% 1.6% 2.4%
3 or 4 units 8.7% 6.9% 5.5%
5 to 9 units 5.2% 6.7% 6.0%
10 to 19 units 3.4% 5.4% 5.2%
20 or more units 12.8% 13.7% 12.3%
Mobile home or other type of housing 2.4% 2.7% 3.7%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Table 3-35 below displays housing stock by year built or the City, County, and State. Older housing generally requires more upkeep, regular maintenance and can cause a cost burden on both renters and homeowners. Majority of Orange’s housing stock was built between 1950 and 1989, the City has a large number of historic homes and historic districts. When well maintained, historic homes can be energy efficient by design, they may also allow for subsidies in exchange for maintenance.

Majority of the County’s and State’s housing units were built between 1980 and 2009 whereas the distribution of development was more dispersed from 1950 to 1990 in the State. Overall, increased numbers of older housing which is not maintained can lead to cost burden and substandard living conditions.
765
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-113
Table 3-35: Housing Unit by Type, Compared by Geography Year Built City of Orange
County of Orange California
Built 2014 or later 1.1% 2.7% 1.7%
Built 2010 to 2013 1.3% 2.0% 1.7%
Built 2000 to 2009 7.1% 8.3% 11.2%
Built 1990 to 1999 9.9% 11.7% 10.9%
Built 1980 to 1989 11.6% 14.9% 15.0%
Built 1970 to 1979 22.9% 23.3% 17.6%
Built 1960 to 1969 24.2% 19.5% 13.4%
Built 1950 to 1959 14.6% 13.0% 13.4%
Built 1940 to 1949 1.8% 2.1% 5.9%
Built 1939 or earlier 5.5% 2.5% 9.1%
Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2019.

Displacement Risk
The potential for economic displacement risk can result from a variety of factors, including large-scale development activity, neighborhood reinvestment, infrastructure investments, and changes in local and regional employment opportunity. Economic displacement can be an inadvertent result of public and private investment, where individuals and families may not be able to keep pace with increased property values and market rental rates.

Urban Displacement
The Urban Displacement Project (UDP) is a research and action initiative of the University of California Berkeley and the University of Toronto. UDP conducts community-centered, data-driven, applied research toward more equitable and inclusive futures for cities. UDP developed a neighborhood change database to map neighborhood transformations and identify areas vulnerable to gentrification and displacement, based on 2015 data from the American Community Survey. This data was developed to assist local decision makers and stakeholders better plan for existing communities and provide additional resources to areas in need or at-risk of displacement and gentrification.

Figure 3-15 shows there are large area of the City currently marked as Stable Moderate/Mixed Income and Stable/Advance Exclusive. Only a few census tracts are actively at risk or currently becoming exclusive.

Additionally, the City has one census tract which contains Chapman University and is identified as a High Student Population area. There currently are not any census tracts reporting ongoing displacement or gentrification in the City.
766
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-114
Figure 3-23: Urban Displacement Project - Gentrification and Displacement

Source: Urban Displacement Project, University of California Berkeley (2021). 767
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-115
Table 3-36 is a key for Figure 3-23, pulled directly from the data source.

Table 3-36: Displacement Typology Criteria and Orange Census Tracts Modified Types and Criteria
Low-Income/Susceptible to Displacement
 Low or mixed low-income tract in 2018.

Ongoing Displacement of Low-Income Households
 Low or mixed low-income tract in 2018.
 Absolute loss of low-income households, 2000-2018.

At Risk of Gentrification
 Low or mixed low-income tract in 2018.
 Housing affordable to low or mixed low-income households in 2018.  Didn’t gentrify 1990-2000 OR 2000-2018.
 Marginal change in housing costs OR Zillow home or rental value increases in the 90th percentile between 2012-2018.
 Local and nearby increases in rent were greater than the regional median between 2012-2018 OR the 2018 rent gap is greater than the regional median rent gap.

Early/Ongoing Gentrification
 Low or mixed low-income tract in 2018.
 Housing affordable to moderate or mixed moderate-income households in 2018.  Increase or rapid increase in housing costs OR above regional median change in Zillow home or rental values between 2-12-2018.
 Gentrified in 1990-2000 or 2000-2018.

Advanced Gentrification
 Moderate, mixed moderate, mixed high, or high-income tract in 2018.  Housing affordable to middle, high, mixed moderate, and mixed high-income households in 2018.  Marginal change, increase, or rapid increase in housing costs.  Gentrified in 1990-2000 or 2000-2018.

Stable Moderate/Mixed Income
 Moderate, mixed moderate, mixed high, or high-income traact in 2018.

At Risk of Becoming Exclusive
 Moderate, mixed moderate, mixed high, or high-income tract in 2018.  Housing affordable to middle, high, mixed moderate, and mixed high-income households in 2018.  Marginal change or increase in housing costs.

Becoming Exclusive
 Moderate, mixed moderate, mixed high, or high-income traact in 2018.  Housing affordable to middle, high, mixed moderate, and mixed high-income households in 2018.  Rapid increase in housing costs.
 Absolute loss of low-income households, 2000-2018.
 Declining low-income in-migration rate, 2012-2018.
 Median income higher in 2018 than in 2000.

Stable/Advanced Exclusive
 High-income tract in 2000 and 2018
 Affordable to high or mixed high-income households in 2018.  Marginal change, increase, or rapid increase in housing costs.

High Student Population
Source: Urban Displacement Project, University of California Berkeley (2021). 768
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-116
Assisted Units “At-Risk” of Conversion
Appendix B of this housing Element outlines the City’s strategy to accommodate growth and future housing production in Orange. The RHNA accommodation strategy does not include plans or identifies land to accommodate new housing, which will replace current residents, specifically residents in affordable housing. Displacement can also occur as covenants for deed restricted affordable housing units expire. Affordable covenants help to ensure that certain housing units remain affordable for an extended period. Covenants help balance the housing market in a community and provide lasting affordable options to low and very low-income households. Table 3-37 below display the data for persons within the City of Orange who qualify for supported low income housing.

Table 3-37: Publicly Supported Housing Demographics, Orange Orange (City) White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # %
Project-Based
Section 8
89 49.17% 2 1.10% 76 41.99% 13 7.18%
HCV Program 221 35.25% 44 7.02% 218 34.77% 144 22.97%
LIHTC 943 39.03% 47 1.95% 1347 55.75% 104 4.30%
Total
Households 24,840 57.94% 430 1.00% 11,370 26.52% 5,535 12.91% 0-30% of AMI 2,880 50.79% 50 0.88% 1,880 33.16% 740 13.05% 0-50% of AMI 4,290 41.67% 65 0.63% 3,785 36.77% 1,270 12.34% 0-80% of AMI 8,130 45.70% 200 1.12% 6,635 37.30% 1,800 10.12% Source: County of Orange Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing, 2020-2024.

Additionally, Table 3-38 below identifies all deed restricted projects in Orange. There is one current project with covenants which will expire in the 2021-2029 planning period.

Table 3-38: Affordable Housing Units in Orange with Covenants and Deed Restrictions Project Name/Address Tenant Type Number of
Assisted Unit
Number of
Bedrooms
Starting Years of
Restriction
Ending Year of
Restriction
Adams Triplex I
1837-1841 East Adams
Avenue Orange, CA 92867
Family 3 1, 2, and 3 1997 2027
Adams Triplex II
1915-1919 East Adams
Avenue Orange, CA 92867
Family 3 1, 2, and 3 1998 2053
Adams Triplex III
1741-1745 East Adams
Avenue Orange, CA 92867
Family 3 1, 2, and 3 1999 2054
Alice Clark Orange Blossom
Apartments
141 East Walnut Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Elderly 4 1, 2, and 3 1997 2052
Allure Apartments
3099 West Chapman Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Workforce
Housing 265 0, 1, and 2 2021 2051
Cameo Apartments
1055 West Town and Country
Road
Orange, CA 92867
Workforce
Housing 262 0, 1, 2, and 3 2021 2051
Casas Del Rio
1740 E La Veta Avenue
Orange, CA 92866
Elderly 40 1 and 2 N/A 2028*
769
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-117
Table 3-38: Affordable Housing Units in Orange with Covenants and Deed Restrictions Project Name/Address Tenant Type Number of
Assisted Unit
Number of
Bedrooms
Starting Years of
Restriction
Ending Year of
Restriction
Chestnut Place/Fairway
Manor
1745 East Fairway Drive
Orange, CA 92866
Elderly 49 1, 2, and 3 1996 2051
Citrus Grove Apartments
1120 North Lemon Street
Orange, CA 92867
Family 56 1, 2, and 3 2010 2065
Esplanade Street Apartments
264-280 South Esplanade
Street Orange, CA 92869
Family 27 1, 2, and 3 2001 2056
Friendly Center**
147 W Rose Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Family 8 1, 2, and 3 N/A 2021
Garrison Apartments
1725 West Katella Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Workforce
Housing 94 0, 1, and 2 2021 2051
Harmony Creek Senior
Apartments
1616 East Rock Creek Drive
Orange, CA 92866
Elderly 41 1, 2, and 3 1997 2052
Hoover Avenue Apartments I
108-118 West Hoover Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Family 20 1, 2, and 3 2006 2071
Hoover Avenue Apartments II
218-228 West Hoover Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Family 20 1, 2, and 3 2007 2072
Huang, Yu Ming
191 N. Parker Street; 628 &
642 W. Maple Avenue,
Orange, CA 92868
Family 2 1, 2, and 3 1991 In Perpetuity
The Knolls/Villa Santiago
3138 East Maple Avenue
Orange, CA 92869
Family 258 1 1996 2046
Lemon Grove Apartments
1148 North Lemon Street
Orange, CA 92867
Family 81 1, 2, and 3 2017 2072
Lemon Street Apartments
481-491 Lemon Street
Orange, CA 92866
Family 6 1, 2, and 3 2001 2056
OHDC/Orange Rotary Senior
Plaza
235 West La Veta Avenue
Orange, CA 92866 (nonprofit)
Elderly 6 1, 2, and 3 2004 2059
Orange Garden Apartments
1931, 1941, & 2003 East
Quincy Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Family 24 1, 2, and 3 1997 2052
Orchid Gardens
1051 N. Glassell Street
Orange, CA 92866
Elderly 17 1, 2, and 3 1989 In Perpetuity
Parker Apartments
161 North Parker Street
Orange, CA 92868
Family 2 1, 2, and 3 1995 2050
Pixley Arms
537 West Almond Avenue
Orange, CA 92866
Elderly 15 1, 2, and 3 1995 In Perpetuity
Plaza Garden Apartments Family 56 1, 2, and 3 1997 2052 770
Section 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing 2021-2029 Housing Element Update - Draft 3-118
Table 3-38: Affordable Housing Units in Orange with Covenants and Deed Restrictions Project Name/Address Tenant Type Number of
Assisted Unit
Number of
Bedrooms
Starting Years of
Restriction
Ending Year of
Restriction
1907, 1935, 1943, & 2003 East
Monroe Avenue 1934, 1942,
& 2002 East Quincy Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Rose Avenue Apartments
1743 East Rose Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Family 6 1, 2, and 3 1998 2053
Serrano Woods
1820 East Meats Avenue
Orange, CA 92865
Family 62 1, 2, and 3 2013 2068
Stonegate Senior Apartments
170 North Prospect Street
Orange, CA 92869
Elderly 20 1, 2, and 3 2004 2059
Villa Modena Apartments
4431 East Marmon Avenue
Orange, CA 92869
Family 5 1, 2, and 3 2001 2056
Walnut Court
1519 East Walnut Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Family 7 1, 2, and 3 1995 In Perpetuity
Walnut-Pixley
1519 E Walnut Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Family 22 1, 2, and 3 N/A 2049
Wilson Avenue Apartments I
1924 & 1934 East Wilson
Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Family 20 1, 2, and 3 2001 2056
Wilson Avenue Apartments II
1844 East Wilson Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Family 10 1, 2, and 3 2004 2069
Wilson Avenue Apartments
III
1944 East Wilson Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
Family 10 1, 2, and 3 2007 2062
*Casas Del Rio’s current affordability is tied to their loan which terminates in 2028; however, their mission is to preserve the affordability of the units in perpetuity
**The Friendly Center intends to take action to maintain its affordable housing component through Section 8 in 2022.

Source: City of Orange, Affordable Housing Resource Toolkit, Affordable Housing Compliance List, Accessed April 2021.

Cost of Preservation of Units
There are many options to preserving units, including providing financial incentives to project owners to extend lower income use restrictions, purchasing affordable housing units by a non-profit or public agency, or providing local subsidies to offset the difference between the affordable and market rate units.