Agenda packet — Oroville City Council, April 18, 2023 (part 4 of 5)

495
Item 10.

WHAT IS NOT COVERED
 DAMAGE DUE TO ACCIDENT, MISUSE, or ALTERATION — Defects and damage caused as the result of any of the following are not covered:
— Flood, collision, fire, theft, freezing, vandalism, riot, explosion, or objects striking the vehicle; — Misuse of the vehicle;
— Installation into unapproved applications and installations; — Alterations or modification of the transmission or the vehicle, and — Damage resulting from improper storage (refer to long-term storage procedure outlined in the applicable Allison Service Manual) — Anything other than defects in Allison Transmission material or workmanship NOTE: This warranty is void on transmissions used in vehicles currently or previously titled as salvaged, scrapped, junked, or totaled.  CHASSIS, BODY, and COMPONENTS — The chassis and body company (assemblers) and other component and equipment manufacturers are solely responsible for warranties on the chassis, body, component(s), and equipment they provide. Any transmission repair caused by an alteration(s) made to the Allison transmission or the vehicle which allows the transmission to be installed or operated outside of the limits defined in the appropriate Allison Installation Guideline is solely the responsibility of the entity making the alteration(s).  DAMAGE CAUSED by LACK of MAINTENANCE or by the USE of TRANSMISSION FLUIDS NOT RECOMMENDED in the OPERATOR’S MANUAL — Defects and damage caused by any of the following are not covered:
— Failure to follow the recommendations of the maintenance schedule intervals applicable to the transmission; — Failure to use transmission fluids or maintain transmission fluid levels recommended in the Operator’s Manual.  MAINTENANCE — Normal maintenance (such as replacement of filters, screens, and transmission fluid) is not covered and is the owner’s responsibility.
 REPAIRS by UNAUTHORIZED DEALERS — Defects and damage caused by a service outlet that is not an authorized Allison Transmission Distributor or Dealer are not covered.
 USE of OTHER THAN GENUINE ALLISON TRANSMISSION PARTS — Defects and damage caused by the use of parts that are not genuine Allison Transmission parts are not covered.  EXTRA EXPENSES — Economic loss and extra expenses are not covered. Examples include but are not limited to: loss of vehicle use; inconvenience; storage; payment for loss of time or pay; vehicle rental expense; lodging; meals; or other travel costs.  “DENIED PARTY” OWNERSHIP — Warranty repair parts and labor costs are not reimbursed to any participating or non-participating OEMs, dealers or distributors who perform warranty work for, or on behalf of, end users identified by the United States as being a “denied party” or who are citizens of sanctioned or embargoed countries as defined by the U.S. Department of Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control. Furthermore, warranty reimbursements are not guaranteed if the reimbursement would be contrary to any United States export control laws or regulations as defined by the U.S. Department of Commerce, the U.S. Department of State, or the U.S. Department of Treasury.

OTHER TERMS APPLICABLE TO CONSUMERS AS DEFINED by the MAGNUSON-MOSS WARRANTY ACT This warranty gives you specific legal rights and you may also have other rights which vary from state to state.

Allison Transmission does not authorize any person to create for it any other obligation or liability in connection with these transmissions.

ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE APPLICABLE TO THESE TRANSMISSIONS IS LIMITED IN DURATION TO THE DURATION OF THIS WRITTEN WARRANTY.

PERFORMANCE OF REPAIRS AND NEEDED ADJUSTMENTS IS THE EXCLUSIVE REMEDY UNDER THIS WRITTEN WARRANTY OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY. ALLISON TRANSMISSION SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR INCIDENTAL OR

CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOST WAGES OR VEHICLE RENTAL EXPENSES) RESULTING FROM BREACH OF THIS WRITTEN WARRANTY OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY.** ** Some states do not allow limitations on how long an implied warranty will last or the exclusion or limitation of incidental or consequential damages, so the above limitations or exclusions may not apply to you.

OTHER TERMS APPLICABLE TO OTHER END-USERS

THIS WARRANTY IS THE ONLY WARRANTY APPLICABLE TO THE ALLISON TRANSMISSION MODELS LISTED

ABOVE AND IS EXPRESSLY IN LIEU OF ANY OTHER WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. ALLISON

TRANSMISSION DOES NOT AUTHORIZE ANY PERSON TO CREATE FOR IT ANY OTHER OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH TRANSMISSIONS. ALLISON TRANSMISSION SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES RESULTING FROM BREACH OF THIS WARRANTY OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY.

QUESTIONS
If you have any questions regarding this warranty or the performance of warranty obligations, you may contact any Allison Transmission Distributor or Dealer or write to:

Allison Transmission, Inc.

P.O. Box 894
Indianapolis, IN 46206-0894
Attention: Warranty Administration PF-9
Form SE0616EN (201009)

Page 2 of 2 ends

496
Item 10.

Warranty Begins:

The transmission cooler shall be free from component or structural failures caused by defects in material and/or workmanship. Collateral damage up to $10,000 per
occurrence is available for the first three (3) years.
(b) any vehicle, chassis, or component, part, attachment or accessory damaged by misuse, neglect, fire, exposure to severe environmental or chemical conditions, acidic environment, improper maintenance, accident, crash, or force majeure such as natural disaster, lightning, earthquake, windstorm, hail, flood, war or riot; (d) products or parts which may in the ordinary course wear out and have to be replaced during the warranty period, including, but not limited to, tires, fluids, gaskets and light bulbs. Pierce assumes no responsibility for the assembly of its parts or subassemblies into finishing products or vehicles unless the assembly is performed by Pierce.

Five (5) Years on Oil Cooler and three (3) years on collateral damage coverage
Warranty Period
Ends After:

Fire and Rescue Apparatus
Coverage:

Five (5) Year Material and Workmanship - Transmission Oil Cooler Three (3) Year Collateral Damage Coverage

1. LIMITED WARRANTY
The original purchaser may void this warranty in part or in its entirety if the product is repaired or replaced (a) without prior written approval of the Pierce Customer Service Department; or (b) at a facility which has not been approved by Pierce as to technical Limited Warranty
Subject to the limitations and exclusions set forth below, Pierce Manufacturing provides the following warranty to the Buyer:
(c) any vehicle, chassis or component, part, attachment or accessory that has been repaired, altered or assembled in any way by any person or entity other than Pierce which, in the sole judgment of Pierce, adversely affects the performance, stability or purpose for which it was manufactured; or
(a) any integral parts, components, attachments or trade accessories of or to the product that are not manufactured by Pierce, including but not limited to engines, transmissions, drivelines, axles, water pumps and generators; with respect to all such parts, components, attachments and accessories, Pierce shall assign to Buyer the applicable warranties, if any, made by the respective manufacturers thereof; Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, Pierce makes no warranty whatsoever as to:

The date of delivery to the first retail purchaser.

This limited warranty shall apply only if the product is properly maintained in accordance with Pierce's maintenance instructions and manuals and is used in service which is normal to the particular model. Normal service means service which does not subject the product to stresses or impacts greater than normally result from careful use. If the Buyer discovers a defect or nonconformity, it must notify Pierce in writing within thirty (30) days after the date of discovery, but in any event prior to the expiration of the warranty period.

THIS LIMITED WARRANTY MAY NOT BE ASSIGNED OR OTHERWISE

TRANSFERRED BY THE BUYER TO ANY SUBSEQUENT USER OR PURCHASER OR TO ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY.

This warranty does not cover repair due to accidents,
misuse, and excessive vibration, flying debris, storage damage (freezing), negligence or modification. This warranty is void if any modification or repairs are performed without authorization. This also voids any future warranty.

This warranty does not cover cost of maintenance or repairs due to lack of required maintenance services as
recommended. Performance of the required maintenance
and use of proper fluids are the responsibility of the owner.

Towing is covered to the nearest distributor or authorized dealer only when necessary to prevent further damage to your transmission.

Labor costs for the removal and reinstallation of goods may be covered when necessary to make repairs. Please contact your OEM for authorization.

Replacement of cooler during the warranty period is limited to 100% of reasonable labor costs up to a maximum of $700 to remove, replace, or repair the oil cooler.

Conditions and
Exclusions:

See Also
Paragraphs
2 thru 4

4. EXCLUSION OF CONSEQUENTIAL AND INCIDENTAL DAMAGES.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein or in any agreement between Pierce and Buyer, IN NO EVENT SHALL PIERCE BE LIABLE FOR ANY CONSEQUENTIAL,

INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, INDIRECT, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES WHATSOEVER,

WHETHER ARISING OUT OF BREACH OF CONTRACT, WARRANTY, TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE AND STRICT LIABILITY) OR OTHER THEORY OF LAW

OR EQUITY, WITH RESPECT TO VEHICLES OR OTHER PRODUCTS SOLD BY

PIERCE, OR THEIR OPERATION OR FAILURE TO OPERATE, OR ANY DEFECTS

THEREIN, OR ANY UNDERTAKINGS, ACTS OR OMISSIONS RELATED THERETO,

3. BUYER'S EXCLUSIVE REMEDY.
(d) products or parts which may in the ordinary course wear out and have to be replaced during the warranty period, including, but not limited to, tires, fluids, gaskets and light bulbs. Pierce assumes no responsibility for the assembly of its parts or subassemblies into finishing products or vehicles unless the assembly is performed by Pierce.

One (1) Year & Five (5) Year Warranty Period
Ends After:

Note: Any Surety Bond, if a part of the sale of the vehicle as to which this limited warranty is provided, applies only to this Pierce Basic One Year Limited Warranty for such vehicle, and not to other warranties made by Pierce in a separate document (if any) or to the warranties (if any) made by any manufacturer (other than Pierce) of any part, component, attachment or accessory that is incorporated into or attached to the vehicle. 1/30/2013 WA0231
THE WARRANTY SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPH 1 IS THE SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE WARRANTY GIVEN BY PIERCE. PIERCE HEREBY DISCLAIMS AND EXCLUDES

ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY,

INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, ANY

WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND ANY WARRANTIES ARISING FROM COURSE OF DEALING OR USAGE OF TRADE.

Fire and Rescue Apparatus
Coverage:

One (1) Year Material and Workmanship Foam System & Five (5) Year Material and Workmanship Control Head
Limited Warranty
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, Pierce makes no warranty whatsoever as to:

Limited warranty 1 year parts and labor for for the foam system and 5 years parts and labor for the control head.

1. LIMITED WARRANTY
(b) any vehicle, chassis, or component, part, attachment or accessory damaged by misuse, neglect, fire, exposure to severe environmental or chemical conditions, acidic environment, improper maintenance, accident, crash, or force majeure such as natural disaster, lightning, earthquake, windstorm, hail, flood, war or riot; Subject to the limitations and exclusions set forth below, Pierce Manufacturing provides the following warranty to the Buyer:
(c) any vehicle, chassis or component, part, attachment or accessory that has been repaired, altered or assembled in any way by any person or entity other than Pierce which, in the sole judgment of Pierce, adversely affects the performance, stability or purpose for which it was manufactured; or
(a) any integral parts, components, attachments or trade accessories of or to the product that are not manufactured by Pierce, including but not limited to engines, transmissions, drivelines, axles, water pumps and generators; with respect to all such parts, components, attachments and accessories, Pierce shall assign to Buyer the applicable warranties, if any, made by the respective manufacturers thereof; The date of the original purchase invoice (issued when the product ships from the factory). Warranty Begins:
505
Item 10.

1. LIMITED WARRANTY
THE WARRANTY SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPH 1 IS THE SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE WARRANTY GIVEN BY PIERCE. PIERCE HEREBY DISCLAIMS AND EXCLUDES ALL

OTHER WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY,

INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, ANY

WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND ANY WARRANTIES ARISING FROM COURSE OF DEALING OR USAGE OF TRADE.

THIS LIMITED WARRANTY MAY NOT BE ASSIGNED OR OTHERWISE

TRANSFERRED BY THE BUYER TO ANY SUBSEQUENT USER OR PURCHASER OR TO ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY.

This limited warranty is applicable to the vehicle in the following percentage costs of warranty repair, if any:

Topcoat Durability & Appearance: Gloss, Color Retention & Cracking
0-72 months 100%
73-96 months 50%
97-120 months 25%
Integrity of Coating System: Adhesion, Blistering/Bubbling 0-36 months 100%
37-84 months 50%
85-120 months 25%
Corrosion: Dissimilar Metal and Crevice
0-36 months 100%
37-48 months 50%
49-72 months 25%
73-120 months 10%
Corrosion Perforation
0-120 months 100%
This limited warranty applies only to exterior paint. Paint on the vehicle's interior is warranted only under the Pierce Basic One Year Limited Warranty.

Items not covered by this warranty include:
(a) Damage from lack of maintenance and cleaning (proper cleaning and maintenance procedures are detailed in the Pierce operation and maintenance manual).
(b) UV paint fade.
(c) Any cab not manufactured by Pierce.

Conditions and
Exclusions:

Fire and Rescue Apparatus
Coverage:

Ten (10) Year Pro-Rated Paint and Corrosion
Custom Body
Ten (10) Years Warranty Period
Ends After:

The date of the original purchase invoice (issued when the product ships from the factory). Warranty Begins:

Exterior surfaces of the body shall be free from blistering, peeling, corrosion or any other adhesion defect caused by defective manufacturing methods or paint material selection. (d) products or parts which may in the ordinary course wear out and have to be replaced during the warranty period, including, but not limited to, tires, fluids, gaskets and light bulbs. Pierce assumes no responsibility for the assembly of its parts or subassemblies into finishing products or vehicles unless the assembly is performed by Pierce. (b) any vehicle, chassis, or component, part, attachment or accessory damaged by misuse, neglect, fire, exposure to severe environmental or chemical conditions, acidic environment, improper maintenance, accident, crash, or force majeure such as natural disaster, lightning, earthquake, windstorm, hail, flood, war or riot;

4. EXCLUSION OF CONSEQUENTIAL AND INCIDENTAL DAMAGES.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein or in any agreement between Pierce and Buyer, IN NO EVENT SHALL PIERCE BE LIABLE FOR ANY CONSEQUENTIAL,

INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, INDIRECT, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES WHATSOEVER,

WHETHER ARISING OUT OF BREACH OF CONTRACT, WARRANTY, TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE AND STRICT LIABILITY) OR OTHER THEORY OF LAW

OR EQUITY, WITH RESPECT TO VEHICLES OR OTHER PRODUCTS SOLD BY

PIERCE, OR THEIR OPERATION OR FAILURE TO OPERATE, OR ANY DEFECTS

THEREIN, OR ANY UNDERTAKINGS, ACTS OR OMISSIONS RELATED THERETO,

REGARDLESS OF WHETHER PIERCE HAS BEEN INFORMED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF ANY SUCH DAMAGES. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Pierce specifically disclaims any liability for property or personal injury damages, penalties, damages for lost profits or revenues, loss of vehicles or products or any associated equipment, cost of substitute vehicles or products, down-time, delay damages, any other types of economic loss, or for any claims by any third party for any such damages.

3. BUYER'S EXCLUSIVE REMEDY.
506
Item 10.

1. LIMITED WARRANTY
THE WARRANTY SET FORTH IN PARAGRAPH 1 IS THE SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE WARRANTY GIVEN BY PIERCE. PIERCE HEREBY DISCLAIMS AND EXCLUDES ALL

OTHER WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY,

INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, ANY

WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND ANY WARRANTIES ARISING FROM COURSE OF DEALING OR USAGE OF TRADE.

THIS LIMITED WARRANTY MAY NOT BE ASSIGNED OR OTHERWISE

TRANSFERRED BY THE BUYER TO ANY SUBSEQUENT USER OR PURCHASER OR TO ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY.

This warranty does not cover damage from lack of
maintenance and cleaning (proper cleaning and maintenance procedures are detailed in the Pierce operation and
maintenance manual).

Conditions and
Exclusions:

Fire and Rescue Apparatus
Coverage:

Three (3) Year Material and Workmanship
Goldstar® Gold Leaf Lamination
Three (3) Years Warranty Period
Ends After:

The date of the original purchase invoice (issued when the product ships from the factory). Warranty Begins:

Each Goldstar® gold leaf lamination shall be free from
defects in material and workmanship.
(d) products or parts which may in the ordinary course wear out and have to be replaced during the warranty period, including, but not limited to, tires, fluids, gaskets and light bulbs. Pierce assumes no responsibility for the assembly of its parts or subassemblies into finishing products or vehicles unless the assembly is performed by Pierce. (b) any vehicle, chassis, or component, part, attachment or accessory damaged by misuse, neglect, fire, exposure to severe environmental or chemical conditions, acidic environment, improper maintenance, accident, crash, or force majeure such as natural disaster, lightning, earthquake, windstorm, hail, flood, war or riot;

4. EXCLUSION OF CONSEQUENTIAL AND INCIDENTAL DAMAGES.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein or in any agreement between Pierce and Buyer, IN NO EVENT SHALL PIERCE BE LIABLE FOR ANY CONSEQUENTIAL,

INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, INDIRECT, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES WHATSOEVER,

WHETHER ARISING OUT OF BREACH OF CONTRACT, WARRANTY, TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE AND STRICT LIABILITY) OR OTHER THEORY OF LAW

OR EQUITY, WITH RESPECT TO VEHICLES OR OTHER PRODUCTS SOLD BY

PIERCE, OR THEIR OPERATION OR FAILURE TO OPERATE, OR ANY DEFECTS

THEREIN, OR ANY UNDERTAKINGS, ACTS OR OMISSIONS RELATED THERETO,

REGARDLESS OF WHETHER PIERCE HAS BEEN INFORMED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF ANY SUCH DAMAGES. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Pierce specifically disclaims any liability for property or personal injury damages, penalties, damages for lost profits or revenues, loss of vehicles or products or any associated equipment, cost of substitute vehicles or products, down-time, delay damages, any other types of economic loss, or for any claims by any third party for any such damages.

3. BUYER'S EXCLUSIVE REMEDY.
507
Item 10.

JROGHQVWDWHĆUHFRP

DEALER SUPPLIED

PRODUCTS SERVICES
Exhibit “E”
5 AND
/OR
508
Item 10.
1 DEALER SUPPLIED PRODUCTS and/or SERVICES
The following products and/or services will be provided by Golden State Fire Apparatus Inc. (GSFA) prior to final delivery:

LICENSED MANUFACTURER
The State of California Vehicle Code, section 11701 requires “every manufacturer of a vehicle subject to registration shall make application to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for a license containing a general distinguishing number”. The manufacturer has a current license at time of proposal and shall provide a copy upon request. Temporary licenses are not acceptable.

LICENSED DEALERSHIP
The State of California Vehicle Code, section 11701 requires a “dealer in vehicles of a type subject to registration, shall make application to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for a license containing a general distinguishing number”. Golden State Fire Apparatus, Inc. has a current license at time of bid as outlined above and is available upon request. Temporary licenses are not acceptable.

LICENSED SALES REPRESENTATIVE
The State of California Vehicle Code, section 11800 requires that it shall be “unlawful for any person to function as a vehicle salesperson without having first procured a license issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)”. The representative has a current vehicle salespersons license at time of proposal and shall provide a copy upon request. Temporary licenses are not acceptable.

VEHICLE REGISTRATION
The State of California Vehicle Code section 11739 requires that the “dealer of a new motor vehicle sale is responsible for applying for the title, securing vehicle registration, and obtaining license plates for the Customer” through the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Golden State Fire Apparatus, Inc. is a factory-authorized dealer of the vehicle being sold and is authorized to register with the State of California as a new vehicle manufacturer.

GSFA will make all necessary applications and complete all transfer papers, including applying for California Exempt “E” license plates.

WEEKLY PROGRESS PHOTOGRAPHS
GSFA will provide weekly photographs of the apparatus or the major components as they are being constructed. The photographs will commence at the start of the manufacturing process and will continue through production by the manufacturer. The reports will show the progress of the apparatus through the course of each week. Special attention will be given to show the unique features and aspects of the apparatus as construction progresses.

FINAL INSPECTION, FACTORY TRIP
A final inspection trip to the manufacturing facility will be provided for two (2) Customer representative(s). The intent of this trip is to ensure that the apparatus is built to specification and to detect any deficiencies that require correction. The final inspection trip will have a duration of four (4) days and three (3) nights and be scheduled at times mutually agreed upon between GSFA and the Customer. Costs for airfare, lodging, meals, and ground transportation while at the manufacturer’s location will be the responsibility of GSFA. Air travel will be from one of the following airports: Sacramento, San Francisco, or San Jose.

Costs such as Customer ground transportation in California, Customer airport parking, Customer luggage fees and Customer incidentals while traveling to the factory will be the responsibility of the Customer.

Flight reservations are non-refundable and in the event of a cancellation after booking, the Customer will 509
Item 10.
2 be responsible for all costs associated with this cancellation, which may include not only the original ticket cost but also any change or cancellation fees imposed by the airline and/ or travel agency. Flight reservations are also non-transferable.

DELIVERY TO AUTHORIZED SERVICE FACILITY
GSFA will, at their expense, deliver the apparatus (including any applicable equipment, spare parts, and supplies) to their Northern California facility in Sacramento for a dealer preparation inspection.

To ensure proper break in of all components while still under warranty, the apparatus shall be delivered under its own power - rail or truck freight shall not be acceptable.

PRE-DELIVERY SERVICE
After transportation from the factory and prior to delivery, the apparatus will receive a pre-delivery service to confirm proper operation and correction of any issues found as a result of said inspection. The Golden State Fire Apparatus, Inc. pre-delivery service consists of the following:
• Engine Compartment and Undercarriage – Check for any broken mounting brackets and inspect for correct capacities of the following (if applicable): engine oil, coolant, power steering fluid, washer reservoir fluid, transmission fluid, rear end fluid, pump transmission oil, and primer oil. • Interior – Operate all doors, windows, and locks for proper adjustment. Check upholstery. • Exterior – Repair reasonable paint scratches or chips. Tighten any loose hardware and inspect tires and wheels for proper pressure and lug torquing.
• Road Test – With the water tank (if applicable) full, the apparatus will be driven approximately twenty miles which allows the drive train components to get up to operating temperature. Road test will be on both city and highway roads. A DOT compliant brake test will be conducted to ensure the system is holding air. The brake condition and wheel seals will also be inspected. • Electrical - Operate all lights, sirens, and other electrical accessories to verify operation. • Pump - If applicable, vacuum test the pump to hold for 15 minutes. After vacuum test, operate the relief valve, transfer valve and check pump shift. Check water tank for leaks and inspect water level gauge for calibration. With discharge caps loose, rapid test all individual gauges and main gauges for calibration. Lubricate valve rods.
• Foam System – If applicable, tighten caps and connect foam lines. Test selector, valves, metering valve and operation of foam system (including flush).
• Fuel Tank - Fuel tank will be filled at the dealership location prior to final delivery. • DEF Tank - DEF tank will be filled at the dealership location prior to final delivery. • Wash - The apparatus will be thoroughly washed at the dealership location prior to final delivery.

FINAL DELIVERY (CUSTOMER LOCATION)
GSFA will, at their expense, deliver the Product (including any applicable equipment, spare parts, and supplies) to the Customer specified address once completed. Prior to delivery of the Product, Customer agrees 510
Item 10.
3 to provide proof of liability and physical damage insurance to GSFA. GSFA will not release the Product to the Customer until such proof of insurance is provided.

It is the responsibility of the Customer to have any outstanding balance due, paid in full to GSFA, prior to or at the time that the Product is complete and ready to deliver. If payment is late or delivery is delayed pending payment, a daily finance charge of $150.00 and a daily storage fee of $50.00 may apply until such payment is received.

Due to insurance liability, the Product will not be delivered without full acceptance and full payment (or prior written agreement between the Customer and GSFA).

END OF EXHIBIT ”E”
511
Item 10.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: DAWN NEVERS, ASSISTANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR

WES ERVIN, PRINCIPAL PLANNER

AMY BERGSTRAND, HOUSING DIRECTOR
RE: HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE (2022-2030) FINAL DRAFT
DATE: APRIL 18, 2023

SUMMARY
The City Council will conduct a public hearing to consider adopting the final draft of the 2022 General Plan Housing Element Update.

DISCUSSION
State Law for Housing Elements
State law requires each jurisdiction to update its Housing Element (one of the nine required elements of a General Plan) every eight years with specific deadlines established by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The City of Oroville is required to submit its updated “Sixth Cycle” Housing Element to the State for certification.

On July 19, 2022, this Council approved the draft Housing Element for submittal to HCD and certified it as exempt from CEQA. Comments from HCD and the public were then incorporated into the document, and staff resubmitted it on February 16, 2023. The document now meets the statutory requirements of HCD, and upon final adoption by the City Council is ready to be approved by HCD.

Oroville is unique in that it now has a plethora of affordable housing, thanks in large part to the state funding that has become available because of the recent fires. While almost all other California communities struggle to approve enough affordable housing, Oroville has necessarily shifted its emphasis on developing market rate and executive housing to accommodate its moderate- and higher-income residents.

The Housing Element provides an analysis of a community’s housing needs for all income levels, along with strategies and actions for responding to those needs. Unlike other elements in the General Plan, the Housing Element is required to be updated every eight years, which allows it to be more responsive to a rapidly changing housing market. The Housing Element is considered the primary policy document to guide the development, rehabilitation, and preservation of housing for all economic segments of the City’s population. California law also specifies that for the private market to adequately address housing needs and demand, local governments must adopt land use plans and regulatory 512
Item 11.

Page 2 ends

systems which provide opportunities for and do not unduly constrain housing development.

It also establishes that each city and county accommodate its fair share of affordable and market rate housing.

Goals in the 2022-2030 Housing Element
Each of the six goals in the new Housing Element has a set of accompanying policies and programs, most of which the City already does. The programs that involve new activities are outlined below.

Goal 1: Increase the availability of permanent housing for all community residents.

Goal 2: Remove constraints that could hinder the production of housing.

Goal 3: Support and encourage the construction of new housing at a range of costs, types, and tenures and in quantities to meet the needs of all income groups, including the very low, low- and moderate-income groups.

Goal 4: Preserve, rehabilitate, and enhance existing housing and neighborhoods.

Goal 5: Promote the conservation of energy in residential neighborhoods.

Goal: 6: Improve fair housing choice and equitable access to opportunity.

Selected Programs and Code Changes Required by HCD:

HCD has required a number of code changes and programs with deadlines to be incorporated into the Element prior to their approval. While many are ongoing and already being done by the City, some are new and will require some staff time or code changes.

Those of potential significance include:
 Code amendments to comply with AB 139 (parking standards for emergency shelters and ‘by right’ zoning to address shelter capacity requirements) and AB 101 (allowing Low Barrier Navigation Centers as a use "by right" in areas zoned for mixed-use and nonresidential zones permitting multi-family uses);
 Provisions to allow transitional housing, supportive housing, agricultural farmworker housing, and residential care facilities housing seven or more persons in all residential zoning districts.
 Redefinition of "Family" to allow more flexibility for housing persons with disabilities.  Provide technical assistance in grant funding applications for the development of new facilities to serve individuals experiencing homelessness, and to incentivize the production of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) that can be offered at affordable rents to Low- to Moderate-Income households per AB 671.
 Removal of constraints to the production of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in accordance with State laws AB 3182, AB 68, AB 881, SB 13, AB 687, AB 680 and AB 681;
 Streamlined permit review processes for projects that request AB 2162 (permanent supportive housing) or SB 35 (affordable housing) reviews;  Monitoring and if needed revision of the use permit approval criteria to promote greater objectivity for residential development.
513
Item 11.

Page 3 ends

 Support the development of agricultural housing by coordinating with developers.  Increased fair housing outreach and tobacco education.  Assemble a taskforce of law enforcement, code enforcement, and staff from Parks and Trees to identify code issues and housing complaints.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The Goals, Policies, and Actions in the Housing Element must be consistent with the General Plan and must support and compliment its Goals, Policies, and Actions. The policy framework in the document reinforces the overall direction of the General Plan through consistency with the following General Plan Goals:

Goal LU-3: Provide housing in a range of residential densities and types to address the housing needs of all segments of the community, including all income groups expected to reside in Oroville.

Goal LU-3 includes several policies guiding housing development, including developing multi-family development where appropriate, building cohesive neighborhoods with distinctive characters and parks and access to public and commercial facilities, and developing affordable housing.

In addition, under Oroville Municipal Code 17.04.050(H) all Zoning and other deliberations by the Planning Commission and City Council should “promote, protect and preserve the general public health, safety and welfare, and to implement the goals and objectives of the General Plan for the City of Oroville”. (Ord. 1749 § 4).

FISCAL IMPACT
None. The Housing element Update was funded using CDBG Program Income funds.

PUBLIC NOTICE
A detailed description of the extensive public outreach process during preparation is found on Pages 8-17 of the document. Outreach also included making the document available for public review for 30 days between June 12 and July 12, 2022. The Planning Commission conducted a fully noticed public hearing on June 23, 2022, and the City Council conducted a public hearing on July, 19, 2022.

In addition, notice of this public hearing appeared on April 8, 2023, in the Oroville Enterprise Record-Mercury register.

FISCAL IMPACT
None. The Housing Element Update was funded using CDBG Program Income funds

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the following actions:
514
Item 11.

Page 4 ends

1. Conduct a public hearing regarding the final Housing Element

2. Re-adopt the July 19, 2022 Notice of Exemption as the appropriate environmental document.

3. Adopt the February 6, 2023 Revised Draft Housing Element as the Final draft

4. Authorize submittal to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for their certification.

5. Adopt Resolution 9132.
.

ATTACHMENTS

1. March 16, 2023 preliminary approval letter from HCD

2. February 6, 2023 Revised Draft Housing Element (redline version showing changes from July 19, 2022)

3. Resolution No. 9132

4. July 19, 2022 Council Staff report and approved CEQA exemption 515
Item 11.
1 RESOLUTION NO. 9132

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AND AUTHORIZING RE-SUBMITTAL OF THE 2022-2030 HOUSING ELEMENT TO THE

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA 22-02).

WHEREAS, safe and affordable housing for all persons is a goal of the City of Oroville (the “City”); and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element of the General Plan provides an opportunity for the City to demonstrate how this goal will be achieved; and WHEREAS, the City is required by State law to prepare a Housing Element which provides information, policies, and programs to encourage the development of housing to meet the needs of all the City’s residents in conformance with State laws and regulations; and
WHEREAS, in has been determined that preparation and adoption of the 2022 Housing Element is exempt from environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15061(b)(3); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Draft 2022 Housing Element on June 23, 2022 and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, the City Council also conducted a public hearing on the Draft 2022 Housing Element on July 19, 2022 and considered the comments from staff, the consultant, the public and the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the February 6, 2023 revised draft is acceptable to HCD and can be certified once the City Council adopts it; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted another public hearing on the Final 2022 Housing Element on April 18, 2023, after the document was revised to meet all statutory requirements of the California Department of Housing and Community Development.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE:

1. Reconfirms the Notice of Exemption as the appropriate environmental document for the Housing Element Update.

2. Adopts the Final 2022 Housing Element with the changes required by the California Department of Housing and Community Development to meet statutory requirements and with changes suggested by the public: and. 516
Item 11.
2 2. Authorizes staff to submit the Final 2022 Housing Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development for their certification.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly introduced and passed at a regular meeting of the Oroville City Council held on the 18th of April 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVE:

_______________________________ _______________________________

JACKIE GLOVER, ASSISTANT CITY CLERK DAVID PITTMAN, MAYOR APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________

SCOTT HUBER, CITY ATTORNEY
517
Item 11.

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
March 16, 2023
Dawn Nevers, Assistant Director
Community Development Department
City of Oroville
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965
Dear Dawn Nevers:

RE: City of Oroville’s 6th Cycle (2022-2030) Revised Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting the City of Oroville’s (City) revised draft housing element update received for review on February 16, 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. The review was expedited to enable the jurisdiction to meet funding criteria for the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program.

The revised draft element meets the statutory requirements described in HCD’s October 25, 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, including adoption, 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 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 518
Item 11.

Dawn Nevers, Assistant Director

Page 2 ends

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 the City’s housing element team provided throughout the 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 Jose Ayala, of our staff, at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Paul McDougall
Senior Program Manager
519
Item 11.
1 Adopted Revised Draft 2022-2030 Housing Element
July 19, 2022February 6, 2023
520
Item 11.
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background……………………………………………...........................................3 Chapter 2: Review of Previous Housing Element.............................................................................18 Chapter 3: Housing Program ...........................................................................................................28 Chapter 4: Housing Needs
Assessment............................................................................................4508 Chapter 5: Resource Inventory......................................................................................................2061 Chapter 6: Constraints
Analysis......................................................................................................225232 Appendices:

A: Review of Progress on Previous Housing
Element....................................................................272281 B: Sites Inventory
Form..................................................................................................................283292 C: Community Meeting #1
Polls.....................................................................................................285294 D: Community Meeting #2
Polls.....................................................................................................288297 521
Item 11.
3 Cover photo by: J. Candela
522
Item 11.
4 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

PURPOSE OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT
California requires that all local governments (cities and counties) adequately plan to meet the housing needs of everyone in the community. California’s local governments meet this requirement by adopting Housing Elements as part of their General Plan. General Plans serve as the local government’s "blueprint" for how the cityCity and/or county will grow and develop over a 15–20-year period and include a minimum of seven mandatory elements: land use, transportation, conservation, noise, open space, safety, and housing. The Housing Element must be consistent with the other elements of the General Plan. General Plans are updated approximately every 20 years, while Housing Elements are on 8-year cycles to ensure relevancy and accuracy, since the housing market and needs are most closely tied to shifts in the economy.

The current Oroville Housing Element was adopted in 2014 and covers the period of 2014-2022.

California’s Housing Element law acknowledges that in order to address the spectrum of housing needs, local governments must adopt plans and regulatory systems that provide opportunities for and do not unduly constrain housing development. It also establishes that each cityCity and county accommodate their fair share of affordable housing as an approach to distributing housing needs throughout the region and state.

This Housing Element update covers the eight-year period from June 2022-June 2030. It is intended to provide the CityCity of Oroville with a comprehensive strategy to promote the production of safe, decent, and affordable housing for all of its residents. It assesses current and projected housing needs, constraints to housing production, and resources available to meet the needs. It then establishes a set of housing goals, policies, and actions programs which are targeted to meet the housing needs over the Housing Element planning period. A key part of the Housing Element lays out strategies to address the needs of community residents that are not typically met by the private market, including low-income households, seniors, homeless individuals, and people with disabilities. The CityCity does not generally build or own housing, but facilitates production by guiding zoning policies, coordinating with community partners, and in the case of affordable housing, by partnering with developers, lenders, and nonprofits on funding opportunities.

The Housing Element consists of the following chapters, as required by State regulations:
 Chapter 1 (Introduction and Background) provides an introduction and background to the Housing Element, including its purpose, local context, regulatory framework, a description of the public participation process, and the inter-governmental review process.
523
Item 11.
5  Chapter 2 (Review of Previous Housing Element) reviews the most recent Housing Element for the period 2014-2022 by summarizing its actions and accomplishments, its affordable housing production goals and results, and the findings from this analysis that are relevant to the 2022-2030 Housing Element Goals, Policies, and Programs.  Chapter 3 (Housing Program) provides the CityCity’s updated Goals, Policies, and Programs for 2022-2030, along with a Quantified Objectives Summary.  Chapter 4 (Housing Needs Assessment) provides data and analysis in the following areas:

Assessment of Fair Housing, demographics, employment, household characteristics, housing stock characteristics, housing affordability, and the special housing needs of households who are extremely low-income, seniors, persons with a disability, femaleheaded, large households, people experiencing homelessness, and farmworkers.  Chapter 5 (Resource Inventory) analyzes sites available to accommodate the CityCity’s share of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) by income level, including the sites’ capacitycity, environmental constraints, and infrastructure/utility availability. This chapter also describes financial resources available to address the identified needs and opportunities for energy conservation.
 Chapter 6 (Constraints Analysis) assesses the various governmental and market factors that may serve as potential constraints to housing development and improvement in Oroville.
 Appendix A provides a detailed review of the CityCity’s progress on the previous Housing Element, which is summarized in Chapter 2.
 Appendix B is the Sites Inventory Form mandated by the State Department of Housing and Community Development to be submitted with the Housing Element document.

Information on these sites used to meet the CityCity’s RHNA is also further described in Chapter 5.
 Appendix C is the Community Meeting #1 polls document.  Appendix D is the Community Meeting #2 polls document.

CONTEXT
Since the CityCity’s Housing Element was last updated in 2014, two significant events have occurred that have impacted housing demand and cost, as well as the development of this Housing Element update: the 2018 Camp Fire and the COVID-19 pandemic which began in early 2020.

Camp Fire
The year 2018 was the deadliest year for wildfires in California’s history, with numerous unprecedented wildfires throughout the state. On November 8, 2018, a wildfire which began near Pulga in Butte CountyButte County quickly spread to the communities west of it, driven by heavy winds and drought conditions. Named the Camp Fire, it largely destroyed the communities of Paradise, Concow, and Magalia, with significant structure loss in Butte Creek 524
Item 11.
6 Canyon and up to the eastern edge of the CityCity of Chico. It destroyed approximately 14,000 residential units and 85 lives were lost. As noted in the 2020 Peloton Research & Economics report, “The Impacts of the Camp Fire Disaster on Tri-County Housing Markets” are discussed below (the Tri-County region includes the three counties of Butte, Glenn, and Tehama):
 In 2018, the largest cities in the tri-county region were in Butte CountyButte County; CityCity of Chico (92,861), CityCity of Oroville (18,091) and the Town of Paradise (26,432). Following the Camp Fire, the Town of Paradise experienced a population loss of 82.9% from 2018. During that same time, the CityCity of Oroville saw a 19.1% growth in population. This basically equated to a decade of growth in one year. A very large proportion of residents whose homes burned down fled to Chico and Oroville, the nearest communities that had not suffered physical damage from the wildfire, to seek short-term shelter and long-term housing.
 This sudden population increase placed an enormous strain on Oroville’s public infrastructure, including roadways, water systems, and public services such as community support functions and case management.
 At the time of the Camp Fire, the tri-county region was already experiencing a very competitive housing market, with rental vacancy rates of less than 2%, very long wait lists for affordable housing and very limited housing inventory available for sale. After the fire, the rental vacancy rate became less than 0.5%.  Over the first six months following the disaster, there was a substantial surge that resulted in record-high home prices and rent rates throughout the tri-county region that displaced residents coupled with a shortage of housing, backlog of housing construction, and rapidly rising homelessness.
 One dynamic shift in the housing market which is particularly important to note was the loss of large neighborhoods of naturally occurring, affordable housing in Paradise.

Paradise was known to be the most affordable community in Butte CountyButte County (both for renters and homeowners) and the vast majority of its housing stock was not subsidized. Housing stock consisted of older homes and mobile homes.

Replacing these naturally affordable units in today’s market, with unprecedented demand and soaring land and construction costs, is a challenge that will take time and effort to overcome.
 Displacement due to the fire affected not only those whose homes were directly destroyed or damaged by the fire, but also the renters whose landlords chose to either sell their rental home to take advantage of higher demand and sales prices, or to rent to a family member or friend who had lost their home. This issue is more fully described and analyzed in the Chapter 4 Needs Assessment.

While this Housing Element update is being prepared three full years after the Camp Fire, the impacts on housing within Oroville have not subsided. There continue to be ongoing challenges with housing inventory, affordability, and displacement. 525
Item 11.
7 There are, however, many strides also being made, with the CityCity’s receipt of HOME funding for the development of multi-family housing for low-income seniors, which should support the construction of 40 affordable rental units, and the receipt of Disaster Low Income Housing Tax Credits, which will produce 312 affordable multi-family units. More projects are on the horizon, but they will take time to secure land and financing, in addition to navigating the current challenges of ever-increasing construction costs. The impact of the Camp Fire will be a key factor influencing the housing market in Oroville for many years, made even more significant by the broader housing challenges experienced in California as a whole, and the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

North Complex Fire
The North Complex Fire, the 6
th largest and 5th most destructive wildfire in California history, burned 318,930 acres on the Plumas National Forest between August 2020 and October 2020. The fire tragically destroyed the town of Berry Creek and several rural communities near Oroville. The incident resulted in 16 deaths and damaged 2,455 structures (“The Forgotten Fire?” Ken Smith, Sacramento News & Review, October 2021). The impacts of the North Complex Fire on Oroville and surrounding communities are discussed further in Assessment of Fair Housing section of Chapter 4.

COVID-19
The COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying shutdown began in earnest in California in March 2020. This resulted in a statewide lockdown which closed many businesses in Oroville for nearly one year and forced those businesses which did remain open to implement different operational models. There were significant reductions in employment, especially for restaurants, retail and small businesses. While the lockdown was largely rescinded in July 2021, ongoing labor and supply shortages continue to impact the local economy. The pandemic also affected the usual community outreach and engagement strategies for the Housing Element update. The CityCity implemented a menu of interactive virtual engagement opportunities, in recognition that the usual in-person outreach would not be possible. For example, in compliance with State and local public health orders, community meetings were moved to an online format, rather than in-person meetings. Meetings used polls and breakout rooms to engage the residents in conversation. The CityCity developed a Housing Element website to serve as a central hub for residents to provide input via online surveys and learn about a variety of Housing Element topics. Efforts to adapt the process to ensure the participation of marginalized populations are fully described in the public participation process below. Despite these efforts, it must be acknowledged that some individuals who would usually participate in person at community meetings are not comfortable with an online format or may not have access to a computer or reliable internet and telephone services.

In terms of the housing market itself, what is known is that many of those who lost employment due to the pandemic found themselves doubling up with family and friends, or 526
Item 11.
8 became homeless, even with rent relief measures that were enacted at the Federal level and the increase/extension of unemployment benefits. The pandemic’s economic pressures have exacerbated the need for affordable housing and a range of housing types to meet the needs of the community.

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Since 1969, Housing Elements have been a required part of each local government’s General Plan process. The State has found that “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 the housing needs of all economic segments of the community.” California Government Code Sections 65580-65589 codify the requirements for the content of, and process to develop the local Housing Element. The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is charged with reviewing and approving each jurisdiction’s Housing Element for compliance with State law.

California State law mandates that all localities adopt a Housing Element Update every eight years. The law also requires that Housing Elements address the following issues, among others:
 Include all economic segments of the community in the planning process;process.  Review the progress and effectiveness of previous Housing Elements;Elements.  Assess housing needs, including those of special needs populations, such as seniors, individuals experiencing homelessness, female-headed households, large households, and persons with disabilities;disabilities.
 Assess the fair housing issues and trends in four key areas, contributing factors to these issues and trends, as well as the local jurisdiction’s fair housing enforcement and capacity;capacity.
 List units at risk of conversion from restricted rents to market rents;rents.  Inventory whether there are an adequate number of appropriately zoned sites to accommodate growth for all income groups, as projected by the State Department of Housing and Community Development;Development.
 Describe available financial and energy efficiency resources;resources.  Address constraints to housing production; and
 Outline a housing program with goals, policies, and programs that are consistent with the General Plan and that address housing needs, constraints, and available resources, including any fair housing issues that have been identified. The housing program must include a timeline of programs during the planning period.

Since Oroville’s Housing Element was last adopted in 2014, the State Legislature has passed a significant number of laws which mandate new analyses or programs in each Housing Element, as well an entire slate of laws regarding Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). These new laws apply 527
Item 11.
9 to the 2022-2030 CityCity of Oroville Housing Element update, and wherever available, HCD guidance memos have been followed in its development. These include, but are not limited to:
 ADUs (AB 3182, AB 671, AB 68, AB 587, AB 670, AB 881, SB 13)—These new laws limit local jurisdictions’ ability to restrict the development of ADUs in a variety of ways and mandate streamlined, ministerial approval of ADUs within defined conditions. For the purpose of the Housing Element, they clarify that a local agency may identify an ADU or JADU as an adequate site to satisfy RHNA housing needs. AB 671 specifically requires that Housing Elements include a plan to incentivize and promote the creation of ADUs that can offer affordable rents for very-low, low-, or moderate-income households.  Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AB 686)—All Housing Elements adopted on or after January 1, 20212021, must contain an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) conducted in accordance with HCD program guidance, and must include a program of actions that promote and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities throughout the community.  No Net Loss (SB 166)— As jurisdictions make decisions regarding zoning and land use, and as development occurs, jurisdictions must have a program to assess their ability to accommodate new housing on the remaining sites in their Housing Element site inventories. A jurisdiction must add adequate sites if land use decisions or development results in a shortfall of sufficient sites to accommodate its remaining housing need for each income category.
 Site Inventory (SB 6, AB 1397, AB 1486, AB 686, AB 725)—The Housing Element establishes a jurisdiction’s strategy to plan for and facilitate the development of housing over the planning period by providing an inventory of land adequately zoned or planned to be zoned for housing and programs to implement the strategy. These laws modified the content of the site inventory, including new analyses for capacitycity calculations, infrastructure requirements, suitability of non-vacant sites, size of site and density requirements, location requirements, sites identified in the previous Housing Element and rezone program requirements, among others.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS
Broad public participation is an essential component of the Housing Element update process, andprocess and is required by State law (Government Code Section 65583(c)(8)). Community outreach must be conducted through a variety of mechanisms to include all economic and cultural segments of the community. This has been furthered strengthened and expanded through the passage of AB 686 which mandates meaningful, frequent, and ongoing community participation, consultation, and coordination that is integrated with the broader stakeholder outreach and community participation process for the overall Housing Element. 528
Item 11.
10 The Oroville Housing Element update process for 2022-2030 employed an extensive outreach effort to engage a wide spectrum of the community within the necessary restrictions imposed by COVID-19. This effort included a Housing Element website, a comprehensive contact list, utilization of a variety of methods to disseminate information and engage residents in the process, an outreach event at the annual Salmon festival, two online community workshops and two online surveys.

After the draft document was completed, it was posted on the CityCity’s Housing Element webpage, with notice to the public as to its availability, and scheduled for review and comment at public hearings with the Oroville Planning Commission on June 23, 20222022, and CityCity Council on July 19, 2022. The public was provided with a 30-day public comment period from June 19 to July 19 before it was submitted to State HCD for review. The CityCity received a State HCD review letter dated October 25, 2022. This current version of the Housing Element includes revisions in response to the HCD review letter as shown in redline, andredline and was made available for public comment February 7-145, 2023.

Outreach
At the beginning of the Housing Element update process, a community outreach contact list was developed to email announcements about public meetings and progress and was updated throughout the process. This contact list included over 150 individuals and encompassed representatives from the following interests and organizations:
 CityCity and County elected
officialsofficials.
 CityCity of Oroville staff
 Butte CountyButte Countywide
Homeless Continuum of Care
 Butte-Glenn 211 (information and
resource referrals)
 Far Northern Regional Center
 Northern Circle Indian Housing
Authority
 Ethnic and cultural groups such as
the Hispanic Resource Council of
Northern California, North State
Hispanic Chamber of Commerce,
African American Family & Cultural
Center and the Hmong Cultural
Association
 Housing Authority of the County of
Butte
 Affordable housing developers
 Water, transportation, and
recreation organizations
 Disability rights advocates
 Legal services
 Senior services and advocacy
groups
 Domestic violence and rape crisis
services
 Education representatives
 Real estate brokers
 Property management association
 Chamber of Commerce and local
businesses
 Healthcare organizations
 Civic organizations, such as the
League of Women Voters
 Various non-profit organizations,
including homelessness
servicesservices.
 Neighborhood associations
529
Item 11.
11  Building industry representatives  General interested community membersmembers.

Methods for Information Dissemination and Engagement
 Website: A website dedicated to the Housing Element update process was made available in three languages: English, SpanishSpanish, and Hmong (toggle option at the top of the page); this webpage functioned as the central location for all information related to the Housing Element update. It included background information on the purpose of the Housing Element, how to participate, the update timeline, resources, and an opportunity to sign up for an email list to receive direct emails on the update process. Most of the resources, including the presentation slides and recordings from the community meetings, are provided in both English and Spanish. Website address: www.orovillehousingelement.com  Social media: The CityCity’s Facebook and Instagram pages were used to notify residents of opportunities to participate in events such as community meetings and online surveys, as well as notifying them when new resources were posted to the website. Facebook events were created for the community meetings. Posts were made available in English, SpanishSpanish, and Hmong.
 Direct email: Parallel to the Facebook and Instagram posts, all stakeholders and interested community members who signed up for email notifications received periodic “email blasts” throughout the process.
 Flyers: A trilingual (English/Spanish/Hmong) flyer announcing Community Meeting #1 was distributed to visitors at the Salmon Festival, a large community event. Flyers provided information on the options to join the meeting online or by calling in via phone, so residents with various levels of access to technology could participateparticipate.
 Newspaper articles: The CityCity sent public services announcements (PSAs) to local newspapers (Mercury Register and the Chico Enterprise Record) and news stations regarding the community meetings. These brief articles gave the public notice about their opportunity to participate in the meetings, with the meeting details.

Salmon Festival Outreach Event (focus group)
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which limited in-person gatherings due to safety and disease control/prevention, the CityCity was not able to hold a conventional focus group for lowincome residents. Instead, the CityCity held an outdoor community outreach event at the Salmon Festival in an effort to abide by the guidelines set forth by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Salmon Festival, which was held 10:00 – 4:00 pm on September 25, 2021, in Historic Downtown Oroville, is a well-attended, outdoor annual community 530
Item 11.
12 festival that celebrates the migration of salmon up the Feather River in Oroville and brings together diverse members of the community.

The CityCity set up a booth at the festival, conducting in-person outreach in an effort to encourage the participation of historically underrepresented community members in the Housing Element Update process. This included educating residents about the Housing Element Update process, answering questions, collecting feedback through paper and electronic surveys, and informing residents of upcoming community meetings. The materials were provided in English, Spanish, and Hmong.

The event and surveys provided residents with the opportunity to provide input on their housing needs and options as well as discuss any barriers or discrimination they faced in accessing housing. They also recommended housing types that are in the greatest need and ways to help people with limited means get into housing. Participants included residents from a variety of demographic, racial, and economic backgrounds, including low-income residents, residents with disabilities, residents experiencing homelessness, seniors, and single mothers.

Below are key takeaways from residents:
 Many residents were unaware or uninformed of the Housing Element Update process or ways to meaningfully participate.
 The 2018 Camp Fire made it even more challenging to find an available affordable housing unit in the CityCity and many individuals were unhoused.  Residents could benefit from case management services to secure safe and decent housing and/or navigate housing discrimination.
 Special populations, especially people with disabilities, could benefit from a housing navigation center model and staff or peer-support at the center for help with accessing resources and navigating systems.

Community Workshops and Online Surveys
Community workshops were held on October 20 and November 17, 2021. These meetings were held on the virtual meeting Zoom platform due to COVID-19. The purpose of the workshops was to solicit input on housing needs, review previous Housing Element Goals, Policies and Programs, and recommend new actions to address unmet needs. Both the community meetings and surveys were advertised on the Housing Element website, the CityCity’s Facebook, and Instagram pages, and in newspaper PSAs. These resources were promoted in English, Spanish, and Hmong. Each meeting included a presentation using PowerPoint slides, which were made available in English, Spanish, and Hmong and included definitions of commonly used terms in the Housing Element. Live Spanish interpretation was provided as option for participants during both meetings and Live Hmong interpretation was provided as an option for the second community meeting, as well as closed captions (Zoom 531
Item 11.
13 “live transcript”) for those who are deaf, hard of hearing, or preferred a visual transcript of the meeting conversation. Interactive polls and a question and answer (Q&A) session helped make the meetings interactive and informative for participants.

Workshop #1 opened with a presentation on the background of the Housing Element process and its purpose; previous Housing Element progress; an overview of the housing needs, funding available to address those needs, and economic context; and an introduction to the previous Housing Element’s Goals, Policies and Programs. In the breakout group, participants then discussed the types of housing most needed in Oroville; what challenges are encountered in finding affordable housing; the special need for large household housing for low-income families and disability accommodations for residents with disabilities; fair housing; the role of ADUs in addressing unmet needs, overall constraints to the development of housing, SROs and why they haven’t been built, impacts from the Camp Fire, and to what degree home ownership should be a priority.

Workshop #2 opened with a presentation on the key findings from the Needs Assessment and an overview of the current Housing Element Goals, Policies, and Programs. In the breakout group, participants then discussed: Fair Housing, Patterns of Segregation, Home Ownership, Special Needs Housing, Promoting a Wide Range of Housing Types, Rehabilitation of Existing Neighborhood and Housing, After-effects of the Camp Fire, Energy Conservation and Affordable Housing. Resources from Workshop#1 and #2 can be found here:
https://www.orovillehousingelement.com/community-surveys Two online surveys, utilizing the SurveyMonkey platform, were available for community members to participate in. The surveys were advertised on the Housing Element Update website, social media, direct email, flyers, newspapers, and at both community meetings and the focus group. The first survey was open from September 25, 20212021, to October 22, 20201, and the second survey was open from December 20, 20212021, to January 3, 2022.

The surveys were provided in English, Spanish, and Hmong. The first survey consisted of 16 questions which asked residents about:
 Their demographics
 The type of housing they live in
 Whether they rent or own their home
 If they were satisfied with their housing
 The physical condition of their home
 Challenges they have experienced in finding housing to meet their needs, especially affordabilityaffordability.
 Barriers to home ownership
 The types of housing most needed in OrovilleOroville.  Discrimination they have encountered in searching for and securing housinghousing. 532
Item 11.
14  Accommodations they or a family member need for a disabling condition and their ability to obtain those accommodationsaccommodations.
 Their prioritization of the CityCity’s current Housing Element Goals The second survey consisted of 7 questions which addressed the following topics:
 Their demographics
 Their ability to secure safe and decent housing in OrovilleOroville.  The types of housing they would like to live in
 Impacts of the Camp Fire on housing displacement
 Potential actions to promote a mix of dwelling types and sizessizes.  How to incentivize the construction of ADUs that offer affordable rents to lowerincome households A total of 65 responses were collected from both surveys. Survey participants represented a diverse set of backgrounds, including college students, seniors, single mothers, low-income residents, local government officials, and both renters and owners. In the first survey, most residents wanted to live in a detached, single-family homes and over half of participant’s residences needed repair, ranging from minor to major improvements. Over 60% of residents felt that the range of housing options in the CityCity did not meet their needs, with the majority of participants citing that there is an insufficient amount of affordable housing and housing options, including housing for seniors and people with disabilities, affordable rental units, and permanent, supportive housing. The survey indicated that 70% of participants felt that there is a need for affordable apartments, 50% felt that there is a need for housing close to services, 60% felt there is a need for single-family homes, and 45% indicated that there is a need for special needs housing in Oroville. About 60-70% of participants reported that residents could benefit from information on assistance programs, down payment assistance, and loans or assistance for repairs and rehabilitation. Many participants cited a recent increase in homelessness.

Participants in the second survey also represented a diverse set of backgrounds. About 60% of participants had trouble purchasing a home due to increases in home prices following the Camp Fire. About 25% of participants reported that increasing partnerships between local governments and agencies, promoting affordable development in the CityCity center, prioritizing development in areas of high segregation and poverty, and decreasing impact fees for affordable housing development are actions that should be given the highest priority. Most participants indicated that offering pre-approved building plans and providing funding for construction costs or forgivable loan programs would be beneficial in promoting the construction of Accessory Dwelling Units.

Summary reports of both community surveys can be found at this link:
https://www.orovillehousingelement.com/community-surveys 533
Item 11.
15 Community Input Summary
In evaluating the input received through these varied engagement efforts, a number ofseveral consistent themes were expressed by community members. They are summarized here with a description of how they are being addressed through the Housing Element programs noted in Chapter 3:
 The Camp Fire had a significant impact on housing displacement and choice because many Camp Fire survivors relocated to Oroville. Given the ongoing risk posed by wildfire in communities surrounding Oroville, as demonstrated by the North Complex Fire in 2020 and the Dixie Fire in 2021, intergovernmental and interorganizational collaboration on housing issues in Butte CountyButte County is needed.

This input is to be addressed through:

Goal 1, Program 1.2.1 “Continue to work with the Butte CountyButte County Homeless Continuum of Care Coalition to facilitate the provision of shelter and services for individuals experiencing homelessness, with the goal of rapidly re-housing individuals.”
Goal 1, Program 1.2.4: “The CityCity will work to provide technical assistance in grant funding applications for the development of new facilities to serve individuals experiencing homelessness as needed.”
 There continues to be a significant shortage of affordable rental units which was exacerbated by the loss of naturally occurring affordable housing due to the Camp Fire. This limits the housing options for the lowest-income households, including seniors, persons with disabilities and those experiencing homelessness.

This input is to be addressed through:

Goal 1, Program 1.2.2 “Amend the CityCity’s Zoning Code to allow Low Barrier Navigation Center development as a use by right in areas zoned for mixed uses and nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses if it meets specified requirements, as defined and delineated in AB 101.”
Goal 2, Program 2.1.5 “Transitional Housing Code Amendments. The CityCity will add a provision to its Municipal Code that will allow Transitional Housing, as defined by Section 50675.2 of the Health and Safety Code, by-right in all residential zoning districts, with no additional requirements than what would be applied to any other residential use.”
Goal 2, Program 2.1.6 “Supportive Housing Code Amendments. The CityCity will add a provision to its Municipal Code that will allow Supportive Housing, as defined by 534
Item 11.
16 Section 50675.14 of the Health and Safety Code, by-right in all residential zoning districts, with no additional requirements than what would be applied to any other residential use.”
This input is to be addressed through:

Goal 4, Program 4.2.1 “The CityCity will install and upgrade public service facilities (streets, curb, gutter, drainage, and utilities) to increase private market investment in declining, deteriorating, and infrastructure deficient neighborhoods.

Goal 4, Program 4.3.1: “To the extent that funding is available, the CityCity will purchase abandoned homes, andhomes and provide rehabilitation assistance to improve deteriorated neighborhoods. Rehabilitated homes will be sold to low-income residents.”
Goal 4, Program 4.3.2: “To the extent that funding is available, the CityCity will support the rehabilitation of approximately 5 units over the next planning period.”  The CityCity’s Municipal Zoning Code may be constraining housing development and/or hindering the development of new housing to meet the needs of all residentsresidents.

This input is to be addressed through:

Goal 2, Program 2.1.5: “The CityCity will add a provision to its Municipal Code that will allow Agricultural Worker Housing for six or fewer persons by-right in all residential zoning districts, with no additional requirements than what would be applied to any other residential use “
Goal 2, Program 2.1.6: “The CityCity will add a provision to its Municipal Code that will allow Transitional Housing, as defined by Section 50675.2 of the Health and Safety Code, by-right in all residential zoning districts, with no additional requirements than what would be applied to any other residential use.”
Goal 2, Program 2.1.7: “The CityCity will add a provision to its Municipal Code that will allow Supportive Housing, as defined by Section 50675.14 of the Health and Safety Code, by-right in all residential zoning districts, with no additional requirements than what would be applied to any other residential use.”
Goal 2, Program 2.1.8: “Establish a comprehensive program to remove constraints to the production of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in accordance with State law.” 535
Item 11.
17 Goal 2, Program 2.1.9: “Amend the Municipal Code to revise emergency shelter parking requirements to comply with AB 139, to not require the number of parking spaces beyond what is necessary for staff that work at the shelter.” This input is to be addressed through:

Goal 6, Program 6.1.3: “The CityCity will meet with Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP) and Butte Habitat for Humanity (Habitat) once per year to discuss potential development opportunities in the CityCity and methods for collaboration “ Goal 6, Program 6.4.3: “Meet with Disability Action Center, Butte CountyButte County, and Legal Services of Northern California (LSNC) at least once per year to coordinate information, referrals, and outreach to residents.”
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: Accessibility and Language As described in the sections above, the CityCity designed and implemented public outreach in accordance with AB 686, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. This section describes these efforts in greater detail.
 Accessibility: The first survey was made available online and in paper copy, with the second survey made available online. Both surveys were provided in English, Spanish, and Hmong for three to four weeks so residents could access it in their preferred format, language, day of the week, and time of the day. The Focus Group and Community Workshops were held mid-week in the evenings to minimize barriers to participation based on work hours. Due to COVID-19, they were held virtually using Zoom. This minimized barriers to participation related to transportation and childcare. Flyers advertised both online and call-in methods for joining the meeting so barriers related to access to technology would be minimized. Challenges encountered included designing virtual meetings to be as similar as possible to in-person meetings, and some residents who would usually participate in person at community meetings not being comfortable with an online format or not having access to a computer or reliable internet and telephone services.
 Language: As of 2019, 84.5% of Oroville residents over the age of five speak English,

5.6% Spanish, and 6.6% Asian and Pacific Islander languages at home (U.S. Census 2015-2019 American Community Survey). Thus, the CityCity focused its efforts on robust trilingual materials and interpretation for English, Spanish, and Hmong languages and contracted with a professional translator for services. In addition, Zoom’s “live transcript” closed captions feature was used for the Focus Group and Community Workshops so residents who are deaf or hard of hearing or who prefer to read closed captions were able to access information. Technical support instructions 536
Item 11.
18 were provided at the beginning of the workshops to orient residents to the accessibility and language features. Recordings of the Community Workshops in English, Spanish, and Hmong were posted on YouTube with closed captions and linked to the Housing Element website. Bilingual presentation slides, breakout group notes, and bilingual definitions of frequently used terms are linked on the Housing Element website: https://www.orovillehousingelement.com/resources

INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
As required in Government Code Section 65589.7, the CityCity has provided its water and sewer providers with an opportunity to participate in the Housing Element so that housing production can be coordinated with infrastructure plans. The CityCity of Oroville has several utility providers, which are Thermalito Water and Sewer (TWSD), South Feather Water and Power, Lake Oroville Area Public Utilities District (LOPUD) California Service Company (CAL Water), and Sewage Commission- Oroville Region (SCOR). At the outset of the Housing Element planning process, the CityCity sent letters to all providers. The letters requested confirmation that the provider has written policies and procedures granting priority for the provision of their services to proposed developments that include low-income housing (per SB 1087, adopted in 2005). The letters also requested that providers review the Housing Element draft, and a keep a copy of the final Housing Element on file. Following adoption of the Housing Element, the CityCity will continue to work with water and sewer providers to coordinate housing and infrastructure plans. 537
Item 11.
19 CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF PREVIOUS HOUSING ELEMENT

BACKGROUND
The Oroville CityCity Council adopted the most recent Housing Element in June 2014 for the planning period of 2014-2022. The CityCity’s 2014 Housing Element was adopted during a time of significantly reduced funding, compared to the 2009 Housing Element. In 2012 the State of California had eliminated Redevelopment Agencies (RDA), and along with them, the CityCity’s primary source of affordable housing funding, the Redevelopment Agency Housing Set Aside.

Due to the loss of the RDA funding, along with ongoing cuts to both CDBG and HOME at the federal level, the CityCity’s funding sources decreased significantly. Though there were cuts due to the dissolution of the RDA, the Housing Department was successful in the applying for CDBG and HOME funding to maintain these programs.

Key initiatives included:
 Provide homebuyer and first-time homebuyer assistance up to $100,000 or 45% of the purchase price of the home; whichever is less (Action 1.1.1)  Ensure the CityCity’s policies and codes promote fair housing and equal access by amending the CityCity’s reasonable accommodation procedure for persons with disabilities (Action 1.3.1)
 A number of actions to protect existing neighborhoods from deterioration and encroachment, including augmenting code enforcement activities to supplement the graffiti removal program, fund neighborhood clean-up fairs, and code enforcement and community beautification efforts (Action 4.1.1); Install and upgrade public facilities such as streets, curb, gutter, and utilities to encourage private market investment in neighborhoods in need of revitalization (Action 4.2.1) purchase abandoned homes, and provide rehabilitation assistance to improve deteriorated neighborhoods (Action 4.3.1); Fund the rehabilitation of owner occupied single family homes (Action 4.3.2)  Promote the development of affordable housing through a diverse set of strategies, including maintaining and publicizing a list of housing developments that serve lowerincome households, persons with disabilities, or other special needs households (Action

1.2.3); Provide technical assistance to developers, nonprofits, or other private sector interests in seeking federal and state financing for affordable housing (Action 3.2.1)

STATE REQUIREMENTS
State Housing Element law (Government Code Section 65588) requires that Housing Elements review the previous Housing Element in the following ways:
538
Item 11.
20  Progress in implementation, including a description of the actual results or outcomes of previous Housing Element goals, policies, and actionsprograms.  Effectiveness, including a comparison of what was projected or planned in the previous Housing Element and what was actually achieved.
 A description of how past programs were effective in addressing the housing needs of special populations, including seniors, farmworkers, those with disabilities and people experiencing homelessness.
 Appropriateness of goals, policies and actionsprograms, including a description of what has been learned based on the analysis of progress and effectiveness of the previous Housing Element, and how the Housing Program is being changed or adjusted to incorporate what has been learned from the results of the previous Housing Element.

This chapter of the Housing Element addresses these requirements as follows:
 Progress in Implementation: Appendix A provides a detailed assessment of the accomplishments and effectiveness of each 2014 Housing Element Action. It also includes notes indicating whether the Action is proposed to be deleted, continued orcontinued or modified.
 Effectiveness: The subsections on Housing Production Goals and Results and Results of Previous Housing Element Actions compare what was projected or planned to what was actually achieved. Information on whether Actions are proposed to be deleted, continuedcontinued, or modified is also summarized here.  Addressing Housing Needs of Special Populations: The subsection on Results of Previous Housing Element Actions analyzes how past actions were effective in addressing the housing needs of special populations.
 Appropriateness of goals, policies and actionsprograms: The subsection on Implication of Findings for the 2022 Housing Element addresses what has been learned through the analysis of the previous Housing Element’s effectiveness and progress, and what is being changed or adjusted in the 2022 Housing Element based on this information.

HOUSING PRODUCTION GOALS AND RESULTS
State law requires regions to plan for housing needs based on future growth projections through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), per Government Code Section 65584. The State Department of Housing and Community Development allocates numeric RHNA unit production goals to regional councils of government, which then allocate these goals to each community within its area of governance. For Butte CountyButte County and each of its incorporated cities the regional council of government is the Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments (BCAG). The RHNA goals identify the housing units needed to accommodate growth over the 539
Item 11.
21 planning period for each of four different income levels: Very-Low (which includes ExtremelyLow), Low-, Moderate- and Above-Moderate Income.

State law does not require that communities meet the RHNA production goals. Instead, State law requires that communities employ planning and funding mechanisms that enable them to achieve the goals. One mechanism that carries a specific State mandate is the Adequate Sites Inventory, described in Chapter 5, per Government Code Section 65583.2. This section requires that each community ensure that there is adequate appropriately zoned land within its jurisdiction to accommodate its RHNA. If a community did not comply with this requirement at the time of submission of the last Housing Element to the State, it must show how this was corrected in the next Housing Element planning period through re-zoning, annexationannexation, or other means. Oroville’s 2014 Housing Element Adequate Sites Inventory demonstrated that the CityCity had sufficient vacant land appropriately zoned to provide for the RHNA.

Figure 1 shows Oroville’s RHNA for the period of January 1, 20142014, to June 30, 2022, and the number of units produced from 2014 through 2021 that are affordable to each income level.

Figure 1: Regional Housing Needs Allocation and Production, January 2014-June 2022 Income Level RHNA Allocation Units Produced % of RHNA Produced Extremely Low 209 0 0.0%
Very Low 210 0 0.0%
Low 284 205 72.2%
Moderate 306 0 0.0%
AboveModerateAbove
Moderate
784 250 31.9%
Total 1,793 674 37.6%
Sources: Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments, 2014 Regional Housing Needs Plan, CityCity of Oroville Community Development Department, 2021 540
Item 11.
22 In addition to the production of new affordable units, the CityCity assisted 164 households through its Homebuyer Downpayment Assistance Program through January 2022 and 3 households through its Owner Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program through January 2022.

RESULTS OF PREVIOUS HOUSING ELEMENT ACTIONS
The 2014 Housing Element included a Housing Program of six Goals. Within each Goal was a set of Policies and Actions. Below is a summary of the Goals and the number of Actions associated with each.
1: Increase housing opportunities and accessibility (6 Actions) 2: Remove constraints to housing (3 Actions)
3: Promote construction of a wide range of housing types (3 Actions) 4: Improve, rehabilitate, and revitalize existing neighborhoods (6 Actions) 5: Promote Fair Housing (2 Actions)
6: Encourage energy efficiency in housing (2 Actions)
The CityCity’s progress on these Goals and Actions is summarized below within the categories of  One Time Actions Completed
 Ongoing Actions That Made Progress
 Actions That Did Not Make Progress
 Effectiveness of Actions to Address Thethe Needs of Special Populations One Time Actions Completed
Update CityCity zoning regulations for Emergency Shelters, Transitional and Supportive Housing, and SROs to be consistent with state law—Action 1.2.2: As a part of Ordinance 1804, the CityCity Council amended zoning codes for emergency shelters, transitional and supportive housing, and SROs to ensure consistency with the State Law in 2014. Action

1.4.1: As a part of Ordinance No. 1804, the CityCity amended local zoning, development standards, and permit processing to be in compliance with Health and Safety Code Section 541
Item 11.
23 65583. However, further amendments to the CityCity Municipal Code are necessary to ensure compliance with all parts of Section 65583, as described in the Chapter 6 Constraints Analysis.

Track Housing Element implementation progress—Action 2.1.2: The CityCity’s Housing Element is in compliance; the CityCity has submitted its Annual Progress Report to the Department of Housing and Community Development.

Ensure availability of adequate sites to accommodate RHNA—Action 3.1.2: In 2015, the CityCity updated zoning codes and maps to coincide with the General Plan land use designations. The CityCity’s MXC and MXN mixed-use zones now permit multi-family, highdensity residential development.

Mandate compliance with Title 24 of the California Administrative Code—Action 6.1.1: The Building Department updated zoning codes to require all new residential development to comply with energy conservation requirements set forth by Title 24 of the California Administrative code.

Ongoing Actions That Made Progress
Provide homebuyer assistance—Action 1.1.1: The CityCity applied for and was rewarded 2016 and 2018 HOME funds each in the amount of $1,000,000 and CDBG Homeownership funds in the amount of $1,000,000. The homebuyer assistance program has been so wellutilized by residents that these funds have been expended. The CityCity also applied for and was awarded $1,000,000 in 2019 HOME funds, $1,000,000 in CDBG NOFA, and $1,000,000 in 2020 CDBG funds to continue this program. Action 1.2.3: The CityCity maintains an updated list of affordable housing projects on the CityCity’s website.

Monitor and improve the development review process—Action 2.1.1: The CityCity offers concurrent processing to streamline development and the zoning ordinance has been updated to provide incentives for low-income housing development, such as fast-track processing and density bonuses. The CityCity has also developed a preapplication/development review process to help minimize processing times and increase information symmetry. In 2020, the CityCity also developed a program to defer development impact fees by deed of trust until occupancy is issued.

Periodically survey fees to ensure they are reasonably related to the cost of services provided—Action 2.1.3: The master fee schedule was last updated in 2020 and is currently in the process of being updated for 2022. In addition, the CityCity developed and instituted a fee deferral program for subdivisions of all income types.

Formatted: Tab stops: 4.94", Left
542
Item 11.
24 Regularly update the CityCity’s GIS system—Action 3.1.1: The CityCity maintains a list of vacant lands that is shared with the public by request.

Secure funding for the production of new affordable housing—Action 3.2.1: The CityCity secured federal and state financial assistance to produce 40 units through 2021. The CityCity also donated vacant land where 12 townhomes will be developed by Veteran Housing development corporation and is working on a 60-unit supportive housing project in the CityCity that will be constructed in two phases.

Secure grants to augment code enforcement and clean up neighborhoods—Action 4.1.1: The CityCity applied for and received 2017 CDBG funds and Cal OES funds to continue code enforcement activities. In addition, the CityCity assembled a task force of law enforcement, code enforcement, and staff from Parks and Trees to identify code issues and housing complaints. The CityCity has continued the CityCity’s Code Enforcement efforts through increased staffing.

Install and upgrade public infrastructure—Action 4.2.1: The CityCity is evaluating the condition, demands, and future needs of public facilities. The CityCity developed a Capital Improvement program that will be implemented annually with roadway, sewer, and drainage infrastructure improvements to support infill development.

Purchase Abandoned Homes and Provide Rehabilitation Assistance—Action 4.3.1: The CityCity does not have funding to provide rehabilitation assistance but is actively acquiring and reselling properties in default. The CityCity acquired and paid off primary loans for several foreclosed homes in this reporting period. Some homes have been sold for fair market value while others were donated to VHDC to sell to income-qualified veterans. The CityCity uses Housing Program Funds (previously RDA funds) and CityCity Revolving loans funds to cure the defaults. The CityCity was awarded PLHA funds to continue this activity.

Support the Owner OccupiedOwner-Occupied Single-family Rehabilitation Program—Action

4.3.2: The CityCity rehabilitated one home, andhome and is currently seeking a contractor to oversee future rehabilitation projects. The CityCity applied for and was awarded $750,000 in 2020 CDBG Owner-occupied rehabilitation funds and have procured a contractor to oversee up to 10 projects over the next three (3) years.

Promote Fair Housing—Action 5.1.1: CityCity staff attends fair housing training and has coordinated fair housing workshops and distributed fair housing informational flyers in public spaces.

Publicize energy conservation incentives—Action 6.1.2: In, 2016, the CityCity approved the inclusion of properties within the CityCity of Oroville for three different Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) programs. 1)Ygreene Works, 2) HERO, and 3) Open PACE. 543
Item 11.
25 Actions That Did Not Make Progress
Provide Funding Assistance for Rehabilitation of Multi-family Units—Action 4.3.3: Due to lack of funding, the CityCity was unable to rehabilitate multi-family units.

Preserve Existing Affordable Rental Housing Stock—Action 4.4.1: Due to lack of funding, the CityCity has been unable regularly coordinate with the California Housing Corporation to identify and preserve at-risk units. However, a review of at-risk units has been conducted for this Housing Element and will continue as described in the Chapter 3 Housing Program under Action 4.1.2.

Effectiveness of Actions to Address Thethe Needs of Special Populations Secure funding for low-income senior housing— Action 3.2.1: The CityCity was awarded HOME Funding for the development of the Sierra Heights Project for seniors. Phase I of the project is completed and provides 40 units for extremely-low-income seniors and Phase II is underway and is expected to be completed in September 2022.

Inform residents of senior independent living facilities—Action 5.1.2: The CityCity works with the Housing Authority of the County of Butte, the Community Action Agency, and other special interest groups to provide senior housing informational materials to residents. The CityCity also administered a survey to seniors to identify their unique housing needs.

Secure funding for housing that serves small and Extremely Low IncomeLow-Income households— Action 3.2.1: The CityCity worked with developers to fund 5 multifamily housing projects using Disaster Low Income Housing Tax Credits that provide 312 units for low income and extremely low-income tenants. Although this is not an SRO project, the demographics of the CityCity of Oroville indicate that most low-income households consist of 1-2 occupants. Therefore, small households will benefit from the development of new, multi-family rental units.

Secure funding for housing people experiencing homelessness— Action 3.2.1: The CityCity worked with developers to secure funding for a permanent supportive housing project by providing a loan in the amount of $1,000,000 of Housing program funds. In addition, the CityCity assisted a Veteran Permanent Supportive Housing Project by providing land donation and a loan in the amount of $1,750,000 to developer. This project will begin construction in 2023, and2023 and offer occupancy in 2024. Lastly, the CityCity donated 5 homes and 3 vacant lots to the Veterans Housing Development Corporation to sell to lowincome and extremely low-income veterans. While this is not technically a project for people with disabilities, it contributes towards meeting the housing needs of people with physical disabilities or mental health conditions.
544
Item 11.
26 Work with the Butte CountyButte County Homeless Continuum of Care to reduce homelessness—Action 1.2.1: A CityCity Council member meets with the Butte CountyButte Countywide Homeless Continuum of Care regularly throughout the year to further COC objectives.

Amend the zoning code to allow reasonable accommodation without discretionary review for persons with disabilities—Action 1.3.1: As a part of Ordinance No. 1804, the CityCity created an administrative mechanism for a disabled person to file a request for reasonable accommodation to make specific housing available to one or more individuals.

The CityCity also made progress in the development of Permanent Supportive Housing as follows:
 Base Camp Village is a 12-unit permanent supportive housing project for people experiencing homelessness with a mental illness diagnosis. The housing project opened in April 2020.
 Prospect View will be another newly constructed project which will offer 39 units of permanent supportive housing for people experiencing homelessness with a mental illness. Construction is slated to begin in 2022 with units available for occupancy in 2023.

A detailed assessment of the accomplishments and effectiveness of each 2014 Housing Element Action can be found in Appendix A, with notes indicating if the Action is proposed to be deleted, continued orcontinued or modified.

IMPLICATION OF FINDINGS FOR THE 2022 HOUSING ELEMENT
Analysis
Given the environment of largely constrained resources between 2014 and 2021, the CityCity made considerable progress on its 2014 Housing Element Programs. Of the 23 actions, only 3 made no progress. The reasons included limited resources (lack of adequate staffing and appropriate funding), the housing market, and high building costs.

When looking at the CityCity’s progress in meeting the 2014-2022 RHNA target goals, it is clear that the private market made significant progress towards meeting the housing needs of low-income residents. It is equally clear that the lack of available public subsidies significantly impeded progress on the development of units for very-low and low-income households.

The Actions in the 2014-2022 Housing Element that were constrained by lack of funding are now poised to take advantage of the myriad of new or augmented funding programs 545
Item 11.
27 available from the State and Federal governments. As described earlier, much of this funding was received as a result of the Camp Fire (CDBG-DR-MHP and Disaster Tax Credits). In addition, the CityCity applied for and received SB-2, LEAP, REAP and PLHA funds. This will significantly support the development of new affordable housing, including permanent supportive housing targeted to individuals with disabilities and those experiencing homelessness, as well as strengthening the CityCity’s planning efforts around housing and investing in the South Oroville neighborhoodneighborhood.

The Actions in the CityCity’s 2022-2030 Housing Program, as shown in Chapter 3, are reflective of taking advantage of these new or augmented funding opportunities in partnership with developers, undertaking changes to the Municipal Code to equitably integrate patterns of development, and addressing recent State laws to remove constraints to the development of housing and shelter services for people experiencing homelessness.

Process
CityCity staff conducted an initial review of the 2014 Housing Element Actions to document accomplishments, assess effectiveness and recommend whether the Action should be continued, modifiedmodified, or deleted in the 2022 Housing Element update. Following this review, the Actions were discussed at Community Workshop #2, and public input on their relevance and feasibility was obtained. Based upon both the CityCity and community review:
 the completed Actions which were intended to be one-time efforts have been removed. In addition, some Actions which are no longer feasible due to a lack of funding or community resources to carry them out have been removed.  some Actions have been revised to bring them up to date with the most recent State legislation or to more appropriately address community resources that are available to support their execution.
 some actions that still have relevance and/or were intended to be ongoing efforts remain the same as the previous Housing Element.
 new Actions that were identified through the Community Outreach efforts, Needs Assessment, Assessment of Fair Housing, Constraints Analysis and/or are required by new State legislation have been added.

All ofAll the Actions are detailed in the Housing Program (Chapter 3) and those which are new or modified are summarized below.

New Actions
546
Item 11.
28  Goal 1, “Increase the availability of permanent housing for all community residents” includes new actions Programs to provide technical assistance in grant funding applications for the development of new facilities to serve individuals experiencing homelessness and incentivize the production of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) that can be offered at affordable rents to Low- to Moderate-Income households per AB 671.
 Goal 2, “Remove governmental constraints to the development of housing” adds new Pprograms to amend the Oroville Municipal Code, including: amendments for complianceto comply with AB 139 (parking standards for emergency shelters and by right zoning to address shelter capacitycity requirements) , as well asand AB 101, which (allowings Low Barrier Navigation Centers as a use “by right” in areas zoned for mixed-use and non-residential zones permitting multi-family uses), decreases parking requirements for emergency shelters, and includes a ; provisions to allow transitional housing, supportive housing, and agricultural farmworker housing, and residential care facilities housing seven or more persons in all residential zoning districts; redefinition of “Family” to allow more flexibility for housing persons with disabilities; . It also establishes a comprehensive program to removal ofe constraints to the production of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in accordance with State laws AB 3182, AB 68, AB 881, SB 13, AB 687, AB 680 and AB 681; streamlined permit review processes for projects that request AB 2162 (permanent supportive housing) or SB 35 (affordable housing) reviews; and revision of the use permit approval criteria to promote greater objectivity. In addition, Program 2.1.4 commits the CityCity to support the development of agricultural housing by coordinating with developers..
 Goal 3, “Support and encourage the construction of new housing at a range of costs, types, and tenures and in quantities to meet the needs of all income groups, including the very low-, low- and moderate-income groups” includes actions Programs to develop a community engagement program to help identify and meet the housing needs of residents.
 Goal 4, “Improve, rehabilitate and revitalize existing homes and neighborhoods” includes new actions Programs to guide redevelopment efforts in neighborhoods that are in need ofneed reinvestment.
 Goal 5, “Promote energy conservation in residential neighborhoods” includes a new goal Program to bring green energy to residents with a focus on reducing costs.
 Goal 6, “Improve fair housing choice and equitable access to opportunity.” The requirements of AB 686 (Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing) have resulted in a new set of 8 11 new actions Programs within this goal.

Modified Actions
547
Item 11.
29  Goal 3, Action Program 3.1.3 updates the existing annual workshops offered to the community by working with one of the region’s largest employers.  Goal 4, Program 4.3.1 expands the Low-Income Home Rehabilitation program to include mobile homes, andhomes and commits the CityCity to work with HCD’s MobilehomeMobile home Division to improve mobile home parks.  Goal 6, Action Program 6.13.2 expands the existing flyers that the CityCity provides to residents, by including information regarding new programs available to residents.

BACKGROUND
This chapter describes a Housing Program comprised of a comprehensive set of goals, policies and programs designed to address the CityCity of Oroville’s housing needs. These needs have been identified through the needs assessment, assessment of fair housing, constraints analysis, site inventory, and resource inventory. The terms “goals, policies and actionsprograms” are defined as follows for the purpose of the Housing Element:
 Goals: The goals are broad statements of the community’s vision and values for itself and are not time dependent. They indicate the direction the community wishes to move towards in providing healthy, safe, sustainable, and affordable housing for all residents.  Policies: The policies are the commitments that the CityCity is making to achieve the related goal or vision and a statement of its operational philosophy around housing.  Actions: These are the specific actions or activities that will carry out the related policies and move the community towards its goals in a concrete and measurable way over time.

The Goals of the Housing Element and the number of Policies and Actions within each Goal are as follows:

Goal 1: Increase the availability of permanent housing for all community residents (3 Policies, 6 ProgramActions)
Goal 2: Remove constraints that could hinder the development of housing (1 Policy, 8 ActionsPrograms)
Goal 3: Provide housing that is affordable to low-income households (2 Policies, 3 ActionsPrograms)
Goal 4: Promote construction of a wide range of housing types (2 Policies, 5 ActionsPrograms) 548
Item 11.
30 Goal 5: Promote the conservation of energy in residential neighborhoods (1 Policy, 2 ActionsPrograms) Goal 6: Improve fair housing choice and equitable access to opportunity (4 Policies, 9 ProgramActions)
Within each goal area, the information is organized as follows, per State requirements:
 Statement of the goal
 Statement of the policy(ies) to achieve the goalgoal.  Description of the program which is directly related to the policypolicy.  The party(ies) responsible for the program’s implementation. This will include specific CityCity staff, as well as community partners where appropriate. The responsibility for approving and directing all CityCity actions rests with the CityCity Council, which is then carried out by designated CityCity staff.
 Potential financing or funding source(s). The availability of funding resources is not guaranteed and is subject to change. More or fewer resources may be available during the planning period. This will impact the feasibility of carrying out the programs stated.  Timeframe for completion. These timeframes provide a reasonable expectation for starting and/or completing programs, given current staff resources and workloads. Like funding, these are subject to change due to circumstances beyond the control of the CityCity.

GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
Expand Housing Opportunity and Accessibility
This section addresses how the CityCity of Oroville will concentrate and focus efforts and resources on increasing the availability of permanent housing for all residents of the community.

Goal 1: Increase the availability of permanent housing for all community residents.

Policy 1.1: Encourage home ownership.

Program: 1.1.1 Homeownership Program. The CityCity will continue providing first-time homebuyer assistance of up to $100,000 or 45% of the purchase price of the home; whichever is less. The maximum purchase price allowed is $314,000 for each qualified household, with the goal of assisting five units per year. At least one unit will be in Census Tract 30.01 if deemed feasible.

Responsible Party: Business Assistance and Housing Development 549
Item 11.
31 Financing: CDBG and HOME grant funds and both HOME and CDBG Program Income Time Frame: Annually fund the program, andprogram and assist five units per year (minimum of one unit in Census Tract 30.01, if deemed feasible).

Policy 1.2: Work cooperatively with other governmental entities and local organizations to facilitate the provision of shelter and services for individuals experiencing homelessness, with the goal of rapid re-housing services.

Program: 1.2.1 Partnerships with Local Organizations. The CityCity will maintain a representative on the Council of the Butte CountyButte Countywide Homeless Continuum of Care to facilitate the provision of shelter and services for individuals experiencing homelessness, with the goal of rapidly re-housing individuals. The CityCity will maintain and publish information which assists residents in applying for rental assistance, Emergency Housing (Section 8) Vouchers, and utility assistance or connecting residents to shelter and supportive services.

Responsible Party: Business Assistance and Housing Development Financing: Grant funds
Time Frame: Ongoing, Update website annually
Program: 1.2.2 Low Barrier Navigation Centers. Amend the CityCity’s Zoning Code to allow Low Barrier Navigation Center development as a use by right in areas zoned for mixed uses and nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses if it meets specified requirements, as defined and delineated in AB 101.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, and CityCity Councils Financing: General fund
Time Frame: Within 6 months of adoption of the 2022-2030 Housing ElementAugust 2023
Program: 1.2.3 Affordable Housing Projects Listing. The CityCity will maintain and publicize a comprehensive listing of housing developments that serve low-income households, 550
Item 11.
32 persons with disabilities, and other special needs populations. This list can be accessed by the public from the CityCity’s website under the Services tab.

Responsible Party: Planning Division Business Assistance and Housing Development Financing: General fund
Time Frame: Update annually or as projects are placed into serviceservice.

Program: 1.2.4 Technical Assistance Program. The CityCity will work to provide technical assistance to local homelessness services agencies in grant funding applications for the development of new facilities to serve individuals experiencing homelessness as needed.

Responsible Party: CityCity Administrator and Building Department Financing: General fund
Time Frame: The CityCity will meet with local homelessness service providers annually to ascertain and plan for technical assistance needs.

Numeric Goal: Provide technical assistance for 2-3 projects and grant applications per year.

Program: 1.2.5 ADU Incentives/Affordable Rentals. Develop a formal program that offers incentives to property owners who develop ADUs that offer affordable rents for very-low, low-, or moderate-income households, with recorded regulatory restrictions on rents.

Incentives in the form of reduced fees, exceptions to customary development requirements, pre-approved and no cost plans, expedited processing times, and funding sources to subsidize construction costs will be considered.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, and CityCity Councils Financing: General fund
Time Frame: Within two years of adoption of the Housing ElementFebruary 2025 Numeric Goal: After program is established, assist 4-5 ADU applications with incentives each year.

551
Item 11.
33 REMOVE CONSTRAINTS TO HOUSING
This section addressaddresses how the CityCity will remove constraints that could hinder the provision of housing through zoning and land use policies.

Policy 2.1: Minimize constraints to the development of affordable housing through supportive codes, ordinances, policies, and guidelines.

Program: 2.1.1 Development Process Review Program. The CityCity will ensure that the CityCity’s review and approval process for residential development, including multi-family housing and housing affordable to low-to-moderate income households, is expeditious.

The CityCity provides pre-application and development review meetings to help minimize processing times. The CityCity will complete an annual review as part of the CityCity’s Housing Element Annual Report to evaluate application processing times and conditions of approval to determine whether improvements could reduce processing times without jeopardizing other public policy objectives. If the CityCity’s review and approval processes are found to unreasonably constrain development, the CityCity will take action to amend the process or establish guidelines and other mechanisms to promote increased application certainty and reduce processing time to the extent deemed feasible. In addition, the CityCity will amend the definition of “Family” in the Municipal Code definitions to remove the requirement that a Family “maintain a single lease or rental agreement for all members of the household and other similar characteristics indicative of a single household.” This revision will allow more flexibility for housing persons with disabilities.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, and CityCity Council Financing: General fund
Time Frame: Annually
Program: 2.1.2 No Net Loss /Unit Production Evaluation Program. Develop and implement a formal ongoing Unit Production Evaluation pursuant to Government Code section 65863 (No Net Loss law). The Unit Production Evaluation will be carried out annually to track the number of extremely low-, very-low, low-, moderate- and above moderateincome units constructed to calculate the remaining unmet RHNA and the sites available to meet the RHNA. It will also track the number of units built on the identified sites to determine the remaining site capacitycapacity by income category and maintain a database of all developable land within the CityCity. If sites identified in the Housing Element to meet RHNA are developed with non-residential uses during the Housing 552
Item 11.
34 Element planning period, the Unit Production Evaluation will include a plan to replace those sites, which may involve identification of new residentially zoned sites, rezoning of non-residential sites and/or annexation of new sites. The evaluation procedure will be updated annually and when sites identified in the Housing Element to meet RHNA are approved for development. The CityCity will encourage the development of multi-family housing units in all zones by not requiring a conditional use permit.

Responsible Party: CityCity Administrator and Contract Planner Financing: General Fund
Time Frame: Within one year of adoption of the 2022-2030 Housing ElementFebruary 2024
Program: 2.1.3 Development Impact Fee Review Program. The CityCity will continue to periodically survey the development application, plan check, and inspection fees, impact fees, and utility connection fees of other cities in the Butte CountyButte County region to ensure that these CityCity fees are reasonably related to the cost of services provided.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Finance Department, and CityCity Council Financing: General fund
Time Frame: Every 2 years, last updated in 20202020.

Program: 2.1.4 Agricultural Worker Housing Code Amendments. The CityCity will add a provision to its Municipal Code that will allow Agricultural Worker Housing for six or fewer persons by-right in all residential zoning districts, with no additional requirements than what would be applied to any other residential use. The CityCity will also coordinate with developers and the Housing Authority of the County of Butte (HACB) to produce farmworker housing. The CityCity will provide technical support and incentives for the production of farmworker housing.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, and CityCity Councils Financing: General fund
Time Frame: Within 6 months of adoption of the 2022-2030 Housing ElementAugust 2023. Coordinate with developers and HACB annually to identify farmworker housing development opportunities.
553
Item 11.
35 Numeric Goal: Assist the development of one farmworker housing project prior to January 2030.

Program: 2.1.5 Transitional Housing Code Amendments. The CityCity will add a provision to its Municipal Code that will allow Transitional Housing, as defined by Section 50675.2 of the Health and Safety Code, by-right in all residential zoning districts, with no additional requirements than what would be applied to any other residential use.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, and CityCity Councils Financing: General fund
Time Frame: Within 6 months of adoption of the 2022-2030 Housing ElementAugust 2023
Program: 2.1.6 Supportive Housing Code Amendments. The CityCity will add a provision to its Municipal Code that will allow Supportive Housing, as defined by Section 50675.14 of the Health and Safety Code, by-right in all residential zoning districts, with no additional requirements than what would be applied to any other residential use. In addition, the CityCity will amend the Municipal Code to establish procedures that comply with AB 2162 requirements and Government Code Section 65651 to streamline permit processing for Supportive Housing.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, and CityCity Councils Financing: General fund
Time Frame: Within 6 months of adoption of the 2022-2030 Housing ElementAugust 2023
Program: 2.1.7 Accessory Dwelling Unit Code Amendments. Establish a comprehensive program to remove constraints to the production of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in accordance with State laws AB 3182, AB 68, AB 881, SB 13, AB 687, AB 680 and AB 681, as delineated in HCD’s “Accessory Dwelling Handbook” (December 2020 and any subsequent updates This will require a thorough analysis of the CityCity’s zoning code, planning processes and development standards, with subsequent amendments to bring the CityCity into compliance with the stated laws.
554
Item 11.
36 Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, and CityCity Councils Financing: General fund
Time Frame: Within 6 months of adoption of the 2022-2030 Housing ElementAugust 2023
Program: 2.1.8 Emergency Shelter Code Amendments. Amend the Municipal Code to revise emergency shelter parking requirements to comply with AB 139, to not require the number of parking spaces beyond what is necessary for staff that work at the shelter.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, and CityCity Councils Financing: General fund
Time Frame: Within 6 months of adoption of the 2022-2030 Housing ElementAugust 2023
Program: 2.1.9 Streamline Affordable Housing Permit Processing. The CityCity will amend the Municipal Code to establish procedures that complies with SB 35 requirements and Government Code Section 65913.4 to streamline permit processing for Affordable Housing.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, and CityCity Councils Financing: General fund
Time Frame: August 2023
Program 2.1.10 Expand Permitted Use of Residential Care Facilities in Residential Zoning Districts.

The CityCity will amend its Municipal Code to permit Residential Care Facilities housing seven or more persons in all residential zoning districts with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Applications for Residential Care Facility use permits will only be subject to those restrictions that apply to residential uses in the same zone. As described in Program 2.1.11, the criteria for approving the CUP will be amended in the Municipal Code to promote objectivity.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, and CityCity Councils Financing: General fund
555
Item 11.
37 Time Frame: August 2023
Program 2.1.11 Promote Objectivity in the Use Permit Review Process. The required findings for approval of a Use Permit, as currently found in Subsection E.4 of 17.48.010 of the Municipal Code, will be amended to: 1) remove non-objective language as described in Chapter 6, Permitting Process Section; and 2) add requirements that the Use Permit determination is in “compliance with federal and state fair housing law” and that “the characteristics of future residents, including their protected class status under state fair housing law, will not be a consideration in making findings.”
Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, and CityCity Councils Financing: General fund
Time Frame: August 2023

FACILITATE HOUSING PRODUCTION
This section addressaddresses how the CityCity will facilitate the development of housing that meets the needs of the community. The CityCity maintains a goal to facilitate the development of a range of housing that varies sufficiently in terms of cost, design, size, location, and tenure to meet the housing needs of all economic segments of the community at a level which can be supported by the utility, water and street infrastructure. Because the CityCity does not build housing itself, the CityCity will take actions to support and facilitate the development of housing through land use policies, zoning, incentives, and funding acquisition. Ultimately, housing development will be carried out by private, for-profit, and non-profit developersdevelopers.

Policy 3.1: Ensure that the CityCity’s inventory of residentially-zonedresidentially zoned land is sufficient to accommodate development for all housing types and income levels commensurate with growth needs and the Regional Housing Needs Allocation.

Program: 3.1.1 Vacant Parcel List. The CityCity will continue to perform regular updates to the CityCity’s GIS system to track development and maintain an accurate list of vacant residential land in the CityCity.
556
Item 11.
38 Responsible Party: Planning Division and Engineering Division Financing: General fund
Time Frame: Update annually

Program: 3.1.2 Community Engagement Program. The CityCity will coordinate an annual workshop with Oroville Hospital to identify the housing needs of employees and ensure that the CityCity’s land use plans support the development of housing suitable for the local workforce as part of the CityCity’s overall economic development program.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Business Assistance and Housing Development Financing: General fund
Time Frame: The CityCity will engage Oroville Hospital on an annual basis to discuss needs, opportunities and resources. This will be completed within 1 year of adoption of the Housing Element.The initial engagement will be before February 2024.

Numeric Goal: Hold an annual workshop with Hospital administrators and employees, and initiate plans to assist 20 employees.

Policy 3.2: Provide technical assistance to developers, nonprofit organizations, or other qualified private sector interests in seeking federal and state financing for affordable housing, including units affordable to extremely-low-income households and supportive housing for persons with developmental disabilities.

Program: 3.2.1 Technical Assistance Program. The CityCity will actively work to identify sources of funding and provide technical assistance to interested developers in seeking funding for the construction of new affordable multi-family housing including units for large family households, extremely low-income households, and persons with development disabilities. Funding to be pursued includes tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds; HCD’s Multifamily Housing Program; and low-income housing tax credits (LIHTC).

The CityCity shall also assist by providing letters of support for funding applications during the application process to increase the chances of a project receiving a funding award.

Responsible Party: Planning Division and Business Assistance and Housing Development Financing: LIHTC, Tax Exempt Bonds, and HCD
557
Item 11.
39 Time Frame: The CityCity will develop a list of affordable housing developers who have developed or have indicated an interest in developing in Oroville. On at least an annual basis, the CityCity will monitor grant funding opportunities and notify developers of the availability of funding and technical assistance to be provided by the CityCity, if interested.
558
Item 11.
40 PRESERVE, REHABILITATE, AND ENHANCE EXISTING HOUSING This section addresses how the CityCity will initiate all reasonable efforts to preserve the quality of existing housing opportunities and to conserve as well as enhance the quality of existing dwelling units and residential neighborhoods.

Goal 4: Preserve, rehabilitate, and enhance existing housing and neighborhoods.

Policy 4.1: Protect existing residential neighborhoods from deterioration and encroachment of incompatible or potentially disruptive land uses and/or activities.

Program: 4.1.1 Code Enforcement. The CityCity will assemble a taskforce of law enforcement, code enforcement, and staff from Parks and Trees to identify code issues and housing complaints.

The taskforce will identify code enforcement grants to augment current code enforcement activities to supplement the graffiti removal program, to fund neighborhood clean-up fairs, and general code enforcement and community beautification efforts. Utilize neighborhood resources, including neighborhood groups (e.g., Neighborhood Watch) to supplement CityCity code enforcement activities., including mobile home parks when possible. Where possible, link code enforcement activities to available funding for improvements and correction of violations.

Responsible Party: Business Assistance and Housing Development and Community Development
Financing: CDBG and CalOES funds
Time Frame: Establish taskforce within one year of adoption of the Housing Element.

February 2025
Numeric Goal: Conduct one cleanup event every six months, with a focus on low-income areas with greater need.

Program: 4.1.2 At-Risk Unit Monitoring Program. Support the preservation of affordability for at-risk units (currently the CityCity does not have any qualifying properties). The CityCity will annually assess the status of projects with project-based rental subsidy contracts that restrict rents to affordable levels to determine the contract expiration 559
Item 11.
41 dates and communicate with property owners regarding their noticing requirements to tenants under Government Code Section 65863.10. For projects with contracts that will expire in the next 3 years, consult with the Housing Authority of Butte CountyButte County and develop a proactive plan to preserve affordable rents at these properties, including initiation of discussion with owners and exploration of financial resources to extend contracts.

Responsible Party: Business Assistance and Housing Development Funding Source: Housing Program Fund
Timeframe: Annually throughout the planning period
Program: 4.1.3 Tobacco Education Program. Assist in disseminating information about tobacco/second-hand smoke education provided by the Leadership in Equity and Development (LEAD), the Butte CountyButte County Public Health, or California Health Collaborative to help improve environmental health outcomes. The CityCity will work with LEAD to develop a 1-page educational handout to distribute to affordable housing complexes, recipients of the CityCity’s home loan or funding assistance programs, and interested property managers. The CityCity will refer property managers with an interest in smoke-free housing to Butte CountyButte County Public Health.

Responsible Party: Business Assistance and Housing Development Funding Source: General Fund
Timeframe: Disseminate information to all affordable housing complexes by July 2023, disseminate information to recipients of home loan or funding assistance programs on an ongoing basis, and refer property managers with an interest in smoke-free housing to Butte CountyButte County Public Health on an annual basis.

Policy 4.2: Ensure adequate public facilities to support housing development.

Program: 4.2.1 Capital Improvement Program. The CityCity will install and upgrade public service facilities (streets, curb, gutter, drainage, and utilities) to increase private market investment in declining, deteriorating, and infrastructure deficient neighborhoods. The CityCity will evaluate public facilities on condition, demands, and future needs. The Capital Improvement Program will prioritize areas for investment for annual roadway, 560
Item 11.
42 sewer, and drainage infrastructure as deemed feasible. The CityCity will prioritize areas of high segregation and poverty for investment, which include Census Tracts 25, 28, 30.01,

30.02, and 37.

Responsible Party: Business Assistance and Housing Development, Planning Division, Engineering Division, Planning Commission, CityCity Council Financing: General Fund, CDBG
Time Frame: The CityCity will identify and fund a minimum of one project in a Census Tract with high segregation and poverty (Census Tracts 25, 28, 30.01, 30.02, and 37) by January 2027.

Policy 4.3: Facilitate housing rehabilitation and stabilize existing neighborhoods, especially those with high foreclosure and vacancy rates.

Program: 4.3.1 Low-Income Home Rehabilitation Program. The CityCity will apply for funding sources to continue this program. To the extent that funding is available, the CityCity will purchase abandoned homes, andhomes and provide rehabilitation assistance to improve deteriorated neighborhoods and mobile home parks, and sell rehabilitated homes to low-income residents. In addition, the CityCity may donate acquired land or properties to local nonprofits for development or redevelopment Rehabilitated homes will be sold to low-income residents. The CityCity will work with HCD’s MobilehomeMobile home Division to secure funding and coordinate services to improve mobile home parks. The CityCity will focus redevelopment efforts in areas of high segregation and poverty, which include Census Tracts 25, 28, 30.02 and 37 and utilize the results of from the Study Oroville Blight study to guide redevelopment efforts.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Building Division, Business Assistance and Housing Development
Financing: General Fund, Housing Program Fund, PLHA funds Time Frame: Apply annually for appropriate available funding. Once funding is secured, provide rehabilitation services to a minimum of 8 homes by January 2030.

Numeric Goal: Provide funding assistance for at least 8 homes. 561
Item 11.
43 Program: 4.3.2 Owner-Occupied Single-Family Home Rehabilitation Assistance Program.

The CityCity will apply for funding sources to continue this program. To the extent that funding is available, the CityCity will support the rehabilitation of approximately 10 owner-occupied units over the next planning period. The CityCity will focus redevelopment efforts in Census Tracts 25, 28, 30.02 and 37, which are areas of high segregation and poverty.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Building Division, Business Assistance and Housing Development
Financing: CDBG, HOME
Time Frame: Apply annually for appropriate available funding. Once funding is secured provide rehabilitation services to a minimum of 10 owner-occupied units by January 2030.

Numeric Goal: Provide funding assistance for at least 10 owner-occupied units.

ENCOURAGE RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSERVATION
The CityCity of Oroville maintains a goal to encourage energy conservation in residential neighborhoods, which can reduce energy bills and enhance housing affordability. The use of available energy conservation measures and programs directly impacts residents’ monthly housing costs by saving them money on their energy bills, increases comfort and safety, and contributes to the conservation of limited resources.

Goal 5: Promote the conservation of energy in residential neighborhoods.

Policy 5.1: Encourage residential energy conservation through required compliance with current building codes and incentives for voluntary conservation efforts.

Program: 5.1.1 Energy Conservation Outreach. The CityCity shall assist in publicizing utility incentives for energy conservation through flyers on the CityCity’s website. In 2016, the CityCity approved the inclusion properties within the CityCity of Oroville for three Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) programs, which are Green Works, HERO, and Open PACE. The CityCity will create and update flyers that detail information on programs and their eligibility requirements.
562
Item 11.
44 Responsible Party: Planning Division, Business Assistance and Housing Development Financing: General Fund
Time Frame: Update flyers by July 2023, and annually thereafter as neededneeded.

Program: 5.1.2 Energy Savings. The CityCity will join the Butte CountyButte County Community Choice Aggregation fund to incentivize the use of green energy for both residents and businesses. The CityCity will take an active role in providing educational materials that discuss the benefits of this program.

Responsible Party: Planning Division, Business Assistance, and Housing Development Financing: General Fund
Time Frame: The CityCity will join the fund by July 2023 and develop promotional materials by December 2023

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHER FAIR HOUSING
With the passage of AB 686, state and local public agencies are required to affirmatively further fair housing through deliberate action to explicitly address, combat, and relieve disparities resulting from past and current patterns of segregation to foster more inclusive communities.

Following the guidance from State HCD, the CityCity of Oroville first analyzes patterns and trends of disparate housing needs and disproportionate access to opportunities through outreach efforts, the assessment of fair housing, and the site inventory. Then, the CityCity identifies and prioritizes significant contributing factors to fair housing choice. Finally, the CityCity establishes strategic policies, goals, and actions to affirmatively further fair housing based on the analysis of contributing factors (California State Department of Housing and Community Development, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, 2021). This section includes the goal, policies, and actions which were informed by the four affirmatively furthering fair housing sections: outreach (pg.), assessment of fair housing (pg. ), site inventory (pg. ) and identification of contributing factors (pg. ).

Goal: 6: Improve fair housing choice and equitable access to opportunity. 563
Item 11.
45 Policy: 6.1: Move toward more balanced and integrated living patterns by addressing concentrations of naturally occurring affordable housing, low-income households, poverty, and low access to opportunity in the CityCity.

Program 6.1.1: Community Development Block Grant Funds. The CityCity will coordinate with the Department of Housing and Community Development to evaluate whether the CityCity’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Housing Rehabilitation Program can be used for housing rehabilitation for renters as well as homeowners. Approximately 70% of households who experience 1 of 4 Housing Problems or 1 of 4 Severe Housing Problems in the CityCity are renter householdshouseholds, and that trend is increasing. In addition, the cityCity will prioritize future rehabilitation, community revitalization, or other investment efforts in Census Tract 30.01, when deemed financially feasible. To the extent possible, CityCity to focus other redevelopment efforts in areas of high segregation and poverty (Census Tracts 25, 28, 30.02 and 37).

Responsible Party: Business Assistance and Housing Development Financing: Allocation of staff time and cost of trilingual outreach (English, Spanish, and Hmong) materials through General Fund
Timeframe: At least three qualifying properties in Census Tract 30.01 to receive funding through the CityCity’s Housing Rehabilitation Program every year, starting in the 2nd year of the Housing Element cycle, beginning January 2024, provided a qualified pool of applicants.

Numeric Goal: Fund at least one property in Census Tract 30.01 annually.

Program 6.1.2: Affordable Housing Incentive Program. The CityCity will encourage the development of affordable housing in high resource areas or areas that do not experience high segregating poverty, such aswhich include Census Tracts 27, 29, and 31 to encourage more balanced and integrated development. The CityCity will develop a program of incentives, such as increases in the density bonus and flexibility in development standards in new growth areas.

Responsible Party: Community Development Department and Assistance and Housing Development
Financing: Allocation of staff time through General Fund 564
Item 11.
46 Timeframe: Staff will analyze the opportunities for affordable housing development in new growth areas and present their findings and recommendations to both the Planning Commission and CityCity Council by December 2023. Any needed modifications to the Municipal Code will be completed by December 2024.

Program 6.1.3: Affordable Housing Development. The CityCity will meet with Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP) and Butte Habitat for Humanity (Habitat) once per year to discuss potential development opportunities in the CityCity and methods for collaboration. The focus will be on feasibility of self-help housing that includes lowinterest loan and down payment assistance programs and permanent supportive housing. The CityCity and developers will consider coordinating self-help housing projects in Census Tract 28, which has a high concentration of rental units.. Assist developers with affirmative outreach to people of color, including Spanish and Hmong language materials.

Evaluate if the CityCity’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Homebuyer Program can be used for down payment assistance.

Responsible Party: Community Development Department and Business Assistance and Housing Development
Financing: Allocation of staff time and cost of trilingual outreach materials through General Fund
Timeframe: The CityCity will engage at least one affordable housing developer on an annual basis to discuss needs, opportunitiesopportunities, and resources, including funding. CHIP and Habitat to be in development on at least two projects each or in collaboration by the end of the Housing Element cycle.

Numeric Goal: CHIP and Habitat to be in development on at least two projects each or in collaboration by the end of the Housing Element cycleJanuary 2030. Develop one selfhelp housing project in Census Tract 28.

Program 6.1.4: Participate in Wildfire Recovery Efforts. Participate in the Camp Fire Collaborative, a long-term recovery group, the Butte CountyButte County Homeless Continuum of Care, a multi-agency planning body, or other appropriate organization involved in long-term recovery efforts from recent wildfires.

Responsible Party: CityCity Administrator & Planning Department Financing: General Fund
565
Item 11.
47 Timeframe: Participate in meetings and/or serve on boards beginning in June 2023

Policy 6.2: Meet the housing needs of protected classes, including persons with disabilities and tribal populations.

Program: 6.2.1 Accessibility Improvements Fund. An average of 20-30% of the population has a disability, which is significantly higher than other areas of Butte CountyButte County. The CityCity will strive to pool funding resources to provide accessibility improvements for sidewalks, public facilities and infrastructure, residences, and businesses if deemed feasible. Per the CityCity’s existing Municipal Code an individual with disability may file a request to the CityCity for reasonable accommodation.

Responsible Party: Planning Division and Engineering Division Financing: General fund
Time Frame: As part of its annual Capital Improvement planning, the CityCity will evaluate if there are certain areas of the cityCity that should be prioritized for public accessibility improvements and annually budget funds accordingly.

Program 6.2.2: Affordable Housing Outreach. The CityCity will meet with the Northern Circle Indian Housing Authority (NCIHA) Tribal HDAP Task Force at least bi-annually to identify opportunities for collaboration, which may include facilitating partnerships with local agencies, identifying funding resources, pooling funding resources, identifying sites for development or redevelopment, and working to increase community awareness, education, and support for future affordable housing developments.

Responsible Party: Community Development Department and Business Assistance and Housing Development
Financing: General Fund
Timeframe: Bi-annually, beginning December 2024 starting by the end of the second year of the Housing Element cycle.

Policy 6.3: Increase fair housing outreach and engagement and expand materials to meet the linguistic needs of the CityCity’s residents.
566
Item 11.
48 Program 6.3.1: Community Needs Assessment. The CityCity will confer with the Southside Oroville Community Center, school districts, Butte CountyButte County Office of Education, the Disability Action Center, Youth for Change, the Hmong Cultural Center, and/or other local agencies at least once per year to assess community needs and issues.

Information can be collected informally or formally through meetings, surveys, at community events, or other methods of engaging with the community. The information will be used to better understand the community’s issues and inform future planning processes.

Program 6.3.2: Fair Housing Outreach and Enforcement Program. The CityCity will meet with Legal Services of Northern California, Southside Oroville Community Center, ButteGlenn 2-1-1, school districts, Butte CountyButte County Office of Education, the Disability Action Center, Housing Authority of the County of Butte, and/or other local agencies at least once per year to coordinate information, referrals, resources, and outreach to residents for available services related to emergencies, employment, housing, assistance programs, and income. This may include providing direct case management services to residents, posting links on the CityCity’s website and Facebook page, and posting physical flyers at CityCity Hall in English, Spanish, and Hmong. In addition, the CityCity will establish a process to receive, review, and respond to fair housing complaints in collaboration with Legal Services of Northern California to better assist residents.

Responsible Party: Community Development Department and Business Assistance and Housing Development
Financing: Allocation of staff time and cost of trilingual outreach materials through General Fund
Timeframe: Coordinate information, referrals, and outreach by the end of the 1st year of the Housing Element cycleDecember 2023. The CityCity will evaluate its outreach efforts at least once per year and adjust as necessary.
567
Item 11.
49 Program 6.3.3: Community Engagement Program. The CityCity will strive to engage residents in areas experiencing high levels of segregation and poverty (Census Tracts 25, 28, 30.01, 30.02 and 37) to serve on boards, committees, task forces, and other local government decision-making bodies.

Responsible Party: CityCity Manager, Community Development Department Financing: Allocation of staff time.

Timeframe: The CityCity will develop an outreach strategy and application process within 18 months of adoption of the Housing Elementby August 2024.

Program 6.3.4: Accessory Dwelling Unit Outreach Program. The CityCity will work to provide educational information and outreach to residents that may be interested in constructing Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), especially units with accessibility improvements. This may include and creating a short, 1–3-page Development Checklist for ADUs. In addition, the CityCity will provide resources and materials both on the CityCity’s website and at CityCity Hall in English, Spanish, and Hmong.

Responsible Party: Community Development Department and Business Assistance and Housing Development
Financing: General Fund
Timeframe: Complete by the end of the first year of Housing Element CycleDecember 2023, and update annually.

Program 6.3.5: Apply for Funding Sources. The CityCity will apply for Community Development Block Grant Funds for Public Services to fund public service activities for residents, especially low-income residents, single mothers, persons with physical disabilities, persons with mental health conditions, and senior residents.

Responsible Party: Community Development Department and Business Assistance and Housing Development
Financing: General Fund
568
Item 11.
50 Timeframe:By the end of the eight year of the 2022-2030 Housing Element cycleJanuary 2030

HOUSING PROGRAM CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN
Government Code, Section 65583(a)(7) requires that the Housing Element identify the means by which the Housing Program, including its Goals, Policies and ActionsPrograms, will be consistent with other General Plan Elements and community goals. Responsible parties within the CityCity organization are listed for each action above. The Community Development Department, Planning Division, is responsible for creating, implementing, and tracking progress on the 2030 General Plan. The Business Assistance/Housing Development Department, is responsible for administering the CityCity’s housing programs, including federal CDBG and HOME funds, and the RDA Housing Set Aside, currently Housing Program Fund, which holds loan repayments from the former RDA housing loan portfolio. The Planning and Housing staff closely collaborated on the Housing Element update to ensure consistency with the other General Plan Elements. The Goals, Policies and Actions Programs in this Housing Element update support and compliment the Oroville 2030 General Plan Goals, Policies and ActionsPrograms, specifically the Land Use, Downtown, Economic Development, and Parks, Public Facilities and Services Elements.

In addition to preparing planning documents, the Community Development Department and Business Assistance/Housing Development Department prepares annual General Plan and Housing Element progress reports and presents them to the CityCity Council. Housing Element progress is also provided to the State Department of Housing and Community Development through the filing of the Annual Progress Report (APR) at that time. These annual reviews provide opportunity for CityCity staff, the CityCity Council and the general public to review progress and consistency between the General Plan Elements.

Based on the policies and actions outlined above, the following objectives in Figure 2, represent a reasonable expectation of the maximum number of housing units that will be produced, rehabilitated, and preserved during this Housing Element cycle. Rehabilitation refers to lowincome, owner-occupied, single-family homes and renter-occupied, multi-family units that are the focus of rehabilitation activities. Preservation refers to affordable rental units at risk of losing affordability without CityCity and/or developer intervention within this planning cycle.

Figure 2: Quantified Objectives Table
Income Level
569
Item 11.
51 ExtremelyLow Very-Low Low Moderate AboveModerate Total New Construction 50 50 50 350 100 600
Preservation of
Affordable Rental
Units At Risk Due
to Expiring
Contracts
N/A N/A5 N/A5 N/A N/A N/A10
Rehabilitation 2 44 98 0 0 144
Total 52 9499 148153 350 100 7544
570
Item 11.
52 CHAPTER 4: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
In order to determine the housing needs for the CityCity of Oroville, a comprehensive assessment of demographic, economic, and housing market data was conducted. This provides a baseline for identifying the CityCity’s greatest housing needs, and forms the development of Goals, Policies, and ActionsPrograms. Data sources for this assessment included: the U.S. Census Bureau, Department Housing and Urban Development, and Department of Agriculture; the California Departments of Development Services, Economic Development, Education, Finance, and Housing and Community Development (HCD); and the Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments, Sierra North Valley Realtors Multiple Listing Service, National Housing Preservation Database, and the CityCity of Oroville.

The Housing Needs Assessment has been organized by topic into the following sections. In response to recent State Housing Element affirmative fair housing legislation, this update to the Housing Needs Assessment includes an Assessment of Fair Housing.  Assessment of Fair Housing
 Demographics
 Employment
 Household Characteristics
 Housing Stock Characteristics
 Rental Market
 For Sale Market
 At-Risk Units
 Housing Affordability
 Extremely Low-Income Households
 Special Needs Households

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING: ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING The California Department of Housing and Community Development released a new guidance titled “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” (AFFH) on April 23, 2021, to assist jurisdictions in meeting the requirements set forth by AB 686. AB 686 creates new requirements for all state and local agencies to ensure that their laws, programs, and activities affirmatively further fair housing and that they take no action inconsistent with this obligation.

The AFFH guidance establishes new processes and guidelines for public entities to improve existing and institute new programs and policies to increase affordable housing for all residents, regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, disability, and all other protected characteristics. The CityCity will take an active role in 571
Item 11.
53 promoting inclusive communities, further housing choice, and address racial and economic disparities through goals, policies, and programs.

The purpose of the Assessment of Fair Housing is to analyze the elements and factors that cause, increase, contribute to, maintain, or perpetuate segregation, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, significant disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs. In addition, this analysis considers the CityCity’s role in conducting fair housing outreach and enforcement. This section of the Housing Element includes identification and analysis of patterns and trends, local data and knowledge, other relevant factors, and conclusions and summary of issues (California State Department of Housing and Community Development, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, 2021).

The authors primarily use census tract and block group data in this analysis. Counties are subdivided into census tracts and each census tract is further subdivided into block groups. All census tracts and block groups are uniquely numbered with a numerical code. There are nine census tracts that encompass the CityCity of Oroville and surrounding unincorporated areas.

These census tracts are Census Tracts 25, 27, 28, 29, 30.01, 30.02, 31, 33, and 37. The CityCity is further divided into block groups, but these block groups do not include a small portion of the south end of the CityCity encompassed by Census Tract 32 and a small portion at the east end of the CityCity encompassed by Census Tract 26.02.

The Assessment of Fair Housing considers patterns and trends over times, local data and knowledge, and other relevant factors for the following five subsections:

A. Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach
B. Segregation and Integration
C. Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty
D. Disparities in Access to Opportunity
E. Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk The authors of this report created a Census Tract Map, depicted below, that identifies the census tracts discussed in this analysis. The map below depicts Census Tracts 25, 27, 28, 29, 30.01,

30.02, 31, 33, and 37, each outlined in red. Each census tract is color-coded and named by its numerical code. The CityCity of Oroville’s boundaries are outlined in black.

572
Item 11.
54 Figure 2.1: Census Tract Map
573
Item 11.
55 A. FAIR HOUSING ENFORCEMENT AND OUTREACH CAPACITYCITY The first subsection of the Assessment of Fair Housing is an assessment of the jurisdiction’s fair housing enforcement and outreach capacitycity.

Pursuant to the California Fair Employment and Housing Act [Government Code Section 12921 (a)], the opportunity to seek, obtain, and hold housing cannot be determined by an individual’s “race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, veteran or military status, genetic information, or any other basis prohibited by Section 51 of the Civil Code.” Local and Regional Patterns and Trends
This section includes data tables, narratives, and maps to illustrate local and regional patterns and trends regarding fair housing enforcement and outreach capacitycity. For the purposes of this analysis, fair housing enforcement and outreach includes the number of Housing Choice Vouchers, fair housing inquiries, and public housing buildings in the CityCity. The Housing Choice Voucher Program provides rental assistance to very low-income families.

Housing Choice Vouchers
The table “CityCity of Biggs, CityCity of Gridley, CityCity of Oroville, CityCity of Chico, and Butte CountyButte County, Number of Households with Housing Choice Vouchers, 2021” depicts the number of households who hold Housing Choice Vouchers in Biggs, Oroville, Chico, Gridley, and Butte CountyButte County in 2021. Housing Choice Vouchers provide financial assistance to allow very low-income families to choose and rent market-rate safe, decent, and affordable privately-owned rental housing (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2021). The Housing Authority of the County of Butte provided 552 Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) to residents in the CityCity of Oroville. In comparison, 993 households hold vouchers in Chico, 48 households hold vouchers in the CityCity of Gridley, and 6 households hold vouchers in the CityCity of Biggs. There are 1,684 vouchers in use in Butte CountyButte County in total.

The map “CityCity of Oroville, Housing Choice Vouchers, 2021” depicts the percentage of renter-occupied housing units that hold Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) within each Census Tract in the CityCity of Oroville in 2021. Census Tract 28 has the highest concentrations of renter-occupied households that hold HCVs in the entire CityCity at 15-30% of all HCVs.

Census Tract 31 has the lowest concentration of renter occupied households that hold HCVs, ranging from 0-5%. HCVs are distributed evenly in the remaining census tracts at concentrations ranging from 5-15% of renter-occupied households. 574
Item 11.
56 The map, “Butte CountyButte County, Housing Choice Vouchers, 2021” depicts Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs) as a percentage of renter occupied housing units in Butte countyButte County. Much of the unincorporated county does not have data available.

Census tracts west of Magalia/Paradise and west of Gridley have 0-5% of renter occupied housing units as households with an HCV. Many of the census tracts surrounding Thermalito and Oroville have 5-15% of renter occupied housing units as households with an HCV. The cityCity of Oroville is the only area in the county with 15-30% of renter occupied housing units as households with an HCV (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool: U.S. Housing and Urban Development).

Figure 3: CityCity of Biggs, CityCity of Gridley, CityCity of Oroville, CityCity of Chico, and Butte CountyButte County, Number of Households with Housing Choice Vouchers Table, 2021 Jurisdiction Number of Households with Housing Choice Vouchers CityCity of Biggs 6
CityCity of Gridley 48
CityCity of Oroville 552
CityCity of Chico 993
Balance of County 85
Butte CountyButte County
(Total)
1,684
Source: Housing Authority of the County of Butte, May and August 2021 Correspondence

575
Item 11.
57 576
Item 11.
58 Figure 3.1: CityCity of Oroville, Housing Choice Vouchers Map, 2021 577
Item 11.
59 Figure 3.2: Butte CountyButte County, Housing Choice Vouchers Map, 2021

578
Item 11.
60 Public Housing Buildings
The map “CityCity of Oroville, Public Housing Buildings” depicts the location of public housing buildings in the CityCity in 2021. Public housing was created to provide safe and decent housing for low-income families, the elderly, and persons with disabilities. There are 54 public housing buildings which are located in clusters throughout the CityCity. There are 24 public housing building in Census Tract 25 at the north end of the CityCity. There are 13 public housing buildings in Census Tract 28 and 9 in Census Tract 27, located in the central parts of the CityCity. There are eight located in the unincorporated areas of Butte CountyButte County to the west of the CityCity.

579
Item 11.
61 Figure 4: CityCity of Oroville, Public Housing Buildings 580
Item 11.
62 Fair Housing Inquiries
Figure 5: CityCity of Oroville, Fair Housing Inquiries depicts the number of fair housing cases the CityCity received in 2013-2021 that warrant possible discrimination. The CityCity received 19 fair housing inquiries, and three of those were regarding a disability. The CityCity of Oroville received significantly more housing inquiries than any other cityCity in the County.

The map, “Butte CountyButte County, FHEO Inquires by CityCity, 2013-2021” depicts the geographic distribution of fair housing inquiries by residents in Butte countyButte County per one-thousand people. This data is not official cases, but represents concerns that residents have about possible discrimination. Data by cityCity is listed below (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool: U.S. Housing and Urban Development).

CityCity of Chico: Less than one fair housing inquiry per one-thousand people.

CityCity of Biggs: Less than one fair housing inquiry per one-thousand people.

CityCity of Gridley: Less than 0.5 fair housing inquiries per one-thousand people.

CityCity of Oroville: Greater than one fair housing inquiry per one-thousand people Town of Paradise: Less than 0.25 fair housing inquiries per one-thousand people.

581
Item 11.
63 Figure 5: CityCity of Oroville, Fair Housing Inquiries

582
Item 11.
64 Figure 5.1: Butte CountyButte County, FHEO Inquires* by CityCity Map, 2013-2021 583
Item 11.
65 Figure 5.2: Butte CountyButte County, FHEO Cases - Total Map, 2020 depicts Title VIII fair housing cases filed by FHEO in Butte countyButte County per one-thousand people. Butte countyButte County had one case filed, thus the map illustrates less than 0.01 cases per one-thousand people (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool: U.S. Housing and Urban Development).

Figure 5.3: Butte CountyButte County, FHEO Cases – Disability Bias Map, 2020 depicts the percent of total cases with a disability bias for Title VIII fair housing cases filed by FHEO in Butte countyButte County per one-thousand people. Butte countyButte County had one case filed and that one case was for disability bias. Thus, the map shows greater than 85% of total cases as having a disability bias (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool: U.S. Housing and Urban Development).

Figure 5.4: Butte CountyButte County, FHEO Cases – Race Bias Map, 2020 depicts the percent of total cases with a race bias for Title VIII fair housing cases filed by FHEO in Butte countyButte County per one-thousand people. Butte countyButte County had one case filed and that one case was not for race bias. Thus, the map shows 0% of total cases as having a race bias (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool: U.S. Housing and Urban Development).

584
Item 11.
66 Figure 5.2: Butte CountyButte County, FHEO Cases - Total Map, 2020

585
Item 11.
67 Figure 5.3: Butte CountyButte County, FHEO Cases – Disability Bias Map, 2020

586
Item 11.
68 Figure 5.4: Butte CountyButte County, FHEO Cases – Race Bias Map, 2020

587
Item 11.
69 Local Data and Knowledge
Local data and knowledge was collected through interviews with regional stakeholders whose service areas include the CityCity of Oroville.

Legal Services of Northern California
On August 12, 2021, authors conducted an online interview over Zoom with a staff member from the Legal Services of Northern California (LSNC) office in Chico, which provides legal services to low-income residents (200% of the poverty level) residing Butte, Tehama, and Glenn Counties. LSNC’s goal is to identify and defeat the causes and effects of poverty by utilizing all available resources. LSNC provides legal services for housing, government benefits, health, and other civil legal issues.

Staff works with residents in Butte and Glenn County who are 60 years and over and have significant disabilities that impact their ability to work or secure housing. Many clients have trouble finding and acquiring housing due to mental illness, credit requirements, and lack of financing for security deposits. Staff indicated there is a need for supportive housing that provides wraparound services. Landlords also need support or education to better assist clients that have special needs.

Due to lack of housing in the region, clients have been unable to utilize Housing Choice (Section 8) and Emergency Housing Vouchers. Furthermore, there is a shortage of accessible units in the region. Staff reported that recent wildfires destroyed naturally occurring affordable housing such as mobile home parks, market-rate substandard housing, and apartment complexes in the burn scar. The Town of Paradise in Butte CountyButte County lost 40 mobile home parks, which have not been restored or reintroduced.

Staff noted that fair housing issues are often reported to the state, not municipalities.

Therefore, the number of fair housing cases within cities is likely larger.

CityCity of Oroville
The CityCity would like to improve outreach by integrating its services with the County.

Currently, affordable housing programs and services are difficult for residents to navigate because CityCity and County services may conflict or overlap and there is not a singular point-of-contact to answer questions. The CityCity has conducted fair housing outreach by distributing flyers to various organizations and posting ads to radios and local newspapers in English, Spanish, and Hmong. However, the CityCity has not conducted fair 588
Item 11.
70 housing enforcement, which is beyond the CityCity’s organizational capacitycity. The CityCity of Oroville does not have a formal process to receive, review, and respond to fair housing complaints. Due to limited staff and capacitycity, fair housing complaints are currently referred to either Legal Services of Northern California, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, or the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) office. Program 6.3.2 in the Chapter 3 Housing Program commits the CityCity to establish a process to receive, review, and respond to fair housing complaints in collaboration with Legal Services of Northern California. No fair housing lawsuits have been filed against the CityCity of Oroville over the previous Housing Element planning period.

The CityCity of Oroville is in compliance with all fair housing laws in its policies and procedures. In addition, tThe CityCity does not have the capacitycapacity to promote fair housing through outreach. However, the staff has hosted two community workshops in the South Oroville neighborhood to assess community needs and prioritize areas and opportunities for investment. Workshops have focused on topics such as housing, infrastructure, code enforcement, and neighborhood watch.

Other Relevant Factors
Local Compliance with State and Federal Fair Housing Laws The Housing Element Update includes a suite of new housing goals, programs, and actions to address state fair housing laws and local compliance, which is discussed further in Chapter 2: Review of Previous Housing Element of the Housing Element Update and Chapter 3: Housing Programs of the Housing Element Update. The CityCity of Oroville did not receive fair housing complaints or undergo lawsuits during the previous housing element cycle.

Summary of Findings
As of 2021, 552 households held Housing Choice Vouchers in the CityCity, which is a significantly high number, at 25% of all renter households. Census Tract 28 has the highest concentration of HCVs, at 15-30% of renter-occupied housing units and Census Tract 31 has the lowest concentration of HCVs at 0-5% of renter-occupied housing units. Many of the census tracts surrounding Thermalito and Oroville have 5-15% of renter occupied housing units as households with an HCV. The cityCity of Oroville is the only area in the county with 15-30% of renter occupied housing units as households with an HCVHCV. 589
Item 11.
71 Of the 54 public housing buildings in the CityCity, 13 are in Census Tract 28 and 24 in Census Tract 25. The CityCity has received 19 fair housing inquiries in 2013-2021, which is significantly high compared to other cities in Butte CountyButte County. These findings indicate that there is a concentration of affordable housing in Census Tract 28 and significantly less affordable housing in Census Tract 31. In addition, there are a significant number of fair housing issues occurring in the CityCity.

Interviews with Legal Services of Northern California indicate that households who have been awarded Housing Choice or Emergency Vouchers may not be able to utilize them due to the shortage of housing in Butte CountyButte County.

The CityCity of Oroville does not have a formal fair housing complaint, review, and enforcement process. Therefore, residents report fair housing inquiries to local agencies and state governments. The CityCity would like to integrate its services with the County to improve fair housing outreach.

B. SEGREGATION AND INTEGRATION
The second subsection of the Assessment of Fair Housing is an assessment of segregation and integration in the jurisdiction. Segregation is defined as housing policies, practices, or procedures – both public and private - that exclude or separate individuals based on their race, ethnicitycity, disability, or income. This can include overt and covert housing discrimination through land use policy, shifting housing markets, and patterns of investment or disinvestment. Historic patterns of segregation persist in California despite the Fair Housing Act in 1968. The analysis of integration considers the equal distribution of people and resources within communities (California Department of Housing and Community Development, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, April 2021 Update).

Local and Regional Patterns and Trends
This section includes data tables, narratives, and maps to illustrate local and regional patterns and trends regarding segregation and integration. For the purposes of this analysis, segregation and integration includes trends and place-based data on race and ethnicitycity, linguistic isolation, familial status, persons with disabilities, and income disparity, and identifies the groups that experience the highest levels of segregation.

People of Color
590
Item 11.
72 The table “CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, Race and Ethnicitycity, 2010 and 2019” compares data on race and ethnicitycity for the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County from in 2010 and 2019. As of 2019, most of the population or 64.2% of residents identify as White (not Hispanic/Latino), 13.6% identify as Hispanic or Latino (of any race), and 8.6% identify as Asian in the CityCity of Oroville. The remainder of the population identify as two or more races, Black/African American, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander.

The CityCity of Oroville experienced a large increase in population of 26.2% from 2010 to 2019, while Butte CountyButte County’s population only increased by 3.3% over that period.

This is likely due in part to the 2018 Camp Fire and residents relocating from eastern Butte CountyButte County to the CityCity of Oroville. The CityCity of Oroville’s Asian population increased by 3.4% and the Hispanic/Latino population increased by 3.2%. The number of White, not Hispanic/Latino individuals increased by 965 individuals, but the overall percentage decreased by 10.5% due to significant increases in non-white populations.

In comparison, Butte CountyButte County’s Asian population increased by 0.5% and its Hispanic/Latino population increased by 2.8%. The number of White, not Hispanic/Latino individuals decreased by 3,926 individuals and the overall percentage decreased by 4.1%.

The CityCity of Oroville is steadily becoming more diverse. 591
Item 11.
73 Source: U.S. Census 2006-2010 and 2015-2019 American Community Survey Figure 6: CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, Race and Ethnicitycity Table, 2010 and 2019 Race or Ethnicitycity CityCity of Oroville Butte CountyButte County 2010 2019 2010-
2019
2010 2019 2010-
2019
Number
of
Persons
Percent of
Total
Population
Number
of
Persons
Percent of
Total
Population
Change Number
of
Persons
Percent of
Total
Population
Number
of
Persons
Percent of
Total
Population
Change
Hispanic/Latino (of any race) 1,600 10.4% 2,646 13.6% +3.2% 29,512 13.5% 36,916 16.3% +2.8% White, not Hispanic/Latino 11,480 74.7% 12,445 64.2% -10.5% 166,463 76.1% 162,537 72% -4.1% Black or African American, not
Hispanic/Latino
445 2.9% 801 4.1% +1.2% 3,012 1.4% 3,342 1.5% +0.1%
American Indian and Alaska
Native, not Hispanic/Latino
139 0.9% 265 1.4% +0.5% 2,050 0.9% 1,699 0.8% -0.1%
Asian, not Hispanic/Latino 801 5.2% 1,674 8.6% +3.4% 8,658 4% 10,057 4.5% +0.5% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific
Islander, not Hispanic/Latino
24 0.2% 89 0.5% +0.3% 481 0.2% 476 0.2% 0%
Some other race, not
Hispanic/Latino
0 0% 8 0% 0% 243 0.1% 321 0.1% 0%
Two or more races, not
Hispanic/Latino
880 5.7% 1,465 7.6% +1.9% 8,216 3.8% 10,469 4.6% +0.8%
Total 15,369 -- 19,393 -- +26.2% 218,635 -- 225,817 -- +3.3% 592
Item 11.
74 Continued…
The maps “CityCity of Oroville, Percent of People of Color, 2018,” “CityCity of Oroville, Percent of People of Color, 2010,” “Butte CountyButte County, Percent of People of Color, 2018,” and “Butte CountyButte County, Percent of People of Color, 2010” depict block group data on the total percentage of people of color, or the non-white population for residents in the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County in 2010 and 2018.

For the purposes of this analysis, non-white individuals are those that identify as any other racial or ethnic subgroup than “White,” including individuals that identify as two or more races. People who identify as nonwhite are considered "people of color.” In most areas of the CityCity in 2018, the percentage of the total non-white population ranges from 21-40%. However, the percentage of the total non-white population ranges from 41-60% in areas falling in Census Tracts 25, 29, 30.01, 30.02, and 33. The highest concentration of nonwhite residents ranges from 61-80%, and these areas fall within Census Tract 30.01.

In Butte CountyButte County in 2018, the portion of non-white residents is significantly smaller, ranging from 20-40% in roughly half of the County and less than 20% in the other half. There are few areas that have a concentration of non-white residents ranging from 41-60% in the County.

These areas fall within Oroville, Biggs, Chico, and Gridley, and southern portions of the County.

The percent of the total non-white population increased significantly in both the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County in 2018 compared to 2010. In 2010, less than 20% of the population was non-white in most areas of Butte CountyButte County. In 2010, Census Tract 25, 29, and 33 in the CityCity of Oroville had a non-white population of 21-40% and Census Tracts

30.01 and 30.02 had a non-white population ranging from 21-60%. The concentration of nonwhite residents increased to 41-80% in Census Tracts 30.01 and 30.02 and 41-60% in Census Tracts 25, 29, and 33 in 2018 compared to 2010. The maps below depict that diversity has substantially increased in all parts of Butte CountyButte County between 2010 and 2018. Trends over time indicate the CityCity’s growth in diversity was concentrated within Census Tracts 25, 29, 30.01, 30.02, and 33.

593
Item 11.
75 Figure 6.1: CityCity of Oroville, Percent of People of Color Map, 2018

594
Item 11.
76 Figure 6.2: CityCity of Oroville, Percent of People of Color Map, 2010 595
Item 11.
77 Figure 6.3: Butte CountyButte County, Percent of People of Color Map, 2018

596
Item 11.
78 Figure 6.4: Butte CountyButte County, Percent of People of Color Map, 2010

597
Item 11.
79 Linguistic Isolation: Language
The table “CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, Languages Spoken at Home, 2010 and 2019” compares data on language and fluency for the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County in 2010 and 2019. In 2019, more than 15.5% of the population spoke a language other than English at home, with Asian and Pacific Islander languages as the most common language at 6.6%, Spanish at 5.6%, and other Indo-European languages at 2.4% of the population. An estimated 6.8% of the total population is not fluent in English.

The percentage of people who spoke a language other than English at home increased by 4% for the CityCity of Oroville and decreased by 2.6% for Butte CountyButte County in 2019 compared to 2010.

In addition, the number of persons over 5 years of age who are not fluent in English increased slightly for the CityCity of Oroville but decreased slightly for Butte CountyButte County. Households that experience linguistic isolation speak limited English, which can make it difficult to access the information or services they need. About 1,200 individuals are not fluent in English, which is nearly half of the population that speaks a language other than English at home.

598
Item 11.
80 Figure 7: CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, Languages Spoken at Home Table, 2010 and 2019 Language & Fluency CityCity of Oroville Butte CountyButte County 2010 2019 2010-
2019
2010 2019 2010-
2019
Number
of
Persons
Percent of
Total
Population
Number
of
Persons
Percent of
Total
Population
Change Number
of
Persons
Percent of
Total
Population
Number
of
Persons
Percent of
Total
Population
Change
Persons 5 years and over that
speak Spanish at home
747 5.3% 997 5.6% +0.3% 19,196 9.3% 20,877 9.8% +0.5%
Persons 5 years and over that
speak Asian and Pacific Islander
languages at home
651 4.6% 1,169 6.6% +2% 5,986 2.9% 7,482 3.5% +0.6%
Persons 5 years and over that
speak other Indo-European
languages
156 1.1% 432 2.4% +1.3% 4,334 2.1% 3,208 1.5% -0.6%
Persons 5 years and over that
speak other languages at home
68 0.5% 155 0.9% +0.4% 619 0.3% 1,104 0.5% +0.2%
Total persons 5 years and over
that speak a language other
than English at home
1,627 11.5% 2,753 15.5% +4.0% 30,135 14.6% 20,692 12% -2.6% Total persons 5 years and over
that are not fluent in English
809 5.7% 1,207 6.8% +1.1% 12,591 6.1% 11,570 5.4% -0.7% 599
Item 11.
81 Source: U.S. Census 2006-2010 and 2015-2019 American Community Survey 600
Item 11.
82 Familial Status
To assess segregation and integration of familial status, this report analyzes data on percent of children in single parent, female households, and percent of children in married couple households within the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County. Census tract level data is used because block group level data is not available.

Married Couple Households
The maps “CityCity of Oroville, Married Couple Households with Children, 2019” and “Butte CountyButte County, Married Couple Households with Children, 2019” indicate the percent of children residing in married couple households in the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County. Living arrangements for children vary significantly withing the CityCity, ranging from 20% to greater than 80% of children residing in married couple households.

In Census Tract 31, greater than 80% of children reside in married couple households, which is the highest concentration in the entire CityCity. In Census Tracts 27, 29, 30.01, and 33 that figure is 60-80% of households. However, in Census Tracts 25, 28, and 27 only 40-60% of children reside in married couple households. Census Tract 30.02 has the lowest concentration at 20-40% of households.

Similarly, in Butte CountyButte County, the number of children residing in married couple households range from 21-61%. However, Census Tract 30.02 has one of the lowest concentrations of children residing in married couple households in the entire County (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool: U.S. Census 2015-2019 American Community Survey). 601
Item 11.
83 Figure 8: CityCity of Oroville, Percent of Children in Married Couple Households Map, 2019

602
Item 11.
84 Figure 8.1: Butte CountyButte County, Percent of Children in Married Couple Households Map, 2019 603
Item 11.
85 Single Parent, Female Households
The maps “CityCity of Oroville, Percent of Children in Single Parent, Female Households, 2019” and “Butte CountyButte County, Percent of Children in Single Mother Households, 2019” indicate the percent of children residing in female householder, no spouse/partner present households in the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County.

The findings indicate that 20-40% of children reside in households headed by single mothers in Census Tracts 28, 30.01, 30.02, and 37. Less than 20% of children reside in households headed by single mothers in Census Tracts 25, 27, 29, 31, and 33.

In most areas of Butte CountyButte County, less than 20% of children live in households headed by single mothers. In some areas of Butte CountyButte County, such as northern parts of the County, south Oroville, south Chico, and the CityCity of Gridley, 20-40% of children reside in households headed by single mothers. The CityCity of Oroville is one of few areas in the County where greater than 20% of households are headed by single mothers (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool: U.S. Census 2015-2019 American Community Survey).

604
Item 11.
86 Figure 8.2: CityCity of Oroville, Percent of Children in Single Parent, Female Households Map, 2019 605
Item 11.
87 Figure 8.3: Butte CountyButte County, Percent of Children in Single Parent, Female Households Map, 2019 606
Item 11.
88 Single Parent Female Households Living Below the Poverty Level The table “CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, Percent of Single Parent Female Households Living Below the Poverty Level, 2010 and 2019” shows the percent of single parent female households whose income in the past 12 months is below the poverty level. Over the past 10 years the CityCity of Oroville has experienced an increase in the number of single parent female householders living below the poverty level.

The CityCity of Oroville has experienced slight increases in single parent female households living below the poverty level in the past 10 years. Single parent female households living below the poverty level in the CityCity of Oroville increased by 40 households in 2019 compared to 2010.

Families that had related children under 18 years old of the single parent female householder and who were living below the poverty level increased by 42 households in 2019 compared to 2010.

In comparison, Butte CountyButte County experienced decreases in single parent female households living below the poverty level and those with related children of the householder under 18 years in 2019 compared to 20102010.

Figure 8.4: CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, Percent of Single Parent Female Households Living Below the Poverty Level Table, 2010 and 2019
Percent of Families Whose Income in
the Past 12 Months is Below the
Poverty Level
CityCity of Oroville Butte CountyButte County
2010 2019 Change 2010 2019 Change
Families with female householder, no
spouse present
207 247 +40 2,126 2,131 +5
With related children of the
householder under 18 years
205 247 +42 1,873 1,776 -97
With related children of the
householder under 5 years only
81 42 -39 426 443 +17
Source: U.S. Census, 2006-2010 and 2015-2019 American Community Survey

607
Item 11.
89 People with Physical Disabilities
The maps “CityCity of Oroville, Percent of Population with a Physical Disability, 2019” and “Butte CountyButte County, Percent of Population with a Physical Disability, 2019” indicate the percent of the population with a disability in the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County. As illustrated below, 20-30% of the population in most areas of the CityCity have a disability. In Census Tracts 25, 29, and 31 only 10-20% of the population has a disability. However, Census Tract 30.01 has the highest concentration of residents with a disability, at 30-40% of the population, which is the highest concentration of residents experiencing disability in any census tract in the County.

In comparison, 10-20% of the population has a disability in about half of the areas of Butte CountyButte County, and about 20-30% of the population has a disability in the other half of Butte CountyButte County (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool: U.S. Census 2015-2019 American Community Survey).

608
Item 11.
90 Figure 9: CityCity of Oroville, Percent of Population with a Disability Map, 2019

609
Item 11.
91 Figure 9.1: Butte CountyButte County, Percent of Population with a Disability Map, 2019

610
Item 11.
92 Income Disparity
This section provides an overview of the percentage of residents experiencing poverty, the median household income, and Gini index in both the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County.

Median Household Income
The maps “CityCity of Oroville, Median Household Income, 2019” and “Butte CountyButte County, Median Household Income, 2019” depicts block group data on median household income in the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County in 2019. The median household income in the State was $87,1100 in 2020. Areas that are light blue represent residents with the lowest median household income which includes most block groups located within Census Tract 28, 30.01, and

30.02. Residents in these areas have a median household income that is less than $30,000, and these areas make up nearly half of the CityCity of Oroville. Residents in Block Group 2, Census Tract 28 have the lowest median household income at $15,179.

Areas that are medium blue represent concentrations of residents that earn between $30,000- 55,000, which includes most of the remaining areas of the CityCity. Areas that are dark blue represent residents with the highest median household income in the CityCity, and these areas are primarily located at the northeast end of the CityCity, in Census Tracts 27 and 31. Residents living in Block Group 3, Census Tract 27 earn the highest median household income at $66,083.

This is still $20,000 below the State average. The difference between areas of the highest and areas of lowest median household income is greater than $50,000, which represents significantly large disparities in income based on residential location.

In Butte CountyButte County, most block groups that have a median household income less than $55,000 or between $55,000 and $87,100. Several areas have a median household income between $87,100 and $125,000. Households that have a median household income between $87,100 and $125,000 are primarily located within Chico and its surrounding areas, as well as south of Biggs, near Gridley. There are a few block groups near Chico where the median household income is greater than $125,000, which is substantially more than the State average.

611
Item 11.
93 Figure 10: CityCity of Oroville, Median household income, 2019 612
Item 11.
94 Figure 10.1: Butte CountyButte County, Median household income, 2019 613
Item 11.
95 Figure 10.2: The CityCity of Oroville, the CityCity of Chico, and Butte CountyButte County, Gini Index, 2020 illustrates the Gini index of income inequality values, which is a measure of the distribution of income across a population. A higher gini index score indicates greater income inequality, or that high-income individuals receive much larger percentages to the total income of the population. The table below indicates that Oroville has a relatively lower gini index, or relatively less income inequality than its neighboring cityCity Chico, and less than Butte CountyButte County and the State of California as a whole.

Figure 10.2: CityCity of Oroville, CityCity of Chico, and Butte CountyButte County, Gini Index, 2020 Gini Index of Income Inequality
Oroville .45
Chico .50
Butte CountyButte County .49
California .49
Source: 2016-2020 ACS 5-Year Estimates Detailed Tables

614
Item 11.
96 Poverty Status
The table “CityCity of Oroville, Butte CountyButte County and the State of California, Poverty, 2012 and 2019” compares data on individuals and families experiencing poverty for the CityCity of Oroville, Butte CountyButte County, and the State of California in 2019 compared to 2012. In this case, 2012 data was used instead of 2010 data because it was the oldest dataset available.

The percent of families experiencing poverty in Oroville is significantly greater that of the State of California as a whole: 25.5% compared to 13.4%. The percent of individuals experiencing poverty in Oroville is also greater than the State of California as a whole: 17.2% compared to

9.6%. These values are also significantly greater than Butte CountyButte County. Individuals and families residing in Butte CountyButte County are significantly more likely to experience poverty than in the State of California.

The percent of both families and individuals experiencing poverty decreased for Butte CountyButte County and the State of California by an average of almost 2% in 2019 compared to 2012. However, those values increased for the CityCity of Oroville by 5.4% and 0.5%, respectively. There are significantly more individuals and families in poverty in the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County than the State of California 615
Item 11.
97 Figure 10.3: CityCity of Oroville, Butte CountyButte County, and State of California, Poverty, 2012 and 2019
Jurisdiction Measure of Poverty
2012 2019 2012-
2019
Percent Estimated
Number
Percent Estimated
Number
Change
CityCity of
Oroville
Families whose income in the
past 12 months is below the
poverty level

11.8% 321 17.2% 541 +5.4%
Individuals whose income in the
past 12 months is below the
poverty level
25% 3,668 25.5% 4,538 +0.5%
Butte
CountyButte
County
Families whose income in the
past 12 months is below the
poverty level

12.9% 6,707 11.1% 5,711 -1.8%
Individuals whose income in the
past 12 months is below the
poverty level

20.6% 44,156 19.1% 41,974 -1.5%
State of
California
Families whose income in the
past 12 months is below the
poverty level

11.5% 983,254 9.6% 860,010 -1.9%
Individuals whose income in the
past 12 months is below the
poverty level

15.3% 5,590,100 13.4% 5,149,742 -1.9%
Source: U.S. Census, 2008-2012 and 2015-2019 American Community Survey The map “CityCity of Oroville, Poverty Status, 2019” depicts the geographic distribution of poverty in the CityCity of Oroville in 2019. For this analysis, census tract data is used because block group data is not available. Approximately 30-40% of the population is living below the poverty level in Census Tracts 28,

30.01, 30.02, and 37, which is greater than most areas of Butte CountyButte County. In contrast, less than 10% of the population is living below the poverty level in Census Tract 31, and 10-20% of the population is living below the poverty level in Census Tracts 27 and 29. In Census Tract 25, 20-30% of the population is living below the poverty level.
616
Item 11.
98 Figure 10.4: CityCity of Oroville, Poverty Status, 2019 617
Item 11.
99 Data and Knowledge from Local Stakeholders
Local data and knowledge is collected through interviews with regional stakeholders whose service areas include the CityCity of Oroville.

Disability Action Center
On September 13, 2021, the authors received a written response to interview questions from a staff member at the Disability Action Center (DAC) located in Chico. DAC is a non-profit, Chico-based organization that provides free support to assist community members in Northern California who have disabilities to achieve their optimal level of self-reliance. DAC serves Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Shasta, Siskiyou, and Tehama Counties. DAC accomplishes this mission thorough provision of informational services, housing assistance, and provider referrals.

Staff noted that the tri-county region of Butte, Tehama, and Glenn County lacks affordable and permanent housing. Low-income residents experience barriers to accessing housing due to poor credit, poor rental histories, income requirements, and felony records. In addition, low-income residents can benefit from robust services and programs to complement housing, such as childcare and educational programs. There are a significant number of single parent female-headed households in the region who may not have the time or resources to access daycare or service programs. Some residents who are transitioning from homelessness to long-term housing may lack knowledge regarding responsible tenant practices and expectations.

Staff commented that Butte CountyButte County has a significant population of residents who are experiencing homelessness. Many are unsheltered and cannot access shelter services because they are not allowed to bring companion animals, which provide support and companionship. In addition, residents who are experiencing unsheltered homelessness do not have access to reliable transportation, food programs, a community kitchen, showers, laundry facilities, internet, electricitycity, or a place to receive mail. Many are survivors of recent fires, especially senior women who have not been able to reconstruct their life, due to lack of identification documentation and the loss of naturally affordable housing in the region. Regions of the burn scars in the town of Paradise and community of Berry Creek still lack power and infrastructure required to build new housing.

Survivors are living in temporary shelters or vehicles while searching for permanent housing options.

These communities are located approximately 20 miles from the CityCity of Oroville.

Despite these factors, addressing homelessness and affordable housing shortages is a contentious issue in the community. Staff believes that local, State, and Federal administrative support in zoning and development application fees could incentivize low-income housing developments.

618
Item 11.
100
Stonewall Alliance Center
On August 4, 2021, authors conducted an online interview over Zoom with a staff member that works at Stonewall Alliance Center (SAC) and Safe Space Winter Shelter (SSWS). SAC is a nonprofit agency based in Chico that serves the Northern Sacramento Valley lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender*, and queer (LGBTQ+) community by providing support, resources, advocacy, and education. SSWS is a non-profit agency based in Chico that provides low-barrier emergency shelter from December to March for people experiencing homelessness, primarily those with severe mental health conditions.

Staff reported that there are few rental vacancies and a lack of assisted living facilities for residents with severe mental health conditions, substance use disorder, or those experiencing homelessness.

Staff noted a need to increase awareness around the factors that contribute to or perpetuate homelessness such as housing shortages, job insecurities, mental health conditions, and drug or substance use issues.

Staff reported that the local LGBTQ+ community faces barriers to accessing housing and homelessness services. LGBTQ+ residents, including the staff member interviewed, felt like they had to hide their identity to avoid harassment from a landlord or roommates. In both Glenn and Butte Counties, staff reported it is common for young, trans people of color to get kicked out of their house and experience homelessness. There are no publicly accessible shower or laundry services in the region. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many public gathering spaces that provided electricitycity and public water fountains were shut off for health and safety. This made it difficult for residents experiencing homelessness to access services that are increasingly provided online.

There are several faith-based shelters in the region, including the Oroville Rescue Mission and the Jesus Center, but no trans or LGBTQ+ friendly shelters in Butte or Glenn County. The LGBTQ+ community in Butte CountyButte County often experiences harassment or denial of services due to their sexual orientation. Couples also face barriers due to dormitory sleeping policies that do not allow them to sleep together. In addition, for community members who are employed, it may be challenging to access shelters who close evening intake at 6:00 pm. Drug testing requirements and ownership of companion animals can also be barriers to accessing shelter services.

Summary of Findings
The CityCity’s total population size grew by more than 25% in 2019 compared to 2010, which is an exponential increase in population size. The majority of the population in the CityCity identifies as White, but diversity has increased substantially. The CityCity experienced large increases in its minority population. A significantly large number of residents identify as Asian, and that number is increasing.

Only 13.6% of the population identifies as Hispanic/Latino. About 1,200 individuals are not fluent in English.

Census Tract 30.02 has one of the lowest concentrations of children residing in married coupled households in the County, at 20-40% of households. Census Tract 31 has the highest concentration of 619
Item 11.
101
children residing in married couple households at greater than 80% of households. Approximately 20- 40% of children reside in households headed by single mothers in Census Tracts 28, 30.01, 30.02, and 37, which is significantly greater than most other areas in the County. In 2019, 247 single mother households were living in poverty. In most areas of the CityCity, 20-30% of the population is living with a disability. Census Tract 30.01 has the highest concentration of residents with a disability, at 30-40% of the population, which is greater than any other census tract in the County.

Residents in Census Tracts 28, 30.01, and 30.02 have the lowest median household income, which is less than $30,000 on average. These areas make up nearly half of the CityCity of Oroville. Census Tract 27 and 31 have the highest median household income. The difference between areas of the highest and areas of lowest median household income is greater than $50,000, which represents significantly large disparities in income based on residential location. The Gini index of income inequality indicates that this income disparity is slightly less than the state level of income disparity. One in four families is experiencing poverty in the CityCity of Oroville. Approximately 30-40% of the population is living below the poverty level in Census Tracts 28, 30.01, 30.02, and 37, which is greater than most areas of Butte CountyButte County. In contrast, less than 10% of the population is living below the poverty level in Census Tract 31, and 10-20% of the population is living below the poverty level in Census Tracts 27 and

29. These findings indicate that low-income residents, residents with a disability, and single parent households are concentrated in Census Tracts 28, 30.01, 30.02, and 37. Affluent resident and marriedcouple households are concentrated in Census Tract 27 and 31. These census tracts also have the least amount of single mother households and residents who are experiencing poverty.

Staff at the Stonewall Alliance Center noted there is a lack of assisted living facilities for residents with severe mental health conditions, substance abuse disorders, and individuals experiencing homelessness.

Residents who identify as LGBTQ+ may face harassment from landlords or denial of shelter services due to their orientation. Staff at Disability Action Center indicated that the tri-county region lacks affordable housing and permanent supportive housing. Many low-income residents face barriers acquiring housing due to poor credit, poor rental histories, income requirements, and felony records. Single mothers, senior women, and residents who are precariously housed could benefit from robust services and programs to complement housing.

C. RACIALLY AND ETHNICALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS OF POVERTY (R/ECAP) The third section of the Assessment of Fair Housing addresses racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAP).

Local and Regional Patterns and Trends
This section includes data tables, narratives, and maps to illustrate local and regional patterns and trends regarding racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty. For the purposes of this analysis, racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty include R/ECAP areas, areas of high segregation and poverty, and racial or ethnic concentrations of people of color or people who identify as White.

620
Item 11.
102
R/ECAP Areas
The map “Butte CountyButte County, R/ECAP, 2020” depicts block group data on racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, which are areas 50 percent or more of the population is nonwhite and 40 percent or of people are living below the poverty threshold. Areas outlined in red experience high levels of racial or ethnic concentrations of poverty. As depicted below, the Butte CountyButte County does not have any of these areas.

621
Item 11.
103
Figure 11: Butte CountyButte County, R/ECAP Areas, 2020

622
Item 11.
104
Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence
Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAA) are areas that have a high proportion of white, affluent residents and a low proportion of people of color and low-income residents. RCAAs tend to have better access to resources such as schools, jobs, healthcare, and higher property values.

Because all areas of the CityCity of Oroville have a median income lower than the State’s average, there are no racially concentrated areas of affluence.

Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) Areas
The Department of Housing and Community Development and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee created a group of organizations and researchers called the California Fair Housing Task Force to identify areas in every region that have been shown by research to support positive economic, educational, and health outcomes for children as well as areas that experience high segregation and poverty. Areas outlined in red meet standards for poverty and racial segregation, in which 30% or more of the population is below the poverty line and there is an overrepresentation of people of color relative to the county within that block group. The CityCity of Oroville has several block groups that experience high segregation and poverty, which are in Census Tracts 25, 28, 30.01, and 30.02, and 37.

623
Item 11.
105
Figure 12: CityCity of Oroville, Areas of High Segregation and Poverty Map, 2020

624
Item 11.
106
Summary of Findings
The findings indicate that there are no R/ECAP areas, however, there are several areas within the CityCity that experience high levels of segregation and poverty. These areas are primarily located in Census Tracts 25, 28, 30.01, and 30.02, and 37. Census Tracts 25, 29, 30.01, 30.02, and 33 experienced the largest increases in diversity in 2019 compared to 2010. These findings suggest that Census Tracts 25, 30.01, and 30.02 are areas in which concentrations of diversity and poverty is substantially growing.

There are no racially concentrated areas of affluence.

D. DISPARITIES IN ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY
The fourth section of the Assessment of Fair Housing addresses disparities in access to opportunity. “Access to opportunity is a concept to approximate place-based characteristics linked to critical life outcomes. Access to opportunity oftentimes means both improving the quality of life for residents of low-income communities, as well as supporting mobility and access to ‘high resource’ neighborhoods” (California State Department of Housing and Community Development, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, 2021).

Local and Regional Patterns and Trends
This section includes data tables, narratives, and maps to illustrate local and regional patterns and trends regarding disparities in access to opportunity. For the purposes of this analysis, disparities in access to opportunity include economic opportunity scores, environmental scores, educational opportunity, proximity to jobs, commuting patterns, and occupational data.

Access to Opportunity
The California Fair Housing Task Force created an opportunity map to identify regions whose characteristics have been shown by research to support positive economic, educational, and health outcomes for low-income families, particularly long-term outcomes for children. The maps below providesprovide composite scores for each block group as well as economic scores, education scores, and environmental scores.

Access to Opportunity, Composite Score
The map, “CityCity of Oroville, Access to Opportunity, 2021” depicts block group level data on disparity in access to opportunity in the CityCity of Oroville.

The map indicates that most areas in the CityCity of Oroville are low resource areas or areas of high segregation and poverty, as mentioned earlier. Several areas have missing or insufficient 625
Item 11.
107
data. Block Group 6, located at the northeast end of the CityCity in Census Tract 27, is considered a moderate resource area.

In comparison, Chico and northern parts of Butte CountyButte County are considered high and highest resources areas, eastern parts of the County are low resource areas, and western parts of the County are moderate resource areas. In comparison to Butte CountyButte County, the CityCity of Oroville is an area with significantly fewer resources. 626
Item 11.
108
Figure 13: CityCity of Oroville, Access to Opportunity Map, 2021

627
Item 11.
109
Figure 13.1: Butte CountyButte County, Access to Opportunity Map, 2021

628
Item 11.
110
Access to Economic Opportunity
The map, “CityCity of Oroville, Economic Opportunity, 2021” depicts block group level data on disparity in access to economic opportunity in the CityCity of Oroville. The map indicates that residents in most parts of the CityCity experience the least positive economic outcome, except for a few areas in Census Tract 27 and 29, where economic outcomes are slightly more positive.

Block Group 6 located in Census Tract 27 has the most positive economic outcome in the entire CityCity.

The map, “Butte CountyButte County, Access to Economic Opportunity, 2021” depicts census tract level data in Butte countyButte County based on economic scores. Generally, the northwest portion of the county around Chico is identified as “more positive economic outcome” and the east and south portions of the county near Biggs, Gridley, Magalia, Oroville, and Paradise are identified as “less positive economic outcome” (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool:
2021 TCAC).

Economic scores are calculated by data indicators of poverty, adult education, employment, job proximity, and median home value found in the U.S. Census 2014-2018 American Community Survey and the U.S. Census 2017 Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics. Scores based on these indicators range from less positive economic outcome to more positive economic outcome. How data indicators are measured is detailed below (California Fair Housing Task Force, 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map Methodology, December 2020).  Poverty: Percent of population with income above 200% 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’s 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 homes

629
Item 11.
111
Figure 13.2: CityCity of Oroville, Access to Economic Opportunity Map, 2021

630
Item 11.
112
Figure 13.3: Butte CountyButte County, Access to Economic Opportunity Map, 2021

631
Item 11.
113
Access to Environmental Opportunity
The map, “CityCity of Oroville, Environmental Score, 2021” depicts block group level data on disparity in environmental scores in the CityCity of Oroville. The map indicates that residents in Census Tract 25, 27, 29, and 31 experience the most positive environmental outcomes in the CityCity. Residents in Census Tracts 30.01, 20.02, 33, and 37 experience the least positive environmental outcomes.

The map, “Butte CountyButte County, Environmental Score, 2021” depicts census tract level data in Butte countyButte County based on environmental scores. Generally, the portions of the county that are more mountainous and less populated are identified as having “more positive environmental outcomes.” These areas are located east of Chico, north of Magalia, and east of Magalia, Paradise, and Oroville. North and west county around Chico and between Chico and Oroville are identified as having “less positive environmental outcomes.” The very east corner of the county is also identified as having “less positive environmental outcomes” (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool: 2021 TCAC).

Environmental scores are calculated by data indicators of pollution, exposures, and environmental effect from CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Scores based on these indicators range from less positive environmental outcomes to more positive environmental outcomes. How data indicators are measured is detailed below (California Fair Housing Task Force, 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map Methodology, December 2020).
 CalEnviroScreen 3.0: Variables include Ozone, PM2.5, Diesel PM, Drinking Water, Pesticides, Tox. Release, Traffic, Cleanup Sites, Groundwater Threats, Hazardous Waste, Impaired Water Bodies, and Solid Waste Sites

632
Item 11.
114
Figure 13.4: CityCity of Oroville, Environmental Score, 2021

633
Item 11.
115
Figure 13.5: Butte CountyButte County, Environmental Score, 2021

634
Item 11.
116
Access to Educational Opportunity
The map, “CityCity of Oroville, Educational Opportunity, 2021” depicts block group level data on disparity in access to educational opportunity in the CityCity of Oroville. The map indicates that residents in all of the census tracts that encompass the CityCity experience the least positive education outcomes, except residents residing in Census Tract 33. Residents in this part of the CityCity experience slightly more positive education outcomes.

The map, “Butte CountyButte County, Educational Opportunity, 2021” depicts census tract level data in Butte countyButte County based on education scores. Generally, the north portions of the county around Chico, and between Chico and Magalia including the communities of Butte Creek Canyon, Cohasset, and Forest Ranch (not listed on map), are identified as “more positive education outcome.” The east and south portions of the county near Oroville, Palermo, and Thermalito, and between Oroville and Paradise, are identified as “less positive education outcome” (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool: 2021 TCAC).

Education scores are calculated by data indicators of math proficiency, reading proficiency, high school graduation rates, and student poverty rate from the 2018-2019 California Department of Education. Scores based on these indicators range from less positive education outcomes to more positive education outcomes. How data indicators are measured is detailed below (California Fair Housing Task Force, 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Map Methodology, December 2020).
 Math proficiency: Percentage of 4th graders who meet or exceed math proficiency standardsstandards.
 Reading proficiency: Percentage of 4th graders who meet or exceed literacy standardsstandards.
 High school graduation rates: Percentage of high school cohort that graduated on timetime.
 Student poverty rate: Percent of students not receiving free or reduced-price lunchlunch.

635
Item 11.
117
Figure 13.6: CityCity of Oroville, Educational Opportunity, 2021

636
Item 11.
118
Figure 13.7: Butte CountyButte County, Educational Opportunity, 2021

637
Item 11.
119
Proximity to Jobs
The map “CityCity of Oroville, Job Proximity Index, 2017” depicts block group data on residents’ proximity to jobs in the CityCity of Oroville. The Jobs Proximity Index scores the accessibility of a given neighborhood to all job locations within an area. The index weighs the distance to employment centers, the amount of employment opportunities, and the competition for jobs.

Proximity to jobs in the CityCity varies from furthest proximity to closest proximity. On average, residents in Census Tract 30.02 are in the closest proximity to jobs followed by residents in Census Tract 28 who are in relatively close proximity to jobs. Residents in Census Tract 33 have low proximity to jobs while residents in Census Tract 29 are in the furthest proximity from jobs.

Residents in Census Tract 27 have moderate access to jobs.

In comparison, the map “Butte CountyButte County, Job Proximity Index, 2017” illustrates that nearly half of Butte CountyButte County is in furthest proximity to jobs with index scores less than 20. These scores are concentrated in the eastern parts of the County. In contrast, many areas in the western parts of the County are in close or closest proximity to jobs. It is important to note that the block groups that cover unincorporated areas of Butte CountyButte County are geographically larger than the block groups closer to the County’s cities. Therefore, a resident may reside in a block group with a high index score but still have a significant commute to work.

638
Item 11.
120
Figure 14: CityCity of Oroville, Job Proximity Index, 2017 639
Item 11.
121
Figure 14.1: Butte CountyButte County, Job Proximity Index Map, 2017

640
Item 11.
122
Commuting Patterns
The table “CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, Commuting Data, 2019” depicts data on commuting patterns for residents in the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County in 2019. In both the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, a little over 70% of the working population drove alone to work. Approximately 15% of workers carpooled in the CityCity of Oroville, which is slightly higher than the number of residents that carpooled in Butte CountyButte County. A significantly large portion of residents, or 46% of residents, work outside their place of residence, indicating that the CityCity of Oroville is a commuter town. Interviews with local organizations indicate that many of these residents are employed in Chico.

The mean travel time to work is 19.1 minutes in the CityCity of Oroville and 20.9 in Butte CountyButte County. Half of the residents in the CityCity of Oroville have a commute time of 14 minutes or less, which is slightly more than Butte CountyButte County. Commute times in Oroville are similar to Butte CountyButte County.

641
Item 11.
123
Figure 15: CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, Commuting Data Table, 2019 CityCity of
Oroville
Butte
CountyButte
County
WORKERS 16 YEARS AND OVER 6,050 93,125

MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK
Drove alone in a car, truck, or van 72.9% 75.9%
Carpooled 14.8% 10.8%

PLACE OF WORK
Worked in county of residence 91.9% 90.6%
Worked outside county of residence 8.1% 9.2%
Worked in place of residence 53.8% 47.8%
Worked outside place of residence 46.2% 39.1%
Not living in a cityCity, town, or census-designated place 0% 13.1%

TRAVEL TIME TO WORK
Mean travel time to work (minutes) 19.1 20.9
Less than 10 minutes 30% 23.1%
10 to 14 minutes 23.2% 22.7%
15 to 19 minutes 10% 16.3%
20 to 24 minutes 7.7% 8.2%
25 to 29 minutes 3.4% 5.2%
30 to 34 minutes 15.8% 11.3%
35 to 44 minutes 1.6% 3.3%
45 to 59 minutes 2.6% 4.3%
60 or more minutes 5.8% 5.7%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey

Occupations and Earnings
The table “CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, Occupations by Number of Persons and Median Earnings, 2015 and 2019” compares 2015 data to 2019 data on occupation and median earnings for the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County. In this case, 2015 data was used instead of 2010 data because it was the oldest dataset available. According to the 642
Item 11.
124
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the rate of inflation increased by 7.7% from 2015 to 2019. As of 2019, median earnings were $25,509. “Management, business, science, and arts occupations” earned the highest median earnings at $49,557 whereas “service occupations” earned the lowest at $16,219.

The CityCity experienced overall decreases in median earnings for all employment sectors, with the exception ofexcept for “Management, business, science, and arts occupations,” which increased by $9,889. In comparison, Butte CountyButte County had higher median earnings overall and saw increases in the median earnings of all employment sectors. These factors indicate that the economic prosperity of all residents may have significantly decreased in recent years.

Overall median earnings decreased by $955 in the CityCity and increased by $4,489 in Butte CountyButte County in 2019 compared to 2015. Butte CountyButte County experienced 8% growth in the employed population or an increase of 6,684 employed individuals within that period.
643
Item 11.
125
Figure 16: CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, Occupations and Earnings, 2019 Occupation CityCity of Oroville Butte CountyButte County 2015 2019 2015-
2019
2015 2019 2015-
2019
Number
of
Persons
Median
Earnings
Number
of
Persons
Median
Earnings
Total
Change
Number
of
Persons
Median
Earnings
Number
of
Persons
Median
Earnings
Total
Change
Civilian employed population 16
years and over
N/A $26,464 N/A $25,509 -$955 89,411 $26,752 96,095 $31,241 +$4,48 9 Management, business, science,
and arts occupations
N/A $39,688 N/A $49,577 +$9,889 30,898 $46,339 $35,393 $53,166 +$6,82 7 Service occupations N/A $18,562 N/A $16,219 -$2,343 20,843 14,449 20,530 $16,715 +$2,26 6 Sales and office occupations N/A $21,719 N/A $26,386 -$4,667 21,162 $24,044 20,278 $26,750 +$2,70 6 Natural resources, construction, and
maintenance occupations
N/A $34,408 N/A $31,538 -$2,870 8,158 $30,649 8,591 $36,409 +$5,76 0 Production, transportation, and
material moving occupations
N/A $28,221 N/A $21,310 -$6,911 8,350 $27,045 11,303 $27,580 +$535 644
Item 11.
126
Local Data and Knowledge
Local data and knowledge is collected through interviews with regional stakeholders whose service areas include the CityCity of Oroville.

North Valley Housing Trust
On October 25, 2021, the authors conducted a phone interview with a staff member from the North Valley Housing Trust, which is an independent funding tool for locally driven affordable housing solutions in Northern California. The North Valley Housing Trust's office is located inis in Chico. The staff member also assists in organizing the Safe Space Winter Shelter in Chico and is a local realtor.

Staff commented that Butte CountyButte County first-time homebuyers who can afford are home are often unable to find one because they are competing with all-cash offers in a competitive housing market. Those that have settled in satellite communities around Chico, including Oroville, where housing is more affordable, often become cost-burdened with increased transportation costs.

Extremely low-income households are unable to afford deposits, provide rental histories, or pay utility bills, which inhibits their ability to secure rental housing. They also have difficulty finding housing that meets their needs, which includes studios or one-bedrooms. Renters of all income backgrounds are facing price gouging, which involves large increases in rent exceeding 10% of the current cost. Executive Order No. N-85-20 issued by Governor Newsom protects counties impacted by wildfires from price gouging, but some residents do not have the resources to take legal action.

Staff noted a rental registry could be beneficial in tracking rents and preventing price discrimination in the region.

Developers are having difficulty finding the finances or funds to get projects off the ground. The local governments in the region do not have the staff to apply for State or Federal funding sources which are complicated and can require costly consulting services. Policies such as the competitive public bid process, costly local utility requirements, or environmental reviews are especially prohibitive for small developers.

Other Relevant Factors
Education
HCD guidance for the Assessment of Fair Housing: Access to Opportunity section calls for data on educational disparities using school performance data from the California Department of Education’s the California School Dashboard database.

Figure 16.1: CityCity of Oroville, Performance Level by State Indicator, 2019 shows grades served and performance level on six state indicators for each school located within the CityCity of Oroville. The 645
Item 11.
127
most recent available data is from 2019. The six state indicators are as follows: chronic absenteeism, suspension rate, graduation rate, college/career, and academic (which includes performance in English language arts/literacy and mathematics). Performance for these measures is based on current year results and whether results improved from the prior year. Performance on state measures, using comparable statewide data, is represented by one of five colors. The performance level (color) is not included when there are fewer than 30 students in any year (i.e. N/A). The order of colors from highest performance to lowest performance is as follows:
 Blue (highest performance)
 Green
 Yellow
 Orange
 Red (lowest performance)
(California Department of Education, California School Dashboard, 2019).

When considering the locations of schools and performance levels of the schools from Figure 15, the authors can then compare to Figure 13: CityCity of Oroville, Access to Opportunity, 2021 to conduct an analysis on educational disparities as it relates to access to opportunity. Figure 13 depicts census tract level data on access to opportunity in the cityCity of Oroville based on composite scores of economic, education, and environmental scores. As mentioned earlier in the analysis, 13 of 14 census tracts in the CityCity are areas of TCAC areas of high segregation and poverty or low resources.

There are 39 schools located in Oroville according to the California Schools Dashboard. It is important to note that school performance data is limited. As depicted in Figure 15, numerous data indicators are not available for schools, such as English Learn Progress and College/ Career readiness. Therefore, the conclusions of this analysis are limited and may not accurately depict school performance due to the very limited data available.

The majority of Oroville schools score relatively poorly in relation to other schools in the state in measures of chronic absenteeism and suspension rates, ranging from red to orange, with the exception of STREAM charter. Many schools also score relatively low scores in suspension rates, ranging from red to orange with the exception of Bird Street Elementary, Hearthstone School, and Poplar Avenue Elementary. High suspension rates and chronic absenteeism is correlated with poor academic performance. Many schools range from red to orange on English and Language Arts and Mathematics performance indicators. In conclusion, most Oroville schools score relatively low in performance in comparison to other schools in the state.

STREAM charter has the best overall performance scores in the CityCity of Oroville, scoring green in chronic absenteeism, orange in suspension rate, blue in English and Language arts and green in mathematics. STREAM charter is located just South of East Oroville Dam Blvd, which does not have a TCAC opportunity score due to missing/insufficient data. Therefore, the authors of this report cannot make conclusions based on missing information.
646
Item 11.
128
Because the CityCity of Oroville primarily consists of “high segregation and poverty” and “low resource” areas, the geographic location of schools has marginal to no impacts on their access to opportunity. Furthermore, most schools have relatively low performance scores. Thus, this analysis concludes that there are no significant educational disparities that correlate to access to opportunity as defined by TCAC.

647
Item 11.
129
Figure 16.1: CityCity of Oroville, Performance Level by State Indicator, 2019 School Name Grades
Served
Chronic
Absenteeism
Suspension
Rate
English
Learner
Progress
Graduation
Rate
College/
Career
English
Language Arts
Mathematics
Nelson Avenue Middle 6-8 Yellow Orange N/A N/A N/A Orange Orange Feather Falls Union
Elementary
K-12 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Prospect High
Continuation
9-12 N/A Yellow N/A Yellow Red N/A N/A
Helen M. Wilcox
Elementary
K-3 Yellow Yellow N/A N/A N/A Yellow Yellow
Pioneer Community Day 1-6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Ophir Elementary K-5 Orange Orange N/A N/A N/A Green Yellow Stanford Avenue
Elementary
K-5 Red Yellow N/A N/A N/A Yellow Yellow
Las Plumas High 9-12 N/A Orange N/A Yellow Yellow Green Yellow Golden Hills Elementary 4-5 Orange Red N/A N/A N/A Orange Orange Honcut K-3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Feather Falls Elementary K-8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Wyandotte Academy K-5 Orange Yellow N/A N/A N/A Yellow Yellow Oroville Union High 9-
Adult
N/A Orange N/A Yellow Yellow Green Yellow
Come Back Butte Charter 9-12 N/A Blue N/A Red Orange N/A N/A Table Mountain K-12 N/A Blue N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Concow Elementary K-8 Red Red N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
648
Item 11.
130
Ishi Hills Middle 6-8 Orange Orange N/A N/A N/A Yellow Yellow Bird Street Elementary K-3 Red Green N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ipakanni Early College
Charter

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Golden Feather Union
Elementary K
-8 Red Red N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Hearthstone School K-12 Yellow Blue N/A Green Yellow Yellow Orange Heritage Community Day 4-8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Berry Creek Elementary K-8 Orange Orange N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Butte CountyButte
County Special Education K
-12 Orange Red N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Oroville CityCity
Elementary P
-8 Orange Yellow N/A N/A N/A Yellow Yellow
BASES Learning Center N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
STREAM Charter K-8 Green Orange N/A N/A N/A Blue Green
Oakdale Heights
Elementary K
-5 Red Yellow N/A N/A N/A Red Orange
Sierra Avenue
Elementary K
-5 Red Yellow N/A N/A N/A Red Orange
Sierra Del Oro Inclusive
Preschool P N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Butte CountyButte
County Office of
Education K
-12 Orange Orange N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Thermalito Union
Elementary K
-8 Yellow Orange N/A N/A N/A Orange Orange
Poplar Avenue
Elementary K
-5 Orange Green N/A N/A N/A Orange Orange
649
Item 11.
131
Pioneer Union
Elementary
K-8 Orange Orange N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Oroville Adult Education
Center

A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Central Middle 5-8 Yellow Orange N/A N/A N/A Orange Red Oroville High Community
Day
9-12 N/A Orange N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Oroville High 9-12 N/A Orange Green Green Yellow Yellow Yellow Plumas Avenue
Elementary
K-5 Orange Yellow N/A N/A N/A Green Yellow
Source: California Department of Education, California School Dashboard, 2019 650
Item 11.
132
Public Transportation
The CityCity of Oroville’s public transportation system includes bus services but does not include air or train services. Residents can access Butte Regional Transit (B-Line) services, which is operated by the Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments and provides both fixed-route and shared paratransit services.

The B-line bus service provides intercitycity transportation within Oroville and regional transportation to Biggs, Chico, Gridley, and Paradise. In an interview with the Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments, staff reported that all fixed route and paratransit buses are ADA compatible. However, some of Oroville’s bus stops do not provide ADA-compliant facilities, busroute maps, or shelters to protect riders (Balanced Mode Circulation Plan, CityCity of Oroville, 2015).

B-line services operate seven days a week apart from six public holidays, but some routes do not operate every day. In 2019, B-Line bus services offered an average of 5,822 rides to residents in the CityCity of Oroville (Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments, 2019).

Residents can access more information such as schedules, maps, and fare prices here:
http://www.blinetransit.com/documents/B-LineWeb2019.pdf The B-Line Paratransit service offers on-demand, door-to-door shared ride services for seniors 70 years and older or persons with physical disabilities who are not able access the fixed-route service.

This service is available at a low-cost to residents per request. In 2019, B-Line Paratransit offered an average of 1,214 rides to residents in the CityCity of Oroville (Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments, 2019).

Residents can estimate the cost of a fare using the paratransit Fare Estimator here:
https://gicwebsrv.csuchico.edu/webmaps/bcag_paratransit/prod/ The map below depicts the service areas for the B-Line Fixed Route and Paratransit services in Butte CountyButte County.

651
Item 11.
133
Figure 16.2: B-Line Fixed Route and Paratransit Service Area Map In accordance with the California State Transportation Development Act, the Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments must identify any unmet public transit needs. In general, ridership rates have been decreasing over the past few years. After the 2018 Camp Fire, several routes were modified as a result of the displacement of people. The report concluded that there are no unmet transit needs that are reasonable to meet. The analysis concluded that Oroville East, Oroville South, and Oroville include transit dependent and transit disadvantaged places or areas with high concentrations of poverty or riders that are most likely to use transit. In general, persons 65 and over and youth 5-19 are most likely to use transit services and qualify for reduced fares in Butte CountyButte County. (Unmet Transit Needs Assessment- 2021-2022, Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments, 2022). Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments is currently in the process of updating its bus lines to increase transit ridership and improve transit accessibility. 652
Item 11.
134
The CityCity of Oroville last updated its “Balanced Mode Circulation Plan” in 2015, which details transit options and plans for future development for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. The plan improves the safety, accessibility, connectivity, education, maintenance, and implementation of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and facilities.

Housing Accessibility
Due to the high proportion of low-income, senior residents and residents with a disability, this section considers the number of affordable housing options with ADA accommodations in the CityCity. Currently, the Housing Authority of the County of Butte manages 130 affordable housing units in Oroville and 63 units are accessible for people with disabilities. There are also 69 privately-owned and managed, affordable housing units in Oroville, and 40 units are for the elderly. In total, there are approximately 103 public housing units in Oroville that are ADA accessible.

Summary of Findings
Nearly all of the Census Tracts in the CityCity of Oroville are considered low resource areas or areas of high segregation and poverty with very low economic and educational outcome scores. Block Group 6, Census Tract 27 is a moderate resource area with the highest economic outcome score in the entire CityCity. Census Tracts 25, 27, 29, and 31 experience the most positive environmental outcomes in the CityCity whereas residents in Census Tracts 30.01, 20.02, 33, and 37 experience the least positive environmental outcomes. The CityCity of Oroville experiences less positive economic and education outcomes than other portions of Butte CountyButte County, but more positive environmental outcomes. On average, schools in Oroville perform relatively poorly to other schools in the State of California.

Residents in Census Tract 33 have low proximity to jobs while residents in Census Tract 29 are in the furthest proximity from jobs. Most residents have a commute time that is 14 minutes or less. A significantly large portion of residents, or 46% of residents work outside their place of residence. Data from BCAG indicates that residents appear to have equitable access to transportation. The CityCity experienced overall decreases in median earnings for all employment sectors except the “Management, business, science, and arts occupations” sector, which may indicate decreases in the economic prosperity of residents. The average median earnings decreased by $955, whereas that number increased in Butte CountyButte County.

Staff from North Valley Housing Trust indicated that residents in Butte CountyButte County are having trouble purchasing homes because due to an increase in competitive bidders that may offer all-cash offers, much like other regions of the state. Renters from all income backgrounds are facing rent gouging and are having trouble finding units that fit their needs, including small units and accessible units.
653
Item 11.
135

E. DISPROPORTIONATE HOUSING NEEDS AND DISPLACEMENT RISK The fifth and final section of the Assessment of Fair Housing is disproportionate housing needs and displacement risk. This part of the analysis considers how people with protected characteristics (such as race, ethnicitycity, income class, sexual orientation, people with disabilities, etc.) and households with low incomes experience disproportionate housing needs when compared to othe rother populations.

Local and Regional Patterns and Trends
This section includes data tables, narratives, and maps to illustrate local and regional patterns and trends regarding disproportionate housing needs and displacement risk. For the purposes of this analysis, disproportionate housing needs and displacement risk includes the income needed to afford housing, housing tenure, housing problems, displacement due to natural disaster, and mobile home parks.

Income Needed to Afford Rental Housing
The table “Butte CountyButte County, Annual Income Needed to Afford Rental Housing, 2021” depicts the annual income needed to afford zero to four-bedroom rental units located in Butte CountyButte County. The annual income needed to afford a one-bedroom unit is $36,160 and a twobedroom unit is $47,680. A 2019 survey indicated that more than half of the population in the CityCity of Oroville has a household income less than $34,999, which means more than half of the population cannot afford a one-bedroom unit. In 2019, the median household income for a household of two persons was $48,558 and for a household of three persons was $33,309 (refer to:

Figure 17: Butte CountyButte County, Annual Income Needed to Afford Rental Housing Table, 2021).

These findings indicate that most three-person households in Oroville can only afford the averagepriced studio in Butte CountyButte County.

Figure 17: Butte CountyButte County, Annual Income Needed to Afford Rental Housing Table, 2021 Unit Size Annual Income Needed to Afford Unit
Zero-bedroom (studio) $33,000
One-bedroom $36,160
Two-bedroom $47,680
Three-bedroom $67,680
Four-bedroom $82,560
654
Item 11.
136
Source: National Low Income Housing Coalition, 2021 Out of Reach Housing Tenure
The table “CityCity of Oroville, Race and Ethnicitycity, 2010 and 2019” depicts housing tenure (own versus rent) for the CityCity of Oroville in 2010 and 2019. The table “Butte CountyButte County, Race and Ethnicitycity, 2010 and 2019” depicts housing tenure (own versus rent) for Butte CountyButte County in 2019 compared to 2010.

In 2019 in the CityCity of Oroville, White households made up 83% of owner-occupied housing units, but only 64% of the population. As mentioned in the previous data tables, 64% of the population of the CityCity of Oroville identifies as White, 14% identifies as Hispanic or Latino, and 9% identifies as Asian. However, 11% of Hispanic or Latino households are owner-occupied and only 4.6% of Asian households are owner-occupied. These findings suggest that Asian residents are significantly less likely to own a home than White and Hispanic or Latino residents.

The number of owner-occupied units increased by 7.4% and the number of renter-occupied increased by 0.2% for Hispanic or Latino residents in the CityCity of Oroville in 2019 compared to 2010. For units that belong to White households, the number of owner-occupied decreased by 8.8% while the number of renter-occupied units increased by 1.8%. This could be due to the significant increase in the number of households that identify as Hispanic or Latino, Asian, or two or more races during that same time period.

In comparison, Butte CountyButte County experienced a significant decrease in the number of White households while the number of households that identify as Hispanic or Latino increased significantly. However, ownership trends remained relatively steady with a slight uptick in the number of Hispanic residents that reside in owner-occupied units by 1.7%.

655
Item 11.
137
Figure 18: CityCity of Oroville, Housing Tenure by Race and Ethnicitycity Table, 2010 and 2019 Source: U.S. Census 2006-2010 and 2015-2019 American Community Survey

Race/EthnicityCity CityCity of Oroville
2010 2019 2010-2019
Owner-occupied
Housing Units
Renter-occupied
Housing Units
Owner-occupied
Housing Units
Renter-occupied
Housing Units
Owneroccupied Renteroccupied
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Change One Race
White 2,393 91.6% 2403 77.8% 2,438 82.8% 2,771 79.6% -8.8% +1.8% Black or African American 39 1.5% 108 3.5% 28 1% 193 5.5% -0.5% +2% American Indian and Alaska Native 0 0% 62 2% 64 2.2% 61 1.8% +2.2% -0.2% Asian 42 1.6% 173 5.6% 134 4.6% 218 6.3% +3% +0.7%
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 3 0.1% 15 0.5% 0 0% 0 0% -0.1% -0.5% Some Other Race 42 1.6% 136 4.4% 64 2.2% 11 0.3% +0.6% -4.1% Two or More Races 94 3.6% 198 6.4% 215 7.3% 229 6.6% +3.7% +0.2% Ethnicitycity
Hispanic or Latino Origin 91 3.5% 210 6.8% 320 10.9% 244 7% +7.4% +0.2% White, not Hispanic/Latino 2,348 89.9% 2,363 76.5% 2,195 74.6% 2,556 73.4% -15.3% -3.1% 656
Item 11.
138
Figure 18.1: County of Butte, Housing Tenure by Race and Ethnicitycity Table, 2010 and 2019 Race/EthnicityCity Butte CountyButte County
2010 2019 2010 vs. 2019
Owner-occupied
Housing Units
Renter-occupied
Housing Units
Owner-occupied
Housing Units
Renter-occupied
Housing Units
Owneroccupied Renteroccupied
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Change One Race
White 47,874 91.5% 27,410 82.7% 45,588 90.6% 28,683 82.0% -0.9% -0.7% Black or African American 419 0.8% 663 2.0% 185 0.4% 826 2.4% -0.4% +0.4% American Indian and Alaska Native 471 0.9% 530 1.6% 507 1.0% 511 1.5% +0.1% -0.1% Asian 942 1.8% 1,326 4.0% 1,104 2.2% 1,530 4.4% +0.4% +0.4% Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 52 0.1% 66 0.2% 30 0.1% 46 0.1% 0% -0.1% Some Other Race 1,308 2.5% 1,591 4.8% 1,269 2.5% 1,719 4.9% 0% +1% Two or More Races 1,308 2.5% 1,591 4.8% 1,648 3.3% 1,674 4.8% +0.8% 0% Ethnicitycity
Hispanic or Latino Origin 3,715 7.1% 4,309 13.0% 4,420 8.8% 5,468 15.6% +1.7% +2.6% White, not Hispanic/Latino 45,624 87.2% 25,289 76.3% 42,883 85.2% 25,376 72.5% -2% -3.8% Source: U.S. Census 2006-2010 and 2015-2019 American Community Survey 657
Item 11.
139
Percent of Renter-Occupied Housing Units
The map, “CityCity of Oroville, Renter-occupied Housing Units, 2021” indicates the proportion of renter-occupied housing units present within each census tract. The map below indicates that 60-80% of residents live in rental units in Census Tract 28, which is the largest concentration of rental units within the entire CityCity. In addition, 40-60% of residents live in rental units in Census Tracts 25, 29, 30.01, and 30.02. High concentrations of rental units may be associated with the low median household income and high occurrence of poverty that is also present in these areas.

The CityCity of Oroville has significantly more renter-occupied housing units than Butte CountyButte County. Roughly 40% or less of the population resides in renter-occupied housing units in most areas of Butte CountyButte County. A larger proportion of renters reside in areas surrounding the Cities of Chico, Oroville, and small portion of the County near the CityCity of Gridley. Chico’s large number of rental housing units is likely correlated to Butte College and Chico State University, which brings in many students that reside in Chico while attending college.
658
Item 11.
140
Figure 18.2: CityCity of Oroville, Renter-occupied Housing Units, 2021

659
Item 11.
141
Figure 18.3: Butte CountyButte County, Renter-occupied Housing Units, 2021 660
Item 11.
142
Housing Problems
The table “CityCity of Oroville, Housing Problems, 2010 and 2018” and the table “Butte CountyButte County, Housing Problems, 2010 and 2018” compare the number of owners and renters in the CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County in 2010 compared to 2018. Data from 2018 is used as it is the most recent available data as of October 2021.

A Housing Problem, as defined by HUD, is a unit that: 1) Lacks complete kitchen facilities; 2) Lacks complete plumbing facilities; 3) Has more than 1 person per room; or 4) Has a housing cost burden over 30% of income. A Severe Housing Problem, as defined by HUD, is a unit that: 1) Lacks complete kitchen facilities; 2) Lacks complete plumbing facilities; 3) Has more than 1.5 persons per room; or 4) Has a housing cost burden over 50% of income. As of 2018, 70% of occupants that have at least one of four Housing Problems and one of four Severe Housing Problems are renters. From 2010 to 2018, the number of total households experiencing Housing Problems increased significantly for both renters and owners in the CityCity.

In comparison to Butte CountyButte County, the number of renters experiencing Housing Problems in Oroville is significantly larger. However, the number of renters experiencing Housing Problems increased significantly from 2010 to 2018 in Butte CountyButte County. These findings indicate the renters are more likely to experience Housing Problems than homeowners, and that trend is worsening.
661
Item 11.
143
Figure 19: CityCity of Oroville, Housing Problems Table, 2010 and 2018 Housing Problems 2010 2018 2010 vs. 2018
Owners Owner
% of
Total
Renters Renter
% of
Total
Total Owners Owner
% of
Total
Renters Renter
% of
Total
Total Owner
%
Change
Renter
%
Change
Household has at least 1
of 4 Housing Problems
850 34.6% 1,610 65.4% 2,460 910 30.7% 2,050 69.3% 2,960 -3.9% +3.9% Household has at least 1
of 4 Severe Housing
Problems
390 30% 910 70% 1,300 515 28.7% 1,280 71.3% 1,795 -1.3% +1.3% Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2006-2010 and 2014-2018 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Data
Figure 19.1: Butte CountyButte County, Housing Problems Table, 2010 and 2018 Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2006-2010 and 2014-2018 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Data
Housing Problems 2010 2018 2010 vs. 2018
Owners Owner
% of
Total
Renters Renter
% of
Total
Total Owners Owner
% of
Total
Renters Renter
% of
Total
Total Owner
%
Change
Renter
%
Change
Household has at least
1 of 4 Housing
Problems
18,765 49.5% 19,165 50.5% 37,930 14,520 41.1% 20,815 58.9% 35,335 -8.4% +8.4% Household has at least
1 of 4 Severe Housing
Problems
8,135 42.2% 11,135 57.8% 19,270 6,735 34.4% 12,865 65.6% 19,600 -7.8% +7.8% 662
Item 11.
144
Overcrowded Households
The map, “CityCity of Oroville, Overcrowded Households, 2015” depicts the number of households that have greater than one occupant per room. In areas that are light green, 8.2% of households are overcrowded. In areas that are green, 8.3-12% of households are overcrowded, which includes Census Tracts 30.02 and 37. In areas that are blue, 15-20% of households are overcrowded, which is double the State average and this includes Census Tracts 29 and 30.01.

The map, “Butte CountyButte County, Overcrowded Households, 2015” shows the percentage of overcrowded households (more than 1.0 persons per room) by census tract in Butte CountyButte County. The most recent available data is from 2015. Most census tracts in the county are at or below the statewide average of 8.2% overcrowded households. The census tracts around Oroville and Thermalito have higher than average overcrowded households – between 8.3% to 20% of all households in those census tracts. Chico has one census tract with higher-than-average overcrowded households. (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool:
2015 Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project).

663
Item 11.
145
Figure 19.2: CityCity of Oroville, Overcrowded Households, 2015

664
Item 11.
146
Figure 19.3: Butte CountyButte County, Overcrowded Households Map, 2015

665
Item 11.
147
Overpayment by Homeowners
The map, “CityCity of Oroville, Overpayment by Homeowners, 2019” depicts the number of households that pay 30% or more of their income toward homeownership costs. An estimated 40-60% of owners residing in areas that are shaded in orange pay more than 30% of their income toward housing costs. This includes Census Tracts 25 and 37. An estimated 60-80% of homeowners residing in areas that are shaded red pay more than 30% of their income toward housing costs. This includes Census Tract 30.01. Finally, an estimated 20-40% of homeowners residing in areas that are shaded yellow pay more than 30% of their income toward housing costs, which includes the rest of the census tracts that encompass the CityCity.

The map, “Butte CountyButte County, Overpayment by Owners Map, 2019” depicts the percentage of owner households with mortgages whose monthly owner costs are 30% or more of household income. Household income is based on earnings in the past 12 months prior to the survey. The only census tracts with 60-80% of owner households with overpayment are located in Chico and Oroville. Most of the county has 20-40% or 40-60% of owner households with overpayment. The census tract in northeast Butte CountyButte County between Chico and Magalia/Paradise has less than 20% of owner households with overpayment. (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool: 2015-2019 American Community Survey).

666
Item 11.
148
Figure 19.4: CityCity of Oroville, Overpayment by Homeowners, 2019

667
Item 11.
149
Figure 19.5: Butte CountyButte County, Overpayment by Owners Map, 2019

668
Item 11.
150
Overpayment by Renters
The map, “Figure 19.6: CityCity of Oroville, Overpayment by Renters, 2019” depicts the number of households that pay 30% or more of their income toward the cost of renting a home. The map indicates that most renters in the CityCity are paying more than 30% of their income toward the cost of renting a home. An estimated 40-60% of renters residing in areas that are shaded dark orange pay more than 30% of their income toward housing costs. This includes Census Tracts 25, 29, 30.01 and 33. An estimated 60-80% of renters residing in areas that are shaded red pay more than 30% of their income toward housing costs, which includes Census Tracts 27, 28, 30.01, and

37. The map, “Figure 19.7: Butte CountyButte County, Overpayment by Renters Map, 2019” depicts the percentage of renter households for whom gross rent (contract rent plus tenant-paid utilities) is 30% or more of household income. Household income is based on earnings in the past 12 months prior to the survey. Generally, the eastern and western parts of the county have 20-40% of renter households with overpayment. The more populated census tracts near communities, cities, and towns have 40-60% or 60-80% of renter households with overpayment.

Only the census tract east of Oroville has less than 20% of renter households with overpayment (HCD AFFH Data Resources and Mapping Tool: 2015-2019 American Community Survey).

669
Item 11.
151
Figure 19.6: CityCity of Oroville, Overpayment by Renters, 2019 670
Item 11.
152
Figure 19.7: Butte CountyButte County, Overpayment by Renters Map, 2019

671
Item 11.
153
Homelessness
The following tables depict point-in-time counts of all individuals experiencing homelessness and point-in-time counts of unsheltered individuals experiencing homelessness.

Figure 20: Butte CountyButte County, Point in Time Count Results, 2009-2019 depicts the total number of individuals experiencing homelessness in jurisdictions within Butte CountyButte County from 2009 to 2019. From 2009 to 2019, Oroville has experienced steady increases in the number of residents experiencing homelessness, peaking at 713 individuals in 2017. This is equivalent to a 14% increase in homelessness in the last decade. Oroville has the second largest number of people experiencing homelessness in Butte CountyButte County. Due to impacts of the Camp Fire in November 2018, outreach efforts during the 2019 yielded fewer volunteers and fewer surveys completed than previous efforts. The decrease in the number of individuals counted during 2019 could be due to of fewer volunteers, rather than a decrease of people experiencing homelessness.

Figure 20: Butte CountyButte County, Point in Time Count Results, 2009-2019 Jurisdiction 2009 2010 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 ’09-’19 % Change
Chico 668 865 1043 804 571 1096 864 29%
Oroville 364 386 545 579 390 713 415 14%
Paradise, Magalia, and
other Ridge Communities
62 83 71 89 49 120 21 -471%
Gridley and Biggs 2 79 97 65 36 28 23 1050%
Other 10 9 16 16 81 26 0 -100%
1106 1422 1772 1553 1127 1983 1323 20%
Source: Butte CountyButte County Continuum of Care
Figure 20.1: Butte CountyButte County, Point in Time Count Unsheltered Results, 2009-2019 depicts the number of unsheltered individuals experiencing homelessness in jurisdictions within Butte CountyButte County from 2009 to 2019. Oroville experienced a steep increase of 116% in the number of individuals experiencing unsheltered homelessness from 2009 to 2019. In 2019, 80% of individuals experiencing homelessness were unsheltered. 672
Item 11.
154
Figure 20.1: Butte CountyButte County, Point in Time Count Unsheltered Results, 2009-2019 Jurisdiction 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 ’11-’19 %
Change
Chico 304 267 147 433 454 49%
Oroville 154 173 100 236 333 116%
Paradise, Magalia, and
other Ridge Communities
28 19 8 61 15 -46%
Gridley and Biggs 50 12 20 10 23 -54%
Other 4 8 8 5 0 -100%
540 479 283 745 825 53%
Source: Butte CountyButte County Continuum of Care
During the process of the Housing Element Update, the CityCity of Oroville surveyed residents experiencing homelessness during an in-person outreach event at a local festival. In addition, the CityCity of Oroville held two community workshops and administered two community surveys, which asked participants to answer questions about residents experiencing homelessness in the community. The key findings of this outreach and the actions taken to address the outcomes of the analysis are included in Chapter 1: Introduction and Background of the Housing Element Update.

Specific actions taken to address the needs of special populations, which includes residents experiencing homelessness, are also addressed in Chapter 2: Review of Previous Housing Element of the Housing Element Update and Chapter 3: Housing Programs of the Housing Element Update. These actions include Program 1.2.1 Partnerships with Local Organizations, Program

1.2.4: Technical Assistance Program, and Program 6.1.4: Participate in Wildfire Recovery Efforts.

Furthermore, in Special Needs Households Section of Chapter 4: Needs Assessment of the Housing Element Update, several organizations in the community provided information regarding patterns and characteristics of residents experiencing homelessness, which include the Disability Action Center and Stonewall Alliance Center. In addition, “The Impacts of the Camp Fire Disaster on Housing Market Conditions and Housing Opportunities in the Tri-County Region, North Valley Community Foundation” report includes information regarding homelessness in Butte CountyButte County, which is summarized and included in this chapter. Formatted: Font: Not Bold, Not Italic 673
Item 11.
155

674
Item 11.
156
Mobile Home Parks
In an interview with the CityCity of Oroville conducted on January 12, 2023, staff indicated that most mobile home parks are located outside of cityCity limits, but there are currently 6six mobile home parks dispersed throughout the CityCity. The CityCity has not permitted a new mobile home park in several decades. Many of the parks are old, and in need of significant rehabilitation and infrastructure improvements. The Oak Street Trailer Park, located in the central downtown area, is a dilapidated mobile home park that the CityCity is interested in targeting for development improvements.

In written correspondence received from the CityCity of Oroville’s Code Enforcement Department on January 24, 2023, staff noted that all parks are connected to power, water, waste, and sewer infrastructure. There are a total of 483 mobile home spaces in parks that are located within the CityCity of Oroville jurisdiction, which make up a significant portion of the affordable housing stock in the CityCity of Oroville.

The CityCity’s mobile home parks are listed below:
 Oak Hill Mobile Home Park: South Oroville, 125 spaces  Cottonwood Estates: Central Oroville, 105 spaces
 Oro Lake Mobile Home Park: East Oroville, 107 spaces
 Shady Rest Mobile Home Park: Southeast Oroville, 50 spaces  Pleasant Valley Mobile Home Park: East Oroville, 84 spaces  Oak Street Mobile Home Park: Central Oroville, 12 spaces Oak Hill Mobile Home Park and Cottonwood Estates house predominantly older residents aged 55 and over and are in relatively good condition. The remaining four parks, Oro Lake, Shady Rest, Pleasant Valley, and Oak Street mobile home parks, are known to house a variety of residents, including families with children, young adults, and elderly residents. The units in these parks are also older, and in need of repair. Several parks have issues with the outside storage of personal property.

Staff indicated that many of the parks could benefit from better management. Most of the units in Pleasant Valley, Oro Lake, and Oak Street mobile home parks are in need of significant rehabilitation or replacement. Staff also noted that these three parks are associated with significantly higher rates of crime including illegal drug use and distribution. 675
Item 11.
157
In 2022, Pleasant Valley mobile home park had the highest volume of police calls received from any mobile home park in the CityCity. These calls were associated with domestic disturbances, thefts, trespass, and stolen vehicle cases. Shady Rest and Oak Street mobile home parks also had a disproportionately high volume of police calls in relation to other parks, which were associated with domestic disturbances, welfare checks, theft, and 911 calls.

According to Table A-53 in Butte CountyButte County’s 2022-2030 Housing Element Update, the cost for a new manufactured home in Butte CountyButte County ranges from $203,000- 208,000. Table A-22 in the Butte CountyButte County’s Housing Element Update indicates that a four-person extremely low-income household in Butte CountyButte County can afford a maximum sales price of about $165,000 and a low-income household can afford a maximum sales price of about $220,000, making manufactured housing generally affordable to Vvery Llow and Llow Iincome households(Butte CountyButte County2022-2030 Housing Element Update, 2022).

Mobile homes are often the only affordable housing option available to Very -Low IncomeLow-Income households, and these households are at-risk of experiencing homelessness if their unit becomes uninhabitable due to deferred maintenance. Program

4.3.1 (Chapter 3 Housing Program) commits the CityCity to include mobile homes as part of its rehabilitation program, and to apply for funds that can assist mobile homeowners and renters. Program 4.3.1 also commits the CityCity to partner with the State HCD Mobile Homes Division to improve living conditions and operations in mobile home parks within the CityCity.

The map, “CityCity of Oroville, Mobile Home Parks, 2019” depicts the location of mobile parks within the CityCity. The map indicates that mobile home parks are dispersed throughout the CityCity and surrounding areas. The majority of mobile home parks are located outside of CityCity limits.

676
Item 11.
158
Figure 21: CityCity of Oroville, Mobile Home Parks, 2019 677
Item 11.
159
Housing Conditions
“Figure 19.6: CityCity of Oroville, Overpayment by Renters, 2019” shows that an overwhelming majority of renters in the CityCity are overpaying and “Figure 18.2: CityCityof Oroville, Renter-occupied Housing Units, 2021” shows that there is a significantly large number of renter-occupied housing units. In addition, “Figure 19: CityCity of Oroville, Housing Problems, 2010 and 2018” shows that 70% of households that have 1 in 4 Housing Problems or 1 in 4 Severe Housing Problems are renters.

This data indicates that there is a significant number of renters who are overpaying and living in poor housing conditions in the CityCity of Oroville.

During the interviews and community meetings conducted as a part of the Housing Element Update, both residents and stakeholders identified South Oroville, which is an older, low-income neighborhood, as an area most in need of substantial rehabilitation and infrastructure improvements. South Oroville is a historically disenfranchised community that was recently annexed into the CityCity and has been the target of recent rehabilitation efforts.

In 2021, the CityCity of Oroville completed a housing conditions survey for South Oroville. The survey concluded that about 25% of existing units need significant rehabilitation, which totalsto 316 units.

These findings are discussedillustrated furtherin “Figure 25.6: Code Enforcement Cases for Substandard Housing, CityCity of Oroville, 2014-2021.”

Local Data and Knowledge
Local data and knowledge is collected through interviews with regional stakeholders whose service areas include the CityCity of Oroville and reports that discuss the 2020 North Complex Fire and the 2018 Camp Fire in Butte CountyButte County.

CityCity of Oroville
On October 13, 2021, the authors conducted an online interview with three staff members from the CityCity of Oroville over Zoom. The CityCity commented that there is a shortage of market-rate, executive housing for government and hospital staff as well as a shortage of rental units, particularly single-family units for all income levels. In addition, a significant number of units do not meet health and safety standards and need rehabilitation. Rents are relatively high in the region, and many residents do not qualify for housing based on income or credit. To meet these diverse needs, the CityCity is interested in encouraging mixed income development.
678
Item 11.
160
Despite the constraint on available housing, the CityCity houses a significant number of 2018 Camp Fire and 2020 North Complex Fire survivors from the Town of Paradise and Berry Creek communities. Many are still staying in hotels, while others are occupying single-family homes and are settling in permanently. The CityCity is experiencing continuous impacts from the fires. Home insurance costs have increased by $6,000-$8,000 annually and many residents are still living in RVs at local campgrounds, empty lots, and rural parts of the CityCity. Many more residents are unable to secure homeowner’s insurance, which makes it difficult to qualify for a mortgage and purchase a home.

Youth for Change
On October 19, 2021, the authors conducted a phone interview from a staff member at Youth for Change, which is a nonprofit that provides services, support, and treatment to children and families in Butte, Sutter-Yuba, Glenn, Shasta, and Trinity Counties. The staff member interviewed works with young adults from 18-24 years that are unhoused. Youth for Change has an estimated 40 active cases of unhoused young adults in Butte CountyButte County at the time of the interview.

Staff indicated that clients may have difficulty with life skills and are living with severe mental illness, substance addiction, and trauma which may inhibit their ability to secure housing.

Clients have difficulty applying for or demonstrating eligibility due to lack of time, education, resources, or mental disability. Staff provides administrative services to assist clients in applying for social service programs, legal identification documentation, Community Housing Improvement Program, and health services in addition to providing direct transportation, career-building, education, and mental health services.

Clients have difficulty finding housing that fits their needs and affordability, which includes one-bedroom or studio apartments and large homes with three or more bedrooms that can be shared by multiple tenants.

Other Relevant Factors
This section considers the impacts of fire disasters on housing in the CityCity of Oroville. The analysis primarily focuses on the impacts of the North Complex Fire that occurred in 2020 and the Camp Fire that occurred in 2018.

679
Item 11.
161

2020 North Complex Fire
According to the Incident Information System (InciWeb), the North Complex Fire began on August 17, 2020 and continued for several months, burning a total of 318,935 acres. The incident resulted in 16 deaths and damaged 2,455 structures.

The fire destroyed homes, businesses, and public buildings in the Berry Creek community, east of the CityCity of Oroville, where many residents currently live in campers, tents, and RVs. Residents who are interested in rebuilding their town face high building and permitting costs, criminal activity in the area, and a perceived lack of assistance from the county government and outside agencies. Local data and knowledge indicate that many fire survivors continue to experience precarious housing situations and challenges with mental health such as post-traumatic stress disorder. Staff at the CityCity indicated that many survivors of the fire have relocated in Oroville.

Rebuilding requires coordination with multiple Butte CountyButte County departments, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, CalFire, and Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). Stricter State regulations that ensure homes are more resistant to fire and increases in the costs of building materials are driving up costs. In addition, residents must pay to clean up toxic debris and install power poles. The costs to insure homes have been greatly inflated.

Residents could benefit from waived permit fees and assistance in development and permitting processes. (“The Forgotten Fire?” Ken Smith, Sacramento News & Review, October 2021)

2018 Camp Fire
Most data for this section are from two studies: 1. The Impacts of the Camp Fire Disaster on Housing Market Conditions and Housing Opportunities in the Tri-County Region produced by North Valley Community Foundation, a local community foundation; and 2. The Camp Fire Regional Economic Impact Analysis produced by 3CORE, a local economic development organization. These two studies, the former on housing impacts and the latter on economic impacts, focus on the tri-county region of Butte, Glenn, and Tehama Counties. This section also includes related data from a local non-profit.

The Impacts of the Camp Fire Disaster on Housing Market Conditions and Housing Opportunities in the Tri-County Region, North Valley Community Foundation, September 2020
680
Item 11.
162
Prior to the 2018 Camp Fire, the tri-county region of Butte, Glenn, and Tehama Counties was already experiencing housing challenges including rising housing costs, rising building costs, low vacancies, limited workforce housing, lack of affordable housing production, and limited types of housing, coupled with economic challenges of slow wage growth, limited number of higher paying jobs, and challenges attracting and retaining employees due to the cost of housing.

The COVID-19 pandemic has threatened the tri-county region in several ways. The medical system is overburdened, residents are spending less money, stores are closing, housing construction has reduced or slowed, and homelessness is increasing, which is adding to the number of residents in precarious economic conditions.

After the 2018 Camp Fire, the tri-county region experienced additional housing challenges including lack of available housing inventory, record high rental rates and housing costs, insufficient assistance for fire survivors, and lack of insurance or underinsurance for many residents. Disaster case management intake records from Butte-Glenn 211 and the Camp Fire Collaborative illustrate unmet needs for fire survivors experiencing homelessness or in precarious housing situations. A substantial surge in home prices and monthly rent rates in the tri-county region in the six months following the Camp Fire disproportionately affected senior households – single people and couples – who had lived in older, lower-cost housing in the burn scar of Concow, Magalia, Paradise, Yankee Hill, and surrounding communities. These households experienced challenges finding homes within their budgets that matched the needs of their families.

Butte CountyButte County’s limited housing inventory went to near record lows and home prices in the County went up 46.7% from November 2018 to September 2019.

There is a shortage of affordable and market-rate multi-family units in the tri-county region. The Housing Authority of the County of Butte (HACB) which also serves Butte CountyButte County, had a waitlist of 300 households for Butte and Glenn Counties combined prior to the Camp Fire. Openings for available affordable units are limited and the waitlist increased to over 2,800 households in August 2019. The CityCity of Willows in Glenn County, the CityCity of Oroville in Butte CountyButte County, and the Cities of corning and Red Bluff in Tehama County tend to attract more demand for market-rate single-family development activity rather than market-rate multi-family development activity.

There is site availability in the tri-county region for large-scale projects. However, developers express challenges for moving projects forward due to high development costs relative to household incomes, including the needed infrastructure required to build and the imbalance of what homes can be delivered and what homebuyers can afford. Additional housing solutions in the region include alternative building techniques such as modular options; manufactured homes; Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs); tiny homes; better financing options for alternative housing types; and community land trusts, housing trusts, and private bonds.
681
Item 11.
163
The Camp fire Regional Economic Impact Analysis, 3CORE, January 2021 The tri-county region of Butte, Glenn, and Tehama Counties is predominantly rural with an economy propelled by agriculture and related activities such as processing, packaging, and wholesale trade of row and field crops, orchard and tree products, and livestock.

Short-term growth projections for Butte CountyButte County expect employment gains to be centered in agriculture, manufacturing, and leisure.

The 2018 Camp Fire resulted in substantial inter-regional and extra-regional population shifts. Residents displaced by the Camp Fire relocated primarily to Chico and Oroville in Butte CountyButte County and to a lesser extent, Glenn and Tehama Counties.

Unincorporated areas of Butte CountyButte County and the CityCity of Oroville experiences larger-than-average population increases and noted nominal increases related to housing demand, business activity, and traffic impacts.

The study concludes that based on available information, the Camp Fire resulted in the loss of many middle-income workers who are unlikely to return to the region. This may result in a demographic distribution that is skewed to lower- and higher-income groups.

The study suggests the key to replacing workers and re-balancing income groups is the ability to produce new, affordable housing in the region.

Butte-Glenn 211 Informational and Referral Data, July 2021 “Figure 21.1: Butte-Glenn 211, Camp Fire Contacts and Referred Services Data Table, November 2018 to October 2021” depicts information on the number of Camp Fire contacts and referred services in Butte-Glenn 211’s database system. Butte-Glenn 211 is an information and referral non-profit agency serving Butte and Glenn Counties by connecting people with assistance services. From the time period of November 1, 2018, to October 31, 2021, the number of referred services to Camp Fire contacts who contacted Butte-Glenn 211 by phone from Butte CountyButte County was 27,134. The total number of Camp Fire contacts to Butte-Glenn 211 originating from Butte CountyButte County was 23,832 and the total number of Camp Fire contacts from all counties and states was 34,892 (Butte-Glenn 211, November 2021 Email Correspondence). This data illustrates the magnitude of the impact of the Camp Fire on Butte CountyButte County residents. Over 30,000 people contacted Butte-Glenn 211 for assistance during and after the Camp Fire, and Butte-Glenn 211 referred over 25,000 services to Camp Fire phone callers from Butte CountyButte County. 682
Item 11.
164
Time Period Number of
Referred Services
to Camp Fire Phone
Callers Originating
from Butte
CountyButte
County
Total Number of
Camp Fire Callers
Originating from
Butte CountyButte
County
Total Number of
Camp Fire Callers to
211 (all
counties/states)
November 1, 2018 to
October 31, 2021
27,134 23,832 34,892
Source: Butte-Glenn 211, November 2021 Email Correspondence

“Figure 21.2: Butte CountyButte County Department of Employment and Social Services, Financial Assistance Provided to Camp Fire Survivors Table, January 2019 to July 2021” depicts the dollar amount of assistance the Butte CountyButte County Department of Employment and Social Services provided to Camp Fire survivors by assistance type.

Vehicles and RVs, home repairs/rebuilds, rent and mortgage, and vehicle items/RV repair were the assistance types with the largest amount of assistance provided in dollars.

These findings illustrate that both temporary and permanent housing was a significant need following the Camp Fire. Butte CountyButte County Department of Employment and Social Services (Butte CountyButte County DESS) administers employment and social services to Butte CountyButte County residents. Butte CountyButte County DESS provided its “Camp Fire Relief Grant Final Report, January 2019 through July 2021” for use in this report on October 5, 20212021, via email correspondence. In January 2019, North Valley Community Foundation provided a one-million-dollar grant to Butte CountyButte County DESS to assist 2018 Camp Fire survivors with housing, mental health, and replacing belongings.

683
Item 11.
165
Figure 21.2: Butte CountyButte County Department of Employment and Social Services, Financial Assistance Provided to Camp Fire Survivors Table, January 2019 to July 2021 Assistance Type Total Assistance Provided in Dollars
Vehicles and RVs $289,978
Home Repairs/Rebuilds $214,806
Rent and Mortgage $170,031
Vehicle Items/RV Repair $165,540
Property Replacement $69,747
Shelter $55,166
Utilities $12,703
Deliveries $11,716
Miscellaneous $10,192
Total $999,968.70
Source: Butte CountyButte County Department of Employment and Social Services, Camp Fire Relief Grant Final Report, January 2019 to July 2021
The Camp Fire Collaborative (CFC)
The Camp Fire Collaborative (CFC) is based in Chico, California and is a community collaboration made up of 50+ nonprofits, private, and public organizations working to address unmet needs of Camp Fire survivors in Butte CountyButte County. It was formed as a Long-Term Recovery Group after the 2018 Camp Fire. The CFC helps to coordinate disaster case management (DCM) currently provided by five organizations in the County.

In an interview for this report on October 25, 20212021, staff commented that Butte CountyButte County has the greatest need for affordable housing, accessible housing, and senior housing following the Camp Fire. The DCM works mostly with seniors with fixed incomes due to the demographics on The Ridge (Magalia, Town of Paradise) prior to the Camp Fire. Staff noted barriers to housing include access to and navigating internet and phone communication as well as temporary address changes, a lack of housing inventory, and units that will accept pets. There are Camp Fire survivor households that 684
Item 11.
166
have been displaced multiple times since the fire and continue to couch surf. Some Camp Fire survivors want to re-settle in the burn scar area to stay close to resources, medical care, and supports systems. Relocating to the Cities of Chico or Oroville is not ideal for them.

When asked about specific barriers that people of color of people with disabilities experience in accessing housing, staff commented that people of color and people who speak English as a second language were a small population on The Ridge and in the DCM caseload. Barriers experienced by these populations include concerns about citizenship status and accessing or accepting resources that may jeopardize information like immigration status. Staff noted that people with disabilities who are Camp Fire survivors and experiencing homelessness is uniquely challenging for long-term recovery. Survivors may be living in RVs and trailers that are not accessible, and there are not many options for accessible housing on The Ridge. Mobile home parks on The Ridge were destroyed in the Camp Fire.

When asked about ongoing impacts of the Camp Fire on the CityCity of Oroville, staff noted that a significant number of clients relocated to Oroville, which resulted in increases in housing costs and decreases rental unit availability in the CityCity due to the significant increase in housing demand in that region. Staff commented that their clients tend to be living in the Cities of Oroville, Corning, Red Bluff, or Redding instead of Chico or Biggs/Gridley, due to the availability of units, and size and price of housing. Many RV campgrounds are now being used as permanent housing for Camp Fire survivors who have a RV/trailer.

Staff noted that the CityCity needs affordable rental housing, family units, and mobile home parks. Many clients have funding for a mobile home, buthome but cannot afford to park it because rents increased from $300-500/month prior to the fire to $600- 800/month after the fire.

Summary of Findings
Most residents in the CityCity have a low income. A 2019 survey indicated that more than half of the population in the CityCity of Oroville has a household income of less than $34,999, which means more than half of the population can only afford a studio. Asian residents are significantly less likely to own a home than White and Hispanic or Latino residents.

In Census Tract 28, 60-80% of residents live in rental units which is the largest concentration of rental units in the entire CityCity. In Census Tracts 25, 29, 30.01, and 30.02, 40-60% of residents live in rental units, which is greater than most other regions of the County. About 70% of households with one of four Housing Problems or one of four Severe Housing Problems are renters. In Census Tracts 29 and 30.01, the level of overcrowding is double that of the State 685
Item 11.
167
average. The majority of homeowner households are paying greater than 30% of their income toward housing costs, but 60-80% of homeowners pay more than 30% of their income toward housing costs in Census Tract 30.01 and 40-60% of homeowners in Census Tracts 25 and 37. In comparison to Butte CountyButte County, households in the CityCity of Oroville are more likely to be overcrowded and overpaying.

Most renters in the CityCity pay more than 30% of their income toward housing costs. However, 60-80% of renters residing in areas that are shaded red in Figure 19.4 Overpayment by Renters pay more than 30% of their income toward housing costs, which includes Census Tracts 27, 28,

30.01, and 37. Naturally occurring affordable housing such as mobile home parks are dispersed evenly throughout the CityCity, but many units are older and in need of rehabilitation. Most units in Pleasant Valley, Oro Lake, and Oak Street mobile home parks need substantial rehabilitation or replacement. These three mobile parks also experience disproportionately higher volumes of crime or disturbances. Homelessness has increased by 14% in the last decade, and the CityCity of Oroville has the second largest population of individuals experiencing homelessness in Butte CountyButte County. Of those individuals, 80% are unsheltered. This data indicates that a significant number of renter households live in poor housing conditions. Both residents and stakeholders identified South Oroville as an area in need of substantial rehabilitation and improvements.

The CityCity commented that there is a shortage of market-rate housing, rental units for all income levels, and many units that need rehabilitation. The CityCity is interested in mixedincome development. Many fire survivors have settled in the region. Increased home insurance costs or inability to obtain homeowners insurance is making it difficult for residents to purchase a home. Staff from Youth for Change also indicated that low-income tenants have trouble securing small units and qualifying for housing.

Furthermore, over 30,000 Camp Fire survivors needed assistance and contacted Butte-Glenn 211. Butte-Glenn 211 referred over 25,000 services to Camp Fire survivors in Butte CountyButte County. The Butte CountyButte County Department of Employment and Social services provided over one million dollars in assistance for vehicles/RVs, home repairs/rebuilds, vehicle/RV repair, property replacement, shelter, utilities, deliveries, and other forms of assistance.

The shortage of housing in the CityCity of Oroville was exacerbated by the Camp Fire, which destroyed naturally occurring affordable housing in the tri-county region of Butte, Glenn, and Tehama Counties and disproportionately impacted low-income and senior residents. Many residents have relocated throughout the region, but some are still unable to find housing, which is resulting in increases in overcrowding and displacement. Rents and housing costs reached record highs after the Camp Fire, which added to the number of households experiences precarious housing conditions. Housing prices in Butte CountyButte County have increased by more than $100,000 because of the Camp Fire. Fires continue to haunt the region. The North Complex Fire destroyed homes, businesses, and public building in the Berry Creek community, where many residents are living in temporary housing solutions such as RVs and campers. 686
Item 11.
168
Interviews with local agencies concluded that single residents, seniors, fixed-income residents, and low-income residents are most impacted by rising housing costs. Community organizations would like to see the CityCity take an active role in promoting and facilitating that development of mixed-density, mixed-use, market-rate, and affordable housing as well as housing that meets the needs of protected classes, especially those experiencing homelessness, mental health conditions, or disabilities. Community organizations requested improved permitting and development processes, such as flexible allowances, mixed-use and high-density zoning, and incentives for infill development.

DEMOGRAPHICS
Population
As of January 1, 2021, the population of Oroville was estimated at 17,863 by the California Department of Finance. “Figure 22: Population Growth, CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, 2016-2021” shows that the population of Oroville declined by 224 persons between 2016 and 2021, with an increase of 2,707 persons between 2016 and 2019 and a decrease of 2,931 persons from 2019 to 2021. Butte CountyButte County’s population declined by 21,317 between 2016 and 2021, with an increase of 2,112 persons between 2016 and 2018 and a decrease of 23,429 between 2018 and 2021. The change in population trends for Butte CountyButte County occurred around the same time as the Camp Fire at the end of 2018. The population of Oroville decreased by about 1.2%, and the population of Butte CountyButte County decreased by about 10%, from 2016 to 2021.

Figure 22: Population Growth, CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, 2016-2021 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Average
Annual
Change
Oroville 18,087 18,101 18,075 20,794 18,888 17,863
Butte CountyButte
County
223,986 225,468 226,098 220,855 208,951 202,669

Oroville-Yearly
Change
-- +14 -26 +2,719 -1,906 -1,025
Butte-Yearly Change -- +1,482 +630 -5,243 -11,904 -6,282 5,109 Source: California Department of Finance, 2021
687
Item 11.
169
Figure 22: Population Growth Chart, CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, 2016-2021

“Figure 22.2: Population Forecast, CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, 2020-2040” shows projected population growth as forecast by the Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments in their Post Camp Fire Study published in 2020. It is forecast that Oroville will increase in population by 2,017 between 2020 and 2040, which is a much slower growth rate than for Butte CountyButte County, which is projected to increase by 51,727 over this period.

This projection model assumes that most of Butte CountyButte County’s growth will occur in the Paradise and Magalia area as those communities rebuild from the Camp Fire.

Figure 22.2: Population Forecast, CityCity of Oroville and Butte CountyButte County, 2020-2040 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2020-2040
Change
2020-2040
Percent
Change
Oroville 19,440 19,621 20,052 20,550 21,457 2,017 10.4% 16000
16500
17000
17500
18000
18500
19000
19500
20000
20500
21000
21500
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
688
Item 11.
170
Butte
CountyButte
County
210,291 230,056 241,333 251,266 262,018 51,727 24.6%
Source: Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments, Post Camp Fire Study, 2020 Population by Age
“Figure 22.3: Population by Age, CityCity of Oroville, 2019” shows the distribution of the population by age for Oroville. Note that this data has a different source (U.S. Census) and time period (2019) than the data used for the Population Growth figures above. The largest 20-year cohort is 20 to 39 years at 30.3%. The largest 10-year cohort is 20 to 29 years old at 15.7% of the population, closely followed by under 10 years old at 15.6% of the total population. About one in five Oroville residents is over 60 years old at 20.8% The median age for Oroville is 34 years old, which is younger than the statewide median age of 36.5 years old.

Figure 22.3: Population by Age, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Age Persons Percent of Total
Under 10 years 3,037 15.6%
10 to 19 years 2,251 11.6%
20 to 29 years 3,043 15.7%
30 to 39 years 2,832 14.6%
40 to 49 years 1,809 9.3%
50 to 59 years 2,254 11.6%
60 to 69 years 2,040 9.9%
70 to 79 years 1,346 6.9%
80 years and over 781 4.0%
Total
689
Item 11.
171
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey

EMPLOYMENT
Total employment in Oroville in December 2020 was 5,500, as estimated by the California Employment Development Department. Employment has ranged between 5,500 and 6,400 from 2010 to 2020. The Labor Force, which is the population that is actively seeking employment, has ranged between 6,100 and 6,800. The unemployment rate decreased from 16.2% in 2010 to

5.3% in 2018, before rising again to 9.8% in 2020. Trends in the unemployment rate have followed national and state trends. (Figure 23: Total Employment and Unemployment, CityCity of Oroville 2010-2020) and (Figure 23.1: Unemployment Rate Chart, CityCity of Oroville, 2010-2020)

Figure 23: Total Employment and Unemployment, CityCity of Oroville 2010-2020 Labor Force Employment Unemployment Unemployment
Rate
2010 6,600 5,500 1,100 16.2%
2011 6,400 5,400 1,000 15.8%
2012 6,400 5,500 900 14.1%
2013 6,400 5,700 800 11.9%
2014 6,400 5,800 600 10.1%
2015 6,400 5,800 500 8.3%
2016 6,800 6,300 500 7.3%
2017 6,800 6,400 400 5.6%
2018 6,100 5,800 300 5.3%
2019 6,400 6,100 400 5.6%
2020 6,100 5,500 600 9.8%
690
Item 11.
172
Ave. Annual
Percent Change

1.54%
Source: Employment Development Department, 2021

Figure 23.1: Unemployment Rate Chart, CityCity of Oroville, 2010-2020

“Figure 23.2: Employment by Industry, CityCity of Oroville, 2019” shows employment by industry for Oroville residents. The Educational services, and health care and social assistance Industry has significantly more employment than any of the other industries, with 24% of all jobs. The industries with the next largest shares of employment are Arts, entertainment, and recreation, and accommodation and food services (9.4%); Manufacturing (9.4%); Finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing (9.2%); and Professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste management services (8.1%).

0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

10.00%

12.00%

14.00%

16.00%

18.00%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
691
Item 11.
173
Figure 23.2: Employment by Industry, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Industry Estimate Percent
Civilian employed population 16 years and over 3,565 100% Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining 94 2.6% Construction 183 5.1%
Manufacturing 336 9.4%
Wholesale trade 64 1.8%
Retail trade 327 9.2%
Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 161 4.5%
Information 11 0.3%
Finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing 329 9.2% Professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste management services
289 8.1%
Educational services, and health care and social assistance 856 24% Arts, entertainment, and recreation, and accommodation and food services
335 9.4%
Other services, except public administration 200 5.6%
Public administration 380 10.7%
692
Item 11.
174
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey

HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS
Household Income
“Figure 24: State Income Categories, Butte CountyButte County, 2021” shows household incomes by category and percent of area income for Butte CountyButte County, as calculated by the State Department of Housing and Community Development. These income categories are referenced in the RHNA Sites Inventory that is part of this Housing Element and are also used in setting target rents for affordable housing programs and projects.

Figure 24: State Income Categories, Butte CountyButte County, 2021 Maximum Income by Persons in the Household
Income Category % of Area
Median
Income
1 2 3 4 5
Extremely Low 0-30% $14,640 $16,740 $18,840 $20,910 $22,590 Very Low 31-50% $24,400 $27,900 $31,400 $34,850 $37,650 Low 51-80% $39,040 $44,640 $50,240 $55,760 $60,240
Median 100% $48,800 $55,800 $62,800 $69,700 $75,300
Moderate 81-120% $58,560 $66,960 $75,360 $83,640 $90,360 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development, 2021 State Income Limits
693
Item 11.
175
“Figure 24.1: Household Income, CityCity of Oroville, 2019” shows the number of households in in Oroville by income category. The largest income category is $25,000 to $34,999 annually at

18.4%, followed by $50,000 to $74,999 annually at 18.2%. Almost one-third of households earn less than $25,000. The median household income is $34,428, much lower than the statewide median income at $75,235.

Figure 24.1: Household Income, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Number of Households % of Total
Less than $15,000 1,000 15.6%
$15,000 to $24,999 1,071 16.6%
$25,000 to $34,999 1,180 18.4%
$35,000 to $49,999 845 13.1%
$50,000 to $74,999 1,169 18.2%
$75,000 to $99,999 449 7.0%
$100,000 or more 712 11.1%
Total Households 6,426 --
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey “Figure 24.2: Household Income by Housing Tenure, CityCity of Oroville, 2019” shows that the median household income for households in owner-occupied housing units is about twice the median income for households in renter-occupied housing units. The largest income category of households in owner-occupied housing units have incomes from $50,000 to $74,999 (23.1%), followed by households with incomes from $35,000 to $49,999 (17.4%). The largest income category of households in renter-occupied housing units also have incomes from $25,000 to $34,999 (22.7%), followed by households with incomes from $50,000 to $74,999 (14.0%).

Almost one-half of households in renter-occupied units earn less than $25,000 (44.4%). This data shows that there are very few renters earning $75,000 or more (9.9%) compared to households in owner-occupied units (28.4%).
694
Item 11.
176

Figure 24.2: Household Income by Housing Tenure, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Household Income (in
past 12 Months)
Owneroccupied
Housing Units
Percentage
Owneroccupied
Renter-occupied
Housing Unit
Percentage Renteroccupied
Less than $5,000 31 1.1% 128 3.7%
$5,000 to $9,999 102 3.5% 195 5.6%
$10,000 to $14,999 135 4.6% 409 11.7%
$15,000 to $19,999 130 4.4% 431 12.4%
$20,000 to $24,999 127 4.3% 383 11.0%
$25,000 to $34,999 389 13.2% 791 22.7%
$35,000 to $49,999 512 17.4% 333 9.6%
$50,000 to $74,999 681 23.1% 487 14.0%
$75,000 to $99,999 308 10.5% 140 4.0%
$100,000 to $149,999 339 11.5% 110 3.2%
$150,000 or more 189 6.4% 76 2.2%
Median household
income (dollars)
$52,854 $26,865
695
Item 11.
177
Occupied housing units 2,943 45.8% 3,483 54.2%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey

Housing Tenure
The majority of units in Oroville are renter-occupied, with 3,483 (54.2%). There are 2,943 units in Oroville that are owner-occupied (45.8%). The proportion of renter-occupied housing units in Oroville is similar to the State of California as a whole, for which 55% of units are owneroccupied.

Figure 24.3: Occupied Housing Units by Tenure, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Number Percent
Owner-occupied housing units 2,943 45.8%
Renter-occupied housing units 3,483 54.2%
Total 7,174 --
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey Householder Age
“Figure 24.4: Tenure by Age of Householder, CityCity of Oroville, 2019” shows that the largest percentage of owner householders are 55 to 64 years old (24.7%), while only 12.5% of owner households are under 35 years old. Of renter householders, 32.2% are under 35 years old and

51.1% are under 45 years old.

Figure 24.4: Tenure by Age of Householder, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Householder Owneroccupied Pct. of
Total
Renteroccupied Pct. of
Total
Total Pct. of
Total
Under 35 years 367 12.5% 1,120 32.2% 1,487 23.1%
35 to 44 years 401 13.6% 659 18.9% 1,060 16.5%
696
Item 11.
178
45 to 54 years 327 11.1% 395 11.3% 722 11.2%
55 to 64 years 788 26.8% 643 18.5% 1,431 22.3%
65 to 74 years 516 17.5% 300 8.6% 816 12.7%
75 to 84 years 434 14.7% 295 8.5% 729 11.3%
85 years and over 110 3.7% 71 2.0% 181 2.8%
Total 2,943 3,483 6,426
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey

HOUSING STOCK CHARACTERISTICS
Population and Housing Units
As of January 1, 20212021, in Oroville, there were an estimated 7,439 housing units and a population of 17,863, according to the State of California Department of Finance. As shown in “Figure 25: Population and Housing Units, CityCity of Oroville, 2010 & 2021,” between 2010 and 2021 Oroville’s population increased by 2,317, while the number of housing units increased by 1,245. The persons per household decreased from 2.60 in 2010 to 2.50 in 2021. The vacancy rate decreased from 8.8% in 2010 to 8.6% in 2021.

Figure 25: Population and Housing Units, CityCity of Oroville, 2010 & 2021 Year

Population Persons in
Households
Persons in
Group Quarters
Total Housing
Units
Vacancy
Rate
Person per
Household
2010 15,546 14,662 884 6,194 8.8% 2.60
2021 17,863 17,006 857 7,439 8.6% 2.50
Source: California Department of Finance, 2021
The overall vacancy rate decreased slightly from 8.8% in 2010 to 8.6% in 2021. The total number of estimated vacancies in 2021 as estimated by the California Department of Finance was 640.

Another data point for vacancies is the U.S. Census 2019 American Community Survey. Figure 697
Item 11.
179

25.1 below shows vacancies by vacancy status. This data shows 472 vacant rental units (including “For rent”, “Rented, not occupied”, and “For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use” categories) and 276 for-sale units (including “For sale only”, “Sold, not occupied”, and “Other vacant” categories), for a total of 748 vacant units. This estimate is higher than the 640 vacancies estimated by the California Department of Finance for 2021. If the “Rented, not occupied” units are removed from the count, the estimate is 513.

Figure 25.1: Vacancy Status, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Vacancy Status Number of Units
For rent 189
Rented, not occupied 235
For sale only 54
Sold, not occupied 0
For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 48
For migrant workers 0
Other vacant 222
Total Vacant Units 748
Source: U.S. Census, 2014-2019 American Community Survey Housing Units by Type
“Figure 25.2: Housing Units by Type, CityCity of Oroville, 2010 & 2021” shows the breakdown of housing units by type as estimated by the State Department of Finance in 2010 and 2021. While just over half of housing units are in single-family detached structures at 53.5%, there has been a significant increase in share of units in single-family attached structures and mobile homes from 2010 to 2021. There is a much greater variety in housing types in Oroville than Butte CountyButte County as a whole, for which 82.0% of housing units are in single-family detached structures.
698
Item 11.
180
Figure 25.2: Housing Units by Type, CityCity of Oroville, 2010 & 2021 Source: California Department of Finance, 2021, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities

Figure 25.3: Housing Units by Type Chart, CityCity of Oroville, 2010 & 2021

Overcrowding
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000
2010
2021
Single Family Detached Units Single Family Attached
2-4 Units in Structure 5+ Units in Structure
Mobile Homes
Year Total
Housing
Units
Single
Family
Detached
Units
Single
Family
Attached
2-4 Units in
Structure
5+ Units in
Structure
Mobile
Homes
2010 6,194 3,625 221 782 1,187 379
2021 7,439 3,980 802 845 1,310 502
Change 1,245 355 581 63 123 123
Percent Change 20.1% 9.8% 262.9% 8.1% 10.4% 32.5%
699
Item 11.
181
Overcrowding is an important measure to help determine if there is adequate housing stock for the population. “Figure 25.4: Tenure by Occupants per Room, CityCity of Oroville, 2019” identifies the number of units that are considered by the federal government as Overcrowded (more than one occupant per room) and Severely Overcrowded (1.5 or more occupants per room). In 2019, there were an estimated 442 Overcrowded housing units in Oroville, which was 6.9% of all units.

There were an estimated 113 Severely Overcrowded housing units estimated, which was 1.8% of all units. (Note that the 6,426 estimated total number of housing units are occupied units rather than total units, from a different source (U.S. Census Bureau) and for a different year (2019) than the estimated number of housing units in “Figure 25.2: Housing Units by Type, CityCity of Oroville, 2010 & 2021.”) There is a significantly larger share of Overcrowded units in Oroville than in Butte CountyButte County as a whole, in which 3.2% of units were Overcrowded in 2019.

Figure 25.4: Tenure by Occupants per Room, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Occupants per Room Owner-occupied Renter-occupied Total

0.50 or less occupants per room 2,097 1,764 3,861

0.51 to 1.00 occupants per room 732 1,391 2,123

1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room 86 243 329

1.51 to 2.00 occupants per room 28 64 92

2.01 or more occupants per room 0 21 21
Total 2,943 3,483 6,426
Overcrowded (1.01 or more) 114 328 442
Severely overcrowded (1.5 or more) 28 85 113
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey 700
Item 11.
182
Housing Conditions
“Figure 25.5: Housing Units by Year Structure Built Chart, CityCity of Oroville, 2019” shows a breakdown of the number of units by the year in which their structure was built. In general, Oroville’s housing stock is older in age, with about three in four units built before 1980. Almost half of Oroville’s units were built between 1950 and 1979 and about one-quarter were built before 1950. This figure shows that construction of residential structures has slowed considerably since 2009, with just 2.2% of all units built in 2010 and later. The large proportion of older units in Oroville indicates a high need for rehabilitation, as many of these units are likely to be in poor condition due to deferred maintenance, as further illustrated by code enforcement data below.

Figure 25.5: Housing Units by Year Structure Built Chart, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Units Percentage
Built 2010 or later 163 2.2%
1980 to 2009 1,688 23.5%
1950 to 1979 3,470 48.4%
1949 or earlier 1,853 25.9%
Total 7,174 --
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey Code enforcement data provides another window to housing conditions. A high number of code enforcement cases relative to the overall number of units, or particular trends by year, type of code enforcement, or location of code enforcement may provide indicators of the level of rehabilitation need in the CityCity. Therefore, trends in the number of code enforcement cases and the type of code enforcement involved were analyzed. The CityCity of Oroville provided data for this report. Of the total of 444 substandard housing cases opened between January 1, 701
Item 11.
183
20142014, and October 4, 2021, 217 of these cases related to the structural integrity of residential buildings, damages caused by flooding, sewer leaks, fire, poor roof conditions, damaged foundations, and cracked walls and floors, as shown in Figure 25.6. This data shows that these types of code enforcement cases peaked in 2016 with 71 cases, and then declined significantly from 2017 to 2021. Single-family housing unit code enforcement cases declined from 38 in 2016 to 12 in 2017, and 7 to 16 from 2018 to 2021. Multi-family housing unit code enforcement cases declined from 24 in 2016 to 7 in 2017, and to just 3-4 cases from 2018 to 2021. Figure 25.6 does not include building violation code enforcement cases. Out of the 408 opened cases in this category, 37 were related to structural integrity of residential structures, damages caused by flooding, sewer leaks, fire, poor roof conditions, damaged foundations, and cracked walls and floors (CityCity of Oroville, October 5, 2021).

702
Item 11.
184
Figure 25.6: Code Enforcement Cases for Substandard Housing, CityCity of Oroville, 2014-2021 Single-family Multi-family Total
2014 11 27 38
2015 14 20 34
2016 38 24 71
2017 12 7 19
2018 16 4 20
2019 16 3 19
2020 7 3 10
2021 11 4 15
Total 125 92 217
Source: CityCity of Oroville, 2021
The CityCity of Oroville commissioned a housing conditions survey for South Oroville, which was completed in 2021. This survey encompassed 1,220 units in the South Oroville neighborhood, which is an older low-income neighborhood in the CityCity of Oroville that was recently annexed.

Of the surveyed units, 25.9%, or 316 units, were determined to be in need of rehabilitation, with the most common types of deterioration present in roofs, walls or columns, windows, and doors.

The number and proportion of foreclosures are other data points for assessing housing conditions since many foreclosed dwellings have deferred maintenance. Real estate sales data was collected for 2014 through 2021. Over this period, there were only 15 sales reported as “Real Estate Owned”, or through foreclosure, ranging from zero to six in each of the years.

Overall, the number of foreclosures from 2014 through 2021 represented 0.3% of all sales in Oroville.

The data reviewed above was used to estimate the number of units in Oroville that are in need of significant rehabilitation. Code enforcement data shows that between January 1, 2014 and October 4, 2021, there were 217 substandard housing cases that related to the structural integrity of residential buildings. Of the building violation code enforcement cases over this period, 37 were related to structural integrity of residential buildings. This totals 254 units 703
Item 11.
185
identified by the CityCity of Oroville as in need of significant rehabilitation over the past seven years. In addition, the housing conditions survey of South Oroville found that an estimated 316 units are in need of significant rehabilitation. Adding these two numbers brings the estimate of units in need of rehabilitation in Oroville to 570 units. This is about 11% of the estimated total units built earlier than 1980.

Housing Production
“Figure 25.7: Housing Production, CityCity of Oroville, 2014-2020” shows housing production by RHNA income level over the previous Housing Element planning period. The total number of units produced over this period was 224, which was 12.5% of the 2014-2022 RHNA goal for total units. Most of the units produced were in the Above Moderate-Income level.

Figure 25.7: Housing Production, CityCity of Oroville, 2014-2020 Source: CityCity of Oroville, 2021
A large number of affordable multi-family residential projects are currently in development. This includes six projects with 226 units that have secured entitlements but have not secured building permits, and six projects with 357 units that have secured building permits. These projects total 12 affordable rent-restricted projects with 583 units that will be placed in service within the next 2-3 years (CityCity of Oroville, October 27, 2021).

RHNA Income Level 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total Very Low 2 8 10
Low 57 4 6 1 68
Moderate
Above Moderate 14 11 1 3 9 56 52 146
Total 71 17 15 3 9 57 52 224
704
Item 11.
186

RENTAL MARKET
Rental market surveys that track average asking rents and vacancy rates are not available for the CityCity of Oroville. However, HUD establishes a Fair Market Rent by unit size annually in order to set contract rents for their subsidy programs. The Fair Market Rents for Butte CountyButte County by unit size over the past seven years are shown in “Figure 26: Fair Market Rent, Butte CountyButte County, 2015-2021.” The average Fair Market Rent increased by $367 over this period, from $968 in 2015 to $1,335 in 2021. This was a 38% increase over that seven-year period. The largest annual increase was after the Camp Fire, between 2018 and 2019, when the average Fair Market Rent increased by $160. Fair Market Rent declined slightly from 2019 to 2020 most likely due to COVID-19 rent freezes, and then increased again in 2021 to levels higher than in 2019.

Figure 26: Fair Market Rent, Butte CountyButte County, 2015-2021 Studio 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom Average
2015 $527 $660 $870 $1,242 $1,541 $968
2016 $622 $713 $907 $1,318 $1,584 $1,029
2017 $656 $729 $923 $1,344 $1,614 $1,053
2018 $712 $785 $992 $1,443 $1,689 $1,124
2019 $808 $894 $1,144 $1,654 $1,921 $1,284
2020 $761 $842 $1,090 $1,567 $1,881 $1,228
2021 $825 $904 $1,192 $1,692 $2,064 $1,335
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Fair Market Rents 2015-2021

705
Item 11.
187

Figure 26.1: Fair Market Rent Chart, Butte CountyButte County, 2015-2021 “Figure 26.2: Average Asking Rent by Building Age, CityCity of Oroville, 2020” shows average rents as of 2020. Units built prior to 1970 rent for approximately 67%-75% of new units. Overall average rent was $1,059.

Figure 26.2: Average Asking Rent by Building Age, CityCity of Oroville, 2020 Year Built Rent
Before 1970 $817
1970-1979 $1,018
1980-1989 $1,250
1990-1999 $0
2000-2009 $1,225
2010+ $0
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
706
Item 11.
188
All $1,059
Source: Kinetic Valuation Group Market Study, 2020

FOR-SALE MARKET
The number of homes sold in Oroville has gradually increased from 2014 to 2019, as shown in “Figure 27: Number of Homes Sold by Type, CityCity of Oroville, 2014-2021.” From 2019 to 2021, the number of homes declined again, following population trends over the same period. A significant portion of homes sold have been manufactured homes, at 18.3% of homes sold in 2020.

Figure 27: Number of Homes Sold by Type, CityCity of Oroville, 2014-2021 Year SF Manufactured Other Total
2014 382 104 0 486
2015 432 108 1 541
2016 423 116 2 541
2017 433 110 4 547
2018 497 116 0 613
2019 591 151 0 742
2020 522 118 6 646
2021 408 91 2 501
Source: Sierra North Valley Realtors, September 2021 Multiple Listing Service Figure 27.1: Number of Homes Sold Chart, CityCity of Oroville, 2014-2021 707
Item 11.
189
“Figure 27.2: Median Sales Price by Type of Sale, CityCity of Oroville, 2014-2021” shows the median sales price for homes sold in Oroville from 2014 through 2021. The median sales price more than doubled from 2014 to 2021, a dramatic increase of $165,000 or 114%. The largest increase within that time period was from 2018 to 2019, when the median sales price jumped by $32,050 or 15%. Median sales prices in nearby Chico rose in a similar fashion at this time, which was the year following the Camp Fire.

Figure 27.2: Median Sales Price by Type of Sale, CityCity of Oroville, 2014-2021 Year SF Manufactured Other Total
2014 $ 152,450 $ 110,000 $ - $ 145,000
2015 $ 164,950 $ 117,000 $ 300,000 $ 150,000
2016 $ 185,000 $ 125,000 $ 195,750 $ 171,000
2017 $ 208,000 $ 139,500 $ 158,250 $ 185,600
2018 $ 218,575 $ 162,250 $ - $ 209,950
2019 $ 255,000 $ 184,837 $ - $ 242,000
2020 $ 285,220 $ 195,000 $ 220,000 $ 270,000
2021 (YTD) $ 325,000 $ 267,500 $ 847,500 $ 310,000
Source: Sierra North Valley Realtors, September 2021 Multiple Listing Service

0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
(YTD)
708
Item 11.
190
Figure 27.2: Median Sales Price by Type of Sale Chart, CityCity of Oroville, 2014-2021

AT-RISK UNITS
Housing Element law (Government Code Section 65583(a)(9)) requires that Housing Elements identify assisted housing developments with contracts restricting rents to affordable levels that will expire within the next 10 years. “Assisted housing developments” include multi-family rental housing that receives government assistance under federal programs, state and local multifamily revenue bond programs, local redevelopment programs, inclusionary housing programs, or local in-lieu fees. There are no housing developments in the CityCity of Oroville that meet these criteria as confirmed by a review of the National Housing Preservation Database and consultation with CityCity of Oroville records.

HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
Overpayment
Housing affordability can be measured by the percent of income paid toward housing costs. HUD considers households that pay over 30% of their income to housing as rent burdened.

Households that pay over 50% of their income to housing are considered severely rent burdened.

This metric indicates the extent of household overpayment.

Figure 28 and 28.1 shows a breakdown of payment for housing costs by renter-occupied units.

Figure 28 shows payment that is less than or more than 30% of income toward housing costs $0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
(YTD)
709
Item 11.
191
(rent-burdened households). Figure 28.1 shows payment that is less than or more than 50% of housing costs (severely rent burdened households).

Figure 28 shows that the majority of renter households in Oroville earn less than $35,000 annually, at 67% of all renter households. An estimated four in five of these households earning less than $35,000 annually (81%) pay 30% or more of income toward housing costs, orcosts or are rent burdened. Figure 28.1 shows that 24% of renter households in Oroville pay 50% or more of income toward housing costs, orcosts or are severely rent burdened.

Figure 28: Renters Paying 30% or More of Income Toward Housing Costs, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Household Income Less than 30% of Income
Toward Housing Cost
30% or More of Income
Toward Housing Costs
Total Renter Occupied
Housing Units
Less than $35,000 418 1,790 2,208
$35,000-49,999 84 223 307
$50,000-74,999 328 144 472
$75,000 or more 286 5 291
Zero or Negative
Income, No Cash Rent,
Not Computed
-- -- 222
Total 1,116 2,162 3,483
Source: US Census, 2015-2019 American Community Survey
Figure 28.1: Renters Paying 50% or More of Income Toward Housing Costs, CityCity of Oroville, 2019
710
Item 11.
192
Household Income Less than 50% of
Income Toward
Housing Cost
50% or More of Income
Toward Housing Costs
Total Renter Occupied
Housing Units
Less than $35,000 1,520 817 2,337
$35,000-49,999 333 0 333
$50,000-74,999 474 13 487
$75,000 or more 326 0 326
Total 2,653 830 3,483
Source: US Census, 2015-2019 American Community Survey
Figure 28.2 shows that households in owner-occupied housing units are fairly evenly distributed across the income spectrum, with 30% earning less than $35,000 annually and 28% earning $75,000 or more. Of owner households earning less than $35,000, 62% pay 30% or more of income toward housing costs. Overall, 28% of owners pay 30% or more of income toward housing costs.

Figure 28.2: Owners Paying 30% or More of Income Toward Housing Costs, CityCity of Oroville, 2019
Household Income Less than 30% of Income
Toward Housing Cost
30% or More of Income
Toward Housing Costs
Total Owner Occupied
Housing Units
Less than $35,000 341 550 891
$35,000-49,999 354 158 512
$50,000-74,999 565 116 681
$75,000 or more 825 11 836
Zero or Negative
Income, No Cash
Rent
23 -- 23
Total 2,108 835 2,943
Source: US Census, 2015-2019 American Community Survey
711
Item 11.
193
“Figure 28.3: Market Rent Compared to Affordable Rent, Butte CountyButte County, 2021” shows market rent compared to affordable rent by income level. Affordable rent is calculated at 30% of monthly income. A three-person Very Low-Income household earning 50% of Area Median Income can afford rent at $796, which is $396 less than the Fair Market Rent for a two-bedroom unit in Butte CountyButte County. A three-person Extremely Low-Income household earning 30% of Area Median Income can afford rent at $549, which is $643 less than the Fair Market Rent for a two-bedroom unit in Butte CountyButte County.

Figure 28.3: Market Rent Compared to Affordable Rent, Butte CountyButte County, 2021 Affordability Category Affordable
Rent
Income (3-person
Household)
Rent
Affordability
Gap
Butte CountyButte County 2-bdrm Fair
Market Rent
$1,192 $47,680
Low Income Household $1,272 $50,900
Very Low Income Household $796 $31,850 $396
Extremely Low Income Household $549 $21,960 $643
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2021 Fair Market Rent and Section 8 Income Limits
Availability of Affordable Units
712
Item 11.
194
“Figure 29: Publicly Subsidized Permanent Rental Units, CityCity of Oroville, 2021” lists publicly subsidized affordable rental units within the CityCity of Oroville. It includes 17 projects with 839 total publicly subsidized permanent rental units, including 63 studios, 248 one-bedrooms, 245 two-bedrooms, 235 three-bedrooms, and 48 four-bedrooms. Seven of the projects are public housing owned by the Housing Authority of the County of Butte. These projects charge rent at 30% of tenant income, regardless of income. The other 10 projects are financed by Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), as well as other funding sources. In addition to units listed below, there are an additional 12 projects with a cumulative total of 563 units that are currently in development and will be placed in service within the next three years. 713
Item 11.
195
Figure 29: Publicly Subsidized Permanent Rental Units, CityCity of Oroville, 2021 Project Name Funding Source/
Target Population
1 BR 2 BR 3 BR 4 BR Total
Assisted
Units
Average Household
Rental Contribution
7 th
Street Housing Authority, Family –
80% of Area Median Income
3 3 30% of Income
Boulder Creek LIHTC - 60% of Area Median
Income
88 48 20 156 $863-$1,099
Casey Court Housing Authority, Family –
80% of Area Median Income
8 8 30% of Income
Gardella Street Housing Authority, Family –
80% of Area Median Income
12 12 30% of Income
Hammon Park Housing Authority, Family –
80% of Area Median Income
27 27 30% of Income
The Highland Apartments LIHTC, Family - 60% of Area
Median Income
32 54 86 N/A
Hillview Ridge Apartments I LIHTC, Family and Special
Populations - 60% of Area
Median Income
23 40 8 71 $772-$984
Hillview Ridge Apartments II LIHTC, Family - 60% of Area Median Income
15 33 8 56 $356-$916
Orange Tree Senior Apartments HUD Multifamily, LIHTC, Senior - 60% of Area Median Income
49 49 $325
Oro Dam Blvd Housing Authority, Family –
80% of Area Median Income
17 17 30% of Income
714
Item 11.
196
Oroville Apartments HUD Multifamily, LIHTC -
Section 8, 60% of Area Median
Income
11 30 20 61 $282
Oroville Inn LIHTC, Northwest Lineman
College Housing
59 $580
Oroville Manor LIHTC, Senior - 60% of Area
Median Income
67 71 N/A
Pomono Avenue Housing Authority, Family –
80% of Area Median Income
3 3 30% of Income
Sierra Heights Senior Apartments LIHTC, Senior 32 8 40 N/A Sierra Village LIHTC, Family - 60% of Area
Median Income
24 24 12 60 N/A
Winston Gardens Housing Authority,
Senior/Disabled – 80% of Area
Median Income
57 3 60 30% of Income
Total 248 245 235 48 839
Sources: Cambridge Real Estate Services, 2021; CityCity of Oroville, 2021; Housing Authority of the County of Butte, 2021; Oroville Inn, 2021; PolicyMap, 2021
715
Item 11.
197
“Figure 29.1: Low-Income Households Relative to Subsidized Housing Units, CityCity of Oroville, 2021” illustrates the affordable housing gap in Oroville. As of 2019, there were an estimated 3,251 households in Oroville earning less than $35,000 in the previous 12 months, which is roughly equivalent to a four-person Very Low-Income household in Butte CountyButte County per the State Income Limits. Of these households, 2,340 pay over 30% of income or more toward housing costs. As shown on Figure 28.3, these households cannot afford the Fair Market Rent.

When compared to the number of subsidized housing units in Oroville at 1,404, this leaves a gap of 936 affordable units that are needed to assist households earning less than $35,000 that are rent-burdened. The number of subsidized housing units includes 839 publicly-subsidizedpublicly subsidized rent-restricted units, 552 households with Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers that reside in Oroville, and 13 households with HUD VASH vouchers that reside in Oroville.

Figure 29.1: Low-Income Households Relative to Subsidized Housing Units, CityCity of Oroville, 2021
Number of Households
Earning < $35,000 3,251
Paying > 30% of Income to Housing Costs 2,340
Paying > 50% of Income to Housing Costs 817
Subsidized Housing Units 1,404
Unmet Need 936
Source: Housing Authority of the County of Butte, 2021; U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey

Figure 29.2: Low-Income Households Relative to Subsidized Housing Units Chart, CityCity of Oroville, 2021
716
Item 11.
198

For-sale Home Affordability
“Figure 30: For-Sale Home Affordability, CityCity of Oroville, 2021” breaks down the median income affordable home price compared to the price of a typical new starter home, the median home price, and the typical mid-range new home price. The median home price is about 17% lower than the price affordable to a Butte CountyButte County four-person median income household. The estimated price of a mid-range new home is about 5% higher than the price affordable to a four-person median income household.

Figure 30: For-Sale Home Affordability, CityCity of Oroville, 2021 Median
Income
Affordable
Home Price
Typical New
Starter Home
Price (1,200
sq. ft.)
Median Home
Price
Starting MidRange New
Home Price
(2,000 sq. ft,)
Household Income $70,700 $45,397 $59,172 $75,434
Affordable Monthly
Housing Payment
$2,062 $1,324 $726 $2,200
Subtract Taxes, MI, and
Property Insurance
$496 $347 $444 $571
Mortgage Payment $1,547 $977 $1,282 $1,629
Affordable Mortgage $355,363 $224,580 $294,500 $374,300 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500
Earning < $35,000
Paying > 30% of Income to Housing Costs
Paying > 50% of Income to Housing Costs
Subsidized Housing Units
Unmet Need
717
Item 11.
199
Down Payment $18,703 $11,820 $15,500 $19,700
Affordable Home Price $374,066 $236,400 $310,000 $394,000 Assumes affordable housing payment at 35% of monthly income, 3.25% interest rate, 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, 5% down payment, property taxes at 1.1%, monthly mortgage insurance payments of $80-$130, monthly property insurance payments of $50-$80. Median home price based on the 2020 median sales price.

Source: Sierra North Valley Realtors, December 2020 Multiple Listing Service, California Department of Housing and Community Development, April 2020

EXTREMELY LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
Income
Extremely Low-Income (ELI) households earn less than 30% of the Area Median Income, as defined by federal and state governments. In Butte CountyButte County, 30% of Area Median Income ranges from $14,850 for a one-person household to $31,040 for a five-person household. As of 2019, the U.S. Census estimated that there were 2,071 households in Oroville earning less than $25,000 annually, which is 32% of all households, as shown in “Figure 24.1:

Household Income, CityCity of Oroville, 2019.”
The Federal Poverty Level is a measure of material need used by federal agencies to determine eligibility for certain programs and benefits. For 2021, the Federal Poverty Level ranged from $12,880 for a one-person household to $31,040 for a five-person household, which nearly aligns with ELI incomes for Butte CountyButte County. In 2019, there were an estimated 708 families with income below the Poverty Level in Oroville (18.1% of all families in Oroville). (Figure 31:

Families Living Below the Poverty Level, CityCity of Oroville, 2019)

Figure 31: Families Living Below the Poverty Level, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Number of
Households
% of Total
Income below poverty 708 18.1%
718
Item 11.
200
Income below poverty, nonfamily, female householder 352 9.0% Income below poverty married-couple family 325 8.3%
Total Households 3,917 --
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey

Overpayment
Most ELI households are rent burdened, many live in overcrowded conditions, and many are atrisk of becoming homeless. “Figure 28: Renters Paying 30% or More of Income Paid Toward Housing Costs, CityCity of Oroville, 2019” shows that there were 1,790 renter households in Oroville that earned less than $35,000 annually as of 2019 (18% of all households). Of these households, 81% paid 30% or more of their income toward housing costs, and 35% paid 50% or more of their income toward housing costs, as shown in “Figure 28.1: Renters Paying 50% or More of Income Paid Toward Housing Costs, CityCity of Oroville, 2019.” Overcrowding
Given the limited purchasing power of ELI households, and the large proportion of ELI households that are rent burdened, it is likely that a large proportion of Overcrowded households are ELI. “Figure 25.3: Tenure by Occupants per Room, CityCity of Oroville, 2019” shows that in 2019, there were an estimated 442 Overcrowded and 113 Severely Overcrowded housing units in Oroville.

Available Units, Resources, and Policies
The Regional Housing Needs Allocation for Oroville estimates a need for the production of 171 units affordable to Very Low-Income households, half of which should be affordable to ELI households, over the 2022-2030 Housing Element planning period. The provision of ELI affordable housing usually requires significant public subsidy for capital costs as well as operations. The very low ELI affordable rents usually necessitate rental assistance such as Section 8 Project Based Vouchers to cover operating expenses. This type of rental assistance pays the landlord the difference between 30% of tenant income and Fair Market Rents as set by HUD. In addition to financing, various local policies can help facilitate the production of ELI housing. These are listed below:
719
Item 11.
201
 Allowance for Single-Room Occupancy (SRO), group homes, and/or tiny home projects as permitted uses in the zoning code; and
 Allowance for Transitional and Supportive Housing in all residentially zoned districts, with no restrictions beyond what would apply to any other types of residential development.

Revisions to the Municipal Code to achieve this policy are laid out in the Chapter 3 Housing Program, Programs 2.1.6 and 2.1.7.

SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSEHOLDS
Seniors
As of 2019, there were an estimated 4,167 people 60 years and older in Oroville. This is approximately 21% of the population. Of householders in Oroville that are 65 years and older, half (864 households) have an annual income that is less than $30,000. An estimated 69% have income less than 45,000. This points to the need for affordable housing for seniors. Most seniors have fixed incomes because they are no longer employed. Seniors with limited fixed incomes require restricted affordable rents that provide predictability, security, and stability. (Figure 32:

Income for Householders 65 Years and Over, CityCity of Oroville, 2019)

Figure 32: Income for Householders 65 Years and Over, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Number of Households % of All Senior Householders
Less than $15,000 289 16.7%
$15,000 to $29,999 575 33.3%
$30,000 to $44,999 321 18.6%
$45,000 to $59,999 269 15.6%
$60,000 to 74,999 78 4.5%
$75,000 to $99,999 105 6.1%
Over $100,000 89 5.2%
720
Item 11.
202
Total 1,726 --
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey As shown in “Figure 32.1: Persons with a Disability by Age, CityCity of Oroville, 2019,” an estimated 1,236 persons 65 years and older in Oroville have a disability. This is 32% of the estimated 3,904 persons with a disability in Oroville, and 43% of the 2,888 persons in this age group. This is higher than the proportion of persons 65 years and older with a disability for the State of California as a whole (35%).

Figure 32.1: Persons with a Disability by Age, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Persons with a
Disability
% of Total
Population
Total population w/ a disability 3,904 21.9%
Under 18 years 246 1.4%
Age 18 to 64 2,422 13.6%
65 years and over 1,236 6.9%
Total Civilian Non-institutionalized Population 17,825 -- Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey

Seniors benefit from a continuum of housing options that accounts for mental and physical disabilities, and restricted mobility challenges that may change over time. Publicly subsidized affordable housing typically helps seniors live independently and age in place for as long as possible. The physical design incorporates ADA units and ADA adaptable features for physical and sensory impairments, in addition to full accessibility to units and common areas for 721
Item 11.
203
wheelchair users. Semi-independent retirement communities and nursing facilities are other residential models that meet critical needs for seniors. There are currently eight state-licensed assisted living care facilities for the elderly with a cumulative capacitycapacity for 339 persons in Oroville (State of California Community Care Licensing Division, 2021). In addition, there are three senior low-income affordable rental properties in Oroville as listed below with a cumulative 160 units.
 Orange Tree Senior Apartments— 49 units (all one-bedroom)  Oroville Manor—71 units (4 studios and 67 one-bedrooms)  Sierra Heights Senior Apartments— 40 units (32 one-bedrooms and 8 two-bedrooms) There are also three additional senior low-income affordable rental properties that are in development and expect to be placed in service within the next three years, as listed below:
 Olive Ranch Apartments, Phase 3— 51 units
 AMG Mitchell Avenue— 72 units
 Sierra Heights Apartments, Phase 2— 48 units

Persons with a Disability
Persons with disabilities have particular housing needs depending on their situation. Public funding sources for housing typically require that 5%-10% of units are fully accessible for persons with physical disabilities per the American with Disabilities Act, and that 2% are accessible to persons with sensory disabilities. In addition, publicly assisted affordable housing often offers resident services that connect tenants with local peer support and advocacy organizations, health services, and transportation assistance. A number of federal and state sources fund Permanent Supportive Housing for persons with mental disabilities, which include individualized case management and mental health services.

There were an estimated 3,904 persons with a disability in Oroville in 2019 according to the U.S.

Census. This was 22% of the total civilian non-institutionalized population in Oroville. This was much higher than the proportion of persons with a disability statewide, which was about 11%. “Figure 33: Disability Characteristics, CityCity of Oroville, 2019” shows persons with a disability by type of disability. One individual may have more than one type of disability. The most commonly identified type of disability listed is “cognitive difficulty”, followed closely by “ambulatory difficulty”.

Figure 33: Disability Characteristics, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 722
Item 11.
204
Persons
Total civilian non-institutionalized population 17,825
Persons with a disability 3,904
Hearing difficulty 788
Vision difficulty 639
Cognitive difficulty 2,097
Ambulatory difficulty 1,963
Self-care difficulty 1,060
Independent living difficulty 1,801
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey (civilian noninstitutionalized population)
State Housing Element law also requires jurisdictions to specifically analyze needs for persons with developmental disabilities. The California State Department of Developmental Services provides data on Regional Center and Early Start consumers by zip code. The CityCity of Oroville includes zip codes 95965 (which also includes Butte Valley, Pulga, and Yankee Hill) and 95966. In the 95965 zip code, there were 420 consumers (168 consumers under 18 years old and 252 consumers 18 years old or older) with developmental disabilities as of the end of September,September 2021. The residency of these consumers included: 266 living at home of parent/family/guardian; 95 in independent/supported living; 46 in a community care facility; 7 in a foster/family home; and 6 others. In the 95966 zip code, there were 490 consumers (212 under 18 years old and 278 over 18 years old) with developmental disabilities as of the end of September 2021. The residency of these consumers included: 343 living at home of parent/family/guardian; 113 in independent/supported living; 20 in a community care facility; 7 in a foster/family home; and 7 others.

The Far Northern Regional Center manages services for persons with developmental disabilities in Butte CountyButte County. The Far Northern Regional Center provides early intervention and behavior services, respite care, licensed homes, adult day activities, supported employment, and healthcare coordination. There are two low-income, publicly subsidized housing complexes with units targeted to persons with disabilities in Oroville.

The CityCity of Oroville does have a reasonable accommodation policy for persons with disabilities to request zoning and building code variances. Reasonable accommodation requests can be approved at a staff level either the Zoning Administrator or their designee. 723
Item 11.
205
Female-Headed Households
Almost over one in three families in Oroville (31%) are female-headed households with no spouse present, which is an estimated 1,217 families. These families have a much lower median income than married-couple families, and families in general, as shown in “Figure 34: Family Median Income, CityCity of Oroville, 2019.” The median income for female-headed families is 62% of the median income for married-couple families.

Figure 34: Family Median Income, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Median Income
Families $48,664
Married-couple families $56,973
Female householder, no spouse present $30,306
Male householder, no spouse present $44,567
Households (All) $34,428
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey Another indicator of economic well-being is the number of families with income below the poverty level. A larger proportion of female-headed families in Oroville has income below the poverty level (28.9%) than families overall (18.1%). For female householders with related children under 18 years old, the percentage of families below the poverty level is much higher, at

56.1%. (Figure 34.1: Female Householder Families Below Poverty Level, CityCity of Oroville, 2019)

Figure 34.1: Female Householder Families Below Poverty Level, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Number of
Female
Householder
Families, No
Spouse Present
% of Female
Householder
Families, No
Spouse Present
Number of
Female
Householder
Families, No
Spouse
Present, With
Related
Children of the
Householder
Under 18 Years
% of Female
Householder
Families, No
Spouse Present,
With Related
Children of the
Householder
Under 18 Years
724
Item 11.
206
Below poverty
level
352 28.9% 303 56.1%
At or above
poverty level
865 71.1% 237 43.9%
Total 1,217 540
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey

Female-headed households can benefit from a number of features offered by publicly subsidized housing. Most importantly this type of housing offers affordable restricted rent. In addition, many of these types of housing projects offer after-school programs and youth recreation programs. Many also have amenities such as computer labs, community rooms for youth activities and adult education, and playgrounds. Affordable childcare is also a critical need for these families.

Large Households
“Figure 37: Household Size, CityCity of Oroville, 2019” depicts the size and tenure of all households in Oroville. Nearly 60% of all households have two or fewer persons. Most owner households are two-person householdshouseholds, and most renter households are one-person households. Households with three or more persons are more likely to be renter households than owner households. An estimated 11.8% of all households have five persons or more, which is an estimated 763 households. Of these large households, 58.8% are renters.

Figure 37: Household Size, CityCity of Oroville, 2019
All Households % of Total Owner
Households
Renter
Households
1-person 1,938 30.2% 851 1,087
2-person 1,858 28.9% 1,066 792
725
Item 11.
207
3-person 1,120 17.4% 406 714
4-person 747 11.6% 306 441
5-person 426 6.6% 197 229
6-person 225 3.5% 83 142
7-or-more-person 112 1.7% 34 78
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey “Figure 35.1: Median Family Income by Family Size, CityCity of Oroville, 2019” shows that families with six or more persons have slightly higher median income than families with fewer persons.

Insufficient data is available to calculate median family income for families with five persons.

Figure 35.1: Median Family Income by Family Size, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Median Income
2-persons $48,558
3-persons $33,309
4-persons $49,299
5-persons --
6-persons or more $54,575
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey Due to expensive housing costs and other costs of living, many large households earning near or less than median income may struggle to make ends meet. Large households also face challenges securing housing that is not overcrowded. The 2021 Fair Market Rent for a fourbedroom unit in Butte CountyButte County is $2,064, which would be affordable for a household 726
Item 11.
208
earning at least $82,560 annually, which is much higher than the Oroville median income for families with six persons or more. This rent is also unaffordable for four-person families earning 80% of Area Median Income at $63,350.

Publicly subsidized housing with three-bedroom or four-bedroom units addresses the needs of Low-Income large families. In Oroville, there are 11 affordable rental complexes with a cumulative total of 235 three-bedroom apartments. In addition, four of these affordable rental complexes have a cumulative total of 48 four-bedroom apartments.

People Experiencing Homelessness
The Butte CountyButte Countywide Homeless Continuum of Care conducts a Point-In-Time Homeless Census every other year. People experiencing homelessness complete voluntary surveys that provide information about the characteristics and causes of homelessness. This is not an exhaustive survey of every individual experiencing homelessness throughout the year, but a snapshot of the number of individuals surveyed on one particular day of the year. The actual number of persons experiencing homelessness at any point during the year is likely higher than the number surveyed in the Point-In-Time Homeless Census.

The most recent Point-In-Time Census for Butte CountyButte County was conducted in January of 2019. The 2021 Point-In-Time Census was rescheduled to January of 2022 due to the COVID19 pandemic. The 2019 Point-In-Time Census counted 415 individuals experiencing homelessness in Oroville. Below are noteworthy data points.  One quarter of these individuals were “chronically homeless”, which means that they had a disability and lived in a shelter, safe haven, or place not meant for human habitation for 12 continuous months or for four separate occasions in the last three years.  In terms of nighttime habitation, 37% were sleeping on the street or sidewalk, 24% were sleeping at an outdoor encampment, and 13% were staying with a friend or family member.
 Of the 415 individuals surveyed, 85% lived in Butte CountyButte County when they lost their housing, and 47% reported this was their first time they have experienced homelessness.
 The 2018 Camp Fire had been a significant factor in causing homelessness in Oroville, as 15% of the individuals surveyed reported being survivors of the Camp Fire and had lived in Camp Fire affected areas.

Beyond permanently affordable rental housing, there are a variety of sheltering strategies that have been implemented across the country to assist persons experiencing 727
Item 11.
209
homelessness. Emergency shelters provide short term shelter, often with referral to other longer-term housing options as well as community services. Transitional housing provides temporary housing, usually for periods of up to 24 months at a time, with supportive services that assists residents to build self-sufficiency and transition to permanent housing.

Permanent Supportive Housing is housing without a limit on the length of residency that provides a variety of supportive services to help residents stabilize and progress in terms of health, income, and/or employment. The Oroville Rescue Mission is a nonprofit organization that runs two emergency shelters in Oroville— Timothy Housing, which is a men’s shelter with 24 beds; and Bethel House, a Women and Children’s shelter with 14 beds. The Oroville Rescue Mission also provides clothing and food distribution, and drug and alcohol support services. The CityCity also made progress in the development of Permanent Supportive Housing as follows:
 Base Camp Village is a 12-unit permanent supportive housing project for people experiencing homelessness with a mental illness diagnosis. The housing project opened in April 2020.
 Prospect View will be another newly constructed project which will offer 39 units of permanent supportive housing for people experiencing homelessness with a mental illness. Construction is slated to begin in 2022 with units available for occupancy in 2023.

Farmworkers
An estimated 94 people were employed in the Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining Industry in Oroville as of 2019, which was 1.5% of all employed residents. There is a higher proportion of people employed in these industries in Butte CountyButte County as a whole, and the State of California. (Figure 36: Agriculture and Related Occupations, CityCity of Oroville, 2019)
Figure 36: Agriculture and Related Occupations, CityCity of Oroville, 2019 Number of People Employed in
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting,
and Mining Industry
% of Total Employed
Population
CityCity of Oroville 94 1.5%
728
Item 11.
210
Butte CountyButte
County
3,874 4.0%
State of California 415,545 2.2%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey

The Census of Agriculture is conducted every five years by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and is a count of U.S. farms and ranches and the people who operate them. This data is available at the county level but not the cityCity level and is provided for additional context about farmworkers in Butte CountyButte County. About 13% of all workers on farms with hired labor in Butte CountyButte County are migrant workers. This means these workers travel from their permanent place of residence to find work at one or more agricultural employers. (Figure

36.1: Farm and Labor Characteristics, Butte CountyButte County, 2017) Figure 36.1: Farm and Labor Characteristics, Butte CountyButte County, 2017 Jurisdiction Number of Farms Number of
Farms with
Hired Labor
Number of
Workers on
Farms with Hired
Labor
Total Migrant
Workers on Farms
with Hired Labor
Butte
CountyButte
County
1,912 709 4,348 580
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2017 Census of Agriculture The Housing Authority of the County of Butte (HACB) owns farm labor housing (also known as farmworker housing) in the CityCity of Gridley which is located in south Butte countyButte County. The farmworker housing in Gridley is located approximately 30 miles from Chico via Highway 99. This is the only farmworker housing owned by HACB in Butte CountyButte County.

HACB and property management firm AWI Management Corporation staff provided information about the Gridley farmworker housing via email correspondence on April 7 and April 19, 2022.

There are 79 occupied units with an average rental contribution of $524 per month. There are 4 one-bedroom units, 59 two-bedroom units, 12 three-bedroom units, and 4 four-bedrooms units.

At the time of the correspondence, there were eight households on the waiting list for a unit.

AWI Management Corporation had started marketing for units using local radio, printing leasing banners, and generating flyers for distributing to local agricultural employees. 729
Item 11.
211
Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP) is a private, non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation serving Butte, Glenn, Tehama, Shasta, Sutter, Yuba, and Colusa counties. CHIP assists low-income and rural disadvantaged residents, seniors, and others who lack financial resources or knowledge to improve or provide adequately for their housing. CHIP has built more than 2,600 housing units in its seven-county service area (Community Housing Improvement Program, Website, 2022).

In an interview for the Housing Element on April 11, 20222022, via Zoom and email correspondence on April 4 and 22, 2022, CHIP staff shared farmworker housing needs and resources in Butte and Glenn counties where their properties are located. CHIP has three farmworker housing projects, with the first coming online in the 1980s. La Vista Verde in Chico (Butte CountyButte County) has 33 units, Las Palmas in Hamilton CityCity (Glenn County) has 12 units, and Rancho de Soto in Orland (Glenn County) has 33 units. All three properties have U.S.

Department of Agriculture (USDA) funding, and Rancho de Soto also has Joe Serna, Jr.

Farmworker Housing Grant Program and Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) funding.

La Vista Verde in Chico has 14 two-bedroom, 14 three bedroom, and 4 four-bedroom units in addition to 1 four-bedroom manager’s unit. The average tenant rental contribution per month is $423. The waitlist is minimal with two households as of April 11, 2022. Staff commented this is due to difficulty with qualifying households and filling units, which is explained in more detail in the following paragraphs.

CHIP’s farmworker housing tenants typically work locally in fields, orchards, dairies, factories, and warehouses that process agricultural products. Some of the tenants work seasonally and others work year-round. Some seasonal workers have different employment in different seasons. Workers are busiest during harvest May through June and September through October.

According to property management staff, tenants’ employment was not affected much by the COVID-19 pandemic.

All three farmworker housing projects in Butte and Glenn counties require eligible immigration status (e.g.e.g., permanent resident, citizen, etc.), and a low-income of 50% AMI or less. If one member of the household is working full-time at the California minimum wage of $15 per hour, any overtime puts the household over the income requirement. Overtime is common for farmworkers at certain times of the year due to seasonal crop harvest. Thus, to meet income requirements with one person of the household working full-time with some overtime, a household would need to be at least three-persons and some households would need to be at least four-persons to qualify. Staff observed that workers with eligible immigration status tend to earn more than what the income limits allow for the housing projects. Rancho de Soto in Orland has LIHTC funding which requires between 30-50% AMI, which staff commented makes it more challenging to find qualified households. Staff shared their perspective that Area Median Income (AMI) is too low for Butte countyButte County. Farmworkers with eligible immigration status are typically paid at least minimum wage. With a two-income household, this means they are not eligible for CHIP’s housing because they are over income at higher than 50% AMI. 730
Item 11.
212
CHIP staff shared unmet needs of farmworker housing in Butte and Glenn counties. These unmet needs include housing that does not require eligible immigration status. There is a mismatch of income and status occurring. Farmworkers with eligible status have higher incomes and do not qualify for housing, whereas farmworkers without documentation have lower incomes but do not qualify for housing due to lack of eligible status. The typical reason for denying an applicant is due to a lack of eligible immigration status. While CHIP staff has had periodic conversations with USDA about these regulations they do not know of organized statewide advocacy on this issue. Though temporary waivers for projects are possible from USDA, USDA and HCD would have to work together to address regulation issues because both funding sources are typically part of farmworker housing projects.

After the 2018 Camp Fire, USDA temporarily waived the farmworker requirement for farmworker housing. Camp Fire survivors who were not farmworkers were able to move into La Vista Verde in Chico and Las Palmas in Hamilton CityCity. This did not happen at Rancho de Soto in Orland due to LIHTC requirements. CHIP’s property management staff stated that at one point after the Camp Fire, La Vista Verde had almost one-third of units filled by fire survivors who were not farmworkers. Effects of this atypical dynamic included more pets and service animals and some tension between long-term farmworker tenants and the new Camp Fire survivor tenants, the latter of which was not strongly welcomed into the community by the former. Long-term farmworker tenants cited issues of fairness, wondering why the new tenants did not have to be farmworkers to qualify for the housing while they did.

In conclusion, there are four farmworker housing projects in Butte and Glenn counties owned by HACB and CHIP. While these counties are known as agriculturally rich areas, issues persist with matching housing needs to available resources for farmworker households. A mismatch of need to regulated resources is occurring, causing resources to be underutilized and households not being able to be housed.
731
Item 11.
213
CHAPTER 5: RESOURCE INVENTORY
This chapter will describe the various resources that can be employed to produce a variety of housing types to meet the needs described in Chapter 4. The principal resources required are adequate appropriately zoned land and financing. There are opportunities to use these resources to not only produce housing, but also further energy conservation, as residential structures are a major energy user and greenhouse gas producer. This chapter will explore available resources in the following sections:
 Adequate Sites Inventory
 Financial Resources
 Energy Conservation Opportunities

ADEQUATE SITES INVENTORY
Regional Housing Needs Allocation
State Housing Element Law requires local governments to plan for their housing needs based on future growth projections that established by the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).

The RHNA establishes goals for the production of housing affordable to various income levels— Above Moderate-, Moderate-, Low-, and Very Low-Income. The goals for Extremely Low-Income and Very Low-Income affordable units are even (50/50) split of the Very Low-Income goal as shown below (85.5 Extremely Low- and 85.5 Very Low-Income). The goals are generally set every

7.5 years and correspond with Housing Element planning periods. “Figure 37: Regional Housing Needs Allocation, CityCity of Oroville, 2022-2030” lists the RHNA goals by income level for the 2022-2030 planning period (January 1, 20222022, through June 30, 2030). 732
Item 11.
214
Figure 37: Regional Housing Needs Allocation, CityCity of Oroville, 2022-2030 Affordability Tier Number of Units Allocated Percentage Very Low 171 27.4%
Low 6 1.0%
Moderate 73 11.7%
Above Moderate 375 60.0%
Total 625 100%
Source: Butte CountyButte County Association of Governments, 2020 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Plan

Analysis of Density to Accommodate Lower Income Housing Government Code Section 65583.2 requires each community to ensure that there is adequate appropriately zoned land within its jurisdiction to accommodate its RHNA. This process is implemented through the Adequate Sites Inventory, which identifies sites that are appropriately zoned and can feasibly developed within the Housing Element planning period. The local jurisdiction’s allowable density as laid out in its zoning code is used to determine the RHNA income level that will apply to each site identified in the Adequate Sites Inventory. State Housing Element Law recognizes that higher densities generally facilitate greater affordability in housing.

Government Code Section 65583.2(c)©(3) requires that Housing Elements establish a reasonable baseline density to feasibly develop Lower Income housing for the Low- and Very Low-Income RHNA income levels for the Adequate Sites Inventory if development plans are not already in place with specific unit counts. However, the CityCity has identified three projects with development plans in place for specific unit counts, so these projects were used for the Low- and Very Low-Income Sites Inventory. For this purposeFor comparison puposespurposes, the development density of six developments that have recently secured entitlements and tax credit allocations in 2020 in Oroville have been analyzed. The baseline density has been established by averaging theaverage density of these Oroville projects that are listed in “Figure 37.1: Low Income Density Analysis.” Sierra Heights Phase II and Riverbend Family Apartments areis on a MXC-zoned parcels that are is being developed at a densityies lower than the average density of the six four other affordable developmentprojectss .. Sierra Heights Phase II is being developed at theThis project has the lowest density due to a steep slope on the site. However, the City has recently received proposals for multi-family housing in MXC zones at much higher densities.

Cascade Apartments has submitted a proposal for planning permit that is 42 units on 1.55 acres for 27.1 units per acre. Lincoln Affordable Apartments has submitted a proposal for planning permit that is 408 units on 13.56 acres for 30 units per acre. As demonstrated, recent multifamily proposals in the R-3 zone are trending toward higher densities. The average density of the projects listed in Figure 37.1 is 18.27 units per acre. Therefore, any site identified to meet the 733
Item 11.
215
Lower Income RHNA in the Adequate Sites Analysis must allow residential uses by right or have secured entitlements, and be in a zoning district that allows at least 18 units per acre.By comparison, the average density of projects in development that are listed in Figure 37.2 Lowand Very-Low Income Sites Inventory is 18.5 units per acre. All of the parcels listed in the Lowand Very-Low Income Sites Inventory are in zoning districts that allow a density of at least 18 units per acre.

Figure 37.1: Low Income Density Analysis
Project Name Zoning Allowable
Density
(du/ac)
Units Acres Units/Acre
Sierra Heights Phase II MXC 10-30 48 3.76 12.77
Oroville Heights Apartments R-3 14-20 66 4.96 13.31
Olive Ranch Phase I R-4 20-30 81 3.15 25.71
Olive Ranch Phase II R-4 20-30 80 2.74 29.20
Mitchell Avenue Senior Apts. R-3 20-30 36 1.99 18.09
Riverbend Family Apartments R-3 20-30 72 4.36 16.51
Average 6469 3.4979 18.217
Source: CityCity of Oroville, 2021

Analysis of Realistic Capacitycity
Government Code Section 65583.2(c)© (1&2) requires that the Housing Element establish a realistic capacitycapacity for each parcel listed in the Adequate Sites Inventory. However, all sites in the Low- and Very-Low Income Sites Inventory have development plans with specific unit counts. Therefore, the actual planned number of units are used for the Sites Inventory instead of an assumption of realistic capacitycity. The average density of projects listed in the Low IncomeLow-Income Density Analysis is very close to the average density of projects listed in the Low- and Very-Low IncopmeIncome Sites Inventory. The zoning districts for all of the sites allow 734
Item 11.
216
for residential development that is at least 18 units per acre.For this purpose, Figure 37.1 lists the multifamily densities for six low-income affordable projects that were recently entitled and secured tax credit allocations in 2020, as described above. The average density of these projects is 18.27 units per acre. The City of Oroville zoning code permits residential uses with densities of 18 units per acre by right in the R-3 and MXC zoning districts. The minimum density in the R-4 zoning district is 20 units per acre. In certain circumstances developers may apply an affordable housing density bonus that allows much greater densities. Therefore, 18 units per acre is a reasonable conservative assumption of capacity for sites identified as Lower Income in the Adequate Sites Inventory.

Sites Inventory
The sites listed in “Figure 37.2: Adequate Sites Inventory, Low and Very Low Income” are currently vacant and zoned for residential uses at densities that will allow for development that meets the RHNA for Low- and Very Low-Income levels. Three of the sites have Mixed Use General Plan Designations and MXC Zoning that allows 10-30 dwelling units per acre. The other site has a High Density Residential General Plan Land Use Designation and R-3 Zoning that allows 20-30 dwelling units per acre. The capacitycapacity for the Mixed Use sites listed are projected at 18 units per acre, which is within the allowable density range for MXC zoning. The Capacitycapacity for the Medium High Density Residential site is 20 units per acre, which is within the allowable density range for R-3 zoning. All of the sites are vacant and none of them have development constraints. The location of all Low- and Very Low-Income housing sites are also shown on the “Figure 38: Lower-Income Sites Inventory Map” under the AFFH: Site Inventory section of this chapter. A detailed description of each project, including affordability and development schedule, is provided below.

APNs 035-250-054
This is a 3.91-acre CityCity-owned parcel that will be developed by Veterans Housing Development Corporation (VHDC) with 64 one-bedroom units for low-income veterans. In January 2022 the parcel was rezoned to R-3 to accommodate the project. A Disposition and Development Agreement between the CityCity and VHDC will include a requirement that the units are rented at levels affordable to Low Income Households for at least 40 years after receiving certificates of occupancy. All NEPA and CEQA environmental clearances have been obtained. The site is cleared and vacant and ready for development. VHDC plans to pull building permits for the project in the summer of 2023.

APN 035-240-100
735
Item 11.
217
This project, named “Cascade Apartments”, will be a 35-unit affordable apartment project on a 1.55-acre parcel zoned Corridor Mixed Use (MXC). This infill parcel is appropriately zoned for multifamily residential without a discretionary use permit, with planning permits secured and environmental review completed. The units are planned to be rented at levels affordable to Low Income Households, but do not have a deed restriction. It is anticipated that building permits for the project will be pulled in the Spring of 2023.

APN 035-040-056
The Lincoln Street project will be 122 units in two phases with 61 units in each phase. Both phases have received funding commitments of CDBG-DR Multifamily Housing Program funds, which will restrict rents to levels affordable to Low Income Households for 55 years from certificates of occupancy. Both phases will also utilize 9% tax credits that will place affordability covenants on the property. Phase 1 has secured planning approvals and Phase 2 will submit a planning permit application next year. Only about half of the parcel is developable because about half of it is steeply sloped. The parcel is zoned Corridor Mixed Use (MXC), which will allow the proposed project by-right without a requirement for discretionary review of use permit. The project has secured a CEQA exemption. The developer plans to pull building permits in the Spring of 2023.

Figure 37.2: Adequate Sites Inventory, Low and Very Low Income Map
ID
APN General
Plan
Zoning Acres Developable
Acres
Units Per
Acre
Projected
Units
1 035-250-054 MUMHD
R
MXCR32.723.
91 2.723.91 1816.4 4864
2 035-250-002 MHDR R-3 3.91 3.91 18 70
23 035-240-100 MU MXC 1.55 1.55 1822.6 2735
34 035-040-056 MU MXC 6.5013
.56

6.50 18.8 117122
Total 14.731

9.02 14.7311.96 18.5 262221
Source: CityCity of Oroville, 2021
736
Item 11.
218

“Figure 37.3: Adequate Sites Inventory, Moderate-Income” lists two sites that will meet the RHNA for Moderate-Incomes. The sites are vacant and infill. The sites have a Medium Density Residential General Plan Land Use Designation and R-2 Zoning that allows 6-14 dwelling units per acre. The capacitycapacity for the site listed is projected at 6 units per acre, which is the minimum density for the R-2 zoning district. All of the sites are vacant and none of them have development constraints. The location of all Moderate-Income housing sites is also shown on the “Figure 38.1: Moderate-Income Sites Inventory Map” under the AFFH: Site Inventory section of this chapter.

Figure 37.3: Adequate Sites Inventory, Moderate-Income
Map
ID
APN General
Plan
Zoning Acres Developable
Acres
Units Per
Acre
Projected
Units
11 031-100-008 MDR R-2 9.50 9.50 6 57
22 031-100-001 MDR R-2 3.49 3.49 6 20
Total 12.99 12.99 6 77
Source: CityCity of Oroville, 2021

“Figure 37.4: Adequate Sites Inventory, Above Moderate-Income” lists three sites that will meet the RHNA for Above Moderate-Incomes. The sites are vacant and infill. Two of the sites have a Rural Residential General Plan Land Use Designation and RR-20 Zoning that allows one unit per lot with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet, allowing about two units per acre. The capacitycapacity for the site listed is projected at 3 units per acre, which is the maximum density for the land use designation and similar to the density of recent subdivisions in this zoning district. One of the sites has a Medium Low Density General Plan Land Use Designation and R-1 Zoning that allows 3-6 dwelling units per acre. Based on the tentative subdivision map for this site, there will be 338 lots, calculating to a density of 6 units per acre. All of the sites are vacant and none of them have development constraintscan feasibly develop the number of units shown, taking into development constraints as described on page 212. The location of all Above Moderate-Income housing sites are also shown on the “Figure 38.2: Above Moderate-Income Sites Inventory Map” under the AFFH: Site Inventory section of this chapter. 737
Item 11.
219
Figure 37.4: Adequate Sites Inventory, Above Moderate-Income Map
ID
APN General
Plan
Zoning Acres Developable
Acres
Units Per
Acre
Projected
Units
11 031-100-024 RR RR-20 8.87 8.87 3 26
22 031-100-025 RR RR-20 8.85 8.85 3 26
33 031-020-043 MLDR R-1 56.45 56.45 6 338
Total 74.17 74.17 5.26 390
Source: CityCity of Oroville, 2021
“Figure 37.5: RHNA and Sites Inventory” shows the 2022-2030 RHNA and Adequate Sites Inventory total units by income level. This shows that there are more than enough units identified in the sites inventory to meet the RHNA goals. The CityCity has not received any requests to develop housing below the identified densities in the Sites Inventory.

Figure 37.5: RHNA and Sites Inventory
Income Level RHNA Sites
Inventory
Surplus
(Deficit)
Lower Income (Very Low and Low Income) 177 262221 8544
Moderate Income 73 77 4
Above Moderate Income 375 390 15
Total 625 729688 10463
738
Item 11.
220
Source: Butte CountyButte CountyAssociation of Governments, 2020 6thCycle Regional Housing Needs Plan

Environmental Constraints to Housing Development
Oroville is located in southeast Butte CountyButte County, 20 miles southeast of Chico, 30 miles east of the Sacramento River. It is bordered on the north by Lake Oroville, and on the west by the Thermalito Afterbay, which is connected to Lake Oroville. The Feather River flows southwest from the Lake Oroville Dam through the cityCity and then runs to the west and parallel to Highway 70 south of the cityCity. The terrain and flora surrounding Oroville is diverse, with the North Table Mountain Ecological Reserve and surrounding buttes to the north, the Sierra Mountain foothills immediately to the east, orchards to the south, and rice farms and other agriculture to the west.

Most of Oroville is in the Wildland Urban Interface, which is defined as residentially developed areas that are adjacent to vegetation subject to wildfire. CalFire has mapped fire hazard zones throughout California. The Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map for the Oroville shows Moderate and High Fire Hazard Severity Zones bordering the north and east sides of the cityCity, with some High Fire Hazard Severity Zones extending into eastern portions of the cityCity. (CalFire Wildland Urban Interface Map, CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zones Maps) There are some air and noise pollution impacts to parts of Oroville from Highway 70, which runs north to south along the west edge of the cityCity. There are very few residential neighborhoods adjacent to Highway 70, however.

According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), significant areas within Oroville are in 100-year flood plain zones. These flood zones include areas on either side of the Feather River that flows through the cityCity, which are Zone A Special Flood Hazard Areas. These areas are free of residential structures and consist of open space and parks. About a quarter of the urbanized area of the cityCity are within Zone X Flood Hazard Areas. This flood hazard zone includes the northern part of the historic cityCity center, extending to the western half of the historic cityCity center parallel to the Feather River, and south parallel and to the east of the Feather River. There are also three pockets of Zone A Special Flood Hazard Areas on the east side of the cityCity, and one pocket of Zone A Special Flood Hazard Area on the south side of the cityCity. FEMA revaluates flood zones as needed and floodplain designations may change in the future with changing conditions.

The National Wetland Inventory shows wetlands bordering the Feather River in areas outside urban development. Most of these wetlands are classified as Riverine System, with smaller portions classified as Palustrine System. There are also a few narrow Riverine System wetland areas extending from the center of the cityCity to the eastern Sierra foothills, following along natural creek beds and channels that have intermittent flowing water. 739
Item 11.
221
All of the sites within the Very-Low and Low IncomeLow-Income Sites Inventory have completed environmental review for the proposed projects. The environmental reviews concluded that there are not any environmental constraints that will impede the projects to develop as proposed.

With regard to the Moderate IncomeModerate-Income Sites Inventory, below is a description of environmental constraints for the two sites listed.
031-100-008— This parcel is on an elevated flat plateau overlooking the Feather River, with adequate space for 57 apartment, condo, or townhome units. The development will avoid oak tree removal to the extent possible, and where necessary, will provide oak tree replacement.
031-100-001— Adjacent to 031-100-008, the parcel has similar site features, but with more slopes. There is adequate buildable space on the parcel for 20 apartment, condo, or townhome units that will complement the adjacent site.

With regard to the Above-Moderate Income Sites Inventory, below is a description of environmental constraints for the three sites listed.
031-100-024— About half of the site (4 acres) is developable and above the river’s floodplain. There is adequate developable land to build the proposed number of units. 031-100-025— Previously approved as part of Riverview Subdivision (TSM 05-04), which included a CEQA and development review approval.
031-020-043— Previously approved for a 197-unit single-family Nelson 56 Subdivision (TSM 05-11), which included a CEQA and development review approval. The parcel is not in a 100- year flood zone since it is in FEMA Zone X. However, there are 16 acres of drainage area on the parcel and the development plan avoids construction of the 197 units and related improvements in that area.

Infrastructure Capacitycity
After conducting an assessment of the Sites Inventory above and infrastructure needs, it was determined that the CityCity of Oroville has adequate infrastructure to support the development of the new residential units included in the Sites Inventory. More information about infrastructure and capacitycapacity is described below.

Water
740
Item 11.
222
The CityCity of Oroville is served by four different water utilities: South Feather Water and Power (SFWPA) serves the eastern and far south parts of the cityCity; CalWater serves the western part of the cityCity; the Thermalito Water and Sewer District (TWSD) serves the northern part of the cityCity; and the Lake Oroville Area Public Utilities District (LOAPUD) serves small portions of the cityCity on the south and southeast. Public water systems in California are regulated by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Drinking Water. Water Management Plans are required to be completed and adopted by water utilities every five years, per California Water Code Section I, Part 2.55 and Part 2.6. Water network descriptions for the two major water suppliers for Oroville, SFWPA and CalWater, are summarized below.

SFWPA adopted a 2020 Urban Water Management Plan and a Water Shortage Contingency Plan in July 2021. The agency provides water to just over 6,800 households that use approximately 1,437 acre-feet of water annually. WFWPA maintains a service area of over 31,000 acres supplied by 141 miles of pipeline, andpipeline and delivers irrigation water seasonally to over 500 customers via 110 miles of canals. Domestic water facilities consist of two treatment plants and four storage facilities that are sourced by the South Fork of the Feather River and Slate Creek, a tributary to the North Fork Yuba River, including reservoirs with a combined storage of 164,577 acre-feet. SFWPA participated in the development of the Northern Sacramento Integrated Regional Water Plan, which covers Butte CountyButte County, and coordinates plans with the Butte CountyButte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation. SFWPA does not have any current plans for major system upgrades or expansions.

CalWater adopted a 2020 Urban Water Management Plan in June 2021. CalWater’sCal Water’s Oroville District operates a water system serving an estimated 10,849 residents with 3,547 municipal connections that use approximately 2,753 acre-feet of water annually. The system includes two storage tanks, six booster pumps, and 52 miles of pipeline supplied by the west branch of the Feather River and three groundwater wells. Supplemental water from the Thermalito Irrigation District is accessed when needed. CalWater participated in the development of the Northern Sacramento Integrated Regional Water Plan, which covers Butte CountyButte County, and coordinates plans with the Butte CountyButte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation. CalWater does not have any current plans for major system upgrades or expansions.

Sewer
The CityCity of Oroville Public Works Department operates a sanitary sewer collection system consisting of over 91 miles of main lines and seven lift stations that convey wastewater to a treatment plant owned and operated by the Sewerage Commission- Oroville Region, which is a joint powers authority that includes the TWSD and LOAPUD. Wastewater flow ranges from

0.85 million gallons per day (mgd) minimum dry weather flow to 11.27 mgd peak wet weather flow. The CityCity adopted a Sewer System Management Plan in October 2009, in 741
Item 11.
223
compliance with the Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirement. This plan describes management activities to effectively manage wastewater and reduce sanitary sewer overflows. A Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update was adopted in January 2013 that evaluates the capacitycapacity of the existing wastewater collection system, proposes improvements to enhance system reliability and accommodate future growth, and calculate appropriate development impact and sewer service fees to support the Capital Improvement Program.

The Capital Improvement Plan includes main line extensions and a new pump station that will cost a combined $40.4 million.

Storm Drainage
The CityCity of Oroville Public Works Department manages the cityCity’s storm drainage system, which consists of approximately 60 miles of drainage pipes and trenches and six regional detention basins. The CityCity’s storm water infrastructure is engineered to protect residents from an extreme hydrologic event, also known as a 100-year storm event. The CityCity’s storm drain plans and management are regulated by the California State Water Resources Control Board and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Storm Water Regulations. Planning and building permits require review by the CityCity’s Public Works Department for storm drainage impacts and management, and compliance with the CityCity’s Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). An adequately funded storm drainage infrastructure and compliance with state and federal regulations is particularly critical for the CityCity of Oroville due to proximity to the Lake Oroville Dam, Feather River, and a number of identified 100-year floodplain areas, as described in the Environmental Constraints section above.

Dry Utilities
Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) provides gas and electricitycity service to Oroville residents and businesses. The CityCity coordinates with dry utility providers, including electricitycity, gas, telephone, and cable, during community master planning efforts and during the CityCity’s project entitlement and building permit process. Refuse service is provided by Recology.

Telephone and DSL internet services are offered by AT&T and available to 79.76% of residents. Cable internet provided by Comcast is available to 75.60% of residents. Other companies provide internet access via fixed wireless systems, including Digitalpath.net, AT&T, Succeed.net, and CCI Wireless. These internet providers cover 98.69% of the cityCity (BestNeighborhood).
742
Item 11.
224
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING: SITE INVENTORY
In this section, sites included in the Site Inventory are identified, mapped, and evaluated on their capacitycapacity to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing. For the purposes of this analysis, the evaluation of fair housing includes patterns and trends of segregation and integration, racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs including displacement risk. The analysis includes data on the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and local data and knowledge, as well as a summary of conclusions and approach to policies and programs.

Isolation of RHNA
“Figures 38, 38.1, 38.2: CityCity of Oroville, Site Inventory Map” depicts nine eight8 sites which the CityCity has identified for future development to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) requirements. The map represents approximate locations. The sites identified in this analysis have the potential to bring 262 221 units for very low-income and low-income households, 77 units for moderate income households, and 390 units for above moderate households, which surpasses the RHNA by 104 63 units. There are 4485 surplus units for low and very low-income households, 4 surplus units for moderate income households, and 15 surplus units zoned for moderate and above moderate-income households.

The sites were chosen based on availability, zoning, and access to infrastructure. Figure 38: Site Inventory Map, 2022, depicts the location of the lower income sites (red), moderate income sites (yellow), and above moderate income sites (green) in the CityCity. The low income and very low incomelow-income sites are numbered 1-3, the moderate income sites are numbered 1-2, and the above moderate income sites are numbered 1-3.

Three of the fourTwo of the three lower income sites are located in close proximity to one another at the CityCity’s center, which is encompassed by Census Tract 28. The fourth third lower income site is located at the north end of Census Tract 30.02, just south of the CityCity’s center. Areas that are zoned for multi-family development are located near the cityCity center, which has limited land for development, better access to infrastructure, and is more feasible for affordable housing development. This encourages higher density developments, such as apartments, which can naturally concentrate residents with low-incomes or experiencing poverty in these areas.

The two moderate income sites are is located adjacent to one another in Census Tract 37, just above the CityCity’s center.

The threetwo above-moderate income sites are located in Census Tracts 25 and 29. The aboveTwo of the above moderate incomemoderate-income sites are located adjacent to one another in Census Tract 25, which is just slightly north of the downtown area. The other above 743
Item 11.
225
moderate incomemoderate-incomesiteislocated in Census Tract 29, whichis at the north end of the CityCity.The capacitycapacityof these sites to affirmatively further fair housing is analyzed in the Improved Conditions and Exacerbated Conditions sections.
744
Item 11.
226
Figure 38: Site Inventory Map, 2022 Formatted: Centered 745
Item 11.
227
746
Item 11.
228
Improved Conditions
This section explores how the sites identified better integrates the community with a consideration for historical patterns and trends, number of existing households, and the impacts on patterns of socio-economic or racial/ethnic concentrations.

Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty
As described in the Assessment of Fair Housing, there are no HUD (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development) defined racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAP) in the CityCity of Oroville. Racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty rely on a racial or ethnic concentration threshold and a poverty test. A racially or ethnically concentrated area of poverty is defined as an area that: 1) has a non-white population of 50% or more for urban areas and 20% for rural areas, and 2) 40% or more of the population lives below the poverty line (or those where the poverty rate is three times the average poverty rate of the metropolitan area). In addition, there are no racially concentrated areas of affluence, which are areas that have high concentrations of affluent, white residents. All census tracts within the CityCity have a median income below the State’s average.

Segregation and Integration
This considers whether all the sites will receive the same amenities, whether the units are any combination of affordable, market-rate, rental, for-sale, multi-family, or singlefamily. It analyzes the opportunities for all income levels to reside in an area of new growth to improve fair housing choice and equitable access to opportunity.

One Two of the above-moderate sites areis located in Census Tract 25, which is an area of high segregation and poverty, increased diversity, and has the most public housing buildings in the entire CityCity. The two moderate income sites areis located in Census Tract 37, which is an area with high segregation and poverty and an area with a high concentration of single mother households. Attracting moderate and above-moderate income residents to these areas improves integration of residents from various income backgrounds. It also improves the likelihood of integrating residents with different household characteristics and racial or ethnic backgrounds, as more affluent residents tend to be White, married-couple households. Residents who are low-income or are experiencing poverty can benefit from increased access to resources and services that is associated with new development.
747
Item 11.
229
Three Two of the low and very low-income sites are in Census Tract 28, which is also an area of high segregation and poverty. One site is located in Census Tract 30.02. Although this attracts low-income residents to the area, both Census Tract 28 and Census Tract

30.02 have been identified as priority areas for investment. Because the region lacks adequate housing and resources, the introduction of new housing stock to the region will likely have a positive effect.

Access to Opportunity
The location of sites in relation to educational opportunity, environmental score, economic opportunity, and transportation is analyzed below.

As mentioned, described in the Assessment of Fair Housing, “Figure 22: CityCity of Oroville, Access to Opportunity Map, 2021” depicts that nearly all areas of the CityCity are considered areas with low access to resources or areas experiencing high segregation and poverty, with the exception of Block Group 6 in Census Tract 27. The proposed moderate and above moderate incomemoderate-income sites are located in Census Tract 25, 29, and 37, which would both benefit from investment. Attracting moderate and above moderate residents to low resource areas increases access to resources and investment in communities that need them the most. Areas of affluence tend to have higher educational outcomes. This could potentially increase the educational outcomes in Census Tract 25, 29, and 37.

The analysis of Access to Transportation, described in the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing section, concluded that there are no unmet transit needs that are reasonable to meet. Furthermore, because the low income and very low incomelow-income sites are concentrated in the CityCity’s center, low-income residents will benefit the best access to transit.

Exacerbated Conditions
This section explores how the sites identified further segregates the community with a consideration for historical patterns and trends, number of existing households, and the impacts on patterns of socio-economic or racial/ethnic concentrations.

Disproportionate Housing Needs and Displacement Risk
748
Item 11.
230
Both quantitative and qualitative data indicate that there is a significant population of very-lowincome residents and a small population of high-income residents. Approximately 50% of households earn less than 35,000 and 18% of households earn more than $75,000, which is greater than the area median income ($70,700). Lastly, about 60% of households have two or fewer persons. Most residents are overpaying and areas to the northwest and southeast of Oroville experience significant overcrowding. Anecdotally, South Oroville is known to be an area that experiences substandard housing conditions. Findings from the Assessment of Fair Housing indicate that 70% of residents who experience 1 of 4 Housing Problems or 1 of 4 Severe Housing Problems are renters and that trend is worsening.

As mentioned previously, 60-80% of the units in Census Tract 28 are renter-occupied units, which indicates that this neighborhood has a high concentration of rental units and more than 80% of renters are overpaying. In Census Tract 30.02, 40-60% of units are renteroccupiedoccupied, and 60-80% of residents are overpaying. The CityCity should consider developing future, multi-family housing developments outside the CityCity’s center and redirect its effort to build owner-occupied housing in this region if deemed feasible. However, the moderate incomemoderate-income sites areis located in Census Tract 37, where more than 80% of renters are overpaying. Attracting moderate income residents to this area will help encourage income diversity and current residents will benefit from improved access to resources.

The CityCity should consider identifying future lower income sites in census tracts that do not experience high segregation and poverty or overcrowding, which include Census Tracts 27, 29, and 31. Lastly, the CityCity could consider mixed-income developments to integrate residents from varying income backgrounds. However, because these affordable housing projects have the potential to bring 262 221 affordable units in census tracts where residents are historically overpaying, the benefits outweigh the costs.

Local Data and Knowledge
Interview Summaries
This section contains a summary of comments regarding housing in the CityCity collected from the interviews discussed in the Assessment of Fair Housing.

Staff from the CityCity of Oroville noted that there is a need for affordable housing and moderate and above moderate incomemoderate-income housing. Many survivors from recent fires have relocated to the CityCity but do not have a permanent place to live, placing a constraint on housing stock and availability. In addition, the CityCity noted that a substantial amount of housing units are in need of repair or rehabilitation to meet health and safety standards.
749
Item 11.
231
Staff at Youth for Change noted that there is a need for studio, one-bedroom units, and large units with multiple bedrooms to meet the need of unhoused youth in the Butte CountyButte County area. Legal Services of Northern California staff indicated that there is a need for supportive housing that provides wraparound services. In addition, there is a shortage of accessible units in the Butte CountyButte County region. Staff from Stonewall Alliance Center reported that in Butte CountyButte County there are few rental vacancies and a lack of assisted living facilities for residents with severe mental health conditions, substance use disorder, or those experiencing homelessness.

Staff from the Disability Action Center noted that in Butte CountyButte County low-income tenants could benefit from supportive services to complement housing. Staff also noted that there is a significant population of unsheltered individuals experiencing homelessness. Staff believes that local, State, and Federal administrative support in zoning and development application fees could incentivize low-income housing developments.

Interviews with staff from multiple organizations found that residents have difficulty finding housing that fits their needs and affordability, which includes one-bedroom or studio apartments and large homes with three or more bedrooms that can be shared by multiple tenants. North Valley Housing Trust noted that Northern California developers are having difficulty finding the finances or funds to get affordable housing projects off the ground.

Policies such as the competitive public bid process, costly local utility requirements, or environmental reviews are especially prohibitive for small developers.

Summary of Conclusions and Approach to Policies and Programs This section on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing in the Site Inventory focuses on improving fair housing choice and equitable access to opportunity. The low-income, very-low-income, moderate, and above moderate-income sites proposed by the CityCity surpass the RHNA requirements by 85 63 units. The surplus of housing units will help meet the needs of fire survivors who have relocated to the region. Interviews with local agencies indicate that there is a need to create housing for all income levels, including affordable housing, small onebedroom/studio units, permanent supportive housing, moderate and above moderate incomemoderate-income housing, and shelters for those experiencing homelessness.

In the future,T the CityCity will consider developing very very-low and low- income housing in areas that do not experience high segregation and poverty, such as Census Tracts 27, 29, and 31 to encourage more balanced and integrated living patterns. The CityCity should will also consider developing self-help housing or other forms of affordable, owner-occupied housing units in Census Tract 28, which has an unusually high concentration of rental units. Other approaches to improve fair housing choice and opportunity are reflected in the Goals, Policies, and Programs section.
750
Item 11.
232
The proposed sites in the Sites Inventory Analysis meet the requirements of residents in the region by providing an excess of housing units to meet the regional housing needs of each income group. In addition, new development in traditionally low-income and under-resourced areas improves access to education and jobs and will help revitalize neighborhoods.

FINANCIAL INVENTORY
State Resources
Permanent Local Housing Allocation (Formula Funds)
Government Administrator/Application Process: CityCity of Oroville/CityCity applies to HCDHCD.

Eligible Uses: A wide range, which includes but is not limited to—affordable rental housing for households below 80% AMI; affordable rental and ownership housing, including Current Status: On-going funding provided through SB2 Building Homes and Jobs Act.

Funding will fluctuate based on revenues taken in by the State.

Permanent Local Housing Allocation (Competitive Funds)
Government Administrator/Application Process: HCD/CityCity applies to HCD in partnership with developerdevelopers.

Eligible Uses: New multi-family housing or rehabilitation of existing multi-family housing that is affordable to households at 60% AMI or less; permanent or transitional rental housing for those at risk of, orof or experiencing homelessness.

Current Status: On-going funding provided through SB2 Building Homes and Jobs Act. The State issues one NOFA each year.

Government Administrator/Application Process: HCD/Developer can applyapply.

Eligible Uses: Deferred payment loan for housing developments with rents affordable to lowincome households. 751
Item 11.
233
Current Status: State funding for this program is expected to be exhausted in 2021, but2021 butmay be renewed in subsequent years through General Fund allocations and/or new bonds.

No Place Like Home (NPLH)
Government Administrator/Application Process: HCD/Counties and Developers coapplyapply.

Eligible Uses: Deferred payment loan for housing developments that target a portion of units to homeless individuals with mental illness. An operating reserve is also provided to awardees based on the number of NPLH-assisted units. In order to be eligible, counties must prepare a plan to address homelessness and commit to provide supportive services to tenants in NPLH-assisted units.

Current Status: A 2018 housing bond and revenue generated from the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funded $2 billion for this program, with funding allocated through four different NOFAs released 2018-2021. The program may be refunded through State allocations and/or a new housing bond in future years.

Affordable Housing Andand Sustainable Communities Program (AHSC) Government Administrator/Application Process: HCD/Developer applies jointly with local transportation agencyagency.

Eligible Uses: Grants for infill low-income affordable housing, and infrastructure that encourages reductions in vehicle trips and greenhouse gas emissions.

Current Status: State program funded by greenhouse cap-and-trade program. Recent revisions to regulations encourage greater participation from rural communities.

Infill Infrastructure Grant Program (IIG)
Government Administrator/Application Process: HCD/CityCity or developer appliesapplies.

Eligible Uses: Gap funding for infrastructure improvements necessary for specific residential or mixed-use infill projects.

Current Status: This is funding from Proposition 1, the Veteran’s and Affordable Housing Bond Act, therefore this funding will sunset when all bond proceeds are disbursed. The State generally issues one NOFA each year.
752
Item 11.
234

Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program (LIHTC)
Government Administrator/Application Process: California Tax Credit Allocation Committee/Developer appliesapplies.

Eligible Uses: New construction or rehabilitation of affordable housing; tax credits are purchased by investors that provide equity to projectsprojects.

Current Status: Each state receives an allocation of federal tax credits for low-income housing. The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee administers allocations to affordable housing projects through a competitive application process. Most low-income affordable projects require the use of tax credits, as it typically provides the largest amount of funding.

Tax Exempt Revenue Bond Authority
Government Administrator/Application Process: California Debt Limit Allocation Committee/Qualifying bond issuer applies on behalf of developerdeveloper.

Eligible Uses: New construction or rehabilitation of affordable housing; banks purchase bonds and make loans with below-market terms to projectsprojects.

Current Status: Each state receives an allocation of debt from the federal government with interest earnings that are exempt from federal taxes. The California Debt Limit Allocation Committee administers allocations to affordable housing projects through a competitive application process.

Federal Resources
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Government Administrator/Application Process: HCD/CityCity applies to HCD on a competitive basisbasis.

Eligible Uses: Housing— Single-Family Housing Rehabilitation, Homebuyer Assistance, Infrastructure in Support of Housing, Multi-family Housing Rehabilitation.

Community Development— Infrastructure improvements in low-income neighborhoods. 753
Item 11.
235
Current Status: The Biden Administration proposed to increase the funding for this program by 8.5%, while the Senate proposed a 20.1% increase, in the HUD Fiscal Year 2022 budget.

The Fiscal Year 2022 budget had not yet been enacted as of January 2022. HCD administers an annual Notice of Funding Availability to competitively award these federal funds across the State in alignment with its HUD Consolidated Plan.

Home Investment Partnership Program (HOME)
Government Administrator/Application Process: HCD/CityCity applies to HCD on a competitive basisbasis.

Eligible Uses: New rental affordable housing; rehabilitation of existing rental affordable housing; down payment assistance programs to promote home ownership; owner-occupied housing rehabilitation; tenant-based rental assistance to prevent homelessness.

Current Status: The Biden Administration proposed to increase the funding for this program by 37.0%, while the Senate proposed a 7.4% increase, in the HUD Fiscal Year 2022 budget.

Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV)
Government Administrator/Application Process: Housing Authority of the County of Butte (HACB), which receives HCV allocations from HUD/Tenants applyapply.

Eligible Uses: Rental assistance for low-income households Current Status: Local housing authorities receive funding for HCV (Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937) from the Federal Government. As of 2021, HACB was administering six vouchers within the CityCity of Oroville. While funding has been cut in recent years, the Biden Administration proposed to increase funding for this program by

8.3%, while the Senate proposed a 6.3% increase, in the HUD Fiscal Year 2022 budget. The Fiscal Year 2022 budget had not yet been enacted as of January 2022.

Project Based Section 8 Vouchers
754
Item 11.
236
Government Administrator/Application Process: Housing Authority of the County of Butte (HACB), which receives HCV allocations from HUD/Developers applyapply.

Eligible Uses: Rental assistance for low-income households tied to units, which can be underwritten by loans that finance housing projectsprojects.

Current Status: Housing authorities may dedicate a portion of their Housing Choice Vouchers as Project Based Vouchers. The Biden Administration proposed to increase the funding for this program by 4.4%, while the Senate proposed a 3.8% increase, in the HUD Fiscal Year 2022 budget. The Fiscal Year 2022 budget had not yet been enacted as of January 2022.

HUD VASH Vouchers
Government Administrator/Application Process: Housing Authority of the County of Butte (HACB), which receives HCV allocations from HUD/Tenants applyapply.

Eligible Uses: Rental assistance and supportive services for homeless veterans Current Status: This federally funded program is managed through a partnership between housing authorities and the U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs. Homeless veterans receive a rental subsidy from the housing authority and case management from the VA. HACB currently administers one VASH voucher in Willows. Funding for this program has been increasing in recent years with strong bipartisan support in Washington D.C.

Continuum Of Care (CoC) Programs
Government Administrator/Application Process: Butte CountyButte Countywide Homeless Continuum of Care/Lead Agency is the County of Butte, Department of Social Services, Housing and Homeless Branch
Eligible Uses: Rental subsidies, rapid re-housing, emergency shelter, homeless prevention Current Status: The Butte CountyButte Countywide Continuum of Care is currently accessing State resources available to them (Emergency Solutions Grant, Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention, Homeless Emergency Aid Program, etc.) and Federal CoC funding through HUD. Funds are passed through to service providers at the County level. The Biden Administration proposed to increase the funding for this program by 16.7%, while the Senate proposed an 8.7% increase, in the HUD Fiscal Year 2022 budget. The Fiscal Year 2022 budget had not yet been enacted as of January 2022.
755
Item 11.
237

OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENERGY CONSERVATION
As energy costs rise and nonrenewable resources are depleted, communities are utilizing energy conservation measures to offset rising costs. Typically, the use of alternative energy sources is most advantageous in new housing development. However, there are many energy-conserving measures that can be retrofitted onto older, existing housing which may conserve the ongoing use of nonrenewable fuels and reduce related costs. Low incomeLow-income families, especially seniors on fixed incomes, are most threatened, spending an average of 16.3% of their income on energy costs.

Energy Conservation programs available to residents of the CityCity of Oroville include:
 Family Electric Rates Assistance (FERA)
 California Alternate Rates for Energy Program (CARE)
 Department of Energy (DOE) Weatherization Program
 Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
 Affordable Housing for Sustainable Communities (AHSC)  Disadvantaged Communities and Single-Family Solar Homes Program (DAC-SASH)  Building Initiative for Low Emissions Development (BUILD) Family Electric Rates Assistance (FERA)
Residents can access energy, weatherization, and utility assistance through PG&E. PG&E provides a plethora of energy conservation services for residents. PG&E offers energy assistance programs for lower-income households to help community members conserve energy and reduce utility costs, which include the Family Electric Rates Assistance (FERA) and the California Alternate Rates for Energy Program (CARE). The FERA program, also administered by PG&E, offers monthly discount of 18% on electricityelectricity to households with three or more people.

Participants qualify through income guidelines.

California Alternate Rates for Energy Program (CARE)
The CARE program offers a monthly discount of 20% or more on gas and electricityelectricity to households with qualified incomes, certain nonprofit organizations, homeless shelters, hospices, and other qualified group living facilities. Participants qualify through income guidelines or if enrolled in qualified public assistance programs.
756
Item 11.
238
Department of Energy Weatherization Program
A key providers of energy conservation services is the Community Action Agency of Butte CountyButte County (CAABC). Community Action Department manages a variety of grant-funded programs, including emergency services, housing services, income and employment, and community services and development for vulnerable, low-income seniors, youth, and families.

The CAABC administers a weatherization program funded by the Department of Energy for lowincome residents, which is typically audit-driven. The weatherization upgrades must pay back in costs over the lifetime of the improvements to be permitted.

LIHEAP
The CAABC also administers LIHEAP (Low Income Homeowner Energy Assistance Program), which is a federally funded program that services the CityCity of Oroville. The program provides utility assistance, weatherization upgrades, and water heater or HVAC replacements to eligible, low-income households. The goal of the program is to assist low-income households with managing and meeting their immediate home heating and/or cooling needs and providing home weatherization upgrades. Both homeowners and renters in Butte CountyButte County are eligible to participate in this program.

Residents are typically eligible for weather-stripping, low-flow showerheads and sink aerators, thermostatic shower valves, attic insulation, replacement of standard light bulbs and fixtures with energy efficient versions, and energy education. Qualified households may also receive assistance in paying their utility costs. This may include electric, natural gas, propane, heating oil, cord wood or wood pellets. Lastly, qualified households can receive heating, cooling, or water heater replacements. There are specific emergency services for clients who have received shutoff notices from their utility provider. Energy education helps residents learn more ways to reduce monthly energy bills.

LIHEAP is designed assist low-income households that pay a high portion of their income to meet their energy needs. Residents interested in any of these services can apply here to determine their eligibility: https://www.caliheapapply.com/. Below is data on households who been serviced in the CityCity of Biggs and Oroville through LIHEAP since 2010:
 Homes weatherized between 2010 – 2019: 10761076.
 January – December 2020: 227
 Heating, Cooling, and/or Water Heater replacements made between 2010 – 2019: 321  January – December 2020: 55
757
Item 11.
239
 Utility Assistance for help with electric bills between 2010 – 2019: 8753  Number of payments made as of June 2021: 1417
Residents and community members can learn more about energy services administered by CAABC on their website at https://www.buttecaa.com/energy-environmental-services/ Affordable Housing for Sustainable Communities (AHSC)
Administered by the Strategic Growth Council and implemented by the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), the AHSC Program funds land-use, housing, transportation, and land preservation projects to support infill and compact development that reduce greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions. Funding for the AHSC Program is provided from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), an account established to receive Cap-and-Trade auction proceeds.

Disadvantaged Communities and Single-family Solar Homes Program (DAC-SASH) AC-SASH is a ratepayer-funded program through the California Public Utilities Commission that provides up-front rebates to help low-income homeowners access the benefits of solar power.

The DAC-SASH low-income solar program runs through 2030 in PG&E utility territory. In Orland, communities identified as "DACs" or disadvantaged communities in the state's CES 4.0 map will be eligible for the solar program based on geography. Households must still qualify based on income, owner occupancy and be connected to PG&E 's electric grid.

Under the original SASH fund, GRID Alternative installed systems on over 5,200 homes in California. GRID is a leading voice in low-income solar policy and one of the nation’s largest nonprofit solar installer, serving families throughout California, Colorado, the Mid-Atlantic region, and tribal communities nationwide. GRID also offers single-family, multifamily and community solar installation services, project development and technical assistance, along with multiple levels of workforce development and service-learning opportunities, from volunteerism to in-depth solar training and paid internships. GRID’s mission is to build community-powered solutions to advance economic and environmental justice through renewable energy.

DAC-SASH goals include:
 Maximize financial savings for low-income households in economically and environmentallyand environmentally disadvantaged communities. 758
Item 11.
240
 Enhance long-term economic self-sufficiency in low-income communities by providing community members with access to green jobs training and solar employment opportunities.
 Provide education on energy efficiency and existing programs that can provide further benefits to families.

Building Initiative for Low Emissions Development (BUILD) Authorized by State of California Senate Bill 1477, the Building Initiative for Low-Emissions Development (BUILD) Program will provide incentives for the deployment of near-zero emissions building technologies in low-income residential buildings emissions significantly beyond what otherwise would be expected to result from the implementation of the prescriptive standards described in Part 6 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (California Energy Code).

The BUILD Program is currently under development, with program goals to raise awareness of near-zero-emission building technologies and applications, test program and policy designs, and gain practical implementation experience and knowledge. The program is designed to be a market transformation program. Through outreach, technical support, and education, BUILD hopes to promote all electric building decarbonization. The first two years of the program is expected to be focused on affordable housing. In the CityCity of Orland, there may be incentive funding for disadvantaged communities. BUILD program guidelines will be finalized by the Fall 2021 and launched be the end of 2021.
759
Item 11.
241
CHAPTER 6: CONTRAINTS ANALYSIS
This section analyzes how governmental policies and procedures, and market factors, may constrain housing development in Oroville. It also includes an assessment of the extent to which identified constraints impact residential production. Some of these constraints are addressed by Goals, Policies and Actions in the Chapter 3 Housing Program.

GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
State Housing Element Law requires that local governments facilitate and promote the provision of housing affordable for all economic segments of the community. While the CityCity does not develop or build housing, local government can establish a regulatory framework that is conducive to the production of housing. On the other hand, some governmental regulations can increase the cost of development and thus constrain the availability of affordable housing.

Governmental constraints can increase costs by adding specific expenses to building costs, such as street improvements or impact fees, or by increasing development timelines and thereby increasing the builder’s incidental costs such as interest payments, property holding costs, or labor. Efforts to modify processes to alleviate constraints may require collaboration with the County of Butte because the County administers building permits for residential projects proposed within the CityCity of Oroville jurisdiction. The CityCity provides information about zoning code, development standards and fees on its website in conformance with Government Code 65940.1(a)(1).

Governmental constraints can be classified in three basic categories: those which pose regulation; those which add direct costs; and those which result in time delays. Regulations and time delays result in increased costs, but they cannot be calculated as easily as direct costs such as fees. The most significant factors falling within the influence of local government are:
 Land use controls
 Site improvement requirements
 Building codes and their enforcement
 Fees and exactions
 Permit processing procedures
 Accommodations for persons with disabilities
760
Item 11.
242
General Plan
The CityCity of Oroville adopted its 2030 General Plan in March 2015. The General Plan describes how the CityCity has regulatory authority over land use within its jurisdictional boundaries, and is also permitted by law to establish future land use designations for areas outside its jurisdictional boundaries that are within its Sphere of Influence (SOI). The General Plan illustrates an abundance of vacant land within the CityCity limits and within the SOI that is zoned for residential uses. Other relevant plans that guide the CityCity of Oroville’s development include the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, the Riverfront Master Plan, and the Community of South Oroville Redevelopment/Annexation Feasibility Study, which examines issues around annexing the South Oroville area that was outside the cityCity boundaries as of the adoption of the General Plan. The document identifies the Rio d’Orod ’Oro, Oro Bay, and unincorporated South Ophir Specific Plan Areas as potential areas for future annexation.

The General Plan also includes general plan designations for land uses. These general plan designations, and related land use controls and regulations, are described in this section. The General Plan states that within the cityCity limits there are 63 acres of land designated for High Density, 151 acres of land designated Medium High Density Residential, 105 acres designated for Medium Density, 1,952 acres designated for Medium Low Density Residential, 278 acres designated for Low Density Residential, 24 acres designated for Very Low Density and Rural Residential, and 953 acres designated for Mixed Use.

Below is a listing of the residential Land Use Designations and associated densities established in the General Plan.
 Rural Residential (RR)— 0-0.2 dwelling units/acre
 Very Low Density Residential (VLDR)— 0.2-1 dwelling units/acre  Low Density Residential (LDR)— 1-3 dwelling units/acre  Medium Low Density Residential (MLDR)— 3-6 dwelling units/acre  Medium Density Residential (MDR)— 6-14 dwelling units/acre  Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)— 14-20 dwelling units/acre  High Density Residential (HDR)— 20-30 dwelling units/acre  Mixed Use (MU)— 10-30 dwelling units/acre (up to 70 dwelling units/acre in Downtown Mixed UseMixed Use zoning designation based on provision of amenities per Policy 2.8 in the Land Use Element)
Residential and Mixed-Use Zoning Districts
As shown in “Figure 39: Residential Zoning Districts,” the CityCity of Oroville’s residential zoning districts allow for a range of housing types. Single-family dwellings are allowed by-right in all the residential zoning districts except R-3, R-4, and RP. Multi-family dwellings are allowed by-right in 761
Item 11.
243
R-2, R-3, R-4, RP, MXN, and MXC zoning districts, and in the MXD zoning district on stories above ground floor commercial uses.

Figure 39: Residential Zoning Districts
Zoning District General
Plan
Designation
Units
Per
Acre
Max. Lot
Coverage
Max.

Height
(ft.)
Min. Lot
Size (sf)
Rural residential one acre (RR-1) RR 0-0.2 10,000 sf 40 43,560 Rural residential 20,000 sf (RR-20) RR 0-0.2 40% 40 20,000 Rural residential 10,000 s (RR-10) RR 0-0.2 40% 35 10,000 Large-lot residential (RL) LDR 1-3 40% 30 8,000
Single-family residential (R-1) MLDR 3-6 50% 30 5,000
Medium-density residential (R-2) MDR 6-14 60% 35 3,000
High-density residential (R-3) MHDR 14-20 65% 45 2,200
Urban-density residential (R-4) HDR 20-30 70% 50 2,000
High-density residential/professional (RP) MU 10-30 65% 45 2,200 Downtown Mixed-Use (MXD) MU 10-70 2.0-3.5
FAR*
55 N/A
Neighborhood Mixed-Use (MXN) MU 10-30 1.0 FAR 40 N/A
Corridor Mixed-Use (MXC) MU 10-30 1.0 FAR 60 N/A
Source: CityCity of Oroville Municipal Code, Chapter 17.28 and 17.34 The Residential Use Table for the Residential Zoning Districts is shown in Figure 39.1 below. The symbols used in Tables 39.1-39.3 have the following meanings:

P Permitted use, zoning clearance required
762
Item 11.
244
A Administrative permit required
UP Use permit required
S See use-specific regulations for permit requirement
Blank Use not allowed
Figure 39.1: Residential Zoning Districts Use Table
Residential Use Permit Requirement For Zone
RL R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 RP
Boardinghouse UP UP UP
Duplex P P P P
Emergency shelter P P
Mobile home park UP UP UP UP UP UP
Multiple-family dwellings P P P P
Residential care facility- 6 units or fewer P P P P P P Residential care facility- 7 units and more UP UP
Second dwelling unit AP AP AP AP AP AP
Single-family dwelling, attached P P P P
Single-family dwelling, detached P P P
Single-family manufactured on permanent
foundation
P P P
Single-room occupancy UP UP
Transitional housing UP UP
Source: CityCity of Oroville Municipal Code
763
Item 11.
245
The Residential Use Table for the Mixed Use Zoning Districts is shown in Figure 39.2 below.

Mixed-use development is defined as including nonresidential uses on the ground floor of each street frontage while also including residential uses for up to 75% of the allowed floor area ratio, and is permitted by right in all Mixed Use Zoning Districts. Residential uses in the Downtown Mixed Use district are permitted only on upper stories above ground floor commercial uses. Also note that for Downtown Mixed-Use (MXD), the density can be up to 70 units per acre and up to

3.5 Floor Area Ratio based on the provision of amenities such as improving wayfinding in the Downtown; providing pedestrian, bicycle, or transit amenities; providing arts or cultural amenities; or incorporating programs to reduce commute trips, prevent crime, or improve sustainability.

Figure 39.2: Mixed Use Zoning Districts Residential Use Table Residential Use

MXD MXN MXC
Caretaker residence UP UP
Mixed-use development P P P
Multiple-family dwellings P(P (1) P P
Residential care facility- 6 units or fewer P P P
Residential care facility- 7 units or more UP UP
Note: (1) Residential uses permitted only on upper stories above ground floor commercial uses.

Source: CityCity of Oroville Municipal Code
Commercial Zoning Districts
Commercial Zoning Districts include the following:

CN— Neighborhood commercial
C-1— Limited commercial
C-2— Intensive commercial
CH— Highway commercial corridor
CLM— Commercial/light manufacturing
OF— Office
Formatted: Space After: 0.5 line
Formatted: Space After: 0 pt
764
Item 11.
246
The Residential Use Table for the Commercial Zoning Districts is shown in Figure 39.3 below.

Residential Use
CN C-1 C-2 CH CLM OF
Caretaker residence UP UP UP UP UP
Residential care facility- 6 units or fewer P P P P P
Residential care facility- 7 units or more
Overlay Zones
The Planned development overlay district (PD-O) encourages maximum flexibility in site planning relating to design, clustering of development, and protecting environmental resources, while encouraging: innovation and development of affordable housing, particularly on properties with environmental constraints, natural resources, or other topographical, geographical, or public improvement and service-related constraints; protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare of the cityCity; and ensuring consistency with the General Plan, applicable Specific Plans, and any design guidelines adopted by the CityCity Council. Development standards may be adjusted or modified in this overlay district where necessary and justifiable, and in compliance with minimum fire safety standards, with exception of the maximum density and Floor Area Ratio (FAR).

Density Bonus
California’s Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915) allows developers to request density bonuses and concessions based on the percentage of affordable units in the proposed project. Before 2021, the maximum density bonus was 35% for housing projects, which included either 11% Very Low-income units, 20% lower income units, or 40% moderate income units. Recent legislation (AB 2345) increased the top range of the density bonus to 50% for housing projects with 15% Very Low-Income units, 24% lower income units, or 44% ModerateIncome units. AB 2345 does not modify the 80% density bonus required to be provided to 100% affordable projects. In addition to the density bonuses, projects meeting the affordability thresholds described above are entitled to one or more incentives or concessions, which could include exceptions to building standards such as setbacks or building coverage ratios. In addition, AB 2345 amends parking ratios for qualifying projects to one space per studio or one-bedroom 765
Item 11.
247
unit, 1.5 spaces per two-bedroom or three-bedroom unit, and 2.5 spaces per four-bedroom unit.

Further reductions in parking standards are allowed for projects within a half-mile radius of a major transit stop, and for senior housing with paratransit service or access to a bus route that operates at least eight times per day.

The CityCity of Oroville Density Bonus provision is located in Chapter 17.24 of the Municipal Code. Section 17.24.010 states that in the event of any conflict between Chapter 17.24 and Section 65915 of the State Government Code, the provisions of the Government Code shall apply.

Parking Requirements
The CityCity’s parking standards for residential development are found in Section 17.12.070 of the Municipal Code. Parking requirements are based on the number of units, bedrooms, or beds, depending on the housing type, as outlined below. For residential development, the off-street parking requirements are listed below:
 Single-family dwellings — 2 spaces per unit
 Duplex — 2 spaces per unit
 Triplex— 1 space for one bedroom units; 1.5 spaces for two or more bedroom units  Multi-family— 1 space for studios and one-bedrooms; 2 spaces for two or more bedroom units if <14 units/acre; 1.5 spaces for two or more bedroom units if >= 14 units/acre; 1 guest space per 4 units
 Boardinghouses — 1 space per bedroom
 Caretaker dwelling unit — 1 space per unit
 Emergency shelter — 1 space per 10 adult beds
 Residential care facility for 6 persons or fewer— same as requirements for applicable type of dwelling unit
 Residential care facility for 7 persons or more — 1 space per 3 beds  Second dwelling unit — 1 space per unit
Required Setbacks
For the RR-1, RR-20, and RR-10 zoning districts, minimum front and rear setbacks are 20 feet, and minimum side setbacks are 10 feet. For the RL zoning district, minimum front and rear setbacks are 20 feet, and minimum side setbacks are 5 feet or 10 feet along any street frontage.

For the R-1 zoning district, the minimum front setbacks are 15 feet and 20 feet for garages, 766
Item 11.
248
minimum rear setbacks are 20 feet, and minimum side setbacks are 5 feet or 10 feet along any street frontage. For the R-2, R-3, R-4, and RP zoning districts, the minimum front setbacks are 10 feet and 20 feet for garages, minimum rear setbacks are 20 feet, and minimum side setbacks are 5 feet or 10 feet along any street frontage. For the MXD zoning district, the minimum front setback is 0 feetfeet, and the maximum front setback is 5 feet, the minimum rear setback is 10 feet, and the minimum side setback is 10 feet if adjacent to a residential zone or 0 feet if adjacent to other uses. For the MXN and MXC zoning districts, there are no setback requirements unless adjacent to residential uses, in which case the minimum front setback is the same as for the adjacent residential zoning district, the minimum rear setback is 20 feet, and the minimum side setback is 10 feet.

Site Coverage Ratio and Floor Area Ratio
Site Coverage is a ratio of the building footprint square footage to lot square footage. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is the ratio of total building square footage to lot square footage. For example, a twostory building that covers the entire lot area would have a 2.0 FAR. For Oroville, site coverage is applied to residential zoning districts, with a maximum site coverage ratio of 40% to 70%, and FAR is applied to mixed-use zoning districts, with a maximum FAR of 1.0 to 3.5.

Growth Controls
The CityCity does not have any growth controls or caps on the number of units that can be built over a designated period of time, in conformance with SB 330. The 2030 General Plan, municipal code, and design guidelines adequately support community character and public safety. CityCity expansions through annexations must be reviewed and approved by the Butte CountyButte County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo), which is a countywide commission established by the State of California to ensure the orderly formation of local government agencies, the preservation of agricultural lands and open space, limitation of urban sprawl, and efficiency in local government services. The CityCity does not have any inclusionary requirements. The CityCity is in compliance with the Housing Accountability Act.

Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types
Zoning codes should provide adequate flexibility for the development of a variety of housing types that meet the range of needs documented in the Chapter 4 Needs Assessment. These housing types help meet residents’ needs according to income, age, current housing status, 767
Item 11.
249
household size, and employment. Below is a description of how the CityCity of Oroville zoning code accommodates each housing type listed below and where amendments to the zoning code are needed to comply with Government Code Section 65583(a)(4), (c)(1), and subdivision 65583.2(c).

Multifamily Rental Housing— allowed by-right (without discretionary permit review) in the R2, R-3, R-4, RP, MXN, and in the MXD zoning district on stories above ground floor commercial uses. Incentives to allow greater densities, exceptions to development standards, and design flexibility are provided through the PD-O Overlay and the Density Bonus. Muni Code Section 17.040.060 defines a "family" as a "household" and "household" is defined as: "Household. One or more persons, whether or not related by blood, marriage or adoption, sharing a dwelling unit in a living arrangement usually characterized by sharing living expenses, such as rent or mortgage payments, food costs and utilities, as well as maintaining a single lease or rental agreement for all members of the household and other similar characteristics indicative of a single household." This definition does not cause a constraint to housing development since this definition of “Family” is not restricted beyond persons sharing a housing unit (i.e. requirements that the persons are related by blood or marriage)This definition in the Muni Code will be revised to remove “as well as maintaining a single lease or rental agreement for all members of the household and other similar characteristics indicative of a single household ”household” as described in Program 2.1.1..

Housing for Agricultural Employees— This housing type is not defined in the Municipal Code, nor is it identified as a permitted use for residential zoning districts. Program 2.1.5 describes how the Municipal Code will be amended to add a provision for Agricultural Worker Housing consisting of six or fewer persons is permitted as a by-right use in all residential zoning districts, in compliance with Health and Safety Code 17021.5. There are no agricultural zoning districts in Oroville that would apply to Health and Safety Code 17021.6 or 17021.8.

Low Barrier Navigation Centers— Low Barrier Navigation Centers are facilities that connect people experiencing homelessness to permanent housing through on-site services. State Law, per AB 101, requires that local government jurisdictions allow Low Barrier Navigation Centers by right in areas zoned for mixed uses and nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses if it meets specified requirements. The CityCity of Oroville Zoning Code does not include Low Barrier Navigation Center as a defined residential use. Therefore, Program

1.2.2 has been included in the Chapter 3 Housing Program to amend the zoning code in order to comply with AB 101.

Transitional Housing— Transitional housing is defined in Section 50675.2 of the Health and Safety Code as rental housing for stays of at least six months but where the units are recirculated to another program recipient after a set period. The CityCity’s Municipal Code currently includes Transitional housing in its definitions section of the CityCity Municipal Code, Section 17.04.060 consistent with Health and Safety Code Section 50675.2.

Transitional Housing is only allowed with a Conditional Use Permit in the R-3 and R-4 zoning districts. In order to comply with Health and Safety Code Section 65583, Transitional Housing 768
Item 11.
250
must be treated no differently than other residential uses and allowed by-right in all residential zoning districts. Therefore, Program 2.1.6 has been included in the Chapter 3 Housing Program to amend the zoning code in order to comply with State Law.

Supportive Housing— Supportive housing is defined by Section 50675.14 of the Health and Safety Code housing with linked on-site or off-site services with no limit on the length of stay and is occupied by a target population as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 53260 (i.e., low-income person with mental disabilities, AIDS, substance abuse or chronic health conditions, or persons whose disabilities originated before the age of 18). Services linked to supportive housing are usually focused on retaining housing, living and working in the community, and/or health improvement. The CityCity’s Municipal Code does not include Supportive Housing as a permitted use. In order to comply with Health and Safety Code Section 65583, Supportive Housing must be treated no differently than other residential uses and allowed by-right in all residential zoning districts. Therefore, Program 2.1.7 has been included in the Chapter 3 Housing Program to amend the zoning code in order to comply with State Law.

Single-Room Occupancy Units— The CityCity’s Municipal Code, Section 17.04.060 defines Single-Room Occupancy (SRO) as “Housing (consisting of single room dwelling units with a minimum size of 150 square feet) that is the primary residency off its occupant or occupants.

The unit must contain either food preparation or sanitary facilities if the project consists of new construction, conversion of non-residential space, or reconstruction. For acquisition or rehabilitation of an existing residential structure or hotel, neither food preparation nor sanitary facilities are required to be in the unit. If any unit does not contain food preparation or sanitary facilities, the building must contain those facilities in a common area shared by tenants.” SRO units are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit in the R-3 and R-4 zoning districts.

Manufactured Homes— The CityCity’s Municipal Code, Section 17.04.060, defines a Manufactured Home in accordance with Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.

Government Code 65852.3 requires that manufactured homes on foundation systems, as defined in the statute, are allowed by-right on lots zoned for conventional single-family residential dwellings. Manufactured Homes on permanent foundations are allowed by-right in all residential zoning districts except R-3, R-4, and RP. Manufactured Homes are also an allowable Second Dwelling Unit as defined in the Municipal Code.

Mobile Homes and Mobile Home Parks—As defined in the CityCity’s Municipal Code, Section

17.04.060, Mobile Home is defined in accordance with 18008 of the Health and Safety Code.

It is defined as “a structure transportable in one or more sections, designed and equipped to contain no more than two dwelling units to be used with or without a foundation system.” Mobile Home Parks are defined in the CityCity’s Municipal Code, Section 17.04.060 as “any area or premises where space or mobile homes is rented, held or rent or on which free occupancy is permitted to house trailer owners and users for the purpose of securing their trailer, but not including automobile or trailer dealerships on which unoccupied house 769
Item 11.
251
trailers are parked for inspection or sale.” Mobile home parks are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit in all residential zoning districts.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), also known as granny flats, in-law units, backyard cottages, or secondary units, are attached or detached dwelling units with complete independent living facilities that are built on the same parcel as an existing main dwelling unit. They are a flexible housing type that can be more affordable to build because they are smaller in size than the typical dwelling unit, and do not require acquisition of a separate lot and construction of new complimentary improvements such as off-street parking. On January 1, 2020, six new bills intended to promote the development of ADUs became State Law. Five of the bills limit the ability of local government to restrict the development of ADUs in a variety of ways. They also set the rules for counting ADUs in a cityCity’s Adequate Site Inventory for the purpose of meeting RHNA in the Housing Element. The sixth law, AB 671, requires local government Housing Elements to include a plan to incentivize and promote the development of ADUs at affordable rents to Very Low-, Low- or Moderate-Income households.

Second Dwelling Units are defined in Municipal Code, Section 17.04 as “an attached or detached dwelling unit that is provided as an adjunct to an existing single-family dwelling unit and that includes complete, independent living facilities, including, but not limited to, an efficiency unit as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code, or a manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.” Second dwelling units are allowed with an Administrative Permit in all residential zoning districts. Administrative permits are ministerial and can only be denied if a project does not meet the applicable development standards. Applicable development standards are outlined in Section 17.16.010 of the Municipal Code. The CityCity’s Second Dwelling Unit standards will need to be modified in order to meet the latest updates to State ADU law. Program 2.1.78 in the Chapter 3 Housing Program establishes a program for updating the CityCity’s Second Dwelling Unit section of the Municipal Code to conform with State Law. The CityCity will comply with current State ADU laws in the interim by adhering to the State ADU Handbook in the processing of ADU applications. In addition, Program 1.2.6 will develop a program that offers incentives to property owners who develop ADUs that offer affordable rents for very-low, low-, and moderate-income households, with recorded regulatory restrictions on rents.

Emergency Shelters
770
Item 11.
252
California Health and Safety Code (Section 50801) defines an emergency shelter as “housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of six months or less by a homeless person.” In compliance with Government Code Section 65583(a)(4), emergency shelters are allowed by-right in the R-3 and R-4 zoning districts. There are currently two Emergency Shelters in Oroville.

AB 139 requires that local governments use their most recent Point-In-Time Homeless Census to determine whether there is adequate capacitycapacity in Zoning Districts where emergency shelters are permitted by-right. If adequate capacitycapacity is not available in these Zoning Districts, the jurisdiction must allow emergency shelters by-right in another Zoning District in order to provide adequate capacitycapacity to meet the need. The 2019 Point-In-Time Homeless Census counted 415 individuals experiencing homelessness in Oroville. The 2030 General Plan estimated as of 2015 that there were about 1,635 acres of vacant residential land in the Oroville.

Approximately 8.3% of the CityCity’s residential land has High Density and Medium High Density Residential Land Use Designations that correspond with the R-3 and R-4 zoning districts.

Applying the 8.3% share of R-3 and R-4 zoned land to the 1,635 vacant acres yields 136 acres.

Based on the size of other emergency shelter improvements and land, it is estimated that two 108-bed shelters would conservatively require about four acres each, for a total of eight acres. If it is assumed that all 415 individuals counted in the 2019 Point-In-Time Homeless Census were served in two emergency shelters in Oroville, there would be more than adequate space to shelter them within the vacant 136 acres of the R-3 and R-4 zoning districts. As emergency shelters are allowed by- right in these two zones with more than adequate capacitycity, CityCity of Oroville regulations in the R-3 and R-4 zoning districts are the same as would apply to multifamily housing and are not a constraint to the development emergency shelters. All emergency shelter permit reviews are subject to development standards outlined in Municipal Code 17.16.210, which ensures adequate care and safety of guests and staff. The standards include: minimum 50 gross feet of personal living space; written management plan approved by the Zoning Administrator; no two emergency shelters within 300 feet from each other; occupancy limited to six months during any 12 consecutive month period; full-time on-site management staff; on-site security; and adequate refuse collection.

AB 139 also requires local governments to ensure that emergency shelter parking standards do not require any parking spaces beyond what is necessary for staff that work at the shelter.

Program 2.1.9 of the Chapter 3 Housing Program describes how the CityCity will amend its parking standards in order to comply with AB 139.

Extremely Low-Income Households
As described in Chapter 4, there are a large number of Extremely Low-Income households in Oroville that have a variety of housing needs. Some Extremely Low-Income households include persons experiencing homelessness or near-homelessness, persons with substance abuse problems, or persons with disabilities. Housing types that may be appropriate for this population 771
Item 11.
253
include the housing types described above, or one of the following housing types, with CityCity of Oroville zoning code permitting requirements described:

Boardinghouses— defined in Municipal Code Section 17.04.060 as a building or portion of a building, other than a temporary lodging facility such as a bed and breakfast, hotel or motel, where sleeping facilities and meals for five or more persons are provided for compensation on a regular basis, are permitted with a Conditional Use Permit in the R-3, R-4, and RP zoning districts.

Residential Care Homes— defined in Municipal Code Section 17.04.060 in accordance with Section 1502 of the Health and Safety Code, with six or fewer clients are permitted by-right in all residential zoning districts, all mixed-use zoning districts, and all commercial zoning districts except the OF zoning district. This meets the requirements of Health and Safety Code Sections 1267.8(g), and 1566.3. Residential Care Homes with seven or more clients are permitted with a Conditional Use Permit in the R-3, R-4, MXD, and MXN zoning districts.

Persons with Disabilities
As part of a governmental constraints analysis, housing elements must analyze constraints upon the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities, per California Government Code Section 65583(a)(4). The Housing Element must demonstrate local efforts to remove any such constraints and provide for reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities through programs that remove constraints.

Residential Care Homes
In accordance with the Community Care Facilities Act, the Oroville zoning code permits Residential Care Homes for six or fewer residents by-right in all residential districts.

Residential Care Homes with seven or more clients are permitted with a Conditional Use Permit in the R-3, R-4, MXD, and MXN zoning districts. The use permits are approved if they meet the following seven findings: 1) not detrimental to general health, safety or public welfare of surrounding area or the cityCity as a whole; 2) suitable location with regard to transportation facilities, public services, and other land uses in the vicinity; 3) adequate infrastructure; 4) compatible with surrounding neighborhood and not adversely affecting abutting properties; 5) site is physically suitable for the proposal; 6) provides services that are necessary or desirable for the community; and 7) permit complies with all applicable laws and regulations, including the General Plan and the CityCity Municipal Code. On February 15, 2022, the CityCity Council heard a presentation outlining this regulatory process and heard testimony from several owners/operators of supportive and other housing types, and did not find an impetus to make any changes at this time. There are no development standards that regulate the concentration or 772
Item 11.
254
spacing of residential care homes. Constructing a new facility or structurally modifying an existing facility would require a building permit.

Reasonable Accommodation
The CityCity of Oroville has a Reasonable Accommodation provision in Section 17.08.160 of its Municipal Code. It is intended to provide equal access to housing throughout the cityCity regardless of an individual’s physical or mental abilities. The provision enables a disabled person to file a request for reasonable accommodation variance from Municipal Code with the Zoning Administrator. The criteria for approval of reasonable accommodation include: (1) applies only to the specific disabled person; (2) the accommodation is subject to all uniform building codes as adopted by the cityCity; (3) changes affecting building exteriors are designed to be substantially similar to the architectural character, colors, and texture of materials of its surrounding dwelling units; and (4) the accommodation does not run with the land and constitutes a permit issued to a specific disabled person. The Zoning Administrator can approve the application without discretionary review by the Planning Commission or CityCity Council. Any application denial must be accompanied by the reasons for denial.

Building Code
Standard requirements regarding accessibility for persons with disabilities are found in California’s Title 24, which is enforced locally by the CityCity’s Community Development Department, Planning and Building Divisions. Special accessibility requirements are required for multi-family residential projects with three or more units.

Conclusion
The CityCity of Oroville General Plan policies and zoning code include a number of provisions that do not constrain development of housing or remove regulatory constraints. Adequate land is zoned for residential uses at a variety of densities, and development standards for zoning districts are adequately flexible and do not unduly increase the cost or decrease the feasibility for housing production. Emergency shelters are permitted by-right in two different residential zoning districts. Residential Care Homes housing six or fewer clients are allowed by-right in all residential zoning districts, as well as mixed-use zoning districts. 773
Item 11.
255
To further remove regulatory barriers to a variety of housing types for special needs groups, and meet Housing Element Law requirements, the CityCity must take a number of additional steps that have been incorporated into the Chapter 3 Housing Program. These include:
 allowance for the development of Low Barrier Navigation Centers by-right in areas zoned for mixed uses and nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses if they meet specified requirements (Program 1.2.2);
 revisions to Second dwelling unit standards to bring them in conformance with State Law (Program 2.1.8);).
 implement incentives to property owners who develop ADUs that offer affordable rents for very-low, low-, and moderate-income households, with recorded regulatory restrictions on rents (Program 1.2.6)
 add a provision for Agricultural Worker Housing, andHousing and allow for this type of housing of six or fewer persons to be permitted by-right use in all residential zoning districts (Program 2.1.5);).
 add a provision that treats Transitional Housing no differently than other residential uses and allow this housing type by-right in all residential zoning districts (Program 2.1.6);).  add a provision that treats Supportive Housing no differently than other residential uses and allow this housing type by-right in all residential zoning districts (Program 2.1.7); and  amend parking standards for Emergency Shelters in order to comply with AB 139 (Program 2.1.9).

Building Codes and Enforcement
Building standards are essential to ensure safe housing, although some codes and standards may constrain the development or preservation of affordable housing. The CityCity currently uses the 2019 California Building Standards Code. This includes the California Electric Code, California Mechanical Code, and the California Plumbing Code. The Code Enforcement Division in the Community Development Department addresses code violations, interfaces with the general public to address concerns regarding code issues, removes abandoned vehicles, and cleans up blighted properties. Code enforcement is handled in response to community concerns and complaints. The CityCity has a Multi-family Inspection Ordinance that identifies blighted and deteriorated housing stock and ensures the rehabilitation or elimination of housing that does not meet minimum building code and housing code standards, orstandards or is not safe to occupy.

PERMITTING PROCESS
The CityCity of Oroville has established a process for reviewing housing projects to make sure they meet the requirements of the CityCity’s Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan. Section 774
Item 11.
256

17.48 of the Municipal Code outlines the process for reviewing and approving different types of permits, which include: Use Permits (also known referred to in this document as Conditional Use Permits), Minor Use Permits, Administrative Permits, Variances, and Rezonings.

Use Permits
The Use Permit submission, review and approval process follows the steps below. 1) The application and fee for Use Permit is submitted to the Zoning Administrator that includes the components as listed in Subsection E.1 of 17.48.010. 2) The Planning Commission holds a minimum of one public hearing to review the application, with a public notice provided 10 days before the hearing. 3) The Planning Commission may grant the Use Permit only upon making all of the findings listed in below (Municipal Code Subsection E.4 of 17.48.010). The Planning Commission may attach conditions to the use permit as deemed necessary to ensure compliance with the zoning code, general plan and to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. In order to promote objectivity in making findings for approval of a Use Permit, Program 2.1.11 commits the CityCity to amend Subsection E.4 of 17.48.010 of the Municipal Code as shown with strikethroughs and additions (highlighted in yellow) below. a. The granting of the permit will not be incompatible with or detrimental to the general health, safety or public welfare of the surrounding area or of the cityCity as a whole.
b. The proposed use follows sound principles of land use by having a suitable location relative to the community as a whole, as well as to transportation facilities, public services and other land uses in the vicinity. c. Public utilities and facilities, including streets and highways, water and sanitation, are adequate to serve the proposed use or will be made adequate prior to the establishment of the proposed use.
d. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed use will be harmonious and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and will not adversely affect abutting properties.
e. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of land use being proposed.
f. The size, intensity and location of the proposed use will provide services that are necessary or desirable appropriate for the neighborhood and community as a whole.
775
Item 11.
257
3)g.The permit complies with all applicable laws and regulations, including the requirements of the general plan, of this title and of the cityCity municipal code, as well as with federal and state fair housing law; and the characteristics of future residents, including their protected class status under state fair housing law, will not be a consideration in making findings.
4) The Planning Commission written determination is issued to the applicant within 10 days of the public meeting in which the determination was made. 5) The applicant or any person dissatisfied with the Planning Commission determination may appeal to the CityCity Council within 15 days after the determination as provided in

17.56.100.
6) Within 45 days of the filing of an appeal, the CityCity Council holds a public hearing to consider the Planning Commission’s action and the appeal. The CityCity Council renders its decision within 30 days of the public hearing and provides immediate verbal notice of the decision. The CityCity Council decision is final.

Minor Use Permits
A proposed project that is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) may be reviewed as a Minor Use Permit. The Use Permit submission, review and approval process follows the steps below.
1) The application and fee for Minor Use Permit is submitted to the Zoning Administrator. 2) The Development Review Committee reviews the application. 3) The Zoning Administrator holds a public hearing to review the application, with a public notice provided 10 days before the hearing.
4) The Zoning Administrator approves or denies the application, andapplication and may attach conditions to the Minor Use Permit as deemed necessary to ensure compliance with the zoning code, general plan and to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare.
5) Applications may be referred to the Planning Commission if it is found to be necessary for further review or on appeal of the applicant or any person dissatisfied with the Zoning Administrator determination.
776
Item 11.
258
Administrative Permits
The Administrative Permit submission, review and approval process follows the steps below. 1) The application and fee for Minor Use Permit is submitted to the Zoning Administrator. 2) The Zoning Administrator approves or denies the application. 3) The Zoning Administrator’s written determination is issued to the applicant within 10 days of the determination.
4) The applicant or any person dissatisfied with the Zoning Administrator determination may appeal to the Planning Commission within 15 days after the determination as provided in 17.56.100.
5) Within 45 days of the filing of an appeal, the Planning Commission holds a public hearing to consider the Zoning Administrator’s action and the appeal. The Planning Commission renders its decision within 30 days of the public hearing and provides immediate verbal notice of the decision. If the Planning Commission’s decision is not appealed to the CityCity Council, the decision is final.

Variances
The Planning Commission has the authority to grant variances to the zoning code in order to prevent discrimination and undue hardship, and no variance is allowed to be granted that would provide a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity. A variance does not permit any land use that is not allowed in the applicable zoning district. The Variance submission, review and approval process follows the steps below.
1) The application and fee for Variance is submitted to the Planning Commission. 2) The Planning Commission holds a minimum of one public hearing to review the application, with a public notice provided 10 days before the hearing. 3) The Planning Commission may grant the Variance only upon making all of the findings listed in Subsection E.3 of 17.48.080.
4) The applicant or any person dissatisfied with the Planning Commission determination may appeal to the CityCity Council within 15 days after the determination as provided in

17.56.100.
777
Item 11.
259
5) Within 45 days of the filing of an appeal, the CityCity Council holds a public hearing to consider the Planning Commission’s action and the appeal. The CityCity Council renders its decision within 30 days of the public hearing and provides immediate verbal notice of the decision. The CityCity Council decision is final.

778
Item 11.
260
General Plan Amendment/Rezone
An amendment to the General Plan or a rezoning may be initiated by the Planning Commission, the CityCity Council, or a request by one or more property owners affected by the proposed by the amendment. The request for General Plan Amendment or Rezone follows the steps below. 1) The application and fee is filed with the Planning Commission. 2) The Planning Commission holds a minimum of one public hearing to review the proposed General Plan Amendment or Rezone, with a 10-day public notice provided, which includes a mailing of the notice to the applicant, anyone who has requested a written notice, all property owners that own property within 300 feet of the property to be rezoned.
3) After reviewing the evidence, the Planning Commission submits its recommendation in written form to the CityCity Council, which includes the reasons for the recommendation and the relationship of the proposed amendment to the adopted General Plan. 4) The CityCity Council holds a public hearing to consider the matter and the Planning Commission’s recommendation, with a public notice provided 10 days before the hearing.
5) The CityCity Council approves, modifies, or disapproves the Planning Commission recommendation upon a majority vote of the CityCity Council.

Subdivision/Parcel Maps
Subdivisions are governed by Title 16 of the Municipal Code. The Planning Commission is designated as the “advisory agency” per the Subdivision Map Act. The following process is used to review and approve subdivision map proposals. A Tentative Subdivision Map and Final Subdivision Map are required for all land subdivisions creating five or more parcels or five or more condominiums, with the following exceptions:
 The land before division contains less than five acres and each parcel created by the division abuts a maintained public street or highway and no dedications or improvements are required;required.
 Each parcel created by the division has a gross area of 20 acres or more and has approved access to a maintained public street or highway;highway.  The land consists of a parcel or parcels having approved access to a public street or highway which comprises part of a tract of land zoned for industrial or commercial development, and which has the approval of the CityCity Council as to street alignments and widths;widths.
779
Item 11.
261
 Each parcel created by the division has a gross area of 40 acres or more; or  The land is to be subdivided solely for biotic and wildlife purposes, pursuant to Section 66418.2 of the Government Code.

The following steps are followed for reviewing and approving subdivision map proposals. 1) The applicant files a Tentative Map with the Zoning Administrator in accordance with Municipal Code Section 16.12.020.
2) The Zoning Administrator reviews the application and notifies the applicant of whether it is complete or incomplete within 30 days from the date of submission. 3) Within 5 days after the Tentative Map is deemed complete, the Zoning Administrator sends the Tentative Map to each agency that is entitled to review the map, as provided in Section 16.12.020.
4) Within 15 days of receiving the Tentative Map, each agency may submit recommendations to the Zoning Administrator for consideration before making a decision on the Tentative Map.
5) The CityCity Engineer prepares a written report to the Planning Commission on the Tentative Subdivision Map, which shall consider the relationship of the Tentative Map to the zoning code, other cityCity ordinances, the General Plan and applicable Specific Plans, and comments from other CityCity departments and public agencies. The report recommends conditions to be placed on the Tentative Map. The report is provided to the applicant at least 5 working days prior to any hearing or action on the Tentative Map. 6) The Planning Commission holds a public hearing to review the Tentative Map within 30 calendar days after the application has been deemed complete and the CityCity has certified the project’s CEQA review and determination, with a public notice provided 10 days before the hearing. The Planning Commission reviews the submitted Tentative Map, the Zoning Administrator report, and any available recommendations from public agencies and other interested parties.
7) The Planning Commission approves as submitted by the applicant, approves with conditions, or disapproves the Tentative Map. Grounds for disapproval are laid out in subsection F. of 16.12.020. The Planning Commission’s action is final unless appealed to the CityCity Council as provided in Section 16.04.060. The Tentative Map is valid for 36 months after approval.
8) At any time before the expiration of an approved Tentative Map, the applicant presents a Final Map to the Zoning Administrator in accordance with Section 16.12.030. 780
Item 11.
262
9) The CityCity Engineer reviews the Final Map, and if in compliance with code, it is signed by all parties required by the Subdivision Map Act.
10) The Zoning Administrator reviews and approves or disapproves the Final Map. The Zoning Administrator may not deny approval of if the Final Map is consistent with the previously approved Tentative Map. Within 15 days of the Zoning Administrator action, the applicant may appeal to the CityCity Council as provided in Section 16.04.060. 11) Upon final approval, the Final Map is sent by the CityCity Clerk to the County Recorder for recording as specified in Sections 66464 and 66468 of the Government Code.

Boundary Line Modification/Minor Land Division
A request for boundary line modification or minor land division must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator in accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 16.32 After review of the application, the Zoning Administrator approves or disapproves the lot line adjustment pursuant to California Government Code Section 66412(d). The Zoning Administrator decision may be appealed by the applicant to the CityCity Council as provided in Section 16.04.060.

Development Review
The purpose of Development Review is to allow the Development Review Committee (DRC) to review all discretionary development applications, such as General Plan Amendments, Rezones, Subdivision Maps, Conditional Use Permits, Variances, etc. In addition, DRC also reviews the design of new construction multi-family projects and single-family dwelling units within the historic area or Downtown Historic Overlay District (DH-O) in order to ensure compliance with the Municipal Code and harmony of appearance in the CityCity’s neighborhoods. The Development Review process follows these steps:
1) An application for Development Review is submitted in accordance with Municipal Code Section 17.52.030.
2) The DRC reviews the application in light of the requirements of the General Plan and any Specific Plan, as well as Municipal Code and any design guidelines adopted by CityCity Council. The applicant may participate in the DRC meetings. 3) The DRC prepares a written report recommending approval, approval with conditions, or denial, unless the action is appealed as provided in Section 17.56.100. 781
Item 11.
263
4) Within 45 days of the filing of an appeal, the CityCity Council holds a public hearing to consider the DRC’s action and the appeal. The Planning Commission renders its decision within 30 days of the public hearing and provides immediate verbal notice of the decision. If the Planning Commission’s decision is not appealed to the CityCity Council, the decision is final.

By-Right Single-Family and Multifamily Permit Processing Permit applications for single-family and multifamily development are reviewed by Planning Staff for eligibility as by-right applications that are not subject to discretionary review. Proposal site plans for single-family developments are then reviewed by the Planning, Engineering, and Building Departments. The first review normally takes 3-5 weeks. Following this review, by-right applications are eligible to start construction. Multifamily project applications follow the same process as single-family applications, but also include design review by the DRC, who does not have the authority to deny an application, butapplication but can require modifications to site plan design to ensure compliance with the General Plan, and community health and safety standards, and the CityCity’s Design Guidelines. After design review, the project may apply for building permit.

SB-35, Permanent Supportive Housing, and Navigation Centers The CityCity does not have a specific procedure for SB-35 applications, or reviewing Permanent Supportive Housing planning permit applications, but will comply with SB-35 and AB 2162 as applicable. Program 2.1.6 includes a CityCity commitment to amend the Municipal Code to comply with AB 2162 for streamlined processing of permit applications for Permanent Supportive Housing. SB 35 allows 60 days for a jurisdiction to determine if a project is eligible for streamlining, and then allows 90 days to complete design review before Planning Commission review and approval. The CityCity of Oroville has never taken that long to process affordable housing projects, andprojects and has never received a request to process a project under SB 35.

Nevertheless, Program 2.1.9 commits the CityCity to amend the Municipal Code to comply with SB-35 in order to streamlineto streamline permit processing for affordable housing. Navigation Centers are not currently defined or addressed in the CityCity’s Municipal Code, but will be added in order to comply with AB 101 as described in Program 1.2.2 in the Chapter 3 Housing Program.

On- and Off-Site Improvement Standards
782
Item 11.
264
Construction of street frontage are required to conform with the CityCity of Oroville Construction Standards as published and made available on the CityCity’s website at https://www.cityCityoforoville.org/services/public-works-department/engineeringdivision/improvement-standards. Some of the key improvement standards are listed below.  The standard residential street designs have a 60 foot60-foot right-of-way with 35-40 foot street width curb to curb, a 5-6 foot park strip, and a 4.5-5 foot sidewalk.  The standard cul-de-sac design has a 120 foot120-foot right-of-way at the widest extent of the right-of-way with 97 foot street width curb to curb, a 6 foot park strip, and a 5 foot sidewalk.
 Curbs and gutters are required, and design specifications are part of the CityCity’s Construction Standards.

Additional subdivision improvements standards are found in the Municipal Code, Section

16.16.070 as follows:
 Any newly created block shall be no longer than 800 feet along any distance between two intersections, unlessintersections unless an exception is made based on topography or other factors as provided in Section 16.04.040.
 Cul-de-sac streets in a residential subdivision shall not exceed 600 feet in length and shall not serve more than 25 parcels.
 The centerlines of streets that extend along existing or planned streets must continue the centerlines of the existing streets as far as practical.

On- and off-site improvement standards are not considered a constraint to housing development. All multi-family projects have been able to access existing water and sewer infrastructure, and complete required street improvements.

Historic Overlay Districts
The downtown historic overlay district (DH-O) covers most of the downtown area and is found in the Oroville Municipal Code 17.44.040, which includes specific development standards for all residential building types. The district’s goal is to encourage revitalization and a vibrant downtown. In addition to the applicable residential and commercial zoning, proposed projects are reviewed for compliance with section 17.44.040 by the Planning Commission, which acts as the Historic Advisory Commission.

Estimated Time Between Planning Permit and Building Permit Submittal 783
Item 11.
265
In the past year, existing developer/builder applicants who have been eligible to receive the state’s 9% disaster tax credits for affordable housing have spent an average of 3-6 weeks preparing building permit applications once receiving entitlements. Applicants not motivated by the tax credit timetable typically take 12 weeks between planning permit approval and building permit submittal. In terms of the time it takes for the CityCity to process permits, on average, Administrative Permits require 2.5 hours, Density Bonuses take 20 hours, Use Permits take 20-36 hours, Zone Change requests require 16 hours, Variance requests require 20 hours, and tentative subdivision maps take 16 hours.

Conclusion
The CityCity of Oroville’s planning and building permit review procedures require similar processing times to other Northern California cities. The CityCity’s permit review processes do not present a significant constraint to residential development. While project review has increasingly become a complex process, the CityCity of Oroville continues to seek ways to make this process more efficient without sacrificing the public’s welfare or safety.

FEES AND EXACTIONS
Permit and Impact fees fund services necessary to carry out local government functions. Permit fees compensate local government staff for reviewing project proposals to ensure that they are consistent with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and State Law. Impact fees fund capital improvements necessitated by the cumulative demand of development. A review of both of these types of fees are is critical to this constraints analysis in order to determine whether the fees unduly add to the cost of development and thereby constrain the provision of housing.

Permit Fees
Permit fees include planning fees, building permit fees, and plan check fees. Planning fees are charged when an applicant submits a proposal for constructing or rehabilitating improvements.

They compensate CityCity staff time for reviewing the proposal. Building permit and plan check fees are charged to review the construction plans to ensure compliance with local and state building codes, and to inspect the project for habitability at completion. Planning Permit fees for the CityCity of Oroville are listed in “Figure 40: Planning Permit Fees,” and Building Permit fees are shown in Figure 41.

784
Item 11.
266

785
Item 11.
267
Figure 40: Planning Permit Fees
Description Fee

PLANNING FEES
Administrative Permit $ 585.78
Amendment/Modification Fee (Use Permits, Variance, TSM, etc.) $ 1,024.09 Annexation $ 3541.30 (Deposit)
Appeal to CityCity Council (Discretionary Items) $ 1,121.38 Appeal to CityCity Council (Ministerial Items) $ 225.00 "Burn-Down" Letter $ 67.59
Condition Compliance $ 512.05 (Deposit)
Development Review Committee $ 230.42
EIR Deposit $ 5,120.45
Final Map $ 1543.30 (Deposit)
Fire Design Review $ 444.46
General Plan Amendment $ 3,946.84$ 3,946.84
(Deposit)
Sign Review $ 172.44
Specified Plan Amendment $ 2,364.00
Specific Plan Deposit $ 3,337.41
Tentative Parcel Map $ 3,500.34$ 3,500.34
(Deposit)
Tentative Subdivision Map $ 4,041.06
Per Resulting Lot Tentative Maps $ 20.48
Use Permit $ 2,889.98$ 2,889.98
(Deposit)
Variance $ 2,317.52$ 2,317.52
(Deposit)
Zone Change $ 3,104.02$ 3,104.02
(Deposit)
Zoning/General Plan Compliance Letters $ 158.73
Source: CityCity of Oroville
Formatted: Justified
786
Item 11.
268
Figure 40.1: Building Permit Fees
Building Permit Fees
Total Valuation Current Fee
Structural
$1.00 to $500.00 $24
$501.00 to $2,00.00 $24.00 for the first $500; plus $3.00 for each additional $100 or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00
$2,001.00 to $40,000.00 $69.00 for the first $2,000.00; plus $11.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $40,000.00 $40,001.00 to $100,000.00 $487.00 for the $40,000.00; plus $9.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 $100,001.00 to $500,000.00 $1,027.00 for the first $100,000.00; plus $7.00 for each $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00
$500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 $3,827.00 for the first $500,000.00; plus $5.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00 $1,000,001.00 to $5,000,000.00 $6,327.00 for the first $1,000,000.00; plus $3.00 for each $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $5,000,000.00
Other Inspections and Fees
Inspections outside normal business
hours (minimum 2 hours)
$85.00 per hour*
Re-inspection fees assessed under
the provisions of Section 6-1.7; 110.7
of the Oroville CityCity Ordinance
1767.
$85.00 per hour*
Additional plan review required due
to changes, additions, or revisions to
plans (minimum 1/2 hour)
$42.50 per 1/2 hour
787
Item 11.
269
For use of outside consultants for
plan review and inspections, or both
Actual Cost**
Plan Review: When a plan or other date is required to be submitted for review, the plan review fee for each building, structure, utility, etc. shall be 65% of the building permit fee shown in the Building Permit Fee Table.

Disabled Access Review: For the
review of California Code of
Regulation Title 24 requirements for
accessibility for the physically
disabled, the fee shall be:
$85.00 per hour*
Energy Conservation Review: For review of the California Code of Regulation Title 24 requirements for energy conservation, the fee shall be equal to 10% of the building permit fee as shown in the Building Permit Fee Table.

Green Building Standards Review: For review of California Code of Regulations Title 24 requirements for green building standards, the fee shall be equal to 15% of the building permit fee as shown in the Building Permit Fee Table.
*= or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction, whichever is greatest. The cost shall include supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employee involved. **= Actual cost includes administrative and overhead costs.

Source: CityCity of Oroville, 2021
Impact Fees
Impact fees fund infrastructure improvements to accommodate growth in the community.

Impact Fees are listed in “Figure 40.2: Impact Fees.”
788
Item 11.
270
Figure 40.2: Impact Fees
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE SUMMARY Oroville Orland Difference Orland Fee Category Single
Family
Residential
Multi-Family
Residential
Single
Family
Residential
Multi-Family
Residential
Single Family
Residential
Multi-Family
Residential
Sewer Impact Fee $
1,794.00$
1,794.00
$ 1,794.00 $ 2,515.00 $ 2,465.82 $ (721.00) $ (671.82)
Drainage Impact Fee $
2,572.00$
2,572.00
$ 1,029.00 $ 1,588.00 $ 1,344.00 $ 984.00 $ (315.00)
Water Impact Fee $ - $ - $ 2,711.00 $ 2,657.82 $ (2,711.00) $ (2,657.82) Roads $ 961.00 $ 745.00 $ 1,736.41 $ 1,065.91 $ (775.41) $ (320.91) Parks and Recreation Impact Fee $
3,843.00$
3,843.00
$ 3,095.00 $ 5,051.59 $ 4,329.94 $ (1,208.59) $ (1,234.94) General Government Impact Fee $
1,135.00$
1,135.00
$ 676.00 $ 5,140.44 $ 4,406.09 $ (4,005.44) $ (3,730.09) Police Impact Fee $
1,393.00$
1,393.00
$ 1,122.00 $ - $ - $ 1,393.00 $ 1,122.00
Fire Impact Fee $ 804.00 $ 648.00 $ - $ - $ 804.00 $ 648.00 Library $ - $ - $ 1,356.07 $ 1,162.35 $ (1,356.07) $ (1,162.35) Total Per Unit $ 12,502.00 $ 9,109.00 $ 20,098.51 $ 17,431.93 $ (7,596.51) $ (8,322.93) Formatted: Right
Formatted: Right
Formatted: Right
Formatted: Right
Formatted: Right
Formatted: Right
Formatted: Right
Formatted: Right
Formatted: Right
Formatted: Right
789
Item 11.
271

School Fees (Sq Ft) $ 4.08 $ 4.08 $ 4.08 $ 4.08 $ - $ - Source: CityCity of Oroville, Oroville Unified School District, 2021

790
Item 11.
272
Fee Cost Reasonableness
The impact fees for Oroville were compared to Orland, a town with a population of 8,527 that is also in the northern Central Valley and about 45 miles from Oroville. As shown, total impact fees per unit for single-family and multi-family are much lower in Oroville than for Orland.

As part of the Impact Fee cost reasonableness assessment, land, construction, and fees costs for a typical single-family and multi-family unit were estimated, as shown in “Figure 40.3: Estimated Single-family Development Costs” and “Figure 40.4: Estimated Multi-family Development Costs.” Soft costs such as architecture, engineering, financing, and developer profit are not included. For the single-family construction costs estimate, a 1,500 square-foot home was modeled. The model shows that for a typical single-family home, the total Permit and Impact Fees are estimated at $21,049, which accounted for 5.5% of the total land and construction costs. For the multi-family construction costs estimate, an apartment complex with 40 units, each 900 square feet in size, was modeled. The model shows that for a typical two-bedroom apartment, the total Permit and Impact Fees are estimated at $16,885, which accounted for 4.7% of total land and construction costs. The fees in both of these models include School Impact Fees that are charged by the Oroville Unified School District in addition to fees charged by the CityCity of Oroville.

Figure 40.3: Estimated Single-family Development Costs
Single Family Home Example
# of Sq. Ft. 1500 Per Sq Ft Cost
Construction Price Sq. Ft $ 200.00
Lot Cost (10k sq ft) $ 37,530.14 $ 25.02
Construction Cost $ 300,000.00 $ 200.00
Contingency and Overhead (10%) $ 30,000.00 $ 20.00
Permit Fees $ 2,427.00 $ 1.62
Impact Fees $ 12,502.00 $ 8.33
School Fees $ 6,120.00 $ 4.08
Total $ 382,459.14 $ 254.97
Note: This model does not include A&E, Developer Profit and other assorted soft costs.

Sources: Permit and Impact Fees— CityCity of Oroville. School Fees— Oroville Unified School District.

791
Item 11.
273
Figure 40.4: Estimated Multi-family Development Costs
Multifamily Example
# of Sq. Ft. per unit 900
# of Units 40
Costs Per Sq Ft Cost Per Unit Cost
Construction Price Sq. Ft $ 260
Lot Cost (2 acres @ $244,860 per) $ 489,720.00 $ 13.60 $ 12,243.00 Construction Cost $ 8,684,607.00 $ 241.24 $ 217,115.18
Other Costs ($115,953 per unit) $ 4,638,120.00 $ 128.84 $ 115,953.00 Permit Fees $ 28,433.00 $ 0.79 $ 710.83
Impact Fees $ 500,080.00 $ 13.89 $ 12,502.00
School Fees $ 146,880.00 $ 4.08 $ 3,672.00
Total $ 14,340,960.00 $ 398.36 $ 358,524.00
Based on 2020 TCAC-DR Oroville Projects.

Sources: Permit and Impact fees— CityCity of Oroville. School fees— Oroville Unified School District.

Conclusion
Based on an analysis of fee increases, development models, and comparison to other cities, the fees in the CityCity of Oroville do not represent a significant constraint on the construction of new housing. The fees charged by the CityCity of Oroville are lower than other similar size cities in the region. The CityCity of Oroville does not have any ordinances that significantly impact the cost and supply of housing, such as inclusionary zoning or short-term rental ordinances. 792
Item 11.
274

NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
Non-governmental constraints are largely driven by the market forces of supply and demand that are shaped within the context of government policy at the federal, state, and local levels. By responding to market factors that impact housing availability and affordability, local governments, in cooperation with federal and state agencies, can help improve access to affordable housing for their residents. This section includes an analysis of land prices, construction costs, and residential real estate financing to better understand the challenges and opportunities to addressing housing needs in the CityCity of Oroville.

Land Prices
Land cost is a fundamental component of the cost of housing. The price of property is impacted by market supply and demand, government land use policies, and the availability of acquisition financing. An analysis of multi-family and single-family residential land prices followsfollows.

Multi-family Residential Land
“Figure 41: Multifamily Residential Land, CityCity of Oroville, 2020” shows data from properties for six affordable projects that received tax credit allocations and are currently in development in Oroville. The average price per acre of the six properties is $244,860 and the average price per square foot is $5.62.
793
Item 11.
275
Figure 41: Multifamily Residential Land, CityCity of Oroville, 2020 Multi-family Land Sales
Project Name Address CityCity Site
Acreage
Site Sq.

Ft.

Land Cost Price per Acre Land
Price
Sq Ft
Sierra Heights Phase II No Address Oroville 3.76 163,786 $499,000 $132,712.77 $3.05
Oroville Heights Apartments 1409 & 1451 Oro Dam
Blvd. W
Oroville 4.96 216,058 $ 1,190,500 $240,020.16
$5.51
Olive Ranch Apartments Phase
I
Table Mtn and Grand Oroville 3.15 137,214 $ 1,120,000 $355,555.56 $8.16
Olive Ranch Apartments Phase
II
Table Mtn and Grand Oroville 2.74 119,354 $ 1,120,000 $408,759.12 $9.38
Mitchell Avenue Senior
Apartments
Mitchell Ave between
FRB and 5th
Oroville 1.99 86,684 $330,000 $165,829.15
$3.81
Riverbend Family Apartments 205 Table Mountain Oroville 4.36 189,922 $725,000 $166,284.40 $3.82
Average $244,860.19
$5.62
Source: CityCity of Oroville 2020 TCAC-DR
794
Item 11.
276
Single-family Residential Land
“Figure 41.1: Single-family Residential Land, CityCity of Oroville, 2021” shows land in Oroville zoned Single-Family Residential that closed sales from October through December,December 2021. The price per square foot ranged from $2.61 to $5.17 for lots that ranged from 4,792 to 8,886 square feet. The average lot size was 7,289 square feet and the average price was $3.75 per square foot.

Figure 41.1: Single-family Residential Land, CityCity of Oroville, 2021 Single Family Lot Assumptions
Address CityCity Price Lot
Size
Date Sold Price per
Sq Ft
Yacht Court Oroville $
35,000$
35,000
8,276 12/2/21 $ 4.23
A Street Oroville $
40,500$
40,500
7,841 11/16/21 $ 5.17
2346 C Street Oroville $
12,500$
12,500
4,792 11/15/21 $ 2.61
498 Lodgeview Drive Oroville $
24,000$
24,000
7,405 11/5/21 $ 3.24
Lodgeview Drive Oroville $
24,000$
24,000
6,534 10/31/21 $ 3.67
7 Hawley Trail Oroville $
32,000$
32,000
8,886 10/13/21 $ 3.60
Average 7,289 $ 3.75
Source: Realtor.com, 2021
795
Item 11.
277
Construction Costs
Construction costs vary widely depending on the type of structure being built. For instance, the total construction cost of a multi-family structure will cost much more than a single-family home, though the cost of each unit in the multi-family structure will generally cost less due to the economies of scale. The development models shown in Figures 41 and 41.1 demonstrate that multi-family construction is generally more expensive per square foot but usually has lower costs per unit due to smaller unit sizes. Multifamily and single-family construction costs in Butte CountyButte County are comparable to other similar size counties in the Central Valley, and generally lower than in the Sacramento Metropolitan Area.

An analysis of total development costs for six affordable tax credit projects in Oroville currently in development was conducted and listed in “Figure 41.2: Multi-family Construction Costs, CityCity of Oroville, 2021.” Total construction costs for these projects averaged $239,548 per unit and $260 per square foot. If funding sources require payment of State Prevailing Wages, construction costs are generally about 15%-20% higher. Senior and studio subsidized apartment complexes generally cost less per unit and more per square foot. Subsidized apartments are generally more expensive to build than market rate apartments because costs, such as developer overhead and profit, financing, and reserves, must be front-loaded into the development budget instead of future year operating budgets. This is because publicly subsidized project rents are restricted to levels affordable to low-incomeslow incomes. Operating income largely covers annual expenses only, with narrow profit margins over the operating period. Furthermore, rent restriction covenants limit price appreciation, as subsidized projects cannot be resold at market prices until 30 to 55 years after they are built.
796
Item 11.
278
Figure 41.2: Multi-family Construction Costs, CityCity of Oroville, 2021 Source: CityCity of Oroville and California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, 2021

Project Name Address Total
Development
Cost (TDC)*
Land Cost Construction
Cost
All Other
Costs
Constructi
on Cost
(Sq. Ft)
Construction
Cost (Unit)
Sierra Heights Phase
II
$16,414,489 $499,000 $9,056,000 $6,859,489 $210.00 $192,680.85 Oroville Heights
Apartments
1409&1451 Oro
Dam Blvd. W
$23,722,012 $1,190,500 $14,161,000 $8,370,512 $197.00 $217,861.54 Olive Ranch
Apartments Phase I
Table Mtn and
Grand
$30,650,580 $1,120,000 $21,261,340 $8,269,240 $281.00 $265,766.75 Olive Ranch
Apartments Phase II
Table Mtn and
Grand
$30,331,815 $1,120,000 $20,998,000 $8,213,815 $281.00 $262,475.00 Mitchell Avenue
Senior Apartments
Mitchell Ave
between FRB and
5th
$12,323,761 $330,000 $7,663,161 $4,330,600 $304.00 $218,947.46 Riverbend Family
Apartments
205 Table
Mountain
$27,924,953 $725,000 $19,848,570 $7,351,383 $287.00 $279,557.32 Average $23,561,268 $830,750 $15,498,012 $7,232,507 $260.00 $239,548.00 797
Item 11.
279
Construction costs have increased significantly over the past five years. These increases have been driven by increases in labor and material costs. The Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley conducted an analysis of multi-family construction costs across California in 2020.

In their report, they pointed out that construction costs increased by 24% statewide between 2009 and 2018. For the period of 2014 and 2018, the increase was 44% percent. The average per square foot hard cost was $177 in 2009, and in 2018 it was $222.

According to the Terner Center report, wages for the Construction and Extraction Occupations category saw an increase of 28.7% between 2006 and 2018. Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers saw the most significant increase in wages at 32.5%. Some of these wage increases were attributed to higher levels of overhead, profit, and contingency by general contractors and subcontractors to mitigate the risk and costs associated with a restricted workforce, and to ensure that they retain workers in a competitive labor shortage environment. (Source: The Hard Costs of Construction: Recent Trends in Labor and Materials Costs for Apartment Buildings in California. The Terner Center for Housing Innovation, UC Berkeley, March 2020.) Construction costs have been further accelerated by large increases in the cost of materials.

Between 2010 and 2018, the cost of concrete increased by 28%, finishes and gypsum increased 65%, and lumber increased 110%. Metals was the only material that decreased over that time period, with a 39% drop. The COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to further cost increases. In some areas, the cost of lumber tripled as supplies became constrained due to sawmills shutdowns.

The increase in construction costs can be attributed to many factors, butfactors but is most significantly due to large increases in materials costs and a restricted workforce. It is not clear if these factors will continue during the next housing element period, but if they do, it could significantly impact not only the number of units that are built, but also their affordability as well.

Financing Availability
Over the past eight years, financing for residential real estate has gradually recovered from the recession of 2008. Interest rates over the past three years have remained at historically low levels, influenced by a federal funds rate near zero percent and federal investment in securities to shore up the economy during the coronavirus pandemic. At the same time, the risky lending practices that precipitated the housing bubble and subsequent recession have been reformed and defaults have declined significantly. After some uncertainty in 2020, equity and debt were much more aggressively employed in 2021 and are expected to continue to be readily available for a variety of residential real estate investments over the next few years. 798
Item 11.
280
Multifamily Rental Financing
Multifamily lending is forecast to reach about $421 billion in 2022, up from the record $409 billion estimated for 2021, which was a 13% increase from 2020 according to the Mortgage Bankers Association. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac plan to increase their levels of multifamily investment in 2022 by increasing purchase caps, broadening the scope of eligible borrowers and projects, and expanding their products with flexible terms and low interest rates. (Source: Why a Lending Bounty Awaits Multifamily Borrowers. Multi-Housing News, November 30, 2021).

Most multifamily loan interest rates are currently tied to the 30-day LIBOR or U.S. Treasury 10-Year Note. The 30-day LIBOR has been stable between December 2020 and 2021, varying between 0.07% to 0.16%, with a rate as of December 2021 at 0.10%. LIBOR is expected to be phased out as a benchmark lending index over the next couple years, andyears and will be replaced by another index that broadly measures bank borrowing costs. The 10-Year Treasury Note has risen from about 0.9% in December 2020 to about 1.5% in December 2021 (Wall Street Journal, December 10, 2021). Over the next year, interest rates on multifamily debt should continue to be in the 2%-4% range for tax-exempt bond funded construction loans and the 3%-5% for permanent loans and market rate commercial construction loans (Commercial Real Estate Finance Company of America, December 2021).

Fannie Mae’s current multifamily loan interest rates are roughly 3.6%-4.0% for a fixed 30- year amortized term (Fannie Mae, December 2021). Current FHA 223(f) multifamily loan interest rates are generally 2.65%-3.65% for a fixed 35-year amortization term (Federal Housing Administration, December 2021). Most affordable housing in California is financed by tax-exempt bonds that are allocated to projects by the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee (CDLAC).

Freddie Mac tracks an Apartment Investment Market Index (AIMI) to measure the relative value of investing in multi-family properties in select major metropolitan areas. From the second quarter of 2020 to the second quarter of 2021, the AIMI rose from 129.2.3 to 132.6.

Freddie Mac stated that the increase in the index over the past year was the result of growth in net operating income for apartment complexes and lower mortgage rates, which offset strong growth in property prices (Freddie Mac Apartment Investment Index, 2nd Quarter, 2021. Equity for market rate multifamily housing is usually invested by Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs). Publicly traded REITs have performed well over the last 10 years, with average annual return of 11.29% between October 2011 and October 2021 (Nareit Industry Fact Sheet, October 2021).

Equity for affordable housing is usually invested by banks and corporations that receive tax credits and deductions in return for their investment. Tax credit investors negotiate an equity price per dollar of tax credit received for each affordable housing project. Equity pricing for Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) in California has been gradually rising after a 799
Item 11.
281
drop in investor interest in 2020. While LIHTC pricing varies greatly depending on project particulars, the partners involved, and location, national pricing averaged about $0.90 per tax credit dollar in the second half of 2021 (CohnReznick Housing Tax Credit Monitor, November 2021 and Novogradac LIHTC Equity Pricing Trends, August 2021). While projects in major California metropolitan markets such as Los Angeles and the Bay Area tend to draw significantly higher pricing than the nationwide average, projects in rural areas of California have historically seen pricing closer to the nationwide average.

Federal funding for affordable multifamily housing is projected to expand over the next few years based on the recently passed American Rescue Plan and HUD budgets, proposed federal budgets for FY 2022, and the housing components of the proposed Build Back Better Act. These initiatives will significantly bolster resources for federal tax credits, entitlement grants for housing production, rental assistance, and homeless services. At the State level, budget surpluses and the Governor’s commitment to addressing California’s housing needs figures to continue financial support for housing programs.

At the beginning of the new Housing Element period, Chico and the surrounding area will see increased investment in subsidized multifamily rental financing through the Community Development Block Grant- Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) program. The purpose of this program is to use federal funds made available through the Presidential Disaster Declaration associated with the Camp Fire to replace destroyed units. Butte CountyButte County has received an allocation of $61 million dollars, with $6.6 million planned for three new construction affordable multifamily projects in Oroville.

Homeownership Financing
The full-year average interest rate on a 30-year fixed rate mortgage was 3.0% in 2021 (Freddie Mac Market Rates Survey, December 9, 2021). After large monthly purchases of treasuries and mortgage securities over the past two years, the Federal Reserve has indicated that it is ready to start diminishing its purchases of treasuries and mortgage securities through 2022. At the same time, it is expected that the Federal Reserve will slightly increase the Federal Funds Rate over 2022. These factors are expected to push mortgage interest rates modestly upward between 0.3% and 0.5% on a 30-year fixed rate loan by the end of 2022 (Kiplinger’s Interest Rates Forecast. Kiplinger, September 2021.) Freddie Mac projects that refinance activity will soften towards the end of 2022 as interest rates rise, and total mortgage originations will decline from $4.5 trillion in 2021 to $3.1 trillion in 2022 (Quarterly Forecast. Freddie Mac, October 15, 2021).
800
Item 11.
282
Natural Disaster Impacts
COVID-19
On March 13, 2020, the President declared the ongoing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant an emergency declaration for all states, tribes, territories, and the District of Columbia pursuant to section 501 (b) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207 (the “Stafford Act”). This declaration shut down “non-essential” businesses such as bars, restaurants and most retail stores. Essential businesses included hardware stores, supermarkets, and other retailers that sold food or medical supplies. Housing construction was considered an essential business, however, COVID still had a severe impact in that sector. Construction sites had to deal with shutdowns due to COVID outbreaks. Many factories supplying building materials experienced shutdowns or reduced staffing. This led to severely constrained supply inventories. Construction projects were delayed due to materials shortages. These delays resulted in fewer units being built to meet the high demand for housing. This contributed to higher home prices and rents.

With the increase in vaccinations and the decline in COVID-19 cases, housing construction began to recover in the second half of 2021.

Camp Fire
On November 18, 2018, a faulty electrical line sparked the deadliest and most destructive wildfire in the history of the State of California in the foothills of Butte CountyButte County.

When the fire was finally fully contained on November 25th, 2018, it had killed 85 people, burned almost 240 square miles, and destroyed 18,000 structures, most of which were dwelling units.

The towns of Paradise and Concow were almost completely destroyed, and 56,000 people were evacuated with 20,000 of them relocating permanently.

A study was conducted by Economic and Planning Systems that was released in January of 2021 that examined the impact of the Camp Fire in Butte, Glenn and Tehama counties. According to the study, most of the residents relocating from Paradise, Magalia, and Concow initially moved to Chico, with a much smaller portion also relocating to Oroville and Orland. The CityCity of Oroville grew by 2,707 persons between 2016 and 2019 and decreased of 2,931 persons from 2019 to 2021. The population of Butte CountyButte County as a whole decreased dramatically by 23,429 (10.4%) between 2018 and 2021.
801
Item 11.
283
Local Response to Non-governmental Constraints
While the CityCity of Oroville cannot directly impact non-governmental constraints, the CityCity will address these constraints by working toward goals that reduce governmental constraints as outlined below.

CityCity Actions that Address Non-governmental Constraints The following actions in the Chapter 3 Housing Program address non-governmental constraints that are described above.

Land Prices
Program 2.1.8 addresses high land prices by facilitating ADU development on existing land developed with single-family residences.

Construction Costs
Program 2.1.2 will defer CityCity development impact fee payments through a deed of trust until a certificate of occupancy is issued for affordable projects utilizing the Density Bonus Program. This will reduce construction financing costs for these projects. Program 2.1.4 commits the CityCity to periodically survey permit and impact fees of other cities in Butte CountyButte County to ensure that CityCity fees are reasonably related to the cost of services provided. This will help keep permit and impact fees in check, which are a significant portion of housing development costs.

Programs 4.1.2, 4.1.3, and 4.3.2 address high construction costs by implementing strategies to preserve, rehabilitate, and/or convert existing structures to rent-restricted affordable housing with long-term rent restrictions. Preservation and rehabilitation is generally much less expensive than new construction.

Financing Availability
Program 3.2.1 directs the CityCity to partner with developers to leverage federal, state, and private sources to meet the CityCity’s housing goals.
802
Item 11.
284
Program 6.2.1 directs the CityCity to collaborate with NCIHA to provide Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) funds to affordable housing in the form of grants or deferred payment loans.

Natural Disaster Impacts
Program 6.2.2 directs the CityCity to address the impacts of the 2018 Camp Fire and 2020 North Complex Fire by analyzing the permitting and development process to provide expedited processing times for mixed-income, high density, infill, and multi-family housing development.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING: IDENTIFICATION AND PRIORITIZATION OF

CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
With the passage of AB 686, the Housing Element now includes a section on affirmatively furthering fair housing called “identification of contributing factors.” A fair housing contributing factor is one that creates, contributes to, perpetuates, or increases the severity of one or more fair housing issues, focusing on the topics in the assessment of fair housing: segregation, racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs. (California State Department of Housing and Community Development, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, 2021). As recommended by State HCD, “Figure 42: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: Identification of Contributing Factors” identifies fair housing issues, contributing factors, meaningful CityCity action, and the priority of the issues from high to low.
803
Item 11.
285
Figure 42: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: Identification of Contributing Factors Priority (high,
medium, low)
Fair Housing Issue Contributing Factors Meaningful CityCity Action High Patterns and trends of segregation
based on income, household
characteristics, disability, and/or
race ethnicitycity.

Census Tract 30.01: Significantly
disadvantaged area which has been
prioritized for redevelopment. The
findings indicate 30-40% of the
population is living with a disability
(highest in Butte CountyButte
County), 60-80% of homeowners
are overpaying, 60-80% of renters
are overpaying, 30-40% of the
population is living in poverty, it is
an area of high segregation and
poverty, and the level of
overcrowding is double the State’s
average at 15-20% of households.

The area median income is less than
$30,000.

Census Tracts 25, 28, 30.01, 30.02,
and 37: Areas of high segregation
and poverty, which
Lack of public or private
investments in specific
neighborhoods.

Lack of community revitalization
strategies.

1. Work with the State
government to consider
using CDBG funds for
rehabilitation of both renter
households and owneroccupied households
(Program 6.1.1).

2. CityCity to prioritize future
rehabilitation, community
beautification, infrastructure
improvements or other
investment efforts in Census
Tract 30.01, when deemed
financially feasible. To the
extent possible, CityCity to
focus redevelopment efforts
in Census Tracts 25, 28,

30.02 and 37 as well
(Program 6.1.1 and Program

4.2.1).

3. Incentivize affordable
housing, such as mixed
income and multi-family
development, in Census
Tracts 27 and 31, which are
804
Item 11.
286
disproportionately experience more
housing issues and burdens than
other areas in the CityCity.
areas that experience more
affluence, to encourage
patterns of integration
(Program 6.1.2).

4. Assess community needs
and issues in areas
experiencing high
segregation and poverty
(Program 6.3.1)

5. Need for improved
permitting and development
processes, such as flexible
allowances, and incentives
for infill development
(Program 6.1.2).

6. CityCity to consider donating
acquired land or
foreclosures for
redevelopment in areas of
high segregation and poverty
to nonprofits or work with
nonprofits to develop
housing that fits the needs
of residents (Program 4.3.1).

7. Capital improvements in
areas of high segregation
and poverty (Program 4.2.1)
805
Item 11.
287
High Wildfires in the region, including the
North Complex Fire and the Camp
Fire, have impacted housing
availability and costs. Renters
experience a higher risk of
displacement than owners and
there is a significantly large number
of renter-occupied housing units in
the CityCity of Oroville.

Displacement of residents due to
natural disaster and resulting
economic pressures.

1. Involve the community in
future CityCity planning
processes, with an emphasis
on residents residing in areas
of high segregation and
poverty (Program 6.3.3).

2. Encourage the production of
ADUs (Program 6.3.4)

3. Collaborate with the
Northern Circle Indian
Housing Authority on
affordable housing
development (Program

6.2.2)

4. Participate in groups
involved in recent wildfire
long-term recovery efforts,
such as the Camp Fire
collaborative, Bear Fire Long
Term Recovery Group, and
Butte CountyButte County
Continuum of Care (Program

6.1.4).

Medium The household income of half of the
population is less than $35,000,
which means more than half the
population cannot afford the
average-priced one-bedroom unit in
Lack of affordable housing in a
range of sizes. Need for onebedroom/studio units, accessible units, and three- bedroom units.

1. Develop a low-income home
rehabilitation program in
which the CityCity using
PLHA funds utilizing Oroville
Blight Study (Program 4.3.1)
806
Item 11.
288
Butte CountyButte County. An
overwhelming majority of renters in
the CityCity are overpaying.

Furthermore, an estimated 70% of
households that have 1 in 4 Housing
Problems or 1 in 4 Severe Housing
Problems are renter households.

Many mobile home parks in the
CityCity are dilapidated, and in need
of significant rehabilitation.

Substandard housing conditions. 2. Work with Community
Housing Improvement
Program (CHIP), Habitat for
Humanity, or other local
nonprofit developers to
identify areas for
development/opportunities
for homeownership
(Program 6.1.3).

3. Apply for CDBG public
services grant (Program

6.3.5)

3.4.Expand low-income
rehabilitation program to
include mobile homes and
strive to pool more funding
resources to improve mobile
home parks.

Medium According to qualitative data from
interviews with key stakeholders,
protected classes, including lowincome residents, single mothers, persons with physical disabilities,
persons with mental health
conditions, and senior residents
face barriers acquiring housing due
to poor credit, poor rental histories,
income requirements, and felony
records.

Lack of community revitalization
strategies.

1. Integrate CityCity, County,
and Butte-Glenn 2-1-1
services to better serve
residents and determine
eligibility for programs.

Single point-of-contact for
referrals/answering
questions (Program 6.3.2).

2. Provide tobacco/ secondhand smoke educational
information to affordable
housing complexes,
807
Item 11.
289
recipients of the CityCity’s
funding or home loan
assistance programs, and
interested property
managers (Program 4.1.3)
Low An average of 20-30% of the
population has a disability, which is
significantly higher than other areas
of Butte CountyButte County.

Lack of assistance for housing
accessibility modifications.

1. Develop an accessibility
improvements fund
(Program 6.2.1).

2. Encourage the production of
ADUs with accessibility
improvements (Program

6.3.4).

Low The CityCity of Oroville does not
have a formal process to receive,
process, respond to, and enforce
fair housing issues or complaints.

Oroville has the most fair housing
inquiries of any jurisdiction in Butte
CountyButte County.

Lack of local private and public fair
housing enforcement and outreach.

1. Develop and fund a formal
process for receiving,
reviewing, and responding to
fair housing complaints in
collaboration with Legal
Services of Northern
California (Program 6.3.2).

2. Meet with North Valley
Property Owners Association
(NVPOA) and Legal Services
of Northern California (LSNC)
at least once per year to
coordinate information,
referrals, and outreach to
residents. Promote existing
fair housing workshops to
both residents and
808
Item 11.
290
landlords. This may include
creating informational
materials to distribute at
CityCity Hall, posting on the
CityCity’s website, and
Facebook page, and sending
an “email blast” to the
CityCity’s stakeholder
contact list (Program 6.3.2).
809
Item 11.
291

APPENDIX A
Review of Previous Housing Element Programs: 2014- 2022 Goal Action
Number
Action
Statement/Intended
Objective
Timeframe
in Housing
Element
Accomplishments/Analysis Continue,
Modify or
Delete?
Adjustment to Meet New
State Laws
H.1: Expand housing opportunities and accessibility

1.1.1 Provide homebuyer
and first-time
homebuyer assistance
up to $100,000 or 45%
of the purchase price
of the home,
whichever is less (max
purchase price is
$200k/updated to
HUD limits). Goal to
assist 5 units per year.

Annually Objective met. The program
has been well-utilized and
the CityCity has applied for
and been rewarded 2019
HOME funds, CDBG NOFA,
and CDBG homebuyer funds
totallingtotaling 3 million to
continue the program.

Continue

1.2.1 Cooperate with Butte
CountyButte County
Continuum of Care to
reduce the number of
homeless individuals
in the area
Ongoing Objective met. CityCity
Council member meets with
the Coalition on a regular
basis to further COC
objectives.

Continue
810
Item 11.
292

1.2.2 Ensure that zoning for
emergency shelters,
transitional and
supportive housing,
and SROs is consistent
with State law. In
addition, provide
assistance with grant
applications for the
development of new
facilities to serve the
homeless.
2014 Objective not met. The
CityCity has been notified of
changes to State legislation
(AB 101) and will modify this
program to allow low barrier
navigation centers where
residential uses are
permitted.

Modify The CityCity will modify
this program to meet
the requirements set
forth by AB 101 for Low
Barrier Navigation
Centers.

1.2.3 Maintain and publicize
a comprehensive
listing of housing
developments that
serve lower-income
households, persons
with disabilities, and
other special needs
populations.

Annually Objective met. The latest
update is complete and
posted on the CityCity's
website.

Continue

1.3.1 In accordance with SB
520, the cityCity will
allow for the approval
of exceptions to land
use regulations to
provide reasonable
accomdationaccommo
dation for persons
with disabilities.

Ongoing Objective exceeded. CityCity
Council's Ordinance No.
1804 created1804 created
an administrative
mechanism for a disabled
person to file a request for
reasonable accommodation
to make specific housing
available to one or more
Continue
with
modificati
ons
811
Item 11.
293
individuals protected under
the Fair Housing Laws.

1.4.1 Continue to ensure
that local zoning,
development
standards, and permit
processing do not
conflict with Health
and Safety Code.
2014 Objective met. CityCity
Council's Ordinance No.
1804 included provisions to
allow farmworker and
migrant housing.

Delete
H.2: Remove constraints to housing

2.1.1 Ensure CityCity's
review and approval
do not constrain
residential
development,
including multi-family
housing and housing
affordable to low-tomoderate income
households.

Annually Objective met. The CityCity
offers concurrent processing
to streamline development
and the zoning ordinance
provides incentives for low
income housing including
fast-track processing and
density bonuses. The
CityCity also offers preapplication / development
review meetings to help
minimizehelp minimize
processing times and give
developers information. In
2020, the CityCity approved
deferringapproved deferring
development impact fees by
Continue
812
Item 11.
294
deed of trust until
occupancy is issued.

2.1.2 Track HE
implementation
progress as part of
annual report
submitted to HCD
Annually Objective met. The CityCity
has submitted an annual
progress report on the
Housing Element and is in
compliance with State law.

The CityCity will modify this
program to include No Net
Loss provisions.

Modify/
Establish
new
program
The CityCity will be
implementing a formal
Unit Production
Evaluation (Per
Government Code
65863 "No Net Loss")
with a regular update to
the Housing Element
Site Inventory.

2.1.3 Survey the
development
application, plan
check, and inspection
fees, impact fees, and
utility connection fees
of other cities in Butte
CountyButte County
to ensure these are
reasonable cost.

Every other
year
beginning
in 2015
Objective met. Latest update
was completed in 2020. An
additional update is in
process. In the last update,
the cityCity approved a fee
deferral program for
subdivisions of all income
types.

Continue
Goal H.3: Facilitate the development of new housing
813
Item 11.
295

3.1.1 Update CityCity's GIS
system to track
development and
maintain a list of
vacant residential lots.

By request Objective met. The latest
update was complete and
posted on the CityCity's
website
Continue

3.1.2 Implement the
Corridor Opportunity
Site overlay through
the use of incentives
and flexibility in
development.

Incentivize
development of 50
moderate-income
units and 20 lowincome units within
the Corridor
Opportunity Site by
2022.

Ongoing Objective Met. In 2015, the
CityCity updated
zoningupdated zoning code
and maps to coincide with
the General Plan land use
designations. CityCity's MXC
and MXN mixed use zones
now permit multi-family,
high-density residential
development.

Delete

3.1.3 Coordinate an annual
workshop with the
Oroville Economic
Development
Corporation to identify
housing needs of
employees
Annually Objective not met. The
CityCity is no longer
coordinating this workshop.

The Oroville Economic
Development Coordination
is quiescent and the CityCity
will modify this program.

Modify
814
Item 11.
296

3.2.1 Work with developers
to identify sources of
funding and provide
technical assistance to
seek funding for new
affordable multi-family
housing, including
units for large family
households, extremely
low income, and
persons with
developmental
disabilities. Pursue taxexempt mortgage
bonds, HCD's
multifamily housing
program, and LIHTC
Annually Objective exceeded. The
CityCity was awarded HOME
funding for the development
of the Sierra Heights Project
for seniors, in which Phase 1
is complete (42 units for ELI
seniors) and Phase 2 will
begin. The CityCity has
donated land (12
townhomes to veterans
under 80% AMI) and is
working with Veteran
Housing Development
Corporation toCorporation
to develop and design a
supportive housing project
(60% and below AMI). The
CityCity has also workedalso
worked with developers to
apply for State tax credits for
the development of 5
affordable multi-family
projects (312 LI and ELI
units). The CityCity also
assisted in the development
of a supportive housing
project on Nelson
roadNelson Road.

Continue
Goal H.4: Preserve, rehabilitate, and enhance existing neighborhoodneighborhood.

815
Item 11.
297

4.1.1 Seek grants to
augment current code
enforcement activities
to supplement the
graffiti removal
program, fund
neighborhood cleanup
fairs, and general code
enforcement and
community
beautification efforts.

Utilize groups (i.e.

Neighborhood watch)
to supplement
activities. Where
possible, link to
available funding for
improvements and
correction of
violations.
2017 Objective exceeded. Code
enforcement activities are
currently being funded with
2017 CDBG funds, which
expire in Julyin July
2022.The CityCity has
assembled a task force of
law enforcement, code
enforcement, and staff from
Parks and Trees to identify
code issues and housing
complaints. The CityCity was
awarded CalOES funds due
to disaster impact. There are
currently 5 code
enforcement
officersenforcement officers,
and the CityCity intends to
add 2-4 more officers.

Continue

4.2.1 Install and upgrade
public service facilities
(streets, curb, gutter,
drainage, and utilities)
to increase private
market investment in
declining,
detioratingdetonating,
and infrastructure
deficient
neighborhoods.

Ongoing Objective not met. The
CityCity is in the process of
evaluating public facilities
onfacilities on condition,
demands, and future needs.

Impact fees are used to
make the infrastructure
investments to support
growth, infill, and
desificationdensification.

The CityCity is seeking
Continue Modified to more fully
address the
requirements of AB 683
"Affirmative Furthering
Fair Housing"
816
Item 11.
298
funding. However, the
CityCity developed a Capital
Improvement program that
will be implemented
annually with roadway,
sewer, and drainageand
drainage infrastructure
improvements..

4.3.1 Purchase abandoned
homes and provide
rehab assistance.

Annually Objective not met. The
CityCity does not have
funding. The CityCity is
transferring foreclosured
housing to the Veterans
Housing Development
Corporation toCorporation
to sell to extremely low
income and low income
veterans. The last 2 homes
were sold at market-value
and the CityCity is not
currently doing
rehabilitation. The CityCity
has applied for LEAP/PLHA
funds to continue this
program. The CityCity is
currently conducting a Blight
study in South Oroville and
will use the information
retrieved from the survey to
guide future redevelopment
efforts.

Continue Modified to more fully
address the
requirements of AB 683
"Affirmative Furthering
Fair Housing"
817
Item 11.
299

4.3.2 Continue Owner
Occupied Single Family
Rehabilitation
Program, funding 5
units over the next
planning period.
ongoing Objective not fully met. The
CityCity assisted in 1
rehabilitation in 2016, but
cannot fundcannot fund
more than 3 projects. The
CityCity received $750,000
for rehabilitation from
CDBG, butCDBG but has not
been able to secure a
contractor for the project
and needs more funding to
continue this program.

Continue Modified to more fully
address the
requirements of AB 683
"Affirmative Furthering
Fair Housing"

4.3.3 Provide funding
assistance for rehab of
multi-family units.
ongoing Objective not met. The
CityCity does not have the
funding to continue this
program.

Delete

4.4.1 Continue partnership
with California
Housing Partnership
Corporation to identify
at-risk units and apply
for state and federal
funding for
preservation i.e.

HOME, CDBG, MHP.

Maintain relationships
with developers and
on-site managers.

Ongoing Objective not met. The
CityCity does not have the
funding to continue this
program.

Modify/
Establish
new
program
Goal H.5: Promote fair housing

818
Item 11.
300

5.1.1 Require that all
recipients of locallyadministeredlocally
administered housing
funds acknowledge
their responsibilities
under the fair housing
law and affirm
commitment.

Coordinate and host
workshops to educate
property owners,
managers, real estate
professionals, and
tenants about fair
housing laws,
discrimination, and
protections. Publicize
fair housing and
dispute resolution
information through
flyers/brochures at
cityCity Hall, the
library, community
centers, senior
centers, local service
offices, real estate
offices, mortgage
offices, management
offices, and on the
CityCity's website.

Ongoing Objective not fully met.

CityCity staff has attended
fair housing training. The
CityCity would like to
coordinate workshops and
educationand education and
increaseand increase
promotion. The last
workshop was coordinated
in 2016. The CityCity
regularly posts flyers
regarding fair housing
information.

Modify Modified to more fully
address the
requirements of AB 683
"Affirmative Furthering
Fair Housing"
819
Item 11.
301

5.1.2 Engage in a public
noticing campaign to
inform persons with
disabilities of their
ability to locate senior
citizen independent
living facilities.

Annually Objective met. The CityCity
currently has information
materials for available senior
housing available at CityCity
Hall. The CityCity works with
Butte CountyButte County
Housing Authority,
Community Action Agency,
and other special interest
groups. The CityCity
administered a housing
needs survey to seniors.

Modify Modified to more fully
address the
requirements of AB 683
"Affirmative Furthering
Fair Housing"
Goal H.6: Encourage energy conservation

6.1.1 CityCity to require all
new residential
development to
comply with energy
conservation
requirements of Title
24 of California
Administrative code.
ongoing Objective met. The CityCity's
Building Department last
updated requirements in
2019.

Delete

6.1.2 Publicize utility
incentives for energy
conservation through
flyers and on the
CityCity's website.

Annually Objective met. In 2016, the
CityCity approved to include
properties within the
CityCity of Oroville in three
different Property Assessed
Clean Energy (PACE)
programs. 1)Ygrene Works,
2) HERO, and 3) Open PACE
and updated this
Modify
820
Item 11.
302
information on their
website.
821
Item 11.
303

APPENDIX B
Table A: Housing Element Sites Inventory Jurisdiction Name Site Address/Intersection 5 Digit ZIP Code Assessor Parcel Number Consolidated Sites General Plan Designation (Current) Zoning Designation (Current) Minimum Density Allowed (units/acre) Max Density Allowed (units/acre) Parcel Size (Acres) Existing Use/Vacancy Infrastructure Publicly-Owned Site Status Identified in Last/Last Two Planning Cycle(s) Lower Income CapacityCity Moderate Income CapacityCity Above Moderate Income CapacityCity Total CapacityCity OROVILLE Veatch
Street
95965 035-
250-
054-
000
A MU MXC 10 30 2.72 CityCit
y Corp
Yard
YES -
Current
YES -
CityCit
yOwned
Pending
Project
Not Used in
Prior Housing
Element
48 0 0 48
OROVILLE Veatch
Street
95965 035-
250-
002-
000
A MHD
R
R-3 14 20 3.96 CityCit
y Corp
Yard
YES -
Current
YES -
CityCit
yOwned
Pending
Project
Not Used in
Prior Housing
Element
70 0 0 70
OROVILLE Mitchell
Avenue
95965 035-
240-
100-
000
MU MXC 10 30 1.55 Vacant YES -
Current
NO -
Private
lyOwned
Pending
Project
Not Used in
Prior Housing
Element
27 0 0 27
OROVILLE Butte
Ave and
5th
Street
95965 031-
100-
008-
000
B MDR R-2 6 14 9.5 Vacant YES -
Current
NO -
Private
lyOwned
Not Used in
Prior Housing
Element
0 57 0 57
OROVILLE Butte
Ave and
5th
Street
95965 031-
100-
001-
000
B MDR R-2 6 14 3.49 Vacant YES -
Current
NO -
Private
lyOwned
Not Used in
Prior Housing
Element
0 20 0 20
OROVILLE Maude
Ave
95965 031-
100-
024-
000
C RR RR200.
2 3 8.87 Vacant YES -
Current
NO -
Private
lyOwned
Not Used in
Prior Housing
Element
0 0 26 26
822
Item 11.
304
OROVILLE Maude
Ave
95965 031-
100-
025-
000
C RR RR200.
2 3 8.85 Vacant YES -
Current
NO -
Private
lyOwned
Not Used in
Prior Housing
Element
0 0 26 26
OROVILLE Nelson
Ave
95965 031-
020-
043-
000
MLD
R
R-1 3 6 56.4
5 Vacant YES -
Current
NO -
Private
lyOwned
Not Used in
Prior Housing
Element
0 0 338 338
OROVILLE Lincoln
Street
95965 035-
040-
056-
000
MU MXC 10 30 6.5 Vacant YES -
Current
NO -
Private
lyOwned
Pending
Project
Not Used in
Prior Housing
Element
117 0 0 117

823
Item 11.
305

APPENDIX C
CityCity of Oroville 2022 Housing Element Update
Community Meeting #1: Housing Needs & Issues
Live Poll Results
October 20, 2021
Community members responded to trilingual polls in English, Spanish, and Hmong that were launched live during the meeting. Both the polls and community members’ aggregated responses are provided below.

Poll 1
Have you participated in previous Housing
Elements? / ¿Ha participado en Elementos
de Vivienda anteriores? / Koj puas tau tuaj
koom hais txog Tsevnyob yav tas los?
a. Yes / Sí / Tau
b. No / No / Tsis tau
c. Unsure / No estoy seguro / Tsis paub
Poll 2
Which housing issues are you most interested in? Please select all that apply. / ¿En que problemas de vivienda está usted más interesado? Por favor seleccione todas las respuestas que correspondan. / Hom tsev nyob abtsi ua koj txausiab tshaj? Xaiv tag nrho cov raug rau koj.
a. Accessible housing for people with disabilities / Vivienda accesible para personas con discapacidades / Vajtsev rau cov neeg semcev
10%
40%
50%
Chart 1: Have you participated in
previous Housing Elements?
(n=10, single choice)
Unsure
No
Yes
824
Item 11.
306
b. Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) / Unidades de Vivienda Accesorias (ADUs, siglas en Inglés) / Tsev nyob (ADUs)
c. Affordable housing / Viviendas asequibles / Cov tsev nyob ua them taus pheejyig d. Market-rate housing / Viviendas a precio de mercado / Tsev nyob raws tus nqi kiabkhws
e. Multifamily housing / Viviendas multifamiliares / Ntau ntau lub tsev rau tsevneeg nyob sibpuab
f. Permanent supportive housing / Viviendas de apoyo permanente / Cov tsev nyob ua muaj kev pab mus li
g. Single-family housing / Viviendas unifamiliares / Tsev kheej ib lub ib lub h. Other / Otro / Lwmyam
Poll 3
Where would you like the CityCity of Oroville to concentrate its efforts? / ¿Dónde le gustaría que la Ciudad de Oroville concentre sus esfuerzos? / Koj xav kom lub Nroog Oroville ua abtsi?
a. First time home buyer programs / Programas para compradores de vivienda por primera vez / Muaj kev pab rau cov thawj zaug yuav tsev b. Housing for people experiencing homelessness / Viviendas para personas que no tienen hogar / Muaj vajtsev pab rau cov neeg ua tau poob mus ua neeg tsis muaj vajtsev nyob lawm
c. Infill development / Desarrollo de rellenos/ Tsim kho d. Multifamily affordable housing / Vivienda multifamiliar asequible / Cov tsev ntau ntau tsevneeg nyob uake pheejyig them tau
e. Multifamily market rate housing / Vivienda multifamiliar a precio de mercado / Cov tsev ntau ntau tsevneeg nyob uake tus nqi kiabkhw
9%
45%
55%
45%
27%
82%
36%
36%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Other
Single-family housing
Permanent supportive housing
Multifamily housing
Market-rate housing
Affordable housing
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs)
Accessible housing for people with disabilities
Chart 2: Which housing issues are you most interested in? (n=11, multiple choice)
825
Item 11.
307
f. Rehabilitation and preservation of existing housing / Rehabilitación y preservación de viviendas existentes / Vajtsev rau cov neeg los thum kev mob nkeeg yeeb tshuaj g. Single-family affordable housing / Viviendas unifamiliares asequibles / Tsev kheej them tau pheejyig
h. Single-family market rate housing / Viviendas unifamiliares a precio de mercado / Tsev kheej tus nqi kiabkhw
i. Other / Otro / Lwmyam

0%
9%
9%
9%
0%
45%
0%
27%
0%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
Other
Single-family market rate housing
Single-family affordable housing
Rehabilitation and preservation of existing housing
Multifamily market rate housing
Multifamily affordable housing
Infill development
Housing for people experiencing homelessness
First time home buyer programs
Chart 3: Where would you like the City of Oroville to concentrate its efforts? (n=11, single choice)
826
Item 11.
308

APPENDIX D
CityCity of Oroville 2022 Housing Element Update
Community Meeting #2: Housing Goals & Programs
Live Poll Results
November 17, 2021
Community members responded to trilingual polls in English, Spanish, and Hmong that were launched live during the meeting. Both the polls and community members’ aggregated responses are provided below.

Poll 1
How did you hear about this event? / ¿Cómo se enteró de este evento? / Koj hnov peb lub koob tsheej no tau licas?
a. CityCity of Oroville Facebook / Página de Facebook de la Ciudad de Oroville / Lub nroog Oroville qhov Facebook
b. Website – www.orovillehousingelement.com / Sitio de Web – www.orovillehousingelement.com / Lub Vasab www.orovillehousingelement.com c. Email from Housing Tools / Email de Housing Tools / Email tuaj ntawm Housing Tools
d. Local organization(s) / Organización(es) local(es) / Cov koomhaum nyob hauv zejzog
e. Radio, news station, or newspaper / Radio, periódico, o estación de noticias / Xovtooj Cua, xovxwm thiab ntawv xovxwm
f. Word of mouth / Me pasaron la voz / Qhia los ntawm neeg g. Other / Otro / Lwmyam
827
Item 11.
309
Poll 2
Did you participate in our first community meeting held October 20, 2021, or the online community survey? / ¿Participó en la primera reunión comunitaria el 20 de octubre de 2021, o en la encuesta comunitaria en línea? / Koj puas tuaj koom peb lub rooj sitham rau lub 10 hli tim 20, 2021 no thiab losis ua cov ntaubntawv tshuam xyuas lub zejzog nyob rau zaum huabcua thiab?
a. Yes / Sí / Tau
b. No / No / Tsis tau
c. Unsure / No estoy
seguro / Tsis paub
0%
0%
100%
Unsure
No
Yes
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Chart 2: Did you participate in our first
community meeting held October 20, 2021, or
the online community survey? (n=4, single
choice)
33%
0%
0%
0%
67%
0%
0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Other
Word of mouth
Radio, news station, or newspaper
Local organization(s)
Email from Housing Tools
Website - www.orovillehousingelement.com
City of Oroville Facebook
Chart 1: How did you hear about this event? (n=3, single choice) 828
Item 11.
310
Poll 3
Did you find this community meeting beneficial? Please select all that apply. / ¿Le pareció servicial esta reunión comunitaria? Por favor seleccione todas las respuestas que correspondan. / Koj puas pom tau tias lub zejzog kev sibtham yeej pab tau thiab? Kos tagnrho cov ua pab tau.
a. Yes, I feel like my voice was heard and I was able to provide input into the Housing Element’s development / Sí, siento que se escuchó mi voz y pude contribuir al desarrollo del Elemento de Vivienda. / Yog, kuv xav tias kuv cov suab yeej hnov thiab kuv yeej pab tau tswvyim rau Kev Tsimkho Vajtsev tseemceeb
b. Yes, I learned new information and/or gained a greater degree of understanding about housing issues / Sí, obtuve nueva información y/o adquirí un mayor grado de comprensión sobre los problemas de vivienda. / Yog, kuv kawm tau yam tshiab thiab/losyog paub totau zoo heev txog teebmeem vajtsev.
c. Yes, I was able to interact with other community members and learn about their ideas and perspectives / Sí, pude interactuar con otros miembros de la comunidad y conocer sus ideas y perspectivas. / Yog, kuv koom thiab kawm tau nrog rau lwm tus neeg nyob hauv zejzog cov tswvyim thiab kev xav. d. No, this was not beneficial to me / No, esto no me benefició. / Tsis, yeej pab tsis tau kuv li
829
Item 11.
311

0%
25%
50%
100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
No, this was not beneficial to me
Yes, I was able to interact with other community
members and learn about their ideas and perspectives
Yes, I learned new information and/or gained a greater
degree of understanding about housing issues
Yes, I feel like my voice was heard and I was able to
provide input into the Housing Element's development
Chart 3: Did you find this community meeting beneficial? (n=4, multiple choice)
830
Item 11.

Page 1 ends

Oroville City CouncilApril 18, 2023

Oroville City Council
April 18, 2023