St. Helena City Council
May 14, 2024

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-148
Table 35 Parking Requirements, St. Helena, Napa, Yountville Type St. Helena City of Napa Town of Yountville
1-2 dwelling units 2 spaces per unit with
1 in garage/carport
Single-family:
2 spaces per unit with 1 in
garage + 1 for each bedroom
in excess of 2 and guest
parking
2 space, 1 covered and 1
screened; 4 for duplex with
1 covered and 1 screened
3+ dwelling units (studios
and 1 bedroom units) 1 covered space + ½ space per unit

1.5 per unit (1-3 units)

1.4 per unit (4-49 units)

1.25 per unit (50+ units)
3 dwelling units – 4 spaces,
2 covered, 2 screened
4 dwelling units – 6 spaces,
3 covered, 3 screened
Additional units require 1
additional covered and 1
additional screened space
per 2 units
3+ dwelling units (2 or more
bedroom units) 2 space per unit with 1 covered
Varies, from 1.75-2 spaces per
unit plus 0.4 space for each
bedroom in excess of 3
Rooming, boarding, or
lodging house
1 space per room and 2 for owneroccupied unit
1 space per sleeping room with
ability for planning commission
to override under certain
circumstances

1.14 spaces per room
Mobile home 2 spaces per unit with centralized guest
parking
Not specified, however, using
single family requirements:
2 spaces per unit with 1 in
garage + 1 for each bedroom
in excess of 2 and guest
parking
Not specified, however,
using single family
requirements:
2 space, 1 covered and 1
screened; 4 for duplex with
1 covered and 1 screened
Source: Chapter 17.124, City of St. Helena Municipal Code, 2015; Town of Yountville Municipal Code 17.116.020; City of Napa Municipal Code 17.54.040.

Parking requirements are additionally not a constraint given the size of the parcels identified in the Sites Inventory. For example, one site with large capacity identified in the sites inventory is Site 8, a 1.5 acre vacant lot located at 882 and 886 College Avenue. This site is projected to have a capacity of 39 units with 15 lower income and 15 moderate income units. If the complex were to have 15 two-bedroom units, 15 one-bedroom units, and 9 studios, it would need a total of 66 parking spaces with 39 of them being covered. The St. Helena Standard Specifications for Public Improvements, Standard Number 321A and 321B call for parking spaces that are 19 feet long by 9.5 feet wide, which equates to 180.5 square feet per parking space. Thus, for Site 8, there would be an allocation of 11,913 square feet of surface space allocated for parking, which accounts for approximately 18.23 percent of the site. This allocation does not pose an undue constraint on the project and provides sufficient parking for the projected residents of the project. Further, developers can design garages, overhangs, and other architectural features which can allow for greater building footprint and thus less land allocated to uncovered parking.

The City’s parking minimums are also in line with State data. According to the Department of Motor Vehicles, there were 147,603 registered vehicles in Napa County in 2021, equating to approximately 1.06 vehicles per person in Napa County. St. Helena’s parking minimums, particularly figures regarding multifamily one-bedroom units, matches the data provided by the DMV.

To help promote the development of emergency homeless shelters, Assembly Bill 671 (2019) was passed which included a variety of measures to incentivize the construction of such facilities, including the requirement that jurisdictions can only require the number of spaces necessary for staff working in the shelter and no more than Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-149
other uses in the same zones. According to Municipal Code Section 17.124, emergency homeless shelters are considered an unlisted use, which leaves it up to the planning commission to determine the parking requirements. Emergency homeless shelters are permitted in the Industrial and Service Commercial zoning districts, which only conditionally permit housing. Commercial and industrial parking requirements require one parking space per 300 square feet of office area, one parking space per 650 square feet of industrial uses, and one parking space per 1,000 square feet of warehouse space, respectively. Based on these standards, the City does not currently comply with State law. The City is committed through Program H-F to amend the Zoning Code to require only be the number of spaces necessary for staff working in the shelter and no more than other uses in the same zones.

Further, the City is also evaluating and revising, as necessary, parking requirements for multifamily uses as a part of the currently ongoing (2023) Comprehensive Zoning Code Update to identify and remove potential constraints to housing development. The Update is scheduled for adoption in fall 2023.

The City does not impose any on-site and off-site improvement standards beyond those necessary to achieve health and safety requirements. The City’s on-and-off site improvements standards, including roadway improvements, water and sewer requirements, and parking standards do not constrain residential development in St. Helena.

Fees and Exactions
The City’s building department fee schedule is designed to directly offset the costs incurred by the City when processing and reviewing development applications, and to inspect new construction. Fees are charged when a building permit is issued and are based on building plans and estimated construction costs.

Development impact fees are charged to new projects in order to offset costs for the construction, expansion, and maintenance of off-site improvements that either were built for the purposes of the new project or were existing improvements from which the new developments will benefit. In the case of St. Helena, impact fees are charged for public safety, civic facilities, water and wastewater services, drainage, traffic mitigation, and schools. In 2013, the City conducted a comprehensive study and update of all of its development impact fees.

As a result, total impact fees for single-family houses decreased from $19.78 per square foot to $16.32 per square foot, a 17.5 percent reduction. Fees for multiple-family development increased from $13.78 per square foot to $21.37 per square foot, a 55 percent increase.

The single-family fee calculations shown in Table 36 are based on an example 2,300 square foot single family residence with three-bedrooms and two-bathrooms with a total construction cost estimate of approximately $920,000 ($400 per square foot). The multifamily fee calculations shown in Table 36 are based on an example eight unit, three story 6,780 square foot multi-family development project.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-150
Table 36 Planning and Development Fees
Fee Description Single-Family Multiple-Family
Planning and Application Fees
Variance $4,500 $4,500
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) $5,200 $5,200
General Plan Amendment $13,000 deposit plus staff time $13,000 deposit plus staff time Zone Change $8,200 deposit plus staff time $8,200 deposit plus staff time Site Plan Review $2,578 $2,578
Specific Plan $25,000 deposit plus staff time $25,000 deposit plus staff time Specific Plan Amendment $4,100 $4,100
Development Agreement $13,500 $13,500
Building Inspection / Permit $1,838 $1,838
Home Occupation Permit $200 standard, $250 expanded $200 standard, $250 expanded Lot Subdivision $6,300 minor; $35,000 major $6,300 minor; $35,000 major Lot Line Adjustment $3,000 $3,000
Tentative Tract Map $4,500 $4,500
Final Parcel Map $2,100 $2,100
Design Review <1,000 square feet: $2,600
>1,000 square feet: $3,700 $3,700
Environmental Fees
Negative Declaration $5,600 plus staff time $5,600 plus staff time Mitigated Negative Declaration (In-House) $11,600 plus staff time $11,600 plus staff time Mitigated Negative Declaration (Contract) $3,200 plus staff time $3,200 plus staff time Environmental Impact Report $9,000 deposit plus staff time $9,000 deposit plus staff time Permit Fee $433 $5,503
City Impact Fees
Public Safety Fee ($1.04/sq ft) $2,392 $7,051
Civic Facilities Fee ($1.95/sq ft) $4,485 $13,221
Parks Fee ($7.16/sq ft) $16,468 $82,580
Water System Fee ($3.05/sq ft) $7,015 $16,747
Wastewater System Fee ($0.45/sq ft) $1,035 $4,475
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-151
Drainage System Fee ($0.73/sq ft) $1,679 $4,678
Transportation Fee ($1.94/sq ft) $4,462 $16,001
Housing Fee (2.5% of construction cost) $18,400 $27,933 Other District Fees
School District Fee ($3.20/sq ft) $6,831 $21,696
Source: City of St. Helena Planning Department, Mintier Harnish, 2022.

City impact fees are included in Table 36 above. Among these, the costliest fee is the Parks fee of $7.16 per square foot. These funds are used to develop and maintain City parks, a critical resource in the community. The City’s wastewater impact fee ($0.45 per square foot), drainage system fee ($0.73 per square foot) and public safety fee ($1.04 per square foot) are particularly low. Further, the City’s civic facilities and transportation fees are both under $2 per square foot. Importantly, City impact fees for multifamily listed in Table 36 are based on an eight-unit development, as explained previously, and have a lower per unit cost than City impact fees shown for a typical single-family use. These impact fees are based on the City’s actual costs and are reevaluated and revised each year. The City’s impact fees do not impose undue impacts to housing cost, supply, and feasibility, and are not a constraint to the development of housing.

Continuing with the example single-family and multi-family projects used in Table 36,Table 37 provides a breakdown of the cost-per-unit and estimated proportion of fee cost for the example project. These fees would be $70,830 and $21,525 per unit, respectively. This represents 7.7 percent of the single-family home project’s construction cost and 12.3 percent of the multi-family home project’s construction cost.

Table 37 Construction Cost Summary, Cost Per Unit and Cost Per Square-Foot Single-Family Multiple-Family
Building Size (square feet) 2,300 6,780
Construction Cost (per square-foot) $400 $206.49
Valuation $920,000 $1,400,000
Total Estimated Fees Per Unit $70,840 $21,525
Fees as % of Construction Cost 7.7% 12.3%
Source: City of St. Helena Planning Department; Mintier Harnish, 2022 The multiple-family development impact fees have increased to reflect the costs of the improvements necessary to serve multifamily residential development. Without the funds collected through the fees, the City could not afford to make the necessary improvements in infrastructure, and thus the fees do not represent an undue governmental constraint to housing development. In addition, fee reductions and adjustments for affordable Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-152
and other housing projects are permitted on a case-by-case basis, as approved by City Council under Section 3, Chapter 3.32 of the St. Helena Municipal Code.

In comparison to nearby jurisdictions, St. Helena’s planning fees are similar in range, as shown on Table 38. For rezoning, St. Helena has some of the most expensive fees in the region, however for tentative tract or parcel maps, St. Helena has some of the lowest fees in the region. Overall, St. Helena does not have fees that result in an extremely significant cost difference between development projects situated in the city and those situated outside of the city in nearby jurisdictions.

Table 38 Planning Application Fees – Surrounding Jurisdictions, Single-Family and Multiple-Family Jurisdiction General Plan Amendment Zone Change Tentative Tract Map
Variance
St. Helena $13,000 deposit plus staff time $8,200 deposit plus staff time $4,500 $4,500
City of Sonoma $16,581 $981
$3,735 plus $395 per
lot plus engineering
time
$2,279
Yountville $7,500 deposit plus staff time $7,500 $5,000 plus staff time $2,500 American Canyon $8,312 $3,714 $8,129 $1,896
County of Napa Established by resolution
of the Board of Supervisors N/A $622.90 plus staff time $6,100.90 plus staff time Source: City of St. Helena Planning Department; Mintier Harnish, 2022 Given similar fee structures to nearby jurisdictions and the development impact fee study in 2013, St. Helena’s fee structure does not pose an undue constraint on the production of housing.

Processing and Permit Procedures
St. Helena, as with other jurisdictions, has two primary types of processing and permit procedures: ministerial and discretionary.

Ministerial Permit Procedures
Ministerial permits are any permits that do not require a decision-making body to provide additional input before its approval. Ministerial permits are handled internally within the planning department and are approved by the planning director. Ministerial permits cover all development that is permitted by right in zones without design review. An example of a common ministerial permit is one for the construction of an accessory dwelling unit on a lot with a preexisting single-family dwelling. Ministerial review typically takes 2-4 weeks. As shown in Table 41, there is very little delay among previous projects. Ministerial permit procedures do not pose a constraint to housing development.

Discretionary Permit Procedures
Discretionary permits are any permits requiring a decision-making body to exercise judgment prior to its approval. As shown in Figure 48, after successfully completing a use permit and passing State environmental review, discretionary permits can be handled administratively through the Planning Director, or through public Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-153
review with the Planning Commission. If an appeal is made against the project, the project is sent to City Council for review.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-154
Figure 48 Discretionary Permit Process Flowchart
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-155
Discretionary permits in St. Helena include general plan amendments, code amendments, specific plans, variances, development agreements, use permits, parcel and subdivision maps, design review, permit/map extensions, lot line adjustments, appeals, revocation of land use permits, and interpretations. As shown in Table 39 and Table 40, most discretionary permits take 3-6 months to process, with some permits taking less time (conditional use permit) or significantly more time (general plan amendment). For the purposes of residential development, conditional use permits (CUPs) and design review are the most pertinent to affecting the affordability, speed, and thus availability of affordable housing.

Table 39 Typical Processing Procedures by Project Type
Single-Family Unit Subdivision (20 units) Multiple-Family (20 Units) Required Permit Procedures
Ministerial Review - ADU Tentative Map Conditional Use Permit Design Review – new SFD Final Map
Design Review Design Review
Initial Environmental Study Initial Environmental Study Environmental Impact
Report Mitigated Negative Declaration
Estimated Total Processing
Time 2 months 12 months 9 months
Source: City of St. Helena, Mintier Harnish, 2022.

Table 40 Timelines for Permit Procedures
Type of Approval or Permit Typical Processing Time Approval body Ministerial Review 2 – 4 weeks Planning Director
Conditional Use Permit 3 months Planning Commission
Zone Change 6 months Planning Commission & City Council General Plan Amendment 6 months Planning Commission & City Council Design Review 3 months Planning Commission
Subdivision Maps 6 months Planning Commission & City Council Parcel Maps 3 months Planning Commission
Initial Environmental Study 6 months Planning Commission & City Council, depending on project
Environmental Impact Report 10 months Planning Commission & City Council Source: City of St. Helena, Mintier Harnish, 2022.

Actual Project Times
Table 41 outlines a selection of seven projects with their entitlement approval dates and issuance of building permits. The time between entitlement and building permit issuance is negligible in St. Helena and is not a constraint to the city meeting its share of the regional housing need.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-156
Table 41 Timelines for Permit Procedures
Description of Project Entitlement Approval Building Permit Issued Time Elapsed A single family dwelling with an
accessory dwelling unit (601 Fulton) 3/19/2020 3/25/2020 4 days An accessory dwelling unit (1856 Adams
St, B) 3/12/2020 6/2/2020 3 months, 20 days
An accessory dwelling unit (1730
Stockton St, B) 1/6/2020 4/9/2020 3 months, 3 days
An accessory dwelling unit (940 Hunt
Ave) 9/17/2020 9/17/2020 Same day
A single family dwelling (222 Pope St) 7/28/2020 7/28/2020 Same day An accessory dwelling unit (1607
Kearney St, B) 6/1/2020 6/4/2020 3 days
An accessory dwelling unit (1135 Church
St, B) 6/8/2020 6/23/2020 15 days
Source: City of St. Helena, Mintier Harnish, 2022.

Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Conditional use permits (CUPs) are required when a land use is listed as a conditional use for a zoning district in the Zoning Code. Conditional Use Permits are subject to review by the Planning Commission, which considers compatibility with surrounding uses, public input, and staff feedback. Conditional use permits typically take three months to fully process, which is not considered a constraint to residential development. All projects that require a conditional use permit, except for the installation or modification of fences, require design review.

Design Review
Design Review is a process undertaken by the Planning Commission on certain projects to promote environmental quality, foster attractiveness, sustain functional utility, preserve neighborhood character, protect public investments, encourage a mix of uses, and raise the level of community expectations for the quality of the environment. 36 Chapter 17.164 of the St. Helena Municipal Code outlines the City’s Design Review policies.

The Municipal Code lists 14 specific design criteria considered by the Planning Commission:

1. Consistency and compatibility with applicable elements of the general plan;

2. Compatibility of design with the immediate environment of the site

3. Relationship of the design to the site;

4. Determination that the design is compatible in areas considered by the board as having a unified design or historical character;

5. Whether the design promotes harmonious transition in scale and character in areas between different designated land uses;

6. Compatibility with future construction both on and off the site;

7. Whether the architectural design of structures and their materials and colors are appropriate to the function of the project;
36 St. Helena Municipal Code. 17.165 Design Review.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-157

8. Whether the planning and siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create an internal sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and the general community;

9. Whether the amount and arrangement of open space and landscaping are appropriate to the design and the function of the structures;

10. Whether access to the property and circulation systems are safe and convenient for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles;

11. Whether natural features and vegetation are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project;

12. Whether the materials, textures, colors and details of construction are an appropriate expression of its design concept and function and whether they are compatible with the adjacent and neighboring structures and functions;

13. Whether the landscape design concept for the site, as shown by the relationship of plant masses, open space, scale, plant forms and foliage textures and colors, create a desirable and functional environment and whether the landscape concept depicts an appropriate unity with the various buildings on the site; and

14. Whether sustainability and climate protection are promoted through the use of green building practices such as appropriate site/architectural design, use of green building materials, energy efficient systems and water efficient landscape materials.37
The Planning Commission examines all proposed new structures and some exterior additions (e.g., additions on historical residential properties, addition of new residential floors) in relation to the above listed design criteria and arrives at one of three recommendations: approve, approve with minor modifications, or disapprove.

Projects that are subject to design review include:
• Any exterior modification to a commercial, multi-family, or designated historic building, including new construction
• The construction of a new single-family home
• Structures, buildings or site modifications requiring use permits in any district, excluding fences • Additions to a single-family home which create a second or third floor, story or living space where one does not currently exist
• Any new structure prior to the issuance of any future building permits for structures on newly created parcels created on maps approved after January 1992
• Any new public facility, or modification thereof
• Demolition, except when required for emergency protection of public health, safety or welfare 37 St. Helena Municipal Code. 17.165 Design Review.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-158
The following projects are subject to administrative design review, which means that they are ministerially decided on by city planning staff as opposed to the Planning Commission:
• Any form of repair or maintenance where the work solely involves the replacement of materials in like kind and form or to any such work in areas not visible to the public from the public right-of-way or areas accessible to the public
• Accessory dwelling units, subject to requirements identified in SHMC 17.116.030 • Alteration, modification, or addition to an existing single-family home that is not eligible for design review
• Construction of an accessory structure in keeping with all development criteria of the zoning district in which the structure is proposed
Design review is required for practically all projects, including all primary residential structures. The City has not adopted a design review exemption for affordable housing development in the City. Therefore, design review is considered a significant constraint to affordable housing development in the City.

The complex and subjective nature of the design review process is a constraint housing production. Through the current comprehensive zoning code update, the City is working to codify objective design standards for singlefamily, small lot, and multifamily uses. Program H-F commits the City to amending the Municipal Code to provide objective design standards for residential development and a ministerial, by-right, process for approval of developments meeting all zoning and design standards.

Currently (2023) the MR zone does not allow for multifamily uses without a conditional use permit (CUP), with the exception of 5th Cycle Housing Element opportunity sites. Although the MR zone is primarily a single-family zone, the requirement for a CUP in this zone constrains the development of smaller multifamily uses. Program H-N commits the City to allowing duplexes and triplexes and a density range of 5.1 to 16 dwelling units per acre in the MR zone without a CUP.

Please note: the City implemented 5th Cycle Housing Element program HE1.D which committed the City to eliminating use permit requirement for multifamily projects on Housing Opportunity sites (Key Housing Sites) in the medium density residential zone. Section 17.40.020 was amended to permit the following:

N. Multiple-family dwellings, apartments, and dwelling groups at a density up to the maximum allowed by the medium density residential district shall be allowed as a permitted use on the following MR zoned parcels, which are identified as “Key Housing Sites” in Table 42 of the city’s 2015-2023 housing element, and are identified as follows by street address and assessor’s parcel number (APN): 567 Pope St. APN 009- 070-002; 591 McCorkle Ave. APN 009-070-003; 1817 Spring St. APN 009-322-009; Sulphur Springs Ave.

APN 009-362-015; Spring St. APN 009-441-023 and 009-552-002; 576 Pope St. APN 009-552-003; 1105 Pope St. APN 009-090-003. (Ord. 17-2 § 6 (part); Ord. 16-8 § 1; Ord. 15-2 § 7 (part): Ord. 12-2 § 6: Ord. 07- 5 § 2 (part): Ord. 05-4 § 1 (part): Ord. 03-4 § 11: prior code § 27.51) Further, The City has received SB 2 and LEAP grants from the State of California to assist with encouraging and streamlining affordable housing development in the city. The City has applied these funds to the Comprehensive Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-159
Zoning Code Update currently underway. The Draft Update works to overcome constraints and encourage development by incorporating objective design standards for residential development and removing CUP requirements for duplexes and triplexes and densities of 5.1 to 16 du/ac in the MR zone, among other efforts.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-160
Table 42 Housing Types Permitted by Base Zoning District Zone Type Agricultural Residential Commercial/Office
I WW
Zoning District A-20 W AP LR LR-1A MR HR CB SC BPO
Design Review Required No Yes
Single-family dwelling P
1 P1,2 P P4 P P4 P4 — — — — P
Residential units (in a mixeduse setting) — — — — — — — C 5 C5,7 C5 C8 —
Residential Condominium or
Townhouse — — — — — C C — — — — —
Duplex or triplex units — — — — — C P — — — — —
Multiple-family dwellings — — — — — P
6 P — — — — —
Mobile homes — — — P P P P — — — — —
Agricultural employee housing — — P P
3 P3 P3 P3 — — — — P3
Supportive housing — — P P P P P C
5 C5,7 C5 — P
Transitional housing — — P P P P P C
5 C5,7 C5 — P
Single room occupancy housing — — — — — — P — — — — —
Intermediate care facility, 6 or
fewer persons — — — P P P P — — — — —
Intermediate care facility, 7 or
more persons — — — — C C C — — — — —
Residential facility, 6 or fewer
persons — — — P P P P — — — — —
Residential facility, 7 or more
persons — — — C C C C — — — — —
Emergency Shelter — — — — — — — — P — P —
P=Permitted C=Conditional —=Prohibited
1Permitted if the single-family dwelling(s) existed prior to October 1, 1993. 2Additional dwellings for occupancy by owners, caretakers and/or other employees, provided density does not exceed one dwelling unit per each five acres of the winery’s contiguous property is a Conditional Use. 3Six or fewer persons only.
4New construction of single-family dwellings where the minimum density of 2 units or greater is a Conditional Use. 5Limited to upper floors only.
6Permitted only to parcels identified in the adopted Housing Element. 7Upper floors only in conjunction with a mixed-use project 8Subject to the restrictions outlined in SHMC 17.60.030, including a maximum 850 square feet floor area, one off-street parking space, and residency requirements.

Note: The Zoning Code text takes precedence over this table and there may be additional requirements or limits not noted on this table.

If the zone is not present in the table (PQP, PR, OS), it does not allow any residential uses by right or through any permitting processes.

Source: St. Helena Municipal Code, Title 17.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-161
SB 330 Streamlining
On October 9, 2019, Governor Newsom signed into law SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019. The act amends existing state laws and creates new regulations around the production, preservation and planning of housing.

The bill has been in effect since January 1, 2020, and sunsets on January 1, 2025. SB 330 will affect both project planning procedures and community planning outcomes.

The goal of SB 330 is to create certainty in the development of housing projects, speeding up the review of these projects, preserving affordable housing and preventing certain zoning actions that reduce the availability of housing. SB 330 does the following (not a comprehensive list):
• Creates a new vesting process for zoning and land use ordinances, policies, and standards in place at the time a preliminary application is submitted (with limitations); • Requires that the historic status or designation of any site be determined at the time an application for a discretionary action is deemed complete;
• Prohibits imposing or enforcing non-objective design review standards established after January 1, 2020;
• Limits the number of public hearings to five for housing projects that meet all objective design standards; and
• Prohibits actions that reduce the total zoned capacity for housing (i.e., down-zoning).

A project that meets any of the following criteria per California Government Code Section 65589.5(h)(2)(B) is subject to the provisions of SB 330:

1. The project consists of residential units only;

2. The project is a mixed-use development consisting of residential and non-residential uses with at least two-thirds of the square footage of the project designated for residential use, including dwelling units and any uses accessory to the residential units; or

3. The project is transitional or supportive housing.

New Preliminary Application Form. SB 330 creates a new vesting process for discretionary housing projects during the five-year period of the bill. It achieves this through the creation of a new “preliminary application” process that establishes a new date for the purposes of locking projects into the ordinances, policies, and standards in effect when a preliminary application (including all required information) is submitted and deemed complete. This vesting does not apply to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) determinations, including historic resource determinations pursuant to CEQA.

Once a complete Preliminary Housing Development Application is submitted (along with other required applications if applicable), the zoning, design, subdivision, and fee requirements in effect as of that date will remain applicable to the project for the duration of the review and entitlement process, provided that all the following provisions are satisfied:

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-162
• Complete discretionary entitlement applications must be submitted and accepted by the Planning Department within 180 days of the Preliminary Housing Development Application being deemed complete;
• If the entitlement applications are deemed incomplete after filing, the application must submit all missing or incomplete items to the Planning Department within 90 days of being notified in writing by Planning Department staff;
• The project may not increase by more than 20 percent in the number of units or total square footage indicated in the Preliminary Housing Development Application, except as the project may be revised using the State Density Bonus; and
• The project must commence construction within 30 months of site permit issuance.

Note that the following modifications may be required even when a Preliminary Housing Development Application is on file:
• Development impact fees, application fees, capacity and connection fees, or other charges may be annually adjusted based on a published cost index;
• Requirements necessary to avoid an adverse impact to public health or safety, or to avoid or lessen an impact under CEQA may be applied; and
• Applicants may submit a new or amended Preliminary Housing Development Application at any time, in which case the requirements in effect at that time shall apply.

The City has created a preliminary SB 330 process and checklist to streamline the design and approval of byright multi-family units within the community. Program H-F provides a by-right streamlined review process for affordable housing developments meeting state affordability thresholds, in compliance with SB 35 and SB 330.

Procedures for Selected Housing Types
The following section describes the processing and permit procedures for selected housing types that are typically used by lower income households. For more housing types, see the Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types section.

Multifamily Rental Housing
Multifamily rental housing is housing traditionally identified as any housing available for rent that has greater than one dwelling unit in a building. Some examples of multifamily rental housing include duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and apartment buildings. Multifamily rental housing is permitted entirely in the High Density Residential (HR) district only. Multifamily rental housing is permitted in the Medium Density Residential (MR) district only on parcels identified in the housing element. MR zoned parcels identified in the fifth cycle housing element are currently codified as being the MR zone parcels that allow multifamily housing. Currently, all multifamily rental housing projects, affordable and market rate, are subject to subjective design review.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-163
Therefore, multifamily rental housing is constrained by the design requirements set forth in the Zoning Code.

Program H-F is included to commit the City to adopting objective design standards to reduce barriers to multifamily rental housing and eliminate subjective design standards.

Mobile Homes
Mobile homes, or manufactured homes, are small, prefabricated homes which are often situated on rented portions of land in mobile home parks. Mobile homes can offer affordable pathways to home ownership and stable shelter for many low-income households. Mobile homes, as shown in Table 42 are permitted in all residential zoning districts in St. Helena. Mobile homes in St. Helena are subject to the following conditions in all residential zoning districts:
• To be occupied only as a single-family residential use, • To be subject to all provisions of the zoning ordinance applicable to conventionally built dwellings, • To be attached to a permanent foundation system in compliance with all applicable building regulations,
• To be covered with an exterior material customarily used on conventionally built dwellings extending to the top of the foundation,
• To have parapet walls or roofs which utilize shingles or other materials customarily used on conventionally built dwellings;
These requirements do not constitute a constraint to the development of mobile homes. However, mobile homes are subject to subjective design review, which poses a significant constraint to their development.

Program H-F is included to commits the City to incorporate objective design standards for single-family, small lot, and multifamily developments, including mobile homes, that provide a ministerial design review process for projects that meet zoning and design standards.

Housing for Agricultural Employees
Housing for agricultural employees is permitted in the agricultural zone for up to 36 persons, thus complying with California Health and Safety Code Section 17026.1. Housing for agricultural employees is also permitted for up to six persons in all residential zones and in the WW zone. Housing for agricultural employees is subject to subjective design review, which poses a significant constraint to development. Program H-F commits the City to incorporate objective design standards for single-family, small lot, and multifamily developments, including farmworker housing, that provide a ministerial design review process for projects that meet zoning and design standards.

Supportive and Transitional Housing
Supportive and transitional housing is permitted in the AP zone, all residential zones, and the WW zone.

Supportive and transitional housing is subject to subjective design review, which poses a significant constraint to development. Program H-F commits the City to incorporate objective design standards for single-family, Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-164
small lot, and multifamily developments, including transitional and support housing, that provide a ministerial design review process for projects that meet zoning and design standards.

Constraints to Housing for Persons with Disabilities
On January 1, 2002, SB 520 went into effect, requiring local jurisdictions to analyze potential governmental constraints to the development, improvement, and maintenance of housing for persons with disabilities as part of a jurisdictions housing element update. Under SB 520, housing elements must also include one of the following: 1) a program to remove constraints, or 2) provide reasonable accommodations for, “housing designed for occupancy by, or with supportive services for, persons with disabilities.” A jurisdiction can fulfill this second clause in a variety of ways including establishing policies that facilitate the provision of housing that is physically accessible to people with mobility impairments, residential care facilities for individuals with Alzheimer’s, housing for persons with AIDS/HIV, and transitional housing that serves homeless with disabilities.

Reasonable Accommodation
The City of St. Helena adopted a reasonable accommodation ordinance in 2015 that provides a procedure to request reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities seeking equal access to housing under the federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (the Acts) in the application of zoning laws and other land use regulations, policies, and procedures.

A request for reasonable accommodation may be made by any person with a disability, their representative or any entity, when the application of a zoning law or other land use regulation, policy or practice acts as a barrier to fair housing opportunities. A person with a disability is a person who has a physical or mental impairment that limits or substantially limits one or more major life activities, anyone who is regarded as having such impairment or anyone who has a record of such impairment. This chapter is intended to apply to those persons who are defined as disabled under the Acts.

A request for reasonable accommodation may include a modification or exception to the rules, standards and practices for the siting, development and use of housing or housing-related facilities that would eliminate regulatory barriers and provide a person with a disability equal opportunity to housing of their choice. Requests for reasonable accommodation shall be made in the manner prescribed in Section 17.200.030.

Requests for reasonable accommodation are submitted on an application form provided by the Planning Department, or in the form of a letter, to the Planning Director and should contain the following information:

1. The applicant’s name, address, and telephone number.

2. Address of the property for which the request is being made.

3. The current actual use of the property.

4. The basis for the claim that the individual is considered disabled under the Acts.

5. The zoning code provision, regulation or policy that is the subject of the applicant’s requested reasonable accommodation, and a narrative and graphic (where applicable) description of the specific accommodation requested.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-165

6. Why the reasonable accommodation is necessary to make the specific property accessible to the individual.

Requests for reasonable accommodation shall be reviewed by the Planning Director if no discretionary permit approval is required other than the request for reasonable accommodation. Requests for reasonable accommodation submitted for concurrent review with another discretionary permit application shall be reviewed by the review authority reviewing the discretionary permit application. The Director shall make a written determination within forty-five (45) days and either grant, grant with modifications, or deny a request for reasonable accommodation in accordance with Section 17.200.060. The written decision to grant or deny a request for reasonable accommodation will be consistent with the Acts and shall be based on a consideration of the following factors:

1. Whether the housing which is the subject of the request will be used by an individual considered disabled under the Acts.

2. Whether the request for reasonable accommodation is necessary to make specific housing available to an individual with a disability under the Acts.

3. Whether the requested reasonable accommodation would impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the town.

4. Whether the requested reasonable accommodation would require a fundamental alteration in the nature of a town program or law, including but not limited to land use or zoning.

5. Whether the requested reasonable accommodation would adversely impact surrounding properties or uses.

6. Whether there are reasonable alternatives that would provide an equivalent level of benefit without requiring a modification or exception to the City’s applicable rules, standards and practices.

7. Whether the accommodation would alter the significance of a historic structure.

In granting a request for reasonable accommodation, the Planning Director may impose any conditions of approval deemed reasonable and necessary to ensure that the reasonable accommodation would comply with the findings required by subsection A of this section, including but not limited to the following:

1. Inspection of the property periodically, as specified, to verify compliance with this chapter and any conditions of approval.

2. Removal of the improvements, where removal would not constitute an unreasonable financial burden, when the need for which the accommodation was granted no longer exists.

3. Time limits and/or expiration of the approval if the need for which the accommodation was granted no longer exists.

4. Recordation of a deed restriction requiring removal of the accommodating feature once the need for it no longer exists.

5. Measures to reduce the impact on surrounding uses.

6. Measures in consideration of the physical attributes of the property and structures.

7. Other conditions necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-166
A determination by the Planning Director to grant or deny a request for reasonable accommodation may be appealed to the City Council in compliance with Section 17.08.180.

The City's required finding “5. Whether the requested reasonable accommodation would adversely impact surrounding properties or uses” poses a potential constraint to housing for residents with disabilities seeking equal access to housing under the federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (the Acts). HCD indicates that, given its importance in addressing barriers to housing for persons with disabilities, reasonable accommodation should not impose discretionary findings similar to that of a Conditional Use Permit, such as impacts to surround uses. Program H-F commits the City to update the municipal code to remove this discretionary finding.

Zoning and Land Use
The City of St. Helena allows residential care facilities serving six or fewer persons as a permitted use in the LR1A, LR, MR, and HR residential zones. For compliance with state law, the City must allow these uses in any zone allowing single-family uses, subject only to the conditions imposed upon residential uses in the same zone. The City currently allows single-family homes in the A-20, W, and WW zones. The City should revise the municipal code to allow residential care facilities of six or fewer in these zones.

Residential care facilities serving seven or more persons require the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. A use permit requirement in zones allowing multifamily uses is a constraint to the development of these uses. The City should revise the municipal code to allow residential care facilities of six or fewer in these zones. 38 Program H-F commits the City to updating the municipal code to allow residential care facilities in all zones, subject only to the requirements imposed upon single-family uses; and facilities of seven or more in all zones, subject only to the same requirements as multifamily uses.39 The City’s parking and loading requirements do not have specific provisions related to persons with disabilities, but there is a provision stating that “rest homes, convalescent hospitals, residential care and similar group care facilities” require only one space for each four beds, which is a reduced requirement compared to the two parking spaces required for typical “one-and two-family dwelling units.”40 Consequently, the reduced parking requirements for group care facilities decrease the parking requirements for some disabled persons, but parking requirements for residential development need to serve all disabled persons.

Permits and Processing
The City’s permitting and processing procedures do not negatively affect the ability to design or retrofit homes that will be accessible for the disabled or constrain the siting of group homes. The City, however, applies the 38 City of St. Helena Municipal Code, Title 17.
39 City of St. Helena Municipal Code, Title 17.
40 City of St. Helena Municipal Code, Chapter 17.124: Parking and Loading Requirements Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-167
same process required for other renovations to retrofitting homes for accessibility, and the City does not have a special process for such retrofits.

As discussed above, residential and intermediate care facilities with fewer than six persons are permitted in residential zones. Although care facilities with seven or more persons are permitted with a Conditional Use Permit in the residential zones, no additional permits are required. This is consistent with the City’s requirements for other multifamily uses such as condominiums, townhomes, apartments, and dwelling groups containing more than four units, which also require a Conditional Use Permit. There are no additional requirements placed on residential or intermediate facilities.

Building Codes
In 2019, the City of St. Helena adopted the 2019 California Building Code with minor amendments. The changes made to this Code by the City, enumerated in the Governmental Constraints section of this document, do not unfairly treat residential and intermediate care homes differently than other residential uses.

Nevertheless, no specific exemptions to the 2019 California Building Code exist for housing for disabled persons. The City of St. Helena does not have local universal design requirements but adopted a reasonable accommodate ordinance in 2015 which provides a reasonable accommodation procedure related to "a zoning law or other land use regulation, policy or practice acts as a barrier to fair housing opportunities", including building codes and the issuance of Building Permits.

Definition of Family
The Municipal Code currently (2022) defined “family” as:
“Family” means any of the following groups living together in the same dwelling unit as a single housekeeping unit:

1. Any number of persons related by blood, marriage or legal adoption;

2. A nuclear family identified by extended cohabitation;

3. A group not exceeding five persons whose interpersonal relationships relating to shared household expenses, duties and private lives are indistinguishable from groups listed in subsections 1 and 2 above.

The definition of family in a jurisdiction’s municipal code can pose some challenges for persons with special needs who may have live-in caregivers, group home arrangements, or other arrangements not reflective of the typical nuclear family. Additionally, the definition used by a city can cause confusion or difficulty when applying to programs such as Community Development Block Grants, which use a more inclusive definition of a family unit.

In the previous element, Program 1.K was included to amend the zoning ordinance to define “family” as one or more persons living together as a single housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit, as required by State law. This change has not been made to the Zoning Code, however, all City actions are made in keeping with California Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-168
State law, as it has precedence over any in-consistent locally adopted land use definitions. The City is undergoing a comprehensive Zoning Code update, which will address the existing outdated adopted definition of “family.” Further, Program H-Fis included in this Housing Element, committing the City to updating this definition specifically.

Spacing or Concentration Requirements
The City of St. Helena does not have any additional spacing or concentration requirements for housing for persons with disabilities. There are no spacing requirements for group homes, residential care facilities, transitional housing facilities, and supportive housing facilities.

In the Service Commercial (SC) and Central Business (CB) districts, supportive housing is permitted only on the upper floors, which is the same requirement imposed on all other residential developments in these zones.

Locally Adopted Ordinances
St. Helena has passed five development-related local ordinances to help ensure growth of quality housing and to create a balance between the need for affordable housing and the market demands of the tourism industry.

Bed and Breakfast Inns
Bed and breakfast inns, a common sight in many tourist-oriented towns like St. Helena, are regulated by a use permit process that requires certain findings to be made, including that:

A. The establishment of a bed and breakfast inn is consistent with the purpose of the general plan, including policies regarding the displacement of rental units in the housing stock.

B. The establishment of a bed and breakfast inn will not be detrimental to a building, structure or feature of significant aesthetic, cultural, architectural or engineering interest or value of a historical nature.

C. The establishment of a bed and breakfast inn is compatible with and will not be detrimental to the character of the neighborhood and surrounding land uses. 41 Additionally, bed and breakfast inns are required to only use up to four bedrooms, a requirement that helps ensure that larger homes are still partially available for use as a permanent residential dwelling. Such affordances can be considered helpful to special needs groups, such as large households. Given these strict requirements, St. Helena’s bed and breakfast inns ordinance does not pose additional constraints to housing and helps limit potential reduction of housing units in the case of a homeowner wishing to convert their residential property to a bed and breakfast.

Short-Term Rentals
Short term rentals are strictly regulated in the City of St. Helena to reduce the impact on the area’s already scarce housing inventory. The City allows only twenty-five short-term rental permits at a time with a maximum 41 City of St. Helena. St. Helena Municipal Code, Title 17. http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/sthelena/. Accessed January 9, 2023.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-169
of four bedrooms in the household being used for short-term rentals. Additionally, the City restricts uses of the propety by guests and enforces additional regulations on sounds and general activities during the hours of 10 P.M. to 7 A.M. Given the strict measures in place, the short-term rentals ordinance doesn’t pose additional constraints to housing. Instead, the ordinance incentivizes property owners to use their homes for other uses with less stringent requirements, which may include long-term rentals.

Time-Share Uses
Time-shares are strictly regulated in the City of St. Helena, are considered commercial uses, and are permitted only in commercial zoning districts. Any existing housing stock in the city is prohibited from being converted into a time-share. As such, the time-share ordinance is not a constraint to housing, but instead assists with ensuring residential land is being put to more productive, residential purposes that assist with alleviating the existing housing crisis.

Affordable Housing
The City’s affordable housing ordinance is a codified ordinance that specifies how the City will provide density bonuses, concessions, and incentives for the construction of affordable housing projects that are designed for seniors, low-income, very low-income, and moderate-income (in the case of condonminiums) persons and families. The affordable housing ordinance also specifies how the City will grant priority for the provision of water and sewer services to affordable developments, a requirement stated in California Government Code Section 65589.7. The affordable housing ordinance also describes the process in which a person voluntarily donates land to the City for residential development use. The ordinance additionally allows for vehicular parking ratios to be beneath those required by the city, subject to Californai Government Code 65589.7 and a recorded covenant against the property.

The affordable housing ordinance does not pose any constraint to housing, but instead acts to formalize State mandated programs and laws designed to incentivize affordable housing.

Housing Trust Fund, Housing Impact Fee and Inclusionary/In-Lieu Fee Requirements In September 2004, the City Council passed Ordinance 2004-7 adding Chapter 17.146 Housing Trust Fund, Housing Impact Fee, and Inclusionary/In-Lieu Fee Requirements to the St. Helena Municipal Code. The regulations are designed so that new non-residential developments and additions are required to pay a housing impact fee and new residential developments containing five units or more are required to include 20 percent of their units as affordable housing, and developments with less than five units pay an in-lieu fee. The fees collected from the nonresidential and residential development then go into a Housing Trust Fund. The use of Housing Trust Fund monies is directed exclusively to “increase and improve the supply of housing affordable to households of moderate, low and very low income” including costs such as land, construction, financing, and reimbursements to the City.42 The monies are available for both ownership and rental projects and services. 42 St. Helena Municipal Code. 17.146.030
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-170
These affordable housing requirements do add additional cost to market rate residential development in the process of creating additional affordable housing in St. Helena. To minimize the impact on the price of market rate housing, the Municipal Code allows developers to submit an “alternative equivalent proposal” and offers a series of concessions or incentives.43 An “alternative equivalent proposal” enables developers to meet the affordable housing requirements through alternative means like dedicating vacant land as long as the proposed alternative aligns with the purpose of the Municipal Code and is approved by the City Council. Concessions and incentives that are automatically available to residential developers who construct inclusionary units include the opportunity to submit a preliminary development proposal, priority in the City application process, and fee deferment. In addition, the City Council can grant additional concessions and incentives including extra density bonuses, changes to City standards, and monetary assistance. The automatic and discretionary concessions and incentives help expedite the process of building affordable housing and therefore minimize the cost to developers.
43 St. Helena Municipal Code. 17.146.050
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-171

9. Opportunities for Energy Conservation
Government Code Section 65583(a) (7) requires the “analysis of opportunities for energy conservation with respect to residential development.” 44 This is important due to the key role played by energy efficiency in determining the relative affordability of housing. Lower rates of energy usage decrease utility costs for residents, making a housing unit more affordable. The discussion that follows outlines current State policies and development standards along with local City policies that promote energy conservation for new and existing development in the City of St. Helena.

Instituted by legislative action in 1978 to reduce overall energy consumption statewide, the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards set thresholds and guidelines for energy efficiency for both residential and nonresidential construction. The revised standards for 2022 went into effect August 11, 2021, under Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations. Title 24 is otherwise known as the California Building Standards Code. The energy requirements of the new State code are significantly more stringent than the prior codes (heat pump requirements for single-family and multi-family homes and businesses; electricity-ready requirements for single-family homes; and new solar power requirements for high-rises, hotels/motels, tenant spaces, offices, stores, restaurants, schools, and civic spaces) and are intended to progress to 100 percent clean electricity and carbon neutrality by 2050 or earlier.

In addition to the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, Part 11 of Title 24 contains California’s Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen). St. Helena adopted the revised standards in 2019, with amendments to require all new indoors plumbing fixtures to meet the 20 percent reduction in water use, a 20 percent reduction in cement use in foundations, and certified U.S. EPA Phase II certified wood-burning devices or pellet-fueled device. These amendments are not considered an impediment to housing development.

On a local level, the 2040 City of St. Helena General Plan Climate Change Element addresses energy conservation for residential development by including goals such as:
• reducing energy demand through improved building and design; • reducing consumption and divert waste; and
• increasing community engagement and advocacy.

The City participates in an AB811 program that allows commercial and residential property owners to finance renewable energy, water efficiency, and energy efficiency improvements through a property tax assessment.

Additionally, the City of St. Helena is currently implementing a program to reduce GHG emissions from City facilities and has an Active Transportation and Sustainability Committee and a Water Advisory Board that oversee its natural resources for energy conservation.
44 HCD Building Blocks for Effective Housing Elements, “Opportunities for Energy Conservation.” Accessed September 24, 2008. http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/housing_element/index.html.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-172
The City has included Programs H-RR through H-UU to educate, encourage, and fund pushes for energy conservation within the community. Through education provided by the City, residents, contractors, and property owners can learn about various ways to integrate energy conservation programs into St. Helena residential developments. The City also intends to stay up to date on State efficiency and building code standards to ensure new and rehabilitated housing developments provide future owners and tenants with longterm cost-savings and energy efficiency.45 Additionally, to further encourage energy efficiency, the City also aims to explore the possibility of offering low-interest loans for energy conservation measures, in addition to continuing to participate in AB-811 programs to finance local efforts. 45 See St. Helena Municipal Code Chapter 15.18
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-173

10. Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types
Key Findings
• St. Helena’s Zoning Code allows for a variety of housing types in the City including multiple-family units, transitional and supportive housing, single-room occupancy units, manufactured and mobile homes, and accessory dwelling units. However, to comply with Section 65915 through 65918 of the California Government Code, St. Helena should amend the Zoning Code to reflect the new maximum density bonus provisions that were adopted by the State in 2020. Additionally, St. Helena must also amend the Zoning Code to allow for low barrier navigation centers, consistent with State law.

Multiple-Family Rental Housing
The St. Helena Zoning Code allows multiple-family dwellings subject to design review in the High Density Residential (HR) zoning district. In addition, the Medium Density Residential (MR) district permits the construction of attached duplex or triplex units with a Conditional Use Permit.46 Multiple-family rental housing is subject to subjective design review, which poses a constraint to development. For more information regarding the design review process and development standards applied to multi-family housing, see the Governmental Constraints section.

Density Bonuses for Affordable Housing
Per California Government Code Sections 65915 through 65918, local governments are required to provide density bonus provisions to projects that comply with specific standards. Legislation approved in 2020 increased the maximum density bonus amounts for very-low-, low-, and moderate-income housing. The California Government Code describes how maximum densities shall be calculated for very low-, low-, and moderateincome housing in a tabular format. Additionally, local governments are also required to provide one or more incentives for qualifying projects and are required to accept an incentive proposed by a developer unless the incentive proposal is found to cause environmental harm, a health and safety issue, a cost reduction, a detriment to historical property, or otherwise contrary to law. Both density bonuses and incentives are granted based on the number of affordable units present in each project.

The City of St. Helena currently establishes density bonus provisions for affordable housing in Chapter 17.144 (Affordable Housing). The provisions in that Chapter do not reflect the new maximum density bonus tier framework that was adopted by the State in 2020. Because of this, the City is not currently in compliance and has included Program H-F to commit the City to amend the Zoning Code for compliance with California Government Code Sections 65915 through 65918. The City is currently (2023) undertaking a Comprehensive Zoning Code Update. Density bonus provisions in the Draft Zoning Code have been revised for compliance with State law. The Comprehensive Zoning Code Update is scheduled for adoption in fall 2023. 46 City of St. Helena. St. Helena Municipal Code, Title 17.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-174
Housing for Permanent and Seasonal Agricultural Employees Sections 17021.5 and 17021.6 of the California Health and Safety Code establish specific requirements for the permitting of agricultural employee housing in a jurisdictions’ zoning code. Specifically, Section 17021.5 mandates that “employee housing providing accommodations for six or fewer employees shall be deemed a single-family structure with a residential land use.” 47 Furthermore, designated employee housing, as defined above, cannot be subject to Conditional Use Permit requirements, zoning variance, fees, taxes, or any other requirement other than those pertaining to a traditional single-family structure. Section 17021.6 pertains to larger employee housing facilities featuring a maximum of 36 beds in group quarters, or 12 single-family units.

Under this legislation, such units are deemed an agricultural land use and cannot be subject to any restrictions, conditional use requirements, zoning variance, fees, taxes, or other requirements not imposed on other agricultural uses in the same zone.

The City is in compliance with Sections 17021.5 or 17021.6 of the California Health and Safety Code. The A-20, AP, and W zoning districts allow large employee housing facilities (12 units or 36 beds) by right. Whereas, the WW, LR-1A, LR, MR, and HR zoning districts allow agriculture employee housing for six or fewer persons subject to design review. Housing for permanent and seasonal agricultural employees is subject to subjective design review, which poses a significant constraint to development. Program H-F commits the City to amending the Zoning Code to replacing subjective design review with objective design standards and SB 330-compliant streamlined review. The City is currently (2023) undertaking a Comprehensive Zoning Code Update. The Draft Zoning Code incorporates objective development and design standards for residential development. These standards will apply to housing for permanent and seasonal agricultural employees. The Comprehensive Zoning Code Update is scheduled for adoption in fall 2023.

Zoning for Emergency Shelters, Transitional Housing, and Supportive Housing
AB-139 requires local government to identify a zone(s) where emergency shelters are allowed by-right without a conditional use or other discretionary permit. Local governments are authorized to impose only those development standards that apply to residential or commercial development within the same zone. However, a local government may impose specified objective standards, including standards for off-street parking based on demonstrated need, as specified. The intent of these regulations is to help streamline the development of varying housing types.

AB-139 requires the need for emergency shelter to be assessed based on the capacity necessary to accommodate the most recent homeless point-in-time count, the number of shelter beds available on a yearround and seasonal basis, the number of beds that go unused on an average monthly basis, and the percentage of those in emergency shelters that move to permanent housing. The bill also requires sufficient parking for employees and one space per two beds in the shelter. Under AB-139 and California Government Code Section 65651, local governments shall allow supportive and transitional housing as a by-right use in all districts where 47 California Government Health and Safety Code 17021.5 (b) Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-175
single-family and multiple-family dwelling unit uses are allowed. Additionally, the State requires that these uses be subject only to those regulations that apply to other residential dwellings (i.e., single-family dwellings, multiple-family dwellings) of the same type in the same district.

Emergency shelters are identified as a by-right use in the I and SC zoning districts. According to a Point in Time Count provided by the Chief of Police, there is one homeless person who resides in St. Helena. There are several parcels in these zones that can accommodate an emergency shelter, including APN 009-580-022-000 (I zoning district) and APN 009-194-005-000 (SC zoning district). These parcels are vacant, habitable, and in proximity to transportation and services. Combined, they total 1.48 acres and can provide capacity for 15 beds, by conservative assumption of 10 beds/acre.

Due to new State law, AB 2339, which amended Government Code section 65583 and took effect in 2023, jurisdictions must now provide capacity for emergency shelters in a zone(s) that allow residential uses and must expand the definition of emergency shelters to include other interim interventions, including but not limited to, navigation centers, bridge housing, and respite or recuperative care. The City is currently (2023) not in compliance with State law as it only allows emergency shelters by-right in the I and SC zones – which don’t allow residential uses – and does not include other interim interventions within the definition of emergency shelters. The City is working to meet these requirements through the currently ongoing (2023) Comprehensive Zoning Code Update by expanding the definition of emergency shelter to include interim interventions, and by allowing emergency shelters as a permitted use without a conditional use or other discretionary permit in the BPO zone where multifamily and single-room occupancy residential uses are permitted. There are several parcels in the BPO zone that could accommodate an emergency shelter, including APN 009-201- 019, an underutilized quarter-acre parcel. The parcel is an infrequently used parking lot with no structures or active uses, and an existing floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.0. The BPO zone allows an FAR of up to 0.5, indicating significant underutilization and an available potential building area of 5,625 square feet.

Additionally, the parcel is located in proximity to Safeway, a pharmacy, Adventist Health St. Helena’s cardiology clinic, the fire department, and high-quality transportation options along Main Street. Based on the calculation methodology established within Government Code Section 65583 by AB 2339 that requires a minimum of 200 square feet per person, this parcel alone has potential capacity for more than 28 people.

Program H-F includes actions committing the City to revising the Zoning Code to allow for emergency shelters in compliance with recent amendments to Government Code section 65583 subdivision (a)(4).

Further, emergency shelters, transitional housing, and supportive housing are subject to subjective design review, which poses a significant constraint to development. Program H-F commits the City to amending the Zoning Code to replacing subjective design review with objective design standards and SB 330-compliant streamlined review through the currently ongoing (2023) Comprehensive Zoning Code Update. The Draft Zoning Code (released October 2022) incorporated objective development and design standards for residential development. The Comprehensive Zoning Code Update is scheduled for adoption in fall 2023.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-176
The City is in compliance with State laws related to supportive housing, and transitional housing. The Zoning Code allows both supportive and transitional housing by-right in all residential zoning districts, and in nonresidential and mixed use zones subject to the same requirements imposed upon residential uses.

Residential Care Facilities
California Government Code Section 65583 requires that housing elements provide a program to “address and where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing for persons with disabilities. The program shall remove constraints to and provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for, intended for occupancy by, or with supportive services for, persons with disabilities.” In line with encouraging the development of housing for those with disabilities, the State requires that small, licensed residential care facilities (defined as facilities with six or fewer residents) be allowed “by right” in all residential zones. Additionally, the State, through HCD, requires that cities consider constraints to reasonable accommodation for large, licensed residential care facilities (defined as facilities with seven or more residents).48
The City of St. Helena allows residential care facilities serving six or fewer persons as by-right uses in the LR-1A, LR, MR, and HR residential zones. For compliance with state law, the City must allow these uses in any zone allowing single-family uses, subject only to the conditions imposed upon residential uses in the same zone. The City currently allows single-family homes in the A-20, W, and WW zones. The City should revise the municipal code to allow residential care facilities of six or fewer in these zones. Just like all other residential uses, residential care facilities are subject to design review, which poses a significant constraint to development.

Program H-F is included to commit the City to amending the Zoning Code to replacing subjective design review with objective design standards and SB330-compliant streamlined review through the currently ongoing (2023) Comprehensive Zoning Code Update. The Draft Zoning Code (released October 2022) incorporated objective development and design standards for residential development. The Comprehensive Zoning Code Update is scheduled for adoption in fall 2023.

Residential care facilities serving seven or more persons require the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. A use permit requirement in zones allowing multifamily uses is a constraint to the development of these uses. The City should revise the municipal code to allow residential care facilities of six or fewer in these zones. 49 Program H-F commits the City to updating the municipal code to allow residential care facilities in all zones, subject only to the requirements imposed upon single-family uses and facilities of seven or more in all zones, subject only to the same requirements as multifamily uses. 48 HCD Building Blocks for Effective Housing Elements, “Constraints for People with Disabilities.” Accessed May 19, 2022. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-blocks/constraints/constraints-for-people-with-disabilities.shtml 49 City of St. Helena Municipal Code, Title 17.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-177
Low Barrier Navigation Centers
California Government Code Section 65660 identifies low barrier navigation centers are facilities that focus on moving people into permanent housing and connecting temporary residents with opportunities for income, public benefits, health services, shelter, and housing. Similar to displaced persons shelters, these facilities are intended to accommodate people with disabilities, pets and their owners, partners (if not a gender-specific site), the storage of possessions, and survivors of domestic violence. Specifically, the State mandates that low barrier navigation centers have services “to meet the diverse needs of (the) population.” As of 2018, low barrier navigation centers are allowed, subject to design review, wherever multiple-family dwellings and mixed-use development are allowed. In addition, local governments may not impose parking requirements onto low barrier navigation centers.

The City is not currently in compliance and has included Program H-F to commit the City to amend the Zoning Code for compliance with California Government Code Section 65660. In updating the Code the City shall list low barrier navigation facilities as allowed by-right wherever multiple-unit dwellings and mixed-use development are allowed.

Single Room Occupancy (SRO)
Single-room occupancy residential units are a traditional form of affordable housing for very low- and lowincome individuals. These units consist of a single room, often between 80 and 250 square feet in size, with or without cooking and sanitary facilities, that is rented out, often on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis. The St.

Helena Municipal Code currently permits single-room occupancy type units in the form of Lodging Houses serving up to two paying occupants in an owner-occupied dwelling, as an accessory use in the LR and MR zoning districts. The HR zoning district currently allows single room occupancy units, subject to design review.

As defined under Chapter 17.04 of the Municipal Code, lodging houses are buildings other than hotels, motels or bed and breakfast inns, where individuals can pay a rent in exchange for accommodations, including room and board, or board alone. Lodging houses serving more than two and up to five occupants require a use permit. Accessory structures featuring cooking and sanitation facilities are required to meet design and building standards like those of standard single-family and second units. Units without such facilities are subject to significantly fewer requirements and are more likely to address very low- and low-income housing needs.50
Factory Built Housing and Mobile Homes
Government Code Section 65852.3(a) requires that manufactured and mobile homes, including the lots on which they are installed, meeting certain standards of construction and be subject to the same development standards that apply to conventional, stick built, single-family homes.51 In accordance with this legislation, the St. Helena Municipal Code, Title 17, defines a single-family dwelling to include a “mobilehome constructed to 50 City of St. Helena. St. Helena Municipal Code, Title 17. 51 GCS 65852.3(a) standards include the constructed or purchased after October 1976, certified under the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974, and installed on a foundation system pursuant to Section 18551 of the Health and Safety Code.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-178
meet 1976 HUD standards, when placed on a permanent foundation, which is designed or used exclusively as a residence, including only one dwelling unit.” 52 Mobile units meeting the above definition are permitted under single-family site development standards in all zones that allow single-family housing units.

In addition, the Low Density Residential (LR), Low Density Residential One Acre Minimum (LR-1A), Medium Density Residential (MR) and High Density Residential (HR) districts specifically permit as an allowed use, permanent mobile homes constructed in accordance with the 1974 safety standards and installed on a permanent foundation. Chapter 17.100 of the Municipal Code sets forth requirements for the Mobilehome Park Overlay (MHP) zoning district that applies the State Mobilehome Parks Act to the establishment and operation of mobilehome parks within the boundaries of the City of St. Helena.53 Under these provisions of the Municipal Code, St. Helena fully adheres to the State standards regarding manufactured and mobile homes, and mobile home parks. Factory built housing and mobile homes are subject to subjective design review, which poses a significant constraint to development. Program H-F is included to commit the City to amending the Zoning Code to replacing subjective design review with objective design standards and SB 330-compliant streamlined review through the currently ongoing (2023) Comprehensive Zoning Code Update, scheduled for adoption in fall 2023.

The Draft Zoning Code (released October 2022) incorporated objective development and design standards for residential development in compliance with State law.

Accessory Dwelling Units
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are defined as attached or detached dwelling units that provide independent living facilities on the same parcel as a legal single-unit or multiple-family unit dwelling, and which include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation. Due to the lower cost of construction and reduced environmental impact, the State has enacted many laws aimed at incentivizing the development of ADUs to help combat the worsening housing crisis. The State requires local governments to treat all ADUs that comply with specific standards as ministerial approvals. Local governments reserve the exclusive right to impose specific design and development standards, which include, but are not limited to setbacks, minimum and maximum parcel size, and maximum height. Second units are exempt from the GMS in Municipal Code Section

17.152.040.

On January 10, 2023, the City adopted a new ADU Ordinance for compliance with California Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22. The City now permits ADUs or JADUs on any lot that is zoned to allow singlefamily dwelling residential use or multifamily dwelling residential use (including all residential, mixed-use, and agriculturally zoned parcels). The updated Ordinance also addressed compliance issues related to the definition of a cooking facility, definition of an efficiency kitchen, allowing both an ADU and JADU for conversions on a lot with an existing or proposed single-family dwelling, separate conveyance of an ADU or JADU, and restricting bedroom count, to meet the requirements of State law.
52 City of St. Helena. St. Helena Municipal Code, Title 17. 53 City of St. Helena. St. Helena Municipal Code, Title 17.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-179
The City is currently undertaking a Comprehensive Zoning Code Update that will address any remaining compliance issues that HCD may find in their review of the newly Adopted ADU Ordinance. Program H-F in this Housing Element commits the City to revising the code for additional compliance with State law by 2026, though the City expects to adopt the Zoning Code Update in summer/fall 2023.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-180

11. Housing Resources
Future Housing Need
State Housing Element law requires that a local jurisdiction accommodate a share of the region’s projected housing needs for the planning period, called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Compliance with this requirement is measured by the City’s ability to provide adequate land with adequate density and appropriate development standards to accommodate the RHNA. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), as the regional planning agency, is responsible for allocating the RHNA to individual jurisdictions within the region.

For the sixth Housing Element cycle, the City of St. Helena has been allocated a RHNA of 256 units, divided into four income levels as follows:
• Very Low Income: 104 units (41 percent)12F
54 • Low Income: 59 units (23 percent)
• Moderate Income: 26 units (10 percent)
• Above Moderate Income: 67 units (26 percent)
The City must ensure the availability of residential sites at adequate densities and appropriate development standards to accommodate these units by income category.

Credits Towards RHNA
Projects with housing units approved or permitted that would not be occupied before the start of the planning period can be credited towards meeting the City’s RHNA. These units can count towards the RHNA based on affordability and unit count provided it can be demonstrated that the units can be built within the planning period of February 2023 through February 2031. Affordability (income category) is based on the actual or projected sale prices, rent levels, or other mechanisms establishing affordability of the units within the project.

In addition, the City can project the number of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) that may be built between 2023 and 2031, based on trends of ADU permitting during the last three years.

Pending or Approved/Entitled Projects
Currently there is one single-family residence and four moderate-income units, not to exceed 120 percent of the AMI, that are approved and undergoing building permit processing. In addition, there are 87 units that are pending planning/entitlement approval under the Hunter Subdivision project. While the Hunter Subdivision 54 The City has a RHNA allocation of 104 very low income units (inclusive of extremely low income units). Pursuant to State law (AB 2634), the City must project the number of extremely low income housing needs based on Census income distribution or assume 50 percent of the very low income units as extremely low. Therefore, the City generally estimates 52 extremely low and 52 very low income units.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-181
project is proposing approximately 25 affordable units, because the affordable agreements are not in place at the time of Housing Element, all unit credits were assumed to be above moderate.

On February 7, 2023, the Planning Commission approved a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the Hunter Subdivision project. The Project was presented to and discussed by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing on May 1, 2023. A second public hearing for the project is scheduled for June 2023 where City Council action on the proposed project is expected to occur. If approved by the City Council, the applicant will need to record the tentative tract map with Napa County Recorders Office which is expected in the fall of 2023 and then submit for final map approval by the City Council in late 2023 to early 2024. The project may then undergo Design Review which could be completed within 12 months of final map approval; with the issuance of building permits expected in 2025. As referenced in Chapter 8, Non-Governmental and Governmental Constraints, recent trends show building permits were issued within four months of entitlement approval for recent housing unit developments, with many projects receiving building permits within a week of entitlement approval. Program H-A further ensures the City is committed to supporting the Hunter Subdivision project through completion and finding alternative solutions if the project is not meeting timelines for the 6th Cycle. As an alternate strategy should there be delays with the Hunter Subdivision beyond control of the City, such as developer financing challenges, the City has also included surplus capacity of 116 units in the above moderate-income category to ensure capacity to meet the RHNA is sustained throughout the planning period.

Table 43 details the pending and entitled projects with housing units.

Table 43 Pending and Entitled Projects
Project
Number Address APN Zoning Project Description Net Units PL20-046 777 Pratt Ave. 009-030-060 Twenty-acre
Agriculture
District (A-20)
Construction of a single-family
residence
1 above
moderateincome
PL20-015 963 Pope St. 009-090-
012/013
Medium
Density
Residential
Construction of four (4) new deed
restricted affordable housing
units on a site with one (1)
existing deed restricted unit.
1 moderate
and 4 lowerincome
#2010-40 Terminus of
Adams Street
009-030-057 Medium
Density
Residential
Hunter Subdivision Tentative
Map to subdivide the 16.9-acre
parcel into 51 single-family lots
and a 3.4-acre multi-family
parcel. The applicant intends to
construct 51 single-family
residences, 11 ADUs, and 25
multi-family units.
87 above
moderateincome*
*The project is subject to Inclusionary Housing requirements with 20% affordable housing.

Projected Accessory Dwelling Units
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.1, the City can satisfy its regional housing need using ADU and junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU) trends and existing resources and incentives that promote their development. Using 2018-2021 data on ADUs/JADUs, the City has issued permits for approximately 9 ADUs on average. Extending this trend over the next 8 years, the City can assume approximately 72 ADU units will be permitted over the next planning period. Feedback from public outreach and research on ADU rental prices indicated that ADUs are typically rented at market rate and should be considered above moderate.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-182
Remaining RHNA
Accounting for the entitled, approved and pending projects, as well as projected ADUs, the City has a remaining RHNA of approximately 184 units, including 159 lower- and 25 moderate-income units. Existing pending and approved projects and ADU trends currently meet the City’s above moderate RHNA requirement. Table 44 details the existing progress towards the 6th cycle RHNA and the remaining RHNA that the City must demonstrate the availability of sites with appropriate zoning and development standards.

Table 44 Progress Towards RHNA
Income/
Affordability Category RHNA Allocation Pending or Approved Estimated ADUs Remaining RHNA Lower 163 4 0 159
Moderate 26 1 0 25
Above Moderate 67 88 72 0
Total 256 92 72 184
Residential Site Inventory
Following the analysis of RHNA credits, specific sites throughout the city were considered for potential for housing development. Site selection for the residential site inventory started with City owned sites where residential development is in line with short-term City goals, then vacant and nonvacant sites zoned for residential use, and lastly sites that could be rezoned to accommodate residential development or residential development at a higher density. Several constraints were considered for each site, including environmental concerns, utility or infrastructure access, feasibility of redevelopment during the next planning period, and realistic capacity assumptions. Sites identified for lower income housing must meet certain density and site requirements, including a minimum density of 20 units per acre, parcel size between 0.5 and 10 acres, and access to high performing schools, jobs, amenities, health care facilities, and grocery stores. Zoning designations with allowable density appropriate for lower income housing capacity include Mixed Use (12-20 du/ac) and High Density Residential (16-26 du/ac).

City-Owned Sites
A review of City-owned properties for sites that are feasible for housing and reflect City priorities was conducted by the City Council in 2021. There are three City-owned properties (1480 Main Street, 1572 Railroad Avenue, and Adams Street/Library Lane) where near-term affordable housing development is in line with community and City priorities for these sites. In 2015, Vernazza Wolfe Associates, Inc conducted a Feasibility Analysis and Comparison of Sites for New Affordable Housing Development which looked at site feasibility and capacity for each of the three City-owned sites. The study evaluated potential risks and time to develop each site and identified the number of units, cost per unit, and funding gaps associated with each site. The analysis determined the three City-owned sites included in the site inventory are suitable for development of housing with 100 percent of units dedicated to lower-income housing. The capacity analysis factored in the size of the site, buildable footprints, maximum allowable floor area ratio and height, a ground-floor commercial Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-183
assumption, and required open and support services spaces. The inventory incorporated the 2015 site feasibility and capacity analysis and revised certain assumptions as needed based on land use changes and new density bonus law. The City is interested in redeveloping these sites and intends to conduct studies to determine the most efficient use of these sites for housing and proceed with the findings for housing development by 2025, consistent with Program H-L. In 2022, the City hired an appraiser to get the most current real estate valuation of all city surplus sites. The City is engaging the services of a consultant in spring 2023 to help begin the surplus land act process.

Site 1: 1480 Main Street (APN 009-211-016)
Table 45 Site 1 Summary
Current Use Fire Stations and Vacant City Hall Structures Parcel Size 1.66 acres (0.9 acres available for redevelopment) Existing General Plan Land Use Central Business and Public/Quasi-Public Existing Zoning Public/Quasi-Public
Proposed Land Use and Zoning Mixed-Use
Allowed Density 12 to 20 units/acre
Site Capacity 22 units
Assumed Capacity and Income
Category 6 Lower Income units
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-184
Site 1 is a 1.66-acre property owned by the City of St. Helena located at 1480 Main Street. City goals for the site include redevelopment of the portion of the site fronting Main Street with a visitor-serving commercial uses as a primary use and housing as a secondary use. The site is currently developed with the St. Helena Fire Department on the northern portion of the site and a vacant one-story building on the southwestern portion of the site. Only the vacant components of the site are proposed for redevelopment. A General Plan Amendment and Rezone change is proposed to change the land use and zoning designation from Central Business & Public/Quasi-Public to Mixed-Use. While the Mixed-Use Zone could potentially support 100 percent commercial development, the City has identified this site as suitable for mixed use housing development with intentions to develop.

The 2015 site feasibility and capacity analysis evaluated housing capacity of the site by analyzing current and adjacent land uses and zoning, site topography, environmental sensitivities, service connection feasibility, as well as setback, height, lot coverage, FAR, density, parking, and landscape requirements. The analysis identified two development scenarios for the site, resulting in a maximum capacity of approximately 44 units in scenario one or 46 units in scenario two. The assessment also accounted for the required number of-site parking spaces, 82 spaces in scenario one and 88 in scenario two. No environmental constraints or service connection obstacles were identified on the site. According to the analysis, development of 44 housing units would result in a building lot coverage of approximately 39 percent in both development scenarios. In the Draft Zoning Code there is currently no standard for building coverage in the proposed Mixed-Use zone, therefore the resulting lot coverage would not conflict with the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Due to the existing Fire Department, the site developable area is assumed to be approximately 0.9 acres (the location of the vacant building on the southwestern portion of the site), which is approximately half the area assumed in the 2015 analysis. The inventory conservatively assumes a maximum of 6 housing units, as the site area could approximately 22 units based on half the units assumed in the 2015 study.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-185
Site 2: 1572 Railroad Avenue (APN 009-193-002)
Table 46 Site 2 Summary
Current Use Temporary City Hall
Parcel Size 0.93 acres
Existing General Plan Land Use Business and Professional Office Existing Zoning Business and Professional Office
Proposed Land Use and Zoning High Density Residential
Allowed Density 16.1 to 26 units/acre
Site Capacity 24 units
Assumed Capacity and Income
Category 20 Lower Income units
Site 2 is a 0.93-acre property owned by the City of St. Helena located at 1572 Railroad Avenue. City goals are in line with affordable housing development on the site. This site is currently used as a temporary location for City Hall. A General Plan Amendment and Rezone is proposed to change the land use and zoning designation to High Density Residential.

The entire 0.93-acre site is able to be redeveloped with the removal of the existing buildings. Based on allowed density under High Density Residential, 24 units would be permitted as a baseline. Density bonus provisions allowed with affordable housing projects would increase the number of units permitted on-site. However, 20 lower-income units were assumed in order to ensure adequate off-street parking capacity. According to the 2015 site feasibility and capacity analysis, which evaluated housing capacity of the site by analyzing current and adjacent land uses and zoning, site topography, environmental sensitivities, service connection feasibility, as well as setback, height, lot coverage, FAR, density, parking, and landscape requirements, the site can accommodate a total of 20 housing units with adequate area for the required 38 parking spaces. According to Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-186
the 2015 assessment, development of 20 housing units on the site would result in a building lot coverage of approximately 31 percent and would be consistent with the maximum lot coverage allowed in High Density Residential zone, 45 percent. The 2015 feasibility analysis and site assessment did not identify any environmental constraints or service connection obstacles that would affect redevelopment of the site. Twenty housing units is slightly higher than 80 percent of the maximum allowable density, at 83 percent. However, given that the City owns and intends to redevelop the site for housing and that this is consistent with the findings 2015 site feasibility and capacity analysis, the development of 20 housing units on-site is considered feasible.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-187
Site 3: Adams Street (APN 009-150-006)
Table 47 Site 3 Summary
Current Use Vacant
Parcel Size 5.6
Existing General Plan Land Use Central Business
Existing Zoning Central Business
Proposed Land Use and Zoning Central Business
Allowed Density n/a
Site Capacity n/a
Assumed Capacity and Income
Category 31 Lower Income units
Site 3 is a 5.6-acre property owned by the City of St. Helena located at the terminus of Adams Street and the crossroads of Adams Street/Library Lane. City priorities of the site include a mix of public, commercial, and residential uses. The site is currently vacant but being leased for a small vineyard operation. No land use changes are proposed as residential uses are permitted on upper stories within the Central Business district.

The site inventory assumes a portion of the site, approximately 1.3 acres, would be dedicated for affordable housing, while the remainder of the site would be used for other public and commercial uses such as a potential location for City Hall and Police station. Based on the 2015 site feasibility and capacity analysis, which evaluated housing capacity of the site by analyzing current and adjacent land uses and zoning, site topography, environmental sensitivities, service connection feasibility, as well as setback, height, lot coverage, FAR, density, Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-188
parking, and landscape requirements, approximately 31 units could be accommodated on the portion of the site adjacent to the Public Library. The site would also accommodate 58 parking spaces where only 53 are required.

According to the 2015 site feasibility and capacity analysis, development of 31 housing units on the 1.3 acre portion of the site would result in a building lot coverage of 28 percent. There is no standard for building coverage in the Central Business zone, therefore the resulting lot coverage would not conflict with the City’s Zoning Ordinance. No environmental sensitivities or service connection constraints were identified for the site.

This site was identified as a housing opportunity site in the 5th housing element cycle.

Privately Owned Vacant and Nonvacant Properties
After reviewing the pending and approved projects, existing ADU/JADU trends, and City-owned properties, additional capacity is needed to fully accommodate the City’s RHNA and to allow for a buffer. A desktop and City tour of parcels that could accommodate more housing and meet the City’s regional housing needs was conducted. Pursuant to Government Code section 65583.2(a), these included:
• Vacant sites zoned for residential use
• Vacant sites zoned for nonresidential use that allow residential development • Residentially zoned sites that are capable of being developed at a higher density than existing conditions
• Commercially zoned sites that are capable of being developed at a higher residential density than existing conditions
• Sites suitable for rezoning to allow for residential uses or allow residential uses at a high density • Sites zoned for residential use or suitable for rezoning to allow residential uses with expressed property owner interest for residential development
Suitability of Nonvacant Sites
The City has recently seen redevelopment of nonvacant, residentially zoned parcels for housing development.

Recently redeveloped parcels included those with existing single-family residences. In addition, the City has recently seen the development of housing on sites with existing vineyards. Examples of recent development trends in residential zones and on properties with existing vineyards include the following:
• 632 McCorkle Avenue: The completed project demolished an existing single family residence to construct 8 new housing units
• 684 McCorkle Avenue: The completed project demolished an existing single family residence to construct 8 new, affordable housing units
• 963 Pope Street: The approved project merged two existing parcels with an existing single family home and constructed 4 new multi-family housing units; all 5 units will be affordable • 500 Mills Lane: The completed project constructed a single-family residence, ADU, and barn on a property with an existing vineyard
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-189
• 601 Fulton lane: The completed project constructed a single-family residence, ADU, and barn on a property with an existing vineyard
The site inventory identified nonvacant residentially zoned sites with similar conditions to trends detailed above (nonvacant sites with existing, single-family residences). The projects listed above were infill sites that redeveloped parcels with existing single family residences with multi-family developments and affordable housing. These projects were located on parcels zoned Medium and High Density Residential. The conditions and characteristics of these projects are similar to Sites 6, 7, and 9 which each have one existing single-family residence and are zoned Median and High Density Residential.

The 632 McCorkle Avenue project had a density of 14.9 units per acre which is 57 percent of the maximum allowed density of the site, the 684 McCorkle Avenue project had a density of 14.7 units per acre which is 56 percent of the maximum allowed density, and the 601 Fulton Lane project had a density of 17.1 units per acre which is 107 percent of the maximum allowed density. The recent redevelopment projects have an average density of 15.5 units per acre, which equates to an average of 73 percent of the maximum allowed density on each site. The site inventory assumes a capacity of approximately 80 percent of the maximum allowed density on each site. This is slightly higher than the average density of recently constructed and approved projects.

However, the sites identified in the inventory are larger than the recent redevelopment projects listed above which allows for more efficient layout and greater capacity for development. In addition, two of the three recently redeveloped sites were narrow parcels where the parcel size and shape limited the configuration and available area for housing development on-site.

Other jurisdictions in the region have also seen redevelopment of nonvacant, residentially zoned parcels for housing development as well. Additional redevelopment projects on nonvacant, residentially zoned parcels in the region include the following:
• City of Calistoga – 2008 Grant Street: The approved project includes demolition of an existing residential structure, a three-sided wooden garage, and a large, fire-damaged shed on a 5.84-acre parcel and construction of 15 single-family homes
• City of Calistoga – Yellow Rose Ranch: The proposed project consists of the demolition of an existing single-family residence, barn, and four accessory buildings and construction of 46 single-family homes, 33 attached ADUs, and 12 detached ADUs
• City of Napa - Browns Valley Subdivision: The proposed project includes the demolition of a singlefamily residence, barn, and several outbuildings and construction of 11 single-family homes • City of Napa – Old Sonoma Road Mixed Use: The proposed project includes the demolition of nine existing non-historic buildings and rehabilitation of three existing historic buildings into two townhome clusters, six new condominium structures, eight single-family homes, and commercial space. The project proposes a total of between 155 and 162 housing units.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-190
• City of Napa – Redwood Grove Housing: The proposed project includes the removal of an existing single-family residence and construction of a two-story, 34-unit, multi-family, 100 percent affordable housing development.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-191
Site 4: 905 Main Street (APN 009-180-008)
Table 48 Site 4 Summary
Current Use Vacant
Parcel Size 0.27 acres
Existing General Plan Land Use Mixed-Use
Existing Zoning Service Commercial
Proposed Land Use and Zoning Mixed-Use
Allowed Density 12 to 20 units/acre
Site Capacity 5 units
Assumed Capacity and Income
Category 4 Above Moderate Income units
Site 4 is a 0.27-acre property located at 905 Main Street. The property is a vacant site in a location prime for development along Main Street. The property owner has expressed interest in development of the site with housing and community members have expressed support for this use. A zoning change is proposed to change the zoning designation from Service Commercial to Mixed-Use, which would bring the property into conformance with the existing General Plan land use designation and incentivize owner redevelopment of the site due to the new allowed on-site uses. In addition, mixed-use development incentives anticipated under Program H-P, such as streamlined design review and fee waivers, would further encourage development of housing on the site. The Mixed-Use land use designation is a new designation introduced in the City’s recent 2040 General Plan Update. The City is currently in the process of updating the Zoning Ordinance to include a Mixed-Use zone consistent with the General Plan and anticipates adopting these changes in Fall of 2023.

Because the Mixed-Use zone has not yet been adopted in the Zoning Ordinance, there are no recent development trends in the city for sites zoned Mixed-Use. According to the City of Napa’s Housing Element Update, two recent mixed-use projects in the city had an average of 92 percent of the maximum allowed Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-192
density of the sites. Napa’s sites inventory assumed a realistic density of 80 percent of the maximum allowed density of each site based on the density of recent mixed-use developments, which averaged 83 percent of the maximum allowed density.55 There is potential that Site 4 could be developed with 100 percent commercial uses. However, the inventory only includes one site with a Mixed Use land use and only a total of four abovemoderate housing units. In addition, the property owner has expressed to the City that they are interested in developing housing on the site. The site is vacant, and the entire 0.27-acre site is able to be developed. Based on 80 percent of the maximum allowed density under Mixed-Use, four above-moderate income units are feasible.
55 City of Napa. 2022. Housing Element Update.
file:///C:/Users/lsegal/Downloads/Napa%20Housing%20Element%20Rev%2002%2020230216.pdf Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-193
Site 5: Main Street between Mills Lane and Dowdell Lane (APN 009-660-005) Table 49 Site 5 Summary
Current Use Vacant
Parcel Size 1.8 acres
Existing General Plan Land Use Service Commercial
Existing Zoning Service Commercial
Proposed Land Use and Zoning High Density Residential
Allowed Density 16.1 to 26 units/acre
Site Capacity 45 units
Assumed Capacity and Income
Category 45 Lower Income units
Site 5 is a 1.8-acre property located on Main Street between Mills Lane and Dowdell Lane. The property is a vacant site in a location prime for development along Main Street. The site is privately owned currently but a local affordable housing non-profit has secured an exclusive option to purchase the property to develop affordable housing, consistent with an approved development agreement for the Farmstead Hotel. A General Plan Amendment and Rezone is proposed to change the land use and zoning designation from Service Commercial to High Density Residential to allow for affordable housing development. The affordable housing project is in the preliminary site design phase which is pending pursuant to adoption of the Housing Element Update and subsequent rezoning of the property to accommodate multi-family housing.

The entire 1.8-acre site is vacant and able to be developed. Based on allowed density under High Density Residential, a total of 45 housing units would be permitted. The affordable housing non-profit organization that owns the site intends to develop a housing project affordable to households earning between 30 percent and 60 percent of the AMI (very low- and low-income). A conceptual site plan was analyzed which determined Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-194
four-story development along Fountain Court and three-stories along Main Street with structured parking could yield approximately 45 units and all required parking spaces. The inventory assumes 45 units. While this is greater than 80 percent of the maximum allowable density of the site, it is consistent with the non-profit’s project plans and less than the maximum density of the project site (46 units).

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-195
Site 6: 709 McCorkle Avenue (APN 009-100-031)
Table 50 Site 6 Summary
Current Use Single Family Residences
Parcel Size 0.9 acres
Existing General Plan Land Use Medium Density Residential Existing Zoning Medium Density Residential
Proposed Land Use and Zoning Medium Density Residential Allowed Density 14 units/acre
Site Capacity 5 units
Assumed Capacity and Income Category 4 Above Moderate Income units Site 6 is composed of a 0.9-acre property located at 709 McCorkle Avenue. The property is underutilized with one existing single family residence and a large undeveloped space. The site is considered underutilized based on the additional density, FAR, height, and lot coverage available.

The property owner along with community members and local nonprofit groups expressed interest in developing more housing on the site. The property owner inquired with the City regarding the possibility of subdividing the property pursuant to SB9, which would allow the lot to be split into two lots with development of up to two units on each lot. The current land use and zoning designation is Medium Density Residential and no changes to land use or zoning are proposed. The site is currently underutilized and does not meet the maximum density allowed under the Medium Density Residential Zone (16 units/acre) with a current density of 1 unit per acre. The site currently has 1 unit, which is approximately 7 percent of the total allowed capacity. The Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-196
existing building lot coverage is about seven percent of the site, allowing for an additional 38 percent coverage for new structures.

The site is composed of a single family lot which could accommodate 14 units under current land use regulations. Due to the existing residence on the site, the inventory conservatively assumed additional units would be added pursuant to SB 9. Each lot can be split into two lots with development of up to 2 units on each lot, for a total of 4 above moderate units (a net increase of 3 units). In addition, each lot could develop ADUs for a total net capacity of 5 units. However, a total of 4 above moderate income units were assumed, given the property owner’s development interests.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-197
Site 7: 821 Pope Street (APN 009-503-001)
Table 51 Site 7 Summary
Current Use Single Family Residence
Parcel Size 1.0 acres
Existing General Plan Land Use High Density Residential Existing Zoning High Density Residential
Proposed Land Use and Zoning High Density Residential
Allowed Density 16.1 to 26 units/acre
Site Capacity 26 units
Assumed Capacity and Income
Category 10 Lower Income and 10 Moderate Income units
Site 7 is a 1.0-acre property located at 821 Pope Street. The site is underutilized with one existing single-family residence and large undeveloped areas on-site. The site is considered underutilized based on the additional density, FAR, height, and lot coverage available.

Land use designations and existing development surrounding the site consist of multi-family housing. The current land use and zoning designation is High Density Residential and no changes to zoning are proposed.

This site mirrors the condition of properties that were recently redeveloped with multi-family housing in the city.

Similar to the 632 McCorkle Avenue, 684 McCorkle Avenue, and 963 Pope Street projects, this site contains existing single family residences on a large parcel but is underutilized as it is located on a High Density Residential zone
The entire 1.0-acre site is able to be redeveloped. Based on allowed density under High Density Residential, development of 26 units would be permitted. However, a total of 20 units, 10 lower income units and 10 Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-198
moderate income units, is assumed in order to accommodate off-street parking capacity. The site is currently underutilized and does not meet the minimum density of the High Density Residential Zone (16.1 units/acre) with a current density of 1 unit per acre. The site currently has 1 unit, which is approximately 4 percent of the total allowed capacity. The existing building lot coverage is about 16 percent of the site, allowing for an additional 29 percent coverage for new structures or up to 45 percent if the site is redeveloped.

This site was included in the 5th Cycle Housing Element and is considered non-vacant, therefore requiring byright approval for projects with at least 20% affordable units.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-199
Site 8: 882 and 886 College Avenue (APN 009-070-043, -044, -045) Table 52 Site 8 Summary
Current Use Vacant
Parcel Size 1.5 acres
Existing General Plan Land Use Public/Quasi-Public
Existing Zoning A-20 (Agriculture)
Proposed Land Use and Zoning High Density Residential
Allowed Density 16.1 to 26 units/acre
Site Capacity 39 units
Assumed Capacity and Income
Category 15 Lower Income and 15 Moderate Income units
Site 8 is composed of three adjacent properties that total 1.5 acres located at 882 and 886 College Avenue. All three properties are vacant and are owned by a single property owner who has expressed interest in residential development on these properties. The site is adjacent to areas with existing multi-family development. A General Plan Amendment and zoning change is proposed to change the land use and zoning designation from Public/Quasi-Public and Agriculture to High Density Residential.

The entire 1.5-acre site is able to be redeveloped. Based on allowed density under High Density Residential, 39 units would be permitted. However, a total of 30 units, 15 lower-income units and 15 moderate income units, is assumed in order to accommodate off-street parking capacity. Future development of the site would not be dependent upon lot consolidation as all three parcels are under the same ownership. Furthermore, Program H-ZZ would incentivize lot consolidation at the time the property is developed.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-200
Site 9: 1447 and 1515 Spring Street (APN 009-590-003, -010) Table 53 Site 9 Summary
Current Use Single Family Residences
Parcel Size 2.4 acres
Existing General Plan Land Use High Density Residential Existing Zoning High Density Residential
Proposed Land Use and Zoning High Density Residential
Allowed Density 16.1 to 26 units/acre
Site Capacity 62 units
Income Category 24 Lower Income and 24 Above Moderate Income units Site 9 is composed of two adjacent properties that total 2.4 acres located at 1447 and 151 Spring Street. Both properties are underutilized with one existing single-family residence and large undeveloped areas on each parcel. The overall site is considered underutilized based on the additional density, FAR, height, and lot coverage available. This site mirrors the condition of properties that were recently redeveloped with multifamily housing in the city. Similar to the 632 McCorkle Avenue, 684 McCorkle Avenue, and 963 Pope Street projects, this site contains existing single family residences on large parcels but is underutilized as it is located on a High Density Residential zone. The site is surrounded by single- and multi-family development and sites zoned High Density Residential, similar to the 632 McCorkle Avenue and 684 McCorkle Avenue projects. The current land use and zoning designation is High Density Residential and no changes to zoning are proposed.

The entire 2.4-acre site is able to be redeveloped. Based on allowed density under High Density Residential, 62 units would be permitted. However, a total of 48 units, 24 lower income units and 24 above moderate income units, is assumed in order to accommodate site circulation improvements and adequate off-street parking Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-201
capacity. The site is currently underutilized and does not meet the minimum density of the High Density Residential Zone (16.1 units/acre) with a current density of 0.83 units/acre. The site has two existing housing units, which equals approximately three percent of the total allowed capacity of the site (62 units). The existing building lot coverage is approximately eight percent and the maximum allowed lot coverage is 45 percent.

Future development of the site would not be dependent upon lot consolidation as all three parcels are under the same ownership. Furthermore, Program H-ZZ would incentivize lot consolidation at the time the property is developed.

This site was included in the 5th Cycle Housing Element, therefore requiring by-right approval for projects with at least 20% affordable units.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-202
Site 10: Spring Street between Hudson Avenue & Valley View Street (APN 009-441-023) Table 54 Site 10 Summary
Current Use Vineyard
Parcel Size 4.4 acres
Existing General Plan Land Use Medium Density Residential Existing Zoning Medium Density Residential
Proposed Land Use and Zoning High Density Residential
Allowed Density 16.1 to 26 units/acre
Site Capacity 114 units
Assumed Capacity and Income
Category 44 Lower Income and 44 Moderate Income units
Site 10 is a 4.4-acre parcel located on Spring Street between Hudson Avenue and Valley View Street. Recent property owner interest in residential development of the site indicates opportunity for housing. Additionally, Focus Group meetings showed interest in High Density Residential uses on this residentially zoned parcel in the form of town homes, which is compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhoods. The site is considered underutilized as it has a residential land use designation but is currently used as vineyards. As previously discussed, the City has seen recent development of housing on properties with existing vineyards.

Site 10 has greater development potential than the recently developed vineyard parcels since it is located on a residentially zoned parcel, while the 500 Mills Lane and 601 Fulton Lane projects were located on parcels with a land use and zoning designation of Agriculture and therefore are only allowed to develop one housing unit and one ADU per parcel. A General Plan Amendment and zoning change is proposed to change the zoning from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-203
The entire 4.4-acre site is able to be redeveloped. Based on allowed density under High Density Residential, 114 units would be permitted. However, a total of 88 units, 44 lower income units and 44 moderate income units, is assumed in order to accommodate adequate off-street parking capacity. The site is currently underutilized and does not meet the maximum density allowed under the Medium Density Residential Zone (16 units/acre) or the minimum density allowed under the proposed land use change to High Density Residential (16.1 units/acre) with a current density of 0 units per acre. The site currently has no on-site development and would be allowed 45 percent lot coverage, or approximately 86,000 square feet of building footprints.

This site was included in the 5th Cycle Housing Element and is considered non-vacant, therefore requiring byright approval for projects with at least 20% affordable units.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-204
Site 11: 1637 Spring Street (APN 009-600-018)
Table 55 Site 11 Summary
Current Use 8 Detached Residential Housing Units
Parcel Size 1.1 acres
Existing General Plan Land Use Medium Density Residential Existing Zoning High Density Residential
Proposed Land Use and Zoning High Density Residential
Allowed Density 16.1 to 26 units/acre
Site Capacity 28 units
Assumed Capacity and Income
Category 8 Additional Lower Income units
Site 11 is a 1.1-acre parcel located at 1637 Spring Street. Recent property owner interest in adding housing units on-site indicates there is opportunity to develop additional housing. The property owner emailed City Staff on March 7, 2022, interested in the development of additional housing units on the property . The property owner stated a desire to double the number of housing units on the site and expressed support for changing the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential, to match the current zoning.

Further, correspondence with the property owner confirmed they are interested in including the site in the site inventory. The land use designation of the site is currently Medium Density Residential, changed from High Density Residential during the latest General Plan Update in 2019. However, the site is still zoned High Density Residential and is adjacent to other parcels zoned High Density Residential. A General Plan Amendment is proposed to change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential, in conformance with the current zoning designation.

Based on allowed density under High Density Residential, a total of 28 units would be permitted. With the existing 8 units and current on-site structures, the site is underutilized based on density, FAR, and lot coverage.

Based on discussions with the property-owner and existing site layout, approximately 8 additional units could Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-205
be accommodated on-site. Therefore, the inventory assumed 8 lower income units, resulting in 16 units total on-site, based on the property owner’s development interests. The site is underutilized and currently does not meet the minimum density of the High Density Residential Zone (16.1 units/acre) with a current density of 7.3 units/acre. The site has 8 existing housing units, which equals approximately 29 percent of the total allowed capacity of the site (28 units). The existing building lot coverage is approximately 30 percent and the maximum allowed lot coverage is 45 percent.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-206
Site 12: 620 McCorkle Avenue (APN 009-502-003)
Table 56 Site 12 Summary
Current Use Single Family Residence
Parcel Size 0.76 acres
Existing General Plan Land Use Medium Density Residential Existing Zoning Medium Density Residential
Proposed Land Use and Zoning Medium Density Residential Allowed Density 5.1 to 16 units/acre
Site Capacity 12 units
Assumed Capacity and Income
Category 3 Additional Above Moderate Income units
Site 12 is a 0.76-acre parcel located at 620 McCorkle Avenue. The site is considered underutilized as it is zoned medium density residential but is currently developed with a single family residence. The site is considered underutilized based on the additional density, FAR, height, and lot coverage available. The site is surrounded by single- and multi-family development and properties zoned Medium and High Density Residential. In addition, community feedback from public meetings and public comment letters have shown the site is a strategic location for housing and the community is interested in including this site in the site inventory. The current land use and zoning designation is Medium Density Residential and no changes to zoning are proposed. This site also is adjacent to recently redeveloped sites at 632 McCorkle Avenue and 684 McCorkle Avenue, which removed an existing single-family residence with multi-family units.

The entire site could accommodate approximately 12 units based on allowed density alone. However, three additional above-moderate income units are assumed in order to accommodate adequate off-street parking capacity and existing residential uses. Therefore, the inventory assumed three additional above moderate income units, resulting in four units total onsite. The site is currently underutilized and does not meet the Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-207
minimum or maximum density allowed under the Medium Density Residential Zone (5.1 and 16 units/acre) with a current density of 1.3 units per acre. The site currently has 1 unit, which is approximately 8 percent of the total allowed capacity. The existing building lot coverage is about 25 percent of the site, allowing for an additional 20 percent coverage for new structures or 45 percent if the site is redeveloped similar to adjacent parcels.

Summary of Site Inventory
In combination with the City’s pending projects and ADU development trends, the site inventory provides adequate sites to meet the City’s RHNA allocation and buffer requirements. Between these three methods, the city can accommodate a total of 472 housing units, including 207 lower-income, 70 moderate-income, and 195 above moderate-income units. Table 57 shows a summary of the number of housing units accommodated by pending projects, ADU trends, and the site inventory.

Table 57 Summary of Housing Units
Lower Income
Moderate
Income
Above Moderate
Income Total
Pending Projects 4 1 88 93
ADU Trends 0 0 72 72
Site Inventory
Site 1 (1480 Main St.) 6 0 0 6
Site 2 (1572 Railroad Ave.) 20 0 0 20
Site 3 (Adams St.) 31 0 0 31
Site 4 (905 Main St.) 0 0 4 4
Site 5 (Main St. btw Mills Ln. and
Dowdell Ln.) 45 0 0 45
Site 6 (709 McCorkle Ave.) 0 0 4 4
Site 7 (821 Pope St.) 10 10 0 20
Site 8 (882 and 886 College Ave.) 15 15 0 30
Site 9 (1447 and 1515 Spring St.) 24 0 24 48
Site 10 (Spring St. btw Hudson Ave.

And Valley View St.) 44 44 0 88
Site 11 (1637 Spring St.) 8 0 0 8
Site 12 (620 McCorkle Ave.) 0 0 3 3
Total 207 70 195 472
St. Helena RHNA plus 20% Buffer 192 31 79 302
Surplus 15 39 116 170
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-208
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-209
Figure 49 Residential Site Inventory Map
Figure 49 Residential Site Inventory Map
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-210
Table 58 Vacant and Nonvacant Sites
Site Address APN Developable
Acres Existing Zoning Rezone Proposed
Proposed
Zoning
Minimum
Density
Maximum
Density
Used in Previous
HE? Nonvacant CityOwned
Lower
Income
Moderate
Income
Above
Moderate
Income
Total
Site 1 (1480 Main St.) 009-211-016 0.90 Public/Quasi-Public Yes Mixed-Use 12 20 No Nonvacant Yes 6 0 0 6 Site 2 (1572 Railroad Ave.) 009-193-002 0.93 Business and Professional Office
Yes High Density
Residential

16.1 26 No Nonvacant Yes 20 0 0 20
Site 3 (Adams St.) 009-150-006 5.6 Central Business Yes High Density Residential

16.1 26 Yes (Moderate
Income and Above)
Vacant Yes 31 0 0 31
Site 4 (905 Main St.) 009-180-008 0.27 Service Commercial Yes Mixed-Use 12 20 Yes (Moderate Income and Above)
Vacant No 0 0 4 4
Site 5 (Main St. btw Mills Ln. and
Dowdell Ln.)
009-660-005 1.8 Service Commercial Yes High Density
Residential

16.1 26 No Vacant No 45 0 0 45
Site 6 (709 McCorkle Ave.) 009-100-032 0.9 Medium Density Residential
No Medium Density
Residential

5.1 16 No Nonvacant No 0 0 4 4
Site 7 (821 Pope St.) 009-503-001 1.0 High Density
Residential
No High Density
Residential

16.1 26 Yes (Lower Income) Nonvacant No 10 10 0 20
Site 8 (882 and 886 College Ave.) 009-070-043, 009-070- 044, 009-070-045

1.5 Agriculture Yes High Density
Residential

16.1 26 No Vacant No 15 15 0 30
Site 9 (1447 and 1515 Spring St.) 009-590-010, 009-590- 003

2.4 High Density
Residential
No High Density
Residential

16.1 26 Yes (Lower Income) Nonvacant No 24 0 24 48
Site 10 (Spring St. btw Hudson
Ave. And Valley View St.)
009-441-023 4.4 Medium Density
Residential
Yes High Density
Residential

16.1 26 Yes (Moderate
Income and Above)
Vacant No 44 44 0 88
Site 11 (1637 Spring St.) 009-600-018 1.1 High Density
Residential
No High Density
Residential

16.1 26 No Nonvacant No 8 0 0 8
Site 12: 620 McCorkle 009-502-003 0.76 Medium Density
Residential
No Medium Density
Residential

5.1 16 No Nonvacant No 0 0 3 3
Total 203 69 36 308
Lower Income
Capacity
Lower Income RHNA with 20 percent buffer: 192
Pending and Approved Projects (lower income) 4
Existing HDR capacity: Site 7 10
Existing HDR capacity: Site 9 24
Existing HDR capacity: Site 11 8
Remaining lower income shortfall 146
Sites with proposed rezone to HDR (Sites 2, 3, 5, 8, 10) 156 Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-211
Availability of Infrastructure and Services
The City of St. Helena is dedicated to improving existing and new infrastructure and facilities to support existing and future development. The City’s annual budget devotes funds towards the Public Works Department which provides design, construction, maintenance, and operation of public facilities and infrastructure within the city.

Public Works is responsible for infrastructure including streets, storm drains, parks, water treatment, water distribution, wastewater collection, and wastewater treatment. Environmental compliance services provided by Public Works also include storm water pollution prevention, sustainability, protection of public trees and floodplain administration, response to infrastructure and weather emergencies. The city’s existing infrastructure system may require minor upgrades to address age and condition-related issues. New construction would be located in areas served by existing infrastructure.

The Integrated Urban Master Plan analyzed future infrastructure and water supply capacity accounting for planned development within the city, including the Hunter Subdivision project, and estimated buildout proposed under the 2040 General Plan, which would be about 7,400 residents by the year 2040. The City’s RHNA plans for the addition of a total of 256 housing units within the planning period. Currently the city has a population of approximately 6,073. Therefore, the additional 256 units would not exceed buildout assumed in the Master Plan.

Wastewater System
The City’s Integrated Utility Master Plan was adopted in 2021 and serves as the guiding document for planning and implementing sewer system improvements through the year 2040. The plan is consistent with the population, land use, employment, and housing projections presented in the 2040 General Plan. The City also has a Sewer System Management Plan that was developed in 2006 and last updated in April 2016. The City’s sewer system service area consists of the City limits and includes approximately 24 miles of active gravity sewer pipelines, 0.4 miles of force mains, and two lift stations that convey flow to the Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Improvements to the Wastewater Treatment Plant began in 2022 to adhere to stricter environmental requirements and are expected to be completed in 2023.

A capacity analysis of the existing wastewater collection system showed a storm event would result in multiple pipeline capacity deficiencies and sanitary sewer overflows at several locations with the existing system.

Wastewater collection systems improvement projects proposed by the Utility Master Plan included gravity main improvements with pipeline replacement and lift station improvements. These improvements would be constructed based on prioritization within the Master Plan and developed as a Capital Improvement Project.

The improvements would be financed through City budgeting and collection of project impact fees. As discussed under the Government Constraints section, impact fees in the city do not represent a constraint to housing.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-212
Potable Water System
The City’s Integrated Utility Master Plan serves as the guiding document for planning and implementing water system improvements through the year 2040, consistent with growth under the 2040 General Plan. Previously, the City utilized the Water Master Plan, developed in 2006, to identify infrastructure need to the year 2020. The City’s water system service area extends beyond the City limits to unincorporated areas in the Meadowood Napa Valley Resort/Neighborhood area and area between Chaix Lane and Zinfandel Lane along Main Street.

There are three main water supply sources: Bell Canyon Reservoir, Stonebridge wells, and an interconnection with the City of Napa. The City’s water system consists of approximately 47 miles of water distribution pipelines.

A capacity analysis of the existing water distribution system showed there is one pump station, the Holmes pump station, that does not have sufficient firm pumping capacity to meet maximum daily demand. Evaluation of the existing treated water storage system capacity found one area that does not have adequate capacity to meet peak hour demand, fire flow storage, and emergency storage. Improvement projects proposed by the Utility Master Plan to prevent system failures caused by leaks, fails, and main breaks include rehabilitation and replacement of water main and transmission lines, which would enable the City to meet potable water demands. The potable water improvements would be constructed based on prioritization within the Master Plan and developed as a Capital Improvement Project. The improvements would be financed through City budgeting and collection of project impact fees. As discussed under the Government Constraints section, impact fees in the city do not represent a constraint to housing.

Storm Water System and Drainage System
The City’s Integrated Utility Master Plan guides planning and implementing the storm drainage system improvements through the year 2040 with growth projections consistent with the 2040 General Plan.

Previously, the Storm Drainage Master Plan, developed in 2000, served as the City’s guide to analyze the existing storm drain system and plan for implementation of improvements. The City’s storm drainage collection system service area consists of the city limits and includes street drainage, inlets, gravity pipelines, open channels, one storm water detention basin, and 33 outfalls that discharge in Sulphur Springs Creek, York Creek, or Napa River.

Evaluation of existing storm drainage capacity showed there would be multiple areas of flooding throughout the system in the event of a 10-year, 50-year, and 100-year storm. Improvement projects proposed by the Utility Master Plan to mitigate storm water system capacity issues include implementing an annual storm drain rehabilitation and replacement program with the assumption that approximately 1.25 percent of the system would be replaced per year until 2040. Storm water infrastructure upgrades would be constructed based on prioritization within the Master Plan and developed as a Capital Improvement Project. The improvements would be financed through City budgeting and collection of project impact fees. As discussed under the Government Constraints section, impact fees in the city do not represent a constraint to housing.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-213
Dry Utilities
PG&E is responsible for supplying electricity and natural gas to the City and surrounding areas. Other dry utilities such as telephone and data services and cable television are serviced by contracted providers within the city, including Xfinity and AT&T.

Circulation System
The City’s Circulation Element, updated in 2019 along with the General Plan, identifies the principal components of the City’s circulation system and issues related to parking, public transit, and pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. The Circulation Element also includes standards and guiding principles for implementing transportation improvements.

The City’s street network is largely grid based with some streets east of State Route 29 that are not fully connected to the network. State Route 29 (Main Street) is the main street used for traveling north-south throughout the city and is the main route for vehicles traveling between Lake County, northern Sonoma County, and the City of Napa and other destinations further south. It runs northwest to southeast through the city and divides the city in two. Congestion along State Route 29 is a major issue within the city and pushes traffic onto local city streets. Much of the traffic congestion seen in the city is caused by tourists traveling throughout the region. The primary transit option in the city is the Vine bus service, however ridership is low with only 0.9 percent of St. Helena residents commuting via transit. Future improvements to the City’s transportation network include improvements aimed at reducing congestion along State Route 29 and enhancing alternative modes of travel, including the addition of pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure.

Environmental Constraints
In 2019, the City certified a FEIR with the 2040 General Plan Update that analyzed all potential environmental impacts associated with the population and development growth proposed under the plan. City Council also adopted CEQA Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations identifying public benefits that override the significant and unavoidable impacts of the General Plan, including agricultural preservation, a balanced mix of land uses and sustainable land use pattern, creation of construction jobs, managing effects of regional traffic, and a shift to a multi-modal circulation system. Environmental clearance for future development projects may tier from the General Plan FEIR, thereby expediting the approval process. Mitigation measures set forth in the FEIR include measures to minimize impacts associated with potential flooding, and other environmental constraints.

There are no known conditions that would preclude any of the selected sites from being developed within the planning period. Sites 4 and 7 are located in the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood hazard zone, Zone X, an area of moderate- to low-risk. Development within Zone X would not preclude the properties from development, as future development would be subject to development standards contained within the Saint Helena Municipal Code, which incorporates FEMA standards for construction in flood hazard zones, as well as relevant policies within the City’s General Plan which regulate development in flood risk areas. In Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 2-214
addition, future development would comply with applicable mitigation measures within the 2040 General Plan EIR, including HYDRO-1 which ensures that no development will impede waters in the floodway, raises base flood levels, or expose housing to undue risk from flooding. The remaining sites are not located within a FEMA flood zone. None of the sites are located within a state of local fire hazard severity zone.

References
Cal Fire. 2008. Draft Fire Hazar5d Severity Zones in LRA, Napa County. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6729/fhszl06_1_map28.pdf Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2022. FEMA Flood Map Service Center: Search By Address. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=1480%20Main%20Street#searchresultsanchor St. Helena, City of. Integrated Utility Master Plan. St. Helena, CA. April 2021. https://www.cityofsthelena.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/public_works/page/2491/cosh_utility _master_plan_final_draft.pdf
St. Helena, City of. General Plan Update 2040. St. Helena, CA. June 2019. https://www.cityofsthelena.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning_resources/page/3505/final_ plan_compiled.pdf
Vernazza Wolfe Associates, Inc. 2015. Feasibility Analysis and Comparison of Sties for New Affordable Housing Development Final Report. Ventura, CA. September 2015.

Agenda Item #10.1.

Public Review Draft Needs Assessment | June 2022

3.Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH)
Insert Cover over this page. Do not alter any Heading 1s underneath the covers.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-1
AFFH Contents

1. Introduction and Overview .......................................................................................A-5

1.1 Approach to Analysis.........................................................................................................................................................A-5

1.2 Fair Housing Methodology.................................................................................................................................................A-6

2. Summary of Fair Housing Issues ...............................................................................A-9

2.1 Regional Trends .................................................................................................................................................................A-9

2.2 Local Trends.......................................................................................................................................................................A-9

2.3 Enforcement and Outreach Capacity................................................................................................................................A-10

3. Segregation and Integration Patterns and Trends..................................................A-14

3.1 Race and Ethnicity ...........................................................................................................................................................A-14

3.2 Persons with Disabilities..................................................................................................................................................A-15

3.3 Familial Status .................................................................................................................................................................A-25

3.4 Household Income ...........................................................................................................................................................A-37

3.5 Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty ....................................................................................................A-45

3.6 Disparities in Access to Opportunities..............................................................................................................................A-52

3.7 Disproportionate Housing Needs .....................................................................................................................................A-74

4. Local Area of Knowledge ........................................................................................A-99

4.1 Stakeholder Input.............................................................................................................................................................A-99

5. Sites Inventory Analysis ........................................................................................A-102

5.1 Opportunity Areas..........................................................................................................................................................A-102

5.2 Improved Conditions......................................................................................................................................................A-103

6. Contributing Factors .............................................................................................A-107 Tables
Table 1 Domains and List of Indicators for Opportunity Maps..............................................................................................A-8 Table 2 Fair Housing Organizations Active in Napa County ...............................................................................................A-11 Table 3 Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Trends (Napa County)...................................................................................................A-15 Table 4 Household Type and Tenure (Napa County)...........................................................................................................A-25 Table 5 Household Type and Tenure (St. Helena) ...............................................................................................................A-27 Table 6 Tenure by Household Type and Presence of Children (St. Helena) .........................................................................A-27 Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-2
Table 7 Housing Cost Burden of Lower-Income Households (2014-2018)..........................................................................A-85 Table 8 Substandard Housing Units (2019) ........................................................................................................................A-89 Table 9 Overcrowding by Tenure........................................................................................................................................A-91 Table 10 Factors that Contribute to Fair Housing Issues ....................................................................................................A-107 Figures
Figure 1 Percent of Total Non-White Population (Napa County) .........................................................................................A-17 Figure 2 Percent of Total Non-White Population (St. Helena)..............................................................................................A-18 Figure 3 Predominant Populations (St. Helena) ...................................................................................................................A-19 Figure 4 Percent of Population with a Disability (Napa County)..........................................................................................A-20 Figure 5 Disability by Type (St. Helena) ...............................................................................................................................A-21 Figure 6 Percentage of Population with One or More Disabilities (St. Helena) ....................................................................A-23 Figure 7 Children in Married-Couple Households (Napa County) ........................................................................................A-29 Figure 8 Female Headed Households with Children, No Spouse/Partner Present (Napa County).........................................A-30 Figure 9 Population of Adults Living with Spouse/Partner (Napa County)...........................................................................A-31 Figure 10 Population of Adults Living Alone (Napa County)..................................................................................................A-32 Figure 11 Children in Married-Couple Households (St. Helena).............................................................................................A-33 Figure 12 Female Headed Households with Children, No Spouse/Partner Present (St. Helena) .............................................A-34 Figure 13 Population of Adults Living with Spouse/Partner (St. Helena)................................................................................A-35 Figure 14 Population of Adults Living Alone (St. Helena) ......................................................................................................A-36 Figure 15 Median Household Income (2015-2019)................................................................................................................A-38 Figure 16 Median Household Income (Napa County) ............................................................................................................A-41 Figure 17 Low and Moderate Income Population (Napa County) ..........................................................................................A-42 Figure 18 Median Household Income (St. Helena).................................................................................................................A-43 Figure 19 Low to Moderate Income Population (St. Helena) .................................................................................................A-44 Figure 20 Areas of High Poverty (Napa County) ....................................................................................................................A-47 Figure 21 Poverty Status (St. Helena) ....................................................................................................................................A-48 Figure 22 Neighborhood Segregation (St. Helena).................................................................................................................A-49 Figure 23 Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (Napa County) ......................................................................................A-55 Figure 24 Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (St. Helena)...........................................................................................A-56 Figure 25 Predominant White Population (Napa County)......................................................................................................A-57 Figure 26 Predominant Populations and Median Household Income (St. Helena) .................................................................A-58 Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-3
Figure 27 Walkability Index (St. Helena)................................................................................................................................A-61 Figure 28 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Education Outcomes (Napa County) ...........................................................................A-65 Figure 29 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Education Outcomes (St. Helena)................................................................................A-66 Figure 30 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Economic (Napa County).............................................................................................A-69 Figure 31 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Economic (St. Helena) .................................................................................................A-70 Figure 32 Job Proximity Index (St. Helena) ............................................................................................................................A-71 Figure 33 CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile Scores (Napa County) ...........................................................................................A-77 Figure 34 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Environment (Napa County)........................................................................................A-78 Figure 35 CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile Scores (St. Helena) ................................................................................................A-79 Figure 36 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Environment (St. Helena) ............................................................................................A-80 Figure 37 Overpayment By Renters (Napa County)................................................................................................................A-81 Figure 38 Overpayment By Homeowners (Napa County).......................................................................................................A-82 Figure 39 Overpayment By Renters (St. Helena) ....................................................................................................................A-83 Figure 40 Overpayment By Homeowners (St. Helena) ...........................................................................................................A-87 Figure 41 Housing Stock Age (2015-2019) ............................................................................................................................A-89 Figure 42 Overcrowded Households (Napa County) ..............................................................................................................A-93 Figure 43 Overcrowded Households (St. Helena)...................................................................................................................A-94 Figure 44 Sensitive Communities (Napa County)...................................................................................................................A-97 Figure 45 Sensitive Communities (St. Helena) .......................................................................................................................A-98 Figure 46 Mortgage Applications and Acceptance by Race .................................................................................................A-101 Figure 47 Location of Sites Inventory in Relation to TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas.............................................................A-105 Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-4
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-5

1.Introduction
In 2018, the California State Legislature passed Assembly Bill (AB) 686 to expand upon fair housing requirements and protections outlined in the Fair Employment and Housing Act. The law requires all State and local public agencies to facilitate deliberate action to explicitly address, combat, and relieve disparities resulting from past patterns of segregation to foster more inclusive communities. AB 686 created new requirements that apply to all housing elements due for revision on or after January 1, 2021. The passage of AB 686 protects the requirement to affirmatively further fair housing within State law.

AB 686 defined “affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH)” to mean “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combat discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity.” AB 686 added an assessment of fair housing to the Housing Element which includes the following components:
• A summary of fair housing issues and assessment of the City’s fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity
• An analysis of segregation patterns and disparities in access to opportunities • An assessment of contributing factors
• An identification of fair housing goals and actions.56

1.1 Approach to Analysis
This AFFH analysis is consistent with the 2021 California Department of Housing and Community Development’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Guidance for All Public Entities and for Housing Elements (AFFH Guidance Memo) which provides guidance on the preparation of housing elements and ensures statutory requirements are satisfied, pursuant to Government Code Section 65583(c)(10).

This AFFH analysis evaluates fair housing issues on the following topics:

1. Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach Capacity

2. Integration and Segregation Patterns and Trends

3. Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty

4. Disparities in Access to Opportunity

5. Disproportionate Housing Needs
56 Housing and Community Development (HCD). 2021. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/affh/index.shtml Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-6

6. Other Relevant Factors, including historical disinvestment, lack of infrastructure improvements, and presence of older affordable housing units that may be at risk of conversion to market-rate housing.

Fair housing priorities goals and actions are also provided specific to St. Helena to address as implementation actions for the Housing Element. The goals and actions address the major contributing factors for the topics above.

1.2 Fair Housing Methodology
The California Government Code Section 65583 (10)(A)(ii) requires cities and counties to analyze areas of segregation, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risk.

To conduct this analysis, the City utilized data from a variety of sources, including:
• The Housing and Community Development (HCD) AFFH Data Viewer • AFFH Segregation Report by ABAG
• Napa Sonoma Collaborative
• Urban Displacement Project (UDP)
• U.S Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
• CalEnviroscreen
• California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC)
• The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) • US Census American Community Survey (ACS)
• AllTransit
• Walk Score
Additionally, the analysis includes input from sources of local knowledge, including special needs groups, housing advocacy organizations, housing and services providers, and residents.

1.2.1 Housing and Community Development’s AFFH Viewer
The AFFH Data Viewer is a tool developed by HCD that features census block group and tract level data from an expansive collection of sources including ACS, HUD, TCAC, UDP, and CHAS. The Data Viewer tool serves as a resource for local and regional governments and provides the ability to explore spatial data patterns concerning fair housing enforcement, segregation and integration, racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, and disparities in access to opportunities and housing. The Data Viewer is Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-7
intended to assist in the creation of policies that alleviate disparities, combat discrimination, and increase access to safe and affordable homes.

1.2.2 AFFH Segregation Report
The University of California, Merced and STIR Labs, on behalf of ABAG, prepared reports for jurisdictions in California studying segregation patterns and current land use policies that correlate with patterns of racial segregation. The report for St. Helena addresses racial and income segregation using the racial isolation index, racial dissimilarity index, and Thiel’s H-Index at the neighborhood level within and regional level.

1.2.3 Napa Sonoma Collaborative
The Napa Sonoma Collaborative (NSC) is a collaboration between Napa and Sonoma Counties that aims to address housing challenges within the region. NSC is made up of housing staff from jurisdictions within Napa and Sonoma Counties and is working to raise awareness and increase participation in the Housing Element update process. The collaborative conducted outreach to gather information on fair housing issues within local communities and discuss constraints to affordable housing.

1.2.4 Urban Displacement Project (UDP)
The UDP was developed to track neighborhood change and identify areas that are vulnerable to gentrification and displacement in California. Indicators of gentrification and displacement are measured at the census tract level based on data from the 2015 ACS. UDP indicators examine census tracts to identify areas that qualify as disadvantaged neighborhoods. Additionally, census tracts identified as disadvantaged neighborhoods by UDP’s criteria are further analyzed to explore changes in the percentage of college educated residents, non-Hispanic White population, median household income, and median gross rents over time to determine levels of gentrification and displacement risk.

1.2.5 CalEnviroscreen
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment developed a screening methodology to identify communities disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution. This tool, called the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen), utilizes existing environmental, health, and socioeconomic data to rank census tracts based on 20 distinct indicators. In general, if a community has a high score for that indicator, it is more impacted by pollution burdens and population vulnerabilities compared to other communities. Designated disadvantaged communities are those with CalEnviroScreen percentile scores of 75 or higher, meaning that they scored within the highest 25 percent of census tracts across California. There are no disadvantaged communities in St. Helena.

1.2.6 California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) HCD and the TCAC created the California Fair Housing Task Force to provide research, evidence based policy recommendations, and other strategic recommendations to HCD and other related state Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-8
agencies/departments to further the fair housing goals.57 The Task Force created the AFFH Data Viewer, an interactive mapping tool to assess population and housing characteristics related to fair housing and access to opportunity to aid in the development of policy for the promotion of equitable and inclusive communities. The data viewer includes Opportunity Maps made from composite scores of three different domains made up from a set of indicators data shown in Table 1. The Opportunity Maps include a measure or “filter” to identify areas with poverty and racial segregation. To identify these areas, census tracts were first filtered by poverty and then by a measure of racial segregation. The criteria for these filters were:
• Poverty Status. Census tracts with at least 30 percent of population that earned an income that was below the federal poverty level.
• Racial Segregation. Census tracts with a location quotient that is higher than 1.25 for Black, Hispanic, Asians, or all non-White populations in comparison to the county.

Table 1 Domains and List of Indicators for Opportunity Maps Domain Indicator
Economic Poverty, Adult Education, employment, Job proximity, median home value
Environmental CalEnviroScreen 3.0 pollution indicators and values Education Math proficiency, reading proficiency, high school graduation rates, student poverty rates
Source: California Fair Housing Task Force, Methodology for the 2020 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps, December 2020

1.2.7 AllTransit
AllTransit is an online database that details transit opportunity for communities. The website explores metrics that reveal the social and economic impact of transit, specifically looking at connectivity, access to jobs, and frequency of service. The AllTransit performance score explores metrics that reveal the social and economic impact of transit, such as connectivity, access to jobs, and frequency of service.

1.2.8 Walk Score
Walk Score provides walkability services and apartment search tools to addresses across the United States, with the mission “to promote walkable neighborhoods.” Walk Score measures walkability by assigning a numerical walkability score based on distance to amenities within a 30-minute walk and evaluates pedestrian friendliness by analyzing population density and road metrics, including block length and intersection density.
57Office of The State Treasurer (STO). 2021. https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity/2020-tcac-hcdmethodology.pdf Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-9

1.2.9 Community Engagement and Outreach
As part of the Housing Element Update, the City implemented a community engagement program, soliciting input from the general public, housing stakeholders, and City decision makers. Results and feedback obtained during the community engagement program have been incorporated into the Housing Element, including this section on affirmatively furthering fair housing practices. Please see Chapter 1 for more details on the City’s outreach efforts.

2.Summary of Fair Housing Issues
This summary guides the prioritization of contributing factors to fair housing issues and the creation of goals and actions to address these issues. Fair housing issues are conditions that restrict fair housing choice or access to opportunity in the geographic area of interest. Fair housing choice means realistic housing opportunities exist, can be accessed without discrimination towards protected characteristics such as race, color, religion, sex, disability, etc., and are informed with adequate information regarding options.

2.1 Regional Trends
Impediments to fair housing within Napa County, and the Bay Area as a whole, include the following:
• Residential segregation between White residents and non-White residents has increased in the last decade.
• Areas with higher percentages of non-White residents generally have less access to proficient schools, jobs, and cleaner air and water.
• Median rental prices rose an approximately $483 (unadjusted for inflation) since 2009, from $1,087 to $1,570, an increase of 44.4 percent in a 10-year period. • The average home value increased from approximately $319,926 to $768,414 in less than 20 years, from 2001 to 2020 (unadjusted for inflation).
• Housing Choice Voucher holders and those with disabilities often find it difficult to find an appropriate housing unit based on locating a unit of appropriate size and/or cost. • Disability, race, and familial status are the most common bases of housing discrimination complaints forwarded to the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity.

2.2 Local Trends
Contributing factors identified as impediments to fair housing in St. Helena are discussed in detail below and include descriptions of how each impediment is addressed in this Housing Element.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-10

2.2.1 Concentrations of Lower- and Moderate-Income Earning Populations HUD defines a Lower and Moderate Income (LMI) area as a census tract or block group where over 51 percent of the population earn an income that is considered lower or moderate relative to the area median income. In St. Helena, residents with low and moderate household incomes are concentrated in the eastern portion of the city. The Housing Element ensures available land to accommodate all income levels on sites located across the city. Efforts to combat this impediment are outlined in Programs H-A, H-B, H-N, H-O, HR, H-U, H-V, H-W and H-OO, which focus on maintaining an inventory of sites suitable for residential development and prioritize and incentivize housing development for lower- and moderate-income residents in the western portion of the city.

2.2.2 Insufficient Housing Stock for Farmworkers
Farmworker housing is a critical need in Napa County and St. Helena due to the presence of year-round agricultural production. The migratory and sometimes seasonal nature of farm workers pose housing challenges for a community and are seen as an impediment for St. Helena as the City tries to house its entire population. Efforts to combat this impediment are outlined in Programs H-E, H-H, H-I, and H-KK, which work to support regional and City farmworker housing efforts, including creating incentives and fasttracking development for workforce/farmworker housing.

2.2.3 Lack of Affordable Housing Types
There is a lack of diversity in housing types that restricts development of affordable housing in St. Helena.

Local land use and zoning regulations perpetuate this deficiency by limiting the form of housing that can be developed on a particular site. Much of the residentially zoned parcels within the city are zoned low and moderate density residential and are not compatible with the construction of duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes and multifamily housing developments. The City is upzoning a number of parcels as a part of the Housing Element Update to allow higher density residential development. Efforts to combat this impediment are outlined in Programs H-A, H-B, H-E, H-H, H-I, H-J, H-M, H-N, H-P, H-Q, H-V, H-X, H-AA, HDD, H-EE, H-FF, H-GG, H-LL, H-NN, and H-OO, which focus on maintaining an inventory of sites suitable for residential development, updating municipal code for developing workforce/farmworker housing, ADUs, housing for disabled and homeless persons, and non-traditional housing types, increasing development density, and fast-tracking housing development.

2.3 Enforcement and Outreach Capacity
Fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity is the ability of a local jurisdiction and fair housing agencies to distribute fair housing and tenants’ rights information to their community. Enforcement and outreach capacity also includes the ability to address compliance with fair housing laws, such as investigating complaints, resolving issues, and conducting fair housing testing.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-11

2.3.1 Regional Resources
Several organizations in Napa County provide aid for fair housing issues and outreach. Table 2 shows organizations and agencies that collaborate with local governments, including St. Helena to address housing and community needs and provide the following services:
• Housing Need Assessment
• Homelessness Needs
• Market Analysis
• Fair housing testing and complaints
• Fair housing counseling and education
• Tenant/landlord counseling and mediation
• Homeless prevention program
• Rental assistance program
• Rent/deposit grant program
• Home seeking services
• Shared housing counseling placement
• Homebuyers’ education learning program
Table 2 Fair Housing Organizations Active in Napa County Organization URL Phone Number
Abode Services https://www.abodeservices.org/napa-county (510) 657-7409 Bay Area Legal Aid (BALA) https://baylegal.org/ (800) 551-554 CA Department of Fair Employment and
Housing https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/ (800) 884-1684
EAH Housing https://www.eahhousing.org/
Fair Housing Advocates of Northern
California (FHANC) https://www.fairhousingnorcal.org/ (415) 457-5025 Fair Housing Napa Valley (FHNV) https://napafairhousing.org/ (707) 224-9720 Napa Continuum of Care https://homelessnapa.com/
Napa County Housing and Homeless
Services Division
https://www.countyofnapa.org/272/HomelessServices (707) 271-7818 Napa Valley Community Housing https://nvch.org/ (707) 253-6140 North Bay Housing Coalition https://www.northbayhousingcoalition.org/ (707) 289-7000 Source: City of Napa AI, 2020; Napa Sonoma Collaborative Fair Housing Enforcement, Outreach Capacity and Resources, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-12

2.3.2 Local Resources
The City of St. Helena contracts with the non-profit organization Fair Housing Napa Valley (FHNV), a regional non-profit fair housing agency, to assist residents with fair housing counseling services, connections to rental assistance and homelessness prevention programs, and to conduct fair housing testing. FHNV assists residents and landlords throughout the city, providing mediation, investigation, and referral services. In addition to the fair housing services provided by active organizations, the Napa County Housing Authority administers the Housing Choice Voucher program for St. Helena and other jurisdictions in the county.

The City complies with existing fair housing laws and regulations. The City does not place more scrutiny or deny projects or individuals of their right to tenancy, residence, or entitlement based on memberships of protected class, in compliance with Government Code section 65008. Implementation of the 6th Cycle Housing Element would bring the City’s adopted regulations and policies into compliance with other fair housing regulations such as Program H-F which would bring density bonus provisions into compliance and allow for greater incentives for affordable housing. The City is also proposing updates to their existing Inclusionary Ordinance to promote more housing choices for residents.

2.3.2.1 Ability to Address Complaints
The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division initiated fair housing testing in 1991. This is a technique used to uncover evidence of discrimination in rental housing. Fair housing testing involves one or more individuals who pose as prospective renters for the purpose of determining whether a landlord is complying with local, State, and federal fair housing laws. Enforcement actions may be taken when investigations yield evidence of a pattern or practice of illegal housing discrimination. Testing may be initiated following the filing of a specific housing discrimination complaint or, as is the case when testing for disability discrimination, as part of an overall effort to determine whether the design or architectural features of a specific rental facility comply with state and federal accessibility requirements. In Napa County, fair housing testing is used to identify unlawful housing discrimination practices based on the real or perceived race, ethnicity, color, religion, gender identity or expression, national origin, disability, familial status, marital status, age, ancestry, sexual orientation, and source of income of prospective renters. Fair Housing Napa Valley conducts fair housing testing of rental properties to assess how well rental properties are conforming to fair housing laws, assists residents in filing fair housing complaints, provides education and technical assistance to housing providers, and provide conciliation services for tenants and landlords.

The Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) maintains a record of housing discrimination complaints filed in local jurisdictions. From 2015 - 2019, 256 fair housing complaints originating in Napa County were filed with DFEH. Overall, disability-related discrimination comprised the largest proportion of cases (56 percent). The next highest basis for discrimination were race and familiar status, comprising nearly 8 percent each. According to the HCD AFFH Data Viewer, no fair housing inquiries for the City of St.

Helena were received between 2013 and 2021. Fair housing inquiries are comments or questions related to fair housing received by HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), not formal Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-13
discrimination complaints. The lack of inquiries is low for the region, as seen when compared to the cities of Santa Rosa (received 61), Sonoma (received 8), and Napa (received 33).

2.3.3 Findings, Lawsuits, and Enforcement Actions
There are currently no active fair housing lawsuits or enforcement actions in the city. However, historically, low-income and minority populations have struggled to procure affordable housing opportunities in the city. In addition, residents have challenged the City for not doing enough to combat housing segregation issues between the western and eastern portions of the city.

In 2013, the City of St. Helena signed a settlement agreement with Esvin Calderon as well as other residents and fair housing providers who had filed a lawsuit against the City on the basis that the City “promoted or maintained policies, practices, or actions that had the purpose of effect of displacing or excluding Latino residents and low-income residents from the City”. According to the settlement the City would comply with a list of requirements that would promote the development of affordable housing units in the city, including depositing $500,000 to the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund and amending the St.

Helena Municipal Code to support and prioritize affordable housing development, and to host fair housing workshops in collaboration with Napa Valley Fair Housing.

In 2016, St. Helena Residents For An Equitable General Plan, the McCorkle East Side Neighborhood Group, and the Protect the St. Helena Vineyard Riverwalk Community Group filed a claim with the City citing that the city is “a segregated city, with an affluent White west and diverse east side where most Hispanics, seniors, and members of other protected groups live largely in a concentrated area near the Napa River.” The City is in the process of adopting a new Zoning Ordinance to be consistent with the 2040 General Plan, which would permit duplexes and triplexes within the MR District (see Program H-N). This would create additional housing choices and affordability levels in the MR Districts on the western side of the city. In addition, several programs, including H-BB, H-EE, and H-XX would implement placemaking strategies to outreach and work with the more diverse and older populations living in the east due to the historic development patterns.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-14

3.Segregation and Integration Patterns and Trends
To inform priorities, policies, and actions, the housing element must include an analysis of integration and segregation, including patterns and trends. Integration generally means a condition in which there is not a high concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a particular type of disability in a specific geographic area. Segregation generally means the opposite condition, in which there is a high concentration of the characteristics described above in a specific geographic area. To adequately assess the patterns of integration and segregation, this section identifies trends at the regional scale (Napa County) and at the local scale (St. Helena).

3.1 Race and Ethnicity
The ethnic and racial composition of a community relates to other housing characteristics including household size, locational preference, and economic opportunity. Additionally, race/ethnicity is a known contributor to unfair housing practices. Historical patterns of racial/ethnic segregation were results of governmental policies from the federal to local level that promoted exclusionary actions and disparate treatment of people of color such as redlining, racially restrictive covenants, and mortgage lending practices. The existence of concentrations of minorities living in one location may be an indicator that some minority groups do not have as many housing choices as non-minority residents.

3.1.1 Regional Trends
Regionally, the urbanized areas of Napa County are more diverse, with a minimum of 40 percent of the population consisting of non-White residents, as demonstrated in the geographic depiction of 2014-2018 ACS data shown in Figure 1. Comparatively, populations in the less urbanized and less densely populated areas of Napa County are generally more predominantly White with populations consisting of about 60 percent or greater of White residents.

HUD utilizes the racial/ethnic dissimilarity index as a measure of segregation. The racial/ethnic dissimilarity index represents the extent of which any two racial/ethnic groups differ across a defined geographical area.

The index ranges from 0-100, where 0 represents perfect integration between the two racial/ethnic groups and 100 representing perfect segregation. An index value below 40 is generally considered low segregation, a value between 40 and 54 is considered a moderate level of segregation, and a value above 55 is a high level of segregation.
58 Racial/ethnic segregation in Napa County slightly increased between 2010 and 2019. Table 3 shows racial/ethnic segregation in Napa County using the dissimilarity index using data from HUD’s AFFH mapping tool. Black and Asian/Pacific Islander residents are the most segregated compared to other racial and ethnic groups. Segregation between Black and White residents and between Asian/Pacific Islander and White residents is high, since their racial dissimilarity index scores are above 55 for 2019. Segregation between Non-White and White residents and between Hispanic and White residents 58HUD, 2020. https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/FHEO/documents/AFFH-T-Data-Documentation-AFFHT0006-July-2020.pdf Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-15
is considered low, since their racial dissimilarity index scores are below 40 for 2019. In Napa County, there has been an increase in segregation across all measured racial/ethnic groups between 2010 and 2019.

Table 3 Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Trends (Napa County) Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 2000 2010 2019
Non-White/White 19.58 26.18 31.24 36.84
Black/White 56.22 52.61 58.76 67.86
Hispanic/White 21.86 28.94 30.13 35.61
Asian or Pacific Islander/White 37.11 38.97 57.35 64.47 Source: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Mapping Tool – Table 3, Version AFFHT0006, 2022

3.1.2 Local Trends
St. Helena is more diverse compared to rural areas of Napa County, which are predominantly White, and less diverse than the cities of Napa and American Canyon. According to 2015-2019 ACS estimates, White residents comprise the largest racial/ethnic group in St. Helena, followed by Hispanic/Latino residents. The predominant population throughout the entire city is White, as shown in Figure 3. The northwest area of the city has the highest predominance of White residents, although the southeast area of the city is predominantly White as well. The eastern areas of the city have the largest non-White populations, as shown in Figure 3.

3.2 Persons with Disabilities
Persons with disabilities include those with a physical or mental impairment including hearing, vision, mobility, cognitive function. For persons with disabilities, fair housing choice and access to opportunity include access to accessible housing and housing in the most integrated setting appropriate to an individual’s needs as required under federal civil rights law, including equitably provided disability-related services that an individual needs to live in such housing. For example, persons with disabilities who are unable to use stairs or need a zero-step shower may not have actual housing choice without the presence of housing units with these accessibility features.59
High spatial segregation of persons with disabilities may indicate fair housing issues related to both physical needs and economic disparities. According to the 2020 Annual Report on People with Disabilities in America, more than 25 percent of persons with disabilities (including physical, intellectual, and developmental; sensory; and other disability categories) live below the Census Bureau-designated poverty line, which is 14.5 percentage points higher than people without a disability.60 Persons with disabilities may be more reliant than persons without disabilities on fixed incomes or access to public transit. 59 HCD 2021. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/affh/docs/affh_document_final_4-27-2021.pdf 60 The Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Disability Statistics and Demographics. 2020. https://disabilitycompendium.org/annualreport
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-16

3.2.1.1 Regional Trends
According to 2015-2019 ACS estimates, a total of 16,244 Napa County residents had one or more disabilities, which represents approximately 11.8 percent of the county’s total population. Figure 4 shows the percentage of the population living with one or more disabilities throughout Napa County. The western areas of the county, which includes the urban areas of the cities, have higher concentrations of persons living with one or more disabilities compared to the eastern areas of the county. The southeastern area of the City of Napa has the highest concentration of persons living with one or more disabilities in the county.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-17
Figure 1 Percent of Total Non-White Population (Napa County) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-18
Figure 2 Percent of Total Non-White Population (St. Helena) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-19
Figure 3 Predominant Populations (St. Helena)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-20
Figure 4 Percent of Population with a Disability (Napa County) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-21

3.2.2 Local Trends
The 2015-2019 ACS estimated a total of 726 residents in St. Helena were living with one or more disabilities, which is approximately 11.9 percent of the total population. Of the 726 individuals living with a one or more disabilities, 466 (64.2 percent) are age 65 or older. The most common type of disability in St.

Helena is ambulatory difficulty, defined as those who have serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs, as shown in
Figure 5. Persons with ambulatory disability have specific housing needs and may require housing that is wheelchair accessible or lacks stairs or steps.

Figure 5 Disability by Type (St. Helena)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B18102, Table B18103, Table B18104, Table B18105, Table B18106, Table B18107.

Figure 6 highlights the percentage of the population living with one or more disabilities in the city by census tract. The southeastern parts of the city, east of Spring Street and Pope Street, have higher concentrations of residents with one or more disabilities (between 10 and 20 percent living with at least one disability).

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-22
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-23
Figure 6 Percentage of Population with One or More Disabilities (St. Helena) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-24
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-25

3.3 Familial Status
Familial status refers to families with children under the age of 18, including those with legal custody of a child, pregnant persons, and those in the process of adopting or gaining legal custody. Families with children may face housing discrimination by landlords, including being denied housing due to the presence of children or being subject to special restrictions or fees. Differential treatments such as limiting the number of children in a complex or confining children to a specific location or unit are also fair housing concerns. In a 2016 housing discrimination study, researchers found that compared to households without children, households with children were shown slightly fewer units and were commonly told about units that were slightly larger, and as a result, slightly more expensive to rent.61 Additionally, female-headed households with children require special consideration and assistance because of generally greater needs for affordable housing and accessible day care, health care, and other supportive services.

3.3.1 Regional Trends
Most households in Napa County are family households, comprising approximately 68 percent of the total 48,705 households in the county. Households with children present comprise 28.1 percent (13,699 households) of the total households or 41.4 percent of all family households in the county. Married couples without children represent 46.9 percent of family households. The majority of family households with children are married couple households with fewer numbers of female and male single parent households.

Single-parent households are more often at risk for housing issues because they rely on a single income and may require access to affordable childcare. Table 4 shows a breakdown of household type by tenure (owned versus rented) and presence of children in Napa County. Single-parent households are more likely to rent than own, especially female, single-parent households. There are 1,008 single-parent households that own and 2,323 single-parent households that rent in Napa County.

Table 4 Household Type and Tenure (Napa County)
Household Type
OwnerOccupied
Percent of Total
OwnerOccupiedRenterOccupied
Percent of Total
RenterOccupied
Married Couple Family, with
Children Present 6,257 20.0% 4,036 23.2%
Single-Parent, Male Householder, no
Spouse Present 383 1.2% 577 3.3%
Single Parent, Female Householder,
No Spouse Present 700 2.2% 1,746 10.0%
Total Households with Children
Present 7,340 23.5% 6,359 36.5%
Total Households 31,276 100% 17,429 100%
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey (ACS), Table B25115 Tenure by Household Type (Including Living Alone) and Age of Householder, 2015-2019 Estimates. 61 HUD. 2016. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/HDSFamiliesFinalReport.pdf.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-26
Figure 7 shows the percentage of children in married couple households in Napa County. The less urban areas of the county have higher concentrations of children residing in married couple households while the urban areas have a lower percentage of children residing in married couple households. In most areas of the county the majority of children live in married couple households, however the northern half of the county generally has a higher percentage of children living in married couple households compared to the southern half.

Figure 8 shows the estimated percentage of children in households with a female head of household with no spouse or partner. Urban areas of the county, especially areas of the City of Napa and Town of Yountville, have higher concentrations of children in female single-parent households with between 20 and 40 percent of family households headed by a single parent female. The southern area of the City of Napa has the highest concentration of children in households with a female head of household with no spouse or partner, with between 40 and 60 percent of families headed by a single parent female. Less urban areas of the county, outside of incorporated cities, have less than 20 percent of families headed by a single female.

Figure 9 shows the percentage of adults living with a spouse or partner in Napa County. In most areas of the county 40 to 60 percent of adults are living with a spouse/partner. In areas in the southeast portion of the county, and on the west side of the City of Napa, there is a higher concentration of adults living with a spouse/partner, consisting of approximately 60 to 80 percent of adults.

Figure 10 shows the percentage of adults living alone, with less than 20 percent adults living alone in most areas in Napa County. In several of the more urban areas, specifically portions of the City of Napa, Yountville, and St. Helena, there is a higher concentration of adults living alone (greater than 20 percent).

3.3.2 Local Trends
Approximately 58 percent of the total 2,702 households in St. Helena are family households, as shown in Table 5. The majority of families are married couple families with more renters than homeowners. However, more single-parent households own their home than rent. Table 6 shows the breakdown of families with children by tenure and household type.

Non-family households are the second most common household type; a total of 42 percent of households fall into this category. These are primarily individuals living alone. Female single parent families make up about 10 percent of both owner-occupied units and rented units. Compared to the entire county, St. Helena has a greater percentage of non-family households, especially those living alone.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-27
Table 5 Household Type and Tenure (St. Helena)
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey (ACS), Table S2501 Occupancy Characteristics, 2015-2019 Estimates.

Table 6 Tenure by Household Type and Presence of Children (St. Helena) Household Type
OwnerOccupied
Percent of Total
OwnerOccupiedRenterOccupied
Percent of Total
RenterOccupied
Married Couple Family, with
Children Present 164 10.3% 230 20.7%
Single-Parent, Male Householder, no
Spouse Present 17 1.1% 11 0.1%
Single Parent, Female Householder,
No Spouse Present 114 7.2% 50 4.5%
Total Households with Children
Present 295 18.6% 291 26.2%
Total Households 1,590 100% 1,112 100%
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey (ACS), Table B25115 Tenure by Household Type (Including Living Alone) and Age of Householder, 2015-2019 Estimates.

The majority of children in St. Helena live in married couple households; however, this percentage is less than in rural areas of Napa County. Figure 11 shows the percentage of children in married couple households in St. Helena is between 60 and 80 percent, while more than 80 percent of children in the surrounding rural areas live in married couple households.

Figure 12 shows the percentage of children in female single-parent households in St. Helena. In the northwest areas of St. Helena, 20 to 40 percent of children live in female single-parent households. In the southeast areas of the city less than 20 percent of children live in female single-parent households.

Figure 13 provides estimates regarding the percent of the adult population living with a spouse in St.

Helena. Throughout the city, 40 to 60 percent of adults are living with a spouse. Figure 14 shows the Household Type Owner-Occupied
Percent of Total
Owner-Occupied
RenterOccupiedPercent of Total
Renter-Occupied
Family
Households 920 58 586 53
Married couple family 735 46 408 37
Male householder, no
spouse present 29 2 63 6
Female householder, no
spouse present 156 10 115 10
Non-family
households 670 42 526 47
Living Alone 644 41 395 36
Not Living Alone 26 2 131 12
Total Households 1,590 1,112
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-28
percentage of the adult population living alone in St. Helena. In the western half of the city, 20 to 40 percent of adults live alone while in the eastern half of the city less than 20 percent of adults live alone.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-29
Figure 7 Children in Married-Couple Households (Napa County) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-30
Figure 8 Female Headed Households with Children, No Spouse/Partner Present (Napa County) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-31
Figure 9 Population of Adults Living with Spouse/Partner (Napa County) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-32
Figure 10 Population of Adults Living Alone (Napa County) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-33
Figure 11 Children in Married-Couple Households (St. Helena) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-34
Figure 12 Female Headed Households with Children, No Spouse/Partner Present (St. Helena) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-35
Figure 13 Population of Adults Living with Spouse/Partner (St. Helena) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-36
Figure 14 Population of Adults Living Alone (St. Helena) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-37
Overall, the northwest portion of the city has a higher proportion of children living in female single-parent households and a higher proportion of adults living alone compared to the southeast portion of the city.

The percentages of children living in married couple households and adults living with a spouse/partner are high throughout the city.

3.4 Household Income
Household income is directly related to the ability to afford housing. Higher income households are more likely to own rather than rent housing. However, as household income decreases, households tend to pay a disproportionate amount of their income for housing and the number of persons occupying unsound and overcrowded housing increases. To achieve fair housing objectives, people in low-income households must have actual choice in housing opportunities – that is, they are able to locate units that are affordable and well maintained in all parts of a jurisdiction and region.

Identifying low or moderate income (LMI) geographies and individuals is important to overcome patterns of segregation. HUD defines a LMI area as a Census tract or block group where over 51 percent of the population is LMI (based on HUD income definition of up to 80 percent of the area median income).

3.4.1 Regional Trends
The median household income of Napa County is $88,596. LMI areas are concentrated in the more urbanized areas of the county, including the City of Napa, St. Helena, and Calistoga. Rural areas of the county tend to have higher income households. Figure 15 shows the median household income for cities within Napa County.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-38
Figure 15 Median Household Income (2015-2019)
Source: Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey American Community Survey, 2015-2019.

Figure 16 shows median household income by block group using 2015-2019 ACS estimates. Block groups with the lowest median income are the eastern area of St. Helena, the area south of Yountville, and areas within the City of Napa.

LMI populations by census tract for Napa County are displayed in Figure 17. Census tracts within Cities of Napa, St. Helena, and Calistoga have the highest percentages of populations with low to moderate income.

These areas are the same areas with the highest percentages of non-White population.

3.4.2 Local Trends
Household incomes in St. Helena tend to be higher than the region as a whole, with a median income of $90,031 compared to the median household income of Napa County ($88,596). St. Helena has a higher median income than many of the surrounding cities, including the cities of Napa, Yountville, and Calistoga, as shown in Figure 15.

Figure 18 provides an overview of median household income by block group in the city. The census blocks with the lowest median income are located on the northeast and east side of St. Helena with median incomes of $47,083 and $51,544, which is less than the state median income of $87,100. Community input identified that many of the property owners in this area are not lower income and are in fact very wealthy.

The low-medium income trends in this area of the city may partially be attributed to the three affordable housing developments (Stonebridge Apartments, Woodbridge Village Apartments, and Hunt’s Grove $-
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
American
Canyon
Angwin Calistoga Deer Park Moskowite
Corner
Napa Oakville Rutherford St. Helena Yountville
Median Household Income Average
$101,792
$72,625
$67,119
$89,500
$61,875
$88,596
$99,375
$90,031
$69,300
$84,043
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-39
Apartments), Vineyard Valley Mobile Home Park, and a senior living community (Silverado Orchards Retirement Community) all located within these two census blocks. The census block with the highest median income is located in the downtown area in the center of the city with a median income of $158,500. The AFFH Data Viewer has no information on median income of the northwest area of St.

Helena.

The LMI populations in St. Helena are concentrated on the east side of the city, as shown in Figure 19.

According to HUD estimates, in the eastern area of the city 68 percent of the population are LMI populations. In contrast, on western side of city less than 20 percent of the population is LMI. This pattern closely corresponds with areas of the city that have a greater non-White population concentration, which is also greater on the eastern side of the city.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-40
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-41
Figure 16 Median Household Income (Napa County)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-42
Figure 17 Low and Moderate Income Population (Napa County) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-43
Figure 18 Median Household Income (St. Helena)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-44
Figure 19 Low to Moderate Income Population (St. Helena) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-45

3.5 Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty To identify racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (known as R/ECAPs), HUD developed thresholds based on racial and ethnic concentration and income level. The threshold for racial and ethnic concentration is a non-White population of 50 percent or more within metropolitan or micropolitan areas (in rural areas it is 20 percent). Areas of “extreme poverty” are defined using the poverty test as those with more than 40 percent of the population at or below the poverty line or a poverty rate or three times the average of the metropolitan area, whichever is less. Areas that meet both the racial/ethnic concentration threshold and the “extreme poverty” threshold are considered R/ECAPs.

3.5.1 Poverty and Segregation

3.5.1.1 Regional Trends
There are no R/ECAPs within Napa County, however there is a small area of in the southern portion of the City of Napa that would be considered an area of extreme poverty with more than 40 percent of the population below the poverty line. According to 2015-2019 ACS estimates, approximately 8 percent of the population of Napa County is below the poverty level. Several areas within county have 10 and 20 percent of the population below the poverty line, including areas in the southern region of the county, in and around the Cities of Napa, American Canyon, and St. Helena. Figure 20 shows the poverty status within Napa County.

3.5.1.2 Local Trends
St. Helena does not have any R/ECAPs. According to 2015-2019 ACS estimates, approximately 8 percent of the population of St. Helena are living below the poverty level, consistent with poverty rates of Napa County. The western half of the city has a greater percentage of the population below the poverty line, between 10 and 20 percent. This area also had a higher percentage of children in a female single parent household.

Figure 21 displays the percentage of the population whose income is below the poverty line in St. Helena.

The poverty rates in St. Helena have shifted over time. The 2010-2014 ACS estimated the eastern half of the city had a greater percentage of the population below the poverty line, opposite of the trend shown by the 2015-2019 ACS estimates.

Figure 22 shows neighborhood segregation in St. Helena using to data from UC Berkeley’s Urban Displacement Project (UDP). According to the UDP the predominant racial/ethnic composition in St. Helena is Latinx-White. ABAG’s Segregation Report also analyzed neighborhood segregation in St. Helena between 2010 and 2020 using the racial isolation index, racial dissimilarity index, and Thiel’s H-Index. The isolation index showed White residents are the most segregated racial group in the city, followed by Latinx residents. The dissimilarity index showed segregation is greatest between Asian/Pacific Islander and White residents, followed by Latinx and White residents. However, the dissimilarity index is an unreliable measure for Asian/Pacific Islander and Black/African populations in St. Helena because their populations are too Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-46
small for accurate calculation. Thiel’s H-index for neighborhood level segregation indicated racial segregation between all racial groups within the city is less than in the average Bay Area jurisdiction.

Compared to all Bay Area jurisdictions, St. Helena is less diverse, with a smaller percentage of the population consisting of people of color.

ABAG’s Segregation Report also analyzed neighborhood level income segregation between 2010 and 2015 in St. Helena using the income group isolation index, income group dissimilarity index, and Thiel’s H-index.

The isolation index showed above moderate income residents are the most segregated income group in the city followed by very low income residents. Among all income groups, segregation of the moderate income population has changed the most between 2010 and 2015, becoming less segregated. The dissimilarity index showed income segregation is greater in St. Helena than in the average Bay Area jurisdiction between lower income residents and non-lower income residents and between very low income residents and above moderate income residents. Overall, segregation between lower income residents and residents who are not lower income increased between 2010 and 2015. According to Thiel’s H-index for neighborhood level income segregation, income segregation in the city is less than the average Bay Area city and remained about the same between 2010 and 2015. Compared to all Bay Area jurisdictions, St.

Helena has a similar share of very low income residents, lower share of low and moderate income residents, and a higher share of above moderate income residents.

In summary, ABAG’s segregation report found White residents and above moderate income residents are the largest and most segregated racial and income groups in St. Helena.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-47
Figure 20 Areas of High Poverty (Napa County)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-48
Figure 21 Poverty Status (St. Helena)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-49
Figure 22 Neighborhood Segregation (St. Helena)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-50
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-51

3.5.2 Concentrated Areas of Affluence
While racially R/ECAPs have long been the focus of fair housing policies, racially concentrated areas of affluence (RCAAs) must also be analyzed. Racially concentrated areas of affluence (RCAAs) are affluent communities that are predominantly White.62 According to a policy paper published by HUD, White residents are the most racially segregated group in the United States and are typically more affluent than majority non-White communities. In addition to having a higher median income, areas of affluence experience less overcrowding, less housing cost burden on renters, and are generally less susceptible to displacement compared to LMI areas.

RCAAs have not been studied extensively, nor has a standard definition been published by HCD or HUD.

HCD has created a metric to identify RCAAs by analyzing the total White population for each census tract and comparing it to the average percentage of total White populations for all census tracts within a given Council of Government (COG) region. This compared value is referred to as the Location Quotient (LQ). For example, a census tract with an LQ of 1.5 has a percentage of total White population that is 1.5 times higher than the average percentage of total White population within the COG region. HCD identifies RCAAs as census tracts with an LQ of more than 1.25 and a median income 1.5 times higher than the COG AMI (or

1.5x the State AMI, whichever is lower).

3.5.3 Regional Trends
There are several RCAAs in Napa County, which are primarily located in more rural areas of the county.

Most of the RCAAs are concentrated along the western portion of the county with several RCAAs located within the northwest part of the City of Napa as well as in the rural areas northeast of the City of Napa. shows RCAAs in Napa County.

The population of Napa County is predominantly White, with the highest concentration of White residents residing in rural areas of the county. Figure 23 highlights the predominantly White census tracts in Napa County. Areas with a lower concentration of White residents are generally located within the valley where population density is higher. The more rural areas along the eastern border of Napa County have high concentrations of White populations, which corresponds with areas that have the highest median incomes in the county.

3.5.4 Local Trends
There are no RCAAs identified within St. Helena. However, similar to patterns of affluence throughout Napa County, areas of St. Helena with higher median incomes correspond to areas with higher proportions of White residents. The northwestern area of the city has a larger proportion of White residents and a higher median income, while the southeastern area has greater racial/ethnic diversity and a lower median income.

The northwestern area of the city has a predominant White population (over 50 percent) and the 62 Goatz, Damanio and Williams, “Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence: A Preliminary Investigation” https://www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/cityscpe/vol21num1/ch4.pdf, (2019).

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-52
southeastern area of the city has a large White population and large Hispanic population (approximately 48 percent each). Figure 26 shows the overlap of high median income and predominant White population in St. Helena.

In addition to having a higher median income, areas of affluence in St. Helena experience lower percentages of overpayment by homeowners, more positive economic outcomes, and more positive environmental outcomes compared to LMI areas.

3.6 Disparities in Access to Opportunities
According to HCD guidance, land use policies and planning often translate into the ability of residents to access neighborhoods of opportunity, with high-performing schools, greater availability of jobs that afford entry to the middle class, and convenient access to transit and services. The limits on housing choice and access experienced by people within protected classes, such as race, sexual orientation, or disability, have far-reaching impacts on access to job opportunity, quality education, and mental and physical health.63 Access to opportunity often means both improving the quality of life for residents of low-income communities, as well as supporting mobility and access to ‘high resource’ neighborhoods. This encompasses education, employment, economic development, safe and decent housing, low rates of violent crime, transportation, and other opportunities, including recreation, food, and healthy environment (air, water, safe neighborhood, safety from environmental hazards, social services, and cultural institutions).

The analysis of place-based characteristics linked to opportunity indicators, quality education, employment, transportation, and healthy environment, seeks to understand the disparity between communities in terms of access to real and potential economic benefits and quality of life.

3.6.1 Transit Access
Reliable access to public transit is crucial, especially for low-income residents and/or persons with disabilities, to provide connections to employment opportunities. Access to employment via public transit can reduce income burden and increase housing mobility, which enables residents to locate housing in more areas.64 The lack of a relationship between public transit, employment opportunities, and affordable housing may impede fair housing choice. Persons who depend on public transit may have limited choices regarding places to live.

3.6.2 Regional Trends
As Napa County is largely rural, residents mainly depend on their personal vehicles for commuting and traveling. Public transit options do exist in Napa County, primarily Vine Transit, a fixed route bus service 63 HCD. 2021. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/affh/docs/affh_document_final_4-27-2021.pdf 64 Ong, Paul and Evelyn Blumenberg, “Job Accessibility and Welfare Usage: Evidence from Los Angeles.” UCLA Department of Policy Studies, (1998).

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-53
operated by the Napa Valley Transportation Authority. Vine Transit operates fixed bus route service throughout the county from American Canyon to Calistoga and provides connections to the Vallejo Ferry Terminal, and El Cerrito Del Norte BART station, SolTrans stations in Vallejo and Fairfield, and the Suisun/Fairfield Train Station. Lake Transit Authority connects southern areas of Lake County to northern Napa County, with bus stops in Calistoga, St. Helena, and Deer Park. Additionally, several low cost, on demand shuttle services are available to the public providing fixed route and door-to-door transit within the city limits of their operating city, including the Yountville Trolley, St. Helena Shuttle, Calistoga Shuttle, and American Canyon Transit. Residents and visitors with physical and/or cognitive disabilities may be eligible to participate in VineGo Paratransit Service, a shared ride service providing curb-to-curb transportation. VineGo offers rides within and between cities throughout the county as well as to Kaiser Vallejo Medical Center.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-54
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-55
Figure 23 Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (Napa County) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-56
Figure 24 Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (St. Helena) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-57
Figure 25 Predominant White Population (Napa County)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-58
Figure 26 Predominant Populations and Median Household Income (St. Helena) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-59
The Commuter Bike Path (Vine Trail) runs parallel to the Napa Valley Railroad and provides an off-street route walking/biking path for recreation and commuting. Ultimately the Vine Trail will cover 47 miles from Vallejo to Calistoga. Currently 12.5 miles of the path has been completed from Kennedy Park in the City of Napa to Yountville. Sections of the Vine trail have also been completed in American Canyon and Calistoga.

AllTransit is an online database that provides details on transit opportunity throughout the United States, specifically looking at connectivity, access to jobs, and frequency of service. Napa County received an AllTransit performance score of 3.3 which equates to a low combination of trips per week and number of jobs accessible by transit.65 Approximately 1.5 percent of commuters use public transit in Napa County. The cities of Napa (4.6), Yountville (4.6), and Calistoga (4.0) have the highest scores with a slighter greater combination of number of trips per week, accessible jobs, and available transit routes.

3.6.3 Local Trends
The City of St. Helena has an AllTransit performance score of 2.4 with approximately 1.0 percent of workers who commute using public transit. This score is lower than the County score of 3.3. One Vine Transit bus route passes through St. Helena, providing connections to the City of Calistoga to the north and City of Napa to the south. Additionally, the St. Helena Shuttle Service provides both a fixed route and an ondemand, door-to-door transit service option within the city limits.

Walk Score is a tool that produces a walkability index by assigning a numerical walkability score to cities and neighborhoods. Walkability is measured by analyzing population density, distance to amenities, and road metrics such as block length and intersection density. St. Helena has a walk score of 83, which is considered very walkable, and most errands can be accomplished by foot66. St. Helena’s walkability score is most negatively affected by the limited number of parks within walking distance from different areas of the city.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also has a walkability index, which ranks block groups according to their relative walkability. The EPA walkability map, shown in Figure 27, shows that walkability varies across the city. The highest walkability scores are in downtown and along Main Street where most of the commercial areas are concentrated. Further from downtown and in the western and eastern parts of the city, walkability scores are below average.
65 https://alltransit.cnt.org/
66 https://www.walkscore.com/
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-60
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-61
Figure 27 Walkability Index (St. Helena)
Source: National Walkability Index, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-62
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-63

3.6.4 Access to Quality Education
Economics literature has consistently found about a 10 percent increase in wages/salary with each additional year of education.67 Educational attainment is directly linked to housing opportunities. TCAC education domain scores, which are used to identify areas of higher or lower education opportunities, incorporate a variety of indicators including math and reading proficiency scores, high school graduation rates and student poverty rates to assess educational outcomes at the census tract level.

3.6.5 Regional Trends
Napa County is served by five school districts: Napa Valley Unified School District, St. Helena Unified School District, Calistoga Joint Unified School District, Howell Mountain School District, and Pope Valley School District. An overview of education outcomes across the Napa County is illustrated in Figure 28 which shows the TCAC Opportunity Areas map. Education outcomes vary throughout the county. Areas in the western portion of the county and portions of the more urban areas have more positive education outcomes compared to eastern portions of the county and southern parts of the City of Napa.

3.6.6 Local Trends
The City of St. Helena is served by the St. Helena Unified School District which is comprised of four schools:
a primary school, elementary school, middle school, and high school. Altogether, approximately 1,243 students were enrolled in 2020 from the City St. Helena and the surrounding areas. Approximately 45 percent of students were White and 52 percent were Hispanic/Latino. St. Helena Unified School District reported a high school graduation rate of 92.9 percent in 2020, 90.1 percent in 2019, and 94.1 percent in 2018. The district reported all students who did not receive high school diplomas in 2019 were Long Term English Learners and socio-economically disadvantaged students.68 Figure 29Figure 28 shows TCAC scores for education outcomes for St. Helena at the census tract level. St.

Helena has better education outcomes than other areas of Napa County. At the city level, the southern and eastern areas of the city have better education outcomes than the western areas.

3.6.7 Economic Outcomes
Housing opportunities are directly related to economic opportunities. Access to high quality employment close to desired and affordable housing results in more housing opportunities and shorter commute times.

The analysis for economic opportunities uses TCAC economic indicators, employment participation data 67 The Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Disability Statistics and Demographics. 2020. https://disabilitycompendium.org/annualreport
68 St. Helena Unified School District 2021-22 Local Control and Accountability Plan https://www.sthelenaunified.org/cms/lib/CA50000465/Centricity/Domain/36/LCAP%20Control%20Accountability%20Plan %202021%202022.pdf
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-64
from the ACS, Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Equity Priority Communities (EPC), and the HUD Jobs Proximity Index.

TCAC economic opportunities are measured by census tract. They consider poverty, adult education, employment, job proximity, and median home values. A higher economic index score reflects more positive economic outcomes. The MTC EPC identifies concentrations of underserved populations in order to direct funding for housing and transportation equity. The HUD Jobs Proximity Index assesses the accessibility to job opportunities at the census block group level.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-65
Figure 28 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Education Outcomes (Napa County) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-66
Figure 29 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Education Outcomes (St. Helena) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-67

3.6.8 Regional Trends
According to the California Employment Development Department, the unemployment rate of Napa County was 3.9 percent in February 2022 (not seasonally adjusted). Top employers in the county include manufacturing (including large- and small-scale wine manufacturing), healthcare, and accommodation and food service. The 2015-2019 ACS estimates reported 74,549 workers in the County of Napa with a labor force participation rate of 65 percent of persons 16 years and older. Approximately 33.7 percent of workers commute 30 or more minutes to work with a countywide mean commute time of 25.6 minutes.

Figure 30 shows the TCAC Opportunity Areas map for economic outcomes across the county. Economic outcomes are varied with more positive outcomes generally located in the western areas of the county and less positive outcomes in the eastern areas of the county. This trend may be attributed to the high concentration of vineyards and wineries in the western and central areas of the county and low population density in eastern areas of the county.

3.6.9 Local Trends
According to the 2015-2019 American Community Survey (ACS), there are 3,159 persons in the labor force in St. Helena with a labor force participation rate of 61 percent. The California Employment Development Department reported the unemployment rate was 3.1 percent in December 2021 (not seasonally adjusted), slightly less than the county. Top industries in the city reflect county trends, with the highest number of workers in manufacturing, healthcare, and accommodation and food service.

Figure 31 shows the TCAC Opportunity Areas map for economic outcomes in St. Helena. Much like the county, economic outcomes are varied across the city. Western areas of the city have more positive economic outcomes and eastern areas have less positive economic outcomes. This pattern of lower economic outcomes in the eastern areas of the city reflects the lower median incomes and greater ethnic diversity that is also experienced in these areas. The eastern areas of the city contain affordable housing developments, a mobile home park, and senior living community which may be contributing to lower median incomes and lower median home values.

ACS 2015-2019 estimates show approximately 22.4 percent of workers commute 30 or more minutes to work and the mean commute time is 19.6 minutes. Figure 32 shows the job proximity index in St. Helena which assesses the accessibility of employment opportunities based on distance, a higher index score corresponds to closer job proximity. Job proximity throughout St. Helena is consistently high (closest proximity), especially when compared to the southern and eastern areas of the county.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-68
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-69
Figure 30 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Economic (Napa County) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-70
Figure 31 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Economic (St. Helena) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-71
Figure 32 Job Proximity Index (St. Helena)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-72
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-73

3.6.10 Healthy Environment
Access to a healthy environment is necessary for communities within a city to thrive. Healthy environment analysis considers patterns in the disparities found within individual neighborhoods and protected area groups. These disparities can vary in a number of categories, including air quality, water quality, safe neighborhood, environmental hazards, social services, and cultural institutions. Recent California laws, AB 1550, Senate Bill (SB) 535 and SB 1000 emphasize the importance of environmental justice as a fair housing issue. Environmental Justice, as defined by HUD, means ensuring the environment and human health are protected fairly for all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, and consideration the means by which federally assisted projects may have disproportionately adversely affect human health or the environmental on minority and low income populations.69 The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment developed the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen) a screening methodology to help identify California communities disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution called. High scoring census tracts tend to be more burdened by pollution from multiple sources and are most vulnerable to its effects, taking into account their socioeconomic characteristics and underlying health status.

3.6.11 Regional Trends
The CalEnviroScreen map for Napa County identifies the degree to which communities are considered burdened by pollution. Figure 33 below shows the pollution burden for Napa County, representing the potential exposure to pollutants and resulting adverse environmental conditions. The more urban areas on the western side of the county have a higher pollution burden, especially within and to the south of the City of Napa. Figure 34 shows TCAC Opportunity Map for environmental outcomes in the county. Similar to the CalEnviroScreen map, the TCAC Opportunity Map shows that the western areas of the county have less positive environmental outcomes compared to the eastern areas of the county. This may be caused by the mountains flank the valley which block wind flow and trap pollution. Additionally, the western and central areas of the county have a higher concentration of people, traffic, and agriculture which produces greater levels of pollution and pesticides. Eastern areas of the county tend to be forested and are less populated

3.6.12 Local Trends
Pollution Burden in St. Helena is lower than many other areas in the county, as shown in Figure 35.

However, the eastern areas of the city have a slightly higher pollution burden (overall score of 40) compared to the rest of the city, with high burdens of pesticides, cleanups, and groundwater threats. The western areas have a slightly lower burden (overall score of 33) with high burdens of pesticides, cleanups, groundwater threats, and solid waste. Pesticide use is considered high throughout the city, likely due to pesticide applications on nearby vineyards. There are two cleanup sites located within the city including one site with an active dry-cleaning business and one site with a manufactured gas plant that was dismantled in 1930. These two cleanup sites are also sources that pose groundwater threats to the city. A 69 HUD, 2021. https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental-review/environmental-justice/ Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-74
third cleanup site is located outside the city limits, southeast of the city, with a food market that has detected high pesticides in the soil beneath the building. A solid waste facility is located in the eastern area of the city which may potentially expose neighboring communities to environmental burdens such as odor, pests, and truck traffic. The southern and eastern areas of the city have a higher pollution burden, which corresponds with areas with higher ethnic diversity, higher populations with a disability, and lower median incomes discussed in the previous sections.

Figure 36 shows the TCAC Opportunity map for environmental outcomes in the City of St. Helena. The southern and eastern areas of the city have less positive environmental outcomes compared to the western areas.

3.7 Disproportionate Housing Needs
Disproportionate housing needs generally refers to a condition in which there are significant disparities in the proportion of members of a protected class experiencing a category of housing need when compared to the proportion of members of any other relevant groups, or the total population experiencing that category of housing need in the applicable geographic area. For purposes of this definition, categories of housing need are based on such factors as cost burden and severe cost burden, overcrowding, homelessness, and substandard housing conditions

3.7.1 Housing Cost Burden
Housing cost burden is defined as the proportion of a household’s total gross income spent on housing costs. Households that spend at least 30 percent of their total gross income on housing costs (rent, mortgage, utilities, and other housing-related costs) are considered cost burdened, and households spending over 50 percent on housing costs are considered severely cost burdened. The higher the housing cost burden, the more likely residents are to live in overcrowded and substandard conditions and are less likely to afford to relocate. Low-income households and persons in protected classes disproportionately experience severe housing problems. Housing problems are households that have one or more of the following problems: lacks a complete kitchen facility, lacks complete plumbing facility, a household that is overcrowded, or a household that is cost burdened.

3.7.2 Regional Trends
Figure 37 shows areas of Napa County where renter households overpay for housing (spend more than 30 percent of household income on housing costs). Overpayment by renters is a widespread issue across the county, especially in the more urban areas of the county as well as the northeast and southeast areas of the county. Similar to overpayment by renters, overpayment by homeowners is common throughout the county, highlighting that the costs of housing are too high for both renters and homeowners. Figure 38 shows areas of the county where homeowners overpay for housing, which is most prevalent in the urban areas of the county as well as the northwest and southeast areas of the county.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-75

3.7.3 Local Trends
Housing cost burden among renters is widespread in St. Helena. Figure 39 shows that 40 to 60 percent of renters overpay for housing in all areas of the city. Additionally, data from HUD’s Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) indicates lower income households are disproportionately overpaying for housing.

Lower-income households experience higher cost burden than moderate income and above households in St. Helena. Approximately 41 percent of extremely low-income households (those earning 30 percent or less of the local area median income (AMI)) are considered severely cost burdened (spend 50 percent or more of their income on housing). Both renters and owners experience cost burden in St. Helena, with higher proportions of lower income households spending greater than 30 percent or 50 percent on housing.

Table 7 shows housing cost burden of lower income households in St. Helena. Generally, a higher percentage of renters than owners experience cost burden, however, more owners than renters experience severe cost burden.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-76
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-77
Figure 33 CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile Scores (Napa County) Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-78
Figure 34 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Environment (Napa County) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-79
Figure 35 CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile Scores (St. Helena) Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-80
Figure 36 TCAC Opportunity Areas – Environment (St. Helena) Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-81
Figure 37 Overpayment By Renters (Napa County)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-82
Figure 38 Overpayment By Homeowners (Napa County)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-83
Figure 39 Overpayment By Renters (St. Helena)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-84
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-85
Table 7 Housing Cost Burden of Lower-Income Households (2014-2018) Household by Type,
Income, and Housing
Problem Renters Percent Owners Percent
Total
Households
Extremely Low-Income
(0-30 % AMI) 185 160 345
With Cost Burden >30% 100 54.1% 105 65.6% 205 59.4%
With Cost Burden >50% 50 27.0% 90 56.3% 140 40.6%
Very Low-Income
(0-30 % AMI) 240 105 345 %
With Cost Burden >30% 195 81.3% 70 66.7% 265 76.8%
With Cost Burden >50% 35 14.6% 40 38.1% 75 21.7%
Low-Income
(51-80 % AMI) 145 160 305 %
With Cost Burden >30% 100 69.0% 85 53.1% 185 60.7%
With Cost Burden >50% 40 27.6% 60 37.5% 100 32.8%
Moderate & Above
Income
(>80% AMI)
500 1,105 1,605 %
With Cost Burden >30% 133 26.6% 205 18.6% 338 21.1%
With Cost Burden >50% 8 1.6% 60 5.4% 68 4.2%
Total 1,070 41.2% 1,530 58.8% 2,600 %
Source: HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), 2014-2018

3.7.4 Substandard Housing
HUD considers housing units to be “standard units” if they are in compliance with local building codes.

Substandard housing is housing that poses a risk to the health, safety, or wellbeing of its occupants or neighbors, includes housing that does not have operable indoor plumbing, electricity, or heat. Housing age can be an important indicator of housing condition in a community. Like any other tangible asset, housing is subject to gradual physical or technological deterioration over time. If not properly and regularly maintained, housing can deteriorate and discourage reinvestment, depress neighboring property values, and eventually impact the quality of life in a neighborhood. Typically, housing over 30 years old is more likely to have rehabilitation needs that may include new plumbing, roof repairs, foundation work, and other repairs. Some older housing units may have health risks such as lead paint and asbestos. Housing issues such as mold may elevate health conditions such as asthma.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-86

3.7.5 Regional Trends
In Napa County approximately 73 percent of all housing units were built before 1990. These older units potentially require minor repairs and modernization improvements. Figure 41 shows the approximate break down by age of housing units.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-87
Figure 40 Overpayment By Homeowners (St. Helena)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-88
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-89
Figure 41 Housing Stock Age (2015-2019)
Source: Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey, 2015-2019 The County of Napa has a total of 881 substandard housing units, approximately 2 percent of the total occupied units in the county. A housing unit is considered substandard if it lacks complete plumbing or kitchen facilities. Of the 881 substandard units, approximately 15 percent lacked complete plumbing facilities and 85 percent lacked complete kitchen facilities. Table 8 shows a breakdown of the number of substandard housing units in Napa County and St. Helena. In the past, lack of telephone service was also an indicator of housing conditions. Today, with the widespread availability of cell and internet phone services, many households have chosen not to install land line telephone services, and availability of telephone service is no longer considered an indicator of substandard housing conditions.

Table 8 Substandard Housing Units (2019)
Condition Napa County St. Helena
Lacking complete plumbing facilities 128 0.26% 0 0.00%
Lacking complete kitchen facilities 753 1.55% 83 3.07%
Total 48705 2702
Source: Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey, 2015-2019.

3.7.6 Local Trends
As shown above in Figure 41, approximately 79 percent of the city’s housing stock was built prior to 1990, potentially requiring minor repairs and modernization improvements.

Table 8 shows 83 units, about 3 percent of the St. Helena’s housing stock, are considered substandard. All identified substandard units lacked complete kitchen facilities. 2014 or
later
2010 to
2013
2000 to
2009
1990 to
1999
1980 to
1989
1970 to
1979
1960 to
1969
1950 to
1959
1940 to
1949
1939 or
earlier
Napa County 1.87% 1.30% 11.76% 12.20% 13.56% 17.76% 12.13% 16.28% 4.86% 8.28% St. Helena 1.34% 0.58% 7.67% 11.58% 11.55% 22.56% 14.64% 14.52% 5.29% 10.27%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%
Year Built
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-90

3.7.7 Homelessness
“Homelessness,” as defined by HUD, describes an individual, who is not imprisoned or otherwise detained, who:
• Lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence; and • Has a primary nighttime residence that is:
– A supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate shelters, and transitional housing for the mentally ill);
– An institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be institutionalized; or
– A public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings.

Throughout Napa Country, homelessness has become an increasingly important issue. Factors that contribute to the rise in homelessness include a lack of housing affordable available for low- and moderateincome households, increases in the number of persons whose incomes fall below the poverty level, reductions in public subsidies, and lack of support for persons with extreme developmental, physical, and mental disabilities.

3.7.8 Regional Trends
Napa County’s 2020 Point-In-Time Count indicated there were 464 persons experiencing homelessness in the county on any given night; mostly in the City of Napa. This is an increase from 322 persons in the 2018 Point-In-Time Count.

3.7.9 Local Trends
The number of homeless persons in St. Helena is unknown as the 2020 Point-In-Time Count does not include a breakdown of the homeless population by jurisdiction. Based on St. Helena’s share of the countywide population, 3.9 percent, it is estimated the City’s homeless population is approximately 18 persons.

3.7.10 Overcrowding
Overcrowding is defined as housing units with more than one person per room (including dining and living rooms but excluding bathrooms and kitchen) and severe overcrowding refers to more than 1.5 persons per room. Large families generally have special housing needs due to lower per capita income, the need for affordable housing, or the need for larger units with three or more bedrooms, resulting in overcrowding.

Some households may not be able to accommodate high-cost burdens for housing and accept smaller housing or reside with other individuals or families in the same home. Potential fair housing issues emerge if non-traditional households are discouraged or denied housing due to a perception of overcrowding.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-91
Household overcrowding is reflective of various living situations such as a housing unit that is inadequately sized to meet a household’s needs, the necessity or desire to have extended family members reside in an existing household, or unrelated individuals or families share a single housing unit.

Not only is overcrowding a potential fair housing concern, but it can also potentially strain physical facilities and the delivery of public services, reduce the quality of the physical environment, contribute to a shortage of parking, and accelerate the deterioration of homes. As a result, some landlords or apartment managers may be more hesitant to rent to larger households, thus making access to adequate housing even more difficult. According to local fair housing service providers and property managers, addressing the issue of large households is complex as there are no set of guidelines for determining the maximum capacity for a unit. Fair housing issues may arise from policies aimed to limit overcrowding that have a disparate impact on specific racial or ethnic groups with higher proportion of overcrowding.

3.7.11 Regional Trends
In Napa County, approximately 6 percent of occupied housing units are overcrowded. As shown in Figure 42, overcrowded housing is most prevalent in the cities of Napa and Calistoga. The City of Napa has the highest percentage of overcrowded units. Certain areas within the city have between 14 and 36 percent of households that are overcrowded. Rural areas experience less overcrowding, and some rural areas have no overcrowded or severely overcrowded units.

Table 9 shows the percentage of housing units that are overcrowded. Renter-occupied households had a larger proportion of overcrowded households in the county.

Table 9 Overcrowding by Tenure
Jurisdiction
Overcrowded
(1+ occupants per room)
Severely Overcrowded
(1.5+ occupants per room)
Renter Owner Total Renter Owner Total
St. Helena 9.26% 1.57% 4.74% 1.44% 1.01% 1.18%
Napa County 11.92% 2.99% 6.18% 3.50% 0.64% 1.66%
Source: Table B25014 Tenure by Occupants Per Room 2015-2019 ACS. Bureau of the Census, American Community Survey, 2015-2019.

3.7.12 Local Trends
Based on 2015-2019 ACS estimates, approximately five percent of households in St. Helena are overcrowded, compared to 6 percent for the county as a whole. As shown in Table 9,a higher proportion of renter households are overcrowded than owned households in St. Helena. Figure 43 shows the percent of overcrowded households throughout the city, no concentrated areas overcrowding of households are shown. ACS estimates indicate overcrowding is a more common housing issue for Hispanic/Latino households than White households where approximately 20 percent Hispanic/Latino households in St.

Helena are overcrowded compared to three percent of White households.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-92
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-93
Figure 42 Overcrowded Households (Napa County)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-94
Figure 43 Overcrowded Households (St. Helena)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-95

3.7.13 Displacement
Displacement, as defined by HCD, is used to describe any involuntary household move caused by landlord action or market changes. Shifts in neighborhood composition are often framed and perpetuated by established patterns of racial inequity and segregation. Movement of people, public policies, and investments, such as capital improvements and planned transit stops, and flows of private capital can lead to displacement. Displacement is fueled by a combination of rising housing costs, rising income inequality, stagnant wages, and insufficient market-rate housing production. Decades of disinvestment in low-income communities, coupled with investor speculation, can result in a rent gap or a disparity between current rental income of the land, and potentially achievable rental income if the property is converted to its most profitable use. These processes can disproportionally impact people of color, as well as lower income households, persons with disabilities, large households, and persons at-risk or experiencing homelessness.70

3.7.14 Regional Trends
The Urban Displacement Project (UDP) is an initiative out of the University of California, Berkeley that conducts data-driven research to better understand gentrification and displacement in order to generate more equitable and inclusive cities. UDP provides data to identify “sensitive communities,” communities that are vulnerable to displacement caused by housing costs or with market-based displacement pressures within or near the community. As shown in Figure 44 below, portions of the cities of Napa and Calistoga are identified as sensitive communities by UDP. These communities are also more racially/ethnically diverse and have lower household median income compared to other areas of the county.

3.7.15 Local Trends
UDP did not identify any areas within St. Helena that are considered vulnerable to displacement, as shown in Figure 45. However, research from the University of California Berkeley indicates that 42.0 percent of households in St. Helena live in neighborhoods susceptible to or experiencing displacement. 70 HCD. 2021. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/affh/docs/affh_document_final_4-27-2021.pdf Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-96
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-97
Figure 44 Sensitive Communities (Napa County)
Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-98
Figure 45 Sensitive Communities (St. Helena)
Source: AFFH Data Viewer, 2022
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-99

4. Local Area of Knowledge
The AFFH analysis identified the eastern portion of St. Helena as generally experiencing more fair housing issues than other areas of the city. Fair housing issues in this area include higher levels of minority populations, low and moderate median income, overpayment of housing, higher median rent, and lower economic and environmental outcomes. The predominant population in this area of the city is White, however it has the highest non-White population of all areas within the city. Additionally, this area has a higher proportion of persons living with a disability compared to other areas. Overall, the eastern portion of the city is a moderate resource area, the same as the rest of the city. Some factors that could play into the trends seen in the data could be the location of existing retirement and older adult living facilities. The population living within these communities are, many time, fixed income and more often single-headed households. In addition, most of the city’s high density land use and housing is located in this eastern portion of the city, which tends to be the housing type most affordable to lower income residents and single-parent households. As part of the Housing Element, the City is committing to improving the number of affordable units city-wide. In addition, with the recently adopted General Plan, the city envisions the redevelopment of Main Street within the eastern portion of the city with new, mixed-use development to increase economic opportunities and investments in this area.

4.1 Local Actions and Policy Efforts
In 2018, the City funded the 2018 St. Helena Housing Update Report, a housing analysis study that identified contributing factors to housing challenges in St. Helena. The report identified that residents believe new housing development primarily occurs east of Highway 29, however according to the report the majority of new construction was located west of Highway 29. In addition, the report also identified community opposition as a challenge to housing development in the city, leading to delays and increased project costs. Community members often desire to maintain the rural character of the city and are very concerned with how new development will impact surrounding neighborhoods.71 In October of 2020, the City Council adopted the Resolution 2020-105: Affirming that Discrimination and Systemic Racism Constitute A Public Health Crisis Causing Disparities in Mental Wellbeing, Language Access, Housing, Economic Development, Health, and Criminal Justice Experience, and Reaffirming Its Commitment to Advancing Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in the City. This resolution commits the City to erasing barriers to opportunities to minority populations, including housing. The Staff Report to City Council for Resolution 2020-105 recommends actions to address racial equity and social justice in the community, including providing Spanish translation for City Council and Planning Commission meetings, provide all City communication in Spanish and reviewing adopted by other cities that promote inclusivity and access to affordable housing.
71 2018. St. Helena Housing and Community Report.
https://www.cityofsthelena.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning_resources/page/3395/staff_rep ort-white_paper.pdf
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-100
The City also prepared a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Strategy to outline the City’s efforts towards diversity, equity and inclusion, and social justice. The strategy includes actions such as creating a Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Committee to discuss topics, including housing and racial justice, and offering live Spanish interpretation for regular and special City Council and Planning Commission meetings. The City continues to provide Spanish interpretation for City Council and Planning Commission meetings.

4.2 Stakeholder Input
The City held three housing workshops to receive feedback from the community on housing issues and the Housing Element Update (on September 16, 2021, January 20, 2022, and March 16, 2022). During these workshops, participants frequently brought up concerns regarding the lack of affordable housing for lower income households and the “missing middle” as well as the need to support affordable home ownership.

AFFH related concerns included the high cost of housing, transportation accessibility, ADU trends (specifically that ADUs tend to be utilized as vacation rentals and not housing).

4.2.1 Other Relevant Factors
Other factors to fair housing issues in St. Helena that have not been previously discussed in this analysis include lack of sufficient housing for farmworkers, availability of affordable units in a range of sizes, access to transportation, access to home ownership. These contributing factors limit the accumulation of wealth and access to housing resources in historically marginalized communities.

4.2.2 Farmworker Housing
An estimated between 6,000 and 9,000 farmworkers are employed Napa County. Sufficient affordable housing options are lacking for farmworkers who are often lower income and have special housing needs, such as seasonal housing. The number of farmworkers employed in St. Helena is unknown, however the city’s central location with regard to vineyards and wineries throughout the county would imply a number of farmworkers are employed in proximity to the city.

4.2.3 Access to Transportation
St. Helena’s public transportation system is operated by Vine Transit which operates one bus route (Route 10) in the city. Route 10 has four stops in the city, however all four stops are along the main road, State Route 29. Areas of the city located further north or south are more than 0.25 miles from a bus stop. This bus route connects the City of Napa and the City of Calistoga where connections to destinations further north or south can be made. Residents who live or work in St. Helena have limited options for traveling via public transit, potentially limiting their housing options.

4.2.4 Access to Home Ownership
Increasing housing costs has produced a barrier to home ownership for St. Helena residents. As of December 2020, Zillow reported typical home values in St. Helena were estimated at $1,665,790, much Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-101
higher than the typical home value in Napa County, which is estimated at $768,410. Typical home values reflect the value of homes in the 35th to 65th percentile range. Home values have been consistently on the rise since 2000 (with the exception of the recession). This trend has made it more difficult for residents, especially lower income residents, to afford homes. Affordable housing projects in the city generally consist of rental units, which do not provide opportunities for lower income residents to own homes.

Mortgage application filing and acceptance data from 2018-2019 indicates there are racial/ethnic disparities among homeownership opportunities for residents in Napa County. As shown in Figure 46, 64 percent of White, Non-Hispanic applicants and 50 percent of Hispanic/Latinx had their loan originated, compared to 36 percent of Asian/ API applicants, 0 percent of Black/African American, and 0 percent of American Indian/Alaska Native applicants.

Figure 46 Mortgage Applications and Acceptance by Race
Source: Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council's (FFIEC) Home Mortgage Disclosure Act loan/application register (LAR) files

4.2.5 Opposition to New Development
According to the 2018 St. Helena Housing Update Report, city residents are “deeply concerned with maintaining the rural character of town” and therefore residents generally oppose housing projects that are perceived to changing neighborhood character. Many previous and ongoing multi-family housing projects 8% 6%
33%
9%
100%
17%
17% 16%
67%
18%
11%
17%
16%
36% 8%
6%
36%
64%
50%
57%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
American
Indian or
Alaska Native,
Non-Hispanic
Asian / API,
Non-Hispanic
Black or
African
American,
Non-Hispanic
White, NonHispanicHispanic or
Latinx
Unknown
Loan Applications
Application approved but not accepted Application denied Application withdrawn by applicant File closed for incompleteness Loan originated
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-102
have been met with comments and concern from community members regarding environmental impacts, such as increases in water demand and increases in traffic as well as impacts to existing neighborhoods and community character.

4.2.6 Location of New Housing
Some residents of the city feel the city is segregated between east and west of Main Street, where the west side of the city consists of a greater percentage of White, affluent residents while the east side of the city has a greater percentage of non-White and low-income residents. In addition, residents have stated that the multi-family housing in the city is located in the eastern area. According to the 2018 St. Helena Housing Update Report, the majority of new construction over the last 10 years has been west of Highway 29.72 The Magnolia Oaks housing development consists of 44 multi-family housing units, 10 of which are affordable to low-income residents. While this project is located just west of Highway 29, other recently multi-family projects have been constructed on the east along McCorkle Avenue. The City is in the process of adopting a new Zoning Ordinance to be consistent with the 2040 General Plan, which would permit duplexes and triplexes within the MR District (see Program H-N). This would create additional housing choices and affordability levels in the MR Districts on the western side of the city. In addition, Programs H-BB, H-EE, and H-XXwould implement placemaking strategies to outreach and work with the more diverse and older populations living in the east due to the historic development patterns.

5.Sites Inventory Analysis

5.1 Opportunity Areas
HCD and TCAC opportunity maps identify areas throughout the state whose characteristics support positive economic (low poverty, high employment, high median household income), educational (reading and math proficiency, high school graduation rates, low student poverty rates), and environmental outcomes (low exposure to pollution). A census tract with a designation of high resource would indicate there are strong educational and economic opportunities, meaning opportunity for current and future residents.

According to the 2022 TCAC Opportunity Map, the entire city is considered an area of moderate resource.

However, the eastern portion of the city has a higher percentage of non-White residents, lower household median income., higher percentage of cost burden among renters and owners, and less positive economic and environmental outcomes compared to the rest of the city. These demographic And socio-economic patterns influenced the locations of potential lower income sites in the city. 72 Erica Skylar. 2018. St. Helena Housing Update Report. https://www.cityofsthelena.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning_resources/page/3395/staff_rep ort-white_paper.pdf
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-103

5.2 Improved Conditions
According to the 2022 TCAC Opportunity Map, the entire city is considered an area of moderate resource.

Demographic and socio-economic spatial patterns show that census blocks with low- and moderate-income households, greater Hispanic/Latino populations, and higher rates of housing problems are located throughout the eastern half of the city. Sites that accommodate housing unit densities appropriate for lower-income units are scattered around the city. Sites that can accommodate most of the lower income units are located in the western and southern part of the city, which has a higher household median income and more positive economic and environmental outcomes. Approximately 38 percent of the total proposed units and 36 percent of the proposed lower-income units planned for in the sites inventory (Appendix B) are located in the eastern part of the city, which has a higher percentage of low- and moderate-income populations and non-White residents. .

Figure 47 shows the site inventory in relation to the TCAC Opportunity Map. Sites proposed within the eastern area of the city are diverse with a mix of lower income and non-lower income sites. Lower income sites spread across the city. Site 7 (821 Pope Street) and Site 8 (882 and 886 College Avenue) have 50% lower income units and 50% moderate income units. The rest of the proposed lower income sites are 100% lower income units.

5.2.1 Exacerbated Conditions
The northern and eastern parts of the city contain block groups considered moderate resource with a higher concentration of Hispanic/Latino population, higher percent of renter occupied units, higher percentage of overpayment by residents, less positive economic outcomes, and higher pollution burden compared to the moderate and high resource areas of the city. According to California Housing Partnership data, all federal and State subsidized housing within St. Helena is in moderate resource areas in the northern and eastern portions of the city. The Sites Inventory does not exacerbate conditions in vulnerable areas of the city by identifying sites that can accommodate lower income units throughout the city. Additionally, one underutilized site was identified that could accommodate above moderate units in the eastern part of the city, which has a higher percentage of non-White residents and cost burden and lower economic and environmental outcomes.

5.2.2 Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty and Affluence There are no racially/ethnically concentrated areas of poverty or affluence identified in St. Helena. However, eastern areas of the city have a larger population of Hispanic/Latino residents as well as LMI populations compared to other areas of the city. In contrast, western areas of the city have higher concentrations of White residents, higher median incomes, and lower concentration of LMI populations. Sites feasible for lower income housing were identified in these affluent areas.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-104

5.2.3 Access to Opportunity
The city is categorized into 2 census tracts, both of which are considered moderate resource. Housing units in the sites inventory are not disproportionately concentrated in different resource areas, and the sites identified in the eastern areas are scattered on vacant and underutilized parcels to facilitate the development of lower- and above moderate-income units.

5.2.4 Disproportionate Housing Needs
The fair housing assessment found a need for affordable housing for people with disabilities and adequate low-income households. The City incentivizes the development of extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate-income housing by reducing development fees and relaxing development standards to incentivize housing development. The City may also assist in acquiring and assembling property, subsidizing on-site and off-site improvements, and assisting in relocation activities as well as clearing and demolition.

5.2.5 Subsidized Housing
In 2019, approximately 1,105 households received Housing Choice Vouchers in the County of Napa, with 10 households receiving rental assistance and 6 households on the wait list in St. Helena.73 The AFFH Data Viewer does not have data on Housing Choice Vouchers for St. Helena. 73 City of Napa Housing Authority’s Annual Report Housing Services Agreement, 2019, https://www.cityofsthelena.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning_resources/page/3395/2018- 2019_housing_services_annual_report.pdf
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-105
Figure 47 Location of Sites Inventory in Relation to TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas Source: AFFH Viewer, 2022
Figure 47 Location of Sites Inventory in Relation to TCAC/HCD Opportunity Areas Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-106
This page is intentionally left blank.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-107

6.Contributing Factors
This assessment of fair housing issues identifies factors that contribute to fair housing issues in the City of St. Helena, as shown in Table 10.

Table 10 Factors that Contribute to Fair Housing Issues Identified Fair Housing Issue Contributing Factor Meaningful Action Fair housing enforcement and outreach · Lack of fair housing requirements and information provided to residents
· Outreach and communication of services
are limited to English
· Limited fair housing testing and
enforcement
· Participate in FHNV meetings, at least
once annually, to coordinate regional
responses to housing discrimination
issues (Program H-XX)
Lack of affordable housing and displacement of
residents
· Increasing rent and house/property costs
· Dominance of single family housing
· Land use and zoning laws
· Availability of affordable units in a range
of housing types
· Diversify and expand the housing stock
to accommodate the varied housing
needs of different groups (Programs H-E,

H-H, H-I, H-J, H-W, H-LL)
· Pursue down payment and mortgage
assistance resources through the
Housing Trust Fund or other resources
(such as CalHome) for local funding to
assist lower and moderate-income
residents (Program H-GG)
· Development of affordable housing on
City-owned sites (Program H-V)
· Provide by right approvals for multifamily housing projects that meet objective design and development
standards (Program H-V)
· At least once annually, provide an
information on accessory dwelling units
(ADUs) in the city, and target outreach
to residents in the high resource
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 A-108
southwest of Main Street and northeast
of Pratt Street (Program H-Q)
Concentration of lower income and minority
households in the southeastern areas of the
city
· Land use and zoning laws
· Location of existing affordable housing
· Prioritize affordable housing in high
resource areas southwest of Main Street
and northeast of Pratt Street (Program
H-V)
· Encourage construction and renting of
ADUs in high resource areas to increase
supply of variety of housing types in the
city (Programs H-I, H-R)
· Prioritize CIP in the eastern part of the
city (Program H-WW)
· Revise inclusionary housing ordinance
for more lower income units, realistic inlieu fees, workforce housing, and more on-site housing requirements (Program
H-F)
· Invest in public infrastructure projects in
low and moderate resource areas that
improve the quality of life for residents
(Program H-WW)
Limited resources for persons with
disabilities
· High cost of transportation for persons
with disabilities
· Lack of ADA compliant sidewalks
· Reduce ridership costs for VineGo
paratransit system (Program H-WW)
· Work with the County of Napa to carry
out the ADA self-Evaluation and
transition Plan to remove barriers for
persons with disabilities to facilities and
programs in Napa County (Program HWW)
Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 B-1
Appendix B:

Comments on the Public Review Draft 2023-2031
Housing Element Update
The City received multiple comment letters on the Public Review Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element Update.

Comments on the Public Review Draft were received between June 29, 2022, and July 30, 2022. Key changes in response to public input include revisions to various programs and the addition of a new site in the sites inventory.

Response to Comments
In response to these comments, the City has made a number of revisions to the Public Review Draft Housing Element, including:
• 1: Policy Document – Program H-Y: Corrected spelling error and added Voorhees Circle (now program H-Z).
• 1: Policy Document – Policy HE 2.5: Revised language for clarity. • 1: Policy Document – Program H-C: Urban Limit Line: Deleted program. • 1: Policy Document – Program H-J: Updated funding sources to include State and Federal programs and grants (now program H-I).
• 1: Policy Document – Program H-M: Zoning to Facilitate Higher Density Housing: Revised for clarity (now program H-N).
• 1: Policy Document – Program H-R: Affordability Requirements for ADU Incentives: Updated text to specify that a regulatory agreement is required (now program H-S). • 5. Housing Conditions – Key Findings: Added source information for the data presented in the key finding related to Cost Burden
• 5. Housing Conditions – Physical Housing Conditions: Estimated the number of homes in need of rehabilitation.
• 6. Housing Market Conditions – Affordable Home Purchase Prices: Corrected broken references to Table 15.
• 6. Housing Market Conditions – For-Sale Housing: Revised note on Table 15 to clarify that 2021 data was used.

Agenda Item #10.1.

City of St. Helena 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Certified, September 25, 2023 B-2
• 11. Housing Resources – Pending and Approved Projects: Revised Table 36 to identify the existing unit at 963 Pope Street as deed restricted.
• 11. Housing Resources – Remaining RHNA: Revised Table 37 to fix incorrect income categorization for 963 Pope Street.
• 11: Housing Resources – Residential Sites Inventory: Added 620 McCorkle (APN 009-502-003) to the available sites inventory.
• 11. Housing Resources – Pending and Approved Projects: Revised Table 36 to identify the existing unit at 963 Pope Street as deed restricted.
• 11. Housing Resources – Remaining RHNA: Revised Table 37 to fix incorrect income categorization for 963 Pope Street.
• 11: Housing Resources – Residential Sites Inventory: Added 620 McCorkle (APN 009-502-003) to the available sites inventory.

Agenda Item #10.1.

P.O. Box 94 St Helena, CA 94574
www.ourtownsthelena.org

July 26, 2022
TO: Members of the City Council and Planning Commission, City of St. Helena FROM: Jennifer La Liberte, Executive Director
SUBJECT: Housing Element Update, 2023-2031, Public Review Draft The Board of Directors of Our Town St Helena and I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the draft Housing Element Update (HEU).

General Comments
Pg 1-4 Potential Funding Sources – There does not appear to be consistency among the potential funding sources for the objectives. Some programs list specific potential sources (though the lists should be expanded) and some list only staff time. It appears this could be related to how current programs are funded. Federal, state, county, local, and private funding sources would seem appropriate for each objective that requires development and construction funding. Also, if detailed funding sources are to be included, then US Department of Agriculture Rural Development should be added.

Pg. 1-6 Throughout the document (beginning on page 1-6), much of the cited data is outdated and does not accurately reflect today’s market conditions. For example, the HEU states “typical contract rent for an apartment in St. Helena was $1,470 in 2019,” and to avoid being cost burdened, a renter would need to earn $59,160.

According to the Napa County 2021 Affordable Housing Needs Report (May 2021) produced by the California Housing Partnership, the average asking monthly rent in Napa County is $1,948 and renters need to earn $77,916 to avoid being cost burdened. Since St. Helena tends to be at the top of the market for Napa County, it’s safe to assume (and observe) that those figures are even higher. Marcus & Millchap publishes a quarterly Bay Area multi-family market report that identifies mean rents by county by unit type which would be more accurate even if not specific to St Helena. We know that a typical two-bedroom market rate unit in good condition is renting for $2,100-$2,650 plus utilities, and three-bedrooms in very good condition are at approximately $3,000 per month.

Pg.1-11 How were the specific quantified objectives derived under each of the programs and how do they relate to each other? There appears to be significant overlap in Agenda Item #10.1.

P.O. Box 94 St Helena, CA 94574
www.ourtownsthelena.org

these objectives. Example: farmworker housing and very low-income housing could be the same housing; senior housing could be incorporated into a lowincome project. The Quantified Objectives Summary Table on 1-40 page provides the totals but not the logic in how the quantities were broken out.

Pg. 1-17 “The City will explore possible incentives for building attached market rate housing units for rent and for sale” which is great, but it ought not take five years to explore incentives. And what action comes after exploration? Similarly, why will it take four years to study potential modifications to the Zoning Code to facilitate higher density housing, etc., when the City is already updating the Zoning Code and the HE and should be fairly versed in what changes are needed? Is it possible to make incremental changes? For example, an immediate step the City could take is to remove the conditional use permit requirement in multi-family zones to streamline the process for developers.

changed hands are also at-risk for conversion.

Pp. 2-23 Beginning on page 2-23, Joe is Joe McGrath, Jordan is Jordan Bentley, Mary Stevenson is Mary Stephenson, John is John Sales, Jennifer Le Liberte is Jennifer La Liberte, and Steve is Steve Goldfarb.

for Napa County, the comma is in the wrong place.

these units which comprise 17.4 percent of the housing stock. If the rental vacancy rate is 3.1 percent and ownership vacancy rate is 5.3 percent, what constitutes the delta (17.4 minus 3.1 minus 5.3)?

40 to 80 years old correlate with the City’s preservation goals?

which is providing listing prices, not value. Based on current listings in St. Helena, $1.6 million is at the lower end of the range. Local realtors could provide updated Agenda Item #10.1.

P.O. Box 94 St Helena, CA 94574
www.ourtownsthelena.org

MLS data which would be timelier and more accurate than Zillow. Also, within this section it is not clear whether existing deed-restricted units are included in totals of rent/homeownership units and monthly cost. It could be that these incomequalified units are affecting the total values. Could this be made more explicit?

sentence and middle of the second sentence that don’t make sense.

figures for 2022, so the footnote to the table should be adjusted accordingly.

a very low and low income; OTSH purchased in June 2021 and recorded 55-year deed restrictions. Also, Grayson Apartments were funded privately through the inclusionary requirements met by 632 McCorkle and references to tax credits, AHP, etc. should be removed. This is an important point because the housing crisis here will not be solved exclusively through non-profits.

restricted and should be noted.

should be moved to “lower” income.

Policies
HE 2.5 “Allow duplexes in all low-density residential zones” – please clarify whether this allowance is by right and not with a conditional use permit.

HE 4.8 “Give preference to projects providing workforce housing affordable to up to 140 percent of the AMI” – there doesn’t appear to be an implementation program associated with this policy. What preference would be given, and would it be at the expense of another affordability level?
Implementation Programs
H-A, H-NN “Concentration of sites for affordable housing” – OTSH supports the City’s efforts to ensure affordable housing sites are identified geographically throughout the city. But we caution that land is scarce, and large sites rarely become available that are suitable for multi-unit housing, and, most that do, tend to be located east of Main Street. We support incentivizing affordable housing wherever it can get Agenda Item #10.1.