Agenda packet — Victorville City Council, January 18, 2022 (part 5 of 11)

HCD is committed to assisting Victorville in addressing all statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law and appreciates your efforts as well as consultants Irlanda Martinez, Hitta Mosesman and Dima Galkin provided in the preparation of your draft element. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Gerlinde Bernd at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Shannan West
Land Use & Planning Unit Chief

Enclosure

HCD Review of the City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 1 September 17, 2021

APPENDIX

CITY OF VICTORVILLE

The following changes are necessary to bring the City’s housing element into compliance with Article 10.6 of the Government Code. Accompanying each recommended change, we cite the supporting section of the Government Code.

Housing element technical assistance information is available on HCD’s website at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/housing-element-memos.shtml.

Among other resources, the housing element section contains HCD’s latest technical assistance tool, Building Blocks for Effective Housing Elements (Building Blocks), available at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-blocks/index.shtml and includes the Government Code addressing State Housing Element Law and other resources.

A. Housing Needs, Resources, and Constraints

1. An analysis of population and employment trends and documentation of projections and a quantification of the locality’s existing and projected housing needs for all income levels, including extremely low-income households… (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(1).)

Include an analysis and documentation of household characteristics, including level of payment compared to ability to pay, housing characteristics, including overcrowding, and housing stock condition. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(2).)

Extremely Low-Income Households (ELI): The element includes some basic information regarding extremely low-income (ELI) households such as the number of households and projected housing needs. However, given the unique and disproportionate needs of ELI households, the element must include analysis to better formulate policies and programs. For example, the element could analyze tenure, cost burden, overcrowding and other household characteristics then examine the availability of resources to determine gaps in housing needs. For additional information, see the Building Blocks at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-blocks/housing- needs/extremely-low-income-housing-needs.shtml.

Housing Conditions: The element identifies the age of the housing stock. However, it must include an estimate and analysis of the number of units in need of rehabilitation and replacement. For example, the analysis could include utilize information from the recent survey, estimates from a recent windshield survey or sampling, estimates from the code enforcement agency, or information from other organizations. For additional information, see the Building Blocks at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/community- development/building-blocks/housing-needs/housing-stock-characteristics.shtml.

2. Affirmatively further[ing] fair housing (AFFH) in accordance with Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 8899.50) of Division 1 of Title 2…shall include an assessment of fair housing in the jurisdiction. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(10)(A).)

HCD Review of the City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 2 September 17, 2021
Assessment of Fair Housing: While the element includes some maps and reporting of data on various components of the assessment of fair housing, it must also include analysis such as trends and characteristics.

Local Data and Knowledge: The element should incorporate local data and knowledge of the jurisdiction into the AFFH section. To assist in meeting this requirement, the element should provide local data not captured in regional, state, or federal data analysis.

Other Relevant Factors: The element must include other relevant factors that contribute to fair housing issues in the jurisdiction. For instance, the element can analyze historical land use and investment practices or other information and demographic trends.

Goals, Priorities, Metrics, and Milestones: The element must be revised to add or modify goals and actions based on the outcomes of a complete analysis. Goals and actions must specifically respond to the analysis and to the identified and prioritized contributing factors to fair housing issues and must be significant and meaningful enough to overcome identified patterns and trends. Actions must have metrics and milestones as appropriate and must address housing mobility enhancement, new housing choices and affordability in high opportunity areas, place-based strategies for community preservation and revitalization and displacement protection.

3. An inventory of land suitable and available for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having realistic and demonstrated potential for redevelopment during the planning period to meet the locality’s housing need for a designated income level, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(3).)

Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Progress: The City’s RHNA may be reduced by the number of new units built since July 1, 2021. The element indicates (p. 8-4) 63 units affordable to low-income households toward the RHNA but must also demonstrate the affordability of the units. Specifically, the element must assign these units based on actual or anticipated sales price or rent level of the units or other mechanisms ensuring affordability (e.g., deed-restrictions).

Realistic Capacity: The element (p. 8-6) mentions an assumption of 75 to 100 percent of maximum allowable densities to calculate residential capacity on identified sites based on an overview of proposed development densities. However, the element should include additional and clear supporting information on typical densities of existing or approved residential developments at a similar affordability level. For example, the element could clearly list other recent projects, the zone, acreage, built density, allowable density, level of affordability and presence of exceptions such as a density bonus.

Infrastructure: The element generally describes infrastructure and forecasts (p. 4-83) in the City. However, it must also demonstrate sufficient total water and sewer capacity (existing and planned) to accommodate the regional housing need in the planning period.

HCD Review of the City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 3 September 17, 2021

Replacement Housing Requirements: If the sites inventory identifies sites with existing residential uses, it must identify whether the current residential uses are affordable to lower-income households or describe whether the additional residential development on the site requires the demolition of the existing residential use. For nonvacant sites with existing, vacated, or demolished residential uses and occupied by, or subject to an affordability requirement for, lower-income households within the last five years there must be a replacement housing program for units affordable to lower-income households (Gov. Code, § 65583.2, subd. (g)(3)). Absent a replacement housing program, these sites are not adequate sites to accommodate lower-income households.

The replacement housing program has the same requirements as set forth in Government Code section 65915, subdivision (c), paragraph (3). The housing element must be revised to include such analysis and a program, if necessary.

Electronic Sites Inventory: For your information, pursuant to Government Code section 65583.3, the City must submit an electronic sites inventory with its adopted housing element. The City must utilize standards, forms, and definitions adopted by HCD.

Please see HCD’s housing element webpage at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community- development/housing-element/index.shtml#element for a copy of the form and instructions. The City can reach out to HCD at [email protected] for technical assistance.

Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types (Emergency Shelters): The element should clarify emergency shelters are permitted without discretionary action and describe the development standards of the Neighborhood Service (C-1) zone. In addition, the element should describe proximity to services in addition to transportation, and any conditions inappropriate for human habitability.

4. An analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the types of housing identified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c), and for persons with disabilities as identified in the analysis pursuant to paragraph (7), including land-use controls, building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions required of developers, and local processing and permit procedures... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(5).)

Land-Use Controls: The element must identify and analyze all relevant land-use controls impacts as potential constraints on a variety of housing types. The analysis should analyze land-use controls independently and cumulatively with other land-use controls. The analysis should specifically address requirements related to multifamily parking and heights. The analysis should address any impacts on cost, supply, housing choice, affordability, timing, approval certainty and ability to achieve maximum densities and include programs to address identified constraints.

Processing and Permit Procedures: While the element states most development is subject to the Site Plan Review and includes information about processing times, it should also describe the procedures for a typical single family and multifamily development. The analysis should address the approval body, the number of public

HCD Review of the City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 4 September 17, 2021
hearing if any, approval findings and any other relevant information. The analysis should address impacts on housing cost, supply, timing, and approval certainty. For example, the element should identify and analyze approval findings for impacts on approval certainty and any approaches to promote certainty and add or modify programs as appropriate.

Group Homes: The element appears to indicate group homes for six or fewer persons are only allowed unless licensed by the state. If necessary, the element should evaluate this requirement as a potential constraint and add or modify programs as appropriate. In addition, group homes for seven or more persons appears to be excluded from several zones allowing residential uses and subject to a conditional use permit. The element should evaluate these requirements as constraints and modify Program PP-I.1 as appropriate.

Building Codes and Enforcement: The element must describe and analyze any local amendments to the building code and their enforcement for impacts on housing supply and affordability. For additional information and a sample analysis, see the Building Blocks at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building- blocks/constraints/codes-and-enforcement-on-offsite-improvement-standards.shtml.

SB 35 Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process: The element must clarify whether there are written procedures for the SB 35 (Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017) Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process and add a program to address these requirements if necessary.

Zoning and Fees Transparency: The element must clarify its compliance with new transparency requirements for posting all zoning, development standards and fees on the City’s website or add or modify programs.

Water Sewer Priority: Water and sewer service providers must establish specific procedures to grant priority water and sewer service to developments with units affordable to lower-income households. (Gov. Code, § 65589.7.) Local governments are required to immediately deliver the housing element to water and sewer service providers. The element should discuss compliance with these requirements and if necessary, add or modify programs to establish a written procedure by a date early in the planning period. For additional information and sample cover memo, see the Building Blocks at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-blocks/other- requirements/priority-for-water-sewer.shtml.

B. Housing Programs

1. Include a program which sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for implementation, which may recognize that certain programs are ongoing, such that there will be beneficial impacts of the programs within the planning period, that the local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element through the administration of land use and development controls, the provision of regulatory concessions and incentives, and the utilization of appropriate federal and state financing HCD Review of the City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 5 September 17, 2021
and subsidy programs when available. The program shall include an identification of the agencies and officials responsible for the implementation of the various actions. (Gov.

Code, § 65583, subd. (c).)
To have a beneficial impact in the planning period and address the goals of the housing element, programs must be revised with discrete timelines and specific commitment.

Programs to be revised with discrete timelines include PP-B.1 (Assist with Development), PP-D.3 (Support Non-profits), PP-D.4 (Assist with Extremely Low- income), PP-F.1 (Advertise Resources), PP-F.2 (Monitor Grant Opportunities), PP-G.1 (Publish Resources) and PP-O.2 (Safe Housing Conditions). Programs to be revised with specific commitment include PP-A.1 (Update the Land Use Element), PP-B.4 (Menu of Incentives), PP-C.3 (Encourage Accessory Dwelling Units), PP-D.4 (Assist with Extremely Low-income), PP-H.3 (Update the Land Use Element) and HE-J.1 (Rent Stabilization Ordinance).

2. Identify actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning period with appropriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to accommodate that portion of the city’s or county’s share of the regional housing need for each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the inventory completed pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) without rezoning, and to comply with the requirements of Government Code section 65584.09. Sites shall be identified as needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(1).)
As noted in Finding A3, the element does not include a complete site analysis; therefore, the adequacy of sites and zoning were not established. Based on the results of a complete sites inventory and analysis, the City may need to add or revise programs to address a shortfall of sites or zoning available to encourage a variety of housing types. In addition:
• R
ezoning: The element identifies a shortfall of sites to accommodate the regional housing needs allocation for lower-income households. As a result, programs to rezone sites must also comply with all by-right provisions pursuant to Government Code section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i). • Replacement Housing Requirements: If necessary, the housing element must include a program to provide replacement housing. (Gov. Code, § 65583.2, subd. (g)(3).) The replacement housing program must adhere to the same requirements as set forth in Government Code section 65915, subdivision (c), paragraph (3).
• Large Sites: The element identifies several large sites and also describes a program was present in the past planning period (p. 5-3) but, given the importance of this program, should also closely evaluate the effectiveness of that program and revise programs PP-A.5 and PP-B.1 as appropriate.

HCD Review of the City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 6 September 17, 2021

3. The housing element shall contain programs which assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate- income households. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(2).)
Special Needs Households: The element must include a program(s) with specific actions and timelines to assist in the development of housing for special needs households, specifically, persons with disabilities, including developmental disabilities.

The program(s) could commit the City to proactively reaching out to developers of affordable housing, adopting priority processing, granting fee waivers or deferrals, modifying development standards, granting concessions and incentives for housing developments that include units affordable to special needs households; assisting, supporting or pursuing funding applications; and outreach and coordination with affordable housing developers.

State Density Bonus Law: As noted on page 3-23, Program PP-A.2 (Menu of Density Bonuses) should be revised with specific commitment to adopt a density bonus ordinance pursuant to Government Code section 65915.

4. Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental and nongovernmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, including housing for all income levels and 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. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(3).) As noted in Findings A4, the element requires a complete analysis of potential governmental and nongovernmental constraints. Depending upon the results of that analysis, the City may need to revise or add programs and address and remove or mitigate any identified constraints.

5. Promote AFFH opportunities and promote housing throughout the community or communities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability, and other characteristics protected by the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Part 2.8 (commencing with Section 12900) of Division 3 of Title 2), Section 65008, and any other state and federal fair housing and planning law. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(5).) A
s noted in Finding A2, the element does not include a complete Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH). Depending on a complete analysis, the element may need to add or revise programs as appropriate.

C. Public Participation
Include a diligent effort by the local government to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element, and the program shall describe this effort. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(9).) While the element describes community meetings and a comprehensive survey, moving forward, the City should employ additional methods for public outreach efforts, particularly HCD Review of the City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 7 September 17, 2021
specific to the housing element and including lower-income and special needs households and neighborhoods with higher concentrations of lower-income households. For example, the City could conduct targeted stakeholder interviews or establish a committee representative of lower-income households in future public outreach efforts. In addition, the element should also summarize public comments and describe how they were considered and incorporated into the element.

Finally, the element does not clearly describe the availability of the draft housing element to the public prior to submittal to HCD. For your information, by not providing an opportunity for the public to review and comment on a draft of the element in advance of submission, the City will not have yet complied with statutory mandates to make a diligent effort to encourage the public participation in the development of the element and it reduces HCD’s ability to consider public comments in its review. The availability of the document to the public and opportunity for public comment prior to submittal to HCD is essential to the public process and HCD’s review. If applicable, the City must proactively make future revisions available to the public, including any commenters, prior to submitting any revisions to HCD and diligently consider and address comments, including making revisions to the document where appropriate. HCD’s future review will consider the extent to which the revised element documents how the City solicited, considered, and addressed public comments in the element. The City’s consideration of public comments must not be limited by HCD’s findings in this review letter.

D. General Plan Consistency
The housing element shall describe the means by which consistency will be achieved with other general plan elements and community goals. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(7).) While the element describes that it was prepared in a manner to ensure internal consistency, it should also describe how internal consistency will be maintained throughout the planning period.

Revised Draft Housing Element HCD
Findings Letter
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
J
anuary 11, 2022
Scott Webb, City Planner
Development Department
City of Victorville
14343 Civic Drive
Victorville, CA 92393-5001
Dear Scott Webb,
RE: Review of City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle (2021-2029) Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting the City of Victorville’s (City) draft housing element received for review on November 12, 2021, along with revisions on January 6, 2022. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (h), the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review.

The draft housing element with revisions addresses most statutory requirements described in HCD’s September 17, 2021 review; however, additional revision is necessary to fully comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gov.

Code), as follows:

A
ffirmatively further fair housing in accordance with Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 8899.50) of Division 1 of Title 2. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(10)(A).) Goals, Actions, Metrics and Milestones: As noted in the prior review, goals and actions must include metrics toward meaningful impact to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH). While in some cases programs do include metrics, programs, including metrics, should be explicit to AFFH to target significant and meaningful outcomes that overcome identified patterns and trends. For example, programs related to safe housing conditions, rehabilitation, improving community infrastructure, revitalization and quality of life could be targeted, including metrics, toward areas of higher need, such as areas of high segregation and poverty.

Programs related to promoting housing choices, new development or creating new affordable opportunities could be targeted (not solely) toward areas of higher opportunity. Finally, programs should explicitly reflect the City’s efforts toward broad community revitalization, including implementation of the Old Town Specific Plan.

Th
e element will meet the statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law once it has been revised and adopted to comply with the above requirement.

Scott Webb, City Planner

Page 2 ends

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

HCD appreciates the dedication and hard work you and the housing element team provided throughout the housing element review. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Gerlinde Bernd at [email protected].

Sincerely,

P
aul McDougall
Senior Program Manager

Final Draft Housing Element HCD
Compliance Letter
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov

January 12, 2022

Scott Webb, City Planner
Development Department
City of Victorville
14343 Civic Drive
Victorville, CA 92393-5001

Dear Scott Webb,

RE: City of Victorville’s 6
th Cycle (2021-2029) Draft Revisions to the Housing
Element

Thank you for submitting the City of Victorville’s (City) draft revisions to the housing element update received for review on January 12, 2022. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (b), the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review.

The revised draft element meets the statuary requirements described in HCD’s January 11, 2022 review. The housing element will comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gov. Code) when it is adopted, submitted to, and approved by HCD, in accordance with Government Code section 65585.

Public participation in the development, adoption and implementation of the housing element is essential to effective housing planning. Throughout the housing element process, the City must continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available while considering and incorporating comments where appropriate.

Scott Webb, City Planner

Page 2 ends

H
CD appreciates your hard work and cooperation throughout the preparation of the City’s housing element. Your efforts and innovation are commendable and will serve as a model for other jurisdictions throughout the State. HCD looks forward to receiving the City’s adopted housing element. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Gerlinde Bernd at [email protected]..

S
incerely,
P
aul McDougall
Senior Program Manager

CITY COUNCIL

ATTACHMENT D
HCD Approval Letter of Draft
Housing Element
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov

January 12, 2022

Scott Webb, City Planner
Development Department
City of Victorville
14343 Civic Drive
Victorville, CA 92393-5001

Dear Scott Webb,

RE: City of Victorville’s 6
th Cycle (2021-2029) Draft Revisions to the Housing
Element

Scott Webb, City Planner

Page 2 ends

S
incerely,
P
aul McDougall
Senior Program Manager

CITY COUNCIL

ATTACHMENT E

ANNOTATED HCD REVIEW

LETTER WITH RESPONSE MATRIX
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov

September 17, 2021

Scott Webb, City Planner
Development Department
City of Victorville
14343 Civic Drive
Victorville, CA 92393-5001

Dear Scott Webb:

RE: Review of City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle (2021-2029) Draft Housing Element

Thank you for submitting City of Victorville’s (City) draft housing element received for review on July 20, 2021. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (b), the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review. In addition, HCD considered comments from Inland Equity Partnership pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (c).

The draft element addresses many statutory requirements; however, revisions will be necessary to comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gov. Code).

The enclosed Appendix describes the revisions needed to comply with State Housing Element Law.

To remain on an eight-year planning cycle, the City must adopt its housing element within 120 calendar days from the statutory due date of October 15, 2021 for Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) localities. If adopted after this date, Government Code section 65588, subdivision (e), paragraph (4), requires the housing element be revised every four years until adopting at least two consecutive revisions by the statutory deadline. For more information on housing element adoption requirements, please visit HCD’s website at: http://www.hcd.ca.gov/community- development/housing-element/housing-element-memos/docs/sb375_final100413.pdf.

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

Scott Webb, City Planner

Page 2 ends

Sincerely,

Shannan West
Land Use & Planning Unit Chief

Enclosure

HCD Review of the City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 1 September 17, 2021

APPENDIX

CITY OF VICTORVILLE

Housing element technical assistance information is available on HCD’s website at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/housing-element-memos.shtml.

A. Housing Needs, Resources, and Constraints

HCD Review of the City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 3 September 17, 2021

B. Housing Programs

HCD Review of the City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 5 September 17, 2021
and subsidy programs when available. The program shall include an identification of the agencies and officials responsible for the implementation of the various actions. (Gov.

Code, § 65583, subd. (c).)

To have a beneficial impact in the planning period and address the goals of the housing element, programs must be revised with discrete timelines and specific commitment.

As noted in Finding A3, the element does not include a complete site analysis; therefore, the adequacy of sites and zoning were not established. Based on the results of a complete sites inventory and analysis, the City may need to add or revise programs to address a shortfall of sites or zoning available to encourage a variety of housing types. In addition:

• Rezoning: The element identifies a shortfall of sites to accommodate the regional housing needs allocation for lower-income households. As a result, programs to rezone sites must also comply with all by-right provisions pursuant to Government Code section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i). • Replacement Housing Requirements: If necessary, the housing element must include a program to provide replacement housing. (Gov. Code, § 65583.2, subd. (g)(3).) The replacement housing program must adhere to the same requirements as set forth in Government Code section 65915, subdivision (c), paragraph (3).
• Large Sites: The element identifies several large sites and also describes a program was present in the past planning period (p. 5-3) but, given the importance of this program, should also closely evaluate the effectiveness of that program and revise programs PP-A.5 and PP-B.1 as appropriate.

HCD Review of the City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 6 September 17, 2021

Special Needs Households: The element must include a program(s) with specific actions and timelines to assist in the development of housing for special needs households, specifically, persons with disabilities, including developmental disabilities.

As noted in Findings A4, the element requires a complete analysis of potential governmental and nongovernmental constraints. Depending upon the results of that analysis, the City may need to revise or add programs and address and remove or mitigate any identified constraints.

As noted in Finding A2, the element does not include a complete Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH). Depending on a complete analysis, the element may need to add or revise programs as appropriate.

C. Public Participation

Include a diligent effort by the local government to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element, and the program shall describe this effort. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(9).)

While the element describes community meetings and a comprehensive survey, moving forward, the City should employ additional methods for public outreach efforts, particularly

HCD Review of the City of Victorville’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 7 September 17, 2021
specific to the housing element and including lower-income and special needs households and neighborhoods with higher concentrations of lower-income households. For example, the City could conduct targeted stakeholder interviews or establish a committee representative of lower-income households in future public outreach efforts. In addition, the element should also summarize public comments and describe how they were considered and incorporated into the element.

D. General Plan Consistency

The housing element shall describe the means by which consistency will be achieved with other general plan elements and community goals. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(7).)

While the element describes that it was prepared in a manner to ensure internal consistency, it should also describe how internal consistency will be maintained throughout the planning period.

Matrix of Edits Made In Response to HCD's September 17, 2021 Review Letter Housing Element Chapter Summary of Edits Made
Letter
Annotation
Note #
#1 - Introduction Additional description on General Plan consistency. 23 Extremely Low-Income Households (ELI): Provide a stand alone section with additional analysis. 1
Housing Conditions: More information on housing conditions. 2 Clarify that emergency shelters are permitted without discretionary action/describe Neighborhood Service (C-1) zone development standards.
11 Describe proximity to services in addition to transportation, and any conditions inappropriate for human habitability.
11 Identify land use constraints related to multifamily parking and heights. 12 Describe the procedures for a typical single family and multifamily development, including approval bodies.
13 Identify constraints to Group Homes and add a program to remove constraints. 14 Describe and analyze any amendments to the building code and their enforcement for impacts on housing supply and affordability.
15 Clarify if written procedures for SB 35 Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process have been completed and add a program.
16 State whether zoning, development standards and fees are available on the City’s website 17 Provide anticipated rents or sales prices for 63 units of planned affordable to low-income households identified.
7 Provide more historical information on typical densities of existing or approved residential developments.
8 State that licensed utility engineer deemed sufficient total water and sewer capacity (existing and planned) to accommodate housing need.
9 Identify replacement housing requirement for sites with existing residential uses with information on those uses.
10 Provide more precise timelines and commitments for the following programs:

PP-B.1 (Assist with Development), PP-D.3 (Support Non-profits), PP-D.4 (Assist with Extremely Low- income), PP-F.1 (Advertise Resources), PP-F.2 (Monitor Grant Opportunities), PP-G.1 (Publish Resources) and PP-O.2 (Safe Housing Conditions). Programs to be revised with specific commitment include PP-A.1 (Update the Land Use Element), PP-B.4 (Menu of Incentives), PP-C.3 (Encourage Accessory Dwelling Units), PP-D.4 (Assist with Extremely Low- income), PP-H.3 (Update the Land Use Element) and HE-J.1 (Rent Stabilization Ordinance). 18 Specify that rezoning must comply with State laws dictating by-right provisions. 19 Evaluate the effectiveness of the Large Sites program and revise related programs. 19 Add a Replacement Housing Program for sites with existing units that may be redeveloped. 19 Add specific actions and timelines to assist in the development of housing for special needs households.
20 Add a program committing to adopt a density bonus ordinance pursuant to State law requirements.
21 Appendix A - Public Engagement Continue to receive comment and make Housing Element Available to the public. 22 Describe local trends and characteristics not captured in regional, state or federal data. 3 Provide local history, historical land use and investment practices and revitalization efforts (redevelopment prior to 2011 and new Community Revitalization Investment Area formation). 4 & 5
Goals, priorities and milestones to specifically address housing mobility enhancement, new housing choices, place-based community preservation and revitalization. 6 #2 - Community Profile
#5 – Constraints
# 7 – Site Inventory
#8 - Housing Programs
Appendix B - Affirmatively
Furthering Fair Housing

CITY COUNCIL

ATTACHMENT F

INITIAL STUDY NEGATIVE

DECLARATION

FINAL
Initial Study/
Negative Declaration
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing
Element Update
PLAN21-00030
November 2021
Prepared for:

City of Victorville
14343 Civic Drive, PO Box 5001
Victorville, California 92392
(760) 955-5135
Contact: Michael Szarzynski, Senior Planner

Prepared by:

600 B Street, Suite 2000
San Diego, California 92101
(619) 236-1778
Contact: Kristin Blackson, PMP, Project Manager

This page intentionally left blank.

IS/ND i November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Table of Contents
Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................... iii Document Overview ................................................................................................................... v Section 1 Project Description ................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Location ........................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Project Overview ............................................................................................. 1

1.3 Regional Housing Needs Assessment ............................................................ 2

1.4 Housing Sites Inventory ................................................................................... 3

1.5 Housing Goals, Objectives, Policies, and Programs ....................................... 4

1.6 Scope of Environmental Review ...................................................................... 4 Section 2 Initial Study Checklist .......................................................................................... 11

2.1 Project Information ........................................................................................ 11

2.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ................................................... 13

2.3 Lead Agency Determination .......................................................................... 14

2.4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ............................................................ 15

2.4.1 Aesthetics ................................................................................................. 16

2.4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ........................................................ 19

2.4.3 Air Quality ................................................................................................. 22

2.4.4 Biological Resources ............................................................................... 25

2.4.5 Cultural Resources ................................................................................... 29

2.4.6 Energy ...................................................................................................... 33

2.4.7 Geology and Soils .................................................................................... 35

2.4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................................... 40

2.4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .......................................................... 43

2.4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................... 49

2.4.11 Land Use and Planning............................................................................ 54

2.4.12 Mineral Resources ................................................................................... 56

2.4.13 Noise ........................................................................................................ 57

2.4.14 Population and Housing ........................................................................... 60

2.4.15 Public Services ......................................................................................... 62

2.4.16 Recreation ................................................................................................ 65

2.4.17 Transportation .......................................................................................... 66

2.4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ........................................................................ 69

2.4.19 Utilities and Service Systems ................................................................... 71

2.4.20 Wildfire ...................................................................................................... 74

2.4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ......................................................... 76

IS/ND ii November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Section 3 List of Preparers ................................................................................................... 79

3.1 Lead Agency .................................................................................................. 79

3.2 Consultants .................................................................................................... 79 Section 4 References ............................................................................................................ 81 Figures
Figure 1. Regional Location .......................................................................................................... 5 Figure 2. Project Location ............................................................................................................. 7 Figure 3. Inventory Sites ............................................................................................................... 9 Tables
Table 1. Victorville 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment Allocation by Household Income (2021–2029) ......................................................................................................... 3

IS/ND iii November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Acronyms and Abbreviations
AB Assembly Bill
BMP best management practice
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CalRecycle California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery CAP Climate Action Plan
CBC California Building Code
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CH4 methane
City or Victorville City of Victorville
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
dB decibel
EIR Environmental Impact Report
GGRP Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan
GHG greenhouse gas
HCD Housing and Community Development
HEU or project City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update IS Initial Study
MDAQMD Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District
N2O nitrous oxide
ND Negative Declaration
NOx oxides of nitrogen
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
O3 ozone
OES Office of Emergency Services
PM10 5.3-micron diameter particulate matter
PM2.5 fine particulate matter
RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation
SB Senate Bill
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCLA Southern California Logistics Airport
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VWD Victorville Water District

IS/ND iv November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

This page intentionally left blank.

IS/ND v November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Document Overview
This Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND) has been prepared in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines for the proposed City of Victorville Housing Element Update (project or HEU). The primary intent of this document is to (1) determine whether project implementation would result in potentially significant impacts to the environment, and (2) incorporate mitigation measures into the project design, as necessary, to eliminate or reduce the project’s potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level.

In accordance with CEQA, projects that h ave the potential to result in either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment must undergo analysis to disclose potential significant effects. The provisions of CEQA apply to California governmental agencies at all levels, including local agencies, regional agencies, state agencies, boards, commissions, and special districts. CEQA requires preparation of an IS for a discretionary project to determine the range of potential environmental impacts of that project and to define the scope of the environment review document. As specified in Section 15064(f) of the CEQA Guidelines, the lead agency may prepare an Mitigated Negative Declaration if, in the course of the IS analysis, it is recognized that the project may have a significant impact on the environment but that implementation of specific mitigation measures would reduce potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level. As th e lead agency for the proposed p roject, the City of Victorville (City or Victorville ) has the principal responsibility for conducting the CEQA environmental review to analyze the potential environmental effects associated with project implementation. During the review process, it was determined that potential impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, an IS/ND has been prepared for the proposed project.

Note: The project has not been approved or denied. It is being reviewed for environmental impacts only. Approval of the project can take place only after the ND has been adopted.

This IS/ND is organized as follows:
 Section 1: Project Description. This section introduces the document and discusses the project description including location, setting, and specifics of the lead agency and contacts.  Section 2 : Initial Study Checklist. This section discusses the CEQA environmental topics and checklist questions and identifies the potential for impacts.  Section 3: List of Preparers. This section lists the organizations and individuals who were consulted and/or prepared this IS/ND.
 Section 4 : References. This section presents a list of reference materials consulted during preparation of this IS/ND.

IS/ND vi November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Public Review
The IS/ND will be circ ulated for a 30 -day public review period from September 17, 2021 , to October 18, 2021.

Comments regarding this IS/ND must be made in writing and submitted to Michael Szarzynski, City of Victorville , Development Department , 14343 Civic Drive , PO Box 5001 , Victorville, California 92392, or by email to [email protected].

Comments should focus on the proposed finding that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment . If th e commenter believes that the project may have a significant environmental effect, it would be helpful for the commenter to identify the specific effect and explain why the effect would occur and why it would be significant.

IS/ND 1 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Section 1 Project Description

1.1 Location
The City of Victorville (City) is in southwestern San Bernardino County, in the geographic subregion of the southwestern Mojave Desert known as the Victor Valley and commonly referred to as the “High Desert” due to its approximate elevation of 2,900 feet above sea level. The Victor Valley is separated from other urbanized areas in Southern California by the San Bernardino and San Gabriel Mountains. The City ’s regional location is shown on Figure 1, Regional L ocation.

Although the City is separated from larger urbanized areas of Southern California, it is easily accessible via Interstate 15, U.S. Route 395, State Route 18, and Historic U.S. Route 66 (see Figure 2, Project Location).

1.2 Project Overview
The project proposes to update the City’s Housing Element for the 6th Cycle planning period from October 15, 2021, to October 15, 2029. The Housing Element is a component of the Victorville General Plan 2030 that assesses the housing needs of all economic segments of the City, defines the goals and policies that would guide the City ’s approach to resolving those needs, and recommends a set of programs that would implement policies over the next few years (City of Victorville 2008a). State law requires that all cities adopt a Housing Element and update it every 8 years. The previous 5th Cycle (2013 –2021) Housing Element was adopted by Victorville City Council in June 2013 and was certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

Pursuant to California Government Code, Section 65583, a Housing Element is required to consist of an identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs and a statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, financial resources, and scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing. Specifically, a Housing Element is required to contain the following:
 An assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constraints relevant to the meeting of these needs (California Government Code, Section 65583[a]);  A statement of the community ’s goals, quantified objectives, and policies relative to the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing ( California Government Code, Section 65583[a]); and
 A program that sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for implementation of the policies to achieve the goals and objectives of the Housing Element (California Government Code, Section 65583[c]).

The Housing Element, as part of the Victorville General Plan 2030, establishes housing -related actionable programs that are intended to guide City decision -making related to land use planning

IS/ND 2 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
and development activities for the 2021–2029 planning period in accordance with the City’s stated housing goals and state law. The Housing Element includes strategies for maintenance of existing housing and action -oriented programs to increase the capacity for additional housing options within the local housing supply as necessary to meet the current and future needs of people living and working in Victorville. Implementation of these strategies will require that the City process a series of future actions, referred to as the Housing Element implementation program, for compliance with California housing law. Meeting the community’s housing needs is a high priority for the City. As widely reported throughout the state, California is in the midst of a housing crisis where demand greatly outweighs supply.

The Housing Element Update (HEU) would consist of the following major components:
 Chapter 1: Introduction
 Chapter 2: Community Profile
 Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
 Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
 Chapter 5: Review of Previous Housing Element (2013–2021)  Chapter 6: At-Risk Affordable Housing
 Chapter 7: Housing Plan
 Chapter 8: Adequate Sites Inventory Analysis and Methodology

1.3 Regional Housing Needs Assessment
State Housing Element law requires housing elements to be updated regularly to reflect a community’s changing housing needs, including preparation of a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) plan (California Government Code, Section 65584[a]). A critical measure of compliance is the ability of a jurisdiction to accommodate its share of the regional ho using needs based on a n RHNA prepared by the HCD for each council of governments in the state that identifies projected housing units needed for all economic segments based on California Department of Finance population estimates.

The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the council of governments for the Southern California region and allocates to the six counties and 191 cities their fair share of the total RHNA for each income category. Each local government m ust demonstrate that it has planned to accommodate its fair share of the RHNA in its Housing Element. The SCAG Board of Directors adopted the RHNA Plan on March 4, 2021. The state requires that 6th Cycle Housing Elements be certified 18 months after that date.

SCAG developed an RHNA based on the HCD determination for the region ’s “fair share ” of statewide forecasted growth through October 2029. Overall, the region needs to plan for an additional 1,341,827 units. The City ’s share of regional future housing n eeds is 8,165 new units.

The RHNA was distributed to jurisdictions in the region using a formula that accounts for access

IS/ND 3 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
to public transit and employment. This allocation is divided into the various income categories in Table 1, Victorville 6th Cycle Regi onal Housing Needs Assessment Allocation by Household Income (2021–2029). The RHNA also includes a fair -share adjustment, which allocates future need by each income category in a way that meets the state mandate to reduce the overconcentration of households with lower incomes in one community.

Table 1. Victorville 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment Allocation by Household Income (2021–2029)
Income Category Above Moderate Moderate Low Very Low Total Dwelling Units 3,790 1,504 1,136 1,735 8,165
Source: SCAG and Connect SoCal 2021.

1.4 Housing Sites Inventory
State law requires that jurisdictions demonstrate in the Housing Element that the land inventory is adequate to accommodate that jurisdiction ’s share of the RHNA . A jurisdiction may meet the RHNA requirement using potential development on suitable vacant and/or nonvacant sites within the community. A jurisdiction must document how zoning and development standards on the proposed sites facilitate housing to accommodate the remaining RHNA requirement.

The HEU would include the Citywide Housing Sites Inventory, which identifies all properties with the potential for residential development (see Figure 3 , Inventory Sites ). No formal land use changes or physical development s are proposed at this time , and the HEU would not identify or approve any specific development projects.

Through its Housing Sites Inventory, the City identified 158 sites that are adequate for development of housing and that have zoned housing capacity that is reasonably developab le within the planning period or will have such capacity with planned zoning and land use changes.

These sites have capacity for at least 15,314 net housing units under the sites ’ existing zoning (or with a proposed zone change in certain circumstances), n et of existing residential units on these sites. A subset of these sites meet s the suitability criteria for sites adequate for lower -income (extremely low -, very -low-, and low -income) housing established by California Government Code, Section 65583.2. Out of the total 158 sites adequate for housing development, 51 sites meet the lower-income suitability criteria. These sites have zoned capacity for at least 4,788 net potential lower-income housing units, with some sites including moderate -income and above-moderate- income units as part of mixed-income development. All sites have sufficient water, sewer, and dry utilities infrastructure available and accessible to support housing development. The Housing Sites Inventory includes more sites than necessary for the City’s allocated share of the RHNA, as there is currently significant developable vacant land within the City’s boundaries.

This capacity is largely available on vacant sites under current land use plan s and zoning regulations. Vacant sites currently zoned for residential uses or planned for rezoning to allow residential uses total 148 and facilitate the development of 14,673 future housing units and the

IS/ND 4 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
remaining 10 sites listed in the Housing Sites Inventory are not vacant. To encourage housing development in accordance with principles of sustainable communities and affirmatively furthering fair housing, the City has identified zoning and land use changes to permit higher - density housing in resource-advantaged areas. All sites that the City plans to rezone are vacant.

1.5 Housing Goals, Objectives, Policies, and Programs
California Government Code, Section 65583(c), requires a program that sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period that the local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the Housing Element. The goals, policies, and programs have been established to address the housing issues in the City and to meet state housing law requirements. The City’s overall objective is to ensure that decent, safe housing is available to current and future Victorville residents of all income levels.

As required by state Housing Element la w, the proposed HEU includes a p lan to facilitate and encourage the provision of housing consistent with the RHNA. The plan would implement strategies and programs intended to address a number of important housing -related issues and to achieve the City’s overarching housing goals, which include the following:
 Encourage development of different housing types to meet the City’s different needs  Maximize land utilization for residential development  Preserve existing housing stock
 Provide more affordable housing
 Maximize solutions for those experiencing or at risk of homelessness  Encourage homeownership
 Improve quality of life and promote placemaking
 Affirmatively further fair housing

1.6 Scope of Environmental Review
The HEU would require environmental review in compliance with CEQA. The HEU would be a policy-level document that would not create physical residential growth but would only identify available sites for residential development during the 2021 –2029 planning period. To implement the 6th Cycle Housing Element, including the recommended rezoning s, the City has initiated a comprehensive General Plan Update and associated Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

Because the HEU would be a policy -level document that would not create physical residential growth and the recommended rezonings would not occur as part of th e project, the City has determined that an ND is the appropriate CEQA document for the HEU.

Date: 6/28/2021 - Last saved by: Noah.Stoop - Path: C:\GIS\Projects\City of Victorville\HousingElement\MapDocs\IS_MND\Figur e1_Regional.mxd Los Ang
eles County
Orange County
Kern County
San Be
rnardino County
Los Angeles County
San Bernardino Count
y
California
City
Barstow
Adelanto
Victorville
Apple Valley
Hesperia
Lake
Arrowhead
Big
Bear Lake
Crestline
Running
Springs
Lake Los
Angeles
£¤395
ÄÆ18
ÄÆ18
ÄÆ247
ÄÆ60
ÄÆ259
ÄÆ57
ÄÆ39
ÄÆ18
ÄÆ39
ÄÆ189
ÄÆ142
ÄÆ206
ÄÆ91
ÄÆ71
ÄÆ72
ÄÆ60
ÄÆ19
ÄÆ83
ÄÆ330
ÄÆ18
ÄÆ173
ÄÆ14
ÄÆ66
ÄÆ58
ÄÆ247
ÄÆ60
ÄÆ38
ÄÆ2
ÄÆ138
§¨¦15
§¨¦605
§¨¦215
§¨¦10
§¨¦210
§¨¦210
§¨¦5
§¨¦15
§¨¦215
§¨¦40
§¨¦15
Victorville Housing Element Update
City of Victorville
Victorville Sphere of Influence
Incorporated Areas
Regional Location
Source: ESRI 2020.

Figure 1
±
01 0 5
Miles

IS/ND 6 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

This page intentionally left blank.

Date: 6/28/2021 - Last saved by: Noah.Stoop - Path: C:\GIS\Projects\City of Victorville\HousingElement\MapDocs\IS_MND\Figur e2_ProjectLocation.mxd Southern California
Logistics Airport
Adelanto
Victorville Apple Valley
Mountain
View Acres
Hesperia
£¤395
ÄÆ138
ÄÆ138
ÄÆ173
ÄÆ18
ÄÆ18
§¨¦15
§¨¦15
Victorville Housing Element Update
City of Victorville
Victorville Sphere of Influence
City of Adelanto
City of Apple Valley
City of Hesperia
City of Mountain View
Project Location
Source: ESRI 2020.

Figure 2
±
02 1
Miles

IS/ND 8 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

This page intentionally left blank.

43 58
18 44
29 96
9293
101
9897
10099
9194
47 45
33 13
46 9
10 11
7 8
72 124
123
121
111126
125
109
110
122
108
53 54
106
38 107
42 28
15 105
25 119
120
118
49 83
71 90
20 14
89 88
84 85
86 87
50 127133
132
128131
130129
21 51
104
26 17
19 102
103
11475
113 112
76 82
78 81
8079
77 16
23 5224
30 35
37 55
27 4
60 6
12 1
63 2
35 66 68
67 65
31 32
115116
117
61 74
40 64
73 62
39 69
41 36
34 Adelanto
Victorville
Apple
Valley
Hesperia
Mountain View
£[395
ÄÆ18
§¨¦15
To p a z A
ve
El E
va
do Rd
Amethyst Rd
National Tra
ils Hwy
Nisqualli
Rd
Amar
gosa
Rd
Hook Blvd 7th
St
Seneca Rd
Hopland St
Hes
peria
Rd
Rancho Rd
Ame
thyst St 7th Ave
Mojave Dr
Bellfl
ower St
Main St
Bellflowe
r Ave
Air Base Rd
Phelan Rd
To p a z
Rd
Eucalyptus St
Mojave St
Bear Valley Rd
El Dorado St
City of Victorville
Inventory Sites
Lower Income
Moderate+ Income
Mixed Income
Date: 6/28/2021 - Last saved by: Noah.Stoop - Path: C:\GIS\Projects\City of Victorville\HousingElement\MapDocs\IS_MND\Figur e3_InventorySitesOverview.mxd Source: ESRI 2021.
±
02 1
Miles
Source: ESRI 2021.

Inventory Sites
Victorville Housing Element Update
±
02 1
Miles
Update Victorville Housing Element
Inventory Sites
Source: ESRI 2021.

Figure 3

IS/ND 10 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

This page intentionally left blank.

IS/ND 11 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Section 2 Initial Study Checklist
The following discussion of potential environmental effects was completed in accordance with Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines to determine if the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment.

2.1 Project Information

1. Project title: City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2. Lead agency name and address: City of Victorville
Development Department
14343 Civic Drive, PO Box 5001
Victorville, California 92392

3. Contact person name, address, and
phone number:

Michael Szarzynski
City of Victorville, Development Department
14343 Civic Drive, PO Box 5001
Victorville, California 92392
(760) 955-5135/[email protected]

4. Project location: City of Victorville and sphere of influence 5 Project sponsor’s name and address: City of Victorville, Development Department 14343 Civic Drive, PO Box 5001
Victorville, California 92392

6. General plan designation: Citywide – varies

7. Zoning: Citywide – varies

8. Description of project: Refer to Section 1, Project Description, of this IS/ND.

9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Refer to Section 1 of this IS/ND.

IS/ND 12 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

10. Other public agencies whose
approval is required:

State law requires jurisdictions to submit a Draft
Housing Element to the HCD for review and that
each jurisdiction consider the HCD’s comments
before Housing Element adoption. Review of
specific development proposals by other
governmental agencies may be required before
development of new housing anticipated in the
Housing Element. Appropriate public agency
review wil l be determined at the time specific
development applications are submitted.

11. Have California Native American
tribes traditionally and culturally
affiliated with the project area
requested consultation pursuant to
Public Resources Code section
21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for
consultation that includes, for
example, the determination of
significance of impacts to Tribal
Cultural Resources, procedures
regarding confidentiality, etc.?
Consultation has been initiated per Assembly Bill
(AB) 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18. Refer to Section

2.4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, of this IS/ND
for details.

IS/ND 13 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by th e project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
☐ Aesthetics ☐ Agriculture and
Forestry Resources
☐ Air Quality
☐ Biological Resources ☐ Cultural Resources ☐ Energy
☐ Geology and Soils ☐ Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
☐ Hazards and
Hazardous
Materials
☐ Hydrology and Water
Quality
☐ Land Use and
Planning
☐ Mineral Resources
☐ Noise ☐ Population and
Housing
☐ Public Services
☐ Recreation ☐ Transportation ☐ Tribal Cultural
Resources
☐ Utilities and Service
Systems
☐ Wildfire ☐ Mandatory
Findings
of Significance

IS/ND 14 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.3 Lead Agency Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
☒ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☐ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent (state), including implementation of the mitigation measures identified herein. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
☐ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Signature Date
Michael Szarzynski, Senior Planner, City of Victorville

IS/ND 15 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
This section documents the screening process used to identify and focus on environmental impacts that could result from th e project. The checklist portion of the IS begins below and includes explanations of each CEQA issue topic. CEQA requires that an explanation of all answers be provided along with this checklist, including a discussion of ways to mitigate any significant effects identified. The following terminology is used to describe the potential level of significance of impacts:
 No Impact. The analysis concludes that the project would not affect the particular resource in any way.
 Less Than Significant. The analysis concludes that the project would not cause substantial adverse change to the environment without the incorporation of mitigation.  Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The analysis concludes that it would not cause substantial adverse change to the environment with the inclusion of mitigation agreed upon by the applicant.
 Potentially Significant. The analysis concludes that the project could result a substantial adverse e ffect or significant effect on the environment , even if mitigation is incorporated. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

IS/ND 16 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.1 Aesthetics

Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views
of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point.) If the project is in an urbanized
area, would the project conflict with applicable
zoning and other regulations governing scenic
quality?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare
that would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐

Environmental Setting
The City is primarily on the broad surface of a large alluvial fan referred to as the Cajon Fan (or Victorville Fan). Areas of high visual sensitivity in or adjacent to the City include the Mojave River, the rocky bluffs of the Mojave Narrows, and the Mojave Narrows Regional Park.

The Mojave River runs along the fan’s eastern margin and is the City’s most notable topographic feature. The Mojave River crosses the City from the southeast to the northwest, conveying runoff out of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains. The river is a perennial desert river containing a variety of vegetation and irregular rocky bluffs and terraces in some areas. The river channel is heavily wooded in the northern portion, while grasses and smaller trees dominate the floodplain areas.

At Mojave Narrows, the terrain becomes steep and predominately rocky, and the river encounters an impenetrable layer of bedrock that forces water to the surface even during dry periods. The Mojave Narrows is a unique topographical and visual point of interest that separates Victorville from the Town of Apple Valley to the east.

Mojave Narrows Regional Park, on the City ’s southeastern border, supports extensive native riparian woodlands dominated by Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), black willow (Salix nigra), and honey mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa). Other native tree species found locally include

IS/ND 17 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
sandbar willow (Salix exigua), white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), and California sycamore (Platanus racemosa). Desert willow (Chilopsis linearis) grows along the river’s drier ephemeral reaches.

Another notable feature of the area is the Joshua trees (Yucca brevifolia), which can grow to 12 meters tall. These trees are distributed on gentle slopes and valley floors of upper bajadas and sandy areas. The trees are also protected by the state as candidate for listing as threatened species.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less Than Significant Impact. The Victorville General Plan 2030 does not designate scenic vistas in the City. However, the City does contain areas of high visual sensitivity, including the Mojave River, the rocky bluffs of the Mojave Narrows, and the Mojave Narrows Regional Park.

Development in the City has the potential to impact these areas of high visual sensitivity.

Development within a viewer’s line of sight of scenic areas may interfere with a scenic resource, either by physically blocking or screening the vista from view or by impeding or blocking access to a formerly available viewing position. Those viewers may see the sce nic areas before development but would have those views blocked after development.

The HEU would include an inventory of sites with the potential to accommodate the housing needs of the City . H owever, the HEU does not propose the dev elopment of housing or associated infrastructure. The HEU would identify potential housing areas to demonstrate compliance with the HCD’s RHNA. Future new residential development pursuant to the HEU would be subject to existing development standards in the Victorville Development Code and CEQA. In addition, the Victorville General Plan 2030 Land Use Element includes a goal to beautify the City to provide for an aesthetically pleasing community. Specifically , Land Use Element Policy 4.1.1 addresses promoting high-quality development in the City by continually monitor ing and upgrad ing the design guidelines for all types of development. Therefore, the project would result in less than significant impacts to scenic vistas.
b. Would the project s ubstantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. No existing or proposed state scenic highways are in the City. Consequently, future development facilitated by the HEU would have no potential to adversely affect, directly and indirectly, scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings, within a state scenic highway. Implementation of the HEU would not im pact scenic resources within a state scenic highway.

IS/ND 18 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
c. Would the project, in non -urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU would include an inventory of sites with the potential to accommodate the housing needs of the City. However, the HEU would not propose the development of housing or associated infrastructure. The HEU would identify potential housing areas to demonstrate compliance with the HCD’s RHNA. Future housing development facilitated by the HEU would be consistent with current land use designations in the City, which would allow for the development of residential units.

The Victorville General Plan 2030 Land Use Element includes a goal to beautify the City to provide for an aesthetically pleasing community. The goal is supported by Land Use Element Policy 4.1.1, which includes several implementation measures designed to promote high-quality development within the City, including continually monitoring and upgrading the design guidelines for all types of development and using Specific Plan and/or redevelopment project sites in areas deemed appropriate for design themes. In addition, the Victorville Development Code also includes several articles designed to regulate scenic quality in the City. Future residential development consistent with the HEU would be required to comply with these policies and, therefore, would not conflict with applicable zoning or regulations designed to protect scenic quality. d. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less Than Significant Impact . The HEU would not propose specific residential de velopment.

However, development of new residential units facilitated by the HEU would result in new sources of light and glare but would be consistent with the ambient light levels from nearby sources. In addition, residential development projects are subject to the Victorville Development Code, which includes operational and development standards that would reduce light or glare impacts. Impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 19 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources

In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects,
lead agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment
Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of
Conservation as an optional model to use in
assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In
determining whether impacts to forest resources,
including timberland, are significant environmental
effects, lead agencies may refer to information
compiled by the California Department of Forestry
and Fire Protection regarding the state’s
inventory of forest land, including the Forest and
Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy
Assessment project; and forest carbon
measurement methodology provided. Would the
project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources
Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by
Public Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production (as
defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use
or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
The California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program designates the majority of the City as Urban (not Important Farmland) (DOC 2021). Several areas of the City are designated as Prime Farmland, scattered along and adjacent to the Mojave River corridor in the vicinity of State Route 18. No Farmlands of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmlands, or Farmlands of Local Importance occur in the City. According to the existing San Bernardino County Office of the Assessor, Victorville District Office, the 148 -acre Kemper-Campbell Ranch site is the only property under a Williamson Act contract (City of Victorville 2008a).

IS/ND 20 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project c onvert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Less Than Significant Impact. Future housing development facilitated by the HEU would be in areas with limited classified Farmland and would allow for residential development on vacant and developed sites that are zoned for residential development . The HEU is consistent with the Victorville General Plan 2030 because it does not identify any new land that is subject to urbanization or rezoning from agricultural use to residential use. Consequently , future housing development would not result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance , and Grazing to non -agricultural use, and impacts would be less than significant.
b. Would the project c onflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the existing San Bernardino County Office of the Assessor, Victorville District Office, the 148 -acre Kemper -Campbell Ranch site is the only property under a Williamson Act contract (City of Victorville 2008a). The HEU does not propose any future development or land use change that would restrict current agricultural uses on this property. Therefore, the HEU would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract, and impacts would be less than significant. c. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
No Impact. No state forests or lands currently used for timber production or management are in the Planning Area. Additionally, no zoning designation for timberland or forest resources is within the Planning Area . Therefore, future residential development facilitated by the HEU would not conflict with existing zoning or cause rezoning of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Therefore, no impact would occur. d. Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. Future housing development facilitated by the HEU would allow for r esidential development on vacant and developed sites that are zoned for residential development and do not exist in areas of potential forest resources. Consequently, the HEU would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur.

IS/ND 21 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
e. Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU would not propose any specific development. However, future housing development facilitated by the HEU would be in areas with limited classified Farmland and would allow for residential development on vacant and developed sites that are zoned for residential development consistent with the Victorville General Plan 2030 because the HEU would not identify any new land that is subject to urbanization or rezoning from agricultural use to residential use. The HEU would not result in a zoning change for existing agricultural properties and would not restrict current agricultural uses on these prop erties. Adoption of the HEU would not involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use. Impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 22 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.3 Air Quality

Where available, the significance criteria
established by the applicable air quality
management district or air pollution control district
may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project region
is non-attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
The City is part of the Mojave Desert Air Basin. Hot summers, mild winters, infrequent rainfall, moderate afternoon breezes , and generally fair weather characterize the climate of the Victor Valley an interior sub-climate of Southern California’s Mediterranean climate. The clouds and fog that form along the Southern California coastline rarely extend across the mountains to Victorville.

The most important local weather pattern is associated with the funneling of the daily onshore sea breeze through Cajon Pass into the upper desert to the northeast of the heavily developed portions of the Los Angeles Basin. This daily airflow brings polluted air into the area late in the afternoon from late spring to early fall. This transport pattern both creates unhealthful air quality and destroys the scenic vistas of the mountains surrounding the Victor Valley.

The most representative air monitoring station is the Victorville Station located at 14306 Park Avenue. Ozone (O3), carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxide (N2O), 5.3-micron diameter particulate matter (PM10), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) are monitored at the Victorville facility (City of Victorville 2008a).

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU would not propose any specific development. Instead, the HEU would identify action programs that could be implemented to provide additional capacity for future development of dwelling units consistent with state housing law. Further, the City is not required to build dwelling units to meet its RHNA allocation requirements ; it is only required to identify potential sites and to create the framework to allow the market the opportunity to develop these units. The RHNA allocation for the City is a total of 8,165 units, which was allocated based

IS/ND 23 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
on SCAG population and growth forecas ts. For any specific future residential projects, Mojave Desert Air Basin consistency would be assessed at the time the projects are proposed and mitigation measures applied as necessary in conformance with CEQA. Therefore, the HEU would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable air quality plans, and impacts would be less than significant.
b. Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard)?
c. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed previously, the HEU would neither propose any changes to land uses nor identify or approve any specific development projects. All future development facilitated as a result of the HEU would require project -specific environmental evaluation to determine if any potential impacts are less th an significant. Potential air quality - related impacts would be location specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. When a development proposal is considered, the project would be subject to adopted de velopment guidelines/standards, and any impacts identified with the development project would be addressed through mitigation measures specific to the impact.

Future projects would be subject to the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) air quality thresholds and would be required to comply with the MDAQMD CEQA Handbook. Short-term air quality impacts resulting from construction of the sites, such as dust generated by clearing and grading activities, exhaust emissions from gas - and diesel -powered construction equipment, and vehicular emissions associated with the commuting of constru ction workers, would be subject to the MDAQMD rule for fugitive dust control requirements for construction projects and the rules and regulations in the MDAQMD R ule Book. In addition, the MDAQMD CEQA Guidelines and the federal Conformity Guidelines identif y project types for sites within the specified distance of existing or planned sensitive receptor land uses that must be evaluated using the MDAQMD ’s health risk significance thresholds, with which future projects would be required to comply. In addition, the HEU would contain policies that would limit air emissions in new development, including promoting infill development (HE-C.1) and encouraging development that includes active transportation infrastructure , such as new and wider sidewalks and protected bike lanes (HE-M.3). Therefore, impacts related to cumulative increases in criter ia pollutants and sensitive receptors would be less than significant. d. Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact. Odors are one of the mo st obvious forms of air pollution to the general public. Although offensive odors seldom cause physical harm, they can be a nuisance to the general public.

IS/ND 24 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
The HEU would not propose development. However, construction associated with future residential development facilitated by the HEU could result in minor amounts of odor compounds associated with diesel heavy equipment exhaust. Construction would not take place all at once and would occur at various locations throughout the City. Any operations near existing receptors would be temporary; therefore, impacts associated with odors during construction would be less than significant.

Residential land uses do not typically result in a source of nuisance odors. Because the project involves policy planning for residential uses, it does not involve development of uses associated with odors, and operational impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 25 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.4 Biological Resources

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e. Conflict with any applicable policies protecting
biological resources?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other applicable habitat
conservation plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Environmental Setting
According to the Victorville General Plan 2030 , the City limits contain the following plant communities: Mojave creosote bush scrub, desert saltbush scrub, rabbitbush scrub, Mojavean juniper woodland and scrub, ruderal (disturbed) communities, Joshua tree woodland, and riparian communities associated with the Mojave River and its floodplain, including transmontane alkali and freshwater marsh, Mojave riparian forest, and southern willow scrub (City of Victorville 2008a).

The Mojave River flows from the San Bernardino Mountains north to Barstow, then east to Soda Lake and the Mojave National Preserve. Mojave Narrows Regional Park is southeast of the Planning Area and is a virtual oasis in the Mojave Desert.

The Victorville Planning Area contains numerous wildlife species considered threatened or endangered as listed by either or both the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the U.S. Fish and Wildl ife Service (USFWS) . This includes the arroyo toad (Anaxyrus

IS/ND 26 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
californicus), desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), Mohave ground squirrel (Xerospermophilus mohavensis ), yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus ), willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii), and least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus).

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sens itive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less Than Significant Impact. Several plant and wildlife species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species have been documented in the City. The most common species requiring mitigation in the City are burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), Mohave ground squirrel, and desert tortoise.

Implementation of the HEU may have the potential to result in the removal of habitats that support sensitive plant species; however, specific development projects are unknown at this time. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review of any adve rse impacts to sensitive plant species . The Victorville General Plan 2030 includes policies designed to promote the preservation of natural communities that support rare, threatened , and/or endangered plants and wildlife species. Specifically, Resource Element Implementation Measure

4.1.1.2 addresses the requirement for biological surveys for undeveloped properties expected to contain biological resources, coordination with the CDFW and USFWS in the preparation of biological surveys and assessments, and keeping the City’s database of sensitive habitats current.

In addition, Resource Element Policy 4.2.1 generally prohibit s private or public development projects or major infrastructure facilities on land within the Mojave River corridor, where biological surv eys have determined there is habitat that supports rare, threatened , and/or endangered plants or wildlife. Conservation of the Mojave River and its floodplain may avoid direct impacts of occupied habitat and avoid take or harm of individual species as defi ned by federal and state agencies.

Separate from the Victorville General Plan 2030 Resource Element, the City, through its CEQA compliance program, requires that new development projects in undeveloped areas prepare an assessment of biological habitat and potential impacts to listed or sensitive species. The City, with concurrence from the USFWS, designated an area within the urbanized part of the community where surveys to detect desert tortoise are not required based on past negative survey results and th e characteristics of the land and nearby improvements that have eliminated desert tortoise habitat or represent significant barriers to desert tortoise movement and sustainability. A map of this no-survey area is maintained at the Victorville Planning Division. Future projects would be required to comply with federal, state, and local regulations in place to protect special-status wildlife species. Therefore, impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special-status species would be less than significant.

IS/ND 27 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
b. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of the HEU may have the potential to adversely affect, directly and indirectly, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities as identified by state and federal agencies. Specific development projects are unknown at this time. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review of any adverse impacts to sensitive plant species. The Victorville General Plan 2030 includes policies designed to promote the preservation of natural communities. Resource Element Policy 4.1.1 intends to encourage development in a manner that will preserve natural communities. In addition, Resource Element Implementation Measure 4.1.1.2 addresses the requirement for biological surveys for undeveloped properties expected to contain biological resources, coordination with CEQA and USFWS in the preparation of biological surveys and assessments, and keeping the City’s database of sensitive habitats current. Separate from the Victorville General Plan 2030, the City, through its CEQA compliance program, requires that new development projects in undeveloped areas prepare an assessment of biological habitat , including riparian habitat and other se nsitive natural communities. Future projects would be required to comply with federal, state, and local regulations in place to protect special-status wildlife species. Therefore, impacts to riparian habitats and other sensitive communities would be less than significant.
c. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Less Than Significant Impact. Isolated wetlands that may be under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which regulates compliance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act , are supported in the City. Implementation of future development und er the HEU may directly or indirectly affect such wetlands. Specific development projects are unknown at this time. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review of any adverse impacts to federally protected wetlands . Any potential impacts to these resources from future projects implemented through the HEU would require consultation with and permits from the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers , Regional Water Quality Control Board, and CDFW and potentially require aquatic resources delineations to be performed. Therefore, impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources would be less than significant.
d. Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or wit h established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of future development under the HEU , including expansion of roads, and increased population may adversely affect the ability of wildlife to move

IS/ND 28 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
through the City and cause habitat fragmentation. Victorville General Plan 2030 Resource Element Goal 4 policy implementation measures address species movement/corridors. In Resource Element Implementation Measure 4.1.1.3, the City shall continue to work with the USFWS and the CDFW to ensure that individual projects comply with federal and state laws protecting sensitive plant and wildlife species. In areas so designated by the agencies, appro priate surveys shall be conducted , and appropriate mitigation shall be applied. In areas so designated by the agencies, appropriate surveys shall be conducted at the times of year necessary to detect all sensitive species for which potentially suitable habitat exists on a given site and appropriate mitigation shall be applied. Future projects would be required to comply with these goals and policies , as well as federal, state, and local regulations in place, to protect species movement. Impacts would be less than significant. e. Would the project conflict with any applicable policies protecting biological resources? Less Than Significant Impact. Projects in the City are required to comply with policies protecting biological resources identified in the Resource Element of the Victorville General Plan 2030 (City of Victorville 2008a). In addition, the City maintains a Joshua Tree Preservation Ordinance, which prohibits the removal of Joshua trees unless following proper procedure and with consent of the City. Any future residential development proposed on sites with Joshua trees would be subject to these regulations, Resource Element policies , and th e California Fish and Wildlife Commission candidacy listing of the western Joshua tree (Yucca brevifolia var. brevifolia). Impacts would be less than significant.
f. Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other applicable habitat conservation plan? No Impact. Implementation of the HEU would not conflict with provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan , or any other applicable Habitat Conservation Plan. No impact would occur.

IS/ND 29 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.5 Cultural Resources

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
Section 15064.5?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to Section 15064.5?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
According to the Victorville General Plan 2030 , the first Native American group to historically occupy the Mojave Desert was the Shoshoneans. This group was composed of bands of people who spoke similar languages. These bands moved west from the Great Basin, a vast inland region of the western United States, into the Mojave Desert. It is believed that these bands were well established 1,200 to 1,500 years ago and possibly as early as 3,000 years ago. One of these bands of people, the Serrano, occupied an area from the southern fringe of the San Bernardino Mountains, east to Twentynine Palms and north into the Mojave Desert. The Serrano practiced a hunting-and- gathering-based subsistence , focusing on the collection of seasonally available food sources.

Prehistoric settlements in the Planning Area centered on the Mojave River drainage, with longer, more permanent habitation occurring on the first and second terraces of the river floodplain. These settlements subsisted on the fruit of Joshua trees, mesquite beans, tule bulbs, and small game, such as rabbit and lizard. The more permanent settlements included formal tools of a non -portable nature, such as ground stone tools. Rock art and shelters were also associated with these sites.

The introduction of the Spanish mission system in the mid - to late 1700s gradually eroded the Serrano’s way of life. Villages were abandoned, hunting and gathering was disrupted by agricultural practices, and Native American populations were significantly reduced by European diseases. In the late 1700 s, the Spanish, led by the famed Spanish explore r Francisco Garcés, explored the western Mojave Desert in an unsuccessful search for an overland route from the Colorado River to Monterey. The Spaniards traveled through the Victor Valley along an ancient Native American trading route, known today as the Mojave Trail. In the early 1830s, part of this trail was incorporated into a pack-train road known today as the Old Spanish Trail, which extended between Southern California and Santa Fe, New Mexico. Some 20 years later, when the histo ric wagon road known as the Mormon Trail or Salt Lake Trail was established between Utah and Southern California, it followed essentially the same route across the Victor Valley area. Since then, the Victor Valley has always served as a crucial link for a succession of major transportation

IS/ND 30 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
arteries, where the heritage of the ancient Mojave Trail was carried on by the Santa Fe Railroad since the 1880s, by the National Old Trails Highway and Historic U.S. Route 66 during the early and mid-20th century, and finally by today’s Interstate 15.

Mining became an important part of the local economy with the discovery of gold, silver, copper, marble, limestone, and borax in the 1860s. Settlement in the area resulted from transportation and local mining activities. Victorville, known as the Town of Victor, was a railroad station named in 1885 after California Southern Railroad (Santa Fe Railroad) construction superintendent Jacob Nash Victor. On January 18, 1886, the plan of the Town of Victor was prepared , which created the grid pattern of the original town. The name was changed to Victorville in 1901 by the U .S.

Post Office to avoid confusion with Victor, Colorado. Agricultural development occurred as a result of available water and rich river bottom lands. Around the turn of the century, large deposits of limestone and granite were discovered, prompting cement manufacturing to become the leading industry in the valley. In 1916, the Southwestern Portland Cement Company began operation in Victorville. In 1926, U.S. Route 66 was designated using the existing National Old Trails Highway system, which was to create a “ribbon of pavement ” from Chicago, Illinois , to California. The route originally went through Hesperia but was realigned in 1924 to create a more efficient and safe route to Victorville. A portion of this famous highway provided a major transportation corridor through Victorville in which Seventh Street and “D” Street were a part.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact. Previously unrecorded and recorded built environment resources are located in the City. Implementation of the HEU may have the potential to result in the removal of historical resources in the City ; however, the HEU does not propose any specific development.

Instead, the HEU would identify action programs that could be implemented to provide additional capacity for future development of dwelling units consistent with state housing law. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review of any adverse impacts to historical resources. The Victorville General Plan 2030 Resource Element Goal 5 is to preserve important historic al resources. Resource Element Policy 5.1.1 requires a project to determine presence/absence of and consider impacts to cultural resources. When necessary, reconnaissance level surveys would be required by qualified professional historians and/or architectural historians. Resource Element Policy 5.1.2 prohibits the destruction of historical resources and requires mitigation for any significant impacts that may be identified during project review. In addition, the Victorville Zoning Ordinance includes a histor ic district overlay that is intended to protect and promote the preservation, maintenance, and/or improvement of landmarks or points of interest and to ensure new structures within the district are compatible with the character to be preserved. Future projects facilitated by the HEU would be required to comply with

IS/ND 31 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
applicable policies to protect historical resources. Therefore, impacts to historical resources would be less than significant.
b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the Victorville General Plan 2030 , at least 178 archaeological and/or historical sites have been identified within the Planning Area. However, only approximately one-third of the total acreage within the Planning Area has been covered by project- related cultural surveys, leaving most of the area yet to be systematically and intensively surveyed (City of Victorville 2008a). Therefore, implementation of the HEU may have the potential to result in impacts to previously known and unknown buried archaeological resources.

The HEU would not propose any specific development. Instead, the HEU would identify action programs that could be implemented to prov ide additional capacity for future development of dwelling units consistent with state housing law. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review of any adverse impacts to archaeological resources.

Victorville General Plan 2030 Resource Element Goal 4 outlines policies that strive to preserve cultural resources in the City, which include archaeological resources. Resource Element Policy

5.1.1 requires projects to determine the presence and absence of and consider impacts to cultural resources during project review. Development that is proposed on known sensitive sites or sites that are discovered to be sensitive require a reconnaissance survey to determine the likelihood of discovering resou rces during construction. In addition, Victorville Municipal Code , Title 16, Chapter 5, Article 2, Grading Regulations, includes specific criteria that address the discovery of archaeological resources during construction excavation. Development that is proposed on known sites requires a reconnaissance survey to determine the likelihood of discovering resources during construction. If resources are encountered on an unknown site, the Victorville Municipal Code requires that grading cease until the resource s can be evaluated. Future projects facilitated by the HEU would be required to comply with applicable policies to protect arch aeological resources.

Therefore, impacts to archaeological resources would be less than significant. c. Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Less Than Significant Impact. Future development consistent with the HEU has the potential to encounter previously buried known and unknown resources. However, the HEU would not propose any specific development. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review of any adverse impacts to arch aeological resources, including human remains. Goal 4 of the Victorville General Plan 2030 Resource Element outlines policies that strive to preserve cultural resources in the City, which include human remains. Resource Element Policy

5.1.1 requires projects to determine the presence and absence of and consider impacts to cultural

IS/ND 32 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
resources during project r eview. Development that is proposed on known sensitive sites or sites that are discovered to be sensitive require a reconnaissance survey to determine the likelihood of discovering resources during construction. In addition, Victorville Municipal Code, Tit le 16, Chapter 5, Article 2, Grading Regulations, includes specific criteria that address the discovery of archaeological resources, including human remains, during construction excavation. Furthermore, if human remain s are encountered during project construction, the California Health and Safety Code and CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5, require that work in the immediate area must halt and that the remains must be protected. The County Coroner and the Native American Heritage Commission shall be notified immediately , if applicable, per Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of California Health and Safety Code. The responsibilities for acting on notification of a discovery of Native A merican human remains are identified in California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.94. Future projects facilitated by the HEU would be required to comply with federal, state, and local regulations in place to protect human remains. Therefore, impacts to human remains would be less than significant.

IS/ND 33 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.6 Energy

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
The California Building Code (CBC) contains standards that regulate the method of use, properties, performance, or types of materials used in the construction, alteration, improvement, repair, or rehabilitation of a building or other improvement to real property. The CBC includes mandatory green building standards (CALGreen) for residential and nonresidential structures; the most recent version includes the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. These standards focus on four key areas: smart res idential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards (preventing heat transfer from the interior to the exterior and vice versa), residential and nonresidential ventilation requirements, and non residential lighting requirements. The City has adopted the 2019 CBC, including CALGreen, and includes it as Title 16, Chapter 5, Building and Fire Regulations, of the Victorville Municipal Code.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
Less Than Significant Impact. Future residential development pursuant to the HEU would be consistent with the current Victorville General Plan 2030 land use designation and would not result in unplanned regional energy use. Implementation of the proposed project has the potential to result in impacts to energy supply due to the anticipated development. Energy resources would be consumed during constructi on of future development under the proposed project. Energy would also be consumed to provide operational lighting, heating, cooling, and transportation for future development. The HEU does not propose any specific development projects that would require energy to operate or an increase in vehicle trips . Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review of any adverse impacts to energy to include site-specific compliance with the CBC, C ALGreen, and any other requirements i ncluded as par t of the Victorville Municipal Code and Victorville General Plan 2030 . Future development accommodated under the HEU would be required to comply with the current and future updates

IS/ND 34 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
to the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, CALGreen, and th e Victorville Energy Code to ensure that energy demand associated with growth consistent with the HEU would not be inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b. Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Victorville General Plan 2030 and the Victorville Climate Action Plan (CAP) (City of Victorville 2015) are the applicable plans for energy efficiency in the City. Victorville General Plan 2030 Resource Element Goal 7 promotes energy sustainability by developing alternative power supplies and reducing energy use. Resource Element Policy 7.2.1 strives to minimize energy use of new residential, commercial, and industrial projects by requiring high efficiency heating, lighting, and other appliances, such as cooking equipment, refrigerators, furnaces, overhead, and area lighting, and low oxides of nitrogen (NOx) water heaters. In addition, the Victorville CAP includes various reduction measures, including building energy efficiency and renewable energy. In addition, the HEU would contain policies related to energy conservation , including encouraging infill development that includes capital improvements like sidewalk repair and lighting improvements (HE -M.2) and continuing to require that all substandard units in the City be improved so that they comply, where required, with the existing Building Code (HE-D.5).

Therefore, because implementation of the HEU would be consistent with the growth assumptions in the Victorville General Plan 2030 , implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with applicable energy efficiency plans. Impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 35 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.7 Geology and Soils

n
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer
to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Landslides? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a result
of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
The Planning Area is located in seismically active Southern California, a region that has experienced numerous earthquakes in the past. The Alquist -Priolo Special Studies Zones Act specifies that an area termed an Earthquake Fault Zone is to be delineated if surrounding faults are deemed sufficiently active or well-defined after a review of seismic records and geological studies.

The City is not located within any Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones.

IS/ND 36 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
According to the Victorville General Plan 2030, five fault systems affect the Victorville area: San Andreas, Helendale, North Frontal, Landers, and San Jacinto Faults. The San Andreas Fault is approximately 24 miles south and is considered most likely to produce a major earthquake.

Portions of the Victorville Planning Area, especially those areas along the Mojave River, may be susceptible to liquefaction.

The topography of the Victorville Planning Area varies considerably from gently sloping topography occasionally dissected by an intermittent stream channel to near ly vertical slopes adjacent to the Mojave River.

Paleontological resources in the City include nine ancient lake bed deposits estimated to date back to the Pleistocene Epoch (10,000 to 900,000 years ago). These lake beds contain numerous mammalian fossils, including teeth, limb fragments, phalanges , and metacarpal from horses, camels, and other large animals. The fossil -bearing rock layers are essentially level due to their formation from an ancient lake bed. According to the Victorville General Plan 2030 , the entire Planning Area is considered sensitive regarding paleontological resources due to the existence of recovery sites throughout.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known faul t? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

No Impact. No known or suspected fault traces are in the Victorville area. Additionally, the City is not subject to the provisions of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. No impact would occur. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impact. Ground shaking is responsible for the majority of damage from earthquakes and can damage or destroy buildings. The intensity of shaking depends on the type of fault, distance to the epicenter, magnitude of the earthquake, and subsurface geology. The closest fault systems could produce earthquakes that cause substantial ground motion that could result in serious injuries or deaths, as well as significant property damage, due to the seismic activity of the region as a whole. However, the HEU would not propose any specific development. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review. Future housing facilitated by the HEU would be required t o comply with the CBC, and Title 16, Chapter 5, Building and Fire Regulations, of the Victorville Municipal Code would reduce exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects from seismic ground shaking. In addition, any proposed construction would require the adoption of appropriate engineering design in

IS/ND 37 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
conformance with the recommended geotechnical standards for construction. Impacts would be less than significant.
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact. Liquefaction results when water-saturated, sandy, unstable soils are subject to intense shaking, such as that caused by an earthquake. These soils lose cohesiveness , causing unreinforced structures to f ail. According to the Victorville General Plan 2030 Safety Element, portions of the Planning Area are within a liquefaction hazard area. Future residential development facilitated by the HEU may have the potential to expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects from liquefaction. The HEU would not proposed any specific development. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review. Future residential development facilitated by the HEU would be required to comply with all relevant federal and state regulations and building standards , including the preparation of a project-specific Geotechnical Investigation Report. Future projects would require the adoption of appropriate engineering design in conformance with the recommended geotechnical standards for construction. Impacts would be less than significant.
iv. Landslides?
Less Than Significant Impact. Several earthquake faults exist within the vicinity of the City. The nearest, the North Frontal Fault Zone of the San Bernardino Mountains, is approximately 5.5 miles southeast of the Planning Area along the base of the Ord Mountains. An earthquake large enough to result in moderate ground shaking is possible. Seismic risks are significantly higher in areas closer to the region’s major faults, and a moderate or major earthquake could result in potentially damaging ground shaking. Development on the hillside areas where steep slopes are present can exacerbate landslide haza rds. The HEU does not propose any specific development. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review. Future residential development facilitated by the HEU would be required to comply with the CBC and the recommendations of the project -specific Geotechnical Investigation Report , including engineered site preparation and adequate structural design, which would reduce potential adverse impacts from landslides. Impacts would be less than significant. b. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU would not propose specific development plans for new housing units at this time. Therefore, project components , such as the amount of grading, excavation, and vegetation removal, for future housing units are unknown. If a project proposes to disturb more than 1 acre of soil, it is required by the state to prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which would include best management practices (BMP s) for erosion and sedimentation control. BMP examples generally include an effective combination of erosion and sediment controls, which include barriers such as silt fences, hay bales, drain inlet protection,

IS/ND 38 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
and gravel bags. Existing vegetation should be preserved as much as possible. Future development of housing units that is facilitated by adoption of the HEU would be subject to these conditions for a construction permit; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c. Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on - or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Less Than Significant Impact. Development on hillside areas when steep slopes are present can increase rates of erosion and exacerbate landslide hazards, lateral spreading, liquefaction , or collapse, which may threaten structures. Portions of the City have areas where slopes exceed 15 percent. Th e development on slopes with this degree of inclination is difficult and should be avoided if possible to prevent property damage resulting from slope failure. The HEU does not propose any specific development. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review. Any future housing development that is fostered by the HEU would be required to adhere to the CBC and other standards and regulations for building designs. The Victorville General Plan 2030 Safety Element contains s pecific goals and policies that address hazards related to the development of hillside areas. The Victorville Zoning Ordinance contains a Slope Protection District, which regulates the maintenance and protection of sloped areas in excess of 5 feet in vertical height. Impacts resulting from unstable geologic units or soil would be reduced through compliance with the Victorville General Plan 2030 , Victorville Zoning Ordinance, existing codes , and adherence with the recommendations of the project -specific Geotechnical Investigation Report, including engineered site preparation and adequate structural design. Any proposed construction would require the adoption of appropriate engineering design in conformance with the recommended geotechnical standards for construction. d. Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less Than Significant Impact. Certain types of clay soils expand when they are saturated and shrink when dried. These are called expansive soils and can pose a threat to the integrity of structures built on them without proper engineering. Expansion and contraction of soils in response to changes in moisture content could lead to differential and cyclical movements that could cause damage or distress to structures and equipment. Thus, they are less suitable for development than non-expansive soils.

Future development of housing unit s consistent with the HEU would have t he potential to be adversely impacted by expansive soils ; however, t he HEU would not propose any specific development. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review. Any future housing development that is fostered by the HEU would be required to adhere to the CBC, the Victorville Development Code, and other standards and regulations for building designs. Impacts resulting from expansive soil s would be reduced through compliance with existing codes and adherence with th e recommendations of the project -specific Geotechnical

IS/ND 39 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Investigation Report, including engineered site preparation and adequate structural design. Any proposed construction would require the adoption of appropriate engineering design in conformance with the recommended geotechnical standards for construction. e. Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the Victorville General Plan 2030 EIR (2008b), there are several areas in the City and its sphere of influence where wastewater is treated with on -site septic systems. However, the Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority estimates in its Sewage Facilities Plan Update Year 2005 Amendment that 97 percent of the City’s population is currently connected to the City ’s sewer system. The Victorville General Plan 2030 allows septic tanks in certain large lot areas in the southwestern portion of the City. Future development facilitated by the HEU may include septic tanks for wastewater disposal. Soils incapable of supporting septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are subject to provisions of the Victorville Municipal Code, which require soils engineering investigations, including soil bearing capacity and soil expansion. The Victorville General Plan 2030 Safety Element requires complete soils and geologic/geotechnical in vestigations as a standard procedure and CEQA compliance where there is a possible threat of liquefaction, subsidence, expansive soils, landslides or mudslides. Therefore, with compliance with the Victorville Municipal Co de and Victorville General Plan 2030 policies, impacts would be less than significant. f. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the Victorville General Plan 2030 , the entire City is considered to be sensitive regarding paleontological resources. Future development projects facilitated by the HEU would have the potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site. However, the HEU would not propose any specific development.

Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review. The Victorville General Plan 2030 Resource Element Goal 5 is designed to protect paleontological resources. Specifically, Resource Element Implementation Measure 5.1.2.3 requires paleontological monitoring of land alteration projects involving excavation into native geologic materials known to have a high sensitivity for the presence of paleontological resources. In addition, Victorville Municipal Code, Title 16, Chapter 5, Article 2, Grading Regulations, includes specific criteria that address the discovery of paleontological resources during construction excavation. Development that is proposed on known sites requires a reconnaissance survey to determine the likelihood of discovering resources during construction. If resources are encountered on an unknown site, the Victorville Municipal Code requires that grading cease until the resource can be evaluated. Future projects facilitated by the HEU would be required to comply with applicable policies to protect paleontological resources. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 40 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are referred to as greenhouse gases (GHG) because they capture heat radiated from the sun as it is reflected back into the atmosphere, much like a greenhouse does. The accumulation of GHG has been implicated as the driving force for global climate change. The primary GHGs are CO2, methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), O3, and water vapor. In emissions inventories, GHG emissions are typically reported in terms of pounds or metric tons of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) per year.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. Future residential development facilitated by the HEU would be designed and constructed in accordance with the provisions of the Victorville Zoning Ordinance, the land use policies of the Victorville General Plan 2030, and the Victorville CAP ( City of Victorville 2015). The HEU does not change any land use policy or any building regulations that would raise or otherwise change development levels that could contribute to an increase in GHGs.

The Victorville General Plan 2030 identifies goals and policies that will contribute to better air quality in the City. The proposed H EU would encourage implementation of these goals and policies. Victorville General Plan 2030 policies and implementation measures that reduce GHG emissions include encouraging planning and development activities that reduce the number and length of single-occupancy automobile trips (Policy 6.1.1); requiring sustainable building design and development for new residential, commercial, and industrial projects (Policy 7.2.1); minimizing energy use of new residential, commercial , and industrial projects by requiring high efficiency heating, lighting , and other app liances, such as cooking equipment, refrigerators, furnaces, overhead and area lighting, and low NO X water heaters (Implementation Measure

7.2.1.2); and requiring drought-tolerant landscaping in all new developments (Implementation Measure 7.2.1.3). In addition, the Victorville CAP includes various reduction strategies with the

IS/ND 41 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
goal of achieving GHG reductions regarding building energy, on -road transportation, wastewater treatment and discharge, and water conveyance.

The HEU would not include any regulations or other policies that would encourage inefficient building practices that could affect the volume of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur under existing Victorville General Plan 2030 policies. Additionally, the HEU would not create the ability for any new development to occur that would not otherwise occur, and would not authorize any specific development project. As such, its adoption would not directly generate any GHG emissions. The HEU is specifically intended to facilit ate the development of housing as allowed by existing land use policies and in a manner that encourages improvement of jobs -housing balance, higher-density development in proximity to transit, and mixed-use development.

Future residential development in th e City w ould be required to comply with Title 24 energy efficiency requirements of the CBC and CALGreen. Compliance with these codes will further increase energy efficiency in new residential buildings, reducing total energy demand and reducing the level of GHG emissions generated from coal, natural gas, and oil -based energy sources. In addition, the HEU contains GHG-reducing policies, including promoting infill development (HE- C.1); continuing to require that all substandard units in the City be improved so that they comply, where required, with the existing Building Code (HE -D.5); encouraging infill development that includes capital improvements like sidewalk repair and lighting improvements (HE -M.2); encouraging the continued provision of open space to the City, such as developments that include green space for public use (HE-M.4); and establishing flexible mixed-use development standards to encourage new development in deteriorated commercial areas (HE -P.2). The HEU would be consistent with the City ’s overall efforts for energy and conservation policies to reduce GHGs; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b. Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less Than Significant Impact. As previously stated, the HEU would not propose any specific development. As such, its adoption would not directly generate any GHG emissions. However, future development facilitated as a result of the HEU would have the potential to generate GHG emissions and to show consistency with the City’s applicable GHG-reducing plan.

The City prepared its CAP in September 2015 to present GHG inventories, identify the effectiveness of California initiatives to reduce GHG emissions, and identify local measures selected by the City to reduce GHG emission s under the City ’s jurisdictional control to achieve the City’s identified AB 32 2020 GHG reduction target. The Victorville CAP allows developers to demonstrate that their projects are consistent with the Victorville CAP by demonstrating compliance with the Victorville Greenhouse Gas Emissions Screening Table review process. The Victorville Greenhouse Gas Emissions Screening Table review process allows developers to

IS/ND 42 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
streamline CEQA review and to bypass a complete GHG analysis on their own for CEQA processing. Emissions associated with projects that are consistent with the Victorville CAP are considered less than significant, and their contributions to cumulative emissions are not considered cumulatively considerable.

However, the Victorville CAP does not align with the statewide goals beyond 2020, and thus, the Victorville CAP is not consistent with the criteria in CEQA Guidelines , Section 15183.5, for the post-2020 period. Consequently, the City is currently working with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority to update the current Victorville CAP to address SB 32 and post -2020 GHG emission reductions.

To meet the intent of SB 32, the City is in the process of adopting the City of Victorville 2021 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (GGRP) to implement Victorville General Plan 2030 policies focused on GHG emissions. The GGRP sets an aggressive goal to reduce GHG emissions by 40 percent below 2020 baseline GHG emission levels. To achieve this goal, the GGRP will require 100 percent of new industrial buildings to install on -site renewable electrical generation ( i.e., photovoltaic solar panels).

Therefore, future projects under the HEU would be required to demonstrate consistency with the Victorville CAP and the GGRP through project-specific CEQA review and to implement mitigation measures as needed. Impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 43 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e. For a project located within an airport land-use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for
people residing or working in the project area?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
g. Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
The California Health and Safety Code defines a hazardous material as “any material that because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment.” Thus, the term “hazardous material” is a broad term for all substances that may b e hazardous, specifically including hazardous substances and hazardous waste. Substances that are flammable, corrosive, reactive, oxidizers, radioactive, combustible, or toxic are considered hazardous.

IS/ND 44 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU would be a policy document and would not propose any specific development. However, construction activities associated with future development under the HEU could involve the use of chemical substances such as solvents, paints, fuel for equipment, and other potentially hazardous materials. These materials are common to typical construction activities and do not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment. New residential units may contain household hazardous materials, such as paint, herbicides/pesticides, diesel fuel, and cleaning products, that have the potential to spill. Residential uses typically do not use or store large quantities of hazardous materials. Long -term operation of the future residential land uses would not involve substantial amounts of hazardous substances during operation. Future development of the sites would be consistent with the type and intensity of surrounding residential development. Adherence to regulations , including federal and local regulations, and standard protocols during the storage, transportation, disposal, and usage of any hazardous materials would minimize the hazard to the public or the environment. In addition, the Victorville General Plan 2030 Safety Element includes goals to protect the community against natural and human-generated hazards and to protect the community from siting projects in known hazards areas. All future development would require project -specific environmental evaluation to determine that any potential impacts related to the transport or release of hazardous waste are less than significant.

Potential hazard-related impacts would be location specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way until the location of a project site is known. When a development proposal is considered, the project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards, and any impacts identified with the development project would be addressed through mitigation measures specific to the impact. Site-specific CEQA review and compliance with the standards and regulations at the time of future development would result in less than significant impacts. b. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. One way human exposure to hazardous substance s could occur is through accidental release. Incidents that result in an accidental release of hazardous substance s into the environment can cause contamination of soil, surface water, and groundwater, in addition to a ny toxic fumes that might be generated. If not cleaned up immediately and completely, hazardous substances can migrate into the soil or enter a local stream or channel causing contamination of soil and water. Human exposure to contaminated soil, soil gas, or water can have potential health effects depending on a variety of factors, including the nature of the contaminant and the degree of exposure.

IS/ND 45 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
As stated previously, the HEU would not propose any specific development. However, construction of new residential units facilitated as a result of the HEU may result in accidental releases, such as petroleum -based fuels or hydraulic fluid used for construction equipment. The level of risk associated with the accidental release of hazardous substances is not consi dered significant due to the small volume and low concentration of hazardous materials that would be used during residential unit construction. The construction contractor would be required to use standard construction controls and safety procedures that would avoid and minimize the potential for accidental release of such substances into the environment. Standard construction practices would be observed such that any materials released are appropriately contained and remediated as required by local, state, and federal law, including the California Hazardous Waste Control Law, California Division of Occupational Safety and Health requirements, federal Resources Conservation and Recovery Act, and the federal Emergency Planning and Community Right -to- Know Act. Compliance with existing laws and regulations would ensure impacts would be less than significant.

Long-term operation of future residential units could contain household hazardous materials, such as paint, herbicides/pesticides, diesel fuel, and cleaning products, that have the potential to spill.

Residential uses typically do not use or store large quantities of hazardous materials. Adherence to regulations and standard protocols during the storage and use of any hazardous materials, as discussed above, would minimize and avoid the potential for significant upset and accident condition impacts. In addition, the Victorville Municipal Code establishes a hazardous materials release response and inventory program to initiate quick response to accidental releases. All future development would require project -specific environmental evaluation to determine that any potential impacts are less than significant. Potential hazard -related impacts would be location specific and cannot be assessed in a meaningful way un til the location of a project site is known.

When a development proposal is considered, the project would be subject to adopted development guidelines/standards, and any impacts identified with the development project would be addressed through mitigation measures specific to the impact. Therefore, impacts related to accidental releases would be less than significant.
c. Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less Than Significant Impact. Schools are located throughout the City. However, development that would be facilitated as a result of the HEU would be strictly residential units, and residential uses typically do not use or store la rge quantities of hazardous waste. New developments would be subject to planning, zoning, and procedures involved in site plan approvals, and land use planning would typically separate uses that would place a school near a development where hazardous materials may be used. Through the City ’s environmental review process, future development projects would be evaluated for the potential release of hazardous materials into the environment.

IS/ND 46 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
In addition, future development would be required to comply with the objectives and policies in the Victorville General Plan 2030 Safety Element , including restricting land uses in areas identified as susceptible to hazards (Objective 2.1) and maintaining a database of the locations, scope, and severity of natural and human-made hazards in the City. Therefore, impacts related to hazardous materials near a school would be less than significant. d. Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU is a policy document and does not propose any specific development. However, future development facilitated as a result of the HEU could locate residential units on a hazardous materials site. Through the City’s environmental review process, it would be determined if a potential development site is on or within the immediate vicinity of any known hazardous material site. If applicable, projects may be require d to prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, which would include a database search for existing hazardous materials sites ; identify potential violations under federal and/or applicable state and local environmental laws; and provide recommendations for correcting deficiencies or problems. Where appropriate, mitigation measures would be r equired for specific projects to reduce potential hazards to the public.

In addition, the Victorville General Plan 2030 Safety Element includes objectives and policies aimed at protecting the public and future development from hazards in the Ci ty. This inc ludes restricting land uses in areas identified as susceptible to hazards (Objective 1.1) and developing and maintaining a database of the locations, scope , and severity of natural and human-made hazards in the City (Policy 1.1). This will aid local planni ng in the siting of projects in known hazard areas. Safety Element Implementation Measure 1.3.1.1 has the Victorville Fire Department continue as the local Certified Unified Program Agency, including having the responsibility to comment on all proposed ind ustrial, medical, research , and development or other types of land uses that involve the generation, storage, use, transportation, disposal , or recycling of hazardous materials and/or hazardous wastes. Therefore, impacts related to hazardous waste sites wo uld be less than significant.
e. Would the project for a project located within an airport land-use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? Less Than Significant Impact. The City contains one airport, the Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA), located in the northwestern portion of the City. The SCLA is a 2,500-acre world- class aviati on and air cargo facility serving international and domestic needs. Currently, the majority of the operations at the SCLA are categorized as General Aviation, with a portion of the operations related to military training missions. The smallest portions of the annual operations are

IS/ND 47 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
categorized as Air Carrier and Air Taxi. No regularly scheduled commercial flights occur at the SCLA; however, there is regularly scheduled air taxi service (City of Victorville 2008a).

To minimize the risk and to reduce the severity of aviation accidents, six safety zones have been established for the SCLA based on the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook guidelines. To ensure that community land uses are outside areas where aviation accidents are most likely to occur, three SCLA Safety Review Areas are identified with policies formulated to address the specific safety concerns of those areas. Future residential development facilitated as a result of the HEU would be required to comply with the SCLA safety guidelines to ensure development is not within a safety hazard zone. In addition, the Victorville General Plan 2030 Safety Element, Goal 1, Objective 1.4, is directly applicable to the SCLA to prevent loss of life, serious injury, and significant damage to structures and critical facilities due to aircraft mishap at the SCLA. Safety Element Policy 1.4.2 is set to avoid conflicts with the Comprehensive Land Use Compatibility Plan for the SCLA. Through the City ’s environmental review process, future development projects would be evaluated for compatibility with the SCLA to ensure a project would not result in a safety hazard of excessive nois e for people residing or working in the Planning Area. Impacts would be less than significant.
f. Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City has prepared its own Emergency Plan in compliance with the State Office of Emergency Services and the Victorville Municipal Code, and it identifies responses and actions depending on the nature and scope of the disaster. In addition, the Victorville General Plan 2030 Safety Element includes emergency preparedness planning consisting of three main compo nents: (1) hazard identification and risk assessment , (2) hazard prevention and abatement, and (3) emergency response and action. The Safety Element identifies hazards present in the City and briefly focuses on assessing the scope of risk associated with t he hazards and emergency preparedness procedures and fire, police, and medical facilities and/or staffing.

Construction activities associated with future residential development associated with the HEU would have the potential to interfere with emergency p lans and procedures if authorities are not properly notified or multiple projects are constructed during the same time and multiple roadways used for emergency routes are concurrently blocked. Future housing facilitated under the HEU would be consistent wi th the current Victorville General Plan 2030 land use designations , and therefore, no changes in the City ’s existing circulation network would be proposed or required under the HEU. However, future housing projects would be subject to site-specific review and would be subject to City regulations regarding street design, site access, and internal emergency access. Compliance would prevent multiple roadways used for emergency routes from being concurrently blocked. Therefore, impacts associated with t he physical interference of an Emergency Evacuation Plan would be less than significant.

IS/ND 48 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
g. Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE)’s Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map Viewer ( CAL FIRE 2021), the City is designated as a moderate and unzoned Local Responsibility Area . No designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones are in the City. Development of future housing consistent with the HEU in a Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone could result in a potentially significant impact from the exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residents are intermixed with wildlands. Through the City ’s environmental review process, future development projects associated with the HEU would be required to abide by the CBC, which contains measures to reduce fire hazards in structures , including the use of materials, fire separation walls, building separation, and fire sprinklers. In addition, the City has adopted a Fire Hazard Abatement Ordinance (Title 8, Chapter 8.08, City of Victorville Fire Code, in the Victorville Municipal Code), which requires the abatement of weeds in excess of 3 inches above the grade in the area of growth on such a portion of the lot or premises within 100 feet of any structure. Adherence to this ordinance reduces the likelihood of fires on undeveloped lands and on vacant lots in the developed portions of the City. Before approval of a development project or issuance of a building permit, the Victorville Water District (VWD) verifies that the peak load water supply requirement is not negatively affected in the case of a fire. Finally, the Victorville General Plan 2030 Safety Element includes several policies that reduce the exposure of people and the environment to wildland fire risks. These include ensuring that new private or public development has sufficient fire protection, police, and emergency medical services available (Policy 2.1.1) and ensuring that new development proposals (private or public) do not over -consume the City ’s water supplies to the extent that the minimum volume of water storage required to meet the City ’s peak load water supply standard could not be met (Policy 2.3.1). Policy 2.4.1 is set to con tinue to share public health and safety concerns with other public agencies, including local, regional, state, and federal.

Implementation Measures 2.4.1.2 and 2.4.1.3 serve to continue to maintain mutual aid agreements with neighboring jurisdictions regarding fire protection. Compliance with existing regulations and Victorville General Plan 2030 policies would reduce impacts to a level below significant. Impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 49 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:

i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or offsite?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
The City is in the Mojave River Watershed, which encompasses approximately 4,700 square miles and is entirely within San Bernardino Co unty. The primary geographic and surface hydrologic feature of the watershed is the Mojave River. The City exhibits typical California and Nevada high desert meteorological conditions. Typical of these conditions are annual rainfall of less than 8 inches. While summers may produce an occasional thunderstorm, the wettest season tends to be from January to March.

A major portion of the City is on top of a gently sloping large alluvial fan situated to the northeast of the San Bernardino Mountains and referred to as the Cajon Fan (or Victorville Fan). The Mojave River runs along the fan’s eastern margin and is the City’s most notable topographic feature. This

IS/ND 50 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
river is very unusual in that it flows from south to north, conveying runoff out of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains for approximately 80 miles until it empties at Soda Lake.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? Less Than Significant Impacts. Clearing, grading, excavation, and construction activities associated with residential development consistent with the HEU may result in short -term impacts to water quality due to sheet erosion of exposed soils and subsequen t deposition of particulates in local drainages. Grading activities lead to exposed areas of loose soil and sediment stockpiles that are susceptible to uncontrolled sheet flow. Future housing development facilitated by the HEU may result in long-term impacts to the quality of stormwater and urban runoff, subsequently impacting downstream water quality, and could potentially create new sources for runoff contamination.

Future housing development facilitated by the HEU would be required to comply with all applicable water quality standards. Any future development within the Planning Area would be subject to the federal Clean Water Act , which is established through compliance with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit, and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act . In the City, the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board issues and approves NPDES permits per the federal Clean Water Act . NPDES Construction General Permits require projects to develop and implement a SWPPP, which must list the BMPs the applicant will employ to “prevent all construction pollutants from contacting stormwater,” and BMPs must be developed “with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off site into receiving water channels.” The SWPPP must also include a visual monitoring program and a chemical monitoring program for non-visible pollutants.

The NPDES also requires local governments to obtain an NPDES Permit for stormwater-induced water pollutants in its jurisdiction. The City is a copermittee of the Mojave River Watershed Group of small communities enrolled under statewide Phase II Municipal Storm water NPDES Construction General Permit No. CAS000004 for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems effective in 2005. The permit establishes a region -wide Stormwater Management Plan to control discharges of sanitary wastewater, septic tank effluent, car wash wastewaters, improper o il disposal, radiator flushing, laundry wastewater, spills from roadway accidents, and improper disposal of toxic materials. Pollutant control measures in the Stormwater Management Plan include a specific focus on failing septic tanks, industrial/business connections, recreational sewage, and illegal dumping. Developers are required to implement appropriate BMPs on construction sites to control erosion and sediment.

In addition, future housing projects would be required to comply with the Victorville Municipal Code, which contains extensive requirements for water conservation and recycling measures. The

IS/ND 51 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Victorville General Plan 2030 Resource Element Policy 1.3.1 requires development projects to prepare and implement Water Quality Management Plans that incorporate BMPs, which reinforces the NPDES regulatory requirements. Compliance with federal, state, and City regulations would reduce impacts to less than significant.
b. Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Less Than Significant Impact. Future housing development facilitate d by the HEU would be consistent with land use designations contained in the Victorville General Plan 2030. Water service in the Planning Area is currently provided by the VWD. The City draws all of its water supply from the Alto (or Upper Mojave) sub-basin of the Mojave River Groundwater Basin.

Future housing development facilitated by the HEU would be required to incorporate features that would reduce impervious area, as feasible, and promote water infiltration. Treatment control and hydromodification management facilities would promote retention and infiltration of stormwater.

Redevelopment of developed sites requires compliance with water quality standards intended to reduce runoff, increase infiltration, and improve water quality. In addition, the Victorville General Plan 2030 Resource Element includes policies that protect grou ndwater resources. Specifically, Water Resources Policy 1.3.1 requires new development and major public and private redevelopment projects to prepare and implement Water Quality Management Plans that incorporate a variety of structural and nonstructural BMPs to minimize, control , and filter construction site runoff and various forms of developed site urban runoff before discharge to receiving waters. Implementation Measure 1.3.1.2 requires future projects to assess and mitigate impacts on surface and ground water quality as a routine aspect of the City ’s CEQA implementation procedures. Compliance with federal, state, and City regulations would reduce impacts to less than significant.
c. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ii. Substantially increase the r ate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? iv. Impede or redirect flood flows?

IS/ND 52 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Less Than Significant Impact. A major portion of the City is on top of a gently sloping large alluvial fan situated northeast of the San Bernardino Mountains and referred to as the Cajon Fan (or Victorville Fan) with the Mojave River running along the fan ’s eastern margin. The majority of the City is characterized by gently sloping topography of less than 9 percent grade.

Future residential development facilitated by the HEU could result in the altera tion of drainage patterns, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, during and after construction activities. Stormwater drainage and system modifications and improvements associate d with future housing development would be required to comply with all applicable regulations, including discharge rate controls, and be designed for a 100-year storm event.

In addition, future housing development facilitated by the HEU would be required to adhere to all federal, state, and local requirements for avoiding construction and operational impacts that could substantially alter the existing drainage pattern or alter the course of a stream or river, including NPDES permitting and the Construction General Permit, compliance with the Victorville Municipal Code, and Victorville General Plan 2030 Resource Element goals and policies for implementing Water Quality Plans and incorporating BMPs. Considering these requirements, future housing development fa cilitated by the HEU would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area. This includes no alteration of the course of a stream or river in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site, substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on or off site, create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems, provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, or impede or redirect flood flows. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d. Would the project, in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Less Than Significant Impact. A tsunami is a very large ocean wave caused by an underwater earthquake or volcanic eruption. Tsunamis can cause flooding to coastlines and inland areas less than 50 feet above sea level and within 1 mile of the shoreline. The entire project is more than approximately 70 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean and would not be susceptible to inundation or flooding due to a tsunami.

Seiches are defined as wave -like oscillatory movements in enclosed or sem i-enclosed bodies of water, such as lakes or reservoirs, and are most typically associated with seismic activity. The City is not subject to inundation by seiche. The majority of the City is characterized by gently sloping topography of less than 9 percent grade. In areas dissected by an intermittent stream channel the terrain can vary with nearly vertical slopes adjacent to the Mojave River. The Victorville Municipal

IS/ND 53 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Code contains provisions to protect against mudflow in Title 16, Chapter 5, Article 16 , Fl ood Damage Prevention.

The principal flood hazard to the developed portions of the City is from the Mojave River. In the event of a 100 -year flood, flood water would be confined to the river ’s floodplain. In addition, several intermittent streams that drain the City and empty into the Mojave River include the Ossom Wash, West Fork Ossom Wash, Bell Mountain Wash, and Oro Grande Wash. There is a potential for flooding from these streams in the event of a 100-year flood. Project developments associated with the HEU in the City would be subject to flooding, damage, and public safety issues if located within the 100-year flood zone.

Construction activity would be subject to the NPDES Construction General Permit, which requires the development and implementation of a SWPPP , which specifies BMPs that reduce or prevent construction pollutants from leaving the site in stormwater runoff and minimize erosion caused by flooding associated with the construction project. The Victorville Municipal Code contains provisions to safeguard the public and structures from flood hazards, including restrictions on uses that are dangerous to health, safety , and property; controls on alterations of natural floodplains, stream channels, and natural flood barriers; and prohibition of development within 100- year flood zone areas as identified by Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Maps and on Victorville land use and zoning maps. Victorville Municipal Code, Title 16, Chapter 5, Article 16, Flood Damage Prevention, contains methods of preventing and reducing flood hazards, and Title 16, Chapter 3, Zoning and Land Use Requirements, provides zoning to ensure safety in Conservancy and Flood Plain (FP) zoned areas. Within the Victorville General Plan 2030 Resource and Safety Elements, goals are provided to protect the community from flooding and geological hazards. The objectives and policies reinforce the Victorville Municipal Code by providing that development be l ocated outside of flood hazard areas, maps be updated to reflect the 100 -year flood hazards, and those areas be designated for Open Space -Natural Hazards on the Land Use Policy Map and on the Conservation/Open Space Map. With implementation of the Victorville General Plan 2030 goals and policies, Victorville Municipal Code, and NPDES Construction General Permit, impacts would be less than significant. e. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed previously, the City is under the jurisdiction of the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board . Water quality standards and control measures for surface and ground waters of the Lahontan region are contained in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region. The plan designates beneficial uses for water bodies and establishes water quality objectives, waste discharge prohibitions, and other implementation measures to protect those beneficial uses.

IS/ND 54 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Future housing projects associated with the HEU would comply with the requirements under the NPDES Permit program, the Phase II Small MS4 General Permit in the Mojave River Watershed, the City-approved Water Quality Management Plan, and implementation of associated BMPs and other requirements of SWPPP , as well as a City -approved Drainage Plan, which would ensure stormwater discharges associated with construction and use of future development projects comply with regulatory requirements in the City and would not conflict with a Water Quality Control Plan or Groundwater Management Plan. Compliance with state and local requirements for avoiding and minimizing construction and operation al impacts to prevent conflicts with or obstruction of implementation of a Water Quality Control Plan or sustainable Groundwater Management Plan, including the Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control District and with federal, state, and City regulations would reduce impacts to less than significant.

2.4.11 Land Use and Planning

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
Physical development in the City is currently governed by the existing Victorville General Plan 2030 adopted in October 2008. The Victorville General Plan 2030 disaggregates the City and its sphere of in fluence according to land use designations, with residential being the predominant existing land use.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project physically divide an established community? Less Than Significant Impact. Projects that divide an established community can involve large scale linear infrastructure, such as freeways, highways, and drainage facilities that bisect an established community or create barriers to movement within that community. “Locally undesirable land uses,” such as prisons or landfills, sited within economically depressed areas can also divide an established community. The HEU would not propose any development. Future housing development facilitated by the HEU would be subject to discretionary permits and would occur as market conditions allow and at the discretion of the individual property owners. However, the HEU would identify a series of implementing actions that would increase housing capacity.

Future housing development would occur in areas currently zoned for residential use; therefore,

IS/ND 55 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
an increase in housing capacity would be a consistent land use that would not physically divide the community. Impacts would be less than significant.
b. Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU is a component of the Victorville General Plan 2030 that assesses the ho using needs of all economic segments of the City. In addition, the HEU would define the goals and policies that would guide the City ’s approach to resolving those needs and would recommend a set of programs that would implement policies over the next few y ears. The HEU would be concerned with specifically identifying ways in which the housing needs of existing and future residents can be met. Specifically, the HEU would put forth specific policies to update the Land Use Element and Victorville Zoning Code to bring regulations and policies in compliance with current state laws and to allow for increased residential development to create more opportunities for development of diverse housing options for residents of the City (Policies HE - A.1 and HE-A.3).

Future projects consistent with the HEU would be subject to the Victorville General Plan 2030, update to the General Plan (once approved), and Victorville Zoning Code. These documents and ordinances include standards to protect aesthetic quality and scenic viewsheds, biological resources, cultural resources, and public health and safety. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 56 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.12 Mineral Resources

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
Naturally occurring mineral resources in the City include sand, gravel , or stone deposits that are suitable as sources o f concrete aggregate, primarily along the Mojave River. The Victorville General Plan 2030 recognizes the potential for occurrence of mineral resources along the Mojave River corridor and d esignates these areas as MRZ-2b mineral resource zones . The MRZ -2b mineral resource zone designation represents areas underlain by mineral deposits where geologic information indicates that significant resources are present or are inferred. In the City, the only areas designated as MRZ-2b occur along the Mojave River corridor.

According to the Victorville General Plan 2030, the predominance of the City is designated as MRZ-3a.

The MRZ-3a mineral resource zone is defined by the Victorville General Plan 2030 Resource Element as “areas containing known mineral occurrences of undetermined mineral resource significance.” Impact Analysis
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
Less Than Significant Impact. Future housing facilitated by the HEU would be consistent with Victorville General Plan 2030 land use designations and would not substantially limit the future availability of known mineral resources. Impacts would be less than significant. b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Less Than Significant Impact. According to the Victorville General Plan 2030 EIR, an active cement mining operation continues to be located on the northwestern side of State Route 18 (City of Victorville 2008b). The sand and gravel mining used in these operations meet the definition of a mineral resource as any form of natural rock materials that have comme rcial value. However, these sand and gravel deposits are not classified by the California Division of Mines and Geology as important mineral resources. In addition, future housing development would occur in areas currently zoned for residential use, which is not compatible with mining operations. Impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 57 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.13 Noise

Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive
noise levels?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
Noise is usually defined as unwanted or excessive sound. Noise consists of any sound that may produce physiological or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest, recreation, and sleep. The primary sources of noise in the City are freeways and roadways, railroad traffic, SCLA aircraft operations, and stationary sources.

The City c onsiders noise exposure for single - or multi -family residential development to be “normally acceptable” if the maximum exterior noise level is 60 decibel (dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) or less. Exterior noise levels at residential occupancies of up to 65 dB CNEL are allowed if exterior levels have been substantially mitigated and interior noise exposures meet the interior noise standard of 45 dB CNEL. Exposures up to 70 dB CNEL for residential uses are considered conditionally acceptable if all measures to reduce such exposure have been taken , but would be considered as significantly noise -impacted. Noise levels above 70 dB CNEL are considered normally unacceptable except in unusual circumstances.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less Than Significant Impact. Development of housing facilitated by the HEU would have the potential to generate both short-term and long-term noise impacts. Short-term noise impacts could occur during grading and construction. Construction activities have the potential to expose adjacent land uses to noise levels that could temporarily exceed the City’s Noise Standards. The

IS/ND 58 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
degree of noise impact would depend on the distance between the construction activity and the noise sensitive receptor. Long -term noise impacts would b e associated with vehicular traffic to/from the site (including residents and visitors), outdoor activities, and stationary mechanical equipment on site. Traffic associated with future developments consistent with Victorville General Plan 2030 land use des ignations would result in long -term increases in ambient noise levels.

However, depending on the size of each development, this increase may be noticeable for some people but may not significantly impact surrounding sensitive uses and may not generate a substantial increase in ambient noise levels.

However, the HEU would not propose any specific development. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would require subsequent CEQA review. Victorville General Plan 2030 Noise Element provisions, particula rly Policies 1.1.1 and 1.2.1 and their respective implementation measures, would reduce potential noise impacts from roadway noise. Resource Element Implementation Measure 6.2.1.1 restricts the siting of new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day. These measures are expected to protect future land uses from locating adjacent to excessive noise generating roadways. In addition, the Noise Element contains a noise/land use compatibility guidelines matrix illustrating which land uses noise levels are normally acceptable and which are not. The Victorville Municipal Code Noise Standards ( Title 13, Chapter 13.01, Noise Control ) establish standards for the regulation of noise levels in the City. The Noise Standards establish base ambient noise levels , which include maximum acceptable noise levels based on the area of noise and time of day. Therefore, compliance w ith the Victorville General Plan 2030 Noise Element policies and compatibility matrix and the Victorville Municipal Code Noise Standards would reduce potential temporary and permanent noise impacts as a result of future housing under the HEU. Impacts would be less than significant.
b. Would the project result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Construction activities from housing developments facilitated by the HEU could generate v arying degrees of groundborne vibration, depending on the construction procedure and the construction equipment used. Operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in amplitude with distance from the source.

The effect on buildings in the vicinity of a construction site often varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and construction characteristics of the receiver building(s). The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibration at moderate levels to slight damage at the highest levels.

Groundborne vibration from construction activities rarely reach levels that damage structures.

The HEU would not propose any specific development. Future projects proposed as a result of the HEU would be subject to project-specific CEQA review and consideration of potential

IS/ND 59 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
groundborne vibration and groundborne noise impacts. Compliance with Victorville General Plan 2030 Noise Element policies and the Victorville Municipal Code would reduce groundborne noise impacts. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c. Would the project, for a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. As stated in Section 2.4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the City contains one airport, the SCLA, in the northwest ern portion of the City. The existing SCLA aircraft contours of 70 and 75 dB CNEL remain entirely on airport property. The 65 dB CNEL noise contour extends off airport property to the south. This area is currently undeveloped. The 60 dB CNEL noise contour extends off airport property to the north, south, and southwest. The 55 dB CNEL noise contour extends off airport property to the north, south, northeast, and southwest (City of Victorville 2008a). The City has also adopted a Specific Plan for development near the SCLA.

The Specific Plan includes Public/Open Space, Business Park, and Industrial designations for land southeast of the runways. The SCLA Specific Plan establishes policies to ensure SCLA operations are compatible with proximate land uses (City of Victorville 2021).

In addition, policies of the Victorville General Plan 2030 Noise Element, notably Polic ies 1.1.2 and 2.2.1 and their respective implementation measures, seek to ensure that no conflict or inconsistency between the operation of the SCLA and future land uses within the Planning Area occurs. These policies and measures require the City to continue to monitor SCLA operations and to coordinate these activities into the planning process. Future housing development as a result of the HEU would be required to comply with both the SCLA Specific Plan and Victorville General Plan 2030 compatibility policies so it would not expose people residing or working in the Planning Area to excessive noise levels. Impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 60 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.14 Population and Housing

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Environmental Setting
According to the California Department of Finance, the population has steadily increased in the City and San Bernardino County from 2010 to 2019 and slightly decreased between 2019 and 2020 due to the Federal Prison Complex inmate decline . Population, housing, and employment are anticipated to grow in the City and San Bernardino County over the next two decades. Specifically, SCAG’s regional forecast ( SCAG and Connect SoCal 2021) anticipates the City ’s population, housing, and employment t o increase by 71,200 people, 27,900 units, and 20,000 jobs between 2016 and 2045.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectl y (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU would be a component of the Victorville General Plan 2030 that would assess the housing needs of all economic segments of the City and would address the City’s ability to meet the regional housing needs as determined by the State of California. In addition, the HEU would define the goals and policies that would guide the City ’s approach to resolving those needs and recommends a set of programs that would implement policies over the next few years. The HEU would not propose any specific development. Future housing development facilitated by the HEU would be subject to discretionary permits and would occur as market conditions allow and at the discretion of the individual property owners. The HEU is concerned with specifically identifying ways in which the housing needs of existing and future residents can be met as necessary to m eet state housing law requirements. The development of new housing holds the potential to increase the number of families and individuals in the area.

However, it would not induce unplanned population growth.

IS/ND 61 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
The HEU would identify a series of implementing actions to increase the City’s housing capacity.

However, any future housing development facilitated by the HEU would occur near existing infrastructure (roads, utilities) and be served by fire and other emergency responders. Given these conditions and the City’s existing development and housing occupancy patterns, it is not anticipated that future housing development facilitated by the HEU would induce population growth indirectly through the extension of roads or other infrastructure. Therefore, the HEU would not directly or indirectly induce unplanned population growth, and impacts would be less than significant. b. Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The HEU would not propose specific development plans at this time. The HEU would anticipate accommodating the City ’s share of the regional housing need s with development primarily on vacant sites. No displacement of housing is anticipated during the planning period.

No impact would occur.

IS/ND 62 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.15 Public Services

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services:

Fire protection? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Police protection? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Schools? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Parks? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Other public facilities? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
Public services for fire protection, police protection, school, parks, and other facilities, are described below.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Fire protection and emergency medical services for the City are provided by the Victorville Fire Department. Within the City limits, four fire stations are staffed and operated by fire staff at Victorville Fire Department (City of Victorville 2021). A fifth station is at the SCLA. In addition, three San Bernardino County fire stations are within the City’s existing sphere of influence that provide fire protection services to the City and adjacent unincorporated areas. Each station is equipped with at least one fire engine and three firefighters, with 10 staff on call if needed. Paramedics are provided at every fire station.

IS/ND 63 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
HEU would generate planned population growth, which could incrementally increase the demand for fire protection services.

Future housing facilitated by the HEU would be required to comply with the CBC standards, which include site access requirements and fire safety standards. The future residential development would also be subject to Victorville Fire Department review through the Site Plan Review process to ensure that adequate em ergency access and fire safety features are provided as part of the project.

Additionally, future development would be required to comply with Victorville Municipal Code, Title 16, Chapter 5, Article 1, Section 16-5.01.080, Development Impact Fee, which offsets impacts of new development on Victorville Fire Department resources. With incorporation of development fees and adherence to local and state regulations, impacts would be less than significant.

Police protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Police protection for the City is provided by the Victorville Police Department, which is contracted with the San Bernardino County Sheriff. The Victorville Police Department is located at 14200 Amargosa Road. The City also has four satellite police statio ns:
(1) Wimbleton Center at 12370 Hesperia Road , Suite 10; (2) Transportation Center at 16838 D Street; (3) Rodeo Drive at 16464 Lariat Road , No. A; and (4) Victor Valley Mall at 14400 Bear Valley Road.

The HEU would not propose any development. Future hou sing development facilitated by the HEU would be subject to discretionary permits and would occur as market conditions allow and at the discretion of the individual property owners. Future housing development facilitated by the HEU would generate planned population growth, which could incrementally increase the demand for police services. As part of the Victorville General Plan 2030 EIR (2008b), the City would ensure that the Victorville Police Department updates its facility, equipment, and personnel plans to accommodate the growth projected for buildout of the Victorville General Plan 2030. The first update shall occur within 1 year of approval of the Victorville General Plan 2030 and encompass a minimum period of 5 years. The plans shall be incorporated i nto City contracts with the San Bernardino County Sheriff and into the City’s capital improvements program process. In addition, each future development would be subject to CEQA review and evaluation of potential impacts on the Victorville Police Department. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Schools?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City is served by the Victor Elementary School District, Adelanto Elementary School District, Hesperia Unified School District, Snowline Joint Unified School District, and the Victor Valley Union High School District. The HEU would not propose any development. The student population growth from future housing development facilitated by the HEU is anticipated to incrementally increase the demand for school facilities and services. However, future development facilitated by the HEU would be subject to the requirements of AB 2926 and SB

IS/ND 64 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
50, which allow school districts to collect development impact fees to minimize potential impacts to school districts as a result of new development. Thus, upon payment of development fees consistent with existing state requirements, impacts would be less than significant.

Parks?
Less Than Significant Impact. Outdoor recreation resources in the City include public parks, public golf courses, public access lakes, bicycle paths and pedestrian trails, and ground -level linkages between recreation areas and urbanized places. According to the Victorville General Plan 2030, the City currently maintains 198.4 acres of parkland. The City also maintains paseo systems within Specific Plan communities that link neighborhoods to local parks and other neighborhoods.

The HEU does not propose any development. However, the creation of new housing as facilitated by the HEU could increase the volume of residents that may use public parks. Future development would be required to comply with Victorville Municipal Code , Title 16, Chapter 5, Article 1, Section 16-5.01.080, Development Impact Fee, which would offset impacts of new development on the City’s parks and recreation facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.

Other public facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU would not propose any specific development. However, the creation of new housing as facilitated by the HEU could increase the volume of residents that may use other public facilities , including the Civic Center Planning Area and Victorville City Library. As part of the Victorville General Plan 2030 EIR (City of Victorville 2008b), the City would update its planning for libraries and community centers at least once every 5 years, beginning in 2010. The plans shall be based on the most current City population and total dwelling unit projections and consider the spatial need for libraries and community centers throughout the City. The plans would be incorporated into the City ’s capital improvements program process. In addition, each future development would be subjec t to CEQA review and evaluation of potential impacts on public facilities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 65 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.16 Recreation

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
Outdoor recreation resources in the City include public parks, public golf courses, public access lakes, bicycle paths and pedestrian trails, and ground-level linkages between recreation areas and urbanized places. Per the Victorville General Plan 2030, the City currently maintains 198.4 acres of parkland, including two public golf courses.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Less Than Significant Impact. Future residential development anticipated during the HEU relies on existing Victorville General Plan 2030 land use designations, which could result in the increase in demand for parks and recreation facilities. Victorville Municipal Code, Title 16, Chapter 5, Article 1, Section 16-5.01.080, Development Impact Fee , requires that all new residential development pay a fee to ensure that the parkland and recreational facility standards established by the City are met with respect to the additional needs created by such development. Future residential development would be required to pay the fee before the issuance of building permits. Therefore, the project would not result in an increase in the use of exis ting neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. Impacts would be less than significant. b. Does the project include recreational facilities o r require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less Than Significant Impact . As previously identified, an increase in demand for existing recreational resources may be anticipated with any residential development facilitated by the HEU.

The HEU would not specifically include any proposals for future construction or expansion of recreational facilities. A proposed recreational facility would be subject to CEQA review of any adverse physical effects on the environment. Impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 66 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.17 Transportation

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
The City’s circulation system is composed of freeways and their interchanges; arterial, collector, and local streets ; public transportation ; and non -motorized transportation. In addition to these facilities and services, implementation and management of the circulation system include parking policies and goods and freight movement. Four major roadway facilities serve the City: Interstate 15, U.S. Route 395, State Route 18; and Historic U.S. Route 66.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project consists of an updated assessment of housing needs in the City and changes to the policies and procedures the City uses in addressing those needs. Future development facilitated as a result of the HEU consistent with Victorville General Plan 2030 land use designations may result in an increase in vehicle trips that would have the potential to impact the circulation system.

However, the HEU would not propose any programs, policies, or ordinances that are inconsistent with current regulations described in the Victorville General Plan 2030 Circulation Element.

Future development under the HEU would be required to comply with all goals, policies, and objectives addressing the City circulation system. These include maintaining a level of service D or better at intersections, except in certain high -activity areas designated by the Planning Commission where a level of service E is acceptable (Policy 1.1.1) , and requiring new development and redevelopment projects to bear responsibility for the traffic system improvements necessary to mitigate the project ’s significant impacts at affected intersections concurrently with construction of such projects. In addition, the Circulation Element contains goals

IS/ND 67 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
and policies for encouraging complete streets and the expansion of multi modal transportation (Goal 2, Policy 2.2.1). Future development would be required to be consistent with City standards, including Victorville Municipal Code , Title 1 6, Development Code, which adopts the CBC standards and regulations related to access and circulation and would be subject to review by the City during final design to ensure adherence to local requirements for internal site circulation and site access. Due to the conceptual nature of the future residential development, proposals would require individual assessments of potential impacts to City policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. In addition, the HEU would contain several policies that would reduce transportation impacts from future projects , including promoting infill development (HE -C.1), encouraging infill development that includes capital improvements like sidewalk repair and lighting improvements (HE -M.2), and encouraging development that includes active transportation infrastructure like new and wider sidewalks and protected bike lanes. With compliance with the Victorville General Plan 2030 goals and policies and the Victorville Municipal Code, impacts would be less than significant. b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU would not propose any specific development. However, future development facilitated as a result of the HEU consistent with Victorville General Plan 2030 land use designations may result in an increase in vehicle miles that would have the potential to impact the circulation system. The City’s Resolution No. 20-031, which establishes Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Guidelines, was approved and adopted on June 23, 2020 , and became effective on July 1, 2020. According to the City’s adopted VMT Analysis Guidelines, projects that will not require a VMT analysis can be screened using either the daily vehicle trips generated by the project or the project’s land use type. The daily vehicle trip threshold is a net increase of 1,285 or less weekday daily trips. Therefore, future development projects brought forth would be required to adhere to the City’s VMT Guidelines, assess VMT impacts, and require project-specific mitigation measures as applicable. Therefore, impacts related to VMT would be less than significant. c. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU does not propose specific development at this time. Design features of future development would need to be consistent with road design features in the City’s existing circulation system. Through the City’s environmental review process, future development projects would be evaluated for potential safety impacts due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 2.4.9, t he City has prepared its own Emergency Plan in compliance with the State Office of Emergency Services and the Victorville

IS/ND 68 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Municipal Code, and it identifies responses and actions depending on the nature and scope of the disaster. The Victorville General Plan 2030 Safety Element identifies hazards present in the City and briefly focuses on assessing the scope of risk associate d with the hazards and emergency preparedness procedures and fire, police, and medical facilities and/or staffing.

Construction activities associated with future residential development associated with the HEU would have the potential to interfere with eme rgency access and procedures if authorities are not properly notified, or multiple projects are constructed during the same time and multiple roadways used for emergency routes are concurrently blocked. Future housing facilitated under the HEU would be consistent with the current Victorville General Plan 2030 land use designations, and therefore, no changes in the City’s existing circulation network are proposed or required under the HEU. However, future housing projects would be subject to site-specific review and would be subject to City regulations regarding street design, site access, and internal emergency access. Compliance would prevent multiple roadways used for emergency routes from being concurrently blocked. Therefore, impacts associated with inadequate emergency access would be less than significant.

IS/ND 69 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size and
scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object
with cultural value to a California Native American
tribe, and that is:

i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in
its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applyi ng the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Less Than Significant Impact . The project proposes the adoption of the HEU. Tribal outreach pursuant to AB 52 and SB 18 was initiated on July 22, 2021 , with four Tribes (Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, and Twentynine Palms Band of Mission Indians ). The Native American Heritage Commission provided a list of Tribes who should be contacted for information related to Tribal Cultural

IS/ND 70 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Resources. Additional Tribes and individuals (Kern Valley Indian Community, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Quechan Tribe of Fort Yuma, San Fernando Band of Mission Indians, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, and Serrano Nation of Mission Indians) identified by the Native American Heritage Commission were contacted on August 9, 2021.

The Quechan Tribe of Fort Yuma responded to the Tribal outreach and identified that they had no comments on the project and that they deferred to more local Tribes. The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians responded identifying that this effort may impact projects located within Serrano ancestral territory and, therefore, is of interest to the Tribe. They requested additional information concerning the proposed project, which was provided to the Band. No other concerns or responses have been received to date. AB 52 and SB 18 consultation is ongoing and will continue throughout the processing of th e project. In addition, f uture development projects implemented through the HEU would require additional consultation with Native American Tribes in accordance with AB

52. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 71 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.19 Utilities and Service Systems

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas,
or telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e. Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
The source of drinking water supply for the VWD is groundwater. The VWD supplies this water by drilling into the ground and withdrawing it using pumps. The water is pumped into tanks above the ground. The water tanks store the water until there is a demand for it, and then it is gravity fed through using water mains/pipes.

The City, through its Public Works Department, provides sewer service to residents and businesses within the City limits. The City owns, operates, and maintains a sanitary sewer collection system including app roximately 411 miles of sewers. The City operates a 2 .5-million-gallon-per-day wastewater treatment plant. This plant is located at the former George Air Force Base, now known as the SCLA. This plant treats industrial waste from a Dr. Pepper/Snapple bottling plant along with domestic waste from the SCLA and the northwestern area of the City. High-quality recycled water is produced from the plant that is used for irrigation at the SCLA and cooling water for a power generation plant. The remainder of wastewater from the City flows through the Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority wastewater treatment plant.

IS/ND 72 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
City-owned storm drainage systems include drain pipes, catch basins, and drainage channels. Curb and gutter, drainage channels, dirt roads, and dirt shoulders lead to a catch basin with drain pipes crossing roads that flow toward the Mojave River.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU would not propose any development. Future housing facilitated by the HEU would be expected to connect to the existing domestic water supply system, wastewater in frastructure, and existing storm water infrastructure. Overall , future housing development construction and operation would result in increased water, wastewater treatment, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications demands and wastewater and solid waste generation, which would require the expansion or construction of utility infrastructure. Specific projects are unknown at this time and would require CEQA review of any adverse effects on the environment. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less Than Significant Impact. The V WD would provide water service to future residential development anticipated by the HEU. Future residential development anticipated during the HEU would rely on existing Victorville General Plan 2030 land use designations. According to the Victorville 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, the City is projected to have an adequate supply of water to meet the increase in demand. In addition, the City is projected to have enough water to meet demand during single-dry year and multiple-dry year scenarios (City of Victorville 2015).

No specific development would be proposed as part of the HEU. New residential development would be required to undergo separate environmental review, including analysis of water supply impacts. All new residential development is required to comply with app licable state and local laws and regulations governing conservation of water supply resources. Sufficient water supplies are available to supply the net increase in water demand anticipated as a result of implementation of the HEU. Impacts would be less than significant.
c. Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project ’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City operates a 2.5-million-gallon-per-day wastewater treatment plant. The remainder of wastewater from the City flows through the Victor Valley Wastewater

IS/ND 73 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Reclamation Authority wastewater treatment plant. Based on the Victorville 2016 Sewer Master Plan, t he City ’s wastewater treatment facility has adequate capacity to serve additional units facilitated by the HEU as part of the City ’s anticipated Victorville General Plan 2030 buildout population. Development facilitated by the HEU would be consistent with the adopted Victorville General Plan 2030 and land use designations. Impacts would be less than significant. d. Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the Victorville General Plan 2030, non-hazardous solid and liquid waste generated in the City is currently deposited in the Victorville Landfill, which is northeast of the City at 17080 Stoddard Wells Road. Based on information provided by the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery ( CalRecycle), Victorville Landfill has a maximum daily throughput of 3,000 tons per day and a remaining capacity of 79,400,000 cubic yards (CalRecycle 2021). It is anticipated that this landfill will have sufficient permitted capacity to service solid waste generated by future residential development facilitated by the HEU.

Impacts would be less than significant.
e. Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU does not propose any specific development. However, construction activities for future development would be subject to conformance with relevant federal, state, and local requirements related to solid waste disposal. Specifically, future projects would be required to demonstrate compliance with the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), which requires all California cities to “reduce, recycle, and reuse solid waste generated in the state to the maximum extent feasible. ” AB 939 requires that at least 50 percent of waste produced is recycled, reduced, or composted. Local jurisdictions, including the City, are monitored by the state (CalRecycle) to verify if waste disposal rates set by CalRe cycle are being met that comply with the intent of AB 939. Future projects would also be required to demonstrate compliance with CALGreen, which includes design and construction measures that act to reduce construction -related waste though material conserv ation measures and other construction-related efficiency measures. Compliance would be verified by the City through review of project plans and specifications. Lastly, the future projects would be subject to compliance with all applicable solid waste handl ing, processing, and disposal requirements stipulated in Title 6, Chapter 6.36, Solid Waste Services, of the Victorville Municipal Code.

Therefore, future projects would be required to comply with the City’s efforts in reducing solid waste and with solid waste regulations at the state level. As such, impacts would be less than significant.

IS/ND 74 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.20 Wildfire

If located in or near state responsibility areas or
lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose
project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from
a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or
other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d. Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Environmental Setting
According to CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps, the City is within a Local Responsibility Area and is not within an area classified as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 2.4.9, the City has prepared its own Emergency Plan in compliance with the State Office of Emergency Services and the Victorville Municipal Code, and it identifies responses and actions depending on the nature and scope of the disaster. In addition, the Victorville General Plan 2030 Safety Element includes emergency preparedness.

Construction activities associated with future residential development associated with the HEU would have the potential to interfere with emergency plans and procedures if authorities are not properly notified or multiple projects are constructed during the same time and multiple roadways used for emergency routes are concurrently blocked. Future housing development facilitated by the HEU would increase the number of housing units in the City, which could result in development in areas of the City adjacent to or in fire hazard areas. In the case of a wildfire evacuation, an increase in housing development would incrementally increase vehicular traffic on evacuation routes. Future housing facilitated under the HEU would be consistent with the current Victorville General Plan 2030 land use designations, and therefore, no changes in the City’s existing circulation network are

IS/ND 75 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
proposed or required under the HEU. However, future housing projects would be subject to site- specific review and would be subject to City regulations regarding street design, site access, and internal emergency access. Compliance would prevent multiple roadways used for emergency routes from being concurrently blocked. Therefore, impacts associated with the physical interference of an Emergency Evacuation Plan would be less than significant. b. Would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU would not propose any specific development. However, development of future residential units on candidate sites in Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone areas are subject to higher wildfire hazards due to slope and prevailing winds based on the location, which would consequently result in higher fire-related risks to people and structures. To minimize risk from wildfire, future development on the candidate housing sites would be required to comply with the 2019 California Fire Code and the CBC to ensure safety and to not create risk toward humans or structures. Impacts would be less than significant. c. Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? Less Than Significant Impact. No specific development is currently proposed. H owever, future housing consistent with the HEU may require the installation of new water, emergency water, wastewater, stormwater, and natural gas infrastructure and connections to City infrastructure. Any new infrastructure components would be required to comply with applicable CBC and California Fire Code regulations. Therefore, implementation of the HEU would not exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. Impacts would be less than significant. d. Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps, the City is not within or near a State Responsibility Area or within an area classified as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.

Any future housing development that is fostered by the HEU would be required to adhere to the CBC a nd other standards and regulations for building designs , which would minimize any potential risks associated with landslides. In addition, future housing would be subject to City and state drainage and stormwater quality requirements that are designed to reduce stormwater runoff from projects sites by promoting infiltrating, minimizing impervious surfaces, and requiring a no- net increase in flow. Therefore, the future development would not expose people or structures to significant risk associated with post-fire landslides, mudflows, and flooding.

IS/ND 76 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

2.4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance

Does the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Have the potential to substantially degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of
a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c. Have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 65088.4, Gov. Code; Sections 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21083, 21083.05, 21083.3, 21093, 21094, 21095, and 21151, Public Resources Code; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino,(1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296; Leonoff v. Monterey Board of Supervisors, (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337; Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th at 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656.

Impact Analysis
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild life species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self -sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU would not propose any specific development. Instead, the HEU would identify action programs that could be implemented to provide additional capacity for future development of dwelling units consistent with state housing law. Implementation of the HEU would not directly remove sensitive vegetation communities or species or eliminate cultural resources because the HEU would not propose specific development projects. Development anticipated by the HEU would be subject to compliance with the regulations and guidelines set forth in the Victorville General Plan 2030 , the update to the General Plan (once approved), Victorville Municipal Code, and development review process. Due to the conceptual nature of the future residential development, proposals would require individual assessments of potential

IS/ND 77 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
impacts to biological and cultural resources. If necessary, additional mitigation would be required to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.

Adoption of the proposed HEU would not significantly degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal , or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore, the proposed HEU’s contribution to adverse impacts on wildlife resources, individually or cumulatively, would be less than significant.
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively con siderable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project involves the implementation of the HEU for the City. The HEU would be a policy document designed to assist the City in future planning.

Cumulative impacts associated with residential development consistent with Victorville General Plan 2030 land use designations have been evaluated at a program or policy level. In addition, future development facilitated by the HEU would be required to be consistent with many Victorville General Plan 2030 policies aimed at reducing cumulative impacts. Furthermore, through the City’s environmental review process, future development projects would be evaluated for potential cumulative impacts. Where needed, appropriate mitigation measures would be required to reduce potential impacts. T herefore, the HEU’s contribution to cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant Impact. The HEU would consist of an updated determination of housing needs in the City and revisions to policies and procedures the City uses in addressing those needs.

The HEU would be a policy document designed to assist the City in future planning. The HEU would not propose any specific development. Environmental impacts with the potential to adversely affect people that may result from development have been evaluated at a program or policy level. Due to the conceptual nature of the future residential development, proposals would require individual assessments of potential impacts to hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and other environmental topics that would directly or indirectly affect people . Where needed, appropriate mitigation measures would be required to reduce potential impacts. Therefore, impacts associated with adoption of the HEU would be less than significant.

IS/ND 78 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

This page intentionally left blank.

IS/ND 79 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Section 3 List of Preparers

3.1 Lead Agency
City of Victorville
14343 Civic Drive, PO Box 5001
Victorville, California, California 92392
Michael Szarzynski, Senior Planner
Scott Webb, City Planner

3.2 Consultants
Harris & Associates
600 B Street, Suite 2000
San Diego, California 92101

Diane Sandman, AICP, Project Director
Ryan Binns, PMP, ENV SP, QA/QC
Kristin Blackson, PMP, Project Manager
Esther Daigneault, Senior Environmental Analyst
Kelsey Hawkins, Environmental Analyst
Lindsey Messner, Technical Editor
Randy Deodat, GIS Analyst

IS/ND 80 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

This page intentionally left blank.

IS/ND 81 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
Section 4 References
CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2021. Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map Viewer.

CalRecycle (California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery). 2021. Victorville Sanitary Landfill. Accessed September 2021. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste /SiteActivity/Details/1870?siteID=2652.

City of Victorville. 2008a. General Plan 2030. Accessed September 2021. https://www. victorvilleca.gov/government/city-departments/development/planning/general-plan.

City of Victorville. 2008b. General Plan 2030 Environmental Impact Report.

City of Victorville. 2015. Climate Action Plan. Accessed September 2021. https://www. victorvilleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/309/636657741247000000.

City of Victorville. 2021. Municipal Code. Ac cessed September 2021. https://library.municode .com/ca/victorville/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT16DECO.

City of Victorville. 2021. Southern California Logistics Airport Specific Plan. Final. July 1.

DOC (California Department of Conservation). 2021. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program.

SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments) and Connect SoCal. 2021. Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report. September 3. Accessed September 2021. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics -and-growth-forecast.pdf?1606001579.

IS/ND 82 November 2021
City of Victorville 6th Cycle Housing Element Update

This page intentionally left blank.

CITY COUNCIL

ATTACHMENT G

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

FROM THE PLANNING
COMMISSION’S NOVEMBER 10,
2021 MEETING
226
Excerpt from the November 10, 2021 Regular Planning Commission Meeting

2. An Amendment to the General Plan to adopt an Updated Housing Element for the 6th cycle Planning Period from 2021 to 2029.

The Planning Commission will consider a resolution of the Planning Commission recommending adoption of the 2021- 2029 Housing Element to the City Council. Pursuant to the provisions set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Planning Commission will also consider recommend ing a draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration for adoption by the City Council.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and adopt Resolution No. P-21-045, recommending City Council adoption of the 2021- 2029 Housing Element Update and the associated Negative Declaration.

Hitta Mosesman of Harris & Associates gave a PowerPoint presentation on the Housing Element Update.

Questions and comments ensued.

Chairman Kurth opened the public hearing.

The following people spoke:

Angel Esparza

Mary Anne State

Chairman Kurth closed the public hearing.

Motion was made to approve staff recommendation.

Moved: Vice Chair Harriman
Seconded: Commissioner Thomas

Motion passed 4-0

Ayes: Commissioner Cook -Askins, Jr., Commissioner Thomas, Vice Chair Harriman, Chairman Kurth

227

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN TO ADOPT AN UPDATED HOUSING ELEMENT FOR THE 6 TH CYCLE PLANNING PERIOD 2021 TO 2029.

APPLICANT: The City of Victorville
PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING DATES: November 10, 2021

SUMMARY FOR NOVEMBER 10, 2021 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING

NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO COMMENTED: 2

NUMBER OF PEOPLE SPEAKING IN FAVOR: 0

NUMBER OF PEOPLE SPEAKING OPPOSED: 0

NUMBER OF WRITTEN COMMENTS IN FAVOR: 0

NUMBER OF WRITTEN COMMENTS OPPOSED: 0

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval

PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Recommended Approval

PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE: Cook-Askins Jr. Aye
Thomas Aye
Kurth Aye
Harriman Aye

sms
228
Item Number: 2
Planning Commission

PUBLIC HEARINGS
Meeting of: November 10, 2021
Submitted By:

Scott Webb, City Planner
Case:

PLAN21-00030
Subject:

An Amendment to the General Plan to adopt an Updated Housing Element for the 6th cycle Planning Period from 2021 to 2029.

The Planning Commission will consider a resolution of the Planning Commission recommending adoption of the 2021-2029 Housing Element to the City Council. Pursuant to the provisions set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Planning Commission will also consider recommending a draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration for adoption by the City Council.

Applicant:

City of Victorville
Location:

Citywide
Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the Pla nning Commission conduct a public hearing and adopt Resolution No. P-21-045, recommending City Council adoption of the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and the associated Negative Declaration.

Summary:

The Housing
Element is part of the C ity’s General Plan and sets forth the polici es and programs to address the housing needs of all households in Victorville. It serves as the City’s eight-year hou sing strateg y and pla ns for the h ousing needs of a ll economic segments of the community through a comprehensive analysis of need, constraints and resources as well as policie s and programs to address those nee ds. City staff and the 13 229
2 2
4 8
City’s General Plan Consultant Harris & Associates kicked off the process of updating the Housing Element in February 2021. A total of three Housing Element public workshops were conducted with the Planning Commission. On February 1, 2021, staff presented an overview of the Housing Element requirements, the City’s assigned Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), and a draft framework of key issues to inform the development of draft goals, policies, and programs. On March 15, 2021, staff presented potential opportunity areas for the housing sites inventory and the preliminary draft goals, policies, and programs. On May 26, 2021, staff presented a preliminary draft sites inventory. In addition to this public workshop outreach, a housing survey was conducted, and stakeholder meetings occurred from February to March 2021.

On July 1, 2021, the Draft Housing Element became available for public review. On July 13, 2021, the Planning Commission and City Council jointly reviewed the draft of the Housing Element at a duly noted public meeting. Thereafter, on July 20, 2021 the Draft Housing Element was submitted to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review and comment. On September 17, 2021, HCD provided written comments on the Draft Housing Element for the City’s consideration (Attachment D). Since that time, staff and the General Plan Consultant have been working to address the comments from HCD and are now presenting the final Housing Element (Attachments B and C) for Planning Commission consideration along with a proposed environmental Negative Declaration for the project.

Discussion/Analysis:

Required Content
Per State law, a Housing Element must include information that addresses the following broad topics:
 Analysis of the City's demographic characteristics and housing needs;  Evaluation of resources and opportunities available to address housing needs;  Analysis of potential constraints to meeting the City's housing needs; and  A review of the City’s accomplishments during the previous planning period and the effectiveness of current policies and programs in meeting housing needs.

In addition, a main component of the Housing Element is the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). In short, RHNA is the process by which each city is assigned a share of the region’s need for additional housing units during the next Housing Element planning period (2021-2029). RHNA allocations are determined for the City by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) based on criteria established in State law. As discussed at previous Housing Element meetings, the City’s final RHNA allocation by household income category for 2021-2029 is as follows:

Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate Total
1,735 1,136 1,504 3,790 8,165
Source: SCAG, March 4, 2021
14 230
2 2
4 8
Structure of 2021-2029 Housing Element
The 2021-2029 Housing Element document are divided into chapters, which includes the policies and programs that ensure there is an adequate supply of safe, affordable housing for all community members, as well as the following four appendices:
 Appendix A – Public Engagement
 Appendix B – Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
 Appendix C – Victorville Site Inventory
 Appendix D – HCD Review Letter (also included as Attachment D to this Staff Report)
The Housing Element is organized into eight primary chapters:
 Chapter 1, Introduction: Provides an overview of the purpose, scope, and organization of the Housing Element.
 Chapter 2, Community Profile: Provides a summary of the City’s demographic and housing characteristics, special needs groups, and housing needs, as well as an overview of the required Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing analysis, detailed further in Appendix B.
 Chapter 3, Housing Constraints: Provides an assessment of the various constraints to housing development and preservation.
 Chapter 4, Housing Resources and Opportunities: Provides an inventory of resources available to meet the City’s existing and projected housing needs.  Chapter 5, Review of Previous Housing Element (2013–2021): Analyzes the progress and effectiveness of programs from the City’s prior Housing Element and reviews the appropriateness of the program for the current Housing Element.  Chapter 6, At-Risk Affordable Housing: Identifies units in the City currently restricted with affordability covenants, focusing on covenants that expire in the next 10 years. As noted in the Chapter, none of the affordable housing developments with affordability covenants in the City will expire in the next 10 years.  Chapter 7, Housing Plan: Specifies the City’s commitments to providing and preserving housing opportunities in the community through goals, policies and programs. The Housing Plan’s eight goals and associated objectives are featured in the Staff Report below. Each goal has policies and programs outlined in the Chapter to facilitate achievement of the goal.
 Chapter 8, Adequate Sites Inventory Analysis and Methodology: Assesses the City’s capacity for new housing development and demonstrates that the City can accommodate its Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation of 8,165 housing units, including 2,871 lower-income affordable units. The prepared Sites Inventory for the 2021-2029 planning period has identified 158 sites that are adequate for development, demonstrating a capacity for at least 15,315 housing units, including 4,788 housing units on sites adequate for lower-income housing. 15 231
2 2
4 8
Housing Plan Goals (Chapter 7)
The goals of this Housing Element are formulated based on information provided in Chapters 2, Community Profile, and 3, Housing Constraints, and input from the City Council, Planning Commission, City staff, and members of the public.  Goal 1: Encourage different housing types to meet needs Objective A: Update the Land Use Element and Zoning Code to achieve compliance with current State laws and review and update the zoning code to facilitate the development of diverse housing options.

Objective B: Streamline the housing development process.  Goal 2: Maximize land utilization for residential development Objective C: Encourage the proper utilization of undeveloped/ underdeveloped residential areas of the City.
 Goal 3: Preserve existing housing stock
Objective D: Maintain and improve the physical condition of existing housing at all affordability levels.

Objective E: Preserve existing affordable housing.
 Goal 4: Encourage more affordable housing units
Objective F: Secure State and federal affordable housing funds and assist developers to identify sources for affordable projects.

Objective G: Leverage existing, and seek new, City resources, such as vacant land and underutilized properties.

Objective H: Promote various types of affordable housing  Goal 5: Maximize solutions for those experiencing or at risk of homelessness Objective I: Increase access to support services and transitional housing opportunities for people experiencing homelessness.

Objective J: Increase tenant protections.
 Goal 6. Encourage homeownership
Objective K: Increase the share of City residents who own the home where they live.

Objective L: Provide programs to increase affordable homeownership opportunities.
 Goal 7: Improve quality of life and promote placemaking Objective M: Encourage developments that will provide community benefits.

Objective N: Increase community participation in the planning process.

Objective O: Address unhealthy housing conditions (e.g., lead, asbestos, overcrowding, mold, pest).

Objective P: Rezone to improve the quality of life by allowing residential development within certain commercial areas.
16 232
2 2
4 8
 Goal 8: Affirmatively further fair housing
Objective Q: Ensure equal housing opportunities for all residents, regardless of their special characteristics as protected under State and federal fair housing laws.

Comments from HCD on Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element
The HCD Review Letter (Attachment D) that the City received from HCD in response to the Draft Housing Element submittal outlines the changes and/or additions that HCD would like to see in order to achieve a state certified housing element. These revisions requested by HCD are minor in nature and have been incorporated into a clean Housing Element version (Attachment B) as well as a track changes version of the Housing Element (Attachment C), which notes the revisions in redlines. The attached HCD Review Letter is annotated with numbers that correspond to a summary matrix of the edits made to the Housing Element provided after the letter. This matrix outlines the changes that were made to the Draft Housing Element directly in response to the comments received from HCD.

Environmental Assessment
The proposed project has been assessed in accordance with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and State CEQA Guidelines. An Initial Study/ Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project by the City of Victorville, the lead agency for this project. The Initial Study/Negative Declaration was made available for public review beginning on September 17, 2021, and the public comment period was open from September 17, 2021 to October 18, 2021. The Initial Study/ Negative Declaration (Attachment E) analyzes the proposed project’s effects on environmental factors and concludes that there will be no adverse environmental impacts to either the human-made or physical environmental setting, and no mitigation measures are required. The Initial Study/ Negative Declaration identifies that there is no substantial evidence that the proposed project would result in significant impacts to any environmental factors, and the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts for the Mandatory Findings of Significance, as the proposed project is the update of the Housing Element, which is a policy document, and does not include any physical changes or development in the City at this time. In accordance with the regulations outlined in CEQA, the Notice of Intent to Adopt an Initial Study/ Negative Declaration, in combination with the Notice of Public Hearing, was provided to the public at least 30 days in advance of this hearing date.

One public comment letter was received on September 29, 2021 from Mitchell M. Tsai, Attorney for the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters. The letter requests to be provided notice for all notices related to the project and states that the City should consider utilizing local, skilled, and trained workforce policies and requirements to benefit the local area economically and mitigate greenhouse gas, air quality and transportation impacts. These comments do not raise an issue with the adequacy or accuracy of the Initial Study/Negative Declaration. As stated in the Project Description of the Initial Study/Negative Declaration, the Housing Element Update does not propose the 17 233
2 2
4 8
development of housing or associated infrastructure. It simply identifies housing areas to meet the assigned Regional Housing Needs Allocation. The adoption of a citywide policy requiring local skilled labor on all constriction projects is not typically associated to the scope of the Housing Element Update or the Initial Study/Negative Declaration and are therefore not required to be included. The Mitchel M. Tsai letter and response from the City’s environmental consultant are included in this report within Attachment F.

Conclusion
Based on the above-mentioned information, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the attached Initial Study/Negative Declaration and adopt Resolution No. 21-045, recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment PLAN21-00030 updating the Housing Element. City staff will then transmit the adopted Housing Element Update for review and final certification by HCD.

Attachments:

Attachment A - Resolution No. P-21-045
Attachment B - 2021-2029 Housing Element
Attachment C - Track Changes Version of Housing Element Attachment D - Annotated HCD Review Letter with Response Matrix Attachment E - Initial Study/Negative Declaration
Attachment F - Response to Initial Study/Negative Declaration Public Comment 18 234

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
A

TTACHMENT A
19 235
1 RESOLUTION NO. P-21-045
A

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF VICTORVILLE

RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PLAN21-00030, THE 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE AND

ASSOCIATED ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION WHEREAS, the State of California requires every municipality to periodically update the Housing Element of its General Plan to review the housing needs of the community and revise its policies, programs and objectives to address those needs.

Jurisdictions such as the City of Victorville that are within the Southern California Association of Governments region are required to update their Housing Elements for the 6th planning cycle, which covers the 2021- 2029 planning period; and WHEREAS, on July 13, 2021, the Planning Commission and City Council jointly reviewed a draft of the 2021- 2029 Housing Element Update. Thereafter, on July 20, 2021 the draft element was submitted to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review and comment pursuant to Section 65585 (b) of the Government Code; and
WHEREAS, on September 17, 2021, HCD provided written comments on the draft 2021-2029 Housing Element for the City’s consideration. The City revised the 2021-2029 Housing Element in response to the findings of HCD, and the revised Housing Element is attached as Exhibit 1 to this Resolution; and WHEREAS, on November 10, 2021 the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update; and WHEREAS, consistent with Section 65585 of the Government Code, the Planning Commission has reviewed the written comments of HCD and finds that the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update as revised fully addresses each of the findings made by HCD; and
20 236
2 WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the Plann
ing Commission considered a Negative Declaration for the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update project, and finds that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment, and hereby recommends that the City Council consider any comments on the Negative Declaration, and adopt the Negative Declaration for the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update project; and
WHEREAS, based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, attached hereto as Exhibit 1, and further recommends that the City Manager, or his/her designee, be authorized and directed to make any technical or clerical revisions of clarifications to the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update as may be required by HCD in order to obtain a finding of substantial compliance with State law; Now, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment PLAN21-00030, replacing the existing General Plan Housing Element in its entirety, as shown in Exhibit 1 attached hereto.
(Insert 2021-2029 Housing Element as Exhibit 1)
21 237

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
A

TTACHMENT B
22 238

REVISED DRAFT
2021–2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2021

23 239

This page intentionally left blank.

24 240

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

CITY COUNCIL
Debra Jones, Mayor
Leslie Irving, Mayor Pro Tem
Elizabeth Becerra, Council Member
Blanca Gomez, Council Member

PLANNING COMMISSION
Rob Kurth, Chair
Rob Harriman, Vice-Chair
Kenneth Cook-Askins, Jr., Commissioner
Bill Thomas, Commissioner

EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT
Keith Metzler, City Manager
Sophie Smith, Deputy City Manager
Jenele Davidson, Deputy City Manager

CITY STAFF
Scott Webb, City Planner
Michael Szarzynski, Senior Planner
Sue Jones, Public Information Officer
Charlene A. Johnson, Secretary
Melissa Nelson, Management Technician

CONSULTANT TEAM
Harris & Associates
25 241

This page intentionally left blank.
26 242

2021–2029 Housing Element
Table of Contents
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acronyms and Abbreviations ..................................................................................................... ix 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Background ............................................................................................................ 1-1

1.2 Community Overview ............................................................................................. 1-2

1.3 Role of the Housing Element .................................................................................. 1-3

1.4 Relationship to Other Elements .............................................................................. 1-4

1.4.1 Public Outreach and Participation ..................................................................... 1-5

1.4.2 Organization ...................................................................................................... 1-5 2 Community Profile ............................................................................................................. 2-1

2.1 Population, Demographic, and Employment Trends .............................................. 2-1

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

2.1.2 Population Trends ............................................................................................. 2-2

2.1.3 Population Demographics: Race, Ethnicity, and Diversity ................................. 2-3

2.1.4 Population by Age and Sex ............................................................................... 2-4

2.1.5 Employment Trends .......................................................................................... 2-6

2.2 Household/Housing Characteristics ...................................................................... 2-11

2.2.1 Housing Types ................................................................................................ 2-11

2.2.2 Housing Type Trend ........................................................................................ 2-12

2.2.3 Vacant Units by Type ...................................................................................... 2-13

2.2.4 Housing Units by Year Built............................................................................. 2-13

2.2.5 Ownership/Rental Statistics ............................................................................ 2-14

2.2.6 Substandard Housing ...................................................................................... 2-16

2.2.7 Housing Conditions ......................................................................................... 2-17

2.2.8 Median Home Sales Price for Existing Homes ................................................ 2-20

2.2.9 Housing Units Permitted ................................................................................. 2-20 27 243

2021–2029 Housing Element
Table of Contents
ii

2.2.10 Overpayment and Overcrowding ..................................................................... 2-21

2.2.11 Household Income .......................................................................................... 2-21

2.3 Extremely Low Income Housing Needs ................................................................ 2-28

2.3.1 Existing Needs ................................................................................................. 2-28

2.3.2 Projected Needs .............................................................................................. 2-28

2.4 Special Housing Needs ........................................................................................ 2-30

2.4.1 Town of Apple Valley and City of Victorville Consolidated Action Plan ............... 2-30

2.4.2 Seniors ............................................................................................................ 2-31

2.4.3 Large Families ................................................................................................. 2-34

2.4.4 People with Disabilities ................................................................................... 2-38

2.5 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing ................................................................... 2-53 3 Housing Constraints .......................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Nongovernmental Constraints ................................................................................ 3-1

3.1.1 Land Costs ........................................................................................................ 3-1

3.1.2 Construction Costs ............................................................................................ 3-1

3.1.3 California Government Code, Section 65583(a)(6), Development Analysis ..... 3-2

3.1.4 Availability of Financing ..................................................................................... 3-3

3.1.5 Availability of Mortgage Financing ..................................................................... 3-4

3.2 Environmental Constraints ..................................................................................... 3-5

3.2.1 Flooding Hazards .............................................................................................. 3-5

3.2.2 Biological Resources ......................................................................................... 3-5

3.2.3 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................ 3-6

3.2.4 Seismic Hazards ............................................................................................... 3-6

3.2.5 Hillsides/Slopes ................................................................................................. 3-6

3.3 Governmental Constraints ...................................................................................... 3-7

3.3.1 Federal and State Constraints ........................................................................... 3-7

3.3.2 Local Constraints ............................................................................................ 3-10 28 244

2021–2029 Housing Element
Table of Contents
iii

3.4 Variety of Housing Types ..................................................................................... 3-16

3.4.1 Single-Family Housing .................................................................................... 3-16

3.4.2 Multi-Family Housing ....................................................................................... 3-16

3.4.3 Manufactured Housing and Mobile Home Parks ............................................. 3-16

3.4.4 Farmworker and Employee Housing ............................................................... 3-17

3.4.5 Single-Room Occupancy................................................................................. 3-17

3.4.6 Emergency Shelters ........................................................................................ 3-18

3.4.7 Low-Barrier Navigation Centers ...................................................................... 3-19

3.4.8 Transitional and Supportive Housing .............................................................. 3-20

3.4.9 Residential, Group, and Community Care Facilities ........................................ 3-21

3.4.10 Accessory Dwelling Units ................................................................................ 3-22

3.4.11 Development Standards .................................................................................. 3-23

3.4.12 Fees ................................................................................................................ 3-28

3.4.13 Other Local Programs ..................................................................................... 3-31

3.5 Reductions to Constraints .................................................................................... 3-31 4 Housing Resources and Opportunities .............................................................................. 4-1

4.1 Identification of Adequate Sites for Future Housing Needs .................................... 4-1

4.1.1 Regional Housing Targets ................................................................................. 4-1

4.2 Financial Resources ............................................................................................... 4-2

4.2.1 Federal Funding Sources .................................................................................. 4-2

4.2.2 State Funding Sources ...................................................................................... 4-5

4.2.3 Quasi-Government Agencies .......................................................................... 4-10

4.2.4 Local Funding Sources ................................................................................... 4-11 5 Review of Previous Housing Element (2013–2021) .......................................................... 5-1 6 At-Risk Affordable Housing ............................................................................................... 6-1

7. Housing Plan ..................................................................................................................... 7-1 Goal 1: Encourage development of different housing types to meet the City’s different needs ................................................................................................................ 7-2 Goal 2: Maximize land utilization for residential development ......................................... 7-8 29 245

2021–2029 Housing Element
Table of Contents
iv
Goal 3: Preserve existing housing stock ........................................................................ 7-10 Goal 4: Encourage more affordable housing units ........................................................ 7-14 Goal 5: Maximize solutions for those experiencing or at risk of homelessness ............. 7-20 Goal 6. Encourage homeownership .............................................................................. 7-25 Goal 7: Improve quality of life and promote placemaking .............................................. 7-27 Goal 8: Affirmatively further fair housing ........................................................................ 7-32 Quantified Objectives .................................................................................................... 7-35 8 Adequate Sites Inventory Analysis and Methodology ....................................................... 8-1

8.1 Summary of Sites Capacity .................................................................................... 8-2

8.2 Capacity Determination .......................................................................................... 8-4

8.3 Identification of Developable Sites and Potential Capacity Methodologies ............. 8-5

8.4 Housing Capacity and Past Housing Production by Community ........................... 8-9

8.4.1 Recent Past Housing Production by Community ............................................... 8-9

8.5 Housing Potential Assumptions – General ........................................................... 8-10

8.6 Housing Potential Methodology – Sites with Commercial Zoning ......................... 8-11

8.6.1 Likelihood of Development of Sites with Commercial Zoning with Residential Uses ................................................................................................ 12

8.7 Consistency with Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing ....................................... 8-12

8.8 Vacant Sites ......................................................................................................... 8-13

8.9 Non-Vacant Sites .................................................................................................. 8-13

8.9.1 Replacement Housing Requirements .............................................................. 8-13

8.10 Accessory Dwelling Units ..................................................................................... 8-14

8.11 Assembly Bill 1486 City-Owned Land ................................................................... 8-15

8.12 Suitability of Sites for Moderate-Income Housing ................................................. 8-15

8.13 Suitability of Sites for Lower-Income Housing ...................................................... 8-16

8.13.1 Sites Used in Previous Planning Periods’ Housing Elements ......................... 8-17

8.13.2 Sites Zoned/Designated for Adequate Density ................................................ 8-17

8.14 Assembly Bill 1397 Requirements ........................................................................ 8-18

8.15 Specific Plans ....................................................................................................... 8-22 30 246

2021–2029 Housing Element
Table of Contents
v

8.16 Senate Bill 330 Requirements .............................................................................. 8-23

8.17 Senate Bill 1333 Requirements – “No Net Loss” .................................................. 8-23

8.18 Development Site Access to Water, Sewer, and Dry Utilities .............................. 8-24

8.18.1 Water and Sewer ............................................................................................ 8-24

8.18.2 Dry Utilities ...................................................................................................... 8-25 List of Tables
Table 2-1. Growth Forecast for 2045 ...................................................................................... 2-1 Table 2-2. Racial and Ethnic Composition .............................................................................. 2-4 Table 2-3. Population by Age (City of Victorville) .................................................................... 2-5 Table 2-4. Residential Code Enforcement Cases, July 1, 2019 – December 31, 2020 ........ 2-16 Table 2-5. Deteriorated Structure Field Survey Results, Old Town Victorville Area ............. 2-17 Table 2-6. Housing Units by Year Built ................................................................................. 2-18 Table 2-7. Households by Income Category ......................................................................... 2-22 Table 2-8. Cost Burden by Income ....................................................................................... 2-22 Table 2-9. Existing Needs for Extremely Low-Income Households ...................................... 2-28 Table 2-10. Resources for Seniors ....................................................................................... 2-33 Table 2-11. Resources for Large Families ............................................................................ 2-36 Table 2-12. Resources for Individuals with a Disability ......................................................... 2-42 Table 2-13. Resources for Female-Headed Households ...................................................... 2-45 Table 2-14. Resources for Farmworkers .............................................................................. 2-48 Table 2-15. Homelessness Resources ................................................................................. 2-52 Table 3-1. Disposition of Home Purchase and Improvement Loan Applications (2020) ......... 3-5 Table 3-2. Disposition of Home Purchase and Improvement Loan Applications (2010) ......... 3-5 Table 3-3. City-Wide Land Use and Zoning .......................................................................... 3-12 Table 3-4. Specific Plan Land Use and Zoning ..................................................................... 3-13 Table 3-5. Permitted Residential Uses by Zone ................................................................... 3-15 Table 3-6. Development Standards ...................................................................................... 3-24 Table 3-7. Parking Requirements for Residential Uses ........................................................ 3-25 31 247

2021–2029 Housing Element
Table of Contents
vi
Table 3-8. Permit Processing Fees ...................................................................................... 3-29 Table 3-9. Building Permit Fees Schedule ............................................................................ 3-30 Table 4-1. 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation (2021–2029) ................................. 4-1 Table 5-1. Program Evaluation .............................................................................................. 5-2 Table 6-1. Affordable Housing Inventory ................................................................................ 6-1 Table 7-1. Quantified Objectives Summary .......................................................................... 7-36 Table 7-2. Quantified Objectives Details............................................................................... 7-36 Table 8-1. Summary of Sites Capacity ................................................................................... 8-3 Table 8-2. Capacity Determination ......................................................................................... 8-4 Table 8-3. Proposed Developments, City of Victorville ........................................................... 8-8 Table 8-4. 2013-2021 Housing Units with Issued Permits by Planning Area ........................ 8-10 Table 8-5. 2021–2029 Site Inventory by Planning Area ....................................................... 8-10 Table 8-6. Commercial Sites and Net Potential Units ........................................................... 8-11 Table 8-7. Identified Sites Suitable for Lower-Income Housing ............................................ 8-17 Table 8-8. Zone/Designation Housing Densities and Associated Density Ranges ............... 8-18 Table 8-9. Victorville Adequate Sites Program Summary ..................................................... 8-20 Table 8-10. Specific Plan Areas with Sites ........................................................................... 8-23 List of Figures
Figure 1-1. Victorville Vicinity Map .......................................................................................... 1-7 Figure 2-1. Population Trend, 2000–2020 .............................................................................. 2-2 Figure 2-2. Population Growth, the City of Victorville and Neighboring Cities ........................ 2-3 Figure 2-3. Current Population by Age and Sex ..................................................................... 2-5 Figure 2-4. Employment (Riverside–San Bernardino–Ontario Statistical Area [2013–2020]) . 2-6 Figure 2-5. Unemployment Rate (Riverside–San Bernardino–Ontario Statistical Area [2013–2020]) ................................................................................................................ 2-7 Figure 2-6. Employment Projections (2016–2026) ................................................................. 2-8 Figure 2-7. Employment by Industry ..................................................................................... 2-10 Figure 2-8. Employment by Occupation................................................................................ 2-11 Figure 2-9. Housing Type ..................................................................................................... 2-12 32 248

2021–2029 Housing Element
Table of Contents
vii
Figure 2-10. Housing Type Trend ......................................................................................... 2-12 Figure 2-11. Vacant Units by Type ....................................................................................... 2-13 Figure 2-12. Housing Units by Year Structure Built .............................................................. 2-14 Figure 2-13. Housing Tenure ................................................................................................ 2-15 Figure 2-14. Housing Tenure by Age .................................................................................... 2-15 Figure 2-15. Housing Tenure by Year Moved to Current Residence .................................... 2-16 Figure 2-16. Substandard Housing ....................................................................................... 2-16 Figure 2-17. Median Home Sales Price for Existing Homes ................................................. 2-20 Figure 2-18. Housing Units Permitted ................................................................................... 2-21 Figure 2-19. Spending on Rent ............................................................................................. 2-23 Figure 2-20. Spending on Rent by Income ........................................................................... 2-24 Figure 2-21. Household Income by (Cash) Rent .................................................................. 2-25 Figure 2-22. Monthly Owner Costs for Mortgage Holders .................................................... 2-25 Figure 2-23. Costs for Mortgage Holders by Income ............................................................ 2-26 Figure 2-24. Household Income by Home Value (for Owned Units) ..................................... 2-26 Figure 2-25. Crowding by Extent and Tenure ....................................................................... 2-27 Figure 2-26. Senior Households by Income and Tenure ...................................................... 2-31 Figure 2-27. Disability by Type – Seniors (65 Years of Age and Over) ................................ 2-32 Figure 2-28. Households by Household Size ........................................................................ 2-35 Figure 2-29. Crowding by Extent and Tenure ....................................................................... 2-36 Figure 2-30. Disability by Type ............................................................................................. 2-39 Figure 2-31. Disability by Type – Seniors (65 Years of Age and Over) ................................ 2-39 Figure 2-32. Disability by Employment Status ...................................................................... 2-40 Figure 2-33. Developmental Disabilities ............................................................................... 2-41 Figure 2-34. Female-Headed Households ............................................................................ 2-44 Figure 2-35. Households by Poverty Status ......................................................................... 2-45 Figure 2-36. Farmworkers .................................................................................................... 2-47 Figure 2-37. Homelessness Solutions Task Force Action Timeline ...................................... 2-49 33 249

2021–2029 Housing Element
Table of Contents
viii
Figure 2-38. City and County Homelessness Point-in-Time ................................................. 2-50 Figure 3-1. Mid-Sized, Transit-Accessible, C1 Zoning .......................................................... 3-33 Figure 8-1. Inventory Sites .................................................................................................... 8-27 List of Appendices
Appendix A. Public Engagement
Appendix B. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Appendix C. Sites Inventory
Appendix D. Housing and Community Development Department Review Letter

34 250

2021–2029 Housing Element
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ix

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AB Assembly Bill
ACS American Community Survey
ADU accessory dwelling unit
AMI area median income
CDBG Community Development Block Grant
CESH California Emergency Solutions and Housing
City or Victorville City of Victorville
COC Continuum of Care
Consolidated Action Plan 2017–2021 Consolidated Plan and 2017–2018 Action Plan Consortium Town of Apple Valley and City of Victorville Consortium CRIA Community Revitalization Investment Area
CTCAC California Tax Credit Allocation Committee
du/acre dwelling units per acre
H.O.P.E. Homeless Outreach and Proactive Enforcement
HCD Department of Housing and Community Development
HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
HSC California Health & Safety Code
JADU junior accessory dwelling unit
JPA Joint Powers Authority
LBNC Low-Barrier Navigation Center
LIHTC Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
NOFA Notice of Funding Availability
RHNA Regional Housing Needs Assessment
SB Senate Bill
SCAG Southern California Association of Local Governments sf square feet
35 251

2021–2029 Housing Element
Acronyms and Abbreviations
x
SRO single-room occupancy
State State of California
Terner Center University of California, Berkeley, Terner Center UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VWD Victorville Water Division
VVEDA Victor Valley Economic Development Authority
36 252

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-1
1 INTRODUCTION
This document is the Housing Element for the City of Victorville (City or Victorville) as updated for the 2021-2029 6th Cycle planning period. The Housing Element is par t of the Victorville General Plan 2030, adopted by the City in October 2008 and certified by the State of California (State) in 2010.

The California Government Code requires that the Housing Element be included in a City’s General Plan as one of seven mandatory elements that express the community’s values, goals, and vision for the future. The Housing Element identifies and analyzes the City’s existing and projected housing needs and contains a detailed outline and work program of the City’s goals, policies, quantified objective s, and programs for the pres ervation, improvement, and development of housing for a sustainable future. The Housing Element identifies ways in which the housing needs of all economic segments of the community, including residents and the local workforce, can be met.

1.1 Background
The provision of adequate housing for families an d individuals of all economic levels is an important public goal. It has been a focus for the State and local gover nments. The issue has grown in complexity due to rising land and construction costs, as well as increasing competition for physical and financial resources in both the public and the private sectors.

In response to this concern, the California Legislature amended the California Government Code in 1980. The amendment instituted the requirement that each local community include a specific analysis of its housing needs and a realistic set of programs designed to meet those needs. This analysis is to be set forth in a Housing Element and incorporated in the General Plan of each municipality.

The California Legislature determined that a primary housing goal for the State is to ensure that every resident has a decent home and suitable living environment. The requirements of the law are prefaced by several statement s of State policy set forth in Section 65580 of the California Government Code:
a. The availability of housing is of vital Stat ewide importance, and the early attainment of decent housing and a suitable living environment for every Californian, including farmworkers, is a priority of the highest order.
b. The early attainment of this goal requires cooperative participation of government and the private sector in an effort to expand housing opportunities and accommodate the housing needs of Californians in all economic levels.
37 253

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-2
c. The provision of housing affordable to lo w- and moderate-income households requires the cooperation of all levels of the government.
d. Local and State governments have a responsibility to use the powers vested in them to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make adequate provision for housing needs of all economic segments of the community. e. The Legislature recognizes that in carrying out this responsibility, each local government also has the responsibility to consider economic, environmental, and fiscal factors and community goals set forth in the general plan and to cooperate with other local governments and the State in addressing regional housing needs. f. Designating and maintaining a supply of la nd and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels is essential to achievi ng the State’s housing goals and the purposes of this article.

California Government Code, Section 65588, requires that local governments review and revise the Housing Element of their comprehensive General Plans (Victorville General Plan) not less than once every 8 years. Prior to the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update for the 2021–2029 planning period, Victorville’s Housing Element was updated in 2014 for the 5th Cycle (2013 to 2021).

Multiple changes to California Housing Element law have become effective since processing of the City’s 5th Cycle Housing El ement. In particular, the State increased its ability to enforce Housing Element requirements, and the ability for interested per sons to challenge the City’s compliance with Housing Element law. Pursuant to California Government Code, Section 65585, the State has a greater range of penalties t hat can be imposed on jurisdictions for non- compliance. This puts the City at risk of exposu re to a variety of fiscal impacts and regulatory impacts that could reduce local control over housing-related decision-making. Jurisdictions that do not comply also risk the State imposing a more frequent Housing Element update cycle.

The 6th Cycle Housing Element Update was prepared to comply with State housing laws, as amended, and all other feder al, State, and local requirements as necessary to demonstrate compliance with State law and gain State certification.

1.2 Community Overview
The City is located in southwestern San Bernardino County in the geographic sub-region of the southwestern Mojave Desert known as the Victor Valley and commonly referred to as the “High Desert” due to its approximate elevation of 2, 900 feet above sea level. Areas surrounding the Planning Area are largely undeveloped and contained within the uni ncorporated County of San Bernardino boundaries. Surrounding urbanized areas include the City of Adelanto to the northwest, 38 254

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-3
Town of Apple Valley to the east, City of Hesperia to the south, and the unincorporated community of Phelan to the west (Figure 1-1, Victorville Vicinity Map).

After experiencing tremendous population gr owth between 2000 and 2010, during which the population almost doubled (from 64,029 to 115,903), the City has seen more modest growth between 2010 and 2018 (from 115,903 in 2010 to 126, 432 in 2018). The City’s growth can be attributed to the availability of relatively low-cost housing (relative to Orange County, Los Angeles County, and other parts of the Inland Empire), particularly for single-family homes.

1.3 Role of the Housing Element
The Housing Element, as part of the Victorville General Plan, establishes housing-related actionable programs that are intended to guide City decision-making related to land use planning and development activities for the planning per iod 2021–2029 in accordance with the City’s stated housing goals and State law. The Housing Element includes strategies for maintenance of existing housing and action-oriented programs to increase the capacity for additional housing options within the local housing supply as necessa ry to meet the current and future needs of people living and working in Victorvi lle. Implementation of these strategies will require that the City process a series of futu re actions, referred to as the Housing Element implementation program, for compliance with California housing law.

Meeting the community’s housing needs is a high priority for the City . As widely reported throughout the State, California is in the mi dst of a housing crisis where demand greatly outweighs supply. Additionally, overall wage growth has not kept pace with increases in housing costs, making median home prices and rents out of reach for a large population of the State.

According to the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies, 1 approximately 50% of California renters were rent burdened (i.e., mo re than 30% of their income went toward rent) with nearly one-third designated as severely rent burdened (i.e., more than 50% of their income went toward rent) prior to the COVID-19 pandem ic. These factors have contributed significantly to various housing problems, such as overcrowding and homelessness.

In the County of San Bernardino specifically , median income increased by 14% between 2018 and 2020,
2 while median home prices in Victorville increased by 23%, 3 and rent increased by 20%.4 These statistics demonstrate the ongoing, well-documented need for affordable housing.

Given high land, construction, and materials costs in California, the development of affordable housing requires public subsidies and assistance, as the costs to develop the housing far exceed the revenues derived from selling/renting the housing at affordable prices/rents. It is important

1 https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/local/california/calma tters/why-is-housing-so-expensive-in-california/509-e463dd3f- 4041-43b9-8983-4226caee88e2.
2 California Department of Housing and Community Development, State Income Limits, 2018 and 2020. 3 Zillow, March 2020.
4 Rentcafe.com, March 2020.
39 255

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-4
to note that there is insufficient public funding available to fill the gap between what it costs to build affordable housing and the revenues gener ated by the housing on a State and federal level. Prior to 2011, many cities like Victorville utilized redev elopment as a financial tool to revitalize blighted areas and fund affordable housin g. However, redevelopment was eliminated in 2011, and this significant funding source (estimated at $2 billion/year Statewide) of locally derived revenues was redirected away from affordable housing and toward local taxing entities’ general funds. The City had helped fund several affordable housing developments prior to 2011, but has been unable to fund these projects since State law eliminated this funding source.

Affordable housing is funded primarily through a combination of sources (as no one source is sufficient to fund individual proj ects), including Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, State grants, project-based housing vouchers from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, loan programs, donation of land, and other sources.

State law recognizes that housing needs may (and do) exceed available resources and, therefore, does not require that the City's quantified objectives be identical to the identified housing needs.

More specifically, the California Government Code, Section 65583(b) (2) states, “It is recognized that the total housing needs . . . may exceed available resources and the community’s ability to satisfy this need within the content of the general plan requirement s . . . . Under these circumstances, the quantified objectives need not be identical to the total housing needs. The quantified objectives shall establish the maximum number of housing units by income category, including extremely low income that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved.” The acknowledgment of the funding limitations is extremely important—cities and counties are required to prepare Housing Elements every 8 years to identify needs and actions to provide for housing at all income levels and for all populations despite a severe shortage in local, State, and federal funding that makes many of the acti ons needed and planned financially infeasible. It is important to recognize that Stat e law requires cities to plan fo r housing, but almost all housing is developed by the private sector.

1.4 Relationship to Other Elements
California Government Code, Section 65300.5, states the following: “The General Plan and elements and parts thereof compri se an integrated, internally consistent, and compatible statement of policies . . . .” The purpose of requiring internal consistency is to avoid policy conflict and provide a clear policy guide for the future maintenance, improvement and development of housing within the City.

The Housing Element was prepared in a manner to ensure that this requirement is met. It is important to note that the City is current ly undergoing updates to the Land Use and Safety Elements of the General Plan as well as prepar ing an Environmental Justice Element. These updates are anticipated to be completed during 2022.
40 256

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-5
The Housing Element has been reviewed for consis tency with the City’s other General Plan elements during the current updates to the Land Use and Safety Elements, and the Environmental Justice Element preparation. As more portions of the General Plan are amended in the future, the Housing Element will be reviewed to maintain consistency.

1.4.1 Public Outreach and Participation
The City prepared a comprehensive Public Engagement Plan for the 6th Cycle Housing Element, Land Use and Safety Element Updates, and Envi ronmental Justice Element. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, the City successfully conduc ted two public workshops on the Housing Element (including online and social media not ice posting) and conducted an online survey, including identifying all stakeholders. Public participation for the 2021–2029 Housing Element included online Planning Commission Special Workshop Meetings on February 1, 2021, and March 15, 2021. Members of the community were invited to address concerns and give input on the ideas for the Housing Element. Special invitations were sent to housing developers, housing professionals, and agencies and organizations that provide supportive housing services to lower and moderate-income households and persons with special needs (see Appendix A for mailing list). Notices were also posted on the City w ebsite and social media platforms, and ads were printed in the local newspaper inviting the community to both workshops. A third meeting before both the Planning Commission and City Council is planned for July 13, 2021, to review the Draft Housing Element. A public review draft was prepared and made available to the community prior to the July 13, 2021, m eeting and will continue to be avail able for at least 60 days. The Draft Housing Element is available on the City website.

1.4.2 Organization
The Housing Element is organized into eight primary chapters:
 Chapter 1, Introduction: Provides an overview of the purpose, scope, and organization of the Housing Element.
 Chapter 2, Community Profile: Provides a summary of the City’s demographic and housing characteristics, special needs groups, and housing needs, as well as an overview of the required Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing analysis, detailed further in Appendix B.  Chapter 3, Housing Constraints: Provides an assessment of the various constraints to housing development and preservation.
 Chapter 4, Housing Resources and Opportunities: Provides an inventory of resources available to meet the City’s existing and projected housing needs.  Chapter 5, Review of Previous Housing Element (2013–2021): Analyzes the progress and effectiveness of programs from the City’s prior Housing Element and reviews the appropriateness of the program for the current Housing Element. 41 257

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-6
 Chapter 6, At-Risk Affordable Housing: Identifies units in the City currently restricted with affordability covenants, focusing on covenants that expire in the next 10 years.  Chapter 7, Housing Plan: Specifies the City’s commitments to providing and preserving housing opportunities in the community.
 Chapter 8, Adequate Sites Inventory Analysis and Methodology: Assesses the City’s capacity for new housing development and demonstrates that the City can accommodate its Regional Housing Needs Assessment allo cation of 8,165 housing units, including 2,871 lower-income affordable units.

42 258

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-7
Figure 1-1. Victorville Vicinity Map

43 259

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 1: Introduction
1-8

This page intentionally left blank.

44 260

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-1
2 COMMUNITY PROFILE

2.1 Population, Demographic, and Employment
Trends
California Government Code, Section 65583(a), requires an assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constraints relev ant to the meeting of these needs. Per Section 65583(a)(1), this section includes an analysis of population and employment trends and details the population characteristics and growth, demographics, and employment trends in the City of Victorville (City or Victorville). The City’s po pulation characteristics and trends are important factors in evaluating the housing needs of its re sidents and identifying strategies to meet those needs through plans, programs, and projects. Population growth, household characteristics, and employment trends influence the housing needs of the community.

2.1.1 Background
Victorville is a growing, vibrant community with affordable housing prices, is conveniently located between the Cities of Los Angeles and Las Vegas, is in proximity to major transportation routes (Interstate 15, U.S. R oute 395, and State Route 18), is home to some of the area's largest employers, and has experienced robust industrial and retail expansion (C ity of Victorville, Economic Development Department ). The former George Air Force Base is currently redeveloping as an industrial hub. Additionally, a high-speed rail line between the Town of Apple Valley and the City of Las Vegas is due to begin construction in 2021, which should bring economic benefits to the City, additional jobs, and a greater need for housing.

These attributes make Victorvi lle an appealing place to live and contribute to the increasing growth rate. Understanding and planning its housing needs are critical to supporting the growing residents and workforce.

According to the Southern California Associat ion of Government’s (SCAG’s) Final Connect SoCal Demographic and Growth Forecast, Tec hnical Report, adopted September 3, 2020, the following represents the growth forecast for Victorville (Table 2-1).

Table 2-1. Growth Forecast for 2045

2016 2045 % Change
Population 123,300 194,500 58%
Employment 33,900 61,800 82%
Households 41,200 61,200 49%
SCAG 2020 Final Connect SoCal Demographic & Growth Forecast 45 261

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-2

2.1.2 Population Trends
Victorville is a growing community with an increasing need for housing to accommodate its population. In 2020, the City’s total population was 126,432, including 4, 917 living in group quarters, according to the California Department of Finance. The population has increased by 9% over the last 10 years from a population of 115,903 but has increased by 97% over the last 20 years, growing from 64,029 in the year 2000. This population boom signifies a staggering 20- year growth rate and significant demand for housing (California Department of Finance E-5 Population and Housing Unit Estimates). Over th is 20-year period, Victorville’s population has grown 3.4% per year, trending higher than the 0. 7% average annual growth rate of the SCAG region. Figure 2-1 charts this population increase over the last 20 years, comparing the City’s growth to the growth throughout the greater SCAG region.

Figure 2-1. Population Trend, 2000–2020

Figure 2-2 illustrates the population changes and growth ra te between 2000 and 2020 for the City and its neighboring cities. Surrounding juri sdictions have experienced growth, though the City’s growth is among the highest of neighboring cities. The City experienced an annual growth rate of 3.4%, as did the City of Adelanto. However, The City ’s annual growth rate of 3.4% outpaced its surrounding neighbors of the Town of Apple Valley’s annual growth rate of 1.6%, the City of Hesperia’s rate of 2.2%, and the City of San Bernardino’s rate of 0.8%.

Between 2000 and 2020, the City’s population increased by a staggering 97.5%, trending just above the City of Adelanto’s 96.7% growth increase. However, th is dramatically outpaced the Town of Apple Valley’s increase of 37.2%, the City of Hesperia’s 54% increase, and the City of San Bernardino’s 17.6% increase.

CA DOF E‐5 Population and Housing Unit Estimates.

0.0 20.0

40.0 60.0

80.0 100.0
120.0
140.0
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Victorville 64,029 87,813 115,903 123,042 126,432
SCAG 16,516,703 17,541,873 18,051,534 18,731,901 19,021,787

15.0 15.5

16.0 16.5

17.0 17.5

18.0 18.5

19.0 19.5
Thousands
Millions
46 262

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-3
Figure 2-2. Population Growth, the City of Victorville and Neighboring Cities

2.1.3 Population Demographics: Race, Ethnicity, and Diversity Racial and ethnic diversity and different cultural background may influence housing characteristics, needs, and preferences, such as preferences for location or housing size to accommodate multi-generational families. Under standing the City’s racial and ethnic demographics can help analyze housing current trends, needs, and projections.

Table 2-2 shows the racial and ethnic compos ition of City residents. The 2014–2018 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates reports that of the population that identifies as one race, 64% of City residents are White, 17% are Black, 4% are Asian, and 8% are some other race. Approximately 54% of City residents are Hi spanic or Latino of any race. Since 2010, the White population has increased by approximately 15%, the Black population by 0.2%, and the Hispanic or Latino population by 6%. The Asian, American Indian or Alaskan native, and native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander communities have decreased in population size.

CA DOF E‐5 Population and Housing Unit Estimates
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Victorville 64,029 87,813 115,903 123,042 126,432
Adelanto 18,130 24,855 31,765 33,803 35,663
Apple Valley 54,239 63,117 69,135 71,930 74,394
Hesperia 62,590 76,548 90,173 92,478 96,393
San Bernardino 185,382 201,295 209,924 216,235 217,946
‐
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
Population
47 263

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-4
Table 2-2. Racial and Ethnic Composition

2.1.4 Population by Age and Sex
Housing needs are influenced by the age structure and characteristics of its residents and are an important factor in evaluating housing needs and planning future development. Different age brackets often have different lifestyles, family sizes, incomes, employment trends, and other preferences that impact their housing choice and affordability. For example, younger adults often rent affordable apartments or purchase condominiums close to work, while the older population tends to buy larger homes to accommodate growi ng families. If a city has a significant senior population, they may require special housing types or services, such as assisted living facilities, housing rehabilitation programs, paratransit, Meals on Wheels, and home he althcare services, to enable seniors to remain in the community. Understanding these characteristics will provide insight and help the City evaluate its current and projected housing needs.

Figure 2-3 summarizes the current age and sex distri bution of City residents (2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates). The population of the City is 50% male and 50% female . It is also a young community. According to the 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates, the median age of City residents is 30 years old. Median age has consistently hovered around 30 for the last 20 years, decreasing from age 30.7 in 2000 to age 29.5 in 2010, before going back up to age 30 in 2020.

2018 Estimate 2018 (%) 2010 Estimate 2010 (%)
Total population 121,861 108,088
One race 114,391 94% 103,261 96%
White 77,443 64% 68,202 63%
Black or African American 20,703 17% 17,166 16%
American Indian and Alaska Native 1,138 1% 1,271 1%
Asian 4,662 4% 4,323 4%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 214 0% 148 0% Some other race 10,231 8% 12,151 11%
Two or more races 7,470 6% 4,827 5%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 1 65,971 54% 50,189 46% 1 Hispanic or Latino is not exclusive of other races ‐ This will result in a data overlap.

Race
American Community Survey 2006‐2010 and 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates. 48 264

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-5
Figure 2-3. Current Population by Age and Sex

As shown in the Table 2-3, 33% of the population in the City is 18 years old and under, whereas this age group makes up 23% of the population across the SCAG region. Approximately 56% of the population is of approximate working age (20 to 64 years old). The City’s seniors (65 years of age and over) represent 9% of the population, which is lower than the 13% across the SCAG region.

While most age groups increased over the last 10 years, the age brackets that grew the most since 2010 include seniors age 65–74 years old (31% increase), adults age 55–65 years old (18% increase), and young adults age 25–34 years old (10% increase).

Table 2-3. Population by Age (City of Victorville)

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
0‐45 ‐91 0 ‐14 15 ‐19 20 ‐24 25 ‐29 30 ‐34 35 ‐39 40 ‐44 45 ‐49 50 ‐54 55 ‐59 60 ‐64 65 ‐69 70 ‐74 75 ‐79 80 ‐84 85+ Age
Male Female
Total %
21,685 18%
6,856 6%
39,566 33%
11,197 9%
52,782 43%
87,394 72%
82,295 68%
77,703 64%
16,074 13%
13,858 11%
11,262 9%
4,365 4%
Age Categories
American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.
5 to 14 years
15 to 17 years
Under 18 years
18 to 24 years
15 to 44 years
16 years and over
18 years and over
21 years and over
60 years and over
62 years and over
65 years and over
75 years and over
49 265

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-6

2.1.5 Employment Trends

2.1.5.1 Regional
Riverside–San Bernardino–Ontario Metropolitan Statistical Area Current Employment/Unemployment Statistics (through 2020) The economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are widely reported on a regional, State of California (State), and national basis. Due to the shutdown on businesses and the loss of jobs due to the economic slowdown, employment and unemployment changed significantly from March 2020 through 2021. Data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics provides a recent view of how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected employment and unemployment. The City is within the Riverside–San Bernardino–Ontario Statistical Area (as defined by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics). The changes in employment and unemployment bet ween 2013 (the year the 5th Cycle Housing Element was adopted) and 2020 are depicted on Figures 2-4 and 2-5.

Figure 2-4. Employment (Riverside–San Bernardino–Ontario Statistical Area [2013–2020])

50 266

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-7
Figure 2-5. Unemployment Rate (Riversid e–San Bernardino–Ontar io Statistical Area [2013–2020])

Employment Projections
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics also provides projections for the Riverside–San Bernardino– Ontario Statistical Area (Figure 2-6).

8.6%

6.8%

5.7% 5.3%

4.3% 4.1% 3.5%

9.1%
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
51 267

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-8
Figure 2-6. Employment Projections (2016–2026)

52 268

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-9

2.1.5.2 City of Victorville
Employment data on the local level is lagging behind the regional data presented in the previous section. SCAG Pre-Certified Data for the City, dated August 2020 (SCAG Pre-Certified Data), uses U.S. Census data and other information as of 2018. According to the 2014–2018 ACS 5- Year Estimates, over 55% of residents 16 years of age and over are employed in the labor force.

The following provides important information about employment in the City:
 The City has 41,794 workers living within its borders who work across 13 major industrial sectors as depicted on Figure 2-7.
o Education and social services are the largest employment group with 9,640 employees (23% of total workers).
o Retail trade is the second largest employment group with 5,928 employees (14% of total workers).
 The mean commute travel time to work is 35 minutes.
 The median household income is $50,691 ( 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table S1901).

Employment by Industry
The City and the greater Victor Valley region have experienced significant economic growth. The Victor Valley Economic Development Authority ci tes pro-business climate, fast-track permitting process, affordable land, proximit y to all western markets, a la rge skilled labor force, family- friendly community, and a fully f unctioning industrial airport with access to low utility costs as reasons manufacturing, warehousing, aerospace, l ogistics, industrial, retail, or commercial services or operations have made the Victor Va lley region their home. Education and social services are the largest employment group with 9,640 employees (23% of total workers). Retail trade is the second largest employment group wi th 5,928 employees (14% of total workers) (Figure 2-7).

53 269

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-10
Figure 2-7. Employment by Industry

The City’s employment has grown by 11% between 2013 (the year the 5th Cycle Housing Element was adopted) to 2019 (the most current data available from the California Employment Development Department). More specifically, California Employment Development Department data shows that employment has grown from 39,000 in 2013 to 43,600 in 2019, an increase of 4,600 in the 6-year period, indicating a recovery from the Great Recession in 2008–2009.

According to the April 4, 2016 High Desert Work force Report (the most recent data readily available), the City’s largest employers include the following:
 Southern California Logistics Airport – 1,890
 Victor Elementary School District – 1,215
 Victor Valley College – 827
 Desert Valley Hospital. / Medical Center – 630
 Victor Valley Global Medical Center – 526
 City of Victorville – 402
 Walmart – 400
 Victor Valley Union High School District - 382
 Costco – 311
 Cemex – 214
American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates using groupings of 2‐digit NAICS codes. 102
2,617
2,858
1,186
5,928
4,227
814
1,731
3,927
9,640
3,401
2,497
2,866
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 Agriculture
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Rrade
Retail Trade
Transportation
Information
Finance
Professional Services
Education & Social Services
Arts, Entertainment, Recreation
Other
Public Admininstration
Number of Jobs
54 270

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-11
Employment by Occupation
In addition to understanding the industries that employ City residents, it is also helpful to identify the types of jobs that are most prevalent. Management is the largest group of job types with 27% of total employees. Sales and service positions are the second most common job type, with 22% of City residents employed in each category (Figure 2-8).

Figure 2-8. Employment by Occupation

2.2 Household/Housing Characteristics
California Government Code, Section 65583(a), requires an assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constraints relevant to meeting these needs. Per Section 65583(a)(2), this section includes an analysis and documentation of household characteristics.

This section details the level of payment compared to ability to pay, housing characteristics, including overcrowding, and housing stock condition in the City.

2.2.1 Housing Types
According to the SCAG Pre-Certified Data, 38,297 housing units are in the City. Of this number, 80% of the housing units are single-family detached (30,432 units), which exceeds the percentage of single-family detac hed units in the SCAG region as a whole (54%) (Figure 2-9).

The majority of other housing units in the City are multi-family (15%), mobile homes (almost 5%), and single-family attached (less than 1%).

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates using groupings of SOC codes.

27.1%

21.8% 22.0%

9.8%

19.3%

34.2%

19.6%

22.8%

8.8%

14.6%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%
Management Services Sales Natural Resources Production Victorville SCAG
55 271

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-12
Figure 2-9. Housing Type

2.2.2 Housing Type Trend
As depicted on Figure 2-10, single-family units have consistently represented the overwhelming majority of housing types over the last 20 years, while only approximately 1,500 multi-family units have been developed over the last 2 decades; the number of mobile homes has remained flat. According to City staff, hi storically, the development community has shown little interest in developing multi-family units in the City, particularly since the Great Recession. The declines in property values in the Victor Valley region were more pronounced than in other parts of the region, like the Counties of Los Angeles and Orange. Lenders that developers rely on to provide financing have been hesitant to provide loans for multi-family projects in inland areas in the last 10 years due to the risk related to future recessions , which has resulted in no multi-family units being developed between 2015 and 2020.

Figure 2-10. Housing Type Trend

CA DOF E‐5 Population and Housing Unit Estimates

79.5%

0.8% 4.5%

10.7%

4.6%

54.4%

7.2% 7.5%

27.3%

3.5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Single‐Family Detached Single ‐Family Attached Multifamily, 2‐4 Units Multifamily, 5+ Units Mobile Homes Percent of Total Units
Victorville (%) SCAG (%)
CA DOF E‐5 Population and Housing Unit Estimates
16,457
4,284
1,757
21,731
4,494
1,730
29,406
5,512
1,737
29,987
5,819
1,743
30,720
5,819
1,758
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
Single‐Family Residential (SFR) Multifamily Residential (MFR) Mobile Homes Housing Units
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
56 272

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-13

2.2.3 Vacant Units by Type
According to the American Communities Surv ey 2014–2018 5-year estimate, 35,187 of the 38,297 housing units in the City are vacant, which results in a vacancy rate of 8%. The unit types that make up the 3,110 vacant units in the City are depicted on Figure 2-11.

Of the 3,110 vacant units, 42% (almost half) are rental units, with units for sale (or sold) making up 29%. Seasonal and other unit types represent the remaining 29% of vacant units in the City.

Figure 2-11. Vacant Units by Type

2.2.4 Housing Units by Year Built
The City experienced the largest growth in housing units between 2000 and 2009, as the Southern California housing market was extrem ely strong before 2008. In contrast, the SCAG region as a whole experienced the largest gr owth in housing unit s between 1970 and 1979 (Figure 2-12).

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.

37.5%

4.7%

26.7%

2.3%

9.4%

0.0%

19.5%20.7%

5.4%

7.9%

4.5%

33.5%

0.3%

27.7%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
For Rent Rented For Sale Sold Seasonal Migrant Other
Percent of Total Vacant Units
Victorville SCAG
57 273

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-14
Figure 2-12. Housing Units by Year Structure Built

The City’s housing stock is generally newer compared to other cities in the SCAG region. Data on the age of the current housing stock illustrates historical development patterns and can indicate the overall condition of the housing stock as older homes require more maintenance and repair (and at greater costs) than units that are 30 years old or less.

2.2.5 Ownership/Rental Statistics
Housing security can depend heavily on housi ng tenure (i.e., whether homes are owned or rented). Ownership units represent approximately 55% of all units, while rental units make up approximately 45% of the City’s units. More spec ifically, the City’s housing stock consists of 32,917 total units, 17,893 of which are owner occupied and 15,024 of which are renter occupied.

The share of renters in the City is lower than the share in the SCAG region overall (Figure 2-13).

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.

0.1%

4.8%

36.2%

18.5%

21.5%

9.1%

3.5% 3.8%

1.4% 1.2%1.0% 1.5%

10.1% 9.5%

15.0% 16.3%

14.5% 15.9%

6.9%

9.3%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
2014 & Later 2010‐2013 2000 ‐2009 1990 ‐1999 1980 ‐1989 1970 ‐1979 1960 ‐1969 1950 ‐1959 1940 ‐1949 1939 & Earlier
Percent of Total Units
Victorville (%) SCAG (%)
58 274

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-15
Figure 2-13. Housing Tenure

Data on the age of household occupants indicates that those 44 years old and younger are renting in the City, while those 45 years old and older tend to be hom eowners. A correlation between age and home ownership exists, as depicted on Figure 2-14.

Figure 2-14. Housing Tenure by Age

The majority (40%) of households began residing in their current residence between 2010 and 2014, with the next largest group (26%) between 20 00 and 2009, which is very similar to the SCAG region as a whole, where the most common move-in period was between 2010 and 2014 (32%) followed by between 2000 and 2009 (26%) (Figure 2-15).

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.

54.4%

52.5%

45.6%

47.5%

40.0%

42.0%

44.0%

46.0%

48.0%

50.0%

52.0%

54.0%

56.0%
Victorville SCAG
Percent of Total Households
Owner (%) Renter (%)
American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.
0 500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
15‐24 25 ‐34 35 ‐44 45 ‐54 55 ‐59 60 ‐64 65 ‐74 75 ‐84 85+ Owner 278 2,804 3,230 3,493 1,836 1,766 2,733 1,370 383 Renter 755 3,811 3,402 3,410 1,039 829 1,089 554 135
Households
59 275

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-16
Figure 2-15. Housing Tenure by Year Moved to Current Residence

2.2.6 Substandard Housing
The results of the 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates indicate that 500 units lack telephone service, 124 units lack plumbing facilities, and 292 units lack complete kitchen facilities (Figure 2-16).

Figure 2-16. Substandard Housing

Another measure of substandard housing condition s involves the number of code enforcement cases. Table 2-4 summarizes the number of code enforcement cases opened in the City between July 1, 2019 and December 31, 2020.

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.

20.0%

40.5%

26.1%

9.2%

4.2%
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
2015 or later 2010‐2014 2000‐2009 1990‐1999 1989 or earlier Renter 4,577 8,456 1,649 252 90
Owner 2,018 4,877 6,932 2,787 1,279
Households (% of total)
Owner Renter
American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.

1.52%

0.38%

0.89%

1.95%

0.39%

1.29%
0%
1%
1%
2%
2%
3%
No Telephone Service Available Lacking Plumbing Facilities Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities Percent of Total Units
Victorville SCAG
60 276

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-17
Table 2-4. Residential Code Enforcement Cases, July 1, 2019 – December 31, 2020 CATEGORY COUNT % OF TOTAL RESIDENTIAL CASES
Substandard Housing 231 29%
Substandard Housing - Water/Sinks 10 1%
Substandard Housing - Mold 81 10%
Substandard Housing - Plumbing 132 17%
Substandard Housing - Heating 10 1%
Substandard Housing - Wiring 138 17%
Tenant Relocation Assistance - Healthy & Safety Endangered 6 1% Unsafe Structures 3 0%
Structure Unfit for Human Occupancy 12 2%
Rental Property Inspection Requirements 176 22%
Total 799

2.2.7 Housing Conditions
To analyze the housing conditions in Victorville, the City considered both code enforcement data and a field survey conducted in the Old Town Area of the City in July 2020. Both sources were considered together to estimate the number of substandard units in the City:
 According to the Old Town field survey, 198 parcels are characterized by deteriorated residential structures.
 City code enforcement data for cases opened July 1, 2019 through December 31, 2020 totaled 799.

Based on both sources, the City estimates a total of 997 are in need of rehabilitation or replacement. Specific information related to the Old Town field survey and building code violations is provided in the following sections.

2.2.7.1 Victorville CRIA Field Survey
The City is in the process of forming a Community Revitalization Investment Area (CRIA) in the Old Town Victorville Area. A field survey of properties in the Old Town Area was conducted in July 2020 to identify and evaluate the prevalence of deteriorated structures. The Old Town Victorville is comprised of approximately 400 acres and is located between Interstate 15 and the eastern boundary of the City. It includes the historic Old Town core, the area north of the railroad tracks, and the 7th Street corridor gateway leading into Old Town.

Structures were deemed “deteriorated” based on observable conditions pursuant to California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 17920.3, which outlines an array of conditions present on the inside or outside of a structure that qualif y a building to be a “det eriorated structure.” However, due to the nature of the field survey, which involved visually evaluating the exterior of properties (not the interior), only those qual ifying conditions visible from the outside each structure were considered. Deteriorated residential structures were identified on 198 parcels in the Old Town Area (shown in Table 2-5), which represents approximately 36% of all Old Town residential parcels.
61 277

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-18

Table 2-5. Deteriorated Structure Field Survey Results, Old Town Victorville Area

Old Town in Relation to Victorville
Old Town is Victorville’s oldest area. Over ti me, the City developed pr imarily in southern and western directions from the Old Town Area. Those areas adjacent to Old Town are also among the oldest in the City lack the housing size and layout desirable to modern renters and homeowners, which is leading to a decline in pr operty conditions. Furthermore, the majority of the structures that have been identified as in need of rehabilitation or replacement were built in unincorporated areas that were later annexed into the City. More specifically, the following areas adjacent to Old Town are observed to be in need of rehabilitation or replacement:
 The deterioration of the structures north of Green Tree Boulevard to the Old Town Area, specifically between Hesperia Road to th e east and the I-15 Freeway to the west, becomes more visible as residents travel north to Old Town. This is due to the fact that structures are generally older in age farther north in the City.  A residential area abutting the I-15 Freeway to the east, north of Mojave Drive and south of Puesta Del Sol was subdivided prior to annexation and has some recent scattered single-family dwellings. However, the area also has older, deteriorated, small, multi-family complexes. Overall, the number of residential structures in need of rehabilitation or replacement is greatest in Old Town and in those areas adjacent to Old Town as compared to those residential areas farther from Old Town where newer residential units are located. Due to the amount of deteriora tion in Old Town, the City is pursuing the creation of a CRIA to help revitalize Old Town (Proposed Programs PP-F.5 and PP-I.8).

2.2.7.2 Code Enforcement Data
As illustrated in Table 2-4, City code enfor cement data for cases opened July 1, 2019 through December 31, 2020 totaled 799.

2.2.7.3 Housing Units Built Before 1980
There are a total of 6,764 resident ial structures in the City built before 1980. Older structures require much more maintenance and some replac ement and repair of structure components, such as roofs, paint, termite damage to wood, etc. Therefore, older structures are more likely to Residential Non-Residential Total
Deteriorated 198 124 322
Non-Deteriorated 353 290 643
Total 551 414 965
Source: CRIA Old Town Area Field Survey, July 2020
62 278

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-19
be in need of rehabilitation or replacement than newer structures. Table 2-6 illustrates the age of the housing stock.

Table 2-6. Housing Units by Year Built

2.2.7.4 Programs
Chapter 7: Housing Plan of the Housing Element contains prog rams and policies that target areas like Old Town to improve housing conditions, including the following:
 PP-F.5 - Community Revitalization and Investment Authority. Establish a Community Revitalization and Investment Authority in the Old Town Area that would allow the City to use 25% of the property ta x increment generated in that area to develop affordable housing and otherwise support the Old Town co mmunity’s revitalization (also Program PP-I.8).
 EP-G.1 - Request for Proposals. The City has issued a Request for Proposals for development of residential properties it owns in the Old Town Area.  PP-L.3 - Development Impact Fee Waiver for Old Town Victorville Area. Explore the potential waiver of development impact fees for all types of housing within Old Town.

2.2.8 Median Home Sales Price for Existing Homes
Median home prices were recorded at $254,000 in 2018 and have not recovered to the pre- Great Recession high of $330,000 in 2006 (23% less than highest median). However, in contrast, median home prices in the SCAG region as a whole have generally risen to pre-Great Recession highs, as depicted on Figure 2-17. Median home prices in the City are also significantly below those of the SCAG region. More specifically, prices in the Ci ty have ranged from a low of 37% Year Built Number
2014 & Later 38
2010‐2013 1,712
2000‐2009 12,875
1990‐1999 6,572
1980‐1989 7,638
1970‐1979 3,237
1960‐1969 1,255
1950‐1959 1,353
1940‐1949 486
1939 & Earlier 433
Total 35,599
Year Structure Built
American Community Survey 2014‐2018
5‐year estimates.
63 279

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-20
of the SCAG region median in 2013 and a high of 60% in 2006 (as shown as a gray dotted line on Figure 2-17).

Figure 2-17. Median Home Sales Price for Existing Homes

2.2.9 Housing Units Permitted
According to the SCAG Pre-Certified Data, 9,110 building permits for housing units were issued in the City between 2000 and 2018. Of this total, 8,110 permits were for single-family units, and 1,000 permits were for multi-family units. Applying the number of permits issued to the population in the City and in the SCAG r egion as a whole (to determine th e number of permits issued per 1,000 people in the population) is an indicator to show how the permit activity in the City compares to the SCAG region.

As shown on Figure 2-18, the City’s permit activity had been higher than the SCAG region between 2000 and 2012. In fact, the activity was 4–6 times higher than the SCAG region between 2002 and 2006. However, after 2012, acti vity slowed down and now trails behind the SCAG region. It is import ant to note that cities in the Victor Valley region experience great property value reductions, higher numbers of foreclosures, and great numbers of assessment appeals following the Great Recession. This impact had presented challenges as the development community and commercial lender s that developers rely on have focused development activity closer to urban, coastal centers. Additionally, residential development as a whole in much of the SCAG region has slowed down, as show n on Figure 2-18. Before 2008, permit activity in the SCAG region was double what occurred in the following 10 years.

SCAG Local Profiles, Core Logic/Data Quick. SCAG median home sales price calculated as household‐weighted average of county medians.

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%
$‐
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
Victorville SCAG Victorville Percentage of SCAG Price
64 280

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-21
Figure 2-18. Housing Units Permitted

2.2.10 Overpayment and Overcrowding
California Government Code, Section 65583(a )(2), requires an analysis and documentation of household characteristics, includ ing level of payment compared to ability to pay, housing characteristics, including overcrowding, and housing stock condition. The sections below provide this important information.

2.2.11 Household Income
Household income is an importa nt data point as it demonstrates an individual or household’s ability to pay for housing.

The California State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) identifies the following income categories based on the area median income (AMI) of each county:
 Extremely Low Income: Households with income up to 30% of the AMI  Very Low Income: Households with income between 31 and 50% of the AMI  Low Income: Households with income between 51% and 80% of the AMI  Moderate Income: Households with income between 81% and 120% of the AMI  Above Moderate Income: Households with income over 120% of the AMI Core Logic/Data Quick. Additional detail available in SCAG 2019 Local Profiles. SCAG median home sales price calculated as household‐weighted average of county medians.
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
All Units 345 1220 2781 3294 413 284 298 46 115 323
Single‐Family Units 345 986 2699 3039 188 284 93 46 115 323 Multifamily Units 0 234 82 254 225 0 205 0 0 0
SCAG, Units per 1000 Pop. 4.0 4.8 6.4 5.2 1.5 1.0 2.2 1.4 2.1 2.4 Victorville, all units per 1000 Pop. 5.4 17.4 35.2 34.1 3.8 2.5 2.5 0.4 0.9 2.6

0.0 5.0

10.0 15.0

20.0 25.0

30.0 35.0

40.0 45.0
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Units permitted per 1000 population
Units Permitted in Jurisdiction
65 281

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-22
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy data separates households slightly di fferently, with a category for households with income between 81% and 100% of the AMI (“Below Median”) and a category for households with income above 100% of the AMI (“Above Median”).

Between 2013 and 2017 (the most re cent data available), 49% of Victorville households had lower incomes (Table 2-7) and 40% of households had incomes above the median income. The percentage of lower income households in Vict orville is higher than in the County of San Bernardino (41%).

Table 2-7. Households by Income Category

2.2.11.1 Cost Burden by Income
Housing cost burden is most commonly measured as the percentage of gross income spent on housing, with an amount of over 30% considered “cost burdened” and 50% considered “severely cost burdened.” However, a lower-income household spending the same percent of income on housing as a higher-income household will likely experience more true cost burden.

The SCAG Pre-Certified Data co ntains information from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on the number of households in the City that pay 30% or more of their gross income on housing costs (Table 2-8). This data indicates that approximately 45% of households in the City are cost burdened, or spend 30% or more of their gross income on housing costs. As shown on Table 2-8, 14,175 of the 32,630 households spend 30% or more of their gross income on housing costs. Approximately 22% of househo lds (7,030) spend over 50% of their gross income on housing costs and are considered “severely cost burdened.” Households Percent Households Percent
Extremely Low (30% AMI or less) 5,365 16% 80,790 13%
Very Low (31 to 50% AMI) 4,840 15% 73,660 12%
Low (51 to 80% AMI) 5,890 18% 102,005 16%
Below Median (81% to 100% AMI) 3,350 10% 62,225 10%
Above Median (Over 100% AMI) 13,185 40% 304,960 49%
Total 32,630 100% 623,640 100%
Victorville
Sources: Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (2013-2017)
Income Category (% of County AMI) San Bernardino County 66 282

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-23
Table 2-8. Cost Burden by Income

2.2.11.2 Spending on Rent
The City has a higher percentage of rent-burdened households than the SCAG region has as a whole. According to the SCAG Pre-Certified Data, 60% of the City’s 15,024 renter households spend 30% or more of gross income on housing costs compared to 55% in the SCAG region.

Additionally, 4,757 renter households in the City (32%) spend 50% or more of gross income on housing costs compared to 29% in the SCAG region.

This data indicates a need for more affordable housing units in the City (Figure 2-19).

Figure 2-19. Spending on Rent

Spending on Rent by Income
Another method to analyze the extent of rent-burdened households in the City is to examine rent expenditure by income bracket. The 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates data on renter households (i.e., the 14,300 renter households in the City where income data is available) shows Income < 30% 30 ‐50% > 50% Total
Extremely Low (30% AMI or less) 1,015 385 3,965 5,365
Very Low (31 to 50% AMI) 665 1,870 2,305 4,840
Low (51 to 80% AMI) 2,045 3,135 710 5,890
Below Median (81% to 100% AMI) 2,155 1,165 30 3,350
Above Median (Over 100% AMI) 12,575 590 20 13,185
Total 18,455 7,145 7,030 32,630
Sources: Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (2013-2017)
Households by Share of Income Spent on
Housing Cost
American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.
349
1,025 953
1,488 1,450
1,157
1,503 1,618
4,757
724
0 500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
<10% 10 ‐15% 15 ‐20% 20 ‐25% 25 ‐30% 30 ‐35% 35‐ 40% 40‐ 49% >50% Not Computed
Number of Households
Percent of Income Spent on Rent
67 283

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-24
the general trend of low-income households spending a higher share of income on housing (e.g., over 50%), while high-income households are more likely to spend under 20% of income on housing costs (Figure 2-20).

Figure 2-20. Spending on Rent by Income

2.2.11.3 Household Income by (Cash) Rent
The data on City renter households' cash rent paid by household income indicates a general trend of lower-income households spending less, on rent while higher-income households spend more on rent. Rent categories range from less than $500 per month (4% of City renters) to over $2,000 per month (2% of City renters). The most common rent category in the City is $1,000– $1,500 per month (43% of City renters) (Figure 2-21).

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Less than $20,000 $20,000 to
$34,999
$35,000 to
$49,999
$50,000 to
$74,999
$75,000 to
$99,999 $100,000 or more
>50% 2,978 1,517 256 6 0 0
30‐49% 287 1,489 1,658 747 89 8
20‐29% 115 195 374 1,177 929 148
<20% 36 26 119 414 349 1,383
Number of Renter Households
Income Category
68 284

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-25
Figure 2-21. Household Income by (Cash) Rent

2.2.11.4 Monthly Costs for Mortgage Holders
The percentage of owner-occupied units in the City is slightly higher than the percentage in the SCAG region as a whole. Approx imately 55% of housing units in the City are owner occupied compared to 52% in the SCAG region. Additi onally, mortgage payments ar e up to 50% less in the City than in the SCAG region as a whole. The most common mortgage payment in the City ranges from $1,000 to $1,500 per month compared to $2,000 to $3,000 per month in the SCAG region (Figure 2-22).

Figure 2-22. Monthly Owner Costs for Mortgage Holders

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Less than
$20,000
$20,000 to
$34,999
$35,000 to
$49,999
$50,000 to
$74,999
$75,000 to
$99,999
$100,000 or
more
>$2000/mo. 0 4 71 32 95 8 1 6 9
$1500‐2000/mo. 449 446 719 699 868 529
$1000‐1500/mo. 1270 1428 1173 1231 431 744
$500‐1000/mo. 1525 1280 432 355 10 97
<$500/mo. 5 1 3 2 67 03 0 0 0
Renter Households
Income
American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.

1.0%

15.7%

40.6%

28.3%

13.2%

1.2% 0.1%0.5%

5.1%

13.7%

19.6%

33.4%

15.4%

12.3%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
<$500 $500 ‐$1000 $1000 ‐$1500 $1500 ‐$2000 $2000 ‐$3000 $3000 ‐$4000 >$4000 Pct. of mortgage‐holders
Mortgage ‐ Monthly Payment
Victorville SCAG
69 285

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-26

2.2.11.5 Costs for Mortgage Holders by Income
The data on mortgage-holding households in the City (by income and the percentage of income spent on mortgage costs) indicates that lowe r-income households spend a higher share of income on housing costs, while high-income households may spend a lower share of income on housing.

The most prevalent income category for City mortgage-holding households is $75,000 or more (6,405 households), and the most prevalent share of income spent on mortgage costs is over 30% (5,126 households) (Figure 2-23).

Figure 2-23. Costs for Mortgage Holders by Income

2.2.11.6 Household Income by Home Value (for Owned Units) The relationship between housing and income can be analyzed by comparing incomes and home values in the City. The most common income category for homeowner households is $100,000 or more (4,971 households), and the most common home value category is $200,000 to $500,000 (9,302 households) (Figure 2-24).

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Less than $20,000 $20,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 or more Over 30% 916 1,896 1,164 902 248
20‐29% 7 66 276 1,567 1,719
Under 20% ‐ 27 81 541 4,438
Mortgage‐holding households
Household Income; Percent of income spent on mortgage costs 70 286

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-27
Figure 2-24. Household Income by Home Value (for Owned Units)

2.2.11.7 Crowding by Extent and Tenure
According to the SCAG Pre-Certified Data, 9% of the total housing units in the City meet the ACS definition of “overcrowding.” More specifically, the ACS reports that 1,444 homeowner and 2,009 renter households had more than one (1) o ccupant per room. Of these households, 253 homeowner households and 535 renter households had more than 1.5 occupants per room, which meets the ACS definition of “severe overcrowding” (Figure 2-25).

Figure 2-25. Crowding by Extent and Tenure

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Less than
$20,000
$20,000 to
$34,999
$35,000 to
$49,999
$50,000 to
$74,999
$75,000 to
$99,999
$100,000 or
more
Above $500,000 9 5 81 33 68 34 5
$200,000 to $500,000 564 958 999 1,841 1,318 3,622
$100,000 to $200,000 635 1,524 716 1,303 1,070 1,032
Below $100,000 1,184 370 354 496 163 272
Owner‐occupied households
Household Income; Home Value
American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.

8.1%

1.4%

13.4%

3.6%

4.9%

1.3%

15.6%

6.4%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

1.0+/room 1.5+/room 1.0+/room 1.5+/room
Owner Owner Renter Renter
Percent of Total Households
Victorville SCAG
71 287

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-28

2.3 Extremely Low Income Housing Needs
Extremely low-income is defined as households with income less than 30% of area median income. According to the HCD "State Income Limits for 2021" letter dated April 26, 2021, the 2021 area median income in San Bernardino County is $77,500. For extremely low- income households, this results in an income of $26,500 or less for a four-person household or $16,600 or less for a one-person household. Households with extremely low-income have a variety of housing situations and needs. For example, most families and individuals receiving public assistance, such as social security insurance (SSI) or disabilit y insurance are consider ed extremely low-income households. At the same time, a minimum wage worker with an annual income of approximately $27,400 or less could be part of an extremely low-income household, depe ndent on their household size. Figure 2-6 provides examples of occupations with wages that could qualify as extremely low-income households, including personal care aides, laborers, food preparation and serving workers, cashiers, and office clerks.

2.3.1 Existing Needs
According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy for the 2012–2016 period, approximately 5,365 extremely low-income households resided in the City, representing 16% of the total hous eholds as shown in Table 2-

9. As shown in Figure 2-9, most (3,850) ex tremely low-income hous eholds are renters and experience a high incidence of housing problems. For example, 83% of extremely low-income households faced housing problems (defined as cost burden greater than 30% of income and/or overcrowding and/or without complete kitchen or plumbing facilities) and 81% were in overpayment situations. Even further, 74% of extremely low-income households paid more than 50% of their income toward housing costs, compared to 22% for all households.

Table 2-9. Existing Needs for Extremely Low-Income Households

2.3.2 Projected Needs
To calculate the projected housing needs, the City assumed 50% of its very low-income regional housing need are extremely low-income households. As a result, from the very low- income need Owner Renter Total
Total Number of ELI Households 1,515 3,850 5,365
Percent with Any Housing Problems 86% 81% 83%
Percent with Cost Burden (30% of income) 82% 81% 81%
Percent with Severe Cost Burden (50% of income) 69% 76% 74% Sources: Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (2013‐2017)
72 288

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-29
of 1,735 units, the City has a projected need of 866 units for extremely low-income households.

Many extremely low-income hous eholds will be seeking rental housing and most likely facing overpayment, overcrowding or substandard hous ing condition. Some extremely low-income households could be with mental or other disabilities and special needs.

To address the range of needs, the City will seek out State and Federal funding to continue to provide assistance and make provisions for development of transitional housing, shelters, single- room occupancy (SRO) housing, and other forms of housing for residents experiencing homelessness. Furthermore, the City will seek to encourage the development of at least one SRO development within the Planning Period (See Proposed Program PP-I.3 in Section 7 of this Housing Element).

Supportive housing is generally defined as permanent, affordable housing with on-site services that help residents transition into stable, more productive lives. Services may include childcare, after-school tutoring, career counseling, etc. Most transitional housing includes a supportive services component. The City regulates suppor tive housing as a residential use, provided supportive services are subordinate to the residential use.

To address the housing needs of extremely low- income households, the City has identified several policies are proposed to help expand affordable housing opportunities for the low income. These include the following the following objectives and existing and proposed policies and programs from the Chapter 7 Housing Plan:
 PP-A.3 - Increase Zoning in Areas Zoned for Multi-Family  PP-B.1 - Assist with Development of Low-Income Housing  PP-B.2 - Expedite Development
 PP-D.4 - Assist Residents with Extremely Low, Very Low, and Low Incomes  PP-F.4 - Recurring Notice of Funding Availability
 PP-F.5 - Community Revitalization and Investment Authority  Objective H - Promote various types of affordable housing  Objective I - Increase housing opportunities and acce ss to support services for people experiencing homelessness
 Objective J - Increase tenant protections
 Objective L - Provide programs to increase affordable homeownership opportunities 73 289

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-30
 HE-Q.3 - Promote housing opportunities for all people regardless of protected characteristics, such as race, color, sex, national origin, religion , sexual orientation, disability, family status, marital status, income, and ancestry, that can limit housing choice.

As part of this effort, the City will follow their housing plan and collaborate with housing providers and stakeholders to meet the City’s affordable housing needs

2.3.2.1 Needs Assessment
According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy for the 2012–2016 period, 5,745 households (approximately 18% of the total households) in the City were senior households (Figure 2-26). Below includes a breakdown of this total:

2.4 Special Housing Needs
California Government Code, Section 65583(a), requires an assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constr aints relevant to th e meeting of these needs. Per Section 65583(a)(7), this section includes an analysis of any special housing needs. This section details the needs of seniors, people with disabilities (including developmental disabilities), large families, farmworkers, families with female heads of households, and fami lies and persons in need of emergency shelter in the City. Studying these gr oups is an important component of identifying special housing needs and meeting these needs through plans, programs, and projects.

These specific segments of the population may have more difficu lty finding decent, affordable housing due to special needs. Special circumstances may be related to one’s employment and income, family characteristics, and disability and household characteristics, among other factors.

Furthermore, many of these groups overlap. For instance, many seniors live with a disability, and many single mothers are homeless. Generally, these groups would be assisted by an increase in affordable housing, especially housing located near public transportation and services.

2.4.1 Town of Apple Valley and City of Victorville Consolidated Action Plan The Town of Apple Valley and the City of Victorville prepared a 2017–2021 Consolidated Plan and 2017–2018 Action Plan (Consortium Consolidated Action Plan) to comply with the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development’s federal block grant funding requirements. The Consolidated Action Plan identifies overall housing and community dev elopment needs for the Town of Apple Valley and the City of Victorville Consortium (Consortium).

In addition to the research data used in this se ction, the Consortium Consolidated Action Plan will be used to determine needs and goals.
74 290

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-31

2.4.2 Seniors
Federal housing data defines a household type as “el derly family” if it c onsists of two people either or both age 62 or over. The special needs of many senior households result from their fixed incomes, higher rate of physical disabilities, and common need for assistance from others.

Senior households have special housing needs primarily due to three major concerns: physical disabilities or limitations, income, and healthcare costs.

2.4.2.1 Needs Assessment
According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy for the 2012–2016 period, 5,745 households (approximately 18% of the total households) in the City were senior households (Figure 2-26). Below includes a breakdown of this total:
 4,250 (or approximately 74%) were homeowner households  1,495 (or approximately 26%) were renter households
 965 (or approximately 17%) earn less than 30% of the area median family income (compared to approximately 24% in the SCAG region)
 2,290 (or approximately 40%) earn less than 50% of the area median family income (compared to approximately 31% in the SCAG Region)
Figure 2-26. Senior Households by Income and Tenure

As a special needs group, seniors are unique. As shown on Figure 2-26, the majority of the City’s senior households are homeowner s and represent 74% of all senior households. According to the 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates, this rate of ownership is high for a special needs group, which makes up approximately 15% of the tota l households in the City. Of these senior homeowners, 1,445 (or 34%) fall below the 50% area medi an income, making senior homeowners within the very-low-income category the most prevalent senior group in the City.

Owner Renter Total
< 30% HAMFI 550 415 965
30‐50% HAMFI 895 430 1,325
50‐80% HAMFI 875 245 1,120
80‐100% HAMFI 560 75 635
> 100% HAMFI 1,370 330 1,700
TOTAL 4,250 1,495 5,745
HUD CHAS, 2012‐2016. HAMFI refers to Housing Urban Development Area Median Family Income.

Percent of Total Elderly
Households:

Income category, relative to
surrounding area: 16.8%

23.1%

19.5%

11.1%

29.6%
75 291

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-32
Poverty thresholds, as defined by the ACS, va ry by household type. For instance, in 2018, a single-person, senior household with an annual income below $12,043 per year was considered in poverty. Alternatively, a tw o-person, senior household was cons idered to be in poverty with an annual income of $15,178, assuming they liv ed with no children under the age of 18. With these figures, the 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates reported the following:
 1,325 (or 5%) of City residents with incomes below the poverty level were 65 years of age and over
 3,927 households in the City have a househol d member 65 years of age and over, and approximately 12% of these families live below poverty level Senior households are likely to be on fixed, lo w incomes and are at a greater risk of housing overpayment. Additionally, seniors have additional physical and social needs. As shown on Figure 2-27, 28% of seniors in the City (compar ed to 23% in the SCAG region) suffer from an ambulatory disability. Ambulatory disabilities are those that result in serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs. This notability of ambulatory disabilities in the City’s senior residents calls for housing that is more accessible to transpor tation and in-house assistance and for housing options with more accessible accommodations.

Figure 2-27. Disability by Type – Seniors (65 Years of Age and Over)

Regarding housing, seniors typically require sm aller, more affordable housing options and/or assistance with accessibility and home maintenanc e. They often require ramps, handrails, and lower cupboards and counters to allow greater a ccess and mobility for wheelchairs or walkers.

Because of their limited mobility, seniors also often need to live close to or have transportation assistance to shopping and medical facilities.

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.

13.9%

10.1%

12.5%

28.2%

13.2%

20.3%

13.1%

6.6%

10.1%

22.9%

10.5%

17.5%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%
Hearing Vision Cognitive Ambulatory Self ‐care Independent Living Percent of Senior Population
Victorville Percent SCAG Region Percent
76 292

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-33

2.4.2.2 Resources and Services
The City currently has a number of existing housing programs available exclusively or primarily to seniors. These services are outlined on Table 2-10.

Table 2-10. Resources for Seniors

Furthermore, the Consortium Consolidated Acti on Plan includes the following goals to address the availability of human services for seniors:
 Promote the development and financing of senior housing  Develop public facility amenities that facility community involvement and recreation  Disseminate fair housing information through literature, media, referrals, and workshops  Encourage programs designed to unite y outh, seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities in mentoring and caregiving
The Consortium Consolidated Action Plan also cont ains strategies to remove or ameliorate the barriers to affordable housing, including the following:

Program Description
CDBG Senior/Disabled
Home Repair (SHRP)
Grants
The sponsor of this program is the Economic Development Department of the City of Victorville. This program provides a one time grant of labor and materials for eligible senior/disabled homeowners for minor home repairs. Grant amounts are up to $10,000.

Repair Service Program
for Senior Homeowners
This program is sponsored through Community Action Partnership. One time grant of labor and material for eligible homeowners for minor repairs and weatherization and insulation.

Land Assemblage and
Write-Down
The Victorville Housing Trust can make funding available to write down the cost of land for the development of senior citizen and/or affordable housing projects by a private (usually not-for-profit) developer.

State Licensed Care
Facilities
There are currently 16 licensed facilities within the City providing residential care for the elderly. These range from large scale facilities such as Knoll’s West or Sterling Commons/Inn to individually run facilities housing six or fewer persons. Combined, these facilities can care for up to 375 people.

Victor Valley Community
Services Council
The Services Council provides senior and disabled services as well as senior urgent repairs.

Planned Unit
Developments
The City allows developments with reduced standards for Senior Housing:

Designed for senior citizen living, the standards generally allow for smaller minimum lot sizes, reduced lot size and yards and age restrictions allow the development to be more affordable and attractive to seniors on fixed incomes. 77 293

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-34
 Maintain the Down Payment Assistance and Homeownership Loan Programs as a tool to increase affordable homeownership opportuni ties for people with low and moderate incomes. By Fiscal Year 2021–2022, the C onsortium shall preserve and expand its affordable housing in low-income neighborhoods by assist at least 50 low- and moderate- income households.
 Expedite development of housing projects fo r seniors and those with low and moderate incomes. All fees shall be waived for shelters and transitional housing projects.  Continue to promote the removal of architec tural barriers to provide barrier-free housing for people with disabilities and enforce the accessibility requirements of federal fair housing law that apply.
 As projects are reviewed by staff, promote the distribution of low- and moderate-income housing to blend with the existing residential neighborhoods and to not be concentrated in any single area of the Town of Apple Valley or City of Victorvill e. Anticipated Impact:

Integration of all income.
 To preserve and expand opportunities and special needs services to integrate all people of a protected class in the community.

The Consortium has also propos ed the action of continuing to consider alternate forms of residential development, including various types of small-lot, single-family subdivisions; mobile home parks that allow owner-occupied spaces; senior multi-family housing developments offering various degrees of care and assistance; mixed-use residential, office, and commercial developments. Through these programs, the City promotes safe and adequate housing for its senior residents and encourages the development of new affordable senior housing.

2.4.3 Large Families
Large households are identified in State housing law as a “group with special housing needs based on the generally limited availability of adequately sized, affordable housing units.” Large households are defined as those with five or more members. Due to the limited supply of adequately sized units to accommodate large family households, large families face an above- average level of difficulty in locating adequately sized, affordable housing. Even when larger units are available, the cost is generally higher than that of sm aller units. The lack of supply, compounded with the low incomes of larger famili es, results in many large families living in overcrowded conditions.

2.4.3.1 Needs Assessment
According to the 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimate s, 32,917 households are in the City (see Figure 2-28). Below is a breakdown of this total:
78 294

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-35
 15,024 were renters, and 17,893 were homeowners.
 8,117 (or approximately 25%) were households with five or more members.  4,147 of the total 15 ,024 (or approximately 28%) renter households were large family households.
 3,970 of the total 17,893 (or approximatel y 22%) homeowner households were large family households.

In comparison to the SCAG region, the City has the following household breakdown:
 A lower share of single-person households than the SCAG region overall (17% v. 24%)  A higher share of seven-or-more-person households than the SCAG region overall (6% v. 3%) Figure 2-28. Households by Household Size

According to the ACS, “overcrowding” is defined as having more than one person per room with more than 1.5 persons per room being defined as “severe overcrowding.” As shown on Figure 2-29, the incidence of overcrowding in the City is lower than that the SC AG region as a whole, suggesting that the City has an adequate s upply of larger homes to accommodate its households. However, nearly 60 % of the total 4,241 overcr owded households are renter households, pointing to a need for larger rental units. More specifically, 2,544 of the total 15,024 (or approximately 17%) renter households are overcrowded, and 535 ( approximately 4%) of renter households are severely overcrowded. On the other hand, 1,697 of the total 17,893 (or approximately 10%) homeowner households are overcrowded, and 253 (or approximately 1%) are severely overcrowded.

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.
2512
3017
2682
2666
2022
1168
957
3121
4347
3410
3045
1752
1131
1087
5,633
7,364
6,092
5,711
3,774
2,299
2,044

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%
123456 7 +
Households (% by size category)
Number of People per Household
Renter Owner Total
79 295

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-36
Figure 2-29. Crowding by Extent and Tenure

2.4.3.2 Resources and Services
Currently, the City has a number of existing housing programs to assist housing affordability for large families, specifically large renter households. These services include the following (Table 2-11).

Table 2-11. Resources for Large Families

In addition to these programs, the City also has a number of unit developments for large families.

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.

8.1%

1.4%

13.4%

3.6%

4.9%

1.3%

15.6%

6.4%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

1.0+/room 1.5+/room 1.0+/room 1.5+/room
Owner Owner Renter Renter
Percent of Total Households
Victorville SCAG
Program Description
Mortgage Assistance
Program
This program provides assistance for homebuyers in the form of closing costs and/or down payments. Through this program, low to moderate income families can obtain the needed assistance in financing the purchase of a home. Focus of this program is on first-time homebuyers, transitioning from renter to owner status.

Section 8 Vouchers
This program provides assistance for renters in the City to have access to affordable housing. A majority of our Section 8 rental vouchers are provided to larger households.
80 296

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-37
 Impressions at Valley Center – Makes available 99 affordable housing units at 15500 Midtown Drive affordable to households with incomes between 45% and 60% of the area median income.

Furthermore, the Consortium Consolidated Acti on Plan includes the following goals to address the availability of quality housing, including housing for large families:
 Encourage decent and affordable housing for residents of the Town of Apple Valley and the City of Victorville
 Encourage collaboration betwe en public agencies, developers, investors, and other stakeholders to develop a wide range of housing development  Support down payment assistance
 Consider establishing rent control for affordability
 Reduce overcrowding in occupied properties
The Consortium Consolidated Action Plan also cont ains the following strategies to remove or improve the barriers to affordable housing:
 Maintain the Down Payment Assistance and Homeownership Loan Programs as a tool to increase affordable homeownership opportuni ties for people with low and moderate incomes. By Fiscal Year 2021–2022, the C onsortium shall preserve and expand its affordable housing in low-in come neighborhoods by assist ing at least 50 low- and moderate-income households.
 As projects are reviewed by staff, promote the distribution of low- and moderate-income housing to blend with the existing residential neighborhoods and to not be concentrated in any single area of the Town of Apple Valley or City of Victorvill e. Anticipated Impact:

Integration of all income.
 To preserve and expand opportunities and special needs services to integrate all people of a protected class in the community.
 Expand their efforts in providing financial li teracy services and advocate for an increase of supply of affordable ownership housing by hosting a minimum of two financial literacy and access of financing for homeownership workshops.
 Increase their participation in financial literacy and new-home buyer workshops.  As projects are reviewed by staff, promote the distribution of low- and moderate-income housing to blend with the existing residential neighborhoods and to not be concentrated in any single area of the Town of Apple Valley or City of Victorville to more fully integrate all income levels.
81 297

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-38
The Consortium has also propos ed the action of continuing to consider alternate forms of residential development, including various types of small-lot, single-family subdivisions; mobile home parks that allow owner-occupied spaces ; and mixed-use residential, office, and commercial developments. Through these program s, the City promotes safe and adequate housing for its residents and encourages the development of new affordable housing.

2.4.4 People with Disabilities
The Americans with Disabilities Act defines a per son with a disability as having a physical or mental impairment that substant ially limits one or more major life activities. People with disabilities have special needs and many earn little income, have high healthcar e costs, are dependent on supportive services, and/or require special building accommodations, such as access ramps or elevators.

People with disabilities face unique problem s in obtaining adequate hou sing. This specific segment of the population, which includes individuals with mental, physical, and developmental disabilities, needs affordable, conveniently loca ted housing that is specially adapted for their specific needs. Living arrangements for people with disabilities depend on the severity of the disability and can include arrangements like (1 ) living at home in an independent environment with the help of other family members, (2) special housing desi gn features for the physically disabled, (3) income support for those unable to work, and (4) in-home supportive services for persons with medical conditions, among others.

2.4.4.1 People with Physical and Mental Disabilities
Physical and mental disabilities can hinder access to housing units of conventional design and limit the ability of individuals with disabi lities to earn an adequate in come. The proportion of individuals with physical disabilities is incr easing nationwide due to ov erall increased longevity and lower fatality rates. Individuals with mental disabilities include those disabled by a psychiatric illness or injury, including schizophrenia, Alzh eimer’s disease, AIDS-related infections, and conditions related to brain trauma. Disabilities tabulated by the U.S. C ensus include sensory, physical, and mental limitations.

Needs Assessment
According to the 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates, 13,135 City residents (approximately 11% of the City’s population) were identified as having a disability. Disabilities included each of the categories tabulated by the U.S. Census, with the majority having a physical disability.

Figure 2-30 presents the number of residents in the City with a disability as reported by the 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates. Some residents have more than one disability. 82 298

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-39
Figure 2-30. Disability by Type

Per the 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates, there are 11,262 seniors in the City. Of that total number, 28% live with an ambulatory disability (see Figure 2-31), making it the most commonly occurring disability amongst seniors 65 and older. Furthermore, relative to the SCAG area, the City houses a higher percentage of seniors with disabilities, pointing to a special need for senior housing in the City.

Figure 2-31. Disability by Type – Seniors (65 Years of Age and Over)

Understanding the employm ent status of people with disabilit ies is an important component in evaluating specialized housing needs. In the City, only 24% of the population with a disability are employed compared to approximately 65% of the total population. While the unemployment rate for individuals with a disability is lower than the rate for those wi th no disability (6% and American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.
2,774
2,840
5,459
6,692
3,144
5,341
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000
Hearing
Vision
Cognitive
Ambulatory
Self‐care
Independent Living
Number of Individuals
American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.

13.9%

10.1%

12.5%

28.2%

13.2%

20.3%

13.1%

6.6%

10.1%

22.9%

10.5%

17.5%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%
Hearing Vision Cognitive Ambulatory Self ‐care Independent Living Percent of Senior Population
Victorville Percent SCAG Region Percent
83 299

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-40
10%, respectively), it is important to consider that 70% of individuals with disabilities are not in the labor force (see Figure 2-32). Overall, individuals living with a disability are seldom employed and, thus, require more assistance with finding affordable housing options.

Figure 2-32. Disability by Employment Status

2.4.4.2 People with Developmental Disabilities
Pursuant to California Welfare and Institut ions Code, Section 4512( a), “developmental disabilities” are those disabilities that begin before adulthood and include intellectual disabilities, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, autism, and those disabling conditions that are closely related to intellectual disabilities or require treatment similar to that of t hose with intellectual disabilities.

However, this definition does not include disability conditions that are solely physical in nature.

Using this definition as a benchmark for the purpose of this analysis, data provided by the U.S.

Census Bureau’s ACS for the population of the City with cognitive difficulty was used to quantify the total number of people with developmental disabilities. The definition of a cognitive difficulty provided by the ACS includes those resulting “ because of a physical, mental, or emotional problem, having difficulty remembering, concentrating, or making decisions.” Therefore, the ACS estimates were used as the def initions provided by the ACS incorporate those noted by the California Welfare and Institutions Code.

Needs Assessment
According to the 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates, 26,250 City residents (approximately 22% of the City’s population) were identified as having a disability. Below is a breakdown of this total:
 Approximately 5,459 (or approximately 21%) of residents with a disability have disabling cognitive difficulty; and
 Of those 5,459 residents with a disabling cognitive diffi culty, approximately 1,411 residents are 65 years of age and over (or approximately 26% of residents with a disabling cognitive difficulty) (see Figure 2-31)
The California Department of Developmental Se rvices also provides data on developmental disabilities by age and type of residence. This information includes a breakdown of the housing types individuals with development al disabilities reside in and by age (minors v. adults). This With a
Disability
Percent of
Total No Disability
Percent of
Total
Employed 1,617 24% 38,822 64%
Unemployed 417 6% 5,896 10%
Not in Labor Force 4,778 70% 15,481 26%
TOTAL 6,812 60,199
American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.
84 300

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-41
data is collected at the ZIP code level and may not perfectly match the 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates data used in this section. However, the data provides more context of the housing conditions of individuals with disabilities (see Figure 2-33). As shown below, individuals with a developmental disability typically reside with a parent, family member, or guardian. However, many individuals reside in independent or supported living and foster homes.

Figure 2-33. Developmental Disabilities

Developmental disabilities can result in individuals with self-care difficulties and/or independent living difficulties, preventing usability of housing units of typical design and function without personal care.

Due to these individuals’ ability to remember, c oncentrate, and make de cisions, their housing opportunities are further hindered because of economic constraints. Together, these factors drive the need for facilities designed to accommodate individuals with developmental disabilities.

Resources and Services
The Fair Housing Accessibility Standards and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code set forth access and adaptability requirements for i ndividuals with physical disabilities. These regulations apply to public buildings, such as motels, employee housing, and factory-built housing, and privately funded, newly constructed apartment houses containing five or more housing units.

The regulations also require that ramp ways, larger door widths, and restroom modifications be designed to enable free access. However, such standards are not mandatory of new single-family residential construction. The City provides grants and loans to individuals with disabilities who have low and moderate incomes for accessibility modifications to single-family homes and assistance to renters with disa bilities. Additionally, the Inland Regional Center, which is the regional center contracted by the California Department of Developmental Service provides Victorville
By Residence: Home of Parent/Family/Guardian 1,327
Independent/Supported Living 89
Community Care Facility 89
Intermediate Care Facility 5
Foster/Family Home 99
Other 15
By Age: 0 ‐ 17 Years 1,624
18+ Years 826
TOTAL 4,074
CA DDS consumer count by CA ZIP, age group and residence type for the end of June 2019. Data available in 161/197 SCAG jurisdictions.
85 301

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-42
programs and services that further aid meeting the needs of those with physical, mental, and developmental disabilities. Programs for people with disabilities include the following (Table 2-12).

Table 2-12. Resources for Individuals with a Disability

Furthermore, the Consortium Consolidated Action Plan includes the following goals to address the availability of quality housing, including housing for individuals with disabilities:

Program Description
Housing and Employment
Program
The San Bernardino County Department of Behavioral Health provides this employment program for individuals with a mental disability. Services include linkage between federal and state funded programs, affordable housing, job training and placement, healthcare, professional counseling, and education.

Senior/Disabled Home
Repair Program
The sponsor of this program is the Economic Development Department of the City of Victorville. This program provides a one time grant of labor and materials for eligible senior/disabled homeowners for minor home repairs. Grant amounts are up to $10,000.

Shelter Plus Care
Program
The sponsor for this program is the Department of Housing and Urban Development. It provides rental assistance that is either tenant-based, project based, or sponsor-based to maximize independence for disabled homeless persons.

State Licensed Care
Facilities
There are approximately 15 adult home facilities providing care to disabled individuals. These facilities are licensed to care for up to 77 people.

State Licensed Care
Facilities
There are approximately 11 adult home facilities providing care specifically to developmentally disabled individuals, with a capacity of 53 individuals.

There are approximately 10 adult residential facilities providing care to disabled adult individuals, which may include those with developmental disabilities, with a capacity of 49 individuals.

There are 2 adult residential care facilities providing care specifically to the mentally disabled, which may include those with developmental disabilities, with a capacity of 12 individuals.

There are 2 small family home facilities providing care to children, which may include those with developmental disabilities, with a capacity of 10 children.

In-Home Support Services
This program is administered by the County of San Bernardino and assists low- income and disabled adults and children with extraordinary needs for care to remain in their own homes by providing personal care services and/or domestic services.

Respite Care
Is a service provided by the Inland Regional Center ("IRC") that is designed to assist families with developmentally disabled children in staying together. The service is designed to give family members a break or relief from the ongoing demands and responsibilities of caring for a child with developmental disabilities.

There are approximately 10 preferred providers that serve the IRC area who will hire someone the family is familiar with to provide the respite care. Also, the IRC provides agency respite care where a provider is assigned to the family if they do not have a preferred provider.

Physical & Mental DisabilitiesDevelopmental Disabilities 86 302

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-43
 Promote the development and financing of housing for people with disabilities  Develop public facility amenities for community involvement and recreation  Disseminate fair housing information through literature, media, referrals, and workshops  Encourage programs designed to unite y outh, seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities in mentoring and caregiving
The Consortium Consolidated Action Plan also cont ains the following strategies to remove or ameliorate the barriers to affordable housing:
 Continue to promote the removal of architec tural barriers to provide barrier-free housing for people with disabilities and enforce the accessibility requirements of federal fair housing law that apply.
 As projects are reviewed by staff, promote the distribution of low- and moderate-income housing to blend with the existing residential neighborhoods and to not be concentrated in any single area of the Town of Apple Valley or City of Victorvill e. Anticipated Impact:

Integration of all income.
 To preserve and expand opportunities and special needs services to integrate all people of a protected class in the community.
 As projects are reviewed by staff, promote the distribution of low- and moderate-income housing to blend with the existing residential neighborhoods and to not be concentrated in any single area of the Town of Apple Valley or the City of Victorville to more fully integrate all income levels.

The Consortium has also propos ed the action of continuing to consider alternate forms of residential development, including various types of small-lot, single-family subdivisions; mobile home parks that allow owner-occupied spaces; senior, multi-family housing developments offering various degrees of care and assistanc e; and mixed-use residential, office, and commercial developments. Through these program s, the City promotes safe and adequate housing for its residents and encourages the development of new affordable housing.

2.4.4.3 Female-Headed Household
Single-parent households require special consideration and assistance because of their greater needs for daycare, healthcare, and other facilities. Female-headed households with children tend to have lower incomes, thus limiting housing availability for this group. 87 303

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-44
Needs Assessment
According to the 2014–2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates, 7,591 female-headed households exist in the City. This number represents approximately 23% (compared to 14% in the SCAG region) of 32,917 households in the City (see Figure 2-34). Below is a breakdown of this total:
 4,001 (or approximately 12%) of total households had children 18 years of age or younger (compared to 7% in the SCAG region)
 653 (or approximately 2%) of total househ olds had children under 6 years of age (compared to 1% in the SCAG region)
Overall, the City has higher ratios of female-headed households than the ratios the SCAG region, pointing to a need for more services for female-headed households.

Figure 2-34. Female-Headed Households

Furthermore, 15% of the City’s households experience poverty compared to the 8% in the SCAG region. Of this total, female -headed households represent 59% of the households living below the poverty level, and all or most of these households have children 18 years of age or younger (see Figure 2-35). Of the total 5,007 households experience poverty:
 2,935 (or approximately 59%) of the total households experience poverty are female- headed households
 2,229 (or approximately 45%) of the total households experience poverty are female- headed households with at least one child 18 years of age or younger  906 (or approximately 18%) of the total hous eholds experience poverty are female- headed households with three or more children 18 years of age or younger American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.
32,917

23.1%; 7,591

12.2%; 4,001

2.0%; 653
‐ 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 Total Households
Total FHH
FHH w/children
FHH w/children under 6
Percent of total househods; Number of households
88 304

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-45
Figure 2-35. Households by Poverty Status

A particular issue that affects all family hous eholds, but especially those headed by females, is finding quality, affordable childcare. Many households find this to be a severe constraint, and in the case of a single-parent hous ehold, the parent may be unable to work if they cannot find affordable childcare. As a result, the parent cannot provide necessities, such as food and housing, for their children.

Although female-headed households in the City represent a sm aller special needs group than seniors and people with disabilities, the Housing Element provides for t he needs of this group through policies that promote maintenance and construction of affordable housing specifically in areas close to commercial districts and transportation corridors.

Resources and Services
The City currently has a number of existing housing programs to assist with housing affordability for female-led households. These services include the following (Table 2-13).

Table 2-13. Resources for Female-Headed Households

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Mortgage
Assistance Program
The City uses CalHOME program income to facilitate participants in the Mortgage Assistance Program. While the program is not limited to female-headed households, it offers such households an opportunity for stable housing that is affordable at lower income levels.

American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates.

15.2%; 5,007

8.9%; 2,935

6.8%; 2,229

2.8%; 906
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000
Total households in poverty
Female‐headed
Female‐headed with children
Female‐headed with 3 or more children
Percent of total households; Number of households
89 305

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-46
Furthermore, the Consortium Consolidated Acti on Plan includes the following goals to address the availability of quality housing, including housing for female-headed households:
 Continue to expand its housing programs to meet the growing need for affordable housing  Continue to use Community Development Bl ock Grant funding to support public service agencies that address the special needs of the underserved, including female-headed families  Proactively seek additional resources to meet the underserved needs In addition to these programs, the City also has a number of unit developments for large families.

The projects include the following:
 Northgate Village – Makes available 138 affordable housing units in one-, two-, and three-bedroom units for households with inco mes between 40% to up to 80% of area median income.
 Impressions at Valley Center – Makes available 99 affordable housing units at 15500 Midtown Drive affordable to 45% of the ar ea median and to 60% of the area median households.

The Consortium Consolidated Action Plan also cont ains the following strategies to remove or improve the barriers to affordable housing:
 Maintain the Down Payment Assistance and Homeownership Loan Programs as a tool to increase affordable homeownership opportuni ties for people with low and moderate incomes. By Fiscal Year 2021–2022, the C onsortium shall preserve and expand its affordable housing in low-in come neighborhoods by assist ing at least 50 low- and moderate-income households.
 As projects are reviewed by staff, promote the distribution of low- and moderate-income housing to blend with the existing residential neighborhoods and to not be concentrated in any single area of the Town of Apple Valley or City of Victorvill e. Anticipated Impact:

Integration of all income.
 To preserve and expand opportunities and special needs services to integrate all people of a protected class in the community.
 Expand efforts to provide financial literacy services and advocate for an increase of supply of affordable ownership housing by hosting a minimum of two financial literacy and access of financing for homeownership workshops.
 Increase participation in financial literacy and new-home-buyer workshops.  As projects are reviewed by staff, promote the distribution of low- and moderate-income housing to blend with the existing residential neighborhoods and to not be concentrated 90 306

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-47
in any single area of the Town of Apple Valley or City of Victorville to more fully integrate all income levels.

The Consortium has also propos ed the action of continuing to consider alternate forms of residential development, including various types of small-lot, single-family subdivisions; mobile home parks that allow owner-occupied spaces ; and mixed-use residential, office, and commercial developments. Through these program s, the City promotes safe and adequate housing for its residents and encourages the development of new affordable housing.

2.4.4.4 Farmworkers
The special housing needs of many farmworkers st em from their low wages and the seasonal nature of their employment. Farmworker popul ation estimates in the City are based on individuals who categorize their employment as “Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, and Mining” in the U.S. Census. This category also includes people who work in non-agricultural fields such as boating, veterinarian services, and landscape and horticulture.

Needs Assessment
According to the 2014–2018 ACS 5-year estimates, 74 farmworkers by occupation (49 of whom are full-time, year-round) and 67 individuals with employment in the agricultural industry (59 of whom are full-time, year-round) are in the City. These individuals make up less than 1% of the SCAG region population (see Figure 2-36).

Figure 2-36. Farmworkers

Farmworkers by Occupation:

Victorville
Percent of
Total Victorville
Workers: SCAG Total
74 0.18% 57,741 Total jobs: Farming, fishing, and forestry occupations 49 0.12% 31,521 Full-time, year-round jobs: Farming, fishing, and forestry occupations Employment in the Agricultural Industry:

Victorville
Percent of
Total Victorville
Workers: SCAG Total
67 0.16% 73,778 Total in agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting 59 0.14% 44,979 Full-time, year-round in agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting American Community Survey 2014‐2018 5‐year estimates using groupings of NAICS and SOC codes. 91 307

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-48
No designated agricultural uses are in or adjacent to the City. People employed in this category are most likely associated with mining or l andscape jobs. While only a small share of SCAG region jurisdictions have farmworkers living in them, they are essential to the region’s economy and food supply.

Resources and Services
While farmworkers are not a special housing needs group in the City, the City currently provides certain permissions in its zoning code that can benefit farmworkers. These permissions include the following (Table 2-14).

Table 2-14. Resources for Farmworkers

2.4.4.5 Homelessness, Transitional, and Emergency Shelters Throughout the County, homelessness has become a substantial issue. Previous factors contributing to the rise in people who are experiencing homelessness included the general lack of housing affordable to people with very low income, increases in the number of people whose incomes fall below the poverty level, reductions in public subsidies to people living at or below the poverty level, the de-instit utionalization of people with ment al illness, and the increase in substance abuse and addiction issues in the region. The current increase in homelessness has been related to the increase in the number of layoffs and loss of employment, which results in the inability to afford housing. Additionally, homelessness can result from the need to get out of an abusive relationship or because of an unexpect ed event, such as a fire, flooding, or earthquake destroying the housing.

Over the last 2 years, the City has taken a proactive approach in ident ifying the needs of the community members experiencing homelessness. More specifically, the City has formed a 92 308

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-49
Homelessness Solutions Task Force, is planning for the development of a 150-bed Wellness and Recuperative Center, and has applied for State grant funding.

The timeline of these actions is shown on Figure 2-37.

Figure 2-37. Homelessness Solutions Task Force Action Timeline

October 2020
City’s Application for Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention (HHAP) Grant was approved.

September 2020
City applies for and is “Waitlisted” for Project Homekey funding.

August 2020
City Council Orders a Notice of Exemption from the (CEQA) Streamlining the Construction Process for the Wellness Center Project.

February-August 2020
City staff conducts research and designates a location for a Wellness and Recuperative Care Center.

October 2019
City Council adopted a Homelessness Strategic Action Plan (included as appendix).

July 2019
Homelessness Solutions Coordinator hired.

April 2019
Homelessness Solutions Task Force Committee created (meetings began in May 2019). 93 309

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-50
Needs Assessment
According to the SCAG Pre-Certified Data, 333 individuals experiencing homelessness in the City, with 154 (approximately 46%) people who are sheltered and 179 (or approximately 54%) who are unsheltered (Figure 2-38).

Figure 2-38. City and County Homelessness Point-in-Time

Resources and Services
The City works with various organizations and jurisdictions to help mitigate homelessness in the region. These collaborations include the following:
 Homelessness Solutions Taskforce – A group of representat ives from community stakeholder groups, local agencies, and the Ci ty meet monthly to develop a strategic action plan and to make recommendations for the appropriate courses of action specific to the community to address homelessness.
 High Desert Homeless Services, Inc. – High Desert Homeless Services, Inc., is a local, private, non-profit 501(c)(3) organization in the City that has been assisting people experiencing homelessness since June 1988. Its mission is to assist residents of the Victor Valley and High Desert area of the County of San Bernardino who have been displaced from long-term housing due to natural disaster or loss of income, and to assist non-residents by providing short-term emergency shelter.  Victor Valley Rescue Mission – Victor Valley Rescue Mission provides shelter to the mail homeless population that is willing to enroll in their program. They also administer an outreach program for those in need.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2019 City and County Homelessness Point‐in‐Time Counts 154
179
333
13,587
53,231
66,818
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Sheltered Unsheltered Total
0 10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
Victorville SCAG
94 310

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-51
 State of California – The City worked with the State to provide homeless services at the San Bernardino County Fairgrounds in the center of the City. These services provide people experiencing homelessness with shelter during days with extreme weather conditions.  County of San Bernardino
o County’s Continuum of Care (COC) – The City commits staff to the planning and implementation process of the COC, which provides funding and a network of resources for homeless abatement. The COC provides emergency shelter, supportive services, transitional housing, and permanent housing. City staff provide the COC Steering Committee critical informati on regarding the types of resources and programs provided to assist people experiencing homelessness. o County of San Bernardino Department of Behavioral Health – The City will continue to work with and refer residents to the County of San Bernardino’s programs to assist residents experiencing homelessness with mental health needs, such as the mental illness homeless program (30 days of bas ic needs, case management, employment, and outreach services to adults with mental illness who are experiencing homelessness), the housing program operated in conjunc tion with the Housing Authority (provides mental health serv ices and long-term, permanent housing for residents with mental illness and/or substance abuse disorders who are experiencing homelessness), and the employment program (provides employment skill evaluations, pre-employment services, job coaching, and collateral services to residents with mental health needs).
o Homeless Outreach and Proacti ve Enforcement (H.O.P.E.) – The program is a proactive approach intended to ultimately reduce calls for service and other resources currently required to assist with the population experiencing homelessness. A community policing philosophy will be used to link the population experiencing homelessness with resources and servic e providers throughout the County. The objective is to stop the revolving door of arrest, incarceration, and then release regarding crimes related to people experiencing homelessness.

It is anticipated that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the State will provide additional grant funding opportunities over the next 8 years for housing and shelter solutions for those experiencing homelessness because it is one of the State’s highest priorities.

To date, the City has applied for the Projec t Homekey, Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention, and Permanent Local Housing Allocation grants.

There are a number of facilities in the City and the Victor Valley region that provide emergency and short-term shelter; financial, employment, and family counseling; and other services. These facilities are presented in Table 2-15.
95 311

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-52
Table 2-15. Homelessness Resources

Furthermore, the Consortium Consolidated Action Plan includes the following actions to address the availability of quality housing, including housing for those experiencing homelessness:
 Provide funding and a network of resources for homeless abatement  Provide emergency shelter, support servic es, transitional housing, and permanent housing
Facility Location Description
High Desert Homeless Services, Inc. 14049 Amargosa Road, Victorville 92392 Provides residential services (55 max at one time)up to 90 days, with possible extension
Samaritan's Helping Hand 15527 Eighth Street, Victorville 92392 Provides motel vouchers, food, clothing, emergency services
Victor Valley Domestic Violence 14114 Hesperia Road, Victorville 92395 Provides emergency shelter and related services to victims of domestic violence
Moses House 15180 Anacapa Road, Victorville 92392 Provides emergency shelter and related services to single mothers
Keys Nonprofit 680 S. Waterman Ave, San Bernardino 92408 Housing Placement US Vets (Inland Empire-High Desert) 15305 6th Street, March Air Reserve Base Housing Placement VA Loma Linda 11201 Benton Street, Loma Linda 92357 Housing Placement Victor Valley Family Resource Center 16000 Yucca Street, Hesperia 923945 Housing Placement Cal Works Homeless Assistance Program 15010 Palmdale Road, Victorville 92392 Housing Placement Family Assistance Program 15075 Seventh Street, Victorville 92395 Housing Placement/Rental Utility Assistance/ Domestic Violence & Transitional Youth Services
Foothill Aids Project 16501 Walnut St, Hesperia 92345 Housing Placement Inland Housing Solution PO Box 239, Loma Linda 92354 Housing Placement At Home (County of San Bernardino) 784 E. Hospitality Lane, San Bernardino 92415 Housing Placement St. John of God 13333 Palmdale Rd., Victorville 92392 Drug and alcohol rehab, 50 beds The Lord's Table 15512 6th St., Victorville 92392 Soup kitchen, meals served daily Ambassador's for Christ 16980 Nisqually Rd., Victorville 92395 Food Services Victor Valley Domestic Violence 14114 Hesperia Road, Victorville 92395 Provides emergency shelter and related services to victims of domestic violence
Inland County Legal Services 13911 Park Ave. Ste 210, Victorville 92392 Community Services Support Rock'n Our Disabilities 13558 Palm St., Hesperia 92345 Community Services Support Searchlight Society (Homeless Outreach) Victorville 92392 Community Services Support United Way 15367 Tamarack Dr., Ste A, Victorville 92392 Community Services Support Community Action Partnership 696 S. Tippacanoe Ave., San Bernardino 92408 Community Services Support/Rental Utility Assistance
Oasis House 688 N. Arrowhead Ave,#203, San Bernardino 92401 Transitional Age Youth Services Cedar House 18612 Santa Ana Ave., Bloomington 92316 Transitional Age Youth Services St. Mary's Regional Medical Center 18300 Hwy 18, PO Box 7025 , Apple Valley 92307 Healthy Communities Holy Family Catholic Church 9974 “I” Avenue , Hesperia 92345 Emergency food for people in the parish First Baptist Church of Apple Valley 22434 Nisqually Rd., Apple Valley 92308 Food Pantry First Assembly of God 15260 Nisqually Rd., Victorville 92395 Food Services High Desert Second Chance 1666 Smoketree St., Hesperia 92345 Food Services Holy Innocents Catholic Church 13230 El Evado Rd., Victorville 92392 Food Services Restoration Center 16663 A St., Victorville 92395 Food Services Salvation Army 14585 LaPaz Dr., Victorville 92392 Food Services Victor Valley Community Services Council 16692 Mojave Dr., Victorville 92395 Community Services Support/Rental Utility Assistance/Food Services
Victor Valley Rescue Mission 15572 7th St., Victorville 92395 Life Recovery Classes/Food Services/Showers Women of Noble Character 14890 Loves Ln., Victorville 92392 Food Services and Showers Church of the Valley 20700 Standing Rock Ave, Apple Valley 92307 Showers Jubilee Church 9608 "I" Ave., Ste G & H, Hesperia 92345 Showers Redeemer Church 22434 Nisqually Rd., Apple Valley 92308 Showers Veterans Crisis Line 12138 Industrial Blvd., Ste 120, Victorville 92392 Life Recovery Classes 96 312

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-53
 Commit staff to the Consortium COC planning and implementation process  Provide the Consortium COC Steering Committee with critical information regarding the types of resources and programs the City currently funds that assi st those experiencing homelessness
In addition to these programs, the City al so has a planned development for its residents experiencing homelessness. The planned project includes the following:
 Wellness and Recuperative Care Center – This center would be the first facility in the County of San Bernardino to offer a minimum of 150 beds, 100 of which will be offered to individuals and families, and 50 will be offe red to those needing continued medical treatment and recovery after hospitalization. Th is center will be the product of the City’s Homelessness Solutions Task Force and be located at 16902 First Street in the City.

This center would also provide a space for nonprofits and government agencies to bring mental health, employment, and housing resources; pet kennel s; storage lockers; and a place for individuals to stay during the day to residents.

2.5 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
In summary, the City’s Sites Inventory (with support from the City’s rezone strategy) will affirmatively further fair housing through the following:
 The distribution of candidate rezone sites ac ross resource areas (including the higher share of lower-income units located in the City’s TCAC/HCD moderate resource areas and in areas with better access to jobs, transit, schools, public services, and other amenities).
 The planned revitalization of low resource areas.

The City’s analysis of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing is detailed in Appendix B, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.

97 313

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 2. Community Profile

2-54

This page intentionally left blank.

98 314

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-1
3 HOUSING CONSTRAINTS
The City, State, and federal governments constrain development through regulatory requirements, such as the California Building Code, the California Environmental Quality Act, zoning, land use plans, and internal processes, which affect pr oject permitting complexity, timelines, and costs.

Public agencies apply these constraints in the interest of protecting the public health, safety, and welfare. Additional constraints take the form of market factors, such as the cost of land, cost of construction, ability to obtain financing, and development feasibility of rental projects.

The City works to reasonably reduce governmental constraints to development and to influence nongovernmental constraints where and when possibl e. This chapter includes a summary of constraints and discusses past and planned initiatives to reduce them where possible.

3.1 Nongovernmental Constraints
Nongovernmental constraints are market, environmental, and economic forces that act as impediments to building housing. The City has le ss control over these factors but can take actions to mitigate undue burdens to housing production.

3.1.1 Land Costs
The City’s large supply of available, relatively inexpensive land is a majo r factor for the rapid growth of housing that has occurred during the past two decades. According to the October 2020 Federal Housing Finance Agency Study, the land share (or portion of the total property value that corresponds to land) of property value in the City was 20% in 2019 compared to 42% in the County of San Bernardino as a w hole. Furthermore, land prices in Victorville are significantly lower than the land prices in nearby countie s. The October 2020 F ederal Housing Finance Agency Study concluded that land prices in the County of San Bernardino were $528,000 per acre in 2019 compared to $202,000 per acre in Victor ville. Relative to many other California cities, land cost is not a constraint to developm ent in the City; however, it is important to note that the land share of property value in Victorville has increased by 5% between 2012 and 2019.

3.1.2 Construction Costs
Residential construction costs have increased significantly since the Great Recession. According to a March 2020 report by University of California, Berkel ey, Terner Center (Terner Center), construction costs in California increased by 25% between 2008 and 2018. The Terner Center notes that construction costs fell immediately following the Great Recession, but rose 80% between 2014 and 2018. According to Marshall & Swift Valuation Service (a CoreLogic product), the cost to build 99 315

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-2
an average-quality1 single-family dwelling unit is $120 per squa re foot in the County of San Bernardino, as of January, 2021 . Rising wages and materials co sts will likely further increase residential construction costs.

3.1.3 California Government Code, Section 65583(a)(6),
Development Analysis
California Government Code, Section 65583(a)(6), requires an analysis of requests to develop housing at densities below those anticipated in the Sites Inventory and the length of time between receiving approval for housing development and submittal of an application for building permit. The analysis must also look at local efforts to remove nongovernmental constraints that create a gap in the jurisdiction’s ability to meet the Regional Housing Needs Assessment by income category.

The City typically does not receive requests fo r development at lower density than what is allowed and physically feasible.

The length of time between receiving approval for housing development and submittal of an application for building permit is typically 3–6 months, depending on project complexity and the time the developer takes to complete construction documents. Items like changes to construction costs or other development costs that affect the feasibility, financing, or negotiations with design professionals are outside the City’s control and may delay projects.

This analysis is required to examine local effo rts to remove nongovernm ental constraints that create a gap in the jurisdiction’s ability to meet the Regional Housing Needs Assessment by income category. The primary nongovernmental c onstraint is the overall cost of affordable housing development (high construction costs) and the lack of public funding sources to subsidize the development of rent-restricted units. Data on cons truction costs indicates that, even with by-right density bonuses pursuant to State law, constructing affordable housing (particularly for households with low and very low incomes) is not profitable for developers and results in a loss without public funding source s. Developers seeking funding from private investors and lending institutions, which require a pro forma analysis (i .e., an analysis showing the costs to develop and the revenues availabl e to fund the development) must demonstrate financial feasibility, or costs that are less than or equal to revenues.

Therefore, public subsidies are required to develop affordable ho using. The subsidy typically comes in the form of low-income housing ta x credits, State grants, HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) funds, dedication of land for projects, and other public sources. It is important to note that the City can offer expedited permit processing and fee deferrals. However,

1 As defined by Marshall & Swift Valuation Service, “average” quality construction is the most common quality level, comprising “approximately 50% of all buildings” and “of good standard code construction with simple ornamentation and finishes.”
100
316

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-3
it cannot fill the funding gap for affordable housing developments on it s own. The subsidies required for affordable housing are typically hundreds of thousands of dollars per unit.

3.1.4 Availability of Financing
The availability of capital to finance new resident ial development is a significant factor that can affect both the cost and supply of housing. Two types of capital are involved in the housing market: (1) capital used by developers for initial site preparation and construction and (2) capital for financing the purchase of units by homeowners and investors. Interest rates substantially affect home construction, purchase, and improvement costs. A fluctuation in rates of just 2.5% can make a dramatic difference in the annual income needed to qualify for a loan. In general, financing for new residential development is avai lable at reasonable rates. However, economic fluctuations due to the COVID-19 pandemic have caused caution among lenders and may have lasting effects through this Housing Element planning period. Despite the current low interest rates, lenders are scrutinizing applicants more than in the past, leading to a lower number of approved mortgages, despite lower interest rates.

Additionally, and importantly in Vi ctorville and other High Desert cities, lenders are reluctant to provide financing to developers for multi-family residential projects. According to members of the development community, rents in the High Dese rt are not high enough to provide a level of comfort to lenders that loans wi ll be repaid with economic fluct uations, as was the case during the Great Recession in 2008–2009 and more recently with the COVID-19 pandemic. The lending community has retained memories from the Great Recession, when property values in the inland portions of Southern California declined at a significantly higher rate than urban, coastal areas.

This lack of available financing for developers to build market-rate (or affordable) apartments and condominiums in Victor ville is a significant constraint in the construction of more housing options for the community and is outside of the City’s control.

3.1.4.1 Homeownership
Home mortgage interest rates fell to historic lows in 2020 and 2021, due in part to the COVID- 19 pandemic. The low interest rate environment combined with pent-up demand for housing has led to significant increases in home prices. According to Redfin.com, the median sales price for single-family residences in the City increa sed by 16% year-over-year in December 2020 compared to 7% in December 2019. These trends could create barriers to homeownership for residents with lower incomes because wage growth has not kept up with the rising home prices.

For instance, median sales prices for single- family residences in the City increased 56% between 2012 and 2019, while median household income only increased 16% during the same period. The 2014–2018 American Community Surv ey 5-Year Estimates data presented in Chapter 2, Community Profile, of the Housing Element show s that a higher percentage of households in Victorville own versus rent. This data shows that approximately 733 single-family homes and 15 mobile homes have been constructed in the City between 2015 and 2020. 101
317

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-4

3.1.4.2 Rental Housing
According the 2014–2018 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, renter households in the City spend more on rent than in the Southern California Association of Governments region as a whole. For instance, 31.7% of renter households in the City spend 50% or more of their gross income on housing costs compared to 28.9% in the Souther n California Association of Local Governments (SCAG) region. High levels of rent burden indica te an increasing demand for affordable housing in the City; however, increasing construction costs and land prices combined with low rent rates an d low densities make it difficu lt for developers to demonstrate financial feasibility for multi-family rental projects.

In total, 80% of the housing stock in the City is single-family, while only 5% is multi-family with two to four units, 11% is multi-family with five or more units, and 5% is mobile homes (total sums to more than 100% due to rounding). This housing type mix indicates that developers have been reluctant historically to build r ental housing in the City. Building permit data suggests that this continued to be the case during the last 8 years. Most recent single-family developments are for-sale projects. However, property owner s and developers are increasingly expressing an interest to City staff in building multi-family, rental developments.

3.1.5 Availability of Mortgage Financing
Under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), lending institutions are required to disclose information on the disposition of loan applications and the income, gender, and race of loan applicants. Data for the City was compiled by aggregating census tracts to approximate the City boundaries.

3.1.5.1 Mortgage and Home Improvement Lending
Conventional financing involves market-rate loans provided by private lending institutions such as banks, mortgage companies, savings and loan s, and thrift institutions. Overall, 2,211 households applied for government-backed mo rtgage loans and 2,053 households applied for conventional home mortgage loans in the City in 2020 (Table 3-1). Of the applications for conventional purchase loans, 72% were approved, 10% were denied, and 17% were withdrawn or closed for incompleteness. The approval rates for government-backed home purchase loans were similar to conventional purchase loans in 2020 and higher than the approval rates in 2010 (Table 3-2). Almost three out of every five (59%) refinance applications were approved in 2020, similar to the approval rate of 55% in 2010. The denial rate was greatest for home improvement loans (46%), although this denial rate did not change from 2010. To supplement market-rate lending, first-time homebuyers have access to the City’s Mortgage Assistance Program, which City staff will continue as part of Program PP-L.1.
102
318

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-5
Table 3-1. Disposition of Home Purchase and Improvement Loan Applications (2020)

Table 3-2. Disposition of Home Purchase and Improvement Loan Applications (2010)

3.2 Environmental Constraints
Environmental constraints to housing development include natural hazards that limit the development potential of land or increase the costs of development. In Victorville, environmental constraints that could impact housing devel opment include flooding hazards, biological resources, cultural resources, seismic hazards, and hillsides/slopes.

3.2.1 Flooding Hazards
The principal flood hazard to the developed porti ons of the planning area is from the Mojave River. In addition, several intermittent stream s that drain the planning area and empty into the Mojave River include the Ossom Wash, West Fork Ossom Wash, Bell Mountain Wash, and Oro Grande Wash. There is a potential fo r flooding from these streams in the event of a 100-year flood. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has prepared Flood Insurance Rate Maps for the City and unincorporated areas of the County of San Bernardino. Title 16 of the Victorville Municipal Code establishes required methods to prevent and reduce flood hazards.

3.2.2 Biological Resources
Several plant and wildlife species that require additional review and potential permitting exist in the planning area. The most common species requiring mitigation in Victorville are burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), Mohave ground squirrel ( Xerospermophilus mohavensis), and desert Approved1 1598 72% 1493 73% 5011 59% 85 36%
Applications Denied 199 9% 201 10% 1059 12% 108 46%
Other2
414 19% 359 17% 2413 28% 43 18%
Total Applicants 2211 100% 2053 100% 8483 100% 236 100% Source: FFIEC MSA/MD 2020 Aggregate Report for Riverside/San Bernardino County by Census Tract Government‐
Backed Purchase
Conventional
Purchase Refinance Home
Improvement
Loan Type
1 Includes those applications approved by the lenders but not accepted by the applicants. 2 Includes files closed for incompleteness, and applications withdrawn.

Approved1 1799 69% 773 69% 942 55% 62 38%
Applications Denied 405 16% 206 18% 416 24% 75 46%
Other2
407 16% 140 13% 346 20% 25 15%
Total Applicants 2611 100% 1118 100% 1703 100% 162 100% 1 Includes those applications approved by the lenders but not accepted by the applicants. 2 Includes files closed for incompleteness, and applications withdrawn.

Loan Type
Government‐
Backed Purchase
Conventional
Purchase Refinance Home
Improvement
103
319

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-6
tortoise (Gopherus agassizii). The California Department of Fish and Wildlife is responsible for the permitting protocols for burrowing owl and Mohave ground squirrel, while the U.S.

Department of Fish and Wildlife issues permits for desert to rtoise due to its listing as an endangered species.

3.2.3 Cultural Resources
Victorville is on the southwestern edge of the Mojave Desert, whic h is rich with cultural and historical resources. The region ’s prehistory is divided into five periods marked by changes in archaeological remains, reflecting different wa ys in which Native Am erican people adapted to their surroundings. Future development projects would be required to provide adequate investigations and monitoring efforts to identify and protect potential Native American resources.

In addition, the Victor Valley has always serv ed as a crucial link for a succession of major transportation arteries, including the ancient Mojave Trail and the Old Spanish Trail. The Victorville Zoning Ordinance includes a historic district zone designation intended to protect and promote the preservation, maintenance, and/or improvement of l andmarks or points of interest and to ensure new structures in the district are compatible with the character to be preserved.

3.2.4 Seismic Hazards
Like the entire Southern California region, Victorville is in an ar ea of high seismic activity. Five fault systems affect the planning area: the San Andreas, Helendale, North Frontal, Landers, and San Jacinto Faults. The San Andreas Fault is approximately 24 miles south of the planning area and is considered most likely to produce a major earthquake. No faults or fault traces are known or suspected to exist in the planning area, and as a result, no Alquist-Pr iolo Special Studies Zones are in the planning area. The level of impact resulting from any seismic activity will depend on factors such as distance from the epicenter, earthquake magnitude, soil characteristics, and subsurface geology. Due to the high probability of seismic activity, consistent with Seismic Safety Zone IV of the California Code, new development is required to employ design and construction techniques that will reduce the potential for loss of life, injury, and property damage in the event of a major earthquake.

3.2.5 Hillsides/Slopes
Development on hillside areas when steep slopes are present can increase rates of erosion and exacerbate landslide hazards, which may threaten st ructures. Portions of the City have areas where slopes exceed 15%. The development on slopes with this degree of inclination is difficult and should be avoided if possible to prevent property damage resulting from slope failure. The Victorville General Plan Safety Element contains specific goals and policies that address hazards related to the development of hillside areas. The Victorville Zoning Ordinance contains a Slope Protection District, whic h regulates the maintenance and protection of sloped areas in excess of 5 feet in vertical height.
104
320

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-7

3.3 Governmental Constraints
Housing affordability is influenced by factors in both the private and public sectors. The laws and policies enacted at the federal, St ate, and local level guide residential development in the City.

The processes for building or expanding housi ng influence the amount of housing developed and its type, form, location, and ultimate price. Land use controls, development standards, fees, and other local programs can have the unintended consequence of serving as a constraint to housing development. The following describes the various potential government constraints on housing development in Victorville.

3.3.1 Federal and State Constraints
Federal and State barriers and disincentives that limit the production of housing include national economic and job market conditions, federal and State laws and regulations, and a significant lack of funding and subsidies needed to suppor t housing affordable to lower- and moderate- income families.

3.3.1.1 National and State Economic and Job Market Conditions Technology and globalization have changed the economy signifi cantly in the last two decades.

Federal laws and policies have allowed U.S. companies to move manufacturing and service jobs overseas and outsource for much lower costs to ma intain or increase profits. This has led to a significant stagnation in wages for lower-skilled wo rkers, while the cost of living (including housing costs) has continued to increase. T he Congressional Research Service published the study “Wage Inequality and the St agnation of Earnings of Low-Wage Workers: Contributing Factors and Policy Options” (February 5, 2020) that states the following:

Over the 1979–2018 peri od, real wages at the 10th per centile of the hourly wage distribution grew by 1.6%, whereas wages at the 50th percentile grew by 6.1% and wages at the 90th percentile grew by 37.6%.

In 2019, the Massachusetts Institute for Technology published the study “The Work of the Future:

Shaping Technology and Institutions,” which states that with automat ion, technology changes, and globalization, workers lacking some form of college degree suffer stagnating wages and have significantly less economic security. This study states that employment is “polarizing” in both the U.S. and the industrialized world for the following reason:
105
321

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-8
At the top end, high-e ducation, high-wage occupations offer strong career prospects and rising lifetime earnings. At the other end, low-education, low-wage occupations provide little economic security and limited ca reer earnings growth. As a result, the pathways to economically stable and secure careers for workers without college degrees are becoming narrower and more precarious. Simply put: we see no shortage of good careers for highly educated workers. And we see no shortage of jobs for less educated workers. But we do find a paucit y of good careers for workers without significant post-secondary training—strong tec hnical or vocational training, associate’s degree level certification in a cr edentialed field, or attainm ent of a traditional four-year college or graduate degree.

As documented above, and in numerous articles and studies in recent years, as automation, technology changes, and globalizati on of jobs and manufacturing have occurred, lower-skilled and less educated workers are not experiencing sufficient wage gr owth to keep up with rising housing costs. This has exacerbated the need fo r affordable housing and the housing crisis currently affecting California and many other states.

The University of California, Berkeley, Labor Center also reports the following information on low- wage earners on their website https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/low-wage-work-in-california/:
 One of every three California workers earns low wages  32% of California workers earned less than $14.35 in 2017  There are nearly 5 million low-wage workers in California Changes in the employment market and wage gr owth are experienced on a local level. In Victorville, median sales prices have increased by 169% between 2012 and 2019 (according to Zillow.com), while median hous ehold income in San Bernardi no County (reported by the U.S.

Census Bureau) only increased 34% during the same period. Limited wage growth is a significant barrier to individuals and families who are currently housed or seek housing and has created a large need for affordable housing.

3.3.1.2 Lack of Federal and State Funding and Subsidies for Affordable Housing
Due to market factors and government regulations—such as the need to se cure multiple funding sources (which delays project development), prevailing wage prem iums, and sustainable development standards (which help to reduce negative en vironmental impacts, but increase costs)—affordable housing can cost more to develop than market-rate housing. As estimated in this Housing Element, the average multi-family project has an estimated development cost of $328,000 per unit (documented later in this chapter); while a lower-income affordable multi-family project has an estimated cost of over $500,000 per unit. This significant reality is a reason that the private sector 106
322

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-9
and market acting alone do not produce affordable housing. Affordable housing development relies on a multitude of public subsidies, both State and federal—those funding so urces are documented in Section 4.2, Financial Resources, of this Housing Element.

Neither the federal nor State governments allocate sufficient funding to subsidize the needed affordable units pursuant to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) numbers allocated to each city and county in California. Ad ditionally, no one source of public subsidy is sufficient to fund affordable housi ng projects completely. Therefore, developers must apply for and leverage multiple State and federal sources of funds, in addition to private lending, which is a time consuming process. One multi-family development can require 5 to 10 funding sources to finance its construction. Developers generally layer or “stack” financing from State and federal tax credits, State housing programs, local land donation and other local grants, federal housing programs, and private loans from financial institutions.

Federal funding for affordable housing represents a large portion of California’s resources to support affordable housing. However, due to pr essures to cut spending, federal funding for housing has declined in recent years while the number of severely cost-burdened (i.e., those spending 50% or more of their income on housing), low-income, renter households has increased. More specifically, Community Development Block Grant and HOME funds allocated to California to produce affordable housing uni ts declined by 51% and 66% between 2003 and 2015, respectively. As a result, with fundi ng cuts and increased demand, the sources of affordable housing funding are stretched very thin and have become increasingly competitive.

3.3.1.3 Redevelopment Dissolution
As a result of legislation in 2011, all redevelopment agencies in the State were dissolved, which has had a profound effect on the quantity and complexity of affordable housing development in the State. Redevelopment was a tax increment financing tool that allowed cities and counties to retain a higher share of the grow th in property taxes in designated “blighted” areas to invest in those areas to remediate blight. Over 400 cities and counties in the State used this tool, referred to as “urban renewal” before 1979. Since 1994, Redevelopment projects were required to allocate 20% of all tax increment for affordable housing in the community. On a Statewide level, over $2 billion annually for affordable housing was lost due to this State law change.

Despite State legislative efforts to replac e Redevelopment with Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts and Community Revitalizati on and Investment Areas, these financing tools generate a tiny fraction of the local funding t hat Redevelopment did previously, which is the reason that only a few Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts and no Community Revitalization and Investment Areas have been adopted over the last 10 years. Put simply, the State has not provided an adequate replacement for affordable housing funding available under Redevelopment.
107
323

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-10
In 1991, the Victor Valley Economic Development Authority (VVEDA) Joint Powers Authority (JPA) was created in response to the closure of the George Air Force Base. The JPA is composed of the Town of Apple Valley, City of Hesperia, City of Victorville, City of Adelanto, and the County of San Bernardino a nd was established with the pr imary purpose of providing a funding mechanism to redevelop the former George Air Force Base (now known as the Southern California Logistics Airport) and to facilitate the successful reuse of the property.

Furthermore, the City created a redevelopment agency (Victorville RDA) in 1980 to further the revitalization of an area located along Bear Valley Road (Bear Valle y Redevelopment Project Area) and the Old Town/Midtown areas of the Ci ty (Old Town/Midtown Redevelopment Project Area). Both the JPA and the Victorville RDA generated significant affordable housing funds until 2011. The City estimates that redevelopment revenues restricted for affordable housing in Fiscal Year 2020–2021 would have exceeded $6 million, including funds pledged to pay debt service on existing housing bonds. With the State’s 2011 dissolution of Redevelopment, this significant funding source has been lost. State efforts to provide annual grants and other funding are significantly less and less reliable (i.e., they are usually awarded competitively) than affordable housing funding under Redevelopmen t. As a result, it is much harder to finance and build the affordable housing needed in the State.

3.3.1.4 State Regulations and Development Challenges
Other regulatory challenges that present barriers to development include the following:
 Complying with State regulations and ener gy standards, greenhouse gas reduction requirements and other environmental condi tions. These help to preserve the environment, but add to development costs.
 Prevailing wages, a federal and State legal requirement for publicly funded projects, can add 13–20% to hard construction costs. These additional costs are added to already-high construction and materials costs and can push an affordable housing project to be financially infeasible.

3.3.2 Local Constraints
The Land Use Element sets forth City policies for local land development. These policies, together with existing zoning regulations, establish the amount and distribution of land allocated for different uses.

The intent of local government regulations is to protect publ ic health and safety, and to ensure a decent quality of life for the community. However, local policies and regulations may positively or negatively affect the price and availability of housing and, in particular, the provision of affordable housing. Land use controls, site impr ovement requirements, fees and exactions, 108
324

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-11
permit processing procedures and other factors can constrain the maintenance, development and improvement of housing.

State and federal regulations also affect the availability of land for housing and the cost of producing housing. Regulations re lated to environmental protection, building codes and other topics are designed to protect the public health and safety, but often these regulations have adverse impacts on housing costs and availability . Perhaps one of the greatest constraints to the production of housing affordable to lower-income households is the chronic shortage of State and federal financial assistance for affordable housing. While constraints exist at other levels of government, the City has little or no control over these regulations and no ability to mitigate their effects on housing directly. Therefore, the City’s efforts emphasize policies and regulations that can be mitigated by the City.

3.3.2.1 Land Use Controls
The Land Use Element sets forth City policies for local land development. These policies, together with existing zoning regulations, establish the amount and distribution of land allocated for different uses. The current Land Use Elem ent was adopted in 2008. An update to the Land Use Element is being processed concurrently with the 2021–2029 Hous ing Element cycle and is expected to be adopted in 2022.

Residential Land Use Designations
The current General Plan designates substantial areas of land for residential development, with a variety of densities from very low (2 dwelling units per acre) to high (20 dwelling units per acre).

The Mixed Use designation allows for even higher density at 60 dwelling units per acre. Table 3-3 lists the current residential land use designations in the General Plan. 109
325

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-12
Table 3-3. City-Wide Land Use and Zoning
LAND USE CATEGORY DESCRIPTION MAX. DENSITY (DU/ACRE)
Very Low Residential (VLR) This category of residential land use is characterized by single-family detached homes on lots with a minimum
area of 0.5 acre, which allows for a maximum density of 2 du/acre.
2 Low Density Residential
(LDR)
This residential land use category is characterized by
single-family detached residential development.
5 Medium Density Residential
(MEDR)
Residential development in this category is typified by attached townhome units or garden-type multi-family
development.
8–12
High Density Residential
(HDR)
Residential development in the HDR land use category
corresponds to multi-family development characterized by apartments and condominiums.
12–20
Mixed Density Residential
(MDR)
This MDR land use category is intended to facilitate
single-family infill development in the event that
extraordinary developmental constraints, such as a lack of required sewer infrastructure, make the continued
development of the permitted high-density uses
impractical or infeasible. Residential development in the MDR land use category ranges from single-family
detached units to multi-family attached units, such as
apartments. The MDR zone district corresponds to this
General Plan land use designation.
1–15
Mixed Use (MU) This MU land use category is intended to facilitate well- integrated multi-family and commercial developments
adjacent to retail development. Permitted mix of uses
include multi-family residential up to a density of 60 du/ac, retail, office, civic, open space, and other similar uses as defined through the planned unit development process.
60 Notes: du/acre = dwelling units per acre
Emergency shelters and single-room occupancies are permitted in some commercial zones; see Table 3-5.

Specific Plans
The Land Use Element provides for Specific Plans, which allow for a variety of residential and business uses to locate or expand in the City. A Specific Plan identifies the location, extent, and density of new development and indicates specific development standards that are applicable within the planning area. In the event that a Specific Plan is proposed for an area that exceeds existing residential densities or introduces changes in land use designations not provided for on the Land Use Policy Map, a General Plan Amendment is required to designate the area as “Specific Plan” and to establish the development limits for the Specific Plan. Victorville currently has 14 Specific Plans governing land use development in designated areas throughout the City (Table 3-4).

110
326

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-13
Table 3-4. Specific Plan Land Use and Zoning

NAME DESCRIPTION SIZE
(ACRES)

DENSITY
(DU/ACRE)

DWELLING
UNITS
Brentwood A mixed-use, master-planned community, including primary and secondary residential development,
recreational uses and commercial development.
641.8 2–8 3,978
The Crossings This community includes a variety of neighborhoods and housing types, many of which are
interconnected through an extensive open space
framework that includes a system of trails.
449 5–18 2,656
Desert Gateway A transit-oriented development focused on a town center, series of village centers, and major
employment centers, all connected by transit.
10,203 2–60 26,100
Foxfire Ranch A high-quality, fa mily-oriented, master-planned community with a variety of housing types.
225 1–7 915
Mesa Verde A major planned mixed-use community, including primary and secondary residential uses and
commercial development and an open space/park
area.
653 2–20 3,384
Mohave Vistas A master- planned community composed of
residential and recreational land uses and a school
site.
219 3.5–9 966
Old Town A mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly community that is the focus for new, higher-intensity development in
the City.
210 Up to 35, up
to 48 with
density
bonus
84,746
Parkview A master- planned community composed of
residential, recreational, educational, and commercial
land uses connected via a network of landscaped
pedestrian environments.
177 4.0–12.5 715
Rancho Tierra A mixed-use master plan town including commercial, industrial, and residential uses in the western
addition portion of Victorville and adjacent to the City of Adelanto.
280 1–7.2 1,347
Southern California
Logistics Airport
Accommodations for a commercial airport and
aviation-related facilities, including compatible
industrial, commercial, and public/recreational uses.
8,703 NA NA
Talon Ranch A high-quality, family-oriented, master-planned community with supportive commercial uses, linked
with open space/trail system.
144 3–8 577
Vista Verde A high-quality development of multiple uses, including commercial, single-family residential, and
possibly a joint-use park/elementary school.
519 3.8–6 2,530
West Creek A variety of master-planned residential uses and an elementary school and open space.
406 2–8 1,598
Civic Center A sustainability plan for Victorville’s Civic Center that intends to revitalize the area, promote infill
development, reduce greenhouse gas emissions,
and encourage energy efficient development.
473 0.5–30 NA
Notes: du/acre = dwelling units per acre
111
327

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-14
Sphere of Influence
New annexations from land in the City’s sphere of influence co uld provide areas for additional residential development. One potential annexation area encompasses the boundary of the Desert Gateway Specific Plan and is shown as a significant section of the North Mojave Planning Area.

The Desert Gateway Specific Plan also has mi xed-use developments pro posed within it at maximum densities of 30 and 60 dwelling units per acre. With 120 acres in the “town center” potentially dedicated to housing, 4,872 units could be provided based on dwelling units per acre.

The smaller scale “village centers” allow for mixed-use development with a maximum density of 30 dwelling units per acre. With three separate areas and 45 acre s available, 1,350 units are possible.

Any annexation would be required to include concurrently two “island” areas, i.e., unincorporated areas located entirely within City boundaries. These have existing low-density single-family homes but do not currently have significant infrastructure improvements. Much of the housing is older and, therefore, may be more affordable than other developed areas of the City.

Zoning
Housing Element law specifies that jurisdictions must ident ify adequate site s to be made available through appropriate zoning and development standards to encourage the development of a variety of housing types for all economic segments of the population. Table 3-5 summarizes the various housing types permitt ed in the City’s zoning distri cts. As required, the City encourages the development of a variety of housing types through its Zoning Code and Municipal Code, including multi- family rental housing, housi ng for farmworkers, emergency shelters, Low-Barrier Navigation Centers (LBNCs), transitional housin g, supportive housing, single-room occupancy (SRO) units, manufactured housing, mobile home parks, and accessory dwelling units. The following sections provide further explanation of the potential for development of each of these housing types in the City.

112
328

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-15
Table 3-5. Permitted Residential Uses by Zone

RESIDENTIAL USES

EXCLUSIVE AGRICULTURAL (AE)

AGRICULTURE RESIDENTIAL (A)

SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL (S-R)
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1)
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-2)
HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-3)
VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-4)

MIXED DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR)

RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME PLANNED

DEVELOPMENT (R-MPD)
NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE (C1)
GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C2/C4)

ADMINISTRATIVE PROFESSIONAL

OFFICES (CA)

PUBLIC AND CIVIC (PC)
Single-family residence P P P P — — — P P — — — —
Multi-family (8 units/acre) — — — — P P P P — — — — —
Multi-family (15 units/acre) — — — — — P P P — — — — —
Multi-family (20 units/acre) — — — — — — P — — — — — —
Condominiums — — — C C C C C — — — — —
Manufactured/mobile homes P P P P — — — P P — — — —
Mobile home park — — — — C C C — — — — — —
Boardinghouse — — — — C C C C — — — — —
Commercial caretakers quarters C C C C C C C — — C — C C Single-room occupancy — — — — — C C C — — C — —
Emergency shelter — — — — C C C — — P — — —
Transitional or supportive housing P P P P P P P P P — — — — State-licensed care facilities, including
group, community, and residential (up
to six individuals)
P P P P — — — P P — — — —
Accessory dwelling unit P P P P — — — P P — — — —
Notes: C = conditional use permit required; P = permitted use; — = not permitted

113
329

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-16

3.4 Variety of Housing Types

3.4.1 Single-Family Housing
Single-family residences are permitted in the Exclusive Agricultural (AE), Agriculture Residential (A), Suburban Residential (S-R), Single Family Residential (R-1), Mi xed Density Residential (MDR), and Residential Mobile Home Planned Development (R-MPD) zones. Most of the City’s Specific Plans provide for single-family residential development at low to medium densities.

Single-family development requires a Site Plan Review, including evaluation of the project, using the City’s design guidelines.

3.4.2 Multi-Family Housing
Multi-family housing at a density up to eight dwelling units per ac re is permitted in the Medium Density Residential (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3), Very High Density Residential (R-4), and Mixed Density Residential (MDR) zones. Mult iple-family housing at a density up to 15 dwelling units per acre is permitted in the Hi gh Density Residential (R-3), Very High Density Residential (R-4), and Mixed Density Residential (MDR) zones. Multi-family density of up to 20 dwelling units per acre is only permitted in the Very High Density Residential (R-4) zone.

According to the City’s Development Code, hotels and motels with 20% or more units containing a kitchen or kitchenette are considered multi-family units.

The City’s Development Code also distinguishes between multi-family housing and condominiums with regard to permitted location. Unlike multi-family housing, condominiums are permitted in the Single Family Residential (R-1), Medium Density Residential (R-2), High Density Residential (R- 3), Very High Density Residential (R-4), and Mixed Density Residential (MDR) zones. In addition, the Old Town Specific Plan and Civic Center Spec ific Plan encourage high-density, multi-family residential development.

3.4.3 Manufactured Housing and Mobile Home Parks
The City’s Development Code distinguishes between manufactured and mobile homes primarily based on whether or not they include a permanent foundation. Acco rding to the code, mobile homes are vehicles containing one or more dw elling units without a permanent foundation. In contrast, manufactured homes are built on a permanent chassis but may be used with or without a permanent foundation. Both mobile and manufac tured homes are permitted in the Exclusive Agricultural (AE), Agricultur e Residential (A), Suburban Resid ential (S-R), Single Family Residential (R-1), Mixed Density Residentia l (MDR), and Residential Mobile Home Planned Development (R-MPD) zones, and subject to t he same property development standards as single-family detached units. Manufactured homes outside mobile home subdivisions must be on a permanent foundation and are s ubject to design regulations to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. The City has established desi gn criteria for manufactured homes consistent with California Government Code, Section 65852.3.
114
330

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-17
Mobile home parks, which include two or more mobile homes, are conditionally permitted in the Medium Density Residential (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3), and Very High Density Residential (R-4) zones on a minimum lot size of 5 acres. There are nine mobile home parks located in the City containing a total of 1,039 spaces.

3.4.4 Farmworker and Employee Housing
Pursuant to the California Employee Housing Act (Section 17000 of the California Health and Safety Code), any employee housing providing accommodations for six or fewer employees shall be deemed a single-family structure within a residential land use designation. Employee housing for six or fewer people must be permitt ed wherever a single-family residence is permitted. To comply with State law, no conditional use permit or variance can be required.

Despite the limited number of farmworkers in the City and surrounding area, the City allows employee housing, including housing for farmworker s, consistent with Health and Safety Code Sections 17021.5, 17021.6, and 17021.8. The Zoning Code stipulates t hat “any facility, place, or building maintained and operated to provide residential care for six or fewer people” and located “in a single-family zoning district shall be subject only to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone if required by state law.” The Zoning Code permits mobile homes for use as employee housing on the same parcel in the Exclusive Agriculture (AE) distri ct. Additionally, in the Agricult ure Residential (A) district, up to three single-family homes can be placed on parcels 3 acres or larger.

In addition, to the above provisions, zoning is available for housing for farmworkers through the variety of other housing types encouraged in the Zoning Code, in cluding multi-family, SRO, manufactured housing, and accessory dwelling units (ADUs).

3.4.5 Single-Room Occupancy
Single-room occupancies are secure residential units that include comm unal or individual kitchens and communal or individual bathroom facilities. They are conditionally permitted in the High Density Residential (R-3), Very High Density Residential (R-4), Mixed Density Residential (MDR), and General Commercial (C2/C4) zones.

The City’s SRO regulations establish the following conditions:
 A management plan approved by the Planning Commission that includes a 24-hour resident manager and security monitoring system.
 The provision of common areas.

115
331

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-18
 One parking space per two units, subject to review and adjustment as part of the conditional use permit review process based upon the proximity of the development to commercial support services and public transporta tion facilities, as well as the inclusion of bicycle parking.
 Common facilities that serve the residents of the SRO development if SRO living units do not provide individual cooking or bathroom facilities.
 When developed as part of a mixed-use development, allowable only in the General Commercial (C2) zone, compatibility with the commercial uses, which must be located on the ground floor.
 Accommodation for the storage space needs fo r tenants in an area or areas separate from the SRO living units.

While there are no SROs currently in the City, the Housing Element includes a program (Program PP-I.3) to encourage development of at least one SRO development within the Planning Period.

3.4.6 Emergency Shelters
Senate Bill 2, enacted in October 2007, requires local governments to identify one or more zoning categories that allow emergency shelters (year-round shelters for people experiencing homelessness) without discretionary action. Assembly Bill (AB) 139 (2019) added stricter requirements and restrictions on cities’ ability to regulate emergency shelters. The Housing Element has a program (Program PP-A.1) to bring the City in to compliance with AB 139, as codified in California Government Code, Secti on 65583 (a)(4)(A). Specifically, the City will modify the portions of its M unicipal Code dealing with the location of and distance between emergency shelters, as well as parking requirements, and will ensure the City uses only objective development standards to come into compliance with current State requirements.

The identified zones in which emer gency shelters are allowed must have sufficient capacity to accommodate at least one year-round shelter and accommodate the City’s share of the regional unsheltered homeless population. According to th e 2020 point-in-time count for Victorville, 298 people experiencing unsheltered homelessness were living in the City.

The City’s Development Code allows emergency shelters without discretionary action in the Neighborhood Service (C-1) zone and with a conditional use permit in the Medium Density Residential (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3), and Very High Density Residential (R-4) zones, as well as with a conditional use permit in the Mixed Use and residential districts of the Old Town Specific Plan. The maximum lot coverage in the C-1 zone is 40%, with a maximum height of 35 feet for buildings in this zone. Any emergency shelter developed in the C-1 zone would be required to be set back 30 feet from a re sidential district. Proposed Prog ram PP-I.1 will evaluate this 116
332

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-19
standard to determine whether it constrains the development of emergency shelters, and staff will revise the standard as needed.

Figure 3-1 illustrates locations in the City where an emergenc y shelter can realistically be developed without discretionary action, i.e., vacant land parcels between 10,000 square feet and 5 acres in size, zoned C-1, and located within 0.5 miles of a tr ansit stop. There are 132 such parcels totaling more than 200 acres. Figure 3-1 also shows the location of Homeless Resource Centers in the City, many of which are within 0.5 miles of locations where emergency shelters can be developed. In addition, Figure 3-1 shows the location of the City’s flood zones and transmission lines, as those areas would not be suitable for development without mitigation. The majority of sites are not located within flood zones or near transmission lines. No areas of the City have been identified as entirely unsuitable for human habitation. The City has sufficient capacity to accommodate multiple year-round shelters to serve the City’s share of the regional unsheltered homeless population.

The City’s commitment to providing sufficient emergency shelters for the community is evident in its commitment to and partnership in t he development of the Wellness and Recuperative Center Campus. The Wellness and Recuperative Center Campus will include 120 beds of interim housing, 48 beds for recuperative care, a multipurpose center, dining, a medical clinic, a dog run/kennel, and offices for support services, all with a 24-hour operation schedule. The Wellness and Recuperative Center Campus will be built on City-owned land within the Old Town Specific Plan Area. More information about the Wellness and Recuperative Center Campus and the City’s efforts to accommodate emergency shelters more generally, is provided in Chapter 2, Community Profile.

3.4.7 Low-Barrier Navigation Centers
AB 101 requires jurisdictions to allow a LBNC devel opment of up to 50 units by right in areas zoned for mixed uses and nonresident ial zones permitting multi-family uses if the development meets specified requirements. The City may also choose to allow larger LBNC developments by right in these zones. According to the Califo rnia Government Code, Section 65660, a “Low- Barrier Navigation Center” is defined as “a Housing First, low-barrier, service-enriched shelter focused on moving people into permanent housing that provides temporary living facilities while case managers connect individuals experiencing homelessness to income, public benefits, health services, shelter, and housing.”
The Housing Element has a program (Program PP-I.1) to permit development of LBNCs by right in areas zoned for mixed-use and nonresidentia l zones permitting multi-family uses, in accordance with California Health and Safety Code, Sections 65660 through 65668. The requirements applied to LBNCs in the aforementioned zones will be limited to the following:
117
333

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-20
 The proposed LBNC shall offer services to connect people to permanent housing through a services plan that identifies services staffing.
 The proposed LBNC is linked to a coordinated entry system so that staff in the interim facility or staff who co-locate in the facility may conduct assessments and provide services to connect people to permanent housing.
 The proposed LBNC complies with Chapter 6.5 (commencing with Section 8255) of Division 8 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
 The proposed LBNC has a system for entering info rmation regarding client stays, client demographics, client income, and exit destination through the local Homeless Management Information System as defined by Section 578.3 of Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

While California Health and Safety Code, Sections 65660 through 65668, are designed to be repealed as of January 1, 2027, t he City intends for its LBNC regulations to remain in the Municipal Code indefinitely.

3.4.8 Transitional and Supportive Housing
The City’s Development Code defines transitional housing as follows:

Housing configured as rental housing developments, with supportive services for up to twenty-four months but not less t han six months. Transitional housing is designated and targeted for recently homeless persons and is intended to move recently homeless persons to permanent housing as quickly as possible and recirculate the assisted housing to another eligible program recipient. This type of housing includes self-sufficiency devel opment services, and limits rents and service fees to an ability-to-pay formula reasonably consistent with the United States Department of Housing and Ur ban Development's requirements for subsidized housing for low-income persons.

Consistent with California Government C ode, Section 65582, the Ci ty’s Development Code defines supportive housing as follows:

Housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by persons with low incomes who have one or more disabilities, including mental illness, HIV or AIDS, substance abuse, or other ch ronic health condition, or individuals eligible for services provided pursuant to the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act (Division 4.5 (commencing with Sect ion 4500) of the Welfare and Institutions Code) and may include, among other populations, adults, emancipated minors, families with children, elderly persons, y oung adults aging out of the foster care 118
334

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-21
system, individuals exiting from instit utional settings, veterans, and homeless people; and that is linked to an onsite or offsite service that assists the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community.

State law requires transitional and supportive housing to be defined as a residential use and subject only to the same regulations as comparable residential uses. Transitional and supportive housing are permitted in the Agri culture Residential (A), Exclusive Agricultural (AE), Suburban Residential (S-R), Single Family Residential (R -1), Medium Density Re sidential (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3), Very High Density Residential (R-4), Mixed Density Residential (MDR), Residential Mobile Home Planne d Development (R-MPD) zones. They are not subject to any regulations beyond what is required for other residential uses in the same zones.

AB 2162 (2018) further requires supportive housing projects of 50 units or fewer to be permitted by right in zones where multi-family and mixed-use developments are permitted when the development meets certain conditions. The City may choose to allow larger supportive housing projects by right in these zones. AB 2162 also prohibits minimum par king requirements for supportive housing within 0.5 mile of public transit. The Housing Element has a program (Program PP-A.1) for the City to come into compliance with these recent legal changes, including to permit transitional and supportive housing by right in mixed-use zones.

See Chapter 2, Community Profile, for more information about the City’s efforts to accommodate transitional and supportive housing.

3.4.9 Residential, Group, and Community Care Facilities Residential care facilities often prov ide care to people with disabili ties, including those with physical and mental disabilities. State law allows residential care facilities of six or fewer individuals in any single-family zone. Consistent with State law, the City permits small residential care facilities that serve six or fewer clients in every residential zone that permits single-family units. Specifically, the City’s Zoning Code permits State-licensed care facilities, in cluding group, community, and residential care facilities, by right in the Exclus ive Agriculture (AE), Agriculture Residential (A), Suburban Residential (S-R), Single Family Residential (R-1), Mixed Density Residential (MDR), and Residential Mobile Home Planned Development (R-MPD) zones. Proposed Program PP-I.1 requires the City to provide revisions to the Development Code to clarify that both licensed and unlicensed residential care facilities for six or fewer individuals are permitted in every residential zone that permits single-family units.

Larger facilities would fall under the definition of boarding houses or convalescent or rest homes.

Boarding houses are conditionally permitted in the Medium Density Residential (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3), Very High Density Re sidential (R-4), and Mix ed Density Residential (MDR) zones, and convalescent homes are conditionally permitted in the Medium Density 119
335

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-22
Residential (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3 ), Very High Density Residential (R-4), Mixed Density Residential (MDR), and Ne ighborhood Service (C-1) zones. The City’s Development Code does not specify which zones allow rest homes. Potential conditions of approval may include hours of operation, security, loading requirements, and management. Conditions would be similar to those for other similar uses in the same zones and would not serve to constrain the development of such facilities. Occupancy standards for residential care facilities are the same as occupancy standards for all other residentia l uses. The City has not adopted a spacing requirement for residential care facilities. Larger re sidential care facilities are not allowed in the Very Low Density (VLDR) or Low Density (LDR) zones. The VLDR zones are largely located at the periphery of the city and have a more ru ral character. They typically have limited infrastructure and lack access to services and transit. Proposed Program PP-I.1 requires the City to evaluate the LDR zone to assess the feasibility of permitting large residential care facilities to ensure that the zoning regu lations do not unduly constrain dev elopment of these facilities, and to review the Development Code as necessary.

3.4.9.1 Definition of Family
Including a definition of “famil y” in the Zoning Ordinance may e ffectively restrict access to housing for households failing to qualify as a family by that defin ition. A restrictive definition of family that limits the number of and differentiates between related and unrelated individuals living together may illegally limit the development and siting of group homes for people with disabilities but not for housing families that are similarly si zed or situated. The Ci ty’s Development Code does not include a definition of family.

3.4.10 Accessory Dwelling Units
An ADU is an attached or detached residential unit that provides complete independent living facilities for one or more people. A junior acce ssory dwelling unit (JADU) is an ADU contained entirely within a single-family residence. Sect ion 16-3.07.030 of the Ci ty’s Development Code regulates ADUs. Currently, ADUs are permitted in the Exclusive Agricultural (AE), Agriculture Residential (A), Suburban Residential (S-R), Single Family Residential (R-1), Mixed Density Residential (MDR), and Residential Mobile Home Planned Development (R-MPD) zones.

Recent State legislation, including AB 68, AB 881, AB 587, AB 671, and Senate Bill 13 modified the way local jurisdictions are allowed to regul ate ADUs and JADUs. This legislation promotes the construction of new ADUs and JADUs and limits the ways citi es can regulate their design.

Under current State law, the City may adopt r egulations governing the design of ADUs, but no lot coverage, floor area ratio, open space, or mi nimum lot size can preclude the construction of a “statewide exemption ADU,” which is an ADU with an area up to 800 square feet, height up to 16 feet, and 4-foot side and rear yard setbacks. Furt her, to comply with the new State law, the City will expand the zones and circumstances under which ADUs and JADUs are allowed, modify the unit size requirement and eliminate the c onverted parking replacem ent requirement. The 120
336

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-23
Housing Element contains a progr am (Program PP-A.1) to bring the City into compliance with the new State restrictions on local ADU regulations.

3.4.11 Development Standards
The City’s Development Code contains development standards for each zoning district intended to protect and promote the heal th, safety, and general welfare of residents and to implement General Plan policies. Developm ent standards have the potential to limit the number of units that may be constructed on a par ticular property, which in turn , can increase the per-unit land costs and result in higher development costs that may impact housing affordability. Development standards for residential zones are presented in Table 3-6. Most development standards are typical and consistent with standards established in surrounding communities. 121
337

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-24
Table 3-6. Development Standards

DEVELOPMENT

STANDARDS

EXCLUSIVE AGRICULTURAL (AE)

AGRICULTURE RESIDENTIAL (A)

SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL (S-R)
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1)
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-2)
HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-3)
VERY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-4)

MIXED DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR)

RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME PLANNED

DEVELOPMENT (R-MPD)
NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE (C-1)
Maximum lot coverage 40%
Minimum net lot area 5
acres
1 acre

0.5 acre
7,200
sf
8,500
sf
10,000
sf
10,000
sf
7,200
sf
7,200
sf
10,000
sf
Maximum dwelling unit
density (per gross acre) NA NA Up to
2 Up to
5 Up to
8 Up to
15 Up to
20 Up to
15 Up to
5 NA
Lot width (feet) 75
Interior 150 150 85 60 60 70 70 60 60
Corner 150 150 85 65 65 75 75 65 65
Reverse corner 150 150 85 75 65 75 75 65 65
Cul-de-sac (at front
setback) 150 150 85 60 60 70 70 60 60
Lot depth (feet) 150 150 150 100 100 100 100 100 100 NA Minimum front yard
setbacks 10
Porch 25 25 20 14 20 20 15 20 20
First story living (feet) 25 25 20 20 20 20 15 20 20
Minimum side yard setback
(feet)
Street side 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Reverse corner street side 15 10
Interior side 10 10 5
&10 5 & 10 5 5 5 5 5 0
Separation between
dwelling units (feet) NA NA 15 NA NA NA NA NA NA 302
Minimum rear yard setback
(feet) 20 10 20 20 20 20 15 10 20 0
Maximum height (feet) 35 35 30 30 301 351 351 35 20 35
Notes:
1 No principle building shall exceed a height of one story when located within one hundred feet of an existing single-family residence.
2 Minimum separation from residential district.

The maximum height of residential buildings in the S-R, R-1, and R-2 is 30 feet, while the maximum height in the AE, A, R-3, R-4, MDR, and C-1 zones is 35 feet. Within the R-MPD zone, the maximum height is 20 feet. In addition, buildi ngs in the R-2, R-3, and R-4 zones are limited 122
338

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-25
to one story when located within 100 feet of an existing single-family residence. With these height limitations it may be difficult to achieve the densities allowable within some of the higher-density zones in the City, such as the R-4 (20 du/ac) zone. This is particularly true for sites located within 100 feet of an existing single-family residence, which are limited to a one-story height. Proposed Program PP-B.3 requires the City to assess existing development standards, including height limits, to evaluate their im pact on residential development and revise as needed to encourage the creation of additional housing within the City.

3.4.11.1 Reasonable Accommodation
State law requires the City to accommodate reques ts from people with disabilities to waive specific requirements or standards of the City’s Development Code to ensure that their homes are accessible. For example, allowable us es in setbacks may need to be modified to accommodate the construction of a ramp for wheelchair users. Whether a particular modification is reasonable depends on the ci rcumstances and must be decided on a case-by-case basis.

Section 16-3.08.100 of the City’s Development Code outlines the process for requesting a reasonable accommodation to City standards. Reasonable accommodation requests may be approved if they are necessary for people with disa bilities to use and enjoy a dwelling unit in question; do not create a health, safety, and welfare issue in regards to land use, zoning, or building; and do not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the City.

3.4.11.2 Parking Requirements
Table 3-7 includes the City’s Development Code parking requirements.

Off-street parking is costly to construct and can limit the spac e on a site available for other purposes. Requiring excessive off-street parking can significantly increas e the cost of housing development. For this reason, off-street parki ng requirements for multi-family residences are typically required proportionate to the size of the residence, with more parking required when residences have more bedrooms, and less for smalle r residences. In some cities, off-street Table 3-7. Parking Requirements for Residential Uses

USE REQUIRED SPACES
Single-family residence 2 spaces within an enclosed garage Multiple-family residences 2 spaces per unit – 1 space shall be covered Condominiums 2 covered spaces per unit (1 space for 1-bedroom units) + 1 uncovered space per 2 units
Manufactured/Mobile Homes within the R-MPD district 2 spaces that may be tandem within a garage, carport, or awning
Mobile home park 2 adjoining spaces per unit that may be tandem + 1 space per 5 units
Boardinghouse 1 space per sleeping room + 3 additional spaces Emergency shelter 1 space for every 10 adult beds, plus 1 additional space for the on-site manager
Transitional or Supportive Housing Same as comparable residential uses Accessory Dwelling Unit None
123
339

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-26
parking requirements may be reduced for residential uses that have lower parking demand, such as senior housing. The City requires two off-st reet parking spaces for multi-family residential units, regardless of size or the population they serve, plus additional guest parking for condominium projects. Proposed Program PP-A.8 requires the City to evaluate existing off-street parking requirements and make recommendations to reduce the number of required off-street parking spaces for residential development with expected lower parking demand.

3.4.11.3 Density Bonus
While the City’s Zoning Code is currently outdated with respec t to density bonuses, the City follows the State-mandated density bonus allowance requirements. Bonuses are provided based on the following percentages:
 Provide at least 10% of the total units of the housing development for households with lower incomes as defined in California Health and Safety Code, Section 50079.5.  Provide at least 5% of the total units of the housing development for households with very low incomes as defined in California Health and Safety Code, Section 50105.  Provide a senior housing development as defined in Civil Code, Sections 51.3 and 51.12, or mobile home park that limits resi dency based on age requirements for housing for seniors pursuant to Civil Code, Sections 798.76 and 799.5.  Provide at least 10% of the total dwelling units in a common interest development as defined in California Civil Code, Section 1351, for people and families with moderate incomes as defined in Section 50093 of the California Health and Safety Code provided that all units in the development are offered to the public for purchase.

The Housing Element has a program (Program PP-A.2) to create a menu of density bonuses in exchange for the provision of comm unity benefits and amenities. Th is will allow the City to incentivize local priorities aside from affordable housing, which is all that is incentivized by the State density bonus parameters.

3.4.11.4 Building Codes and Enforcement
The City has adopted the 2019 edition of the California Building Code (CBC), which incorporates the 2018 International Building Code with California amendments, and establishes standards and requires inspections at various stages of construction to ensure code compliance. The City’s building code also requires new residential constr uction to comply with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards, which s pecifies that a minimum percentage of dwelling units in new developments must be fully accessible to the ph ysically disabled. Amendments to the CBC have been related to state mandated fire code and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requirements. While the incor poration of these meas ures may raise housing 124
340

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-27
construction costs, these standards are necessary to provide access to homes for people with disabilities and to ensure a safe living envir onment for the community . Further, the CBC is adopted by many cities throughout California and does not, in general, pose a constraint to development of affordable housing.

Code enforcement in the City is the responsibility of the Code Enforcement Division of the Development Department. The code enforcement team assists residents and business owners in an effort to maintain a comfortable, safe, and clean living and business environment through community awareness and enforcement programs. The Code Enforcement Division investigates complaints pertaining to private property, incl uding but not limited to the storage of inoperable vehicles, junk and debris, unsecured or unmaint ained commercial and residential properties, illegal dumping, and violations of zoning, bui lding, and business license regulations. Code enforcement reacts to citizen complaints and proactively addresses conditions that generate blight, negatively impact residential communities or commercial zones, and affect the public’s health and safety. Residents can file code enforcement complaints online on the City’s website, by email, by phone, or in-person at City Hall in Victorville.

The City offers residential compliance assist ance to address code violations through several loan programs and solid waste services. The Seni or Home Repair is designed to assist low- income persons at least 62 years old, perm anently disabled or handicappe d, with a one-time grant to make eligible home repairs. The Resi dential Rehabilitation Program can be used to correct health and safety issues or code violati ons. This program offers low interest deferred loans to income eligible homeowners. To assist with cleaning up trash and removing bulky items, the City offers bulky item pick-up services and free bulky item drop-off, available only to residents of Victorville.

3.4.11.5 Permitting
The permitting process required for residential dev elopment contributes to the cost of housing because these costs are ultimately reflected in the selling price. The permitting and review process can also increase the time it takes for new development to be completed, thus slowing the production of new housing supply and adding to costs for developers who must hold land in anticipation of entitlement.

The City’s goal, as encapsulated in Program PP- B.2, is to expedite pr ocessing of residential development applications. Construction of a projec t can often begin quickly because the City’s Development Department takes ca re of all plan check responsib ilities, including fire and engineering. The result is a streamlined and efficient review, cutting the time the plans are with the City. If complete, all plans are turned around within 4 weeks of the initial submittal and 2 weeks of the revised submittal. Currently, the City does not have a formal procedure for expediting projects with affordability components.
125
341

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-28
Permits for Residential Use
Site Plans
Site Plan Review is required for all new resi dential development and all expansions of existing residential uses, with the exception of expansions that do not add habitable space or a kitchen, or projects that require a conditional use permit. The purpose of Site Plan Review is to ensure that new development is consistent with City General Plan goals and policies, Development Code objectives and standards, with the City’s design guidelines, and with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Site Plan Review allows the City discretion in evaluating projects and lets the approving authority place reasonable conditions on residential development to ensure that the public health, safety, and welfar e are maintained. Development is reviewed to evaluate any potential impacts on the privacy, views, and overall quality of existing buildings in the area, and to ensure adverse impacts and disruptions to surrounding uses are minimized.

Depending on the type and location of the proposed development, site plans may be approved by the zoning administrator or their designee or may require Planning Commission approval.

Development on existing sites is generally appr oved by the zoning admin istrator, while new development is approved by the Planning Commission and appealable to the City Council. Minor site plans approved by the zoning administrator on existing sites do not require a public hearing, but site plans reviewed by the Planning Commission require a public hearing. While the site plan review process allows for considerable discretion on the part of the approving authority, the City is a development-friendly community and has hist orically approved most permit requests for residential development.

Conditional Use Permits
Condominiums, mobile home parks, boardinghous es, commercial caretaker quarters, single- room occupancies, and some emergency shelters require conditional use permits for approval.

Conditional use permits may be approved by the z oning administrator for projects on existing sites or modifications to existing conditional use permits. All other conditional use permits require approval by the Planning Commission. A public hearing is required for approval of a conditional use permit, regardless of the approving author ity. Findings are required for approval of conditional use permits, which include the determination that the project complies with relevant requirements in the City’s Development Code, is consistent with the General Plan, and will not create traffic that will overload the street syst em or create a public safety hazard. Conditional use permits typically require 4–6 weeks for processing.

3.4.12 Fees
Development fees that apply to residential development in Vict orville are not set based on the actual cost of services but rather on a se t schedule adopted by the City Council. Current City fees are as follows.
126
342

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-29

3.4.12.1 Permit Processing Fees
Table 3-8 includes the City’s permit processing fees.

Table 3-8. Permit Processing Fees

PERMIT FEE
Conditional Use Permit $2,454.18
Minor Conditional Use Permit $429.48
Planned Unit Development $1,840.63 + $18.40 per lot
Development Agreement $4,908.35 + $613.54 per revision
Environmental Assessment:

Categorical Exemption $122.71
Initial Study/Negative Declaration $1,227.08
Environmental Impact Report Actual cost
Variance $1,227.08
Minor Variance $889.64
Minor Deviation $306.77
Tentative Tract Map $1,840.63 + $18.40
Tentative Parcel Map $1,227.08
General Plan Amendment $1,840.63
Specific Plan $6,135.42
Specific Plan Amendment $3,067.72
Site Plan/Modification $2,454.18
Minor Site Plan $470.83
Building Plan Review Sliding scale based on valuation ($29.25+) Building Permit Sliding scale based on valuation ($45+) Development Impact Fee $11,327.00/single-family unit
$7,639.00/multi-family unit
Victor Valley Water Reclamation Authority
Fee/Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant Fee Varies by number of fixtures ($200+) Sewer Capacity Typically $350 per house
Technology Fee 4.8% of plan review, building permit, mechanical permit, electrical permit, and plumbing permit fees
Green Building Fee Sliding scale based on valuation ($1.00+)

The actual fees for a building pe rmit cover a wide variety of cost s. To provide an estimate of what the costs amount to, fees were calculated for a 1,500-square-foot single-family residence (assuming a quarter-acre lot) and an 800-square- foot apartment unit (a ssuming a 20 unit-per- acre density). The fees are as follows (Table 3-9).
127
343

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-30
Table 3-9. Building Permit Fees Schedule
FEE 1500-SQUARE-FOOT SINGLE
FAMILY
800-SQUARE-FOOT APARTMENT
UNIT
Green Building $6.00 $3.13
Seismic $16.25 $7.92
Imaging $81.25 $39.59
Plan Review $554.00 (reduced by 70% for tract
houses)
$198.37
Building Permit $860.00 $305.19
Electrical Permit $139.75 $102.70
Plumbing Permit $134.00 $115.00
Mechanical Permit $74.45 $74.45
Bear Valley Bridge $180.00 (only if in specified area) $180.00 (if in specified area) Goodwill Bridge $280.00 (only if in specif ied area) $280.00 (if in specified area) Street Light $300.00 (scattered single-family only) NA
Fire Hydrant $500.00 (scattered single-family only) NA
Storm Drain $2,585/acre (if in specified area) $2,585/acre (if in specified area) Sewer Assessment Determined by Eng. Dept. Determined by Eng. Dept.

Sewer Capacity $350.00 $350.00
Water $4,750 (approximate)
Total (Range) $7,445,75 - $8,691.95 $1,325.60 - $1,605.60

Several agencies that are separate from the City charge fees, which affect the cost of building.

Those agencies and fees are as follows:
 Victor Valley Wastewater Re clamation Authority/Southern California Logistics Airport (SCLA) Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant (sewer): $3,750 per unit  Residential School District Fees (amounts are per square foot):
o $3.39 (Adelanto Elementary School District)
o $1.22–$2.17 (Victor Valley Union High School District) o $5.36 (Hesperia Unified School District)
o $?? (Snowline Joint Unified School District)
o $2.89 (Victor Elementary School District)
Using the scenarios above and aver aging certain specified areas and the school district fees, the building permit fee amount (e xcluding permit processing fees) for a single-family home generally ranges from $16,196 to $17,443 and the f ee amount for a multi-family unit generally ranges from $7,743 to $8,023.
128
344

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-31

3.4.12.2 Transparency in Development Process
To increase transparency in the development process as required by law, the City has a variety of tools available for developers. The City’s website includes an online permitting portal/fee estimator, a tool to look up zoning by property, as well as t he City’s zoning map, development code, and land use plans. Most development and building fees are posted on the City’s website, but permit fees are not listed online. Proposed Program PP-B.5 requires the City to add the current permit fees to the fee information available on the City’s website.

3.4.13 Other Local Programs

3.4.13.1 Required Improvements
For new development on unimproved sites, the City requires the developer to construct on-site improvements and contribute to its fair share of off-site improvements. The typical residential street width is 40 feet. A gutter, a 6-inch cu rb, and a 6-foot-wide sidewalk are also required.

Typically, water and sewer connections are on all existing City streets. New development will connect to the adjacent infrastructure connections.

New single-family development in Victorville occurs on large expanses of land, often through the Specific Plan process. A require ment of Specific Plan develop ment is that all roads and infrastructure be planned and implemented as part of the development. This requirement enables infrastructure costs to be shared among a large number of houses (typically 200+ units), thereby reducing the per-unit site improvement cost.

3.5 Reductions to Constraints
The City intends to address the constraints ident ified here as described in Chapter 7, Housing Plan, of this Housing Element, particularly with the programs mentioned in this chapter.

The City currently has not adopt ed written procedures for the SB 35 (Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017) Streamlined Minister ial Approval Process. The City presently does not have a written procedure to provide affordable housing with priority for water and sewer services consistent with SB 1087. Proposed Program PP-O.3 addresses these requi rements, and includes the requirement that the City immediately deliver the 6 th Cycle Housing Element, once adopted, to water and sewer service providers.

129
345

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-32

This page intentionally left blank.

130
346

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-33
Figure 3-1. Potential Emergency Shelter Locations without Discretionary Action

131
347

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 3: Housing Constraints
3-34

This page intentionally left blank.

132
348

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-1
4 HOUSING RESOURCES AND

OPPORTUNITIES

4.1 Identification of Adequate Sites for Future
Housing Needs
State law requires that jurisdictions provide an adequate number of sites to allow for and facilitate the production of their share of regional hous ing. To determine whether a jurisdiction has sufficient land to accommodate its share of regional ho using needs for all income groups, that jurisdiction must identify “adequate sites.” Under State law (California Government Code, Section 65583[c][1]), adequate si tes are those with appropria te zoning and development standards—with services and facilities—needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of housing for all income levels.

4.1.1 Regional Housing Targets
Table 4-1 shows the 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation for the City of Victorville (City or Victorville), as determined by the Southern Ca lifornia Association of Governments, for the 8-year period (2021–2029).

Table 4-1. 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation (2021–2029)

INCOME CATEGORY DWELLING UNITS PERCENT
Extremely Low (30% AMI or less) 868 10.6%
Very Low (31 to 50% AMI) 867 10.6%
Low (51 to 80% AMI) 1,136 13.9%
Moderate (81 to 120% AMI) 1,504 18.4%
Above Moderate (Over 120% AMI) 3,790 46.4%
Total 8,165 100.0%
Note: The City has a RHNA allocation of 1,735 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% of the very-low-income units as extremely low. Assuming an even split, the City’s RHNA allocation of 1,735 very-low-income units may be divided into 867 very low and 868 extremely low income units. However, for purposes of identifying adequate sites for the RHNA allocation, State law does not mandate the separate accounting for the extremely low income category.

Housing Element law does not require the City to ensure that the numbers of housing units identified in the RHNA are built within the planning period. Howe ver, the law requires that the City provide an inventory of land suitably zoned and with available infrastructure and utilities to meet that need.

California Government Code, Section 65583.2(c )(3)(B), specifies that a minimum density of 30 units per acre is necessary to meet the City’s low- and very-low-income housing needs. 133
349

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-2
The City satisfied its 5th Cycle RHNA requirement by planning for the number of units assigned to it in that cycle. Progress in the City’s residential development permitting during the 5th Cycle is documented in the City’s Annual Progress Reports. Chapter 8, Adequate Sites Inventory Analysis and Methodology, along with Appendix C, det ail the City’s plan to satisfy its 6th Cycle RHNA requirement.

4.2 Financial Resources

4.2.1 Federal Funding Sources

4.2.1.1 Home Investment Partnerships Funds
The Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program is a federal program created as a result of the National Housing Affordability Act of 1990. Local jurisdictions may use HOME funds to develop and support affordable rental housing and homeownership affordability through acquisition, including assistance to homebuyer s, new construction, reconstruction, or rehabilitation of non-luxury housing with suitable amenities, including real property acquisition, site improvements, conversion, demolition, and other expenses, such as financing costs and relocation expenses of any displaced persons, families, businesses, or organizations. HOME funds may also be used to provide tenant-based r ental assistance. All housing developed with HOME funds must serve families with low and very low incomes.

The City formed the Town of Apple Valley and Ci ty of Victorville Consortium (Consortium) to meet the threshold of obtaining HOME entitlement status with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The successful formation of the Consortium resulted in an annual allocation of HOME funds to both communities. For Fiscal Year 2021–2022, the Consortium anticipates receiving approximat ely $783,345. Of that amount, the City and the Town of Apple Valley will receive an estimated $523,797 and $259,548, respectively.

The City has successfully used HOME funds to assist with the Mortgage Assistance Program, which can provide up to $55,000 for down payment and closing costs assistance with no payments for 30 years with a 3% interest, deferr ed loan. Funds are made available to first-time homebuyers that have contributed 1% toward the pur chase price of their primary residence on a first-come, first-served basis.

4.2.1.2 Community Development Block Grant Program
Through the federal Community Development Bl ock Grant (CDBG) Program, HUD provides funding for a range of community development activities. CDBG funds are awarded for housing activities, including acquisition and rehabilitation, homebuyer assistance, economic development, homeless services, and public services. CDBG fu nds are subject to certain restrictions and generally cannot be used for new housing construction. CDBGs primarily benefit households with incomes not exceeding 80% of the County area median income. 134
350

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-3
The City is a CDBG entitlement city based on its demographics and receives CDBG funds annually. The City recently received an award of $1,377,613 and released a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) in November 2020, with applications due in January 2021.

These funds are used for a variety of housing programs, including the following:
 Residential Rehabilitation Program – This program offers low-interest deferred loans to income-eligible homeowners for improvements to correct health and safety or building code violations, or to fund maintenance to housing units to prevent deterioration and dilapidation. Eligible progr am repairs include roof, wind ow, plumbing, sewer, and driveway repair/replacement.
 Senior/Disabled Home Repair Program – This program is designed to assist homeowners with low incomes who are at least 62 years of age, permanently disabled, or handicapped, by providing a one-time grant in an amount of not less $1,000 and up to $15,000, to make eligible home repairs.

The City is anticipated to use the majority of remaining CDBG and HOME funds on solutions for persons experiencing homelessness. It is important to note that the City and the Town of Apple Valley prepared a 2017–2021 Consolidated Pl an and 2017–2018 Action Plan (Consortium Consolidated Action Plan) to comply with HUD’s federal block grant funding requirements. The Consortium Consolidated Action Plan identifie s overall housing and co mmunity development needs for the Consortium.

The Consortium Consolidated Action Plan identifies the needs, prio rities, goals, and allocation strategies for CDBG and HOME funding for program years July 1, 2017, to June 30, 2021. Based on an extensive public participation process, the needs asse ssment, and the housing market analysis, the City determined to direct its funding to the following priorities:
 Support services for the people experiencing homelessness and those at risk for homelessness
 Human services
 Increased economic development and employment opportunities  Housing programs
 Accessibility and mobility

4.2.1.3 U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Housing Service The U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Housing Service provides loans in rural areas to finance homes and building sites. Rural Rental Housing Loans are direct, competitive mortgage loans made to provide affordable multi-family rental housing for families with very low, low, and 135
351

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-4
moderate incomes; seniors; and people with disabi lities. More information is available on the U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development website.

4.2.1.4 Housing Opportunities fo r Persons with AIDS Program The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS Program was established to provide housing assistance and related supportive services for people with HIV/AIDS who have low incomes and their families. Housing Opportunities for Pers ons with AIDS Program funds may be used for a wide range of housing, social services, program planning, and development costs, including but not limited to the acquisition, rehabilitation, or new construction of housing units; costs for facility operations; rental assistance; and short-term payments to prevent homelessness.

4.2.1.5 Section 108 Program
Section 108 is the loan guarantee provision of the CDBG Program. This provision provides communities with a source of financing fo r a variety of housing and economic development activities. All rules and requirements of the CDBG Program apply, and therefore, all projects and activities must principally benefit people with lo w and moderate incomes, aid in the elimination or prevention of blight, and/or meet urgent needs of the community.

Monies received per the Section 108 loan guarant ee program are limited to no more than five times the applicant’s most recently appr oved CDBG amount less prior Section 108 commitments. Activities eligible for these funds include economic development activities eligible under the CDBG Program; acquisition of real property; rehabilitation of publicly owned property; housing rehabilitation eligible u nder the CDBG Program; constr uction, reconstruction, or installation of public facilities; related relocati on, clearance, or installation of public facilities; payment of interest on the guaranteed loan and issuance costs of public offerings; debt service reserves; and public works and site improvements.

Section 108 loans are secured and repaid by pledges of future and current CDBG funds.

Additional security requirements may also be imposed on a case-by-case basis.

4.2.1.6 Legacy Programs
The HUD 811 program provides funding to devel op and subsidize rental housing with the availability of supportive services for adults with disabilities who have very low and extremely low incomes, allowing people with disabilities to live as independently as possible in the community by subsidizing rental housing opportunities.

The HUD 236 program provides an interest rate reduction payment to subsidize debt service costs, effectively operating as a subsidy to the developer to reduce the cost of the project and, thus, the rent levels needed to support it. Projects using this program are often coupled with rental housing assistance payments to reach households with lower incomes. Under Section 236, two rent schedules were worked out for residents with incomes at or below 80% of area 136
352

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-5
median income one: (1) a “market rent” based on the cost of a market rate mortgage and (2) a “basic rent,” a figure based on a 1% mortgage. The tenant pays the greater of the basic rent or 25% of their income but in no case would rent payments exceed the market rent.

4.2.1.7 Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
The federal Section 8 program provides rental assistance to households with low income. With a Section 8 voucher, households pay 30–40% of their income toward housing, and the San Bernardino Housing Authority (HASBC) pays the rest up to cert ain maximum rent limits. The vouchers are paid directly to the property ow ners. The HASBC inspects its tenants’ units annually to ensure that health and safety standar ds are met. This program also allows households to use their vouchers toward the purchase of a home.

The HASBC manages approximately 783 Section 8 household vouchers in the City. To ensure the affordability of its potential at-risk units, the HASBC is wo rking to extend the term of its existing vouchers and increase the number of vouchers during this planning period.

4.2.2 State Funding Sources

4.2.2.1 Low-Income Housing Tax Credit s (Federally Funded for the Most Part and State Administered)
The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTCAC) administers the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Program to encourage private investment in affordable rental housing for households meeting certain income requirements. Credits are av ailable for new construction projects or existing properties undergoing rehabilitation. Two type s of federal tax credits are available and are generally referred to as 9% and 4% tax credits. Each number refers to the approximate percentage that is multiplied against a project’s re quested “qualified basis” to determine the amount of annual federal tax credits the CTCAC will award the project.

The 9% tax credit is limited and calculated at $2.70 per person (returning to $2.35 per person in 2022), making California’s limit for 2018 $106.7 mi llion in annual tax credits. Because project owners can take the annual tax credit each year for 10 years, the CTCAC can award $1.067 billion in 9% tax credits. Because 9% tax cr edits are so desirable and in limited supply, the CTCAC awards them through a co mpetitive process twice per year. Projects compete on point scoring, and because most projects receive the maximum point score, the CTCAC’s tiebreaker formula generally decides the outcomes.

The 4% tax credit is derived from a project’s use of tax-exempt bond authority allocated by the California Debt Limit Alloca tion Committee and is limited only by the amount of bond cap available to California. In 2017, the CTCAC awarded $124.9 million in 4% annual tax credits, which equates to $1.249 billion in total credits over 10 years. The CTCAC awards 4% tax credits non-competitively (i.e., over-the-counter) to all projects that meet threshold criteria. 137
353

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-6
Recognizing the extr emely high cost of developing housing in California, the State legislature authorized a State LIHTC program to augment the federal LIHTC program. Authorized by Chapter 1138, Statutes of 1987, the State credit is only available to a project that has previously received or is concurrently receiving an allocation of federal credits. Thus, the State program does not stand alone but, instead, supplements the federal LIHTC program. In 2018, State law authorized $98.6 million in State LIHTCs. These are one-time credits taken over 4 years; thus, there is no ten-fold multiplier. Because State credits are also in limited supply, the CTCAC awards them competitively as well. In total, 85% of the State credits are integrated into 9% tax credit projects and awarded through the same competition. 15% of the State credits are reserv ed for 4% tax credit projects, and applicants compete for these State credits in a separate competition.

4.2.2.2 Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program The Affordable Housing and Su stainable Communities Program funds land use, housing, transportation, and land preservation projects t hat support infill and co mpact development and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in disadvantaged communities. Funds are available in the form of loans and/or grants in two project areas: (1) Trans it-Oriented Development and (2) Integrated Connectivity. There is an annual competitive funding cycle.

4.2.2.3 CalHome
CalHome makes grants to local public agencies and nonprofit corporations to assist first-time homebuyers become or remain homeowners through deferred-payment loans. Funds can also be used to assist in the development of multiple-unit ownership projects.

4.2.2.4 California Emergency Solutions and Housing Program The California Emergency Solutions and Housing (CESH) Program provides grant funds to eligible applicants for eligible activities to assist people experiencing or at risk of homelessness.

Eligible applicants are Administrative Entities (local governments, nonprofit organizations, or unified funding agencies) designated by the Cont inuum of Care to administer CESH funds in their service area. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) administers the CESH Program with funding from the Building Homes and Jobs Act Trust Fund (Senate Bill 2, Chapter 364, Statutes of 2017).

4.2.2.5 Emergency Solutions Grants Program
The Emergency Solutions Grants Pr ogram makes grant funds available for projects serving individuals and families experiencing homelessne ss through eligible nonprofit organizations or local governments. The Emergency Solutions Grants Program funds can be used for support services, emergency shelter/transitional housi ng, homelessness prevent ion assistance, and permanent housing. Funds are available in California communities that do not receive 138
354

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-7
Emergency Solutions Grants Pr ogram funding directly from HUD. Funding is announced annually through a NOFA.

4.2.2.6 Golden State Acquisition Fund
The Golden State Acquisition Fund was seeded with $23 million from the HCD Affordable Housing Innovation Fund. Combined with matching funds, the Golden State Acquisition Fund makes up to 5-year loans to developers for acquisition or preservation of affordable housing.

Loans are a maximum of $13,950,000, and funds are made available over the counter.

4.2.2.7 Homekey
Homekey provides grants to local entities (inclu ding cities, counties, and other local public entities, such as housing authorities and federally recognized tribes) to acquire and rehabilitate a variety of housing types, such as hotels, mo tels, vacant apartment buildings, and residential care facilities, to serve people experiencing homelessness who are at high risk for serious illness and impacted by COVID-19.

4.2.2.8 Housing for a Healthy California Program
The Housing for a Healthy California Program provides funding on a competitive basis to deliver supportive housing opportunities to developers us ing the federal National Housing Trust Fund allocations for operating reserve grants and capital loans. HCD will also use a portion of moneys collected in calendar year 2018 and deposited into the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund to provide funding through grants to counties for capital and operating assistance.

4.2.2.9 Housing Navigators Program
Housing Navigators Program allocates $5 million in funding to counties for the support of housing navigators to help young adults from 18 years up to 21 years of age secure and maintain housing, with priority given to young adults in the foster care system.

4.2.2.10 Housing-Related Parks Program
The Housing-Related Parks Program funds the creation of new park and recreation facilities or improvement of existing park and recreation facilities that are associated with rental and ownership projects that are affordable to households with very low and low incomes.

4.2.2.11 Infill Infrastructure Grant Program
The Infill Infrastructure Grant Program provides grant funding for infrastructure improvements for new infill housing in residential and/or mixed-use projects. Funds are made available through a competitive application process.
139
355

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-8

4.2.2.12 Joe Serna, Jr., Farmworker Housing Grant Program The Joe Serna, Jr., Farmworker Housin g Grant Program makes grants and loans for development or rehabilitation of renter- and owner-occupied housing for farmworkers with priority for households with lower incomes.

4.2.2.13 Local Early Action Planning Grants
The Local Early Action Planning grants program assists cities and counties to plan for housing through providing over-the-counter, non-competitive planning grants.

4.2.2.14 Local Housing Trust Fund Program
The Local Housing Trust Fund Program provides matching funds to local and regional housing trust funds dedicated to the creat ion, rehabilitation, or preser vation of affordable housing, transitional housing and emergency shelters.

4.2.2.15 Mobilehome Park Rehabilitation and Resident Ownership Program The Mobilehome Park Rehabilitation and Resident Ownership Program makes short- and long- term low-interest rate loans for the preservation of affordable mobile home par ks for ownership or control by resident organiza tions, nonprofit housing sponsors, or local public agencies. The Mobilehome Park Rehabilitation and Resident Ownership Program also makes long-term loans to individuals to ensure continued affordability. Funds are made available through a competitive process in response to a periodic NOFA.

4.2.2.16 Multifamily Housing Program
The Multifamily Housing Program makes low-interest, long-te rm, deferred-payment permanent loans for new construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of permanent and transitional rental housing for households with lower incomes.

4.2.2.17 National Housing Trust Fund
The National Housing Trust Fund is a permanent federal program with dedicated sources of funding not subject to the annual appropriations. The funds can be used to increase and preserve the supply of affordable housing, wi th an emphasis on rental housing for households with extremely low income (i.e., households with incomes of 30% of area median income or less). In 2021, California will receive approximately $10.1 million for the program. Funds will be made available through a competitive process and will be announced through a NOFA.

4.2.2.18 No Place Like Home Program
The No Place Like Home Program will have $2 billion in bond proceeds to invest in the development of permanent supportive housing for people who are in need of mental health 140
356

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-9
services and are experiencing homelessness or chronic homelessness or who are at risk of chronic homelessness.

4.2.2.19 Pet Assistance and Support Program
The Pet Assistance and Support Program provides funds to homeless shelters for shelter, food, and basic veterinary services for pets owned by individuals experiencing homelessness.

4.2.2.20 Permanent Local Housing Allocation
Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) provides a permanent source of funding to all local governments in California to help cities and counties implement plans to increase the affordable housing stock. Approximately 90% of the PL HA program funding is available as a non- competitive, formula-based allocation to entitlement and non-entit lement jurisdictions in the State. The balance is available on a competitive basis for non-entitlement jurisdictions.

4.2.2.21 Predevelopment Loan Program
The Predevelopment Loan Program makes short- term loans for acti vities and expenses necessary for the continued preservation, construction, rehabilitation, or conversion of assisted housing primarily for households with low incomes. Availability of funding is announced through a periodic NOFA. Eligible applicants include local government agencies, nonprofit corporations, cooperative housing corporations, and limited partnerships or limited liability companies where the general partners are nonprofit mutual or public benefit corporations.

4.2.2.22 Regional Early Action Planning Grants
The Regional Early Action Plann ing Grants program helps counc ils of governments and other regional entities collaborate on projects that have a broader regional impact on housing. Grant funding is intended to help regional governments and entities facilitate local housing production that will assist local governments in meeting their RHNA.

4.2.2.23 Section 811 Project Rental Assistance
Section 811 Project Rental Assistance offers long-term project-based rental assistance funding from HUD through a collaborativ e partnership among the California Housing Finance Agency (CHFA), California Department of Health Care Services, HCD, California Department of Developmental Services, and CTCAC. Opportuniti es to apply for this project-based assistance are through a NOFA published by the CHFA.

4.2.2.24 Supportive Housing Multifamily Housing Program The Supportive Housing Multifamily Housing Program provides low-interest loans to developers of permanent affordable rental housing that contain supportive housing units. 141
357

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-10

4.2.2.25 Transit-Oriented Development Housing Program
The Transit-Oriented Development Housing Program makes low-interest loans and grants for rental housing that includes affordable units that are located within 0.25 miles of a transit station.

Eligible applicants include cities, counties, transit agencies, developers, and redevelopment agencies. Applications are accepted in response to a periodic NOFA.

4.2.2.26 Transitional Housing Program
The Transitional Housing Program allocates $8 million in funding to counties for the purpose of housing stability to help young adults 18 to 25 y ears of age secure and maintain housing, with priority given to young adults formerly in the foster care or probation systems.

4.2.2.27 Veterans Housing and Homelessness Prevention Program The Veterans Housing and Homelessness Prev ention Program makes long-term loans for development or preservation of rental housing for veterans with very low and low incomes and their families. Funds are made available to sponsors who are for-profit or nonprofit corporations and public agencies. Availability of funds is announced annually through a NOFA.

4.2.3 Quasi-Government Agencies

4.2.3.1 Federal Home Loan Bank – Affordable Housing Program The purpose of the Affor dable Housing Program is to subsidize the interest rates on advances or loans made by the Federal Home Loan Bank system to a member bank and to provide direct subsidies to these banks. T he banks then pass these subsidized interest rates and direct subsidies on to housing developers to help them support the development of affordable rental housing. The subsidies must be used to finance the purchase, construction, and/or rehabilitation of rental housing, at least 20% of the units of which will be occupied by and affordable for households with very low incomes for at least 15 years.

4.2.3.2 Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac – National Housing Trust Fund The National Housing Trust Fund was establ ished as part of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 and provided grants to States to increase and preserve the supply of rental housing for families with extremely low and very low incomes, including families experiencing homelessness, and to increase homeownership for families and individuals with extremely low incomes. The act requires Fannie Mae and Freddi e Mac to transfer a percentage of their new business to finance the trust fund.
142
358

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-11

4.2.4 Local Funding Sources

4.2.4.1 Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Asset Fund
The dissolution of the City’s Redevelopment Agency eliminated t he ability to obtain redevelopment tax increment monies. However, the successor agency has assets and a limited amount of funds from the rema ining Redevelopment Agency funds. The City may use these funds to finance housing programs including the following:
 New housing development
 Acquisition and rehabilitation
 Mortgage Assistance Program
 Owner-occupied rehabilitation

4.2.4.2 Proposition 46 Funds
Proposition 46, the Housing and Emergency Shelte r Trust Fund Act of 2002, was a Statewide housing bond initiative passed by voters in November 2002, which authorized $2.1 billion in bond financing for various housing programs administe red by HCD and CHFA. Eight different funds were formed from this bond issuance, incl uding the Home Improvement Loan Fund, the Preservation Opportunity Fund, the Emergen cy Housing and Assistance Fund, and the School Facilities Fee Assistance Fund, among others. T hese funds will finance pr ograms such as the Local Housing Trust Fund matching grant progr am; accessibility grants for renters; code enforcement; multi-family acquisition, rehabilitation, construction, or conversion; and others. The City and nonprofit housing developers can apply to the appropriate funding programs in order to subsidize some of the affordable housing to be bui lt in the City. The Ci ty used CalHome funds to fund its Owner-Occupied Rehabilitation Program.

4.2.4.3 Community Revitalization and Investment Area
In 2015, Assembly Bill 2 established Community Revitalization and Investment Areas (CRIAs) as a type of tax increment financing district to replace Redevelopment Agencies, which were eliminated in 2012. CRIAs would increase funding for and producti on of affordable housing in disadvantaged communities, as well as funding for other types of infrastructure projects. CRIAs have an affordable housing set aside of 25%. The City is currently establishing a CRIA and anticipates that it will be adopted concurrently with the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update.

4.2.4.4 Opportunities for Energy Conservation
Construction of energy efficient buildings can add to the production costs of ownership and rental housing. Over time, however, housing with energy conservation features should reduce occupancy costs as the consumption of fuel and electricity is decreased. This can result in monthly housing costs that are equal to or less than what they otherwise would have been had no energy conservation 143
359

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-12
devices been incorporated in the new residential buildings. This section provides an overview of opportunities for energy conservation during the 2013–2021 Housing Element planning period.

State Regulations
Title 24 of the California Administrative C ode establishes energy conservation standards that must be applied to all new resi dential buildings. The regulatio ns specify energy saving design for walls, ceilings, and floor installations, as well as heating and cooling equipment and systems, gas cooling devices, conservation standards, and the use of non-depleting energy sources, such as solar energy or wind power. Compliance with the energy standards is achieved by satisfying certain conservation requirements and an energy budget. Among the alternative ways to meeting the energy standards are the following:
 Alternative 1: The passive solar approach, which re quires proper solar orientation, appropriate levels of thermal mass, south-facing windows, and moderate insulation levels.  Alternative 2: Generally requires higher levels of insulation than Alternative 1 but has no thermal mass or window orientation requirements.
 Alternative 3: Also is without passive solar design, but requires active solar water heating in exchange for less stringent insulation and/or glazing requirements.

Residential developers must comply with these standards while localities are responsible for enforcing the energy conservation regulations.

State and Federal Programs
The California Department of Community Servic es and Development in partnership with the network of local community services agencies that assist lower-income households, administers the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Progr am, which provides financial assistance to lower-income households to offset the costs of heating and/or cooling their residences.

Local Measures and Programs
The current Housing Element has a program (Program PP-A.4) to rezone certain areas of the City from exclusively commercial use to mixed-use. The areas are selected for their feasibility of developing a mix of uses, including housing for lower-income households, that is located near resources such as parks, schools, and public services, as well as employment and retail uses. This and other policies and programs of this Housing Element will encourage and facilitate the redevelopment of underutilized commercial sites within the City's primary transit corridors. Mixed-use residential development that is both pedestrian- and transit-oriented conserves energy by reducing the number of vehicular trips and encouraging the efficient use of land and construction materials. 144
360

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-13
City residents also have access to a program t hat will assist with home weatherization, the Weatherization Program – Energy , Education, & Environmental Services Program, that is provided by Community Action Partnership San Bernardino County.

Private Sector Programs
The following private sector energy conservation programs are available to housing developers and City residents:
 California Alternative Rates for Energy (CARE): Lower-income customers enrolled in the CARE program receive a 20% discount on their electric and natural gas bills and are not billed in higher rate tiers that were cr eated for Southern California Edison. CARE is funded through a rate surcharge paid by all other utility customers.  Energy Management Center: Southern California Edison offers a range of rebates and incentives, as well as educational material, on its website to encourage households and businesses to use energy more efficiently, including incentives for solar panels, efficient water heaters, smart thermostats, and a loan program for residential energy efficiency improvements.

4.2.4.5 Administrative Resources
Described below are public agencies and nonprofit organizations that have been involved or are interested in housing activities in the City. Thes e agencies play important roles in meeting the housing needs of the community. In particular, these agencies and organizations have been or are currently involved in the improvement of the housing stock, expansion of affordable housing opportunities, preservation of existing affordable housing, and/or provision of housing assistance to City households in need.

San Bernardino County Community Development and Housing Agency The County of San Bernardino is a public agency that provides subsidized housing and other housing- related services to lower- and moderate-income individuals and families. In addition to conventional public housing in the County of San Bernardino, the Community Development and Housing Agency is currently administering the San Bernardino County Rent Relief Partnership, an emergency rental assistance program for County residents impacted by the CO VID-19 pandemic. The County Community Development and Housing Agency also operates or participates in a range of housing programs using HUD and State funds. The City is a participating jurisdiction, meaning residents are eligible to receive assistance through the following programs and service providers:
 Mortgage Credit Certificate Program
 Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board
 Home Repair/Rehabilitation Programs
 Housing Choice Vouchers
145
361

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 4: Housing Resources and Opportunities
4-14
Private Developers and Service Providers
Private developers and service prov iders are available to assist with the provision of housing and housing-related services in the City. These private entities can be for-profit or nonprofit ventures. The following are some of the ac tive affordable housing developers and supportive housing service providers in the County of San Bernardino:
 A Community of Friends
 Abode Communities
 Adaptive Identify Systems
 Angeles Contractor, Inc.
 Building Healthy Places Network
 Building Industry Association
 Clifford Beers Housing
 Coachella Valley Housing Coalition
 Crate Modular
 EAH Housing
 ERNA Enterprises, LLC
 Family Assistance Program
 George Behnam Architects
 Habitat for Humanity
 Illumination Housing, LLC
 Intertech Building Design
 Investment Concepts, Inc.
 Jamboree Housing Corporation
 Lincoln Avenue Capital
 Meta Housing Corporation
 National CORE
 Neighborhood Partnership Housing
Services & NPHS Community Land
Trust
 Pontious Architecture
 San Bernardino County Economic
Development
 Strategic Realty Holdings, LLC
 The Bradco Companies
 Urban Resource
 Victor Valley Family Resource Center
The City will continue to work with these and other qualified housing developers and service providers to create affordable housing through new construction, acquisition/rehabilitation, and preservation. 146
362
2021–-2029 Housing Element
Chapter 5: Review of Previous Housing Element (2013–2021) 5-1
5 REVIEW OF PREVIOUS HOUSING
ELEMENT (2013–2021)
The City of Victorville (City or Victorville) implemented various programs as part of its 5th Cycle Housing Element in an effort to maintain it s existing housing stock, conserve and improve existing affordable housing, increase housing pr oduction, provide assistance to households in need, create equal opportunity to housing, and co mply with State law and code amendments.

Table 5-1 on the following pages provides an analysis of the progress and effectiveness of each program and reviews the appropriateness of the program to determine if it should be continued, modified, or deleted from the 6th Cycle Housing Element.

A number of the City’s progr ams addressed the housing needs of special needs populations during the 5th Cycle period. Special needs populations include seniors, persons with disabilities (including developmental disabilities), large families, families with female heads of households, and families and individuals in need of emergen cy shelter. The City addressed the housing needs of special populations through the following programs:
 Seniors – The City assisted nearly 100 s enior homeowners and homeowners with disabilities with minor home repairs through the Senior/Disabled Repair Grant Program.  Large Families – The City has created pathways to affordable homeownership as well as rental assistance through its Mortgage Assistance Program and Section 8 vouchers.  People with Disabilities – In 2015, the City approved an ordinance to incorporate Americans with Disabilities Act standards. T he City also offers home repair grants to homeowners with disabilities through its Senior/Disabled Repair Grant Program.  Female-Headed Households – The City’s Mortgage Assistance Program provides down payment assistance for households with low incomes, creating affordable homeownership opportunities for female-headed households.  Families and Individuals in Need of Emergency Shelter – The City contributed $1.5 million to the development of the Desert Haven Apartment Project, which will serve the population experiencing chronic homelessness. The City also approved an ordinance in 2015 to ensure compliance with State law regarding transitional and supportive housing regulations.

147
363

2021–-2029 Housing Element
Chapter 5: Review of Previous Housing Element (2013–2021)

5-2
Table 5-1. Program Evaluation

PROGRAM NAME PROGRAM OBJECTIVE PROGRAM ACTION PROGRESS AND CONTINUED APPROPRIATENESS

MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING HOUSING STOCK
Housing
Rehabilitation
Program
Provide rehabilitation assistance to
ensure maintenance of the older
housing stock.

Provides loans and grants to income-qualified
homeowners to rehabilitate their homes.

Since 2013, the City has assisted 152 homeowners by
providing loans and grants to rehabilitate their homes.

This program will be continued.

Code Enforcement Preserve housing units by enforcing
Municipal Codes.

Enforce Municipal Codes and abate violations.

Encourage use of City programs to rehabilitate
and bring property into compliance.

The code compliance loan program was created in
2016–2017 to assist residents correct code violations.

Since the program was implemented, 16 cases have
been created and 16 cases were closed. This program
will be continued.

Senior/Disabled
Repair Grants
Assist seniors and people with
disabilities with minor home repairs.

Revitalize and enhance neighborhoods. Correct
code enforcement violations, by providing
grants of up to $10,000.

During the 5th Cycle period, the City assisted nearly 100 households through the program. The City has met its
goal of assisting 5–10 households annually. This
program will be continued.

CONSERVING AND IMPROVING EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Section 8 Rental
Vouchers
Ensure continued availability of
Section 8 rental vouchers.

Continue to assist approximately 800–900
recipients with very low incomes per year with
Section 8 vouchers.
6,934 vouchers were issued to households with low
incomes between 2013 and 2020. This program will be
continued.

At-Risk Housing
Preservation
Protect the affordability of the City’s
existing assisted units.

Seek opportunities to continue the affordability
of existing units at risk of converting to market
rate.

During the 5th Cycle period, the City extended the
affordability period for the Kimberly Park Apartments,
which were set to expire during this time. The new
affordability period extends until 2034. This program will be modified to monitoring units, because no units are at risk for the next 10 years.

Affordable Housing
Monitoring
Maintain Compliance of Affordable
Housing Agreements.

Monitor affordable housing projects to ensure
the requirements of the affordable housing
covenants are being met.

Through this program, the City ensures compliance with
affordable housing agreements for affordable
developments. As of 2020, the City monitored five
projects, all of which remain affordable. These projects include Northgate Village, Rodeo Meadows, Casa Bella,
Impressions, and Hillcrest Apartments. This program will be continued.
148
364

2021–-2029 Housing Element
Chapter 5: Review of Previous Housing Element (2013–2021)

5-3
Table 5-1. Program Evaluation

PROGRAM NAME PROGRAM OBJECTIVE PROGRAM ACTION PROGRESS AND CONTINUED APPROPRIATENESS

HOUSING PRODUCTION
Density Bonuses Provide additional affordable units. Update zoning code to ensure developers understand the benefits and ability to utilize a
density bonus.

The City intends to work with developers to utilize
density bonuses throughout the City. This program will
be continued and will be modified to offer a menu of
density bonuses in exchange for the provision of
community benefits.

Inclusionary
Housing
Utilize federal and State funds to
provide affordable units as part for
market developments.

Continue to seek opportunities to finance
inclusionary housing units.

The City intends to work with developers to analyze the feasibility of an inclusionary housing policy. This
program will be continued.

Tax Credit
Developments
Offer financial assistance to
qualified housing developers who
commit to provide affordable units
to leverage projects.

Allocate HOME/Community Development Block
Grant funds during this planning period to assist
qualified housing developers who provide
affordable housing.

The City intends to work with developers to encourage
the use of low-income housing tax credits to develop
affordable housing. This program will be continued.

Encourage and
Facilitate Large Lot
Development
Develop policies to facilitate lot
subdivision.

Streamline and expedite the approval process
for land division for projects that include
affordable housing units, ministerial review of lot
line adjustments, deferral or waiver of fees
related to the subdivision for projects affordable
to households with lower incomes, provide
technical assistance to acquire funding, and
modification of development requirements.

With large swaths of undeveloped land, the City can
significantly benefit from assisting and encouraging the subdivision of large lots. Most often, the City receives requests for large lot subdivision for single-family,
homeownership communities. During the 5
th Cycle
period, the City recorded 26 tract maps and approved 27 tentative tract maps. The tentative tract maps, 24 of
which were more than 10 acres in size, contributed to
the development of more than 5,600 market-rate
housing units. During the 6
th Cycle period, the City will
focus this program on the subdivision of sites 10 acres or larger, to increase the feasibility of affordable housing development, as determined by the State.

Civic Center Specific
Plan
Provide opportunities for additional
affordable and sustainable high-
density multi-tenant housing
developments in an in-fill, urban
setting.

Adopt the plan and implement the goals and
policies set forth within the plan to revitalize the
Civic Center area.

The Specific Plan was adopted and approved in April
2016 and provides opportunities for additional affordable and sustainable high-density multi-tenant housing
developments in an in-fill, urban setting. This program was completed in April 2016. The City will adopt a new
program to change certain commercial zones to mixed-
use zoning, with a similar objective as this completed
program.
149
365

2021–-2029 Housing Element
Chapter 5: Review of Previous Housing Element (2013–2021)

5-4
Table 5-1. Program Evaluation

PROGRAM NAME PROGRAM OBJECTIVE PROGRAM ACTION PROGRESS AND CONTINUED APPROPRIATENESS

HOUSING ASSISTANCE
Housing Subsidy Offer financial assistance to
qualified housing developers who
commit to provide affordable units.

Allocate Neighborhood Stabilization
Program/HOME/Community Development
Block Grant funds during this planning period to
assist qualified housing developers who provide
affordable housing.

The City provided $1.5 million as financial participation to the development of the Desert Haven Apartment
Project. The 31-unit project is under construction and
will be completed in 2021. The project will serve the
population experiencing homelessness. This program
will be continued, with a modification to apply for and generate additional funding sources.

Mortgage
Assistance Program
Continue the Mortgage Assistance
Program to assist homebuyers with
lower incomes.

Provide financial assistance to enhance the
home purchasing options to households with
low incomes by providing up to $65,000 in down
payment and/or closing costs.

During the 5th Cycle Period, the City has provided down payment assistance to eight households. This program
will be continued.

Neighborhood
Stabilization
Program
Affordable housing project
assistance that are making
available affordable housing units.

Make available up to $20,000 per unit to
projects that are making available affordable
housing units.

The City contributed $1.5 million to the Desert Haven
Apartment Project, which will make available 30
affordable housing units. A version of this program will be continued, focused on obtaining additional funding.

Housing
Affordability
To monitor existing policies and
programs that encourage the
development of housing for
households with lower incomes and
to make necessary changes as
needed.

Monitor existing policies and programs during
the planning period to facilitate lower income
housing while prioritizing funding to support the
development of housing for households with
extremely low incomes.

As of January 2021, 5 affordable housing projects
funded by the City remain affordable and comply with
federal and State funding. Additionally, the City
contributed $1.5 million toward the development of the
Desert Haven Apartment Project that will serve the
population experiencing chronic homelessness. This
program will be continued.

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
Reasonable
Accommodations
Continue to require compliance with
Americans with Disabilities Act
standards in all new multi-family
and redevelopment projects.

Adopt a Reasonable Accommodation ordinance
within 6 months of Housing Element Adoption.

The City approved an ordinance in February 2015 that
incorporates Americans with Disabilities Act standards
for all new multi-family and redevelopment projects. This program was completed in February 2015.

Fair Housing Ensure fair housing for all residents
of Victorville.

Adhere to recommendations in the City’s
adopted Analysis of Impediments to Fair
Housing. Reduce housing discrimination.

The City contracts with the Inland Fair Housing and
Mediation Board using Community Development Block
Grant funds to provide fair housing services and
owner/tenant mediation. During 2020, the Inland Fair
Housing and Mediation Board assisted 1,078 Victorville
residents to resolve fair housing matters. This program will be continued.
150
366

2021–-2029 Housing Element
Chapter 5: Review of Previous Housing Element (2013–2021)

5-5
Table 5-1. Program Evaluation

PROGRAM NAME PROGRAM OBJECTIVE PROGRAM ACTION PROGRESS AND CONTINUED APPROPRIATENESS

STATE LAW COMPLIANCE/CODE AMENDMENTS
Transitional and
Supportive Housing
Observe State law and remain in
compliance with transitional and
supportive housing regulations.

Adopt an ordinance as it pertains to transitional
and supportive housing as a residential use,
subject only to standards of similar housing
types with the same zone as required by State
law only.

The City approved an ordinance in September 2015 to
ensure observance with State law and remain in
compliance with transitional and supportive housing
regulations. The City is currently in the process of
developing the Wellness and Recuperative Center within
the Old Town Specific Plan Area. Assembly Bill 139
(2019) changed State law regarding transitional and
supportive housing. A version of this program will be
continued to maintain compliance following the State law changes.
151
367
2021–-2029 Housing Element
Chapter 5: Review of Previous Housing Element (2013–2021) 5-6

This page intentionally left blank.

152
368

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 6: At-Risk Affordable Housing
6-1
6 AT-RISK AFFORDABLE HOUSING
The City of Victorville (City or Victorville) has a number of affordable housing developments with affordable covenants restricting their affordability for a specified term. Many of these covenants are the result of requirements for obtaining public subsidies. Housing units with covenants that expire within the next 10 years are considered “at risk” as the units could convert to market-rate when the covenants expire. Through its Affor dable Housing Monitoring Program, the City ensures that affordable units comply with their respective agreements.

Table 6-1 is a list of affordable housing developments with affordability covenants in the City. As shown in Table 6-1, no units in the City have a ffordable covenants that expire in the next 10 years. Therefore, there are no at-risk units in the City.

Table 6-1. Affordable Housing Inventory

PROJECT NAME ADDRESS

NUMBER OF

SUBSIDIZED
UNITS
TOTAL
NUMBER

OF UNITS
PER

PROJECT

TYPE OF

FINANCING

EXPIRATION OF

AFFORDABILITY

REQUIREMENT
Rodeo Drive Apts. 14200 Rodeo Drive 99 99 Section 8, FHA 2065 Sherwood Villa Apts. 14900 Arlette Drive 101 101 Section 8, FHA 2069 Northgate Village Apts. 17251 Dante Street 68 68 Section 8, State, RDA 2060
Village Oak Apts. 14449 Begonia
Road 116 116 Section 42 Tax
Credit Units 2054
Northside Commons 16733 Sunhill Drive 82 83 Section 42 Tax Credit Units 2057
Kimberly Park Apts. 15135 Kimberly
Drive 132 132 Section 42 Tax
Credit Units 2034
Impressions at Valley
Center
15500 Midtown
Drive 99 100 CTAC, HOME,
RDA Perpetuity
Village at Victorville 16711 Chalon Road 79 80 CTAC 2061 Casa Bella Family
Apts.
16980 Nisqualli
Road 286 288 CTAC 2063
Rodeo Meadows 14152 Rodeo Drive 48 48 CTAC/RDA 2057
Rancho Seneca Apts. 14779 Seneca Road 200 200
Desert Haven 16959 Stoddard
Wells Road 31 31 NSP 2075
Total 1,341 1,346

153
369

2021–2029 Housing Element
Chapter 6: At-Risk Affordable Housing
6-2

This page intentionally left blank.

154
370

2021–2029 Housing Element
C
hapter 7: Housing Plan
7-1

7. H OUSING PLAN
California Government Code, Section 65583(c), requires a program that sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period that the local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the Housing Element. The goals, policies, and programs have been established to address the housing issues in the City and to meet State housing law requirements, including the identification of the agencies and officials responsible for the implementation of the various actions. The City’s overall objective is to ensure that decent, safe housing is available to current and future Victorville residents of all income levels.

The goals of this Housing Element are formulated based on information provided in Chapters 2, Community Profile, and 3, Housing Constraints, of this document and input from the City Council, Planning Commission, City staff, and members of the public. The components of this section can be described as follows:
• Goals are the results that the City desires to achieve over the housing planning period.

T
hey are general expressions of values or preferred outcomes, and therefore, are abstract in nature and may not be fully attained. The goals are the basis for City policies and actions during this period.
• Objectives a
re specific, action-oriented statements that mark progress toward goals. • Policies are specific statements that will guide decision-making. Policies serve as the d
irectives to developers, builders, service providers, decision makers and others who will initiate or review new development projects or seek to provide housing-related services in the City. Some policies stand alone as directives, but others require that additional actions be taken. These additional actions are listed as "programs." • Programs/Activities/Actions a re the core of the City's housing strategy.

Programs/Activities/Actions translate goals and policies into actions. These include on-going programs, procedural changes, zoning ordinance changes, and other actions that implement the housing policies and help achieve housing goals. Each program/activity/action identifies the funding source, responsible party, and timeframe for implementation.

155
371

2021–2029 Housing Element
C
hapter 7: Housing Plan
7-2
Goal 1: Encourage development of different housing
t
ypes to meet the City’s different needs
Encouraging development of a wide range of housing types is necessary to address the diverse n
eeds of current and future Victorville residents.

To enable the development of various housing types, the City has identified two objectives:
• Objective A: U pdate the Land Use Element and Zoning Code to achieve compliance with current State laws and review and update the zoning code to facilitate the development of diverse housing options.
• Objective B: St reamline the housing development process.

Objective A: Update the Land Use Element and Zoning C ode to achieve compliance with current State laws and review and update the zoning code to facilitate the development of diverse housing options
Updating the Land Use Element and Zoning Code to brin g regulations and policies in compliance with current State laws and to allow for increased residential development will create more opportunities for development of diverse housing options for residents of Victorville.

Policies
• H E-A.1: Identify residential zones where allowable density can be increased to support d
evelopment of affordable housing, including for extremely low-income households. • HE-A.2: Offer a menu of density bonuses in exchange for the provision of community benefits/amenities.
• HE-A.3: Identify commercial and residential zones where zoning can be changed to allow f
or mixed-use and/or higher density residential development (also Policy HE-P.1). • HE-A.4: Encourage the integration, on a community level, of housing constructed e
xpressly for lower- and moderate-income households with high quality, market-rate residential development.
156
372

2021–2029 Housing Element
C
hapter 7: Housing Plan
7-3
Existing Programs
• E P-A.1: Facilitate Access to Density Bonuses. T he City is updating its zoning code to ensure developers understand the benefits and ability to use a density bonus. • EP-A.2: Encourage Single-Family Home Development in D esignated Areas. Single- family homes continue to be a popular housing choice for households with moderate and above moderate incomes. The City will continue to facilitate the development of single- family units to help households to build their wealth and to enjoy housing stability. • EP-A.3: Encourage Buffers and Transitions. Fo r new residential developments, provide adequate buffers or transitions between residential uses and commercial, industrial, and institutional uses.
• EP-A.4: Adequate Setbacks. P rovide for adequate setbacks in residential neighborhoods to ensure privacy and adequate light and air.

Proposed Programs/Activities/Actions
• P P-A.1: Update the City’s Land Use Element and Zoning Ordinance. Incorporate changes to bring the City’s Land Use Element and Zoning Ordinance into compliance with new State laws. Specifically, modify development standards and regulations to streamline and remove barriers to residential development (particularly affordable housing, accessory dwelling units (ADUs), emergency shelters, and transitional/supportive housing). These modified standards could include increasing R-4 development standards from 20 units per acre to 30 units per acre (See Proposed Program PP-A.4), reducing setback and lot coverage standards, creating objective standards, and waiving development impact fees, among others. Additionally, any modified standards shall be directed toward meeting the social and economic needs of the community (also Proposed Program PP-H.3).

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, and City Coun cil Timeframe: Land Use Element will be updated in 2022. Zoning will be updated within 1 year and 90 days from receipt of comments from Housing and Community Development (HCD) on the draft Housing Element, to coincide with the City’s Land Use Element Update.

157
373

2021–2029 Housing Element
C
hapter 7: Housing Plan
7-4
• P P-A.2: Adopt a Density Bonus Ordinance and Create a Menu of Density Bonuses.

Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915, the City will adopt a legally compliant density bonus ordinance. In addition, the City will identify appropriate density bonus levels to offer to developers in exchange for the provision of certain community benefits and amenities. This program will allow for the development of a greater diversity of housing stock while also attracting private investment in the City’s affordable housing stock, streetscapes, parks and open spaces, and other community benefits as identified and prioritized by City Council.

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commis sion, and City Council Timeframe: By end of FY 2022-23
• P P-A.3: Increase Zoning in Areas Zoned for Multi-Fami ly. To encourage lower-income housing development throughout the City, particularly in resource-advantaged areas, the City will change zoning and land use designations to increase the allowable density in portions of the City’s High Density Residential (R3) and Very High Density Residential (R4) zones to allow up to 20 and 30 dwelling units per acre, respectively.

Development standards will be updated to accommodate densities within a year of Land Use Element update approval.
• P P-A.4: Change Zoning in Appropriate Commercial and R esidential Zones.

Pursuant to Chapter 8, Adequate Sites Inventory Analysis and Methodology, of this Housing Element, rezone certain commercial zones in the West City, Baldy Mesa, Golden Triangle, and East Bear Valley Planning Areas, as well as the 7th Street Commercial corridor to permit mixed-use development, in some cases allowing residential development up to 30 dwelling units per acre. The City is undertaking this rezoning effort to encourage lower-income housing development in resource-advantaged portions of the City and to encourage revitalization of deteriorated and underutilized commercial areas.

Where rezoned areas include sites in the Site Inventory, the new zoning will permit owner- occupied and rental multifamily uses by right for developments in which 20% or more of the units are affordable to lower income households and will comply with the other by- right provisions of Government Code 65583.2 (h) and (i) (also Proposed Program PP- P.1).
158
374

2021–2029 Housing Element
C
hapter 7: Housing Plan
7-5

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commission, City Council Timeframe: Within 1 year and 90 days from receipt of comments from HCD on the draft Housing Element, to coincide with the City’s Land Use Element Update

• P
P-A.5: Encourage the Subdivision of Sites that are 1 0 Acres or Larger. Encouraging the subdivision of sites that are 10 acres or more can provide more opportunities for development of affordable housing, which the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has determined is more feasible on sites between 0.5 and 10 acres in size. During the 5th Cycle period, the City recorded 26 tract maps and approved 27 tentative tract maps. The tentative tract maps, 24 of which were more than 10 acres in size, contributed to the development of more than 5,600 market-rate housing units. The relatively large number of subdivisions demonstrates the outsized role that subdivisions play in local residential development. The City will encourage the subdivision of large lots, particularly for affordable housing, by routinely giving high priority processing to subdivision maps that include affordable housing units. Additionally, the City will consider providing incentives, such as reduced setback and parking requirements, and increased allowable density, lot coverage, or floor area ratio.

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commis sion, and City Council Timeframe: Ongoing
• P P-A.6: Continue to Encourage Single-Family Home Deve lopment in Designated Areas. Single-family homes continue to be a popular housing choice for households with moderate and above moderate incomes. The City will continue to facilitate the development of single-family units to help households to build their wealth and to enjoy housing stability.

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commis sion, and City Council Timeframe: Ongoing
• P P-A.7: Encourage Buffers and Transitions. Fo r new higher density residential developments, provide adequate buffers or transitions in relation to existing lower density residential uses, as well as to commercial, industrial, and institutional uses that may be incompatible with residential use.

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commis sion, and City Council Timeframe: Ongoing
159
375

2021–2029 Housing Element
C
hapter 7: Housing Plan
7-6
• P P-A.8: Evaluate and Change Off-Street Parking Requir ements. Evaluate existing off- street parking requirements and make a recommendation to reduce the number of required off-street parking spaces for residential development with lower parking demand, as appropriate.

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commis sion, and City Council Timeframe: Ongoing
Objective B: Streamline the housing development process T
he time and cost to permit projects is often a top c onstraint cited by developers because financing and interest costs increase the longer it takes to construct, sell, or rent a development.

Streamlining the development process will reduce the cost of development, increasing the financial feasibility of residential development, facilitating an increase in residential development.

Policies
• H E-B.1: Ex pedite the entitlement process for certain developments (affordable, condominiums, townhomes, etc.).
• HE-B.2: Evaluate the costs and benefits of waiving, reducing, or deferring development f
ees, and identify opportunities to do so for certain development types. • HE-B.3: Increase certainty of entitlement procedures and accessibility to resource i
nformation for developers.

Existing Programs
• E P-B.1: Planned Unit Development. Th e City allows developments with reduced standards for senior housing that generally allow for smaller lot sizes, while reduced yard and age restrictions allow the development to be more affordable and attractive to seniors on fixed incomes.

Proposed Programs/Activities/Actions
• P
P-B.1: Assist with Development of Low-Income Housing. To assist the development of housing for households with lower incomes, the City will seek to defer, reduce, or waive fees for land divisions, lot line adjustments, and Specific Plans proposing, or resulting in parcel sizes that facilitate, multi-family developments affordable to households with lower incomes (i.e., determined by the State to be 0.5–10 acres). The City will work with property owners and nonprofit developers to target and market the availability of sites 160
376

2021–2029 Housing Element
C
hapter 7: Housing Plan
7-7
with the best potential for development. In addition, the City will offer the following i
ncentives for the development of affordable housing, including but not limited to:
o Streamlining and expediting of the approval process f or land division for projects that include affordable housing units
o Ministerial review of lot line adjustments
o Deferral or waiver of fees related to the subdivisio n for projects affordable to households with lower incomes
o Reduced setback and parking requirements
o Increased allowable density, lot coverage, and floor area ratio o Technical assistance to identify funding and with the modification of development requirements

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commis sion, and City Council Timeframe: Identify potential property owners, nonprofit developers, and available sites by end of FY 2022-23. After that, market available sites and incentives on an ongoing basis throughout 6th Cycle.
• P P-B.2: Expedite Development. E xpedite development of housing projects for seniors, people with disabilities, or people with low and moderate incomes. The City will consider waving or reducing fees for shelters/transitional and permanent supportive housing projects.

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commis sion, and City Council Timeframe: Ongoing. Consideration for fee waiver and reduction to be within 2 years of the Housing Element Update approval.
• P P-B.3: Review the City’s Development Standards. Th e City will review their current development standards and will update as appropriate to encourage development. For example, the City will assess existing height limits to evaluate their impact on residential development and revise as needed to encourage the creation of additional housing within the City.

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commis sion, and City Council Timeframe: Review development standards by the end of FY 2022-23 and make revisions by the end of FY 2024-25.
161
377

2021–2029 Housing Element
C
hapter 7: Housing Plan
7-8
• P P-B.4: Provide a Menu of Incentives/Concessions for Developers. To expedite the process of finding resources and incentives, Victorville will seek to post an overview of available incentives/concessions and the application process for developers on the City’s website. The City will gather all information on available concessions for housing developers, including state, federal and local funding, density bonuses, reduced development and zoning standards, streamlining, etc. All information will then be presented in one place on the City’s website to provide a “one-stop shop” for developers.

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commis sion, and City Council Timeframe: Within 2 years of the Housing Element Update approval. Gather information on the first year and develop the page on the second year. Page will be updated as appropriate.
• P P-B.5: Provide Permit Fee Information for Developers . The City’s website provides an online portal/fee estimator, a tool to look up zoning by property, most development and building fees, and the City’s zoning map, development code, and land use plans. In addition to the existing information, the City will add the current permit fees to the fee information available on the City’s website.

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division
Timeframe: By the end of FY 2022-23.
• P P-B.6: Senate Bill (SB) 35 Streamlined and Ministeri al Approval Process. The City will establish a streamlined, ministerial review process for qualifying multi-family residential projects consistent with SB 35.

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division
Timeframe: Within a year of adoption of the Housing Element Goal 2: Maximize land utilization for residential
d
evelopment
A
s is the case in many High Desert cities, Victorvill e benefits from an availability of land.

However, with a growing demand for housing, it is important for the City to maximize land utilization for residential development. The City has identified the objective below in connection with this goal.
162
378

2021–2029 Housing Element
C
hapter 7: Housing Plan
7-9
Objective C: Encourage the proper utilization of undeveloped/ u
nderdeveloped residential areas of the City
There are residential areas in the City that are und e veloped or underdeveloped. Encouraging the proper utilization of these areas will help to maximize land utilization in locations currently being served by utilities and near services.

Policies
• H E-C.1: Promote infill development.
• H
E-C.2: Promote residential development fully served by public services and utilities.

Proposed Programs/Activities/Actions
• P P-C.1: Update the City’s Zoning Ordinance to Allow f or Higher Densities in Areas with Underdeveloped/Underutilized Property. The City will update the current Zoning Ordinance to ensure that they are allowing for higher density in areas with underdeveloped/underutilized property. Such as an update will maximize land utilization for residential development.

Multiple State laws have been passed since 2019 establishing statewide standards for local regulations governing ADU development. State law requires that ADUs be allowed on any single-family residential land, despite local ordinances or homeowners’ association rules and requirements, as well as multi-family residential land. Additionally, State law requires jurisdictions to develop a plan to encourage and incentivize ADUs in an effort to address the current California housing crisis. The City will update the current ADU ordinance to ensure that the policies conform to State requirements, as established by Assembly Bill (AB) 3182 (2020), Senate Bill 13, AB 68, AB 881, AB 587, AB 670, and AB 671 (2019). Such an update would modify the requirements of ADU development in the City, including restrictions on unit sizes and allowance of ADUs in multi-family zones.

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commis sion, and City Council Timeframe: 2022
163
379

2021–2029 Housing Element
C
hapter 7: Housing Plan
7-10
• P P-C.3: Plan to Encourage ADUs. AB 671 requires local agencies’ housing elements to include a plan that promotes the creation of ADUs that can offer affordable rents for households with very low, low, or moderate incomes. As part of the ADU ordinance update (including public outreach), the City will also explore options to facilitate affordable housing options for ADUs, such as tiny homes. The City will also explore incentives and tools to facilitate ADU construction, such as pre-approved ADU plans or kits, waived development impact fees, increased outreach and education, larger unit square footage allowances and reduced setback and lot coverage standards in exchange for deed restrictions, among other incentives.

SCHEDULE OF ACTIONS
Funding Source: City General Fund and grants, if available Responsible Party: Planning Division, Planning Commis sion, and City Council Timeframe: Research and explore options by end of Calendar Year (CY) 2022. Begin providing incentives by 2023. Evaluate potential extension of incentives at the end of the planning period.

Goal 3: Preserve existing housing stock
P
reserving existing housing is as important as produc ing more housing. Older housing in the City may be naturally affordable (i.e., without subsidies), as priced by the housing market, because it may be priced at lower sales or rental price than new housing. Existing housing must be well maintained to provide quality housing across income levels.

To preserve the existing housing stock, the City has identified the following objectives:
• Objective D: M aintain and improve the physical condition of existing housing at all affordability levels.
• Objective E: P reserve existing affordable housing.

Objective D: Maintain and improve the physical condit ion of existing housing at all affordability levels
The City intends to support the repair and maintenanc e of existing homes in the City to ensure that households living in existing homes can live in safe and sanitary conditions and to reduce the potential for loss of existing units from the City’s housing stock.

Policies
• H E-D.1: Encourage the maintenance and repair of existing renter- and owner-occupied h
ousing to prevent deterioration through educational and outreach programs on basic housing maintenance procedures and techniques.
164
380

2021–2029 Housing Element
C
hapter 7: Housing Plan
7-11
• H E-D.2: The City will make available programs to assist property owners that can d
emonstrate financial need in the upgrading of their substandard units. • HE-D.3: Pr omote the replacement of substandard housing units that cannot be feasibly rehabilitated.
• HE-D.4: Coordinate code enforcement efforts with housing rehabilitation programs (
including outreach and fair housing enforcement programming). • HE-D.5: Continue to require that all substandard units in the City be improved so that they c
omply, where required, with the existing Building Code (Also Policy HE-O.3).

Existing Programs
• E P-D.1: Federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) S enior/Disabled Home Repair Program Grants. The sponsor of this program is the Development Department of the City of Victorville. The program provides a one-time grant of labor and materials for eligible senior homeowners and homeowners with disabilities for minor home repairs.

Victorville City CouncilJanuary 18, 2022

Victorville City Council
January 18, 2022