HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - October 19, 2011 G-02 PHAGENDA ITEM
dh CITY OFLODI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
�
AGENDA TITLE: Conduct Public Hearing to Consider Planning Commission's Recommendation to
Certify the 2010-2016 Housing Element and Introduce an Interim Ordinance
MEETING DATE: October 19,2011
PREPARED BY: Community Development Department
RECOMMENDEDACTION: Conduct public hearing to consider the Planning Commission's
recommendation to certify the 2010-2016 General Plan Housing
Element and introduce an interim ordinance.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Housing Element addresses the City's housing needs for the
2010-2016 planning period. It is one of seven mandated elements of
the General Plan required by State law. The Housing Element is
subject to detailed State law requirements, and is the only element
required to be reviewed and certified by the State of California Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD). Failure to secure a Certified Housing Element from HCD can result in the loss of
funding for housing and infrastructure related to projects and potential legal challenges. The Housing
Element is a six-year blueprint for housing Lodi's residents, presenting data, policies, and programs for
housing the City's residents at all income levels, including low- and moderate -income residents, as well
as those with special needs, such as seniors. The Housing Element shows how the City will house its
share of the projected population growth and of the region, as defined in the Regional Housing Needs
Allocation (RHNA), produced by the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG).
The 2010-2016 Housing Element spells out several implementation actions to promote availability and
affordability of housing. The State reviewed and conditionally approved the element pending
implementation actions. In order to maintain certification, the Planning Department is now in the process
of implementing those actions identified in the Housing Element. One of the implementation actions is to
enact an interim ordinance within a year to clearly define densities in the newly created General Plan
land use classifications (Downtown Mixed Use, Mixed Use Corridor and Mixed Use Center) to meet the
RHNA goal of over 4,929 units during the period from 2010 to 2016. The purpose of the proposed Interim
Ordinance is to ensure General Plan consistency and provide land use density definitions for new land
use classifications created by the recently adopted General Plan. These land use classifications do not
exist in the Zoning Code that is in effect.
State housing law mandates that local governments plan to meet the existing and projected housing
needs of all economic segments of the community through their housing elements (Government Code
§65580). The law specifies that in order for the private market to adequately address housing needs and
demand, local governments must adopt land use plans and regulatory systems which provide
opportunities for, and do not unduly constrain, housing development. The law further requires housing
APPROVED:
, City Manager
Housing Element— Interim Ordinance
October 19,2011
Page Two
elements be updated every five years and that every updated housing element be submitted to the State
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to ensure compliance with the State's
requirements. When the State HCD determines that a Housing Element complies with the law it grants
"certification".
On March of 2003, the City Council adopted the City's 2003-2009 Housing Element. The document was
forwarded to State HCD, who subsequently granted certification. In 2009, the City contracted with Dyett &
Bhatia, Inc. for the preparation of the updated Housing Element for the 2010-2016 planning period. In
preparing the updated Draft Housing Element, staff and the consultant requested public input and
direction from the Planning Commission and the City Council regarding policies, quantifiable objectives
and action programs through a series of workshops and public meetings conducted between June 2008
and December 2009 as part of the General Plan update, along with technical assistance from HCD. The
draft Housing Element that was presented to the Planning Commission on June 18, 2010, was submitted
to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for their review and approval
shortly thereafter. The attached document is presented in strike -out format in order to show the changes
that have occurred since the Commission's initial review pursuantto State comments.
Unlike other State -mandated General Plan elements, the Housing Element is the only element requiring
State Certification for compliance, and it is subject to detailed statutory requirements (California
Government Code Sections 65580 and 65589), regarding its content, and in summary, must contain the
following:
1. An evaluation of the results from housing programs implemented during the previous review period;
(i.e. the City's Current Housing Element adopted in 2003);
2. An assessment of the City's existing and projected housing needs based on housing, land use,
population, demographic, and employment trends;
3. An analysis of housing opportunities within the City, including an inventory of suitable sites and the
City's capacity to meet regional fair -share housing goals;
4. An analysis of constraints to providing housing and mitigating opportunities for those constraints;
and
5. A set of goals, policies, resources, and programs for the preservation, improvement and
development of housing.
Regional Housing Needs Assessment and the Inventory of Sites
A key component of the Housing Element is the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). State law
requires that during each planning period, each local jurisdiction must provide their "fair share" of the
region's new housing need. Factors for determining need include anticipated demand generated by
employment and population growth. The RHNA identifies not only the number of housing units the City
must plan for, but also the affordability level of those units. Through the RHNA process, HCD provides its
determination to the State's sub -regional councils, who then assign each local jurisdiction their fair share
of housing need.
In San Joaquin County, SJCOG determines the amount of affordable housing the county will need for the
time period and then divides that need among its participating jurisdictions. According to SJCOG, Lodi is
responsible for accommodating 3,891 additional housing units between 2007 and 2014, of which 1,621
units should be affordable to extremely -low-, very -low- and low-income households, approximately 42%
of Lodi's total share of regional housing needs. The table below shows the number and percentage of
housing units identified in the Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan for Lodi for the 2007 through 2014
planning period, by income category.
JACommunity Development\Council Comm unications\2011\10-19 PH -Housing Element.doc
Housing Element— Interim Ordinance
October 19,2011
Page Three
Extremely /Very
39
44
7
Low
Low
Moderate
Above Moderate Total
Regional Housing Needs 971
650
716
1,555 3,891
Percent of Total 25%
17%
18%
40% 100%
Source: SJCOG, 2008.
Lodi is not responsible for actual construction of these units. However, Lodi is responsible for creating a
regulatory framework in which these housing units can be built. The intent of the allocation is to ensure
that each local jurisdiction provide adequate sites and adequately zoned land to accommodate the
RHNA. To meet this objective, the proposed Housing Element contains a plan that addresses the
potential and actual governmental constraints on housing development, and demonstrates the City's
inventory of vacant land or underutilized sites with appropriate zoning and density to meet its RHNA
needs.
About half of Lodi's RHNA is met by developments which are already built, are under -construction, or
which have been approved through the Planning Commission, but which don't yet have building permits
(See Table 3-1 of the Housing Element, Attachment C to this report). In total, completed and approved
project will produce 547 housing units. Further, approved projects would produce 2,948 dwelling units of
varying densities (See Table 3-3 of the Housing Element, Attachment D to this report). In addition to
these categories of housing, the Housing Element includes a detailed land inventory and analysis of
housing opportunity sites in Lodi which are categorized as under utilized and vacant parcels that could
accommodate residential development at various densities. If developed at the densities prescribed in
the General Plan 2010, vacant sites, where new market rate or assisted (affordable) housing could be
built, have the potential to house an additional 1,112 units (See Table 3-4 of the Housing Element,
Attachment E to this report). Similarly, under-utilized sites, where new market rate or assisted (affordable)
housing could be built, have a potential to provide additional 322 units (See Table 3-5 of the Housing
Element, Attachment F to this report). Considered together, Lodi has a capacity of 4,929 units during the
Housing Element planning period. This total includes sufficient capacity at each household income level
to meet and exceed the RHNA.
Summary of Housing Sites
Completed & Development
Projects
39
44
7
457
547
Approved Master Plans
236
236
899
1,575
2,948
Vacant
532
403
63
114
1,112
Underutilized
194
104
16
8
322
Total
1,001
787
985
2,154
4,929
Regional Housing Needs
Allocation
971
650
716
1,555
3,891
Surplus
30
137
269
599
1,036
Source: Dyett & Bhatia, 2010.
J:\Community Development\Council Comm u n ications\201 1\1 0-19 PH - Housing Element.doc
Housing Element— Interim Ordinance
October 19,2011
Page Four
Analysis of Constraints on Housing
There are two categories of constraints to building housing in Lodi (see Housing Element,
Chapter 3):
Governmental constraints: includes land -use controls, development standards,
infrastructure requirements, development fees and development approval processes.
Non -Governmental constraints: Includes land costs, environmental hazards, land
availability, construction costs, financing for real estate development, and neighborhood
sentiment.
Housing Programs
The Housing Element identifies the various City programs which fund housing rehabilitation, assistance
to first-time homebuyers, support housing development, and provide miscellaneous services to low -and
moderate -income households (See Housing Element, Chapter 4). In addition, this Housing Element
contains policies to provide incentives for the development of affordable housing opportunities. It calls for
the City to study the possibility of providing certain benefits to developers who build affordable units such
as expedition of the development review process and reduction in development impact fees. Program 3.1
describes modifications to the impact fee program to alleviate disincentives to multi -family housing
construction. In addition, Program 1.2 calls for the exemption of affordable units from the growth
management allocation process, which would eliminate the time and expense of the process.
Quantified Obiectives
The proposed Housing Element contains quantified objectives, relative to the maintenance preservation,
improvement and development of housing during the years 2010-2016. While the City has identified
sufficient sites to meet all 1,621 units of the RHNA, the City does not anticipate having sufficient financial
resources to ensure that the entire need for very low-, low- and moderate -income units will be met. A
substantial portion of the City's resources are anticipated to be devoted to assisting households with the
greatest needs—very low- and low-income households.
Statement of the City's Housing Goals, Policies and Actions
Chapter 4 of the Housing Element details goals, policies and action plans, including an implementation
program table which identifies the agency responsible for each action, a timeline and funding sources
(see Appendix A "Accomplishments"). The goals in this Housing Element are:
• Provide adequate sites suitable for housing for all income groups
•
Promote the development of adequate housing for low –and moderate -income
households
• Remove constraints to the availability and affordability of housing for all income groups
• Conserve and improve older housing and neighborhoods
Preserve affordable rental housing
• Promote sustainable development and sustainable communities
General Plan Analvsis
The Housing Element contains an appendix which details how the Housing Element is consistent with
established City policies in the General Plan (See Housing Element, Appendix A). Lodi's Land Use
Element already permits high density housing and mixed use developments on the main streets and
commercial corridors—which is partially why this Housing Element shows the City can accommodate the
2010-2016 RHNA without any further annexation. This is because the vision and specific policies
contained in the General Plan seek to encourage and facilitate the types of infill, re -use, mixed-use, and
central city/corridor-oriented residential development that are the focus of the Housing Element and the
City's ability to accommodate its regional housing allocation from SJCOG. In addition, this Housing
Element, when adopted by City Council, will fulfill the General Plan's implementation strategy: "Prepare
and adopt remaining General Plan Elements."
JACommunity Development\Council Comm unications\2011\10-19 PH - HousingElement.doc
Housing Element— Interim Ordinance
October 19,2011
Page Five
Zoninq Ordinance
One of the implementation actions is to enact an interim ordinance to clearly define densities for newly
created General Plan land use classifications (Downtown Mixed Use, Mixed Use Corridor and Mixed Use
Center) to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goal of over 4,929 units during the
period from 2010 to 2016. The purpose of an Interim Ordinance is to ensure General Plan consistency
and provide land use density definitions for new land use classifications created by the recently adopted
General Plan. These land use classifications do not exist in the Zoning Code that is in effect. State laws
require definitions and zoning allowances to be consistentwith State housing law.
Pursuantto State condition of approval that the City adopts an interim ordinance within a year to create a
link between the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance, an interim ordinance is being introduced along
with the resolution. The proposed interim ordinance clarifies types of residential uses allowed in
Downtown Mixed Use, Mixed Use Corridor and Mixed Use Center land use categories. These three land
use categories are unclassified in the Zoning Ordinance in effect. Each land use classification would
allow housing density equivalent to the High Density General Plan land use category, which allows
density range between 15-35 dwelling units per acre. The proposed interim ordinance sets densities for
each of these categories as follows:
General Plan Land Use
Classification
ResidentialDensity (du/ac),
(from the General Plan)
Corresponding Zoning District
(other development standards)
Downtown Mixed Use
8-35
c-2
Mixed Use Corridor
2-35
C-1
Mixed Use Center
8-35
C-1
The C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) and C-2 (General Commercial) zoning districts in effect permit
density as described above. However, the recently adopted General Plan combines the various
commercial districts into a single commercial land use classification and creates three new land use
classifications. The densities described above are consistent with densities allowed in the C-1 and C-2
districts. Adoption of an interim ordinance would create a nexus between the adopted General Plan and
Housing Element 2010-2016.
The Housing Element is consistent and compatible with the General Plan and policies. The proposed
interim ordinance is necessary to create a nexus between the General Plan, the Housing Element and
the zoning ordinance. The Housing Element does not eliminate the requirement that specific future
development projects be consistent with all applicable policies and development standards. In
accordance with State law, the 2010-2016 Housing Element includes the City's housing policies and
goals, identify action programs, quantified objectives, and resources required for the preservation,
improvement, and development of housing to meet the existing and projected needs of the community,
during the planning period. Program goals and objectives established through a series of workshops,
public meetings, and guidance from the Planning Commission and City Council, has resulted in the
attached Draft Housing Element.
Housing Element— Interim Ordinance
JACommunity Development\Council Comm unications\2011\10-19 PH- Housing Element. doc
Housing Element— Interim Ordinance
October 19,2011
Page Six
ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENTS
The City prepared Lodi General Plan 2010 and adopted General Plan EIR 2010 (SCH#2009022075).
The proposed Housing Element is an implementation of the General Plan 2010 and the General Plan EIR
(SCH#2009022075) is the project's Environmental Document. Having been so included, all General Plan
level environmental effects were of necessity, therein addressed. City of Lodi General Plan 2010, City of
Lodi General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, February2010 and City of Lodi General Plan Draft
Environmental Impact Report, November 2009 are available for review at the City of Lodi, Community
Development Department, located at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California 95240.
The draft Housing Elementand proposed interim ordinancewere approved bythe Lodi Planning Commission on
September 14,2011.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable.
Kbrfrat Bartlam
Community Development Director
Attachments
KB/jw
JACommunity Development\Council Communications\2011\10-19 PH - HousingElement.doc
DYETT & BHATIA
Urban and Regional Planners
CITY OF LODI
JULY 2011
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ............................... 1-1
1.1 Purpose and Contents................................................................. 1-1
1.2 Community Context.................................................................... 1-2
1.3 State Requirements......................................................................1-3
1.4 Data Sourcesand their Use........................................................1-4
1.5 Public Participation......................................................................1-4
1.6 General Plan Consistency........................................................... 1-6
2 Housing Needs Assessment .................. 1-14
2.1 Population and Housing Characteristics..................................2-1
2.2 Household Trends.........................................................................2-3
2.3 Income and Housing Costs.........................................................2-4
2.4 Housing Characteristics...............................................................2-9
2.5 Employment................................................................................2-12
2.6 Special Needs Populations.......................................................2-14
2.7 Analysisof Assisted Housing Projects At -Risk ..........................2-18
2.8 Opportunitiesto Promote Sustainable Development .......... 2-22
2.9 Future Housing Needs................................................................2-24
3 Resources and Constraints .................. 3-1
3.1 Sites Inventory and Analysis........................................................3-1
3.2 Administrative and Financial Resources.................................3-23
3.3 Constraints...................................................................................3-31
4 Housing Strategy ........................... 4-1
4.1 Goalsand Policies........................................................................4-1
4.2 Implementation Programs..........................................................4-3
4.3 Quantified Objectives...............................................................4-22
A.Accomplishments ............................ A-1
Lodi Housing Elwwt
This page intentionally left blank
Introduction
1.1 PURPOSEAND CONTENTS
The Lodi Housing Element is part of the City's General Plan, which is a comprehensive
policy statement regarding the physical, economic, and social development of the city; the
preservation and conservation of natural and human features of the landscape, and the
re -use of land and buildings within the city. Although housing represents a high priority,
planning for housing must be balanced with the community's economic needs and
environmental, resource, and open space protection policies, which are also essential
aspects of the City's General Plan. Whereas general plans often reflect planning periods
15-25 years long, housing elements are updated every five to eight years, in accordance
with State law. This Housing Element coincides with an update to the Lodi General Plan
and is therefore an integral part of the updated document.
The Housing Element addresses one of the State -mandated General Plan topics and most
basic human needs: shelter. For this reason the Housing Element represents a critical link
between land use and transportation policies, which define the location, layout, and
movement of people and goods, and environmental/resource policies. For a city to have a
strong and balanced economy, where people live in proximity to where they work,
workers must have places to live within their economic means.
The Housing Element contains three parts following this introduction:
• Chapter 2: Community Profile contains an analysis of population, housing, and
employment characteristics and trends; the needs of special population groups
such as seniors, large families, and persons with disabilities; indicators of unmet
need, such as overcrowding, overpayment, substandard housing, and the potential
loss of affordable rental housing; and future housing construction needs. The pur-
pose of the community profile is to characterize existing conditions and unmet
housing needs among Lodi's current residents and to plan for future residents in
the city.
• Chapter 3: Resources and Constraints addresses the opportunities and chal-
lenges to meet the housing needs identified in the community profile. Resources
include the availability of land, adequate sites to meet housing needs, public and
private organizations that provide housing and supportive services, and funding
to implement the City's housing strategy. Constraints include the impacts of gov-
ernment action on housing availability and affordability, the interaction of market
forces, infrastructure, and environmental conditions. This analysis focuses on the
magnitude of potential constraints and identifies measures to remove them.
• Chapter 4: Housing Strategy identifies goals, policies, programs, and quantified
objectives to meet identified housing needs, reduce constraints on housing avail-
ability and production, and make effective use of available resources. As part of its
strategy, this section defines the responsible agencies, timeframes, and the antici-
pated results of the programs.
1-1
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bwmt
• Appendix A: Accomplishments describe achievements during the previous
Housing Element planning period (2001 to 2009), including housing units con-
structed or available for development and implementation of programs and poli-
cies. Lessons learned from these accomplishments have been used to revise poli-
cies and programs.
1.2 COMMUNITY CONTEXT
This section describes Lodi's community and demographic context in brief; Chapter 2:
Community Profile provides further details.
According to the 2007-2014 Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan prepared by San
Joaquin County Council of Governments, Lodi should plan to accommodate 3,891
additional residential units between 2007 and 2014. Of those residential units, 1,621, or
42%, should be affordable to extremely low-, very low-, or low-income households. It
should be emphasized that this is the amount of housing the City should plan for; actual
amounts of housing built will be influenced by broader economic forces, including the
recent national and regional economic downturn. Potential impacts of market factors, as
well as City policies and regulations, are examined in Chapter 3: Resources and
Constraints.
Between 2000 and 2008, the city's population increased by 11%. By comparison, Tracy
and Manteca, similarly sized cities, grew 43 and 35x/0, respectively, while the population
of Stockton grew 19% during this period. Since 2000, population growth in Lodi has been
concentrated in children (0-4 years) and people between the ages of 45 and 64.
Although historically San Joaquin County has been known for its agriculture and food
processing industries, in 2007 the sectors that accounted for the greatest shares of total
employment were trade, transportation and utilities (17%) and government (14%).
Between 1992 and 2007, the following sectors saw the greatest increases in the number
of jobs: construction, professional and business services, education and health services,
retail trade, and transportation/warehousing/utilities. A high percentage of Lodi
residents (54%) work outside the community, reflecting regional employment
interdependencies.
Lodi residents earn 91% of the countywide median income, according to the 2005-2007
American Community Survey. Despite having lower incomes than the county as a whole,
city residents have a local poverty rate that is similar to that of San Joaquin County.
Moreover, the poverty rate in Lodi is slightly lower than it was in 2000 (shrinking from
17 to 15%).
Lodi's housing stock is composed primarily of single-family homes. The total number of
housing units increased from 21,381 in 2000 to 23,353 in 2008—a 9% change. The
majority of new units are single-family detached homes, composing 96% of the new stock
added since 2000. There is an overall lack of construction of townhomes, duplexes, small -
and medium-sized apartment buildings, which often represent more affordable rental
housing. Of occupied housing units in Lodi, 55% are owned and 45% are rented. The
vacancy rate between 2000 and 2008 has remained unchanged at 3% for both rental and
ownership housing units, according to the Department of Finance. A vacancy rate of 5% is
1-2
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Amwnent
considered to be "normal'; a vacancy rate less than 5% indicates a tight market in which
households may not be able to find vacant units that fit their needs.
Lodi has experienced a growing gap between housing costs and local incomes. In recent
years, there has been a substantial increase in the number of households paying more
than 30% of their incomes for housing. In 2000, 44% of renter households overpaid for
housing; by comparison, 58% of renter households overpaid according to the 2005-2007
American Community Survey three-year estimate. In 2000, 24% of homeowners
overpaid for housing costs; that number increased to 38% in 2005-2007. Rent -restricted
housing affordable to lower-income households is limited in Lodi. However, given recent
shifts in the economy—a reduction in home sale prices and an increase in unemployment
and potential decrease in household income, the extent of overpayment is not known.
1.3 STATE REQUIREMENTS
Beginning in 1980 and refined periodically, the California Legislature adopted
requirements for the contents of housing elements (California Government Code sections
65580 to 65589.5). The contents of a housing element, as mandated by State law, include:
• An assessment of housing needs that includes an analysis of population and hous-
ing characteristics, employment and population projections, special housing
needs, subsidized rental housing at -risk of conversion, future housing construc-
tion need (regional housing allocation), and opportunities for energy conserva-
tion;
• An analysis of constraints (governmental and non-governmental) to the mainte-
nance improvement, or development of housing for all income levels;
• An inventory of vacant and underutilized sites by zoning category, with an as-
sessment of the availability public facilities, and services to those sites; and
• A housing strategy containing an evaluation of past program achievements, goals,
and policies, and a schedule of implementing actions with quantified objectives.
Although State law regarding housing elements requires communities to address the
needs of all residents, particular attention in the housing element law is devoted to the
needs of extremely -low-, very -low- and low-income households. Specifically, State law
requires housing elements to:
• Identify adequate sites to facilitate and encourage housing for all income levels;
• Remove governmental constraints to housing production, maintenance, and im-
provement;
• Assist in the development of adequate housing for low- and moderate -income
households;
• Conserve and improve the condition of existing affordable housing; and
• Promote housing opportunities for all persons.
1-3
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bwmt
1.4 DATA SOURCESAND THEIR USE
A variety of local, regional, State, federal, and private sources of information were used to
prepare the Housing Element. As required by State law (Government Code Section
65584), the principal source of information used to determine future housing
construction need is the San Joaquin County Regional Housing Needs Allocation for the
2007 to 2014 planning period. Other principal sources of information included the U. S.
Census Bureau, American Community Survey (typically the 2005-2007 three-year
estimate), California Department of Finance, the California Employment Development
Department, the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California Association of Realtors, local
nonprofit organizations serving special needs populations, local housing developers,
residents, and local real estate and property management firms.
1.5 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The Housing Element was prepared in parallel with an update to the General Plan;
extensive General Plan public participation activities addressed the topic of housing. The
City encouraged participation by all segments of the community in the preparation of the
Housing Element through a combination of general public notices and direct contacts
with organizations serving low-income and special needs groups.
GENERAL PLAN OUTREACH
The General Plan Update was initiated in October 2006. In order for the General Plan to
accurately address community needs and values, the City undertook a comprehensive
public process of obtaining the input of residents, business and property owners, and City
officials. This process involved the sharing of information and ideas between elected and
appointed officials, City staff, planning consultants, and community members.
Community members and stakeholders participated in the planning process through
several medium over the course of three years, including a citywide survey, public
workshops and meetings, stakeholder interviews, newsletters, and a project website.
Housing was a key issue in all of these public participation activities.
The first community workshop was held in June 2007. Participants were given a chance
to brainstorm their visions for the future of Lodi and share their thoughts on issues
concerning land use, community design and development, and transportation. Input was
also solicited through a citywide survey, interviews with stakeholders, and meetings with
decision -makers. Memos and published reports were prepared to summarize feedback
and then incorporated into three "sketch plan" land use scenarios, which included
various configurations for residential development that would accommodate a range of
income levels. An open house workshop was held in May 2008 to inform community
members about the effects of various development scenarios and to solicit feedback on a
preferred alternative. In addition, meetings with more than 20 business and community
groups were held in 2008 to solicit feedback on the alternatives. Comments sent to City
staff were also collected, reviewed, an integrated, as appropriate. Following community
feedback, a "preferred" land use plan was prepared.
During the General Plan outreach process, comments related to housing included:
varying opinions on building affordable housing in Lodi; varying opinions on appropriate
residential densities; support for mixed use development and development Downtown;
1-4
Chapter : Housng Needs Assessrnent
concerns about residential development in existing agricultural areas; desire to continue
the allowance of gated communities; desire for more senior housing; desire for more
moderate income housing; and support for the existing Growth Management Ordinance.
HOUSING ELEMENT OUTREACH
Stakeholder Forum
In addition to the outreach combined with General Plan Update, the City conducted direct
public outreach to individuals and organizations representing a broad spectrum of the
community, particularly organizations representing lower-income and minority
residents. The City issued mailed notices/invitations prior to a July 22, 2009 stakeholder
meeting to representatives of the following organizations and groups. Ten stakeholders
attended.
• Frontier Community Builders
• Service First of Northern California (Neighborhood Stabilization Program Devel-
opers for Lodi)
• Lodi Improvement Committee
• LOEL Foundation (senior center)
• Farmers & Merchants Bank
• Habitat for Humanity
• Tokay Development
• Visionary Home Builders (non-profit affordable housing developer)
• PAM Development (for-profit affordable housing developer)
• Colliers International Commercial Brokerage
• Housing Authority of San Joaquin County
• Community Partnership for Families
• Habitat for Humanity
• Lodi Boy's & Girl's Club
• Lodi Unified School District
• City Council and Planning Commission
• Community leaders
• Property owners
These organizations include the primary groups that provide services to lower-income
and special needs residents in Lodi. These organizations also serve individuals with
limited English proficiency. Following the stakeholder forum, a memo summarizing the
findings was prepared. Comments were organized into four categories and included the
following:
1-5
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bement
1. Housing needs: senior affordable housing, tenants for rental housing, Section 8
vouchers, homeless services, migrant workers/family housing, and supportive
housing for persons with disabilities.
2. How to promote affordable housing: fix perception program, develop mixed -
income; encourage TOD Downtown, develop incrementally, and consider rehabili-
tation of existing units into affordable units, as opposed to new construction.
3. Constraints: housing rehabilitation, neighborhood resistance, developer reluc-
tance, conditions of approval/plan review process, and infrastructure (e.g. sewer).
4. Programs and services: need for more project -based Section 8, tax credits are
competitive, lending market is tight, and need for housing assistance programs
(e.g. first time homebuyers program has been successful).
This organization allowed for easy translation between stakeholder comments and the
preparation of the Housing Element. For example, feedback from stakeholders,
specifically non-profit and for-profit developers, about the City's plan review process and
impact fees directly informed those analyses in Chapter 3: Constraints. Similarly, to
alleviate negative perceptions about affordable housing, the City developed a program
(Program 4.4 in Chapter 4) to educate community members about the purpose, need for,
design, and impact of affordable housing.
Public Review and Hearings
On May 27, 2010, the City announced the availability of the Draft Housing Element on the
City's website. Contact information for the Community Development Director was
provided. Any substantive comments received were evaluated and incorporated, as
appropriate. On June 24, 2010, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the
Housing Element to accept public comments. One community member spoke favorably
on the Housing Element. No changes were recommended by the public.
1.6 GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
To promote a uniform and compatible vision for the development of the community, the
General Plan must be internally consistent in its goals and policies, as required by
California Government Code Section 65300.5. Government Code section 65583(c)
requires that a housing element describe how consistency has been achieved among the
general plan elements. The most important aspect of consistency among general plan
elements is that policies and implementation measures do not conflict, but support one
another, to achieve the overall goals and vision of a general plan. Since the Housing
Element preparation coincided with the City's comprehensive General Plan Update,
policy measures were developed in parallel. As a result, the City has concluded that the
Housing Element is consistent with the vision of the General Plan. Policies included in
other General Plan elements that affect housing are summarized below.
LAND USE ELEMENT
LU -P3 Do not allow development at less than the minimum density prescribed by
each residential land use category, without rebalancing the overall plan to
comply with the "no net loss provisions of state housing law."
M
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Amwnent
LU -P4 Maintain the highest development intensities downtown, and in mixed-use
corridors and centers, with adequate transition to Low -Density Residential
neighborhoods.
LU -P6 Locate new medium- and high-density development adjacent to parks or other
open space, in order to maximize residents' access to recreational uses; or
adjacent to mixed-use centers or neighborhood commercial developments, to
maximize access to services.
LU -P18 Encourage medium- and high-density residential development in downtown
by permitting residential uses at upper levels; and east and northwest of
downtown, as depicted on the Land Use Diagram, by identifying vacant and
underutilized sites that are appropriate for redevelopment.
LU -P24 Guide new residential development into compact neighborhoods with a
defined Mixed -Use Center, including public open space, a school or other
community facilities, and neighborhood commercial development.
LU -P26 Require a master or specific plan in areas with a Mixed -Use Center and
adjacent complementary uses, as a condition of subdivision approval. Uses
should include neighborhood commercial, civic and institutional uses, parks,
plazas, and open space—consistent with Land Use Diagram (unless any of
these uses are found infeasible and/or alternative locations are available to
carry out mixed-use policies). Streets should adhere to the pattern depicted on
the Land Use Diagram.
LU -P27 Provide for a full range of housing types within new neighborhoods, including
minimum requirements for small -lot single family homes, townhouses,
duplexes, triplexes, and multi -family housing.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT
GM -G4 Provide public facilities—including police and fire services, schools, and
libraries—commensurate with the needs of the existing and future population.
GM -P2 Target new growth into identified areas, extending south, west, and southeast.
Ensure contiguous development by requiring development to conform to
phasing described in Figure 3-1 [of the General Plan]. Enforce phasing through
permitting and infrastructure provision. Development may not extend to
Phase 2 until Phase 1 has reached 75% of development potential (measured in
acres), and development may not extend to Phase 3 until Phase 2 has reached
75% of development potential. In order to respond to market changes in the
demand for various land use types, exemptions may be made to allow for
development in future phases before these thresholds in the previous phase
have been reached.
GM -P3 Use the Growth Management Allocation Ordinance as a mechanism to even
out the pace, diversity, and direction of growth. Update the Growth
Management Allocation Ordinance to reflect phasing and desired housing mix.
1-7
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
Because unused allocations carry over, as of 2007, 3,268 additional permits
were available. Therefore, the Growth Management Allocation Ordinance will
not restrict growth, but simply even out any market extremes.
GM -P4 Update allocation of units by density to ensure that development density
occurs as recommended in Chapter 2: Land Use. For instance, approved
permits should be allocated to provide 45.4% of permits for low density,
27.3% medium density, and 27.3% high density/ mixed use housing during
phase 1. This represents a shift towards slightly more medium and high
density housing in Lodi.
GM -P5 Update impact fee system to balance the need to sufficiently fund needed
facilities and services without penalizing multifamily housing or infill
development.
GM -P6 Annex areas outside the existing sphere of influence to conform with
development needs for Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3. Subsequent phases shall
be annexed as current phases reach development thresholds.
GM -P8 Ensure that public facilities and infrastructure—including water supply,
sewer, and stormwater facilities—are designed to meet projected capacity
requirements to avoid the need for future replacement and upsizing, pursuant
to the General Plan and relevant master planning.
GM -P9 Coordinate extension of sewer service, water service, and stormwater
facilities into new growth areas concurrent with development phasing.
Decline requests for extension of water and sewer lines beyond the city limit
prior to the relevant development phase and approve development plans and
water system extension only when a dependable and adequate water supply
for the development is assured.
GM -P11 Prepare master plan documents as necessary during the planning period to
address the infrastructure needs of existing and projected growth, and to
determine appropriate infrastructure provision for each phase. Existing
master plan documents should be used until new master plans are developed,
and updates should occur as follows:
• A sanitary sewer system master plan should be undertaken soon after
General Plan adoption. In particular, this master plan should address how
to best provide sewer service for the growth on the east side of the city
and for infill development, and to determine if additional wastewater
flows will need to be diverted into the proposed South Wastewater Trunk
Line.
• A citywide stormwater master plan should be prepared soon after General
Plan adoption to confirm or revise existing planning studies.
• A White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility master plan should be
completed during the early stages of Phase 1, most likely in 2013 or 2014.
NK,
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Amwnent
• A recycled water master plan was prepared in May 2008 and is current as
of 2009. It may be appropriate to update this document when the next
WSWPCF master plan is prepared, in 2013 or 2014, to evaluate the feasi-
bility of constructing a scalping plant to provide recycled water for use
within the city.
• A potable water supply and distribution master plan is not urgently
needed, as of 2009. Future planning should be completed as necessary.
• The Urban Water Management Plan should be updated on a five year basis
in compliance with State of California mandated requirements. Future
plans should be developed in 2010, 2015, 2020, 2025, and 2030.
COMMUNITY DESIGN AND LIVABILITY ELEMENT
CD -P1 Incentivize infill housing—within the Downtown Mixed Use district and along
Mixed Use Corridors—through the development review, permitting and fee
processes.
CD -P2 Ensure that Zoning and Subdivision ordinances include measures that guide
infill development to be compatible with the scale, character and identity of
adjacent development.
CD -P26 Focus new growth, which is not accommodated through infill development of
existing neighborhoods, in easily -accessible and pedestrian friendly
neighborhoods that include neighborhood -oriented commercial, public
services such as schools and parks, and residential uses.
CD -P38 Promote location and siting of buildings that minimizes energy use by features
such as enhancing use of daylight, minimizing summer solar gain, and use of
ventilating breezes.
CD -P39 Design any City -owned buildings or City- owned buildings that are proposed
for new construction, major renovation to meet the standards set by LEEDTM
or equivalent.
CD -P40 Prepare, or incorporate by reference, and implement green building and
construction guidelines and/or standards, appropriate to the Lodi context, by
2012. The guidelines and/or standards shall ensure a high level of energy
efficiency and reduction of environmental impacts associated with new
construction, major renovation, and operations of buildings. Ensure that these
guidelines/standards:
• Require documentation demonstrating that building designs meet mini-
mum performance targets, but allow flexibility in the methods used.
• Exceed California's 2005 Title 24 regulation standards for building energy
efficiency by 15%, with particular emphasis on industrial and commercial
buildings.
1-9
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
• Reduce resource or environmental impacts, using cost-effective and well -
proven design and construction strategies.
• Reduce waste and energy consumption during demolition and construc-
tion.
• Identify street standards, such as street tree requirements, appropriate
landscaping practices, and acceptable materials.
• Incorporate sustainable maintenance standards and procedures.
• Promote incorporation of energy conservation and weatherization fea-
tures in existing structures. Develop programs that specifically target
commercial and industrial structures for energy conservation and weath-
erization measures in order to reduce annual kWh per job.
These guidelines could be developed directly from the LEED (Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design) system developed by the U.S. Green
Building Council, the California-based Build It Green GreenPoint rating system,
or an equivalent green building program.
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
T -P1 Ensure consistency between the timing of new development and the provision
of transportation infrastructure needed to serve that development. Regularly
monitor traffic volumes on city streets and, prior to issuance of building
permits, ensure that there is a funded plan for the developer to provide all
necessary transportation improvements at the appropriate phase of
development so as to minimize transportation impacts.
T -P2 Review new development proposals for consistency with the Transportation
Element and the Capital Improvements Program. Ensure that new projects
provide needed facilities to serve developments, and provide all needed
facilities and/or contribute a fair share to the City's transportation impact fee.
T -P21 Work cooperatively with the Lodi Unified School District on a "safe routes to
schools" program that aims to provide a network of safe, convenient, and
comfortable pedestrian routes from residential areas to schools.
Improvements may include expanded sidewalks, shade trees, bus stops, and
connections to the extended street, bike, and transit network.
T -P35 Require community care facilities and senior housing projects with more than
25 units to provide accessible transportation services for the convenience of
residents.
PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
P -P2 Provide open space to meet recreation and storm drainage needs, at a ratio of
eight acres of open space per 1,000 new residents. At least five acres must be
constructed for park and recreation uses only. Drainage basins should be
constructed as distinct facilities, as opposed to dual -functioning park and
drainage basin facilities.
1-10
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Amwnent
P -P3 Pursue the development of park and recreation facilities within a quarter -mile
walking distance of all residences.
P -PS Update the City's Open Space and Recreation Master Plan, as necessary to:
• Arrange a distribution of open spaces across all neighborhoods in the city;
• Ensure that parks are visible and accessible from the street, to the sur-
rounding neighborhood, and citywide users; and
• Provide a variety of open spaces and facilities to serve the needs of the
community, ensuring a balance between indoor and outdoor organized
sports and other recreation needs, including passive and leisure activities.
P -P7 Work with developers of proposed development projects to provide parks and
trails, as well as linkages to existing parks and trails.
P -P19 Require master planned residential communities to dedicate parkland
consistent with General Plan standards. In -lieu fees will only be acceptable
where an exemption from providing a neighborhood park facility would not
adversely affect local residents because an existing park is nearby.
P -P20 Address park dedication and new development impact fees as part of the
Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations Update, to ensure compliance
with the General Plan park and open space standard.
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
C -P3 Support the continuation of agricultural uses on lands designated for urban
uses until urban development is imminent.
C -PS Ensure that urban development does not constrain agricultural practices or
adversely affect the economic viability of adjacent agricultural practices. Use
appropriate buffers consistent with the recommendations of the San Joaquin
County Department of Agriculture (typically no less than 150 feet) and limit
incompatible uses (such as schools and hospitals) near agriculture.
C -P17 For future development projects on previously un -surveyed lands, require a
project applicant to have a qualified archeologist conduct the following
activities: (1) conduct a record search at the Central California Information
Center at the California State University, Stanislaus, and other appropriate
historical repositories, (2) conduct field surveys where appropriate and
required by law, and (3) prepare technical reports, where appropriate,
meeting California Office of Historic Preservation Standards (Archeological
Resource Management Reports).
C -P37 Promote incorporation of energy conservation and weatherization features
into existing structures. Update the Zoning Ordinance and make local
amendments to the California Building Code, as needed, to allow for the
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
implementation of green building, green construction, and energy efficiency
measures.
C -P38 Encourage the development of energy efficient buildings and communities. All
new development, including major rehabilitation, renovation, and
redevelopment projects, shall incorporate energy conservation and green
building practices to the maximum extent feasible and as appropriate to the
project proposed. Such practices include, but are not limited to: building
orientation and shading, landscaping, and the use of active and passive solar
heating and water systems. The City may implement this policy by adopting
and enforcing a Green Building Ordinance.
C -P41 Encourage the use of passive and active solar devices such as solar collectors,
solar cells, and solar heating systems into the design of local buildings.
Promote voluntary participation in incentive programs to increase the use of
solar photovoltaic systems in new and existing residential, commercial,
institutional, and public buildings.
C -P42 Continue to offer rebates to residential, commercial, industrial and municipal
customers of Lodi Electric Utility who install photovoltaic (PV) systems or that
participate in the Lodi Energy Efficient Home Improvement Rebate Program.
Ensure that rebate programs are well advertised to the community and offer
rebates that are sufficient to gain community interest and participation.
C -P43 Work with the California Energy Commission and other public and non-profit
agencies to promote the use of programs that encourage developers to
surpass Title 24 Energy Efficiency standards by utilizing renewable energy
systems and more efficient practices that conserve energy, including, but not
limited to natural gas, hydrogen or electrical vehicles. Offer incentives such as
density bonus, expedited process, fee reduction/waiver to property owners
and developers who exceed California Title 24 energy efficiency standards.
SAFETY ELEMENT
S -P6 Prohibit new development, except for public uses incidental to open space
development, within Zone A (100 -year flood zone) of the most current FEMA
floodplain map (see Figure 8-1 [in the General Plan] for the most current
map).
S -P10 Require that all fuel and chemical storage tanks are appropriately constructed;
include spill containment areas to prevent seismic damage, leakage, fire and
explosion; and are structurally or spatially separated from sensitive land uses,
such as residential neighborhoods, schools, hospitals and places of public
assembly.
S -P11 Ensure compatibility between hazardous material users and surrounding land
use through the development review process. Separate hazardous waste
facilities from incompatible uses including, but not limited to, schools,
1-12
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Amwnent
daycares, hospitals, public gathering areas, and high-density residential
housing through development standards and the review process.
S -P22 Require new development to include grading and erosion control plans
prepared by a qualified engineer or land surveyor.
NOISE ELEMENT
N -G2 Protect sensitive uses, including schools, hospitals, and senior care facilities,
from excessive noise.
N -P4 Discourage noise sensitive uses such as residences, hospitals, schools,
libraries, and rest homes from locating in areas with noise levels above 65db.
Conversely, do not permit new uses likely to produce high levels of noise
(above 65db) from locating in or adjacent to areas with existing or planned
noise -sensitive uses.
N -PS Noise sensitive uses, such as residences, hospitals, schools, libraries, and rest
homes, proposed in areas that have noise exposure levels of "conditionally
acceptable" and higher must complete an acoustical study, prepared by a
professional acoustic engineer. This study should specify the appropriate
noise mitigation features to be included in the design and construction of
these uses, to achieve interior noise levels consistent with Table 9-3 [of the
General Plan].
N -P6 Where substantial traffic noise increases (to above 70db) are expected, such
as on Lower Sacramento Road or Harney Lane, as shown on the accompanying
graphic [see General Plan], require a minimum 12 -foot setback for noise -
sensitive land uses, such as residences, hospitals, schools, libraries, and rest
homes.
N -P14 Reduce vibration impacts on noise -sensitive land uses (such as residences,
hospitals, schools, libraries, and rest homes) adjacent to the railroad, SR -99,
expressways, and near noise -generating industrial uses. This may be achieved
through site planning, setbacks, and vibration -reduction construction
methods such as insulation, soundproofing, staggered studs, double drywall
layers, and double walls.
1-13
DR*T Lodi Housng Bement
This page intentionally left blank.
1-14
2 Housing Needs Assessment
This assessment aims to evaluate the effectiveness of existing housing policies and
programs and provide a general direction and focus for future housing initiatives.
2.1 POPULATION AND HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
POPULATION
According to the California Department of Finance (DOF), Lodi's 2008 population was
estimated to be 63,362, as shown in Table 2-1. Lodi has been the slowest growing city in
San Joaquin County in recent years; between 2000 and 2008, the city's population
increased by 11%. In contrast, the comparable -sized cities of Tracy and Manteca grew
43% and 35%, respectively, during this period.
Table 2-1: Comparison of Population Growth in Selected Areas
Jurisdiction
2000
2008
Increase
% Change
San Joaquin County
563,598
685,660
122,062
22
Lodi
56,999
63,362
6,363
11
Escalon
4,437
7,131
2,694
61
Lathrop
6,841
17,429
10,588
155
Manteca
49,258
66,451
17,193
35
Ripon
7,455
14,915
7,460
100
Stockton
243,771
289,927
46,156
19
Tracy
56,929
81,548
24,619
43
3)urce. U.S Census 2000, DOF, 2008.
As shown in Table 2-2, Lodi's population has grown at an average annual rate of nearly
1% since 1990 and projections indicate that growth is expected to continue at a modest
pace (1.2%) through the next several decades. Using projections by San Joaquin Council
of Governments (SJCOG), we can estimate that the population of Lodi is expected to
increase by 13% between 2008 and 2015 (not shown). It should be noted that the City's
residential permit activity in 2009-10 has resulted in less than five units.
2-1
Lodi Housing Elw)mt
Table 2-2: Population Growth Trends
Year
Population
Aerage Annual % Change
Actual 1990
51,874
--
2000
56,999
0.9
2008
63,362
1.3
Projected 2010
65,028
1.3
2015
69,055
1.2
2020
73,130
1.2
Smos U.S Off su$ 1990-2000; DOF, 2008; S;LOQ4 2007.
AGE
Table 2-3 reports a breakdown of the city's population by age cohort in 2000, according
to the U.S. Census and a three-year (2005-2007) average estimate provided by the
American Community Survey (ACS). Middle-aged adults represent the greatest
proportion of Lodi's population. A comparison between these years show the greatest
increases in the number of children four and under, as well as in middle-aged residents,
ages 45 to 64. These data suggest that Lodi has attracted more young families in recent
years and may have a need for family housing with two or more bedrooms.
Table 2-3: Age Characteristics and Trends
Age
2000
Number
Fbrcant
2005-2007'
Number
Fercant
0 to 4
4,495
8
6,081
9
5 to 17
11,596
20
12,213
19
18 to 24
5,472
10
6,337
10
25 to 44
16,032
28
17,278
27
45 to 64
11,263
20
14,067
22
65+
8,141
14
8,744
14
Total
56,999
100
64,720
100
I. 2005-2007 data are based on a sample of residents. The U.S. Census Bureau advises that 2005-2007
age values should be compared with caution to 2000 values.
bburce U.S mss, 2000; AOS Three -Year Estimate, 2005-2007.
RACEAND ETHNICITY
Lodi has a smaller non-white population compared with San Joaquin County as a whole;
while in 2000 36% of Lodi's population was non-white, the county's non-white
population made up 53% of its total. However, while the majority of Lodi's population
remains white, the trend since 2000 is toward increasing diversity, as shown in Table 2-
4. The overall growth in population since 2000 was modest, but the number of Hispanic
residents grew by approximately 45%. Asian residents increased slightly, but still
represent a small proportion of the population in Lodi.
2-2
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Anent
Changes in race and ethnic composition relate to certain housing needs as some
demographic and economic characteristics correlate with race. For example, though the
data are not available for more recent years, in 2000, Hispanic households had
significantly higher average family sizes than the overall average for Lodi (4.2 compared
to 3.3).
Table 2-4: Ethnicity Characteristics and Trends
FxxVghnicity 2000 2005-2007' % Charige
(2000 to
Number Fbrc errt Number Ferc ed 2005-2007)
White 36,200 64 37,239 58 3
Latino/Hispanic Origin 15,464 27 22,379 35 45
Asian or Pacific Islander 2,860 5 3,424 5 20
Native American 309 < 1 392 < 1 27
African American 260 < 1 185 < 1 -29
Other2 1,906 3 1,101 2 -429
Total 56,999 100 64,720 100 14
I. 2005-2007 data are based on a sample of residents. The U.S. Census Bureau advises that these 2005-2007 ethnic-
ity values should be compared with caution to 2000 values.
2. Persons who identified as Hispanic or Latino and having "two or more races" were included in the "Other" cate-
gory in the 2000 U.S. Census which may partly explain the decrease in 2007.
3)urce. U.S CamA 2000, AM7lhree-Yeer Estimata 2005-2007.
2.2 HOUSEHOLD TRENDS
HOUSEHOLD GROWTH
The number of households in Lodi increased at a slower rate than the city's population
during the last two decades. Therefore, the average household size increased over this
period. The ACS reports 21,887 households for the 2005-2007 three-year estimate, as
shown in Table 2-5.
Table 2-5: Household Growth Trends
Year Hcusehdds Nuaoical Gwxp
1990 19,001 --
2000 20,692 1,691
2005-2007 21,887 1,195
3)urce. U.S Census 1990-2000, A(S7hree-Year Estimate, 2005-2007.
HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION AND SIZE
Table 2-6 describes Lodi households, by family or non -family composition. According to
the ACS in the 2005-2007 period, the majority of households in Lodi were family
households—those with at least two people who are related to each other by blood or
marriage. More than half of family households had children under age 18 living at home.
Conversely, since 2000, non -family households have decreased. Of the non -family
2-3
Lodi Housing Elw)mt
households, more than 80% were composed of householders living alone. These data
support findings from the age cohort analysis that housing for families will continue to be
needed during the planning period.
Table 2-6: Household Type
Source: U.S Cams 2000; ACS7hree-Year Estimate, 2005 -2007 -
Over half of all households in Lodi are composed of one or two members, as shown in
Table 2-7. However, household size has been increasing in recent years. The median
household size rose from 2.7 in 2000, to 2.8 in 2008. Thirteen percent of households have
five or more persons, generally considered large households. (See Section 2.6: Special
Needs Populations for a compete discussion of large households).
Table 2-7: Household Size
Househdd Sze
2000
Number
Percent
2005-2007
Number
Percent
Family Households
14,349
69
15,715
72
With Children
7,400
36
8,361
38
With No Children
6,949
34
7,354
34
Female Householder, no spouse
2,522
12
3,028
14
With Children
1,629
8
1,765
8
Non -Family Households
6,343
31
6,172
28
Total Households
20,692
21,887
Source: U.S Cams 2000; ACS7hree-Year Estimate, 2005 -2007 -
Over half of all households in Lodi are composed of one or two members, as shown in
Table 2-7. However, household size has been increasing in recent years. The median
household size rose from 2.7 in 2000, to 2.8 in 2008. Thirteen percent of households have
five or more persons, generally considered large households. (See Section 2.6: Special
Needs Populations for a compete discussion of large households).
Table 2-7: Household Size
Househdd Sze
Number
Fbroff t
I -person household
4,984
23
2 -person household
6,845
31
3 -person household
3,314
15
4 -person household
3,844
18
5 or more person households
2,900
13
Total
21,887
100
Average
2.8
3)urce: ACS Three-Yeer Estimatp, 2005-2007, DOi= 2008 (avra9e).
2.3 INCOMEAND HOUSING COSTS
INCOME
Table 2-8 describes income by household size and tenure. According to the ACS 2005-
2007 estimate, the median income for all households in Lodi was $48,074, compared
with $52,872 for San Joaquin County as a whole. Household income is lowest for one-
person households and highest for four -person households. In general, income growth
does not correlate with household size, since larger families usually indicate children or
seniors who are likely out of the workforce. Notably, the median income of homeowners
was $67,322—more than twice the median income of renters, which was $31,138. The
2-4
Chapter : Haring NeedsAswnent
monetary resources needed to own a home are much greater than those needed to rent,
which partially explains this discrepancy.
2-5
Lodi Housing Elw)mt
Table 2-8: Median Household Income by Household Size
Housshdd Sze
Inaame
I -person households
$23,542
2 -person households
56,152
3 -person households
55,594
4 -person households
65,895
5 -person households
56,786
6 -person households
37,404
7 or more person households
51,176
Median Income (All Households):
48,074
Median Income (Owners)
67,322
Median Income (Renters)
31,138
Sburoa- ACS Three -Year Estimate; 2005-2007.
Table 2-9 shows disparity in median household incomes when stratified by race and
ethnicity. Non -Hispanic white households had the highest incomes at $53,472. Hispanic
households had a median income of $36,576, approximately $17,000 less than non -
Hispanic whites. African American households had the lowest median income of all ethnic
groups in 2007, at $21,591.
Table 2-9: Median Household Income by Race and Ethnicity
PbaoElEthnidty Inwrne
White, not of Hispanic Origin $53,472
African American 21,591
Asian (not including Pacific Islander) 47,090
Other race 37,928
Latino/Hispanic Origin 36,576
Note: Data for the categories of Native American and Two Or More Races were not included
because they were not available or had a large margin of error.
Smax ACS Three -Year Estimate; 2005-2007.
Poverty Status
The recent poverty rate in Lodi is slightly lower than it was in 2000. According to the
ACS, approximately 15% of the population lived at or below the poverty level, similar to
San Joaquin County as a whole; in 2000, the poverty rates were 17% and 18%,
respectively. Female -headed households with children had more than twice the poverty
rate for the entire population, approximately 40%, representing more than 700
households in Lodi. Seniors age 65 and over held the lowest rate of poverty over all
groups measured. Table 2-10 shows the poverty status by population and by family type
in Lodi and in San Joaquin County.
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Amwnent
Table 2-10: Poverty Status
Sburw ACS Three -Year Estimat4 2005-2007.
HOUSING COSTS
According to the California Association of Realtors, the median price for a home in Lodi
(including single-family and multifamily ownership homes, new and existing) in May
2009 was $155,000, as shown in Table 2-11. This represents a substantial decline of 31%
compared with the median sale price the previous year, in May 2008. This change is in
line with housing market trends in the county (37% decline year over year) and
statewide.
Table 2-11: Year over Year Median Housing Price in Selected Areas
Jrrisdidion
Lodi
May 2009
Sin ,baquin Cbunty
San Joaquin County
HajseWd Type
Number
% of Total
Number %of Total
Families
1,605
10
16,978
11
w/ children under 18
1,530
18
12,964
15
Female Householder
752
25
7,926
28
w/ children under 18
717
41
6,515
36
Population
Total
9,399
15
93,400
14
Under 18
3773
21
36,746
19
18 to 64
4831
13
51,680
13
65 and over
795
10
4,974
8
Sburw ACS Three -Year Estimat4 2005-2007.
HOUSING COSTS
According to the California Association of Realtors, the median price for a home in Lodi
(including single-family and multifamily ownership homes, new and existing) in May
2009 was $155,000, as shown in Table 2-11. This represents a substantial decline of 31%
compared with the median sale price the previous year, in May 2008. This change is in
line with housing market trends in the county (37% decline year over year) and
statewide.
Table 2-11: Year over Year Median Housing Price in Selected Areas
Jrrisdidion
May 2008
May 2009
Parent Change
San Joaquin County
$241,500
$152,000
-37
Lodi
226,000
155,000
-31
Manteca
270,000
190,000
-30
Ripon
348,250
292,500
-16
Stockton
195,000
112,000
-43
Tracy
315,000
238,000
-24
Sburce: California Asmdation of Fetors 2009.
Chart 2-1 depicts the median home price fluctuations in Lodi since 2002. During this time
period prices peaked in July 2006, at $430,750, and then started to decline. Prices were
lowest in March 2009 of this period, at $135,000. This decline has made homes
purchasing much more attainable for residents who can afford to buy homes.
2-7
Lodi Housing Element
Chart 2-1: Median Home Sale Prices (January 2002 - August 2009)
$500,000
$450,000
$400,000
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$0
`p'� �o'� o°c �a°` �o`� p'O `o`°
N 1J 1`'c N 1''c 1; 1`'� 1; 1''� la, NO
3)urce: Cafifonua Amdation of Rm tcr4 2002-2009.
On the other hand, contract rents increased at a higher rate than in the previous decade,
up by 32% since 2000, as shown in Table 2-12. The median contract rent in Lodi was
$784 in the 2005-2007 ACS period, and nearly the same, $776, for the County as a whole.
Some of the increase may be attributed to inflation, but the demand for rental housing
combined with a lack of rental housing construction has also likely contributed to the rise
in rents.
Table 2-12: Median Contract Rents
,urisdiction
2000
2005-2007
Pero9d Gia►ige
San Joaquin County
Lodi
$521
527
$784
776
34
32
b%urm U.S Census 2000, ACS Three -Year Estimate, 2005 -2007 -
Overpayment
In recent years, there has been a substantial increase in the number of households paying
more than 30% of their incomes for housing, as shown in Table 2-13. Overpayment is
defined as housing costs that exceed 30% of a household's income. Housing costs include
payments for the housing unit (rent or mortgage payment), utilities, property taxes, and
homeowner's or renter's insurance.
In 2000, 44% of renter households overpaid for housing; by comparison, 58% of renter
households overpaid in 2005-2007. In 2000, 24% of homeowners overpaid for housing
costs; that number increased to 38% in 2005-2007. Not surprisingly, overpayment is
most severe among lower income households. For example, for households earning less
than $20,000, 63% of owner -occupied households and 95% of renter -occupied
households are overpaying for housing. These data suggest a need for more affordable
housing, particularly rental housing for lower-income residents.
Chapter : Haring NeedsAssesgnent
Table 2-13: Households Paying More Than 30 Percent for Housing
/nape
Owner-Obaapied
Number Rroent
F;bnter-occupied
Number Fbrcent
Less than $20,000
611
63
2,554
95
$20,000 to $34,999
743
45
1,952
82
$35,000 to $49,999
1,075
57
758
49
$50,000 to $74,999
1,294
57
386
21
$75,000 or more
845
16
0
0
Total
4,568
38
5,650
58
Source• ACS Three -Year Estimate, 2005-2007.
Lodi's housing stock is comprised primarily of single-family homes. The total number of
housing units increased from 21,381 in 2000 to 23,353 in 2008—a 9% change, as shown
in Table 2-14. The majority of new units are single-family detached homes, composing
96% of the new stock added since 2000. There has been little increase in the stock of
townhomes, duplexes, or multifamily units, which often represent more affordable rental
housing than single-family homes.
DOF estimated a combined vacancy rate for rental and ownership units of 3% in 2008;
this value has remained unchanged since 2000. Vacancy rates less than 5% typically
indicates a tight market in which households may not be able to find vacant units that fit
their needs.
Table 2-14: Housing Units, by Type
Source: DOF 2000 and 2008.
TENURE
Of the 21,887 occupied housing units in Lodi, 12,136 units (55%) are owner -occupied
and 9,751 (45%) are renter -occupied, as shown in Table 2-15. These rates have remained
stable since the 2000 Census. Table 2-15 also describes tenure, by age group. The most
notable trend in tenure by age was the slight decline in the rate of homeownership
among householders age 65 to 74 years. The same group showed an increased rate in
M
2000
Number
Parma
2008
Number
Percent
% Glange
(2000-2008)
Single -Family Detached
13,221
62
15,127
65
9
Single -Family Attached
1,454
7
1,487
6
<1
2 to 4 Units
1,742
8
1,768
8
<1
5 or More Units
4,500
21
4,506
19
<I
Mobile Homes
464
2
465
2
<1
Total
21,381
100
23,353
100
9
Source: DOF 2000 and 2008.
TENURE
Of the 21,887 occupied housing units in Lodi, 12,136 units (55%) are owner -occupied
and 9,751 (45%) are renter -occupied, as shown in Table 2-15. These rates have remained
stable since the 2000 Census. Table 2-15 also describes tenure, by age group. The most
notable trend in tenure by age was the slight decline in the rate of homeownership
among householders age 65 to 74 years. The same group showed an increased rate in
M
Lodi Housing Element
tenure of rental units, which suggests that people of retiring age may be moving to senior
rental housing or may not have adequate homeownership options due to lack of income
or lack of housing supply. (Notably, no new senior housing has been built in Lodi during
the previous planning period, though at least 80 affordable units are planned for this
planning period.)
Table 2-15: Tenure by Age of Householder
3)urce. U.S Census 2000, ACSThree-Yeer Estimate 2005-2007.
HOUSING CONDITIONS
Age of Structure
Approximately 66% of Lodi's housing stock was built before 1980, as shown in Table 2-
16. When units are 30 years or older, they typically begin to require some major
improvements and repairs in order to retain their quality, suggesting a large portion of
homes may need substantial upgrades if they have not been maintained over the years.
Table 2-16: Year Structure Built
Year
Number
2000
2005-2007
1,910
Houwhdder, by Age
Number
% of Age Coup
Number % of
Age Croup
Owner -occupied housing units
33
1960 or Before
7,714
34
Householder 15 to 54 years
5,900
45
6,488
47
Householder 55 to 64 years
1,794
70
2,335
70
Householder 65 to 74 years
1,703
74
1,566
70
Householder 75 years+
1,911
71
1,747
70
Total:
11,308
--
12,136
--
Pixter-occupied cupied housing units
Householder 15 to 54 years
7,217
55
7,304
53
Householder 55 to 64 years
781
30
1,022
30
Householder 65 to 74 years
591
26
678
30
Householder 75 years+
795
29
747
30
Total:
9,384
--
9,751
--
3)urce. U.S Census 2000, ACSThree-Yeer Estimate 2005-2007.
HOUSING CONDITIONS
Age of Structure
Approximately 66% of Lodi's housing stock was built before 1980, as shown in Table 2-
16. When units are 30 years or older, they typically begin to require some major
improvements and repairs in order to retain their quality, suggesting a large portion of
homes may need substantial upgrades if they have not been maintained over the years.
Table 2-16: Year Structure Built
Year
Number
Fbraent
2000 or Later
1,910
8
1980 to 2000
5,935
26
1960 to 1980
7,488
33
1960 or Before
7,714
34
Total
23,047
100
3)urce• ACS Three -Year Estimat4 2005-2007.
Substandard/In Need of Rehabilitation
The most current information on substandard housing, from a Housing Assistance Plan
(HAP) prepared by the City for federal funding in 1984, was that 1,778 housing units
2-10
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Amwnent
were in substandard condition, of which 156 needed replacement. The number of
substandard housing units in 1984 represented about 12% of the housing stock and
about 70% of the number of housing units over 40 years old at the time. The HAP used 40
years as a criterion for estimating potential rehabilitation need.
Over that past 25 years, the number of housing units over 40 years old has increased, to
almost 11,000 (about 47% of the city's housing stock, compared to about 17% in 1984). If
the relationship between age and condition in 2009 is the same as in 1984, as much as
70% of the housing over 40 years old may need rehabilitation, or up to 7,600 dwelling
units. This number represents one-third of the city's housing stock.
The City's Community Improvement Unit within the Lodi Police Department administers
the code enforcement program that works to bring substandard homes into compliance
with all applicable building and health and safety codes. Over the past 10 years, the Code
Enforcement Unit has completed activities that have resulted in improvements to
approximately 1,800 housing units. Using this rate of improvements as an average, the
Unit will be able to rehabilitate approximately 1,080 housing units during the planning
period.
Housing improvements have also been driven by the Lodi Improvement Committee
(formerly the Eastside Improvement Committee), which assists and advises on property
maintenance, neighborhood improvement and historical preservation issues; designs and
implements programs to reduce blight and foster community pride; and works to reduce
crime, drugs, and blight in coordinating civil actions against nuisance property owners.
OVERCROWDING
Overcrowding (defined as more than one occupant per room) rates are generally low in
Lodi, suggesting that most households are able to find housing to accommodate their
household size. However, there are still 2,209 households that are overcrowded,
requiring large housing units with more rooms. Between 2000 and 2007, the rate of
overcrowding for both homeowners and renters in Lodi decreased, as shown in Table 2-
17. The number of renters living in overcrowded conditions was approximately 7% in
2000. By comparison, less than 3% of homeowners lived in crowded conditions,
according to 2005-2007 estimates.
Table 2-17: Overcrowding (Occupants per Room)
2-11
2000
2005-2007
Housng Units, by Tenure
Number
%of Total
Number
%of Total
Owner -Occupied
One or fewer occupants per room
10,614
51
11,544
53
More than one occupant per room
650
3
592
3
fbnter-Occupied
One or fewer occupants per room
7,525
36
8,134
37
More than one occupant per room
1,905
9
1,617
7
Total
20,694
100
21,887
100
2-11
Lodi Housing Elw)mt
Sburos U.S mss, 2000; ACS7hree-Year Estimate, 2005-2007-
2.5 EMPLOYMENT
According to the California Employment Development Department (EDD), in San Joaquin
County, Trade, Transportation and Utilities (17%); Government (14%); Retail (9%); and
Education and Health Services (9%) represent the largest employment sectors, as shown
in Table 2-18. Farm -related jobs have seen a decline over the past 15 years, now
representing just 6% of total employment in the County.
Table 2-18: Employment in San ,baquin County
Sburce: ®D, 1992 and 2007.
Within Lodi, food manufacturing and plastics businesses employ many workers,
according to 2006 data from the City of Lodi Economic Development Division. Retail,
health care and other services, and local government (including education) also comprise
a large part of Lodi's economy.
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
SJCOG projects a modest increase in jobs during the planning period in Lodi (1.6%
annually) between 2005 and 2015, as shown in Table 2-19. Most cities in the county are
projected to add jobs at a rate between 1% and 2% each year.
2-12
% of Total
% 0han9e,
,W4 by Type
1992
2007
in 2007
1992-2007
Total Farm
15,100
12,200
6
-19
Total Non -Farm
152,000
209,200
94
38
Trade, Transportation and Utilities
31,900
50,300
17
58
Government
35,300
40,900
14
16
Retail Trade
19,000
26,900
9
42
Educational and Health Services
18,000
26,100
9
45
Manufacturing
21,900
21,300
7
-3
Professional and Business Services
10,200
18,500
6
81
Leisure and Hospitality
12,000
17,700
6
48
Construction
6,500
15,500
5
138
Transportation, Warehousing & Utilities
6,900
13,500
5
96
Nondurable Goods
11,200
10,700
4
-4
Durable Goods
10,700
10,600
4
-1
Financial Activities
8,700
9,800
3
13
Wholesale Trade
6,000
9,900
3
65
Other Services
5,100
6,400
2
25
Information
2,300
2,500
1
9
Natural Resources and Mining
100
200
<1
100
Total
167,100
221,400
100
32
Sburce: ®D, 1992 and 2007.
Within Lodi, food manufacturing and plastics businesses employ many workers,
according to 2006 data from the City of Lodi Economic Development Division. Retail,
health care and other services, and local government (including education) also comprise
a large part of Lodi's economy.
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
SJCOG projects a modest increase in jobs during the planning period in Lodi (1.6%
annually) between 2005 and 2015, as shown in Table 2-19. Most cities in the county are
projected to add jobs at a rate between 1% and 2% each year.
2-12
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Anent
Table 2-19: Employment Projections in Selected Areas
,urisdidion
2005
2015
Average Annual
GmWh Rate
San Joaquin County
207,397
234,343
1.2
Lodi
23,438
27,457
1.6
Escalon
2,094
2,472
1.7
Lathrop
4,872
5,639
1.5
Manteca
12,809
14,691
1.4
Ripon
3,077
3,386
1.0
Stockton
92,122
101,001
0.9
Tracy
17,998
22,160
2.1
Note: Estimates reflect number of jobs, not employed residents.
Sburm S,WGi 2006.
Over half of Lodi residents commuted to jobs outside the city in 2007, as shown in Table
2-20. This was slightly more moderate compared to San Joaquin County as a whole,
which reports 57% of workers commuting outside the county. Still, these figures suggest
that Lodi residents are not filling many of the jobs that are available in the city or that
fewer jobs are available in Lodi.
Table 2-20: Em ployed Residents and Com m uting
Race of Work F6rsons Fervent
Lodi Employed Residents
Worked in Lodi 12,018 46
Worked Outside Lodi 14,295 54
San Joaquin County Employed Residents
Worked in San Joaquin County 100,020 43
Worked Outside San Joaquin County 134,625 57
Sburw ACS Three -Year Estimate; 2005-2007.
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
According to EDD cities in San Joaquin County have experienced increased
unemployment rates since 2000, as shown in Table 2-21. The unemployment rate in
2008 in Lodi was 8%, up from 5% in 2000 (not shown). By comparison, the
unemployment rate in San Joaquin County was estimated at 10% in 2008, up from 7% in
2000 (not shown). The current regional and national economic downturn suggests that
the unemployment rate may remain high during the Housing Element planning period.
This suggests that household income levels may decline and that households may have
difficulty in paying rents and mortgages or in securing affordable housing.
2-13
Lodi Housing Elw)mt
Table 2-21: Employment Rates in Selected Areas (2008)
iirisdiction
Labor Faroe
6rinloyment
Unemployment
Number
Fe?rant
San Joaquin County
297,200
266,100
31,000
10
Lodi
32,000
29,500
2,500
8
Escalon
3,500
3,100
300
9
Lathrop
5,600
5,200
400
7
Manteca
27,600
25,100
2,500
9
Ripon
5,900
5,600
400
6
Stockton
123,900
108,200
15,800
13
Tracy
33,300
31,100
2,100
6
2.6 SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS
Certain groups in the City of Lodi encounter greater difficulty finding decent, affordable
housing due to their special needs or circumstances. Special circumstances may be
related to a household's employment and income, family characteristics, medical
condition or disability, and/or household characteristics. A focus of the Housing Element
is to ensure that persons from all walks of life have the opportunity to find suitable
housing in Lodi.
State Housing Element law identifies the following special needs groups: senior
households, persons with disabilities, single -parent (particularly female -headed)
households, large households, farmworkers, extremely- and very -low-income persons
and families in need of emergency shelter. This section provides a discussion of housing
needs for each particular group, and identifies the programs and services available to
address their housing and supportive services needs.
6"WI GI&I
Senior housing needs may be more problematic to meet than the needs of other residents
since seniors are often living on a fixed income and many have special housing and care
needs. According to the ACS for the 2005-2007 period, approximately 21% of households
in Lodi were headed by persons age 65 years and older. Of these elderly households,
3,313 were homeowners and 1,425 were renters; more than half consisted of persons
who lived alone.
Approximately 10% of individuals 65 years of age or older in Lodi were below the
poverty level in 2007, compared to about 15% of the total population. As previously
discussed, there was a decline in homeownership among householders age 65 and older
since 2000. Together, these data suggest that seniors may not have adequate resources to
sustain increased housing -related expenses.
In 2007, approximately 42% of senior households consisted of women living alone (1,986
households). Elderly women are especially in need of financial assistance because so
many of them live alone and they tend to have lower incomes than male seniors.
2-14
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Assasgnent
According to the California Department of Social Services, there are currently ten licensed
care facilities for seniors located in Lodi. The facilities provide 510 beds for persons age
60 and above. There are also six adult residential facilities with a capacity of 121 persons
that may be available for seniors. The City itself also administers various day programs
designed for its senior residents. In a public-private partnership, the City maintains and
operates Hutchins Street Square, a multi-purpose community center located in an old
high school. The Square is home to a senior center that provides classes, programs and
services for the elderly. The Lodi Senior Citizens Commission, an active community
organization, identifies the needs of seniors and initiates action to address those needs.
LOEL Gardens is a private senior community center, which includes 14 units restricted to
low-income senior households.
PERSONS W ITH DISABILITIES
Persons with disabilities may have special housing needs because of health costs, fixed or
limited incomes, and/or a lack of accessible and affordable housing. A disability is defined
broadly by state and federal agencies as any physical, mental, or emotional condition that
lasts over a long period of time, makes it difficult to live independently, and affects one or
more major life activities.
According to the ACS for the 2005-2007 period, 16% (7,872 persons) of Lodi's working
age (16 years and older) population had some disability. Of these persons, almost half,
3,914, were age 65 years or older. Of the population between 16 and 64, more than 75%
of persons with an employment disability were below the poverty level.
Individuals with disabilities do not necessarily require special housing features or
supportive services. However, to maintain independent living, persons with disabilities
may need special housing design features, income support, and/or in-home supportive
services. More severely disabled individuals may require a group living environment
supported by trained personnel.
According to the California Department of Social Services, Lodi is home to one licensed
adult day care facility with a capacity to serve 30 clients. In addition, the County offers
home improvement grants, which can be used to make upgrades/modifications to ensure
accessibility. Lodi enforces State building code standards and model code requirements
for accessibility in residential construction (Title 24 of the California Administrative
Code).
FEMALE HOUSEHOLDERSW ITH CHILDREN
Single -parent households may have special housing needs due to limited income and
child day care requirements. These special needs particularly affect female householders
with children because their incomes tend to be lower than male householders. Women
with children comprised the majority of single -parent households in the 2005-2007 ACS
estimate: almost 70% (1,765 households).
According to ACS for the 2005-2007 period, 40% of the city's female -headed families
with children lived in poverty, up from 24% in 2000—a substantial increase. The median
income for female -headed households with children was $22,996, compared to $63,071
for married -couple families with children. Battered women with children comprise a sub -
2 -15
Lodi Housing Bement
group of female -headed households that are especially in need. In the Lodi area, several
social service providers and emergency housing facilities serve women in need, including
the Women's Center of San Joaquin County and the Lodi House Hope Closet.
LARGE HOUSEHOLDS
Large households, defined as having five or more members, often require special housing
needs due to a limited supply of adequately sized, affordable housing units. Three-
bedroom housing units comprise 45% of all units, however, four and five or more
bedroom units comprise just 8% and 1%, respectively. Additionally, rental units have
fewer bedrooms: only 25% of rental units have three -bedrooms and just 3% have four or
more bedrooms.
As previously mentioned, the ACS reported 2,900 large households in Lodi, of which
nearly half were renter households. Large households represent 13% of the city's total
households. Although rates of overcrowding have declined in recent years, there are still
over 2,200 overcrowded households. Although these numbers do not necessarily
represent the same set of households, they do indicate there is currently an unmet need
for affordable housing with more bedrooms in Lodi.
FARMWORKERS
Farmworkers traditionally are defined as persons whose primary incomes are earned
through permanent or seasonal agricultural labor. Permanent farmworkers work in the
fields, processing plants, or support activities on a year-round basis. When workloads
increase during harvest periods, the labor force is supplemented by seasonal or migrant
labor. Farmworkers' special housing needs typically arise from their limited income and
the unstable, seasonal nature of their employment, according to the California Institute
for Rural Studies. Because of these factors, farmworker households have limited housing
choices and are often forced to double up to afford rents.
According to the 2005-2007 ACS, there were 1,417 Lodi residents (representing 5% of
the workforce) employed in farming, forestry and fishing occupations. Although this is
not a large resident farmworker population, Lodi is located within the larger agricultural
region of San Joaquin County that employs 12,200 workers, according to EDD.
The Migrant Health Program of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
released a study in 2000 estimating the number of migrant and seasonal farmworkers
and their non-farmworker household members in California: the Migrant and Seasonal
Farmworker Enumeration Profiles Study. The study was based on secondary source
material, including existing database information and interviews with knowledgeable
individuals. The study indicated that San Joaquin County has an estimated 46,913
farmworkers, including 21,721 migrant and 25,192 seasonal farmworkers—much higher
numbers than the EDD reports, likely because of the different methodology used.
The Housing Authority of San Joaquin County currently manages three migrant family
farm labor housing developments within the County, with the capacity to accommodate
341 individuals. This housing is available annually from the first week of May through the
end of October. Day care centers are provided for farm workers as well as services from
the EDD, the Social Security Administration, and education and health care services.
2-16
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Am nrent
Some of the migrant farmers who formerly moved from state to state or from other
countries to California to pursue agricultural employment may have now become
permanent residents of Lodi. As such, the housing needs of farmworkers are primarily
addressed through the provision of permanent housing, rather than migrant farm labor
camps. Their housing need may be the same as other households and large families who
are in need of affordable housing with three or more bedrooms.
EXTREMELY -AND VERY -LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) database reported 2,503
extremely -low- and 2,381 very -low-income households in 2000, each representing 12%
of all households, as shown in Table 2-22. An additional 17% of households (3,602) are
considered low-income. In sum, 41% of households in the city may be eligible for below-
market rate housing.
Table 2-22: Households, by Income Category
Irmne Category
Number
Per -oat
Extremely -Low (530% of AMI)
2,503
12
Very -Low (30%:5 50% of AMI)
2,381
12
Low (50%:5 80% of AMI)
3,602
17
Moderate and Above (>80% AMI)
12,162
59
Total
20,648
100
See Table 2-24 in Section 2.9 for updated (2009) definitions of income categories.
Housing Provided for Very- and Extremely Low Income Households
Public and Assisted Housing
The City does not own or operate any public or assisted housing. The Housing Authority
of San Joaquin County has five rent -restricted public housing projects. None of these are
in the City of Lodi. There are two rent -restricted projects in Lodi. The Creekside South
Apartments contain 40 family units developed using the Section 236 mortgage subsidy
program and Section 8 rental subsidy. (See Section 2.7: Analysis of Assisted Housing
Projects At -Risk for a discussion of at -risk status.) LOEL Gardens is a private senior
community center, which includes 14 units restricted to low-income senior households.
Tenant -Based Housing Assistance
The Housing Choice Voucher Program provides portable vouchers that assist low-income
households with housing costs. The program is administered countywide by the Housing
Authority of the County of San Joaquin. Specific information on the location of vouchers is
not made available. The Housing Authority administers over 4,500 vouchers throughout
the County. As of October 2008 housing choice voucher program for San Joaquin County
had 11,735 families on the waiting list. The County manages 4,500 vouchers countywide,
2-17
Lodi Housing Elw)mt
204 of which are used in Lodi.' The majority of those on the waiting list (68%) were
extremely -low-income families with children. The remainder was comprised of families
with disabilities (28%) and seniors (8%).
HOMELESS
According to the most recent count of homeless individuals performed by San Joaquin
County in 2009, Lodi had 94 homeless persons, 26 of whom were not in shelters.
Lodi has two facilities that provide shelter to the homeless. The Archway Shelter,
operated by the Salvation Army, has 52 shelter beds for men and 28 beds for women and
children. The Lodi House, which provides shelter for women and children, has 26 beds
for women and children. Additionally, these facilities maintain a combined 40 beds for
transitional housing needs. During the off-season, one of the migrant farmworker French
Camp Facilities is made available to the homeless. These facilities were also used as
evacuation sites during the January 1997 floods and as "emergency" housing for families
displaced by city or county action.
There is no information to suggest that Lodi is in need of additional homeless facilities,
but with the national and regional economic downturn, financial assistance may be
required to provide services to an increased homeless population or others requiring
temporary emergency housing.
2.7 ANALYSIS OF ASSISTED HOUSING PRO.JECTSAT-RISK
ASSISTED RENTAL HOUSING PRO,JECTSAT RISK OF CONVERSION
Existing rental housing that receives governmental assistance is a key source of
affordable housing in Lodi that should be preserved. The loss of such rental units reduces
the availability of housing affordable to extremely -low-, very -low- and low-income
households. It is far more cost-effective to preserve existing affordable housing than to
replace it with newly constructed units, unless housing has reached a substantial level of
deterioration.
This section identifies publicly assisted rental housing in Lodi, evaluates the potential of
such housing to convert to market rate units during a ten-year period (January 2007 to
July 2017), and analyzes the cost to preserve or replace at -risk units. Resources for
preservation/replacement of units and housing programs to address their preservation
are described in Chapter 3: Resources and Constraints.
Table 2-23 lists the four publicly assisted multi -family rental housing projects in Lodi.
1 Phone conversation with Melinda Hazard, San Joaquin County Housing Authority, 11/23/09.
2-18
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Amwnent
Table 2-23: Inventory of Publicly Assisted Rental Housing
Sturm 717e National Housing Trust 2008, Oty of Lodi, 2010, California Housing Partnership 2010.
The Bethel Gardens Senior Apartments is a nonprofit- and Church -owned property that
has a subsidized mortgage that has kept the units affordable. The property was
constructed in 1971 and is currently in good condition. This mortgage matures in
December 2011, but the property owner has not indicated that it intends to convert to
market rate—it is not the mission of the church to operate a for-profit business. The
property is not considered at risk, but the City will continue to encourage the owner to
maintain affordability and prepay the HUD 236 mortgage (if feasible) to ensure that their
tenants are able to receive Enhanced Vouchers.
According to the National Housing Trust's database of assisted rental housing projects,
Creekside South Apartments is a Section 8 Preservation Project with a Section 8 contract
that expired on February 29, 2008; and a HUD 236 Loan that will be paid off in November
of 2013. This suggests that the property is at -risk of conversion to market -rate housing.
As of January 2010, the property owner is still operating the project under Section 8
Program contract restrictions, but could opt to convert the project to market rate housing
during the period covered by this Housing Element (2007 to 2014). However, according
to the owner's representative at Eugene Burger Management Corporation, the ownership
does not intend on converting the project to market -rate once the 236 Loan has been
satisfied in 2013.
PRESERVATION AND REPLACEMENT OPTIONS
To maintain the existing affordable housing stock, the City can either preserve the
existing assisted units or facilitate the development of new units. Depending on the
circumstances of at -risk projects, different options may be used to preserve or replace
the units. Preservation options typically include: 1) transfer of project to non-profit
ownership; 2) provision of rental assistance to tenants using non-federal funding
2-19
Affordable
R ojed Na►neiAddress
Units
Type
Funding 3)urc a
Earliest Expiration
Creekside South Apartments
40
Family
Section 236 Section 8
November 2013
601 Wimbledon Drive
(Section 236)
February 2008
(Section 8)
Lodi Hotel
76
Senior
CDBG/ HOME, Tax Credits
2026
7 South School Street
Bethel Gardens
24
Senior
HUD 236
December 2011
701 S. Ham Lane
LOEL Gardens
Senior
CDBG/ HOME
March 2021
104 South Washington Street
5
301 East Oak Street
5
303 East Oak Street
4
Total
154
Sturm 717e National Housing Trust 2008, Oty of Lodi, 2010, California Housing Partnership 2010.
The Bethel Gardens Senior Apartments is a nonprofit- and Church -owned property that
has a subsidized mortgage that has kept the units affordable. The property was
constructed in 1971 and is currently in good condition. This mortgage matures in
December 2011, but the property owner has not indicated that it intends to convert to
market rate—it is not the mission of the church to operate a for-profit business. The
property is not considered at risk, but the City will continue to encourage the owner to
maintain affordability and prepay the HUD 236 mortgage (if feasible) to ensure that their
tenants are able to receive Enhanced Vouchers.
According to the National Housing Trust's database of assisted rental housing projects,
Creekside South Apartments is a Section 8 Preservation Project with a Section 8 contract
that expired on February 29, 2008; and a HUD 236 Loan that will be paid off in November
of 2013. This suggests that the property is at -risk of conversion to market -rate housing.
As of January 2010, the property owner is still operating the project under Section 8
Program contract restrictions, but could opt to convert the project to market rate housing
during the period covered by this Housing Element (2007 to 2014). However, according
to the owner's representative at Eugene Burger Management Corporation, the ownership
does not intend on converting the project to market -rate once the 236 Loan has been
satisfied in 2013.
PRESERVATION AND REPLACEMENT OPTIONS
To maintain the existing affordable housing stock, the City can either preserve the
existing assisted units or facilitate the development of new units. Depending on the
circumstances of at -risk projects, different options may be used to preserve or replace
the units. Preservation options typically include: 1) transfer of project to non-profit
ownership; 2) provision of rental assistance to tenants using non-federal funding
2-19
Lodi Housing Element
sources; and 3) purchase of affordability covenants. In terms of replacement, the most
direct option is the development of new assisted multi -family housing units. These
options are described below.
Transfer of Ownership
Transferring ownership of an at -risk project to a non-profit housing provider is generally
one of the least costly ways to ensure that at -risk units remain affordable for the long
term. By transferring property ownership to a non-profit organization, low-income
restrictions can be secured indefinitely and the project would become potentially eligible
for a greater range of governmental assistance. This preservation option is a possibility
for the Creekside South Apartments and would be based on the estimated market value
of the units.
Rental Assistance
Project -based Section 8 rent subsidies can be used in combination with Low Income
Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) to leverage private capital in areas where the market rent
exceeds the maximum rents under the LIHTC program. Under Section 8, the Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) pays the difference between what tenants can
pay (defined as 30% of household income) and what HUD estimates as the fair market
rent on the unit. This difference between the market rent paid by the Section 8 program
and the underlying rent used by the affordable housing industry to estimate the capacity
of property to pay debt service is called the Section 8 increment. This additional debt may
be used for renovation of existing affordable housing and production of new rental
housing affordable to very -low-income households.
Purchase of Affordability Covenants
Another option to preserve the affordability of the at -risk project is to provide an
incentive package to the owner to maintain the project as affordable housing. Incentives
could include writing down the interest rate on the remaining loan balance, and/or
supplementing the Section 8 subsidy received to market levels. The feasibility of this
option depends on whether the complex is too highly leveraged. By providing lump sum
financial incentives or on-going subsidies in rents or reduced mortgage interest rates to
the owner, the City can ensure that some or all of the units remain affordable.
Construction and Conversion of Replacement Units
The construction of new affordable housing units is another means of replacing the at -
risk units should they be converted to market -rate units. The cost of developing housing
depends upon a variety of factors, including density, size of the units (i.e., square footage
and number of bedrooms), location, land costs, and type of construction. Assuming an
average development cost per housing unit of $90,000, it would cost approximately $3.6
million to construct 40 new assisted units.2
2 See Section 3.3: Constraints for details on how construction costs were estimated.
2-20
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Amwnent
Given the current housing market downtown (regionally and nationally), there may be
opportunities for the City to work with non-profit housing developers and property
management companies to purchase existing properties on the open market and
maintain them as affordable housing.
As an Entitlement Community, Lodi now will look to HCD for HOME Program funds.
Through the Neighborhood Services Division of the City's Community Development
Department, which administers the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Program, Lodi intends to pursue funding opportunities for new rental construction
projects and rental rehabilitation projects with both non-profit and for-profit developers.
In the last year within the Urban County, the City also received an allocation of
Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds to be used to acquire vacant, foreclosed
properties for rehabilitation and reuse as affordable housing.
Both of these activities will provide the opportunity to put restrictions in place to ensure
long-term affordability. (See Section 3.2: Administrative and Financial Resources for a
detailed description of funding resources.)
ORGANIZATIONS INTERESTED IN PRESERVING ASSISTED RENTAL
HOUSING
The preservation of affordable rental housing at risk of conversion to market rate
housing can be assisted by non-profit organizations with the capacity and interest to
acquire, manage, and permanently preserve such housing. The California Department of
Housing and Community Development maintains a list of interested non-profit
organizations. A number of organizations have expressed an interest in preserving
affordable rental housing in San Joaquin County, including:
• Visionary Home Builders, 315 N. San Joaquin Street, Stockton, CA 95202, (209)
466-6811 (formerly ACLQ
• Christian Church Homes of Northern California, Inc, 303 Hegenberger Road, Suite
201, Oakland, CA 94621, (510) 632-6714
• Domus Development, 594 Howard Street, Suite 204, San Francisco, CA 94105,
(415) 856-0010
• Eden Housing, Inc, 22645 Grand Street, Hayward, CA 94541 (510) 582-1460
• Eskaton Properties, Inc, 3939 Walnut Avenue, Carmichael, CA 95608, (916) 974-
2060
• Foundation for Affordable Housing, Inc, 30950 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite -100, San
Juan Capistrano, CA 92675, (949) 443-9101
• Housing Corporation of America, 6265 Variel Avenue, Woodland Hills, CA 91367,
(818) 789-5550
• Mercy Housing California, 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 202, West Sacramento, CA
95691, (916) 414-4400
2-21
Lodi Housing Elw)mt
• Rural California Housing Corp, 6501 Elder Creek Road, Sacramento, CA 95824,
(916) 388-2630
• Satellite Housing, 1521 University Avenue, Berkeley, CA 94703-1422, (540) 647-
0700.
• Stockton Shelter for the Homeless, P.O. Box 4803, Stockton, CA 95204, (209) 465-
3612
2.8 OPPORTUNITIESTO PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Energy costs directly affect housing affordability through their impacts on the
construction, operation, and maintenance of housing. There are many ways in which the
planning, design, and construction of residential neighborhoods and structures can foster
energy conservation to reduce this cost impact and at the same time produce an
environmental benefit. Techniques for reducing energy costs include construction
standards for energy efficiency, energy-saving community design alternatives, the layout
and configuration of residential lots, and the use of natural landscape features to reduce
energy needs. Sustainable development also encompasses the preservation of habitat and
species, improvement of air quality (particularly important in this region), and
conservation of natural resources, including water and open space.
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS
The State of California has adopted building standards for energy efficiency that apply to
newly constructed dwellings and residential additions. Title 24 of the California Code of
Regulations sets forth mandatory energy efficiency standards that can be achieved
through prescriptive means or through compliance with a maximum "energy budget."
Prescriptive means include the use of appliances, building components, insulation, and
mechanical systems that meet minimum energy efficiency ratings. Local governments
implement state energy standards as part of their building code enforcement
responsibilities.
RESOURCES FOR ENERGY CON SERVAT I O N
The City of Lodi operates its own electric utility, Lodi Electric Utility, which provides
residential, commercial, and industrial electric service, and allows flexibility and control
over energy sources. In 2008, the City's average power mix included more renewable
energy (27%) compared with the statewide average (10%) and less coal (21%) than the
statewide average (32%). In addition to sustainability efforts in energy sources, Lodi
Electric Utility offers several programs to reduce residential energy use, including:
• Residential Energy Survey Program, which helps residents identify major energy
uses and how these can be reduced;
• Residential Appliance Rebate Program, which provides rebates on the purchase of
new, energy-efficient appliances;
• Energy Efficient Home Improvement Program, which offers rebates on other
types of energy efficient residential systems (fans, space conditioning, insulation,
thermostats, windows, etc.);
2-22
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Assasgnent
•
H ousing-As-A- System Inspection Program, which uses diagnostic equipment to
analyze mechanical and air delivery/duct systems and includes an inspection of
attic insulation and windows; and
• A residential energy conservation demonstration program, in which a single-
family home has been fitted with the latest energy conservation technology and is
open to public tours to promote energy saving features.
Pacific Gas & Electric, which provides gas to the city, provides a variety of energy
conservation services for residents and also participates in several other energy
assistance programs for lower income households, which help qualified homeowners and
renters, conserve energy and control electricity costs. The California Alternate Rates for
Energy Program provides a 15% monthly discount on gas and electric rates to income -
qualified households, certain nonprofit -operated facilities housing agricultural
employees, homeless shelters, hospices, and other qualified non-profit group living
facilities. The Relief for Energy Assistance through Community Help (REACH) Program
provides one-time energy assistance to customers who have no other way to pay their
energy bills. The intent of REACH is to assist low-income customers, particularly the
elderly, disabled, sick, working poor, and the unemployed, who experience severe
hardships and are unable to pay for their necessary energy needs.
GENERAL PLAN GOALS AN D POLICIES
Other elements in the General Plan discuss policy measures to reduce energy
consumption through land use, transportation, and conservation efforts.
• The Land Use Element prioritizes new mixed-use centers, which will consolidate
residential, retail, and small office uses, and which will be co -located with parks
and schools. It encourages a diversity of housing types, in particularly promoting
townhouse and multi -family units, which are more energy efficient compared
with single-family homes. It also promotes infill development in the city's Down-
town and major corridors to capitalize on transit facilities and existing commer-
cial and public services.
• The Growth Management Element and Infrastructure Element seeks to maintain
the city's compact form and ensure the preparation of infrastructure plans and
improvements in tandem with new develop. Policies also require water conserva-
tion measures, which in turn reduces consumption of energy embodied in the dis-
tribution of water.
• The Community Design and Livability Element promotes site planning and green
building measures to reduce energy consumption and improve quality of life. This
includes lot orientation to maximize solar gain and ventilating breezes, and im-
plementation of building standards consistent with LEEDTM or equivalent green
building programs. The Element also regulates lighting, to reduce light pollution
as well as energy consumption and requires street trees and shade in certain loca-
tions to reduce the urban heat island effect.
• The Transportation Element seeks to reduce the reliance on cars and increase the
convenience of alternate modes through new connections and improved circula-
tion for transit, bikes and pedestrians. The City operates its own local "GrapeLine"
2-23
Lodi Housing Elw)mt
transit service, which allows it to closely coordinate land use and transit planning
decisions. As a result, the City can both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and im-
prove air quality.
• The Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element proposes to increase the acreage
of carbon -sequestering open space, retain mature trees, and encourage the use of
native and trees and drought -tolerant plantings.
• The Conservation Element seeks to preserve agricultural land, and food and wine
production until urban development is imminent. It seeks to protect and restore
habitat and species, particularly along the Mokelumne River. The Element also
encourages energy conservation through the promotion of solar panels and heat-
ing systems; the preparation of a climate action plan, and a heat island mitigation
plan.
Together these policies and programs seek to reduce the consumption of natural
resources and limit greenhouse gas emissions, while at the same time promoting public
health and overall quality of life for residents.
2.9 FUTURE HOUSING NEEDS
HCD defines the annual income limits for various housing affordability categories for
each county in the state. In 2009, the median income for a family of four under these
guidelines was $63,600. The income categories and their corresponding income ranges
are shown in Table 2-24. These income categories are referenced throughout the Housing
Element.
Table 2-24: Income Limitsfor San baquin County
/name Category
Percentage of Cbunty Median Ihmme
Income Limits (family of four)
Extremely Low
Less than 30%
Less than $19,100
Very Low
30-50%
$19,100 - 31,800
Low
50-80%
$31,801 - 50,900
Moderate
80-120%
$50,901 - 76,300
Above Moderate
120% and above
Over $76,300
SJCOG determines the amount of affordable housing the county will need for the time
period and then divides that need among its participating jurisdictions. According to
SJCOG, Lodi is responsible for accommodating 3,891 additional housing units between
2007 and 2014, of which 1,621 units should be affordable to extremely -low-, very -low -
and low-income households, approximately 42% of Lodi's total share of regional housing
needs.
Lodi is not responsible for actual construction of these units. However, Lodi is
responsible for creating a regulatory framework in which these housing units can be
built. This includes the creation, adoption, and implementation of general plan policies,
Zoning Ordinance regulations, and/or economic incentives to encourage the construction
of the needed range of housing units.
2-24
Chapter 2: Haring Needs Anent
Table 2-25 shows the number and percentage of housing units identified in the Regional
Housing Needs Allocation Plan for Lodi for the 2007 through 2014 planning period, by
income category.
Table 2-25: Regional Housing Needs AIlocation for the City of Lodi (2007-2014)
Irwme Categories
ExtrW7elj- Abow
/VaryLow Lav Moderate Moderate Total
Regional Housing Needs 971 650 716 1,555 3,891
Percent of Total 25% 17% 18% 40% 100%
2-25
This page intentionally left blank.
Lodi Housing Elwwt
2-26
3 Resources and Constraints
This chapter describes housing site opportunities, resources for residential development
and programs, constraints to developing housing in Lodi, and recommendations for how
to remove such constraints.
3.1 SITES INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS
Land on which to construct housing is one of the most critical resources necessary to
meet future housing demand. Without adequate vacant or underutilized land, the City of
Lodi cannot demonstrate how it will accommodate its share of the regional housing
needs allocation (RHNA). The amount of land required to accommodate future housing
needs depends on the city's physical characteristics, zoning, availability of public facilities
and services, and environmental conditions.
ADEQUATE SITES
To determine whether the city has sufficient land to accommodate its share of regional
housing needs for all income groups, Lodi must identify "adequate sites." Under State law,
adequate sites are those with appropriate zoning, development standards, and
infrastructure capacity to accommodate new construction needs. A locality's sites are
adequate if the land inventory demonstrates sufficient realistic capacity at appropriate
densities and development standards to permit development of a range of housing types
and prices to accommodate the community's share of the RHNA by income level.
The extent to which the city has "adequate sites" for housing affordable to very -low- or
low-income households will depend, in part, on zoning standards, particularly the
maximum allowed density, parking, building coverage, height, and set -back standards.
The combination of the city's flexible zoning standards, allowances for housing on
commercial properties and a history of approving housing, planned development
provisions, and exceptions and variances suggests that Lodi can accommodate its share
of the RHNA on sites available within the existing city limits and in new growth areas to
be annexed into the city.
The types of sites that are appropriate for residential development in Lodi are divided
into three categories, described in detail in the section below and in Figure 3-1.
1. Development Projects - This category includes land with housing development
either recently built, under construction, or approved by the City.
2. Approved Master Plans - This category includes the three master plan projects
that have been approved by the City, but for which subsidies have not been identi-
fied.
3. Vacant or Underutilized Infill - This category includes vacant land or land cur-
rently occupied that is capable of being developed at higher densities or with
greater intensity than the existing use. All sites contain General Plan designations
that permit residential use. The majority of this type of land is located adjacent to
existing residential areas or in areas designated for mixed-use development ac-
cording to the General Plan.
3-1
Lodi Housing Elw)mt
4. Annexation Areas - This category includes land that has been designated in the
General Plan, but has not yet been annexed by the City of Lodi. The figure shows
sites are included in Phase 1 of the General Plan—outside the current city limits,
but inside the Sphere of Influence.
3-2
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
Insert Figure 3-1: Housing Sites Inventory
3-3
■
RON
■•
�ill IIIA
=7T � l
6= 6W
�CWE;ffi-�
RiHA
m
iMMI MIIMM
AWE"
W�mmmm
mm.
Now
r�
.sr
E LOIAV
Lodi Housing Element
DEMONSTRATING APPROPRIATENESS OF SITES
Appropriate Densities and Housing Types
Although subsidized housing is limited in Lodi, what does is exist has been created
through a variety of means and densities, including new construction, rehabilitation, low -
and moderate densities. Loel Gardens maintains three separate senior homes, with five
units each, representing some of the smaller housing types on smaller lots (less than 1/4
acre), that blend in with adjacent single-family homes.
Creekside South Apartments provides 40 subsidized family units on a 2.2 acre parcel,
representing a density of 18 units per acre. On the larger end, the approved Eden Housing
development will provide 80 senior units on a 4.4 acre site at the same density level. It
has a General Plan designation of Mixed -Use Corridor and a Single -Family Residential
Zoning classification. It has a General Plan designation of High -Density Residential and a
Planned Development Zoning classification. These examples suggest that the "default"
density of 20 units/acre, permitted by State law, is an appropriate density for recent
development types. Finally, Hotel Lodi, with 76 units, is a rehabilitated mixed use
development (formerly a hotel), located above several Downtown shops.
Appropriate Land Use Designations
The City's Zoning Ordinance, including zoning districts and the zoning map, has not yet
been updated to be consistent with the General Plan, adopted in 2010. As described in
Program 1.1, the Zoning Ordinance will be revised within one year of adoption of this
Housing Element. Until the Zoning Ordinance is updated, General Plan land use
designations and density/intensity standards shall apply on all sites, as described in the
matrix below. For information purposes, the General Plan Land Use Diagram is shown in
Figure 3-2.
General Ran Land Use Designation
Densty lunge (units'a q)
HouseWd Ihmne LeW Ao"nmodated
Mixed Use Center
8-35
Extremely -Low-, Very -Low-, and Low
High Density
15-35
Extremely -Low and Very -Low
Medium Density
8-20
Moderate
Low Density
2-8
Above moderate
Demand and Market Trends
Chapter 2 described the continued demand for affordable housing, given low income
levels and overpayment, as well as a constrained supply, with new housing construction
remaining static for several years. A market study prepared for the Eden Housing senior
affordable development project corroborated the pent-up demand for affordable senior
housing in particular. The study projected demand from 928 households (in and around
Lodi) for 79 spots, concluding that the development would likely be fully occupied in just
three months. Although no new housing has been constructed in several years,
developments that have been approved are part of mixed use communities, with
commercial and public uses complementing residential uses. This concept is upheld by
3-4
Q*ter 3: R--murces and Constraints
the recently adopted General Plan which calls for "mixed use centers" in new residential
development areas.
3-5
Lodi Housing 9wwt
Insert Figure 3-2: General Plan Land Use Diagram
Low Density Residential
Mixed Use Corridor jI City Limits
_ Medium Density Residential
Business Park
L___a Sphere of Influence (2008)
_ High Density Residential
Office
7/7� Armstrong Road Agricultural o 0.25
0.5 l
_ Commercial
Public/Quasi-Public
Cluster Study Area
Miles
_ Downtown Mixed Use
Industrial
Figure 3-2
_ Mixed Use Center
Open Space
General Plan Land Use
Diagram
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
Financial Feasibility
Both developer and homeowners' loans and feasibility are critical aspects of the potential
for development and purchasing of new housing. The current housing makes developers
wary and less likely to move forward with new projects. The City is committed to
pursuing state and regional funding opportunities (see Program 1.5 and resources
section below) to provide incentives for development and bridge financing gaps. Given
the City's commitment to TOD and mixed-use development as identified in the General
Plan, the City may be able to access state bond funds and other regional grants to create
model projects in the Central Valley.
As described in the non-governmental constraints section in Chapter 4, the tightening of
the mortgage lending market has made it more difficult for households to secure loans. In
2007, the overall loan approval rating for the city was 47 percent. However, very low
interest rates, combined with the City's successful implementation of the first-time
homebuyers program suggest that financing is still feasible for a range of income levels,
with good credit ratings.
1. Development Projects
Within Lodi, there are already several development projects that have been completed,
approved or are under construction, or which have been completed that will count
toward meeting the RHNA. Table 3-1 reports development projects since January 2007,
by income level. In total, development projects will produce 547 housing units, including
90 units that may be developed at below market rates. Where affordability funding has
been secured—specifically for the Eden Housing senior development and the Service
First of California acquisitions—this is documented in the final column of the table.
3-7
Lodi Housing Bement
Table 3-1: Development Projects (January 2007- December 2010)
Housing Unity by Mcam
Extremely Above
R gfect Name /Very Low Low Moderate Moderate Total Affordability Funding
Completed
Legacy Estates Unit 2
144
144
n/a
KB Homes -The Villas (Service First of Nor. CA)'
80
80
Neighborhood Stabilization Program
Legacy Homes Unit 1
77
77
n/a
Small Units with Low Value (Consolidated)2
7
7
Small Units with Low Value
Service First of Northern CA - 500 E. Oak I
I
HOME
Service First of Northern CA - 502 E. Oak I
I
Neighborhood Stabilization Program
Service First of Northern CA - 110 South Garfield I
I
HOME
Approved
Eden Housing 39 40
1
80
CDBG, HOME
Century Meadows One Unit 2
74
74
n/a
Century Meadows One Unit 1
55
55
n/a
865 E. Olive Ave.
19
19
n/a
1911 S. Church St.
7
7
n/a
Service First of Northern CA - 324 Watson Street I
I
Neighborhood Stabilization Program
Total 39 44 7 457 547
1. Service First of Northern California acquired a constructed unit in foreclosure to resell as a low-income housing unit.
2. Based on small lot size/valuation at 541 E. Maple, 543 E. Maple, 330 N. Pleasant, 1456 Rumi, 1436 Rumi, 1459 Rumi, and 1439 Rumi. See City of Lodi, Analysis of
Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. Submitted to HCD, 2010.
Source: Otyof Lodi, D*t & ®hatia, 2009.
C
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
As a result of these development projects, the City would not yet meet the RHNA at any
household income levels. Additional sites will be required to accommodate housing
needs. Table 3-2 describes this remaining need of 1,538 extremely -/very -low and low-
income units.
Table 3-2: Remaining Need
bburos- San ,baquin Cbunty Cbundl of Gwwnment,5 2008, City of Lodi, 2009
2. Approved Master Plans
Three master plan projects were approved by the City in advance of the recent General
Plan update, but have not yet been constructed: FCB Southwest Gateway, Blue
Shield/Reynolds Ranch, and FCB Westside. Given developers' target sale prices,
development agreements, and/or approved densities, sites within these plans may
accommodate affordable housing as described below.
A. Affordable Targeted Sales Prices. Given the current housing market downturn, many
market -rate homes in Lodi have become affordable, even to low-income households,
though not subsidized. Certain development project units can be considered affordable
for low and moderate income households due to their Medium- or High -Density
Residential General Plan designation, designation for high-density senior housing, lot and
unit size (e.g. 1,850 to 2,350 square feet on moderately sized lots), and the corresponding
likely sales price: in the mid to high -$200,000s.3 To illustrate, as reported in Table 2-24,
income limits for the County are up to $76,300 for a family of four to qualify for Moderate
income housing (120% of median). Assuming that a family spends no more than 30% of
its income on housing, it has the ability to spend up to $22,890 per year (or $1,908 per
month). Assuming a 30 -year fixed interest rate at 5% and 20% downpayment, a home up
to $290,000 could be attainable.4
B. Approved Medium- and High -Density Housing. In addition to City Council approvals
and certified environmental impact reports, each project has been awarded growth
management allocations, and does not require subsequent City Council action to build at
the density levels described herein. Moreover, the General Plan references these projects
as key projects in the Plan's Phase 1 development, which seeks to avoid leapfrog
development by prioritizing contiguous development within just a few miles of the
3 E-mail correspondence between Joseph Wood, City of Lodi, and Tom Doucette, President of FCB
Homes, December 10, 2010.
4 Ginnie Mae online mortgage calculator. http://www.ginniemae.gov/2x prequal/le detail whatif.asp.
9a
Housng Unit4 by Inane
Extremely,
Above
AkryLow
Low Moderate Moderate
Total
Regional Housing Needs Allocation
971
650 716 1,555
3,891
Development Projects
39
44 7 457
547
Remaining Need
932
606 709 1,098
3,344
bburos- San ,baquin Cbunty Cbundl of Gwwnment,5 2008, City of Lodi, 2009
2. Approved Master Plans
Three master plan projects were approved by the City in advance of the recent General
Plan update, but have not yet been constructed: FCB Southwest Gateway, Blue
Shield/Reynolds Ranch, and FCB Westside. Given developers' target sale prices,
development agreements, and/or approved densities, sites within these plans may
accommodate affordable housing as described below.
A. Affordable Targeted Sales Prices. Given the current housing market downturn, many
market -rate homes in Lodi have become affordable, even to low-income households,
though not subsidized. Certain development project units can be considered affordable
for low and moderate income households due to their Medium- or High -Density
Residential General Plan designation, designation for high-density senior housing, lot and
unit size (e.g. 1,850 to 2,350 square feet on moderately sized lots), and the corresponding
likely sales price: in the mid to high -$200,000s.3 To illustrate, as reported in Table 2-24,
income limits for the County are up to $76,300 for a family of four to qualify for Moderate
income housing (120% of median). Assuming that a family spends no more than 30% of
its income on housing, it has the ability to spend up to $22,890 per year (or $1,908 per
month). Assuming a 30 -year fixed interest rate at 5% and 20% downpayment, a home up
to $290,000 could be attainable.4
B. Approved Medium- and High -Density Housing. In addition to City Council approvals
and certified environmental impact reports, each project has been awarded growth
management allocations, and does not require subsequent City Council action to build at
the density levels described herein. Moreover, the General Plan references these projects
as key projects in the Plan's Phase 1 development, which seeks to avoid leapfrog
development by prioritizing contiguous development within just a few miles of the
3 E-mail correspondence between Joseph Wood, City of Lodi, and Tom Doucette, President of FCB
Homes, December 10, 2010.
4 Ginnie Mae online mortgage calculator. http://www.ginniemae.gov/2x prequal/le detail whatif.asp.
9a
Lodi Housing gement
Downtown. The General Plan codified approved densities for these three projects, by
designating land uses and densities consistent with these approvals, as shown in Table 3-
3. Therefore, where residential densities have been approved at 20 dwelling units per
acre or higher, sites are appropriate for Very -Low and Low Income households. Zoning
for all three sites is Planned Development (PD).
• Blue Shield/Reynolds Ranch: This approved master planned project will include a
mix of residential, office, and commercial development. The business park com-
ponent of this project was completed and occupied by Blue Shield in 2008 and
commercial retail underway, with a Costco warehouse opening in 2011. The resi-
dential component has not yet been constructed, but has approvals and growth
management allocations for 1,080 units including 9.3 acres of High -Density Resi-
dential and 58.0 acres of Medium -Density Residential. The former units are ap-
propriate for Very -Low and Low Income households. The latter units are intended
for senior housing; though no subsidy has been identified, the development ap-
proval calls for duplexes, which may be appropriate for Moderate Income house-
holds as described in bullet (A) above.
• FCB Southwest Gateway: This approved master planned project will be a residen-
tial community with a school and open space. The site is currently vacant and
construction has been delayed given the economic downturn. The project has ap-
provals and growth management allocations for 1,230 units, including 17 acres of
High -Density Residential and 30 acres of Medium -Density Residential. While the
High -Density units are appropriate for Very -Low and Low Income households, the
Medium -Density units may be appropriate for Moderate income households as
described in bullet (A) above.
• FCB Westside: This approved master planned project will be a residential com-
munity with a school and open space. The site is currently vacant and construc-
tion has been delayed given the economic downturn. The project has approvals
for 638 units, including 10 acres of High -Density Residential and 23 acres of Me-
dium -Density Residential. While the High -Density units are appropriate for Very -
Low and Low Income households, the Medium -Density units may be appropriate
for Moderate income households as described in bullet (A) above. In addition, the
development agreement also requires the landowner to either rehabilitate or pay
the costs of rehabilitating up to 25 residential units (or up to $1.25 million) within
the Eastside neighborhood, which has a concentration of homes in need of repairs.
C. Adequate Infrastructure. Services will be constructed in tandem with residential
development through a combination of special assessments, impact fees, and on/off-site
improvements requirements. None of the master plan projects have environmental or
other impediments that would restrict their development at full potential. Infrastructure
needs have been identified where necessary. For example, in 2002, the City adopted the
Westside Facilities Master Plan, a master plan for the "FCB Westside" development
project, which identifies a mix of land use and City services necessary to support the
proposed land uses for the area. See Section 3.3: Constraints for a detailed description of
public facilities and infrastructure needs.
3-10
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
Table 3-3: Approved Master Plans
Housing Unit4 by Irm-ne
RRojett Name and Maximum Above
Si`atus ARV Ames Cawal Ran Designation Density Lary Low Low Moderate Moderate Total Units
05803004 1.0 Low Density Residential
8
4 4
05803006 1.5 Medium Density Residential 20 8 8 16
2.0 Low Density Residential
05803009 8.1 Medium Density Residential
8
20
8 8
45 45 90
9.4 High Density Residential 35 60 60 60
05803014 6.3 Low Density Residential
05803015 8.6 Low Density Residential
FCB SW Gateway 13.0 Low Density Residential
(Approved. Vacant. 05803017
Buildout at 55% as- 2.5 High Density Residential
sumes roads and 6.9 Low Density Residential
utilities.) 05803018
8
8
8
35 33 33 33
8
35 16 16 16
8
20
25 25 50
05804001
180
27
27
37
37
50
50
12.0
99
57
57
65
48
30
30
25 25 50
05804001
19.4
Low Density Residential
8
85
85
12.0
Medium Density Residential
20
65
65
130
05804002
22.1
Low Density Residential
8
97
97
3.1
Medium Density Residential
20
17
17
34
05804004
13.0
Low Density Residential
8
57
57
1.0
Medium Density Residential
20
6
6
12
05804005
5.5
Low Density Residential
8
24
24
05804014
24.5
Low Density Residential
8
95
95
Total
109 109
275
737
1,230
(continued next page)
3-11
Lodi Housing Elwwt
Table 3-3: Approved Master Plans (continued)
Housng Unit4 by Irm-ne
RRojett Name and Maximum Above
Status ARV Ames General Ran Designation Density Lary Low Low Moderate Moderate Total Units
8
20
8
20
8
20
37 37
34 33 67
79 79
44 45 89
27 27 54
35 52 52 51
8
155
146 146
Total
10.5
Low Density Residential
02740001
156
378
638
7.5
Medium Density Residential
FCB Westside
8
22.2
Low Density Residential
(Approved. Vacant.
02740002
9.9
Medium Density Residential
Buildout at 45% as-
Low Density Residential
8
sumes roads and
3
3.3
Low Density Residential
utilities.)
02740003
6.1
Medium Density Residential
9.9
High Density Residential
02938005
41.3
Low Density Residential
8
20
8
20
8
20
37 37
34 33 67
79 79
44 45 89
27 27 54
35 52 52 51
8
155
146 146
Sburoe: City of Lodi, 2011.
3-12
Total
52 52
156
378
638
05813002
0.9
Low Density Residential
8
4
4
05813003
0.6
Low Density Residential
8
3
3
05813004
0.4
Low Density Residential
8
2
2
05813005
0.4
Low Density Residential
8
2
2
Reynolds Ranch
(Approved. Vacant,
05813006
0.4
Low Density Residential
8
2
2
except office and
05813021
6.4
Low Density Residential
8
36
36
commercial compo-
built
05865001
2.0
Low Density Residential
8
11
11
nent as per
development plan.
05813014
0.3
Medium Density Residential
20
1
1
2
Buildout at 70% as-
05813022
6.5
Medium Density Residential
20
45
46
91
sumes additional
roads and utilities.)
05813024
10.2
Medium Density Residential
20
71
71
142
05865002
1.5
Low Density Residential
8
8
8
05865003
1.5
Medium Density Residential
20
11
11
22
05865004
39.6
9.3
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
20
35
75 75
265
75
265
530
225
Total
75 75
468
462
1,080
GRAND TOTAL
372.0
236 236
899
1,577
2,948
Sburoe: City of Lodi, 2011.
3-12
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
3. Vacant and Underutilized Infill
Through its General Plan policies, the City emphasizes infill development, a compact
community, residential neighborhoods that are accessible to commercial services, and
higher densities in appropriate locations. Table 3-4 and Table 3-5 describe vacant and
underutilized sites, respectively, that represent appropriate locations for below-market
rate housing. Vacant infill sites have the capacity for 998 below-market rate units;
underutilized sites could produce as many as 314 below-market rate housing units. The
following tables identify an assumed density value, based on densities permitted in the
General Plan. Current zoning designations are shown; however, zoning designations will
be updated following adoption through the implementation of interim zoning regulations
as specified in Program 1.1.
Underutilized sites include sites where uses are no longer in operation, in disrepair, or
have surpassed their useful life. Sites designated as Mixed Use Corridor were prioritized,
since the General Plan calls for reinvestment in these areas. As evidenced by the small
number of vacant parcels in the city, the City has done a commendable job of avoiding
leapfrog development. Given the current economic client, redevelopment of underutilized
parcels—included closed businesses—will be important for avoiding blighted conditions
and maintaining the city's compact form and accessible neighborhoods. Moreover, these
sites already have infrastructure in place, which may reduce development costs
compared to projects on greenfield land.
Unit capacity is determined by multiplying the number of acres by the assumed density
and buildout factor. Sites were deemed appropriate for extremely -low- or very -low-
income households due to their allowed density; location; and proximity to transit,
neighborhood services, and public facilities. The Mixed Use Corridor designation permits
100% residential development except along Cherokee Lane and Lodi Avenue, where 25%
and ground -floor frontage should be commercial active uses, respectively. Likewise, the
Downtown Mixed Use designation requires ground -floor active uses. These restrictions
are calculated as part of the unit capacity. A realistic development capacity of 80 percent
("buildout factor") is assumed for most vacant sites. Sites over ten acres in size are
assumed to have a development capacity of 70 percent to account for additional open
space and enable appropriate development typologies (e.g. small apartment complexes of
no more than 30 units for very -low income households). For underutilized sites, the
assumed density value also takes into account the realistic potential for redevelopment,
such as any existing uses to remain on the site or a potential mix of uses.
3-13
DFNFT Lodi Housng Bement
Table 3-4: Vacant Infill Sites
Extremely
Current
addart
Max.
Lav
Above
Total
ARV
Ace
Address
General Ran Dedgnation
Zoning
Factor
Density
Aby-Low Low
Moderate Moderate
QWty
05814052
19.6
1920 S Lower Sacramento
Medium Density Residential
R -MD
70%
20
120 120
34 0
274
05814012
19.2
1784 S Lower Sacramento
Medium Density Residential
R -MD
70%
20
120 120
29 0
269
06201005
7.8
1774 South Church Street
Medium Density Residential,
R-1, R-2
80%
20
30 63
31
124
High Density Residential
02939015
6.2
971 N Lower Sacramento
Medium Density Residential
R -C -P
80%
20
30 57
12
99
02742008
5.3
1333 Lower Sacramento
Low Density Residential
R-2
80%
8
33
33
02742010
3.8
1330 Westgate Dr
Low Density Residential
R-2
80%
8
24
24
05814014
2.3
1690 N Lower Sacramento
Low Density Residential
R -MD
80%
8
14
14
04302304
2.2
217 North School Street
Downtown Mixed Use
C-2
70%
35
30 23
0
53
04728015
1.9
1 130 South Cherokee
Mixed Use Corridor
C-2
60%
35
30 10
0
40
04728021
1.9
1 150 South Cherokee
Mixed Use Corridor
C-2
60%
35
30 10
0
40
04502046
1.0
410 W Lodi Ave
Mixed Use Corridor
C-1
60%
35
21
0
21
06201003
0.9
1912 South Church Street
High Density Residential
R-1
80%
35
24
0
24
04323001
0.6
604 East Pine
Mixed Use Corridor
C-2
80%
35
16
0
16
02741020
0.6
2115 W Kettleman Lane
Mixed Use Corridor
R -C -P
80%
35
15
0
15
03726003
0.4
427 W Lockeford St
Mixed Use Corridor
C-2
80%
35
11
0
11
04307401
0.4
208 E Pine Street
Mixed Use Corridor
C-2
80%
35
11
0
11
04318002
0.4
113 N Cherokee
Mixed Use Corridor
C-2
60%
35
8
0
8
03726001
0.3
427 W Lockeford St
Mixed Use Corridor
C-2
80%
35
9
0
9
04302301
0.3
216 North Church Street
Downtown Mixed Use
C-2
70%
35
7
0
7
04306716
0.2
301 E Lodi Ave
Mixed Use Corridor
C-2
60%
35
5
0
5
04307406
0.2
220 E Pine Street
Mixed Use Corridor
C-2
80%
35
6
0
6
04314035
0.2
527 East Lodi Avenue
Mixed Use Corridor
C-2
60%
35
4
0
4
03726002
0.2
427 W Lockeford St
Mixed Use Corridor
C-2
80%
35
5
0
5
TOTAL
76.0
532 403
63 114
1,112
1. Sites
designated as Mixed Use Corridor along
Cherokee Lane require at least one quarter of the developed portion of the site to be commercial uses and along Lodi
Avenue require active uses (e.g. retail, restaurants, cafes) at the ground level. This requirement is assumed in the table calculations.
2. Sites
designated as Downtown Mixed Use require
active uses (e.g. retail, restaurants, cafes) at the ground
level. This
requirement is assumed in the table calculations.
Sburce: City of Lodi, Dyett & ®hatia, 2009.
3-14
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
Table 3-5: Underutilized Infill Sites
inoame Levels
Ext. Low
Coal Flan
CLrrer►t
addout
Max.
/Vey
Above
Total
R7oto
ARV
Acres
Address
Designation
Zoning
Factor
Deity
Low
Low Moderate
Moderate
Capacity
6dsting Land l49--
#
Agriculture, surrounded on all
sides by completed or approved
urban development. No William -
401 E Harney
Medium Density
son Act. Across street from Lois
06229037
6.6
Ln
Residential
PD
80%
20
70
35
0
105
E. Borchardt Elementary School.
3-1
One story older building. Former
use as car dealership is no longer
in operation. Surrounded by
1045 South
Mixed Use
commercial, residential, and
04740004
3.4
Cherokee
Corridor
C-2
40%
35
30
41
0
71
school uses.
3-2
Site owned by church; half of site
fronting Kettleman is vacant;
existing structures to remain.
2100 Tienda
Mixed Use
Surrounded by church, residen-
02741022
3.1
Drive
Corridor
R -C -P
50%
35
30
12
0
42
tial, and commercial uses.
3-3
Surface parking lot, one story
Mixed Use
commercial building (could re -
Corridor
main), and vacant land. Sur -
929 South
Low Density
rounded by commercial and resi-
04739007
1.8
Cherokee
Residential
C-2, RE -1
50%
35
8
8 8
8
32
dential uses.
3-3
Mixed Use
One story old motel. Could be
Corridor
renovated or redeveloped as
1050 South
Low Density
housing. Surrounded by commer-
04741001
1.2
Cherokee
Residential
C-2, RE -1
50%
20
8 8
0
16
tial and residential uses.
3-4
One story office building (could
remain) and vacant land. Sur -
1833 W
Mixed Use
rounded by commercial and resi-
03104020
1.0
Kettleman
Corridor
R -C -P
50%
35
18
0
18
dential uses.
3-3
Surface parking lot takes up ma-
jority of site; one story used car
dealership no longer in operation.
16 South
Mixed Use
For lease. Surrounded by com-
04323013
0.6
Cherokee
Corridor
C-2
50%
35
10
0
10
mercial and school uses.
3-4
3-15
DR*T Lodi Housng Bement
I. Totals may not sum precisely due to rounding.
2. Sites designated as Mixed Use Corridor along Cherokee Lane require at least one quarter of the developed portion of the site to be commercial uses and along Lodi Avenue require active
uses (e.g. retail, restaurants, cafes) at the ground level. This requirement is assumed in the table calculations.
3. Sites designated as Downtown Mixed Use require active uses (e.g. retail, restaurants, cafes) at the ground level. This requirement is assumed in the table calculations.
S)urce• Dyett & Hiatia, 2009
3-16
Income Levels
Ext. Low
General Ran
Owed
L3tulobut
Max.
lverYL
Above
Total
Rioto
ARV
Ages
Address
Dedgnation
Zoring
Factor
Densty
Low
Low Moderate Moderate
Capacity
6dstingLand Llse
#
Closed theater, site for sale. Pos-
sible redevelopment with adja-
1100 West
Mixed Use
cent parcel while retaining thea -
03310014
0.5
Lodi Ave
Corridor
C-2
50%
35
8
0
8
ter tower.
3-5
One story old building and sur -
I 110 West
Mixed Use
face parking lot. Business no
03310015
0.5
Lodi Ave
Corridor
C-2
70%
35
8
0
8
longer in operation. For lease.
3-5
One existing home to remain;
rest of site vacant. Surrounded by
40 South
Mixed Use
commercial, residential, and
04323012
0.3
Cherokee
Corridor
C-2
80%
20
5
0
5
school uses.
3-4
Former Goodwill store --closed
and for sale --and surface parking
lot. Surrounded by commercial
200 E Oak
Mixed Use
and residential uses. Proximity to
04306401
0.3
Street
Corridor
C-2
60%
35
7
0
7
Downtown.
3-6
Total
19.3
194
104 16 8
322
I. Totals may not sum precisely due to rounding.
2. Sites designated as Mixed Use Corridor along Cherokee Lane require at least one quarter of the developed portion of the site to be commercial uses and along Lodi Avenue require active
uses (e.g. retail, restaurants, cafes) at the ground level. This requirement is assumed in the table calculations.
3. Sites designated as Downtown Mixed Use require active uses (e.g. retail, restaurants, cafes) at the ground level. This requirement is assumed in the table calculations.
S)urce• Dyett & Hiatia, 2009
3-16
w
A
74
l
Mi i
t ;W
JEW Fa
P4.i
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
4. Annexation Areas
Annexation is not required to fulfill the RHNA, but this section lays the groundwork for
annexation should the housing market pick up in the short-term. Lodi has used its
planning powers and the growth management process to prevent premature conversion
of prime agricultural land, protect natural resources that border the city, and ensure
orderly and efficient extension of public facilities and services. The General Plan Growth
Management and Infrastructure Element identifies a phasing strategy to facilitate
contiguous development and avoid unnecessary and premature conversion of
agricultural land. Housing Element policies in the Strategy section call for discussions
with property owners about annexation to commence by the end of the planning period
in 2014. Potential annexation areas are identified by Phase 1 of the General Plan,
specifically the portion of Phase 1 that lies outside of the current city limits, but inside the
Sphere of Influence. (Phase 1 General Plan sites inside the city limits are subsumed in the
relevant sections above: development project, vacant and underutilized sites.) These
annexation areas allow for 2,681 housing units, including 1,373 units available for below-
market rate units. Annexation sites are documented in Table 3-6.
Methods
The lettered key in the first column of the table corresponds to the relevant site in Figure
3-1. Existing land use information is provided for each site. Most of these sites are
currently in agricultural use. Some sites contain one or more associated residences. Sites
will only redevelop once agricultural uses cease. All unit capacity calculations assume
that existing housing units would remain on the site. Sites within Mixed Use Centers are
assumed to build out as 80% residential uses and 20% non-residential uses. Calculations
also provide for 25% of the total area for streets and other infrastructure for each land
use type (exceptions are noted in Table 3-6, as dictated by specific site conditions).
Infrastructure
As part of the Growth Management Program, which regulates the maximum amount of
residential growth that can occur over time, the City requires that projects identify on -
and off-site infrastructure improvements necessary to serve the project. Internal
infrastructure is generally provided as part of the initial construction of a project. The
areas proposed for annexation, as included in this Housing Element, will be subject to
compliance with the City's regulations and policies related to infrastructure, which will
alleviate any potential constraints the availability of public facilities (namely, storm
drains, water distribution, and sanitary sewer) would have on housing construction. See
Section 3.3: Constraints for a detailed description of public facilities and infrastructure
needs.
3-20
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
Table 3-6: Annexation Area Sites
Unit4 by Inmm Category
BdrW7 lJ1-- Above
Key
Acres
General Ran Designation
Busting Land UsdSte Ox text
/Very Low Low Moderate Moderate
Totaf
Agricultural use in operation. One existing
A
39.0
Low Density Residential
residence.
194
194
Existing residences and development pro-
jects pending. Assumes 40% of site could be
B
13.2
Medium Density Residential
developed.
61
61
C
20.2
Low Density Residential
Vacant
100
100
Nursery and agricultural use in operation.
D
37.1
Low Density Residential
One existing residence.
184
184
Existing residences on approximately one-
quarter of site. Agricultural use in operation
E
40.0
Low Density Residential
on remaining portion of site.
199
199
Agricultural use in operation. One existing
F
39.3
Low Density Residential
residence.
195
195
Agricultural use in operation. Three existing
G
27.8
Medium Density Residential
residences.
255
255
H
30.1
Low Density Residential
Agricultural use in operation.
150
150
1
12.0
High Density Residential
Agricultural use in operation.
275
275
J
11.7
Medium Density Residential
Agricultural use in operation.
107
107
K
17.2
Medium Density Residential
Agricultural use in operation.
158
158
L
32.8
Low Density Residential
Agricultural use in operation.
163
163
M
6.4
Mixed Use Center
Agricultural use in operation.
36 36
71
N
6.8
Medium Density Residential
Agricultural use in operation.
63
63
Agricultural use in operation. One existing
O
18.3
Mixed Use Center
residence.
102 102
203
3-21
DFWFT Lodi Housng Bement
Table 3-6: Annexation Area Sites
Key Acres Gerwal Ran Designation
Busting Land UsdSte Ox text
Unit4 by Inmm Category
EdrW7djF Above
/Very Low Low Moderate Moderate
Totaf
P
6.7
Medium Density Residential
Agricultural use in operation.
62
62
Q
12.9
Medium Density Residential
Agricultural use in operation.
119
119
R
11.2
Low Density Residential
Agricultural use in operation.
56
56
S
13.3
Low Density Residential
Agricultural use in operation.
66
66
Total
395.9
412 137 824 1,307
2,681
4. Totals may not sum precisely due to rounding.
3)urce. Dyeit & 3-&ia, 2009
3-22
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
Summary
Lodi has a capacity of 4,927 units during the Housing Element planning period. This
total
includes sufficient capacity at each household income level to meet and exceed the
RHNA.
A summary is provided in Table 3-7.
Table 3-7: Summary of Housing Sites
Housing Units, by Income
Extremely-
Above
/Very Low
Low Moderate
Moderate
Total
Completed & Development Projects 39
44 7
457
547
Approved Master Plans 236
236 899
1,575
2,946
Vacant 532
403 63
114
1,112
Underutilized 194
104 16
8
322
Total 1,001
787 985
2,154
4,927
Regional Housing Needs Allocation 971
650 716
1,555
3,891
Surplus 30
137 269
599
1,036
bburce: Dyett & ®hada, 2009.
3.2 ADMINISTRATIVE AND FINANCIAL RESOURCES
ADMINISTRATIVE RESOURCES
Described below are public and non-profit agencies that have been involved or are
interested in housing activities in Lodi. These agencies play important roles in meeting
the housing needs of the community. In particular they are 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 households in
need.
Central Valley Low Income Housing Corporation (CVLIHC)
CVLIHC provides both permanent supportive housing for homeless households with
disabilities and transitional housing and support services for homeless families. CVLIHC's
permanent and transitional programs are located at scattered sites throughout San
Joaquin County, with participants having the primary responsibility for the units where
they live. Supportive services include basic life skills training, parenting and family
counseling, transportation assistance, child care, assistance in school enrollment, and job
search training. CVLIHC's programs provide housing and supportive services for about
415 households.
Christian Church Homes(CCH)
CCH has been providing housing in communities since 1961. The organization was
created to meet the housing needs of low-income seniors who faced limited housing
choices in northern California. CCH manages 60 facilities providing 5,700 units. All but
one of CCH's facilities is HUD -subsidized. CCH has never sold or defaulted on any of its
3-23
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bement
owned facilities. Most of the subsidy programs allow low-income residents to pay only
30% of their adjusted gross income for rent.
Community Home Builders and Associates (CH BA)
CHBA is a non-profit, public benefit corporation involved in the development,
construction and management of affordable housing for individuals and families of low -
to moderate -incomes. The organization was founded in 1990 by the Home Builders
Association of Northern California. Through its sponsorship of the San Jose Conservation
Corps' YouthBuild program, CHBA has provided employment for at -risk youth in the
construction trades while helping to create opportunities for the building industry to
partner with local communities in an effort to fulfill affordable housing goals.
Eden Housing, Inc.
Eden Housing is a non-profit developer that has completed more than 5,000 housing
units. Eden serves low-income families, seniors, persons with disabilities, the formerly
homeless and first-time home buyers. Eden Housing has substantial experience in
applying for funding through government programs, including low-income housing tax
credit, and HUD Section 202 and 811 programs. Eden Housing is developing an 80 -unit
affordable senior housing development on Tienda Drive.
Eskaton Properties, Inc.
Eskaton's primary mission is to enhance the quality of life for seniors through health,
housing, and social services. Eskaton currently operates 13 planned affordable
retirement communities in northern California for seniors with limited income, including
the Manteca Manor in Manteca and is planning to open a 14th facility in 2010. These
independent living facilities are located close to a variety of services and offer apartment
living with maintenance handled by staff. Rental fees are typically subsidized by the
federal government.
Habitat for Humanity, San .baquin County
Habitat for Humanity is a non-profit, faith -based organization dedicated to building
affordable housing and rehabilitating homes for lower income families. Habitat builds
and repairs homes with the help of volunteers and partner families. Habitat homes are
sold to partner families at no profit with affordable, no -interest loans. Volunteers,
churches, businesses, and other groups provide most of the labor for the homes.
Government agencies or individuals typically donate land for new homes. In the past, the
City of Lodi has provided an allocation of HOME Program funds to the local Habitat for
Humanity chapter for land acquisition to accommodate their new construction activities.
However, the availability of vacant parcels for such development and the higher cost of
land in recent years have prevented Habitat from further development.
Housing Authority of San .baquin County (HASJC)
HASJC offers programs to assist extremely -low- to moderate -income households with
their housing costs, including the Section 8 rental assistance program, public housing,
and migrant farmworker housing. Specifically, HASJC manages five public housing
projects and three migrant farm labor housing developments throughout San Joaquin
3-24
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
County. In addition, HASJC provides the Family Self -Sufficiency Program as well as
supportive services centers, which provide a range of services to help people become
financially self-sufficient.
Lodi House
Lodi House is a non-profit agency that provides shelter for homeless women and
children. In addition to shelter, Lodi House provides food, advocacy, counseling, and
numerous workshops on a variety of topics. Lodi House is geared towards assisting
women in achieving independence so that they can find a home for themselves and their
children. Five families reside together at Lodi House at a time. The City of Lodi has
contributed to the Lodi House in recent years.
LOEL Gardens Senior Housing
The LOEL Gardens Senior Center, in addition to providing supportive services and
activities to seniors at their facility at 105 S. Washington, also provides affordable
housing to seniors. With funding provided through the City's CDBG and HOME Programs,
LOEL has acquired several residential properties around their Senior Center and has a
total of 14 units designated for very -low and low-income seniors.
Mercy Housing California (MHC)
MHC is a non-profit developer that provides affordable housing for families, seniors,
formerly homeless persons, individuals with HIV/AIDS and persons with chronic mental
illnesses and physical impairments. With the assistance of public and private funding,
MHC builds or rehabilitates housing to meet community needs. The types of housing
developed include: multi -unit rental apartments, single-family homes, single room
occupancy (SRO) apartments for formerly homeless adults, and accessible units for
individuals with physical disabilities.
Salvation Army Shelter
The Salvation Army operates a 70 bed men's shelter in Lodi, which provides food,
clothing, and medical services. The Salvation Army also operates a 16 -bed transitional
housing facility, as well as a 26 -bed emergency shelter for women and children and a 24 -
bed transitional housing facility for women and children. The City of Lodi has contributed
$419,000 to the Salvation Army in recent years.
Satellite Housing, Inc.
Satellite Housing is a non-profit organization, based in Berkeley, that provides affordable,
service -enriched housing that promotes healthy and dignified living for people with
limited options, including seniors, families, and adults with special needs. Satellite
Housing has been awarded a $1.3M HUD 811 Loan to develop a small project to serve
special -needs adults and is looking for a location in Lodi in which to place that project,
since the primary location in Manteca has become unavailable.
Service First of Northern California, Inc.
Service First of Northern California Service First of Northern California is a non-profit
organization, based in Stockton, that provides affordable housing to the residents of San
3-25
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bement
Joaquin County. It is one of three non-profit entities permitted to use the Neighborhood
Stabilization Program (NSP) funds in Lodi. In 2009, it acquired three properties (438 Via
Marco, 324 Watson Street and 502 E. Oak Street) for redevelopment and resale to low- to
moderate -income families, using NSP funds.5 It is in the process of acquiring two
additional properties at 500 E. Oak Street and 110 South Garfield Street, also for resale to
low-income families, using HOME funds.6
Stockton Shelter for the Homeless
Stockton Shelter is a not-for-profit agency that serves the homeless. The organization has
three year-round shelters and opens a fourth shelter at one of the Housing Authority's
migrant camps during the winter months. The family shelter has 100 beds and serves
single women and families. The single men's shelter provides 152 shelter beds. There are
also 200 mats that these two shelters share for overflow purposes. The Holman House, a
shelter for persons living with HIV/AIDS has beds for 11 people. The seasonal migrant
worker shelter sleeps 250 people. Stockton Shelter offers a variety of services, including
case management, drop-in services, showers, meals, and other supportive services.
FINANCIAL RESOURCES
The City of Lodi has access to a variety of existing and potential funding sources available
for affordable housing activities. These include local, State, federal and private resources,
and are summarized in Table 3-8. Described below are the four largest housing funding
sources the City can use for housing production, rehabilitation, or preservation: CDBG,
HOME Investment Partnership Program grants, the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program,
and the new Neighborhood Stabilization Program offered by HUD.
Community Development Block Grant
The federal CDBG program provides funds for a variety of community development
activities. The program is flexible in that the funds can be used for a range of activities.
The eligible activities include, but are not limited to: acquisition and/or disposition of
real estate or property, public facilities and improvements, relocation, rehabilitation and
construction (under certain limitations) of housing, homeownership assistance, and also
clearance activities. From 2001 to 2007, the City used $510,922 in CDBG dollars to
produce eleven very -low-income units. Since 2007, the City has used $229,380 in CDBG
funds to produce nine units.
Neighborhood Stabilization Program
The Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) is a federal program established for the
purpose of stabilizing communities that have suffered from foreclosures and
abandonment. Two rounds of funding have been approved through the Housing and
Economic Recovery Act of 2008 and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
5 San Joaquin County. "Neighborhood Stabilization Program July 1, 2009 thru September 30, 2009
Performance Report." Page 9.
6 City of Lodi. Planning Commission Staff Report. "Tentative Parcel map 09-P-02." December 9, 2009.
3-26
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
2009. NSP is a component of the CDBG program. Grants allow communities and
nonprofits to purchase foreclosed or abandoned homes and rehabilitate and/or resell
homes to qualified low- to moderate -income households. Available data indicates that the
San Joaquin County area has the highest rate nationally of foreclosures per housing unit.
Approximately 580 homes were foreclosed in Lodi in the 18 -month period between
January 2007 and August 2008.7 San Joaquin County is the grantee entity for Lodi; it
allocated $577,908 to Lodi, nearly 10% of the County's total allocation. As described in
the Administrative Resources section above, Service First of Northern California has been
acquiring four vacant foreclosed homes in Lodi for affordable housing redevelopment,
using these funds.
HOME Investment Partnership Program
Federal HOME funds can be used for activities that promote affordable rental housing
and homeownership for lower income households. Such activities include the following:
building acquisition, new construction, reconstruction, moderate or substantial
rehabilitation, first-time homebuyer assistance, and tenant -based assistance. A federal
priority for the use of HOME funds is the preservation of at -risk housing projects. Since
2001, the City has allocated $996,299 in HOME funds to produce 40 low-income units.
HOME funding is now provided through the State HOME program on a competitive
application basis; the City's application for funding is pending.
Section 8 Rental Assistance
The Section 8 program is a federal program that provides rental assistance to very -low-
income households in need of affordable housing. The program offers a voucher that pays
the difference between the current fair market rent and what a tenant can afford to pay
(e.g., 30% of their income). The voucher allows a tenant to choose housing that may cost
above the payment standard, but the tenant must pay the extra cost. The program is
administered by the Housing Authority of San Joaquin County.
Table 3-8: Financing Resources for Affordable Housing
FundingTM-WRogam Desgiption BigibleActivities
Community Development Grants awarded to the City on a formula - Acquisition
Block Grant basis for housing and community develop- - Rehabilitation
ment activities. - Home Buyer Assistance
- Economic Development
- Homeless Assistance
- Public Services
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 San Joaquin County. "Neighborhood Stabilization Program July 1, 2009 thru September 30, 2009
Performance Report." Page 3.
3-27
DFWFT Lodi Housng Bement
Funding TM-WRoTam
De97iptio17
Big6fe Activities
Neighborhood Stabilization
HUD program allows communities to pur-
- Acquisition
Program (NSP)
chase foreclosed or abandoned homes and
- Rehabilitation
Section 108
to rehabilitate, resell, or redevelop these
- Land Banks
homes for low- to moderate -income fami-
- Demolition
lies.
_ Home Buyer Assistance
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emergency Shelter Grants
Grants potentially available to the City
- Shelter Construction
(ESG)
through the County to implement a broad
- Shelter Operation
range of activities that serve homeless per-
- Social Services
sons. Funding availability is uncertain for the
_ Homeless Prevention
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
current year.
- Acquisition
HOME
Grant program potentially available to the
- Acquisition
City on a competitive basis for housing ac-
- Rehabilitation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 203(k)
tivities. City competes for funds through the
_ Home Buyer Assistance
State's allocation process.
- Rental Assistance
Low -Income Housing Tax Tax credits are available to persons and - New Construction
Credits (LIHTC) corporations that invest in low-income - Acquisition
rental housing. Proceeds from the sales are _ Rehabilitation
typically used to create housing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mortgage Credit Certificate Income tax credits available to first-time - Home Buyer Assistance
(MCC) Program homebuyers to buy new or existing single-
family housing. County Housing Authority
makes certificates available.
Section 8 Rental Assistance Rental assistance payments from the Hous- - Rental Assistance
Program
ing Authority of San Joaquin County to
- Home Buyer Assistance
owners of private market rate units on be-
half of very -low-income tenants.
Section 108
Provides loan guarantees to CDBG entitle-
- Acquisition
ment jurisdictions for capital improvement
- Rehabilitation
projects. Maximum loan amount can be up
_ Home Buyer Assistance
to five times the jurisdiction's recent annual
-Economic Development
allocation. Maximum loan term is 20 years.
- Homeless Assistance
- Public Services
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 202
Grants to non-profit developers of suppor-
- Acquisition
tive housing for the elderly.
- Rehabilitation
- New Construction
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 203(k)
Provides long-term, low interest loans at
- Land Acquisition
fixed rates to finance acquisition and reha-
- Rehabilitation
bilitation of eligible property.
- Relocation of Unit
- Refinance Existing Indebt-
edness
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 811
Grants to non-profit developers of suppor-
- Acquisition
tive housing for persons with disabilities,
- Rehabilitation
including group homes, independent living
_ New Construction
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
facilities and intermediate care facilities.
- Rental Assistance
3-28
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
Funding TM-WRogram
De97iptio17
Big6fe Activities
U.S. Department of Agricul-
Below market -rate loans and grants for
- New Construction
ture (USDA) Housing Pro-
farmworker rental housing.
- Rehabilitation
grams (Sections 514/516)
for shelter support services.
Affordable Housing Part-
Provides lower interest rate CHFA loans to
- Home Buyer Assistance
nership Program (AHPP)
home buyers who receive local secondary
financing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CalHOME
Provides grants to local governments and
- Home Buyer Assistance
Farmworker Housing Assis-
non-profit agencies for local home buyer
- Rehabilitation
tance Program
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
assistance and owner -occupied rehabilitation
- New Construction
programs and new home development pro-
jects. Will finance the acquisition, rehabilita-
tion, and replacement of manufactured
homes.
California Housing Assis- Provides 3% silent second loans in conjunc- - Home Buyer Assistance
tance Program tion with 97% CHFA first loans to give eligi-
ble buyers 100% financing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California Housing Finance Below market rate financing offered to - New Construction
Agency (CHFA) Rental builders and developers of multi -family and - Rehabilitation
Housing Programs elderly rental housing. Tax exempt bonds - Acquisition
provide below-market mortgages.
CHFA Home Mortgage CHFA sells tax-exempt bonds to make be- - Home Buyer Assistance
Purchase Program low -market loans to first-time buyers. Pro-
gram operates through participating lenders
who originate loans for CHFA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California Self -Help Housing Provides grants for the administration of - Home Buyer Assistance
Program (CSHHP) mutual self-help housing projects. - New Construction
Emergency Housing and
Provides grants to support emergency hous-
- Shelters & Transitional
Assistance Program (EHAP)
ing.
Housing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emergency Shelter Program
Grants awarded to non-profit organizations
- Support Services
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
for shelter support services.
Extra Credit Teacher Pro-
Provides $7,500 silent second loans with
- Home Buyer Assistance
gram
forgivable interest in conjunction with lower
interest rate. CHFA first loans to assist eli-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gible teachers to buy homes.
Farmworker Housing Assis-
Provides State tax credits for farmworker
- New Construction
tance Program
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
housing projects.
- Rehabilitation
3-29
DFWFT Lodi Housng Bement
Funding TM-WRoTam
De97iptio17
BigUe Activities
Housing Enabled by Local
Provides 3% interest rate loans, with repay-
- New Construction
Partnerships (HELP)
ment terms up to 10 years, to local govern-
- Rehabilitation
- Supportive Housing
ment entities for locally -determined afford-
- Acquisition
port services to live independently.
able housing priorities.
- Home Buyer Assistance
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bonds requiring the developer to lease a
- Site Development
Joe Serna Jr. Farm -worker
Provides recoverable grants for the acquisi-
- Home Buyer Assistance
Housing Grant Program
tion, development and financing of owner-
- Rehabilitation
(FWHG)
ship and rental housing for farmworkers.
- New Construction
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multi-Family Housing Pro-
Deferred payment loans for the new con-
- New Construction
gram (MHP)
struction, rehabilitation and preservation of
- Rehabilitation
rental housing.
- Preservation
Self-help Builder Assistance Provides lower interest rate CHFA loans to - Home Buyer Assistance
Program (SHBAP) owner -builders who participate in self-help
- New Construction
housing projects. Also provides site acquisi-
- Site Acquisition
tion, development and construction financ-
-Site Development
ing for self-help housing projects.
State law.
Supportive Housing/ Minors Funding for housing and services for men-
- Supportive Housing
Leaving Foster Care tally ill, disabled and persons needing sup-
- Foster Care
port services to live independently.
ing by issuing housing mortgage revenue
Financial Incentives under
The County's Density Bonus Ordinance
- New Construction
the Density Bonus Ordi-
offers financial incentives, as required by
nance
State law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tax Exempt Housing Reve-
The County can support low-income hous-
- New Construction
nue Bond
ing by issuing housing mortgage revenue
- Acquisition
bonds requiring the developer to lease a
- Rehabilitation
fixed percentage of the units to low-income
families at specified rental rates.
California Community Rein- Non-profit mortgage banking consortium - New Construction
vestment Corporation designed to provide long term debt financing - Rehabilitation
(CCRC) for affordable multi -family rental housing. - Acquisition
Non-profit and for profit developers contact
member banks.
Federal National Mortgage - Fixed rate mortgages issued by private - Home Buyer Assistance
Association (Fannie Mae) mortgage insurers.
- Mortgages which fund the purchase and - Home Buyer Assistance
Rehabilitation of a home. - Rehabilitation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Low Down -Payment mortgages for Single- - Home Buyer Assistance
Family Homes in underserved Low-income
and minority cities.
3-30
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
Funding TM-WRogram De97iptio17 Bigible Activities
Freddie Mac Home Works Provides first and second mortgages that
- Home Buyer Assistance
include rehabilitation loan. County provides
gap financing for rehabilitation component.
Households earning up to 80% area median
income qualify.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Savings Association Mort- Pooling process to fund loans for affordable
- New Construction of
gage Company Inc. ownership and rental housing projects. Non-
rentals, cooperatives, self
profit and for profit developers contact
help housing, homeless shel-
member institutions.
ters, and group homes
3.3 CONSTRAINTS
A number of factors may constrain the development of housing, particularly housing
affordable to lower income households. These factors can generally be divided into
"governmental constraints," or those that are controlled by federal, state, or local
governments; and "nongovernmental constraints," factors that are not generally created
or affected by governmental controls.
An analysis of these factors can help in the development of programs that lessen the
effect of construction on the supply and cost of housing.
NONGOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
Mortgage and Rehabilitation Financing
The availability of financing affects a person's ability to purchase or improve a home.
Under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), lending institutions are required to
disclose information on the disposition of loan applications by the income, gender, and
race/ethnicity of the applicants. This applies to all loan applications for home purchases
and improvements, whether financed at market rate or with government assistance.
In 2007, 482 households applied for conventional loans to purchase homes in Lodi. The
overall loan approval rate was 47%. By comparison, in 2001, 83% of loans were
approved. This tightening of lending has compounded the downturn in the national and
local housing markets, making it more difficult for households to secure loans. For
government-sponsored loans, 19 households applied and the approval rate was 84% in
2007. Home improvement loans only had a 30% approval rate with 183 households
applying in total. In general, census tracts with a higher percentage of households of color
or lower incomes experienced greater difficulty in securing loans.$
To address potential private market lending constraints and expand homeownership and
home improvement opportunities, the City of Lodi offers and/or participates in a variety
of home buyer and rehabilitation assistance programs. These programs assist extremely -
8 2007 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data: "Aggregate Table 1: Disposition of Loan Applications, By
Location of Property and Type of Loan, 2007."
3-31
DR*T Lodi Housng Bement
low-, very -low-, low-, and moderate -income residents by increasing access to favorable
loan terms to purchase or improve their homes.
Cost of Land
A key factor in determining housing costs is the price of raw land and any necessary
improvements. Because of the economic downturn, over the course of the last two years
virtually no land has been sold in the city since 2007. The price of existing homes
continues to drop, so the market has not yet stabilized enough to create much demand for
new home construction, let alone new land. In early November 2009, there was one
listing for residentially zoned land (R-2) on LoopNet, an online real estate resource. The
property, 5.26 acres in size, was listed as $1.9 million, meaning that it is priced at
$361,217 per acre. According to Jeffrey Kirst at Tokay Development, a local developer,
residentially zoned land anywhere in the city would not sell for more than $75,000-
$100,000 per acre at present.9
Construction Costs
Single -Family Homes
Various factors can affect the cost of building a single-family house, including the type of
construction, custom versus tract development, materials, site conditions, finishing
details, amenities, square footage, and structural configuration. These factors create a
wide variation in construction costs, from as little as $110 per square foot for basic
construction to as much as $160 for high-quality custom construction. A basic, 1,200 -
square foot starter home could be constructed in Lodi for $132,000. Including land cost of
about $14,000 per lot,10 permit and development impact fees of $15,433,11 site
preparation, and other miscellaneous costs, the minimum cost of producing a 1,200 -
square foot home in Lodi is estimated to be between $160,000 and $170,000, excluding
developer fee or profit.
Multi -Family Homes
Contacts with multi -family housing developers in the Lodi region indicate that
construction costs for multi -family housing units, excluding land and site preparation
costs, fees, and related expenses range from $90 to $95 per square foot, depending on the
quality of construction and interior amenities. Therefore, the construction costs for a
1,000 square foot unit would be between $90,000 and $95,000. Assuming land cost of
approximately $5,000 per lot,12 permit and development impact fees of $11,000,13 site
9 Phone conversation with Jeffery Kirst, Tokay Development, 11/9/09.
10 Assuming land is $100,000/acre, and the residential density is 7 units per acre, each lot would be
$14,285.
11 Lodi Community Development staff estimate.
12 Assuming land is $100,000/acre, and the residential density is 20 units per acre, each lot would be
$5,000.
3-32
Chapter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
preparation, and other costs, the minimum cost of producing a 1,000 -square foot, multi-
family home in Lodi is estimated to be between $106,000 and $111,000, excluding
developer fee or profit.
GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
Local policies and regulations impact the price and availability of housing and
subsequently the provision of affordable housing. Land use controls, site improvement
requirements, fees and exactions, permit processing procedures, and other factors can
constrain the maintenance, development, and improvement of housing. This section
discusses potential governmental constraints, as well as policies that encourage housing
development in the city.
In September 2003, the City of Lodi published a draft revised Zoning Ordinance to
replace the existing Zoning Ordinance, adopted in 1954. The Planning Commission held
several public hearings to gain input on the new code, however for various reasons, the
revised Zoning Ordinance was not adopted; it is the City's expectation to undertake
revisions to this draft for consistency with the new General Plan and then adopt them.
The draft proposed Ordinance makes many changes to remove constraints to
development and is referenced in the discussion below. However, the analysis and
subsequent recommendations are based on the City's current Zoning Ordinance.
General Plan Designationsand Permitted Densities
The Land Use Element was recently updated as part of the comprehensive General Plan
Update. The Element sets forth the City's development policies. These policies, as
implemented by the Zoning Ordinance (Title 17 of the Lodi Municipal Code), establish the
amount of land allocated for residential and other uses within the city. The Zoning
Ordinance needs to be updated to reflect the recent General Plan Update (see Program
1.1 in Chapter 4). The Land Use Element establishes ten land use designations in total
(see Table 3-9), including six that allow residential uses: Low -Density Residential,
Medium -Density Residential, High -Density Residential, Downtown Mixed -Use, Mixed -Use
Corridor, and Mixed -Use Center. With this most recent General Plan, the City is
emphasizing a dense, mixed-use downtown as well as mixed-use development along the
city's major corridors: Kettleman and Cherokee lanes and Lodi Avenue.
At the time of this writing, the Zoning Ordinance has not been updated to be consistent
with the General Plan. Table 2-8 describes how the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance
will be implemented in this interim period: according to the residential densities
stipulated in the General Plan and corresponding development standards from the
Zoning Ordinance. This interim solution will be implemented by Program 1.1.
Table 3-9: Development Standards, by Land Use Designation
Land Use Gassification fbddential CbrreTcnding Zoning Distrid
Density (du/ac) (other deidopment standardo
13 Lodi Community Development staff estimate.
3-33
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
Residential
Low -Density Residential
2-8
R -LD
Medium -Density Residential
8-20
R -MD
High -Density
15-35
R -HD
Mixed -Use
Downtown Mixed Use
8-35
C-2
Mixed Use Corridor
2-35
C-1
Mixed Use Center
8-35
C-1
Medium- and High -Density Residential and the mixed-use designations all allow multi-
family housing by right. The Mixed Use Corridor designation permits 100% residential
development except along Cherokee Lane and Lodi Avenue, where 25% and ground -floor
frontage should be commercial active uses, respectively. Likewise, the Downtown Mixed
Use designation requires ground -floor active uses. Still, the range of districts that permit
residential development and the densities they offer (2-35 units per acre) allow for a
variety of housing types and therefore does not serve as a constraint to housing
development.
Smart Growth and Transit -Oriented Development
Both the General Plan, adopted in April 2010 and the Transit -Oriented Design Guidelines
for Downtown prioritize locations for high-density development. The first guiding
principle of the General Plan seeks to maintain the City's compact form, with virtually all
new development located within three miles of Downtown. Lodi's Downtown and major
transit and commercial corridors (including Lodi Avenue, Cherokee Lane, and Kettleman
Lane) are priority areas for high-density and mixed-use with primarily residential
development, in order to capitalize on access to transit, public facilities, and services.
New growth areas are focused around mixed use centers that envision a range of housing
choices (including high-density development, appropriate for below-market rate
housing). Three new schools and several parks are intentionally located next to mixed
use centers and the highest residential densities to promote walkability and access to
services. The General Plan and TOD Design Guidelines serve to remove constraints to
affordable housing, by supporting housing choices, including high-density.
Zoning Standards and Permitted Housing Types
The existing Zoning Ordinance regulates the type, location, density, and scale of
residential development and exists to protect and promote the health, safety, and general
welfare of residents. In addition, the Zoning Ordinance serves to preserve the character
and integrity of existing neighborhoods. As shown in Table 3-10, Lodi's Zoning Ordinance
includes design standards and guidelines for districts that permit residential
development. As shown in Table 3-10, multi -family housing is allowed by right, without a
conditional use permit, in the R -GA, R -MD, R -HD, R -C -P, P -D, C-1, and C-2 districts.
The development standards contained in the City's Zoning Ordinance are consistent with
other cities of Lodi's size and character. Examples include: maximum lot coverage from
45 to 60% and height limits of 35 feet in Low and Medium Density designations and 60
3-34
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Qanstraints
feet in High Density zones. Table 3-10 summarizes the City's development standards.
Note that densities in the Sites Inventory are determined by the General Plan designation.
As described in Program 1.1, the Interim Zoning Ordinance will provide guidance
between how the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance will be implemented until such
times as the Zoning Ordinance is comprehensively updated.
Development Standards
Yards and Setbacks
Yard and setback requirements are consistent with permitted densities in residential
zones: 20 feet in front, ten feet in rear, and five feet on each side. There is no side yard
setback requirement in multi -family zones, except on corner lots (which are required to
have a side yard setback of 10 feet) and lots adjacent to a residential zone (which are
required to have a 5 foot side yard). Yard and setback requirements within the other
zoning districts are typical in comparison with most jurisdictions.
3-35
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
Table 3-10: Residential Development Standards and Housing Types Permitted by Zone
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Zoning Distrids
Two Family
X
P
P
P
Zoning Standards
P1
P2
PLD
PG4
PMD
RHD
PGP
RD
G1
G2
Max Density (du/ac)5
8
8
8
20
20
35
20
*1
20
20
Min Lot Size (sq ft)
6,500
5,000
5,000
4,000
4,000
4,000
5,000
*1
4,000
4,000
Min Lot Width (ft)
60
50
50
50
40
40
50
*1
40
40
Front Yard Setback (ft)
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
*1
20
None
U
U
10% lot
P
None, 10 on
None, 10 on
None, 10 on
None, 10
X
X
U
Side Yard Setback (ft)
5
width min 5
5
corner
corner
corner
on corner
*1
5
None
Rear Yard Setback (ft)
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
*1
10
10
Building Coverage (%)
45
45
40-50
50
50
60
50
*1
50
60
Max Building Height (ft)
35
35
35
35
35
60
35
35
35
75;
Parking (spaces/unit)
2 covered
2 covered
2, 2/3 covered6
2, 2/3 covered
2 uncovered
2 uncovered
*z
*1, z
*z
*z
Housing T)pes Perr4tted
Single Family
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Two Family
X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Three/Four Family
X
X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Multi -Family
X
X
X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Condominiums
U
X
X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Second Units
U
U
U
U
U
U
P
P
P
P
Family Care Homes
P4
X
P4
U
U
U
P
P
X
X
Rest Homes
X
X
X
U
U
X
P
P
X
X
Nursing/Convalescent
X
X
X
U
U
X
P
P
X
X
Hotel/Motel
X
X
X
X
X
P
X
P
P
P
Lodging/Boarding Houses
X
X
X
X
X
P
X
P
P
P
Mobile Homes
X
X
X
X
U
U
X
X
X
U
I . P -D Zone allows for al land uses when shown on planned development and subject to requirements of a use permit.
2. Parking requirements vary by intensity and type of residential use.
3. Maximum height within the designated central business area only; elsewhere, heights in C-2 are determined by adjacent districts.
4. Permitted uses subject to Planning Department approval.
5. Maximum density drawn from General Plan assumptions.
6. 2/3 covered means that two-thirds of the spaces in a multi -family development must be covered. So, if there are three apartments and each has the required two spaces, four
of the spaces must be covered.
Source: Criapter 17, Lodi Munidpal Code
3-36
Q*ter 3: R--gources and C2anstraints
Building Coverage
The City's building coverage standards are reasonably related to the density provisions in
each residential zone. In multi -family zones, permitted building coverage ranges from 40
to 50% in the R -LD zone (low density multi -family) to 60% in the R -HD zone. Building
coverage pertains to the primary (main) building and any accessory structures.
Lot Size and Lot Area per Dwelling Unit
In zones designated for single-family homes, minimum lot size is 6,500 square feet in the
R-1 zone and 5,000 square feet in the R-2 zone. Where lower density multi -family
development is allowed, minimum lot size is 6,000 square feet. Zones allowing high-
density multi -family development have a minimum lot size of 4,000 square feet.
Building Height
Permitted building heights range from 35 feet in single-family and low- and medium -
density multi -family zones to 60 feet (four stories) in the high-density multi -family zone.
Residential uses are allowed in the C-2 zone, which has a maximum building height of 75
feet (six stories) in the city's Downtown Business District. Outside of the Downtown
Business District, building heights are limited to 35 feet. Lodi's Zoning Ordinance
includes a provision for exceptions to standard height limitations for non -habitable
architectural elements and structures.
Parking Standards
Parking ratios for residential uses in Lodi are determined by dwelling unit type,
regardless of occupancy. For all residential uses including mobile homes, two spaces per
unit is the standard parking requirement. Lodging and retirement homes are required to
provide one parking space per two sleeping rooms. Convalescent homes and rest homes14
are subject to different standards that require one parking space per three beds. Hotel
and motel uses must have one space per room and one space for the facility's manager.
The City's parking ratios are reasonable in relation to the likely demand for parking from
different residential uses for housing units with two or more bedrooms. The requirement
of two spaces per unit for multi -family uses may be a constraining factor on development
of small, infill lots typical of most vacant parcels in Lodi. The required parking may be
also excessive for efficiency/studio and one -bedroom units. The City currently mitigates
this constraint by providing an administrative process for approving minor deviations
from zoning standards; including parking requirements (see the section below on
Development Review Process). It should be noted that the new Zoning Ordinance
(Program 1.1) modifies the multi -family parking requirement by requiring one covered
space per one -bedroom unit, two covered spaces per two bedroom unit, plus one
uncovered guest space for every three units.
14 It should be noted that the definitions of lodging, convalescent, and rest homes will be updated in the
new Zoning Ordinance (see Program 1.1).
3-37
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bement
Design Guidelines
The City adopted Transit -Oriented Development Design Guidelines for Downtown in
2008 and is preparing general design guidelines as part of the update to the Zoning
Ordinance (Program 1.1), to implement the policies of the General Plan and Housing
Element. These documents do not serve as a constraint to development. In fact, they
serve to alleviate constraints, since they provide detailed guidance about the City's design
preferences (e.g. ground floor features, green design, and parking) that can assist an
applicant in preparing an application that conforms to the City's regulations.
Development Standard Conclusion
The City's development standards do not impose a constraint to achieving maximum
residential densities and are reasonably related to neighborhood quality goals and
protecting the health and safety of residents. However, the Zoning Ordinance will need to
be updated to be consistent with the General Plan within one-year of adoption, as
stipulated in the Program 1.1.
Permitted Housing Types
Licensed Residential Care Facilities
The city has 16 licensed residential care facilities; six adult residential care and ten
residential care facilities for the elderly. Residential care facilities are licensed by the
State of California to provide permanent living accommodations and 24-hour supervision
for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or assistance for
sustaining the activities of daily living. Licensed residential care facilities include
hospices, nursing homes, convalescent facilities, sanatoriums, and group homes for
minors, persons with disabilities, and people in recovery from alcohol or drug additions.
Under State law, the City of Lodi is required to permit licensed residential care facilities
that serve six or fewer persons by right in residential districts. Facilities that serve more
than six people can be required to have a Use Permit.
The Lodi Zoning Ordinance does not provide a general definition for licensed residential
care facilities. The Zoning Ordinance does define "nursing/convalescent home," a type of
licensed residential care facility, and states that such facilities are permitted with a Use
Permit in the R -GA and R -MD zones and by right in the R -C -P and P -D zones (see Table 3-
10). The lack of a more inclusive definition in the Zoning Ordinance could create an
impediment to the location of licensed residential care facilities (other than
nursing/convalescent homes) as the decision to allow such uses would be made on a
case-by-case basis without a clear set of criteria. The Zoning Ordinance should be
amended to clarify that all types of residential care facilities of six of fewer individuals
are permitted by right in residential zones (see Program 1.1). Instead of identifying types
of residential care facilities that are permitted, the Ordinance should be amended to
discuss State -defined licensed residential care facilities, in general. The Ordinance could
also identify the zoning districts and permit process under which facilities of seven or
more persons are permitted (Program 1.1).
The Zoning Ordinance contains no occupancy, distance, proximity, placement, or other
requirements that would explicitly constrain the establishment of residential care
3-38
Chapter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
facilities, including those for special needs groups such as senior citizens and disabled
persons. For such facilities, the City follows State law, which, as stated earlier, permits
residential care facilities of six or fewer persons by right in residential zones. Also, State
law prohibits the overconcentration of residential care facilities, which is defined as
facilities separated by a distance of less than 300 feet. These provisions of State law have
not been explicitly incorporated within the Zoning Ordinance, and should be
incorporated (see Program 1.1).
Single Room Occupancy Units
The current Zoning Ordinance does not provide a definition for single room occupancy
(SRO) units. SRO units are generally small in nature and lack separate kitchen or
bathroom facilities for every unit. Meals are often provided, and residents stay on a
permanent or semi-permanent basis; rent is often accepted on a weekly or monthly basis.
SRO units are frequently one of the only sources of housing available to extremely -low-
income people (in Lodi, a one-person household making $13,350 or less annually
qualifies as extremely -low-income). The Zoning Ordinance's definition of
"boardinghouse," "a building other than a hotel, containing not more than five sleeping
rooms, where lodging and meals for five or more persons are provided for compensation"
could cover some SROs, but is not very broad. The draft proposed Zoning Ordinance
broadens the definition for "rooming or boarding houses" by not limiting the occupancy
of the facility. The Zoning Ordinance could be amended to include a definition for "group
residential" that would include all living situations with shared living quarters without
separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit, including boarding houses,
dormitories, and SROs (see Program 1.1).
Supportive and Transitional Housing
The current Zoning Ordinance does not provide a definition for supportive and
transitional housing. Supportive and transitional housing is geared towards individuals
and families who have been homeless and who benefit from supportive services such as
job counseling and day care as they get back on their feet and are able to afford their own
house or apartment. Residents in supportive and transitional housing typically stay up to
a year before moving out. According to State law, supportive and transitional housing
must be treated the same as any other residential use in a residential zone. The Zoning
Ordinance could be amended to include a definition for "supportive and transitional
housing" that explicitly states that such housing be treated the same as other residential
uses (see Program 1.1).
Emergency Shelters
Recent State law (5132) mandates that jurisdictions either permit emergency shelters by
right in one or more zones or enter into a multi -jurisdictional agreement with
neighboring jurisdictions to fund and operate a shelter or shelters to meet their collective
homeless need. Lodi currently meets this new requirement—emergency shelters are
allowed by right in the C -M and C-2 zones or their equivalent in the Zoning Ordinance
update. These zones were selected based on their access to transit, public facilities, and
commercial services. C-2 and C -M sites are all located primarily in Downtown Lodi and
along Cherokee Lane (a major commercial street with transit access, located adjacent to
the eastern residential neighborhoods). Moreover, there are older motels along Cherokee
3-39
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bwmt
Lane that could be used as emergency shelters if necessary. In sum, available land and
existing structures would accommodate the estimated homeless population—fewer than
100 persons, as described in Chapter 2. Moreover, Program 1.1 calls for amending the
Zoning Ordinance to create development standards for emergency shelters to further
facilitate their development. C-2 (though likely renamed) will continue to serve as the
primary identified zone allowing emergency shelters by right.
Second Units
The City defines a second unit as, "an additional living unit on a lot within a single-family
zone." A second unit is a self-contained unit with separate kitchen, living and sleeping
facilities. A second unit can be created by (1) altering a single-family dwelling to establish
a separate unit or (2) adding a separate unit onto an existing dwelling. In accordance
with State law, second units are allowed without the requirement of a Use Permit, within
the R-1, R-2, and R -LD zoning districts. They are automatically permitted in the R -GA, R -
MD, and R -HD zoning districts.
The City requires that second units be architecturally compatible with the existing single-
family dwelling. They must have separate exterior entrances and be no larger than four
hundred square feet in floor area. The unit must also have one off-street parking space in
addition to the parking required for the existing residence. The definition of second units
in the Zoning Ordinance states that a second unit must be attached to the existing single-
family house. Despite this definition, the City allows second units detached from the
primary residence as a matter of practice. As part of implementing this Housing Element,
the City will revise the Zoning Ordinance definition to reflect its current practice of
allowing detached second units, consistent with State law requirements (Program 1.1,
referenced above, also memorializes this practice). Program 1.1 would amend the code to
permit second units up to 640 square feet by right.
Conclusion
There are a number of proposed changes to the Zoning Ordinance that will facilitate
residential development and allow for greater design flexibility. The most significant
examples that have not already been mentioned are:
• Modify the number and definition of residential zoning designations for consis-
tency with the General Plan and to create greater development flexibility;
• New Low -Density Residential designation that allows for the development of sin-
gle-family detached, two-family and three-family homes up to the General Plan
Land Use Density of 7 units per acre;
• Provision for a variety of housing types in residential zones including care facili-
ties, shelters and live/work projects;ls
15 While the draft Zoning Ordinance permits shelters with a Conditional Use Permit, before adoption
the new, revised Zoning Ordinance will need to be amended to allow emergency shelter by right in a
zone or zones (planned to be the equivalent of the current C-2 zone) or the City needs to enter into a
multi -jurisdictional agreement to provide adequate shelter services.
3-40
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
• Single-family detached lot sizes as small as 5,000 square feet;
• No minimum lot width or depth requirements which will provide more flexibility
in site designs;
• Reduction of minimum front yard setbacks to 15 -feet; and
• Requirement for Use Permit approval to build single family dwellings in the Me-
dium and High density zoning designations.
With the adoption of the draft revised Zoning Ordinance (included in this Housing
Element as Program 1.1) in addition to the other edits/additions to the draft revised
Zoning Ordinance discussed in this section, the City's zoning will not serve as a constraint
to development.
Development Process
Growth Management Ordinance
In 1991, the City adopted a Growth Management Allocation Ordinance (GMAO) to
regulate the location, amount, and timing of residential development.
Under the ordinance, the maximum number of housing units approved each year by the
City reflects a 2% increase in population. Unused permits rollover to the next year and
there is no annual limit on the number of resulting permits that may be utilized. The
ordinance establishes a residential density allocation system, with the goal of promoting
a mix of housing types in the designated percentages listed in Table 3-11. These
percentages were derived from the breakdown in existing housing units in Lodi when the
ordinance was first conceived in 1989.
Table 3-11: Growth Management Ordinance Breakdown by Density
Haring Type Units'Acre F arcent
Low Density
<7
65%
Medium Density
7-20
10
High Density
>20
25
Source: City of Lodi, Gmeral Ran 1991.
The allocation for a given year is calculated in the following manner: Lodi's DOF
population estimate x 0.02 _ Lodi's DOF estimate of persons per household = number of
allocations
For example, in 2008, the 2% GMAO translated to a maximum of 453 residential building
permits a year: 295 for low density housing units (under seven units/acre), 45 for
medium density housing units (7-20 units/acre), and 113 for high-density housing units
(over 20 units/acre).
The breakdown by density establishes an upper limit for the number of permits, but does
not guarantee that the density quotas for the three categories are attained by the end of a
given year. Because in most years demand has been less than available permits, an
3-41
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bement
inventory of available permits has built up, standing at a total of 5,111 available units
(remaining from the 1989-2008).
Assuming that Lodi's population continues to grow at 1.2% annually (the average growth
rate from 2000-2008), with 2.8 persons per household (the average household size in
2008), permits for about 2,779 additional units will be allocated from January 1, 2009 to
June 30, 2014. This means that in total, development permits for approximately 7,890
units will be available to fulfill Lodi's RHNA, which is 3,891. The density breakdown of
these allocations appears in Table 3-12, below. Of the City's 3,891 RHNA, 971 are
allocated to extremely -low -/very -low-income units and 650 are allocated to low-income
units. This means that the City must identify sites for a total of 1,621 affordable units
during this planning period. The default density—the density at which it is assumed by
HCD that affordable units can feasibly be built—is at least 20 units per acre for Lodi.
While some medium density sites may therefore qualify, even if only high-density sites
are counted, there are 2,779 allocations—more than enough to cover the 1,651 RHNA for
all economics segments of the population.
Table 3-12: Expected Housing Unit Allocation by Density During the Planning Period
lbsio'ential Density (unitsla e)
1989-2008
2009-2014
Total
Low Density
2,607
1,806
4,413
Medium Density
389
278
667
High Density
2,115
695
2,810
Total
5,111
2,779
7,890
Source• Qty of Lodi; DOF2008.
How Permits are Allocated and Points Awarded
Proposed developments receiving the highest number of points under an annual permit
application process receive allocations. Projects are ranked by point -score and
eliminated as necessary in order to equal the number of permits allowed for a given year.
No single-family development is allowed to receive more than one third of the permits
available in any single year unless the number of applications is less than the total
permits available for the year. The current GMAO excludes commercial and industrial
projects; senior housing; on-site replacement of housing in existence as of September 1,
1989; and projects of four units or less. To facilitate the development of affordable units,
Program 1.2 excludes affordable housing from units that are required to receive
allocations.
In practice, demand for permits has not exceeded the supply since 1991. Since that time
there has been a backlog of available permits which rolls over from year to year. There is
no cap on the number of allocations that can be granted annually nor is there an
expiration date. Moreover, multi -family and affordable housing are eligible for 30
additional points. As shown in the table below, multi -family housing is eligible for up to
20 bonus points for landscaping and architectural design, not available to single-family
developments. In addition, projects with units affordable for low and moderate income
households can earn up to 10 points. However, because of the large number of permits
available, this scoring system is not expected to be necessary or used during this Housing
Element planning period. The City awards points as follows:
3-42
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
GroWh Management F6TYA Qiteria
FbOts
Agricultural Land Conflicts
Does not require conversion of vacant agricultural land?
10
Adjacent to agricultural land on one, two, or three sides?
3-7
Project is surrounded by agricultural land?
0
Onsite Agricultural Land Mitigation
No agricultural land mitigation necessary?
10
Adequate on-site buffer for entire or part of project?
5-7
No buffer between agricultural land and project?
0
General Location
Within priority area I, 2 or 3?
0-200
Contiguous Development
Abuts existing development on four sides?
10
Abuts existing development on three, two, or one sides?
3-7
Surrounded by undeveloped land?
0
Wastewater/Water/Drainage (points for each)
Adjacent to existing Master Plan sewers/water/basin or mains?
10
Project will extend Master Plan line/basin?
4-8
Project requires construction of a new lift station/well/basin?
0
Promotion of Open Space (site efficiency/low lot coverage)
Coverage lost to rooftop/hardscape = 20% or less?
10
Coverage lost to rooftop/hardscape = 30% to 60%?
2-8
Coverage lost to rooftop/hardscape = 70% or greater?
0
Traffic
Project widens or improves an existing facility?
10
Project will extend Master Plan streets?
4-8
Project requires roadway improvements which are available in the Street Impact Fee
Program
0
Program improves circulation by providing additional access to adjacent development
(including non -vehicular) (bonus points)
+I to 5
Below -Market Housing
Provides 25% or more of units for low and moderate income households
10
Provides 20-24% of units for low and moderate income households
8
Provides 15-19% of units for low and moderate income households
6
Provides 10-14% or more of units for low and moderate income households
4
Provides 5-9% or more of units for low and moderate income households
2
Provides <5% or more of units for low and moderate income households
0
Site Plan and Project Design (bonus points for multi -family housing ONLY)
3-43
DF?AFT Lodi Housng Bement
G,oWh Management F6TYA Qiteria
FbOts
Landscaping (determined by Planning Commission)
0-10
Architectural Design (determined by SPARC)
0-10
Schools
Project within ''A mile of existing/proposed elementary school
10
Project within %i mile of existing/proposed elementary school
5
Project more than % mile of existing/proposed elementary school
0
Project within % mile of existing/proposed middle school
10
Project within I mile of existing/proposed middle school
5
Project more than I mile of existing/proposed middle school
0
Project within I mile of existing/proposed high school
10
Project within 2 miles of existing/proposed high school
5
Fire Protection
Project within 3 minute emergency vehicle driving time from nearest fire station
10
Project within 4 minute emergency vehicle driving time from nearest fire station
5
Project beyond 4 minute emergency vehicle driving time from nearest fire station
0
Conclusion
Overall, the Growth Management Program does not present a substantial constraint to
development during this planning period. There are more than enough available
allocations to meet housing demand. There is no annual cap on the number of allocations
that can be granted and no expiration on the permits Moreover, senior units are exempt
from the allocation process and affordable units will be exempt (Program 1.2).
However, the allocation process adds time and cost up front to the development process
for two reasons. The allocations occur once a year and an investment is required on the
applicant's part to provide the level of site plan and application detail required by the
City to receive an allocation. The reason the City only accepts allocations once a year is so
that projects can be compared. Generally, projects submitted in May will receive
allocations by the end of the calendar year. The time and cost are recouped for successful
applicants who receive allocations because their proposed site plans and other details of
the development proposal are reviewed and approved by the City during the allocation
process. This provides a degree of certainty and ultimately efficiency in the approval
process.
Once a development proposal is approved, an applicant may proceed with a Tentative
Subdivision Map (TSM). Approval of the TSM is the final major regulatory process for the
applicant. Following approval of the TSM and allocation of housing units, the applicant
generally need only apply for ministerial approvals (final subdivision map, building
permits, etc.). Applicants can apply for multi-year allocations (up to three years), which
further reduces the long-term cost of receiving development approvals under the
allocation process. However, use of housing allocations must be done in accordance with
3-44
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Qanstraints
the schedule approved and construction occur in the year for which the allocation
applies.
The City of Lodi does not believe that added costs exist with respect to the Growth
Management Program. The time frame for project review and approval is consistent with,
if not shorter than, other communities. The review of site plans in the approval of multi-
family projects is consistent with sound planning practice and other jurisdictions. Finally,
since the inception of the Ordinance, no medium or high density request has been denied;
this is important given the statewide and local need for affordable housing opportunities.
Development Review Process
A City's development review process—the steps that it lays out and the time that it takes
to review and make a decision on a development application—can serve as a constraint
to residential development. This section explains the City's development review
practices.
Administrative Deviations
Minor deviations from the provisions of Lodi's Zoning Ordinance are approved through
the processing of an administrative deviation. This process requires the submittal of an
application and involves review and approval by Community Development and Public
Works and Electric Utility Department staff only and can be submitted for land located
within any zoning district. Administrative deviations are issued only because of special
circumstances such as topography or size constraints that obstruct development of a site.
Lodi's Zoning Ordinance identifies the only modifications for which an administrative
deviation can be issued. These modifications include: off-street parking requirements,
setback requirements, area and width requirements, height requirements, and
landscaping requirements. Modifications are only allowed up to a certain percentage of
the standard requirements.
Site Plan and Architectural Review
The development review process includes site plan and architectural review for certain
development projects by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC). The
purpose of this review is to ensure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and promote
orderly development. Projects required to obtain site plan and architectural approval
are:
• Residential buildings proposed in R -GA, R -MD, R -HD, R -C -P, C-1, and C-2, except
single-family dwellings, duplexes, and triplexes;
• Commercial -professional offices and institutional buildings proposed in areas
zoned R -C -P and C-1;
• Nonresidential buildings proposed in areas zoned C-1, C-2, and C -M;
• Nonresidential buildings proposed in areas zoned M-1 and M-2, which abut areas
zoned R-1, R-2, R -GA, R -MD, R -HD, R -C -P, C-1, and C-2; and
3-45
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
• Any use requiring a Use Permit, or when the Planning Commission or City Council
requires a site plan and architectural review as a condition of a discretionary
permit.
Site plan and architectural review is facilitated by the SPARC, which was established to
assist the Planning Commission in reviewing site plans and architectural drawings. Four
of the five members are appointed by the Mayor, while the SPARC is appealable to the
Planning Commission. The Planning Commission is the final regulatory authority that
issues decisions on most developments within the city. SPARC meetings are open to the
public and are publicly noticed.
Applicants are required to submit the following information to the Committee:
• A site plan of the proposed structures that complements the neighborhood and
preserves light and air on adjoining properties;
• Landscaping and/or fencing of yards and setback area, use of landscaping, and/or
fencing for screening purposes;
• Design of ingress and egress;
• Off-street parking and loading facilities;
• Drawings or sketches of the exterior elevations; and
• Designation of location of existing fire hydrants.
These requirements are relatively easy to meet and do not add significantly to the cost or
time required for site plan review since these elements are already required for planning
and building approval processes and proceed in parallel. The SPARC meets monthly or as
needed. The review process proceeds as follows:
• Planning staff reviews site plan and architectural review applications to deter-
mine if projects require discretionary approval from the Planning Commission in
addition to site plan and architectural review. Discretionary approval may be re-
quired if a project needs a use permit or variance—it does not apply to multi-
family dwellings in the following districts, which permit multi -family housing by
right: R -GA, R -MD, R -HD, R -C -P, C-1, and C-2. On the other hand, condo conver-
sions would trigger a use permit, though existing tenants would have the first
right of refusal.
• If it is determined that discretionary approval is required, the application in ques-
tion is sent to the Planning Commission for review of the site plan and architec-
tural features.
• If the application falls into one of the categories requiring site plan and architec-
tural review (but does not require discretionary approval), it is reviewed by the
SPARC.
• The approval body, whether the Planning Commission or the SPARC, has the
power to approve or disapprove the application or to approve the application
subject to compliance with modifications or conditions to comply with the City's
3-46
Chapter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
Municipal Code and other applicable laws and regulations—this evaluation
against existing laws serves as the findings for approval or denial.
• The SPARC has up to 21 days to make a decision. Upon approval of submitted
plans, or at the expiration of 21 days, the City issues a building permit, provided
that all building code requirements have been met and the applicant does not
need a Use Permit (which triggers Planning Commission review).
• The SPARC's decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission. Appeals must
be filed in writing, with a $300 fee, within ten days of the SPARC's decision.
Development Review Timeframe
The development review timeframe is affected by several factors. Some of these factors,
such as the amount of time it takes to a) determine the completeness of an application, b)
determine if environmental review is necessary, and c) approve or disapprove a project
from the date environmental review is complete or determination of categorical
exemption is made are within the control of jurisdictions. Other factors, such as the time
it takes to gather application materials or complete an environmental document are
largely in the hands of developers. Still other factors such as the availability of project
financing are dependent upon the state of the economy.
The City complies with State law by taking only 5-10 days to determine if an application
is complete and 5-10 days to determine if environmental review is required (the State
actually allows up to 30 days for both of these steps) as well as only 180 days when an
EIR is required or 60 days when a negative declaration is made (or the project is exempt
from CEQA) to approve or disapprove a project (see Table 3-13). However, typically,
project approvals take longer because of the factors discussed above that are out of the
City's control as well as additional steps such as conditional use permits and construction
permits that may be required.
A typical single-family development will require a residential allocation, tentative and
final tract map, environmental review (Negative Declaration or EIR), Planning
Commission review, City Council review (if a Planning Commission decision is appealed),
and construction permits (building, grading, etc.). From start to finish, the process will
typically take six to 12 months. A large or complex project, particularly one triggering
state or federal environmental mandates, can take longer. A typical multi -family
development will require a residential allocation, environmental review (Negative
Declaration or EIR), Planning Commission review, City Council review (if a Planning
Commission decision is appealed), and construction permits (building, grading, etc.).
From start to finish, the process will typically take six to 12 months.
Multi -family and single-family developments are also required to go through the Site Plan
and Architecture Approval Committee process. It takes two to four weeks to complete
staff review before the development can be submitted to the Committee. Then, the
Committee takes 21 days to review the project. It should be noted that smaller
developments in the city such as one single family home or two- to four -unit multi -family
structures are only required to obtain building permits and are not required to go
through the Site Plan and Architectural Approval Committee.
3-47
DR*T Lodi Housng Bement
3-48
Q*ter 3: R--gouraas and Canstraints
Table 3-13: Development Review Process Timeframe
T.We of D%dcV>-
Ment
Type of Approval'
Approving
Authonty2
Timeframe for fbdew (Ma)imum # of days to approve)
To Deter- To Deter-
rrune Can- mune Envi-
pleteness of ronmental To Approvd Disapprove
Application FbweW R4ect4
400 sq. ft. or less
Variance
is permitted by-
approved
right; above 400
by Planning
sq. ft. requires a
Commis-
5-10 busi-
5-10 busi-
4-6 weeks (typically ex -
Second Unit
Variance
sion
ness days
ness days
empt from CEQA)
Single -Family
--------------------
Multi-Family (no
180 days if EIR required
zone change)
---------------------
(only 90 if 49% or more
Multi -Family (PD
: Permitted by-
Planning
5-10 busi-
5-10 busi-
units are affordable); 60
zone change)
right
Division
ness days
ness days
days if a Negative Declara-
tion required or exempt
Affordable
; from CEQA
Housing
Senior Housing
Planning
State Defined Commis- 5-10
6-12 weeks
Large Licensed sion Use 5-10 busi- business
Residential Cares permit ; ness days days
=-------------'---------------'-------------- =- - - -- - = -----------------
I. Permitt-ed--by-right--- - --'--permitted---------with-----a--U-se Permit, etc.
2. Planning Division (ministerial), Planning Commission and/or City Council, etc.
3. To determine whether an environmental impact report, negative declaration, or mitigated negative declaration shall be
required.
4. From date environmental review is complete or determination of categorical exemption made. Times listed for ap-
proval/disapproval do not take the time needed for the PD Zone change into account.
5. Licensed Residential Care facilities are licensed by the State of CA to provide permanent living accommodations and
24-hour primarily non-medical care and supervision for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection,
or assistance for sustaining the activities of daily living. Living accommodations are shared living quarters with or with-
out separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit. Licensed residential care facilities include hospices,
nursing homes, convalescent facilities, and group homes for minors, persons with disabilities, and people in recovery
from alcohol or drug addictions.
bburm City of Lodi, 2009.
Constraintsto Housing for Personswith Disabilities
Given that persons with disabilities frequently have difficulty finding housing that meets
their needs, the State requires special analysis of governmental constraints to housing for
persons with disabilities.
3-49
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bement
Zoning and Land Use Policies and Practices
Lodi's Zoning Ordinance permits certain detached and attached accessory uses and
various projections into yards and setbacks. While the Ordinance does not specifically
indicate that facilities for access by persons with disabilities are permitted, accessory
uses such as ramps or lifts for handicapped accessibility are similar to the permitted uses
that are specified. Requests for reasonable accommodations are approved
administratively (without the requirement of a public hearing or other special review)
unless the nature of the request triggers a major design review, which is unlikely. The
City does not charge a separate fee for such consultation, and any representative of an
applicant (including the applicant) can make a request to the City for reasonable
accommodations. Reasonable accommodations requests are subject to a building permit
($118 for a single-family home) and generally take 10-15 business days to approve.
There are no specific programs, or provisions within the Zoning Ordinance that
specifically obstruct the development of housing or other structures that accommodate
persons with disabilities. However, there are no special provisions either, which may be a
constraining factor upon improvements and developments focused to meet the special
needs of persons with disabilities. Creation and implementation of a program designed to
increase the allowances for persons with disabilities would remove this potential
constraint [See Program 1.1].
On- and Off-site Improvement Standards
Site improvements are an important component of new development and include roads,
water and sewer, and other infrastructure necessary to serve the development.
Improvement requirements are regulated by the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Within the
existing city limits, off-site improvement requirements are typically limited because the
infrastructure needed to serve infill development is already in place. Where off-site
improvements are required, they typically relate to local improvements to existing
facilities to accommodate higher density development or to repair or replace aged
infrastructure.
Street Improvements
Street improvement standards can have a significant impact on housing cost. The cost of
providing streets for new residential developments, in turn, is primarily influenced by
the required right-of-way width, pavement width, and pavement improvement
standards. Table 3-14 summarizes Lodi's right-of-way and pavement requirements for
the hierarchy of streets. The right-of-way and pavement requirements allow for adequate
though slightly narrower streets in residential areas than in many communities.
Minimum pavement widths of 50 feet or more for collector streets and 40 feet of more for
residential streets are common among local jurisdictions. Lodi's Zoning Ordinance
includes a provision for reimbursement to developers for excess widths of street
construction, more than 68 feet for construction of new streets and widening in excess of
34 feet on one side.
Required street improvements include curbs, gutters, and sidewalks of at least 5 1/2 feet
in width. The minimum sidewalk improvement standard is consistent with accessibility
requirements for persons with disabilities and is adequate for ensuring pedestrian access
3-50
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
in residential areas. Planting strips equaling 2% of the five and a half foot swath are also
required.
Table 3-14: Street Standards
Sheet Type
Rbquired Rght-0f-Way (ft)
R9quired Pay ernent Width (ft)
Minor Residential
50
30,34
Standard Residential
55
35, 39
Minor Collector
60
44
Major Collector
68
52
Local
66
52
Secondary Arterial
80
64
Minor Arterial
94
78
Major Arterial
1 18
102
Souros- City of Lodi Department of Riblic Wb*4 2005.
Drainage
Lodi requires that developers of residential subdivisions prepare master storm drainage
plans for the area associated with the tentative map. Storm drains must conform to the
City's master storm drainage plan. Any facilities within the subdivision that are not part
of the City's master plan are the developer's responsibility. However, the City Council has
the ability to grant credits to developers for storm drain lines and manholes that
developers construct. Payment of mitigation for drainage impacts is included within the
City's development impact fee.
Sanitary Sewers
Internal sanitary sewers and appropriate off-site sanitary sewers are required for all
proposed development. Installation is required to comply with the current City policies
and standards. In the event that developments are asked to construct oversized facilities,
Lodi has established a mechanism by which the developer is reimbursed for excess
improvements. As part of the development impact fee paid by development, funding, in
part, for construction, operation, and maintenance of city-wide sanitary sewer facilities is
provided.
Potable Water
Internal water transmission pipelines and appropriate off-site connection facilities are
required for all proposed development. Installation is required to comply with the
current City policies and standards. Similar to the process for sanitary sewers, in the
event that developments are asked to construct oversized facilities, the developer is
reimbursed for excess improvements. The City also levies a development impact fee that
is used, in part, to construct, operate, and maintain citywide water system facilities.
3-51
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bement
Code Enforcement
The Building Department provides assistance to applicants and owners in meeting State
and local codes by publishing compliance forms, handouts, and worksheets; and through
the plan check process. The City's Community Improvement Unit within the Lodi Police
Department administers the code enforcement program that works to bring substandard
homes into compliance with all applicable building and health and safety codes. Over the
past 10 years, approximately 1,800 housing units that were identified as out of
compliance have made improvements. Using this rate as an average, the City should be
able to rehabilitate approximately 1,080 housing units during the planning period. The
City recent instituted a code enforcement tool through its website, allowing community
members to report violations, upload photographs, and track progress in rectifying the
program. This tool is expect to assist in increasing reporting of violations, as well as
increase accountability for the City in issuing violations or warnings and for property
owners to bring their properties into compliance.
Fees
Development Impact Fees
The City of Lodi levies one combined development impact fee for all the various
municipal facilities and services under the City's jurisdiction. Although requiring
developments to either construct site improvements and/or pay pro rata shares toward
the provision of infrastructure and public services is common practice, these
requirements nonetheless result in increases to the cost of housing development and in
turn, the final sale price or rent of housing. Despite the initial cost that impact fees
impose on new homes, such fees are necessary to protect the public health and safety.
Calculating Fees: Residential Acre Equivalent
Development impact fees can serve as a constraint to affordable housing development as
the current fee program disincentivizes multi -family development. This constraint will be
alleviated through revision of impact fee program, as described in Program 3.1. To
calculate the fee charged to a residential development, the City has established a formula
based on the fee per acre times the number of acres for each type of public
facility/service. The fee charged to residential development depends on its "residential
acre equivalent," or RAE, factor. The "equivalent" for purposes of calculating the factor is
a single-family home in the Low Density General Plan land use category (factor of 1.00).
The specific factor or ratio of fee, applied to a specific type of residential development is
based on the City's estimate of the amount of facility or service that a particular land use
will need in relation to a single-family home in the Low Density land use category. For
example, a housing unit in the High Density residential category has a RAE factor that
ranges from 1.00 for storm drainage to 4.72 for police services, as shown in Table 3-15.
As a result, per acre fees are much higher for the High Density category than for the Low
Density category: $211,558 and $82,955, respectively.
3-52
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
Table 3-15: Development Impact Mitigation Fees($/acre)
Impact Fee
Lav Density
Land Use Category
Medium Density
High Density
RAE
1.00
1.96
3.49
Water
$/Acre
$5,390
$10,564
$18,811
RAE
1.00
1.00
1.00
Storm Drainage
$/Acre
$19,713
$19,713
$19,713
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RAE
1.00
1.96
3.05
Streets
$/Acre
$15,335
$30,057
$46,772
RAE
1.00
1.77
4.72
Police
$/Acre
$2,119
$3,751
$10,002
RAE
1.00
1.96
4.32
Fire
$/Acre
$2,070
$4,057
$8,942
RAE
1.00
1.43
2.80
Parks & Recreation
$/Acre
$29,770
$42,571
$83,356
RAE
1.00
1.43
2.80
General City
$/Acre
$8,558
$12,238
$23,962
Total (per acre)
$82,955
$122,951
$211,558
Assumed Units/Acre
7
20
30
Total (per dwelling unit)
$11,851
$6,148
$7,052
S)urw City of Lodi, ,bnuary 201a
The RAE factors are based on an average density assumption for each residential land use
category, not the specific density of the proposed development. In multifamily zones, the
RAE factors can have the effect of significantly increasing the fee payment of
development projects (on a per-unit basis) that have lower densities and fewer units
than the average assumed by the City. One method of mitigating this potential cost impact
would be for the City to use a factor for establishing fees on multifamily projects based on
the actual density of the proposed development, not the average density assumed by the
City. See program 3.1 which serves to mitigate this constraint, reducing the impact fees
assessed on multi -family units and reducing the existing disincentive.
Planning Fees
The Planning Division collects the fees listed in Table 3-16. Many of the fees include a
base fee as well as an hourly charge for staff time. The Planning Division operates on an
hourly basis. The fee is a deposit against expected time and cost to complete. The deposit
amounts listed are averages with more complex projects requiring additional funds.
Planning fees could total about $3,500 for a single-family dwelling and likewise for a
multi -family unit.
3-53
DR*T Lodi Housng Bement
Table 3-16: Planning Fees ($)
Fee Category
Fee Amount
Planning and Application Fees
Administrative Deviation
$350 + Hourly
Annexation
4,000 + Hourly
Appeals
300
Document Imaging
50
Development Plan Review
2,500 + Hourly
General Plan Amendment
3,000 + Hourly
Home Occupation
100
Landscape Review
175 + Hourly
Pre -Development Review
250
Rezone
2,000 + Hourly
Site Plan and Architectural Review
1,875 +Hourly
Use Permit
2,000 + Hourly
Variance
1,000 + Hourly
Subdivision
Lot Line Adjustment
$650+ Hourly
Tentative Parcel map
2,500 + Hourly
Tentative Subdivision Map
4,600 + Hourly
Environmental
Preliminary Environmental Assessment
$250 + Hourly
Environmental Impact Report
Hourly
Negative Declaration
900 + Hourly
Sburm Lodi Ranning Fee Stliedule, 7/1/09.
Total Fee Estimates and Comparisons
As mentioned in the discussion of construction costs, City staff estimate that a basic,
1,200 -square foot single family home would necessitate $15,433 in development impact
fees. The minimum cost of producing such a home in Lodi is estimated to be between
$160,000 and $170,000, excluding developer fee or profit. Therefore, fees represent
about nine percent of the development costs—fairly low compared to the typical
threshold of about 12 percent. A multi -family 1,000 -square foot unit would require
development impact fees of about $11,000 per unit. The cost of constructing such a unit is
estimated at between $106,000 and $110,000, excluding developer fee or profit.
Therefore fees represent about ten percent of total development costs.
A review of planning fees from neighboring cities reveals that Lodi's fees are in-line, if not
lower, than those charged in other San Joaquin County jurisdictions. While it is difficult to
do a direct comparison of fees collected across jurisdictions because the types of fees
jurisdictions levy vary somewhat, Table 3-17, below, compares several common fees.
Rezonings, tentative parcel maps, and most negative declarations and use permits are
3-54
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Constraints
less expensive in Lodi than in Tracy, Stockton, and Manteca while annexation, appeals,
and general plan amendment fees are in-line with those charged in these surrounding
jurisdictions. Given this information, the City's Planning Fees are not seen as a constraint
to residential development.
Table 3-17: Comparison of Fees Across Jurisdictions($)
Fee Category
Lodi
Tracy
Sibdcton
Manteca
Annexation
$4,000
$10,500
$6,061-13,216
$3,000
Appeals
300
276
NA
250
General Plan Amendment
3,000
NA
2,707
3,500
Negative Declaration
900 + Hourly
1,420
2,970
500-1,000
Rezone
2,000 + Hourly
2,550
6,126
2,400
Tentative Parcel Map
2,500 + Hourly
7,300
5,930
5,000 +50/lot
Use Permit
2,000 + Hourly
340-9,595
4,1 1 1
2,400
Source City of Lodi Funning Fee &iedule, 7/1/09, City of Tracy Ranning Diwscn gnplicatian R•ooessing Feed 10/20/2003,
City of 3odctcn Ranning Fee Worksheet FY2009-2010, 819/2009, and City of Manteca Community Dadcpment Depart-
ment, Ranning Divson, Fee &hedtle; 10/23/2008.
ENVIRONMENTAL, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND PUBLIC SERVICE
CONSTRAINTS
Environmental factors, including a lack of necessary infrastructure or public services, can
constrain residential development in a community by increasing costs and reducing the
amount of land suitable for housing. As discussed below, the City's water, sewer, and
storm drain facilities are adequate to accommodate the existing and future development
of Lodi. The following discussion addresses the constraint which environmental and
infrastructure issues may pose on housing development for the City of Lodi.
As part of the General Plan Update in 2009, an infrastructure assessment was undertaken
to determine infrastructure demand, supply, and projected improvements in both infill
and new growth areas. Although the assessment was completed for a 2030 planning
horizon and full General Plan development potential, the analysis has been adjusted to
accommodate the 2014 horizon and Housing Element sites presented in Section 3.1. Note
that these are conservative estimates, since the infrastructure analysis includes both
residential and non-residential uses identified in Phase 1 of the General Plan.
Historically, the city has grown in increments, which has ensured the availability of public
services for new development, while avoiding adverse impacts to levels of service to
existing residents. New development is assessed a development impact mitigation fee,
which in part, funds the incremental improvements to the water, sewer collection and
disposal, and drainage systems. One of the City's major goals, identified in the General
Plan is to maintain an adequate level of service in the City's infrastructure to meet the
needs of existing and projected development.
Storm Drainage and Flood Control
Based on revised flood risk evaluations prepared by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) for the City of Lodi and San Joaquin County, effective October 19, 2009,
3-55
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
flood hazards are a constraint to development only in two areas of the city: the area
immediately adjacent to the Mokelumne River along the city's northern boundary, and
the area around the White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility. No new development
is planned within either of these areas, as shown in Figure 3-3. Most of the city lies in
Zone X, which describes lands subject to the 0.2% annual (500 -year) flood zone or that lie
within the 100 -year flood zone, but with flooding depths less than one foot. This suggests
that these areas have a low susceptibility to major flooding, but would be inundated, with
depths less than one foot, during a 500 -year flood event.
Levees or berms along the Mokelumne River protect the city from flood events. As long as
levees are not over -topped and maintain their structural integrity, flooding is considered
to be very unlikely. Should a major storm event cause levees to be over topped or if a
levee fails, flooding would occur. Flooding also can occur when runoff exceeds the
capacity of local systems and cannot drain adequately. The City's existing stormwater
system functions well, with no substantial flooding problems.
The General Plan Growth Management and Infrastructure Element identifies storm drain
improvements and calls for the preparation of a storm water master plan. Table 3-18
describes the proposed improvements for the sites identified in this Housing Element.
Facility planning and sizing will need to be refined and verified though preparation of the
detailed stormwater master plan.
Table 3-18: Required Stormwater Infrastructure
Location Fbquired Infrastructure
East of Beckman Road
(Pixley Park)
South of Harney Lane
North of Kettleman
Lane and west of
Lower Sacramento
Road
An upgraded (size and pumps) public station is required for this basin.
Detention basins and trunk storm drains will be needed for all watersheds. A
pump station with two pumps will also be required. There will need to be an
outfall pipe line located in a 75 foot wide greenbelt buffer along the south
boundary of the city that flows to a new 60 cfs pump station on the east side
of the WID canal (WID pump station). These improvements are part of the
South Lodi Storm Drain Master Plan and South Hutchins Study Area Storm
Drainage Master Plan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Storm drainage service for the area of growth North of Kettleman Lane and
west of Lower Sacramento Road, within General Plan Phase I, has already
been planned. No additional new facilities are necessary.
bburm West Yost Asqdates 2008.
Based on the City's incremental approach to annexation and the extension of the public
facilities and services through the payment of development fees, Lodi does not anticipate
that residential development will be impeded in infill areas or the areas to be annexed
due to drainage or flood control issues.
3-56
Q*ter 3: R--gources and Canstraints
Insert Figure 3-3: Flooding Potential
3-57
loss
11N
NONE
IIS;:
jj�ll S� � r•
�I L
II`y3 7 � �{�t„�■�
5<�. s_—
rle—t
1111 . � •.
mac'
. .I It
• I� yell �-'-1
u— L
�Gr
7
1 �
Immom
MONm
ammim
on, m
INF
iN�~
Nr
ELOIAV
DR*T Lodi Housng Bement
Water Service
The City of Lodi operates the potable water distribution system that serves all areas
within the city limits. The City's water supply comes from groundwater via 27 municipal
wells, with a safe yield for the area estimated to be about 15,000 acre-feet per year.
Under terms of an agreement with the Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID), 6,000 acre-
feet per year of surface water is also currently available. In addition, further groundwater
and surface water supplies will be made available through the annexation process, since
new land area increases the safe yield and WID supplies available to the City,
respectively.
A complete water supply and demand analysis was undertaken as part of the General
Plan Update and associated environmental review. Scaling this analysis method from the
General Plan's 2030 growth areas and planning horizon, to the 2014 Housing Element
sites and horizon, also results in a finding of an adequate water supply to meet demand.
Table 3-19 documents these estimates, finding that water supplies are adequate to meet
demand in both normal and dry years.
Table 3-19: Projected W ater Demand and Supply for the 2014 Housing Element (acre-
feet per year)
Nbard Year
Dry Year
Supply Type
Groundwater (Current Safe -Yield)
15,000
15,000
Groundwater (Future Safe -Yield)'
3,300
3,300
Surface Water (Current WID Contract)
6,000
3,000
Surface Water (Resulting from Annexation)'
3,200
3,200
Total Supply
27,500
24,500
Total Demand
18,250
18,250
Surplus
9,250
6,250
I. Assumes 2.3 acre-feet per acre in additional safe yield resulting from 1,058 annexation acres and 370 acres
resulting from development projects.
2. The City has the option to purchase an additional three acre-feet per year for each acre of WID land that
is annexed.
Source: West Yost Assoaates CityQf Lodi, Dyett & 3-&Ja, 2009.
The General Plan Growth Management and Infrastructure Element also identifies the
following water distribution improvements:
• A new transmission main is required from the new surface water treatment plant
to Mills Avenue. This main would be connected to the existing water distribution
system to supply surface water to the City's water system.
• Specific water system requirements should be further evaluated through prepara-
tion of a potable water master plan at an appropriate time in the future.
• New wells will be required in the southern and eastern areas of the city. Addi-
tional water storage tanks may be needed.
3-58
Q*ter 3: R--gouroes and Canstraints
Moreover, an updated Urban Water management Plan will be developed in 2010,
consistent with State law and will be consistent with this Housing Element and the
recently updated General Plan. As discussed above, the city's desire to grow
incrementally is addressed through the implementation of a growth management
program and the levying of a development impact mitigation fee. Development that
occurs within annexed areas will provide internal water transmission facilities and pay
fees as appropriate for necessary off-site infrastructure. Therefore, water service will not
be a constraint to the City's ability to meet future housing needs.
Sewer Service
The City of Lodi owns and operates the municipal wastewater system, which collects all
domestic and limited industrial wastewater flows within the city limits. The City also
owns and operates a wastewater treatment plant, the White Slough Water Pollution
Control Facility (WSWPCF), located six miles south of the city. With the recent expansion
of the plant, WSWPCF has an Average Dry Weather Flow (ADWF) capacity of 8.5 mgd.
The ADWF flow to the WSWPCF for 2008 was 6.4 mgd, indicating that the existing facility
currently has an excess capacity of about 2.1 mgd (ADWF). This excess capacity will
accommodate much of the development proposed in this Housing Element. However, the
infrastructure assessment for the General Plan determined that capacity expansion of the
WSWPCF would be required within the early stages of Phase 1. The City of Lodi
Wastewater Master Plan (2001) preliminarily identified the facilities needed to achieve a
capacity of 12 mgd. The General Plan Growth Management and Infrastructure Element
calls for the preparation of an updated sanitary sewer master plan to address future
needs for infill and new growth areas. Table 3-20 describes the improvements needed to
adequately meet the needs of the Housing Element sites and other Phase 1 General Plan
development (including non-residential uses).
Table 3-20: Required Sewer Infrastructure Improvements
Location
Fbquired Infrastructure
South Wastewater
There is excess capacity available in this planned sewer. As of 2008, the only
Trunk Line Master
segment of this sewer that has been constructed is the segment through the
Plan Sewer Shed
Reynolds Ranch development, which has excess capacity.
Harney Lane Lift Sta-
Sufficient pump station capacity already planned; part of the South Wastewater
tion Sewer Shed
Trunk Line.
Redevelopment
Some of the sewers serving the downtown area are currently flowing at or
Sewer Sheds
above their design capacity. Additional sewer improvements needed to serve
infill will be determined by preparation of a sewer master plan for these areas.
WSWPCF
Capacity expansion of the WSWPCF will be required within the early stages of
Phase 1. Alternatively, a scalping plant near the City could be constructed to
provide recycled water for use in/near the city that would reduce the size or
extent of the required new facilities at the WSWPCF. However, there would
need to be a nearby use for the recycled water for a scalping facility to be feasi-
ble. Part of the City of Lodi Wastewater Master Plan.
�Torf_fa_ TA
Development within annexed areas will provide sewer collection facilities and pay fees as
appropriate for necessary off-site infrastructure. Infill areas will also require sewer
3-59
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
improvements, as identified above. Since the initial planning steps have been taken to
assess sewer infrastructure needs, expansion of sewer service to meet the City's future
housing needs is not a constraint to development.
Agriculture and the Williamson Act
Nearly all of the soils in the Lodi area are classified, by the U.S. Department of
Conservation, as prime agricultural soils, some requiring frequent irrigation. Historically,
various parcels within this area have been subject to Williamson Act compliance.16
Potential residential annexation areas, defined by Phase 1 of the General Plan and
described in Section 3.1, include 73 acres of land covered by active Williamson Act
contracts. Of these acres, 68 acres are designated for Low Density Residential and five
acre for Medium Density Residential. The City does not need this land in order to
accommodate its share of the RHNA (specifically the below-market rate units) and does
not intend to pursue annexation until those contracts have expired and the market is
ready for urban development.
Protection of Habitat and Species
The San Joaquin County Multi -Species Conservation and Open -Space Plan (SJMSCP) is a
50 -year habitat conservation plan that seeks to protect agriculture, open space, habitat,
and wildlife, in order to address the impacts of urban development and conversion of
open space land. In 2001, the City of Lodi adopted the SJMSCP, thereby allowing project
applicants to use this plan to mitigate open space conversions while satisfying CEQA
requirements. Project applicants may: pay an in -lieu fee that mitigates cumulative
impacts; dedicate habitat lands as conservation easement or fee title; purchase mitigation
bank credits from a mitigation bank approved by SJMSCP; or propose an alternative plan,
consistent with the SJMSCP goals and equivalent in biological value. It should be noted
that there are no known protected species in areas encompassed by the housing sites
listed in this document.
In preparing the SJMSCP, land uses and habitats were mapped throughout the County and
categorized into land use categories to help determine compensation fees. Potential
annexation areas described in Section 3.1 fall into three of the SJMSCP compensation
zones and include the following per acre fees in 2009: No Pay Zone ($0), Multi -Purpose
Open Space Land ($7,052), and Agricultural Habitat Open Space ($14,104). As a voluntary
plan, developers have the option to participate (or not) depending on site evaluation.
Participation may increase or decrease the costs associated with mitigating the
environmental impact, depending upon site specific conditions. Although electing to pay
an in -lieu fee would increase development costs, this cost is the same as other cities in
the county that participate in the SJMSCP.
16 The Williamson Act is a mechanism by which agricultural land is preserved for a specified period of
time.
3-60
Q*ter 3: R--murces and Constraints
3-61
4 Housing Strategy
The provision of housing is a critical concern for cities throughout California. The
housing element is a city's major statement of local housing strategy, providing an
integrated set of goals, policies and programs to improve the condition and availability
of housing.
4.1 GOALSAND POLICIES
H -G1 Provide a range of housing types and densities for all economic
segments of the community while emphasizing high quality
development, homeownership opportunities, and the efficient use of
land.
H -P1.1 Promote the development of a broad mix of housing types through the
following mix of residential densities as described in Policy GM -P4 of the
Growth Management Element.
H -P1.2 Regulate the number of housing units approved each year to maintain a
population -based annual residential growth rate of 2%, consistent with the
recommendations of the Mayor's Task Force and the growth management
ordinance.
H -P1.3 Facilitate and encourage the development of affordable and senior housing
units.
H -P1.4 Maintain and regularly update its land use database to monitor vacant
residential land supply.
H -P1.5 Pursue available and appropriate State and federal funding programs and
collaborate with nonprofit organizations to develop affordable housing.
H -P1.6 Promote the expeditious processing and approval of residential projects that
conform to General Plan policies and City regulatory requirements.
H -P1.7 Reduce the cost impact of City policies, regulations, and permit procedures
on the production of housing, while assuring the attainment of other City
objectives.
H -P1.8 Intersperse very -low- and low-income housing units within new residential
developments and shall ensure that such housing is visually
indistinguishable from market -rate units.
H -P1.9 Promote the development of senior and other special needs housing near,
and/or with convenient public transportation access to, neighborhood
centers, governmental services, and commercial service centers.
H -G2 Encourage the maintenance, improvement, and rehabilitation of
existing housing stock and residential neighborhoods, particularly in
the Eastside area.
4-1
DFWFT Lodi Housng Bement
H -P2.1 Encourage private reinvestment in older residential neighborhoods and
private rehabilitation of housing.
H -P2.2 Use available and appropriate State and federal funding programs and
collaborate with nonprofit organizations to rehabilitate housing and improve
older neighborhoods.
H -P2.3 Give housing rehabilitation efforts high priority in the use of Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, especially in the Eastside area.
H -P2.4 Support the revitalization of older neighborhoods by keeping streets and
other municipal systems in good repair.
H -P2.5 Allow reconstruction of existing housing in the Eastside area and in
commercially or industrially designated areas in the event such housing is
destroyed or damaged.
H -P2.6 Implement historic preservation guidelines to preserve historically
significant residential structures and insure that infill projects fit within the
context of the neighborhood. (See the Community Design & Livability and
Conservation elements for implementation of this policy.)
H -P2.7 Enforce residential property maintenance standards.
H -G3 Ensure the provision of adequate public facilities and services to
support existing and future residential development.
H -P3.1 Support the use of CDBG funds for the upgrading of streets, sidewalks, and
other public improvements.
H -P3.2 Ensure that new residential development pays its fair share in financing
public facilities and services and pursues financial assistance techniques to
reduce the cost impact on the production of affordable housing.
H -P3.3 Ensure that all necessary public facilities and services shall be available prior
to occupancy of residential units.
H -P3.4 Require that park and recreational acquisitions and improvements keep
pace with residential development.
H -G4 Promote equal opportunity to secure safe, sanitary, and affordable
housing for all members of the community regardless of race, sex, or
other discriminatory factors.
H -P4.1 Seek to address the special housing needs of persons with disabilities, lower
incomes, large families, seniors, single -parent households, farmworkers, and
persons in need of temporary shelter.
H -P4.2 Make available to the public information on nonprofit, county, State, and
federal agencies that provide education, mediation, and enforcement
services related to equal housing opportunity.
4-2
Chapter 4: Housing blrategy
H -P4.3 Modify existing regulations that govern the conversion of apartments and
mobile home parks to condominiums to protect the safety and investment of
purchasers of the condominiums and minimize the impacts on rental
tenants.
H -P4.4 Work with surrounding jurisdictions to address the needs of the homeless
on a regional basis.
H -P4.5 Cooperate with community-based organizations that provide services or
information regarding the availability of assistance to the homeless.
H -P4.6 Promote fair housing programs and services to residents and property
owners in Lodi.
H -G5 Encourage residential energy efficiency and reduce residential energy
use.
H -P5.1 Require the use of energy conservation features in the design and
construction of all new residential structures and promote the use of energy
conservation and weatherization features in existing homes.
H -P5.2 Pursue residential land use and site planning policies, and promote planning
and design techniques that encourage reductions in residential energy
consumption.
4.2 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS
The following programs describe actions that the City intends to implement during the
time frame of this Housing Element (2007 through 2014). For some of these programs,
the description includes a target (quantified objective) for the number of units to be
produced or households to be assisted during the Housing Element timeframe.
H -G1 Provide a range of housing types and densities for all economic
segments of the community while emphasizing high quality
development, homeownership opportunities, and the efficient use of
land.
Program 1.1: Revise Zoning Ordinance
Within one year of adoption of the Housing Element, the City will bring the Zoning
Ordinance into conformance with the General Plan. The City shall revise Title 17 of the
Lodi Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) to reduce barriers to, and provide incentives
for, the construction and conservation of a variety of housing types, including Medium,
High -Density, and affordable housing consistent with the policies and programs of this
Element. Revisions to Title 17 will include, but not be limited to, the following:
The addition of a chapter that provides for density bonuses and other incentives
for projects that include 5% very -low-income housing, 10% low-income hous-
ing, 10% median -income housing, and senior housing (even if none of the units
are income restricted), in compliance with Sections 65915 - 65918 of the Cali-
fornia Government Code. The maximum density bonus granted is 35%. The City
shall work with the San Joaquin County Housing Authority in developing proce-
4-3
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bwmt
dures and guidelines for establishing income eligibility for the "reserved" units
and for maintaining the "reserved" units as affordable units for at least 30 years.
The City shall seek Housing Authority administration of the reserved units. The
City shall establish a program to publicize the availability of the density bonus
program through the City's website, program information at the Community De-
velopment Department public counter, and pre -development meetings with
housing providers (such as the housing unit allocation stage). The City shall en-
courage prospective housing developers to use the density bonus program at
pre -development meetings.
• Conformance with California Government Code sections 65852.3 and 65852.7,
which require that manufactured homes in single-family zones on permanent
foundations be permitted under the same standards as site -built homes (with
limited exceptions).
• The City will continue to allow, by right, the development of emergency shelters
in areas zoned C -M or C-2 (or their equivalent under the updated Development
Code). These zones typically have good transit and services access, and allow
both commercial and residential development. The sites inventory identified 2.5
acres designated Downtown Mixed Use (which is consistent with the C-2 zone as
described below) that could be used for emergency shelters. These sites could
accommodate the estimated 94 homeless, including separate shelters for indi-
vidual adults and families.
• Addition of definitions for transitional and supportive housing as well as clarifi-
cation that they are treated the same as other residential uses in residential
zones. This is intended to help support housing options for extremely -low in-
come households and others in need of additional services.
Addition of a definition of Farmworker housing that does not conflict with State
law definitions for employee housing (beginning with California Health and
Safety Code Section 17000) and specification of the zoning districts and stan-
dards under which such housing will be permitted. The City will also designate
residential and commercial zones in which Farmworker housing will be permit-
ted. Such zones will be selected, in part, based on the availability of vacant land
or sites with re -use potential. In implementing this program, the City will treat
permanent housing for Farmworkers who live in Lodi year-round the same as
other permanent housing (single-family, multi -family, manufactured homes,
etc.) The City will permit seasonal or migrant Farmworker housing in a similar
fashion to group homes with respect to the zones and conditions for approval.
Farmworker housing will be permitted by right in any zone in which agriculture
is a primary permitted use.
Clarification of residential care facility definition and standards. Create a defini-
tion for "residential care facility" that is broad and encompasses facilities that
care for a range of clients. The City will specify that all such facilities with six or
fewer residents are permitted in residential zoning districts. The City will also
designate zoning districts in which facilities of seven or more persons will be
permitted through a Use Permit and standards for such facilities. In addition, to
comply with State law, the Zoning Ordinance will be clarified to explicitly pro-
hibit the overconcentration of residential care facilities (facilities should be at
least 300 feet apart).
4-4
Chapter 4: Housing Strategy
• Amend the Zoning Ordinance to include a definition for "group residential' that
includes all living situations with shared living quarters without separate
kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit, including boarding houses,
dormitories, and SROs
Revision of off-street parking requirements (Chapter 17.60) to reduce standards
to: 1 covered space/1-bedroom and two covered spaces/2-bedroom as well as
one uncovered space for guests for every three units.
Revision of standards for second dwelling units to allow the conversion of acces-
sory buildings to second units (as well as allowing detached second units, in
general) subject to compliance with all other zoning and parking standards, an
appropriate minimum lot size for detached second units (640 square feet), and
architectural compatibility with the main dwelling unit. The City will permit sec-
ond dwelling units through an administrative permit process (i.e. ministerial
and by right; not requiring a Use Permit) in compliance with State law (Califor-
nia Government Code section 65852.2).
• Specification of procedures for requesting reasonable accommodations for per-
sons with disabilities that allow for administrative (ministerial) approval of ac-
cessible features. Create explanatory handouts for those wishing to request rea-
sonable accommodations.
• Completion of other significant revisions that will facilitate residential develop-
ment and allow for greater design flexibility, such as:
- Revised zoning districts consistent with the new land use designations in the
Land Use Element);
- New Low Density Residential designation that allows for the development of
single-family detached, two-family and three-family homes up to the General
Plan Land Use Density of eight units per acre;
- Provision for a variety of housing types in residential zones including care
facilities, shelters and live/work projects;
- New Group Residential definition that will cover all group living situations
with shared living quarters and without separate kitchens or bathrooms for
each room or unit (for example: dormitories, fraternities, single room occu-
pancy (SRO) units).
- Single-family detached lot sizes as small as 5,000 square feet;
- Minimum and maximum setbacks to match the desired General Plan intent
and desired character for specific districts, with reduced—or potentially
even no—front setbacks in pedestrian -oriented mixed-use districts.
- No Use Permit requirements to build multi -family dwelling within the Me-
dium or High density designations
Until the Zoning Ordinance is comprehensively updated to be consistent with
the recently adopted General Plan, the City will adopt and administer interim
zoning regulations to ensure General Plan consistency in development review.
The following matrix, which will be incorporated into the interim regulations,
describes what development regulations will apply in General Plan land use des-
ignations that permit residential development by right.
4-5
DFWFT Lodi Housng Bement
General Ran Land Use Gasification
R)4d9ntial Density (du/ac)
(from the General Ran)
CorreTaxting Zoning District
(other deilopment standardo
Low -Density Residential
2-8
R -LD
Medium -Density Residential
8-20
R -MD
High -Density
15-35
R -HD
Downtown Mixed Use
8-35
C-2
Mixed Use Corridor
2-35
C-1
Mixed Use Center
8-35
C-1
Ensure that densities established in the General Plan are not unduly limited by
the interim regulations; where interim regulations may get in the way of a
project attaining the General Plan -desired densities, update the regulations so
that they are not a constraint.
Responsibility: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Timeframe: Complete Zoning Ordinance amendments as part of the new unified
development code within one year of adoption of this Housing Element
and interim zoning regulations within one month of adoption of this
Element.
Funding: General Fund and federal funds (application underway)
Objective: Reduce regulatory barriers to the provision of housing.
Program 1.2: Revise Growth Management Program
The City will revise its growth management program to exempt housing units
affordable to very -low- or low-income households with long-term affordability
restrictions. The City will also monitor the program to ensure that it does not represent
a constraint to multi -family and affordable housing for all income groups. The program
should be evaluated for cumulative effects of all development application requirements
and costs by the end of the planning period.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Revise Growth Management Program within a year of adoption of this
Housing Element and evaluate implementation by the end of the
planning period.
Funding: Application fees
Objective: Expedite the residential development approval process for affordable
housing.
Program 1.3: Personal Security Standards
The City will continue to implement design standards applicable to all new residential
projects with the objective of improving the personal security of residents and
HVI
Chapter 4: Housing Strategy
discouraging criminal activity. Design standards will address issues such as the
placement of landscaping, accessory buildings, and accessory structures in a manner
that does not impede the City's ability to conduct neighborhood police patrols and
observe potential criminal activity; lighting and other security measures for residents,
and the use of materials that facilitate the removal of graffiti and/or increase resistance
to vandalism.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Current and ongoing (2007-2014)
Funding: Development fees
Objective: Reduce the susceptibility of residential properties and neighborhoods to
criminal activity and increase residents' perception of personal safety.
Program 1.4: Land Inventory
The City shall maintain a current inventory of vacant, residentially zoned parcels and a
list of approved residential projects, and shall make this information available to the
public and developers, including information on underutilized sites within the
downtown area with residential or mixed-use development potential. The City shall
update the inventory and list at least annually.
To maintain adequate sites throughout the planning period to accommodate the City's
RHNA, pursuant to Government Code Section 65863, the City will monitor available
residential capacity and evaluate development applications, particularly in non-
residential and/or mixed use zones. Should an approval of development result in a
reduction of capacity below the residential capacity assumed in the sites inventory, the
City will identify and zone sufficient sites to accommodate the shortfall to ensure that
the "no net loss" provision is upheld (i.e. if any units that had been designated for
subsidized housing are developed as market rate, then an equal number of units must
be designated in their stead).
The inventory update of infill sites should focus on opportunity sites along Mixed Use
Corridors, in the Downtown Mixed Use designation and residential areas Downtown, as
identified in the Land Use Element. The City promotes the land inventory and the
availability of each update through the City's website, a notice at the Community
Development Permit Counter, and a press release subsequent to each update.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Maintain a current land vacant residentially zoned land, Ongoing.
Funding: General Fund; contributions from property owners
Objective: Increase the potential for infill development, thereby reducing the need
to prematurely annex land and convert agricultural land to urban use.
Program 1.5: Pursue State and Federal Funds in Support of Housing Construction
4-7
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bwmt
The City will continue to pursue available and appropriate state and federal funding
sources to support efforts to construct housing meeting the needs of low -and moderate -
income households, to assist persons with rent payments required for existing housing
units, to provide supportive services, and to provide on- and off-site improvements and
public facilities, in support of affordable housing projects. The City takes the following
actions in pursuit of State and federal funding:
a. Meet annually with private nonprofit and for-profit affordable housing providers
and public agencies that are interested in constructing affordable housing (and
keep in contact with them throughout the year), providing special needs housing
or shelter, and/or providing supportive services for low-income and special
needs residents. The purpose of the annual meetings will be to discuss priorities
for lending City support for funding requests for affordable housing projects and
programs during the subsequent 12 to 24 months. The City will promote these
annual meetings through direct notices to private and public entities that have
provided housing or supportive services in Lodi, or that expressed an interest in
doing so, in the past.
b. Provide support to other entities (nonprofit organizations, for-profit affordable
housing providers, and public agencies) that apply directly for state or federal
funds. Examples of support to be provided by the City include: 1) expedited
processing of planning permits that are needed before an applicant can submit a
state or federal funding request or receive funds; 2) providing information to
complete a funding request (such as demographic, housing, or economic statis-
tics in support of an application); and 3) letters of support for projects or pro-
grams that the City has approved (including preliminary or conceptual ap-
proval). This can help support organizations such as Central Valley Low
Income Housing Corporation and the Loel Foundation which provide services to
extremely -low income households.
c. Apply directly for State and federal funding under programs in which the City
must be the applicant.
In pursuing State and federal funding, and working with other private and public
entities to provide affordable housing, the City seeks to increase the availability of
housing and supportive services to the most vulnerable population groups and those
with the greatest unmet needs, such as very -low-income and frail seniors, persons with
disabilities who cannot live independently, farmworkers and their families, low-income
large families, and single -parent households, particularly those with small children.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe: For Action a., annual meetings, 2007-2014; for Action b., quarterly each
year, depending on funding deadlines for specific State and federal
programs, 2007-2014; for Action c. semi-annual review and assessment
of funding opportunities based on (1) funding cycles and eligible
activities for various State and federal programs, (2) projects and
programs proposed to the City for State or federal funding, and (3) City
staff capacity to prepare funding requests.
Funding: California Multi -family Housing Program, California Housing Finance
Agency Affordable Housing Partnership Program, Low -Income Housing
Tax Credits (State and federal), CalHome Program, Federal Home Loan
Chapter 4: Housing Sirategy
Bank—Affordable Housing Program, Enterprise Community Partners,
Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development Programs—
Section 221(d) (low-income), Section 202 (elderly), Section 811 (persons
with disabilities), National Stabilization Program, and Joe Serna Jr.
Farmworker Housing Fund.
Objective: 20 extremely -low-, 50 very -low-, and 50 low-income housing units
Program 1.6: Encourage Efficient Use of Land for Residential Development
The City encourages the efficient use of land for residential development while reducing
the premature conversion of agricultural land to urban use. The City uses the following
approaches:
• The General Plan Growth Management and Infrastructure Element guides con-
tiguous development through the identification of three expansion phases: The
third phase includes Urban Reserve designations that define future growth areas
if initial phases are built out. (See the Growth Management and Infrastructure
Element for details.)
• In response to the City's dual goals of preserving agricultural land/open space
and supporting employment in the agriculture industry, the City will develop an
agricultural conservation program that establishes a mitigation fee to protect
and conserve agricultural lands. The fee will be assessed for acreage converted
from agricultural to urban use, and used for conservation easements, fee title
acquisition, research, education and capital improvement projects that benefit
agriculture. (Program details and priority areas are described in the Conserva-
tion Element, Policy C -P7.) Notably, all conservation areas are outside the City's
current Sphere of Influence and future growth areas as delineated in the current
Land Use Element and therefore would not affect any housing sites listed in the
inventory herein. The program will be developed with community input follow-
ing buildout of phase 1 of the General Plan. During development of the program,
the City and community members should consider how to exempt or reduce the
fee for High Density and/or affordable housing projects.
The City has adopted the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Conservation and
Open -Space Plan (SJMSCP), a habitat conservation plan that seeks to protect ag-
riculture, open space, habitat, and wildlife, in order to address the impacts of ur-
ban development and conservation of open space land. This allows project ap-
plicants to mitigate open space conversions and satisfy CEQA requirements by
paying an in -lieu fee, dedicating land, purchasing credits from a mitigation bank
or proposing an alternative plan consistent with SJMSCP goals.
Responsibility: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Timeframe: Require fee payment as mitigation, ongoing (2007-2014); enforce Urban
Reserve designation and contiguity requirements when this Housing
Element is adopted.
Funding: General Fund
4-9
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
Objective: Preserve agricultural land and reduce the amount of land needed to meet
future urban growth needs.
Program 1.7: Provide Rental Assistance
The City shall continue to support the San Joaquin County Housing Authority in its
administration of the Housing Choice Voucher rental assistance program (formerly
called Section 8 Program). The City's support will include distribution of program
information at the Community Development public counter, distribution of program
information to rental property owners as part of the City's code enforcement activities,
annual meetings with representatives of the Housing Authority to discuss actions the
City can take to encourage greater participation in the Voucher Program by rental
property owners, and creation and maintenance of a link to the Housing Authority's
website on the City's web site.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Distribution of Housing Choice Voucher Program information, current
and ongoing, 2007-2014; create website link to Housing Authority
website within six months of adoption of this Housing Element, maintain
link thereafter, 2009-2014.
Funding: General Fund
Objective: Increase rental property owner awareness of, and participation in, rental
assistance programs.
Program 1.8: Focus on Neighborhood Improvement Initiatives
The City will continue to designate a staff position, Neighborhood Services Manager
(NSM), within the Community Development Department to focus on the
implementation of housing and neighborhood improvement programs. Among the
duties of the NSM are to:
• Develop programs and plans to produce housing, especially affordable housing,
by means of new construction, rehabilitation or acquisition;
• Implement neighborhood improvement programs on a city-wide basis and de-
velop neighborhood improvement strategies;
• Ensure compliance with federal and State laws and regulations and consistency
with local objectives and community requirements;
• Prepare a variety of reports on housing preservation and development,
neighborhood improvement and code enforcement, and other related City activi-
ties; and
• Manage programs for housing rehabilitation, first-time buyer and code enforce-
ment. Through 2009, the City operated both housing rehabilitation and first-
time homebuyer programs through the Urban County CDBG/HOME Program.
Since 2000, a total of 71 low-income households have been assisted. Beginning
in 2010, Lodi turned to the State of California HOME Program to fund the first-
time homebuyer program and has been awarded $800,000 to do so.
4-10
Chapter 4: Housing Strategy
The Lodi Police Department is responsible for enforcing City codes and ordinances
pertaining to neighborhood maintenance; the NSM is tasked with coordinating activities
with the code enforcement supervisor and staff within the Police Department.
Responsibility: Community Development Department; Police Department
Timeframe: Current and ongoing, 2007-2014
Funding: CDBG, Ca1HOME Program
Objective: Improve the City's ability to focus on the implementation of housing and
neighborhood improvement programs.
Program 1.9: Annex Land to Accommodate Future Housing Needs as Necessary
The City will pursue annexation of land outside the existing Sphere of Influence to
conform to the development needs for Phase 1, 2, and 3. Subsequent phases should be
annexed only as current phases meet development capacity thresholds, as described in
the Growth Management and Infrastructure Element. South of Harney Lane, an area
which would require annexation, 338 acres have been identified for Low -Density
Residential; nearly 100 acres for Medium- and High -Density Residential, and 28 acres
for the residential component of Mixed Use Center. Given the backlog of unused housing
allocations, recently approved development projects, and available sites within the
current City limits, the City does not need to annex land to meet current housing needs.
Nevertheless, the City will initiate the process with property owners by the end of the
planning period.
Responsibility: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Timeframe: Pursue discussions with property owners about annexation, as
appropriate according to housing needs, but no later than the end of the
planning period in 2014.
Funding: Annexation and permit fees
Objective: Increase the City's residential development capacity to accommodate its
share of the region's future housing construction needs.
Program 1.10: Provide Homebuyer Assistance
The City will continue to implement a first-time homebuyer down payment assistance
program. The City will continue to participate with the Housing Authority in a
countywide consortium for the issuance of mortgage revenue bonds or mortgage credit
certificates to assist first-time homebuyers. The City will promote the program by
providing information at the Community Development Department's public counter and
by providing a link to the program on the City's web site. The City's Neighborhood
Services Manager will contact real estate agents active in Lodi to identify opportunities
for program participation.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
4-11
DR*T Lodi Housng Bement
Timeframe: Current and ongoing, 2007-2014; provide website link and information
at the public counter within one year of adoption of this Housing
Element; Neighborhood Services Manager to meet with local realtors
within one year of adoption of this Housing Element.
Funding: CDBG, HOME, Ca1HOME, Ca1HFA's California Homebuyer's Down
Payment Assistance Program, Mortgage Credit Certificate or Mortgage
Revenue Bonds (through San Joaquin County or a local government
consortium)
Objective: 24 homebuyers: 4 very -low-, 10 low-, and 10 moderate -income housing
units
Program 1.11: Promote the City's Multi -family Housing Development
Standards
The City will promote its multi -family development standards through the Community
Development Department's link to the City's website, information brochures available
at the Community Development Department, pre -application meetings, and a notice to
the local homebuilder's, realtor's, and contractor's associations.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Current and ongoing (2007-2014); information is currently available on
the City's website and at the public permit counter. The City also
encourages pre -application meetings. These practices will continue
indefinitely. A notice of the City's multi -family development standards
will be distributed to industry organizations within six months of the
adoption of this Housing Element.
Funding: General Fund, Permit Fees
Objective: Increase awareness of the City's multi -family development standards.
Program 1.12: Subdividing Large Sites for Lower Income Households
To assist the development of housing for lower income households on larger sites
(more than 10 acres), the City will facilitate land divisions, lot line adjustments, and
specific plans resulting in parcels sizes that enable multifamily developments affordable
to lower income households. The City will work with property owners and non-profit
developers to target and market the availability of sites with the best potential for
development. In addition, the City will offer the following incentives for the
development of affordable housing including but not limited to:
• Streamlining and expediting the approval process for land division for projects
that include affordable housing units,
• Deferral or waiver of fees related to the subdivision for projects affordable to
lower income households,
• Technical assistance to acquire funding.
4-12
Chapter 4: Housing Strategy
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Determine appropriate incentives within one year of adoption. Provide
incentive throughout planning period, as projects are submitted to the
Planning Division.
Funding: General Fund.
Objective: Facilitate parcel sizes that that are developable for multi -family
affordable housing and consistent with recommendations/requirements
of state, federal and local financing programs.
H -G1 Encourage the maintenance, improvement, and rehabilitation of
existing housing stock and residential neighborhoods, particularly in
the Eastside area.
Program 2.1: Evaluate Applications for the Demolition of Residential Structures
The City shall implement policies and procedures for evaluating applications for
demolition of residential structures. This evaluation shall consider the implications of
the demolition with respect to the retention of affordable housing. If demolitions are
deemed to result in a reduction of the amount of affordable housing in Lodi, the City
shall require the proponent of the demolition to cooperate with the City in providing
relocation assistance to displaced residents and in determining the means for replacing
demolished units. The City will provide information regarding its policies and
procedures on the City's website and at the Community Development Department's
public counter.
The City will determine the most appropriate method of implementing this program
through a review of past demolition permits and conditions.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Complete review within six month of adoption of this Housing Element;
implement new review procedures within one year of adoption of this
Housing Element, ongoing thereafter, based on proposals.
Funding: Permit fees, property owner contribution
Objective: Maintain or replace existing affordable housing
Program 2.2: Assist the Eastside Area with Housing Rehabilitation and Code
Enforcement
The City will continue to combine code enforcement and housing rehabilitation
assistance, targeted to the Eastside area. Code enforcement falls under the purview of
the Lodi Police Department, while the Neighborhood Services Manager (NSM) is
responsible for coordinating rehabilitation efforts. The NSM will promote its program
through the Lodi Improvement Committee, a neighborhood organization that provides
direct outreach to area residents and property owners, by providing information at the
Community Development Department's public counter, and through a link to the
4-13
DR*T Lodi Housng Bement
program on the City's website. The NSM will work with the Committee to continue
marketing the program to Eastside area residents and property owners.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Current and ongoing, 2007-2014
Funding: CDBG, HOME, Ca1HOME, Neighborhood Stabilization Program funding
Objective: Improvement of 750 units (including private investment to correct code
violations) over the planning period of this Housing Element: 250
extremely low -/very -low-, 250 low-, and 250 moderate -income.
Program 2.3: Implement Property Maintenance and Management Standards
The City will continue to implement standards for private property maintenance
(Chapter 15.30 of the Municipal Code) to 1) control or eliminate conditions that are
detrimental to health, safety, and welfare; 2) preserve the quality of life and alleviate
certain socioeconomic problems created by physical deterioration of property; and 3)
protect property values and further certain aesthetic considerations for the general
welfare of all residents of the City of Lodi.
Responsibility: Police Department (code enforcement); Community Development
Department, Neighborhood Services Division (implementation)
Timeframe: Code enforcement on both complaint and pro -active basis; Current and
ongoing, 2007-2014
Funding: Inspection fees, code violation penalties, CDBG funds (for dwelling units
occupied by low-income households)
Objective: Eliminate substandard building and property conditions
Program 2.4: Conduct a Housing Condition Survey
The City will conduct a housing survey to document its efforts at improving housing
conditions and to identify future areas and housing types for targeting its code
enforcement, housing rehabilitation assistance, and neighborhood improvement efforts.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Complete survey and report to City Council within one and a half years of
adoption of this Housing Element.
Funding: CDBG, General Fund
Objective: Document housing conditions and establish priorities for future code
enforcement, housing rehabilitation assistance, and neighborhood
improvement efforts.
Program 2.5: Preserve Affordable Rental Housing
4-14
Chapter 4: Housing Sirategy
There are currently no affordable units at -risk of converting to market rate in Lodi.
However, if in the future units become at -risk, the City would coordinate a meeting or
series of meetings between the Housing Authority, local nonprofits, and the owner (or
owner's representative) to discuss the owner's intentions to remain or opt out of the
federal Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8) Program and future plans for the property.
If the owner intends to convert the apartments to market rate housing or sell the
property, Lodi will seek to facilitate the acquisition of the property by a nonprofit or
other entity to preserve the rental units as affordable housing. The City would not take
part directly in negotiations regarding the property, but would apply for State or federal
funding on behalf of an interested nonprofit entity, if necessary, to protect the
affordability of the rental units. Lodi would request that the property owner provide
evidence that it has complied with State and federal regulations regarding notice to
tenants and other procedural matters related to conversion and contact HUD, if
necessary, to verify compliance with notice requirements.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Implement this program as necessary.
Funding: Minimal administrative cost to coordinate meetings; CDBG, HOME,
Ca1HFA, Multi -family Housing Program, and Section 207 Mortgage
Insurance for Purchase/Refinance (HUD) as potential funding sources for
preservation
Objective: To preserve affordable rental housing units.
Program 2.6: Target the Eastside Area for Use of Funds for Public Improvements
The City will continue to target a portion of its annual CDBG allocation for public
improvements in the Eastside area in support of its housing rehabilitation and
neighborhood improvement activities. The General Plan Land Use Diagram identifies
the Eastside Area for Medium and High Density Residential, acknowledging
opportunities for redevelopment and reinvestment through density increases. Public
investment is intended to stimulate private investment in order to preserve the
character of the neighborhood and introduce new housing, while also improving
streetscapes and connections to downtown. In addition, the City will continue the
practice of including conditions in developer agreements of major projects to pay for
rehabilitation of housing units. Funds can be specifically directed toward units for
extremely -low and very -low income households and supportive housing providers, and
will be negotiated on a case by case basis.
Responsibility: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Timeframe Annual CDBG allocation, maintain zoning, 2007-2014
Funding: CDBG, permit fees, impact fees
Objective: Preserve and improve the Eastside area
H -G2 Ensure the provision of adequate public facilities and services to
support existing and future residential development.
4-15
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
Program 3.1: Collect Development Impact Fees and Enforce Improvement
Requirements
The City will continue to collect a unified development impact fee to pay for off-site
public facilities and services needed for residential development and require that
residential developers continue to provide on-site infrastructure to serve their projects.
The City shall continue to charge fees that reflect the actual cost of service provided to
housing units anticipated by this Element. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the
City will require evidence that the developer has paid the required school impacts fees.
The City will review and adjust its fee formula, particularly for multi -family dwelling
units in the Medium and High Density Residential and Mixed Use General Plan land use
designations. Per unit and per acre fees should be reasonable, in order to encourage the
development of higher density affordable housing units while corresponding with the
estimated public facility and service impact for the specific project being proposed. The
review and adjustment is anticipated to result in a reduction of fees for some multi-
family projects. Utilities, streets, parks, and emergency services improvements should
be developed consistently with infrastructure improvements and planning efforts
identified in the appropriate in the Growth Management and Infrastructure;
Transportation; and, Parks, Recreation, and Open Space elements.
Responsibility: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Timeframe Submit proposed fee schedule adjustment to Planning Commission
within six months of adoption of this Housing Element.
Funding: General Fund
Objective: Reduce impact fees for multi -family projects based on actual project
densities
Program 3.2: Assure Adequate Public Services for Residential Development
The City will continue to use its growth management program to ensure that the pace of
development is consistent with the City's, and other public facility and service
providers' abilities to provide public facilities and services and maintain minimum
facility and service standards for the entire community. The City will contact other
public facility and service providers annually during the housing unit allocation process
to insure that these agencies can serve the increased number of housing units to be
allocated.
Responsibility: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Timeframe Annually during housing allocation process, 2007-2014
Funding: Application fees, development impact fees
Objective: Provide public facilities and services meeting minimum City standards
Program 3.3: Use of CDBG Funds
4-16
Chapter 4: Housing Strategy
The City will continue to use CDBG funds to upgrade public facilities and services in
older neighborhoods. (See Program 1.8 for implementation.)
Program 3.4: Provide Park and Recreation Facilities (See General Plan Policy P -
P20)
Program 3.5: Support Transit Facilities and Transit -Oriented Development
To coordinate the availability of public transit as Lodi develops and to support transit -
oriented development (TOD) on infill sites and properties with re -use potential, the City
shall:
a) Insure the continued construction of transit facilities, facilitate adequate transit
service and lower the cost of living within the community, with funding to be
paid from traffic impact fees, State, and federal funding sources, and "Measure K"
sales tax funds.
b) Determine whether areas with infill/reuse potential (see Program 1.4) qualify as
infill opportunity zones. The City shall designate qualified areas that are appro-
priately located for higher density residential and mixed-use developments in
such zones, near transit facilities.
c) If adopted under action "b," promote development opportunities in infill zones
through a link on the City's website, an information bulletin to be distributed to
property owners within these zones, and developers and business organizations
in Lodi, and one or more meetings with business and community organizations
to explain the benefits and implications of infill zone designation for develop-
ment opportunities.
d) Use the City's adopted Transit -Oriented Development Design Guidelines to de-
velop TOD in Lodi's Downtown, establishing a framework for infill development
and public improvements, such as streets and open spaces.
Responsibility: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Timeframe: For Action a., annually, prior to the adoption of a City budget, 2007-2014;
for Action b., within one year of adoption of this Housing Element,
designate infill opportunities within a year and a half and identify and
adopt zoning amendments that are needed and appropriate to develop
within infill opportunity zones within two years of adoption of this
Housing Element; for Action c., within two years of adoption of this
Housing Element, conduct one or more community meetings within two
and a half years of adoption of this Housing Element; for Action d.,
ongoing.
Funding: Development impact fees, State and federal transportation funds
Objective: Increase housing opportunities near transit facilities and encourage
forms of travel other than private vehicles. All income groups will be
targeted for TOD housing. However, extremely -low and very -low income
households that may rely on transit as their primary transportation
mode should be prioritized.
4-17
DFWFT Lodi Housng Bement
H -G3 Promote equal opportunity to secure safe, sanitary, and affordable
housing for all members of the community regardless of race, sex, or
other discriminatory factors.
Program 4.1: Promote Fair Housing Services
The City shall promote equal housing opportunity for all persons in compliance with
State and federal laws by continuing to provide funding for the operation of the City's
Affirmative Fair Housing Program. Under the program, the City provides information to
the public on State and federal fair laws, provides referrals to county, State, and federal
agencies for investigation of fair housing complaints, and provides financial support to
Stockton/San Joaquin Community Housing Resource Board (CHRB), which provides
landlord -tenant mediation services. From 2005-2010, the City provided approximately
$20,000 to the CHRB for fair housing purposes.
The City will collaborate with CHRB to promote fair housing information and resources
at an annual community event. Lodi will promote fair housing activities and resources
by providing links through its website to nonprofit, county, state, and federal agencies;
providing fair housing information at the Community Development Department public
counter; designating a point of contact within the Department to handle fair housing
inquiries; and distributing fair housing information at public locations in the City (such
as the Lodi Public Library and the LOEL Senior Center).
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe Current and ongoing, 2007-2014; annual community event for display of
air housing information within one year of adoption of this Housing
Element; fair housing links will be provided on the City's website within
six months of adoption of this Housing Element.
Funding: CDBG
Objective: Provide information on fair housing law to the public and support
landlord -tenant mediation services
Program 4.2: Regulate Condominium Conversion
The City currently regulates the conversion of rental housing to condominium or stock
cooperative ownership to reduce the displacement of extremely low-, very low-, low-,
and moderate -income households (See Title 15 of the Lodi Municipal Code). However,
the regulations need to be expanded and strengthened. The City should amend Title 15
to ensure that:
1. Residential condominium conversion projects are consistent with the Housing
Element of the General Plan and State law;
2. Converted dwellings meet certain safety, quality and appearance standards;
3. Purchasers of converted dwelling units are fully informed as to the physical con-
dition of the structure and facilities;
4. Tenants are provided with notice of the conversion, relocation benefits and the
opportunity to purchase the residential units being converted; and
4-18
Chapter 4: Housing Strategy
5. The City maintains a supply of affordable housing.
Responsibility: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Timeframe: Amendment of Title 15 will occur within two years of the adoption of this
Housing Element.
Funding: Application fees
Objective: Minimize the impact of displacement of very low-, low- and moderate -
income households and assure safety of converted units.
Program 4.3: Pursue Regional Solutions to Homeless Needs
The City shall continue to support regional solutions to homelessness through its
collaboration with the Salvation Army. Over the past five years, Lodi has contributed
$418,798 to the Salvation Army for the expansion or improvement of its facilities. The
City is also open to the possibility of providing funds to other nonprofit organizations.
The City shall also support San Joaquin County in implementing the Ten Year Plan to
End Homelessness and continue to have a City representative serve on the Board of the
Emergency Food and Shelter Program.
Responsibility: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Timeframe Current and ongoing, 2007-2014; annual review of applications by
nonprofit organizations for use of City's share of CDBG funds
Funding: CDBG
Objective: Provide regional solutions to homelessness through assistance to
nonprofit organizations and the County who work on solutions to end
homelessness in the region.
Program 4.4: Educate the Public About Affordable Housing
Affordable housing is seen negatively by many in the community; the perception is that
affordable housing drives down property values, increases the demand for services, and
facilitates criminal activity. The reality is that affordable housing helps police officers,
fire fighters, teachers, and other low- and moderate -wage workers live in the Lodi. The
City will:
• Put together a newsletter on housing in Lodi that discusses typical wages for
various jobs that are held in the city and the housing costs that each earner can
afford; and
• Conduct a workshop on the issue of affordable housing, publicizing the event to
neighborhood groups, community organizations, religious institutions, and oth-
ers. Discuss affordable housing myths and the value that affordable housing can
bring to a community, as well as important issues to consider.
4-19
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bwmt
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Newsletter and workshop will occur within two years of adoption of this
Housing Element.
Funding: General Fund
Objective: Provide information to the community about the benefits of affordable
housing.
Program 4.5: Incentivize Affordable Housing Development
To incentivize the development of affordable housing opportunities, the City will study
the possibility of providing certain benefits to developers who build affordable units
such as expedition of the development review process and reduction in development
impact fees. Program 3.1 describes modifications to the impact fee program to alleviate
disincentives to multi -family housing construction. In addition, Program 1.2 calls for the
exemption of affordable units from the growth management allocation process, which
would eliminate the time and expense of the process.
As described in Program 1.5, the City will meet annually with private nonprofit and for-
profit affordable housing providers and public agencies that are interested in
constructing affordable housing (and keep in contact with them throughout the year),
providing special needs housing or shelter, and/or providing supportive services for
low-income and special needs residents. The purpose of the annual meetings will be to
discuss priorities for lending City support for funding requests for affordable housing
projects and programs during the subsequent 12 to 24 months. The City will assist
applicants in the subdivision of land on larger sites as necessary to facilitate affordable
housing development.
The Needs Assessment identified approximately 2,500 Extremely -Low Income
households in 2000. Senior housing has been prioritized due to a growing senior
population. Female -headed households with children, large households, and
farmworkers with families require multi -bedroom units, preferably in multi -family
buildings that can provide usable common open space. The City will continue to assist
non-profit developers with site acquisition, allow multi -family housing by right in
several zoning districts, and identify funding sources to facilitate development and
rehabilitation. For single -person Extremely -Low Income households, such as persons
transitioning out of homelessness, seniors, or others that can be accommodated with
efficiency units, Program 1.1 supports the modification of the Zoning Ordinance to
broaden the definition of boarding houses and the allowance of SROs. The National
Stabilization Program in particular, will prioritize units for Very -Low and Extremely -
Low Income households.
Responsibility: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Timeframe Investigate possible incentives for facilitating the development of
affordable housing and present findings to City Council within one year
of the adoption of this Housing Element. The Zoning Ordinance and
Growth Management Ordinance update will be completed within one
year of the adoption of this Housing Element.
4-20
Chapter 4: Housing Strategy
Funding: General Fund, National Stabilization Program and other federal sources
(see also Program 1.5)
Objective: Facilitate the development of affordable housing opportunities in the
city.
Program 4.6: Facilitate the Development of Project -Based Section 8 Units.
The City will work with nonprofit developers to try and secure project -based Section 8
funding in order to develop and maintain affordable family and senior units in the city.
Responsibility: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Timeframe Hold a meeting and work with local nonprofits to secure project -based
Section 8 funding within a year and a half of adoption of this Housing
Element.
Funding: General Fund
Objective: Facilitate the development
opportunities in the city.
of affordable and senior housing
H -G4 Encourage residential energy efficiency and reduce residential energy
use.
Program 5.1: Promote Energy Efficiency and Weatherization Improvements for
Older Homes
The City shall continue to promote energy conservation and weatherization
improvements as eligible activities under the Lodi Housing Rehabilitation Program
(Program 2.2). The City will post and distribute information on currently available
weatherization and energy conservation programs operated by the City, nonprofit
organizations, and utility companies through the Lodi website, the Community
Development Department public counter, the Lodi Public Library, the LOEL Senior
Center, and other public locations. The Conservation Element also promotes energy
conservation and weatherization improvements to existing structures and public
buildings.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe Current and ongoing, 2007-2014
Funding: CD13G, HOME, public and private utilities, nonprofit organizations (such
as the San Joaquin County Department of Aging, Lodi Electric Utility
Department, and Pacific Gas and Electric)
Objective: Increase energy efficiency in older homes
Program 5.2: Energy Conservation for New Homes
4-21
DR*T Lodi Housng Bement
The City shall enforce State requirements for energy conservation, including Title 24 of
the California Code or Regulations (State building code standards), in new residential
projects and encourage residential developers to employ additional energy
conservation measures in the design of new residential developments. In addition, the
Community Design & Livability Element addresses green building and construction
techniques.
Responsibility: Community Development Department
Timeframe Current and ongoing, 2007-2014 as part of review of planning and
building permit applications
Funding: Permit fees
Objective: Increase energy efficiency in the design and construction of new homes
Program 5.3: Encourage Use of Solar Devices Through Voluntary Incentives
Program (see Program C -P40 in the Conservation Element)
4.3 QUANTIFIED OB.ECTIVES
The City of Lodi has established quantified objectives for several program categories to
provide measurable standards for monitoring and evaluating program achievements.
Quantified objectives have been established for accommodating the City's share of San
Joaquin County's regional housing needs, new housing construction, housing
rehabilitation, and the preservation of existing affordable housing. The quantified
objectives represent the target goal based on the needs, resources (including, land and
financing), constraints, policies, and programs identified in this element. The quantified
objectives for the City's share of regional housing needs and housing construction differ
because the housing construction objective is based on the City's estimate of the
number homes that can actually be constructed and at each household income level.
Table 4-1: Quantified Objectives
Conservation of Rental Housing4 0 0 0 0 0 0
1. Quantified objectives are for the 2007 — 2014 San Joaquin County Regional Housing Needs Allocation
2. Quantified objectives are based on anticipated market rate housing production (for moderate- and above moder-
ate -income) and availability of financial resources to assist in the construction of very low- and low-income hous-
ing. The proposed Eden Housing senior development, expected to be financed by CDBG and HOME funds, is in-
cluded in the extremely low- and very low-income household categories.
3. Based on historic rate of code enforcement and housing rehabilitation and anticipated availability of state and fed-
eral funding between 2009 and 2014. Based on funding potential from CDBG, HOME, Ca1HOME, and the
Neighborhood Stabilization Program.
4. Currently, no at -risk housing units have been identified that meet conservation requirements.
4-22
Housng Units by Iran
Extremely
Abo>.e
QWive Type
Low
VaryLow
Low Moderate Moderate
Total
Accommodate Regional Share'
971
650 716 1,555
3,891
New Construction
39
962
784 978 1,855
4,618
Homebuyer Assistance
2
2
10 10 0
24
Housing Rehabilitation
50
200
250 250 0
750
Conservation of Rental Housing4 0 0 0 0 0 0
1. Quantified objectives are for the 2007 — 2014 San Joaquin County Regional Housing Needs Allocation
2. Quantified objectives are based on anticipated market rate housing production (for moderate- and above moder-
ate -income) and availability of financial resources to assist in the construction of very low- and low-income hous-
ing. The proposed Eden Housing senior development, expected to be financed by CDBG and HOME funds, is in-
cluded in the extremely low- and very low-income household categories.
3. Based on historic rate of code enforcement and housing rehabilitation and anticipated availability of state and fed-
eral funding between 2009 and 2014. Based on funding potential from CDBG, HOME, Ca1HOME, and the
Neighborhood Stabilization Program.
4. Currently, no at -risk housing units have been identified that meet conservation requirements.
4-22
Chapter 4: Housing Srategy
This page intentionally left blank.
4-23
A. Accomplishments
A.1. OVERVIEW
The success of the updated Housing Element is dependent to a great extent on a useful
examination of the policies and implementation programs included in the previously
adopted Housing Element. The evaluation identifies programs that have been successful
in achieving housing objectives and addressing local needs, as well as programs that
require modifications to address objectives in the updated Housing Element. State law
(California Government Code section 65588 (a)) requires each jurisdiction review its
housing element as frequently as appropriate to evaluate:
• The appropriateness of the housing goals, objectives, and policies in contributing
to the attainment of the State housing goal;
• The effectiveness of the housing element in attainment of the community's hous-
ing goals and objectives; and,
• The progress of the jurisdiction in implementing the housing element.
According the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD),
"Housing Element Questions and Answers: a Guide to the Preparation of Housing
Elements," "the review is a three-step process:
• Review the results of the previous element's goals, objectives, policies, and pro-
grams. The results should be quantified where possible (e.g., the number of units
rehabilitated), but may be qualitative where necessary (e.g., mitigation of gov-
ernmental constraints).
• Compare what was projected or planned in the previous element to what was
actually achieved. Analyze the significant differences between them. Determine
where the previous housing element met, exceeded, or fell short of what was an-
ticipated.
• Based on the above analysis, describe how the goals, objectives, policies and
programs in the updated element are being changed or adjusted to incorporate
what has been learned from the results of the previous element.
A.2. CONSTRUCTION ACHIEVEMENTS
Table A-1 summarizes accomplishments during the 2001-2009 period. At that time, the
City's total RHNA projected by the San Joaquin Council of Governments was 4,014 units.
Actual construction, according to the Department of Finance, was 1,757 units. Some of
these "above moderate" units may actually be affordable to low income households—
given the decline in housing prices in the city—even though they were not subsidized.
Although the RHNA targets were not achieved in actual construction, the City made
available a sufficient number of appropriate housing sites, in each income category to
meet RHNA requirements. This is documented in the General Plan update Land Use
chapter which describes potential for low-, medium-, and high-density residential
developments, as well as mixed use residential units totaling 4,4,00 units. Moreover,
several large development projects, including a variety of density levels and unit types,
were approved during the planning period at high densities, but without subsidies. Due
A-1
DR*T Lodi Housng Bement
to the local, regional and statewide housing and lending market constriction, these
projects have not necessarily moved into the construction phase.
Table A-1: Housing Units Produced and Needs Met, by Income (2001-2009)
S woq.- Lodi Housng Bement 2003-2009, Dgowtment of Finanog (2001, 2009); Dyett & Bhatia, 2009.
A.3. PROGRAM EVALUATION
This section summarizes achievements for each program in the 2004 Housing Element.
Programs are organized within relevant Housing Element goals.
Goal A: To provide a range of housing types and densities for all economic segments of the
community while emphasizing high quality development, homeownership opportunities,
and the efficient use of land.
Program 1: Zoning Ordinance Revisions.
The City shall revise Title 17 of the Lodi Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) to reduce
barriers to, and provide incentives for, the construction and conservation of a variety of
housing types. The full program is located on p. IV -8 of the 2003-2009 Housing Element.
Objective: Reduce regulatory barriers to the provision of housing
Progress: The comprehensive Code update was on hold initially due to budget
constraints and the update of the General Plan. The provisions in this program have
been or will be included in the Administrative Draft of the Zoning Ordinance, which is
underway. The Ordinance is being updated to be consistent with the General Plan,
which was adopted in April 2010. This program has been updated in this Housing
Element to meet State law and to implement new policies in the General Plan.
Program 2: Revise Growth Management Program.
The City will revise its growth management program to exempt housing units
affordable to very -low- or low-income households with long-term affordability
restrictions.
Objective: Expedite the residential development approval process for affordable
housing.
A-2
6ctremeljF
lVery Low
Unit4 by IrWrne C ategovy
Low Moderate
Above Mod-
erate
Total
Regional Housing Needs Allocation
990
664
738
1,622
4,014
Less Units Constructed
0
3
7
1,747
1,757
Less Previously Identified and Available
0
0
839
2,854
3,693
Less Redesignated Pursuant to Housing
Element
0
0
0
0
0
Less Other Sites Rezoned
1,200
800
400
2,000
4,400
Surplus
210
139
508
4,979
5,836
S woq.- Lodi Housng Bement 2003-2009, Dgowtment of Finanog (2001, 2009); Dyett & Bhatia, 2009.
A.3. PROGRAM EVALUATION
This section summarizes achievements for each program in the 2004 Housing Element.
Programs are organized within relevant Housing Element goals.
Goal A: To provide a range of housing types and densities for all economic segments of the
community while emphasizing high quality development, homeownership opportunities,
and the efficient use of land.
Program 1: Zoning Ordinance Revisions.
The City shall revise Title 17 of the Lodi Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) to reduce
barriers to, and provide incentives for, the construction and conservation of a variety of
housing types. The full program is located on p. IV -8 of the 2003-2009 Housing Element.
Objective: Reduce regulatory barriers to the provision of housing
Progress: The comprehensive Code update was on hold initially due to budget
constraints and the update of the General Plan. The provisions in this program have
been or will be included in the Administrative Draft of the Zoning Ordinance, which is
underway. The Ordinance is being updated to be consistent with the General Plan,
which was adopted in April 2010. This program has been updated in this Housing
Element to meet State law and to implement new policies in the General Plan.
Program 2: Revise Growth Management Program.
The City will revise its growth management program to exempt housing units
affordable to very -low- or low-income households with long-term affordability
restrictions.
Objective: Expedite the residential development approval process for affordable
housing.
A-2
Appendix A• A=plishments
Progress: This program is part of the Administrative Draft of the Development Code
update, described in Program 1.1. This program will be implemented when the draft
Code is adopted.
A-3
DR4FT Lodi Housing Bwmt
Program 3: Personal Security Standards.
The City will continue to implement design standards applicable to all new residential
projects with the objective of improving the personal security of residents and
discouraging criminal activity. Design standards will address issues such as the
placement of landscaping, accessory buildings, and accessory structures in a manner
that does not impede the City's ability to conduct neighborhood police patrols and
observe potential criminal activity; lighting and other security measures for residents,
and the use of materials that facilitate the removal of graffiti and/or increase resistance
to vandalism.
Objective: Reduce the susceptibility of residential properties and neighborhoods to
criminal activity and increase residents' perception of personal safety
Progress: This is an on-going implementation. The new Development Code will
incorporate new ideas related to how good site planning and architecture can result in
improving personal security. Development proposals are sent to both the Police and
Fire Departments for review; their recommendations are incorporated into the project
design and conditions of approval. This program is implemented through the City's
design review process. Therefore, development fees are the funding source.
Program 4: Land Inventory.
The City shall prepare and maintain a current inventory of vacant, residentially zoned
parcels and a list of approved residential projects, and shall make this information
available to the public and developers, including information on underutilized sites
within the downtown area with residential or mixed-use development potential. The
City shall update the inventory and list at least annually. The City will promote the land
inventory and the availability of each update through the City's web site, a notice at the
Community Development Permit Counter, and a press release subsequent to each
update.
Objective: Increase the potential for infill development, thereby reducing the need to
prematurely annex land and convert agricultural land to urban use
Progress: The land inventory has been prepared and updated. The development
potential was completed and led to the current General Plan land use concept of a
mixed-use designation. This inventory also contributed to the identification of a suitable
site for the 80 -unit Eden Housing affordable housing development described in Chapter
4. This program has been modified in this Housing Element to account for new land use
designations and development opportunities described in the new General Plan.
Program 5: Pursuit of State and Federal Funds in Support of Housing
Construction.
The City shall pursue available and appropriate state and federal funding sources to
support efforts to construct housing meetings the needs of low -and moderate -income
households, to assist persons with rent payments required for existing housing units, to
provide supportive services, and to provide on- and off-site improvements and public
facilities, in support of affordable housing projects. The City will take the following
actions in pursuit of state and federal funding: [see 2003-2009 Housing Element for
complete program]
A-4
Appendix A• Ac oW plishments
Objective: 150 very Low-income housing units, 100 low-income housing units
Progress: The City continues to pursue and utilize State and federal grants and funds.
For example, in 2007, HOME and CDBG funds were used for the following programs:
Down -Payment Assistance ($900,000 for 13 home -buyers); site acquisition assistance
for a five -unit senior affordable development; $8,600 towards Lodi's share of the San
Joaquin Fair Housing Program that assists renters with fair housing issues; and $38,654
for ADA accessibility improvements at the Salvation Army Homeless Shelter (it's
estimated that over 4,000 clients will benefit from the improvements).
Program 6: Encourage Efficient Use of Land for Residential Development.
The City will investigate incentive and regulatory tools to encourage efficient use of land
designated or held in reserve for urban development within the existing Lodi Sphere of
Influence to reduce the premature conversion of agricultural land to urban use. If
determined to be feasible, the City will adopt one or more incentives or regulations.
Objective: Preserve agricultural land and reduce the amount of land needed to meet
future urban growth needs
Progress: All development has been required to mitigate for loss of prime farmland. The
use of a TDR program was studied and rejected. A transitional designation (Urban
Reserve) is incorporated in the Draft General Plan to define future growth areas and
protect agricultural land. This program was amended in Chapter 4 of this Housing
Element to reflect these changes.
Program 7: Rental Assistance.
The City shall continue to support the San Joaquin County Housing Authority in its
administration of the Housing Choice Voucher rental assistance program (formerly
called Section 8 Program). The City's support will include distribution of program
information at the Community Development public counter, distribution of program
information to rental property owners as part of the City's code enforcement activities,
creation and maintenance of a link to the Housing Authority's website on the City's web
site, and annual meetings with representatives of the Housing Authority to discuss
actions the City can take to encourage greater participation in the Voucher Program by
rental property owners.
Objective: Increase rental property owner awareness of, and participation in, rental
assistance programs
Progress: The Housing Authority has been in transition for past several years, so
implementation has not yet been completed. The new Executive Director is interested
in developing better working relationship. The City continues to support the use of
vouchers. As of November 2009, the County managed 4,500 vouchers countywide, 204
of which were used in Lodi.
Program 8: Neighborhood Improvement.
The City will continue to designate a staff position, Community Improvement Manager
(CIM), within the Community Development Department to focus on the implementation
of housing and neighborhood improvement programs.
A-5
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
Objective: Improve the City's ability to focus on the implementation of housing and
neighborhood improvement programs
Progress: Implementation has been ongoing through regular code enforcement activity.
The Code Enforcement function has been moved to the Lodi Police Department and a
new Supervising Community Improvement Officer position has been created/filled to
supervise that program. The remaining elements of this program remain within the
Community Development Department under the direction of the Neighborhood
Services Manager (formerly Community Improvement Manager). This program has
been revised in this Housing Element to acknowledge this change. The City has also
implemented a web -based code enforcement reporting and tracking system to improve
efficiency and accountability. CDBG and HOME funded.
Program 9: Annexation of Land to Accommodate Future Housing Needs.
The City will work with property owners of approximately 600 acres outside the
current City limits, but within Lodi's Sphere of Influence (SOI), to plan for, and annex
the land to the City so that additional residential development opportunities can be
provided to meet Lodi's future housing construction needs. The 600 acres is located
between Harney Lane, Lower Sacramento Road, the Woodbridge Irrigation District
canal, and the western SOI boundary. The City has facilitated a specific planning process
with property owners of over 300 acres to prepare these sites for annexation to the
City.
Objective: Increase the City's residential development capacity to accommodate its
share of the region's future housing construction needs between 2001 and 2009, and
subsequent years, under the San Joaquin County Council of Governments housing
allocation plan
Progress: Annexation of 524.28 acres has taken place and projects approved consist of
3,249 units. The City has targeted acreage for higher density development as well as
possible senior and affordable housing sites. The City will continue to work with
developers to create a range of housing types. Notably, developers see first time
homebuyers as the majority of their sales volume, with moderate sized units on
moderate sized lots as an appropriate and affordable (though not necessarily
subsidized) housing type.
Program 10: Homebuyer Assistance.
The City will continue to implement a first-time homebuyer down payment assistance
program. The City will continue to participate with the Housing Authority in a
countywide consortium for the issuance of mortgage revenue bonds or mortgage credit
certificates to assist first-time homebuyers. The City will promote the program by
providing information at the Community Development Department's public counter and
by providing a link to the program on the City's web site. The City's Community
Improvement Manager will contact real estate agents active in Lodi to identify
opportunities for program participation. Because the availability of homes within the
program price limits is extremely limited in Lodi, there will likely be a small number of
assisted homebuyers.
Objective: 50 homebuyers
A-6
Appendix A• Ac oW plishments
Progress: In 2007, the City used $900,000 in HOME and CDBG funds to assist 13 home-
buyer households through the Downpayment Assistance Program. (As an Entitlement
community, the City of Lodi now looks to the State HOME Program funding. Community
Improvement Manager changed to Neighborhood Services Manager.)
Program 11: Commercial Linkage Fee.
The City will undertake a "nexus" study to determine whether a direct connection exists
between non-residential development in Lodi that creates jobs and the need for housing
affordable to lower income workers who will fill some of those jobs. The study will
attempt to estimate:
• Projected employment growth by industry and occupation based on land use
policies in the General Plan, zoning regulations, and development trends;
• The difference between the cost to develop housing in Lodi and the amount that
lower income households can afford to pay for housing (the subsidy gap needed
to make housing affordable); and
• The dollar amount per square foot, by industry or land use category, that non-
residential developments would need to pay to close the subsidy gap.
Objective: Increase local funding options for affordable housing and improve the
balance between the supply of housing affordable to the local workforce and anticipated
job creation
Progress: City Council has not been supportive of a Commercial Linkage Fee Program
due to the adverse impact that they feel it would have on non-residential development,
especially in the current economic environment. Therefore, the program will not be
implemented.
Program 12: Promote the City's Multifamily Housing Development Standards.
The City will promote its multifamily development standards through the Community
Development Department's link to the City's website, information brochures available
at the Community Development Department, pre -application meetings, and a notice to
the local homebuilder's, realtor's, and contractor's associations.
Objective: To increase awareness of the City's multifamily development standards.
Progress: Information about multi -family housing options is currently available at the
permit counter and through the City's website. The City holds pre -application meetings
upon request of the developer.
Goal B: To encourage the maintenance, improvement, and rehabilitation of existing
housing and residential neighborhoods, particularly in the Eastside area, and the
preservation of existing affordable housing.
Program 13: Demolition of Residential Structures.
The City shall implement policies and procedures for evaluating applications for
demolition of residential structures. This evaluation shall consider the implications of
the demolition with respect to the retention of affordable housing. If demolitions are
A-7
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
deemed to result in a reduction of the amount of affordable housing in Lodi, the City
shall require the proponent of the demolition to cooperate with the City in providing
relocation assistance to displaced residents and in determining the means for replacing
demolished units. The City will provide information regarding its policies and
procedures on the City's website and at the Community Development Department's
public counter.
Objective: Maintain or replace existing affordable housing
Progress: The City does not issue a significant number of residential demolition permits.
In code enforcement cases, demolition is usually the last option and is used when there
are building code or zoning issues that cannot be addressed by repair or remodeling the
unit in a reasonable or cost-effective manner. In most cases, demolished units are
replaced with new residential units.
Program 14: Housing Rehabilitation and Code Enforcement.
The City will continue to combine code enforcement and housing rehabilitation
assistance, targeted to the Eastside area. The City will promote its program through the
Eastside Improvement Committee, a neighborhood organization that provides direct
outreach to area residents and property owners, by providing information at the
Community Development Department's public counter, and through a link to the
program on the City's website. The City's Community Improvement Manager will work
with the Committee to continue marketing the program to Eastside area residents and
property owners.
Objective: Improvement of 1,000 housing units (including private investment to correct
code violations) over five years
Progress: Code Enforcement function is now under the Lodi Police Department.
Neighborhood Services Manager (formerly Community Improvement Manager) still
responsible for coordinating Housing Rehab efforts with code enforcement and
promote this effort through the Lodi Improvement Committee (formerly Eastside
Improvement Committee). CDBG, HOME, Ca1HOME and Neighborhood Stabilization
Program (NSP) funding. The City has also required developers of major new projects to
provide funds to assist in the rehabilitation of existing residential units through the
development agreement process.
Program 15: Property Maintenance and Management Standards.
The City will continue to implement standards for private property maintenance
(Chapter 15.30 of the Municipal Code) to 1) control or eliminate conditions that are
detrimental to health, safety, and welfare; 2) preserve the quality of life and alleviate
certain socioeconomic problems created by physical deterioration of property; and 3)
protect property values and further certain aesthetic considerations for the general
welfare of all residents of the City of Lodi.
Objective: Eliminate substandard building and property conditions
Progress: Over 906 complaints related to property maintenance and substandard
housing issues were received and investigated in 2007. While code enforcement
function has moved from Community Development to Lodi Police Department, the
W.
Appendix A• Ac oW plishments
overall coordination of these efforts still falls to the Community Development through
the Neighborhood Services Division. Funded by CDBG, HOME Program, NSP, and
General Fund
Program 16: Housing Condition Survey.
The City will conduct a housing survey to document its efforts at improving housing
conditions and to identify future areas and housing types for targeting its code
enforcement, housing rehabilitation assistance, and neighborhood improvement efforts.
Objective: Document housing conditions and establish priorities for future code
enforcement, housing rehabilitation assistance, and neighborhood improvement efforts
Progress: The Housing Condition Survey was not undertaken, but is still necessary and
included as program in this Housing Element update.
Program 17: Preservation of Affordable Rental Housing.
There is one subsidized rental housing project in Lodi (Creekside South Apartments)
that contains 40 housing units affordable to low-income households. These units are at
risk of converting to market rate housing. To preserve Creekside South as affordable
rental housing for low-income households, the City will coordinate a meeting or series
of meetings between the Housing Authority, local nonprofits, and the owner (or owner's
representative) to discuss the owner's intentions to remain or opt out of the federal
Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8) Program and future plans for the property.
Objective: To preserve 40 affordable rental housing units
Progress: City staff routinely check in with property owners/managers of affordable
housing projects to determine affordability status and assist in preservation of units at
risk of conversion to market rate.
Program 18: Mobilehome Park Preservation.
Lodi will meet with mobilehome park owners to discuss their long-term goals for their
properties and the feasibility of preserving these parks. Feasibility will be evaluated
based on the condition of park infrastructure and buildings, the condition of mobile
homes located in the park, parcel size, accessibility to services, and surrounding land
uses. Several of the parks are small (with fewer than 50 spaces) and may not be prime
candidates for preservation.
Objective: To preserve approximately 400 mobilehomes and spaces in mobilehome
parks with the highest feasibility for continued operation
Progress:_ The City did coordinate an inspection of one mobile home park property with
State HCD inspectors, the property owner and local enforcement officials. No funds
were available to continue this program: the program is dropped in this update.
Program 19: Preservation of the Eastside Area.
The City will continue to target a portion of its annual CDBG allocation for public
improvements in the Eastside area in support of its housing rehabilitation and
A-9
DFWFT Lodi Housng Bement
neighborhood improvement activities. The City will also maintain the Eastside single-
family residential zoning as a regulatory tool to preserve the character of the
neighborhood and encourage private investment in older homes.
Objective: To preserve and improve the Eastside area.
Progress: The updated General Plan supports intensification of housing and investment
(such as streetscape improvements) in the Eastside Area. This program will be updated
to reflect this change, but continue the financial support.
Program 20: Redevelopment Agency Funding.
Should the City Council adopt a redevelopment project area between 2003 and 2009, at
least 20% of any tax increment funds accruing to the Agency will be used to support
low- and moderate -income housing projects and programs. The City will also adopt an
implementation plan that provides funding for public improvements to the downtown
and residential neighborhoods within the redevelopment project area.
Objective: To preserve and improve the downtown and residential areas within the
proposed redevelopment project area
Progress: Lodi voters rejected the proposal to establish a redevelopment project area
during a citywide vote in March 2009.
Goal C. To ensure the provision of adequate public facilities and services to support
existing and future residential development.
Program 21: Development Impact Fees and Improvement Requirements.
The City will continue to collect a unified development impact fee to pay for off-site
public facilities and services needed for residential development and require that
residential developers continue to provide on-site infrastructure to serve their projects.
The City shall continue to charge fees that reflect the actual cost of service provided to
housing units anticipated by this Element. Prior to the issuance of building permit, the
City will require evidence that the developer has paid the required school impacts fees.
The City will review and adjust its fee formula for multifamily dwelling units in the
medium and high density general plan land use designations so that the fee encourages
the development of higher density affordable housing units while corresponding with
the estimated public facility and service impact for the specific project being proposed.
Objective: Reduce impact fees for multifamily projects based on actual project densities
Progress: This will be comprehensively reviewed and amended as an implementation to
the updated General Plan.
Program 22: Growth Management Program.
The City will continue to use its growth management program to insure that the pace of
development is consistent with the City's, the Lodi Unified School District's, and other
public facility and service providers' abilities to provide public facilities and services
and maintain minimum facility and service standards for the entire community. The
A-10
Appendix A• Ac oW plishments
City will contact other public facility and service providers annually during the housing
unit allocation process to insure that these agencies can serve the increased number of
housing units to be allocated.
Objective: To provide public facilities and services meeting minimum City standards
Progress: The Growth Management Program is still intact. However, Program 1.2, to
exempt affordable housing from the allocations process, will be implemented with
adoption of the updated Development Code.
Program 23: Use of CDBG Funds.
The City will continue to use CDBG funds to upgrade public facilities and services in
older neighborhoods. (See Program 8 for implementation.)
Progress: In 2007, the City used CDBG funds to assist 13 homebuyers through the
Down -Payment Assistance program; 25 households with funds for home
improvements/rehabilitations; and the LOEL Center to rehabilitate ten senior housing
units. The City also funded construction of ADA accessibility improvements through
four projects that will benefit thousands of disabled, elderly, and homeless residents in
the city, many of whom fall within the very -low and low-income categories.
Program 24: Park and Recreation Facilities.
The City will annually review its Park and Recreation impact fee to ensure that these
fees, in combination with other funds that may be available to the City, will allow Lodi to
acquire and improve sufficient parkland and provide recreation facilities according to
the minimum standards contained in the General Plan Parks, Recreation, and Open
Space Element.
Objective: To provide park and recreation facilities and services meeting minimum
General Plan standards
Progress: Park fees are being reviewed along with the comprehensive update of all
impact fees, resulting from new park standards in the General Plan.
Program 25: Transit Facilities and Transit -Oriented Development.
To coordinate the availability of public transit as Lodi develops and to support transit -
oriented development on infill sites and properties with re -use potential, the City will
continue to construct and maintain transit facilities, determine appropriate sites higher
density residential and mixed-use developments near transit facilities and provide this
information through the City's website and through business and community
organizations.
Objective: To increase housing opportunities near transit facilities and encourage forms
of travel other than private vehicles
Progress: The City adopted Transit -Oriented Development Downtown Design
Guidelines in 2008, to stimulate development Downtown. These guidelines modeled
development feasibility based on a scenario where 15% of the housing units were
affordable at below-market rates. In addition, the updated General Plan identifies
A-11
DR*T Lodi Housng Bement
appropriate locations for high-density development near transit and other services.
The TOD Downtown Design Guidelines were funded by Caltrans.
Goal D: To promote equal opportunity to secure safe, sanitary, and affordable housing for
all members of the community regardless of race, sex, or other arbitrary factors.
Program 26: Fair Housing Services.
The City shall continue to promote equal housing opportunity for all persons in
compliance with state and federal laws by continuing to provide funding for the
operation of the City's Affirmative Fair Housing Program. Under the program, the City
provides information to the public on state and federal fair laws, provides referrals to
county, state, and federal agencies for investigation of fair housing complaints, and
provides financial support to Stockton/San Joaquin Community Housing Resource
Board (CHRB), which provides landlord -tenant mediation services.
Objective: To provide public facilities and services meeting minimum City standards
Progress: CDBG funds were used to contribute towards Lodi's share of the San Joaquin
Fair Housing Program which assists renters with fair housing issues. The City
contributes to this program on an annual basis. It is estimated that the program assists
110 households per year, most of whom are very -low and low-income households.
$8,600 of CDBG funds in 2007.
Program 27: Special Housing Needs.
The City shall continue to implement zoning standards, provide regulatory incentives,
work with nonprofit and other private housing providers, and provide financial
assistance, within the City's limited fiscal capacity, to facilitate the development and
operation of housing meeting the needs of special population groups. (See Programs 1,
5, and 17 for implementation.)
Progress: The City continues to support households with special housing needs. The
Zoning Ordinance update, to be adopted within one year of Housing Element adoption,
will further support regulations that support housing for special needs population (e.g.
allowance for SROs, emergency shelters).
Program 28: Condominium Conversion.
The City shall continue to regulate the conversion of rental housing and mobilehome
parks to condominium or stock cooperative ownership to reduce the displacement of
low- and moderate -income households. The City will implement requirement in Title 15
of the Lodi Municipal Code, which govern condominium conversion. (See Program 18
for implementation on mobilehome park conversion.)
Objective: To minimized the impact of displacement of low- and moderate -income
households
Progress: The City continues to implement the regulations for condominium
conversions according to the existing ordinance.
Program 29: Regional Solutions to Homeless Needs.
A-12
Appendix A• Accomplishments
The City shall continue to support regional solutions to homelessness through its
participation in San Joaquin County's Continuum of Care strategy and collaboration
with the Salvation Army. The City provides annual contributions to nonprofit
organizations that assist in the implementation of the strategy. Programs and services
under the Continuum of Care strategy include overnight shelter for individuals and
families in immediate need of assistance, transitional shelter, rent assistance for
homeless individuals and families ready to live in conventional housing, and supportive
services to assist homeless individuals and families in making a successful transition
from homelessness to independent living.
Objective: To provide regional solutions to homelessness through continuum of care
strategy
Progress: The City supports countywide efforts to end homeless and serves on the
board of the Emergency Food and Shelter Program. The current Zoning Ordinance
permits emergency shelters in zones with the greatest access to transit, public facilities,
and commercial services (C-2 and C -M). There are several older motels along Cherokee
Lane (a major commercial street with transit access, located adjacent to the eastern
residential neighborhoods) that could be used as emergency shelters if necessary.
Goal E. To encourage residential energy efficiency and reductions in residential energy
use.
Program 30: Energy Efficiency and Weatherization Improvements for Older
Homes.
The City shall continue to permit energy conservation and weatherization
improvements as eligible activities under the Lodi Housing Rehabilitation Program. The
City will post and distribute information on currently available weatherization and
energy conservation programs operated by the City, nonprofit organizations, and utility
companies through the Lodi website, the Community Development Department public
counter, the Lodi Public Library, the Loel Senior Center, and other public locations.
Objective: To increase energy efficiency in older homes
Progress: In the 2006-2007 year, the City Electric Utility Department provided the
following: grants to 100 low-income families to help pay their electric bills; monthly
30% discounts to an additional 2,200 low-income families; in-house and online energy
audits for 117 and 110 customers, respectively; a series of six "Energy Smart"
workshops with over 1,500 attendees; energy efficiency home improvement rebates for
100 customers; and appliance rebates to 275 customers.
Program 31: Energy Conservation for New Homes.
The City shall enforce state requirements for energy conservation, including Title 24 of
the California Code or Regulations (state building code standards), in new residential
projects and encourage residential developers to employ additional energy
conservation measures in the design of new residential developments.
Objective: To increase energy efficiency in the design and construction of new homes
A-13
DRAFT Lodi Housng Bement
Progress: All building plans and energy calculations are reviewed to make sure that
they comply with Title 24 requirements. Subdivision design standards have been
amended to require landscaped parkways, necessitating shade trees that will reduce
ambient temperatures. Similarly, the City also requires shade trees when constructing
or expanding parking lots.
A-14
RESOLUTION NO. 2011-166
A RESOLUTION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTING THE 2010-16 HOUSING ELEMENT
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lodi has heretofore considered the
request for the approval of the 2010-16 Housing Element of the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65300 et seq. specifies cities shall
adopt and periodically update their General Plans; and
WHEREAS, the City of Lodi Community Development Department has
initiated and caused to be prepared a proposed Housing Element for the period from
2010-2016; and
WHEREAS, the draft 2010-16 Housing Element was prepared and circulated
for public review, with such circulation including the provision of the requisite review
period for the State of California Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council of the City of Lodi
have held several public hearings and workshops during the period from May 2008
to April 2010 to solicit public input on the 2010 General Plan, which included the
proposed draft Housing Elementfor 2010-16; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after conducting a public hearing and
after consideration of all public comment, including comments from the California
Department of Housing and Community Development, has recommended that the
City Council adopt the 2010-16 Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, adoption of an interim ordinance is required by the State
Department of Housing and Community Development in order to create a nexus
between the General Plan, the Housing Element, and the Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a proposed interim ordinance will be introduced on October 19,
2011, and adopted on November 2, 2011, that sets land use intensity for Downtown
Mixed Use, Mixed Use Corridor, and Mixed Use land use categories as follows:
Mixed Use Corridor
2-35
C-1
Mixed Use Center
8-35
C-1
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED by
the City Council of the City of Lodi as follows:
1. The updated Housing Element conforms to the provision of the Planning and
Zoning Law in the California Government Code Title 7 Division 1 beginning
with Section 6500.
2. The City Council hereby adopts the 2010-16 Housing Element.
Dated: October 19, 2011
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2011-166 was passed and adopted by the
Citv Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held October 19, 2011 by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Hansen, Katzakian, Mounce, Nakanishi,
and Mayor Johnson
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS— None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS— None
rHL
City Clerk
2011-166
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI
AMENDING LODI MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 17 — ZONING — CHAPTER
17.57, "GENERAL REGULATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS," BY ADDING
SECTION 17.57.200, "INTERIM REGULATIONS FOR MIXED USE
DESIGNATIONS
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Lodi Municipal Code Title 17, "Zoning," Chapter 17.57, "General Regulations
and Exceptions," is hereby amended by adding Section 17.57.200 and shall read as follows:
17.57.200 Interim Regulations For Mixed Use Designations
General Plan Land
Use Classification
Residential Density (du/ac)
(from the General Plan)
Corresponding Zoning District
(other development standards)
Downtown Mixed Use
8-35
C-2
Mixed Use Corridor
2-35
C-1
Mixed Use Center
8-35
C-1
Section 2 - No Mandatory Duty of Care. This ordinance is not intended to and shall not be
construed or given effect in a manner which imposes upon the City, or any officer or
employee thereof, a mandatory duty of care towards persons or property within the City or
outside of the City so as to provide a basis of civil liability for damages, except as otherwise
imposed by law.
Section 3. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed
insofar as such conflict may exist.
Section 4. This ordinance shall be published one time in the "Lodi News Sentinel," a
daily newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Lodi, and shall be
in force and take effect 30 days from and after its passage and approval.
Approved this _ day of , 2011.
BOB JOHNSON
Mayor
Attest:
RANDI JOHL
City Clerk
State of California
County of San Joaquin, ss.
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that Ordinance
No. was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held
October 19, 2011, and was thereafter passed, adopted, and ordered to print at a regular
meeting of said Council held , 2011, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS —
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS —
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS —
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS —
I further certify that Ordinance No. was approved and signed by the Mayor of the
date of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law.
Approved as to Form:
D. STEPHEN SCHWABAUER
City Attorney
2
Randi Johl
City Clerk
ity yr LMvL
010 Hous
1•.�y, a -J±#-�.r`:�
am.M[Z.1Il[aflmolBid
J
Housing Element
Overview
❑ Part of the General Plan
❑ Update Required by State Law
❑ Joint effort of SJCOG, county and cities
❑ Focus housing priorities & strategies through
2016
❑ Review by HCD - ""Certified"
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
Housing Element Adoption
Process
❑ Outreach/Education
❑ Prepare Housing Element
❑ HCD/State Review
❑ Public Hearing
❑ Adoption
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
Process to date
❑ Public Meetings
■ Draft Housing Element discussed before the Planning
Commission since the draft process was initiated in May
2008.
■ The Planning Commission has reviewed the document twice
in a public meeting and provided comments with regard to
the programs, policies, and site availability.
■ Staff has conducted public workshops regarding the
Housing Element process over the past two years in
conjunction with the General Plan update process
❑ HCD Review
■ Role is to review, comment androvide direction in order
for the document to be "certifiedp'.
■ August 2011, City received a letter of conditional
certification from HCD.
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
Housing Element
Organization
1. Introduction
2. Housing Needs Assessment
3. Resources & Constraints
4. Housing Strategy
Appendix A: Accomplishments
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
1. Introduction: Housing Element Requirements
❑ Provide a Housing Element in conformance with state and
regional requirements.
❑ Preserve and improve housing and neighborhoods
❑ Provide opportunities for affordable housing in
conformance with the adopted Regional Housing Needs
Assessment (RHNA) allocation for Yorba Linda.
❑ Remove governmental and other constraints to housing
investment.
❑ Establish appropriate zoning and housing incentives to
facilitate Housing Element goals and policies.
❑ Promote fair and equal housing opportunities.
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
Housing Element
Requirements
❑ Accommodate a variety of new housing:
■ Single-family houses
■ Multi -family residences
■ Second units (granny flats)
■ Farm worker housing
■ Persons with special needs &disabilities
■ Transitional &supportive housing
■ Emergency shelters
■ Manufactured housing
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
2: Housing Needs Assessment
❑ Demographic and Housing Characteristics and
Trends
❑ Special Needs Populations
❑ Analysis of Assisted Housing Projects At -Risk
❑ Opportunities for Sustainable Development
❑ Future Housing Needs
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
70.000
❑ Community Profile
■ 63,300 residents 60,000
■ 21,900 households
50,000
❑ Since 2000
■ 11% increase in residents 40.000
■ 6% increase in households
30,000
Increase in families, household 20'000
size, and young children
10,000
Ev
u
Demographics
and Trends
Population Households
■ 2000 ■ 2008
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
16.000
14.000
12.000
10.000
8.000
6.000
4.000
2.000
0
Single -Family Trend
Continues
Single -Family Single -Family 2 to 4 Units 5 or More Mobile Homes
Detached Attached Units
■ 2000 ■ 2008
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
14
12
19
a 8
L
6
4
2
9
Unemployment Rising
2999 2991 2992 2993 2994 2995 2996 2997 2998 2999
Year
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
Special Needs Populations
❑ Seniors
❑ Persons with Disabilities
❑ Female Householders with Children
❑ Large Households
❑ Farmworkers
❑ Extremely Low Income Households
❑ Homeless
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
Regional Housing Needs
Assessment
❑ Regional Housing Needs (RHNA)
■ Mandated by state law
■ Each city must accommodate its fair share of the county's
housing need
■ Housing for all economic segments in each jurisdiction
■ Linked to availability of sites with appropriate zoning
■ Programs to encourage new housing at all income levels
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
RHNA Income Category
San Joaquin County
Income Category
Percentage of County Median
Income
Income Limits
Extremely Low (<30%)
Less than 30%
Less than $19,100
Very Low
31-50%
$19,101 - 31,800
Low
51-80%
$31,801 - 50,900
Moderate
81-120%
$50,901 - 76,300
Above Moderate
120% and above
Over $76,301
Assumptions:
Based on a family of 4
30% of gross income for rent or PITI
10% down payment, 6% interest, 1.25% taxes & insurance
Source: Cal HCD; Conexus
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
Future Housing Needs
❑ SJCOG Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
❑ City must shown site availability for 3,892 units, by
household income levels
Area Median Income
Category Income (AMI) Limit*
*Based on a four -person household.
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
Regional Housing Needs
Assessment
❑ Regional Housing Needs (RHNA)
■ Need for approximately 3,892 new units
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
Housing Units, by Income
Above
Extremely -/Very
Mod
Low
Low
Moderate erate
Total
Completed & Development Projects
39
44
7 457
547
Approved Master Plans
236
236
899 1,575
2,948
Vacant
532
403
63 114
1,112
Underutilized
194
104
16 8
322
Total
1,001
787
985 2,154
4,929
Regional Housing Needs Allocation
971
650
716 1,555
3,892
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
3: Resources and Constraints
❑ Sites Inventory and Analysis
❑ Administrative and Financial Resources
❑ Constraints
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
M -4 ul
■
1 �6mm 61mbin-L
Housing Sites Potential
Completed &
Development Projects
Approved Master
Plans
Vacant
Underutilized
Total
Regional Housing
Needs Allocation
Surplus
Extremely- Above
/Very Low Low Moderate Moderate Total
39 44 7 457 547
236
236
899
1,575
2,946
532
403
63
114
1,112
194
104
16
8
322
11001
787
985
2,154
41927
971
650
716
1,555
3,891
30
137
269
599
11036
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
Constraints
❑ Non -Governmental
■ Financing availability, market conditions
■ Land & construction costs
❑ Governmental
■ Land use controls & enforcement
■ Development process
■ On and off-site improvement requirements
❑ Environmental & Infrastructure
■ Storm Drain and Flood Control
■ Water Service
■ Sewer Service
■ Agriculture and Williamson Act
■ Protection of Habitat and Species
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
4: Housing Strategy
❑ Goals and Policies
❑ Implementation Programs
❑ Quantified Objectives
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
lmp/ementation Programs
❑ The Housing Element
contains a variety of
implementation
measures such as
Adoption of interim
zoning ordinance,
revision of growth
management
program, etc.
City of Lodi 20 10-20 16 Housing Element
SUBJECT:
PUBLISH DATE:
Please immediately confirm receipt
of this fax by calling 333-6702
CITY OF LODI
P.O. BOX 3006
LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
RECOMMENDATION TO CERTIFY THE 2010-16 HOUSING ELEMENT
AND ADOPT AN INTERIM ORDINANCE
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 8,2011
TEAR SHEETS WANTED: One (1) please
SEND AFFIDAVIT AND BILL TO: RANDI JOHL, CITY CLERK
City of Lodi
P. 0 Box 3006
Lodi, CA 95241-1910
DATED: THURSDAY, OCTOBER 6,2011
ORDERED BY: RANDI JOHL
CITY CLERK
J IFER M. OBISON, CMC
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
MARIA BECERRA
ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
Verify Appearance of this Legal in the Newspaper — Copy to File
forinAadvins.doc
DECLARATION OF POSTING
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
RECOMMENDATIONTO CERTIFY THE 2010-16 HOUSING ELEMENT AND
ADOPT AN INTERIM ORDINANCE
On Thursday, October 6, 2011, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a
Notice of Public Hearing to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation to
certify the 2010-16 Housing Element and adopt an interim ordinance (attached and
marked as ExhibitA) was posted at the following locations:
Lodi Public Library
Lodi City Clerk's Office
Lodi City Hall Lobby
Lodi Carnegie Forum
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on October 6, 2011, at Lodi, California.
JEANIFER 10. ROBISON, CMC
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
N:\Administration\CLERK\Forms\DECPOSTCDD.DOC
ORDERED BY:
RANDIJOHL
CITY CLERK
MARIA BECERRA
ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
DECLARATION OF MAILING
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION
TO CERTIFY THE 2010-16 HOUSING ELEMENT AND ADOPT AN INTERIM ORDINANCE
On Thursday, October 6, 2011, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, I deposited
in the United States mail, envelopes with first-class postage prepaid thereon, containing a
Notice of Public Hearing to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation to certify the
2010-16 Housing Element and adopt an interim ordinance, attached hereto Marked Exhibit A.
The mailing list for said matter is attached hereto, marked Exhibit B.
There is a regular daily communication by mail between the City of Lodi, California, and the
places to which said envelopes were addressed.
declare under penalty of perjurythat the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on October 6, 2011, at Lodi, California.
JVINIFER M. ROBISON. CMC
ASSISTANT -CITY CLERK
Forms/decmail.doc
ORDERED BY:
RANDIJOHL
CITY CLERK, CITY OF LODI
MARIA BECERRA
ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
• CITY OF LODI
Carnegie Forum
305 West Pine Street, Lodi
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Date: October 19,2011
Time: 7:00 p.m.
For information regarding this notice please contact:
Rand! Johl
City Clerk
Telephone: (209) 333-6702
F CO i ICEy I F UBLIC HEARING
EM-tir-i =I
NOTICE S HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, October 19, 2011, at the hour of
7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will
conduct a public hearing at the Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider
the following item:
a) The Planning Commission's recommendation to certify the
2010-16 Housing Elementand adopt an interim ordinance.
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the Community Development
Department, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, (209) 333-6711. All interested persons are
invited to present their views and comments on this matter. Written statements may be
filed with the City Clerk, City Hall, 221 West Pine Street, 2nd Floor, Lodi, 95240, at any
time prior to the hearing scheduled herein, and oral statements may be made at said
hearing.
If you challenge the subject matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those
issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in
written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior to
the close of the public hearing.
rde of the Lodi City Council:
di Johl
City Clerk
Dated: October 5, 2011
Approved as to form:
D. Stephen Schwabauer
City Attorney
CLERK\PUBHEAR\NOTICES\NOTCDD.DOC 107 m
Company
1. J. Manassero
2.
3.
Calif. Valley
Addressl
Miwok Tribe
4.
Ione Band of
Miwok Indians
5.
North Valley
Yokuts Tribe
6.
Southern Sierra
Denis
Miwuk Nation
7.
Wilton
95240
Rancheria
8. 1
Brookfield
General Plan Update — mailing list
(EXHIBIT B1
city
FirstName
LastName
Addressl
Lo(Rty (5)pte
Postal
Lodi
Code
2171 E. Armstrong Rd.
95242
Denis
Silber
1050 Port Chelsea Cr.
Lodi CA
95240
Silvia
Burley,
10601 Escondido Place
Stockton
CA
95212
Chairperson
Matthew
Franklin,
P.O. Box 1190
Ione
CA
95640
Chairperson
Katherine
Perez
P.O. Box 717
Linden
CA
95236
Erolinda
Anthony
Brochini,
P.O. Box 1200
Mariposa
CA
95338
Chairperson
Mary
Daniels-
7916Famell Way
Sacrame
CA
95823
Tarango,
nto
Chai erson
Douglas
Brewer
500 La Gonda Way, Suite
Danville
CA
94526
100
JACommunity Development\Planning\Lists\Agenda Mailing Lists\General Plan Update Mailing List.DOC Page 1 09/19/2011
Kari Chadwick -- eu - via, emmmnm� -l�o-F� �' �kr�►�
Distribution List Name: Housing Element Update 2010
Members:
Anne Cerney
acerney@inreach.com
Barbara Kauss
bkauss@hacsj.com
Brad Hays
bhays@capitolavenue.com
Carol Orneles
cjornelas@visionaryhomebuilders.org
Hilda Bohacek
hbohacek@cpfsj.org
Jeff & Crystal Kirst
ckirst@gmail.com
John Beckman
johnb@biadelta.org
John Shores
johnshores@comcast.net
Mike Boettger
mboettger@pamcompanies.com
Pat McCuen
pmccuen@capitolavenue.com
Pete Gibson
pgibson@fcbhomes.com
Richard Jones
julius_45@yahoo.com
RobinaAsghar
rasghar@cpfsj.org
Sharon Simas
ssimas@servicefirstnc.org
Steve Jarrett
stephenjarrett@comcast.net
Tariq Din
tarigdin@presidentialar.com
Tim Mattheis
tkmhome@sbcglobal.net
Tim Mattheis
TM@wmbarchitects.com
Tim Mustin
tmustin@colliersparrish.com
Tracy Williams
tracy@loelcenter.net
Kari Chadwick — ZeA k j.\ C",
Distribution List Name: General Plan Updates
Members:
Brett Jolley
BJolley@herumcrabtree.com
Crystal Kirst
ckirst@gmail.com
Dale C. Prohaska
turner61 O@softcom.net
Dale Gillespie
dale@rpmcompany. net
DanielThigpen
dthigpen@recordnet.com
Denis Silber
dsilber@lodiusd.net
EJC
ejc_enterprise@verizon.net
FrederickAddison
frederick@u borainc.com
George Cloud
gcloudjr@gmail.com
Greg Costa
fcands@lodinet.com
Greg Costa
costasquad@verizon. net
Jeff Traverso
j.traverso@sbcglobal. net
John Beckman
johnb@biadelta.org
Jon Schrader
JonSchrader@FMBonline.com
Kate Hart
khart@aklandlaw.com
Kattie Patterson
kpatterson@sjfb.org
Kelly Stump
kelkel38@aol.com
Kevin Dougherty
kdougherty@fcrei.com
Marty Willett
mwillett@g-rem.com
Matt Dobbins
mjdobbins22@msn.com
Michael Caruba
mcarouba@dg prealestate.com
Rick Gerlack
makualike@comcast. net
Rod Attebery
rattebery@neumiller.com
RosemaryAtkinson
rosymoonatk@comcast. net
Russ Munson
Russ@winerose.com
Warmerdam
warmerdam7@sbcglobal.net