2001/08/28 City Council Resolution (13)RESOLUTION NO. 2001- 192
RESOLUTION NO. 2001- 192
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROHNERT PARK, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING AMENDMENTS
TO THE ROHNERT PARK GENERAL PLAN 2000 HOUSING ELEMENT AND
LAND USE AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
WHEREAS, on July 25, 2000, the Council of the City of Rohnert Park approved
Resolution No. 2000 -152 approving the 2000 General Plan.
WHEREAS, on December 29, 2000, the State Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD) sent a letter to the City commenting on the approved
Housing Element.
WHEREAS, on February 13, 2001, the City Council approved Resolution No.
2001 730 stating the City's intent to amend the Housing Element.
WHEREAS, on April 10, 2001, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2001-
88 initiating amendments to the General Plan to respond to the State Department of
Housing and Community Development's comments.
WHEREAS, on April 26, 2001, the Planning Commission recommended,
pursuant to Planning Commission Resolution No. 2001 -13, approval of the amendments
to the Rohnert Park General Plan 2000 Housing Element and Land Use and Growth
Management Elements.
WHEREAS, City staff met with and had several telephone conversations with
staff from the State HCD Department regarding the proposed revisions and additional
revisions requested by the State HCD Department.
WHEREAS, on July 6, 2001, the State HCD Department sent a second letter
commenting on its review of the City's revisions to the Housing Element.
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments to the Rohnert Park General Plan 2000
were processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law.
WHEREAS, on August 28, 2001; the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park
reviewed the proposed amendments and supporting data during a scheduled public
hearing at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or
opposition to the proposed amendments.
WHEREAS, at the August 28, 2001 City Council meeting, upon hearing and
considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the
Council considered all the facts relating to the proposed amendments.
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2001- 192
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROHNERT PARK DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
Section 2. Environmental Clearance. The City Council of the City of Rohnert
Park certified the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Rohnert Park 2000 General
Plan by adoption of Resolution No. 2000 -152 on July 25, 2000. The proposed General
Plan Amendments are within the scope of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
approved for the Rohnert Park 2000 General Plan and this EIR adequately addresses this
amendment for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (Section
15168(e) of CEQA.). The environmental findings found in Resolution 2000 -152 and its
Exhibit A are hereby incorporated herein as part of this Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of
Rohnert Park adopts the amendments to the Housing Element as shown in Exhibit A,
Public Hearing Draft 8/01; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park
adopts the revisions to the Land Use and Growth Management Element as follows:
1. General Plan 2000 (2nd Edition), Land Use and Growth Management Element,
page 2 -16:
a. First paragraph, fourth line, delete the words "both residential and...."
b. Delete second paragraph (begins "FAR limitations are included... ").
c. Delete fourth paragraph (begins "Existing legal housing units... ").
2. General Plan 2000 (2nd Edition), Land Use and Growth Management Element,
page 2 -17:
a. Delete the following phrase from the fourth column: "See Table 2.2 -2 for
residential FAR standards ".
b. Delete footnote #3.
3. General Plan 2000 (2 "d Edition), Land Use and Growth Management Element,
page 2 -18:
a. Third paragraph, delete second sentence (begins with "In addition,
maximum sizes...).
b. Delete Table 2.2 -2, Maximum Size of Housing Units.
4. General Plan 2000 (2nd Edition), Land Use and Growth Management Element,
page 2 -21, Commercial, delete the following phrase starting on the seventh
line: "...on two sites, subject to the provisions of the Housing Element: E.
Cotati Avenue/Bodway Parkway site and the Mountain Shadows proposed
site on Golf Course Drive."
2
RESOLUTION NO. 2001- 192
DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED on this 28th day of August, 2001, by the
City of Rohnert Park City Council.
Attest:
City of Rohnert P
an
FLORES: AYE REILLY: AYE SPIRO: AYE VIDAK- MARTINEZ: AYE MACKENZIE: AYE
AYES: (5) NOES: (0) ABSENT: (0) ABSTAIN: (0)
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
9 Housin g "Exhibit A"
INTRODUCTION
The Housing Element is one of the general plan elements required by state law. This element
has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of California Government Code
Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580).
This element contains:
• An assessment of housing needs in the City,
• The identification of constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, and development of
housing for all income levels,
• An inventory of resources available to the City to meet these needs,
• A statement of the community's goals, quantified objectives, and policies related to the
maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, and,
• A seven and one -half year schedule of actions the City is undertaking or intends to undertake
to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the Housing Element.
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ELEMENTS
The Housing Element was prepared as an integral part of the revised Draft General Plan (May
2000). The General Plan Diagram and the policies contained in the Land Use and Growth
Management Element and the Community Design Elements were used to determine the location,
amount, and type of potential housing. The Plan's other elements were used to identify factors
that affect the timing of housing development.
HOUSING ELEMENT'S TIMEFRAME
Unlike the other elements of the General Plan, the Housing Element's timeframe is tied to a five -
year "housing needs process" schedule set by the State. Typically, the State orders the California
Housing and Community Development Department to provide a determination of each region's
share of the state housing need. This requirement has been suspended for a number of years, and
the Bay Area's last Housing Needs Determination occurred ten years ago.
In 1999, the State initiated a housing needs process for the Bay Area that covers January 1, 1999
— June 30, 2006. Therefore, this Housing Element's timeframe is consistent with that period.
9 -1
Rohnerf Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
DATA SOURCES
The most current housing data and information available was used during the preparation of the
Housing Element. Unfortunately, the most recent version of the United States Census, which is a
primary source of housing information, is 1990. The complete results of Census 2000 will not be
available until 2002, at which time the Element could be updated. The end of March 2001, the
U.S. Census Bureau published the City's total population number from the 2000 Census as
42,236.
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
An extensive community outreach effort accompanied the preparation of the General Plan. Flyers
were sent to all mailing addresses in the City, announcing workshops pertaining to the General
Plan update. Significant media contact, banners at public buildings, and other outreach efforts
were conducted to publicize the importance of widespread public participation.
In addition to numerous workshops, invitations to sounding board sessions were mailed to
approximately 800 randomly - selected addresses within the city limits. Fifty -seven people
attended one of ten, two -hour meetings that were held over a period of two weeks.
Representatives of for - profit and non - profit groups also provided input through public testimony
and written comments.
Input on housing issues and potential housing actions was also received from the 1997 Rohnert
Park Community Summit, which brought together many of the community's leaders and citizens.
A housing task force was formed to research, discuss, and recommend courses of action
regarding housing issues.
11.3%
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
9.1 HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS AND NEEDS
STATEWIDE HOUSING NEEDS
A recent publication' of the California Department of Housing and Community Development
(HCD), identifies the following statewide housing needs:
• Much higher levels of housing construction are needed to adequately house the state's
population.
• High housing cost burdens are increasingly an issue for both owners and renters. The
combination of upward price pressure in the housing market and relatively tight urban
housing markets has led to increasing cost burdens, particularly for low- income renter
residents.
• In addition to high housing cost burdens, in some portions of the state, the level of
overcrowding has dramatically increased.
• A substantial portion of affordable rental housing developments statewide are at risk of
conversion to market rate use. This situation threatens thousands of low- income elderly
households and families, exacerbating local housing needs.
• California has an extensive agricultural economy that depends on temporary workers to
harvest and process crops. Significant numbers of these critical workers migrate throughout
the state, facing housing challenges that impact their welfare.
• The homeless individuals and households who have fallen through the cracks of society face
significant difficulties in obtaining shelter and reintegrating themselves into the broader
society.
Other housing concerns observed by HCD officials2 include:
• Lower - income households are paying more than 50% of their income towards housing costs,
thus creating problems related to mobility, health care, food, and other essential needs.
• California has the third - lowest home ownership rate in the country.
Many of these statewide housing concerns face the City of Rohnert Park and are discussed and
addressed in this element.
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
Rohnert Park's housing market has undergone significant changes since the first homes were
built. In 1962 when the City incorporated as a general law city, only 903 dwelling units existed.
In the early 60's and 70's, the primary market was single - family detached housing units and
mobilehome parks. Such housing was affordable by a great majority of residents and families
moving into the area.
9 -3
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Much of the city has been developed using a neighborhood concept in accordance with a master
plan. Each neighborhood area includes single - family and multi - family housing types arranged
around a school and park. Shopping centers have been designed to be within convenient walking
distance from local neighborhoods.
During the 1970s, increasing numbers of apartments, townhouses, condominiums, and
mobilehomes were added to the city's housing inventory as lower -cost alternatives to single -
family housing. The 1980s saw continued strong development of single - family housing as well as
numerous apartment projects. The city's housing stock increased by more than 55% during this
decade.
During the 1990s, the City saw its tallest residential building constructed, a four -story elderly
housing project, and the development of numerous other housing units for lower- income
households. Development of large custom homes occurred at the north end of the city. No
additional mobilehome parks were developed during this period.
Table 9.1 -1
Rohnert Park Dwelling Units, 1980 — 2000
Housing Type 1980 1990 2000
Single- family 4,819 8,143 8,960
Multi- family 2,837 4,306 5,020
Mobilehomes /travel trailers 1,299 1,466 1,467
Total 8,955 13,915 15,447
Sources: U.S.Census, California Department of Finance
At the beginning of 2000, the City had approximately 15,447 dwelling units that provided a
diverse range of accommodations for owners and renters. Nearly half of the city's homes
were single - family detached units (Table 9.1 -2). Multi- family units (two or more units in
structure) comprised one -third of the housing stock.
Compared to the types of housing in Sonoma County and California, the city's housing
distribution is characterized by:
• A lower percentage of single - family detached units than the county
• A higher percentage of single - family attached units than both the county and state
• A significantly higher proportion of multi - family units than the county
• A slightly higher proportion of mobilehomes than both the county and state
9 -4
Chapter 9
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Table 9.1 -2
Housing Distribution Comparison, 2000
Housing Type
No. of Units
City
Distribution
County
State
Single- family
detached
7,241
47%
68%
56%
attached
1,719
11%
7%
7%
Multi- family
2 — 4 units in structure
1,048
7%
6%
8%
>_5 units in structure
3,972
26%
6%
24 %
Mobilehomes
1,467
9 %
7%
5%
Source: California State Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit, May 2000
HOUSING CONDITIONS
Housing Conditions Survey
Housing
In November 1999, a visual inspection was made of the older neighborhoods in Rohnert
Park, including Sections A, B, C, E, and L, as well as all five of the mobilehome parks. A
total of 2,898 conventionally- constructed residences and 1,466 mobilehome units were
visually surveyed.
The condition of each housing unit was classified utilizing the following definitions:
Sound: A structure providing safe, sanitary and adequate housing. The structure shows no
visible damage and exhibits the appearance of regular maintenance. Small areas of peeling
paint, untended fences, or unkempt landscaping may be included in a sound rating.
Sound Deficient: A structure providing safe, sanitary and adequate housing but shows two or
more deficiencies which if unrepaired may lead to structure deterioration. Deficiencies
include broken windows, large areas of peeling paint, large driveway cracks, missing
shingles, and deteriorating fencing.
Deteriorating: A structure that does not provide safe, sanitary and adequate housing but
could if rehabilitated. The structure exhibits a combination of major defects and deficiencies
that indicate a prolonged absence of regular maintenance or inadequate original construction.
Examples include several broken and /or boarded windows, large areas of missing roof
shingles, holes or cracks in the walls and /or foundation, sagging porch and /or roof lines,
missing or damaged doors, inadequate additions and inadequate original construction.
Dilapidated: A structure that has deteriorated past the point of economical rehabilitation, is
unsafe, unsanitary, and inadequate housing. The structure exhibits a majority of major
defects and deficiencies including a severely damaged foundation, roof, and /or porch line,
large holes in walls and roof, missing or broken windows and doors, severely peeling paint,
9 -5
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
an unpaved pitted and rutted driveway, inadequate additions, and inadequate original
construction.
The overwhelming majority of units surveyed were found to be in "sound" condition, with
the appearance of regular maintenance of the home and landscaping. Many homes had been
renovated with new roofs, windows, or additions, or were in the process of renovation. The
only deficiencies identified were minimal painting needs (e.g., trim), clean -up of limited
outdoor storage (e.g., a pile of construction materials), replacement of garage doors, and
resealing of cracked driveways. The city's mobilehomes were also found to be well -
maintained.
Only 14 homes were identified by the survey as being "sound deficient," with junk- or trash -
filled yards, a broken window, large areas of peeling paint, substantially cracked driveways,
and /or deteriorating fencing. In all cases, it appeared that a nominal amount of work would
correct all of the deficiencies.
Not surprisingly, most of the identified maintenance situations occur in the "A" and "B"
Sections of the City, the oldest neighborhoods. No mobilehomes were identified as being
deficient.
It should be noted that the housing conditions survey was only an exterior visual inspection,
and it is likely that many of the older homes are in need of such maintenance as new roofs
and heating systems, as well as such energy- saving measures as insulation, double -pane
windows, and weather- stripping. These conditions could only be identified by a thorough on-
site inspection.
Soils in the Rohnert Park area have a high shrink/swell characteristic. These soil conditions
have been a contributing factor in cracking in foundations, slabs, driveways, and walkways.
The 152 travel trailers located in the Sonoma Grove Travel Trailer Park provide a form of
very low -cost housing. Because maintenance of the park is regulated and enforced by the
State of California, the trailers were not inspected during the housing conditions survey.
Although travel trailers are not designed for use as permanent housing, the park's trailers are
occupied as such. This is the only violation of state housing codes that exists, according to
the state park inspector.
Housing Maintenance
The generally well- maintained conditions and presence of home improvements are evidence
of a move towards conserving the City's existing units in the face of limited housing
development. A gentrification process may also be underway, as families find these
neighborhoods to be the only ones within their financial grasp. Based on listing prices for
homes in the older neighborhoods, they are within the affordability range of moderate -
income households. For example, two three - bedroom, two -bath homes at the end of 1999
were offered for sale in the "A" Section at $204,950 and $214,9504. Similar prices could be
found in the "E" Section ($219,900) and the "L" Section ($217,500).
ml
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
The apparent rise in home maintenance levels is borne out in the comparison of the 1999
housing conditions survey results, which identified 14 homes as being "Sound Deficient"
with those of previous surveys in 1981 and 1989. In 1981, 50 homes were found to be
"Sound Deficient," a number that had risen to 68 in 1989, along with four homes being
identified as "Deteriorating."
Potential Natural Disaster Impacts
The City of Rohnert Park would be subjected to very high levels of shaking in the event of a
magnitude 7.1 earthquake on the Heal dsburg-Rodgers Creek fault. In such an event, the
Association of Bay Area Governments estimates that at least 13,669 dwelling units in
Sonoma County would be uninhabitable5.
More than half of the "red- tagged" units is anticipated to be mobilehomes, which tend to
sustain greater damage from equivalent intensities of shaking than wood -frame buildings.
During an earthquake, the jacks on which a coach is typically placed will tip, causing the
coach to fall off some or all of its supports. Although the jacks may punch holes through the
floor of the coach, it is usually relatively undamaged. Despite the minimal damage, however,
the mobilehome becomes uninhabitable, as it must be returned to its foundation, leveled
again, and reconnected to utilities.
Although single - family, wood- framed homes are less likely to be red - tagged, significant
damage can occur from falling hot water heaters, failed cripple walls, falling unreinforced
masonry chimneys, and dislocation of structures from their foundations. Two -story homes
with living space over garages are particularly vulnerable to damage.
Similarly, multi - family wood - framed buildings may have living areas above parking areas,
supported only by posts. The "soft" first story may also be constructed of concrete masonry
unit bearing walls. These designs offer little resistance to lateral seismic forces. The city's
building official has identified 30 to 40 multi - family units in four buildings with ground floor
parking that could be highly susceptible to seismic damage.
The Rohnert Park Community Development Commission (CDCRP) recently completed the
installation of earthquake- resistant bracing systems in more than 474 mobilehomes, which
represent nearly one -third of the 1,466 mobilehomes within the city. Additional efforts are
needed to protect the remaining units.
Fair Housing
According to a local representative of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD)6, not more than a dozen fair housing complaints were received by HUD
from Rohnert Park residents over the past year. Actual complaints typically represent only 10
percent of all fair housing violations, however.
Fair Housing of Sonoma County (FHOSC) reports receiving seven fair housing - related
complaints during the nine months in 1999 that the agency was operational. Three of the
complaints were related to discrimination against families with children, and there was one
E�
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
complaint for each of the following types of discrimination: disability, race, marital status,
and national origin.
A 1999 FHOSC audit' tested 60 Sonoma County apartment complexes representing 900
units of rental housing to identify the existence of differential treatment of families with
children. The audit concluded that such families can expect to experience discrimination
20% of the time. However, none of the nine Rohnert Park rental complexes tested by FHOSC
were identified as treating potential tenants with children differently from those without.
City Fair Housing Practices
Existing fair housing practices of the City of Rohnert Park include:
• Reviewing the fair housing records and practices of agencies and firms during contract
negotiations, and including provisions in contracts allowing city inspection of fair
housing documentation.
• Including fair housing practices among the items addressed by the CDCRP's auditor
during annual visits to the sites of contracting agencies and firms. CDCRP staff also
conducts occasional site visits and program audits of agency contractors; fair housing and
discrimination compliance is one purpose of such inspections.
• The dissemination of fair housing information through mailings to all city households,
phone requests, posters in public locations, and referrals to Sonoma County Rental
Information and Mediation Services.
• Monitoring the occupancy characteristics of housing projects targeted towards lower -
income households to ensure that minorities, families, and the disabled are fairly
represented. For example, a recent resident profile from the 50 -unit Tower Apartments
project reported that 67 percent of its residents were white (compared to a 1990 census
level of 82 percent), 15 percent were black (3 percent census figure), and 15 percent were
Hispanic (7 percent census figure). Six of the 75 adults were classified as disabled. An
annual report of program data is made to the CDCRP.
• Monitoring the racial and ethnic characteristics of loan recipients in city- supported
projects and programs to promote equal representation and discourage discrimination or
restrictions in housing choice.
• Requiring contractors to file monthly or annual progress reports that include information
on program beneficiaries. Fair housing and discrimination compliance are reviewed
when these reports are examined.
• Adopting the Uniform Housing Code standards for maximum occupancy of dwelling
units, which has no limit on the number of residents in a dwelling unit, as long as
minimum floor area requirements are met.
.;
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
• Providing equitable public services throughout the City, including public transportation,
crime prevention, police protection, street lighting, street cleaning, trash collection,
recreational facilities and programs, and schools; and providing for the development of
commercial centers in all neighborhoods
• Publicizing openings on city boards and commissions through several newspapers.
• Ensuring that an over - concentration of lower- income housing does not occur in
neighborhoods.
• Encouraging the provision of a full array of banking services in convenient locations
throughout the City.
• Promoting the provision of housing affordable to lower - income households, which
affirmatively furthers fair housing because minority families and persons with disabilities
are disproportionately represented among those that would benefit from low -cost
housing.
HOUSING SUPPLY
An insufficient supply of housing can occur when household formation increases at a more
rapid pace than housing construction, and can lead to high housing costs, overcrowded living
conditions, gentrification pressure on existing housing, and difficulty in finding suitable
housing.
In Sonoma County, the demand for housing is also affected by job growth related to the
expansion of local companies and the establishment of new businesses that bring in large
numbers of out -of -area buyers. This demand is in addition to the normal need for housing
associated with the formation of new households through children leaving home, marriage,
and divorce.
Housing Availability
At the beginning of 2000, approximately 3.6% of housing units in the City were vacant
according to the California Department of Finance (DOF). (The City's vacancy rate has
ranged from 3.63% to 4.02% over the last ten years.) This rate was less than half of the
county's and state's average 7.3% vacancy rate reported by DOF. It is also substantially
lower than the 5.1% level that HCD finds is needed to allow adequate mobility within the
housing market.
Rental Housing
There are indications that the vacancy rate decreased significantly during 1999. At the end of
the third quarter in 1999, there were fewer than two vacancies for every 100 apartments in
Sonoma County9. Just six months earlier, the vacancy rate was almost twice that. In Rohnert
Park, there were only three vacancies among the 2,298 apartment units surveyed. In a
balanced market, there would be five vacancies per 100 apartments.
..
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Rental opportunities for single - family homes are even tighter because many owners of
single - family rentals have decided to take advantage of today's strong purchase market —
where prices are up 20 percent in two years — and sell.
Ownership Housing
A major element of the American dream is a home of one's own in the neighborhood of
one's choice. Owning a home is one of the primary ways of accumulating wealth in our
society, a form of wealth acquisition that is especially protected in the U.S. tax code.
Homeownership stabilizes housing costs for a family and protects them from the variations
that occur in rental housing.
Being a homeowner is also known to increase people's feelings of control over their lives
and their sense of overall well- being. High rates of homeownership are believed to
strengthen neighborhoods as well, by increasing residents' stake in the future of their
communitieso
The 1990 Census reported that 56 percent of the city's units were owner - occupied, an
ownership level that was somewhat lower than the County's 63 percent. This finding is
consistent with the city's higher proportion of multi- family housing.
At the end of 1999, there was a scarcity of homes for sale throughout Sonoma County.
Overall, the county had a 1.7 -month supply on hand at the end of November 1999 — the first
time during the 1990s that the supply of resale housing dropped below two months 1. This
inventory was far below the five- to seven -month supply of homes that is considered a
"balanced" market that places buyers and sellers on equal footing. At the lower end of the
price range, there was less than a one -month supply.
Condominiums are becoming a choice for first -time buyers as a result of the tight single -
family housing market. But with increasing demand, the condominium market is even tighter
than single - family homes, with only 28 condominiums on hand at the end of 1999 in the
entire county.
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
Housing cost is generally the greatest single expense item for households. For owner
households, housing expenses consist of mortgage and interest payments, insurance,
maintenance, and property taxes. For renter households, housing expenses consist of rent and
utilities.
Higher- income households may choose to spend greater portions of their income for housing
expenses. However, many low- income households must involuntarily spend a large share of
their income on housing.
The housing cost burden for recent home purchasers is even greater than that of all
homeowners on average, since the relative cost of homeownership decreases over time (long-
�*3[ll
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
term owner costs do not adjust to the market value of housing). This situation exists despite
the fact that the median income for recent purchasers has generally risen
Housing Prices and Rents
Housing Prices
The 1990 median value of Rohnert Park homes, $185,000, was the fourth - lowest of the nine
cities in Sonoma County, and was also lower than the state's or county's median value
($194,300 and $200,600, respectively).
By April 2000, however, the median housing price (based on condominium and single- family
home resales) in the Rohnert Park/Cotati /Penngrove areas was $275,475, significantly
exceeding the California median price of $241,600. However, it was still lower than the
$290,000 county median housing resale price, and the $469,250 Bay Area median price'.
A study by the National Association of Home Builders 14 identified the Santa Rosa
metropolitan area as the fifth least - affordable region for housing nationwide in the last
quarter of 1999.
Bay Area inflation in 1999 grew at almost twice the U.S. rate, as surging housin prices
drove the cost of living up, and exceeded the national rate for the third year in a row'_ . Home
prices in the Bay Area increased by 6.0 percent and rent increased by 6.9 percent, compared
to national increases of 2.4 and 3.0 percent, respectively.
A rise in the Bay Area's consumer price index can have a ripple effect through the housing
market when landlords use it as a gauge to raise the rent. Rapid housing appreciation also
impedes the "filtering" process through which new construction is purchased and occupied
by residents of the existing housing stock, thereby freeing existing housing for purchasers at
the lower end of the income scale.
The median Rohnert Park housing price saw a 13 percent increase between September 1998
and September 199916. An even more striking example of the recent rapid increase in
housing prices is the case of a three - bedroom home in the M Section that appreciated by
$64,000 (35 percent) between February 1998 and August 199917.
The incremental rise in interest rates and consumer worries about the stock market may force
a slight cooling in the housing market in 2000.
Rents
The average apartment rent in Sonoma County was up I 1 percent in the 12 months ended
September 30, 1999. Average monthly rent was $895, up from $808 a year earlier and $766
two years ago. Three - bedroom apartments averaged $1,227 (up $155 or 14.5 percent in the
past year), two - bedroom units averaged $1,013 (up $88 or 9.6 percent), and one - bedrooms
averaged $777 (up $70 or 10 percent)18.
9 -11
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Because of the extremely low vacancy rate, landlords are able to rent their units for amounts
that far exceed the "fair market rate" established by HUD. It is becoming common for
landlords to increase rents more than once a year, in amounts of $50 or more19.
In 1999, it was estimated that 38 percent of renters in Sonoma County were unable to afford
the fair market rent for a one - bedroom apartment and 48 percent were unable to afford a two -
bedroom unit. The fair market rate for one- and two - bedroom units required the expenditure
of 46 percent and 59 percent, respectively, of a household's income. The hourly wage needed
to afford a one - bedroom unit at fair market rent was $12.31, and $15.94 for a two - bedroom
unit20.
A recent survey 21 of 57 Sonoma County complexes that rent to lower- income households (a
total of 3,500 apartments) found that the average wait to get into one of these complexes is
more than two years, and some report up to a five -year waiting list. Some complexes have
more than 300 applicants waiting for units.
Overpayment for Housing
The State of California considers a lower- income household that pays more than 25 percent
of its income for housing to be living in unaffordable housing and "overpaying" for housing.
Based on this standard and the most recent census data, roughly one -half of all Rohnert Park
households overpaid for housing in 1990. Of households with incomes of less than 81
percent of the median income (total of 5,017), 90 percent overpaid for housing (2,133 owner
households and 2,381 renter households).
A 30 percent housing expenditure standard is used by HUD. However, the 30 percent
threshold is deceptive because, for many low- income families, spending 30 percent on
housing costs leaves very little for other necessities, whereas for middle- income families, it is
an appropriate expenditure level. Based on the 30 percent standard, roughly 42 percent of
Rohnert Park households overpaid for housing in 1990.
HUD establishes annual income limits in various categories that are used in the
administration of its programs. The 2000 HUD income limits for Sonoma County and its
jurisdictions are shown in Table 9.1 -3 and are based on a 2000 area median income of
$58,100 for a family of four. The maximum monthly housing cost that households in each
income category should bear has been calculated using a maximum expenditure of 30
percent of income for rent and utilities.
As shown in Table 9.1 -4, many of the jobs in Rohnert Park and the region have salaries
within the low- income range. These include jobs in the service sector, such as waiters, cooks,
room cleaners, and food preparation workers; in the retail sector, such as sales clerks; and
professional jobs such as accountants, librarians, and nurses. In many cases, even the
combined wages of two working parents result in a lower- income household.
Over 5,000 applications for the Section 8 rental assistance program were received by the
Sonoma County Housing Authority from low- income households during a five -week period
in 1999. Of these applications, only 396 low- income households have been placed. Many of
9 -12
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
the households waiting to receive assistance remain homeless or at risk, improperly housed,
and under - served. Of these households, many are special needs groups, including, but not
limited to the elderly, large families, and the disabled 2.
Table 9.1 -3
HUD Income Limits, Sonoma County, March 2000;
and Maximum Monthly Housing Costs
Income Group Limits
Very Low Low Median Moderate
Household Size ( <_50% of AMI) (51- 80% of (100% of AMI) (81 -120% of
AMI) AMI)
1 person
Maximum Annual Income
$20,350
$32,550
$40,650
Max. Monthly Housing Cost2
$509
$814
$1,018
2 persons
Maximum Annual Income
$23,250
$37,200
$46,500
Max. Monthly Housing Cost
$581
$930
$1,163
3 persons
Maximum Annual Income
$26,150
$41,850
$52,300
Max. Monthly Housing Cost
$654
$1,046
$1,308
4 persons
Maximum Annual Income
$29,050
$46,500
$58,100
Max. Monthly Housing Cost
$726
$1,163
$1,453
5 persons
Maximum Annual Income
$31,350
$50,200
$62,750
Max. Monthly Housing Cost
$784
$1,255
$1,568
6 persons
Maximum Annual Income
$33,700
$53,900
$67,400
Max. Monthly Housing Cost
$843
$1,348
$1,685
'Average monthly income level established annually by HUD
2Maximum monthly housing cost is based on the expenditure of 30% of income for rent and utilities.
$48,800
$1,221
$55,750
$1,395
$62,750
$1,569
$69,700
$1,743
$75,300
$1,881
$80,850
$2,022
9 -13
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Table 9.1 -4
Examples of Wages for Lower - Income Occupations
Occupation
Hourly Wage'
Annual
Income
Cashier
$7.65
$15,912
Food preparation worker
$7.88
$16,390
Stock clerk
$8.50
$17,680
Cook - restaurant
$9.00
$18,720
Travel agent
$9.11
$18,949
Salesperson
$9.50
$19,760
Groundskeeper
$9.75
$20,280
Teller
$9.80
$20,384
Assembler, fabricator
$10.00
$20,800
Emergency medical technician
$10.72
$22,298
General office clerk
$11.60
$24,128
Medical assistant
$11.99
$24,939
Secretary, general
$12.23
$25,438
Firefighter
$13.36
$38,904
Truck driver - heavy
$13.50
$28,080
Bookkeeper
$13.95
$29,016
Office manager
$14.38
$29,910
Writer, editor
$14.38
$29,910
Welder, cutter
$15.00
$31,200
Social worker
$15.34
$31,907
Teacher - elementary school
--
$32,000
Dental assistant
$16.00
$33,280
Licensed vocational nurse
$16.00
$33,280
Physical therapy assistant
$16.00
$33,280
Paralegal personnel
$17.26
$35,901
Drafter
$17.55
$36,504
Accountant
$18.22
$37,898
Machinist
$18.50
$38,480
Automotive mechanic
$19.38
$40,310
Registered nurse
$20.00
$41,600
Computer engineer, programmer
$21.00
$43,680
Source:, Occupational Outlook and Training Directory, Sonoma
County 1998 -1999, Sonoma
County Human Services
Department.
1Based on median pay after 3 years' experience
The Housing Authority administers the Section 8 program within the City of Rohnert Park.
There are 347 of the city's households currently using the Section 8 program to help afford a
residence. The program's waiting list includes 261 Rohnert Park households, most of whom
are seniors or are disabled. A representative of the Housing Authority notes that it has
become more difficult to find homes affordable to lower- income households in Rohnert Park
9 -14
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
for holders of Section 8 certificates due to many homes being taken off the rental market and
sold23.
Approximately 340 Rohnert Park households were provided one -time assistance with rental
deposits and monthly rents or mortgage payments over the last five years, an indication that a
significant number of families are at risk of becoming homeless.
Overcrowding
High housing costs force lower- income households to share living accommodations with
extended family and friends, or rent out rooms in their homes, leading to crowded living
conditions. Large household sizes, multi - generational households, high numbers of children
per household, low incomes, and the limited availability of large rental units all are related to
overcrowding.
The 1990 Census reported that 536 (169 owner- occupied and 367 renter - occupied) of the
City's occupied dwelling units had more than one person per room (excluding kitchens and
bathrooms) and were therefore considered "overcrowded." These units represented 4 percent
of total occupied units. Only 1.3 percent of the units were severely- overcrowded (over 1.5
persons per room). Renter - occupied units had a higher proportion of overcrowded and
severely- overcrowded units (6 percent and 2.4 percent, respectively) than owner - occupied
units (2.4 percent and .5 percent).
This level of overcrowding is significantly lower than that of California in 1990, which was
12.3 percent of total households. However, the higher incidence of overcrowding in renter
households in Rohnert Park was consistent with that of the state's, with renters being three
times more likely than owners to be overcrowded.
SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS
The special housing needs of certain persons and households are discussed in this section.
The Elderly
The 1990 Census reported 2,718 city residents age 65 or over (7.5 percent of the population),
and 1,913 households headed by persons 65 and over. This proportion is significantly below
those of other Sonoma County communities. Of the total elderly households, 1,365 were
owner - occupied units (18.2 percent of all owner households) and 548 were renter households
(9.2 percent of all renter households).
Existing Housing for the Elderly
Approximately one -half of senior households in Rohnert Park live in housing specifically
designed for seniors, senior multi - family complexes, or mobilehome parks. Multi- family
complexes in Rohnert Park that have been designed to meet the needs of the elderly include
205 market -rate units located in Pacific Springs, a comprehensive retirement complex, 230
subsidized units in the Altamont Senior Apartments, and 63 subsidized units for seniors at
9 -15
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Country Club Village. Out of 172 units at Copeland Creek Apartments, only 12 units are
occupied by persons who are less than 65 years of age.
Of the five mobilehome parks in the city, three were designed and are operated to meet the
needs of seniors and have a total of 720 spaces. The other two parks allow families but the
majority of residents are also elderly. Mobilehomes meet the needs of many seniors because
they provide an independent living environment with smaller yards and homes requiring lower
levels of maintenance.
There are approximately six group care homes licensed in the City that can accommodate up to 28
elderly individuals, some of whom can be non - ambulatory or mentally- disordered.
Characteristics of Elderly Households
The majority of the elderly are on fixed incomes such as pensions, social security, and
personal savings. Many elderly households pay an excessive proportion of their income for
housing because their incomes are low. In 1990, twice as many elderly households in the city
had incomes of less than $25,000 than Rohnert Park households as a whole. However, only 6
percent of residents over the age of 65 were living in poverty in 1990. Of these, 74% were
elderly women.
Elderly homeowners often cannot afford maintenance and repairs because of their lower,
fixed incomes. They may also not be able to afford modifications that are needed to their
homes to ensure their safety and improve their mobility, such as grab bars and ramps.
Elderly Housing Needs
As citizens get older, their housing needs change. Special housing needs of the elderly
include smaller and more efficient housing to minimize maintenance and barrier -free designs
to accommodate restricted functions.
Many older persons own their homes and most prefer to remain there as they grow older24.
Therefore, efforts are needed to help the elderly maintain independent life styles. In 1990, .
815 elderly Rohnert Park residents were identified as having a mobility limitation. Housing
locations near public transit are needed for senior citizens because they may not drive. The
elderly need additional auxiliary services such as housecleaning, health care, and grocery
delivery when illness and disability limit their capacity to fend for themselves.
House sharing can provide older homeowners with revenue, as well as added security and
companionship, and provides renters with affordable housing. Accessory apartments, which
are separate units within a home, offer the same advantages plus privacy.
As it becomes increasingly difficult for the elderly to live independently, there is a need for
congregate or group housing that provides small individual units without kitchens or with
minimal provision for cooking, and some common facilities and services, including shared
arrangements for meals and housekeeping services. Congregate care housing is particularly
Nw.
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
attractive to older persons, as building design and services can be tailored to their specific
needs.
Life care facilities can also provide all levels of care on the same site to meet the
progressively greater needs of the elderly. These facilities often have apartments, congregate
housing, an infirmary, and nursing home in the same or adjacent buildings. Elderly persons
buy into a life care project with an initial fee, then pay a monthly fee thereafter. The fee
usually guarantees occupancy in a particular size of apartment and one meal a day. Tenants
may also move into a "personal care" unit or nursing facility if health support needs change.
The Disabled
The 1990 Census reported 2,182 persons, 16 and older, with a mobility or self -care limitation
living in Rohnert Park. Of this number, 932 (43 percent) were persons 65 years of age and
older. These limitations may substantially restrict the disabled's ability to live in
conventional housing.
The County Health Service Department,
approximately 8,000 county residents have
Rohnert Park is not available. The Mental
housing needs of mentally -ill persons:
Mental Health Division, estimates that
mental disabilities25 . A specific estimate for
Health Division has identified the following
• Mentally ill adults need more supported housing options. The Hendley Circle model
[Santa Rosa] has worked well. More of this type of housing is needed, particularly in the
[county's] southern regions, including Rohnert Park and Sonoma.
• A recent development within the past few years is a crisis in residential care options for
elderly persons living on Supplemental Security Income who have mental health
problems. It is nearly impossible to find any residential care home that will accept low -
income, elderly persons who have a mental health diagnosis.
• Duplex studio units, units that count as one unit but offer single- occupancy living spaces,
are needed for this population.
Existing Housing for the Disabled
Muirfield Apartments, a 24 -unit project completed in 1999, provides housing for people with
developmental disabilities who are capable of living independently. The tenants will likely
have jobs in the community and do their own cooking. The rents are subsidized through a
project rental assistance contract with HUD, so the tenants only pay 30% of their income in
order to live there. The project was facilitated by a $292,000 below- market interest rate loan
from the CDCRP for pre - development costs and project development.
Additionally, eight units in The Gardens apartment project, constructed in 1995 with the
assistance of the CDCRP, are fully handicapped - accessible.
MIFA
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
There are approximately 15 licensed group homes in Rohnert Park for developmentally
disabled adults that can accommodate up to 72 individuals.
State and Federal Requirements
In response to the serious lack of accessible housing in the United States, the Fair Housing
Act requires that all ground floor dwelling units in buildings of four or more units without
elevators and all dwelling units in elevator buildings of four or more units include the
following basic features of accessible and adaptive design:
• Public and common areas must be accessible to persons with disabilities
• Doors and hallways must be wide enough for wheelchairs
• All units must have:
• An accessible route into and through the unit
• Accessible light switches, electrical outlets, thermostats and other environmental
controls
• Reinforced bathroom walls to allow later installation of grab bars and
• Kitchens and bathrooms that can be used by people in wheelchairs.
The Fair Housing requirements are included in California's Title 24 regulations, which are
enforced by the city through its building codes, building plan review, and site inspections.
In the case of persons with a physical or mental disability (including hearing, mobility and
visual impairments, chronic alcoholism, chronic mental illness, AIDS, AIDS Related
Complex and mental retardation) that substantially limits one or more major life activities,
landlords may not:
Refuse to let tenants make reasonable modifications to their dwelling or common use
areas, at their expense, if necessary for the disabled person to use the housing, or
Refuse to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices or services if
necessary for the disabled person to use the housing.
Disabled Housing Needs
Despite recent efforts by the City to assist in the construction of disabled - accessible housing,
there continues to be a significant demand, especially at the lower- income levels, as
evidenced by the high proportion of disabled persons on the waiting list for the Section 8
housing assistance program.
Besides the construction of new accessible housing, the needs of individuals with limitations
can sometimes be met by simply retrofitting existing housing to transform conventional units
into suitable housing. This is perhaps the least costly way in which to provide housing
specifically for individuals with special limitations.
4311:3
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
There is also a need to improve the "visitability" of housing to allow mobility- impaired
residents to visit families and friends 26. A visitable home provides less accessibility than an
accessible home, and is meant to be those units not required to be accessible. Visitability
means that:
At least one entrance is at grade (no step) and can be approached by an accessible
route, such as a sidewalk, and,
The entrance door and all interior doors on the first floor are at least 34 inches wide,
offering 32 inches of clear passage space.
A visitable home also serves persons without disabilities, such as a person pushing a stroller,
a person delivering large appliances, or a person using a walker.
Large Families
Large families are defined by the Census as households with s4five or more members. In
1990, there were 49-9l 383 such households, or 103-.6 percent of all households in Rohnert
Park. Of these, 9493-1- large families lived in owner- occupied units, and 434 occupied
rental units.
Lower - income, large households generally have difficulty locating appropriately -sized
housing. A survey of market -rate rental projects conducted in 1994 by Burbank Housing
Development Corporation found very few offering three - bedroom units, and none offering
four- bedroom units. The Sonoma County Housing Authority's waiting lists show a
significant number of "large families" waiting for _rental assistance.
Whereas 72.4 percent of owner- occupied homes in 1990 contained three or more bedrooms,
only 27.9 percent of renter- occupied homes were as large. Overall, owner- occupied units had
one more bedroom, on average, than renter - occupied units.
The 176 unit Mountain Shadows apartment project approved in July 2000 includes eiizht
three bedroom apartments In January 2001 the City approved a General Plan amendment
(changing a site from commercial to residential) and architectural and site plan review for the
Masma Construction Project a 16 -unit apartment complex comprised of all three - bedroom
units At least two of the units (15 %) will be affordable to very -low and /or low income
households. The Mountain Shadows The existing Gardens apartment project, approved in
1995, -(J 91-5} included four three - bedroom units and four four - bedroom units to help address
the housing needs of large families.
Female- Headed Households
The 1990 Census documented 879 Rohnert Park families with minor children that were
headed by a female with no husband present (17.9 percent of all families with minor
children), contrasted with 236 families headed by a male with no wife present (4.7 percent).
9 -19
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearinq Draft 8/01
More than 60 percent of all sub - families were female- headed (167 female- headed
subfamilies); none of the sub - families was male- headed. Sub - families are defined as a
second parent/child household living with another household.
The incomes of female- headed households were lower than those of other types of families,
with a mean income of $21,775 compared to a mean income of $44,766 for all families with
children. These families represented 44 percent of all families living below poverty level in
1989.
The incomes of 208 female - headed households (that contained a total of 376 children) were below the
poverty level. Only 125 of the female heads of households were more than 65 years of age, and of this
number, only nine were below the poverty level.
Since incomes of female - headed households are proportionately lower, their primary housing
need is housing affordable to lower - income households.
Existing Housing for Single- Parent Households
Over the last few years, the CDCRP has purchased three four - bedroom /two -bath homes in
Rohnert Park that are suitable for single - parent families. Up to four families share each
house. The rent proceeds are used to maintain the homes and landscaping, and pay for
utilities. All applicants are carefully screened before occupancy and are provided with living
skills training and counseling.
The City also supported The Gardens, a 1995 project that targets lower- income families and,
partly because of a request by the City, specifically accommodates single- parent households
through a number of architectural features. The four - bedroom units are designed to facilitate
shared rentals so that a single parent could arrange for live -in assistance with childcare from
a relative, friend, student, or senior. The floor plans provide a separate downstairs bedroom
for some separation from the upstairs bedroom suites. Even in the two- bedroom townhomes,
there are generous separate living spaces to allow a single parent to create some "adult
space." Additionally, the units incorporate a movable kitchen work island so that a parent
can attend to childcare needs more readily while cooking27.
Farmworkers
The 1990 Census reported that 258 city residents were employed in farming, forestry, and fishing;
however it is not known how many of these, if any, were farmworkers.
ABAG's Projections 2000 estimated that by the year 2005, there would be only 150 jobs
related to agriculture and mining in the Rohnert Park subregional study area. This low
number could reflect the fact that agricultural operations in the immediate vicinity of the City
are generally limited to family -owned and operated farms centered on cattle grazing and hay
growing that do not customarily require hired and temporary farm labor.
The subregional study area is much larger than the 1999 city limits. Projections 2000 does
not include an estimate for agricultural jobs within the City itself, but given the complete
9 -20
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
absence of land in agricultural production within the city limits, it can be assumed that there
are no farmworker jobs within the City limits and there will be none during the planning
period.
However, farmworker housing remains a regional need, as described in the Sonoma County
Consolidated Plan prepared by the Sonoma County Community Development Commission 28
Agriculture is an important industry in Sonoma County and farmworkers are
an important part of the community. The California Human Development
Corporation (CHDC), a nonprofit agency dedicated to bettering the lives of
farmworkers and other low - income persons, reported that there are 4200
documented farmworker households in Sonoma County. Approximately 75%
of farmworkers reported U. S. citizenship or permanent resident alien status.
In addition, there is a seasonal migrant worker population. The majority of
the migrant workers are young, single males traveling alone who are here for
the harvest. Many of the migrant workers are here illegally.
According to the Sonoma County Housing Element, agricultural employment
was the primary source of income for about 80% of the farmworker
households. Farmworkers have a difficult time locating affordable housing in
Sonoma County. Due to a combination of limited English language skills and
low household incomes, the ability to obtain housing loans for home
purchase is extremely limited. For the same reason, rentals are also very
difficult to obtain.
More than one -half of the large family, farmworker households live in one or
two bedroom units, resulting in overcrowding. Approximately 12% of these
households have five or more members. The percentage of large families
reported for farmworker households is five times the percentage of large
families countywide. Much of the housing occupied by farmworker
households is old and in need of repairs.
Another unique factor of the farming community is that most migrant
farmworkers are single men who leave their families behind to work in the
fields, and who have no adequate housing. These men live in fields, shacks,
barns, or other unsuitable places. Although there is some overlap in many
need areas, the housing needs of the migrant male differ markedly from the
housing needs of farmworker families.
Providing affordable seasonal and year -round housing for farmworkers and
migrant workers is a need in Sonoma County.
The California Economic Development Department (EDD) reports that during the
year 2000 the annualized average employment in farm production and services was
6,750. As noted above however, detailed data on the proportion of farmworkers
living in incorporated versus unincorporated areas or what proportions are year round
9 -21
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
residents that work in other sectors during non-peak agricultural months is still
unknown.
The Homeless
A person or family is considered homeless if they lack a fixed and regular night -time
residence, or has a primary night -time residence that is a supervised publicly- operated shelter
designated for providing temporary living accommodations, or is residing in a public or
private place not designated for, or ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation for
human beings29.
The Sonoma County Task Force on the Homeless reports that a majority of the homeless are
county residents, rather than transients.
Characteristics of the Homeless
Reasons for homelessness in Sonoma County include 30
• The lack of permanent affordable housing
• The high cost of housing
• The large gap between housing costs and low wages
• A rental vacancy rate at or below 1%
• Personal emergencies
• Cutbacks in federal housing assistance
• Chronic substance abuse
• Insufficient support systems
• Spousal /partner abuse or abandonment
• Physical or mental illness
• A lack of life skills
• Loss of employment
Populations at risk of becoming homeless also include those living in subsidized housing
units if their subsidies are discontinued, and those who have fixed or low incomes facing rent
increases.
9 -22
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
It is very difficult to reliably estimate the numbers of homeless. The 1990 Census listed 15
Rohnert Park citizens living in emergency shelters and identified two homeless persons on
the street. There are a number of homeless individuals living in local motels.
Housing experts have determined that, on average, about one percent of a community's
population may be homeless at some time during the year. Based on a population of about
40,000, approximately 400 people in Rohnert Park may become homeless during a year.
These individuals and families may find temporary housing with friends and relatives, stay in
a garage, camp out in their automobile, or stay in a shelter.
The Sonoma County Consolidated Plan 2000 estimates the County's homeless population to
be 8,215, which is almost evenly divided between individuals and families. This division
significantly differed from the statewide homeless population, whose composition is closer to
two- thirds individuals and one -third families.
Despite high levels of consumer confidence, booming technology stocks and general
economic prosperity throughout the country, the number of homeless children today is higher
than at any other time since the Great Depression. A 1999 report3l found that families
account for 38 percent of U.S. homeless, and children are the fastest - growing segment of the
homeless population. Consequently, the nationwide demand for emergency shelter by
families with children has increased 50 percent since 1995 and 15 percent in 1999 alone.
It is estimated that the statewide housing need for homeless persons is divided among the
following types of housing 32:
• Emergency shelter need 27.4%
• Transitional housing need 35.0%
• Permanent housing need 37.7%
City Assistance for the Homeless
Although the City has contributed financially to the Armory Shelter Program in Santa Rosa,
its efforts have focused primarily on preventing homelessness and providing transitional
housing. It provides substantial support to such groups as Petaluma People Services, which
provides one -time assistance with rental deposits and monthly rents or mortgage payments
for those at risk of becoming homeless (assisting approximately 340 Rohnert Park
households between 1995 and 1999).
The City also supports the Homeless Prevention Group, which provides one -time, interest -
free loans to low- income households with adequate and stable sources of income who need
assistance in emergency situations to prevent eviction from an established residence or have
not accumulated enough funds to pay initial rental moving /move -in costs.
As previously mentioned, through an agreement with Committee on the Shelterless (COTS),
the City has supported the purchase of three four - bedroom /two -bath homes in Rohnert Park
9 -23
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
to provide transitional housing for families who were at risk of becoming homeless. Up to
four families share each house.
Transitional housing bridges the gap between homelessness and permanent housing. It is
typically a temporary shared living environment with the provision of supportive services
that are designed to help persons transitioning from homelessness to maintain stability and to
prevent repeated homelessness.
Few buildings in Rohnert Park could be readily and economically converted into
conventional emergency shelters. Given very high apartment occupancy rates and the fact
that local motels are thriving, there may not be an opportunity to develop emergency housing
in this manner. Given that Rohnert Park has largely developed since 1960, there are also no
residential hotels, rooming houses, or similar buildings that lend themselves to conversion to
a traditional emergency shelter. If a conventional emergency shelter were established in
Rohnert Park, it would probably be in a newly- constructed building or former City facility.
Other Homeless Facilities
Although there is no homeless shelter in Rohnert Park, emergency shelter is available nearby
in Santa Rosa and Petaluma. In Santa Rosa, Catholic Charities operates the Family Support
Center which provides emergency, overnight shelter for families with children and the
Homeless Services Center, a day service center for homeless individuals. The Center serves
75 to 100 persons during the spring and summer, and 100 to 150 individuals during the
winter months.
Other homeless facilities in the vicinity include a homeless shelter at the National Guard
Armory in Santa Rosa that is operated during the winter months by the Interfaith Shelter
Network. The Armory shelter has a typical population of 120 men and women, and a
capacity of approximately 170. It is open about 12 hours per day, opening each evening
around 7 pm. Users of the shelter are allowed a shower, dinner, and breakfast.
Additional facilities include the Redwood Gospel Mission in Santa Rosa, which houses from
70 to 80 men each night. The Manna Home provides emergency shelter for women and
children, and the Vietnam Veterans of California, Inc. operates a facility for homeless
families with children and single veterans. The women's emergency shelter (operated by the
YWCA) provides emergency shelter for women and children fleeing domestic violence. The
Sonoma County People for Economic Opportunity operate two homes, one for families and
one for single women. Sonoma County also has a residential AIDS shelter. The Elwood
Opportunity Center in Petaluma is a daytime service center for homeless individuals.
In total, the emergency shelters assist about 10 percent of homeless persons in Sonoma
County during the year. Statewide, there is sufficient inventory of available facilities to meet
the needs of only about one in six homeless individuals, and only one in five homeless
families33.
Many local churches and charities provide funds for emergency shelter at local motels when
families are displaced from their homes by fires or other circumstances.
9 -24
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
University Students
Sonoma State University (SSU) is located adjacent to the Rohnert Park city limits and
receives sewer service from the City. It is also connected to the City's Pipeline Extension of
the City of Santa Rosa Subregional Reclaimed Water System and receives a portion of the
City's current allocation of dry weather flows designated by the subregional treatment
system.- SSU does not contribute to the maintenance or improvement of the City's roadways
and circulation systems. The university creates a need for student housing in the community.
During the 1999 -2000 school year, the campus supported 7,011 students and 1,122
employees. The Master Plan for the university anticipates an eventual enrollment of 10,000
students.
The university's goal is to provide campus housing for at least the first two years (freshman
and sophomore) of a student's tenure, and have some additional space for upperclassmen.
Based on annual enrollment growth projections of five percent, it is estimated that the
university's housing need will increase from approximately 1,796 in Fall 2000 to 3,326 in
Fall 20044.
At the beginning of the 1999 school year, SSU housed approximately 1,340 students on campus
and by Fall 2000 will be housing 1,800. Due to growth projections and the lack of available
student housing in the surrounding communities, the university is hoping to add housing through
the following projects:
• Phase II of Sauvignon Village, projected for occupancy in Fall 20012, will house 900
more students.
• A housing complex may be developed in what is now Parking Lot D to accommodate 400
students.
• The university has a goal of developing housing on a 34.6 -acre parcel located adjacent to,
and northwest of, the existing campus boundary, which is not currently owned by the
university. Housing scenarios range from high- density apartment -style courtyard housing to
lower- density, single - family attached and detached dwellings that could accommodate
faculty and university stafe . The General Plan's Land Use Diagram reflects the university's
intentions for residential development in this area.
The SSU Associated Students also operates a transitional housing program that provides housing
assistance for up to six weeks.
The City is concerned with student housing needs as is SSU; SSU however, assumes some
responsibility for their growth and for providing student housing at a density that helps to meet the
anticipated need The City has no regulatory _ control over the activities of the University.
9 -25
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Student Housing Needs
New student housing should be located near the university and appropriate commercial centers to
ensure access without the need for automobiles. In general, students should have housing they
can rent for the school year.
Approximately 75 students per year receive emergency housing assistance from the university.
Rents for student housing should be as low as possible to meet limited student budgets. Students
with limited financial resources may find it difficult to meet move -in requirements for rent and
security deposits. Landlords and apartment managers are generally not willing to accept parents
as co- signers or to consider financial aid income (such as loans, grants, and scholarships) when
determining whether a student meets the income requirement of three times the rent leve136
Several students have claimed at City Council meetings that they have faced discriminatory
rental practices in Rohnert Park.
SUMMARY OF EXISTING HOUSING NEEDS
The city's existing housing needs, as described in this section, are summarized below. These
needs are addressed by the Housing Element's programs and policies detailed in Section 9.5.
Housing Conditions
• A structural conditions survey has identified 14 homes in Rohnert Park as "sound deficient"
and in need of repair and /or clean -up.
• Homes in the city's older neighborhoods were constructed without such energy- saving design
features as insulation, double -pane windows, and weather stripping.
• A major earthquake could render some of the city's housing units, especially mobilehomes,
uninhabitable.
• Approximately 30 to 40 multi - family units in buildings with ground floor parking could be
highly susceptible to seismic damage.
Housing Supply
• The current housing vacancy rate of 3.6% is substantially lower than the 5.1% level needed
to allow adequate mobility within the housing market.
• The current supply of homes offered for resale is far below the level that is considered a
"balanced" market that places buyers and sellers on equal footing.
• Many homes are being taken off the rental market and sold, due to the high demand for
ownership housing.
9 -26
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Housing Affordability
• A moderate - income or lower - income family of four would have to pay more than 30% of its
income to purchase the median housing - priced Rohnert Park home in 1999.
• Similarly, the average $1,227 rent for a three - bedroom apartment is not affordable to a
lower- income family of four, and has increased 14.5 percent during 1999.
• According to the last census, approximately. one -half of all Rohnert Park households
overpaid for housing, a level that rises to 90 percent for lower- income households.
• Many of the jobs in Rohnert Park and the region have salaries within the low- income range,
and in many cases, even the combined wages of two working parents result in a lower -
income household.
Special Needs
• The waiting list for Housing Authority's Section 8 rental assistance program includes 261
Rohnert Park households, most of whom are seniors or are disabled.
• Housing needs of the elderly include affordable homes that require lower levels of
maintenance, are barrier -free, and are located near public transit. There is also a need for
congregate, group, and continuing care housing.
• Mentally ill adults need more supported housing options, similar to the Hendley Circle model
Santa Rosa;.
• Additional residential care homes that will accept low- income, elderly persons who have a
mental health diagnosis are needed.
• Duplex studio units, units that count as one unit but offer single- occupancy living spaces, are
needed for the mentally -ill population.
• Housing needs of the physically disabled include disabled- accessible housing designs and
housing locations near public transit.
• There is a lack of apartments with three bedrooms or more to accommodate large families.
• Female- headed households need housing units designed for multiple households to lower
housing costs, share childcare, and obtain emotional support.
• Farmworker households need housing that is affordable to lower- income households,
including large units as well as housing for single males.
• There is no homeless shelter in the city.
• College students need housing that is affordable to lower- income households near the
university and commercial centers.
WPM
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
• Students may face discriminatory rental practices in Rohnert Park.
9 -28
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
9.2 PROJECTED HOUSING NEEDS
GROWTH PROJECTIONS
ABAG Projections 2000
The Association of Bay Area Government's (ABAG), a regional council of governments, hffs
r-eeently released publication entitled Projections 2000 for the Bay Area, which. is designed to
predict regional and local growth and distribution of population, households, employment,
income, and labor force during the period 2000 -2020. Projections 2000 forecasts are based on
regional and county growth models, and the local availability of land, local development
policies, density assumptions, and travel demand.
For the Rohnert Park area, Projections 2000 provides estimates for the area within the 1999 city limits, as well
as a larger subregional study area that encompasses large areas outside of the city. As eplained further under
the subsection on REGIONAL HOUSING NEED DETERMINATION the ABAG numbers are based on
improper methodology and an inaccurate description of the City's sphere of influence. ABAG protects the
following household and job growth within the city limits during the Housing Element's planning penod of
January 1 1.999 to June 30, 2006:
AT A ry5-
Table 9.2 -1
Projected Growth within 1999 City Limits, 1/1/99 — 6/30/06
1/1/99 6/30/06 Change
Households 14,865 15,428 +563/ 4%
Total Jobs 23,332 27,348 +4,016/17%
Source: ABAG Regional Housing Distribution Model
The specific types of projected jobs within the city limits have not been provided by ABAG.
However, ABAG anticipates that nearly two -third of the new jobs projected to be added within
the Rohnert Park subregional area between 2000 and 2010 will be in the service and retail
sectors, which typically pay some of the lowest wages (see Housing Affordability), and the same
will likely be true for jobs within the city limits. The increase in low- paying jobs will have an
associated increase in the demand for affordable housing.
General Plan Buildout
As summarized in Table 2.3 -3 of the Land Use and Growth Management Element, buildout
under the General Plan is anticipated to be somewhat lower than the Projections 2000 estimates.
9 -29
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
The projected annual population growth rate of 1 percent will add approximately 8,400 residents
to the City, resulting in an estimated population of 50,400 by 2020.
Job growth is expected to occur at an annual growth rate of 1.9 percent, adding 9,700 jobs for a
total of approximately 31,600 jobs by 2020.
REGIONAL HOUSING NEED DETERMINATION
Periodically, the State of California provides funds for HCD to determine the housing needs for
each region. The housing needs process focuses attention on one of the most significant problems
facing the state, region, and community, and calls upon each local community to address its fair
share of responsibility. HCD determines the supply and affordability of housing that would, if
met, make housing more accessible to existing and future residents. This determination is based
on existing housing need, including the level of overcrowding, the potential loss of housing due
to demolition, and projected regional growth rates (projected population, jobs, and households).
HCD has recently determined the Bay Area's 1999 — 2006 housing construction need to be 230,743
units. This number is a goal that is not meant to match, and often exceeds, anticipated and actual growth
in housing.
In turn, ABAG is responsible for allocating the regional housing need goal among the cities and
counties in the Bay Area. The numbers adopted by ABAG are required to be included in each
locality's general plan, along with a strategy aimed at meeting their housing need.
ABAG has assigned 11.1 percent of the 1999 -2006 regional housing construction need, or
25,672 units, to Sonoma County. Of the county's total, 2, i 244-,4642 units have been
allocated to the City of Rohnert Park to be developed within its 1999 city limits. This housing
goal is further divided among four income categories that are defined in Table 9.2 -2.
Table 9.2 -2
Rohnert Park Regional Housing Need, 1999 — 2006
)'
Number of Units
w/i 1999 Within
Share of
Income Group City limits* Sol*
Total
Total
Very Low (S 50% of AM12) 276 125
401
18.9%
Low (51 — 80% of AMI) 192 78
270
13.1%
Moderate (81 — 120% of AMI) 408 • 189
597
27.9%
Above Moderate ( >_ 120% of AMI) 586 270
856
40.1%
Totals 1,462 662
2,124
100%
Source: ABAG Regional Housing Needs Determination, June 1, 2000
Planning includes 1/1/99 through 6/30/06
period
2 Established by HUD on an annual basis
"Regional Housini4 Need Determination numbers are based on an inaccurate sphere -of- influence boundary.
Mill
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
The City of Rohnert Park had& requested the Association of Bay Area Governments to revise the
determination of its share of the regional housing need. The City's proposed revision wasis based
upon available data and accepted planning methodology and i-swas supported by adequate
documentation in accordance with Government Code §65584. The proposed revision wasi -s
based primarily on ABAG's improper methodology and ABAG's inaccurate description of the
City's sphere of influence. More information about the City's proposal to revise the determination
of its share of the regional housing need is found in correspondence from the City of Rohnert
Park to ABAG dated April 28, 2000, August 18, 2000 and October 31, 2000 which are
incorporated into this Housing Element by this reference. City representatives also spoke at the
ABAG Executive Board meetings on November 16 2000 and March 15 2001 and at the City's
appeal hearing before the ABAG Housing Need Appeal Committee on January 25, 2001.
The City's share of the regional housing need includes that share of the housing need of persons
at all income levels within the area significantly affected by the city's general plan (Government
Code §65584(a)). Therefore, in this general plan, the City has provided for its share of the
regional housing need in the sphere of influence proposed by this General Plan (see Table 9.5 -1)
since the sphere of influence is the area significantly affected by this general plan.
POTENTIAL LOSS OF AFFORDABLE UNITS
In the past, the federal government signed contracts with private owners of real estate to provide
housing that is affordable to low- income tenants. These contracts for mortgages subsidized by
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development are expiring, leading to a loss of
affordability for affected units.
State law 37 requires owners of such projects to provide at least nine months notice of contract
termination or prepayment of federal assistance to tenants and public agencies. Owners who are
proposing to sell or dispose of their properties must also provide first right of refusal to purchase
those properties to entities who agree to maintain the affordability of the units.
Country Club Village
There is only one assisted housing development that iswas eligible to change from low- income
housing uses during the next 10 years: Country Club Village, a project of 63 apartments that is
occupied by 41 very low- income and 22 low- income elderly and disabled households. The
project received original financing from HUD and has been allocated Section 8 rental assistance
certificates. The income restrictions associated with the project's HUD financing wereafe set to
expire in May 2001, and the owners have r-eeen y notified the City and the County Housing
Authority of their intent not to renew their contract. The County Housing Authority has
successfully_ negotiated with the property owner the use of Section 8 vouchers for all 63 seniors
living in the complex None of the residents have had to relocate.This ae ion will allow rents to
fise beyond the faif market fents established by 14UP, probably r-equi-ing ienants to
f:elaeate to more a&f:dable housing.
9 -31
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Las Casitas de Sonoma Mobile Home Park
In April 2001 the Rohnert Park Housing Financing Authority issued $4,875,000 of mobile home
park revenue bonds to allow Millennium Housing a non - profit corporation to acquire the Las
Casitas de Sonoma mobile home park a 126 space mobile home park in Rohnert Park. The
specific purpose of Millennium Housing is to encourage preserve rehabilitate develop, operate,
and maintain decent safe sanitary.and affordable housing for low- income and disadvantaged
persons in California In addition to the revenue bond financing the City of Rohnert Park
assisted the acquisition by loaning Millennium Housing $250,000 of redevelopment agency set -
aside funds As part of the financing Millennium Housing is contractually obligated to maintain
50% of the Park for low and very -low income residents Rents for the entire park are subject to
the City's rent control ordinance.
SUMMARY OF PROJECTED HOUSING NEEDS
The city's projected housing needs, as described in this section, are summarized below. These
needs are addressed by the Housing Element's programs and policies detailed in Section 9.5.
• Nearly two - thirds of the new jobs projected within the city could be in the service and retail
sectors, which typically pay some of the lowest wages. The increase in low- paying jobs will
have an associated increase in the demand for affordable housing.
The City's prelimi regional housing need allocation for the planning period is
2,124,,E units, of which 671468 are units affordable to lower - income households.
9 -32
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
9.3 HOUSING DEVELOPMENT 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 cannot be affected by
government controls.
An analysis of these factors can help in the development of programs that lessen their effect on
the supply and cost of housing.
GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
Governmental regulations and exactions are designed to achieve desirable land use patterns,
coordinate development with infrastructure expansion, finance capital improvements, equitably
distribute the cost of public services, maintain the ambiance of existing neighborhoods, improve
the urban environment, and preserve open space and unique ecosystems.
However, they should be evaluated to determine whether they are excessive and represent an
unnecessary constraint on the availability or affordability of housing being built, or contribute to
the loss of existing affordable housing.
General Plan Policies
In addition to the Housing Element, two of the General Pian'S oth er eieiiieiits directly affect the
location, type, and timing of housing that may be developed: the Land Use and Growth
Management Element, and the Community Design Element.
Land Use and Growth Management Element
The Land Use and Growth Management Element provides for a variety of housing types,
including Rural Estate Residential, a housing type currently not found in the city, as well as
higher- density housing to meet the needs of students and lower- income households.
Density and FAR
The Element includes four land use designations, with the density and area ratio :E•"-'';
parameters shown in Table 9.3 -1. Minimum densities are included in all residential designations
in order to maximize residential development on a limited supply of land, and achieve a balance
and variety of housing types (Policy LU -8).
The density and provisions outlined in Table 9.3 -1 are sufficiently high to allow the
development of housing affordable to lower- income households, based on previous housing
projects, especially when combined with the 25% lower- income housing density bonus required
by state law.
9 -33
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Table 9.3 -1
Residential Land Use Designations
Density FAR Land Use Designation (units /gross acre) t=aster Max- BuNding Area (sq- ft-)
Rural Estate up to 2.0 R9RG
Low Density 4.0-6.0 049 }
Medium Density 6.1 —12.0 9-5
High Density 12.1-24.0 4-
Mixed -Use Development'- 2.0 FAR4Va n/a 2 0 FAR
is residential uses mixed with office and /or commercial uses; FAR excludes parking structures and garages
The 2.0 FAR allowed for mixed -use developments that incorporate residential uses is a higher FAR
than allowed for developments without housing (1.5), and is intended is promote housing in these
areas.
The Element also includes the following provisions to foster housing affordable to lower- income
households:
• "Second units" and density bonuses are allowed in addition to the maximum densities.
• The minimum lot size in the Low Density classification is 5,000 square feet, but the Zoning
Ordinance may permit lots as small as 4,500 square feet to promote compact development if
they meet specified community design standards in specific neighborhoods.
The potential residential development that could occur based on the Element's designations is
discussed in Section 9.4.
Urban Growth Boundary and Growth Management
The Land Use and Growth Management Element provides for the establishment of an Urban
Growth Boundary (UGB) that represents the ultimate edge of urban uses in the Rohnert Park
Planning Area by the year 2020. It includes the area within the 1999 city limits as well as all of
the annexation and specific plan areas provided for in the General Plan. if the pFopes The 20-
year Urban Growth Boundary ballot measure (Measure N, 2000) wasi -s approved by the voters in
November 2000, it wi44 replaced Policy GM -2 in the General Plan and may be modified only by
public vote, except in certain circumstances.
The UGB will promote a compact urban form that ensures the efficient provision of services, and
preserve agricultural and open space outside of the boundary.
!STI
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
The growth management provisions of the Element are intended to ensure that growth within the
UGB is paced to achieve General Plan build -out over a 20 -year period, representing an annual
average population growth rate of one percent, as well ensure that the necessary infrastructure
and public facilities are provided for new development.
The growth management program attempts to ensure an average approximate 1% growth rate
over twenty Years , and
only applies a limitation on development if the following two -part test is met: during the
following ealendar- residential development approvals in any two successive calendar
years exceeds 560 units and also exceeds 675 units over the previous three -year period.. The
pr-agFam's pr-Avisions-fer- annual growth erweed the 495 unit annual aver-age needed to meet thee
allaeated to the City for- the 4999 -2006 p Therefore,
there is no residential cap on development during any one year as long as the two criteria have
not been met; hence ,.a large number of units could be built during the later part of the planning
period if significant growth has not occurred in the earlier years Given that the greatest amount
of development will likely occur in the later part of the planning period the cap is not likely to be
triggered until after the planning_ period If a residential development cap is triggered it would
apply to Final Subdivision Maps and not to building_ permits; therefore it does not prevent the
construction of residential units or the issuance of building permits under approved final
subdivision maps.
Furthermore, housing that is affordable to very low- and low- income households is not included
in the total housing counts for the cap (Policy GM -3). The program also allows the cap to be
adjusted up or down by as much as 10 percent by the City Council on an annual basis to
accommodate changes in land use program assumptions including adjustments to accommodate
the City's Regional Housing Need as well as for factors such as -fefe� ,vacancy rate
factors and household size}.
If a residential development cap is triggered based on the two criteria, then `Alen ^ ^p4ea _°-
pregr-am's annual limits, a project's
contribution towards housing affordable to lower- income households will be given top priority in
determining preference for allocation of development approval (Policy GM -5). The growth
management program will also be reviewed annually to determine, in part, whether priority
should be given to specific housing types to achieve a balanced land use and housing program
and to ensure internal consistency within the General Plan (Policy GM -4).
Balance of Housing Types
A balance of housing types is also encouraged by Policy GM -16, which requires that specific
plans and implementing ordinances ensure that the contemplated housing types for each specific
plan area are attained at build -out.
Based on this evaluation, it can be concluded that the provisions of the Land Use and Growth
Management Element do not represent a constraint on the development of housing for all income levels.
9 -35
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Community Design Element
The Community Design Element is intended to protect and enhance Rohnert Park's physical and visual
character. Several of its policies promote a diverse and affordable housing base, including the integration
of townhomes and multi - family dwellings with single - family residences (Policy CD -17) and
consideration for reducing parking requirements for high- density and senior housing (Policy CD -29).
None of the Community Design Element's goals or policies negatively impact the affordability
or design of new residential development.
Zoning Ordinance Requirements
The provisions of the city's Zoning Ordinance directly control the approval process for
residential development and affect the type and design of housing that may be constructed. fps
antieipated - that —a A complete revision of the Zoning Ordinance began in December 2000,
to reflect ids the new policies and programs
of the General Plan, as well as incorporate many state - mandated provisions. However, it is useful
to evaluate the effects of the current Zoning Ordinance on housing while it is used in the interim.
Residential Zoning Districts
The City's Zoning Ordinance specifies the zoning districts in which residential development may
occur and under what circumstances. There are three basic residential zones:
• R -1 District allows single- family dwellings, including mobilehomes and manufactured
housing, as permitted uses. Multi- family dwellings adjacent to non - residential districts for a
distance of 150 feet are also allowed through a conditional use permit in the R -1 District.
• R -2 District allows single - family and two - family dwellings as permitted uses. Multi- family
dwellings are also allowed under the same circumstances as the R -1 District
• R -M District allows multi - family dwellings as permitted uses.
Much of the city's single - family development has occurred in the R- 1:6,500 District, although a
custom -home subdivision was recently completed on larger lots at the northern city boundary,
and the "D" Section is developed at an overall density of 8,000 square feet per unit.
Residential Development in Non - Residential Districts
The Zoning Ordinance also allows multi - family residential uses in all commercial zoning districts and
the M -L Limited Industrial district through a conditional use permit (CUP). This provision is
especially important since all residentially -zoned property within the current city limits has been
developed and this is the only means of providing opportunities for housing development at present.
However, the CUP process can be a barrier to the approval of residential development, as shown
by the city's recent experience with Burbank Housing Development Corporation's application
for an apartment project on a commercially -zoned site. Although the project's environmental
review identified no significant impacts and staff recommended approval of the application, it
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
was subjected to two lengthy Planning Commission public hearings and an appeal hearing by the
City Council. By the time the project was ultimately approved, BHDC's property options had
lapsed and could not be renewed.
Zoning Ordinance Definitions
The ordinance's definition of "family" does not restrict the number of individuals who may
reside in a home; any limitation is defined by Housing Code Section 15.12.010, based on the
floor space of habitable rooms. This limitation is consistent with the state's Uniform Housing
Code.
State Requirements
Amending the Zoning Ordinance in the following areas to implement provisions of state law
would facilitate residential development:
Second units: A second unit is an additional residential unit on the same lot as a primary
single - family dwelling that provides complete, independent living facilities for one or more
persons. Second units are usually considered housing affordable to lower- income households
because there are no land costs associated with their development and they frequently rent
for less than comparably -sized apartments. They may also occupy unused space in large
homes, and by supplementing the income of the homeowner, allow the elderly to remain in
their homes or make it possible for lower- income families to afford homes.
• The City is required by state law to process a request for a second unit through a conditional
use permit, and approve the application if it complies with specified criteria. Amending the
Zoning Ordinance to prescribe clear procedures and standards for approving second units
would encourage and facilitate their development.
Density bonuses and other affordable housing incentives: State law requires the City to adopt
an ordinance that specifies the method of providing density bonuses and other developer
incentives for lower - income housing units. Although projects with density bonuses have been
reviewed and approved in the past, amending the Zoning Ordinance to include procedures
and standards for density bonuses and other incentives would facilitate the review and
approval of projects proposing affordable housing.
• Sites for emergency shelters and transitional housing: State law requires the City to identify
sites for emergency shelters and transitional housing, however, they have not yet been
identified. The Zoning Ordinance must be amended to allow opportunities for the
development of such facilities in suitable locations.
Residential Development Standards
The Zoning Ordinance prescribes minimum standards for residential lot sizes, yards, and open
space per unit, and maximum lot coverage (Table 9.3 -2). These standards are typical of many
California communities and contribute to the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare;
and the maintenance of the city's quality of life.
9 -37
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Table 9.3 -2
Selected Development Standards for Residential Zones
Minimum Site Requirements Minimum Yards Min. Open Max. Lot
District Width Depth Area (sf.) Density' Front - Side -Rear Space /DU Coverage
R -1: 8,000
75 ft.
100 ft.
8,000
5.5
20 - 5 - 20 ft.
--
50%
R- 1:6,500
65 ft.
100 ft.
6,500
6.7
20 - 5 - 20 ft.
--
50%
R- 2:Duplex
60 ft.
100 ft.
6,000
7.3
20 - 5 - 20 ft.
500 sf.
40%
R- M:2,000
100 ft.
100 ft.
2,000
21.8
20 - 10 - 20 ft.
530 sf.
40%
R- M:1,500
60 ft.
100 ft.
1,500
29.0
20 - 10 - 20 ft.
400 sf.
40%
R- M -H:800
100 ft.
100 ft.
800
54.5
20 - 15 - 20 ft.
200 sf.
50%
Source: Rohnert Park Zoning Ordinance
1 Units per acre
Modifications to minimum standards are allowed under many circumstances, including:
• Reductions in minimum lot size, side and rear yards, and distances between structures on a
lot; and increases in maximum lot coverage of up to 10 percent through the P -D Planned Unit
Development combining district
,auctions ;,, iem�ira� side and rear vnrds to a minimum of five feet through a conditional
•
Reductions 111 yu.avu / ^
use permit
• Increases in maximum lot coverage of up to five percent through the approval of a variance
by the Planning Director
The only maximum height limitations on residential development apply in the R -MA 500
District, which has a limit of three and one -half stories. Conversely, there is a four -story
minimum height requirement in the R- M -H:800 District, which can only be reduced through a
conditional use permit.
None of these development standards have been identified by applicants as prohibitively
restrictive. The minimum open space and maximum lot coverage provisions that correspond to
each multi - family density can be easily met. Furthermore, non - profit housing groups seeking to
provide housing affordable to lower- income households have found the densities allowed in the
multi - family districts to be sufficiently high for their needs, especially with a density bonus.
Parking Standards
Minimum residential parking standards in the Zoning Ordinance are:
• Single - family dwellings: 2 spaces enclosed in a garage or carport
9 -38
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
• Duplexes: 4 spaces, 2 of which must be in a garage or carport
Multi- family units, 3 -9 units: 3 spaces for each per 2 dwelling units, with one to be enclosed
in a garage or carport for each dwelling unit.,. One uncovered guest parking space shall also
be provided for each four units, plus the number of additional spaces prescribed by the
Planning Commission or City Council. one of whieh t be in a b nbe OF r-PeFt for- ea
r
unit, plus the number- of additional spaees pfeser-ibed by the PlaflHiflg GE)fflffliSSi0H if deeffied
Multi- family units, 10 or more units: 2 spaces for each dwelling unit, with one to be
enclosed in a garage or carport for each dwelling unit One additional uncovered parking
space shall be provided for each bedroom in excess of three bedrooms per unit. One
uncovered guest parking space shall also be provided for each four units plus the number of
additional maces prescribed by the Planning Commission or City Council if deemed
necessary_ , , ear-por-t, plus one additional
uneover-ed par-king spaees for eaeh bedr-oom in exeess of three bedrooms per- unit,—plus the
number- of additional spaees pr-eser-ibed by the Planning Commission if deemed neeessar-y
• Senior Housing Developments: 1 space per unit plus the number of additional spaces
prescribed by the Planning Commission or City Council if deemed necessary.
• Mobilehome parks and trailer parks: 1 covered space per unit, plus one -half uncovered guest
space per unit
—The Planning Commission may grant exceptions to parking requirements through a conditional
use per,i,it. This provision has been'wsed frequently in the past to allow the conversion of garages
n�entl,
to living space, without a requirement for any new covered parking to offset the loss of parking.
The Commission recently indicated its desire to continue allowing such conversions because
they may be needed by a family to accommodate an elderly relative or by an elderly resident to
supplement their income through rentable space.
Residential developers and city staff have identified the following issues with the City's
parking requirements in the past:
• The Zoning Ordinance provision allowing the Commission to require additional parking for
multi - family development is too vague and specific standards should be defined to facilitate
project design and review.
• Ordinance regulations require the same amount of parking for all sizes of multi- family units
and do not allow fewer spaces for smaller (e.g., studio and one - bedroom) units.
• There is no provision for reduced parking in the case of projects for elderly -er disabled
residents.
• There is no provision for reduced parking standards for student housing projects near
Sonoma State University.
9 -39
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Amending the Zoning Ordinance to include these provisions would facilitate the residential
development process.
Design Standards
The Zoning Ordinance requires architectural and design review of residential development. The
site plans, elevation drawings, and landscaping plans of larger projects are typically reviewed by
the Planning Commission, which uses the following design guidelines when evaluating a project:
• Variation from adjoining structures in the height, bulk, area, openings or breaks in the facade
facing a street, and /or line and pitch of roof
• Variation from adjoining structures in the arrangement on the parcel
• Variation in architectural motifs
• Variation from directly adjacent structures of materials, color and arrangement of exterior
materials
• Internal harmony and consistent relationships within the design of a structure
Subdivisions of single - family dwelling units are also required to have specific numbers of
exterior design variations depending upon the number of lots in the subdivision, and to provide
architectural designs that vary from those in adjacent subdivisions. Developers are encouraged to
provide a variety of floor plans.
The Zoning Ordinance also includes design standards for manufactured homes to ensure that
they are compatible with conventionally -built residential structures in the surrounding area.
These standards do not exceed the limitations prescribed by state law.
Although the Zoning Ordinance delegates design review authority to the Director of Planning
and Community Development, in practice most residential projects are reviewed and approved
by the Planning Commission. Should the City wish to continue this approach, the Zoning
Ordinance should be appropriately amended to reflect current procedures, and clearly delegate
certain responsibilities to the Director.
Project Review
Delays in processing housing development applications through the city's review and approval
process can add to housing costs. If the developer buys the land outright, there are interest costs,
and if they obtain an option to purchase, there are option costs to hold the land.
Length of Review
In recent years, varying amounts of time were taken to consider and approve housing
construction proposals. Generally, the greater the public controversy regarding a proposal, the
longer the time spent in the review process. Public hearing continuances have resulted from
requests by project opponents for additional information, studies, and project re- designs. Each
9 -40
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
change in the project design can have associated architect and engineering fees, which grow with
each revision.
Processing delays can also result from incomplete submittals by project applicants, inadequate
responses to staff requests for additional information and exhibits, and failure to design projects
to city standards.
Appeal Process
The review process can also be delayed by provisions of the Municipal Code, as was the case of
a recent conditional use permit application for a housing project targeted towards lower- income
households that was denied by the Planning Commission. The applicant's appeal to the City
Council was delayed for several weeks by a provision in the Zoning Ordinance (Section
17.62.070 D.) that allows the Council to decide whether it wants to hear an appeal. Amending
the Zoning Ordinance to automatically require a public hearing by the Council on all appeals
pertaining to housing projects targeted towards lower- income households would expedite their
review.
Specific Plan Requirement
The Land Use Element requires the preparation of specific plans prior to development in any of
the growth areas. While this requirement will lengthen the review and approval process, it is
necessary to ensure that development occurs in a manner consistent with land use and design
criteria, environmentally - sensitive areas are conserved, and adequate infrastructure is provided.
The City has recently doubled its professional planning staff in order to expedite the preparation
and approval of specific plans, as well as the residential growth anticipated by the Land Use
Element.
h-aro-k of AFt0GIe 44 Autherity
Ar-tiele 34. of the (;ajifomia Constitution requires that when the eity > > or
e
The Qty of Rohner-t Par-k attempted the appr-oval of an Ar-tiele 34 measure in 1994, whieh w0uld
have authofized an aver-age of 100 lew ineoffle units per- year for- aper-iod of ten years. The
measui:e r-eeeived only 46% of the yotes east and.-was defeated.
Although the Qty has been effeetive in pr_oy�-,�-g rentals affordable to lower- ineeme households
Adopted Codes
The City has adopted recent editions of the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Housing Code,
National Electrical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, and the Uniform
Fire Code.
9 -41
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
The City has amended these codes in a few instances when necessary to protect the health,
safety, and welfare of its residents. For example, the Building Code has been amended with
additional requirements for concrete slab floors to mitigate local expansive soil conditions.
Lighted address numbers are required to improve identification of homes by emergency
personnel. Smoke detectors are required in single- family homes and automatic fire alarm
systems must be provided in multi - family complexes, apartment complexes, and condominium
complexes. Automatic fire suppression systems must be installed in new residential structures
and substantially - remodeled dwelling units. While these measures result in higher initial housing
costs, they are offset over the long run by savings on homeowners insurance and property
damage.
On average, five residential code enforcement actions occur each month. Given that buildings
constructed in Rohnert Park are aging, the need for building code enforcement activity has
increased in recent years.
Site Improvements
The Community Design Element calls for a 52 -foot wide local neighborhood street section (CD
Figure 3.2 -5) that provides two travel lanes, two parking lanes, sidewalks, and curbs and gutters
on either side. This design is intended to adequately accommodate traffic, parking, pedestrians,
and drainage.
Additional requirements in the city's Subdivision Ordinance include the planting of street trees
or a $40 per tree payment, and the installation of utility lines underground. These requirements
¢reativ enhance the appearance of residential neighborhoods.
Impact Fees and Exactions
The City charges a variety of development impact fees for capital outlay, water and sewer
connections, water reclamation, traffic impacts, and parks /open space /recreation. For example,
water and sewer fees are used to pay for the increased system capacities required by the
development. In some circumstances, a development impact fee is also assessed on projects for
them to "buy in" to the system of existing infrastructure.
While these fees may affect housing prices, the only alternatives would be their payment by the
existing taxpayers of the City of Rohnert Park or no further residential development, either of
which are infeasible.
A 1998 fee survey compared the development impact fees charged by Rohnert Park (Table 9.3-
3), including the "buy -in" fee, with six other jurisdictions that share the same market area and
water and sewage treatment systems, and are in a similar stage of urban development.
The survey found that the development impact fees charged by the City, totaled approximately
$13,277 for a single - family dwelling (three bedrooms, two baths, 1800 square feet), a total that
was $1,674 lower than the average for the comparable fees of the other six cities.
9 -42
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
As shown in Table 9.3 -3, the city's water connection, sewer connection, and parks and recreation
fees are lower for multi - family dwellings than single- family units in recognition of their
generally lower impacts on these systems.
Fees are also charged for services provided by the planning and engineering departments during
the review, entitlement, and construction phases of a residential project. The study also
concluded that these fees afewere significantly lower than all surveyed cities, and that the City
provides services with limited cost recovery from applicants for staff time and materials. In June
2001 the City approved a new service fee schedule for planning; engineering; building and fire
permits reviews and infections The new fees are primarily based on time and materials (i.e.,
full cost recovery) The site and architectural review fees for affordable housing projects,
however, was not changed from the set fee of $200 Further, as part of the new permit fee
schedule permit fees may be deferred for housing projects targeted to lower - income households,
if approved by the City Council when needed to ensure project feasibility. Further, also subject
to Council approval,. permit fees may be waived for housing projects requesting a density bonus.
ME,IQ
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Table 9.3 -3
Residential Development Fees per Unit
Type of Fee
Fee
Special Water Connection
$1715
Single- family
$1300
Multi- family
$ 325
Traffic Signalization
$1085
Single- family
$1085
Multi- family
$1830
Mobilehome
$ 925
Sewer Service Connection
Single- family
$5910
Multi- family
$4945
Mobilehome
$3545
Water/Wastewater Conservation
$ 325
Capital Outlay
Single family
1 bedroom
$1050
2 bedrooms
$1285
3 bedrooms or more
$1455
Multi - Family
1 bedroom
$ 870
2 bedrooms
$ 925
3 bedrooms
$1185
4 bedrooms or more
$1340
Mobilehome parks - adults only
1 bedroom
$ 630
2 bedrooms
$ 750
3 bedrooms or more
$ 870
Mobilehome parks with children
1 bedroom
$ 750
2 bedrooms
$ 870
3 bedrooms or more
$ 925
Development impact
$17,715/acre
( "buy -in" for previously unassessed property)
Source: 1998 Fee Survey
9 -44
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Rohnert Park has developed according to the neighborhood concept. Residential neighborhoods
are constructed around a park and /or school site, the dedication of which is required by the city's
subdivision regulations. The required area is approved by the City Council upon approval of the
tentative map. Standards in the General Plan provide guidance as to how much land needs to be
dedicated.
City Housing Programs
The inclusionary housing requirement (Program 9.1 of Section 9.5) is a critical component of the
city's housing program and an active means of providing affordable units to households typically
shut out of the housing market. Developers of residential projects are required to rent or sell 15
percent of the units at prices or rents affordable to lower- or moderate - income households. The
inclusionary program is also intended to promote the economic integration of lower- income
households in neighborhoods and the dispersion of such units throughout the city. The
requirement may also provide an incentive for developers to take the next step and increase their
project's share of units affordable to lower- income households to 25 percent in order to qualify
for a state housing density bonus.
The inclusionary requirement is also intended to offset the negative effects of new market -rate
housing on the provision of non - market rate housing. The construction of above - moderate
income housing depletes the amount of available residential land, while contributing to rising
land prices because of a greater scarcity of developable sites. Market -rate housing development
also exacerbates the affordable housing problem by creating greater needs for goods and services
typically provided by low- income employees.
There has been extensive debate over the question of who bears the cost of an inclusionary
requirement. Depending on the relative strength of the housing market, the costs may be incurred
by:
• Land owners, who may receive a lower price for their land if developers are expecting a
lower profit margin from the inclusionary requirement
• Developers, who may have to accept lower profits if housing prices cannot be raised
• The purchasers of market -rate units, who may have to pay higher housing prices if the local
and regional housing supply is limited and prices are at least as high in areas outside the city
In the currently- strong housing market, it is possible that the costs of the inclusionary housing
requirement will be incurred by all three groups.
It is not anticipated that this requirement will have the effect of diverting residential development
to other Sonoma County jurisdictions, since inclusionary requirements have been adopted by
Santa Rosa, Petaluma, Healdsburg, Cotati, Sonoma, and Sebastopol. The Windsor General Plan
contains an inclusionary housing policy that has not yet been implemented.
By limiting the inclusionary requirement to 15% and providing alternative means of compliance,
such as the provision of land for the required inclusionary units, nits payment of an in -lieu fee, and
9 -45
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
incorporation of second units, the program is not seen as an undue or onerous constraint on the
provision of market -rate housing.
Summary of Governmental Constraints
• Governmental constraints on the development of housing, as described in this section, are
summarized below. The removal of these constraints is addressed by the Housing Element's
policies and programs detailed in Section 9.5.
• The conditional use permit requirement for multi- family housing in non - residential districts
can be a barrier to the approval of residential development.
• The Zoning Ordinance needs procedures and standards for second units.
• The Zoning Ordinance needs- procedures and standards for density bonuses and other lower -
cost housing incentives.
• The Zoning Ordinance needs to provide opportunities for the siting of emergency shelters
and transitional housing.
• The Zoning Ordinance requires the same amount of parking for all sizes of multi - family
units, and a specific standard for guest parking is needed for multi - family projects to
facilitate their review and approval.
• Parking reductions are not currently allowed for smaller multi - family units, housing for the
elderly or disabled, or student housing near SUnonia State University.
• The Planning Commission reviews the design of residential projects, although this
responsibility is delegated to the Director of Planning and Community Development by the
Zoning Ordinance.
• The review process for housing projects may be delayed by a provision in the Zoning
Ordinance (Section 17.62.070 D.) that allows the Council to decide whether it wants to hear
an appeal.
The laek of Ai:tiele 34 atither-ity that would allow the City to develop, eefistr-uet, OF
law ineeme housing has hindeFed its a&r-dable housing program.
NONGOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
Nongovernmental constraints are those that are not created by local governments, but may be
lessened through their actions.
M,
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Direct Construction Costs
Construction Materials
Housing prices are influenced partly by the types of construction materials used. Homes in
Rohnert Park are generally of wood frame construction and finished with stucco or wood siding.
This type of construction is the least expensive conventional method (brick, stone and concrete
block are more costly). Composition shingle and built -up roofs, which are found on a large share
of the community's homes, are also the least expensive, followed by wood shingle, wood shake,
concrete tile, metal tile and clay tile38
.
The cost of lumber and wood products accounts for one -third of the costs of materials used to
build a home. A typical 2,000- square foot home uses nearly 16,000 board feet of lumber and
6,000 square feet of structural panels, such as plywood 39. A number of factors have recently
driven lumber prices to near - record levels, making new homes less affordable. These factors
include the increased pace of housing construction nationwide due to the improved economy,
increased demand for lumber in Asia, a cut in federal timber sales, quotas on sales from Canada,
mill closures, hurricane destruction in the Southeast, and an El Nino - shortened building season
last yearao
Since the beginning of 1999, the average price of framing lumber is up 36 percent and the
average price of plywood is up 60 percent41. A typical wood -frame home uses about 15,000
board feet of lumber, and every $1 increase in the avera e wholesale price of 1,000 board feet of
lumber increases the cost of a typical home about $204. The cost of lumber for a local single -
family house averaged $20,000 in 1999.
The booming housing construction trend has also led to tremendous shortages in insulation,
drywall, cement, and concrete. Although producers are working at maximum capacity, they still
cannot provide sufficient quantities of materials, resulting in higher prices. It appears that only a
downturn in housing construction will alleviate the high prices for construction materials and the
constraints on their availability.
Labor Supply
In addition to the shortage of building materials, builders have been unable to fill the high
demand for housing in Sonoma County due to a shortage of skilled labor. The area lost many
construction workers during the recession of the early 1990s, and rebuilding the labor supply will
take many years. The Home Builders Association of Northern California is not anticipating a
significant increase in the skilled labor force; therefore, the labor shortage will continue to be a
constraint on the supply of new housing43.
Over the long term, direct construction costs (including materials and labor) have decreased as a
proportion of total costs due to a dramatic drop in the number of person -hours required to
construct a unit, and the use of less- skilled (and therefore, lower -paid) workers because of a
greater use of pre- fabricated materials. These costs, however, remain the largest component of
the overall cost of a new single - family home44
9 -47
Rohnerf Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
The City can minimize construction costs by not requiring more costly kinds of building
materials on residences, such as clay tile roofs. However, there is nothing within the city's power
to affect the availability and cost of skilled labor.
Design and Location Preferences
Housing costs are affected in part by a residence's location, size, design, and the number and
type of amenities.
Housing Type and Location
A public opinion survey of 645 households nationwide conducted by the National Association of
Home Builders asked respondents to consider two hypothetical living arrangements:
• Purchasing a $150,000 townhouse in an urban setting close to public transportation, work,
and shopping; or,
• Purchasing a larger single - family home for $150,000 in an outlying area, with longer
commutes to work but more private open space.
Eighty -two percent of survey respondents chose the single - family house in an outlying area.
However, given the city's large number of mobilehomes, single - family homes on small lots,
condominiums, and apartments, it appears that residents are also willing to accept non - traditional
designs.
Size and Amenities
There has been a dramatic change over the last 30 years in the size of housing units and the amenities
provided to them, as shown in Table 9.3-4. The average size of a single- family home has increased by
nearly half. One -third of new homes has four or more bedrooms, despite the drop in average household
size, partly due to the rise of specialty rooms such as home offices, sunrooms, media rooms, and exercise
rooms. All of these design trends can result in higher prices for housing.
Countering higher construction costs is a trend towards smaller residential lots. The average lot
size for new homes nationwide has dropped nearly 5,000 square feet over the last 20 years.
Future Trends
Analysis of the United States Census Bureau's 1999 Current Population Survey reveals that while
homeownership rates have risen over the last few years, the rise in apartment households has outpaced
those rates. The data also showed that the fastest - growing segment of the apartment market came from
households earning $50,000 or more, a 4.7% increase over the previous year45.
The Census Bureau is projecting a boom in the population groups most likely to choose an
apartment — young adults, one - person households and married couples with no children.
Apartments offer a lifestyle better suited to the needs of these groups by combining convenience
and amenities. They also provide flexibility to respond to job and lifestyle changes.
M 1.1
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Table 9.3 -4
Comparison of New Home Characteristics Nationwide
Characteristic
1971
1999
Average floor area
1,500 sq. ft.
2,225 sq. ft.
Homes <_ 1,600 sq. ft.
65%
26%
Homes >_ 2,400 sq. ft.
9%
67%
Two or more stories
17%
52%
2 1/2 or more bathrooms
15%
53%
Four or more bedrooms
18%
33%
Dishwasher equipped
91%
Range /stove /oven equipped
-
88%
Central air conditioning equipped
36%
84%
Two -car or greater garage
53%(1975)
79%
Garbage disposal equipped
75%
Microwave equipped
__
67%
Fireplace(s) equipped
36%
61%
Security system equipped
--
36%
Sources: "Characteristics of New Homes Completed,
" Census Bureau;
1998 Builder Practices Survey, NAHB Research Center
The recently- approved Mountain Shadows apartment project reflects this trend. Amenities that
are planned for tenants include indoor and outdoor athletic facilities, a fitness center, a resort -
style swimming pool, and a built -in computer desk in every unit wired with high -speed Internet
service.
Furthermore, tax law changes in 1997 have caused many Americans to question the assumption
that owning a home is better from an economic standpoint than renting. Now that the first
$500,000 of capital gains on homes sold by joint filers are exempt from taxes, many people —
particularly empty nesters — are choosing to sell their homes and rent, letting someone else worry
about cutting the grass, household repairs, and paying property taxes.
Land Costs
Approximately 25 percent of housing costs are attributable to land costs in most real estate
markets. A major component of this cost is land speculation. Land costs are also affected by such
factors as zoning density, the availability of infrastructure, the existence or absence of
environmental constraints, and the relative amount of similar land available for development.
Vacant, residentially -zoned property within the 1999 city limits is limited to a .75 -acre infill site
off of E. Cotati Avenue. This site was recently under a purchase agreement for $220,000, which
9 -49
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
would have had an associated land cost of $10,000 per unit, assuming the property was
developed at the highest density.
Land costs for residential development in the areas designated for growth by the General Plan
will not be known until properties have been annexed and development costs have been
calculated. Whatever the future values are, it can be assumed that the cost of land will be a major
factor in the cost of lower -cost housing. The City has assisted with pre - development costs for
lower- income housing projects in the past, including the securing of property options, and it is
likely that similar assistance in the future could prove useful to the development of such housing.
Financing Costs
Mortgage Interest Rates
Besides lowering monthly interest payments for new buyers, lower interest rates allow existing
homeowners to refinance their homes, thereby lowering monthly housing costs and perhaps
preserving their ownership status.
Mortgage interest rates fell to 6.66 percent for a 30 -year, fixed -rate mortgage in September 1998,
the lowest levels since 1971. However, they have since risen to 8.24 percent in July 2000 for zero
discount point loans46. Rising rates usually cool a housing market as lower- income buyers are
unable to qualify at the higher rates and other postpone purchases until the next rate cycle.
Many major financial institutions and mortgage lenders that finance housing have offices in
Rohnert Park. Additional financial institutions and mortgage lenders that lend in Rohnert Park
have offices located in nearby Santa Rosa or Petaluma.
The large number of active real estate lenders in Rohnert Park indicates a strong real estate
market. The Bank of America has listed the Rohnert Park area as one of the most attractive
places in the world in which to live, and tabbed the area as a prime real estate investment
opportunity. Real estate prices have appreciated substantially in recent years in all sections of
Rohnert Park and there is no indication that the trend will end. Consequently, a relatively large
number of financial institutions invest in local real estate.
Given the number and the size of some of the financial institutions active in Rohnert Park, there
is no current shortage of financing for housing projects. There is loan money available for new
construction, housing rehabilitation and mortgage financing.
Homes sales are occurring in all parts of the community, and there is no evidence of mortgage -
deficient areas in the community for new construction or rehabilitation loans.
Construction Financing
Financing costs for construction are affected partly by how early in the development process
loans must be taken out and how long the loans must be carried. Project delays can increase total
interest payments, as well as create greater financial risk for a project. Overall, construction
financing usually represents a small contribution to total housing costs.
�*W
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Down Payments and Move -In Costs
The ability to accumulate a down payment remains a formidable barrier to many potential
homebuyers. Low - income households find it difficult to make the transition from rental to
ownership units because they cannot accumulate a downpayment while renting47. A $226,000
home (the September 1999 median price of homes in Rohnert Park) would require a 10 percent
down payment of more than $22,000.
Similarly, low- income households are unable to obtain rental housing because they cannot
accrue the necessary downpayment in the form of security deposits and first and last months'
rents.
Summary of Nongovernmental Constraints
Nongovernmental constraints on the development of housing, as described in this section, are
summarized below. Reducing these constraints, to the extent feasible, is addressed by the
Housing Element's policies and programs detailed in Section 9.5.
• The high demand for lumber products and other construction materials has resulted in high
prices, leading to higher housing costs.
• Public demand for larger homes with more amenities has resulted in higher housing costs.
• The limited availability of land for residential development has resulted in high land costs.
11911 Interest rot— rticrnialifv ln�a7Pr- in(`.nmP, hnilRP.hn1C1C.
• Downpayments and move -in costs are often beyond the means of lower- income households.
9 -51
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
9.4 HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AND RESOURCES
During the planning period for this Housing Element (1/1/99 — 6/30/06), new housing will be
provided through the construction of units within the 1999 city limits as well as in growth areas
to the east and west. Other opportunities for housing include the development of second units on
existing single - family lots.
POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Development within the 1999 City Limits
As the City approaches buildout within its current boundaries, there are limited opportunities for
residential construction. As shown in the following table, 29514—units have already been
constructed or approved since the beginning of the planning period, and there are opportunities
for approximately 505 563 more units.
Table 9.4 -1
Potential Residential Development —1999 City Limits
Use Approved/ Affordability
Location Design. Acres Potential Units Classification
Constructed Projects (1999)
Muirfield Apartments
Honeybrook II
Rohnert Park West
24 apartments
26 single - family
units
41 single - family
units
Very low
Above - moderate
Above - moderate
I1309 Maurice Avenue
N. Comm.
<1.0
7 apartments
Low
Approved Projects
: aapart eRts
LOW
Mountain Shadows
Comm.
8.50
176 apartments
Moderate
Apts. .............................-..................................................................................................................................................................
............... ..........................................................................................................
.............I.................
................... .............................:.................................
Masma Construction
Comm.
0.76
16 apartments
Moderate, low, v.low
Second Units:
Evelvn Ave.
Low - Density
1 unit
Very -low
Alma Ave.
Low - Density
1 unit
Very -low
Burton Ave.
Low - Density
1 unit
Very -low
Single Units:
Business Park Drive
Commercial
1 unit
Low
Redwood Drive
Commercial
1 unit
Low
9 -52
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Potential
Development
Inside 1999 City
Limits Mixed Use 8.36 40 multi - family units Moderate, low, v. low
6025 Commerce Blvd.
1400 E. Cotati Avenue High .75 22 multi - family units Moderate, low, v. low
Density
City Center Mixed Use 3.72 180 multi-family. Moderate, low, v. low
units
Second Units Low Density 15 units Low, v. low
Wellness Center Office 10.0 195 units - senior Moderate, low, v.low
Surplus Well Sites Residential varies 5 units Moderate, low
Potential Redevelopment
Southwest Blvd. Mixed Use 7.0 50 multi - family Moderate, low, v.
Center units low
6920 Commerce Blvd. High 1.25 30 multi - family Moderate, low, v.
Density units low
6750 Commerce Blvd. High .94 26 multi - family Low, v.low
Density units
Total 566858 dwellin g I
units
Privately -Owned Land
The potential for residential development on privately -owned vacant land within the 1999 city
limits is extremely limited:
• An approved and constructed mixed -use project on Maurice Avenue that includes seven,
one - bedroom apartments along with a neighborhood commercial center_ ntly unde
• An approved 176 unit apartment complex, the The City has appr-eved - use per-FRit -for- the
Mountain Shadows Apartments project, is currently under construction. It is on an 8.5 -acre
commercially -zoned site across from the Doubletree Hotel that is proximate to the freeway,
schools, parks, and commercial services. The 176 units, projected to be completed in 2001,
will be arranged in three -story structures. Unit sizes range from one to three bedrooms, and
project residents will be provided with extensive on -site recreational opportunities. The
project's developer expects to fulfill an unmet demand for rental housing.
9 -53
Rohnert Park General Plan
Citv Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
The City has approved a 16 unit apartment complex the Masma Construction project, on a 0.76
acre previously designated commercial site on E Cotati Avenue. The 16 -unit project is
projected .,to be completed in 2001. Unit sizes will all be three bedrooms and 15% of the
units will be for low or very -low income households.
During the later part of 2000 and the beginning of 2001 the City approved three second -units
on single- family residential properties.
During 2000 the City approved two separate living units as part of the approval for two
mini - storage protects located on commercially -zoned sites.
• The only vacant residentially -zoned property within the city limits is a .75 -acre site at 1400
E. Cotati Avenue. Burbank Housing Development Corporation received approval for 20
lower- income apartments on the site in 1999, however, its option has lapsed. Development of
the site with apartments by another applicant is likely in the near future.
During the general plan update process, other vacant and uncommitted sites were evaluated as to
their suitability for residential development. It was concluded that most of the sites should retain
their commercial or industrial designations due to a future need to provide community services,
or because the sites were unsuitable for residential use because of high noise levels (e.g., near
Highway 101 and /or a baseball stadium), inadequate access, incompatible uses in the vicinity
(wastewater holding ponds and sewage pump station or industrial uses, animal shelter, radio
station. CHP facilitv), and/-of lack of adequate services (schools community � arks public safety
station shopping etc.). Nevertheless, residential development could be approved for these sites
through a conditional use permit.
However, the land use designation was changed to "Mixed Use" for two sites that were
previously designated "Commercial" in order to encourage residential development. The Mixed
Use designation will allow residential development as a permitted use on the following sites:
• An 8.36 -acre vacant site on the west side of Commerce Boulevard, north of Hinebaugh
Channel (approximately 6025 Commerce Blvd.). Although the rear of the parcel is unsuitable
for residential development due to its proximity to the freeway, the site could accommodate
multi - family units on the front portion. Access and other infrastructure necessary to support
residential use on the site are already in place.
• The seven -acre Southwest Boulevard Shopping Center, which is discussed below.
Second Units
As described in the previous section, a second unit is an additional residential unit on the same
lot as a primary single - family dwelling which provides complete, independent living facilities for
one or more persons. Second units could potentially be developed on many existing lots,
particularly in the city's older neighborhoods that are larger in area.
NAT!
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Within a period of three months three second units were approved by the City. Only one of the
three was appealed to the City Council and it was approved Given a large article in the local
paper, Community Voice regarding the approval of one of the first second units, it is estimated
that at least an additional 15 second units will applied for and approved between 2001 and
2006. , it is Eliffieult to estimate how many eoi
pE)tentiaj residential development The revised ordinance will However-, revising the Aening
Or-dinanee to include explicit standards and staff approval for second units that will further eould
encourage their development in the near future by eliminating the he requirement for a conditional
use permit if the standards consistent with state law, are met.-
Potential Redevelopment
The number of sites within the city limits that could be redeveloped with residential uses is very
limited. Single- family areas are fully developed and occupied, and units have been generally
maintained in good condition. Multi - family housing complexes likewise are almost completely
occupied and have been maintained in standard condition. Industrial parcels are also largely
utilized and have been maintained.
However, a few redevelopment opportunities exist:
The City is currently planning the construction of a new City Hall on City Hall Drive. The
new building is expected to be completed by the end of 2002. The current City Hall site
at 6750 Commerce Blvd will be sold to the Redevelopment Agency for the construction
of 26 units of lower - income housing.
The owner of an office complex at 6920 Commerce Boulevard has submitted preliminary
plans for a 30 unit -- apartment project on this
site.. The land use designation for the site was changed in the updated General Plan from
Diag — Professional- Administrative Office to Jesignates the site— as High Density
Residential. Given its location in front of an existing apartment complex, the development of
approximately 30 multi- family units on the site is feasible. Existing access and other
infrastructure is adequate to accommodate residential development on the site.
Portions of the seven -acre Southwest Boulevard Shopping Center are aging and it may have
lost viability as a neighborhood commercial center. While specialty stores occupy some of
the commercial space, other commercial space has remained vacant for several years.
Ownership of the center is split among several owners and the site is divided among multiple
parcels. The City has received a number of inquiries regarding the potential redevelopment
of the site The land use designation for the site was changed in the updated General Plan
from Neighborhood Commercial to Mixed -Use to encourage and facilitate the
redevelopment of the property.
Multi- family development of perhaps 50 units could be approved on the site and
redevelopment housing funds are available. Although consolidating the entire seven
MIN
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
parcel site under one ownership would be problematic the housing could be constructed on
just two or three of the seven parcels.- Existing access and other infrastructure appears
adequate to accommodate residential development on the site. The City has recently hired a
new Assistant City Manager with economic development experience that will work with the
property owners to facilitate the redevelopment of the site.
• Further Article 34 of the California Constitution requires that when the city develops,
constructs or acquires a housing project targeted towards lower- income households, its
qualified electors must approve the project by a majority. The Article 34 ballot measure
(Measure O 2000) was approved by the voters in November 2000. This approval allows the
City to be more pro- active in its use of City and Redevelopment Funds.
City -Owned Land
Vacant city -owned property within the 1999 city limits that would be suitable for residential
development is very limited. The development potential of each is described below.
The City owns two sites within the City Center (430 and 450 City Hall Drive). The 1999 City
Center Concept Plan identifies residential uses as an important component of the pedestrian -
oriented center, which will eventually include city hall, the public library, and commercial
uses. Dwelling units are allowed as a primary use, and higher floor -area ratios (2.0 vs. 1.5)
are allowed for mixed -use projects that include residences. As noted above the current City
Hall site on Commerce Blvd has been identified for affordable housing.
Revenue bonds to construct a new city hall and library within the City Center have been sold,
and it is hoped that their construction in the next few years will be a catalyst for mixed -use
development nearby.
The City is actively working with potential developers to construct approximately 180 high -
density units above ground -floor commercial uses. A mix of lower- and moderate - income
units is assumed for these sites, with the potential for senior housing.
The sites are designated as "Mixed Use" by the General Plan diagram, which will allow
residential development as a permitted use. One of the properties is vacant, while the other is
improved with an office building and parking lot that will be demolished. Access and other
infrastructure necessary to support residential uses on the sites are already in place.
The City owns 14 undeveloped acres on the west side of the community that adjoin a
baseball stadium and wastewater holding ponds. The City is considering dividing this area
into three parcels in order to sell them. An appraisal report prepared for the parcels
concluded that they are best suited for light industrial, research and development, or office
uses. These sites are not considered suitable for residential use due to stadium noise, dog
shelter noise, the objectionable odors that occur when the holding ponds are filled, and the
lack of residential services on the west side, such as schools, parks, and a public safety
station.
9 -56
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
• A 10 -acre, city -owned site located at the northeast corner of Rohnert Park Expressway and
Snyder Lane was given to the city with the stipulation that it be used for medical uses. It is
under lease to a group proposing hopi*g to develop the property with a comprehensive
"wellness center," that may include continuing care housing for the elderly. In February
2001 the City Council approved a resolution recognizing a proposal by Kisco Corporation
for a Senior Independent Living and Wellness Campus as an already permitted use under the
City's lease agreement With the assistance of the City's redevelopment housing set -aside
funds the Kisco Corporation has agreed to set aside 20% of the 195 units in the senior
independent living phase for low and very -low income levels Kisco is currently preparing
their development plans for submittal to the City.I4W�
• A 1.58 -acre site owned by the city at 705 Rohnert Park Expressway, located near Food 4
Less, is designated for recreational purposes by the General Plan. Due to limited access, it is
not considered suitable for residential uses.
The City also owns a number of sites that are reserved for the development of water wells
and storage tanks. These sites are not availa-11- 10. 1-1--efiHal Oeve—F.—
needed as integr-a! eompolients in the water- supply systefi+--
The City is currently reviewing
these sites to determine which ones can be designated as surplus and sold for residential
purposes or designated for homeless or transitional housing.
Growth Areas
The city's regional share of housing for the planning period is to be provided within the 1999
city limits. However, significant residential growth could occur in areas outside of the limits.
1999 Sphere of Influence
The city's current Sphere of Influence is comprised of the area within the 1999 city limits and
two areas outside of it: the 25 -acre Wilfred /Dowdell Specific Plan area (proposed for a
commercial center), and the Canon Manor neighborhood. It does not include lands north of
Sonoma State University or south of Canon Manor that were included in the ABAG Regional
Housing Need Determination for the City of Rohnert Park.
The Canon Manor rural subdivision, an unincorporated area located immediately south of
Sonoma State University, is accessed by graveled roads and supported by individual water wells
and septic systems. The subdivision has been plagued by failing sewer systems and contaminated
water supplies.
Before annexation of Canon Manor to the City of Rohnert Park and further residential
development of any density or intensity can occur, a funding mechanism must be established to
bring the infrastructure, including its streets, up to city standards. Property owners, the City,
Sonoma County, and LAFCO have been working together over an extended period to resolve
these issues, and it is hoped that an assessment district can be established to pay for the necessary
improvements
9 -57
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Potential development of the Canon Manor area as provided for by the General Plan Diagram
includes approximately 113 Rural Estate Residential infill units and 191 Low Density
Residential units south of Alice Drive.
Expanded Urban Growth Boundary
The Cites expanded Urban Growth Boundary as proposed in the Land Use and Growth
Management Element of this General Plan and as approved by the voters includes The Land Use
alid tj, ,4 _ - - -± Element pr �ef the potential construction of 4,025 dwelling units
outside of the 1999 Sphere of Influence, distributed among the various specific plan areas as
shown in the following figure and Table 9.4 -2. Of those 4,025, approximately 1,516 are expected
to be built by 2006 See subsection regarding __Timing of Development for a complete schedule of
steps to be taken by the City to facilitate expansion and annexation of these areas. The proposed
SOI also includes Sonoma State University.
Table 9.4 -2A
Potential Residential Development -- Sonoma State University
(outside of 1999 Sphere of Influence)
Location
Use Designation
Constructed/
Proposed Units
Constructed Projects
Sauvignon Village (2000)
Public /Institutional
212 apartments- student hsq.
900 beds
Potential Development:
University Village
Vinters Glen
(part of the University
Public /Institutional
Public /Institutional
450 apartments- student hsq.
190 single - family- faculty hsq/
63 second units - student or
Specific Plan area)
faculty (total =253)
TOTAL
915 units*
*Although the 915 units are projected to be built during the planning period and
the City of Rohnert Park provides services to SSU only the 253 units of faculty/
second -units proposed on non -SSU owned land within the University Specific
Plan Area are counted in the City's housing objectives for the planning period.
It is not known when the SSU campus may annex to the City.
M-1
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Table 9.4 -213
Potential Residential Development — Growth Areas
(outside of 1999 Sphere of Influence)
Location
Rural
Estate
0 -2
UPga
Low
Density
4 -6 upga
Medium
Density
6 -12
upga
High
Density
12 -24 upga
Mixed
Use
Total
Units
University
District SP
20 – 25
245 –2-95
510– 560
570– 630
70-100
1415 -1610
NE Specific
40 – 60
575 – 635
100-140
200 –250
-
915-1085
Plan
SE Specific
30 – 50
145 –165
180 – 220
_
55 – 75
410-510
Plan
NW Specific
Plan
-
_
_
800– 900
_
800 –900
Totals
90-135
965 –1095
790 – 920
1570 –1780
123-175
3540 -4105*
* As noted above approximately 1,516 of these units are expected to be built by 2006, based on the Growth
Management Program of an average of 225 units /year over six years (2001 -2006) plus an approximate of 15%
for affordable units for very low and low income households which are exempt from the 225 units /year average
(includes the 253 units of SSU faculty /second -unit housing) See subsection regarding Timing of Development
for a complete schedule of steps to be taken by the City to facilitate expansion and annexation of these areas.
RU LGW Medium #49h Mixed Total
yl=osatier} rat Derx,,Ry Dens" use ass
ErA 4-6 -upga 6 -12 upga 12 7�ga
ate 'r°- c.p9c. °�9
2
UP
M
9a
\/ 2-() 245 290 510 560 5 • `i 630 _ _ 1'0
L 2-
NE Sp eGitttrr-tai�}- 49 975 635 100 1"40 nOO - P90 - 915 1085
68
SF. cis Watt 30 !4165 1900– 220 -- 55 75 410-510
59
� lu*
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Tetals 90 965 - -4095 7°.90 —°2c)
M
4570 — 4'23 —, ; 5 3540-4105
4-7"
The total potential residential growth within the Growth Areas during 1999 -1,uub is estimates to
be 1,516 units (includes the 253 units of SSU faculty /second -unit housing that are proposed to be
located within the University Specific Plan Area) Together with the potential residential
development within the 1999 City limits (858 units) the total protected growth during the 1999 -
2006 planning period is 2,374.
The range of residential densities will provide opportunities for housing at all income levels. In
general, development within Rural Estate and Low Density areas will produce housing within the
above - moderate income range, Medium Density will accommodate above - moderate and
moderate - income housing, and High Density and Mixed Use will provide opportunities for
lower- income housing as well as higher - income units. The University Housing will provide
housing for both students and faculty.
The General Plan Diagram also promotes a range of housing densities, types, and sizes within
residential neighborhoods (CD -H). The Community Design Element allows townhomes and
multi - family dwellings to be integrated with single - family residences (CD -17).
Tle.ye.lnpment outside of the 1999 city limits will occur within five designated specific plan areas
(depicted in Figure 2.4 -1 of the Land Use and Growth Management Element) and in and around
the existing Sonoma State University Campus. Except for the provisions of the Growth
Management program which provides for a 1% average approximate growth rate but does not
establish a specific cap on building permits, and exempts low and very -low income projects from
this ave�no phasing requirements have been imposed on these areas, and property owners of
any specific plan area could submit a specific plan and annexation request to the City after
adoption of the General Plan. Given the considerable growth pressures in the area and theme, active
interest in development expressed by- numerous property owners and
owner representatives (letters have been received from representatives for both the Northeast
and the University Specific Plan areas expressing their intent to submit preliminary applications
sometime in September 2001 • for both of those areas and two others the developers have hired
consultants to begin work on site surveys and preparation of a specific plans; for at least one of
the areas the University District the preliminary wetland surveys have been completed and the
consulting team for the .project includes architects economists and home builders), it is likely
that one or more specific plan will be prepared and submitted within this year, 2001, or next.
ShE)r-gy after- adeption of -the General Plan.
If such plans are not forthcoming, the City weould take an active lead in the preparation of the
specific plans, as it did for the Wilfred- Dowdell Specific Plan, which is scheduled for adoption in
2001 -0. In that case, the City brought together the many property owners in the area to formulate
Mus
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
a plan, and paid for the plan's preparation, with deferred reimbursement from the property
owners.
The type and location of residential development for each of the specific plan areas is
summarized below, as described in the Land Use and Growth Management Element.
Sonoma State University
Although Sonoma State is currently not within the City's boundaries or sphere -of- influence it is
directly served by the City of Rohnert Park in a number of ways The University's non - potable
campus water distribution system is connected to the City's Pipeline Extension of the City of
Santa Rosa Subre¢ional Reclaimed Water System which provides water for the campus irrigation
and fire hydrant systems The University currently depends on wells to supply its potable water
demands as does Rohnert Park fora portion of its water supply, the growth of the University will
directly contribute to the lowering of the water table within the area. The University's
wastewater collections stem is connected to the City's wastewater collection system and
impacts the City's wastewater collection system capacity; further, the University is included in
the City's current allocation of dry weather flows designated by the subregional treatment system.
The City also has a mutual aid agreement with the University for fire and emergency services
and a joint investi ag tive agreement for Public Safety as well as provides off -site police protection
in the vicinity of the University. There are seven City parks within one -mile of the University.
University District Specific Plan Area
Potential residential development within the University District, as called for by the Land Use
and Growth Management Element (Table 2.4 -1) includes:
• A 25 -40 acre mixed -use center, located directly adjacent to Sonoma State University, which
could include between 70 and 100 units.
• Approximately 35 to 45 acres of High Density Residential development immediately
adjacent to the district's commercial core or along the linear park. This High Density
Residential development need not be in a continuous uniform width band around the
commercial core; however, all High Density Residential development in the area shall be
adjacent to the core.
• Medium Density Residential development (60 to 70 acres) around the commercial core /High
Density Residential uses.
• Low Density Residential development (55 to 65 acres) east of the medium density area.
• Rural Estate Residential development of 30 to 35 acres on the eastern edge of the Specific
Plan area
M1
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Northeast Specific Plan Area
The General Plan Diagram provides for approximately 23.1 acres of Rural Estate Residential and
109.1 acres of Low Density Residential along the east side of Snyder Lane, between Copeland
Creek and the "G Section" Neighborhood; as well as approximately 6.6 acres of Medium Density
Residential and 12.5 acres of High Density Residential along the north and south sides of
Eleanor Avenue.
Community Design Element Policy CD -43 stipulates that the High Density Residential
development is to be located adjacent to open space and along the proposed north -south arterial
and collector streets to maximize accessibility.
Southeast Specific Plan Area
The General Plan Diagram provides for approximately 10 acres of mixed -use development,
which could result in the development of approximately 64 units, 30.3 acres of Low Density
Residential, and 19.6 acres of Medium Density Residential in the Southeast Specific Plan Area.
A higher floor ratio is allowed for the mixed -use area if it includes residential development (1.0
as opposed to .4) to encourage the development of housing in this area.
Northwest Specific Plan Area
Approximately 800 to 900 High Density Residential units could be constructed on 40 to 50
residentially- designated acres in the Northwest Specific Plan Area, developed on either side of
the Wilfred Avenue extension.
Community Design Element Policies CD -44 and CD -47 are designed to ensure that residential
developments are designed to capitalize on views of the surrounding separator to the west and
north, and beyond, and that adjacent commercial areas are compatible with the residential uses.
Timing of Development
General Plan buildout is envisioned to occur over a period of 20 years, at an average growth rate
of 225 housing units per year. The actual timing of development will depend on a number of
factors, including:
• Market demand for housing
• Preparation and approval of specific plans
• Availability of water and wastewater disposal services, and
• Annexation approval.
The City proposes to proceed with applying for an expansion of its sphere -of- influence and its
first annexation under the following schedule:
MIM
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Begin meeting with County Officials: April 2001
(required by Government Code Section 56425(b))
Adoption of Growth Management Ordinance: July 2001
(Growth Management Ordinance required by voter - approved UGB Measure)
Application to LAFCO for SOI Expansion: Sept 2001
Adoption of ls` Specific Plan(s) July 2002
1st Annexation Approval(s) Sept. 2002
Property owners /developers from each of the Specific Plan areas have been in contact with the
City on a number of occasions regarding the City's schedule and when they can submit their
applications for specific plans; as noted above two letters have been received stating the intent
of the property owners to file preliminary_ plans for the Northeast and University Specific Plan
areas in September 2001 The City is taking a pro- active role in proceeding ahead with the
Growth Management Ordinance and staff has met with LAFCO staff regarding the annexation
process Should the applications not be received by October 2001 the City would begin
preparation of a specific plan for one or more of the specific plan areas based on the overall
needs of the City including its regional housing needs The intent would be to complete the first
specific plan and the first annexation approval no later than the end of 2002 with subsequent
plan approvals occurring shortly thereafter. Further, the voters have approved the expansion of
the City's boundaries and the ballot measure for Article 34 which will allow the City to assist
with the development of low and very -low income housing within the City's expanded
boundaries.
D��hlir Farilitipc
Land Use and Growth Management Element policies48 require residential development
applications to include a Public Facilities Financing Plan that demonstrates how streets, water,
wastewater and solid waste disposal, and parks will be provided to the project. The Plan must
demonstrate that completion of all necessary public facilities concurrently with the development
is feasible.
Additionally, Growth Management Policy GM -15 requires the city to prepare, adopt, and
implement a Capital Improvement Program to provide a framework to undertake citywide public
facility improvements needed to accommodate anticipated growth. Some public facilities may be
deferred, but only under specific provisions of Policies GM -11 and —12.
City Water Supply
The City of Rohnert Park currently derives its drinking water supply from municipal wells and
the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) Petaluma Aqueduct, which supplies water from the
Russian River. The sources of the aqueduct water are from the Dry Creek and Russian River
Watersheds. Rohnert Park's average annual use of SCWA water currently exceeds its
entitlement, but the City has been able to purchase additional water from the unused allocation of
another SCWA member.
9 -63
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
As of 2000, the City of Rohnert Park has approved a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
between the SCWA and the eight public parties to whom the SCWA provides water supplies. As
part of the MOU, the City will receive an interim allocation until September 2010, when it is
anticipated that additional water supplies will become available from SCWA. The planned
SCWA entitlement will fulfill future growth demands from 2010 through 2020, and allow the
City to reserve municipal wellfield production for backup and emergency supply purposes.
However, during the interim, the City will continue to rely on their municipal wellfield as a
source of water to supplement the SCWA allocation schedule.
City Wastewater Disposal
All development within the existing city limits is connected to sewer service. Sewer mains
collect wastewater and transport it to a pumping station and the Laguna Water Reclamation
Treatment Plant. As of 1999, the wastewater mains were sized to serve the area within the 1999
city limits.
The City of Rohnert Park is a partner in a sub - regional wastewater disposal system, and has been
allocated a share of its capacity. Although the city's average dry weather wastewater flows
exceed its allocation, it has been able to purchase excess capacity from other system partners.
Two projects are underway to increase the system's reclaimed water storage and distribution
capacity. A storage pond has been completed and the Regional Water Quality Control Board has
approved a 1.2 -mgd increase in the expansion of the treatment plant's capacity. Rohnert Park is
expected to receive at least one -third of this increase, which will accommodate residential
vrowth in the. short term.
The Subregional Long Term Wastewater Project is intended to meet the needs of partner cities
through 2010 by transporting treated wastewater to The Geysers for injection into the geothermal
field. It is anticipated that the City's capacity allocation from this project can accommodate an
additional 2,751 dwelling units (3,155 units if sewer hook -ups are not provided to Canon Manor)
49 This capacity would accommodate residential development until at least 2012, which is well
beyond the planning period for this Housing Element.
Protection of Residential Quality
The Community Design Element contains several goals and policies designed to protect existing
residential neighborhoods from negative effects associated with development, and to create
livable environments in new neighborhoods, including the following:
• Ensure that the University District is developed in a manner that is sensitive to the existing
residential developments to the west (CD -31)
• Ensure that development in existing neighborhoods is respectful of the character of existing
uses and causes minimal design intrusion. (CD -53)
• Develop linkages within and between neighborhoods through linear parks, interconnected
networks of streets (CD -2)
Ml
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
• Promote connections with adjacent neighborhoods (CD -B and CD -2)
• Ensure a fine- grained and integrated pattern of streets that provide continuity between
neighborhoods, have a human scale, and enhance the character of neighborhoods (CD -24)
• Minimize the visual dominance of garages (CD -21)
AGENCY AND FUNDING RESOURCES
Agencies and programs that address housing needs within the City of Rohnert Park are already in
place.
Community Development Commission
State law authorizes local governments to establish one or more redevelopment project areas to
eliminate blight, and to expand and improve the supply of low and moderate - income housing.
Redevelopment agencies may use the power of eminent domain to assemble and acquire sites for
housing, both within and outside of a project area. They may also issue revenue bonds to finance
infrastructure and provide long -term, low- interest loans for construction and rehabilitation.
Funds may also be generated by tax increment financing, which captures for a time, all or a
portion of the increased tax revenue that results from greater private investment in a project area.
The Community Development Commission of the City of Rohnert Park ( CDCRP) was created in
1987 and established a Redevelopment Project Area that is generally west of the Northwestern
Pacific Railroad tracks, with the exception of several isolated areas east of the tracks that are
included within its boundaries (see following figure). Existing residential arras contained W 1.1111
the Project Area include the A, B, and L Section neighborhoods, and portions of the C and M
Sections, as well as three mobilehome parks.
The CDCRP's powers and funds generation represent an important resource for housing, not
only in the redevelopment project area, but outside of its boundaries as well. According to state
law, twenty percent of the CDCRP's gross tax increment (less certain adjustments) must be
transferred to the Housing Fund each year. This allocation must be spent on housing - related
programs within five years of their deposit into the fund. For 1999 -2000, the Housing Fund
allocation is ti ated to be was $910,000, and for 2000 -2001 the Housing Fund allocation is
estimated to be $1,030,000 which will funded and will fund the programs described below and in
Section 9.5.
California Community Redevelopment law specifies that at least 30 percent of all new or
rehabilitated dwelling units developed by the Community Development Commission must be
affordable to low or moderate income households. Not less than 50 percent of the affordable
dwelling units developed by the CDCRP must be affordable to very low- income households.
Overall, at least 15 percent of all new or rehabilitated dwelling units developed by the CDCRP
and other entities in the project area must be affordable to low or moderate income households,
and not less than 40 percent of the affordable dwelling units must be affordable to very low -
income households.
9 -65
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Since its establishment, the redevelopment agency has undertaken numerous programs and
expended significant funds to support the development and conservation of housing. Its actions
between 1995 and 1999 are described in detail in Appendix A, Implementation of the 1995
Housing Element.
Current Programs
Programs that are currently sponsored and supported by the CDCRP include the following:
• First -Time Homebuyer Downpayment Assistance Program
The CDCRP provides in downpayment assistance as a silent second for qualifying low- and
median - income, first -time homebuyers. Up to $15,000 is available to low- income households
and $10,000 to median - income households. No interest is charged on the deferred loan, and
the loan is forgiven at the end of ten years if the homebuyer lives in the house as their
primary residence for the entire period. The loans are available to households both within
and outside of the redevelopment project area.
Twenty -six loans were v.611 have.- approved by mid -July 2000, assisting one very low -
income household, 15 low- income households, and 10 median - income households, and more
than $300,000 was• '" have bee* committed. Thirteen loans are estimated to have been
approved by mid -July 2001 2 very low - income 7 low- income, and 6 median - income
households.
In May 2000, the CDCRP authorized an additional $500,000 in funding for the program.
• Christmas in April
The redevelopment agency coordinated a Christmas in April program in Rohnert Park on
April 15, 2000 and April 28, 2001. Using community volunteers and donated materials,
seveneiahteen homes occu -pied by very low- income households, including €tee sixteen
elderly and enefour disabled households, were rehabilitated to provide warmth, safety, and
security. Typical repairs included fi*i*gje Alacin leaky roofs, building wheelchair ramps,
electrical rewiring, repairing plumbing, installing new furnaces and hot water heaters,
installing smoke detectors, replacing doors and windows, landscaping, and painting. The
CDCRP's 1999 -2000 budget provided $20,000 of funding for the program and the 2000-
2001 budget provided $25,000 of funding for the program.
• Owner - Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program
The CDCRP's 1999 -2000 and 2000 -2001 budgets both includeds $500,000 for loans for the
rehabilitation of owner - occupied housing (both conventional construction and mobilehomes),
and $175,000 to the Sonoma County Community Development Commission (SCCDC) for
administration costs. The program assists low- and moderate - income households with
incomes of up to 120 percent of area median income.
•..
Chapter 9
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Redev figure3 - -no change from July 2000 approval
Housing
9 -67
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
•.:
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
The maximum loan amount is $35,000 for conventional homes and $15,000 for
mobilehomes. Deferred, forgivable loans are available to very low- and low- income
households, and amortized loans are available at below- market interest rates to moderate -
income households.
The program's priority is for moderate- quality improvements necessary to assure that the
home meets code requirements and basic housing quality standards. Eligible improvements
also include room additions where the unit is too small for the occupant family, repairs or
modifications for improved accessibility for disabled and /or elderly occupants,
weatherization for energy conservation, and the construction of carports where no covered,
off - street parking exists.
SCCDC staff ..,developed brochures, flyers, and press releases to market the program.
Advertising and outreach included newspaper articles and press releases, direct mailings
to property owners, and neighborhood informational meetings.
• Support to Homeless Service Providers
The 1999 -2000 CDCRP budget includes funding of $51,250 to Petaluma People Services and
$10,000 to the Homeless Prevention Group to address the needs of the homeless or those in
danger of becoming homeless. The 2000 -2001 budget includes funding of $55,000 to
Petaluma People Services and $10,000 to the Homeless Prevention Group.
• Mortgage Credit Certificate Program
The redevelopment agency participates in the Sonoma County Mortgage Credit I CI LI„IL;a«
(MCC) Program, which is a federal income tax program that allows a household to take a
portion of their mortgage interest as a credit rather than a deduction. The program is
available to low- and moderate - income households.
• Shared Living Home
The CDCRP is currently in the process of establishing a fourth shared - living home.
Future Programs
The CDCRP's Housing Fund contained approximately $2,900,000 for housing programs as of
July 1, 2000. Additions to the fund during the planning period (2000 to 2006) are estimated to be
$7,200,000, for a total of $10,100,000.
Housing programs that the CDC is likely to undertake during the planning period are:
• Housing administration services provided by the City
• Homeless prevention services
• First Time Homebuyer /Silent Second Program
...
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
• Owner - Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program
• Preservation of Country Club Village Apartments
• Multi- family housing construction assistance (such as City Center and within specific plan
areas)
• A mobilehome park acquisition program
Sonoma County Community Development Commission
The city's redevelopment agency has contracted with SCCDC in the past for administrative
services for its rehabilitation programs. The SCCDC employs staff with training and experience
in conducting such programs. Its services include marketing rehabilitation loan funds, taking
applications and obtaining third -party verifications of application information, employing
underwriting standards in the approval of loans, obtaining appraisals, verifying payment of taxes,
ordering credit reports, obtaining title reports, verifying insurance coverage, procuring pest
reports, preparing rehabilitation work programs, procuring contractors for rehabilitation work,
monitoring construction and obtaining releases, and preparing and recording final loan
documents.
Sonoma County Consolidated Plan
In order to receive Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnership Act,
and Federal Emeraencv Shelter Grant funds, the City of Rohnert Park has executed a Joint
Powers Agreement for Community Development with Sonoma County and six other cities within
the county that do not qualify for their own entitlements. The city and town managers of the
participating municipalities form the Technical Advisory Committee that reviews and makes
recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on issues relating to the distribution of funds
within their jurisdictions.
CDBG funds have been used by the City in the past to facilitate the development of affordable
housing, fund a rehabilitation program, and carry out an earthquake- bracing program for
mobilehomes. During 2000, CDBG funds will be used to install approximately 96 sidewalk
access ramps at 66 intersections in the oldest sections of the city to enable the mobility of the
disabled.
Mobilehome Rent Stabilization
Mobilehomes constitute a major source of affordable housing in Rohnert Park. In an effort to
provide reasonable standards for, and limit space rent increases to reasonable levels, the city's
voters approved Ordinance 494 in 1987. Rather than setting rent ceilings, as in some apartment
rent control ordinances, Ordinance 494 established a process by which park owners may obtain
adjustments in space rent, linked to changes in the Consumer Price Index and capital
improvements within the parks. The ordinance is currently being challenged by park owners who
wish to decontrol the rental rates for vacant spaces.
We]
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
The city has established a Mobile Home Rent Appeals Board to ensure that Municipal Code
Chapter 9.70 (Ordinance 494) is administered fairly for both mobilehome park residents and park
owners, who may file space rent petitions. If a petition is filed, the Board serves as a quasi -
judicial body that issues rulings on the space rent issue. The Board is staffed by the Assistant
City Manager, City Attorney, and the Housing Specialist.
Fannie Mae Investment Plan
A number of programs have been recently initiated by Fannie Mae, the nation's largest source of
financing for home mortgages and multi - family housing, that may be used to promote homeownership,
housing rehabilitation, and housing upgrades within the City of Rohnert Park. The "House Bay Area"
program is a $16 billion, five -year housing investment plan designed oto increase affordable rental and
homeownership opportunities for families in the nine - county Bay Area .
Specific housing needs Fannie Mae plans to address with its lender partners include:
• Expanding affordable mortgage products and services to support under- served communities,
and low- and moderate - income families;
Making available low downpayment products such as Flexible 97, a three - percent
downpayment mortgage for borrowers with good credit histories but who lack the necessary
funds for a downpayment; and
• Working with local lenders to provide products like Fannie Mae's HomeStyle loans for home
purchase and renovation efforts.
Fannie Mae has also committed $100 million to the New Immigrants Initiative, a pilot program
that enables people newly arrived in this country to achieve homeownership in a more flexible,
streamlined fashion. Specifically, the initiative allows working, non - permanent residents who
have applied for their permanent resident card to be eligible for certain Fannie Mae affordable
mortgages. Key features include: down payments as low as three percent, more flexibility for
borrowers with cash on hand, the use of a borrower's most recent hourly wage rate to determine
qualifying income, acceptance of boarder income from relatives living in the same household,
and part -time or multiple job income of a 12 -month duration to be averaged over the most recent
24 months.
To help Bay Area residents prepare their homes to guard against future natural disasters, Fannie
Mae has also launched a new loan initiative called "Project Impact Prevention Loans." These
loans provide an affordable source of financing for upgrades to homes to prevent damage from
natural disasters before they occur. Examples of the types of upgrades than can be financed
include: foundation bolting, chimney bracing, cripple wall stiffening, window opening
reinforcement, dry rot repair, and termite damage repair. There are no income limitations for
borrowers, who can obtain up to $20,000 at a competitive interest rate, with repayment terms of
up to ten years.
9 -71
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Sonoma County Rental Information and Mediation Service
Sonoma County Rental Information and Mediation Service (SCRIMS) provides information
about the rights and responsibilities of tenants and landlords, and landlord- tenant law. The
organization also mediates disputes. Residents seeking such assistance have been referred to
SCRIMS in the past.
Fair Housing of Sonoma County
Fair Housing of Sonoma County ( FHOSC) is a joint project between Fair Houisng of Marin and
Sonoma County People for Economic Opportunity. FHOSC is funded by HUD to conduct fair
housing services in Sonoma County, to counter illegal discrimination, and to educate Sonoma
County tenants, managers and property owners as to their rights and responsibilities under state
and federal fair housing laws.
FHOSC provides bilingual counseling, investigative services, mediation, and legal referrals to
persons confronted with housing discrimination, followed by mediation or referrals to HUD, the
California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, or to attorneys, as appropriate. There is
no charge for these services. The agency also provides information and training for rental
property owners, real estate agents, and apartment managers on discrimination issues.
Community Support Network
Community Support Network (CSN) is a non - profit agency that provides a wide range of
cervices to mentally a_ nd /or emotionally ill and homeless adults. CSN offers a network of social
services, including residential alternatives to institutional care, social and vocational
rehabilitation, chemical dependency counseling, case management, supportive housing, and
other special social services. CSN is working with CDCRP to purchase a four -plex in Rohnert
Park to shelter eight clients.
OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENERGY CONSERVATION
The City has implemented the provisions of Title 24 of the State Building Code that require new
residential buildings to meet a comprehensive set of standards for energy conservation. Builders
of these units may achieve compliance either by calculating energy performance in a prescribed
manner or by selecting from alternative component packages that prescribe a fixed method of
compliance. All proposed residential units are checked by the Building Department to ensure
that their design and construction complies with Title 24 energy standards. Additions and
alterations must also meet these standards if they increase the heated or cooled floor space of a
building.
Opportunities for improving energy conservation in the design of residential development
include ensuring the consistency of tentative tract maps with Section 66473.1 of the Subdivision
Map Act, which requires the designs of subdivisions to provide for future passive or natural
heating or cooling opportunities, and requires the planting of trees along streets and in parking
lots to reduce heat.
9 -72
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Homes constructed in the city between 1956 and 1975 probably need to be insulated or have
supplemental insulation installed. The rehabilitation program recently initiated by the CDCRP
covers such energy conservation retrofitting as insulation and weatherstripping.
9 -73
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
9.5 HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
The following goals, policies, and programs are designed to address the existing and projected
housing needs of the City of Rohnert Park. Each program has one or more individuals, bodies, or
agencies responsible for its implementation, along with a potential or committed funding source,
and a schedule for its implementation during the 1999 — 2006 planning period.
This section of the Housing Element is also the implementation plan for the Community
Development Commission of Rohnert Park.
GUIDING POLICY
The City of Rohnert Park supports safe and affordable housing
for all social and economic segments of the community as a
means of securing desirable social and economic diversity.
GOAL: HOUSING SUPPLY
PF47 -HO -A Promote opportunities for housing development to accommodate projected
growth and facilitate mobility within the ownership and rental markets.
POLICIES: HOUSING SUPPLY
.,_ �L- innn ;t..t: ;rte
PT-1 Promote residential development wittin the ,777 c,Ly 11111"a.
Program
1.1 Require that development of the following sites designated as "Mixed Use" by
the General Plan Diagram include at least the specified number of multi- family
units:
a) The City Center area: a minimum of 1804 -98 multi - family units
b) The Southwest Boulevard Shopping Center redevelopment site: a minimum of
50 multi - family units
Responsibility:
Funding Source:
Scheduler
9 -74
air-e£ter —of planning and Community r ,
Planning Department, Planning Commission
General Fund for review of proposals,
Housing Funds for affordable housin,.
July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006, as development proposals
for the mixed -use sites are submitted
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
1.2 Meet with property owners of both the City Center Area and the Southwest
Boulevard Shopping Center on an ongoing basis to discuss and facilitate
redevelopment of the sites.
Responsibility: City Manager Planning Department
Funding source General Fund, Housing Fund
Schedule: July 26 2000 - June 30, 2006
1.3 Use Redevelopment Housing funds to encourage construction of housing and
seek grants where possible for funding of additional site improvements
particularly for the City Center Area Southwest Boulevard Shopping Center,
and the current City Hall site.
Responsibility: City Manager, CDCRP
Funding source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: July 26 2000 - June 30, 2006
P-- i -7HO -2 Facilitate residential development within the growth areas.
Programs
2.1 Coordinate the preparation of specific plans and annexation applications. If no
applications for specific plans have been received by the end of October 2001,
identify a priority area and initiate preparation of a specific plan.
Should applications not be received by October 2001 the City would begin a
specific plan process for one or more of the specific plan areas based on the
overall needs of the City including its regional housing needs. The intent
would be to complete the first specific 21an and the first annexation approval
no later than the end of 2002 with subsequent plan approvals occurring
shortly thereafter.
Responsibility: City Council, Planning Department
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006, as applications are
submitted
2.2 Deny proposals for residential downzonings or reclassifications of
residentially- designated property to nonresidential uses if such changes would
9 -75
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
have adverse impacts on the achievement of the City's Quantified Objectives
that could not be offset or minimized.
Responsibility: Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006, as applications are
submitted
2.3 Following the approval of a specific plan, require the applicant to post sites
designated for high- density housing with visible, durable signs containing
information about the site's development potential. Require such information
to be provided in appropriate sales offices and provided to prospective buyers
of nearby homes.
Responsibility: Planning Department Dec -ter-
Funding Source: Project Applicant
Schedule: Following approval of specific plans
l? L4-7HO -3 Ensure that residential sites are served by adequate infrastructure and services.
Programs
3.1 Continue to work with regional agencies to ensure an adequate long -term water
supply and wastewater disposal system.
Responsibility: EngineeringP bl Wer-kF, Department, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
3.2 Continue to establish assessment districts and utilize subdivision agreements to
finance adequate infrastructure.
Responsibility: City Council Engineering Department and Publie War- s
4a€f
Funding Source: General Fund for administrative costs
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006, during the processing of
specific plans
NW
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
GOAL: BALANCE OF HOUSING TYPES
PF- -MHO -B Provide for a range of housing types within the community to accommodate
a variety of incomes and lifestyles, and enable residents to remain in Rohnert
Park throughout their lives if they so choose.
POLICY: BALANCE OF HOUSING TYPES
Pf-4-7HO -4 Promote a diversity of housing types, including single - family detached and
attached residences, mobilehomes, multi - family rental and ownership units, second
units, and units combined with non - residential uses.
Programs
4.1 During the application and review process for specific plans, ensure that they
provide for the diversity of housing types specified in the Land Use and Growth
Management Element.
Responsibility: Planning Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006, as applications are
reviewed
4.2 Amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow for second units on owner - occupied lots
with single - family, detached homes, either simultaneously with or after the
construction of the primary unit, subject to appropriate standards. In the
amendment includeC -e side allowing the approval by the Planning Director of
second units to existing owner - occupied lots if
specified criteria are met, and allowing reduced parking and modified parking
designs for second units.
Responsibility: Planning Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: January 2002 u}y -, -2LO
4.3 Continue to work with the Kisco Corporation to facilitate development of the
Wellness Center with 20% of units in senior independent living phase for very -
low and low income households.
Responsibility City Manager Planning Department
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: March 2001 - January 2002
9 -77
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
GOAL: PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
P€ -17HO -C Address to the maximum extent feasible the housing needs of all economic
segments of the present and future community, giving highest priority to lower -
income households.
POLICIES: PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
P€�' 1� 1O -5 Minimize governmental constraints on the provision of housing that is affordable
to lower- income households.
Programs
5.1. Add density bonus definitions and provisions to the Zoning Ordinance to
facilitate the review of projects that propose a state housing density bonus.
Responsibility: Planning Departmentifeet-er, Planning Commission, City
Council
Funding Source: "eneral Fu-nu
Schedule: January y 002 Ju4 '�T
5.2. Revise the Zoning Ordinance's parking standards to provide reduced parking
requirements for studio and one - bedroom apartments, and for student housing
near Sonoma State University.
Responsibility: Planning Departmentifee-ter, Planning Commission, City
Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: January 2002 u4 '4Q'-
5.3. Revise the Zoning Ordinance's parking standards to provide clear requirements
for guest parking in multi - family projects.
Responsibility: Planning Director, Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: January 2002 J 1y4-moo
9 -78
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
5.4. Amend Section 17.62.070 of the Zoning Ordinance to streamline the process
for appealing an action of the Planning Commission by eliminating the step of
having the City Council first determine if they will hear an appeal before
actually the he appeal itself. t " y " r publi a heaF' "" fef ali
row„
r I e 1,. USeh0l&
The existing provision requires that the City Council first meet to decide if an
appeal will be accepted before a public hearing before the Council can be
scheduled This additional step results in delays for all proiects, including
those targeted to lower income households.
Responsibility: Planning Departmentk-eet , Planning Commission, City
Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: January 2002 u '�
_5.5. Amend Chapter 17.40 of the Zoning Ordinance to clarify the design review
authority for residential projects.
The current practice is to rear all new construction to the Planning
Commission The Council and Commission would consider allowing Planning
and Community Development Director approval for smaller projects and
additions based on Council approved design criteria. The purpose of this
- ^,I,..,....,.t t.. l niiit„ *n tt�n nnnrn�f/rI of cvw"Mor nrnip, -tv nr additions to
amen"Meni iS 6y�(ui occawte the `^YY - - - -
existing projects.
Responsibility: Planning Depart-ient4eeler, Planning Commission, City
Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: January 2002 1-1- 1,
5.6 Amend the Zoning Ordinance to add single room occupancy housing as a
permitted use in districts allowing multi - family housing.
SRO's are residential facilities in which furnished rooms are rented on a
weekly or monthly basis and which provide common facilities and services for
laundry, cleaning, and meals. They can provide transitional or permanent
housing for homeless individuals or couples.
Responsibility: Planning Departmentifeetef, Planning Commission, City
Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: January 2002'
Mft]
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
5.7. Consider deferring development fees for housing projects targeted to lower -
income households when needed to ensure project feasibility.
In Tune of 2001 the City Council adopted _a policy deferring permit and
inspection fees for housing proiects targeted to lower - income households when
approved by the Council based on the need to ensure project feasibility. A
similar policy will be considered by the City Council during the update of the
development fees.
Responsibility: City Council
Funding Source: General and Redevelopment Funds
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006, as applications are
reviewed
5.8 > and
ImRlement
Article 34 authority -approved authority - by voters in November 2001 to allow
construction of very -low and low- income housing units with the assistance of
redevelopment set -aside housing funds.
funds.
Responsibility: City Manager,. CDCRP City Council
Funding Source: General and Redevelopment Funds
Schedule: By 20 November 2000 - June 30, 2006
5.8A. Use Redevelopment Housing Funds to purchase the City Hall building at 6750
Commerce Blvd for the construction of affordable housing.
Responsibility: CDCRB City Council
Funding Source: Redevelopment Funds
Schedule: July 2001 - December 31 2003
5.9. Maximize potential residential development by amending the Zoning
Ordinance to revise its definition of "dwelling unit" to stipulate that for the
purposes of calculating density, duplex studio units whose total square footage
does not exceed 850 square feet shall be considered a single unit.
Revise the appropriate ordinances that require residential development fees to
stipulate that for the purposes of calculating fees, duplex studio units whose
total square footage does not exceed 850 square feet shall be considered a
single multi - family, one - bedroom unit.
• :E
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
This vroeram would serve to facilitate the development of student and senior
housing as well as other single -room occupancy facilities.
Responsibility: Planning Department Finance Depart mentm eeter— 4
Planning, Fifla ee pi -eete«
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: January 200 -July 4ma—�v0z1
5 10 Maximize the potential for farmworker housing by amending the Zoning
Ordinance to add farmworker housing as a_ permitted use in districts allowing
multi - family housing.
Responsibility: Planning Department Planning Commission, City
Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: January 2002
5 11 Help to maintain existing and future mobile
home parks by amending the
Zoning Ordinance to add a mobile home park overlay district.
Responsibility: Planning_ Department
Planning Commission, City
Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: September 2002
512 Review zoning and building codes to remove impediments, if any, to
construction of permanent supportive housing
for persons with disabilities. In
preparation of the updated Zoning_ Ordinance
insure that zoning regulations
relative to housing for persons with mental
disabilities are consistent with
aws.
applicable Fair Housing Laws.
Responsibility Planning Department
Planning Commission, City
Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: January 2002
9 -81
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
5.13 At the time of the annual review required pursuant to Policy GM -4 and the
Growth Management Ordinance re- evaluate the Growth Management
Program including the trigger cap to ensure that the City's fair share
allocations can be achieved within the context of the Growth Management
Program Ordinance.
Responsibility: Planning Department Planning Commission, City
Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: May 2002 (first review) - June 30, 2006
MHO -6 Facilitate the availability of market -rate housing to low- and moderate - income,
first -time homebuyers.
Programs
6.1 Continue to issue, in cooperation with other jurisdictions in Sonoma County,
mortgage credit certificates to qualified low- and moderate - income, first -time
homebuyers. Work with the Sonoma County Housing Authority to ensure that
Rohnert Park receives a share of future allocations. (Potential number of
households assisted: 75 total, 10 first -time buyers)
/1T 11T T
Responsibility:
Funding Source: State program
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
6.2 Continue the First Time Homebuyer Downpayment Assistance Program to low -
and median - income households. Review the program parameters at least
annually and make program adjustments as may be indicated by changes in the
housing market. (Potential number of households assisted 2000 -2002: 20)
This program provides downpayment assistance to first -time homebuyers
through "silent second" mortgages of up to $15,000 per household. No interest
is charged on the loans and they are forgiven after ten years if the homebuyer
lives in the house as their primary residence for ten years.
Responsibility: CDCRP
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: FY 2000 -2002
6.3 Expand the First Time Homebuyer Downpayment Assistance Program to low -
income households that are outside of the Redevelopment Project Area.
(Potential number of households assisted: 20)
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Responsibility: CDCRP
Funding Sources: CDBG Program (application for $150,000 has been made
for 2000 -2001 funding cycle)
Redevelopment Funds ($150,000 matching funds)
Schedule: FY 2000 -2001
PF 17HO -7 Comply with the affordable housing requirements of California Community
Redevelopment Law to maximize the number of affordable units provided.
Program
7.1 Ensure that at least 30 percent of all dwelling units developed by the CDCRP
are affordable to low- or moderate - income households, and that not less than
50 percent of these are affordable to very low- income households. Ensure that
at least 15 percent of all dwelling units developed in the redevelopment project
area by public or private entities or persons other than the agency are affordable
to low- or moderate - income households, and that not less than 40 percent of
these are affordable to very low- income households.
These requirements are consistent with California Community Redevelopment
Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33413). They may also be satisfied by
several alternative methods.
Responsibility: City Manager, l-1Ly — Ouncil,
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
7.2 Develop a structured program with specific actions and timelines for using
Redevelopment Housing Funds consistent with California Commumty
Redevelopment Law.
Responsibility: City Manager, City Council, CDCRP
Funding Source: Redevelopment Funds
Schedule: September 30, 2001
�HO -8 Make the maximum use of resources available for the provision of housing
affordable to lower- income households.
Programs
MCI
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
8.1 Continue to work with other agencies to take advantage of their administrative
resources and receive a reasonable share of federal, state and private funding
for housing.
Responsibility: City Manager, City Council, CDCRP
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
8.2 Maintain contacts with nonprofit housing organizations to benefit from their
expertise in developing and supporting affordable housing. Refer potential
developers of such housing to these organizations for assistance.
Responsibility: Planning Director, City Manager
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
8.3 Continue to partner with local mortgage brokerage firms to minimize
administrative costs to the city.
_The firms provide advertising, process applications, secure first mortgages, and
address legal paperwork for the first -time homebuyer program.
Responsibility: City Manager, CDCRP
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
8.4 Publicize affordable housing programs through the city's public
communications and publications.
Responsibility: City Manager
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
8.5 Work with other Sonoma County jurisdictions to explore the feasibility of
enacting a housing impact fee on businesses that generate a significant number
of jobs in the community. Following enactment of a housing impact fee,
establish an affordable housing trust fund.
With the City of Santa Rosa as the lead,. the City of Rohnert Park has
contributed financially to and is participating in a Countywide Housing Nexus
Study aimed at establishing the relationship between nonresidential uses and
9 -84
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
increased housing demand The study is a prerequisite to establishing an
impact fee under California state law. The study is expected to begin about
April 13 and take three to four months to complete.
Responsibility: City Manager, Planning Director
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: b-� September 30, 2001 T , y-
PP 17HO -9 Require the provision of affordable housing as part of residential development
throughout the community.
Program
9.1 Require non - market rate housing to be included as part of residential projects,
as follows:
a) 15 percent of the units in a rental housing project of five or more units shall
be affordable to very low- and low- income households.
b) 15 percent of the units in a for -sale project of five or more units shall be
affordable to low- and moderate - income households.
c) Alternative methods of meeting the intent of the inclusionary requirements,
such as the provision of land for the required inclusionary units or the
payment of an in -lieu fee, may be permitted under certain circumstances.
d) The inclusionary units shall be constructed concurrently with market -rate
units when feasible.
e) The long -term affordability of the inclusionary units shall be guaranteed.
Consider providing_ a program of incentives (e fee deferral priority
processing local public subsidy, and reduced design standards for such elements
as setbacks infrastructure open space landscaping outdoor amenities, and
parking) to assist developers in meeting the inclusionary housing requirements.
Responsibility: ;ireeter- of Planning and Community it Development,
r
Planning Department, nR 4m +t—C — ��e "�
Attorney, Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: January. 2002Mar-eh 2004.
9 -85
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
GOAL: PRESERVATION OF AFFORDABLITY
1?F- 1 -7HO -D Preserve the City's existing affordable housing stock, and ensure the long-
term affordability of new non - market rate units.
POLICIES: PRESERVATION OF AFFORDABILITY
PF-4-7HO -10 Preserve the affordability of the City's existing affordable housing stock.
Programs
10.1 Continue to enforce Chapter 9.70, which controls space lease increases to
protect the interests of mobile home park residents and park owners, and
provide staffing to the Mobile Home Rent Appeals Board.
Responsibility: City Council, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney,
Housing Specialist
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
10.2 Continue to enforce Chapter 16.58 of Title 16 (Subdivisions), which regulates
,-.f ,wP nr onn.,r r6on of nce in mobilehome narks.
L11G l.eJS0.61v1t V1 UJIi, ♦.uut,sv vi u.w, v= .+.__..,_.-.- -- --- ----- -- r
The provisions of this chapter require the filing of a report with the City
Council when a subdivision application is filed for the conversion of a
mobilehome park to another use, or at least six months before the closure of a
park or the cessation of use of the land as a mobilehome park. The report shall
address the impact of the conversion, closure, or cessation of use. The Council
is required to hold a public hearing on the report and may impose measures to
mitigate associated impacts.
In June 2001 the City approved a Mobile Home Park Conversion ordinance to
replace Chapter 16.58. The new ordinance incorporates and expands the
provisions of former Chapter 16.58 including the added provisions o a
conditional use permit requirement and preparation of a Relocation and
Purchase Assistance Plan
Responsibility: City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
r 6 - 2000 - jug n� 3- , 2006june 2001
Schedule: ,-� i 2�
10.3 Refrain from considering or approving the report referenced in Program 10.2
until the City Council is able to adopt zoning regulations which, to the
•:.
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
maximum extent feasible and legally possible, protect and maintain the
affordable housing provided to the residents of the City of Rohnert Park by
mobile home parks in Rohnert Park.
If this ordinance is not in effect within one hundred and twenty days of the
adoption of the General Plan, this Program 10.3 shall be of no further force and
effect.
Responsibility: Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: August 1, 2000 - November 30, 2000
10.4 Work to ensure the ongoing affordability of the Country Club Village
apartments, whose income restrictions are set to expire in May 2001, by, in
part, contacting the entities interested in participating in the First Right of
Refusal program and the Sonoma County Housing Authority.
The County Housing Authority negotiated with the owner of the Country Club
Village apartments to allow Section 8 vouchers for residents of the complex.
No residents have had to relocate.
Responsibility: City Manager, City Housing Staff, CDCRP
Th,.,a;,,r. C ,,,,�P• RPAPVelnnment Fiind
Schedule: 43eginnifin july - 200BJuly -2001
10 .5 Similar to the recent purchase by Millennium Housing Corporation of the Las
Casitas Mobile Home Park work with and financially assist Millennium
Housing Coloration and other nonprofits to purchase existing mobile home
parks within the City and to maintain the parks as affordable places to live.
Responsibility: City Manager, City Housing staff, CDCRP
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: July 26 2000 - June 30 2001 as opportunities are created
and presented
P�- 1- 7HO -11 Ensure the long -term affordability of units developed or provided with city
assistance.
Programs
11.1 Impose resale or rent controls on all units that receive city financial assistance
or state housing density bonuses for not less than 30 years.
Responsibility: Planning Director, Planning Commission, City Council
M -31
Rohnert Park General Plan
Funding Source:
Schedule:
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
General Fund
July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006, as projects are approved
11.2 Impose long -term re -sale or rental controls on affordable units provided
through the inclusionary housing program or city subsidies to ensure that they
remain affordable to the targeted income groups.
Responsibility: Planning Commission and City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006, as projects are approved
11.3 Continue to record affordability covenants upon homes that receive silent
second loans through the first -time homebuyers program.
Responsibility: Housing Staff, CDCRP
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund, General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
11.4 Encourage and facilitate to the extent possible, participation by property
owners in federal for -sale and rental housing assistance programs that maintain
affordability for very low and low income residents.
Responsibility: City Housing Staff, CDCRP
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 1, 2000 — June 30, 2006
GOAL: HOUSING FOR SPECIAL NEEDS
PF. ! 7HO -E aD--rom teAddress housing opportunities for special needs groups.
POLICIES: HOUSING FOR SPECIAL NEEDS
IPT- 14-7HO -12 Pr-emeteAddress the pr-ovision - ofneed for housing for persons with special needs.
Program
12.1 Consider deferring city fees for housing projects that meet special needs when
necessary to improve the financial feasibility of such projects.
In June of 2001 the City Council adopted a new hermit fee schedule which
provides for deferring permit and inspection fees for housing projects targeted
s ::
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
to lower income households based on the need to ensure proiect feasibility. A
similar policy will be considered by the City Council during the update of the
development fees.
Responsibility: CDCRP, City Council
Funding Source: Redevelopment and General Funds
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
P- 4- 7HO -13 PfameteAddress the n -o need for rental units for larger families.
Program
13.1 Require apartment projects that receive CDCRP funding to include units with
more than two bedrooms.
Responsibility: City Housing Staff, City Council
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006, as projects are submitted
PF 17HO -14 PfemeteAddress the kneed for disabled - accessible units and housing
for the disabled.
Programs
14.1 Give a high priority to projects that include disabled - accessible units when
allocating CDCRP support and funding.
Responsibility: CDCRP
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006, as projects are submitted
14.2 Target households with disabled persons when promoting the CDCRP's
rehabilitation program.
The program allows the financing of repairs and modifications that improve
accessibility for disabled occupants.
Responsibility: Housing Staff
NMI
Rohnert Park General Plan
Funding Source
Schedule
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Redevelopment Fund
Throughout life of program
14.3 Support efforts to provide housing for mentally- or emotionally - disabled adults.
Responsibility: City Council, CDCRP
Funding Source: General and Redevelopment Funds
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
14.4 Install sidewalk access ramps in the oldest sections of the city to facilitate the
mobility of the disabled (number of ramps installed in 2000: approximately
96). Apply for additional CDBG funding to install additional ramps.
Responsibility: City Council, CDCRP, Public Works Department
Funding Source: CDBG and Redevelopment Funds
Schedule: 2000-2002
14.5 Review City building codes to determine their consistency with HUD_
regulations and State law concerning housing for persons with disabilities.
Require City building inspectors to require developers to strictly comply with
these regulations in order to increase the stock of housing accessible to persons
with �licahilitiPc
Responsibility: Building, Department City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: January 2002
P-P J- 7HO -15 AddressPr-emete the need for housing for the elderly.
Programs
15.1 Amend the Zoning Ordinance to permit lower parking requirements for senior
housing.
Responsibility: Planning Director, Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 1, 2001
15.2 Target elderly households when promoting the CDCRP's rehabilitation
program.
=011
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
The program allows the financing of repairs and modifications that improve
accessibility for elderly occupants.
Responsibility: Housing Staff
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: Throughout life of the rehab program
PF- 4-7HO -16 Prevent homelessness and support efforts to provide housing for the homeless.
Programs
16.1 Revise the Zoning Ordinance to allow emergency and transitional shelters as
permitted uses in conjunction with an existing Church and other places of
religious assembly,-and in appropriate districts (residential and commercial)
either by right (6 or less persons) or by use permit (7 or more persons) to
facilitate the provision of such shelters_ if ibl es ` et "FAine they
needed in the eity. (Note: With these revisions to the Zoning Ordinance, the
afe sites identified in Program 16.2 will not require rezonings to allow for
homeless or transitional shelters).
Responsibility: Planning Director Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: January 2002
16.2 In addition
shelter include d
Cotati Ave (5,201
west of Food4Les
may also be avai
COT
Ur
zoning) Additional potential locations include the — following sites when
theythat may become available after construction of the new city hall: former
library, forme~ eity hf"; and former finance office building, and any school
sites determined to be surplus. -.Further, provide additional funding support for
the purchase of three additional transitional homes by COTS or another non -
rp ofit.
Responsibility: Planning Director, Planning Commission, City Council
Funding Source: General Fund Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: july 4Januar ; 20024- - June 2005
9 -91
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
1613 Continue providing homeless prevention and support services by providing
funding to Petaluma People Services, Homeless Prevention Group, or similar
agencies. (Estimated Rohnert Park households assisted: 618, estimated Rohnert
Park persons assisted: 2,112) Provide additional funding to homeless
prevention and support services from Redevelopment Housing funds for
homeless shelter facilities within the City.
Responsibility: CDCRP
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund (FY 99 -00: $51,250 to PPS,
$10,000 to HPG)
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
1634 Continue working with the Committee on the Shelterless to provide shared
housing for families who would otherwise become homeless.
Responsibility: CDCRP
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
16.4. Provide information regarding homeless services to city employees who are
likely to be in contact with those needing shelter. Direct employees to refer
such persons as appropriate.
Responsibility: Specified City employees; City Manager
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
PFD- PHO -17 P-remeteAddress the need for affordable and accessible housing for Sonoma State
University students.
Program
17.1 Support the development of multi - family housing for university students on
the E. Cotati Avenue /Bodway Parkway site and on and around the
University campus.-
Responsibility: Planning Director, Planning Commission
Funding Source: General Fund
DAN
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Schedule: During review of a conditional use permit for student
housing and in discussions for providing services to the
University.
HO 17A Support efforts for providing farmworker housing both within and around
Rohnert Park.
Progams
17A.1 Set aside a portion of the Redevelopment Agency's housing funds for
contribution to a non - profit agency providing affordable farmworker housing.
Responsibility City Housing Staff City Council
Funding Source: Redevelopment Funds
Schedule: July 2001 - June 30, 2006
17A.2 Continue to research and quantify farmworker housing need based upon 2000
Census and work with the California Human Development Corporation and
the Sonoma County Farm Bureau to develop programs for assisting and
encouraging the development of farmworker housing based on that need.
Responsibility: City Housing Staff Planning Director
PUIIUlIp, JVUlGG. uGiierui a uiiu
_
Schedule: May 2001 - December 2002, or as Census data becomes
available and project applications are received
17A.3 Inform the California Human Development Corporation and the _Sonoma
County Farm Bureau and other agencies that assist with farmworker housing
during the early application stage of project proposals for multi - family
residential development.
Responsibility Planning Department City Housing Staff
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: May 2001 - June 30, 2006
9 -93
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
GOAL: FAIR HOUSING
pF-1-7HO -F Promote housing opportunities. for all people regardless of race, religion,
disability, gender, marital status, ancestry or national origin.
POLICIES: FAIR HOUSING
PF 47HO -18 Discourage discriminatory housing practices.
Programs
18.1 Provide information about the Sonoma County Rental Information and
Mediation Service and Fair Housing of Sonoma County to city employees who
are likely to receive fair housing complaints. Direct employees to refer such
persons as appropriate.
Responsibility: City employees specified by City Manager
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
18.2 Post information regarding local, state and federal fair housing programs in
such public places as City Hall, Community Center, Senior Center, and the post
office.
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: Within 3 months of Housing Element adoption
18.3 Continue to review the fair housing records and practices of agencies and firms
during contract negotiations, and include provisions in contracts allowing city
inspection of fair housing documentation.
Responsibility: City Housing Staff
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
18.4 Continue to include fair housing practices among the items addressed by the
CDCRP's auditor during annual visits to the sites of contracting agencies and
firms. Conduct occasional site visits and program audits of agency contractors
for fair housing and discrimination compliance.
Responsibility: City Housing Staff
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
9 -94
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
18.5 Continue to monitor the occupancy characteristics of housing projects targeted
to lower- income households to ensure that minorities, families, and the
disabled are fairly represented.
Responsibility: City Housing Staff
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
18.6 Continue to monitor the racial and ethnic characteristics of loan recipients in
city- supported projects and programs to promote equal representation and
discourage discrimination or restrictions in housing choice.
Responsibility: City Housing Staff
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
18.7 Continue to require contractors to file monthly or annual progress reports that
include information on program beneficiaries. Review fair housing and
discrimination compliance when these reports are examined.
Responsibility: City Housing Staff
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
18.8 Continue to provide equitable public services throughout the City, including
public transportation, crime prevention, police protection, street lighting, street
cleaning, trash collection, recreational facilities and programs, and schools.
Responsibility: City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
18.9 Continue to publicize openings on city boards and commissions through several
newspapers.
Responsibility: City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
18.10 Continue to ensure that an over - concentration of lower- income housing does
not occur in neighborhoods.
Me
Rohnert Park General Plan
Responsibility:
Funding Source:
Schedule:
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Planning Department, Planning Commission, City
Council
General Fund
July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006; as projects are reviewed
18.11 Contact Fair Housing of Sonoma County to inform them of possible rental
discrimination against students, and request an investigation of its existence,
followed by possible remediation.
Responsibility: Housing Specialist
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: Within three months of Housing Element update
18.12 Investigate and work with SSU students on their recent claims of housing
discrimination within the City of Rohnert Park.
Responsibility: City Manager Housing Specialist
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: Within three months of Housing Element update
GOAL- PRESERVATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF HOUSING STOCK
PF4�HO -G Preserve and improve the City's existing housing stock.
POLICIES: PRESERVATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF HOUSING STOCK
PF-4- 7HO -19 Promote the maintenance of the existing housing stock.
Programs
19.1 Continue administering the adopted housing rehabilitation program, seeking to
rehabilitate as many units as possible. (Potential households assisted: 14)
In October 1999, the redevelopment agency approved a $675,000 owner -
occupied housing rehabilitation program. The program provides deferred, ten -
year loans of up to $15,000 to mobile home owners and 15 -year loans of up to
$35,000 to conventional homeowners with incomes of less than 120% of area
median income. The loans would be forgiven after 10 years for households with
incomes of less than 80% of area median income. The program's priority is
making moderate- quality improvements necessary to assure that the homes
meet code requirements and basic housing quality standards.
F*1&011
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Responsibility: City Housing Staff, Sonoma County Housing Authority
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund ($675,000)
Schedule: Beginning in 2000 until funds are exhausted
19.2 Expand the housing rehabilitation program to low- income households outside
of the redevelopment project area. (Potential households assisted: 8)
Responsibility: CDCRP
Funding Sources: CDBG Funds ($1.50,000)
Redevelopment Funds ($37,500 matching funds)
Schedule: 2001-2002
19.3 Coordinate a Christmas in April program in Rohnert Park, focusing on lower -
income households, particularly the elderly and people with disabilities. (Total
households assisted in 2000: seven, including five elderly households, one city -
owned home provided to Committee on the Shelterless, and one home of a 55-
year old disabled woman with severe arthritis.)
Using community volunteers, this program rehabilitates homes to provide
warmth, safety, and security. Typical repairs include fixing leaky roofs,
building wheelchair ramps, electrical rewiring, repairing plumbing, installing
new furnaces and hot water heaters, installing smoke detectors, replacing
.1 ., .. _t n1ru6 nN/) 11 /17Nf1Y10
CIUV /J (.L /Ll.� VVL /LCGVYVJ, LI,LLLU,Jt,aIcios, wiw�wo..�•
Responsibility: City Housing Staff
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund ($20,000)
Schedule: April 15, 2000
PP 47HO -20 Work towards improving living conditions in the Canon Manor area.
Program
20.1 Continue to work with Canon Manor residents and property owners to establish
an assessment district to pay for adequate water supply, wastewater disposal,
and circulation systems.
Responsibility: Public Works Department
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
9 -97
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Darr - 4- HO -21 Maintain the Sonoma Grove Trailer Park as a form of . shelter for very low -
income students and households that, in nearly every case, could not afford other
housing available in Rohnert Park
Program
21.1 Consider requests by the trailer park owner for the funding of appropriate
projects that would maintain the park.
Responsibility: CDCRP
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
PF47HO -22 Minimize the extent of potential earthquake damage to housing.
Programs
22.1 Encourage owners of wood -frame homes to ensure that they are adequately
secured to foundations and have adequate bracing by providing guidelines and
sample plans at the Building Department.
Responsibility: Building Official
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: Within three months of Housing Element approval
22.2 Inform owners of multi - family housing whose structures may be highly
susceptible to seismic damage, and help owners obtain financing for
retrofitting.
Responsibility: Building Official, CDCRP
Funding Source: General and Redevelopment Funds
Schedule: Inform owners within three months of Housing Element
approval
Assistance with financing: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
22.3 Include information about the need for residential seismic retrofitting and
retrofitting methods in the city's communications with residents. Publicize
Fannie Mae's Project Impact Disaster Prevention Loan Program.
The Project Impact Disaster Prevention Loan Program is intended to help Bay
Area residents guard their homes against future natural disasters. The program
has a quick approval process and ensures that work is performed by certified
contractors who are qualified to make disaster - resistant improvements.
..;
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Unsecured, fixed -rate loans of up to $15,000 are available and may be paid off
in up to ten years. There are no income limitations for borrowers.
Responsibility: City Manager's Office
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: Within three months of Housing Element approval; on an
intermittent basis thereafter
22.4 Consider funding and implementing another mobilehome bracing program.
A previous bracing program reinforced more than 474 of the city's
mobilehomes.
Responsibility: CDCRP
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: Consider during preparation of FY 2000 -2001 CDCRP
budget
P-F- 17HO -23 Use the provisions of California Community Redevelopment Law to ensure that a
share of housing units that are rehabilitated are affordable to lower- income households.
Programs
23.1 Continue to ensure that at least 30 percent of all dwelling units substantially
rehabilitated by the CDCRP are affordable to low- or moderate - income
households, and that not less than 50 percent of these are affordable to very
low- income households. Ensure that at least 15 percent of all dwelling units
substantially rehabilitated in the redevelopment project area by public or
private entities or persons other than the agency are affordable to low- or
moderate - income households, and that not less than 40 percent of these are
affordable to very low- income households.
These requirements are consistent with California Community Redevelopment
Law. They may also be satisfied by several alternative methods.
Responsibility: City Manager, City Council, CDCRP
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006
...
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
GOAL: ENERGY CONSERVATION
HO -H Encourage energy conservation in housing.
POLICY: ENERGY CONSERVATION
MHO -24 Promote the use of energy conservation features in the design of residential
development.
Programs
24.1. Continue to evaluate residential projects for consistency with Section 66473.1
(Energy Conservation) of the Subdivision Map Act during the development
review process.
Responsibility:
Funding Source:
Planning Staff
General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006, as projects are submitted
24.2 Continue to require the planting of trees as part of residential projects to
provide cooling during the summer months.
Responsibility: Planning Director, Public Works Director
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006, as projects are submitted
PT4- 7HO -25 Promote energy conservation in the city's older homes.
Programs
25.1 Encourage participants in the CDCRP's rehabilitation program to include
energy conservation measures, such as insulation and weatherstripping, in their
improvements.
Responsibility: City Housing Staff, SCCDC
Funding Source: Redevelopment Fund
Schedule: Beginning in 2000 until funds are exhausted
GOAL: ATTAINMENT OF HOUSING GOALS
P- F4 -7-HO -I Maximize attainment of the Housing Element's goals and programs.
9 -100
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
POLICY: ATTAINMENT OF HOUSING GOALS
PT MHO -26 Provide an active leadership role in fulfilling the programs of the Housing
Element.
Program
26.1 Follow through on the actions and programs prescribed in the Housing Element
in a timely manner and monitor progress annually.
Responsibility: As designated by program; Planning Director responsible
for preparation of annual monitoring report
Funding Source: As designated by program; General Fund
Schedule: July 26, 2000 - June 30, 2006; annual progress report by
July 1 st
26.2 Provide information to the city's staff and decision makers about the
characteristics of affordable housing, high- density development, and lower -
income families so that they can act in an informed manner and education the
community.
Provide such resources as "Myths and Facts About Affordable and High -
Density Housing" (California Planning Roundtable), "The Effects of
Subsidized and Affordable Housing on Property Values: A Survey of Research
(«CD), "Every Comm— ,nity Needs Good Multi-Family Housing" (NAHB),
"Growing Smarter with Apartments (NMHC), and videos that show exemplary
high- density housing designs and feature interviews with project residents and
neighbors.
Responsibility: City Manager, Planning Director
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: Within 6 months of Housing Element adoption
PF HO -27 Use the growth management program to promote the city's housing program.
Program
27.1 As part of any allocation criteria related to implementation of the city's growth
management ordinance, give priority to projects that address the housing needs
identified in this element and further the city's housing program.
Responsibility: City Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: July 4.2_6, 2000 - June 30, 2006
9 -101
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
27.2 To ensure the adequate provision of streets water, wastewater, solid waste and
parks require a Public Facilities Financing Plan for all new developing areas
demonstrating completion of all necessary infrastructure and public facility
improvements concurrently with development Working with the developers
on the development of those plans and associated development agreements,
establish assessment districts developer impact fees etc. to facilitate and fund
infrastructure improvements (e establishment of an assessment district,
developer fees, etc.).
Responsibility: Planning Department City Manager City Council
Funding Source: Private developers General Fund
_
Schedule: July 26 2000 - June 30 2006 as specific plan
applications are received
27.3 In the year 2003 to ensure 12rogress toward the Quantified Objectives outlined in
Table 9.5-1, review the number of constructed approved and proposed housing
units for each household level relative to the planning period objectives. If
sufficient rogress has not been achieved to assure the accomplishment of the
objectives by the end of the planning period condition future projects so as to
achieve consistency_ with the objectives.
Responsibility: Planning Department Planning Commission, City
Council
Funding Source: General Fund
Schedule: June 2003
9 -102
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES
The following table summarizes the City's quantified objectives for the period of January 1,
1999 to July 1, 2006. These objectives represent a reasonable expectation of the maximum
number of new housing units that could be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved during the
planning period, based on the housing opportunities described in Section 9.4 and the policies and
programs outlined in Section 9.5.
Table 9.5 -1
Quantified Objectives for Housing; January 1, 1999 —July 1, 2006
Income Group
V. Low Low Moderate Above- Totals
Moderate
New Construction
Honeybrook II (1999)
Rohnert Pk. West (1999)
Muirfield Apts. (1999)
24
Mountain Shadows Apts.
26 SF units
1309 Maurice Avenue
City Center
34
Southwest Blvd. Center
4
6025 Commerce Blvd.
3
6920 Commerce Blvd.
2
1400 E. Cotati Avenue
2
Masma Construction
1
Second Units
9
Single Units - Business Park
42365
& Redwood Drive
180 MF units
Wellness Center
20
6750 Commerce (City Hall)
13
Surplus Well Sites
2
SonomaState
63
University*
Specific Plan Areas 53224 488154 666313 506572 4.4- 641,263 MF /SF
units*
Totals 424401 444270 925847 573856 4,76M2,374 units *"
Rehabilitated Units
CDCRP Rehab Program
• Inside project area 735 735 4470 households
• Outside project area 940 640 households
Christmas in April 740 740 households
Totals 740 4575 735 99150 households
9 -103
26
26 SF units
41
41 SF units
24 MF units
176
176 MF units
7
7 MF units
23
42365
58
180 MF units
4
42
50 MF units
3
34
40 MF units
2
26
30 MF units
2
18
22 MF units
1
14
16 MF units
9
18 second units
2
2 SF units
20
77
78
195 senior units
13
26 MF units
2
1
5 SF units
28
81
81
253 MF /SF units
Specific Plan Areas 53224 488154 666313 506572 4.4- 641,263 MF /SF
units*
Totals 424401 444270 925847 573856 4,76M2,374 units *"
Rehabilitated Units
CDCRP Rehab Program
• Inside project area 735 735 4470 households
• Outside project area 940 640 households
Christmas in April 740 740 households
Totals 740 4575 735 99150 households
9 -103
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Conserved Affordable Units
Enforcement of Chap. 9.70
733 733
1,466 units
Country Club Village 41
22
63 units
Las Casitas de Sonoma 31
32 63
126 units
Mobile Home Park
Totals 41
755 733
X81.655 units
* For the household income level breakdown it is assumed: (1) at least 202 units will be built as
inclusionary units and an additional 176 units will be built with funds provided by the Redevelopment
Housing Fund and funds generated through Program 8.5. (all very -low and low income household
units are exempt from the average projection of 225 units /year).ass mes 225 ...Ark A -r^+^ „n, +L_per
yea-F, divided betweeR above-mederate
* *Although projected to be built within the planning period and to use City services the SSU student
housing has not been included in the quantified objectives since it is unknown when SSU may annex
to the City.
9 -104
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
APPENDIX A
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 1995 HOUSING ELEMENT
A review and evaluation of the previous housing element is useful in determining whether
programs have been implemented, which programs have been effective in addressing the
community's housing needs, and where further work is needed.
PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTATION
The 1995 Housing Element's programs were carried out between January 1, 1995 and December
31, 1998. During that time, the City was successful in implementing many of its objectives,
policies, and actions. Most notably the City or CDCRP has:
• Prevented homelessness for at least 350 families and 1,150 individuals through its support
of a number of homeless prevention agencies. More than $613,535 was spent to provide
grants and loans to those at imminent risk of becoming homeless, provide emergency shelter
to those already homeless, and purchase housing for single - parent families who would
otherwise be homeless.
• Increased the supply of land available for residential development by amending the
Zoning Ordinance to allow such development in commercial and most industrial zoning
districts through a conditional use permit, and by rezoning two sites to a multi - family
residential district to facilitate the development of apartments.
• Promoted the construction of affordable housing by approving a conditional use permit
application for 20 units targeted to lower- income households on a commercially -zoned site,
including four density -bonus units.
• Assisted in the construction of 20 very low - income units and 233 low - income units by
providing low- interest loans and facilitating other types of funding.
• Guaranteed the long -term affordability of many units by arranging financing, applying
loan conditions, and enabling mobile home park residents to purchase their park.
• Ensured the structural integrity of over 474 mobilehomes by installing earthquake-
resistant bracing systems.
• Initiated a owner - occupied rehabilitation program with $675,000 in deferred low- interest
loans for home improvements that correct code violations and address basic housing quality
standards.
• Assisted 72 households in purchasing a home, including eight first -time buyers, through
Mortgage Credit Certificates and deferred, interest -free downpayment loans.
e Enabled the construction of 24 apartments for developmentally - disabled adults by
providing $292,000 in low- interest loans.
9 -105
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Several of the 1995 Element's programs were not implemented. Reasons for the lack of
implementation include:
Adoption of Measure N — In 1996, a measure was approved by the public that established
an urban boundary that was nearly contiguous with the city limits. This action limited the
amount of residentially - developable land and residential construction opportunities.
Although the measure had an exemption for boundary adjustments for affordable housing, no
proposals were received for the area outside of the city limits.
Initiation of the 1997 General Plan update — Closely following adoption of the 1995
Housing Element, the Council initiated another General Plan update, and some actions were
deferred until its completion.
Unclear identification of implementation responsibilities — Program actions did not
identify the person or group responsible for their implementation, and there was a lack of
follow- through.
DETAILED EVALUATION OF 1995 ELEMENT
The following section summarizes pertinent objectives, policies, and actions from the 1995
Housing Element, and identifies the successes and inadequacies of the City's housing program
between January 1, 1995 and December 31, 1998 (referred to as "the reporting period "). Related
objectives, policies, and actions are grouped together.
Prevention of Homelessness
Objective 1. Assure that 15 households at risk do not become homeless each year from 1995
to 1997.
Policy 8. The community should use as many outside resources as possible to confront
homelessness.
Action 17. The City or Community Development Commission should provide
approximately $5,000 per year through 1995 for homeless prevention programs that
function in the Rohnert Park area.
The Community Development Commission of Rohnert Park (CDCRP) used many different
agencies during the reporting period to prevent homelessness from occurring. Specifically, the
City took the following actions:
• Contributed $201,325 to Petaluma People Services, which provides one -time assistance with
rental deposits and monthly rents or mortgage payments for those at risk of becoming
homeless. The recipients do not repay these funds. Approximately 340 Rohnert Park
households were assisted through this program during the reporting period.
• Contributed $15,000 to the Homeless Prevention Group, which provides one -time, interest -
free loans to low- income households with adequate and stable sources of income who need
assistance in emergency situations to prevent eviction from an established residence or have
9 -106
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
not accumulated enough funds to pay initial rental moving /move -in costs. Preference is given
to households with dependents, elderly members or disabled members.
• Made a $5,500 grant to the Armory Shelter Program in Santa Rosa.
• Between 1995 and 1997, contributed $15,700 to the Interfaith Shelter Network, which
operates the Armory Shelter Program in Santa Rosa that provides emergency night -time
shelter for homeless adults during the winter months. The number of program clients who
gave their place of residence as Rohnert Park ranged from 7 to 32 annually.
• Through an agreement with Committee on the Shelterless (COTS), supported the
establishment of three four - bedroom /two -bath homes in Rohnert Park at a cost of $376,010
to provide housing for single - parent families who would otherwise become homeless. Up to
four families share each house. COTS screens all applicants carefully before occupancy and
provides living skills training and counseling.
Action 28. Maintain the Sonoma Grove Trailer Park as an innovative low cost form of
shelter for low - income students and households that, in nearly every case, could not afford
other housing available in Rohnert Park.
Sonoma Grove Trailer Park has been maintained as an alternative form of low cost housing.
Availability of Development Sites
Objective 6. Identify and evaluate sites needed to address the anticipated ABAG housing
share allocations from 1995 -1997.
After adoption of the 1995 General Plan, the City Council initiated a new General Plan update
program and established a citizen's committee. The committee proposed residential construction
in areas outside the city limits. However, in 1996, city voters approved Measure N, which
established an urban boundary that was essentially the same as the city limits with the exception
of a commercial /industrial area and a middle school site. This action severely limited the amount
of residentially - developable land and residential construction opportunities.
Although Measure N effectively prohibited housing construction outside the urban boundary, it
allowed an exception to add land for development that primarily consisted of housing necessary
for the city to meet its fair share of regional housing need, and it was not feasible to
accommodate the development within the urban boundary. However, no proposals were received
for the development of affordable housing outside of the urban boundary.
Objective 3. By August 31, 1995, amend the zoning ordinance to allow all types of
residential units in all commercial [districts] so as to provide sites appropriately approved
for construction of units affordable to very low- income households and low- income
households.
Action 19. By June 30, 1995, the Planning Commission and City Council will consider an
amendment to the City zoning ordinance authorizing Multi- family Housing in commercial
and industrial zoning district with approval of a special use permit. The ordinance
9 -107
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
amendment will establish the standards and regulations that apply to multi- family
development on such parcels. The standards and regulations will be similar to those that
apply to parcels in the R- M:2000:PD district, which would allow a maximum of 21.8 units
per acre.
In 1996, the City Council and Planning Commission amended the Zoning Ordinance to allow
multi - family development within all commercial and industrial zoning districts (except the
General Industrial District) with the approval of a conditional use permit, subject to the
regulations of the R- M:2000 Multi - Family Residential District. However, the amendments did
not limit multi - family development to affordable units, as envisioned by Objective 3.
Action 20. By June 30, 1996, the Planning Commission and City Council will notify
property owners and surrounding property owners, hold public hearings, and consider
designating [commercially- and industrially- zoned] parcels for Multifamily Housing
development:
The City rezoned two Laguna Drive sites from commercial to RM:1500 to accommodate the
development of 44 apartments.
Two State Farm Drive sites and the property at 5580 Snyder Lane were developed with
commercial uses and were not available for residential development.
The Snyder Lane site adjacent to the Community Center, and the Southwest Shopping Center
have not been reviewed for possible re- designation.
Action 21. By June 30, 1996, the Planning Commission and City Council will notify
property owners and surrounding residents, hold public hearings, and consider changing
the zoning classification of 1245 Hagemann Lane from R- 1:40,000 Single Family to R-
M:2000:PD, Multi- Family, a 10.00 acre parcel.
The City received an application for a 20 -unit, single- family home project on the 10 acres at
1245 Hagemann Lane and the site was rezoned from R- 1:40,000 Single Family to R- 1:7,000.
Action 22. From the present through 1996 and according to established procedures and
standards, the Planning Commission and City Council will consider use permit applications
for multi - family projects on the following parcels located in the PA:PD, Professional
Administrative District:
420 City Hall Drive
5210 Country Club Drive
Use permit applications for multi- family projects were not received for either of these sites. The
City Hall Drive site was developed with an office building in 1999. The Country Club Drive site
is still vacant.
9 -108
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
New Construction of Affordable Housing
Objective 2. Construct 676 rental and owner - occupied units during the period 1995 to 1997.
The number of units affordable to very low- income households would be 478 units; low -
income households would be 198 units.
Permits for the construction of 483 housing units were issued by the City during 1995, 1996, and
1997. Twenty of these units were affordable to very low- income households and 233 units were
affordable to low- income households.
During the entire reporting period of 1995 -1999, permits were issued for:
• 20 very low- income units
• 233 low- income units
• 351 above moderate - income units
Policy 11. Affordability guarantees such as silent seconds, covenants, and contract
provisions should be instituted when deemed appropriate in conjunction with a specific
affordable housing project or program.
The affordability of all housing projects assisted by city funds during the reporting period was
guaranteed. Specific provisions follow:
• The affordability of all 8 very low- income apartments and 12 low- income apartments at
The Gardens is guaranteed until 2023.
• The affordability of 67 low- income units at Edgewood Apartments is guaranteed until
2011.
The affordability of 60 low- income spaces at Rancho Feliz Mobilehome Park is
guaranteed until 2018.
Action 3. The voters of Rohnert Park defeated a proposition of Article 34 in 1994 for the
Community Development Commission to assist with the construction of a specified number
of housing units affordable to low income households. The City Council is considering this
proposition for the ballot in the future for voter approval.
The City did not consider another attempt at receiving Article 34 approval, which allows the City
to develop, construct, or acquire low- income housing using state or federal funds, due to a
prohibition against the City campaigning for such a measure and a lack of sponsorship by
another agency or group. However, the lack of Article 34 authority is not seen as a major
hindrance in assisting in the development of affordable housing because the City may still
subsidize such housing by contributing funds to non - profit entities.
Action 23. In any given year as resources allow, the Community Development Commission
will offer funds, at better than market terms, for multi - family projects that provide housing
affordable to very low, low - income and moderate income households. In exchange for
9 -109
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
providing funds, the Agency agreement will stipulate that units will remain available at
affordable rents for at least 15 years.
Action 26. In 1995, construction commenced on a 30 -unit project at 120 Santa Alicia. The
CDC will make available at least $260,000 for the project. The Agency agreement will
stipulate that units will remain affordable to very low income households for at least 30
years.
Action 27. The City or Community Development Commission would pursue development of
new affordable rental projects after 1995.
CDCRP loaned $292,000 to North Bay Rehabilitation Services at a below- market interest
rate for the construction of 24 apartments for developmentally - disabled persons at 305
Laguna Drive. The terms of the loan include a requirement that 10 units be occupied by very
low - income persons and the remainder occupied by low- or moderate - income persons for a
period of at least 40 years. All of the units are actually provided at very low- income
affordability levels through the use of the Section 8 rental assistance program.
A for - profit corporation constructed 168 one - bedroom apartments (Edgewood Apartments)
at 325 Laguna Drive in 1995. The City authorized federal tax credit financing for the project
and entered into a loan agreement with the owner for payment of building fees. As a
condition of its involvement, the City required the affordability of 67 low- income units to be
guaranteed until 2011.
CDCRP loaned $260,000 to The Gardens project at 120 Santa Alicia Drive at a 3% interest
rate, with all payments deferred for 30 years. The affordability of the 8 very low- income
units and 12 low- income units is guaranteed until 2023.
Action 42. After 1995, the City and /or Community Development Commission, working
with a nonprofit housing development corporation, should endeavor to create a mobile
home subdivision.
There has not been progress on this action item during the reporting period due to a lack of
available sites.
Assistance for Ownership Housing
Action 36. The Community Development Commission will implement a Mortgage Credit
Certificate (MCC) program.
Between 1995 and 1998, 64 Rohnert Park households participated in the MCC program,
including 13 lower - income households.
Additionally, CDCRP established the First -Time Homebuyer Downpayment Assistance Program
in 1995 to help lower- income households purchase a home. The deferred, interest -free loans are
forgivable after a 10 -year residency period, and up to $16,000 could be borrowed to cover the
downpayment and closing costs. During 1995, $126,300 was expended to assist eight first -time
homebuyers, including one low- income household and seven moderate - income households.
9 -110
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
In 1998, CDCRP committed $400,000 more to the program, with the hopes that 27 or more
homebuyers could be assisted. Up to $15,000 may be loaned to low- income households and
$10,000 to households earning up to 100% of area median income. At least 25% of the
households assisted by the program must be at or below 80% of area median income. Priority is
also given to households that could not purchase a home, but for the downpayment assistance,
and to households with a member that currently lives and /or works in Rohnert Park.
Action 35. The Community Development Commission will assist with the purchase of up to
20 condominiums at the Windsong complex in "M" Section by low and moderate - income
households. Assistance will be provided through silent second financing commencing in
1993 and continuing approximately three years.
Due to the availability of purchase assistance through other agencies, the City decided its
assistance was not needed in this effort.
Maintenance of Affordability
Objective 5. Conserve 196 existing assisted housing units from the present through 1999.
Maintain 27 of these units as affordable to very low - income households, 15 of these units as
affordable to low income households, and 154 affordable to moderate - income households.
[refers to Americana and Crossbrook projects]
Action 4. The City and the Community Development Commission should endeavor to
maintain existing housing affordable to low and very low- income households [in the
Americana and Crossbrook apartment projects].
In 1995 Bay Apartment Communities, Inc. purchased Crossbrook Apartments. With the
assistance of the City, Bay Apartment Communities obtained 30 -year revenue bond financing for
the purchase. The financing contains provisions that some of the units be rented to low- or
moderate - income tenants.
Representatives of the City contacted the owner of Americana Apartments in 1994 to discuss the
mortgage revenue bonds that were set to expire in 1995 for 20 low- income and 80 moderate -
income units. Several options were explored to finance the project and retain the affordable
units. City officials attempted to bring together the owner and possible buyers of Americana
Apartments. The owner decided to not sell the project, to refinance with private financing, and
discontinue the reservation of affordable units.
Action 16. Continue review of proposed conversions of apartments to condominiums and
cooperatives. Approval of conversions should be contingent upon a rental unit vacancy rate
that exceeds five percent.
The City continues to be committed to reviewing proposed conversions of apartments to
condominiums and cooperatives. Since adoption of the Housing Element, no such conversions
were proposed. In some instances, units approved as condominiums were rented. After an
interim period, these units were sold as condominiums.
9 -111
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Action 41. By the end of 1997, the City and /or Community Development Commission
should try to help the residents of at least one mobile home park purchase their park.
The City assisted the residents of Rancho Feliz Mobile Home Park. City staff negotiated with the
private owner of the park, formulated financing, and arranged for the purchase of the park. The
City and CDCRP formed a Housing Financing Authority to issue revenue bonds, purchase the
park in 1995, and to continue to operate the park. Two residents serve on the governing board of
the Authority. The Authority has maintained space rents and made several capital improvements
in the park. At a future date when the bonds can be refinanced or are paid off, the Authority will
transfer ownership of the park to a resident's association.
Growth Management
Action 1. The City should update its growth management policies as follows so the City can
continue to reasonably link the pace of growth with the provision of necessary services and
facilities while accommodating its regional share of housing affordable to very low, low and
moderate income households.
The City did not take pursue an update of its growth management policies because the adoption
of Measure N had a practical effect of limiting development.
Codes and Standards
Action 2. The City should review building . codes and subdivision design standards and
identify changes that could increase development densities, increase energy efficiency,
and /or reduce per unit housing construction costs by the end of 1995.
This action was not implemented.
Action 6. In 1996, the Planning Commission will prepare recommendations regarding
granting waivers and variances from impact fees and development standards in exchange
for a firm written agreement to reserve housing units affordable to very low and low -
income households. The City Council will review the Planning Commission
recommendations and consider adoption of one or more ordinances that implement the
recommendations by the end of 1995.
This action was not implemented.
Infrastructure Capacity
Action 8. From 1992 through 1998, the City will attempt to secure wastewater treatment
capacity from Subregional Sewage System participants with unused and uncommitted
allocations.
The City executed an agreement with Santa Rosa to secure unused wastewater treatment
capacity, as long as the plant does not exceed its state -rated capacity
Action 9. The City will continue to use treated wastewater to irrigate lands in the Rohnert
Park area including the City owned Mountain Shadows Golf Courses. The City, in
9 -112
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
cooperation with the Subregional Sewage System, will install a west to east pipeline
generally along Copeland Creek so as to make available treated wastewater for irrigation
of publicly and privately owned properties.
The City has continued to use treated wastewater to irrigate publicly -owned lands, including the
golf course. The subregional wastewater system has installed a reclaimed wastewater pipeline
generally along Copeland Creek including branch lines. This wastewater is used to irrigate public
parks, private landscaping, school grounds, and areas at Sonoma State University. The pipeline
was activated in 1996.
Action 10. The City will support expansion of the Subregional Sewage System wastewater
treatment capacity by 1998 so as to increase the wastewater treatment allocation for
Rohnert Park sufficient to serve its fair share of housing units.
The City has supported the efforts to add capacity to the wastewater treatment system through
the proposed Geysers Recharge Project. In the interim, a new storage pond has been completed
to expand treatment capacity at the wastewater treatment plant, and is awaiting Regional Water
Quality Control Board approval.
Action 11. Upon adoption of this Housing Element, the City will provide a copy to the
Subregional Sewage System and formally request an allocation of wastewater treatment
capacity sufficient to serve the identified housing projects which meet Rohnert Park's need
for housing affordable to very low and low- income households.
A copy of the adopted 1995 Housing Element was transmitted to the subregional system. The
City requested wastewater treatment capacity sufficient to meet the needs for areas within the
current City limits including identified housing projects. There has been sufficient treatment
capacity to provide for affordable housing projects constructed since 1995.
Housing Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Objective 4. Rehabilitate 100 stick built and manufactured housing units during the period
1995 to 1997. Of the total number of units rehabilitated, 11 should be occupied by very low -
income households, 36 should be occupied by low - income households, and 53 should be
occupied by moderate - income households.
The CDCRP contracted with the Sonoma County Community Development Commission
(SCCDC) for door -to -door contact with mobilehome owners, and provided funds for the
installation of mobilehome earthquake- resistant bracing systems (ERBS) in the three parks in the
redevelopment area (Rancho Feliz, Rancho Verde and Las Casitas Mobile Home Parks). All
families were low- to moderate - income households, with priority given to single -wide units and
low- income households.
The City also obtained CDBG funds to provide ERBS in Rancho Grande and Valley Village
Mobile Home Parks. The rehabilitation program ultimately provided grants in the amount of
$362,140 to mobilehome owners for the installation of over 200 bracing systems by June, 1997.
9 -113
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Action 12. A nonprofit community organization should enroll in the Christmas in April
program by the end of 1995.
Although this program was not implemented by 1996, it was implemented on April 15, 2000.
Action 40. By the end of 1995, the City and /or Community Development Commission
should try to create a mobile home rent guarantee program.
No action was taken to implement a mobile home rent guarantee program. However, in 1995,
CDCRP purchased the 297 -unit Rancho Feliz Mobilehome Park and guaranteed the affordability
of 131 low- income and 57 moderate - income mobilehomes. The CDCRP also pledged annual
funds of $250,000 for a five -year period to be used for capital improvements within the park.
Monitoring
Action 13. On an annual basis, the Planning Commission will prepare a report to the City
Council regarding the status and progress in implementing the housing element. Upon
review by the City Council, a copy of the report will be submitted to the Department of
Housing and Community Development.
The Planning Commission did not prepare annual reports regarding implementation of the
housing element.
Housing for Special Populations
Action 29. In 1995, a nonprofit corporation will construct up to 24 multifamily units at 305
Laguna Drive. The project will be designed to provide housing for persons with disabilities.
In 1996, CDCRP loaned North Bay Rehabilitation Services $292,000 at a below- market interest
rate for pre - development costs and project development of 24 apartments for developmentally -
disabled individuals. The loan was needed to secure an option on the property and cover costs
that were not reimbursed through the Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons with
Disabilities Program that NVRS obtained. The loan's promissory note restricts at least 10 of the
units to low- income persons, and provides that the Commission may assume ownership of the
project upon expiration of the HUD contracts in 40 years.
The project was occupied in 1999 and provides low -cost, accessible housing close to public
transportation, shopping, and medical facilities, as well as supportive services and employment
enhancement opportunities to its residents.
Action 14. In cooperation with Sonoma State University, identify sites for development of
student housing and anticipate such development after 1995.
Action 31. In 1996 the Planning Commission will conduct a survey of sites suitable for the
development of student housing in the vicinity of Sonoma State University. The Planning
Commission will prepare recommendations for the City Council regarding sphere of
influence boundary changes, annexations, extension of public services, and site design.
9 -114
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Sonoma State University identified housing construction sites on campus. A student village
housing units was constructed in 1999 and SSU is planning to construct more units by Fall 2002.
Therefore, the City did not undertake a survey of suitable off -site housing sites in the vicinity of
the campus.
Action 30. The City Attorney should determine whether a residential care facility could be
constructed on the "hospital site" given the recorded covenant.
Action 33. The City will encourage the construction of a long -term care facility by the end
of 1997.
The City has granted an option to a consortium of individuals interested in created a health care
complex on the hospital site that may include a long -term care facility.
Action 32. The City will make available descriptions of equal housing opportunity laws,
examples of housing discrimination, citizen responsibilities, and grievance procedures.
In 1995, the City mailed an information brochure regarding equal housing opportunity to every
household in the community. The City has supported the annual use of Community Development
Block Grant Funds to help finance the Sonoma County Rental Information & Mediation Services
(SCRIMS) which addresses housing discrimination complaints. When individuals with housing
discrimination complaints contact the City, they are advised to contact SCRIMS, the Sonoma
County District Attorney's office, or the California Department of Fair Employment and
Housing.
Jobs /Housing Balance
Policy 10. Achieving and maintaining a rough balance between jobs and housing is a city
priority.
In 1999, there were approximately 23,332 jobs in the City of Rohnert Park, and 14,865 housing
units, for a jobs /housing ratio of 1.57, according to the Association for Bay Area Governments.
The ratio of jobs to employed residents was 1.04, according to Table 2.3 -3 of the draft General
Plan.
9 -115
Chapter 9: Housing
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
Footnotes
1 The State of California's Housing Markets, 1990 — 1997, Statewide Housing Plan Update Phase II, Institute
for Urban and Regional Development University of California Berkeley, 1999.
2 Remarks by Cathy Creswell, HCD Acting Deputy Executive Director, and Linda Wheaton, HCD Housing
Specialist, to ABAG Housing Methodology Committee, April 2, 1999.
3 Ron Bellavia, California Department of Housing and Community Development
4 The Press Democrat, Real Estate section
5 "Shaken Awake!, " Association of Bay Area Governments, 1996.
6 Paul Smith, Acting Chief, HUD San Francisco Branch
7 Wendy Vazquez, Bilingual Housing Counselor, Fair Housing of Sonoma County
8 "Discrimination Against Families with Children in Rental Housing," Fair Housing of Sonoma County, January
2000
9 Realfacts, The Press Democrat, October 25, 1999.
10 "What We Know About Mortgage Lending Discrimination in America," U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban
Development
11 "Homes Sales Boom Continues," The Press Democrat, December 23, 1999.
12 The State of California's Housing Markets, 1990 — 1997, Statewide Housing Plan Update Phase H, Institute
for Urban and Regional Development University of California Berkeley, 1999.
13 California Association of Realtors
14 Housing Opportunity Index: Fourth Quarter 1999, National Association of Home Builders, April 2000
15 `Bay Area Inflation Stays Ahead of U.S.," The Press Democrat, January 3, 2000
16 Median Home Prices for Selected California Cities and Areas, California Assn. of Realtors, October 1999.
17 "Sonoma County Home Prices Soar," The Press Democrat, August 8, 1999
18 Realfacts, The Press Democrat, November 17, 1999
19 Sonoma County Consolidated Plan 2000 (Draft II), Sonoma Co. Community Development Commission
20 "Out of Reach," National Low Income Housing Coalition, September 1999
9 -117
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
21 Sonoma County Advocacy Group, 1999
22 Sonoma County Community Development Commission, Consolidated Plan 199712000.
23 Paul Carroll, Sonoma County Housing Authority, November 1999
24 "Housing Options for Older Americans" Fact Sheet, Administration on Aging
25 Sonoma County Consolidated Plan, Draft II, Sonoma Co. Community Development Commission, May 2000
26 Fair Housing Planning Guide, U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development
27 1994 Low - Income Housing Tax Credit Application for The Gardens, Burbank Housing Development Corp.
28 Sonoma County Community Development Commission, Consolidated Plan 199712000.
29 Federal definition of a homeless person per the McKinney Act (1987)
30 Sonoma Co. Consolidated Plan 2000, Draft II, Sonoma Co. Community Development Comsn., May 2000
31 Homeless in America: A Children's Story, Institute for Children and Poverty and Homes for the Homeless.
32 The State of California's Housing Markets, 1990 — 1997, Statewide Housing Plan Update Phase H, Institute
for Urban and Regional Development University of California Berkeley, 1999.
33 The State of California's Housing Markets, 1990 — 1997, Statewide Housing Plan Update Phase H, Institute
for Urban and Regional Development University of California Berkeley, 1999.
34 Tim Tiemens, Sonoma State University, December 1999.
35 Sonoma State University Master Plan Revision Draft EIR, 1999.
36 Tim Tiemens, Sonoma State University, December 1999.
37 Government Code Section 65863.10.
38 Residential Cost Handbook, 1990.
39 National Association of Home Builders
40 "Lumber Cost Stings Home Buyers," The Press Democrat, July 8, 1999.
41 Random Lengths
42 National Association of Home Builders.
9 -118
Rohnert Park General Plan
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
APPENDIX B
INVENTORY OF ASSISTED HOUSING
Gardens Apartments 21 Family 21 0 0 0
120 Santa Alicia
Muirfield Apartments 24 Disabled 24 0
712 -758 Laguna Dr.
9 -116
0 0
CDBG
HCD
PRIV
CDC 2025 1,533,000 $403,800
TAXC
CDBG
HCD
PRIV
CDC 2039 1,752,000 $461,000
HUD
ELDERLY
EARLIEST YR
COST OF
COST OF
NAME & TOTAL
FAMILY
VERY
ABOVE
TYPE OF
AFFORDBILITY REPLACE-
PRESERVING
ADDRESS UNITS
GROUP
LOW
LOW
MOD
MOD
ASSIST
EXPIRES
MENT UNITS
UNITS
Aaron House
1
Group
1
0
0
0
CDC
2021
$200,000
$ 8,670
735 Bonnie Ave
HUD -202
HCD
Altamont Apts.
230
Elderly
0
92
0
138
TAXC
2017
16,790,000
$320,160
300 Enterprise Dr.
PRIV,
Country Club Village
63
Elderly
41
22
0
0
HUD -C
2001
4,599,000
$432,030
6351 Country Club
Crossbrook Apts.
226
Family
0
46
180
0
MRB
2025
16,498,000
$398,820
655 Enterprise Dr.
Shared Housing
7668 Beverly Ave.
4
Family
4
0
0
0
CDC
Indefinite
200,000
$34,680
7982 Santa Barbara
4
Family
4
0
0
0
CDC
Indefinite
200,000
$34,680
746 Brett Avenue
4
Family
4
0
0
0
CDC
Indefinite
200,000
$34,680
Park Meadows Apts.
61
Family
0
12
49
0
MRB
2014
4,453,000
$41,760
7425 Camino Colegio
Tower Apartments
50
Family
50
0
0
0
CDC
2048
3,650,000
$433,500
781 E. Cotati Ave.
TAXC
Gardens Apartments 21 Family 21 0 0 0
120 Santa Alicia
Muirfield Apartments 24 Disabled 24 0
712 -758 Laguna Dr.
9 -116
0 0
CDBG
HCD
PRIV
CDC 2025 1,533,000 $403,800
TAXC
CDBG
HCD
PRIV
CDC 2039 1,752,000 $461,000
HUD
City Council Public Hearing Draft 8/01
43 "New Home Construction Falls Behind," The Press Democrat, January 30, 2000
44 1988 California Statewide Housing Plan
45 Renter By Choice' Households Growing," Professional Builder, January 1, 2000
46 Mortgage Market Information Services, June 30, 2000
47 CDBG Program Application for First Time Home Buyer Program, 2000.
48 GM -9 through GM -12
49 Rohnert Park General Plan Revised Draft EIR, Section 4. 10, May 2000
so News Release, Fannie Mae, June 1, 1999
Chapter 9: Housing
9 -119