HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem No. 12 Attachment Lake Elsinore AdmintDraft CD 2014-2021 HE_1-15-13
City of Lake Elsinore
2014‐2021 Housing Element
ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT
Consultant to the City:
Hogle-Ireland, Inc.
January 2013
This page intentionally left blank.
Chapter 6
Table of Contents
6.0 Housing Element................................................................................................3
6.1 Introduction........................................................................................................3
Purpose and Organization.................................................................................3
State Requirements and Legislative Changes.................................................3
General Plan Consistency..................................................................................5
Community Outreach and Input......................................................................5
Data Resources....................................................................................................6
6.2 Community Profile and Housing Needs Assessment................................7
Population Trends..............................................................................................7
Income and Employment.................................................................................14
Special Needs Groups......................................................................................20
Housing Profile.................................................................................................25
Projected Housing Need..................................................................................41
6.3 Housing Constraints Analysis.......................................................................43
Market Constraints...........................................................................................43
Governmental Constraints..............................................................................48
Environmental Constraints..............................................................................82
6.4 Housing Resources – Site Inventory and Analysis...................................85
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)..............................................85
6.5 Housing Element Plan..................................................................................135
Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs.......................................................136
Quantified Objectives by Income Group.....................................................145
6.6 Review of Past (2008‐2014) Accomplishments..........................................146
Chapter 6
2
This page intentionally left blank.
Chapter 6
3
6.0 Housing Element
6.1 Introduction
State law, in recognition of the role of land use planning in local governments’ provision of
affordable housing, requires inclusion of a Housing Element in the General Plan for every
jurisdiction. Cities and counties in California prepare their Housing Elements by consulting
State Law, the existing General Plan, and community stakeholders. The result is a
comprehensive strategy for providing affordable housing over the planning period.
Purpose and Organization
The Housing Element is one of the seven mandatory elements of the General Plan. Through
policies, procedures, and incentives, it provides an action‐plan for maintaining and expanding
the housing supply in the City of Lake Elsinore.
Lake Elsinore’s Housing Element for the planning period of January 1, 2014 to October 1, 2021
describes policies and programs including:
Identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs, resources and
constraints;
A statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, and scheduled programs for
preservation, improvement and development of housing;
Identification of adequate sites for housing; and
Adequate provision for existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the
community, including very low, lower, moderate and higher incomes.
State Requirements and Legislative Changes
The California Legislature states that a primary housing goal for the State is ensuring every
resident has a decent home and suitable living environment. Section 65580 of the California
Government Codes describes the goal in detail:
a. The availability of housing is of vital statewide importance, and the early attainment
of decent housing and a suitable living environment for every Californian, including
farm‐workers, is a priority of the highest order.
Chapter 6
4
b. The early attainment of this goal requires cooperative participation of government
and the private sector in an effort to expand housing opportunities and
accommodate the housing needs of Californians of all economic levels.
c. The provision of housing affordable to low‐ and moderate‐income households
requires the cooperation of all levels of the government.
d. Local and state governments have a responsibility to use the powers vested in them
to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make adequate
provision for housing needs of all economic segments of the community.
e. The Legislature recognizes that in carrying out this responsibility, each local
government also has the responsibility to consider economic, environmental, and
fiscal factors, and community goals set forth in the general plan, and to cooperate
with other local governments and the state in addressing regional housing needs.
Section 65581 of the California Government Code reflects the Legislative intent for mandating
that each City and County prepare a Housing Element:
a. To assure that counties and cities recognize their responsibilities in contributing to
the attainment of the state housing goal.
b. To assure that counties and cities will prepare and implement housing elements
which, along with federal and state programs, will move toward attainment of the
state housing goals.
c. To recognize that each locality is best capable of determining what efforts are
required by it to contribute to the attainment of the state housing goal, provided
such a determination is compatible with the state housing goal and regional housing
needs.
d. To ensure that each local government cooperates with other local governments in
order to address regional housing needs.
State law requires housing elements to be updated every four or eight years to reflect a
community’s changing housing needs; eight‐year planning cycles are available to jurisdictions
that adopt their housing element on time. The Government Code also requires that each draft
Housing Element be reviewed by the California Department of Housing and Community
Chapter 6
5
Development and that the Department’s findings be incorporated prior to adoption, or that
specified findings be made in response to the Department’s comments.
In response to changing State law pertinent to housing elements, this updated Housing Element
addresses SB 812, which requires jurisdictions to include an analysis of the housing needs for
developmentally disabled persons in the Housing Element.
General Plan Consistency
The Lake Elsinore General Plan, adopted in December 2011, includes the seven mandatory
elements combined into a smaller number of integrated chapters. This Housing Element is
consistent with the General Plan’s policies and proposals. The Housing Element, for example,
draws upon the development capacity levels given in the Community Form Element to
determine the appropriate location for affordable housing development.
The City will ensure consistency between the Housing Element and the General Plan, and as
new policies are introduced, they will be consistent with existing elements. If any General Plan
elements are updated, the Housing Element can also be modified to maintain consistency
within the General Plan.
Community Outreach and Input
Section 65583(c)(8) of the Government Code requires local government make “a diligent effort
to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development
of the housing element.” This process not only includes residents of the community, but also
coordinates participation among local agencies and housing groups, community organizations,
and housing sponsors. The result is more informed policies and programs for providing
affordable housing.
In Lake Elsinore, an article was included in the City’s Fall/Winter 2012 Activity Guide, to solicit
information from residents on any housing concerns. The public was also invited to participate
in the update process at a public workshop/joint Planning Commission and City Council
workshop, held on January 29, 2013. In addition, the public was invited to review the Draft
Housing Element which was made available on the City website throughout the update
process.
Chapter 6
6
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP FEEDBACK
The Community Workshop on January 29, 2013 was held to ensure that the housing concerns of
low‐ and moderate‐income and special needs residents were addressed. In addition to standard
noticing published by the City, individual invitation letters were distributed to agencies and
organizations that serve the low and moderate‐income and special needs community in Lake
Elsinore. Included in the invitations were:
Housing Authority of the County of Riverside
Fair Housing Council of Riverside County
City of Lake Elsinore Senior Activities Center
Civic Partners ‐ Lake Elsinore
H.O.P.E. (Helping Our People in Elsinore)
Lake Elsinore Citizen Committee
Lake Elsinore NAACP Branch 1034
Riverside County Office on Aging
National Community Renaissance
California Housing Partnership Corporation
Southern California Association of Non‐Profit Housing
BRIDGE Housing Corporation
[Comments received to be completed following meeting and completion of draft review period]
Data Resources
Data from a variety of resources were used in the crafting of the Housing Element. One of the
most cited sources is the 2010 Census The Census provides consistent demographic
characteristics that are widely accepted. California Department of Finance 2012 Population and
Housing estimates supplement the 2010 Census data. Additional information has been drawn
from the 2012 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, which is drawn
from American Community Survey 2005‐2009 Estimates. CHAS data is based on special
tabulations for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) from sample
Census data.
Chapter 6
7
6.2 Community Profile and Housing Needs
Assessment
The Housing Needs Assessment provides the foundation for establishing the objectives,
policies, and programs for addressing housing needs in the City of Lake Elsinore. This
assessment addresses population characteristics, employment patterns, and income levels. The
information illustrates how Lake Elsinore has grown and changed, and helps the City identify
patterns and trends relevant to housing policies and programs. Projections show how the
community demographics are expected to change over the coming years.
The following sources were used to generate this demographic and housing profile of Lake
Elsinore:
U.S. Bureau of the Census
U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS)
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG)
California State Department of Finance
Various other sources
Population Trends
Lake Elsinore has experienced rapid population growth over the past two decades, as has most
of Riverside County. In order to meet the future housing needs of the growing population it is
important to analyze the current housing and population trends for the City of Lake Elsinore.
To clarify the type of housing that will be needed to meet anticipated future demand, Housing
Element law requires an assessment of population and employment trends. Characteristics such
as age, ethnicity, and employment influence the type and cost of housing needed or in high
demand. Tracking demographic changes helps the City better plan for, respond to, or anticipate
changing housing demand.
Chapter 6
8
POPULATION GROWTH
Between 1990 and 2000, as reported by the Census, the population of Lake Elsinore grew
approximately 58 percent, from 18,285 to 28,930 residents. The 58 percent increase is substantial,
but is similar to other cities in Riverside County that have experienced increases in population
due to the relative affordability of the area in comparison with Los Angeles and Orange
Counties (see Table 1 for further information). Between 2000 and 2010, Lake Elsinore continued
to experience strong growth, with a 2010 population of 51,812 persons. The City of Murrieta
experienced greater increases in population than Lake Elsinore during this same time period,
and Norco, Riverside, Corona, Temecula, and Hemet experienced less growth than Lake
Elsinore.
Table 1
Population Growth: Lake Elsinore and Surrounding Cities (1990‐
2010)
Jurisdiction 1990 2000 20101
% Change
1990‐2000
% Change
2000‐2010
Riverside 226,505 255,166 303,871 13% 19%
Corona 76,095 124,966 152,374 64% 22%
Temecula 27,099 57,716 100,097 113% 73%
Murrieta3 ‐ 44,282 103,466 ‐ 134%
Hemet 36,094 58,812 78,657 63% 34%
Lake Elsinore 18,285 28,930 51,821 58% 79%
Norco 23,302 24,157 27,063 3.7% 12%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Note: Murrieta incorporated in 1991, therefore did not have a 1990 Census population count
The Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) periodically publishes growth
forecasts for the fourteen member jurisdictions, as well as unincorporated Riverside County
within the sub‐region. The most recent growth forecast (from 2012) projects a 2020 population
in Lake Elsinore of 70,500, and increasing to 93,800 persons by 2035 (see Table 2).
Chapter 6
9
Table 2
Projected Population and Housing Growth in Lake Elsinore:
Population Housing Units
Year Number
Growth Percent
Change Number
Growth Percent
Change
2020 70,500 36% 21,000 29%
2035 93,800 33% 28,700 37%
Source: SCAG 2012 Riverside County Growth Forecast
Note: Percent change for 2020 population based on comparison to 2010 report by the U.S. Census
(51,821 persons and 16,253 housing units).
In addition to population projections, several other demographic characteristics and trends
define housing needs. Among these characteristics are age composition, racial and ethnic
composition, and household size.
AGE DISTRIBUTION
Population age distribution serves as an important indicator of housing needs, because housing
needs and preferences change as individuals or households grow older. Young families tend to
focus more on cost and the ability to become first‐time homebuyers. Cost and access to services
are important to seniors because they may be on fixed incomes and have mobility limitations.
Table 3 shows the age distribution of Lake Elsinore residents, as reported by the 2000 and 2010
Censuses.
In 2010, the 0‐9 year‐old age group constituted the largest age group at approximately 18
percent, immediately followed by the school age group at 17.9 percent. Comparing the City’s
age distribution with that of California as a whole, the data show that the older adult age
groups (60+) comprise a relatively small proportion of the population in Lake Elsinore (9.1
percent of the City’s population compared to 16.3 percent statewide). The City has a much
higher younger population than the statewide average; 36 percent of the City’s population is
under 19 years in age, in comparison with 28 percent statewide. The City’s population of 45‐64
year olds has increased by five percentage points from 2000. The large proportion of working
adults and school‐age children and the small senior population means that demand will likely
continue to grow for larger units for families.
Chapter 6
10
Table 3
Age Distribution of Population: Lake Elsinore and Statewide
2000 2010
Age Group Number Percent Number Percent Statewide
0‐9 Years 6,057 20.9% 9,431 18.2% 13.5%
10‐19 Years 5,196 18.0% 9,237 17.9% 14.6%
20‐24 Years 1,849 6.4% 3,583 6.9% 7.4%
25‐34 Years 4,245 14.7% 7,761 15.0% 14.3%
35‐44 Years 5,026 17.4% 7,970 15.4% 13.9%
45‐54 Years 3,048 10.5% 6,758 13.0% 14.1%
55‐59 Years 883 3.1% 2,345 4.5% 5.9%
60‐64 Years 691 2.3% 1,771 3.4% 4.9%
65‐74 Years 1,136 3.9% 1,842 3.6% 6.1%
75‐84 Years 636 2.2% 854 1.6% 3.7%
84+ Years 161 0.6% 269 0.5% 1.6%
Median Age 28.7 ‐ 29.8 ‐ ‐
Total 28,928 100% 51,821 100% 100%
Source: U.S. Census 2000, 2010
RACIAL AND ETHNIC COMPOSITION
Table 4 shows the racial/ethnic distribution of population in Lake Elsinore and Riverside
County at large. The populations of each race are very similar in the City and County. The
largest difference between the County and City is that 48.4 percent of the City’s population
identify themselves as a person of Hispanic origin, while 45.5 percent of the County population
does the same. This difference is less than three percent and reflects that the City is
representative of the County at large in ethnic composition.
Chapter 6
11
Table 4
Race and Ethnicity in Lake Elsinore and Riverside County (2010)
City of Lake Elsinore Riverside County
Racial/Ethnic Group Number Percent Number Percent
One Race 48,632 93.8% 2,084,977 95.2%
White 31,067 60.0% 1,335,147 61.0%
African‐American 2,738 5.3% 140,543 6.4%
American Indian and
Alaska Native 483 0.9% 23,710 1.1%
Asian 2,996 5.8% 130,468 6.0%
Native Hawaiian &
Other Pacific Islander 174 0.3% 6,874 0.3%
Other 11,174 21.6% 448,235 20.5%
Two or More Races 3,189 6.2% 104,664 4.8%
Total 51,821 100% 2,189,641 100%
Persons of Hispanic
Origin (of any race) 25,073 48.4% 995,257 45.5%
Source: U.S. Census 2010
HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS
Household type and size, income level, the presence of persons with special needs, and other
household characteristics may affect access to and demand for housing and housing programs.
This section details the various household characteristics in Lake Elsinore.
Household Type and Size
Household characteristics and types can impact the type of housing needed. For instance,
single‐person households often occupy smaller apartment units or condominiums. Married
couples often prefer larger single‐family homes, particularly if they have children. This
Chapter 6
12
underscores the need to provide a diversity of housing to give households of different ages and
types the opportunity to live in Lake Elsinore.
The U.S. Census Bureau defines a household to include all of the people who occupy a housing
unit as their usual place of residence. A housing unit is a house, an apartment, a mobile home
or trailer, a group of rooms, or a single room occupied as separate living quarters, or if vacant,
intended for occupancy as separate living quarters. Separate living quarters are those in which
the occupants live separately from any other individuals in the building and which have direct
access from outside the building or through a common hall.
Table 5
Household Growth Trends and Projections
Year Households Numerical Change Percent Change
1990 6,066 ‐ ‐
2000 8,818 2,752 45%
2005 11,793 2,975 34%
2010 15,239 3,446 29%
2020 21,022 5,783 38%
2035 28,662 7,640 36%
Source: U.S. Census 1990 and 2000; SCAG 2008 Regional Transportation Plan Growth Forecast, by City
According to the 2010 U.S. Census, an average of 3.48 people lived in a Lake Elsinore
household. This represents 3.9 percent increase from the 3.27 average in the 2000 U.S. Census.
Not only did the average household size rise, the total number of households rose as well, from
8,818 to 15,239 in 2010 (Table 5). Between the years 2000 and 2010, the number of households
increased by 73 percent. The number of households increased most likely due to the relatively
lower‐priced homes in comparison with Los Angeles and Orange Counties (see the Housing
Issues discussion). Lake Elsinore’s average household size of 3.48 is higher than that of
Riverside County as a whole, which averaged 3.14 persons per household. This is most likely
due to the high number of families living in the City. Over three‐quarters of the households in
Lake Elsinore consist of families.
The data in Table 6 indicates that Lake Elsinore appears to be a stable, family‐oriented
community, with 80.9 percent of all households classified as families in 2010. The City has a
higher number of family households than the County (74 percent), and much higher than the
Chapter 6
13
State (68.7 percent), and the nation (68.7 percent). The proportion of family households in Lake
Elsinore has increased since 2000, when it was 78 percent.
Table 6
Household Characteristics
2000 2010
Household Type Number Percent Number Percent
Percent
Change
Total Households 8,818 100% 14,788 100% 68%
Families 6,874 78% 11,961 80.9% 74%
Families with Own Children 4,335 49% 7,195 48.7% 66%
Non‐Families 1,943 22% 2,827 19.1% 45%
Renter‐Occupied 3,086 35% 5,027 34% 63%
Owner‐Occupied 5,732 65% 9,761 66% 70%
Average Household Size 3.27 3.48 6.4%
Source: U.S. Census 2000 and 2010
As identified in Table 6, family households increased by 74 percent, an increase of nearly 5,087
families. Non‐family households also increased, but much less dramatically at a rate of 45
percent.
Table 7 compares household size by renter and owner between 2000 and 2010. Based upon this
information, it appears the need for two and three bedroom units is still important as in both
2000 and 2010 the majority of households consisted of 2‐4 people. In addition, there was a
significant increase in households with five or more members, making larger units of three or
more bedrooms increasingly important to accommodate these households, and especially
renters.
Chapter 6
14
Table 7
Household Size by Tenure
2000 2010
People per
Household Renter Owner Renter Owner
Renter
Percent
Change
Owner
Percent
Change
1 630 796 690 1262 10% 59%
2 623 1,613 908 2564 46% 59%
3‐4 1,129 2,015 1887 3652 67% 81%
5+ 736 1,275 1542 2283 110% 79%
Total 3,118 5,699 5027 9761 61% 71%
Source: U.S. Census 2000 and 2010
Income and Employment
Household income is the most important, although not the only factor, affecting housing
opportunity because it determines a householdʹs ability to purchase or rent housing, and to
balance housing costs with other necessities. Income levels vary considerably among
households, affecting preferences for tenure, location, and housing type. While higher‐income
households have more discretionary income to spend on housing, low‐ and moderate‐income
households have a more limited choice in the housing they can afford.
Income Profile
According to the 2006‐2010 American Community Survey 5‐year estimates (ACS), the median
household income for Lake Elsinore was $63,726, exceeding the Riverside County’s median
income of $57,768. Figure 1 shows that, in comparison with the County, Lake Elsinore has a
smaller proportion of residents earning less than $25,000 per year. Lake Elsinore’s residents
earning between $25,000 and $35,000 is comparable in size to the County. Lake Elsinore has a
larger proportion of residents earning between $50,000 and $150,000 than the County. In the
wealthiest categories where households are earning more than $150,000 per year, the trend
reverses with the County having a higher number of households in this category than Lake
Elsinore.
Chapter 6
15
For housing planning and funding purposes, the State Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) uses five income categories to evaluate housing need based on the Area
Median Income (AMI) for the County:
Extremely Low‐Income Households earn between 0 and 30 percent of AMI
Very Low‐Income Households earn between 31 and 50 percent of AMI
Low‐Income Households earn between 51 and 80 percent of AMI
Moderate‐Income Households earn between 81 and 120 percent of AMI
Above Moderate‐Income Households earn over 120 percent of AMI
Figure 1
Household Income Distribution, 2010
City and County Income Analysis
0.0%5.0%10.0%15.0%20.0%25.0%
$150,000 or more
$100,000 to $149,999
$75,000 to $99,000
$50,000 to $74,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$15,000 to $24,999
$0 to $14,999
In
c
o
m
e
L
e
v
e
l
Percentage of Total Incomes
Lake Elsinore
Riverside County
Source: U.S. Census 2010
The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) special Census tabulations
developed for HUD provide a specific breakdown of household income adjusted for family
size. According to the CHAS, over 13 percent of the Cityʹs total households are classified as
extremely low income (less than 30 percent of AMI), 11 percent are classified as very low
income (approximately 31‐50 percent of AMI), and nearly 17 percent are classified as low
income (approximately 51‐80 percent AMI). However, the majority of the City of Lake Elsinore
Chapter 6
16
households (61 percent) are classified as moderate income (greater than 80 percent of AMI) or
greater. Tenure is closely correlated with income, as those households with lower incomes
usually cannot afford to buy a home (Table 8 and Figures 2 and 3).
Table 8
Household Income by Tenure
Total Households Renter Owner
Income Category Percent Percent Percent
Extremely Low Income (30% or less) 11% 19.6% 7%
Very Low Income (>50%) 10% 17.5% 7%
Low Income (>50%) 17% 25% 14%
Moderate Income (>50%) 61% 37.6% 71%
Total1 100% 100% 100%
Source: State of Cities Data Systems: Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Data, 2005‐2009
Notes:
1. Numbers are rounded and therefore may not result in 100%
2. Income ranges are approximate percentages. Actual income limits for Riverside County are promulgated annually by HUD
and published by California HCD.
Figure 2
Household Income‐ Renter
020040060080010001200
Extremely Low Income
Very Low Income
Low Income
Moderate/ Above Moderate Income
Number of Households
Elderly Small Families Large Families All Others
SOURCE: HUD CHAS DATA BOOK (BASED ON 2000 CENSUS)
Chapter 6
17
Figure 3
Household Income‐ Owner
050010001500200025003000350040004500
Extremely Low Income
Very Low Income
Low Income
Moderate/ Above
Moderate Income
Number of Households
Elderly Small Families Large Families All Others
SOURCE: HUD CHAS DATA BOOK (BASED ON 2000 CENSUS)
Employment Trends
The City of Lake Elsinore has historically depended upon tourism for an employment base.
However, the City has expanded the employment opportunities to include jobs within
commercial and industrial businesses. Residents who work within Lake Elsinore are primarily
employed in services positions, manufacturing businesses, construction, and retail trade. This
is consistent with the major employers in the City of Lake Elsinore (see Table 9), which include
the Lake Elsinore Outlet Center and Lake Elsinore Unified School District.
Chapter 6
18
Table 9
Major Employers
Company
Number of
Employees Business Type
Lake Elsinore Unified School
District 1,526
School District
Lake Elsinore Outlet Center 1,169 Retail Outlet Mall
Stater Bros. Market 305 Supermarket
Wal‐Mart 245 Retail
Costco 201 Retail
Lake Elsinore Storm/Golden
State Concession 200
Professional Baseball Club
Medley Communications 175 Cable TV
Shirt WERX/Innovative
Merchandising 160
Advertising
EVMWD 170 Water District
Home Depot 160 Retail
Riverside Public Social Services 160 Government
Target 150 Retail
Lake Elsinore Hotel & Casino 150 Restaurant/Casino
Lake Chevrolet 116 Car Dealership
Lowe’s 106 Retail
Source: Lake Elsinore 2011 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
According to the United States Census 2010, there is an estimated 21,271 residents of Lake
Elsinore with jobs. This number increased over 87 percent from 2000, when 11,352 residents
reported having jobs. The increase in the number of residents with jobs in the City from 2000 to
2010 (87 percent) is fairly similar with the population increase in the City from 2000 to 2010,
which was 79 percent.
Table 10 shows the type of occupations held by Lake Elsinore residents. The majority of
residents are employed within the educational services, health care and social assistance, retail
trade, and manufacturing. Professional, scientific, management, administrative, and waste
Chapter 6
19
management services is the next highest category, with construction jobs the fifth highest
occupation.
Table 10
Major Industries
Industry Description Number of Employees Percent
Educational services, and health care
and social assistance 3,665 17.2%
Retail trade 2,861 13.5%
Manufacturing 2,649 12.5%
Professional, scientific, and
management, and administrative
and waste management services 2,331 11.0%
Construction 2,228 10.5%
Arts, entertainment, and recreation,
and accommodation and food
services 2,116 9.9%
Finance and insurance, and real
estate and rental and leasing 1,291 6.1%
Other services, except public
administration 1,141 5.4%
Transportation and warehousing,
and utilities 1,106 5.2%
Public Administration 718 3.4%
Wholesale Trade 577 2.7%
Information 395 1.9%
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and
hunting, and mining 193 0.9%
TOTAL 21,271 100%
Source: US Census Bureau 2010
Chapter 6
20
Special Needs Groups
Certain groups have more difficulty finding decent, affordable housing due to their special
circumstances. Special circumstances may be related to one’s income earning potential, family
characteristics, the presence of physical or mental disabilities, or age‐related health issues. As a
result, certain groups typically earn lower incomes and have higher rates of overpayment for
housing, or overcrowding. A central goal of the Housing Element is to assist in the housing of
persons with special needs.
Elderly
According to the 2010 Census, 2,965 senior residents (individuals 65 and older) lived in Lake
Elsinore, representing 5.7 percent of the population. This was a 1,032 person increase over the
2000 Census figures. Although the number of seniors increased, the proportion of the City’s
population that is composed of seniors decreased one percentage point, from 6.7 percent in 2000
to 5.7 percent in 2010. The City has 1,845 senior households,1 of which 17 percent were renters
and just over 83 percent were homeowners.
Many elderly persons have limited income potential, as they are most often retired and have
fixed incomes (retirement funds and Social Security income). Within the City of Lake Elsinore
senior population, the vast majority (81 percent) who rent have incomes that are classified as
low‐income or below (80 percent of the AMI or less), while 62 percent of seniors that own
homes were classified as low‐income or below. This poses a special problem with regard to
housing affordability.
Disabled
Both mentally and physically disabled residents face housing access and safety challenges.
Disabled people, in most cases, are of limited incomes, often receiving Social Security income
only, with housing costs taking the majority of their monthly income. Because people with
disabilities spend a higher percentage of income on housing, overcrowding is frequent as
housing expenses are shared with others, oftentimes live‐in caretakers. In addition, adults often
have the problems of securing and paying for childcare. They may have the further burden of
obtaining an education or training for themselves to increase their incomes and their ability to
find affordable housing. In addition, disabled persons may face difficulty finding accessible
housing (housing that is made accessible to people with disabilities through the positioning of
1 Households of one or two people. Source: HUD CHAS Data Book 2005‐2009 (based on U.S. Census 2010)
Chapter 6
21
appliances and fixtures, the heights of installations and cabinets, layout of unit to facilitate
wheelchair movement, etc.).
California State Code Title 24 requires all multiple‐family residential developments of three or
more units, and stacked condominium developments of four or more units, to be accessible to
disabled persons. However, because these Title 24 regulations were not in effect at the time that
some of the City’s housing units were constructed, there may be a shortage of housing units
accessible to people with disabilities.
Some Lake Elsinore residents have personal disabilities that prevent them from working,
restrict their mobility, or make it difficult for them to care for themselves. In 2010, 6.6 percent of
the population reported a disability, slightly below the proportion at the County level (10.3
percent). Most strikingly, nearly half of the senior population (40.5 percent) in Lake Elsinore
reported a disability.
Table 11
Disability by Age
Age Group Total Persons
Persons with a
Disability
% of Total Age
Group
Under 18 years 17,421 427 2.5%
18‐64 Years 30,748 2,023 6.6%
Over 65 Years 2,167 877 40.5%
Total 50,336 3,327 6.6%
Source: U.S. Census 2010, ACS 3‐year estimates
Developmentally Disabled
According to Section 4512 of the Welfare and Institutions Code a ʺdevelopmental disabilityʺ
means a disability that originates before an individual attains age 18 years, continues, or can be
expected to continue, indefinitely, and constitutes a substantial disability for that individual.
Developmental disabilities include mental retardation, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and autism; the
term also includes disabling conditions found to be closely related to mental retardation or to
require treatment similar to that required for individuals with mental retardation, but does not
include other handicapping conditions that are solely physical in nature.
Chapter 6
22
Many developmentally disabled persons can live and work independently within a
conventional housing environment. More severely disabled individuals require a group living
environment where supervision is provided. The most severely affected individuals may
require an institutional environment where medical attention and physical therapy are
provided. Because developmental disabilities exist before adulthood, the first issue in
supportive housing for the developmentally disabled is the transition from the person’s living
situation as a child to an appropriate level of independence as an adult.
The State Department of Developmental Services (DDS) currently provides community‐based
services to approximately 243,000 persons with developmental disabilities and their families
through a statewide system of 21 regional centers, four developmental centers, and two
community‐based facilities. The Inland Regional Center is one of 21 regional centers in the State
of California that provides point of entry to services for people with developmental disabilities.
The center is a private, non‐profit community agency that contracts with local businesses to
offer a wide range of services to individuals with developmental disabilities and their families.
In Lake Elsinore, 278 persons are consumers of the services provided at the local Regional
Center.
Table 11
Inland Regional Center Consumers
Age Group Total Persons
0‐14 yrs 105
15‐22 yrs 70
23‐54 yrs 95
55‐64 yrs 8
65+ yrs 0
Total 278
Source: California Department of Development Services, 2012
Families
State law identifies two specific family groups as having special housing needs: large
families/households and families with female heads of households. The reasons for their special
need status varies and may include lower income status, the presence of children, and the need
for financial assistance, as well as the available of suitably sized housing.
Chapter 6
23
Table 12
Special Needs Households
Characteristics
Large
Households2
Female‐Headed
Households –
No Husband
Female‐Headed
Households with Own
Children
Total Households 3,825 2,140 1,343
% of all households1 26% 14% 9%
Renters 40% 51% 62%
Owners 60% 49% 38%
Source: U.S. Census 2010
1. City Total Households equals 14,788
2. Large households have five or more members, including both family and non‐family households.
Large Households
In general, large households (with five or more members) are identified as a group with special
housing needs based on the limited availability of adequately sized, affordable housing units.
Large households are often of lower income, frequently resulting in the overcrowding of
smaller dwelling units and in time, accelerating unit deterioration.
The 2010 Census reported 3,825 large households (five or more members) in Lake Elsinore, of
which 23 percent own their home. These households are usually families with more than two
children or families with extended family members such as in‐laws or grandparents living in
the same housing unit. According to Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS)
data, 70 percent of large‐family owners and 78 percent of large‐family renters experienced one
or more housing problems. Housing problems include overcrowding, cost burden, and
substandard conditions.
Female‐Headed Households
Single‐parent households require special consideration and assistance because of the greater
need for day care, health care, and other services. Female‐headed households with children
particularly tend to have lower incomes, thus limiting housing availability for this group. In
addition, these households have a greater need for accessible daycare and other supportive
services. In 2010, 2,140 female‐headed households lived in Lake Elsinore, representing 14
Chapter 6
24
percent of all households. Female‐headed households with children made up nine percent of all
households.
Farmworkers
According to the 2010 Census, only 193 residents of Lake Elsinore have jobs in the
“Agricultural, Farming, Forestry, Fishing and Mining” industries. This number has increased
by 126 since the 2000 census, however is still relatively insignificant compared to the other
industries. Furthermore, many of these workers may be permanent employees in the mining
industry. Historically, the City of Lake Elsinore’s economy was linked to tourism, not
agriculture.
Homeless Persons
The 2011 County of Riverside Homeless Count was conducted by several agencies and led by
the County Department of Public Social Services. The count revealed a population of
approximately 6,203 homeless in Riverside County on January 24‐25, 2011. In Lake Elsinore,
estimates are approximately 113 homeless persons on City streets on a given night. This
represents approximately 2 percent of the County’s homeless population. The 2013 Homeless
Point in Time Count is being held on January 23, 2013. These statistics are estimates and should
be used with caution, as the potential margin of error is likely high, as recognized by the
County of Riverside Homeless Count 2011.2
The Department of Housing and Urban Development utilizes the federal definition of homeless
(The United States Code, Title 42, Chapter 119, Subchapter I §11302). Homeless is defined as:
1. An individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence; and
2. An individual who has a primary nighttime residence that is —
A. A supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide
temporary living accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate shelters,
and transitional housing for the mentally ill);
B. An institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be
institutionalized; or
C. A public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular
sleeping accommodation for human beings.
2 “A point‐in‐time (PIT) homeless enumeration has an inherent bias of not capturing homeless persons who
experience short episodes of homelessness during other times of the year.” County of Riverside Homeless Count
2011.
Chapter 6
25
There are numerous factors that contribute to homelessness in the City of Lake Elsinore and
Riverside County. Difficulties in obtaining employment, insufficient education, mental illness,
and substance abuse are a few of the more traditional factors. The lack of affordable housing in
the region has particularly been a problem since the 1980s.
The 2010 American Community Survey (ACS) estimates that the number of people living at or
below the poverty line in Lake Elsinore is 13.2 percent; which is similar to the poverty level of
Riverside County at large (13.4 percent). The high cost of housing in the region and the
number of persons living in poverty combine to create a serious potential for homelessness.
In response to the growing needs of the homeless population in Riverside County, the
Continuum of Care (COC) process began in 1994. The Department of Community Action
established a Continuum of Care Workforce in 1998. The City of Lake Elsinore is included
within the COC geographic area B, which also includes other Riverside County cities located
along the Interstate 15 freeway corridor.
Despite the overwhelming need for emergency shelters in Riverside County, there are only a
total of 543 full time shelter beds, available in the entire region, according to the Riverside
County Department of Public Social Services (DPSS) in 2012. Each year, between November 1st
and March 31st the Emergency Cold Weather Shelter Program (ECWSP) provides emergency
shelter for homeless persons who cannot gain admittance into regular full time housing.
California National Guard Armories are used for the ECWSP, as well as other suitable facilities
as needed.
Housing Profile
This section addresses characteristics of the housing supply in Lake Elsinore, including type,
age, condition, and availability.
Housing Stock
Residential construction activities in the City have increased at a rate of 71 percent (6,748 units)
from 2000 to 2010. This exceeds the construction rate in Riverside County, which has occurred
at a rate of 37 percent (216,033 units). Table 13 compares the growth rate of Lake Elsinore to
other cities in Riverside County, and to Riverside County at large.
Chapter 6
26
Table 13
Housing Unit Growth
Jurisdiction
2000 2010
Percent Change 2000‐
2010
Corona 39,271 47,174 20%
Norco 6,277 7,322 17%
Lake Elsinore 9,506 16,253 71%
Murrieta 14,921 35,294 137%
Temecula 19,099 34,004 78%
Riverside County 584,674 800,707 37%
Source: US Census 2000, 2010
Housing Types
Lake Elsinore was developed as a community of single‐family dwelling units and has primarily
remained as such. The percentage of multiple‐family units being built in comparison to single‐
family units has steadily decreased since 1990. Between 2000 and 2012 only 854 multiple family
units were built in the City in comparison to 6,098 single family units built. Single‐family
structures now make up 79.2 percent of the City’s housing stock, with multi‐family comprising
16.4 percent and mobile homes and other housing filling out the remaining 4.4 percent.
Chapter 6
27
Table 14
Housing Unit Types
1990 2000 2012
Housing Type
Number
of Units
Percent
of Total
Number
of Units
Percent
of Total
Number
of Units
Percent
of Total
2000‐
2012
Percent
Change
in Units
Single‐Family
Detached 3,673 52.6% 6,214 65.4% 12,207 74.3% 96.4%
Single‐Family
Attached 687 9.8% 707 7.4% 812 4.9% 14.9%
Total Single‐Family 4,360 62.4% 6,921 72.8% 13,019 79.2% 88.1%
Multi‐Family 2‐4
Units 583 8.4% 735 7.7% 1,025 6.2% 39.5%
Multi‐Family 5+
Units 1,071 15.3% 1,099 11.6% 1,663 10.1% 51.3%
Total Multi‐Family 1,654 23.7% 1,834 19.3% 2,688 16.4% 46.6%
Mobile Homes,
Trailer & Other 967 13.9% 751 7.9% 727 4.4% 3.2%
Total 6,981 100.0% 9,506 100.0% 16,434 100% 72.9%
Source: CA Department of Finance, 2000 and 2012, US Census 1990
Tenure
Housing tenure refers to whether a unit is occupied by its owner or by a renter. Table 15 shows
that the ratio of owners to renters in Lake Elsinore has stayed fairly consistent in the City
between 2000 and 2010. Sixty‐six percent of Lake Elsinore residents owned the home in which
they lived in 2010. This speaks to the stability of the City’s residential neighborhoods. The City’s
housing stock was developed with the intention of providing reasonably priced, detached
single‐family home ownership opportunities. This trend has continued from 1990, with the
percentage of homeowners steadily increasing within the City over the past 20 years.
Chapter 6
28
Table 15
Tenure and Vacancy
2000 2010
Tenure Number
Percent
of Total
Occupied Number
Percent
of Total
Occupied
Percent
Change
Total Occupied 8,818 100.0% 14,788 100.0% 67.7%
Owner Occupied 5,699 64.6% 9,761 66.0% 71.3%
Renter Occupied 3,118 35.4% 5,027 34.0% 61.2%
Vacancy Rate 2000 2010
Rental 2.5% 6.8%
Owner 2.1% 4.6%
Overall Vacancy Rate 7.2% 9.0%
Source: U.S. Census 2000 and 2010
Vacancy
The vacancy rate indicates a relationship between supply and demand. Four percent is
considered to be a healthy vacancy rate – one that permits sufficient choice among a variety of
housing units – although a healthy rate can be as low as two percent for ownership units and as
high as five to six percent for rental units. A limited vacancy rate is an indication that demand
for housing is outpacing supply and usually results in higher housing costs, reducing housing
opportunities for lower‐income households.
The 2010 U.S. Census reported that the City of Lake Elsinore had a vacancy rate of nine percent,
a slight increase from the 2000 vacancy rate of 7.2% but lower than the 1990 vacancy rate of
13.1%. This vacancy rate is indicative of the foreclosure crisis that affected the region and the
nation at large. As the recession wanes, vacancy rates are anticipated to decrease.
Chapter 6
29
HOUSING ISSUES
Housing Condition
The age and condition of Lake Elsinore’s housing stock is an indicator of potential rehabilitation
needs. Commonly, housing over 30 years of age needs some form of major rehabilitation, such
as a new roof, foundation work, plumbing, electrical or other structural or major components.
The age of the housing stock, as defined by the year the units were built, is shown in Table 16.
As of 2010, approximately 23 percent of all the housing units in the City were built before 1980,
whereas approximately 77 percent of the units in Lake Elsinore were built between 1980 and
2010. Based on these figures, it is evident that the majority of Lake Elsinore’s housing has been
constructed within the past 30 years, meaning that most housing should not need major
rehabilitation at this time. However, by the end of this planning period (2021), approximately
43 percent of the City’s existing housing stock will exceed 30 years in age and some
rehabilitation needs are likely among the 3,211 houses constructed between 1980 and 1989.
Table 16
Age of Housing Stock
Year Constructed Number Percent
2005 or later 3,014 19.2%
2000‐2004 3,007 19.1%
1990‐1999 2,870 18.3%
1980‐1989 3,211 20.4%
1970‐1979 1,596 10.2%
1960‐1969 845 5.4%
1950‐1959 376 2.4%
1940‐1949 189 1.2%
1939 or earlier 599 3.8%
Total 15,679 100%
Source: 2006‐2010 ACS 5‐year estimates
The City has an ongoing program to identify, determine the condition of, and initiate
rehabilitation or demolition proceedings. For example, in 2012, 15 units within the City of Lake
Elsinore have been identified as needing rehabilitation or demolition pending funding.
Chapter 6
30
The Economic Development Agency Home Repair Program through Riverside County is not
available for the fiscal year July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013, however this program may be available
in subsequent fiscal years. If so, Lake Elsinore homeowners will be eligible for assistance in
rehabilitating or repairing homes.
Overcrowding
In response to a mismatch between household income and housing costs in a community, some
households may not be able to buy or rent housing that provides a reasonable level of privacy
and space. Residents may accept smaller‐sized housing or double up with other families to
afford housing costs. An overcrowded household is defined as one with more than one person
per room, excluding bathrooms, kitchens, hallways and porches. Severely overcrowded
households are those with more than 1.5 persons per room. Overcrowding contributes to
increases in traffic and on‐street parking within a neighborhood and accelerates deterioration of
homes and infrastructure.
Table 17 shows some overcrowding in Lake Elsinore. As indicated by the American
Community Survey (ACS) 5‐Year Estimates, approximately six percent of all housing units in
the City were overcrowded. Rates of overcrowding are more pronounced for renter households
than for owner households. Approximately 11 percent of all renter‐occupied units are
overcrowded while only 5 percent of owner‐occupied units are overcrowded. Approximately
1.8% of all renter‐occupied units and approximately 1 percent of owner‐occupied units are
severely overcrowded.
According to the 2000 Census, 15 percent of all households in the City were overcrowded,
which means that the problem has lessoned between 2000 and 2010. The City’s 2010
overcrowding rate of six percent was consistent with the County as a whole, which was
approximately seven percent.
Chapter 6
31
Housing Costs
The cost of housing in a community is directly correlated to the number of housing problems
and affordability issues. High housing costs can price low‐income families out of the market,
cause extreme cost burdens, or force households into overcrowded or substandard conditions.
Ownership Housing
The Lake Elsinore median home price in 2011, based information provided by DataQuick
Information System, was $185,000 (see Table 18). This was 2.37 percent lower than the median
price in 2010. The median home price in Riverside County as a whole in 2011 was $10,000
higher than in Lake Elsinore. Median housing prices in Lake Elsinore have stayed fairly
consistent from 2010 to 2011, similar to other neighboring cities.
Much of the region has experienced a decline in home prices following the sub‐prime mortgage
market collapse of 2007. In 2007, the median home price in Lake Elsinore was $380,000; the
median for Riverside County at large was $395,000. Between 2007 and 2011, home prices in
Lake Elsinore fell by nearly $200,000, which represents a 51 percent decrease.
Table 17
Overcrowding by Tenure
Housing
Units
% of all
Housing
Units1
Number of
Renter
Units
% of all
Renter
Units2
Number of
Owner
Units
% of all
Owner
Units
Overcrowded
(1 ‐ 1.5 persons/room) 724 5% 477 11% 247 2.5%
Severely Overcrowded
(>1.5 persons/room) 127 1% 80 1.8% 47 .5%
Total Overcrowded
(>1 persons/room) 851 6% 557 12.8% 294 3%
Source: 2006‐2010 ACS 5 year estimate
Chapter 6
32
Table 18
Riverside County Median Home Prices
Location 2010 2011 % Change
Lake Elsinore $189,500 $185,000 ‐2.37%
Corona $330,000 $315,000 ‐4.55%
Murrieta $244,000 $240,000 ‐1.64%
Norco $331,000 $340,000 2.72%
Riverside (City) $191,000 $190,000 ‐0.52%
Temecula $275,000 $273,000 ‐0.73%
Riverside County $200,000 $195,000 ‐2.50%
Source: DataQuick Information Systems, DQ News
Rental Housing
According to the 2010 Census, 34 percent of Lake Elsinore households live in rental housing.
Table 19 shows that the HUD‐determined fair market rents for Riverside County fall within the
range of the rents within Lake Elsinore. Therefore, the rental rates in Lake Elsinore generally
align with the HUD determined fair market rents.
Overpayment
State and federal standards specify that households spending more than 30 percent of gross
annual income on housing experience a housing cost burden. Housing cost burdens occur when
Table 19
Riverside County Fair Market Rents and Lake Elsinore Rental Ranges
Efficiency
One‐
Bedroom
Two‐
Bedroom
Three‐
Bedroom
Four‐
Bedroom
Fair Market $886 $974 $1,149 $1,617 $1,886
Lake Elsinore Range $500‐$600 $559‐$1,070 $618‐$1,350 $677‐$1,799 $1,341‐$2,000
Lake Elsinore Median $550 $1,005 $1,125 $1,410 $,1800
Source: HUD User 2012, Craigslist search performed 2012.
Chapter 6
33
housing costs increase faster than household income. When a household spends more than 30
percent of its income on housing costs, it has less disposable income for other necessities such as
health care. In the event of unexpected circumstances such as loss of employment or health
problems, lower‐income households with a burdensome housing cost are more likely to become
homeless or double up with other households. Homeowners with a housing cost burden have
the option of selling the homes and become renters. Renters, on the other hand, are vulnerable
and subject to constant changes in the housing market.
Table 20 shows the connection between income, household type, and cost burden. CHAS data,
developed by the Census for HUD, provides detailed information on housing needs (e.g.
housing cost burden) by income level for different types of households in Lake Elsinore. The
CHAS defines housing problems to include:
Units with physical defects (lacking complete kitchen or bathroom)
Overcrowded conditions (housing units with more than one person per room)
Housing cost burden, including utilities, exceeding 30 percent of gross income
Severe cost burden, including utilities, exceeding 50 percent of gross income
The proportion of households experiencing cost burden declined as income increased.
Households experiencing overpayment (greater than 30 percent of the household’s income
spent on housing) or severe overpayment (greater than 50 percent of the household’s income
spent on housing) were split between renters and owners. However, renters were
overwhelmingly experiencing overpayment and severe overpayment in the lowest income
category (extremely low income). People in this income level who are renting are in the most
danger of becoming homeless as they do not have the advantage of the asset of owning a home.
Chapter 6
34
Table 20
Housing Assistance Needs of Low‐Income Households
Renters Owners Household by
Type, Income and
Housing Problem Elderly
Large
Families
Total
Renters Elderly
Large
Families
Total
Owners
Total
Households
Extremely Low‐Income
(<30% AMI) 70 165 805 320 35 695 1,500
% with housing
problems 86% 94% 88% 78% 57% 83% 85%
% Cost Burden >30% 86% 82% 86% 75% 57% 78% 82%
% Cost Burden >50% 43% 70% 79% 69% 0% 72% 76%
Very Low‐Income
(>30 to 50% AMI) 130 110 720 275 190 670 1,390
% with housing
problems 65% 100% 91% 60% 76% 85% 88%
% Cost Burden >30% 62% 86% 88% 60% 76% 85% 87%
% Cost Burden >50% 35% 68% 49% 29% 71% 62% 55%
Low‐Income
(>50 to 80% AMI) 55 155 1,035 355 335 1,310 2,345
% with housing
problems 82% 81% 74% 38% 88% 67% 70%
% Cost Burden >30% 82% 81% 68% 38% 67% 61% 64%
% Cost Burden >50% 82% 10% 17% 11% 37% 37% 28%
Total Households 315 715 4,105 1,530 1,855 9,350 13,455
% with housing
problems 60% 78% 63% 46% 70% 59% 60%
% Cost Burden >30% 59% 60% 57% 46% 63% 56% 56%
% Cost Burden >50% 38% 29% 29% 28% 27% 26% 27%
Note: Data presented in this table is based on special tabulations from sample Census data. The number of households
in each category usually deviates slightly from the 100% count due to the need to extrapolate sample data out to total
households. Interpretations of this data should focus on the proportion of households in need of assistance rather than
on precise numbers.
Source: HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Databook, 2012 (Census 2005‐2009 data).
Chapter 6
35
Affordability
Affordability is determined by comparing the cost of housing to the income of local households.
High housing costs impact communities far beyond the affordability problem. The lack of
affordable housing contributes to high levels of housing cost burden, overcrowding, and even
homelessness. In assessing housing affordability, the California Health and Safety Code Section
50052.5 provides the following definition of affordable housing cost based on the area median
income level (AMI) adjusted by family size and income level:
Table 21
Calculation of Affordable Housing Cost
Owner Rental
Extremely Low (0‐30% AMI) 30% of 30% AMI 30% of 30% AMI
Very Low (0‐50% AMI) 30% of 50% AMI 30% of 50% AMI
Lower (>50‐80% AMI) 30% of 70% AMI 30% of 60% AMI
Moderate Income (>80‐120% AMI) 35% of 110% AMI 30% of 110% AMI
Affordable housing cost for certain income groups may be subject to an optional calculation and adjustment
under Section 50052.5.
Using these updated affordability thresholds, current housing affordability at the County level
can be estimated for the various income groups (Table 22).
Chapter 6
36
Table 22
Housing Affordability
Affordable
Payment Housing Costs
Maximum
Affordable Price
Income Group
AMI
adjusted
by size Renter Owner Utilities
Taxes &
Insurance Home Rental
Extremely Low (0‐30%
AMI)
One Person $13,290 $332 $332 $50 $80 $44,351 $282
Small Family $17,085 $427 $427 $100 $90 $51,999 $327
Four Person Family $18,990 $475 $475 $125 $95 $55,864 $350
Large Family $20,505 $513 $513 $175 $100 $57,591 $363
Very Low (>30‐50% AMI)
One Person $22,150 $554 $554 $85 $115 $77,574 $469
Small Family $28,475 $712 $712 $125 $130 $100,188 $587
Four‐Person Family $31,650 $791 $791 $175 $140 $104,437 $616
Large Family $34,175 $854 $854 $200 $145 $111,701 $654
Lower
(>50‐80% AMI) 60%AMI 70%AMI
One Person $26,580 $31,010 $665 $775 $100 $165 $111,893 $565
Small Family $34,170 $39,865 $854 $997 $150 $190 $143,991 $704
Four‐Person
Family $37,980 $44,310 $350 $1,108 $200 $210 $153,010 $750
Large Family $41,010 $47,845 $1,025 $1,196 $250 $220 $159,232 $775
Moderate
(>80‐120% AMI)
110%
AMI
One Person $48,430 $1,218 $1,421 $100 $215 $242,599 $1,118
Small Family $62,645 $1,566 $1,827 $150 $260 $310,766 $1,416
Four‐Person Family $69,630 $1,741 $2,031 $200 $280 $340,092 $1,541
Large Family $75,185 $1,880 $2,193 $250 $300 $360,271 $1,630
Source: 2012 Department of Housing and Community Development State Income Limits and Hogle‐Ireland analysis
1. Small Family = 3 persons; Large Families = 5 persons
2. Property taxes and insurance based on averages for the region
3. Calculation of affordable home sales prices based on a down payment of 10%, annual interest rate of 6.5%, 30‐year mortgage,
and monthly payment 30% of gross household income
4. Based on Riverside County AMI $63,300 and 2012 HCD State Income Limits
5. Monthly affordable rent based on payments of no more than 30% of household income
6. Definition of affordable housing cost per Health and Safety Code Section 50052.5
Chapter 6
37
Comparing housing costs and maximum affordable prices for low‐income households shows
that low‐income households are being priced out of the Riverside County and Lake Elsinore
rental and ownership market. Given the affordable home prices presented in Table 22, single‐
family home ownership is beyond the reach of most lower‐income households; however,
moderate‐income families could afford a median priced home in Lake Elsinore.
Assisted Housing at Risk of Conversion to Market Rate Housing
State housing law requires an inventory and analysis of government‐assisted dwelling units
eligible for conversion from lower income housing to market rate housing during the next ten
years. Reasons for this conversion may include expiration of subsidies, mortgage pre‐payments
or pay‐offs, and concurrent expiration of affordability restrictions. The majority of subsidized
properties listed in Table 23 are owned by for‐profit companies, increasing the eventual risk of
conversion to market rate.
At‐Risk Units
A review of the assisted housing inventory indicates that one assisted multi‐family complex is
subject to expiration of affordability restrictions between 2014‐2024, the Lakeside Apartments.
However, the Lakeview Apartments (Phase I and II) and the Redevelopment Agency have
recently renegotiated terms to rehabilitate the affordable housing units within the project and
renew the contract to restrict units to affordable housing within the project. The affordable
housing income restrictions will be in place for a minimum of 55 years. The Parkside
Apartments were financed with HUD Section 515 funding; the owners have not as of 2012
indicated their intention to prepay the Section 515 loan. Twenty‐two tenants are currently
having their rent subsidized by a federal program called the Rental Housing Construction
Program (RHCP), enabling seniors and disabled residents to pay $100‐$300 of the base rent of
$665. Effective January 1, 2014, this funding may no longer be available. According to the HUD
Section 8 database, no projects in Lake Elsinore are receiving project‐based Section 8 funding.
Preservation of at‐risk projects can be achieved in a variety of ways, with adequate funding
availability. These include:
Transfer of ownership to nonprofit developers and housing organizations
Providing rental assistance to renters through other funding sources
Purchase affordability covenants
Refinance mortgage revenue bonds
Chapter 6
38
Table 23
Subsidized Dwelling Units
Project Name Tenant Type
Total
Units
# of
Affordable
Units Funding Program
Earliest
Conversion
Date
Parkside Apartments
442 Kellogg Street
(Limited Profit)
Senior/
Handicapped/
Disabled
37 14
HCD Financed
Section 515
N/A
Villa Siena Apartments
31300 Casino Drive
Family 126 126 Low Income
Housing Tax Credit 2054
Lake View Apartments
(Phase I)
32209 Riverside Drive
(Limited Profit)
Family 88 87
Lake Elsinore
Redevelopment
Agency
10/12/2065
Lake View Apartments
(Phase II)
32211 Riverside Drive
(Limited Profit)
Family 64 63
Lake Elsinore
Redevelopment
Agency
10/12/2065
Lakeside Apartments
15195 Lincoln Street
Family 128 52
Lake Elsinore
Redevelopment
Agency Restrictions
2023
Broadway Machado
Apartments
16436 Broadway Street
Family 28 14 Housing Authority
of Riverside County N/A
Fairview Apartments
33051 Fairview Street
Family 16 16 Housing Authority
of Riverside County N/A
Broadstone Rivers Edge
Apartments
2088 Lakeshore Drive
Family 184 28
Lake Elsinore
Redevelopment
Agency Restrictions
2060
Pottery Court
295 West Summer Avenue
Family 113 111
Lake Elsinore
Redevelopment
Agency Restrictions
2066
Sources: HUD Section 8 Database, Special Report: Low Income Housing Tax Credit Properties in California (www.nhtinc.org);
Riverside County Housing Authority (www.harivco.org); Lake Elsinore 1998‐2005 Housing Element
Chapter 6
39
Alternatively, units that are converted to market rate may be replaced with new assisted multi‐
family units with specified affordability timeframes.
Transferring ownership of the affordable units to a nonprofit housing organization is a viable
way to preserve affordable housing for the long term and increases number of government
resources available to the project. The feasibility of this option depends on the willingness of the
owner to sell, funding sources to actually buy the property, and the existence of a nonprofit
organization with sufficient administrative capacity to manage the property. The City can
explore transfer of ownership options with potential agencies or organizations included in the
State’s Department of Housing and Community Development qualified entities list. Projects in
which all units are affordable, and not just a portion of units are affordable, can participate in
ownership transfers more simply and are therefore more likely to be feasible.
In Lake Elsinore, the estimated market value for the 52 affordable units at‐risk for conversion to
market rate is evaluated in Table 24. The current market value for all affordable at‐risk units is
estimated to be about $57 million.
Table 24: Market Value of At-Risk Projects
Units Total Units in At-Risk
Total units 52
Annual Operating Costs ($234,000)
Gross Annual Income $687,960
Net Annual Income $453,960
Market Value $4,993,560
1. Median Rent = $1,125
2. Average Size = 800 sqft
3.4% vacancy rate and annual operating expenses per square foot = $5.00
4. Market value = Annual net project income * multiplication factor (ratio of the price of
a real estate investment to its annual rental income)
5. Multiplication factor for a building in moderate condition = 11
State, local, or other funding sources can be used to provide rental subsidies to maintain the
affordability of at‐risk projects. These subsidies can be structured to mirror the Section 8
program, whereby the subsidy covers the cost of the unit above what is determined to be
affordable for the tenant’s household income (including a utility allowance) up to the fair
market value of the apartment. The total annual subsidy to maintain the 52 at‐risk units is
estimated at nearly $300,000. The per unit subsidy is estimated to be $5,640 annually.
Chapter 6
40
Another option to preserve the affordability of at‐risk projects is to provide an incentive
package to the owners to maintain the projects as low‐income housing. Incentives could include
writing down the interest rate on the remaining loan balance. The feasibility of this option
depends on whether the complexes require rehabilitation or are too highly leveraged. By
providing lump‐sum financial incentives or on‐going subsidies in rents or reduced mortgage
interest rates to the owner, some or all of the units could remain affordable. However, given the
limited funding available to jurisdictions for such efforts, especially given the demise of
redevelopment in California, these options are unlikely to come to fruition.
The construction of new low‐income housing can be a means to replace at‐risk units. The cost of
developing new housing depends on a variety of factors including density, size of units,
construction quality and type, location, and land cost. Assuming a development cost of $200,000
for a multi‐family rental unit, the cost of replacing all 52 affordable at‐risk units would be
approximately $10.4 million.
Estimates of Housing Need
Several factors influence the degree of demand, or “need,” for housing in Lake Elsinore. The
four major needs categories considered in this element are:
Housing needs resulting from population growth, both in the City and the surrounding
region;
Housing needs resulting from the overcrowding of units;
Housing needs that result when households pay more than they can afford for housing;
and
Housing needs of “special needs groups” such as the elderly, large families, female‐
headed households, households with a disabled person, farmworkers, and the homeless.
Chapter 6
41
Table 25
Summary of Existing Housing Need
Overpaying Households1 Special Needs Groups
Renter 2,325 Elderly Persons 2,965
Owner 7,580 Disabled Persons 3,327
Total 9,905 Large Households 3,825
Extremely Low‐Income (0‐30% AMI) 1,500 Female Headed Households 2,140
Very Low‐Income (31‐50% AMI) 1,390 Female Headed Households with
Children 1,343
Low‐Income (51‐80% AMI) 2,345 Farmworkers 193
Overcrowded Households2 Homeless 113
Renter 557
Owner 294 Affordable Units At‐Risk of Conversion 52
Total 851
Source: 2010 Census, 2012 CHAS
1. Overpaying households are all households with 30% or greater household income dedicated to house payments.
2. Overcrowded households are based upon greater than 1 person per room
Projected Housing Need
California General Plan law requires each city and county to have land zoned to accommodate
its fair share of the regional housing need. The California Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD), in conjunction with the SCAG, determine a projected
housing need for the region covered by SCAG, including the counties of Riverside, San
Bernardino, Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura and Imperial. This share, known as the Regional
Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), is 412,721 new housing units for the 2014‐2021 planning
period throughout the SCAG region. SCAG has, in turn, allocated this share among its
constituent jurisdictions, distributing to each its own RHNA divided along income levels. The
City of Lake Elsinore has a RHNA of 4,929 housing units to accommodate in the housing
element period. The income distribution is as shown in Table 26.
Chapter 6
42
Table 26
Regional Housing Needs Allocation 2014‐2021
Income Group % of County AMI
Number of Units
Allocated
Percent of Total
Allocation
Very Low1 0‐50% 1,196 24%
Low >50‐80% 801 16%
Moderate >80‐120% 897 18%
Above Moderate 120%+ 2,035 41%
Total ‐‐‐ 4,929 100%
1State law allows local jurisdictions to use 50 percent of the very low income category to represent households of extremely low‐
income (less than 30 percent of the AMI).
Extremely Low Income Households
According to Housing Element Law Section 65583, local agencies may calculate the subset of
very low‐income households that qualify as extremely low‐income households (30 percent or
less of the Riverside County median income) by presuming that 50 percent of the very low‐
income households qualify as extremely low‐income households. The 2014 SCAG RHNA
projected 1,196 very low‐income households in the upcoming planning period. Therefore, 598
extremely low‐income households are projected in Lake Elsinore between 2014 and 2021. This
Housing Element will describe policies and programs that the City can utilize towards
implementing this housing needs allocation.
Chapter 6
43
6.3 Housing Constraints Analysis
The City of Lake Elsinore recognizes the need for the development of sound, affordable housing
for all its residents. The key factors constraining housing development include land availability,
the economics of development, and governmental regulations, all of which may impact the cost
and amount of housing produced. These constraints may result in housing that is not affordable
to low‐ and moderate‐income households, or may make new residential construction
economically difficult for developers. Constraints to housing production significantly impact
households with lower incomes and special needs. State law requires that Housing Elements
analyze potential and actual governmental and non‐governmental constraints to the
production, maintenance, and improvement of housing for all persons of all income levels and
disabilities. In Lake Elsinore, constraints to housing are often related to the overall housing
market and are part of regional trends over which the City has no control.
This section discusses potential constraints on the provision and cost of housing development in
Lake Elsinore. According to State Housing Element Law, the constraints analysis must
demonstrate local efforts to remove barriers to achieving goals for housing production and
housing for persons with disabilities. Should constraints preclude the achievement of housing
goals, jurisdictions are required to address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove
governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing.
Where constraints to housing production related to the City’s regulations or land use controls
are identified, appropriate programs to mitigate these constraints are included in the Housing
Plan.
Market Constraints
Many factors affecting housing costs are related to the larger housing market. The availability of
land, the cost and availability of financing the price of land, and the cost of construction all
contribute to the cost of housing, and can hinder the production of affordable housing.
Additionally, the availability of financing can limit access to homeownership for some low‐
income households.
DEVELOPMENT COSTS
A significant cost factor associated with residential building is the cost of building materials,
which can comprise a significant portion of the sales price of a home. An indicator of
construction costs is Building Valuation Data compiled by the International Code Council (ICC).
Chapter 6
44
The unit costs compiled by the ICC include structural, electrical, plumbing, and mechanical
work, in addition to interior finish and normal site preparation. The data is national and does
not take into account regional differences, nor does the data include the price of the land upon
which the buildings are built. The 2012 national averages for costs per square foot of apartment
units and single‐family homes are as follows:
Type I or II, Multi‐Family: $144.89 to $127.29 per sq. ft.
Type V (Wood Frame), Multi‐Family: $101.08 to $96.58 per sq. ft.
Type V (Wood Frame), One and Two Family Dwelling: $113.10to $105.93 per sq. ft.
The unit costs for residential care facilities generally range between $171 and $122 per square
foot. These costs are exclusive of the costs of land and soft costs, such as entitlements, financing,
etc. The Cityʹs ability to mitigate high construction costs is limited without direct subsidies.
A reduction in amenities and quality of building materials (above a minimum level of
acceptability for health, safety, and adequate performance) could result in lower sales prices.
Additionally, manufactured housing (including both mobile homes and modular housing) may
provide for lower priced housing by reducing construction and labor costs.
Another factor related to construction cost is development density. With an increase in the
number of units built in a project, overall costs generally decrease as builders can benefit from
the economies of scale. This reduction in costs is of particular benefit when density bonuses are
utilized for the provision of affordable housing.
The price of land can be the most significant component of housing development costs. Land
costs may vary depending on whether the site is vacant or has an existing use that must be
removed. Similarly, site constraints such as environmental issues (steep slopes, soil stability,
seismic hazards, or flooding) can also be factored into the cost of land. The cost of land in Lake
Elsinore and surrounding cities has risen substantially since the 1990s due to a decrease in the
availability of vacant or otherwise developable land in the Inland Empire region; however the
recent downturn in the housing market has reduced land and housing prices significantly since
2007. The high cost of land is a contributing factor to the lack of affordable housing in all of
Southern California.
LAND AVAILABILITY
The cost of land directly influences the cost of housing. In turn, land prices are determined by a
number of factors, most important of which are land availability and permitted development
density. As land becomes scarcer, the price for land increases. In terms of development density,
land prices are positively correlated with the number of units permitted on each lot. Thus, a
higher density lot may command a higher price than one designated for lower densities, but
Chapter 6
45
upon completion the developer may realize a higher profit margin based on a greater number
of units sold.
Over the past few decades, vacant residential land sales have increased due to the highly active
Southern California housing market. Even in this market environment, there are significant
differences in land prices in the region. In general, land prices in Riverside County are more
affordable than the pricier Los Angeles and Orange County markets; in fact, the lack of
inexpensive residential land in Los Angeles and Orange Counties was a major impetus for the
development of the Inland Empire, including Lake Elsinore and western Riverside County.
Accordingly, Lake Elsinore, along with other cities within Riverside County, is providing
affordable housing for workers in Orange County and Los Angeles County.
Within the Riverside County market, there are also significant differences in land prices. New
master‐planned communities in Temecula, Corona, and parts of the Coachella Valley have
generally garnered higher residential land prices than more established communities in central,
southern and parts of eastern Riverside County.
Although they remain a significant cost component of a new home, land prices in Lake Elsinore
do not significantly constrain the production of housing, relative to surrounding jurisdictions.
In fact, the land costs in Lake Elsinore are more conducive to construction than other areas of
Riverside County, and have contributed to the potential for single‐family market rate units to be
constructed which are generally affordable to moderate, and in some cases, lower income
households.
LABOR COST
The California Labor Code applies prevailing wage rates to public works projects exceeding
$1,000 in value. Public works projects include construction, alteration, installation, demolition,
or repair work performed under contract and paid for in whole or in part out of public funds.
While the cost differential in prevailing and standard wages varies based on the skill level of the
occupation, prevailing wages tend to add to the overall cost of development. In the case of
affordable housing projects, prevailing wage requirements could effectively reduce the number
of affordable units that can be achieved with public subsidies.
AVAILABILITY OF MORTGAGE AND REHABILITATION FINANCING
The availability of financing affects a person’s ability to purchase or improve a home; the cost of
borrowing money for residential development is incorporated directly into the sales price or
rent. Interest rates are determined by national policies and economic conditions, and there is
Chapter 6
46
virtually nothing a local government can do to affect these rates. Jurisdictions can, however,
offer interest rate write‐downs to extend home purchasing opportunities to a broader economic
segment of the population. In addition, government‐insured loan programs are an option
available to some households to reduce mortgage requirements. As of 2012, interest rates
remained at historic lows, facilitating resurgence in the housing market.
Under the federal Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), lending institutions are required to
disclose information on the disposition of loan applications and the income, gender, and race of
loan applicants. The availability of financing for a home greatly affects a person’s ability to
purchase a home or invest in repairs and improvements.
As shown in Table 27, a total of nearly 29,400 households applied for conventional mortgage
loans to purchase homes in the Riverside‐San Bernardino‐Ontario MSA during 2011, of which
Lake Elsinore is a part. The data includes purchases of one‐ to four‐unit homes, as well as
manufactured homes. More than half of the loan applications were received from households
that reported their income as above moderate‐income (earning greater than 120 percent of
Median Family Income [MFI]). Moderate‐income households (80 to 120 percent of MFI) and
lower‐income households (less than 80 percent MFI) accounted for 21 percent and 24 percent,
respectively. Sixty‐five percent of the applications were originated (approved by lenders and
accepted by applicants) and 15 percent were denied, with the remaining applications
withdrawn, closed for incompleteness, or not accepted by the applicants. As expected, the
denial rates were lower for the moderate‐ and upper‐income groups.
Chapter 6
47
Table 27
Disposition of Conventional Home Purchase Loan Applications
Riverside‐San Bernardino‐Ontario MSA
Applicant Income
Total
Apps.
% of
Total
%
Origin
ated
%
Denie
d
Lower‐ Income (<80%
MFI)
7,118 24% 59% 18%
Moderate‐Income (80 to 120% MFI) 6,291 21% 64% 15%
Upper‐Income (>120% MFI) 15,351 52% 68% 12%
All 29,379
** 100%** 65% 15%
Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), 2011.
* “Other” includes applications approved but not accepted, withdrawn, and files closed for incompleteness.
**Totals do not sum to equal “all” due to the unavailability of income data for some applicants.
Government‐backed lending represents a significant alternate financing option for Lake
Elsinore residents. About 36,000 Riverside/San Bernardino‐area households applied for
government‐backed lending in 2011 (Table 28). Usually, low‐income households have a much
better chance of getting a government‐assisted loan than a conventional loan. The number of
government backed loans has increased significantly from the height of the housing boom; in
2011, the number of applications for governmental‐assisted loans exceeded that for
conventional loans by 23 percent. No longer available are other loan options such as zero
percent down, interest‐only, and adjustable loans. As a result, government‐backed loans have
become a very attractive option for many households.
Chapter 6
48
Table 28
Disposition of Government-Assisted Home Purchase Loan Applications
for the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario MSA
Applicant Income
Total
Apps.
% of
Total
%
Originate
d % Denied
Lower‐Income (<80% MFI) 14,585 40% 65% 14%
Moderate‐Income (80 to 120% MFI) 10,781 30% 70% 13%
Upper‐Income (>120% MFI) 10,354 29% 70% 12%
All 36,060*
* 100%**68% 13%
Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), 2011.
* “Other” includes applications approved but not accepted, withdrawn, and files closed for incompleteness.
**Totals do not sum to equal “all” due to the unavailability of income data for some applicants.
According to Dataquick, the number of California homes entering the formal foreclosure
process dropped in the second quarter of 2012 to its lowest level since early 2007. The decline
stems from a combination of factors, including an improving housing market, the gradual
burning off of the most egregious mortgages originated from 2005 through 2007, and the
growing use of short sales over foreclosures. Most of the loans going into default are still from
the 2005‐2007 period. The median origination quarter for defaulted loans is still third‐quarter
2006, indicating that weak underwriting standards peaked then. In the second quarter of 2012,
5,677 homes in Riverside County were foreclosed, a 3 percent increase from the same quarter of
2011, according to reports by Dataquick, an information database that tracks housing cost and
issues. Among Southern California counties, Riverside County is second to Los Angeles County
(10,568 foreclosures) in the number of foreclosed homes.
Governmental Constraints
Housing affordability can be affected by factors in both the private and public sectors. Actions
by the City can have an impact on the price and availability of housing. Public policies can
affect overall housing availability, adequacy, and affordability. Land use controls, site
improvement requirements, building codes, fees, and other local programs intended to improve
the quality of housing may serve as a constraint to housing development. Consistent with State
law (Government Code Section 65583) this section addresses six potential constraints to housing
development:
Chapter 6
49
Land use controls
Building codes and their enforcement
Site improvements (on and off‐site)
Fees and exactions
Processing and permit procedures
Housing for people with disabilities
LAND USE CONTROLS
Development and growth in Lake Elsinore are issues of critical importance to City government
and residents. Land use controls, site improvement requirements, building codes, fees, and
other local programs to improve the overall quality of housing may serve as a constraint to
housing development. Land use controls set forth by the General Plan and Municipal Code
Chapter 17 (Zoning) could have direct effects on the availability and affordability of housing in
the City. Controls currently in place in Lake Elsinore are described below.
GENERAL PLAN COMMUNITY FORM ELEMENT
In December 2011, the Lake Elsinore City Council adopted a new General Plan. The Community
Form Element sets forth the Cityʹs policies for guiding local development and growth. These
policies, together with zoning regulations, establish the density, intensity and distribution of
land uses within the City. The Element includes new mixed‐use development categories that
promote development of mixed commercial, office, and residential uses with densities ranging
from 7 units per acre up to 24 units per acre (higher densities are achievable with a density
bonus incentive). In early 2012, the City Council completed comprehensive Zoning Map
amendments, to adopt the newly added mixed use Zoning Districts and to rezone High Density
Residential parcels to the R‐3 zone, consistent with the General Plan Land Use map.
Chapter 6
50
Table 29
Residential Land Use Designations
General Plan
Land Use Category
Corresponding
Residential Zone
Districts
Maximum
Densities Typical Residential Types
Hillside Residential R‐M‐R
1 DU/half/acre
to 10 acres
depending on
slope
Detached single‐family dwellings & small
agricultural uses
Lakeside Residential R‐1 1 DU/ 10,000
s.f.
Custom single family homes focusing on
lake views
Low Density Residential R‐M‐R, R‐R, R‐E,
R‐H 1‐3 DU/acre Detached single‐family dwellings,
secondary residential units
Low‐Medium Density R‐H,R‐1 1‐6 DU/acre Detached single‐family dwellings,
secondary residential units
Medium Density
Residential R‐H, R‐1,R‐2,MC 7‐18 DU/acre
Attached and detached single‐family
dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes,
multi‐family residential units, group
quarters
High Density Residential R‐1,R‐2,R‐3, MC 19‐24 DU/acre Attached single‐family dwellings, multi‐
family residential units, group quarters
Commercial Mixed Use CMU 7‐18 DU/acre Residential uses are allowed in a
subordinate capacity.
Residential Mixed Use RMU 19‐24 DU/acre
Apartments, condos, duplexes, triplexes,
fourplexes, townhouses, boarding houses,
row houses
Note 1: The General Plan and Comprehensive Zoning Regulations allow for higher densities based on the type of development
proposed. See discussion below.
Source: City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Appendix B General Plan/Zoning Compatibility Matrix, 2011, City of Lake Elsinore,
2012; City of Lake Elsinore, 2012
Residential land use designations are dispersed throughout the City. Densities range from one
to three units per acre for Low Density areas and up to 24 units per acre in the Residential
Mixed Use and High Density Residential areas. With the inclusion of Density Bonus Incentives,
these High Density Residential areas can accommodate an additional 35 percent density
increase.
Chapter 6
51
The Land Use Element designates approximately 61 percent of the City and its Sphere of
Influence’s land for residential use. In addition, 286 acres are designated Residential Mixed‐Use
(RMU), which allows residential uses to be integrated with commercial uses. A total of 631
acres are designated Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) within the City, which allows both
commercial and residential uses. Residential and Commercial Mixed Use designations are
intended for more urban areas within the City. The Residential Mixed Use designation focuses
on higher density residential uses with additional commercial uses, while the Commercial
Mixed Use designation focuses on Commercial development with some high density residential
development. The higher densities allowed in the High Density and Residential Mixed Use
designations create opportunities for providing affordable housing.
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
The City regulates the type, location, density, and scale of residential development primarily
through the Title 17 – Zoning of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). Zoning regulations
are designed to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of residents, as well
as implement the policies of the City’s General Plan. The zoning regulations also serve to
preserve the character and integrity of existing neighborhoods. The following table is based on
the zoning designations found in the current Zoning Code (2012).
Chapter 6
52
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
53
Ta
b
l
e
30
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
R‐M‐R
R‐R
R‐E
R‐H
R‐1
R‐2
R‐3
RM
U
CMU
Mi
n
i
m
u
m
Lo
t
Ar
e
a
10
ac
r
e
s
2 ac
r
e
s
½ ac
r
e
*
12
,
0
0
0
sf
*
6,
0
0
0
sf
*
(i
n
t
e
r
i
o
r
lo
t
s
)
7,
7
0
0
sf
*
(c
o
r
n
e
r
lo
t
s
)
7,
2
6
0
sf
8,
4
0
0
sf
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
only:
2,
4
2
0
sf
Mi
x
e
d
Use: 1,815 sf 1,815 sf of net lot area
Mi
n
i
m
u
m
Lo
t
Wi
d
t
h
16
0
ft
70
ft
(c
u
l
‐
de
‐sa
c
s
)
16
0
ft
70
ft
(c
u
l
‐de
‐
sa
c
s
)
10
0
ft
50
ft
(c
u
l
‐de
‐
sa
c
s
)
25
ft
(f
l
a
g
lo
t
s
)
80
ft
45
ft
(c
u
l
‐de
‐
sa
c
s
)
25
ft
(f
l
a
g
lo
t
s
)
60
ft
65
ft
(c
o
r
n
e
r
lo
t
s
)
40
ft
(c
u
l
‐de
‐sa
c
s
)
25
ft
(f
l
a
g
lo
t
s
)
60
ft
70
ft
N/A N/A
Lo
t
Ar
e
a
pe
r
Dw
e
l
l
i
n
g
Un
i
t
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
1 du
/
3
,
6
3
0
sf
of
lo
t
ar
e
a
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
lo
t
s
<8
,
4
0
0
sf
= 1 du
/
2
,
4
2
0
sf
of
lo
t
ar
e
a
Lo
t
s
8,
4
0
0
sf
or
mo
r
e
= 1 du
/
1
,
8
1
5
sf
of
lo
t
ar
e
a
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
only:
2,
4
2
0
sf
Mi
x
e
d
Use: 1,815 sf N/A
Mi
n
i
m
u
m
DU
Fl
o
o
r
Ar
e
a
1,
4
0
0
sf
1,
4
0
0
sf
1,
5
0
0
sf
1,
2
0
0
sf
*
1,
0
0
0
sf
*
St
u
d
i
o
:
45
0
sf
1‐be
d
:
60
0
sf
2‐be
d
+
:
70
0
sf
+
10
0
sf
fo
r
ea
c
h
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
be
d
r
o
o
m
St
u
d
i
o
:
45
0
sf
1‐be
d
:
60
0
sf
2‐be
d
+
:
70
0
sf
+ 10
0
sf
fo
r
ea
c
h
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
be
d
r
o
o
m
St
u
d
i
o
:
450 sf
1‐be
d
:
600 sf
2‐be
d
+
:
700 sf +
10
0
sf
for each
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
be
d
r
o
o
m
Studio: 450 sf 1‐bed: 600 sf 2‐bed+: 700 sf + 100 sf for each additional bedroom
Fr
o
n
t
40
ft
30
ft
30
ft
*
20
ft
*
20
ft
*
20
ft
*
N/
A
N/A N/A
Si
d
e
30
ft
*
20
ft
*
15
ft
*
5 ft
& 12
ft
*
5 ft
*
5 ft
*
N/
A
N/A N/A
Mi
n
i
m
u
m
Se
t
b
a
c
k
s
Re
a
r
50
ft
50
ft
50
ft
20
ft
20
ft
*
15
ft
*
N/
A
N/A N/A
Ma
x
i
m
u
m
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
Co
v
e
r
a
g
e
10
%
20
%
25
%
30
%
50
%
50
%
60
%
N/A N/A
Ma
x
i
m
u
m
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
He
i
g
h
t
30
ft
30
ft
30
ft
30
ft
30
ft
*
30
ft
*
30
ft
*
N/A N/A
So
u
r
c
e
:
Ci
t
y
of
La
k
e
El
s
i
n
o
r
e
Zo
n
i
n
g
Co
d
e
,
20
1
2
.
* Ex
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
s
an
d
/
o
r
sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
ap
p
l
y
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
54
Th
i
s
Pa
g
e
In
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
Le
f
t
Bl
a
n
k
Chapter 6
55
Open Space
To improve the living environment of residential neighborhoods, communities typically require
housing to have a certain amount of open space, such as yards, common space, and
landscaping. In Lake Elsinore, open space is reflected in setbacks and lot coverage requirements
for single‐family developments and minimum required open space areas for multi‐family
developments.
For single‐family homes, buildings may cover between 10 and 50 percent of the lot (depending
on the zoning), leaving the remaining 90 to 50 percent for open space. Most of this open space is
located within the required front and rear yards. The nearby communities of Murrieta (25%‐
50% lot coverage) and Temecula (10%‐35% lot coverage) require an equivalent to or have more
restrictive lot coverage standards. However, open space within the single‐family zoning
districts are not viewed as a constraint on development as the densities in these districts are
governed by lot size requirements.
Lake Elsinore’s R‐2 and R‐3 zoning districts require 100 square feet of open space for each one‐
bedroom dwelling unit, with the minimum dimension for the open yard or patio being 10 feet.
If, however, the open space is provided through balcony space, the minimum size is 60 to 80
square feet with a minimum dimension of 6 feet, dependent on unit size. Duplexes and triplexes
within these zones require a higher minimum private open space area of 350 square feet with a
minimum dimension of 15 feet. Zoning regulations also require that multi‐family projects
including four or more units provide additional space for community recreation (common open
space), at 250 square feet per dwelling unit. The City of Murrieta has a similar open space
standard, requiring 100 square feet for ground floor units and 60 square feet for upper floors,
with an additional 200 square feet of common open space per unit. The City of Temecula
requires a minimum of 25% of lot area for open space and 200 square feet of private open space
per unit within their Medium Density Residential (max 12 du/ac) zoning district, with a
minimum of 30% of lot area for open space and 150 square feet of private open space per unit
within their High Density Residential (max 20 du/ac) zoning district.
The open space requirements listed above for multi‐family developments in Lake Elsinore are
not viewed as constraints to development as efficient site planning can maximize density while
also providing the open space amenities that provide the quality of life residents desire. Lake
Elsinore’s maximum building coverage of 50% to 60% in the multi‐family residential zoning
district far exceeds the 30% to 35% limits within Murrieta and Temecula. The greater allowance
for maximum building coverage and similar to lesser open space requirements provides greater
flexibility within the City of Lake Elsinore to provide affordable housing.
Chapter 6
56
Parking
City parking standards for residential developments are tailored to the vehicle ownership
patterns associated with different residential uses. The Code requires parking based on the
number of units on the property. Parking requirements for residential uses are listed in Table
31. For single‐family developments, LEMC Title 17 requires two parking spaces within an
enclosed garage and two additional open spaces on the driveway. Multi‐family residential
requirements vary based on the number of bedrooms in each unit, and require guest parking.
Table 31
Parking Requirements
Type of Dwelling Parking Requirements
Single‐Family Dwelling 2 covered parking spaces per DU plus 2
open spaces in a driveway
Multiple‐Family Dwelling Units
Studio and One‐bedroom unit 1 covered and 2/3 uncovered parking
spaces per DU
Two or more bedroom unit 1 covered and 1 1/3 uncovered parking
spaces per DU
Boarding houses 1 space per resident
Convalescent, nursing and/or rest homes 1 open parking space for each 3 beds
Source: City of Lake Elsinore Zoning Regulations, 2012 Section 17.148.030‐ Number of parking spaces
permitted.
Parking requirements for the residential component of mixed‐use developments are determined
by the uses in Table 31 above, however, a request to reduce the number of required parking
spaces may be made to the Planning Commission provided a Parking Study supports the
finding that the number of parking spaces actually needed for a specific project is less than that
required by Code.
Parking standards require fewer parking stalls for smaller units such as studios and one‐
bedroom units. In addition, LEMC Section 17.58.045‐ Density Bonuses, Additional Incentives,
permits the City to reduce the required number of vehicular spaces that would otherwise be
required. LEMC Section 17.58.050‐ Density Bonus Agreement Requirements, is consistent with
the parking requirements of California Government Code Section 65915(p). These two sections
Chapter 6
57
permit the City to reduce the number of parking stalls required to allow for higher density
development of a project.
Lake Elsinore’s parking standards are comparable to those found in surrounding communities,
including Murrieta and Temecula. The City’s Density Bonus standards also allow for additional
creativity and flexibility in development. The parking requirements are not viewed as
constraints to development as efficient site planning can maximize density while providing
needed parking for residents.
To assess potential constraints, a review of recently approved large‐scale projects was
completed to determine if maximum densities are achievable. This review revealed that at least
three recently approved projects in Lake Elsinore were able to achieve maximum densities
while complying with all development standards, indicating that there are limited constraints to
housing development.
The Fairfield Apartments, 20.44 du/ac, located in northeastern Lake Elsinore and River’s Edge
Apartments, 26 du/ac, located east of downtown near the Lake Elsinore Diamond were
approved in 2004‐2005, and are now constructed and occupied. The Pottery Court Apartments
project, a very low income multi‐family development, was approved in 2008 at 26 dwelling
units per acre; this development was opened in 2012. All of these projects include three‐story
structures, which maximizes the height limit and none of the projects filed for a Variance to
adjust the parking requirement.
Specific Plan District
The Specific Plan District (SPD) zone is intended to allow greater design flexibility and to
encourage well‐planned developments. A specific plan document, site plan, tentative tract map,
and final tract map are required to develop a specific plan development. The SPD zone permits
the combination of several land uses. Mixed uses may include any combination of residential,
commercial, industrial, open space, and agricultural uses.
Mixed‐use Development Standards
The Cityʹs overriding constraint with regard to residential development is the relatively low
density within the single‐family residential zoning designations. With the expansion of the
High Density Residential designation in certain areas and the introduction of two mixed‐use
designations into the General Plan, the City has provided expanded opportunities for different
types of housing and increased densities (up to 24 units per acre). In 2012, the City adopted
Chapter 6
58
corresponding mixed use zoning districts and development standards to implement General
Plan policy.
Table 32
Mixed Use Development Standards
Standards CMU RMU
FAR 0.8:1 1.0:1
Density 7‐18 du/ac
19‐24 du/ac
(Up to 35 du/ac with
Density Bonus)
Lot Size No Minimum No Minimum
Front
10 ft 10 ft
St. Front 10 ft 10 ft
Minimum
Setbacks
Interior None None
Source: City of Lake Elsinore Zoning Code, 2012.
The intent of the RMU District is to provide a development opportunity to combine both
residential and neighborhood retail and service uses, preferably incorporated into a mixed‐use
project. The RMU District accommodates primarily medium to high density residential mixed‐
use developments, with limited commercial, institutional, office and service uses distributed in
a manner compatible with the street environment and adjacent to residential areas.
The intent of the CMU District is to accommodate a development opportunity that offers a mix
of land uses in a compact, high quality, pedestrian‐friendly, interactive pattern. Commercial
mixed‐use districts are characterized by interconnected streets, wide sidewalks, outdoor public
spaces and activities.
PROVIDING FOR A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES
The Community Form Element and LEMC Title 17 contain the basic standards that allow for the
development of a variety of housing types. Title 17 development standards are considered
standard for suburban communities in Riverside County and Southern California and do not
impede the ability to develop housing at appropriate densities. Table 33 lists the allowed
location of specific uses. A matrix showing the allowable housing types in each residential zone
will be incorporated into the comprehensively updated Title 17.
Chapter 6
59
Table 33
Permitted Uses in Residential Zones
Uses R‐M‐R R‐R R‐E R‐H R‐1 R‐2 R‐3
One Family Homes P P P P P P* P*
Two‐Family Homes ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ P ‐
Multi‐Family Housing ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ P P
Day Care P* P* P* P* P* P* P*
Home Occupations A* A* A* A* A* A* A*
Large Family Day Care C* C* C* C* C* C* C*
Mobile Home on Permanent
Foundation P* P* P* P* P* ‐ ‐
Residential Care P* P* P* P* P* P* P*
Rest Homes ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ C C
Second units P* P* P* P* P* P* P*
P = Automatically permitted use
A = Accessory Use. Use permitted only if accessory to another primary use on the same site
C = Conditional Use. Use eligible for consideration under the conditional use procedures and permitted only if the
conditional use permit is approved, subject to the specific conditions of such permit.
* = Use shall be subject to special conditions or specific restrictions as listed in this section.
‐ = Not a permitted use.
Source: Lake Elsinore Zoning Code, 2012
Multi‐Family Housing
Multi‐family housing is permitted by right in the R‐2, R‐3, CMU, and RMU zones. Multi‐family
developments in residential zones are subject to regulations related to the distance between
buildings, as this distance is not permitted to be less than 15 feet. Additional privacy standards
related to the placement of windows are also required in all multi‐family housing projects.
Second Units
As indicated in Table 35, Lake Elsinore permits the creation of second units on all residential
sites containing an existing single‐family home as consistent with State law. Conditions of
Chapter 6
60
approval for second units are standard and do not impede the creation of second units. These
conditions include:
A maximum of one second unit on each lot.
The gross floor area for the accessory dwelling unit must not exceed 30 percent of the
existing residence for attached units and 50 percent of the existing residence for
detached units. A maximum square footage of 1,000 is permitted for attached units and
detached units shall not exceed 1,200 square feet.
The second unit shall contain no more than 2 bedrooms.
The second unit must be compatible with the existing primary residence in terms of
form, material, and architectural design.
Second units must include one off‐street parking space in a garage. This space shall not
be located within the required setbacks or through tandem parking.
There shall not be more than one exterior entrance on the front or on any street side of
the second unit and no exterior stairway shall be located on the front of the building.
The main dwelling unit shall continue to comply with the minimum standards
applicable to a single‐family detached dwelling unit in the zoning district even with the
development of a second unit.
Senior Citizen Housing
The City of Lake Elsinore does not have any specific regulations for the development of senior
citizen housing. At this time, senior citizen housing is subject to the same regulations and
process as any residential development; however senior housing may seek density bonus
incentives, consistent with State law.
Community Care Facilities
LEMC Title 17 defines residential or community care facilities as providing for the care of
children and mentally and physically handicapped persons in a residential environment.
Consistent with State law, the City facilitates the development of residential care facilities by
treating licensed facilities that serve six or fewer persons as standard residential uses. Those
facilities that serve more than 6 persons are allowed with the approval of a Conditional Use
Permit in all residential zones.
Emergency and Transitional Housing
Emergency housing provides short‐term shelter (usually for up to six months of stay) for
homeless persons or persons facing other difficulties, such as domestic violence. Transitional
Chapter 6
61
housing provides longer‐term housing (up to two years), coupled with supportive services such
as job training and counseling, to individuals and families who are transitioning to permanent
housing.
To facilitate the development of emergency housing and comply with State law, the City
amended the Zoning Code in 2012 to address emergency shelters and transitional and
supportive housing. Consistent with State law, transitional housing is permitted in the R‐3,
RMU, and CMU zones.
Emergency homeless shelters are designated as a permitted use in the C‐M (Commercial
Manufacturing) and M‐2 (General Manufacturing) zones. The ordinance includes emergency
shelter development standards and operational regulations consistent with state law. The
LEMC has been modified to include the following codes related to Emergency and Transitional
housing:
Chapter 17.08 DEFINITIONS
17.08.50 E definitions.
“Emergency shelter” Immediate and short‐term housing with supportive services for homeless
persons that is limited to occupancy of six months or less. No individual or household may be denied
emergency shelter because of an inability to pay.
17.08.200 T definitions.
“Transitional Housing” Buildings configured as rental apartment developments, that operate
under program requirements which call for the termination of assistance and recirculation of the assisted
unit to another eligible program recipient at some predetermined future point in time, which shall be no
less than six months, and no more than two years. Appropriate sites for the transitional housing
development should include those close to public services and facilities including transportation.
Chapter 17.84 R‐3 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
17.84.020 Permitted Uses.
L. Supportive housing.
M. Transitional housing.
Chapter 17.86 RMU RESIDENTIAL MIXED‐USE DISTRICT
17.86.020 Permitted Uses.
Table of Mixed‐Use Land Uses
Chapter 6
62
Supportive housing.
Transitional housing.
Chapter 17.134 CMU RESIDENTIAL MIXED‐USE DISTRICT
17.134.020 Permitted Uses.
Table of Mixed‐Use Land Uses
Supportive housing.
Transitional housing.
Chapter 17.132 C‐M COMMERCIAL MANUFACTURING DISTRICT
17.132.020 Permitted Uses.
F. Emergency Shelter, in accordance with Sec. 17.132.150 Emergency Shelter Use &
Development Standards
17.132.150 Emergency Shelter Use & Development Standards
In accordance with California Government Code Sec 65582, 66583(a), and 65589.5 emergency
shelters are permitted as a matter of right in the CM zone. The purpose of regulating the siting of
emergency shelters, their use and development, is to ensure the development of emergency shelters do not
adversely impact adjacent parcels or the surrounding neighborhood, and shall be developed in a manner
that protects the health, safety, and general welfare of nearby residents and businesses while providing for
the housing needs of the homeless.
A. Use Standards
1. Number of Beds. An emergency shelter shall contain a maximum of 50 beds.
2. Hours of Operation. Emergency shelter operations are limited to the evening
hours and shall open not earlier than 5:00 pm and close not later than 8:00 a.m. daily. All clientele shall
vacate the premises upon closing. There shall be no in‐and‐out privileges for clientele using the shelter
between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.
3. Management. The shelter shall provide onsite management during hours of
operation, at a ratio of one staff member for every 15 beds. Staff members shall be awake and on duty
during the operating hours of the shelter.
4. Use of the Program. The shelter shall operate on a first come, first served basis.
It is preferred that the shelter operate on a voucher system, wherein intake procedures are performed as a
separate function from the shelter and results in a referral to the shelter program for a specified period of
time.
5. Objective of the Program. Services shall be provided to assist clients in
obtaining permanent shelter, income, and services.
Chapter 6
63
6. Length of Stay. Clients are permitted to return to the shelter for a maximum of
180 days unless their individual management plan provides for longer residency while regularly
participating in training or rehabilitation.
7. Reimbursement. No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter
because of an inability to pay.
8. Licensing. The facility shall demonstrate that it is in good standing with
County, State and City licensing agencies, if required for the owner, operator and staff.
9. Shelter Management Plan. The shelter shall provide a written management
plan to the City that includes provisions for staff training and qualifications; neighborhood outreach
program including litter pickup with a 500‐foot radius, and traversing the neighborhood daily for input
and reconnaissance; transportation options; security; location of smoking area; volunteer and donation
program and procedures; intake screening to ensure compatibility with services provided at the facility,
and for the training, counseling and treatment programs for clients; and health, safety and emergency
plans.
B. Development Standards
1. The development standards set forth in the C‐M zone shall apply, unless
otherwise specified herein.
2. Interior Waiting Area. Interior onsite waiting and client intake area shall be a
minimum of 200 square feet, including seating for 25 clients at any one time.
3. Exterior Waiting Area. A covered exterior onsite waiting area shall be
provided, at a minimum of 100 square feet for seating for 50 clients at any one time, to protect clients
from the elements.
4. Separation between Shelters. An emergency shelter shall be no closer than 300
feet from another emergency shelter, as measured from the nearest property line.
5. External Lighting. Adequate external lighting shall be provided for security
purposes. The lighting shall be stationary and directed away from adjacent properties and public‐rights‐
of‐way.
6. Parking. Off‐street parking requirements shall provide for employees, residents
and visitors, including a loading space, as set forth in the facility management plan which shall
demonstrate the need for spaces at the facility.
7. ADA Access. The shelter shall be compliant with the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
8. Amenities. The facility may include central cooking and dining areas, laundry
area, recreation area, recreation rooms, counseling centers, child card facilities, play areas, bike racks, and
other support services for the exclusive use of the residents and staff.
Chapter 17.140 M‐2 GENERAL MANUFACTURING DISTRICT
17.140.20 Permitted Uses.
Chapter 6
64
L. Emergency Shelter, in accordance with Sec. 17.132.150 Emergency Shelters Use &
Development Standards.
Supportive Housing
In a supportive housing development, housing can be coupled with social services such as job
training, alcohol and drug abuse programs, and case management for populations in need of
assistance, such as the homeless, those suffering from mental illness or substance abuse
problems, and the elderly or medically frail. The City amended the Zoning Code in 2012 to
include supportive housing as permitted by right in the CMU, RMU, and R‐3 zones. The LEMC
has been modified to include the following codes related to Supportive Housing:
Chapter 17.08 DEFINITIONS
17.08.190 S definitions.
“Supportive housing” Housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target
population, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in
retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and,
when possible, work in the community.
Manufactured and Mobile Homes
Manufactured housing, including mobile homes on permanent foundations, is permitted by
right on all lots which permit single‐family houses subject to certain restrictions, pursuant to
State law. These restrictions include the following:
The mobile home must be certified pursuant to the National Mobilehome Construction
and Safety Standards Act of 1974.
The mobile home must be installed on a permanent foundation.
The exterior shall be of a material similar to that utilized in conventionally built single‐
family dwellings.
The roof shall be of a material similar to that utilized in conventionally built single‐
family dwellings, have an eave and gable overhang of not less than twelve inches (12”)
measured from the vertical side of the manufactured home and have a pitch not less
than that required for conventionally built single‐family homes.
An enclosed garage shall be provided which is similar to that provided for single‐family
dwellings and the exterior siding and roof materials shall be the same as the
manufactured home.
Chapter 6
65
Farmworker Housing
As indicated in the Community Needs Assessment, only 193 Lake Elsinore residents have
“Agricultural, Farming, Forestry, Fishing and Mining”” occupations, according to the 2010
Census. City records indicate that there are no agricultural operations in Lake Elsinore. As Lake
Elsinore is evolving into an urbanized community and does not contain any large‐scale
commercial agricultural activities, there is no need for land use regulations to address the State
Employee Housing Act (Section 17000 of the Health and Safety Code).
Single‐Room Occupancy Facilities
Single‐room occupancy (SRO) buildings house people in single rooms, with tenants often
sharing bathrooms and kitchens. SROs are not specifically identified in Title 17. The density
and services available in the downtown make this an ideal location for permitting SROs. The
possible conditional use permit criteria for the review of SROs pertain to performance standards
such as hours of operation, security, and parking, etc.
SPECIFIC PLAN AREAS
The City of Lake Elsinore has adopted a number of specific plans to facilitate a diversity of
development types. These include:
La Laguna Estates Specific Plan – 660 dwelling units on 488 acres
Cape of Good Hope Specific Plan – 67 dwelling units on 41 acres
Cottage Lane Specific Plan – 48 dwelling units on 12 acres
Spyglass Ranch Specific Plan – 1,035 dwelling units on 259 acres
Lakeshore Village Specific Plan – 410 dwelling units on 37 acres
North Peak Specific Plan – 1,200 dwelling units on 1,786 acres
Ramsgate Specific Plan – 2,759 dwelling units on 1,366 acres
Tuscany Hills Specific Plan –1,847 dwelling units on 1,010 acres
Canyon Hills Specific Plan – 3,830 dwelling units on 1,969 acres
Canyon Creek Specific Plan – 1,152 dwelling units on 476 acres
Elsinore City Center Specific Plan – 162 dwelling units on 49 acres
East Lake Specific Plan – 7,389 dwelling units on 2,893 acres
Alberhill Ranch Specific Plans– 3,667 dwelling units on 1,901 acres
Murdock Alberhill Specific Plan – 1,819 dwelling units on 511 acres
Outlet Center Expansion Specific Plan – 47 acres
Villages at Lakeshore Specific Plan– 146 dwelling units on 20 acres
Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan– 302 dwelling units on 246 acres
Chapter 6
66
Diamond Specific Plan – 600 dwelling units on 87 acres
DENSITY BONUS
In May 2008, the City adopted a Residential Density Bonus Ordinance, consistent with
California Government Code Section 65915 et seq. (State Density Bonus Law). The Density
Bonus Ordinance allows developers of residential projects to apply for up to a 35 percent
increase in the maximum residential density allowed by the project site zoning and land use
designation, subject to certain qualifications. With adoption of implementing zoning for the
Residential Mixed Use General Plan land use designation, a density bonus incentive of up to 35
dwelling units per net acre is permitted when site amenities are provided. Amenities for which
a bonus may be granted are defined below.
Density Bonus Incentives
Exceptional Architecture
Incorporation of Green‐Building techniques
Child‐care facilities provided on‐site
Project site is located within 1,500 feet from a regular bus stop or rapid transit system
stop
Project site is located within a quarter mile from a public park or community center
Project site is located within a half mile from school grounds/facilities open to the
general public
Project site is located within one mile from a public library
Project site is located within a half mile from a full‐scale grocery store
Project site is located within a half mile from a medical clinic or hospital
Project site is located within a quarter mile from a pharmacy
Provision for affordable housing
Aggregate parcels
Chapter 6
67
Table 34
Density Bonus Opportunities
Group
Minimum
Percent of
Units Bonus Granted
Additional
Bonus for Each
1% Increase in
Target Units
% Target Units
Required For
Maximum 35%
Bonus
Very Low‐Income 5% 20% 2.5% 10%
Low‐Income 10% 20% 1.5% 10%
Moderate‐Income
(Condo or PUD Only) 10% 5% 1% 10%
Senior Citizen 35% 20% ‐‐ ‐‐
Developers may seek a waiver or modification of development standards that have the effect of
precluding the construction of a housing development meeting the density bonus criteria. The
developer must show that the waiver or modification is necessary to make the housing units
economically feasible.
Consistent with State law, the City also offers incentives and concessions. A developer can
receive an incentive or concession based on the proportion of affordable units for target groups.
Incentives or concessions may include, but are not limited to, a reduction in setback and square
footage requirements and a reduction in the ratio of vehicular parking spaces. These
concessions must demonstrably result in financially sufficient and actual cost reductions.
BUILDING CODES AND ENFORCEMENT
In addition to the previously mentioned land use controls, Lake Elsinore utilizes the 2010
California Building Standards Code to regulate building standards including housing,
plumbing, mechanical, and electrical codes.
The City utilizes its code enforcement powers in a manner that does not constrain housing
development or improvement. The goal of the Code Enforcement Division is to find solutions to
problems resulting from violations of the Cityʹs Municipal Code. To assist neighborhoods and
businesses in preserving an appealing appearance, the City has established property
maintenance standards. These standards are part of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and
establish the minimal maintenance standards for properties.
Chapter 6
68
To ensure that the Municipal Code is followed, Code Enforcement Officers assist individuals in
keeping their properties in compliance. The Code Enforcement Officers have the authority to
expeditiously abate problems that may endanger the health, safety, and welfare of the
community, which helps preserve the housing stock by requiring owners to maintain their
properties in sound condition. The abatement process typically requires the clean‐up or repair
of properties that are found to be in violation of City Code. City staff promptly responds to
property maintenance complaints and is available to work with property owners in preventing
and correcting Code violations. The local enforcement of these codes does not add significantly
to the cost of housing.
ENERGY CONSERVATION
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations mandates uniform energy conservation standards
for new construction. Minimum energy conservation standards implemented through Title 24
may increase initial construction costs throughout the State, but reduce operating expenses and
expenditure of natural resources over the long run and contribute to the abatement of global
warming.
ON‐ AND OFF‐SITE IMPROVEMENTS
Site improvements are a necessary component of the new development process. Improvements
can include the laying of sewer and water lines and new streets for use by a community when
that infrastructure is lacking, and these improvements make the development feasible. All
developed residential areas in Lake Elsinore are served by sufficient infrastructure. Additional
infrastructure is required for all new developments prior to occupancy of the units.
In Lake Elsinore, required site improvements vary depending on the existing condition of each
project. Typical off‐site infrastructure improvements for new projects include constructing new
streets, which include undergrounding of utilities, parkway landscaping, curbs, gutters,
sidewalks, and street lighting. Local residential streets require a dedication of 56 feet with a
curb‐to‐curb width of 36 feet. Full infrastructure improvements and extension of infrastructure
will more typically be associated with new single‐family development, which would most likely
serve moderate to above moderate residents.
Lake Elsinore has a number of adequate sites with existing infrastructure. Multi‐family
residential developments, which would more likely serve the moderate, low income, and very
low income developments, are strongly encouraged to locate on sites within Lake Elsinore with
existing full or partial infrastructure improvements. This reduces costs on a project and
facilitates the development of low and very low income residential units.
Chapter 6
69
On‐site improvements may include driveways, drive aisles, parking, landscaping, and utility
laterals to serve the residential units. These improvements are not seen as constraints to
development as efficient site planning should balance necessary on‐site improvement costs to
make affordable housing feasible.
INFRASTRUCTURE
Water Availability
The General Plan EIR accounts for future build‐out of the City of Lake Elsinore and the
identified sites to meet the RHNA are consistent with the General Plan vision. Elsinore Valley
Municipal Water District (EVMWD) provides water, wastewater, and reclaimed water service
to the Lake Elsinore. EVMWD obtains approximately half of its water supply from
groundwater and surface water from Railroad Canyon Reservoir (Canyon Lake). The remainder
of the water supply is imported from sources such as the Colorado River aqueduct and State
Water Project, and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California sources, Lake Skinner
and Lake Mathews.
Since the local population is expected to increase, additional water supply sources are necessary
to meet future growth. Future supplies include the construction of a pump station that would
increase capacity and plans to address groundwater overdraft through the implementation of
the Back Basin Groundwater Storage Project. EVMWD also plans to complete multiple
groundwater projects including new and replacement wells and a well blending pipeline. The
EVMWD 2010 UWMP indicates that there are sufficient water supplies and water shortage
contingency plans to protect existing and future water needs within its service area, to meet
projected growth consistent with General Plan policy.
Lake Elsinore’s RHNA can be accommodated within the existing zoning and General Plan
designated parcels in the City and therefore would not create an impact on water services
beyond what was identified and analyzed in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report
(EIR).
Sewer
The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) provides sewer service for the City of
Lake Elsinore. The EVMWD contains six sewersheds, operates three wastewater treatment
facilities, and 358 miles of sewer mains up to 54 inches in diameter, and 33 lift stations. The
EVMWD Wastewater Master Plan indicates the need for wastewater treatment plant expansions
Chapter 6
70
from the current 9.7 million gallons per day (mgd) to 16.2 mgd by the year 2020. The Plan calls
for the abandoning of the 0.5 mgd Horsethief Canyon Plant, construction of a new Alberhill
Plant with a 2020 year capacity of 3.0 mgd, and the expansion of the 8.0 Regional Plant to 12.0
mgd. This expansion plan will accommodate the 6.5 mgd anticipated increase in wastewater
capacity. Additionally, the Plan proposes improvements to gravity sewers, force mains, and lift
stations as part of the overall improvements to the wastewater system. The General Plan EIR
indicated that the EVMWD has adequate sewer capacity to serve the General Plan buildout;
however, sewer system improvements will be required and will be the responsibility of
individual builders.
FEES AND EXACTIONS
Development and Planning Fees
Various fees are collected by the City to cover costs of processing development permits. All
application processing is by Cost Recovery System wherein applicants shall deposit funds in
accordance with the best estimate of actual costs for staff time, noticing requirements, public
hearings and documentation. Table 35 includes a comparison of Lake Elsinore permit deposits
with those of neighboring jurisdictions. Application fees can pose a constraint on the
production of housing units and adversely affect housing affordability, especially when they
are higher than those found in surrounding communities. A survey of entitlement fees imposed
by surrounding communities was conducted to determine how they compare to the
development fees deposited in Lake Elsinore. Fees in Lake Elsinore as of February 2011, are
comparable to, and often less than, those of surrounding communities, and do not represent a
constraint on the production or preservation of housing, including affordable housing.
Chapter 6
71
Table 35
Entitlement Application Fees February 2011
Action/Activity Lake Elsinore* Murrieta Temecula
Conditional Use Permit
Minor (when processed in
conjunction w/another development
application)
$3,401 $3,805 Deposit
Major (when processed alone) $5,601 $6,805 Deposit
$3,441
Design Review
Commercial/Industrial $6,760 + $120/acre
Residential (including Tracts) $6,060 + $3/unit
Minor Design Review $2,050
Discretionary
Administrative $3,910
N/A N/A
Amendment DR (Comm/Ind) $2,050
Amendment DR (Residential( $4,060 + $2/unit
Development Agreement
City Staff Review $15,500
City Attorney Review $2,000
Amendment $4,000
$15,000 Deposit $51,581.00
Environmental
Other CEQA Review $1,500 $4,910
Environmental Impact Report $19,000 $15,000 Deposit
Mitigation Monitoring Program $8,000
N/A
Extension of Time
Tentative Map $3,150 $1,623 $3,372
Minor Design Review – 1st
Extension Request (Administrative
Approval)
$868 $1,623 $1,363‐$2,687
Minor Design Review – 2nd
Extension Request (PC/CC Approval) $1,618
General Plan Amendment $7,406 $10,000 Deposit $3,928‐$7,278
Specific Plan (including amend) $21,677 $20,000 Deposit/$10,000
Deposit $78,424
Substantial Conformance $907 $5,794
Tentative Parcel Map
Revised Map (after 2 years) $2,677 Minor‐$3,200/
Major‐$4,619 N/A
Commercial/Industrial N/A $7,786 $5,355
Chapter 6
72
Table 35 (Continued)
Entitlement Application Fees February 2011
Action/Activity Lake Elsinore* Murrieta Temecula
Commercial/Industrial $8,963 $7,786 $5,355
Residential Parcel Map $6,563 $7,126 $3,843
Revised Map (within 2 years) $2,618 Minor‐$3,200/
Major‐$4,619 N/A
Revised Map (after 2 years) $2,677 Minor ‐ $3,200/
Major ‐ $4,619 N/A
Tentative Tract Map $19,063 $12,700 $10,089‐$14,624
Revised Map (within 2 years) $7,066 N/A $5,713‐$8,044
Revised Map (after 2 years) $7,086 N/A N/A
Variance $2,829 Adm‐$1,477
PH‐$2,971 $3,708
Zone Change $5,851 $10,000 Deposit N/A
*Includes Planning, Engineering, and Fire Department review fees.
Source: Cities of Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, and Temecula, February 2011
Projects involving new single‐family or multi‐family residential developments of 4 dwelling
units or less require the application of a Minor Design Review, with an application deposit of
$2,050. New single‐family tracts and multi‐family developments that involve more than four
dwelling units require the application of a Residential Design Review, with an application
deposit of $6,060 plus $3 per proposed residential unit. New single‐family tracts and
condominium developments would also include an application of a Tentative Tract Map with a
flat deposit of $19,063. The Residential Design Review application always includes the payment
of an environmental review deposit. The deposits range from $1,500 to $19,000 for an Initial
Study to an Environmental Impact Report, which varies with project size and environmental
sensitivity of the project area. Minor Design Reviews are exempt from environmental review
deposits.
Once a residential project is approved by the City, the developer will then submit construction
drawings for a building permit. Table 36 below lists a range of fees for single family building
permit fees based on the square foot area of the home. The table also includes a typical multi‐
family unit permit cost, which is an average from the City’s recent Pottery Court apartment
project.
Chapter 6
73
Table 36
Building Permit Fees
Action/Activity 1,800 s.f. SFR
w/600 s.f. garage
2,000 s.f. SFR
w/600 s.f. garage
2,500 s.f. SFR
w/600 s.f. garage
855 s.f. typ
MFR unit*
Structural Plan Check $840 $896 $1,035 $360
Planning Review Fee $224 $239 $276 $96
Building Permit Fee $1,120 $1,195 $1,380 $480
TOTAL $2,184 $2,330 $2,691 $936
*Fees are average of permits pulled on a 113 unit apartment project, 2011
In addition to planning application fees, many municipal jurisdictions charge development
impact fees, and developers in turn incorporate those fees into housing costs, which can reduce
the affordability of housing. These fees can include park fees, police and fire fees, and sewer
and waterline fees imposed in accordance with new development.
Table 37 shows that as of 2012, development impact fees for Lake Elsinore were generally less
than those incurred in nearby communities of Murrieta and Temecula. These lower impact fees
reduce constraints and expenses for moderate and low‐income developers looking to build in
the region.
Chapter 6
74
Table 37
Development Impact Fees
Action/Activity Lake Elsinore Murrieta Temecula
Park Capital Improvement Fund
Single Family <50 lots $1,600/du $3,828.93/du $3,037.14/du detached
$2,175.86/du attached
Single Family >50 lots In lieu fee = fair market
value of req dedication $3,828.93/du
Duplex/Triplex $1, 500/du $2,412.23/du
Fourplex $1,450/du $2,412.23/du
Apartments $1,400/du $2,412.23/du
$529.33/du $885.25/du detached Open Space & Trails Development N/A
$103.89/du $634.21/du attached
$1,530.49‐$2,855.82/du SFR Storm Drain $2,225‐$8,675/acre*
$457.71/du MFR
N/A
Traffic
Single Family $1,369/du $133.33/du $260.49/du detached
Multi Family $959/du $82.90/du $12.33/du attached
$782.09/du SFR $1,840.21/du detached Street System Improvement N/A
$497.05/du MFR $1,288.15/du attached
$210.60/du $808.93/du detached
Library Capital Improvement Fund $150/du
$133.33/du $579.54/du attached
Fire Facility
Single Family $751/du $668.31/du $631.59/du detached
Multi Family $612/du $988.44/du $293.08/du attached
$231.59/du SFR $265.93/du detached Police Facilities N/A
$240.06/du MFR $470.49/du attached
City Hall & Public Works
Single Family $809/du $269.49/du N/A
Duplex, Triplex, Fourplex $696/du $269.49/du
Apartments $404/du $269.49/du
Community Center
Single Family $545/du $210.60/du N/A
Duplex, Triplex, Fourplex $469/du $133.34/du
Apartments $272/du $133.34/du
Marina Facilities
Single Family $779/du N/A N/A
Duplex, Triplex, Fourplex $671/du N/A
Apartments $389/du N/A
Animal Shelter Facility
Single Family $348/du N/A N/A
Chapter 6
75
Table 37 (Continued)
Development Impact Fees
Action/Activity Lake Elsinore Murrieta Temecula
Duplex, Triplex, Fourplex $299/du N/A
Apartments $174/du N/A
Major Bridge, Freeway Overpass, Ramps
Single Family N/A $1,902.47/du N/A
Multi Family N/A $1,208.93/du
Riverside County Transportation
Uniform Mitigation Fee
Single Family $8,873/du $10,046/du $8,873/du
Multi Family (>8du/ac) $6,231/du $7,054/du $6,231/du
Riverside County Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan Fee
0‐8 du/ac $1,938/du $1,938/du $1,938/du
8.1‐14.0 du/ac $1,241/du $1,241/du $1,241/du
>14.0 du/ac $1,008/du $1,008/du $1,008/du
0‐8 du/ac (SFR) $17,182/du* $22,281.21‐$23,606.55/du $18,540/du detached
8.1‐14.0 du/ac (MFR) $12,428‐$12,478/du* $14,822.37/du $12,693/du attached TOTAL
>14.0 du/ac (MFR) $11,249/du* $14,589.37/du
*Lake Elsinore Impact Fee total does not include the Storm Drain impact fee.
Source: Cities of Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, and Temecula, 2012.
A 2012 National Impact Fee Survey polled 38 California jurisdictions and estimated an average
total impact fee of $31,000 for single‐family residences and $19,000 for multi‐family units within
the state.1 Lake Elsinore is on the lower end of the National Impact Fee Survey as the City
assesses approximately $17,000 in total impact fees per single family unit and about $12,000 per
multi family unit.
Lake Elsinore has one development fee that is not included in the Development Impact Fee
total: the Storm Drain impact fee. Lake Elsinore assesses the Storm Drain impact fee based on a
project’s Drainage District location on a per acre basis. With 50 Drainage Districts ranging from
$2,225‐$8,675/acre, this results in multiple variations in the final calculation of impact fees with
no absolute range. Even so, total impact fees still are less than the averages reported in the
National Impact Fee Survey.
1 Source: Duncan Associates, 2012
Chapter 6
76
Capacity charges are another common source of capital funding. Under California Government
Code Section 66000, public agencies are allowed to impose capacity charges at the time a new
customer connects for the first time. The purpose of the charge is to recover the reasonable cost
of facilities attributable to development. Funds from this capacity charge will be used for
replacing and renewing existing facilities and for upgrading and constructing facilities required
to expand the system to build‐out.
PROCESSING AND PERMIT PROCEDURES
The processing time required to obtain approval of development permits is often cited as a
contributing factor to the high cost of housing. For some proposed development projects,
additional time is needed to complete the environmental review process before an approval can
be granted. Unnecessary delays add to the cost of construction by increasing land holding costs
and interest payments. The review process in Lake Elsinore involves up to three levels of
reviewing bodies: Planning Staff, Planning Commission, and the City Council.
The majority of residential developments in the City are single‐family homes or small
subdivisions which do not require lengthy processing time. All new multi‐family residential
developments must complete a development plan application, which is then reviewed and
approved, conditionally approved, or rejected by the appropriate body. Table 38 provides a list
of average processing times for the various permits or procedures that may be required prior to
the final approval of a project. As can be seen in this table, the processing times required for the
various entitlement applications are reasonable and do not represent a constraint to, or
contribute to the cost of, the development or preservation of housing. These timeframes are
approximate and depend on the scope of the project, number of corrections in plan check, and
timeliness of the applicant’s resubmittal. In addition, projects requiring environmental review
and/or appeals may take substantially longer to process.
Chapter 6
77
Table 38
Development Review Timeframes
Type of Process
Approximate
Timeframe Reviewing Body
Design Review 4‐8 months
Planning Commission/ City Council
*If project is within a specific plan,
shorter review may be applicable
Plan Check/Building Permits
2 weeks/check
1st check; 1 week
resubmittals Building Division
Conditional Use Permit 3‐5 months Planning Commission
Variance Up to 6 months Planning Commission
Tentative Parcel/Tract Map 4‐8 months Planning Commission/City Council
General Plan Amendment 4‐6 months Planning Commission/ City Council
Zone Change 4‐6 months Planning Commission/ City Council
Source: Lake Elsinore City Staff, April 2012
The City’s development timeframes are designed to accommodate development. The average
processing times for single‐family and multi‐family projects vary depending upon the size of
the development and if a subdivision map is involved.
Small Residential Projects
All Minor Design Review (single‐family residences and multi‐family projects involving four or
less units) projects and Conditional Use Permits require approval from the Planning
Commission. Small homes constructed on existing lots of record could be issued permits within
five to six weeks of Planning Commission approval, including Planning and Building and
Safety review.
Larger Residential Projects
All Zone Changes, Specific Plans, Planned Unit Developments, Subdivisions (Parcel and Tract
Maps) and Design Review (Residential projects involving four or more units) are required to be
approved by the City Council unless the project is within an approved specific plan which may
provide a shorter approval process. Apartment developments require Planning Commission
Chapter 6
78
and City Council approval. As such, the development process is increased by approximately
three months from the small residential projects timeline. Larger projects with many corrections
required during Building review typically take longer to process.
Subdivisions
Before a developer or property owner makes any division of land or real property located in the
City, a tentative map is required in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. Once an
application is deemed complete and within 50 days of the application being filed with the City,
the Planning Commission will act on the tentative map and either recommend approval,
recommend conditional approval, or recommend denial. At a subsequent regular meeting, after
receipt of the Planning Commission recommendation, the City Council will act on the tentative
map and either approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove it. A proposed subdivision can
be denied by the City Council if it does not meet all of the requirements of the Municipal Code,
or if the City Council makes any of the following findings:
That the proposed division of land is not consistent with applicable general and specific
plans
That the design or improvement of the proposed division of land is not consistent with
applicable general and specific plans
That the site of the proposed division of land is not physically suitable for the proposed
density of the development
That the design of the proposed division of land or the proposed improvements are
likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure
fish or wildlife or their habitat
That the design of the proposed division of land or the type of improvements are likely
to cause serious public health problems
That the design of the proposed division of land or the type of improvements will
conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of
property within the proposed division of land. The City Council may approve a division
of land if it finds that alternative easements for access or for use will be provided, and
that they will be subsequently equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public.
Design Review Process
The City of Lake Elsinore’s processing for land use entitlement approval includes review by the
Development Review Committee (DRC). Part of the DRC review process includes ensuring
projects are consistent with the requirements of LEMC Section 17.184‐ Design Review.
Applicants may review this section of the code in order to understand and be consistent with
Chapter 6
79
the guidelines the DRC will be using to assess the project. A Design Review entitlement
application requires a public hearing and the adoption of specific findings, including:
The project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the General Plan
and the zoning district in which the project is located.
The project complies with the design directives contained in LEMC Section 17.184.060
and all other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code.
Conditions and safeguards pursuant to LEMC Section 17.184.070, including guarantees
and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval
of the subject project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the
objectives of this chapter and the planning district in which the site is located.
The approval process for both smaller and larger residential projects includes submitting a
development application and fees to the City and completing the Design Review process (see
Figure 4). Smaller projects may receive approval at a public meeting scheduled after the project
has completed the Development Review Committee process. Larger projects are first reviewed
by the Planning Commission at a public meeting and then forwarded to the City Council with a
recommendation of approval or denial, unless the project is within an approved specific plan
which may provide a shorter approval process.
Figure 4 ‐ Land Use Entitlement Process
Chapter 6
80
The City’s average development processing times are typical of those for surrounding
jurisdictions. They allow for State‐mandated review periods for environmental documents as
well as for legally advertised and noticed public hearings. In addition, the City of Lake Elsinore,
like surrounding jurisdictions, is required to adhere to the development review timeframes
mandated by the State Permit Streamlining Act.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
A conditional use permit is an entitlement application which requires a public hearing and the
adoption of specific findings, including:
The proposed use, on its own merits and within the context of its setting, is in accord
with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which
the site is located.
The proposed use will not be detrimental to the general health, safety, comfort, or
general welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the
proposed use or the City, or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood
or the City.
The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, and
for all the yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping, buffers and other features
required in this Title.
The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways with proper design both as
to width and type of pavement to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the
subject use.
That in approving the subject use at the specific location, there will be no adverse effect
on abutting property or the permitted and normal use thereof.
That adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to LEMC Section 17.168.50 have been
incorporated into the approval of the Conditional Use permit to insure that the use
continues in a manner envisioned by these findings for the term of the use.
The purpose and intent of the conditional use permit is to ensure that these uses which are not
permitted by right are located, planned, and used in such a manner as not to be detrimental to
the abutting properties and to the community as a whole. Conditions of approval are utilized to
preserve the integrity and character of the zoning district, the utility and value of adjacent
property, and the general welfare of the neighborhood and the public. Conditions can include
such requirements as special yards and fencing, specific parking and circulation requirements,
street and/or alley dedications, landscaping, regulations of noise and other nuisances, and
height and residential density limitations. Residential uses requiring a conditional use permit
include large family day care and rest homes.
Chapter 6
81
HOUSING FOR DISABLED PERSONS
State law requires localities to analyze potential and actual constraints upon housing for
persons with disabilities, demonstrate efforts to remove governmental constraints, and include
programs to accommodate housing designed for people with disabilities. The City has no
special zoning or land use restrictions that regulate the siting of housing for persons with
disabilities.
In accordance with State law, Lake Elsinore permits State‐licensed residential care facilities
serving six or fewer persons in all of its residential zoning districts by right. Several housing
types for persons with disabilities are permitted by right or require a discretionary permit that
is no more stringent than those for other conditional uses. Rest homes are permitted with a
conditional use permit in the R‐2 and R‐3 multi‐family areas.
Inclusion of an overly restrictive definition of a “family” in the zoning code may have the
potential of discriminating against group homes or other housing for persons with disabilities
on the basis of familial status. The Lake Elsinore Municipal Code defines family as “one or more
persons immediately related by blood, marriage or adoption living together as a single
housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit together with any domestic employees. A group of not
more than six (6) unrelated persons living together as a single housekeeping unit with their
domestic employees shall also be considered a family.” The City acknowledges that the
definition of “family” may cause the misperception by the public that development can be
restricted to blood related families. As part of its review of the LEMC, the City intends to revise
or remove the definition of family and rely more generally on the term “household.”
As stated above, the City has adopted the California Building Standards Code. Standards
within the Code include provisions to ensure accessibility for persons with disabilities. These
standards are consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act. No local amendments that
would constrain accessibility or increase the cost of housing for persons with disabilities have
been adopted. To accommodate disabled persons in public facilities, the City defers to Title 24
of the California Handicap Accessibility Code.
Reasonable Accommodation
The Fair Housing Act, as amended in 1988, requires that cities and counties provide reasonable
accommodation to rules, policies, practices and procedures where such accommodation may be
necessary to afford individuals with disabilities equal housing opportunities. While fair housing
laws intend that all people have equal access to housing, the law also recognizes that people
Chapter 6
82
with disabilities may need extra tools to achieve equality. Reasonable accommodation is one of
the tools intended to further housing opportunities for people with disabilities. For developers
and providers of housing for people with disabilities who are often confronted with siting or
use restrictions, reasonable accommodation provides a means of requesting from the local
government flexibility in the application of land use and zoning regulations or, in some
instances, even a waiver of certain restrictions or requirements because it is necessary to achieve
equal access to housing. Cities and counties are required to consider requests for
accommodations related to housing for people with disabilities and provide the
accommodation when it is determined to be “reasonable” based on fair housing laws and the
case law interpreting the statutes.
State law allows for a statutorily based four‐part analysis to be used in evaluating requests for
reasonable accommodation related to land use and zoning matters and can be incorporated into
reasonable accommodation procedures. This analysis gives great weight to furthering the
housing needs of people with disabilities and also considers the impact or effect of providing
the requested accommodation on the City and its overall zoning scheme. Developers and
providers of housing for people with disabilities must be ready to address each element of the
following four‐part analysis:
The housing that is the subject of the request for reasonable accommodation is for
people with disabilities as defined in federal or state fair housing laws;
The reasonable accommodation requested is necessary to make specific housing
available to people with disabilities who are protected under fair housing laws;
The requested accommodation will not impose an undue financial or administrative
burden on the local government; and
The requested accommodation will not result in a fundamental alteration in the local
zoning code.
To create a process for making requests for reasonable accommodation to land use and zoning
decisions and procedures regulating the siting, funding, development and use of housing for
people with disabilities, the City will create and adopt a reasonable accommodation procedure
and provide information to residents via their public counters and website.
Environmental Constraints
Significant environmental and infrastructure constraints often hamper development of
sufficient housing for all economic segments. The paragraphs below address potential
environmental and infrastructure constraints to residential development in Lake Elsinore. These
Chapter 6
83
issues are discussed in more detail in the Public Safety and Welfare Element of the General
Plan.
Federal and State regulations require environmental review of proposed discretionary projects
(e.g., subdivision maps, use permits, etc.). Costs resulting from the environmental review
process are bundled into the cost of housing and are passed on to the consumer. These costs
include fees charged by local government and private consultants needed to complete the
environmental analyses and from delays caused by the mandated public review periods.
However, the presence of these regulations helps to preserve the environment and ensure
environmental safety for Lake Elsinore residents.
Environmental constraints can significantly affect the creation of new housing in a community.
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, significant portions of Lake Elsinore
and its Sphere of Influence are located within a 100‐ year flood zone. Several flooding sources
have been identified within the City, including Arroyo del Toro, Channel H, Elsinore Spillway
Channel, Lake Elsinore, Leach Canyon Channel, Lime Street Channel, McVicker Canyon,
Ortega Wash and others. New development projects are required to consider flooding and
storm drainage effects in their design. Limited encroachment into the 100‐year floodplain
fringe of roads, parks, sewer and water improvements, and pedestrian routes is allowed in
order to permit development of properties within this area. The City reviews development
projects within the floodplain to ensure compliance with City, state, and federal floodplain
management.
The City of Lake Elsinore and its Sphere of Influence are located within the Elsinore fault
system. The Elsinore fault consists of multiple strands, a number of which are recognized as
active and zoned by the State of California under the Alquist‐Priolo Act. Risk of surface rupture
along these zoned active traces is substantial. The Elsinore fault is believed to be capable of
generating earthquakes with magnitudes in the range of 6.5 to 7.5. Thus, the City and the
Sphere of Influence are likely to experience repeated moderate to strong ground shaking
generated by the Elsinore fault in the foreseeable future. To reduce effects on development, the
City may require site‐specific remediation measures during the development review process to
minimize impacts of fault activity. The applicable Building Codes also includes requirements to
prevent earthquake damage.
In addition, a large portion of the City falls into a very high fire hazard severity zone as defined
by the California Fire/CDF State Plane. The steep terrain and frequent high‐velocity wind
conditions in these areas contributes to rapid spread of wildfire when one occurs. The City
requires fuel modification zones around development within these high hazard areas by
thinning or clearing vegetation within 100 feet of buildings and structures.
Chapter 6
84
In addition to considering environmental conditions, before a development permit is granted, it
must be established that public service and facilities systems are adequate to accommodate any
increased demand generated by a proposed project. Lake Elsinore relies upon other government
agencies, private utility companies, and contractors to maintain and upgrade many of the
community’s major infrastructure systems.
Chapter 6
85
6.4 Housing Resources – Site Inventory and
Analysis
This section summarizes the land, financial, and administrative resources available for the
development and preservation of housing in Lake Elsinore. The analysis includes an evaluation
of the availability of land resources for future housing development; the City’s ability to satisfy
its share of the region’s future housing needs, the financial resources available to support
housing activities, and the administrative resources available to assist in implementing the
City’s housing programs and policies.
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
Lake Elsinore’ Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the 2014‐2021 planning period
has been determined by SCAG to be 4,929 housing units, including 1,196 units for very low‐
income households, 801 units for low‐income households, 897 units for moderate‐income
households, and 2,035 units for above moderate‐income households.
AVAILABILITY OF SITES FOR HOUSING
Identifying Adequate Sites
State law requires that a community provide an adequate number of sites to allow for and
facilitate production of the City’s regional share of housing. To determine whether the City has
sufficient land to accommodate its share of regional housing needs for all income groups, the
City must identify “adequate sites.” Under State law (California Government Code sections
65583), adequate sites are those with appropriate zoning and development standards, with
services and facilities, needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of
housing for all income levels. Land considered suitable for residential development includes
the following:
• Vacant residentially zoned sites
• Vacant non‐residentially zoned sites that allow residential uses (such as mixed‐use)
• Underutilized residentially zoned sites that are capable of being developed at a higher
density or with greater intensity
Chapter 6
86
• Non‐residential zoned sites that can be redeveloped for, and/or rezoned for, residential
use (via program actions)
An important component of the Lake Elsinore Housing Element is the identification of sites and
future housing development opportunities for the 2014‐2021 planning period. Since Lake
Elsinore has a sufficient amount of undeveloped land, the majority of what is identified in the
Sites Inventory section focuses on vacant sites zoned for residential or mixed‐use.
Underutilized sites are also analyzed. Opportunities for residential development in the City fall
into one of these categories:
• Vacant land that is designated for residential or mixed‐use
• Underutilized sites that permit residential or mixed‐use where the current use of the
property is less than the maximum allowed by the general plan designation, and where
infrastructure needs for additional development can be met by existing or proposed
systems
The following maps identify sites within the City that fall under one of the categories identified
above. The “Key Map” at the top left‐hand corner of each map outlines the geographic location
of the area within the City. The Planning Area for each location corresponds with the Specific
Plan or area identified in the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS) map.
Residential Sites Inventory and Analysis of Suitability and Availability
The sites identified in the maps are locations determined to be ideal for accommodating future
housing, including affordable housing. Analyses based on potential environmental constraints,
infrastructure, and realistic development capacity calculations are discussed. The maps also
include an analysis of non‐vacant and underutilized lands that are listed in Table 41.
The sites inventory includes properties within the Commercial Mixed Use, High Density, and
Residential Mixed Use designations (see Table 39), as well as two specific plan areas. Densities
permitted pursuant to High Density Residential and Residential Mixed Use designations permit
24 units per acre, which would be sufficient to facilitate affordable housing. The Commercial
Mixed Use designation permits up to 18 units per acre, and would be consistent with the
moderate and above moderate income categories. The High Density and Residential Mixed Use
categories are the only two categories utilized to identify units to meet the lower income
required RHNA.
Mixed use designations were calculated based upon the General Plan and Zoning Code
requirements within the Commercial Mixed Use and Residential Mixed Use designations. The
Chapter 6
87
General Plan states that Commercial Mixed Use properties shall contain a minimum of 50
percent commercial uses. Therefore, the sites analysis provides a range of potential dwelling
units based upon the minimum and maximum allowable residential densities for the
Commercial Mixed Use designation (see Appendix A for specific site listings). The Commercial
Mixed Use designation was calculated based upon the median allowable density, providing a
conservative estimate of potential above‐moderate and moderate housing within the planning
area.
The Residential Mixed Use designation allows a maximum density of 24 dwelling units per
acre. An additional 20‐ to 35‐percent of the building square footage may be utilized for
commercial uses as an incentive for mixed use development. This is in addition to permitted
residential development. Therefore, a two‐acre Residential Mixed Use development could
propose a 48‐ unit housing development with additional space for commercial uses‐ up to 35‐
percent of the building square footage.
Table 39
Lake Elsinore Demographic Projections and Density
General Plan Designation Density Range Allowable Residential
Composition
Commercial Mixed Use 7‐18 dwelling units per acre 0‐50% Residential
Residential Mixed Use 19‐24 dwelling units per acre 100% Residential
High Density Residential 19‐24 dwelling units per acre 100% Residential
Specific Plan Varies Varies
Demographic projections and density calculations are consistent with the General Plan’s
estimate for the buildout. A maximum of 80‐percent of the site acreage was estimated for
residential development (see Appendix A for specific site listings). The sites analysis multiplies
the reduced acreage by the maximum allowable density (24 dwelling units per acre). This
results in a fairly conservative estimate of potential development of sites within the City. Multi‐
family, affordable development within the City has proven to exceed this estimate. An
example of this is the Pottery Court affordable housing apartment complex, which was entitled
at a density of 26 dwelling units per acre, well exceeding the General Plan estimates (as detailed
later in this section under AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS). The Rivers Edge
Apartments, approved in 2005 and built in 2007, was also entitled at 26 dwelling units per acre.
Chapter 6
88
The 80‐percent development of a site’s acreage is a conservative estimate for projects within the
City of Lake Elsinore as development generally occurs at a higher density.
Table 40
Focus Areas
Total Acreages and Dwelling Units
Land Use Density
Range
(DU/AC)
Acres Density Dwelling
Units1
High Density 19‐24+ 84 24 1,598
Residential Mixed Use 19‐24+ 43 24 825
Commercial Mixed Use 7‐18 238 18 1,501
Alberhill Ranch – Brighton Specific Plan Varies 400 Varies 1,401
Diamond Specific Plan <18 87 <18 600
Total 5,925
1. Acreage reduced to 80‐percent and multiplied by density to calculate total dwelling units in High Density and
Residential Mixed Use Designations; Median density utilized for Commercial Mixed Use; Specific Plan unit count
pursuant to adopted Specific Plans and maps
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
89
La
n
d
U
s
e
A
c
r
e
s
D
w
e
l
l
i
n
g
Un
i
t
s
Hi
g
h
D
e
n
s
i
t
y
0.
0
0.
0
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Mi
x
e
d
U
s
e
0.
0
0.
0
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Mi
x
e
d
U
s
e
14
5
.
6
0
-
1
,
8
6
0
Me
d
.
D
e
n
s
i
t
y
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
0.
0
0
.
0
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
90
Th
i
s
pa
g
e
in
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
le
f
t
bl
a
n
k
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
91
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
92
Th
i
s
pa
g
e
in
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
le
f
t
bl
a
n
k
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
93
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
94
Th
i
s
pa
g
e
in
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
le
f
t
bl
a
n
k
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
95
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
96
Th
i
s
pa
g
e
in
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
le
f
t
bl
a
n
k
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
97
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
98
Th
i
s
pa
g
e
in
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
le
f
t
bl
a
n
k
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
99
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
10
0
Th
i
s
pa
g
e
in
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
le
f
t
bl
a
n
k
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
10
1
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
10
2
Th
i
s
pa
g
e
in
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
le
f
t
bl
a
n
k
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
10
3
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
10
4
Th
i
s
pa
g
e
in
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
le
f
t
bl
a
n
k
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
10
5
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
10
6
Th
i
s
pa
g
e
in
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
le
f
t
bl
a
n
k
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
10
7
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
10
8
Th
i
s
pa
g
e
in
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
le
f
t
bl
a
n
k
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
10
9
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
11
0
Th
i
s
pa
g
e
in
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
le
f
t
bl
a
n
k
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
11
1
Di
a
m
o
n
d
S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
P
l
a
n
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
La
n
d
U
s
e
A
c
r
e
s
D
w
e
l
l
i
n
g
Un
i
t
s
Hi
g
h
D
e
n
s
i
t
y
0.
0
0.
0
Mi
x
e
d
U
s
e
87
.
0
60
0
Me
d
.
D
e
n
s
i
t
y
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
0.
0
0
.
0
PA
1
PA
2
PA
3
PA
4
PA
5
PA
6
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
11
2
Th
i
s
pa
g
e
in
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
le
f
t
bl
a
n
k
.
Chapter 6
113
VACANT LAND
State law requires that jurisdictions demonstrate in the Housing Element that the land
inventory is adequate to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of the region’s projected growth.
Lake Elsinore is a growing community and has a sufficient amount of vacant land to meet its
regional housing need as allocated by SCAG. The City’s inventory of vacant land that would
realistically be suitable for residential development totals over 790 acres, as identified in Table
41. This list does not include all vacant sites within the City. Rather, these vacant sites are ones
that the City identifies as best suited for meeting the City’s share of the regional housing need.
Only land within the High Density, Residential Mixed Use, Commercial Mixed Use
designations or Specific Plans were identified to provide for the City RHNA share. Together
with underutilized sites, there is the potential to yield 5,925 units without utilizing a density
bonus. Should developers choose to use density bonus opportunities, the capacity would be
even higher.
Table 41 summarizes Lake Elsinore’s residential development potential of vacant and
underutilized sites. Estimates of potential capacity on the vacant or underutilized land are
based on an assumption of 80‐percent of the available acreage being developed (not including a
density bonus), multiplied by a density of 24 dwelling units per acre in higher density areas.
Potential capacity of Commercial Mixed Use areas is based on median density, to provide a
conservative estimate. These methods are consistent with projections contained in the General
Plan.
Chapter 6
114
Table 41
Residential Capacity on Vacant and Underutilized Sites
Focus
Area Land Use Designation
Residential
Density
Range
Estimated
Density
Vacant
Acreage
Under‐
utilized
Acreage
Capacity
w/o density
bonus1
1 Lake Elsinore Hills District
Commercial Mixed Use 7‐18 du/ac 18 143.64 1.96 923
Lake View District 2 Residential Mixed Use 19‐24 du/ac 24 18.24 ‐‐ 350
Lake Edge/Lake View District
3 High Density Residential
Commercial Mixed Use
19‐24 du/ac
7‐18 du/ac
24
18
9.62
39.93
‐‐
1.22
185
257
Lake Edge/Lake View District 4 High Density Residential 19‐24 du/ac 24 26.38 2.82 561
Commercial Mixed Use 7‐18 du/ac 18 28.37 18.65 294
Riverview District 5 High Density Residential 19‐24 du/ac 24 9.85 ‐‐ 189
Historic District
6 High Density Residential 19‐24 du/ac 24 5.24 1.00 120
Residential Mixed Use 19‐24 du/ac 24 3.93 1.66 107
Commercial Mixed Use 7‐18 du/ac 18 0.62 ‐‐ 4
Historic District
High Density Residential 19‐24 du/ac 24 5.06 4.57 185 7
Residential Mixed Use 19‐24 du/ac 24 2.30 ‐‐ 44
Historic District 8 Residential Mixed Use 19‐24 du/ac 24 8.91 ‐‐ 170
Commercial Mixed Use 7‐18 du/ac 18 1.86 ‐‐ 23
Business District 9 High Density Residential 19‐24 du/ac 24 18.57 ‐‐ 356
Business District 10 Residential Mixed Use 19‐24 du/ac 24 8.7 ‐‐ 156
11 Alberhill Ranch ‐ Brighton
Specific Plan 5‐30 du/ac varies 400 ‐‐ 1,401
Diamond Specific Plan 12 Mixed Use max 24 du <18 87 ‐‐ 600
TOTAL: ‐ 791.3 31.87 5,925
Underutilized Sites
Underutilized sites account for a very small portion of the sites identified to accommodate the
City’s regional housing need. Underutilized sites have the potential to yield approximately 349
Chapter 6
115
units. In contrast, vacant sites can accommodate more than the regional housing need (4,929
units) with the potential to yield 5,576 units. Appendix A lists the underutilized sites identified
in each focus area and provides a description of the current use and potential capacity for the
sites.
The underutilized sites identified within the sites analysis are limited to those sites with one
single‐family residence or a small commercial building onsite. In addition, the sites identified
are located adjacent to vacant parcels, creating the potential for one developer to consolidate
lots and redevelop a larger area into a single affordable housing project. The City already has a
successful history with consolidating vacant and underutilized sites with the Pottery Court
affordable housing development. Underutilized sites similar to the circumstances of Pottery
Court were identified within the sites analysis for potential units. Further discussion regarding
the City’s ability to work with developers to consolidate lots, including those with existing
underutilized development, is included in the discussion on Affordable Housing Projects.
Suitable Sites
Over 200 acres of Residential Mixed Use and High Density residential designated land (see
Focus Areas 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and the Diamond Specific Plan) has been determined to be
most suitable for accommodating the City’s affordable housing need. These vacant and
underutilized sites are located in the City’s Lake View District, Historic District, Business
District, and within the Diamond Specific Plan. The High Density Residential and Residential
Mixed Use designations allow densities of up to 24 dwelling units per acre or more with
approval of a density bonus.
Historic District
The Historic District (see Focus Areas 6, 7, and 8) is an ideal location for development of future
affordable housing, as it is located within close proximity to downtown Lake Elsinore. In
addition, there are commercial shopping areas within ¼ mile of the opportunity sites. Public
transit is available throughout this area, with a bus stop at Graham and Langstaff and transfer
stations at the Wal‐Mart located on the east side of the Interstate‐15 freeway at Grape Street.
This service line connects with Downtown Lake Elsinore, the Senior Center, and the Lake
Elsinore Outlets.
The majority of underutilized residentially zoned sites listed in Table 41 are within the Historic
District areas (see Focus Areas 6, 7, and 8). The two highest‐density land uses, High Density
Residential and Residential Mixed Use, are located in the Historic District. The identified sites
include vacant and underutilized properties that present opportunities to consolidate parcels to
provide larger affordable housing developments.
Chapter 6
116
Assuming development at 80‐percent of the total acreage for these designations, Focus Areas
within the Historic District have the potential to yield 653 dwelling units without considering
density bonuses; 626 of these are at densities capable of supporting low‐ and very low‐income
housing. A parcel‐specific listing of the available sites is provided in Appendix A.
Business District
The Business District (see Focus Areas 9 and 10) provides a suitable location for affordable
housing in an area that contains many vacant parcels with the potential to develop live‐work
projects. Focus Area 10 is composed entirely of vacant parcels. Approximately 8.7 acres of
vacant Residential Mixed Use property could be utilized to provide affordable housing within
this Focus Area. After identifying parcels for potential consolidation, there is the opportunity to
provide 156 units for affordable housing in Focus Area 10, not including potential density
bonuses.
The Alberhill Ranch – Brighton Area Specific Plan
The Brighton area is a portion of the larger Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan. The Brighton area is a
400‐acre master planned community, planned for mixed land use development. Historically
used for mining, large areas of land are available for new development once the resources are
fully extracted. The Brighton area has completed a Vested Tentative Tract Map for future
construction of 1,401 dwelling units and 1,358,000 square feet of commercial/office. Three areas
would permit high density (30 du/acre) residential development (PA 1, 3, and 5). The table
below provides a breakdown of Brighton planning areas with residential unit yields:
Table 42
The Alberhill Ranch – Brighton Specific Plan Residential Summary
Planning Area Acres Total Units Commercial SF
Planning Area 1 – Suburban Village 9.8 40 299,739
Planning Area 2 – SFR II 161.2 534 ‐‐
Planning Area 3 – Suburban Village 34.6 80 1,058,261
Planning Area 4 – SFR II 18.7 71 ‐‐
Planning Area 5 – HDR 11.5 225 ‐‐
Planning Area – SFR I 164.5 451 ‐‐
TOTAL 400.3 1,401 1,358,000
Source: City of Lake Elsinore, VTTM No. 35001
Chapter 6
117
The Diamond Specific Plan
The Diamond Specific Plan is an 87‐acre master planned mixed‐use development providing for
commercial, office, educational, entertainment, and residential uses. The Specific Plan
designates the entire developable area as Mixed‐Use land use to allow flexibility in the
development of the plan. Density or intensity of an individual development within the
Diamond Specific Plan may exceed the General Plan allowed density provided that the overall
density of the project site as an average does not exceed the General Plan density or the
development caps established by the Specific Plan. The Plan allows for the development of up
to 600 multi‐family residential units, 897,000 square feet of commercial‐retail space and a 150‐
room hotel. The table below provides a breakdown of The Diamond Specific Plan planning
areas with residential unit yields:
Table 43
The Diamond Specific Plan Residential Summary
Planning Area Acres Total Units Commercial SF
Planning Area 1 – Lakeshore 7.1 50 82,000
Planning Area 2 – Community Core 27.5 275 590,000
Planning Area 3 – Waterfront 7.3 0 30,000
Planning Area 4 – Stadium 16.1 0 35,000
Planning Area 5 – Malaga North 11.7 50 110,000
Planning Area 6 – Malaga South 11.7 225 50,000
Roads 5.8
TOTAL 87.2 600 897,000
Source: City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division
Appendix A includes all parcels from the Focus Areas to demonstrate their individual and
overall contribution toward the City’s RHNA.
SMALL SITES
Lake Elsinore Historic Subdivision Trends
The City of Lake Elsinore has been known as a resort community since its incorporation in 1888.
Lake Elsinore had many vacation homes and bungalows that were developed in the first half of
the 20th Century, and was a major draw for tourist‐centered activities. Property throughout the
City was subdivided into small lots (some as little as 25‐feet by 100‐feet in size) during the late
Chapter 6
118
1800’s and early 1900’s in order to cater lot sales to tourists, vacationers, and other out‐of‐town
purchasers.
With regard to Focus Areas 6 through 9 and all parcels within the Historic District of Lake
Elsinore, the lot patterns and sizes reflect the then‐practice of subdividing properties into
multiple small lots for speculative sale in a resort community. In the 100 years since,
development approaches have evolved to require much larger parcels to achieve more
economically viable and desirable housing products. Thus, developers look to lot consolidation
as the preferred method of creating optimal building sites in downtown Lake Elsinore, and the
City has been a partner in encouraging this practice.
Small Sites Analysis
The sites analysis identifies sites throughout the City that have the highest potential for
development as new housing and affordable housing projects. Some sites identified are small
and may not be as conducive for a large‐scale development as larger parcels. Thus, the City has
focused its analysis on sites located adjacent to other underutilized or vacant parcels that could
be consolidated for a larger project. In fact, many small parcels throughout the City have not
been identified as potential sites because they are not located adjacent to other parcels that
could be consolidated to create a larger project. Small sites are identified in Focus Areas 4, 6, 7,
8, 9, and 10. Appendix A identifies all properties within the focus areas that are considered
small sites and groups the sites together to analyze consolidation potential. Table 44 is a
summary of the lot consolidation potential for the focus areas.
Chapter 6
119
Table 44
Lot Consolidation Summary
FOCUS AREA Acres Capacity
Consolidation
Potential
High
Density
Residential1 Mixed Use2
Historic District – Focus Area 6 6.24 136 75 75
Historic District – Focus Area 7 11.93 229 146 127 19
Historic District – Focus Area 8 8.91 170 170 170
Business District – Focus Area 9a 7.79 150 128 128
Business District – Focus Area 9b 6.73 145 122 122
Business District – Focus Area 9c 3.77 72 39 39
Business District – Focus Area 10a 3.25 51 51 51
Business District – Focus Area 10b 5.45 105 101 101
The Diamond Specific Plan3 58.00 600 600 600
TOTAL 112.07 1,638 1,432 491 941
1. Refers to all High Density designated parcels that can be consolidated.
2. Refers to all Mixed Use parcels that can be consolidated.
3. The Diamond Specific Plan includes a total of 600 dwelling units to be constructed within four Planning Areas.
Lot Consolidation
Small sites are identified in Focus Areas 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and the Diamond Specific Plan. Sites
identified within these focus areas are located adjacent to one another and result in larger
parcels of land available for potential lot consolidation and development of a single project.
According to HCD, most assisted housing developments utilizing State or Federal financing
resources typically include at least 50 to 80 units. Appendix A identifies several areas for
consolidation that are smaller in size than the recommended yield of 50 to 80 dwelling units.
However, in reviewing HCD’s list of Rental Housing Complexes available in Riverside County
and San Bernardino County, it is evident that projects of 50 dwelling units or less for Low and
Very Low income levels have been constructed throughout Riverside and San Bernardino
Counties. The following cities are identified as having projects of 50 units or less on the lists:
Lake Elsinore
Desert Hot Springs
Palm Springs
Coachella
Chapter 6
120
Mecca
Blythe
San Bernardino
Upland
Barstow
Mentone
Joshua Tree
In addition, the Coachella Valley Housing Coalition has identified affordable housing projects
of fewer than 50 dwelling units in the cities of Riverside, Cathedral City, Indio, and Moreno
Valley in addition to the cities identified on the HCD Rental Complexes list. Therefore, the sites
analysis has identified some potential areas for lot consolidation where fewer than 50 dwelling
units can be built, similar to projects that have been approved and constructed throughout the
Inland Empire.
Parcel Mergers
The City of Lake Elsinore has approved and completed 15 parcel merger applications between
2004 and 2012 (see Table 45). These applications resulted in the consolidation of multiple lots
into one or two lots, including one merger that consolidated three lots into a single lot within an
area permitting up to 24 dwelling units per acre. The City works with developers to approve
lot consolidations in order to design projects that will result in a single cohesive development,
rather than smaller projects located on multiple lots. As a result, the small sites identified
within the City could be consolidated through the Parcel Merger process to create larger
projects in multiple areas of the City.
In Lake Elsinore, projects also combine lots through a tentative parcel map process. For
example, the Pottery Court development combined 23 existing parcels into a 4.3 acre site to
facilitate the construction of the 113 unit residential development. This project consisted of 111
very low‐income units and two units reserved for resident managers.
Chapter 6
121
Table 45
Parcel Merger Applications
Parcel Merger
No.
Original No. of
Lots Final No. of Lots Existing Zoning Existing Density
2004‐06 3 1 R‐2 12 Units / Acre
2004‐10 4 2 R‐1 6 Units / Acre
2004‐11 3 1 R‐1 6 Units / Acre
2005‐21 3 2 R‐2 12 Units / Acre
2006‐09 4 2 R‐1 6 Units / Acre
2006‐16 3 1 R‐3 24 Units / Acre
2007‐10 3 1 R‐2 12 Units / Acre
2007‐19 4 2 R‐2 12 Units / Acre
2008‐03 3 1 R‐2 12 Units / Acre
2009‐21 4 1 R‐2 12 Units / Acre
2010‐1084 2 1 CMU 18 Units/Acre
2010‐1278 2 1 RMU 24 Units/Acre
2012‐471 2 1 Specific Plan Specific Plan
2012‐597 2 1 R‐2 12 Units / Acre
2012‐1130 2 1 R‐1 6 Units / Acre
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
Potential environmental constraints to future development of sites include the Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and seismic and flooding hazards, which are addressed in
the Non‐Governmental Constraints Section of the Housing Element. Significant portions of
Lake Elsinore and its Sphere of Influence are located within a 100‐year flood zone and also lie
within the Elsinore fault system. Any sites located within a 100‐year flood zone are required to
comply with City, State, and federal floodplain management as part of the Development
Review process. To reduce seismic effects on development, the City may require site‐specific
remediation measures during the development review process to minimize impacts of fault
activity. The applicable Building Codes also include requirements to prevent earthquake
damage. To limit wildfire hazards, the City requires fuel modification zones around
development within high hazard areas by thinning or clearing vegetation within 100 feet of
buildings and structures. The Development Review process identifies potential hazards and
Chapter 6
122
requires projects mitigate these hazards prior to project approval. None of the sites identified
are significantly more hazardous than any other sites within in the City.
The sites inventoried in Appendix A have a residential land use designation and zoning in
place which was determined based on surrounding land uses and has already examined
potential environmental constraints as part of the General Plan Environmental Impact Report.
Aside from the constraints mentioned above, few additional constraints would impede the
development of new housing units in the future on the identified sites.
INFRASTRUCTURE
The General Plan indicates that unimproved or badly deteriorated roadways, roadways without
sufficient capacity for anticipated new development, inadequate storm drain infrastructure,
insufficient parkland and recreation facilities, and inadequate public safety facilities are in need
of repair and/or improvement. The City understands that improvements can be achieved with
a comprehensive approach that includes reviewing infrastructure plans for each application for
discretionary approval of General Plan amendments, tentative parcel or tentative tract maps, or
development proposals that include extension of an existing street or construction of a new
street. The City requires that project applications for new development be reviewed for
adequate infrastructure. Applications are evaluated on a case‐by‐case basis to ensure there is
the capacity to service new developments. Infrastructure requirements and costs are also
discussed in the Non‐Governmental Constraints Section of the Housing Element.
COMPARISON OF SITES INVENTORY AND RHNA
More than adequate land is available to accommodate the City’s regional share of housing
through the 2014‐2021 planning period. The City has the capacity to accommodate at least 5,925
new housing units on vacant or underutilized land. Of these, 2,423 units can be accommodated
in High Density Residential and Residential Mixed Use Designations. As the residential sites
inventory (Appendix A) identifies the potential for 2,423 dwelling units within the High
Density Residential and Residential Mixed Use designations, and the very low‐ and low‐income
RHNA totals only 1,997, there is ample opportunity for development of affordable housing that
will meet the remaining RHNA allotment for the very low‐ and low‐income groups (see Table
46).
Chapter 6
123
Table 46
Comparison of Sites Inventory and RHNA
Income
Category RHNA
Available
R3 DU
Available
RMU DU
Available
CMU DU
Specific
Plan DU
Surplus
Units1
Very Low
and Low 1,997 1,598 825 426
Moderate
and Above
Moderate
2,932
1,501 2,001 570
Total Units 4,929 996
1. Surplus units are dwelling units available beyond the required RHNA
In 2012, Lake Elsinore completed zoning map amendments to provide consistency with the
General Plan for all parcels designated Residential Mixed Use, Commercial Mixed Use, and
High Density Residential. Identified Specific Plans have been adopted and development
processes are ongoing. As such, all zoning is in place for identified sites. The City of Lake
Elsinore has the availability of land to more than satisfy the 4,929 RHNA units identified for the
2014‐2021 planning period.
INLAND EMPIRE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS
State housing element law utilizes a density to correlate affordability and income groups
(RHNA) with zoning and residential capacity (sites inventory). To demonstrate densities to
encourage the development of housing affordable to lower income households, the statute has
always provided the ability to analyze the appropriate density. Recent amendments to the
statute added a default density standard as an option to streamline the analysis requirements
where the Department of Housing and Community Development must accept specific density
standards. For jurisdictions with a population greater than 25,000, and located within a
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) with a population of more than two million, the default
density is 30 dwelling units per acre (or higher). Lake Elsinore has a population greater than
25,000 and is within the Riverside‐San Bernardino MSA with over four million people. Thus,
per State law, Lake Elsinore’s default density is 30 dwelling units per acre.
Density is a critical factor in the development of affordable housing. In theory, maintaining low
densities typically increases the cost of construction and land per unit and increases the amount
of subsidy needed to ensure affordability, while higher density development can lower per‐unit
land cost and facilitates construction in an economy of scale. The highest residential density
permitted by the City’s General Plan is 24 units per acre (see Table 32). Density bonuses allow
Chapter 6
124
for a density of up to 35 units per acre in the High Density Residential and Residential Mixed
Use categories. These density ranges encourage the development of housing for low‐ and very‐
low income households given factors such as land values and construction costs in Lake
Elsinore and the surrounding area are substantially lower than in other MSAs, such as Los
Angeles County. To demonstrate that a density of 24 units per acre can encourage the
development of housing affordable to lower income households, a three‐part analysis was
prepared based on market demand, financial feasibility, and project experience within the
zones(s).
Market Demand
Market rents for newer (less than five years old) apartments in Lake Elsinore can be generally
affordable to the upper range of lower income households. One bedroom rents generally range
from $559 to $1,070 with a median rent of $1,005. For a one bedroom apartment, some units in
the City may be affordable to the upper range of a lower income household. These rents are
significantly less than experienced elsewhere in the region. As a result, market rate apartments
constructed under existing zoning of 24 units per acre can nearly be affordable to lower income
households without financial subsidies.
Table 47
Affordable Rent to Market Rent Comparison
Bedroom
Type
Affordability for
Very Low Income
Household
Affordability for
Lower Income
Household
Market Rent
Range
Market
Median Rent
1 Bedroom $587 $704 $559 ‐ $1,070 $1,005
2 Bedroom $616 $750 $618 ‐ $1,350 $1,125
3 Bedroom $654 $775 $677 ‐ $1,799 $1410
*Affordability calculated pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 50053
Sources: 2012 State Income Limits; September 2012 Rent Survey: craigslist.org
Land Prices
As noted above, land prices in Lake Elsinore and western Riverside County generally are much
less expensive than in the nearby counties of Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego, due to the
availability of land and other factors. Recent surveys of vacant residential land sales
demonstrate a significant decline in land prices since 2007. Based on a sampling of residential
land sales in 2008, per acre prices were found to generally range between $570,000 and $720,000
per acre. In contrast, 2012 land prices can be found as low as $18,333 per acre. A sampling of
local land costs revealed a high of $178,000 per acre in October 2012 (Table 48).
Chapter 6
125
Table 48
Vacant Residential Land Sales
Zoning Price Square Feet
Price per
Square Foot
R1 & R2 $275,000 653,400 $0.42
Varies (329 parcels) $2,024,020 2,798,294 $0.72
R3 (Lake Front) $2,600,000 1,568,160 $1.66
R1 $67,000 41,818 $1.60
R1 $10,000 6,534 $1.53
R3 $275,000 278,348 $0.99
R2 $1,350,000 431,680 $3.13
Varies (R1‐R3) 200,000 78,844 $2.54
R‐1 $2,749,000 670,824 $4.10
Source: Loopnet.com, search completed October 2012.
Financial Feasibility
Given the availability and land prices in Lake Elsinore, densities of 24 units per acre encourage
the development of housing affordable to lower income households. This assumption is further
supported by conversations with non‐profit developers. Based on conversations with several
developers of housing affordable to lower income households, the availability of land, sizeable
parcels (e.g. an acre or more) and subsequent economies of scale and construction costs for
garden style apartments are contributing factors to the cost effectiveness of 24 units per acre.
This cost effectiveness of 24 units per acre, in simple terms, can be expressed in terms of land
costs per unit at various densities. For example, the following table uses an average land price
of $178,500 per acre, the price of a property for sale in 2012 in Lake Elsinore. Based on a typical
total development cost of approximately $225,000 per unit, the table shows a somewhat
significant difference between lower densities (e.g. 15 units per acre) and higher densities such
as 24 and 30 units per acre. Specifically, land costs per unit at 24 units per acre are less than
$7,500 per unit and represent only 3.31 percent of total development costs. By representing less
than 5 percent of total development costs, a density of 24 units per acre encourages the cost
effectiveness of housing affordable to lower income households.
Chapter 6
126
Table 49
Land Costs per Unit
Units per Acre Land Costs per Unit Percent of Total
Development Costs
10 units per acre $17,850 7.93%
15 units per acre $11,900 5.29%
20 units per acre $8,925 3.97%
24 units per acre $7,438 3.31%
30 units per acre $5,950 2.64%
Assumptions: Average land price of $178,500 per acre and total development costs of $225,000 per unit.
Facilitating higher density developments can benefit both the housing developer and low‐
income families if units are constructed. The City can encourage developers by offering
incentives, in an effort to assist in the development of higher density projects.
Information based on Project Experience
The development of projects with densities below 24 dwelling units per acre may be explained
by the development history of the City. Lake Elsinore only recently experienced a surge in its
population and is still transitioning from a rural to a suburban community. Unlike many
existing, older jurisdictions in more densely populated areas, Lake Elsinore still has significant
vacant land available that is relatively inexpensive. While the City has continued to plan for the
future by encouraging developers to utilize the existing density bonus ordinance, High Density
Residential and Residential Mixed Use designations are considered in order to accommodate
the very‐low and low‐income RHNA allocation. Appendix C includes a letter provided by an
experienced affordable housing developer in California who is extremely familiar with
developing affordable housing in different jurisdictions throughout the state. The developer has
reviewed the sites available for housing in the Housing Element and has found that the City
“has an abundance of sites which are suitable for affordable housing.”
Table 50 below provides a listing of several known affordable housing development projects
within the Riverside‐San Bernardino MSA that have been approved and/or constructed at a
density of 18 dwelling units or fewer per acre, well below the City of Lake Elsinore’s maximum
density of 24 dwelling units per acre in the High Density and Residential Mixed Use
designations.
Chapter 6
127
Table 50
Metropolitan Statistical Area Developed Low Income Projects
City/Project
Allowable
Maximum
Density
Approved
Density
Total
DU Approved/Constructed
Big Bear Lake
Crossings at Big Bear Lake
12 du/ac 16 du/ac* 42 Constructed
Desert Hot Springs
Arroyo De Paz
Brisas De Paz
14 du/ac
14 du/ac
9.81 du/ac
13.0 du/ac
94
62
Constructed
Constructed
Fontana
Ceres Way Apartments
Paso Verde – Phase 1
12 du/ac
12 du/ac
10.91 du/ac
9.96 du/ac
60
50
Constructed
Constructed
Hesperia
KDF Communities
KDF Communities
15 du/ac
15 du/ac
15.17 du/ac*
17.14 du/ac*
110
72
Constructed
Constructed
Murrieta
Eagle Glen
Madison Park
Reserves at Madison Park
18 du/ac
18 du/ac
18 du/ac
15.96 du/ac
18.00 du/ac
18.00 du/ac
320
284
248
Constructed
Constructed
Constructed
Rancho Cucamonga
San Sevine Villas
Villagio Apartments
14 du/ac
20 du/ac
17.48 du/ac*
15.81 du/ac
225
166
Constructed
Constructed
*Project included a density bonus
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS
The Redevelopment Agency received a $1 million grant from the Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) to develop a 113‐unit affordable housing development, which
would provide 111 units restricted for very low‐income families. The project, known as Pottery
Court, is located on 4.3 acres near Pottery Street and Langstaff Avenue, with a density of
approximately 26 dwelling units per acre (with a density bonus). The project was approved in
2009 and completed construction in 2012. To facilitate the project, the City worked with the
developer to consolidate 23 individual vacant and underutilized lots, the majority of which
were under separate ownership. The Pottery Court affordable housing project demonstrates the
City’s commitment to facilitate development of affordable housing. Furthermore, it is evident
Chapter 6
128
that the market supports development of very low‐income housing at densities consistent with
the High Density Residential and Residential Mixed Use designations.
The Pottery Court affordable housing project is located within the Historic District. This area is
characterized by small lots containing small multi‐family housing developments or single‐
family residences. Commercial development is located approximately one‐quarter mile from
the affordable housing project. Focus Area 5 in the Riverview District (the old rodeo site) will
permit up to 189 units in one project, before any density bonuses. These units will be located
adjacent to public transit that provides access to the Senior Center and several commercial
shopping areas, including the center in which the Wal‐Mart is located. The opportunity for
affordable housing will be even greater in this area, and as evidenced by the Pottery Court
affordable housing project, developers have demonstrated their willingness to build affordable
housing at 24 dwelling units to the acre.
IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS AND RESOURCES
A variety of federal, state and local programs are available to create and/or maintain rental and
purchase affordable housing for lower income households and for persons with special needs.
These programs are also available to other jurisdictions for potential acquisition, subsidy, or
replacement of units at‐risk. Table 51 summarizes financial resources available to the City,
private and non‐profit parties to preserve/create housing that is affordable. The Lake Elsinore
Redevelopment Agency in the past used housing set‐aside funds (20 percent of tax increment
revenues) to support new housing construction. On December 29, 2011, the California Supreme
Court ruled to uphold ABx1 26, which dissolved all redevelopment agencies (RDAs) in the
State. A companion bill, ABx1 27, which would have allowed the RDAs to continue to exist, was
also declared invalid by the court. The court’s decision required that all RDAs within California
be eliminated no later than February 1, 2012. As such, the Lake Elsinore Redevelopment Agency
was dissolved in 2012. No additional housing set‐aside funds are available. Table 51 outlines
other available resources to assist with the development of affordable housing.
Chapter 6
129
Table 51
Resources Available for Housing Activities
Program Description Eligible Activities
Local Resources
Density Bonus The City allows an increase in density
to developers who set‐aside at least
portions of their project to low‐
income or very low‐income persons,
as well as additional development
concessions/incentives.
Density Bonus
Tax‐Exempt Bonds The City has the authority to issue
tax‐exempt bonds. Bond proceeds are
used to develop affordable housing.
Housing Development
City Owned Land If available and appropriate, City
owned land may be made available.
Housing
Community Facilities
County of Riverside Resources
County of
Riverside
Programs
Housing Improvement Program,
Rental Rehab Program, Senior Home
Repair (minor and enhanced), First
Time Homebuyers Program, Multi‐
family Revenue Bonds, Shelter Plus
Care.
Rental Assistance
Home and Rental Rehabilitation
Assistance
First Time Home Buyers Assistance
State Resources
Mortgage Credit
Certificate (MCC)
Federal tax credit for low and
moderate income homebuyers who
have not owned a home in the past
three years. Allocation for MCC is
provided by the State and
administered by the County.
First Time Home Buyer Assistance
California
Department of
Housing &
Community
Development
Predevelopment
Loan Program
Low interest loans for the
development of affordable housing
with non‐profit agencies.
Predevelopment Loans
Chapter 6
130
Table 51
Resources Available for Housing Activities
Program Description Eligible Activities
Emergency Shelter
Program
Grants awarded to non‐profit
organizations for shelter support
services.
Support Services
Mobile Home Park
Conversion
Program
(M Prop)
Funds awarded to mobile home park
tenant organizations to convert
mobile home parks to resident
ownership.
Acquisition
Rehabilitation
California
Housing Finance
Agency (CHFA)
Multiple Rental
Housing Programs
Below market rate financing offered
to builders and developers of
multiple family and elderly housing.
Tax‐exempt bonds provide below‐
market mortgage money.
New Construction
Rehabilitation
Acquisition of Properties
California
Housing
Rehabilitation
Program
Low interest loans for the
rehabilitation of substandard homes
owned and occupied by lower‐
income households. City and non‐
profits sponsor housing rehabilitation
projects.
Rehabilitation
Repair of Code Violations
Property Improvements
California
Housing Finance
Agency Home
Mortgage Purchase
Program
CHFA sells tax‐exempt bonds to
provide below‐market loans to first
time homebuyers. Program is
operated through participating
lenders that originate loans
purchased by CHFA.
Homebuyer Assistance
Low Income
Housing Tax
Credit (LIHTC)
Tax credits available to individuals
and corporations that invest in low‐
income rental housing. Tax credits are
sold to corporations and people with
high tax liability, of which the
proceeds are utilized for housing
development.
Rehabilitation
New Construction
Acquisition
Chapter 6
131
Table 51
Resources Available for Housing Activities
Program Description Eligible Activities
Federal Resources
Community
Development
Block Grant
(CDBG)
Entitlement program that is awarded
to the City on a formula basis. The
objectives are to fund housing
activities and expand economic
opportunities. Project must meet one
of three national objectives: benefit
low and moderate income persons;
aid in the prevention or elimination of
slums or blight; or meet other urgent
needs.
Section 108 Loan Repayments
Historic Preservation
Admin. & Planning
Code Enforcement
Public Facilities Improvements
Economic Development
Housing Activities (i.e. acquisition,
rehabilitation)
HOME Investment
Partnership
Program
A flexible entitlement grant program
for housing. The intent of this
program is to expand the supply of
decent, safe, and sanitary affordable
housing. HOME is designed as a
partnership program between the
federal, state, and local governments,
non‐profit and for‐profit housing
entities to finance, build/rehabilitate
and manage housing for lower‐
income owners and renters.
Multi‐Family Acquisition/Rehab
Single‐Family
CHDO Assistance
Administration
Emergency Shelter
Grants (ESG)
Annual grant funds are allocated on a
formula basis. Funds are intended to
assist with the provision of shelter
and social services for homeless.
Homelessness Prevention
Essential Services
Operating Expenses
Housing
Opportunities for
Persons with AIDS
(HOPWA)
Funds are allocated to Lake Elsinore
on behalf of all jurisdictions in
Riverside County. Funds are made
available countywide for supportive
social services, affordable housing
development, and rental assistance to
persons with HIV’AIDS.
Rental Assistance
Supportive Social Services
Administration
Chapter 6
132
Table 51
Resources Available for Housing Activities
Program Description Eligible Activities
Supportive
Housing Grant
Grants to improve quality of existing
shelters and transitional housing.
Increase shelters and transitional
housing facilities for the homeless.
Housing Rehabilitation
Section 8 Rental
Assistance
Rental assistance program which
provides a subsidy to very low‐
income families, individuals, seniors
and the disabled. Participants pay
30% of their adjusted income toward
rent.
Rental Assistance
Section 811/202 Grants to non‐profit developers of
supportive housing for the elderly
and disabled persons. Section 811 can
be used to develop group homes,
independent living, facilities, and
intermediate care facilities.
Acquisition
Rehabilitation
New Construction
Rental Assistance
Support Services
Section 811 Grants to non‐profit developers of
supportive housing for person with
disabilities, including group homes,
independent living facilities and
intermediate care facilities.
Acquisition
Rehabilitation
New Construction
Rental Assistance
Shelter Plus Care Provides grants for rental assistance
for permanent housing and case
management for homeless
individuals with disabilities and their
families.
Rental Assistance
Homeless Prevention
Chapter 6
133
Table 51
Resources Available for Housing Activities
Program Description Eligible Activities
Home Ownership
for People
Everywhere
(HOPE)
HOPE program provides grants to
low income people to achieve
homeownership. The three programs
are:
HOPE I — Public Housing
Homeownership Program
HOPE II — Homeownership of Multi‐
family Units Program
HOPE III — Homeownership for
Single‐family Homes
Homeownership Assistance
Section 108 Loan Provides loan guarantee to CDBG
entitlement jurisdictions for pursuing
large capital improvement or other
projects. The jurisdiction must pledge
its future CDBG allocations for loan
repayment. Maximum loan amount
can be up to five times the entitlement
jurisdiction’s most recent approved
annual allocation. Maximum loan
term is twenty (20) years.
Acquisition
Rehabilitation
Home Buyer Assistance
Homeless Assistance
Private Resources
Community Home Buyer Program
– Fixed rate Mortgages
Homebuyer Assistance
Community Home Improvement
Mortgage Program – Mortgages for
purchase and rehabilitation of a
home
Homebuyer Assistance/Rehab
Federal National
Mortgage
Association
(Fannie Mae)
Making Home Affordable–
Refinance and Loan Modification
services
Homeowner assistance to avoid
foreclosure
Chapter 6
134
Table 51
Resources Available for Housing Activities
Program Description Eligible Activities
California
Community
Reinvestment
Corporation
(CCRC)
Non‐profit mortgage banking
consortium that pools resources to
reduce lender risk in financing
affordable housing. Provides long
term debt financing for affordable
multi‐family rental housing.
New Construction
Rehabilitation
Acquisition
Federal Home
Loan Bank
Affordable
Housing Program
Direct subsidies to non‐profit and for‐
profit developers, and public agencies
for affordable low‐income ownership
and rental projects.
New Construction
Expand Home Ownership for Lower
Income Persons
Administrative Resources
Primary responsibility for the implementation of the City’s housing programs and activities lies
with the City Manager and the Community Development Department, including the Planning
and Building Divisions. The primary responsibilities of the Community Development
Department include the overall implementation of the City's General Plan Goals and Policies
through its programs such as the Zoning and the Subdivision Ordinances, as well as
implementing Specific Plans. In addition, the Community Development Department is
responsible for the long-range planning and physical development of the City. The department
ensures the City's viability through enforcement of land use, construction, health, safety, and
environmental regulations.
135
6.5 Housing Element Plan
The Housing Plan provides direction for City decision makers to achieve the long‐term housing
objectives set forth in the Lake Elsinore Housing Element. The Plan is established to guide the
development, redevelopment and preservation of a balanced inventory of housing to meet the
needs of present and future residents of the City. It is the overall goal of the City to ensure that
all residents have decent, safe, sanitary and affordable housing regardless of income.
The specific goals, policies and programs detailed in this section provide the framework for the
City’s overall housing program. Specific policies and implementation programs included in
this element are intended to provide a wide variety of tools to implement the City’s General
Plan goals. Actual programs will be implemented at the discretion of the City in order to meet
established objectives.
As used here, a goal is a statement defining a desired end result; a policy is a plan of action to
guide decisions and actions; and a program identifies the method, agencies, officials, funding
sources, and time frame the City will undertake to implement the policies and achieve the goals
set forth in this Housing Element. Together, goals, policies, and programs establish the
framework for making decisions that affect the availability of housing in Lake Elsinore.
Consistent with State law, the Housing Element goals, policies, and programs aim to:
Conserve and improve the condition of the existing housing stock
Assist in the development of housing for low‐ and moderate‐income households
Identify adequate sites to encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for
all income levels
Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints
to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing
Promote equal opportunities for all persons
Chapter 6
136
Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs
Goal 1 Preservation, maintenance, and
improvement of the existing
housing stock to provide decent
housing opportunities and a
satisfying living environment for
the residents of Lake Elsinore.
Policy 1.1 Continue to enforce building, land
use, and property maintenance codes.
Policy 1.2 Facilitate the removal or rehabilitation
of housing units that pose serious
health and safety hazards to residents
and adjacent structures.
Policy 1.3 Continue programs directed at
preserving the physical quality of
housing and neighborhood
environments and maintaining
compliance with established
standards.
Policy 1.4 Encourage the incorporation of energy
conservation features in the design of
all new housing developments and the
addition of energy conservation
devices/practices in existing
developments.
PROGRAM 1: CODE ENFORCEMENT
Enforce City codes to remedy unsightly or hazardous conditions in residential neighborhoods.
Provide information and technical assistance to property owners regarding housing
maintenance.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Chapter 6
137
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department – Planning, Building and Code
Enforcement Divisions
Funding Source: Department Budget
PROGRAM 2: REMOVAL OF SUBSTANDARD HOUSING
Eliminate, through demolition, unsafe and dilapidated housing units that cannot be
rehabilitated.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department – Planning, Building and Code
Enforcement Divisions
Funding Source: Department Budget, General Fund, CDBG
PROGRAM 3: ABANDONED PROPERTIES
Enforce the City’s Abandoned Residential Property Registration Program (Ordinance 1252), and
encourage owners of houses and properties that become vacant and abandoned due to
foreclosure to maintain or rehabilitate the properties.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department – Planning, Building and Code
Enforcement Divisions
Funding Source: Department Budget
PROGRAM 4: SENIOR HOME REPAIR PROGRAM
Utilize CDBG or other funds, as available, to provide financial assistance for minor repairs of
homes owned and occupied by lower‐income senior citizens. Eligible repairs include plumbing,
electrical, painting, carpentry, roof repairs, and masonry work. Provide assistance to
approximately 10‐15 very low‐ and low‐income households.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department – Planning Division
Funding Source: CDBG
Chapter 6
138
PROGRAM 5: ENERGY CONSERVATION
Implement the Climate Action Plan (CAP) to reduce local greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in
accordance with State law. Carry out the housing related strategies and measures identified in
the CAP to meet GHG emissions targets over the next two decades.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department – Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
Chapter 6
139
Goal 2 The provision of affordable housing to accommodate the local
housing needs.
Policy 2.1 Preserve and expand the City’s supply of affordable rental and ownership
housing for lower‐ income households.
Policy 2.2 Use incentives and regulatory concessions to promote the development of
housing for lower‐income persons and those with special needs including, but
not limited to, large families, persons with physical or developmental
disabilities, families with children, the elderly, and the homeless.
Policy 2.3 Encourage partnerships to maximize resources available for the provision of
affordable housing.
Policy 2.4 Actively pursue federal and state housing program funds to provide housing
assistance and to support the development of housing affordable to lower‐
income households.
Policy 2.5 Discourage the conversion of existing apartment units to condominiums where
such conversion will diminish the supply of very low, low‐ and moderate‐
income housing.
Policy 2.6 Promote coordination and cooperation between the City, developers, and
neighborhood residents early and throughout the process for affordable
housing developments.
PROGRAM 6: DENSITY BONUS
Encourage the use of the Density Bonus Ordinance to obtain higher densities in residential
developments and increase the availability of affordable housing units in exchange for
exceptional architecture and amenities. A copy of the Density Bonus Ordinance shall be
attached to Residential Design Review Applications.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department – Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
Chapter 6
140
PROGRAM 7: AFFORDABLE HOUSING SITES
Make available on the City website and distribute to interested developers a list of City‐owned
property suitable for affordable housing projects and the Housing Element which includes a
Residential Sites Inventory and Site Suitability Analysis. Update the City‐owned property list
annually. Provide Habitat for Humanity – Inland Valley with information on residential sites
suitable for affordable housing development.
Timeframe: Upon Housing Element Adoption and Certification; Annually
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department – Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
PROGRAM 8: PRESERVATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Assist in the preservation of 52 affordable units at risk of converting to market rents by
periodically monitoring the status of the units that are at risk of converting to market rate
during the planning period. If any property owners indicate plans to convert affordable units to
market rate rents, the City will contact qualified entities to explore transfer of ownership
options (list provided in Appendix B). Inform residents in units that are converting to market
rents of affordable housing programs available in the City, including Section 8 and other
affordable housing developments.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Administrative Services Department; Community Development Department –
Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
PROGRAM 9: AFFORDABLE HOUSING PARTNERSHIPS
Work with agencies and organizations to increase affordable housing activities such as
construction, rehabilitation, or financial assistance to renters and owners. Provide a link to
available housing programs for residents and developers on the City website. Partnerships and
programs to continue and/or pursue include but are not limited to: County of Riverside
Housing Authority (City/County Mortgage Revenue Bonds), County of Riverside Economic
Development Agency (First Time Home Buyer and Mortgage Certificate Program), California
Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA), Habitat for Humanity.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Chapter 6
141
Responsible Agency: Administrative Services Department; Community Development Department –
Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
PROGRAM 10: RENTAL ASSISTANCE
Continue to support the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. Direct eligible households
to the Section 8 rental assistance program managed by the Housing Authority of Riverside
County. Provide information to landlords regarding participation in the Section 8 Rental
Assistance Program.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Administrative Services Department; Community Development Department –
Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
PROGRAM 11: SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING
Encourage non‐profit organizations to pursue funding for the construction of elderly, disabled,
or other special needs housing. Provide referrals to programs such as the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly
Program and the California Department of Mental Health/CalHFA Mental Health Services Act
(MHSA) Housing Program.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Administrative Services Department; Community Development Department –
Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
PROGRAM 12: HOMELESS NEED
Consistent with available funding, address the needs of at‐risk and homeless individuals and
families through assistance to non‐profits serving the homeless population.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Administrative Services Department
Funding Source: CDBG
Chapter 6
142
Goal 3 Adequate sites to accommodate the City’s housing need.
Policy 3.1 Use the City’s General Plan, Municipal Code, other land use and development
plans, and the development process to provide housing sites that meet the
identified local need.
Policy 3.2 Promote a balance of housing types, including mixed‐use development, to meet
the needs of the community.
Policy 3.3 Maintain an inventory of vacant and underutilized land and make available to
the development community.
Policy 3.4 Promote the provision of housing for special needs households.
PROGRAM 13: CONSISTENCY ZONING
Continue with subsequent phases of the Consistency Zoning Project to bring zoning consistent
with the General Plan Land Use Designations, in accordance with the Compatibility Matrix
shown in Appendix B of the General Plan. As part of Zoning Code amendments, incorporate a
matrix of permitted uses in residential zones into Title 17 – Zoning of the Municipal Code to
facilitate understanding of allowed uses.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department – Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
PROGRAM 14: SPECIFIC PLANS
Promote development within existing and future specific plans to produce planned community
environments with a variety of housing types and densities.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Administrative Services Department; Community Development Department –
Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
Chapter 6
143
PROGRAM 15: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS
Work toward the incorporation of a wide range of housing types (including special needs
housing), densities, and affordability levels during the negotiation or renegotiation of
development agreements with residential developers. Encourage developers to construct a
percentage of affordable housing concurrently with market rate housing in each phase of
development. During the Development Agreement process, facilitate and incentivize, as
feasible, the development of housing projects on small sites, lot consolidation of adjacent small
sites, and development of large parcels sizes that facilitate multi‐family developments
affordable to lower income households.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Administrative Services Department; Community Development Department –
Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
Goal 4 Remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement,
and development of housing.
Policy 4.1 Periodically review residential development standards and regulations,
ordinances, processing procedures, and fees to identify and mitigate
constraints that may impede the development, improvement, and conservation
of housing.
Policy 4.2 Provide avenues for the development of housing for extremely low‐income
and special needs persons.
PROGRAM 16: SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING
Support the housing needs of special needs households by prioritizing projects that include
special needs housing or housing for extremely/very low‐income households and by referring
residents to the Inland Regional Center for housing and services available for persons with
developmental disabilities.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Administrative Services Department; Community Development Department –
Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
Chapter 6
144
Goal 5 Equal access to housing for all residents.
Policy 5.1 Continue to enforce fair housing laws prohibiting discrimination in the building,
financing, selling, or renting of housing on the basis of race, ethnicity, ancestry,
national origin, religion, sex, disability, age, marital status, familial status, source
of income, sexual orientation, or any other arbitrary factor.
PROGRAM 17: FAIR HOUSING
Work towards ensuring fair housing choices for all residents by advertising resident rights
under federal and State fair housing laws and providing access to local fair housing service
providers. Make this information available on the City website. Amend Title 17 of the
Municipal Code to revise or remove the definition of family to be flexible for a variety of
household types, consistent with State and federal laws.
Timeframe: 2014‐2021
Responsible Agency: Administrative Services Department; Community Development Department –
Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
PROGRAM 18: REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION
Adopt a process to address requests for reasonable accommodation, and develop procedures
regulating siting, funding, development and use of housing for people with disabilities.
Timeframe: 2014
Responsible Agency: Administrative Services Department; Community Development Department –
Planning Division
Funding Source: Department Budget
Chapter 6
145
Quantified Objectives by Income Group
Table 52 summarizes the City’s quantified objectives for the 2014‐2021 planning period by
income group. The objectives include:
Construction of 4,929 new housing units, representing the City’s RHNA of 1,196 units
for extremely/very low‐income households, 801 units for low‐income households, 897
units for moderate‐income households, and 2,035 units for above moderate income
households.
Rehabilitation of 15 units through the Senior Home Repair Program
Conservation of 52 units at risk of converting to market rate
Table 52
Summary of 2014‐2021 Quantified Objectives
Income Level
Extremely
Low
Very
Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate Total
Construction Objective (RHNA) 598 598 801 897 2,035 4,929
Housing to Be Rehabilitated ‐‐ 15 ‐‐ ‐‐ 15
At‐Risk Housing Units to Be Conserved ‐‐ 52 ‐‐ ‐‐ 52
Note: Pursuant to AB 2634, local jurisdictions are also required to project the housing needs of extremely low
income households (0‐30% AMI). In estimating the number of extremely low income households, a jurisdiction can
use 50% of the very low income allocation or apportion the very low income figure based on Census data.
Chapter 6
146
6.6 Review of Past (2008‐2014) Accomplishments
State law (California Government Code Section 65588[a]) requires jurisdictions to review their
housing elements to evaluate:
The appropriateness of the housing goals, objectives, and policies in contributing to the
attainment of the state housing goal;
The effectiveness of the housing element in attainment of the community’s housing
goals and objectives; and
The progress in implementation of the housing element.
The evaluation helps a jurisdiction identify the extent to which adopted programs have been
successful in achieving stated objectives and addressing local needs, and how such programs
continue to be relevant in addressing current and future housing needs. The evaluation
provides the basis for recommended modifications to policies and programs in the updated
element, and provides meaningful guidance for establishing new objectives.
Table 53 shows the progress the City made toward implementing the 2008‐2014 Housing
Element programs. Based on this information, an analysis of the effectiveness and continued
appropriateness of these programs is provided, and the goals, policies, and programs of this
Housing Element have been updated to reflect this evaluation.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
14
7
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
1A
.
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
/
Z
o
n
i
n
g
Co
d
e
Up
d
a
t
e
s
Up
d
a
t
e
an
d
am
e
n
d
th
e
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
an
d
Zo
n
i
n
g
Co
d
e
pe
r
i
o
d
i
c
a
l
l
y
to
en
s
u
r
e
th
a
t
gr
o
w
t
h
tr
e
n
d
s
an
d
la
n
d
us
e
po
l
i
c
i
e
s
,
as
th
e
y
re
l
a
t
e
to
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
av
a
i
l
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
,
ar
e
ad
d
r
e
s
s
e
d
.
Th
e
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
ha
s
be
e
n
up
d
a
t
e
d
an
d
ad
o
p
t
i
o
n
oc
c
u
r
r
e
d
on
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
13
,
20
1
1
.
Th
e
fi
r
s
t
ph
a
s
e
of
co
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
re
z
o
n
i
n
g
,
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
re
z
o
n
i
n
g
fo
r
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
y
wi
t
h
CM
U
,
RM
U
,
an
d
HD
R
,
wa
s
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
in
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
20
1
2
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
is
pu
r
s
u
i
n
g
Phase 2 of the
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
y
zo
n
i
n
g
project to bring
zo
n
i
n
g
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
throughout the City
wi
t
h
th
e
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Plan. Phase 1 (the
Mi
x
e
d
Us
e
an
d
the High Density
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
zo
n
e
s
)
was completed in
20
1
2
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is continued and
re
n
a
m
e
d
in
th
e
2014‐2021 Housing
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
1B
.
20
1
4
‐19
Re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
an
d
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
Pl
a
n
An
an
n
u
a
l
up
d
a
t
e
an
d
st
a
t
u
s
re
p
o
r
t
of
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
as
s
i
s
t
e
d
or
un
d
e
r
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
fo
r
Ci
t
y
as
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
wi
l
l
be
pr
e
p
a
r
e
d
an
d
su
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
to
th
e
Ci
t
y
Co
u
n
c
i
l
/
Re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Ag
e
n
c
y
.
Th
e
re
p
o
r
t
wi
l
l
al
s
o
be
fo
r
w
a
r
d
e
d
to
HC
D
.
Ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
Fe
b
r
u
a
r
y
1,
20
1
2
,
al
l
re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
ag
e
n
c
i
e
s
in
th
e
St
a
t
e
of
Ca
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
we
r
e
di
s
s
o
l
v
e
d
pu
r
s
u
a
n
t
to
AB
1X
26
.
Si
n
c
e
th
e
r
e
is no longer a
Re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Agency, this program is
no
t
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
in
the 2014‐2021 Housing
El
e
m
e
n
t
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
14
8
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
1C
.
Sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
Pl
a
n
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
En
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
a
va
r
i
e
t
y
of
ho
u
s
i
n
g
ty
p
e
s
in
sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
pl
a
n
s
,
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
an
d
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
.
En
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
th
e
us
e
of
de
n
s
i
t
y
bo
n
u
s
e
s
to
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
th
e
av
a
i
l
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
of
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
un
i
t
s
.
To
fa
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
in
th
e
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
ar
e
a
,
th
e
Ci
t
y
ad
o
p
t
e
d
th
e
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Ma
s
t
e
r
Pl
a
n
,
th
e
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Co
d
e
(l
a
n
d
us
e
an
d
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
re
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
an
d
th
e
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
Pl
a
n
on
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
13
,
20
1
1
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
wo
r
k
wi
t
h
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
of
va
r
i
o
u
s
Sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
Pl
a
n
s
th
r
o
u
g
h
o
u
t
th
e
Ci
t
y
to
en
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
a
va
r
i
e
t
y
of
ho
u
s
i
n
g
ty
p
e
s
an
d
de
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
.
Sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
Pl
a
n
s
can facilitate the future
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of
housing for all income
le
v
e
l
s
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
will continue in
th
e
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Housing Element.
1D
.
De
n
s
i
t
y
Bo
n
u
s
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
En
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
us
e
of
th
e
De
n
s
i
t
y
Bo
n
u
s
Or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
to
fa
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
.
De
v
e
l
o
p
a
pr
o
c
e
s
s
to
en
s
u
r
e
pl
a
n
n
e
r
s
di
s
c
u
s
s
de
n
s
i
t
y
bo
n
u
s
e
s
wi
t
h
pr
o
j
e
c
t
ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
ad
o
p
t
e
d
th
e
De
n
s
i
t
y
Bo
n
u
s
Or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
in
Ma
y
of
20
0
8
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
ad
d
e
d
a
De
n
s
i
t
y
Bo
n
u
s
in
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
in
th
e
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Mi
x
e
d
Us
e
an
d
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Mi
x
e
d
Us
e
zo
n
e
s
.
A
de
n
s
i
t
y
bo
n
u
s
wa
s
us
e
d
in
th
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of
th
e
11
3
‐un
i
t
Po
t
t
e
r
y
Co
u
r
t
Ap
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
will continue in the 2014‐
20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element. The City will
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
to
encourage the use of
de
n
s
i
t
y
bo
n
u
s
and a copy of the
De
n
s
i
t
y
Bo
n
u
s
Ordinance has been
at
t
a
c
h
e
d
to
applicable Residential
De
s
i
g
n
Re
v
i
e
w
Applications.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
14
9
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
1E
.
Fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
As
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
Id
e
n
t
i
f
y
on
e
si
t
e
pe
r
ye
a
r
,
if
av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
,
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
in
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
s
to
an
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
pr
o
j
e
c
t
(l
e
a
s
i
n
g
at
a lo
w
e
r
ra
t
e
,
la
n
d
wr
i
t
e
do
w
n
s
,
or
pr
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
of
of
f
‐
si
t
e
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
)
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
co
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
d
Re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
fu
n
d
s
($
4
mi
l
l
i
o
n
)
to
w
a
r
d
th
e
11
3
‐
un
i
t
Po
t
t
e
r
y
Co
u
r
t
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
pr
o
j
e
c
t
.
Du
e
to
th
e
loss of Redevelopment
fu
n
d
i
n
g
,
th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is not continued
in
th
e
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Housing Element.
1F
.
No
n
‐Pr
o
f
i
t
De
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
As
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
a
li
s
t
of
Ci
t
y
/
A
g
e
n
c
y
ow
n
e
d
la
n
d
su
i
t
a
b
l
e
fo
r
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
fo
r
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
to
no
n
‐pr
o
f
i
t
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
to
ut
i
l
i
z
e
.
Th
e
20
0
8
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
an
in
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
of
si
t
e
s
su
i
t
a
b
l
e
fo
r
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
,
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
;
th
e
El
e
m
e
n
t
is
av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
on
th
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
we
b
s
i
t
e
.
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
7
in
the 2014‐2021 Housing
El
e
m
e
n
t
in
c
l
u
d
e
s
this objective. As
su
c
h
,
th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is a duplicate and is
re
m
o
v
e
d
fr
o
m
the 2014‐2021 Housing
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
1G
.
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
Ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
En
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
an
d
ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
e
fo
r
a
wi
d
e
ra
n
g
e
of
ho
u
s
i
n
g
ty
p
e
s
,
de
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
an
d
pr
i
c
e
ra
n
g
e
s
wi
t
h
i
n
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
s
an
d
en
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
to
in
c
l
u
d
e
a
pe
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
of
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
co
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
l
y
in
ea
c
h
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
re
g
u
l
a
r
l
y
en
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
s
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
of
Sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
Pl
a
n
ar
e
a
s
to
in
c
l
u
d
e
a
wi
d
e
ra
n
g
e
of
ho
u
s
i
n
g
ty
p
e
s
an
d
de
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
.
Fo
r
ex
a
m
p
l
e
,
th
e
Ci
t
y
co
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
e
d
wi
t
h
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
of
th
e
Al
b
e
r
h
i
l
l
Ra
n
c
h
an
d
is
wo
r
k
i
n
g
wi
t
h
th
e
Al
b
e
r
h
i
l
l
Vi
l
l
a
g
e
Sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
Pl
a
n
s
to
ob
t
a
i
n
a
va
r
i
e
t
y
of
ho
u
s
i
n
g
ty
p
e
s
an
d
de
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
,
as
we
l
l
as
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
of
th
e
Po
t
t
e
r
y
Co
u
r
t
ap
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
co
m
p
l
e
x
.
Wo
r
k
i
n
g
wi
t
h
developers for the
at
t
a
i
n
m
e
n
t
of
varying housing types
an
d
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
housing has provided
be
n
e
f
i
t
s
to
th
e
City’s residents. This
pr
o
g
r
a
m
wi
l
l
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
in the 2014‐2021
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
15
0
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
1H
.
An
n
u
a
l
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
St
a
t
u
s
Re
p
o
r
t
s
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
an
n
u
a
l
pr
o
g
r
e
s
s
re
p
o
r
t
s
on
th
e
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
an
d
qu
a
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
as
pa
r
t
of
th
e
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
st
a
t
u
s
re
p
o
r
t
to
th
e
St
a
t
e
.
Si
n
c
e
ad
o
p
t
i
o
n
of
th
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
,
th
e
Ci
t
y
ha
s
an
n
u
a
l
l
y
pr
e
p
a
r
e
d
th
e
an
n
u
a
l
pr
o
g
r
e
s
s
re
p
o
r
t
as
pa
r
t
of
th
e
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
st
a
t
u
s
re
p
o
r
t
to
th
e
St
a
t
e
.
Pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
an
an
n
u
a
l
report to the State
is
a
ro
u
t
i
n
e
fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
for the City. As
su
c
h
,
a
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is not needed to carry
ou
t
th
i
s
ta
s
k
.
This program is not
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
in
th
e
2014‐2021 Housing
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
1I
.
Sm
a
l
l
Si
t
e
s
/
L
o
t
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
an
d
in
c
e
n
t
i
v
i
z
e
th
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of
ho
u
s
i
n
g
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
on
sm
a
l
l
si
t
e
s
an
d
lo
t
co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
of
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
sm
a
l
l
si
t
e
s
.
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of
th
e
11
3
‐un
i
t
Po
t
t
e
r
y
Co
u
r
t
ap
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
co
m
p
l
e
x
re
q
u
i
r
e
d
co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
of
23
pa
r
c
e
l
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
al
s
o
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
7
pa
r
c
e
l
me
r
g
e
r
s
in
va
r
i
o
u
s
ar
e
a
s
of
th
e
ci
t
y
to
fa
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
.
In
c
e
n
t
i
v
i
z
i
n
g
small site development
an
d
wo
r
k
i
n
g
with developers to
ac
h
i
e
v
e
lo
t
co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n
is part of
Ci
t
y
st
a
f
f
’
s
standard practices in
pr
o
j
e
c
t
re
v
i
e
w
and approval processing
an
d
al
s
o
oc
c
u
r
s
as part of development
ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
As these
ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
fa
l
l
under other programs in
th
e
20
1
4
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element (Program
15
)
,
th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
will be removed from
th
e
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Housing Element.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
15
1
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
1J
.
La
r
g
e
Si
t
e
s
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
En
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
,
th
r
o
u
g
h
in
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
s
an
d
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
as
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
,
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
th
a
t
re
s
u
l
t
in
la
r
g
e
pa
r
c
e
l
s
si
z
e
s
th
a
t
fa
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
mu
l
t
i
f
a
m
i
l
y
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
to
lo
w
e
r
in
c
o
m
e
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
To
en
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of
mu
l
t
i
‐
fa
m
i
l
y
an
d
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
,
th
e
Ci
t
y
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
y
zo
n
e
ch
a
n
g
e
s
in
zo
n
e
s
th
a
t
al
l
o
w
hi
g
h
e
r
de
n
s
i
t
i
e
s
.
Th
i
s
ef
f
o
r
t
wi
l
l
re
d
u
c
e
th
e
ti
m
e
an
d
co
s
t
of
fu
t
u
r
e
mu
l
t
i
‐fa
m
i
l
y
an
d
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
.
In
c
e
n
t
i
v
i
z
i
n
g
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
development,
pa
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r
l
y
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
housing, is part
of
Ci
t
y
st
a
f
f
’
s
standard practices in
pr
o
j
e
c
t
re
v
i
e
w
and approval processing
an
d
al
s
o
oc
c
u
r
s
as part of development
ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
As these
ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
fa
l
l
under other programs in
th
e
20
1
4
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element (Program
15
)
,
th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
will be removed from
th
e
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Housing Element.
2A
.
Co
d
e
En
f
o
r
c
e
m
e
n
t
En
f
o
r
c
e
Ci
t
y
co
d
e
s
to
re
m
e
d
y
un
s
i
g
h
t
l
y
or
ha
z
a
r
d
o
u
s
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
in
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
ar
e
a
s
an
d
pr
o
v
i
d
e
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
te
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
as
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
to
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
ow
n
e
r
s
re
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
ho
m
e
ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
Co
d
e
En
f
o
r
c
e
m
e
n
t
Di
v
i
s
i
o
n
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
fi
l
e
no
t
i
c
e
s
an
d
vi
o
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
to
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
no
t
in
co
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
wi
t
h
Ci
t
y
Co
d
e
.
Te
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
as
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
to
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
ow
n
e
r
s
re
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
ho
m
e
ma
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
is
al
s
o
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
by
th
e
Ci
t
y
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
re
f
e
r
s
in
t
e
r
e
s
t
e
d
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
ow
n
e
r
s
to
th
e
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Co
u
n
t
y
ED
A
wh
i
c
h
of
f
e
r
s
tw
o
ho
m
e
re
p
a
i
r
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
:
Ho
m
e
Re
p
a
i
r
Lo
a
n
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
(H
R
L
P
)
an
d
Se
n
i
o
r
Ho
m
e
Re
p
a
i
r
Gr
a
n
t
(S
H
R
G
)
.
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
maintenance
is
an
im
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
component of
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
de
c
e
n
t
housing in Lake
El
s
i
n
o
r
e
.
Th
i
s
program continues in the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
15
2
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
2B
.
Re
m
o
v
a
l
of
Su
b
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Un
i
t
s
El
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
un
s
a
f
e
an
d
di
l
a
p
i
d
a
t
e
d
ho
u
s
i
n
g
un
i
t
s
th
a
t
ca
n
n
o
t
be
re
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
d
,
ei
t
h
e
r
th
r
o
u
g
h
de
m
o
l
i
t
i
o
n
or
en
f
o
r
c
e
m
e
n
t
of
ap
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
pr
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
of
th
e
Un
i
f
o
r
m
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
an
d
Re
v
e
n
u
e
an
d
Ta
x
Co
d
e
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
Co
d
e
En
f
o
r
c
e
m
e
n
t
Di
v
i
s
i
o
n
ha
s
id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
15
un
i
t
s
th
a
t
ar
e
to
o
de
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
e
d
to
be
re
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
d
.
Of
th
e
s
e
,
5
ha
v
e
be
e
n
de
m
o
l
i
s
h
e
d
,
3
ar
e
pe
n
d
i
n
g
de
m
o
l
i
t
i
o
n
,
an
d
th
e
re
m
a
i
n
i
n
g
8
ar
e
wa
i
t
i
n
g
on
fu
n
d
i
n
g
.
Ma
i
n
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
ho
u
s
i
n
g
and neighborhood
qu
a
l
i
t
y
is
an
im
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
component of
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
de
c
e
n
t
housing in Lake
El
s
i
n
o
r
e
.
Th
i
s
program will continue in
th
e
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Housing Element.
2C
.
Ab
a
n
d
o
n
e
d
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
Re
g
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
En
f
o
r
c
e
th
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
Ab
a
n
d
o
n
e
d
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
Re
g
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
(O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
12
5
2
)
,
an
d
en
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
ow
n
e
r
s
of
ho
u
s
e
s
an
d
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
th
a
t
be
c
o
m
e
va
c
a
n
t
an
d
ab
a
n
d
o
n
e
d
to
ma
i
n
t
a
i
n
or
re
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
th
e
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
wi
t
h
th
e
Or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
en
f
o
r
c
e
Or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
15
2
an
d
re
q
u
i
r
e
s
ow
n
e
r
s
of
va
c
a
n
t
fo
r
e
c
l
o
s
e
d
or
ab
a
n
d
o
n
e
d
ho
m
e
s
to
re
g
i
s
t
e
r
th
e
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
wi
t
h
th
e
Ci
t
y
.
Ma
i
n
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
ho
u
s
i
n
g
and neighborhood
qu
a
l
i
t
y
is
an
im
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
component of
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
de
c
e
n
t
housing in Lake
El
s
i
n
o
r
e
.
Th
i
s
program will continue in
th
e
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Housing Element.
2D
.
Se
n
i
o
r
Ho
m
e
Re
p
a
i
r
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
fu
n
d
i
n
g
as
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
fo
r
ap
p
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
10
‐15
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
fo
r
th
e
mi
n
o
r
re
p
a
i
r
s
of
ho
m
e
s
ow
n
e
d
an
d
oc
c
u
p
i
e
d
by
lo
w
‐in
c
o
m
e
se
n
i
o
r
ci
t
i
z
e
n
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
di
d
no
t
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
it
s
ow
n
pr
o
g
r
a
m
to
as
s
i
s
t
el
d
e
r
l
y
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
.
Qu
a
l
i
f
y
i
n
g
La
k
e
El
s
i
n
o
r
e
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
we
r
e
ab
l
e
to
ap
p
l
y
to
th
e
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Co
u
n
t
y
Se
n
i
o
r
Ho
m
e
Re
p
a
i
r
Gr
a
n
t
pr
o
g
r
a
m
du
r
i
n
g
th
e
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
pe
r
i
o
d
.
Ma
i
n
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
ho
u
s
i
n
g
quality for City
se
n
i
o
r
s
is
an
im
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
objective. The
Ci
t
y
wi
l
l
ap
p
l
y
for HUD funding to
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
th
i
s
program within the
Ci
t
y
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
will be included in
th
e
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Housing Element.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
15
3
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
2E
.
Af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Re
p
o
r
t
s
Ci
t
y
wi
l
l
ma
i
n
t
a
i
n
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
un
i
t
s
an
d
st
r
i
v
e
to
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
th
e
am
o
u
n
t
an
n
u
a
l
l
y
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
wi
l
l
tr
a
c
k
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
un
i
t
s
ci
t
y
‐wi
d
e
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
ha
s
ga
i
n
e
d
an
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
11
1
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
un
i
t
s
at
th
e
Po
t
t
e
r
y
Co
u
r
t
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
an
d
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
an
up
d
a
t
e
on
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
as
pa
r
t
of
th
e
i
r
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
an
n
u
a
l
pr
o
g
r
e
s
s
re
p
o
r
t
.
Pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
an
an
n
u
a
l
report to the State
is
a
ro
u
t
i
n
e
fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
for the City and
en
c
o
u
r
a
g
i
n
g
affordable housing
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
occurs during
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Agreement Negotiations
(P
r
o
g
r
a
m
15
)
.
This program is not
ne
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
an
d
will be removed from the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
3A
.
As
s
i
s
t
e
d
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
to
pr
e
s
e
r
v
e
th
e
La
k
e
v
i
e
w
ap
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
(6
4
at
ri
s
k
un
i
t
s
)
.
In
20
1
0
,
th
e
Ci
t
y
an
d
De
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
re
c
o
r
d
e
d
an
Af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Re
g
u
l
a
t
o
r
y
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
pr
e
s
e
r
v
i
n
g
th
e
un
i
t
s
fo
r
55
ye
a
r
s
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
was successfully
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
an
d
is removed from the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
3B
.
Ci
t
y
Su
p
p
o
r
t
e
d
Fi
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
Op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
an
d
In
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
s
St
i
m
u
l
a
t
e
pr
i
v
a
t
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
an
d
no
n
‐pr
o
f
i
t
ef
f
o
r
t
s
in
th
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
an
d
fi
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
of
ho
u
s
i
n
g
fo
r
lo
w
e
r
an
d
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
in
c
o
m
e
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
us
i
n
g
a
va
r
i
e
t
y
of
fu
n
d
i
n
g
so
u
r
c
e
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
pa
r
t
n
e
r
e
d
wi
t
h
Br
i
d
g
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
to
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
Po
t
t
e
r
y
Co
u
r
t
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
11
1
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
un
i
t
s
wi
t
h
i
n
th
e
Ci
t
y
ut
i
l
i
z
i
n
g
HU
D
,
RD
A
,
Co
u
n
t
y
HO
M
E
an
d
SC
A
C
fu
n
d
s
.
En
c
o
u
r
a
g
i
n
g
affordable housing
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
and pursing funding
so
u
r
c
e
s
oc
c
u
r
s
during Development
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
Ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
This program
is
re
m
o
v
e
d
as the objectives are
co
v
e
r
e
d
un
d
e
r
Program 15 of the 2014‐
20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
3C
.
Af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
Si
t
e
s
Su
r
v
e
y
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
a
li
s
t
of
ho
u
s
i
n
g
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
si
t
e
s
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
fo
r
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
an
d
pr
o
v
i
d
e
th
e
li
s
t
to
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
in
t
e
r
e
s
t
e
d
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
th
e
li
s
t
of
ho
u
s
i
n
g
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
si
t
e
s
li
s
t
e
d
in
th
e
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
to
in
t
e
r
e
s
t
e
d
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
will continue and be
re
n
a
m
e
d
in
th
e
2014‐2021 Housing
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
15
4
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
3D
.
Ho
m
e
Fo
r
e
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
s
In
v
e
s
t
i
g
a
t
e
fe
a
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
of
ac
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
fo
r
e
c
l
o
s
u
r
e
ho
m
e
s
of
f
e
r
i
n
g
th
e
m
to
lo
w
in
c
o
m
e
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
.
St
r
i
v
e
to
ac
q
u
i
r
e
5
ho
m
e
s
du
r
i
n
g
th
e
pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
pe
r
i
o
d
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
di
d
no
t
ac
q
u
i
r
e
an
y
fo
r
e
c
l
o
s
e
d
ho
m
e
s
du
r
i
n
g
th
e
re
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
pe
r
i
o
d
.
Gi
v
e
n
th
e
lo
s
s
of redevelopment
fu
n
d
i
n
g
,
th
e
program will not be
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
at
this time and the City
wi
l
l
in
s
t
e
a
d
focus its affordable
ho
u
s
i
n
g
ac
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
on existing City or
Co
u
n
t
y
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
.
This program is
re
m
o
v
e
d
fr
o
m
the 2014‐2021 Housing
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
3E
.
Mu
l
t
i
‐Fa
m
i
l
y
Ac
q
u
i
s
i
t
i
o
n
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
to
ta
r
g
e
t
on
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
of
at
le
a
s
t
25
un
i
t
s
fo
r
ve
r
y
lo
w
in
c
o
m
e
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
,
as
we
l
l
as
pr
e
p
a
r
e
ou
t
r
e
a
c
h
ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
to
en
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
lo
c
a
l
CH
D
O
’
s
an
d
no
n
‐pr
o
f
i
t
s
to
pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
in
av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
.
Po
t
t
e
r
y
Co
u
r
t
wa
s
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
an
d
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
du
r
i
n
g
th
e
pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
pe
r
i
o
d
,
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
11
1
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
un
i
t
s
to
ve
r
y
lo
w
in
c
o
m
e
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
wo
r
k
e
d
wi
t
h
Br
i
d
g
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Co
r
p
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
to
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
th
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
.
Ot
h
e
r
fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
pa
r
t
n
e
r
s
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
Co
u
n
t
y
of
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
,
We
l
l
s
Fa
r
g
o
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Le
n
d
i
n
g
an
d
In
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
,
an
d
Ca
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Re
i
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
Co
r
p
.
Pr
o
a
c
t
i
v
e
ef
f
o
r
t
s
to increase the supply
of
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
housing are part of City
st
a
f
f
’
s
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
practices.
Co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
n
g
with non‐profit
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
an
d
varied financing sources
oc
c
u
r
s
du
r
i
n
g
project review and
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
pr
o
c
e
s
s
i
n
g
and also occurs as
pa
r
t
of
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
agreement
ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
Given the loss of
re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
funding, the program is
no
t
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
at this time and the City
wi
l
l
in
s
t
e
a
d
focus its affordable
ho
u
s
i
n
g
ac
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
on existing City or
Co
u
n
t
y
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
.
This program has
be
e
n
re
m
o
v
e
d
from the 2014‐2021
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
15
5
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
3F
.
Ci
t
y
/
C
o
u
n
t
y
Mo
r
t
g
a
g
e
Re
v
e
n
u
e
Bo
n
d
En
s
u
r
e
fu
n
d
s
al
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
by
Mo
r
t
g
a
g
e
Re
v
e
n
u
e
Bo
n
d
ar
e
ex
p
e
n
d
e
d
to
me
e
t
th
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
RH
N
A
ne
e
d
s
.
Mo
r
t
g
a
g
e
Re
v
e
n
u
e
Bo
n
d
s
we
r
e
us
e
d
to
pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
fi
n
a
n
c
e
th
e
ac
q
u
i
s
i
t
i
o
n
an
d
re
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
of
th
e
La
k
e
v
i
e
w
Ap
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
wh
i
c
h
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
64
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
un
i
t
s
.
Mo
r
t
g
a
g
e
Re
v
e
n
u
e
Bonds are one of
ma
n
y
to
o
l
s
available to fund
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
housing development.
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
su
c
h
as these have been
co
m
b
i
n
e
d
in
t
o
Program 9 of the 2014‐
20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
3G
.
Af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
– Ne
w
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
En
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
of
ap
p
r
o
x
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
75
ne
w
ho
u
s
i
n
g
un
i
t
s
in
th
e
Lo
w
‐
to
Ve
r
y
‐Lo
w
In
c
o
m
e
ca
t
e
g
o
r
i
e
s
.
Lo
b
b
y
th
e
St
a
t
e
to
am
e
n
d
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
an
d
Re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
La
w
to
al
l
o
w
ci
t
i
e
s
to
co
m
b
i
n
e
th
e
i
r
lo
w
an
d
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
in
c
o
m
e
fu
n
d
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
pa
r
t
n
e
r
e
d
wi
t
h
Br
i
d
g
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
to
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
Po
t
t
e
r
y
Co
u
r
t
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
11
1
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
un
i
t
s
wi
t
h
i
n
th
e
Ci
t
y
.
Ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
Fe
b
r
u
a
r
y
1,
20
1
2
,
al
l
re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
ag
e
n
c
i
e
s
in
th
e
St
a
t
e
of
Ca
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
we
r
e
di
s
s
o
l
v
e
d
pu
r
s
u
a
n
t
to
AB
1X
26
.
Pr
o
a
c
t
i
v
e
ef
f
o
r
t
s
to increase the supply
of
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
housing are part of the
Ci
t
y
ro
u
t
i
n
e
responsibilities.
Co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
n
g
with non‐profit
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
an
d
varied financing sources
oc
c
u
r
s
du
r
i
n
g
project review and
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
pr
o
c
e
s
s
i
n
g
and also occurs as
pa
r
t
of
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
agreement
ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
This program has been
re
m
o
v
e
d
as
these objectives are
du
p
l
i
c
a
t
e
d
un
d
e
r
Program 15 of the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
3H
.
Si
n
g
l
e
Ro
o
m
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
(S
R
O
)
En
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
an
d
pr
o
v
i
d
e
fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
in
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
s
th
r
o
u
g
h
RD
A
fu
n
d
s
fo
r
th
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of
SR
O
un
i
t
s
.
Th
e
Re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Ag
e
n
c
y
wa
s
di
s
s
o
l
v
e
d
in
ac
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
wi
t
h
St
a
t
e
ma
n
d
a
t
e
s
,
th
u
s
no
pr
o
g
r
e
s
s
wa
s
ma
d
e
on
th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
.
Du
e
to
th
e
loss of Redevelopment
fu
n
d
i
n
g
,
th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is not included in
th
e
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Housing Element
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
15
6
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
3I
.
Se
c
t
i
o
n
8 Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Su
p
p
o
r
t
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
to
su
p
p
o
r
t
th
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Ch
o
i
c
e
Vo
u
c
h
e
r
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
ha
s
su
p
p
o
r
t
e
d
an
d
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
su
p
p
o
r
t
th
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Ch
o
i
c
e
Vo
u
c
h
e
r
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
by
re
f
e
r
r
i
n
g
el
i
g
i
b
l
e
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
,
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
to
la
n
d
l
o
r
d
s
,
an
d
su
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
th
e
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
.
Th
e
Se
c
t
i
o
n
8
program is an important
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
fo
r
Lake Elsinore residents.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is included in the 2014‐
20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
3J
.
Se
c
t
i
o
n
20
2
El
d
e
r
l
y
or
Ha
n
d
i
c
a
p
p
e
d
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
En
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
no
n
‐pr
o
f
i
t
s
to
ap
p
l
y
fo
r
HU
D
Se
c
t
i
o
n
20
2
fu
n
d
i
n
g
an
d
ex
p
e
d
i
t
e
pr
o
c
e
s
s
i
n
g
an
d
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
of
su
c
h
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
en
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
s
no
n
‐pr
o
f
i
t
s
to
se
e
k
fu
n
d
i
n
g
to
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
in
th
e
Ci
t
y
bu
t
di
d
no
t
ha
v
e
th
e
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
to
ex
p
e
d
i
t
e
th
e
pr
o
c
e
s
s
i
n
g
an
d
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
of
HU
D
Se
c
t
i
o
n
20
2
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
has been combined with
se
v
e
r
a
l
ot
h
e
r
s
under Program 11 in the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
3K
.
i
.
Em
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
Ho
m
e
l
e
s
s
Sh
e
l
t
e
r
s
Up
d
a
t
e
th
e
Zo
n
i
n
g
Or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
to
id
e
n
t
i
f
y
zo
n
e
(
s
)
th
a
t
pe
r
m
i
t
em
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
sh
e
l
t
e
r
s
by
ri
g
h
t
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
wi
t
h
SB
2
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
ʹs
Mu
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
Co
d
e
wa
s
am
e
n
d
e
d
on
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
11
,
20
1
2
,
al
l
w
i
n
g
em
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
ho
m
e
l
e
s
s
sh
e
l
t
e
r
s
as
a
pe
r
m
i
t
t
e
d
us
e
in
th
e
CM
an
d
M2
zo
n
e
s
as
re
q
u
i
r
e
d
by
Se
n
a
t
e
Bi
l
l
2 (S
B
2)
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
was successfully
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
an
d
is removed from the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
15
7
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
3K
.
i
i
.
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
an
d
Su
p
p
o
r
t
i
v
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Am
e
n
d
th
e
Zo
n
i
n
g
Or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
to
co
m
p
l
y
wi
t
h
SB
2
re
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
fo
r
tr
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
an
d
su
p
p
o
r
t
i
v
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
.
To
fa
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
th
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
of
em
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
ho
u
s
i
n
g
an
d
co
m
p
l
y
wi
t
h
St
a
t
e
la
w
,
th
e
Ci
t
y
am
e
n
d
e
d
th
e
La
n
d
Us
e
Co
d
e
on
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
11
,
20
1
2
to
ad
d
r
e
s
s
em
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
sh
e
l
t
e
r
s
an
d
tr
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
an
d
su
p
p
o
r
t
i
v
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
was successfully
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
an
d
is removed from the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
3K
.
i
i
i
.
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
an
d
Su
p
p
o
r
t
i
v
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Co
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
e
wi
t
h
ne
a
r
b
y
mu
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
i
t
i
e
s
to
in
v
e
s
t
i
g
a
t
e
th
e
po
s
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
of
un
d
e
r
t
a
k
i
n
g
jo
i
n
t
ef
f
o
r
t
s
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
em
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
tr
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
an
d
ho
m
e
l
e
s
s
sh
e
l
t
e
r
s
,
an
d
su
p
p
o
r
t
FE
S
G
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
Th
e
Co
u
n
t
y
of
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
is
th
e
le
a
d
en
t
i
t
y
fo
r
ad
d
r
e
s
s
i
n
g
ho
m
e
l
e
s
s
n
e
s
s
an
d
ap
p
l
y
i
n
g
fo
r
FE
S
G
fu
n
d
s
in
So
u
t
h
w
e
s
t
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Co
u
n
t
y
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
su
p
p
o
r
t
s
th
e
Co
u
n
t
y
’
s
ef
f
o
r
t
s
to
ad
d
r
e
s
s
ho
m
e
l
e
s
s
n
e
s
s
by
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
CD
B
G
fu
n
d
i
n
g
to
or
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
as
s
i
s
t
i
n
g
ho
m
e
l
e
s
s
an
d
ne
e
d
y
in
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
s
an
d
fa
m
i
l
i
e
s
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is
removed from the 2014‐
20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element as its objectives
–
co
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
n
g
with other entities and
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
sp
e
c
i
a
l
needs housing ‐ falls
un
d
e
r
se
v
e
r
a
l
other programs in the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
3L
.
Ca
l
H
F
A
Me
n
t
a
l
He
a
l
t
h
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
Ac
t
(M
H
S
A
)
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ad
v
e
r
t
i
s
e
an
d
pr
o
v
i
d
e
re
f
e
r
r
a
l
su
p
p
o
r
t
to
th
e
Me
n
t
a
l
He
a
l
t
h
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
Ac
t
(M
H
S
A
)
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
wh
i
c
h
of
f
e
r
s
fi
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
an
d
su
b
s
i
d
i
e
s
fo
r
pe
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
su
p
p
o
r
t
i
v
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
re
f
e
r
r
a
l
s
an
d
ad
v
e
r
t
i
s
e
s
th
e
MH
S
A
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
has been combined with
se
v
e
r
a
l
ot
h
e
r
s
under Program 11:
Sp
e
c
i
a
l
Ne
e
d
s
Housing in the 2014‐2021
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
15
8
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
3M
.
Co
u
n
t
y
of
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
of
Pu
b
l
i
c
So
c
i
a
l
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
‐Ho
m
e
l
e
s
s
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
Un
i
t
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
fi
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
as
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
to
th
e
Co
u
n
t
y
of
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
of
So
c
i
a
l
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
‐Ho
m
e
l
e
s
s
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
Un
i
t
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
su
p
p
o
r
t
s
th
e
Co
u
n
t
y
’
s
ef
f
o
r
t
s
to
ad
d
r
e
s
s
ho
m
e
l
e
s
s
n
e
s
s
by
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
CD
B
G
fu
n
d
i
n
g
to
He
l
p
i
n
g
Ou
r
Pe
o
p
l
e
in
El
s
i
n
o
r
e
(H
O
P
E
)
,
th
e
“B
a
c
k
p
a
c
k
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
”
at
th
e
lo
c
a
l
sc
h
o
o
l
s
,
wh
e
r
e
ba
c
k
p
a
c
k
s
fi
l
l
e
d
wi
t
h
fo
o
d
it
e
m
s
ar
e
gi
v
e
n
to
ch
i
l
d
r
e
n
wh
o
ar
e
in
th
e
sc
h
o
o
l
lu
n
c
h
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
to
su
s
t
a
i
n
th
e
m
ov
e
r
th
e
we
e
k
e
n
d
s
an
d
al
s
o
to
th
e
As
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
Le
a
g
u
e
of
Te
m
e
c
u
l
a
Va
l
l
e
y
,
wh
o
s
e
Op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Sc
h
o
o
l
Be
l
l
pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
cl
o
t
h
i
n
g
an
d
sh
o
e
s
to
ne
e
d
y
ch
i
l
d
r
e
n
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is folded into Program
12
:
Ho
m
e
l
e
s
s
Need in the 2014‐2021
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
15
9
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
4A
.
Fa
s
t
‐Tr
a
c
k
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
i
n
g
Ad
o
p
t
a
fo
r
m
a
l
“F
a
s
t
Tr
a
c
k
”
po
l
i
c
y
to
st
r
e
a
m
l
i
n
e
th
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
pr
o
c
e
s
s
i
n
g
ti
m
e
of
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
fo
r
ne
w
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
or
re
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
of
ho
u
s
i
n
g
fo
r
lo
w
e
r
‐
an
d
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
‐
in
c
o
m
e
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
,
se
n
i
o
r
s
,
ha
n
d
i
c
a
p
p
e
d
un
i
t
s
,
an
d
mi
x
e
d
‐
us
e
/
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
in
f
i
l
l
in
th
e
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
do
e
s
no
t
ha
v
e
an
of
f
i
c
i
a
l
fa
s
t
tr
a
c
k
sy
s
t
e
m
in
pl
a
c
e
.
Ho
w
e
v
e
r
,
be
c
a
u
s
e
of
th
e
be
n
e
f
i
t
s
of
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
to
th
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
,
th
e
Ci
t
y
wo
r
k
s
wi
t
h
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
of
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
to
ex
p
e
d
i
t
e
th
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
pr
o
c
e
s
s
as
ne
e
d
e
d
.
Fo
r
ex
a
m
p
l
e
,
th
e
Po
t
t
e
r
y
Co
u
r
t
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
wa
s
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
st
r
e
a
m
l
i
n
e
d
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
in
or
d
e
r
fo
r
th
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
to
qu
a
l
i
f
y
fo
r
ta
x
cr
e
d
i
t
s
an
d
me
e
t
ap
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
de
a
d
l
i
n
e
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
wo
r
k
s
with developers of
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
to expedite the
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
pr
o
c
e
s
s
as needed during
pr
o
j
e
c
t
re
v
i
e
w
and approval processing
an
d
as
pa
r
t
of
development agreement
ne
g
o
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
This program has been
re
m
o
v
e
d
as
these objectives are
du
p
l
i
c
a
t
e
d
un
d
e
r
Program 15 of the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element. Should
th
e
Ci
t
y
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a formal Fast Track
sy
s
t
e
m
,
on
e
of
the criteria shall be the
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
or rehabilitation of
ho
u
s
i
n
g
fo
r
lower‐ and moderate‐
in
c
o
m
e
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
,
seniors,
ha
n
d
i
c
a
p
p
e
d
units, or mixed‐use
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
in
f
i
l
l
projects in the
Do
w
n
t
o
w
n
ar
e
a
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
16
0
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
4B
.
Mo
d
i
f
y
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Fe
e
s
De
v
e
l
o
p
a
fe
e
wa
i
v
e
r
,
re
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
,
an
d
de
f
e
r
r
a
l
po
l
i
c
y
fo
r
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
wi
t
h
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
un
i
t
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Fe
e
Sc
h
e
d
u
l
e
wa
s
re
v
i
e
w
e
d
du
r
i
n
g
th
e
fi
r
s
t
qu
a
r
t
e
r
of
20
1
2
,
wi
t
h
cl
a
r
i
f
y
i
n
g
la
n
g
u
a
g
e
.
Ho
w
e
v
e
r
,
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
of
de
f
e
r
r
a
l
of
fe
e
s
re
m
a
i
n
s
on
a
ca
s
e
‐by
‐
ca
s
e
ba
s
i
s
.
Th
e
Po
t
t
e
r
y
Co
u
r
t
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
wa
s
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
fo
r
an
ex
e
m
p
t
i
o
n
fr
o
m
TU
M
F
fe
e
s
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is
removed from the 2014‐
20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element. However,
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
of deferral of fees will
re
m
a
i
n
on
a ca
s
e
‐by‐case basis.
4C
.
Ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
to
pe
r
m
i
t
ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d
ho
u
s
i
n
g
on
pe
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
fo
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
in
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
zo
n
e
s
if
al
l
ap
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
ca
n
be
me
t
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
pe
r
m
i
t
ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d
ho
u
s
i
n
g
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
wi
t
h
Go
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
Co
d
e
Se
c
t
i
o
n
65
8
5
2
.
3
(
a
)
,
wh
i
c
h
re
q
u
i
r
e
s
th
a
t
wi
t
h
th
e
ex
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
of
ar
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
u
r
a
l
re
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
,
a
lo
c
a
l
go
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
sh
a
l
l
on
l
y
su
b
j
e
c
t
ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d
ho
m
e
s
to
th
e
sa
m
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
to
wh
i
c
h
a
co
n
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
si
n
g
l
e
‐fa
m
i
l
y
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
dw
e
l
l
i
n
g
on
th
e
sa
m
e
lo
t
wo
u
l
d
be
su
b
j
e
c
t
Th
e
si
t
i
n
g
an
d
permit processing for
ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d
homes are regulated by
St
a
t
e
la
w
.
As
complying with these
la
w
s
is
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
practice for the City,
th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
has been removed from
th
e
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Housing Element.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
16
1
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
4D
.
In
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
Im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
Id
e
n
t
i
f
y
an
n
u
a
l
do
l
l
a
r
am
o
u
n
t
an
d
/
o
r
li
s
t
of
in
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
el
i
g
i
b
l
e
fo
r
CD
B
G
an
d
Re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
fu
n
d
i
n
g
to
fa
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
al
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
fu
n
d
i
n
g
fo
r
th
e
Po
t
t
e
r
y
Co
u
r
t
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
in
20
0
8
;
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
of
th
e
11
3
un
i
t
pr
o
j
e
c
t
wa
s
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
in
20
1
2
.
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
is
no
t
currently committed for
in
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
improvements. Re‐
ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
of
this objective will occur
as
th
e
Ci
t
y
ap
p
l
i
e
s
for CDBG funding.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
has been removed from
th
e
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Housing Element.
4E
.
Zo
n
i
n
g
Am
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
s
Re
v
i
e
w
va
c
a
n
t
la
n
d
in
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
an
d
id
e
n
t
i
f
y
/
p
r
o
m
o
t
e
si
t
e
s
av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
to
ac
c
o
m
m
o
d
a
t
e
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
an
d
re
z
o
n
e
as
ne
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
.
As
pa
r
t
of
th
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Up
d
a
t
e
,
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
we
r
e
id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
to
ac
c
o
m
m
o
d
a
t
e
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
an
d
we
r
e
re
z
o
n
e
d
to
al
l
o
w
hi
g
h
e
r
de
n
s
i
t
y
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
was successfully
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
an
d
is removed from the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element. In its
pl
a
c
e
,
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
13: Consistency Zoning
is
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
with the objective of
co
n
t
i
n
u
i
n
g
General Plan/Zoning
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
y
ef
f
o
r
t
s
.
4F
.
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Mi
x
e
d
Us
e
Or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
Am
e
n
d
th
e
Zo
n
i
n
g
Or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
fo
r
th
e
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Mi
x
e
d
Us
e
zo
n
i
n
g
de
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
wi
t
h
th
e
ne
w
la
n
d
us
e
ca
t
e
g
o
r
y
id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
th
e
re
c
e
n
t
l
y
up
d
a
t
e
d
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
.
Th
e
Zo
n
i
n
g
Co
d
e
wa
s
am
e
n
d
e
d
in
Ap
r
i
l
of
20
1
2
to
in
c
l
u
d
e
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
fo
r
a
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Mi
x
e
d
Us
e
Zo
n
e
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
wi
t
h
th
e
re
c
e
n
t
l
y
up
d
a
t
e
d
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
;
Zo
n
i
n
g
Ma
p
am
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
s
we
r
e
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
in
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
20
1
2
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
was successfully
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
an
d
is removed from the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
16
2
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
4G
.
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Mi
x
e
d
Us
e
Or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
Am
e
n
d
th
e
Zo
n
i
n
g
Or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
fo
r
th
e
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Mi
x
e
d
Us
e
zo
n
i
n
g
de
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
,
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
wi
t
h
th
e
ne
w
la
n
d
us
e
ca
t
e
g
o
r
y
id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
th
e
re
c
e
n
t
l
y
up
d
a
t
e
d
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
.
Th
e
Zo
n
i
n
g
Co
d
e
wa
s
am
e
n
d
e
d
in
Ap
r
i
l
of
20
1
2
to
in
c
l
u
d
e
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
fo
r
a
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Mi
x
e
d
Us
e
ca
t
e
g
o
r
y
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
wi
t
h
th
e
re
c
e
n
t
l
y
up
d
a
t
e
d
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
;
Zo
n
i
n
g
Ma
p
am
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
s
we
r
e
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
in
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
20
1
2
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
was successfully
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
an
d
is removed from the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
4H
.
Re
a
s
o
n
a
b
l
e
Ac
c
o
m
m
o
d
a
t
i
o
n
Ad
o
p
t
a
pr
o
c
e
s
s
to
ad
d
r
e
s
s
re
q
u
e
s
t
s
fo
r
re
a
s
o
n
a
b
l
e
ac
c
o
m
m
o
d
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
de
v
e
l
o
p
pr
o
c
e
d
u
r
e
s
re
g
u
l
a
t
i
n
g
si
t
i
n
g
,
fu
n
d
i
n
g
,
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
an
d
us
e
of
ho
u
s
i
n
g
fo
r
pe
o
p
l
e
wi
t
h
di
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
.
Wh
i
l
e
th
e
Ci
t
y
wa
s
ab
l
e
to
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
ma
n
y
of
th
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
fo
r
th
e
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
pe
r
i
o
d
,
th
i
s
ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
wa
s
no
t
me
t
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
wi
l
l
ad
o
p
t
a
re
a
s
o
n
a
b
l
e
ac
c
o
m
m
o
d
a
t
i
o
n
pr
o
c
e
s
s
by
20
1
4
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is included in the 2014‐
20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
5A
.
Fi
r
s
t
Ti
m
e
Ho
m
e
b
u
y
e
r
s
As
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
fa
v
o
r
a
b
l
e
ho
m
e
pu
r
c
h
a
s
i
n
g
op
t
i
o
n
s
to
lo
w
an
d
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
in
c
o
m
e
ho
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
th
r
o
u
g
h
th
e
Co
u
n
t
y
’
s
Fi
r
s
t
Ti
m
e
Ho
m
e
b
u
y
e
r
’
s
Do
w
n
Pa
y
m
e
n
t
As
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
re
f
e
r
r
a
l
s
to
th
e
Co
u
n
t
y
’
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
an
d
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
ha
r
d
co
p
i
e
s
of
th
e
pr
o
g
r
a
m
’
s
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
pa
c
k
e
t
at
th
e
Ci
t
y
Ha
l
l
Pu
b
l
i
c
Co
u
n
t
e
r
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is folded into a more
ge
n
e
r
a
l
pr
o
g
r
a
m
(Program 9) in the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
5B
.
Ca
l
H
F
A
Af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Pa
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
re
f
e
r
r
a
l
su
p
p
o
r
t
to
lo
c
a
l
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
le
n
d
e
r
s
pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
n
g
in
th
e
CA
L
H
F
A
Af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Pa
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
(A
H
P
P
)
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
re
f
e
r
r
a
l
su
p
p
o
r
t
to
lo
c
a
l
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
le
n
d
e
r
s
pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
n
g
in
th
e
Ca
l
H
F
A
AH
P
P
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is folded into a more
ge
n
e
r
a
l
pr
o
g
r
a
m
(Program 9) in the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
16
3
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
5C
.
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
fo
r
Hu
m
a
n
i
t
y
Co
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
e
wi
t
h
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
fo
r
Hu
m
a
n
i
t
y
by
id
e
n
t
i
f
y
i
n
g
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
wi
t
h
i
n
th
e
Ci
t
y
fo
r
th
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
or
re
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
of
ho
m
e
s
av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
fo
r
lo
w
‐in
c
o
m
e
fa
m
i
l
i
e
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
co
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
e
wi
t
h
Ha
b
i
t
a
t
on
Hu
m
a
n
i
t
y
an
d
su
p
p
o
r
t
s
th
e
or
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
’
s
re
v
i
t
a
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
pr
o
j
e
c
t
in
th
e
Bi
r
d
Tr
a
c
t
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
of
th
e
Ci
t
y
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is folded into a more
ge
n
e
r
a
l
pr
o
g
r
a
m
(Program 9) in the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
5D
.
Ho
m
e
o
w
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
Op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
Re
f
e
r
r
a
l
s
Es
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
re
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
s
wi
t
h
lo
c
a
l
le
n
d
e
r
s
,
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
an
d
ot
h
e
r
co
n
s
t
i
t
u
e
n
c
i
e
s
to
id
e
n
t
i
f
y
ho
m
e
ow
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
su
p
p
o
r
t
s
th
e
Co
u
n
t
y
of
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
’
s
Fi
r
s
t
Ti
m
e
Ho
m
e
b
u
y
e
r
s
Do
w
n
Pa
y
m
e
n
t
As
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
an
d
pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
re
f
e
r
r
a
l
s
fo
r
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is folded into a more
ge
n
e
r
a
l
pr
o
g
r
a
m
(Program 9) in the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
5E
.
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Co
u
n
t
y
Mo
r
t
g
a
g
e
Ce
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
e
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Pu
b
l
i
s
h
an
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
ha
n
d
o
u
t
on
th
e
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Co
u
n
t
y
Mo
r
t
g
a
g
e
Ce
r
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
e
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
.
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
re
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
ho
m
e
o
w
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
is
av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
on
th
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
We
b
s
i
t
e
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is folded into a more
ge
n
e
r
a
l
pr
o
g
r
a
m
(Program 9) in the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
6A
.
Ca
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Fi
n
a
n
c
e
Ag
e
n
c
y
(C
a
l
H
F
A
)
–
Mu
l
t
i
f
a
m
i
l
y
Fi
n
a
n
c
e
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
Ad
v
e
r
t
i
s
e
an
d
pr
o
v
i
d
e
re
f
e
r
r
a
l
s
to
su
p
p
o
r
t
th
e
Ca
l
H
F
A
’
s
Mu
l
t
i
f
a
m
i
l
y
Fi
n
a
n
c
e
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
re
f
e
r
r
a
l
s
to
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
in
t
e
r
e
s
t
e
d
in
Ca
l
H
F
A
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is folded into a more
ge
n
e
r
a
l
pr
o
g
r
a
m
(Program 9) in the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
16
4
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
6B
.
De
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
Le
n
d
i
n
g
As
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
di
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
s
be
t
w
e
e
n
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
an
d
ba
n
k
s
re
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
th
e
Ca
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Re
i
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
Ac
t
(C
C
R
A
)
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
to
wo
r
k
wi
t
h
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
an
d
le
n
d
e
r
s
,
if
re
q
u
e
s
t
e
d
.
Th
i
s
ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
is part of the City’s
ro
u
t
i
n
e
re
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
and is carried
ou
t
as
ne
e
d
e
d
.
This program has been
re
m
o
v
e
d
fr
o
m
the 2014‐2021 Housing
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
6C
.
Eq
u
a
l
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
En
s
u
r
e
fa
i
r
ho
u
s
i
n
g
ch
o
i
c
e
s
fo
r
al
l
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
by
:
ma
i
n
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
an
n
u
a
l
me
m
b
e
r
s
h
i
p
in
th
e
Fa
i
r
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Co
u
n
c
i
l
of
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Co
u
n
t
y
,
pr
e
p
a
r
i
n
g
an
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
ha
n
d
o
u
t
,
an
d
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
on
th
e
Fe
d
e
r
a
l
an
d
St
a
t
e
Fa
i
r
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Ac
t
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
is
a
me
m
b
e
r
of
th
e
Fa
i
r
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Co
u
n
c
i
l
of
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Co
u
n
t
y
an
d
ha
s
ac
c
e
s
s
to
,
an
d
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
wh
e
n
ne
e
d
e
d
,
th
e
ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
th
e
Co
u
n
t
y
Co
u
n
c
i
l
ha
s
av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
re
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
fa
i
r
ho
u
s
i
n
g
ri
g
h
t
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
ha
s
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
on
g
o
i
n
g
su
p
p
o
r
t
of
th
e
Fa
i
r
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Co
u
n
c
i
l
th
r
o
u
g
h
o
u
t
th
e
pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
pe
r
i
o
d
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is crucial to furthering
fa
i
r
ho
u
s
i
n
g
in
Lake Elsinore and is
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
in
th
e
2014‐2021 Housing.
6D
.
Ci
t
y
We
b
s
i
t
e
Th
e
Ci
t
y
sh
a
l
l
up
d
a
t
e
it
s
we
b
s
i
t
e
to
in
c
l
u
d
e
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
on
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
,
ho
u
s
i
n
g
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
,
an
d
in
c
l
u
s
i
o
n
a
r
y
un
i
t
s
fo
r
in
t
e
r
e
s
t
e
d
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
an
d
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
of
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
we
b
s
i
t
e
pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
th
e
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
wi
t
h
ac
c
e
s
s
to
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
on
ho
u
s
i
n
g
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
an
d
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
at
th
e
Ci
t
y
,
Co
u
n
t
y
,
St
a
t
e
,
an
d
Fe
d
e
r
a
l
le
v
e
l
s
.
Pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
on the City’s
we
b
s
i
t
e
is
a
ro
u
t
i
n
e
function for the
Ci
t
y
.
Va
r
i
o
u
s
programs in the 2014‐
20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element indicate
pr
o
g
r
a
m
/
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
information be
po
s
t
e
d
on
th
e
City website. This
pr
o
g
r
a
m
du
p
l
i
c
a
t
e
s
those objectives
an
d
is
re
m
o
v
e
d
from the 2014‐2021
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
El
e
m
e
n
t
.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
16
5
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
6E
.
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
m
o
t
e
co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
co
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
be
t
w
e
e
n
th
e
Ci
t
y
an
d
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
s
an
d
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
ea
r
l
y
an
d
th
r
o
u
g
h
o
u
t
th
e
pr
o
c
e
s
s
fo
r
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
.
Pu
b
l
i
c
pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n
is
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
pr
o
c
e
d
u
r
e
.
Fo
r
ex
a
m
p
l
e
,
th
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
of
Po
t
t
e
r
y
Co
u
r
t
me
t
wi
t
h
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
s
of
th
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
to
he
a
r
th
e
i
r
co
n
c
e
r
n
s
,
an
d
pu
b
l
i
c
pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n
wa
s
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
du
r
i
n
g
th
e
pu
b
l
i
c
he
a
r
i
n
g
s
.
Th
i
s
ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
is still important to the
Ci
t
y
an
d
ha
s
be
e
n
included as a policy
in
th
e
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Housing Element.
6F
.
An
n
u
a
l
Re
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
Ci
t
y
wi
l
l
id
e
n
t
i
f
y
an
d
re
p
o
r
t
al
l
ac
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
th
a
t
th
e
y
ha
v
e
pa
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
in
wi
t
h
th
e
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Co
u
n
t
y
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
.
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
pr
o
j
e
c
t
ac
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
wi
t
h
th
e
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Co
u
n
t
y
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
ar
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
e
d
in
th
e
an
n
u
a
l
re
p
o
r
t
s
to
th
e
St
a
t
e
as
we
l
l
as
in
th
e
Ri
v
e
r
s
i
d
e
Co
u
n
t
y
pe
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
re
v
i
e
w
s
fo
r
th
e
Co
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
e
d
Pl
a
n
wh
i
c
h
in
c
l
u
d
e
s
th
e
CD
B
G
pr
o
g
r
a
m
.
Se
c
t
i
o
n
8
ac
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
ar
e
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
e
d
in
th
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
Pl
a
n
s
th
a
t
th
e
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
is
re
q
u
i
r
e
d
to
su
b
m
i
t
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
duplicates efforts of
ot
h
e
r
ag
e
n
c
i
e
s
and is not necessary.
Pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
an
an
n
u
a
l
report to the State
is
a
ro
u
t
i
n
e
fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
for the City. This
pr
o
g
r
a
m
ha
s
no
t
been included in the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element.
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
6
16
6
Ta
b
l
e
53
CI
T
Y
OF
LA
K
E
EL
S
I
N
O
R
E
20
0
8
‐20
1
4
HO
U
S
I
N
G
EL
E
M
E
N
T
AC
C
O
M
P
L
I
S
H
M
E
N
T
S
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Ac
c
o
m
p
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
s
Co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
Appropriateness
7A
.
En
e
r
g
y
Co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
Ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
Ma
i
n
t
a
i
n
an
d
di
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
li
t
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
on
en
e
r
g
y
co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
ha
s
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
a
si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
nu
m
b
e
r
of
en
e
r
g
y
co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
on
it
s
we
b
s
i
t
e
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
en
e
r
g
y
co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
in
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
s
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
by
th
e
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
ha
s
al
s
o
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
it
s
Cl
i
m
a
t
e
Ac
t
i
o
n
Pl
a
n
,
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
13
,
20
1
1
wh
i
c
h
is
av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
on
th
e
Ci
t
y
’
s
we
b
s
i
t
e
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is removed from the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element. In its place
a
po
l
i
c
y
an
d
pr
o
g
r
a
m
have been added
to
ad
d
r
e
s
s
en
e
r
g
y
conservation and
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
of strategies from the
Ci
t
y
’
s
Cl
i
m
a
t
e
Action Plan.
7B
.
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
su
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
l
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
by
en
f
o
r
c
i
n
g
th
e
go
a
l
s
,
po
l
i
c
i
e
s
,
an
d
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
in
th
e
Su
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
l
e
En
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
Se
c
t
i
o
n
of
th
e
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
ha
s
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
to
en
f
o
r
c
e
th
e
go
a
l
s
,
po
l
i
c
i
e
s
,
an
d
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
of
th
e
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Pl
a
n
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is removed from the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element. In its place
a
po
l
i
c
y
an
d
pr
o
g
r
a
m
have been added
to
ad
d
r
e
s
s
en
e
r
g
y
conservation and
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
of strategies from the
Ci
t
y
’
s
Cl
i
m
a
t
e
Action Plan.
7C
.
En
e
r
g
y
Co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
En
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
ma
x
i
m
u
m
ut
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
of
Fe
d
e
r
a
l
,
St
a
t
e
,
an
d
lo
c
a
l
go
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
th
a
t
as
s
i
s
t
ho
m
e
o
w
n
e
r
s
in
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
en
e
r
g
y
co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
ha
s
en
c
o
u
r
a
g
e
d
en
e
r
g
y
co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
su
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
l
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
th
r
o
u
g
h
it
s
ge
n
e
r
a
l
pl
a
n
up
d
a
t
e
,
ad
v
e
r
t
i
s
e
m
e
n
t
s
on
pr
o
g
r
a
m
s
av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
to
th
e
Ci
t
y
,
an
d
by
ad
o
p
t
i
o
n
of
a Cl
i
m
a
t
e
Ac
t
i
o
n
Pl
a
n
.
Th
i
s
pr
o
g
r
a
m
is removed from the
20
1
4
‐20
2
1
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
Element. In its place
a
po
l
i
c
y
an
d
pr
o
g
r
a
m
have been added
to
ad
d
r
e
s
s
en
e
r
g
y
conservation and
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
of strategies from the
Ci
t
y
’
s
Cl
i
m
a
t
e
Action Plan.
Chapter 6
167
Table 54 summarizes the quantified objectives contained in the City’s 2008‐2014 Housing
Element, and compares the City’s progress in fulfilling these objectives.
Table 54
Summary of 2008‐2014 Quantified Objectives and Progress
Income Level
Extremely/Very
Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate Total
Construction Objectives (Remaining RHNA)
Goal 1,200 921 ‐‐ ‐‐ 2,121
Progress 111 ‐‐ ‐‐ 2,932 3,043
Rehabilitation Objectives
Goal 20 10 5 ‐‐ 35
Progress ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐
Preservation/Assistance Objectives
Goal 46 104 2 ‐‐ 152
Progress 46 104 2 ‐‐ 152
Source: City of Lake Elsinore, 2012
Based on a review of Building Department records of permits issued between January 2006 and
July 2012, the City fulfilled and surpassed its total quantified objective for new housing
construction. The City did fall short of the objective for extremely/very low and low‐income
units. The shortfall in production relative to the stated objective is not unexpected knowing that
the high cost of development requires extremely/very low income affordable housing projects
to seek significant subsidies or development incentives. However, given land prices in Lake
Elsinore, many market rate housing units are available at affordable costs.
The rehabilitation objective for the Senior Home Repair Program (run by the County of
Riverside) was 15 units. From 2008 to 2012, no grants were awarded. The City is seeking to
create a local Senior Home Repair Program in order to increase its rehabilitation activities.
For the previous planning period, the only identified units at risk of conversion to market-rate units were
the 152 units at the Lakeview Apartments. The Lakeview Apartments (Phase I and II) and the
Chapter 6
168
Redevelopment Agency renegotiated affordability terms to rehabilitate the affordable housing units
within the project and renew the contract to retain units as affordable housing. The affordable housing
income restrictions will be in place for a minimum of 55 years.
Appendix A
A‐1
Appendix A
Parcel‐Specific Sites Inventory
Appendix A
A‐2
This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix A
A‐3
APNGP DesignationDensity ZoningCurrent UseAcresCapacity
377340001Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant9.4259
377340002Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant9.5159
377340003Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant9.5660
377340004Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant7.6648
377340005Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant3.7123
377340007Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant10.1563
377340015Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant5.3834
377340014Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant4.931
377340019Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant2.6316
377340018Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant5.5335
377340011Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant11.7173
377340010Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant10.2564
377340020Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUSFR1.9612
377340021Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant2.3815
377330005Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant5.8437
377330006Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant6.6842
363090001Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant9.9862
363090002Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant10.1864
363090003Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant10.3164
363090011Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant9.5960
377340009Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant0.362
Total 923
Lake Elsinore Hills ‐ Focus Area 1
Appendix A
A‐4
ID #APNGP DesignationDensityZoning
Current
Use AcresCapacity
Consolidation
Potential
1379315033Residential Mixed UseUp to 35 du/acRMUVacant4.9695Yes 95 units
2379090012Residential Mixed UseUp to 35 du/acRMUVacant1.2624
3379090013Residential Mixed UseUp to 35 du/acRMUVacant1.2925
4379090023Residential Mixed UseUp to 35 du/acRMUVacant2.4848
5379090022Residential Mixed UseUp to 35 du/acRMUVacant8.25158
Total 18.24350
Yes
255 units
Lake View‐ Focus Area 2
Appendix A
A‐5
ID #APNGP DesignationDensityZoningCurrent UseAcresCapacity
Consolidation
Potential
1379160004High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR3Vacant596 Yes 96 units
2379131019High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR3Vacant3.8674
3379131006High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR3Vacant0.24
4379131005High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR3Vacant0.24
5379131015High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR3Vacant0.367
6379207006Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant2.5916
7 379207004Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant3.9325
8379180001Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant8.6454
9379180002Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant9.0657
10379180003Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant5.9137
11379180005Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant3.4522
12379120001Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant6.3540
13379120012Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMU
Underutilized
Commercial 1.228
Total 442
Yes
89 units
Lake View‐ Focus Area 3
Appendix A
A‐6
ID #APNGP DesignationDensityZoningCurrent UseAcresCapacity
Consoli‐
dation
Potential
1379060027High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant4.3684
2379060022High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant13.71263
3379060005High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant3.4466
4379060026High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.510
5379060007High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Underutilized1.9237
6379060008High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Underutilized0.917
7379060017High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.8817
8379060024High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.459
9379060025High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.285
10379060010High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant1.2524
11379060016High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.285
12379060015High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.224
13379060014High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.36
14379060020High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.153
15379060021High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.143
16379060012High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.296
17379060011High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.132
18381040005Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant1.258
19381040006Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUUnderutilized SF1.489
20381050001Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant14.2589
21381050002Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMU
Underutilized
Commercial15.496
22381320023Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant4.6529
23381040026Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant0.312
24381040008Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUUnderutilized SF1.7711
25381320020Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant7.9149
Total 67855
Lake View‐ Focus Area 4
Yes
561 units
Appendix A
A‐7
ID #APNGP DesignationDensityZoning
Current
Use AcresCapacity
Consolidation
Potential
1373071002High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR3Vacant0.815
2373071018High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR3Vacant9.05174
Total 9.85189
Yes
189 units
Riverview ‐ Focus Area 5
Appendix A
A‐8
Appendix A
A‐9
Appendix A
A‐10
ID #APNGP DesignationDensityZoningCurrent UseAcresCapacity
Con‐
solidation
Potential
1377320004High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant1.2023
2377320003High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Underutilized SFR2.3345
3377320008High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Underutilized SFR1.3125
4377320007High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Underutilized SFR0.5711
5377320001High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Underutilized SFR0.194
6377272015High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.163
7377272016High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.173
8377272017High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.153
9377272018High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.163
10 377273003High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.34 7
11377273011High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.143
12377273012High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.183
13377273016High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.173
14377273015High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.173
15377282002High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.163
16377282003High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.173
17377291009Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.408
18377291010Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.418
19377291011Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.173
20377292017High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.214
21377292018High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.296
22377292019High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.082
23373025004Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.173
24 373025005Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.163
25377244007High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.336
26377244006High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.163
27377271005High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.163
28377271006High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.153
29377244003High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.163
30377244004High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Underutilized SFR0.173
31377271003High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.163
32377271002High Density ResidentialMax 24 du/acR‐3Vacant0.163
33373025028Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.173
34373025027Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.173
35373025007Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.173
36373025009Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.173
37373025008Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.347
Total 11.93229
Yes
19 units
Historic District ‐ Focus Area 7
Yes
19 units
Yes
108 units
Appendix A
A‐11
ID #APNGP DesignationDensityZoning
Current
Use AcresCapacity
C on‐
solidation
Potential
1 373145003Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.122
2 373145004Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant4.4485
3 373153036Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.245
4 373153002Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.234
5 373153001Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.8817
6 373153016Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.204
7 373153017Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.5110
8 373153018Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.112
9 373153019Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.112
10 373153023Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.285
11 373153020Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.143
12 373153021Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.102
13 373154029Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.122
14 373154028Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.173
15 373154030Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.163
16 373154003Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.132
17 373154025Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.132
18 373154020Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.153
19 373154024Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.143
20 373154021Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.163
21 373154022Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.153
22 373154023Residential Mixed UseMax 24 du/acRMUVacant0.245
23 374263001Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant0.739
24 374263002Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant0.729
25 374263006Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant0.263
26 374263005Commercial Mixed Use6‐18 du/acCMUVacant0.152
Total10.77193.39
Historic District‐ Focus Area 8
Yes
54 units
Yes
29 units
Yes
87 units
Appendix A
A‐12
Appendix A
A‐13
Appendix A
A‐14
Appendix A
A‐15
Appendix A
A‐16
Appendix A
A‐17
The Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan ‐ Brighton VTTM 35001
The
AHR
Brighton
SP ID
Riverside
County APN
Specific Plan
Land Use Density Current Use Acres Capacity*
PA1 390130028
Suburban
Village
Max 30
du/ac Vacant 9.8
390130026
40
PA2 390160006 SFR II 6 du/ac Vacant 161.2 534
390190017
390190014
390160003
390190015
PA3 390190014
Suburban
Village
Max 30
du/ac
389020062
390190018
389020064
390190015
Vacant 34.6 80
PA4 390200008 SFR II 6 du/ac Vacant
Vacant 18.7 71
390200010
PA5 389080055 HD MFR Max 30
du/ac
389080056
Vacant 11.5 225
PA8 390130028 5 du/ac Vacant 164.5 451
390160006
SFR I
390200008
390210021
390200010
390190015
Total 400 1,401
*Capacity limit is preset per Planning Area per the Specific Plan
Appendix A
A‐18
The Diamond Specific Plan
The
Diamond
SP ID
Riverside
County
APN
Specific
Plan
Land Use Density Current Use Acres Capacity*
PA 1
373210014
373210016
373210019
373210020
373210021
373210023
373210024
373210026
373210027
Mixed
Use Max 24 du/ac Underutilized
Commercial
0.44
0.20
0.37
0.85
2.99
0.37
0.06
1.63
0.60
50
PA2
363150006
363161029
363161030
363161031
363161032
363161033
363161034
363161035
373210037
373210038
373210039
373210043
Mixed
Use Max 24 du/ac Vacant
0.38
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.60
0.19
0.49
2.71
8.74
5.79
1.52
275
PA 5
363161012
363161037
365280022
373210041
Mixed
Use Max 24 du/ac Vacant
0.24
0.46
7.31
3.82
50
PA 6 371030035
Mixed
Use Max 24 du/ac Vacant 11.70 225
Total 58.00 600
*Capacity limit is preset per Planning Area per the Specific Plan
Appendix B
Appendix B
Qualified Entities for At‐Risk Developments
Appendix B
This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix B
Qualified Entities for At‐Risk Developments
ORGANIZATION ADDRESS TELEPHONE CONTACT PERSON
Affordable Housing
People
7720 B El Camino Real,
Ste. 159
Carlsbad, CA 92009
(760) 436‐5979 Lance Carnow
BUILD Leadership
Development Inc.
1280 Bison, Ste. B9‐200
Newport Beach, CA
92660
(949) 720‐7044 Tracy Green
Century Pacific Equity
Corporation
1925 Century Park East,
Ste. 1900
Los Angeles, CA 90067
(310) 208‐1888 Charles L.
Schewennesen
Coachella Valley Housing
Coalition
45‐701 Monroe St, Ste.
G., Plaza I
Indio, CA 92201
(760) 347‐3157 Rebeca Dennis
Coalition for Economic
Survival
514 Shatto Place, Suite
270
Los Angeles, CA 90020
(213) 252‐4411 Alison Dickson
Community Housing
Group
11575 Sorrento Valley
Road
San Diego, CA 92121
(858) 792‐7377 Bob Clarke
Community Housing
Works
4305 University Ave.
Suite 550
San Diego, CA 92105
(619) 282‐6647 Anne Wilson
Community Partnership
Dev. Corp
7225 Cartwright Ave
Sun Valley, CA 91352
(818) 503‐1548 Ollie McCaulley
DML & Associates
Foundation
6043 Tampa Ave, Ste
101A
Tarzana, CA 91356
(818) 708‐2713 Myron Lieberman
Doty‐Burton Associates 1224 East Wardlow Road
Long Beach, CA 90807
(562) 595‐7567 Stephen Doty
East Los Angeles
Community Corporation
530 South Boyle Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90033
(323) 269‐4214 Robert Cox
Foundation for Quality
Housing Opportunities,
Inc.
4640 Lankershim Blvd,
#204
North Hollywood, CA
91602
(818) 763‐0810 Sy or Gary Braverman
Housing Authority of the
City of Los Angeles
P.O. Box 17157, Foy
Station
Los Angeles, CA 90017
(213) 252‐2701 Phillip DeLao
Housing Corporation of
America
31423 Coast Highway,
Ste. 7100
(323) 726‐9672 Carol Cromar
Appendix B
Qualified Entities for At‐Risk Developments
ORGANIZATION ADDRESS TELEPHONE CONTACT PERSON
Laguna Beach, CA 92677
Jamboree Housing
Corporation
2081 Business Center,
#216
Irvine, CA 92612
(949) 263‐8676 Lila Lieberthal
Los Angeles Center for
Affordable Tenant
Housing
1296 N. Fairfax Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90046
(323) 656‐4410 Larry Gross
Los Angeles Low Income
Housing Corp. (LALIH)
1041 South Crenshaw
Los Angeles, CA 90019
(323) 954‐7575 Jim Peerson
Neighborhood Housing
Services of the Inland
Empire, Inc.
1390 North D Street
San Bernardino, CA
92405
(909) 884‐6891 Edward Moncrief
Nexus for Affordable
Housing
1544 W. Yale Avenue
Orange, CA 92867
(714) 282‐2520 Bruce Solari
National Community
Renaissance (CORE)
9065 Haven Avenue,
Suite#100
Rancho Cucamonga, CA
91730
(909) 483‐2444 Jeffrey S. Burum
Orange Housing
Development Corporation
414 E. Chapman Avenue
Orange, CA 92866
(714) 288‐7600 x25 Todd Cottle
Phoenix Programs Inc. 1875 Willow Pass Rd, Ste
300
Concord, CA 94520
(925) 825‐4700 Carrie Sechler
San Diego County SER‐
Jobs for Progress, Inc.
3355 Mission Ave, Ste
123
Oceanside, CA 92054
(760) 754‐6500 George Lopez
Shelter for The Homeless 15161 Jackson Street
Midway City, CA 92655
(714) 897‐3221 Jim Miller
Southern California
Presbyterian Homes
516 Burchett Street
Glendale, CA 91203
(818) 247‐0420 Sally Little
St. Vincent de Paul
Village
3350 E Street
San Diego, CA 92102
(619) 687‐1029 Harvey Mandel
The East Los Angeles
Community Union
(TELACU)
5400 East Olympic Blvd,
Ste 300
Los Angeles, CA 90022
(323) 721‐1655 Jasmine Borrego
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development list of Qualified Entities (HPD 00‐01)
Appendix C
F‐1
Appendix C
Letter from Bridge Housing Corporation
Appendix C
F‐2
This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix C
F‐3
Appendix C
F‐4