Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2021-57 CC Resolution
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-57 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT AND UPDATES TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN (LONG RANGE PLANNING PROJECT NO. LR18-1620) AND APPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM NO. 2021-01 TO THE GENERAL PLAN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine, and declare that: A. The City of Temecula adopted its first Housing Element (Second Cycle) on November 9, 1993. B. The City of Temecula first amended its Housing Element (Third Cycle) on October 8, 2002. C. The City of Temecula adopted a Comprehensive Update of its General Plan on April 12, 2005. D. The City of Temecula amended its Housing Element (Fourth Cycle) on July 27, 2010. E. The City of Temecula amended its Housing Element (Fifth Cycle) on January, 2014. F. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) completed the Sixth Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) on March 4, 2021, with a minor amendment adopted on July 1, 2021. G. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) approved the RHNA allocation on March 22, 2021. H. Government Code Section 65588 establishes October 15, 2021, as the due date for cities located in the SCAG region to submit their 2021-2029 Housing Element Update to the State. I. The City of Temecula must adopt its 2021-2029 Housing Element within 120 days of the above -referenced due date in order to remain on an eight year planning cycle. J. The Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element includes an analysis of potential sites that indicates that the City of Temecula has adequate development capacity under existing zoning designations to meet its RHNA of 4,139 total units and related affordable housing needs for lower and moderate income households. K. On August 17, 2021, the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element was released to the community for public comment and review including to groups that represent lower income and special needs populations in Temecula; and L. On August 17, 2021, the City hosted a community open house to introduce the Draft Housing Element and solicit public feedback on the Housing Plan. M. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, codified at Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR § 15000 et seq.), the City is the lead agency for the adoption of the 2021-2029 Housing Element and the update to the Public Safety Element (the Project); and N. This Housing Element Update and Update to the Public Safety Element was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by law. O. The Planning Commission considered the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Update to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan and environmental review on September 15, 2021 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. P. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2021-28 recommending that the City Council adopt the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, Update to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan, and EIR Addendum No. 2021-01 to the General Plan, based upon the findings set forth hereunder. Q. The City Council, at a regular meeting, considered the 2021-2029 Housing Element (Sixth Cycle), and Update to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. R. At the conclusion of the City Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the City Council approved the 2021-2029 Housing Element (Sixth Cycle), and Update to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan, Long Range Planning Project No. LR18-1620 subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. S. All legal preconditions to the adoption of the Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The City Council, in adopting the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and update to the Public Safety Element hereby finds, determines and declares that: General Plan Amendment A. The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Minor Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update has been designed to be consistent with State Housing Law, the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for local agencies under jurisdiction of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and to be internally consistent with the other elements of the Temecula General Plan with implementation of the identified programs. The updates to the Public Safety Element are being updated to comply with State law. B. The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Minor Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan will not have a significant impact on the character of the built environment; The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update is compatible with the nature, condition and development of existing uses, buildings and structures and will not adversely affect the existing or planned uses, buildings, or structures. The Housing Element Update contains the goals, policies, and programs that will help guide the production of future housing within the City, in concert with other elements of the General Plan. The Housing Element Update will provide flexibility and opportunity in the development of residential uses to meet the needs of all economic segments of the community within the City. The specific programs of the Housing Element Update will provide opportunityfor affordable housing through the identification of appropriate sites and density, provisions for density bonus law, provisions for transitional, supportive, and employee housing, as well as establishment of development standards for emergency shelters. The Housing Element and the City's current General Plan have adequate capacity to accommodate all units. Furthermore, the proposed updates to the Public Safety Element will update the Public Safety Element to comply with State law. In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR has been prepared which concludes that the proposed updates to the General Plan Housing Element and Public Safety Element do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated. None of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present to require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and no additional environmental review is required. C. The nature of the proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Minor Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community; The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update will promote the health, safety, comfort and general welfare of the City and its residents through the goals, policies, and implementation programs geared towards ensuring adequate housing for all income levels in the community. The proposed Housing Element Update complies with all statutory requirements and is internally consistent with the other elements of the General Plan with implementation of the identified programs. The proposed Housing Element will not expose people to an increased risk of negative health or public safety impacts and potential impacts related to the health, safety and general welfare of the community were analyzed in the environmental review and determined to be less than significant as a result of this project. The Housing Element and the City's current General Plan have adequate capacity to accommodate all units. Furthermore, the updates to the Public Safety Element will further enhance safety, in compliance with State law. In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR has been prepared which concludes that the proposed updates to the General Plan Housing Element and Public Safety Element do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated. None of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present to require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and no additional environmental review is required. Section 3. Further Findings. The Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element has been prepared to meet the requirements of State law and local housing objectives, and is consistent with the other elements of the current Temecula General Plan. Section 4. Environmental Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the recommendation for approval of the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Minor Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan, Long Range Planning Project No. LR18-1620. A. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, staff has reviewed and considered the Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") for the General Plan certified by the City Council on April 12, 2005 (State Clearinghouse No. 2003 06104 1), including the impacts and mitigation measures identified therein. Staff has also reviewed the Harveston Specific Plan Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2019070974), Altair Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2014111029) and Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2013061012). B. In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR (Addendum 2021-01) has been prepared which concludes that the proposed updates to the General Plan Housing Element and Public Safety Element do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated. No new development is permitted under the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update where it is not currently permitted in the General Plan, and all new development analyzed in the Housing Element Update is in areas already designated for residential or mixed use. In addition, no new information of substantial importance has surfaced since the certification of the General Plan EIR. None of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present to require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and no additional environmental review is required. C. Based on the findings set forth in the Resolution, the City Council herby adopts General Plan Addendum 2021-01 prepared for this project. Section 4. Adoption. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby adopts the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan and General Plan Addendum 2021-01 in substantially the same form as attached here to as Exhibit «A59 C PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 12`h day of October, 2021. ATTES Randi A+&,76ity Clerk [SEAL] 1 Maryann Edwards, Mayor I' 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2021-57 was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 12`h day of October, 2021, by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Alexander, Edwards, Rahn, Schwank, Stewart NOES: 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS: None Randi Johl, City Clerk 6 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT August 2021 UILY ui i ernecuia f, 41000 Main Street **! Jemecula, CA 92590 httpsl/temeculaca.ggv/ a 12--+*- _ _ • - mmm ���:� • �� K ,Yr -., n Al 1 { _ »..�.« .. �..,�....�- .:��-;;;sue-�--=���• � ,�;�; *+�� PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT PREPARED FOR: CITY OF TEMECULA 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 PREPARED BY: DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP 180 E Main Street Suite 108 Tustin, CA 92780 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT ORGANIZATION Part 1: Housing Plan Part 1 of the 2021-2029 Housing Element is the City's "Housing Plan", which includes the goals, policies, and programs the City will implement to address constraints and needs. The City's overarching objective is to ensure that decent, safe housing is available to all current and future residents at a cost that is within the reach of the diverse economic segments which comprise Temecula. Part 2: Background Report Part 2 of the 2021-2029 Housing Element is the "Background Report" which identifies the nature and extent of Temecula's housing needs, including those of special populations, potential housing resources (land and funds), potential constraints to housing production, and energy conservation opportunities. By examining the City's housings, resources, and constraints, the City can then determine a plan of action for providing adequate housing, as presented in Part 1: Housing Plan. In addition to identifying housing needs, the Background Report also presents information regarding the setting in which these needs occur. This information is instrumental in providing a better understanding of the community, which in turn is essential for the planning of future housing needs. Appendix A: Housing Sites Inventory The Housing Element must include an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development to meet the City's regional housing need by income level. Appendix B: Glossary The Housing Element includes, as Appendix B, a glossary of key terms and phrases. Appendix C: Public Engagement Summary As part of the Housing Element Update the process, the City hosted numerous opportunities for the community and key stakeholders to provide feedback on existing housing conditions, housing priorities, priority areas for new residential growth, and topics related to fair housing. Public engagement was facilitated in both English and Spanish to further engage the Temecula community. Public participation played an important role in the refinement of the City's housing goals and policies and in the development of new housing programs, as included in Part 1: Housing Plan. The public's input also helped to validate and expand upon the contextual information included in Part 2: Background Report. The City's efforts to engage the community in a meaningful and comprehensive way are summarized in Appendix C. Appendix D: 2017 Assessment of Fair Housing In 2017 the City of Temecula prepared an Assessment of Fair Housing. This Assessment provides the foundation and context for the City's Assessment of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, as included in Part 2 of the Housing Element. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT PART 1: HOUSING PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-2 I. INTRODUCTION The eight -year plan is the centerpiece of the 2021-2029 Housing Element for Temecula. The Housing Plan sets forth the City's goals, policies, and programs to address the identified housing needs. Housing programs included in this plan define the specific actions the City will take to achieve specific goals and policies. The City's overall strategy for addressing its housing needs has been defined according to the six goals: 1. Providing adequate housing sites; 2. Assisting in development of affordable and special needs housing; 3. Removing constraints to housing production; 4. Conserving and improving existing housing stock; 5. Affirmatively furthering fair housing; and 6. Promoting public participation. A. Goals and Policies Provide Adequate Housing Sites Goal 1 Provide a diversity of housing opportunities that satisfy the physical, social, and economic needs of existing and future residents of Temecula. Discussion The City provides for a mix of new housing opportunities by designating a range of residential densities and promoting creative design and development of vacant land and reuse of developed land. By providing for the construction of a range of housing, the needs of all sectors of the community can be met. Policy 1.1 Provide an inventory of land at varying densities sufficient to accommodate the existing and projected housing needs in the City. Policy 1.2 Encourage residential development that provides a range of housing types in terms of cost, density, unit size, configuration, and type, and presents the opportunity for local residents to live and work in the same community by balancing jobs and housing types. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-3 Policy 1.3 Require a mixture of diverse housing types and densities in new developments around the village centers to enhance their pedestrian orientation and diversity. Policy 1.4 Support the use of innovative site planning and architectural design in residential development. Policy 1.5 Encourage the use of clustered development to preserve and enhance important environmental resources and open space, consistent with sustainability principles. Policy 1.6 Encourage the development of compatible mixed -use projects that promote and enhance the village concept, facilitate the efficient use of public facilities, support alternative transit options, and provide affordable housing alternatives by establishing a program of incentives for mixed -use projects. Policy 1.7 Where feasible, use City -owned or City -controlled land for affordable housing projects. Policy 1.8 To the extent feasible, make use of the tools available to the City to assemble land or sell land at a write -down for affordable housing. Policy 1.9 Maintain adequate capacity to accommodate the City's unmet Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for all income categories throughout the planning period. Policy 1.10 Allow by -right approval for housing developments proposed for non -vacant sites included in one previous housing element inventory and vacant sites included in two previous housing elements, provided that the proposed housing development consists of at least 20 percent lower income and affordable ` housing units. Assist in Development of Affordable and Special Needs Housing Goal Provide housing for people of different economic segments and with special needs. Discussion The City of Temecula works to provide a variety of affordable housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community. By coordinating with other government agencies and nonprofit organizations to access funding sources for affordable housing and to partner in the creative provision of affordable housing, the City CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-4 helps provide safe and affordable housing for all residents in the community. The City is also committed to ensuring that adequate housing opportunities are available for persons with special needs, such as the elderly, persons with disabilities, including persons with developmental disabilities, large families, single -parent households, and the homeless. Policy 2.1 Promote a variety of housing opportunities that accommodate the needs of all income levels of the population, and provide opportunities to meet Temecula's fair share of extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate- income housing by promoting the City's program of density bonuses and incentives. Policy 2.2 Support innovative public, private, and nonprofit efforts in the development of affordable housing, particularly for special needs groups. Policy 2.3 Encourage the use of nontraditional housing models, including single -room occupancy (SRO) or Efficiency Unit Housing structures and manufactured housing, to meet the needs of special groups for affordable housing, temporary shelter, and/or transitional housing. Policy 2.4 Pursue all available forms of private, local, state, and federal assistance to support development and implementation of the City's housing programs. Policy 2.5 Require that all new affordable housing developments incorporate energy- and water -efficient appliances, amenities, and building materials to reduce overall housing -related costs for future low- and moderate -income households and families. olicy 2.6 Establish and maintain a City database to monitor trends in the economy and Temecula's demographics to be able to anticipate shifts in trends, while continuing to provide relevant affordable housing. Policy 2.7 Develop and coordinate multi -agency, regional, and cross - jurisdictional approaches to homelessness and special needs housing, including transitional housing. Remove Constraints to Housing Production Goal 3 Reduce and/or remove governmental and non- governmental constraints in the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, where appropriate and legally possible. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-5 Discussion The City's goal is to reduce or remove constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing to ensure the provision of housing affordable to all members of the community. Governmental requirements for the development and rehabilitation of housing often add to the cost of the provision of affordable housing and may result in fewer opportunities for housing affordable to lower -income households. Although nongovernmental constraints like the cost of land, construction costs, and the availability of financing are primarily market - driven and generally outside direct government control, Temecula can influence and offset the negative impact of nongovernmental constraints through responsive programs and policies. Policy 3.1 Expedite processing procedures and fees for new construction or rehabilitation of housing. Policy 3.2 Consider mitigating development fees for projects that provide affordable senior housing, and special needs. Policy 3.3 Periodically review City development standards to ensure consistency with the General Plan and to ensure high -quality affordable housing. Policy 3.4 Monitor State and federal housing -related legislation, and update City plans, ordinances, and processes as appropriate to remove or reduce governmental constraints. Policy 3.5 Regularly identify and evaluate the impact of nongovernmental constraints on housing development and implement programs to reduce negative impacts. Conserve and Improve Existing Housing Stock Goal 4 Conserve the existing housing stock with an emphasis on affordable housing. Discussion Along with providing for new affordable housing opportunities, the City also has a goal to preserve existing affordable housing opportunities for residents. By providing incentives and programs to maintain both the affordability and the structural integrity of existing units, the City ensures that affordable housing opportunities are preserved as the housing stock ages. Policy 4.1 Monitor the number of affordable units eligible for conversion to market -rate units and continue the means to minimize the loss of these units. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-6 Policy 4.2 Develop programs directed at rehabilitating and preserving the integrity of existing housing stock for all income levels. Policy 4.3 Support the efforts of private and public entities in maintaining the affordability of units through implementation of energy conservation and weatherization programs. Affirmatively Further Fair Housing Goal Affirmatively further fair housing, providing equal housing opportunity for all residents in Temecula. Discussion In order to make provisions for the housing needs of all segments of the community, the City must affirmatively further fair housing and ensure that equal and fair housing opportunities are available to all residents. Policy 5.1 Encourage and support the enforcement of laws and regulations prohibiting discrimination in lending practices and insurance practices to purchase, sell, rent, and lease property. Policy 5.2 Support fair housing efforts to ensure that all income segments of the community have unrestricted access to appropriate housing. Policy 5.3 Encourage housing design standards that promote the accessibility of housing for persons with special needs, such as the elderly, persons with disabilities, including persons with developmental disabilities, large families, single -parent households, and the homeless. Policy 5.4 Encourage and consider supporting local private nonprofit groups that address the housing needs of the homeless and other disadvantaged groups. Policy 5.5 Prohibit discrimination in the sale or rental of housing based on age, familial status, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or other protected characteristics for all housing projects approved by the City. Policy 5.6 Encourage the equitable spatial distribution of affordable housing throughout the City, particularly where adequate support facilities exist (i.e. alternative transportation, jobs, etc.). Policy 5.7 Educate the public on lower -income and special needs housing through existing annual reports or other forms of media. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-7 Policy 5.8 Assist in affirmatively furthering and enforcing fair housing laws by providing support to organizations that provide outreach and education regarding fair housing rights, receive and investigate fair housing allegations, monitor compliance with fair housing laws, and refer possible violations to enforcing agencies. Policy 5.9 Accommodate persons with disabilities who seek reasonable waiver or modification of land use controls and/or development standards pursuant to procedures and criteria set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. Promote Public Participation Goal Encourage collaboration between housing developers and neighborhood organizations on affordable housing projects and addressing neighborhood concerns. Discussion The promotion of public participation in the planning process is an important responsibility for local agencies. Residents and other stakeholders like the development community and neighborhood organizations are all influenced by the City's housing plans and programs and their input must be considered and reflected in the City's decision - making process. Policy 6.1 Use the public participation process to educate the public on lower -income and special needs housing through existing annual reports or other forms of media. Policy 6.2 Strengthen opportunities for participation in the approval process for all housing projects, including affordable housing. B. Housing Programs The goals and policies contained in the Housing Plan address Temecula's identified housing needs and are implemented through a series of housing programs. Housing programs include both programs currently in operation in the city and new programs that have been introduced to address the unmet housing needs, affirmatively further fair housing, and ensure that Temecula's housing goals, policies, and programs are aligned with federal and state requirements. This section provides a description of each housing program and future program goals, along with identifying the program funding sources, responsible agency, and time frame for implementation. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-8 Provide Adequate Housing Sites (Goal 1) A key element in satisfying the housing needs of all segments of the community is the provision of adequate sites for housing of all types, sizes, and prices. This is an important function in both zoning and General Plan designations. 1. Land Use Policy and Development Capacity The Land Use Element of the Temecula General Plan and the City's Development Code designates land within the city for a range of residential densities that support residential development suitable for all income levels. The City of Temecula received a RHNA of 4,193 units for the 2021- 2029 RHNA period. After credits for constructed units (27) and approved units (132) are taken into consideration, the City of Temecula has a remaining 2021-2029 RHNA of 4,034 units, including 1,327 extremely/very low-income, 702 low-income, 757 moderate -income and 1,249 above moderate -income units. The residential sites inventory consists of accessory dwelling units, vacant residential land exclusive of Specific Plan areas, and vacant residential land inside Specific Plan areas. Together, these resources have the capacity to accommodate at least 9,347 new units at all income levels. These sites can accommodate the remaining RHNA for all income levels through year 2029. The City will continue to maintain an inventory of available sites for residential development and will continue to make it available on the City's website; it will also be provided to prospective residential developers upon request. Eight -Year Objectives • The City will reglarly monitor the availability of sites zoned for Nresidential uses to ensure sufficient capacity exists to accommodate Temecula's Regional Housing Need Allocation at all income levels for the duration of the planning period. • The City will continue to maintain an inventory of sites suitable for residential development and provide that information online and to interested developers. • The City will encourage the reservation of land that is currently designated for multiple -family development by providing the multi -family sites inventory to multi -family housing developers to solicit development interest. The City will update the multi -family sites inventory at least once a year. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-9 The City will continue to allow residential mixed use to be permitted at a density of at least 30 units per acre to encourage the construction of multi -family housing by right. In addition, the City will continue to provide appropriate flexible development standards such as increased building height and shared parking opportunities for developments with minimum densities of 20 dwelling units per acre in the Zoning Ordinance. The City will continue to promote its Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) Zoning District, which is applicable to over 100 acres in the City and has resulted in the approval of multiple affordable housing projects during the prior planning period. Information related to the AHO will continue to be provided online and proactively to affordable housing developers working in and around the City of Temecula. As part of preapplication meetings (which are provided at no charge), the City will continue to educate the development community on the AHO and highlight the opportunities to develop affordable housing in the City of Temecula. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tlm efram e • Ongoing implementation and annual reporting throughout the planning period 2. Maintain Adequate Sites Throughout the Planning Period The City will monitor the consumption of residential acreage, including review of proposed General Plan amendments, Zoning map amendments, and development projects, to ensure an adequate inventory is available to meet the City's 2021-2029 RHNA obligations. The City will develop and implement a monitoring procedure pursuant to Government Code Section 65863 and will make the findings required by that code section if a site is proposed for development with fewer units or at a different income level than shown in the Housing Element. Should an approval of development result in a reduction of capacity below the residential capacity needed to accommodate the remaining need for lower income, moderate, or above CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-10 moderate income households, the City will identify and, if necessary, rezone sufficient sites within 180 days to accommodate the shortfall and ensure "no net loss" in capacity to accommodate the RHNA, consistent with State law. Any site rezoned will satisfy the adequate site requirements of Section 65583.2 and will be consistent with the City's obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. Eight -Year Objectives Review each housing approval on sites listed in the Housing Element and make findings required by Government Code Section 65863 if a site is proposed with fewer units or a different income level than shown in the Housing Element. If insufficient suitable sites remain at each income level, identify and, if necessary, rezone sufficient sites within 180 days. Identify additional sites that may be required to be upzoned to meet "no net loss" requirements for Housing Element adoption in 2025 (a mid -cycle review). Any site identified to be upzoned will satisfy the adequate site requirements of Section 65583.2 and will be consistent with the City's obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. • Report as required through the HCD annual reporting process. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources 'I• Departmental Budget Tim efram e • Ongoing implementation, at time of approval of a project on a site listed in the Housing Element, and annual reporting throughout the planning period 3. Public Property Conversion to Housing Program The City will maintain a list of surplus City -owned lands, including identification of address, APN, General Plan land use designation, zoning, current use, parcel size, and status of and (surplus land or exempt surplus land). The City will work with non -profits and other public agencies to CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-11 evaluate the feasibility of transferring surplus City -owned lands identified to be feasible for conversion to affordable housing and not committed to other City purposes for use in the development of affordable housing by the private sector. The inventory will be updated annually in conjunction with the APR (Program 1). Any disposition of surplus lands shall be conducted consistently with the requirements of Government Code Section 54220 et. seq. Eight -Year Objectives • Maintain an accurate list of surplus City -owned lands for the duration of the planning period • Collaborate with developers of affordable housing to explore opportunities to develop affordable housing at City -owned lands Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget and federal and State technical assistance grants Tim efram e • Annually 4. Replacement of Affordable Units Consistent with the requirements of Government Code Section 65583.2(g), development projects on sites in the housing inventory (Appendix A) that have, or have had within the past five years, residential uses restricted to rents affordable to low or very low income households or residential uses occupied by low or very low income households, shall be conditioned to replace all such units at the same or lower income level as a condition of any development on the site and such replacement requirements shall be consistent with Section 65915(c)(3). Eight -Year Objectives • Identify need for replacement for all project applications and ensure replacement, if required, is carried out CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-12 Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget; replacement costs to be borne by development of any such site Tim efram e • Ongoing 5. Accessory Dwelling Units Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units QADUs) help meet the City's housing needs for all income levels and also provide a housing resource for seniors and low- and moderate -income households throughout the entire community, not just in any single geographic area. The City will continue to apply Development Code regulations that allow accessory units (also known as second units or granny flats) by right in all residential zones, in accordance with State law. The City of Temecula will continue to amend the ordinance based on future changes to State law and work with HCD to ensure continued compliance with State law. The City will also continue to monitor the extent of ADU production to ensure that the ordinance modifications are successful and that the Housing Element goals can be met. Eight -Year Objectives • Survey and evaluate potential methods to encourage ADU 14 development throughout the community and adopt appropriate procedures, policies, and regulatory provisions. • Monitor State law for future updates to ADU regulations and update the City's Development Code to be consistent with future updates as needed. • Continue educating the community on the opportunity to develop ADUs and promote the development of ADUs affordable to lower -income households. • Prepare and adopt "permit ready" ADU plans to promote the development of ADUs in all geographic areas of the City. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-13 Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim efram e • Adopt "permit ready" ADU plans by December 31, 2022; ongoing education of ADU development options and distribution of material online and at City Hall Assist in the Development of Affordable and Special Needs Housing (Goal 2) New construction is a major source of housing for prospective homeowners and renters. However, the cost of new construction is substantially greater than other program options. Incentive programs, such as density bonuses, offer a cost-effective means of providing affordable housing. Other programs, such as the County's First Time Home Buyer Program, increase the affordability of new and existing housing. Additionally, the programs to work with the development community to promote the production of housing suitable for persons with special needs can help ensure that equal opportunities are available for persons of different economic backgrounds and housing needs. 6. Density Bonus Ordinance The City will provide for density bonuses consistent with State law, including provisions for density bonuses and incentives for projects that contain 100% very low and low income units. The City will monitor State law updates which impact density bonuses and will update local plans and programs as necessary. Eight -Year Objectives • Continue to encourage density bonus opportunities which increase the total allowable density for senior and affordable housing projects. • Monitor State law for updates to density bonus regulations and update the City's Development Code as needed. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART 1: HOUSING PLAN HP-14 Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim efmm e • Ongoing implementation 7. Land Assemblage and Affordable Housing Development The City can utilize CDBG funds to purchase land for the development of lower- and moderate -income housing. Eight -Year Objectives • The City will continue to acquire land for use in the provision of affordable housing. The City will facilitate the development of housing units affordable to lower -income households by publicizing its density bonus program and its incentives, and by making this information available to developers and nonprofit housing agencies through the development application process. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • CDBG Funds Tim efram e Ongoing, as projects are processed through the Planning Department. The City will publicize program incentives on the City's website on an on -going basis. The City will acquire land if, and when, the City has available funds to do so. The City will begin a project if and when funds are secured to do so. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-15 8. Housing for Extremely Low -Income Households Under state law, the City shall identify zoning to encourage and facilitate housing suitable for extremely low-income households, such as supportive housing and efficiency unit housing. The City allows Efficiency Unit Housing in the Medium and High Density Residential zoning districts and conditionally permits them in the Community Commercial and Professional Office zones. Eight -Year Objectives The City will encourage the development of housing for extremely low-income households through a variety of activities, such as conducting outreach to housing developers on an annual basis, providing financial assistance (when feasible) or in -kind technical assistance or land write -downs, providing expedited processing, identifying grant and funding opportunities, applying for or supporting applications for funding on an ongoing basis, reviewing and prioritizing local funding at least twice in the planning period, and/or offering additional incentives beyond the density bonus. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim efram e • Ongoing, as projects are processed through Planning Department and annual outreach with local developers 9. Special Needs Housing Construction Special needs housing developers work to ensure housing opportunities are available that are accessible to and supportive of persons and households with special needs, such as persons with developmental disabilities. The City will continue to encourage qualified housing developers to pursue development of housing that addresses populations with special housing needs in the City. The City will continue to collaborate with housing developers, specifically special needs housing developers, to identify potential sites, write letters of support to help secure governmental and private -sector CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-16 funding, and offer technical assistance related to the application of City incentive programs (e.g., density bonus). Eight -Year Objectives • The City will advise developers regarding the community's special needs populations and work with developers to promote the inclusion of product types and units that meet the needs of the City's special needs groups. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim efram e • Contact with developers at least annually and on an ongoing basis to implement the above objectives 10. Mortgage Credit Certificate Program The Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) program is administered countywide by the County of Riverside Economic and Development Agency (EDA) and is a way for the City to further leverage homeownership assistance. MCCs are certificates issued to income - qualified first time home buyers authorizing the household to take a credit against federal income taxes of up to 20% of the annual mortgage interest paid. This tax credit allows the buyer to qualify more easily for home loans as it increases the effective income of the buyer. Eight -Year Objectives • The City will continue to promote the regional Mortgage Credit Certificate program to assist an average of ten households annually by publicizing the program and making the program known to developers and nonprofit housing agencies. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART 1: HOUSING PLAN HP-17 Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim efram e • Ongoing 11. Energy Conservation and Energy Efficiency The City will encourage the use of energy conservation features in residential construction and remodeling. Eight -Year Objectives • The City will partner with Southern California Edison (SCE) and the Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) to promote energy -saving programs such as the Residential Multifamily Energy Efficiency Rebate program, the Heating and Cooling Rebate program, and incentives of up to $4,000 available to SCE and SoCalGas residential customers. • The City will annually ensure that local building codes arc consistent with state -mandated green building standards. l� The City will be responsible for implementing the state's energy conservation standards (e.g., Title 24 Energy Standards). This includes checking building plans and other written documentation showing compliance and inspecting construction to ensure that the dwelling units are constructed according to those plans. Applicants for building permits must show compliance with the state's energy conservation requirements at the time building plans are submitted. • The City will review the General Plan to determine if updates are needed to support and encourage energy efficiency in existing and new housing, especially in areas of the City with lower CalEnviroScreen scores which may suffer from elevated levels of environmental burdens. Responsihle Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-18 Tim efram e • Ongoing, as programs are available. Annually review local building codes, as projects are processed through Planning Department and annual outreach with local developers Remove Constraints to Housing Production(Goal 3) Under state law, the Temecula Housing Element must address, and where appropriate and legally possible remove, governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing. The City must also consider the role of nongovernmental constraints to housing development and, to the extent feasible, develop programs to reduce the impacts of nongovernmental constraints. The following programs are designed to lessen constraints to housing development. 12. Development Fees Developers of affordable/senior housing may qualify to receive from the City of Temecula a deferral of development fees, reduction of development fees, or a reimbursement of development fees paid by the developer. Typically, developers of affordable/senior housing pay the City the required development fees. If the development qualifies for a deferral of development fees or a reimbursement of development fees, the developer enters into a contract with the Agency, which then sets the terms of the deferral or reimburses the developer for the fees paid. Eight -Year Objectives • The City of Temecula will continue to enter into development agreements with qualifying senior/affordable housing projects on a case -by -case basis to provide deferral, reduction, and/or reimbursement of development fees. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • CDBG Tim efram e Ongoing, as projects are processed through the Planning Department CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-19 13. Expedite Processing of Affordable Housing Projects Under state housing law, residential projects with an affordable component have priority processing when it comes to the provision of water service from water purveyors. Similarly, the City of Temecula will continue to expedite processing of affordable housing projects. Eight -Year Objectives • The City will continue to implement expedited review to all projects with an affordable housing component. • The City will need to develop objective criteria to evaluate affordable housing projects to qualify them for expedited processing. • The City will continue to prioritize projects based on the level of affordability being proposed in order to meet its regional housing need. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim efram e • Ongoing, as projects are processed through the Planning Department. The City already prioritizes affordable housing project processing. The City will advertise via the City's website. 14. Emergency Shelters and Transitional/Supportive Housing The Temecula Development Code provides for the provision of emergency shelters and transitional/supportive housing within the City consistent with State law. Eight -Year Objectives • The City will continue to permit emergency shelters and transitional/supportive housing as identified in the Development Code consistent with Government Code requirements. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-20 • The City will continue to work with public agencies and private entities to provide adequate resources for the community's homeless population. The City will also, to the extent feasible, participate in efforts to unite organizations and entities that provide services to the homeless. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim efram e • Ongoing implementation and annual reporting throughout the planning period 15. Periodic Consistency Review of General Plan, Municipal Code, and State Law To minimize governmental constraints due to inconsistencies between the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, California codes, state law, or regulatory requirements, the City will conduct a biannual review of the Municipal Code and General Plan to ensure internal consistency and to ensure consistency with legislative and regulatory amendments, adoption of new state laws, and policy changes resulting from case law. Eight -Year Objectives • City staff will track and stay abreast of changes in state housing law and work with the City Attorney to incorporate changes into the General Plan and Municipal Code in order to reduce or remove housing constraints. • The City Attorney will advise staff on significant case law interpretations that may cause the need to amend the General Plan or Municipal Code. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART 1: HOUSING PLAN HP-21 Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim efram e • Biannually review for consistency 16. Zoning Code Amendments — Housing Constraints The City shall update the Zoning Code to remove constraints to a variety of housing types and ensure the City's standards and permitting requirements are consistent with State law. The update shall address the following: A. Low barrier navigation centers: The Zoning Code shall be updated to define and permit low barrier navigation centers consistent with the requirements of Government Code Sections 65660 through 65668, including treating low barrier navigation centers as a use by right in areas zoned for mixed use and nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses. B. Agricultural worker housing: The Zoning Code will be updated to define agricultural worker housing and to identify that any agricultural worker housing consisting of no more than 36 beds in a group quarters or 12 units or spaces shall be deemed an agricultural land use and permitted in the same manner as agricultural uses consistent with Health and Safety Code Section 17021.6. The Zoning Code will also be updated to provide for streamlined, ministerial approval of agricultural worker housing that meets the requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 17021.8. C. Employee housing: The Zoning Code will be updated to define employee housing separately from agricultural worker housing and to clarify that employee housing serving six or fewer employees shall be deemed a single family structure and shall be subject to the same standards for a single family residence in the same zone. D. Streamlined and ministerial review for eligible affordable housing projects: The Zoning Code will be updated to ensure that eligible multifamily projects with an affordable component are provided streamlined review and are only subject to objective design standards consistent with relevant provisions of SB 35 and SB 330 as provided by applicable sections of the Government Code, including but not limited to Sections 65905.5, 65913.4, 65940, 65941.1, 65950, and 66300. State law defines objective design standards as those that CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART 1: HOUSING PLAN HP-22 "involve no personal or subjective judgement by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant and public official prior to submittal." E. Emergency shelter parking: The Zoning Code will be updated to require sufficient parking to accommodate all staff working in the emergency shelter, provided that the standards do not require more parking for emergency shelters than other residential or commercial uses within the same zone, in compliance with AB 139. F. Accessory Dwelling Units in PDO Zones: The City will amend Planning Development Ordinance Zones 2 and 7 to specifically allow for Accessory Dwelling Units consistent with State law. Eight -Year Objectives • Ensure that the City's Zoning Code is consistent with State law and update the Zoning Code as needed to comply with future changes. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim efram e • Zoning Code Amendments adopted by February 2023 Conserve and Improve Existing Housing Stock (Goal 4) A community's existing affordable housing stock is a valuable resource that should be conserved and, if necessary, improved to meet habitability requirements. 17. Preserve At -Risk Housing Units The City of Temecula will implement the following programs on an ongoing basis to conserve the community's affordable housing stock. a. Monitor Units At Risk: Monitor projects at risk of converting to market rate within the planning period. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-23 b. Work with Potential Purchasers: Establish contact with public and nonprofit agencies interested in purchasing and/or managing units at risk. c. Tenant Educa tion: The California Legislature passed AB 1701 in 1998, requiring that property owners give a nine -month notice of their intent to opt out of low-income restrictions. The City will work with tenants of at -risk units and provide them with information regarding tenant rights and conversion procedures. The City will also provide tenants with information regarding Section 8 rent subsidies through the Riverside County Housing Authority and other affordable housing opportunities. d. Assist Tenants of Existing Rent -Restricted Units to Obtain Priority Status on Section 8 Waiting List: Work with the Riverside Housing Authority to place tenants displaced from at -risk units on a priority list for Section 8 rental assistance. Eight -Year Objectives • The City will monitor the status of affordable projects at risk of converting to market rate. • The City will identify nonprofit organizations as potential purchasers/managers of at -risk housing units. • The City will explore funding sources available to preserve the affordability of projects at risk of converting to market rate or to provide replacement units. • The City will assist qualified tenants to apply for priority status on the Section 8 voucher/certificate program immediately should the owners of the at -risk project choose not to enter into additional restrictions. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department and Riverside Housing Authority Funding Sources • CDBG Funds, and Section 8 Vouchers/ Certificates Tim efram e • Annually monitor CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-24 18. Code Enforcement While the majority of the existing housing stock in Temecula is less than 30 years old, there is a need to enforce housing maintenance for some of the older housing units. The City implements a code enforcement program to correct housing and building code violations. The City has adopted and enforces the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Eight -Year Objectives • The City will continue to seek voluntary compliance for code - related issues and violations to enforce the UBC and offer information regarding the City's housing rehabilitation programs to low- and moderate -income households cited for code violations. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim efram e • Ongoing 19. ResiderAdal Improvement Program The City adopted a Five -Year Consolidated Plan and became a CDBG Entitlement City as of July 2012. The Five -Year Consolidated Plan includes funding a new Residential Improvement Program with CDBG funds. Eight -Year Objectives • The City will utilize CDBG funds or other funds, as available, to provide financial assistance for minor repairs of homes owned and occupied by lower -income homeowners. Eligible repairs include plumbing, electrical, painting, carpentry, roof repairs, and masonry work. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-25 Funding Sources • CDBG Funds Tim efram e • Ongoing, as funding is available 20. Section 8 Rental Assistance Program The Section 8 rental assistance program extends rental subsidies to very low-income families and the elderly that spend more than 30% of their income on rent. The Section 8 certificate subsidy represents the difference between the excess of 30% of the monthly income and the actual rent (up to the federally determined Fair Market Rent (FMR)). Most Section 8 assistance is issued to recipients as vouchers, which permit tenants to locate their own housing and rent units beyond the FMR, provided the tenants pay the extra rent increment. The City contracts with the Riverside County Housing Authority to administer the Section 8 Certificate/Voucher Program. Eight -Year Objectives • The City will continue to contract with the County of Riverside to administer the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program and provide rental assistance to at least 105 very low-income Temecula households. • The City will support the County of Riverside's applications for additional Section 8 allocation. • The City will promote the Section 8 program to second unit owners by publicizing this program and making the information known to City and County agencies and to housing nonprofits. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • HCD Section 8 allocations Tim efram e • Ongoing CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-26 21. Mobile Home Assistance Program (MPAP) To preserve affordable housing opportunities found within mobile home parks, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) provides financial and technical assistance to low- income mobile home park residents through the Mobile Home Assistance Program (MPAP). The MPAP provides loans of up to 50% of the purchase price plus the conversion costs of the mobile home park so that low- income residents or organizations formed by low-income residents can own and/or operate the mobile home park. Heritage Mobile Home Park is the only mobile home park in Temecula. The owners have indicated that they intend to operate the park indefinitely. In the event that the owners decide to close the park, the City will work with the tenants to acquire funding through the MPAP program. Eight -Year Objectives The City will provide technical assistance to Heritage Mobile Home Park residents in pursuing MPAP funds in the event that the owners propose to close the mobile home park. Responsihle Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim efram e • Ongoing, as funding is available Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (Goal 5) The City of Temecula is committed to implementing programs that affirmatively further fair housing. 22. Equal Housing Opportunity In order to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community, the housing program must include actions that affirmatively further fair housing and promote housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, family size, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, age, disability, or other protected characteristics. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-27 The Riverside County Consortium, of which the City is a member, has adopted an Analysis of Impediments (AI) to Fair Housing Choice and has conducted fair housing planning to implement the recommendations identified in the Al. The Fair Housing Program of Riverside County maintains a comprehensive approach to affirmatively further and ensure equal access to housing for all persons. The three major components of this approach are education, training/technical/consultant assistance, and fair housing rights assistance. The Fair Housing Program of Riverside County is also an advocate for affordable housing, legislative reform, local compliance, and research projects relative to fair housing and human rights issues. The agency works with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and HUD in the referral, enforcement, and resolution of housing discrimination cases. In 2017, the City prepared an Assessment of Fair Housing which included a thorough analysis of fair housing issues and goals and programs related to affirmatively furthering fair housing. This Assessment is included as Appendix D to the Housing Element and provides a detailed roadmap for addressing fair housing issues. The Housing Plan includes the City's 2017 Assessment of Fair Housing by reference and directs the City to implement the programs identified therein in accordance with the Assessment's direction. Eight -Year Objectives • Temecula will continue to participate in the Riverside County Consortium in implementing the fair housing plan. • The City will place fair housing brochures at City counters, public libraries, the Temecula Community Center, and the Temecula Community Recreation Center. Material will be provided in English and Spanish. Copies will also be made available for other venues as requested or identified at later dates. • The City will continue to post information regarding fair housing services on the City website. Information will be provided in English and Spanish. Future fair housing workshops can also be advertised on the City website. • The City will continue to provide referral services to the Fair Housing Program of Riverside County for residents inquiring about fair housing issues. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-28 • The City will continue to update its fair housing brochures to conform to state law. • The City will undertake ongoing efforts to educate the public about affordable housing. • The City will work with the Fair Housing Program of Riverside County to identify any specific geographic areas in the City which have higher levels of discrimination claims and will target outreach and education to these areas. • The City will continue to utilize CDBG funds to affirmatively further fair housing choice through the provision of fair housing education, counseling, anti -discrimination and landlord -tenant mediation services and to provide equal housing opportunities for protected classes. • Implement the programs identified in the City of Temecula 2017 Assessment of Fair Housing Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim ef-.am e • Ongoing 23. Housing Referral Directory The City provides housing referral services through its Housing Referral Directory. People contacting the City are provided information on housing projects offering housing specific to a person's needs. Eight -Year Objectives • The City will continue to offer housing referral services through its Housing Referral Directory. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-29 Funding Sources • Departmental Budget Tim efram e • Ongoing, as funding is available 24. Economic Displacement Risk Analysis The City of Temecula can reduce the impact of displacement when it occurs by preventing practices that increase or enable displacement. To determine if market force economic displacement is occurring due to development of new housing, increased housing costs, or other factors, the City will conduct a study to determine if individuals and families are being displaced and to evaluate local conditions that may contribute to displacement. The study will analyze gentrification locally and will assess how new development and community investments may potentially influence displacement. If this study shows that displacement is occurring, the City will develop an action program based on the identified causes of displacement, including specific actions to monitor and mitigate displacement. Annual review of the action program may result in modifications to further reduce displacement risk. This program addresses the fair housing issue of disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risk. Eight -Year Objectives Conduct a Displacement Risk Analysis Study to identify the local conditions that lead to displacement and develop and implement an action program based on the results. Identify potential partners to participate in the study that specialize in eviction -related topics related to displacement. Annually monitor program effectiveness. Responsjble Agencies 'qql;4� • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-30 Tim efram e Conduct study by December 31, 2023 and begin to establish resulting programs by June 1, 2024. Ongoing implementation and annual reporting throughout the planning period. Promote Public Participation (Goal 6) The City of Temecula values the role the public plays in planning for fair and equitable housing options for current and future residents. 25. Housing Element Monitoring and Reporting To ensure that the housing programs identified in this Housing Element are implemented and achieve their goals, an accurate monitoring and reporting system is required. Service agencies receiving CDBG funding from the City are required to report on their program accomplishments at least annually. Records from service agencies help the City assess the extent of housing and supportive service needs, particularly regarding special needs populations. The City is also required to submit annual reports to the state addressing its success in implementing the General Plan and Housing Element. These reports provide decision -makers with useful information regarding how successful the housing programs are in meeting the needs of the community. Eight -Year Objectives • The City will continue to require that service agencies report their accomplishments annually. This information will be used by the City to assess the community's housing needs and how well these needs are being met by the existing programs. • The City will continue to submit annual reports to the state assessing the implementation of the General Plan and Housing Element. Responsible Agencies • Planning Department Funding Sources • Departmental Budget and CDBG Funds CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART 1: HOUSING PLAN HP-31 Tim efram e • Annually II. QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES State law requires the Housing Element to include quantified objectives for the maximum number of units that can be constructed, rehabilitated or conserved. Policies and programs establish the strategies to achieve these objectives. The City's quantified objectives are described under each program, and represent the City's best effort in implementing each of the programs. Assumptions are based on past program performance and funding availability, construction trends, land availability, and future programs that will enhance program effectiveness and achieve full implementation of the City's housing goals. The new construction objectives shown in the table are based on the City's RHNA for the 2021-2029 planning period for very low-, low and moderate -income housing, historic trends, and expectations for new second units. Rehabilitation and conservation objectives are based on specific program targets, including such programs as use of Section 8 rental housing vouchers. The table below summarizes the City's quantified objectives for housing during the 2021-2029 planning period. Table 1: Quantified Objectives 2021-2029 Income Category New Construction Rehabilitation Conservation/ Preservation Extremely Low 136 0 180 Very Low 136 35 Low 240 0 Moderate 622 0 0 Above Moderate 1,004 0 0 Totals 2,138 35 180 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT PART l: HOUSING PLAN HP-32 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT PART 2: BACKGROUND REPORT CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Qom. This page intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Cycle6 Housing Element Update............................................................................................................................1 I. Introduction....................................................................................................................................................1 A. Community Context...................................................................................................................................1 B. State Policy and Authorization...................................................................................................................2 C. Organization of the Housing Element Background Report and Policy Document.....................................3 D. Relationship to Other General Plan Elements...........................................................................................4 E. Data Sources and Glossary.......................................................................................................................4 F. Public Participation....................................................................................................................................5 II. Accomplishments Under the 5th Cycle Housing Element............................................................................11 A. Review of 5' Cycle Housing Element.....................................................................................................11 B. Housing Production During 5th Cycle RHNA Period...............................................................................11 C. Appropriateness and Effectiveness of 5th Cycle Housing Element.........................................................12 III. Housing Needs Assessment.............................................................................................................................25 1. Introduction and Background...................................................................................................................25 2. Population Trends and Characteristics....................................................................................................26 C. Household Characteristics..................................................................................................................31 D. Income................................................................................................................................................ 33 E. Housing Characteristics......................................................................................................................37 F. Housing Costs.........................................................................................................................................42 G. Future Housing Needs.................................................................................................................................51 H. Special Needs Groups.................................................................................................................................52 I. Units at Risk of Conversion............................................................................................................................66 J. Estimates of Housing Need...........................................................................................................................69 IV. Constraints on Housing Production..............................................................................................................71 A. Potential Non -Governmental Constraints................................................................................................71 B. Governmental Constraints.......................................................................................................................74 C. State Tax Policies and Regulations.......................................................................................................109 D. Infrastructure Constraints......................................................................................................................110 E. Environmental Constraints....................................................................................................................111 V. Housing Resources....................................................................................................................................116 A. Regional Housing Need.........................................................................................................................116 B. Progress Towards the RHNA................................................................................................................117 C. Sites for Housing Development.............................................................................................................120 C. Housing, Financial, and Services Resources........................................................................................130 D. Administrative Resources......................................................................................................................135 E. Environmental Constraints....................................................................................................................137 F. Energy Conservation and Climate Change...........................................................................................137 G. Consistency with the General Plan............................................................................................................138 H. Relationship to Other City Plans and Policies............................................................................................139 I. Priority for Water and Sewer........................................................................................................................139 VI. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Analysis..............................................................................141 A. Fair Housing Needs Assessment.....................................................................................................142 B. Analysis of Available Federal, State, and Local Data and Local Knowledge....................................143 C. Disproportionate Housing Need........................................................................................................154 D. Displacement Risk............................................................................................................................156 E. Assessment of Contributing Factors to Fair Housing Issues in Temecula........................................157 F. Analysis of Sites Pursuant to AB 686....................................................................................................159 G. Analysis of Contributing Factors and Fair Housing Priorities and Goals...........................................161 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBR-1 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Regional Housing Needs Allocation - 5th Cycle Progress...............................................................12 Table 2: 5th Cycle Program Evaluation.............................................................................................................14 Table 3: Population Trends - Neighboring Jurisdictions................................................................................26 Table 4: Population by Age (2018).....................................................................................................................27 Table 5: Race and Ethnicity(2018).....................................................................................................................27 Table 6: Job Growth and Employment Status...................................................................................................28 Table7: Jobs by Industry ...................................................................................................................................29 Table8: Jobs by Occupation..............................................................................................................................29 Table 9: Travel Time to Work(2018)...................................................................................................................30 Table 10: Commute Method(2018).....................................................................................................................30 Table 11: Households by Tenure and Age (2018).............................................................................................32 Table 12: Household Size by Tenure (2018)...................................................................................................... 33 Table 13: Median Household and Per Capita Income.......................................................................................33 Table 14: Household Income for All Households and by Tenure(2018).........................................................34 Table 15: Households by Income Group(2017)................................................................................................35 Table 16: Occupations with Wages for Extremely Low to very Low -Income Households (2020).................36 Table 17: Housing Stock by Type and Vacancy (2020)....................................................................................37 Table 18: Vacancy by Type(2018)......................................................................................................................38 Table 19: Housing Stock Conditions (2018)...................................................................................................... 39 Table 20: Overcrowding by Tenure(2018).........................................................................................................41 Table 21: Household Size by Tenure (2018)......................................................................................................41 Table 22: Number of Bedrooms by Tenure (2018)............................................................................................42 Table 23: Homes for Sale (May 2021).................................................................................................................43 Table 24: Median Home Value by Community..................................................................................................44 Table 25: Rental Costs(2018).............................................................................................................................44 Table 26: Rental Rates by Number of Bedrooms..............................................................................................45 Table 27: State Income Limits - Riverside County(2021)................................................................................46 Table 28: Housing Affordability by Income Group...........................................................................................47 Table 29: Households by Income Level and Overpayment (2017)..................................................................49 Table 30: Deed Restricted Affordable Housing Units....................................................................................... 50 Table 31: Mobile Home Parks in Temecula....................................................................................................... 51 Table 32: Regional Housing Needs Allocation - 6th Cycle..............................................................................52 Table 33: Senior Population and Households (2010 and 2018).......................................................................53 Table 34: Householder Age by Tenure (2018)................................................................................................... 54 Table 35: Disabilities by Disability Type(2018)................................................................................................. 56 Table 36: Disabled Persons by Employment Status (2018).............................................................................57 Table 37: Developmentally Disabled Persons by Residence Type (2018)......................................................58 Table 38: Facilities and Services for Disabled Persons...................................................................................59 Table 40: Household Size versus Bedroom Size by Tenure(2018)................................................................. 61 Table 41: Families and Female Householder with Children Under 18 (2018)................................................. 62 Table 42: Homeless Facilities(2020)*................................................................................................................65 Table 43: Facilities and Services for the Homeless.......................................................................................... 66 Table 44: Summary of at -Risk Subsidized Housing Units............................................................................... 67 Table45: Summary of Needs.............................................................................................................................. 70 Table 46: Residential Development Standards................................................................................................. 77 Table 47: Residential Development Standards - Old Town Specific Plan......................................................79 Table 48: Residential Development Standards - Planning Development Overlays.......................................80 Table 49: Parking Space Requirements.............................................................................................................81 Table 50: Permitted Housing By Zoning District...............................................................................................88 Table 51: Permitted Housing By Zoning District...............................................................................................90 Table 52: Housing Qualifying for Density Bonus.............................................................................................. 93 Table 53: Density Bonuses Allowed..................................................................................................................93 Table 54: Planning Fee Schedule*......................................................................................................................99 Table 55: Development Impact Fees For The City of Temecula....................................................................101 Table 56: Total Processing and Fees for Typical Single- and Multi -Family Units........................................102 Table 57: Typical Processing Times for Single- and Multi -Family Units......................................................106 Table 58: Regional Housing Need Allocation, 2021-2029...............................................................................116 Table 59: Progress Towards Meeting the 2021-2029 RHNA...........................................................................117 Table60: Remaining RHNA..............................................................................................................................119 Table 61: Vacant Residential Sites (Exclusive of Specific Plans).................................................................124 <11) `I 11 \I1' 111 V (�1 \11: Al I,[ VA ll�1I oI]')11'1V(,III\11\I 1�\'I'(.1v"U\1)1"1 V`IyI Table 62: Vacant Residential Land within Specific Plan Areas.....................................................................125 Table63: Large Lot Inventory ...........................................................................................................................129 Table 64: Comparison of RHNA Candidate Sites Realistic Capacity and RHNA..........................................130 Table 65: Overview of ROI Data Point Indicators............................................................................................147 Table 66: People -Based Regional Opportunity Index (ROI) Low and Lowest Opportunity Census Tracts, Temecula............................................................................................................................................................150 Table 67: Place -Based Regional Opportunity Index (ROI) Low Opportunity Census Tract, Temecula ...... 150 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Median Home Sales Price for Existing Homes..................................................................................43 Figure 2 Vacant Developable Parcels in the City of Temecula......................................................................127 Figure 3: Regional Opportunity Index, People, 2014, Temecula....................................................................148 Figure 4: Regional Opportunity Index, Place, 2014, Temecula......................................................................149 APPENDICES Appendix A — Housing Site Inventory Appendix B — Glossary Appendix C — Public Engagement Summary Appendix D — 2017 Assessment of Fair Housing, Temecula CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-III GENERAL P LA.I\�l HOUSING ELEMENT I. INTRODUCTION A. Community Context Nestled in Temecula Valley in southwestern Riverside County, just north of the San Diego County line, sits the City of Temecula, which was incorporated in 1989. Having grown from a modest initial incorporated population of 27,099, the City of Temecula is currently home to approximately 112,000 residents in an area of roughly 30 square miles. The City is bounded by the City of Murrieta to the north, unincorporated areas within the County of Riverside to the east, west, and south, and unincorporated areas within the County of San Diego to the south. Regional access to the City is provided by Interstate 15, a north/south freeway that connects the Inland Empire region of Riverside and San Bernardino counties to San Diego County, and State Route 79, a primarily east/west highway (although it runs concurrent with I-15 through the City of Temecula) that links Interstate 10 with Interstate 15, and links Temecula to communities further east in unincorporated Riverside and San Diego counties. Since its early beginning, the Temecula Valley has always been a place where the combination of mild climate and beautiful rolling hills have attracted human settlement. The hillsides were the home of the Temecula Indians, the first residents of the area. Ancestors of the Temecula Indians were in this area as early as 900 A.D. The native people from here to the coast who shared the same language and culture became commonly known as the Luisefios, because many of their villages were once under the influence of Mission San Luis Rey. Temecula's modern European history began in the 1800s, when Old Town Temecula played an important role as a stop along the Butterfield Overland stagecoach line, which was to run between St. Louis and San Francisco. Old Town Temecula is the historic core of the City and is located in its western portion. Change from a small agricultural community to an urbanized City began in earnest in 1964 when Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical purchased the 87,500-acre Vail Ranch. Development of the ranch occurred under the design of a master plan that continues to influence the land use pattern and circulation system of Temecula today. While much of the City's development pattern has been guided by master plans over the past 50 years, as the City looks to CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBR-1 accommodate a new generation of residents, future development will occur in line with new master plans (including "Specific Plans") which set the framework for more diverse communities which offer a broader range of housing and lifestyle choices. Moreover, while there continues to be vacant land left to develop in Temecula, the majority of it is currently entitled, under construction, or undevelopable; looking forward, the City is excited to plan for and implement strategic programs which reflect this new development pattern. B. State Policy and Authorization State Housing Law (Government Code Section 65583) requires that a "housing element shall consist of an identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs and a statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, financial resources, and scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing. The housing element shall identify adequate sites for housing, including rental housing, factory -built housing, and mobile homes, and shall make adequate provision for the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community." This report is an update of the Housing Element adopted by the City in 2013. The assessment and inventory must include all of the following: • Analysis of population and employment trends, documentation of projections, and a quantification of the locality's existing and projected housing needs for all income levels. Such existing and projected needs shall include the locality's share of the regional housing need in accordance with Section 65584 of the Government Code. • Analysis and documentation of household characteristics, including level of payment compared to ability to pay, housing characteristics, including overcrowding, and housing stock condition. • An inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having potential for redevelopment, and an analysis of the relationship between zoning, public facilities, and city services to these sites. Analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels and for persons with disabilities, including land use controls, building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions required of developers, local processing and permit procedures, and any locally adopted ordinances that directly impact the cost and supply of residential development. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-2 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Analysis of potential and actual non -governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the availability of financing, the price of land, the cost of construction, requests to develop housing at densities below the minimum densities in the inventory of sites, and the length of time between receiving approval for a housing development and submittal of an application for building permits that hinder the construction of a locality's share of the regional housing need. • Analysis of any special housing needs, such as those of the elderly, disabled, including developmentally disabled, large families, farmworkers, families with female heads of households, and families and persons in need of emergency shelter. • Analysis of opportunities for energy conservation with respect to residential development. • Analysis of existing assisted multifamily rental housing developments that are eligible to change from low-income housing to market -rate during the next 10 years. C. Organization of the Housing Element Background Report and Policy Document The City faces important housing issues such as preserving the historic traditions of the community, ensuring that new development is compatible with the existing character, providing a range of housing that meets the needs of all residents, ensuring that affordable housing is available to all segments of the community, and balancing employment with housing opportunities. The Background Report of this housing element identifies the nature and extent of Temecula's housing needs, including those of special populations, potential housing resources (land and funds), potential constraints to housing production, and energy conservation opportunities. By examining the City's housings, resources, and constraints, the City can then determine a plan of action for providing adequate housing. This plan is presented in the Housing Plan, which is the policy component of the Housing Element. In addition to identifying housing needs, the Background Report also presents information regarding the setting in which these needs occur. This information is instrumental in providing a better understanding of the community, which in turn is essential for the planning of future housing needs. Since the update of the City's last Housing Element in 2013, statutory changes have occurred that must be included in the 2021-2029 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBR-3 Temecula Housing Element. These laws have been incorporated in the appropriate sections throughout this Background Report (Part 2 of the Housing Element) as well as in its accompanying Housing Plan (Part 1). D. Relationship to Other General Plan Elements The Temecula General Plan comprises the following 10 elements: (1) Land Use; (2) Circulation; (3) Housing; (4) Open Space/ Conservation; (5) Growth Management/Public Facilities; (6) Public Safety; (7) Noise; (8) Air Quality; (9) Community Design; and (10) Economic Development. Background information and policy direction presented in one element is also reflected in other General Plan elements. For example, residential development capacities established in the Land Use Element are incorporated within the Housing Element. The General Plan goals and policies were reviewed for consistency with proposals recommended in this Housing Element update. This Housing Element builds upon other General Plan elements and is consistent with the goals and policies set forth by the General Plan. City staff maintains a conscious effort to ensure that revisions to any element of the General Plan achieve internal consistency among all General Plan elements. The City also recognizes that recent changes to State laws require the updating of various elements of the General Plan, upon update of the Housing Element, to address the following issues: • Required amendment to address flood hazards and flood management, fire hazards, sea level rises, and other climate change -related issues. E. Data Sources and Glossary The data used for the completion of this Housing Element comes from a variety of sources, including the United States Census, the American Community Survey, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, various studies produced by the City of Temecula, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) approved data set, the California Department of Finance, the California Department of Employment Development, local newspapers, and local real estate agents. These data sources represent the best data available at the time this Housing Element was prepared. This Housing Element Background Report, along with the state - mandated requirements, includes a glossary of terms used in the element. This glossary has been included to allow readers to better CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-4 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT understand the terminology used in the Housing Element discussion; it can be found in Appendix B of this element. F. Public Participation State law requires that "the local government shall make a diligent effort to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element ." (Government Code Section 65583). Residents of Temecula and other key community stakeholders have had, and will continue to have, several opportunities to provide input during the development of the Housing Element. In February 2020, the City launched its Housing Element Update website (TemeculaCA.gov/housing) to provide the community with an overview of the project, answer key questions, explain the Regional Housing Needs Allocation, and host links for community surveys and workshops. Housing Survey V� On March 26, 2020, the City released a robust Housing Survey to assess current conditions and better understand community priorities regarding housing in Temecula. By the time the survey was closed at the end of August 2020, the City had received over 850 responses. From March through August 2020, the City undertook the following activities to promote the Housing Element Update, educate the community regarding housing opportunities and challenges, and encourage participation in the Survey: Newsletter sent to every resident (approximately 33,000 addresses) which included an article about the Housing Element Numerous social media posts using the hashtag #HouseThis? resulting in 52,000 social media impressions/views and 729 social media impressions generated • Emails sent to over 10,000 stakeholders • Targeted advertisements shared with the Temecula Chamber and Southwest Riverside County Association of Realtors • Advertisements and educational material shared on Channel 3 (local broadcast) and the City's YouTube channel e Paper copies of the Housing Survey were made available at City Hall, the Senior Center, area laundromats, and through the City's Homeless Liaisons CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBR-5 The results of the Housing Survey were summarized in a Community Survey Report which was finalized in October 2020 and posted to the City's website for public review and consideration; the Community Survey Report is included as Appendix C. Virtual Community Workshop In an effort to further educate the community regarding the Housing Element Update, the City hosted a live bilingual (English and Spanish) Virtual Community Workshop on September 23, 2020 using Zoom due to social distancing requirements related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Virtual Community Workshop consisted of a recorded presentation providing an overview of the project, local housing conditions and socioeconomic information, and key issues and opportunities which will be addressed in the City's updated Housing Element. Videos of the English- and Spanish -language presentations (which included translated PowerPoint presentations) were made available on the City's website following the live presentation. As of June 1, 2021, the presentation has been viewed 131 times. This this process, the City received the following general types of feedback: • More affordable housing options should be available to meet the needs of all household incomes • The historic character of Temecula should be preserved • New residential growth should be balanced with new infrastructure improvements • People who grow up in Temecula should be able to afford to continue to live here Draft Housing Element Public Review The Draft Housing Element was circulated for a 30-day Public Review on August 17, 2021 (set to conclude on September 15, 2021). As part of this review period, the City hosted a community open house on August 17, 2021 to introduce the Draft Housing Element and solicit public feedback on the Housing Plan. The community open house was advertised on social media in English and Spanish and flyers were posted throughout the community in both languages. Through this process, the City received the following feedback, which is also detailed in Appendix C: • To be summarized upon conclusion of Public Review CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-6 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Stakeholder Engagement The City mailed or emailed meeting notification letters to numerous stakeholders and interested parties, including: • Affirmed Housing • Amcal Housing • Assistance League of Temecula Valley • Atria Senior Living • Autism Society Inland Empire • Birth Choice • Boys and Girls Club of Southwest County • Bridge Housing • Building Industry Association • California Apartment Association Inland Empire • California State University San Marcos, Temecula • Canine Support Teams • Catholic Charities • Chemo Buddies 4 Life • Circle of Care Ministries • City of Murrieta k* • City of Temecula • CityNet • Coachella Valley Housing Coalition • Community Access Center • Community Mission of Hope • Comprehensive Autism Center • County of Riverside Department of Social Services • County of Riverside Economic Development Agency • County of Riverside Health Department • Court Appointed Special Advocate of Riverside County • Desert AIDS • Economic Development of Southwest California • Fair Housing Counsel of Riverside County, Inc. • Foothill AIDS • Go Banana • GRID Alternatives • Habitat for Humanity Inland Valley • Health to Hope • Hitzke Consulting • Homeowners Associations • Hospice of the Valleys • Housing Authority of the County of Riverside • Inland Regional Center • John Stewart Company • Ken Follis • League of Women Voters CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBR-7 • Love of Christ Fellowship Church • Michelle's Place • Mission Village Apartments • OC YMCA • Our Nicholas Foundation • Path of Life Ministries • Pechanga Casino • Project Touch • Rancho Community Church • Rancho Damacitas • Rancho en Espanol • Riverbank Village Apartments • Riverside City and County CoC • Riverside County Office on Aging • Riverside County Sheriff • Riverside Transit Agency • Riverside County Veterans Services • Rose Again Foundation • SAFE Alternatives for Everyone • Safety Research Associates, Inc • Smart Moms • Solari Enterprises • Southern California Council of Governments • Southwest Riverside County Association of Realtors • Southwest Workforce Development Center • St. Catherine's Catholic Church • State Council on Developmental Disabilities • State of California Department of Housing and Community Development • Temecula Homeless Coalition • Temecula Murrieta Rescue Mission • Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce • Temecula Valley Historical Society • Temecula Valley Unified School District • Temecula Valley Union School District Adult Transition Program • Temecula Valley Winegrowers Association • The Center for Life Change • U.S. Vets Initiative • VA Loma Linda Healthcare • Various religious institutions • Voice of Children • Wells Fargo • Western Riverside Council of Governments CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-8 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Final Housing Element Also prior to adoption the Draft Housing Element a Notice of Public Hearing will be published in the local newspaper and a direct mailing sent to organizations representing the interests of low and moderate income households and persons with special needs Other Comments Received The City has not yet received any other public comments on the Housing Element Update separate from those collected through the above mentioned engagement efforts. o�. r� CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBR-9 This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-10 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT II. ACCOMPLISHMENTS CINDER THE 5TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT The following sections reviews and evaluates the City's progress in implementing the 5th Cycle (2014-2021) Housing Element. This section also analyzes the difference between projected housing need and actual housing production. A. Review of 51h Cycle Housing Element The 5th Cycle Housing Element program strategy focused on the accomplishment of policies and implementation of programs to provide adequate housing sites; assist in development of affordable housing; remove governmental constraints; conserve and improve existing affordable housing; and promote equal housing opportunity. The 5th Cycle Housing Element identified the following goals: GOAL 1: Provide Adequate Housing Sites Provide a diversity of housing opportunities that satisfy the physical, social, and economic needs of existing and future residents. GOAL 2: Assist in Development of Affordable Housing Provide affordable housing for all economic segments of Temecula. GOAL 3: Remove Governmental Constraints Remove governmental constraints in the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, where appropriate and legally possible. GOAL 4: Conserve and Improve Existing Affordable Housing Conserve the existing affordable housing stock. GOAL 5: Promote Equal Housing Opportunities Provide equal housing opportunities for all residents in Temecula. B. Housing Production During 5th Cycle RHNA Period The City's 5th Cycle Housing Element specifically addressed housing needs for the City from 2014 through 2021 and will continue to be implemented through October 2021, when the City's 6th Cycle Housing Element will be adopted. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-11 Table 1 below shows the total number of housing units built in the City during the 5th RHNA cycle to date and compares these units with the units required to be accommodated under the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) provided by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). During the 2014-2021 RHNA period, 1,604 units were constructed in the City and another 291 are under construction and will be delivered on or before June 30, 2021, as shown in Table 1. Between units built and under construction, the City will have delivered 1,895 housing units, 127% of its 5' Cycle RHNA. Table 1: Regional Housing Needs Allocation — 5th Cycle Progress y T E 3 i J K W J ; a) J y 7 y N "O O W CD > `� O N 'O Q O m O � RHNA 187 188 251 271 596 1,493 Allocation Built 7 15 1,574 1,604 Under 0 0 85 206 291 Construction/ Permitted Remaining 180;RN 180 25 171 0 (Surplus 0 Allocation of 1,184 units) Source: City of Temecula, 2021 C. Appropriateness and Effectiveness of 5th Cycle Housing Element The overarching goals and policies of the 5th Cycle Housing Element continue to be appropriate to encourage the City's housing goals. While most goals, policies, and programs included in the 5th Cycle Housing Element continue to be appropriate to address the City's housing needs, the Housing Plan will be updated to provide clearer guidance, to remove redundancies, and to provide more specific direction to encourage affordable and special needs housing at viable sites and affirmatively further fair housing. The Housing Plan will also be updated to streamline programs so that they are easier for staff to implement and to include a matrix of programs that includes mid -cycle timing priorities to make it easier to identify the applicability and timing of programs during the planning period. To improve the ease of use of the Housing Plan, the housing programs will be presented as a user- friendly table. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-12 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT As discussed in Table 2, most housing programs have been effective or are necessary. The intent of these programs will be kept in the Housing Plan, with revisions to address identified specific housing needs, constraints, affirmatively furthering fair housing, or other concerns identified as part of this update. The City implemented many of the housing programs in the last several years and anticipates that these changes will further encourage workforce, affordable, and special needs housing. The City of Temecula has a variety of affordable housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community. By partnering with government agencies, non-profit organizations, and private property owners, it works to create safe and affordable housing for all residents of our community. All the affordable housing units located within the City of Temecula are owned and managed by private property managers. The City maintains a robust "Affordable Housing Brochure" which is available online and at City Hall which catalogs all the City's affordable multi -family rental units and provides the address, unit count, and contact information for each property. The Housing Plan, included as Part 1 to the City's updated Housing Element, included in this 2021-2029 Housing Element includes modifications to make programs more effective, clarify objectives, and ensure that the programs are implementable. See the Housing Plan provided for the goals, policies, and programs of this Housing Element. While the City took a number of significant steps to promote housing during the prior planning period, including adopting General Plan Amendments that added over 3,000 additional residential units to the City's housing stock, the experience of Temecula and other small communities throughout the State demonstrates that it is very difficult for local governments to meet their fair share housing goals for lower and moderate income housing when working alone. All cities, including Temecula, have limited financial and staffing resources and require substantial state and/or federal assistance, which is not always available at the levels necessary to support the City's housing needs, as well as the technical assistance of area non-profit housing developers and agencies. Additionally, Temecula is also facing infrastructure constraints outside of its control, including an immediate need for I-15 improvements and other transportation improvements. As discussed below, the City has modified some of its existing programs to better reflect community priorities and meet state housing objectives, and has introduced a number of new programs to further address short- and long-term housing needs. In order to develop an effective housing plan for the 2021-2029 period, the City must assess the effectiveness of its existing housing programs and determine the continued appropriateness of such programs in CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-13 addressing housing adequacy, affordability, and availability issues. This section evaluates the accomplishments of each program against the objectives established in the 5th Cycle Housing Element, explains any discrepancy in program achievements, and recommends programmatic changes to the 2021-2029 Housing Element. Table 2: 5th Cycle Program Evaluation Program Eight -Year Objective Progress/Effectiveness Continue/Modify/Delete Provide Adequate Housing Sites 1. Land Use Element • The City will monitor the The City continues to monitor the Continue and Development Code availability of sites zoned for availability of sites suitable for residential uses to ensure residential development and has sufficient capacity exists to maintained adequate capacity for accommodate Temecula's the duration of the current planning Regional Housing Need period. Allocation. The City maintains an inventory of • The City will maintain an suitable housing sites, including inventory of sites suitable for whether the site is developed of residential development vacant, and provides this inventory (including underutilized to the development community via commercial sites) and the City's online GIS dataset, which provide that information to includes identification of vacant interested developers. land. • The City will encourage the The City continues to allow reservation of land that is residential mixed use projects to be currently designated for developed at densities of at least 30 multiple -family development units per acre. by providing the multi -family sites inventory to multi- In 2018 the City adopted its family housing developers to Affordable Housing Overlay solicit development interest. (AHO) Zoning District (Chapter The City will update the 17.21 of the Temecula Municipal multi -family sites inventory Code). The purpose of the AHO is at least once a year. to facilitate the development of • The City will continue to affordable multifamily housing, allow residential mixed use to enable the city to meet its housing be permitted at a density of goals, and ensure that affordable 30 units per acre to housing developments will be encourage the construction compatible with surrounding land of multi -family housing by uses by establishing an affordable right. In addition, the City housing overlay zoning district. A will continue to provide property designated within the appropriate flexible affordable housing overlay may be development standards such developed either in the manner as increased building height Provided by the AHO or in the and shared parking manner provided in the underlying opportunities for zoning district. Projects that comply developments with minimum with the requirements of the AHO densities of 20 dwelling units are permitted by right. Two projects per acre in the Zoning have been entitled in the AHO Ordinance. Zoning District and are moving • The City will address Zoning forward with construction. and General Plan Land Use Designation inconsistencies. • To accommodate Temecula's regional housing need for units affordable to lower - CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-14 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT income households totaling 2,007 (1381 4th cycle unaccommodated plus 626 for the 5th planning period), the City will establish an Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) on the sites identified in Appendix B, applicable to at least 100 acres. After establishment of the AHO, sites identified in Appendix B will require the following: o Minimum densities of 20 units per acre with a maximum allowable density of 30 units per acre under the AHO 0 50 percent of the remaining need (1,003 units) will be accommodated on sites allowing exclusively residential uses where no commercial or mixed used development is _ allowed. o Multifamily uses at the densities established under the AHO will be allowed by right, without a CUP, planned development permit or other discretionary action pursuant to GC Section 65583.2 (h) and (i) o If needed, the City will amend existing development standards to accommodate the increased allowable densities within the overlay areas. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-15 2. Sites for Emergency • The City will continue to The City continued to work with the Continue Shelters permit emergency shelters as Riverside County Continuum of identified in the Care and other nonprofit Development Code. organizations to provide resources • The City will continue to for homeless persons seeking work with public agencies shelter. Several nonprofit agencies and private entities to continue to provide referrals to provide adequate resources housing facilities for the homeless in for the community's the Temecula Valley area. homeless population. The The City has utilized CDBG funds City will also, to the extent to Support a continuum of services feasible, participate in efforts in Riverside County to prevent and to unite organizations and eliminate homelessness including, entities that provide services but not limited to, homelessness to the homeless. prevention programs, emergency • The City will develop shelter programs and transitional standards for emergency housing. Since July 1, 2017, the City shelters consistent with has funded $71,647 of CDBG funds Government Code Section towards the program administered 65583. through the Temecula Help Center and collaborative efforts to local Community Based Organization (CMOH — Community Mission of Hope). During the City's Consolidated Plan Cycle, which the City is in its 4th year of its 5-year plan the Program has assisted 453 persons on a projected goal of 350 persons for the 5-year cycle. The City has continued to focus on this need and continues to place the high importance on addressing the City's residents facing homelessness and those at risk of being homeless. Additionally, the City provides funding to help support Project TOUCH, a winter shelter operated out of the Roadway Inn in Temecula. For the 2020-2021 season, the City of Temecula provided financial assistance in the amount of $10,000 and the facility provided shelter for 10-12 individuals per night. 3. Sites for • The City will amend the In April 2013 City amended the Modify: The City has Transitional/Supportive Temecula Municipal Code to Municipal Code to require amended its Municipal Housing ensure that supportive and transitional/supportive housing to Code as specified. The transitional housing are be subject to the same permit City will identify new treated as residential uses processing procedures as other objectives to ensure subject only to the same housing in the same zone and to that sites continue to restrictions that apply to require SROs to be permitted by be available for other residential dwellings of right within residential zones. In transitional/supportive the same type in the same April 2013, the City Council housing. zone. adopted an Ordinance permitting transitional and supportive housing, as well as efficiency unit housing in residential zones. Assist in Development of Affordable Housing 4. Density Bonus • The City will establish a In 2018 and 2020, the City adopted Continue Ordinance density bonus program a density bonus program consistent consistent with State Density with State Density Bonus Law CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-16 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Bonus Law (Government (Ordinance 18-10 and Ordinance Code Section 65915). No. 2020-05). • The City will inform The City continued to encourage residential development density bonus opportunities which applicants through the pre- increase the total allowable density application process and/or for senior and affordable housing through the Development projects. Review Committee meeting of opportunities for density increases. 5. Land Assemblage • The City will continue to The City approved one deed- Continue and Affordable acquire land for use in the restricted affordable housing Housing Development provision of affordable developments during the 2017 housing. calendar year. The project resulted • The City will facilitate the in the construction of 15 new very development of housing low-income units. The City units affordable to lower- approved two deed -restricted income households by affordable housing developments publicizing its density bonus during the 2020 calendar year. program and its incentives, Together, they will result in the and by making this construction of 131 affordable information available to units. developers and nonprofit The City issued a Request for housing agencies through the Proposals to develop various city - development application owned sites. One land purchase is process. underway (Uptown Sports District) for affordable housing development. The City actively participates in events and seminars with the development community in order to advertise and communicate our incentives. The City also promotes its Pre -application development process in which incentive information is provided in the initial planning of a future project. 6. ADUs • The City will continue The City continued to allow and Continue to allow and promote the promote the construction of construction of affordable affordable second units. The City second units to result in the has developed a comprehensive construction of ten new website dedicated to sharing second units. The City will information about the opportunity also promote the program by to develop second units and is publicizing the program and currently working on preparing notifying owners of permit -ready ADU plans (not yet underutilized residential complete). property. 7. Mortgage Credit • The City will continue to The City continued to promote the Continue Certificate Program promote the regional MCC Program administered by the Mortgage Credit Certificate Riverside County Economic program to assist an average Development Agency (EDA). Two of ten households annually households were assisted under this by publicizing the program program between 2014 and 2020. and making the program The City actively provides known to developers and information about the MCC nonprofit housing agencies. Program to the general public when inquiries about homebuyer assistance programs are received. Participation in the Coun 's MCC CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-17 Program is approved by the City Council on an annual basis. Last year, an article about the program was published in a local newspaper. 8. First Time Home • The City will work with The City studied the opportunity to Delete Buyer (FTHB) Program Riverside County to establish participate in the County's FTHB a consortium to participate in program but ultimately participation the County's FTHB program. was not feasible. The City will also review state Notices of Funding Availability (NOFAs) as they are released in an effort to participate in the state FTHB program. 9. Housing for • The City will encourage the The City conducts regular Continue Extremely Low -Income development of housing for inspections of affordable housing Households extremely low-income units, and provides them with any households through a variety resources they may request. The of activities, such as City has also syndicated Mission conducting outreach to Village Apartments with a 55-year housing developers on an covenant, rehabilitation, and project annual basis, providing wide solar to reduce climate financial assistance (when impacts. Additionally, Rancho feasible) or in -kind technical California Apartments re -upped assistance or land write- their convent for 55 years, rehabbed downs, providing expedited the project, and made energy processing, identifying grant improvements. and funding opportunities, The City hosts an annual Temecula applying for or supporting Trekkers program to educate real applications for funding on estate agents on the City's zoning an ongoing basis, reviewing process, permitting process, and and prioritizing local funding available support and services. at least twice in the planning The City offers a free pre - period, and/or offering application to all developers to assist additional incentives beyond with due diligence. the density bonus. The City conducted an affordable housing RFP. Two projects are in the pipeline (Rancho Highlands and Las Haciendas). Both projects used streamlining, (AHOZ and Uptown Temecula Specific Plan). One 14 additional affordable project, Vine Creek has also been entitled. 10. Energy • The City will partner with The City has promoted energy Continue Conservation Southern California Edison conservation in a variety of ways, (SCE) and the Southern including: California Gas Company • 2014 newsletter mailer that (SoCalGas) to promote included energy efficiency tips, energy -saving programs such have a request with our social as the Residential Multifamily media team to identify examples. Energy Efficiency Rebate • Nov. 7 2012 Energy Upgrade program, the Heating and California Workshop held at Cooling Rebate program, and library incentives of up to $4,000 • Flex Alerts on August 18, 2020 available to SCE and • Oct. 24, 2019 Wildfire Safety SoCalGas residential Energy Alert customers. • The City will annually ensure • July 8, 2018 Wildfire Safety Alert that local building codes are • November 9, 2020 Recycling consistent with state- Day CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-18 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT mandated green building The City continues to review local standards. building codes to ensure they are • The City will be responsible consistent with state -mandated for implementing the state's green building standards. The City energy conservation also continues to implement the standards (e.g., Title 24 state's energy conservation Energy Standards). This standards and requires applicants includes checking building for building permits to demonstrate plans and other written compliance at the time building documentation showing plans are submitted. compliance and inspecting construction to ensure that the dwelling units are constructed according to those plans. Applicants for building permits must show compliance with the state's energy conservation requirements at the time building plans are submitted. Remove Governmental Constraints 11. Development Fees • The City of Temecula Continue Reimbursement will continue to enter into The City continues to approve development agreements Owner Participation Agreements to with qualifying assist with the development of senior/affordable housing affordable housing and projects on a case -by -case reimbursement of City fees as basis to provide development appropriate. fee reimbursement. 12. Expedite Processing • The City will continue to The City continued to implement Continue of Affordable Housing implement expedited review shorter processing times for Projects to all projects with an affordable housing projects. Three affordable housing affordable housing projects received component. expedited review and processing • The City will need to develop during the 2014-2021 planning objective criteria to evaluate period. affordable housing projects The City continues to implement to qualify them for expedited expedited review to all projects with processing. an affordable housing component. • The City will continue to The City also establishes priority prioritize projects based on based on the level of affordability the level of affordability being proposed in order to further being proposed in order to meet the RNHA. meet its regional housing As part of the City's new Affordable /need. Housing Overlay (AHO) Zoning District (adopted in 2018), the City established Regulations and Development Standards applicable to projects developed pursuant to the AHO. The City is currently undertaking an update to its Zoning Code to identify potential issues related to objective/subjective design standards and will update the Code to create consistent objective design standards in accordance with State law. 13. Periodic • City staff will track and stay The City continued to track and stay Continue Consistency Review of abreast of changes in state abreast of changes in state housing housing law and work with law which would require CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-19 General Plan, Municipal the City Attorney to amendments to the General Plan Code and State Law incorporate changes into the and Municipal Code. There were General Plan and Municipal several housing -related Code. amendments made to the code • The City Attorney will advise during the 2014-2021 planning staff on significant case law period, including amendments interpretations that may related to accessory dwelling units, cause the need to amend the short-term rentals, and density General Plan or Municipal bonus. The City also facilitates Code. weekly meetings with the City Attorney, Staff receives training from the City Attorney, and the City Attorney prepares opinion letters. Conserve and Improve Existing Affordable Housing 14. Preserve At- • The City will monitor The City continued to work with Continue Risk Housing Units the status of affordable interested parties to renew the projects at risk of converting covenants on any expiring to market rate. affordable restrictions. Specifically, • The City will identify the Rancho California Apartments nonprofit organizations as have been rehabilitated and potential upgraded and the property's Section purchasers/managers of at- 8 contract, which was set to expire risk housing units. in 2013, has been renewed for 55 • The City will explore funding years (through 2068). The City has sources available to preserve also worked closely with Mission the affordability of projects at Village as well. risk of converting to market rate or to provide City staff continues to assist the replacement units. general public and tenants with • The City will assist qualified Section 8 rental information. The tenants to apply for priority City continues to work with the status on the Section 8 Riverside County Housing voucher/certificate program Authority regarding displaced immediately should the tenants. owners of the at -risk project choose not to enter into additional restrictions. 15. Code Enforcement • The City will continue to seek The City continued implementation Continue voluntary compliance for of Weed Abatement and code -related issues and Abandoned Vehicle Abatement violations to enforce the programs. Annually during the UBC and offer information 2014-2021 planning period, the City regarding the City's housing generally conducted 20,444 rehabilitation programs to complaint -driven code case low- and moderate -income inspections, 22,015 proactive code households cited for code case inspections, [6,488 weed violations. abatement cases, and 328 abandoned vehicle cases. 16. Residential • The City will utilize CDBG Thirty-four households received Continue Improvement Program funds or other funds, as CDBG funds through the Habitat available, to provide financial for Humanity Critical Home assistance for minor repairs maintenance repair program and an of homes owned and additional five households were occupied by lower -income supported through the CRID homeowners. Eligible repairs Alternatives Solar Improvements. include plumbing, electrical, During the 2014-2021 planning painting, carpentry, roof period, the City has worked with repairs, and masonry work. Habitat for Humanity on CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBR-20 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT rehabilitation programs. Additionally, CDBG-CV2 funds will be used for mortgage assistance. Since July 1, 2017, the City has funded $151,127.00 of CDBG funds towards the program administered through Habitat for Humanity Inland Valley. During the City's Consolidated Plan Cycle, which the City is in its 4th year of its 5-year plan the Program has assisted 18 households on a projected goal of 15 for the 5-year cycle. The City has continued to focus on this need and continues to place the high importance on assisting low-income residents with maintaining an affordable housing stock and ensuring that owners are able to address critical repairs needed to their homes through these grants. Eligible residents are eligible for $10,000 grants in address the critical needs necessary to their household. 17. Section 8 Rental • The City will continue to The Section 8 Rental Assistance Continue Assistance Program contract with the County of Program is administered by the Riverside to administer the Riverside County Housing Section 8 Rental Assistance Authority. The City assists qualified Program and provide rental tenants to apply for the Section 8 assistance to at least 105 very voucher/certificate program and low-income Temecula provides information about the households. Section 8 rental assistance • The City will support the voucher/certificate program. County of Riverside's Since 2014, 758 units have been applications for additional assisted. Section 8 allocation. City staff provides information on The City will promote the handouts and on the City website Section 8 program to second regarding affordable housing and unit owners by publicizing contact information for the this program and making the Riverside County Housing information known to City Authority regarding Section 8. and County agencies and to housing nonprofits. 18. Mobile Home • The City will provide The City will provide technical Continue Assistance Program technical assistance to assistance to Heritage Mobile Home (MPAP) Heritage Mobile Home Park Park residents in pursuing MPAP residents in pursuing MPAP funds in the event that the owners funds in the event that the propose to close the mobile home owners propose to close the park. There are been no requests for mobile home park. this assistance during the 2014-2021 planning period. Promote Equal Housing Opportunities 19. Equal Housing • Temecula will continue to The City continued to participate in Continue Opportunity participate in the Riverside the Riverside County Consortium in County Consortium in implementing the fair housing plan, implementing the fair post information regarding fair housing plan. housing services on the City • The City will place fair website, and provide referral housing brochures at City CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-21 counters, public libraries, the services to the Fair Housing Temecula Community Program of Riverside County. Center, and the Temecula City staff placed posters at all Community Recreation affordable housing locations, City Center. Hall, public libraries, the • The City will continue to post Community Center, and the information regarding fair Community Recreation Center. All housing services on the City brochures updated and provided to website. Future fair housing the City by the Fair Housing workshops can also be Council are placed at these locations advertised on the City for the public to access. website. • The City will continue to The City actively maintains a provide referral services to website identifying affordable the Fair Housing Program of housing complexes in Temecula. Riverside County for To support and ensure equal access residents inquiring about fair to housing opportunities, the City housing issues. has utilizes CDBG funds to • The City will continue to affirmatively further fair housing update its fair housing choice through the provision of fair brochures to conform to housing education, counseling, anti - state law. discrimination and landlord -tenant • The City will undertake mediation services, and to provide ongoing efforts to educate equal housing opportunities for the public about affordable protected classes. Since July 1, 2017, housing. the City has funded $76,838 of CDBG funds towards the program administered through Fair Housing Council of Riverside County. During the City's Consolidated Plan Cycle, which the City is in its 4th year of its 5-year plan the Program has assisted 1,205 households on a projected goal of 1,750 households for the 5-year cycle. The City has continued to focus on this need and continues to place the high importance on assisting low-income residents with fair housing services for both residents and landlords. 20. Housing Referral • The City will continue to The City continued to offer housing Continue Directory offer housing referral referral services through its Housing services through its Housing Referral Directory. Referral Directory. 21. Housing for • The City will continue to The City continues to implement Continue Persons with treat licensed residential care the Temecula Municipal Code Disabilities facilities and State -licensed which treats licensed residential care group homes serving six or facilities and State -licensed group fewer persons no differently homes serving six or fewer persons than other by right single- no differently than other by right family housing uses. In single-family housing uses. addition, the City will Implementation of the Municipal continue to allow residential Code also allows residential care care facilities with seven or facilities with seven or more persons more persons, by right in the by right in the High Residential zone High Residential zone district district and conditionally in all other and conditionally in all other residential zones. residential zones. The City continues to support and • The City will continue to provide resources for individual provide a formalized homeowners requesting exemptions reasonable accommodation to zoning and development CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBR-22 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT process for individual homeowners requesting exceptions to zoning and development standards to accommodate a disability. standards in order to accommodate a disability. The City has updated Pala Park to be more accessible. Separately the City has invested in Eagle Soar Splash Pad, an accessible splash pad. The City also makes significant investments in specific programming for people with special needs and hybrid programming (helping people with disabilities interface with those people without disabilities). 22. Employee Housing • The City will amend the The City has undertaken a number Continue Temecula Municipal Code to of updates to its Municipal Code define and permit employee during the past planning period to housing providing address State law. The City will accommodations for six or continue to implement amendments fewer employees. Employee to its Municipal Code to meet all housing shall be deemed a State law requirements. single-family structure with a residential land use designation. • The City will review, and if necessary amend the Temecula Municipal Code to comply with the other requirements of the Employee Housing Act detailed above. 23. Housing Element • The City will continue to The City continues to submit annual Continue Monitoring and require that service agencies reports to the state assessing the Reporting report their accomplishments implementation of the General Plan annually. This information and Housing Element. will be used by the City to assess the community's housing needs and how well these needs are being met by the existing programs. • The City will continue to submit annual reports to the state assessing the implementation of the General Plan and Housing Element. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-23 This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-24 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT III. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT 1. Introduction and Background The purpose of the Housing Needs Assessment is to describe housing, economic, and demographic conditions in Temecula, assess the demand for housing for households at all income levels, and document the demand for housing to serve various special needs populations. The Housing Needs Assessment also addresses whether assisted housing projects are at risk of converting to market rate projects. The Housing Needs Assessment is intended to assist Temecula in developing housing goals and formulating policies and programs that address local housing needs. Several sources of data were used to describe existing demographic and housing conditions, including the following: • Pre -Certified Local Housing Data package for the City of Temecula developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and pre -certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for use in 6th cycle housing elements. • Data from the 2010 U.S. Census, 2014-2018 U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS), California Department of Finance (DOF), California Employee Development Department (EDD), and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is included to provide information on population, household, housing, income, employment, and other demographic characteristics. • Regional information from the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County. • Other sources of economic data such as information from the websites Zillow.com and Apartments.com, and other published data are used where current Census, ACS, DOF, HUD, and other standard data sources do not provide relevant data. • Interviews with key agencies and organizations were conducted to obtain information on housing needs and, in particular, needs of populations with special housing needs. • Research and data related to fair housing, including Census Scope, Social Science Data Analysis Network, the UC Davis Center for Regional Change and Rabobank, N.A., and the California Fair Housing Task Force. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-25 Due to the use of multiple data sources (with some varying dates), there are slight variations in some of the information, such as total population and total household numbers, presented in this document. However, these variations do not significantly affect the discussion of overall housing trends and changes. 2. Population Trends and Characteristics Population Growth Table 3 shows population growth for Temecula and other jurisdictions in the region from 2000 through 2020. According to data prepared by the California DOF, the population of Temecula in 2020 was 111,970 persons, an increase of approximately 11.9% since 2010. During the previous decade (2000 to 2010), the City's population increased by 73.4%. Temecula's growth rate has been higher than the countywide growth rate, with Riverside County experiencing significantly lower population growth rates than Temecula during the 2000 to 2010 period, and slightly lower population growth rates than Temecula during the 2010 to 2020 period, as shown in Table 3. Factors for growth include its affordable housing (compared to Los Angeles, Orange County and San Diego County) desirable climate, high quality education system, and geographical features. The rapid growth in Temecula during the 2000 to 2010 period can be partially attributed to the annexation of Vail Ranch in 2001, and Redhawk in 2005. Other Of neighboring jurisdictions, the City of Murrieta had both the greatest numeric change in population (71,279 persons) and the largest percentage change in population (161%). Table 3: Population Trends — Neighboring Jurisdictions Jurisdiction 2000 2010 2020 Change 2000-20 %Change 2000.20 Temecula 57,716 100,097 111,970 54,254 94.0% Lake Elsinore 28,928 51,821 63,453 34,525 119.4% Hemet 58,812 78,657 85,175 26,363 44.8% Perris 36,189 68,386 80,201 44,012 121.6% Murrieta 44,282 103,466 115,561 71,279 161.0% Riverside County 1,545,387 2,189,641 2,442,304 896,917 58.0% Sources: US Census, 2000; DOF, 2020 Age Changes in the age groups can indicate future housing needs. Table 4 compares age cohort sizes in 2018 for Temecula and Riverside County. In Temecula, children under 15 comprise 22.9% of the City's population, teens and young adults (15 — 24) represent 14.3%, and CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBR-26 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT adults in family -forming age groups (25 - 44) comprise 26.5%. Adults aged 45 to 64 represent 26.1% of the population and seniors (65 and over) comprise 10.3%. In 2018, the median age in Temecula (34.8 years) was half a year lower than that of Riverside County (35.3 years) and a year and a half lower than the statewide median age (36.3 years). The median age of City residents increased, up from 32.8 years in 2010. Table 4: Population by Age (2018) Age Temecula Number Percent Riverside County Number Percent Under 5 Years 7,165 6.4% 158,008 6.6% 5 to 9 8,474 7.6% 169,403 7.1 % 10 to 14 10,027 8.9% 177,796 7.5% 15 to 19 8,768 7.8% 177,697 7.5% 20 to 24 7,232 6.4% 170,153 7.1 % 25 to 34 14,834 13.3% 328,917 13.8% 35 to 44 14,957 13.3% 303,627 12.7% 45 to 54 17,390 15.5% 303,884 12.8% 55 to 64 11,849 10.6% 265,192 11.1 % 65 to 74 7,363 6.6% 186,772 7.8% 75 to 84 3,039 2.7% 101,900 4.3% 85 and Over 1,132 1.0% 39,937 1.7% TOTAL 112,230 100% 2,383,286 100% Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS Race and Ethnicity Table 5 shows the ethnic composition of Temecula's population. More than two-thirds (69.2%) of the City's population identify as White. The next largest racial group is "other race" (9.3%), followed by Asian (8.6%), "two or more races" (6.7%), Black or African American (5.1 %), American Indian or Alaska Native (0.6%), and Native Hawaiian and w Pacific Islander (0.6%). More than one quarter of the population (29.6%) is of Hispanic or Latino origin. Temecula is a less culturally diverse community than the County as a whole, which can influence buying preferences and the demand for special needs housing (e.g., multigenerational housing). Table 5: Race and Ethnicity (2018) Temecula Riverside County Race/Ethnicity Number Percent Number Percent White 77,689 69.2% 1,450,134 60.8% Black or African American 5,675 5.1 % 153,545 6.4% CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-27 American Indian or Alaska Native 639 0.6% 19,281 0.8% Asian 9,656 8.6% 152,130 6.4% Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander 624 0.6% 6,843 0.3% Some Other Race 10,440 9.3% 495,241 20.8% Two or More Races 7,507 6.7% 106,112 4.5% TOTAL 112,230 100% 2,383,286 100% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 33,194 29.6% 1,154,517 48.40% Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS Employment One of the factors that can contribute to an increase in demand for housing is expansion of the employment base. Table 6 shows the employment and unemployment rates for persons 16 years and older that were in the labor force in 2010 and 2018. In 2018, ACS data indicated that there were 56,371 employed persons in the Temecula labor force and that the unemployment rate was approximately 6.7%, a decrease from 8.6% in 2010 as the City (and country) emerged from the Great Recession. According to the labor report data compiled by the California EDD, the Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario Metropolitan Area's average annual unemployment rate in 2018 was estimated at 4.3%, Riverside County's rate was 4.5%, while California's was 4.1%. Table 6: Job Growth and Employment Status 2010 Number Percent 2018 Number Percent Total Persons in Labor Force 49,321 100% 56,371 100% Employed 45,094 91.4% 52,619 93.3% Unemployed 4,227 8.6% 3,752 6.7% Sources: US Census, 2006-2010 ACS and 2014-2018 ACS Industry and Occupations Of Temecula's employed residents, the "Educational services, health care and social assistance" industry employed the most people at 20.7%. The second largest employment sector was the "Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation, food services" industry, which had 16.1 % of the total employed persons in Temecula. The top two employment categories in Riverside County were the "Educational services, health care and social assistance" industry at 20.7% and the "Retail trade" industry at 12.9%. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBR-28 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 7: Jobs by Industry Industry Number Percent Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, mining 228 0.4% Construction 3,348 6.5% Manufacturing 4,564 8.8% Wholesale trade 1,326 2.6% Retail trade 6,067 11.8% Transportation, warehousing, utilities 2,872 5.6% Information 1,131 2.2% Finance and insurance, real estate and rental and leasing 3,013 5.8% Professional, scientific, management, administrative, waste mgmt. 5,356 10.4% Educational services, health care and social assistance 10,691 20.7% Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation, food services 7,300 14.2% Other services 2,470 4.8% Public administration 3,210 6.2% TOTAL (Civilian Labor Force) 51,576 100% Armed Forces 1,043 100% Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS The City's workforce holds a variety of types of jobs as shown in Table 8, with the largest sector (38.8%) working in management, business, science, and arts occupations, followed by 24.1% in sales and office occupations. Employment and occupation trends play an important role in defining housing needs. This relationship extends beyond the impact of employment growth on housing demand in the City and includes how wage levels and median earnings affect the type of housing affordable to workers and households in Temecula. There is a significant gap, for example, between the median earnings of a resident employed in management and a resident employed in a service occupation, and this translates into the type of housing that is needed in the City. Table 8: Jobs by Occupation Occupation Number Percent Median Earnings* Management, business, science, and arts occupations 20,013 38.8% $72,450 Service occupations 10,783 20.9% $22,418 Sales and office occupations 12,429 24.1 % $32,454 Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations 3,622 7.0% $47,230 Production, transportation, and material moving 4,729 9.2% $35,390 *Median earnings in previous 12 months prior to survey Sources: SCAG 6th Cycle Data Package; US Census, 2014-2018 ACS CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-29 Travel to Work Approximately 53% of Temecula workers 16 years and over travelled less than 30 minutes to work. Comparatively, more than a quarter (25.5%) of workers drive more than 60 minutes to work, which reflects the fact that many individuals working in Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego counties live in Temecula due to its relatively more affordable home prices. Most Temecula workers, 78.0%, drive alone to work and 11.4% carpool. Table 9 identifies travel time to work and Table 10 identifies commute methods for Temecula workers in 2018. Table 9: Travel Time to Work (2018) Number Percent Less than 10 minutes 5,726 12.1% 10-19 minutes 13,544 28.6% 20-29 minutes 5,702 12.0% 30-44 minutes 5,710 12.0% 45-59 minutes 4,625 9.8% 60 + minutes 12,092 25.5% Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS Table 10: Commute Method (2018) Number Percent Drive Alone 39,867 78.0% Carpooled 5,827 11.4% Public Transportation 50 0.1% Walk 611 1.2% Other 1,044 2.0% Work at Home 3,716 7.3% Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-30 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT C. Household Characteristics According to the Census, a household is defined as all persons living in a housing unit. This definition includes families (related individuals living together), unrelated individuals living together, and individuals living alone. A housing unit is defined by the Census as a house, an apartment, a mobile home, a group of rooms, or a single room that is occupied (or if vacant, is intended for occupancy) as separate living quarters. Separate living quarters are those in which the occupants live and eat separately from any other persons in the building and which have direct access from the outside of the building or through a common hall. The occupants may be a single family, one person living alone, two or more families living together, or any other group of related or unrelated persons who share living arrangements. People living in retirement homes or other group living situations are not considered "households" for the purpose of the U.S. Census count. The household characteristics in a community, including household size, income, and the presence of special needs households, are important factors in determining the size and type of housing needed in the City. Table 11 below identifies the ages of householders in Temecula and Riverside County in 2018 based on ACS data from 2014-2018. Homeowner households are generally headed by residents early middle-aged to middle-aged, with 56.4% of homeowner households headed by a resident 35-59 years of age; however,13.5% of homeowner households are headed by someone 65-74 years. Households who rent their homes trend slightly younger; about 74% of renter households are headed by a person aged 25-54. Qv CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-31 Table 11: Households by Tenure and Age (2018) Temecula Riverside County Number % Number % Total: 33,889 - 718,349 Owner Occupied: 22,127 65.3% 472,401 65.8% Householder 15 to 24 years 172 0.5% 2,850 0.4% Householder 25 to 34 years 2,425 7.2% 43,381 6.0% Householder 35 to 44 years 3,843 11.3% 77,261 10.8% Householder 45 to 54 years 5,896 17.4% 101,801 14.2% Householder 55 to 59 years 2,742 8.1 % 54,048 7.5% Householder 60 to 64 years 2,214 6.5% 49,348 6.9% Householder 65 to 74 years 2,977 8.8% 80,773 11.2% Householder 75 to 84 years 1,384 4.1 % 46,189 6.4% Householder 85 years and older 474 1.4% 16,750 2.3% Renter Occupied: 11,762 34.7% 245,948 34.2% Householder 15 to 24 years 565 1.7% 12,648 1.8% Householder 25 to 34 years 2,604 7.7% 56,200 7.8% Householder 35 to 44 years 3,037 9.0% 60,241 8.4% Householder 45 to 54 years 3,039 9.0% 47,171 6.6% Householder 55 to 59 years 966 2.9% 18,293 2.5% Householder 60 to 64 years 403 1.2% 14,055 2.0% Householder 65 to 74 years 809 2.4% 21,041 2.9% Householder 75 to 84 years 239 0.7% 10,839 1.5% Householder 85 years and older 100 0.3% 5,460 0.8% Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS 5-Year Data Profile (Table B25007) Table 12 identifies the household sizes by housing tenure. In 2018, the majority of households consisted of 2 to 4 persons, which is consistent with the County's profile although Temecula's percentage was higher (70.5% vs. 60.3%). Large households of 5 or more persons made up 15.6% of the total households in Temecula. The average household size was 3.31 persons in Temecula, compared to 3.27 persons for the County. Additionally, the average household size in 2018 for an owner - occupied unit was 3.34 persons per household and 3.25 persons per household for a renter -occupied unit. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBR-32 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 12: Household Size by Tenure (2018) Temecula Riverside County Number % Number % Owner Households 22,127 100.0% 472,401 100.0% Householder living alone 2,659 12.0% 94,214 19.9% Households 2-4 persons 16,040 72.5% 297,075 62.9% Large households 5+ persons 3,428 15.5% 81,112 17.2% Average Household Size 3.34 persons 3.25 persons Renter Households 11,762 100.0% 245,948 100.0% Householder living alone 2,065 17.6% 61,899 25.2% Households 2-4 persons 7,852 66.8% 135,765 55.2% Large households 5+ persons 1,845 15.7% 48,284 19.6% Average Household Size 3.25 persons 3.3 persons Total Households 33,889 100.0% 718,349 100.0% Householder living alone 4,724 13.9% 156,113 21.7% Households 2-4 persons 23,892 70.5% 432,840 60.3% Large households 5+ persons 5,273 15.6% 129,396 18.0% Average Household Size 3.31 persons 3.27 persons Sources: SCAG 6th Cycle Data Package; U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS; 2014-2018 ACS 5-Year Data Profile (Table B25009) D. Income Household Income From 2000 to 2018, the median household income increased by 52.8% to $90,964 and the per capita income increased by 58.3% to $34,135. From 2010 to 2018, there was an increase in both per capita and median household incomes. Table 13 identifies the per capita and median household incomes. Table 13: Median Household and Per Capita Income 2000 2010 2018 Median Household Income $59,516 $77,850 $90,964 Per Capita Income $21,557 $29,089 $34,135 Sources: US Census, 2000; US Census, 2014-2018 ACS In 2018, the majority (76.9%) of Temecula's households earned in excess of $50,000 per year. The incidence of households earning less than $35,000 per year was significantly higher among renter households (25.5%) than owner households (9.7%). Table 14 identifies household income by tenure. As shown in Table 14, the median income of owner households is approximately $43,000 more than renter households. Compared to the County, median household incomes are higher for both owner and renter households - by 37.6% and 50.9%, respectively. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-33 Table 14: Household Income for All Households and by Tenure (2018) Income All Households Number Percent Owner Households Number Percent Renter Households Number Percent Less than $5,000 485 1.4% 195 0.9% 290 2.5% $5,000 to $9,999 328 1.0% 65 0.3% 263 2.2% $10,000 to $14,999 706 2.1% 327 1.5% 379 3.2% $15,000 to $19,999 707 2.1% 256 1.2% 451 3.8% $20,000 to $24,999 901 2.7% 268 1.2% 633 5.4% $25,000 to $34,999 2,008 5.9% 1,026 4.6% 982 8.3% $35,000 to $49,999 2,706 8.0% 1,391 6.3% 1,315 11.2% $50,000 to $74,999 5,585 16.5% 3,250 14.7% 2,335 19.9% $75,000 to $99,999 5,173 15.3% 3,331 15.1% 1,842 15.7% $100,000 to $149,999 7,904 23.3% 5,770 26.1% 2,134 18.1% $150,000 or more 7,386 21.8% 6,248 28.2% 1,138 9.7% Median Household Income - Temecula $90,964 $107,349 $64,060 Median Household Income - Riverside County $63,948 $77,991 $42,445 Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS Households by Income Group A special aggregation of 2013-2017 ACS data performed by HUD - tided the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data - provides a breakdown of households by income group by tenure. The number of households in extremely low, very low, low, and moderate/above moderate -income groups is shown in Table 15. Nearly 80% of all households are at or above moderate income. The HUD CHAS data indicates the extremely low-income group represents 5.6% of households, and a higher proportion are renters (1,315) than owners (565). The very low-income group represents 6.6% of households and the low-income group represents 10.4% of households. The City's RHNA (see Table 32) identifies the City's share of regional housing needs for extremely low, very low, and low-income households, as well as for moderate and above moderate -income households. As shown in Table 15, there is a larger proportion of renters in the extremely low, very low, and low-income groups, while there is a larger proportion of moderate and above moderate -income groups in owner households. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-34 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 15: Households by Income Group (2017) Income Group Total Owner Renter Households Percent Households Percent Households Percent Extremely Low (<30% AMI) 1,880 5.6% 565 2.6% 1,315 10.9% Very Low (31-50% AMI) 2,210 6.6% 705 3.3% 1,505 12.5% Low (51-80% AMI) 3,510 10.4% 1,900 8.8% 1,610 13.4% Moderate and Above Moderate (>80% AMI) 26,050 1 77.4% 18,430 1 85.3% 7,620 63.3% TOTAL 33,645 100% 21,600 100% 12,045 100% Source: HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), 2013-2017 Available: https:Ilwww.huduser.gov/portalldatasetslcp.html Poverty Levels The 2014-2018 ACS data indicates that 1,632 (5.9%) of all Temecula families and 7,678 individuals (6.9%) had incomes at or below the poverty level. According to the ACS data, poverty rates are disparate between races and economic indicators are greatest for those identified as Black or African American. In 2018, those identified as Black or African American had a poverty rate of 11.8% compared to 9.2% for American Indian and Alaska Natives, 8.7% for "some other race alone," 7.8% for Hispanics/Latinos, 7.0% for Asians, and 6.4% for Whites. The level of poverty in a jurisdiction often influences the need for housing to accommodate those persons and families in the very low and low-income categories. The U.S. Census Bureau measures poverty by using a set of money income thresholds that vary by family size and composition of who is in poverty. If a family's total income is less than the family's threshold, then that family and every individual in it is considered in poverty. For example, the poverty threshold for a family of two with no children would be $17,120, a household of two with a householder aged 65 or older and no children has a poverty threshold of $15,453, and the poverty threshold of a family of four with two children under the age of 18 would be $25,926. (U.S. Census Bureau, 2019). Extremely Low -Income Households Extremely low-income (ELI) households are defined as those earning up to 30% of the area median household income. For Riverside County, the median household income in 2020 was $75,300. For ELI households in Temecula (and the rest of Riverside County), this results in an income of $26,200 or less for a four -person household or $15,850 for a one -person household. ELI households have a variety of housing situations and needs. For example, most families and individuals CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-35 receiving only public assistance, such as social security disability insurance or disability insurance, qualify as ELI households. Table 16 provides representative occupations with hourly wages that are close to, but not within, the ELI income range as reported by the Employment Development Department. Note that all occupations indicated median annual wages above the ELI income threshold for a one -person household, perhaps suggesting that any employment in Temecula could lift a household out of the extremely low-income group. As shown in Table 15, ELI households make up 5.6% of all households in Temecula. Based on Table 29, 86.4% of ELI households in Temecula pay more than 30% of their incomes for housing. Table 16: Occupations with Wages for Extremely Low to very Low -Income Households (2020) Occupation Title Median Hourly Wage Cleaners of Vehicles and Equipment $12.67 Bartenders $12.64 Gaming Change Persons and Booth Cashiers $12.63 Hosts and Hostesses, Restaurant, Lounge, and Coffee Shop $12.59 Cooks, Fast Food $12.58 Pressers, Textile, Garment, and Related Materials $12.57 Amusement and Recreation Attendants $12.56 Waiters and Waitresses $12.56 Dishwashers $12.40 Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Occupations $12.36 Graders and Sorters, Agricultural Products $12.33 Ushers, Lobby Attendants, and Ticket Takers $12.32 Gaming Dealers $12.23 Door -to -Door Sales Workers, News and Street Vendors, and Related Workers $12 20 Farmworkers and Laborers, Crop, Nursery, and Greenhouse $12.20 Dining Room and Cafeteria Attendants and Bartender Helpers $12.15 Source: Employment Development Department, Long -Term Occupational Projections 2018-2028 (accessed May 2021) Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583(a)(1), 50% of Temecula's very low-income regional housing needs assigned by HCD are projected to be extremely low-income households. As a result, from the very low-income need of 1,359 units (see Table 32), the City has a projected need of 679 units for extremely low-income households (i.e., households earning 30% or less of the area median income). Based on current figures, extremely low-income households will most likely be CITY OF TLMLCULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-36 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT facing an overpayment, overcrowding, or substandard housing conditions. Some extremely low-income households could include individuals with mental or other disabilities and special needs. To address the range of needs of ELI households, the City will implement several programs including the following programs (refer to the Housing Element Policy Document for more detailed descriptions of these programs): • Program 4: Replacement of Affordable Units • Program 7: Land Assemblage and Affordable Housing Development • Program 8: Housing for Extremely Low -Income Households • Program 8: Special Needs Housing Construction • Program 14: Emergency Shelters and Transitional/Supportive Housing • Program 17: Preserve At -Risk Housing Units • Program 20: Section 8 Rental Assistance Program • Program 22: Equal Housing Opportunity • Program 23: Housing Referral Directory • Program 24: Economic Displacement Risk Analysis E. Housing Characteristics Housing Type Table 17 identifies the types of housing units in Temecula in 2020. The table summarizes total housing stock according to the type of structure. As shown in the table, the majority of housing in Temecula is single- family detached housing, which accounted for 78.5% of units in 2020. Mobile homes represent 0.4% of the housing stock. Multifamily units represent 17.5% of the housing stock, with duplex through fourplex units accounting for 2.3% and multifamily developments with five or more units accounting for 15.2%. Single-family attached homes represent 7.2% of housing units. Table 17: Housing Stock by Type and Vacancy (2020) Total Single Family Multifamily Mobile Homes Occupied Vacant Detached Attached 2-4 5 +Units Units 36,550 28,701 1,300 847 5,540 162 34,511 2,039 Percent 100% 78.5% 7.2% 2.3% 15.2% 0.4% 94.4% 5.6% Sources: SCAG 6th Cycle Data Package; DOF E-5 Report 2020 Vacancy Rate Table 18 also shows the number and percentage of occupied units and the percentage of vacant units. It is important to note that these counts CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-37 include all vacant units, including those units that are newly constructed but not yet occupied. In order for the housing market to function properly in a city there should always be some level of housing vacancy, otherwise rents or housing prices could skyrocket. The 5.6% vacancy in Temecula is in line with the historical equilibrium in California (5.5% for rental vacancy and 1.2% for homeownership vacancy). ' The 2014-2018 ACS data indicates that there were 2,047 vacant units in 2018. As shown in Table 18, of the total vacant units in 2018, 717 were for rent, 169 were for sale, 180 were rented or sold but not yet occupied, and 503 were for seasonal, recreational, or occasional use. The overall vacancy rate in Temecula in 2018 was 6.0%, a rate which has fluctuated since 2010. Table 18: Vacancy by Type (2018) Vacancy Type Number Percent For rent 717 35.0% Rented, not occupied 117 5.7% For sale only 169 8.3% Sold, not occupied 63 3.1% For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 503 24.6% For migrant workers 0 0.0% Other vacant 478 23.4% TOTAL 2, 047 100% Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS Housing Conditions The U.S. Census provides only limited data that can be used to infer the condition of Temecula's housing stock. In most cases, the age of a community's housing stock is a good indicator of the condition of the housing stock. Moreover, many federal and state programs also use the age of housing as one factor in determining housing rehabilitation needs. Typically, housing over 30 years of age is more likely to have rehabilitation needs that may include plumbing, roof repairs, electrical repairs, foundation rehabilitation, or other significant improvements. The 2014-2018 ACS data indicates that only a small percentage (1.9%) of the housing in the City is greater than 50 years old (i.e., built before 1970). Another 5.3% of units were built between 1970 and 1979. The majority of housing in the city (92.8%) was built after 1980. The age of the housing stock indicates that while the need for maintenance and rehabilitation assistance may grow during the planning period, it will likely be attributable to only a small proportion of total housing. Units built prior to 1970 may require aesthetic and maintenance repairs 1 "California's low residential vacancy rates signal more construction," First Tuesday Journal (February 15, 2021). CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-38 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT including roof, window, and paint improvements and some units in this age range may also require significant upgrades to structural, foundation, electrical, plumbing, and other systems. When examining a housing stock to determine what condition it is in, there are certain factors that the Census considers. For example, older units may not have plumbing that is fully functional or the plumbing might be substandard. Table 19 indicates that a small percentage of occupied dwelling units (0.2%) lacked complete plumbing facilities in 2018. Table 19: Housing Stock Conditions (2018) Year Structure Built Owner -Occupied Number Percent Renter -Occupied Number Percent Total Number Percent 2014 or later 539 2.4% 108 0.9% 647 1.9% 2010 to 2013 879 4.0% 390 3.3% 1,269 3.7% 2000 to 2009 7,136 32.3% 4,406 37.5% 11,542 34.1% 1990 to 1999 7,643 34.5% 3,470 29.5% 11,113 32.8% 1980 to 1989 4,516 20.4% 2,356 20.0% 6,872 20.3% 1970 to 1979 1,004 4.5% 808 6.9% 1,812 5.3% 1960 to 1969 226 1.0% 71 0.6% 297 0.9% 1950 to 1959 93 0.4% 50 0.4% 143 0.4% 1940 to 1949 27 0.1 % 44 0.4% 71 0.2% 1939 or earlier 64 0.3% 59 0.5% 123 0.4% TOTAL 22,127 1 100% 11,762 100% 33,889 100% Plumbing Facilities (Occupied Units) Units with Complete Plumbing Facilities 22,095 99.9% 11,727 99.7% 33,822 99.8% Units Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities 32 0.1% 35 0.3% 67 0.2% Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS (Table B25036) As noted, the City's housing stock is relatively new with only 7.2% of dwelling units in Temecula having been constructed prior to 1980. As such, while structural deterioration and maintenance problems may exist, only a small portion is likely to require rehabilitation. To supplement the Census information regarding housing conditions, the City of Temecula included specific questions pertaining to the quality of the City's housing stock in its Housing Element Update community survey, which was available on the City's website from March 26 through September 30, 2020 (this is further detailed in Appendix B). When asked to rate the physical condition of the residence they lived in, the majority (46.4%) responded that their home shows signs of minor deferred maintenance such as peeling paint or chipped stucco, while 33.2% indicated that their home was in excellent condition. Another 12.6% of respondents indicated that their home CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-39 Qv was in need of a modest repair (like a new roof or new siding) and only 5.0% reported that their home needed a major repair (such as new foundation, complete new plumbing, or complete new electrical). Homeowners were more likely than renters to respond that their residence was in excellent condition (40% to 16%). Community members were also asked to report the type of home improvements they have considered making to their homes. The most popular answers that applied were improvements for painting, "does not apply" (meaning they are not considering any improvements at this time), solar, and new heating and air conditioning (HVAC). Additionally, the City's Planning Division has identified homes built prior to 1990 as potentially in need of rehabilitation and multifamily homes built prior to 2000 may be in need of energy efficiency retrofits and other rehabilitation. The City will continue to implement its Residential Improvement Program using CDBG funds to help lower - income homeowners to rehabilitate substandard housing. Overcrowding Typically, a housing unit is considered overcrowded if there is more than one person per room and severely overcrowded if there are more than 1.5 persons per room. Table 20 summarizes overcrowding data for Temecula. It should be noted that kitchenettes, strip or Pullman kitchens, bathrooms, porches, balconies, foyers, halls, half -rooms, utility rooms, unfinished attics, basements, or other space for storage are not defined as rooms for Census purposes. Overcrowded households are usually a reflection of the lack of affordable housing available. Households that cannot afford housing units suitably sized for their families are often forced to live in housing that is too small for their needs, which may result in poor physical condition of the dwelling unit. In 2018, 994 housing units (2.9% of the total occupied units) were overcrowded, which represented 2% of owner units and 4.7% of renter units. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-40 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 20: Overcrowding by Tenure (2018) Persons per Room Owner Number Percent Renter Number Percent Total Number Percent 1.00 or less 21,682 98.0% 11,213 95.3% 32,895 97.1% 1.01 to 1.50 378 1.7% 396 3.4% 774 2.3% 1.51 or more 67 0.3% 153 1.3% 220 0.6% TOTAL 22,127 100% 11,762 100% 33,889 100% Overcrowded 445 2.0% 549 4.7% 994 2.9% Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS As shown in Table 21, the average household size in Temecula was 3.31 persons in 2018, which was slightly higher than the City's average household size in 2010 (3.15). Table 21 shows Temecula's household sizes for owner, renter, and all households. The average household size was higher for owners (3.34 persons). Renter households had an average size of 3.25 persons. The majority (72.5%) of owner households had two to four persons, compared to 66.8% of renter households that were two to four persons in size. Table 22 identifies bedrooms by tenure. Although large owner households and large renter households are proportionally equivalent (15.5% vs. 15.70/o), the proportion of larger homes (4 or more bedrooms) is significantly higher for owner households. Table 21: Household Size by Tenure (2018) Household Size Owner Number Percent Renter Number Percent Total Number Percent 1-person 2,659 12.0% 2,065 17.6% 4,724 13.9% 2-person 6,974 31.5% 3,182 27.1% 10,156 30.0% 3-person 4,326 19.6% 2,137 18.2% 6,463 19.1% 4-person 4,740 21.4% 2,533 21.5% 7,273 21.5% 5-person 2,300 10.4% 1,334 11.3% 3,634 10.7% 6-person 749 3.4% 325 2.8% 1,074 3.2% 7-or-more-person 379 1.7% 186 1.6% 565 1.7% TOTAL 22,127 100% (65.3% of total) 11,762 100% (34.7% of total) 33,889 100% Average Household Size 3.34 3.25 3.31 Source: SCAG 6th Cycle Data Package CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-41 Table 22: Number of Bedrooms by Tenure (2018) Bedroom Type Number Owner Percent Renter Number Percent Total Number Percent No bedroom 65 0.3% 172 1.5% 237 0.7% 1-bedroom 6 0.0% 1,396 11.9% 1,402 4.1% 2-bedroom 1,375 6.2% 3,941 33.5% 5,316 15.7% 3-bedroom 8,416 38.0% 3,177 27.0% 11,593 34.2% 4-bedroom 9,090 41.1% 2,348 20.0% 11,438 33.8% 5 or more bedroom 3,175 14.3% 728 6.2% 3,903 11.5% TOTAL 22,127 100% 11,762 100% 33,889 100% Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS F. Housing Costs As shown in Figure 1, between 2000 and 2018, median home sales prices in Temecula increased 134% while prices in the SCAG region increased 151%. The 2018 median home sales price in Temecula was $460,000, down from a high of $491,500 experienced in 2006. Prices in the City have ranged from a low of 76.5% of the SCAG region median in 2008 to a high of 97.4% in 2004. In May 2021, there were 172 homes listed for sale on Zillow.com with prices ranging from $79,000 (manufactured home) to $6,900,000 for a 9 bed/10 bath home. Of these homes, there were 149 detached single- family homes with sales prices beginning at $429,999. As shown in Table 23, most homes for sale are in the $700,000+ price range (55.2%), with 32.6% of homes in the $500,000 to $699,999 range and 12.2% of homes priced under $500,000. Zillow identified the April 2021 median sales price as $586,159. While the median sales price is not affordable to lower and moderate -income households (see Table 28), the City's home sales prices, which are more than $100,000 higher compared to Riverside County (Zillow reported a median home sales price of $475,454 for the County in April 2021), could result in demand from the above -moderate income group who seek higher priced units that may offer more space or amenities than other homes in the southern California region, including Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego counties. Additionally, the long-term home cost impacts related to the COVID-19 pandemic remain to be seen. While it is possible that some price impacts are temporary (i.e., higher than average rental rates), it is possible that the pandemic will leave a permanent impact on the housing market; the City will continue to monitor these changes and work proactively to address issues related to home availability and cost as defined in the Housing Plan. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-42 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 23: Homes for Sale (May 2021) Price Homes Percent $700,000 and more 95 55.2% $600,000 - $699,999 27 15.7% $500,000 - $599,999 29 16.9% $400,000 - $499,999 20 11.6% $300,000 - $399,999 0 0% $200,000 - $299,999 0 0% $100,000 - $199,999 0 0% $0 - $99,999 1 0.6% Source: Zillow.com, 2021 Figure 1: Median Home Sales Price for Existing Homes $500.000 $400.000 - $300.000 $200,000 - - $100.000 — 120.0% 100.0% -'-- s0.0% 60.00/4 40.0% 20.0% 0.0% 00 (S' O1 0"� Off` 00 d, OA 00 d, 'y0 ,� Y'1. y", Y11 tih y0 yA y0 �O ry0 y0 0ry0 ry0 f �O 0f ti0 0'p �O �O �O �O 'p 'P --*—Temecula —*-- SGAG - - - Temecula Percentage of SCAG Price Source: SCAG 6th Cycle Data Package Housing costs are affected by supply and demand and can affect the affordability of the housing in the City of Temecula. Table 24 shows the median home value in Temecula was $426,400 in 2018. Home values in Temecula are some of the highest in the region, highlighting the importance of Temecula's commitment to continue to provide additional opportunities for more affordable and attainable housing options. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-43 Table 24: Median Home Value by Community Table 25: Rental Costs (2018) W J Jurisdiction Median Home Value Perris $261, 000 Menifee $329,800 Murrieta $400,300 Temecula $426,400 Lake Elsinore $333,600 Riverside County $347,600 Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates, 2018. Rental Housing Table 25 summarizes rents paid in Temecula in 2018 by rental range. The range with the highest percentage of units rented was between $1,500 and $1,999 at 33.4% (3,809 units). Only 8.7% of rentals were under $1,000 per month. Almost one-third (35.7%) of all rentals were over $2,000 per month. Based on a review of rental ads on Zillow.com, Hotpads.com, and Apartments.com, the median rent in Temecula is $2,435 per month. There were 120 rentals available in May 2021. Rents ranged from $1,460 to $3,000 for 2 bed/2 bath homes to $2,400 and more for a four -bedroom home. It should be noted that this data was collected during the COVID-19 pandemic, when rental rates are at an all-time high due to limited supply, public health concerns, and renters' inability to secure other safe and affordable housing options. Table 25 below reflects rental costs as of 2018, which may be more indicative of long- term rental rates than the units specifically listed for rent during the COVID-19 pandemic. Rent Range Number Percent Less than $500 215 1.9% $500 to $999 774 6.8% $1,000 to $1,499 2,520 22.1% $1,500 to $1,999 3,809 33.4% $2,000 to $2,499 2,575 22.6% $2,500 to $2,999 1,137 10.0% $3,000 or more 358 3.1 % Median (dollars) $ 1,787 Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-44 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 26: Rental Rates by Number of Bedrooms Bedroom Type Rental Survey Units Available Range Average Rent Studio 0 N/A N/A 1 bed 7 $1,345 - $2,850 $1,632 2 bed 80 $1,460 - $3,000 $1,816 3 bed 20 $2,000 - $3,600 $2,290 4 bed or more 13 $2,400+ N/A Sources: Zillow.com and Apartments.com, May 2021 Income Groups The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) publishes household income data annually for areas in California. Table 27 shows the maximum annual income level for each income group adjusted for household size for Riverside County. The maximum annual income data is then utilized to calculate the maximum affordable housing payments for different households (varying by income level) and their eligibility for housing assistance programs. • Extremely Low -Income Households have a combined income at or lower than 30% of area median income (AMI), as established by the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). • Very Low -Income Households have a combined income between 30 and 50% of AMI, as established by HCD. • Low -Income Households have a combined income between 50 and 80% of AMI, as established by HCD. • Moderate -Income Households have a combined income between 80 and 120% of AMI, as established by HCD. • Above Moderate -Income Households have a combined income greater than 120% of AMI, as established by HCD. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-45 Tabie 27: State Income Limits - Riverside County (2021) Income Group 1 Person 2 Person 3 Person 4 Person 5 Person 6 Person 7 Person 8 Person Extremely Low $16,600 $19,000 $21,960 $26,500 $31,040 $35,580 $40,120 $44,660 Very Low $27,650 $31,600 $35,550 $39,500 $42,700 $45,850 $49,000 $52,150 Low $44,250 $50,600 $56,900 $63,200 $68,300 $73,350 $78,400 $83,450 Moderate $65,100 $74,400 $83,700 $93,000 $100,450 $107,900 $115,300 $122,750 Above Moderate $65,100+ $74,400+ $83,700+ $93,000+ $100,450+ $107,900+ $115,300+ $122,750+ Source: HCD 2021 Riverside County Income Limits Housing Affordability Table 28 shows the estimated maximum rents and sales prices, respectively, that are affordable to very low, low, moderate, and above moderate -income households. Affordability is based on a household spending 30% or less of their total household income for shelter. Affordability is based on the maximum household income levels established by HCD (Table 27). The annual income limits established by HCD are similar to those used by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for administering various affordable housing programs. Maximum affordable sales price is based generally on the following assumptions: 4% interest rate, 30-year fixed loan, and down payments that vary with income level, as described in Table 3- 25. Comparing the maximum affordable housing costs in Table 28 to the rental rates in Table 25 and Table 26, rental rates in Temecula as of mid-2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic which has increased housing costs across the board, are generally affordable to moderate - income and above moderate -income households. While there may be IN, some units affordable to lower -income households, units are generally scarce. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Temecula, like cities all over the country, has seen limited supply and increased A*W*ANkL demand for safe and affordable housing. It can be expected that as the City recovers from the impacts related to COVID-19, housing options will increase to pre -pandemic levels and home costs may become more affordable. In May 2021, there were no rental units available under $1,345 a month - meaning available units are not affordable for extremely low or very low-income groups. Moderate and above moderate -income households can afford a broad range of available housing. Although there are homes for sale in Temecula available to very low, low, moderate, and above moderate income groups based on a comparison of Table 24 and Table 28, the majority of homes (i.e. in CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-46 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT the $700,000+ range) are affordable to only above moderate -income households. Table 28: Housing Affordability by Income Group One Person Two Person Four Person Six Person Income Group Home Sale Price* Monthly Rent or Housing Cost Home Sale Price* Monthly Rent or Housing Cost Home Sale Price* Monthly Rent or Housing Cost Home Sale Price* Monthly Rent or Housing Cost Extremely Low $55,163 $396 $63,941 $453 $92,887 $655 $126,874 $879 Very Low $100,051 $660 $114,682 $754 $143,945 $941 $167,550 $1,093 Low $165,423 $1,055 $188,833 $1,205 $235,848 $1,506 $270,347 $1,748 Moderate $255,004 $1,581 $290,315 $1,808 $360,740 $2,259 $417,119 $2,620 Above Moderate $255,004+ $1,581+ $290,315+ $1,808+ $360,740+ $2,259+ $417,119+ $2,620+ *Maximum affordable sales price is based on the following assumptions: 4.0% interest rate, 30-year fixed loan; down payment: $5, 000 — extremely low, $10, 000 — very low; $15, 000 — low, $25, 000 — moderate; property tax, utilities, and homeowners insurance as 30% of monthly housing cost (extremely low/very low), 28% of monthly housing cost (low), and 25% of monthly housing cost (moderate/above moderate). Homes sales prices are rounded to nearest $100. Source: De Novo Planning Group, 2021 Extremely Low income Households As previously described, extremely low-income households earn less than 30% of the County Area Median Income (AMI). Depending on the household size, these households can afford rents between $396 and $879 per month and homes priced at $55,163 to $126,874. As of May 2021, there were no rental homes listed on Zillow or Apartments.com that would be affordable to extremely low-income households. However, based on US Census data, approximately 8% of renters pay monthly rents affordable to extremely low-income households. Extremely low-income households may be able to afford to purchase a mobile home in Temecula; however, real estate listings for these homes indicate that homes affordable at this price point may have age restrictions and are in very limited supply. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-47 Very Low-income Households Very low-income households earn between 31% and 50% of the County Area Median Income (AMI). Depending on the household size, these households can afford rents between $660 to $1,093 per month and homes priced at $100,051 and $167,550. As of May 2021, there were no rental homes listed on Zillow or Apartments.com that could be affordable to very low-income households. However, based on US Census data, approximately 9% of renters pay monthly rents affordable to very low-income households (inclusive of units also affordable to extremely low-income). Very low-income households may be able afford to purchase a mobile home in Temecula; however, even those affordable to very low-income households may have age restrictions and there continues to be a very limited supply. Low-income Households Low-income households earn between 51% and 80% of the County Area Median Income (AMI). Depending on the household size, these households can afford rents between $1,055 to $1,748 per month and homes priced at $165,423 to $270,347. As of May 2021, some rentals listed on Zillow or Apartments.com would be affordable to low- income households; these units include one- and two -bedroom options. Based on US Census data, about one-third (30.8%) of renters pay monthly rents affordable to larger low-income households, meaning the rent is less than $1,748 per month. However, it should be noted that most renters are not six -person households, so the actual affordability by household size may be significantly more limited. Low- income households may be able to afford to purchase a mobile home in Temecula; however, even those affordable to low-income households may have age restrictions and there continues to be a very limited supply. Moderate income Households Moderate -income households earn between 80% and 120% of the County Area Median Income (AMI). Depending on the household size, these households can afford rents between $1,581 to $2,620 per month and homes priced at $255,004 to $417,119. As of May 2021, most rental units available were affordable to moderate -income households; these units included multifamily homes as well as single-family homes listed for rent by the homeowner. As of mid-2021, moderate -income households still cannot afford the vast majority of homes listed for sale as of May 2021 (which are primarily single-family detached homes), but may be able to afford other housing choices such as mobile homes and multifamily homes. This is further confirmed by US Census data. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-48 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Overpayment As with most communities, the location of the home is one of the biggest factors with regard to price. Relative to Riverside County, housing in Temecula is more expensive. Furthermore, housing is generally not affordable to extremely low, very low, and low-income households of smaller sizes. As shown in Table 29, 49.9% of renters in Temecula and 29.7% of homeowners overpay for housing. The majority of renters that overpay are in the lower income groups, with 79.8% in the extremely low- income group and 73.1% in the very low-income group severely overpaying for housing (over 50% of their monthly income). Comparatively, 77.9% of extremely low-income owners and 66% of very low-income owners are severely overpaying. Therefore, while overpayment is more predominate among lower income renter households, overpayment is an issue for both renter and owner households. More than one-third (37%) of all households in Temecula overpay for housing. Table 29: Households by Income Level and Overpayment (2017) Household Overpayment Renters Owners Total % of Income Category Extremely Low -Income Households 1,315 565 1,880 100% With Cost Burden >30% 1,115 / 84.8% 505 / 89.4% 1,625 86.4% With Cost Burden >50% 1,050 / 79.8% 440 / 77.9% 1,495 79.5% Very Low -Income Households 1,505 705 2,210 100% With Cost Burden >30% 1,300 / 86.4% 560 / 79.4% 1,855 83.9% With Cost Burden >50% 1,100 / 73.1% 465 / 66% 1,565 70.8% Low -Income Households 1,610 AOL 1,900 3,510 100% With Cost Burden >30% 1,375 / 85.4% 1,200 / 63.2% 2,580 73.5% With Cost Burden >50% 810 / 50.3% 770 / 40.5% 1,585 45.2% Total Extremely Low, Very Low, and 3,790 / 85.6% 2,265 / 71.5% 6,060 80% of lower income Low-lnco % households Moderate and Above Moderate -Income 7,620 18,430 26,050 100% Households With Cost Burden >30% 2,225 / 29.2% 4,160 / 22.6% 6,385 24.5% With Cost Burden >50% 210 / 2.8% 520 / 2.8% 735 2.8% 12,04 21,600 With Cost Burden >30% 6,015 / 49.9% 6,425 / 29.7% 12,445 37.0% With Cost Burden >50% 3,170 / 26.3% 2,195 / 10.2% 5,365 15.9% Note: Data is rounded to the nearest 5. Source: HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), 2013-2017 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-49 Affordable Housing Inventory The City uses various funding sources to preserve and increase the supply of affordable housing through new construction and the acquisition and/or rehabilitation of renter -occupied units. Affordability covenants in Temecula include developments that hold federal subsidy contracts, received tax credits or mortgage revenue bonds, and/or were financed by redevelopment funds or non-profit developers. Table 30 shows assisted units with covenants that require rents to be maintained at affordable levels for various agreed upon periods of time. In 2020, Temecula had 759 total deed -restricted affordable units. A recorded deed restriction serves as an affordability covenant that restricts the income level of a person who occupies the property, and ensures the property will remain available for low to moderate -income persons through the foreseeable future. Table 30: Deed Restricted Affordable Housing Units No. of No. of Total Project Name Address Type Restricted Units Units Cameron Historical Building 41925 5th St., Temecula CA Equal Opportunity 24 24 92590 Housing Cottages of Old Town Varies 17 17 Creekside Apts. 28955 Pujol St., Temecula CA 49 49 92590 Front Street Plaza 28693 Old Town Front St., Family/Seniors 23 23 Temecula CA 92590 Habitat I Varies 2 2 Habitat II Varies 7 7 Madera Vista Apts. 44155 Margarita Rd., Temecula Family/Seniors 110 110 CA 92592 Mission Village Apts. 28497 Pujol St., Temecula CA Family 75 76 92590 Oaktree Apts. 42176 Lyndie Ln., Temecula CA Family 44 45 92591 Palomar Heritage 41955 5th St., Temecula CA Family 22 22 Apartments 92590 Portola Terrace Apts. 28701 Pujol St., Temecula CA Family/Seniors 44 45 92590 Rancho California Apts. 29210 Stonewood Rd., Temecula Family 54 55 CA 92591 Rancho Creek Apts. 28464 Felix Valdez Rd., Temecula Family 30 30 CA 92590 Rancho West Apts. 42200 Main St., Temecula CA Family 150 150 92590 Riverbank Apts. 28500 Pujol St., Temecula CA Senior 65 66 92590 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-50 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Temecula Reflections 31111 Black Maple Dr., Temecula Family 11 11 Townhomes CA 92592 Warehouse at Creekside 42081 Third St., Temecula CA Family 32 32 Apts. 92590 Total 759 764 Sources: California Housing Partnership, 2021; National Housing Preservation Database, 2021; US Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2021 Mobile Homes Mobile homes offer a more affordable option for those interested in homeownership. The median value of a mobile home in Riverside County in 2018 was $60,200 (2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates Data Profile). Overall, 161 mobile homes are located in Temecula (DOF, Table 2: E- 5, 1 /1 /2019). As shown by Table 31, there is one mobile home park in the City with a total of 196 permitted spaces. In addition to the cost of a mobile home, owners must either purchase a residential site or rent a mobile home space. And although they present a more affordable alternative, mobile home rents have risen steadily throughout southern California since 2009.2 Table 31: Mobile Home Parks in Temecula Park Name/Address Operator MH Spaces HERITAGE MH COMMUNITY (33-0386-MP) 31130 S. CAREFREE COMMUNITIES CA, LLC 196 GENERAL KEARNY RD, TEMECULA, CA 92591 Total Mobile Home Spaces 196 Source: HCD 2019 Mobile Home Park Listings G. Future Housing Needs A Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) is mandated by the State of California (Government Code Section 65584) for regions to address housing issues and needs based on future growth projections for the area. The RHNP for Temecula is developed by the Southern California '416�;S3 Association of Governments (SCAG), and allocates a "fair share" of regional housing needs to individual cities. The intent of the RHNP is to ensure that local jurisdictions address not only the needs of their immediate areas but also that needs for the entire region are fairly distributed to all communities. A major goal of the RHNP is to ensure that every community provides an opportunity for a mix of affordable housing to all economic segments of its population. Z Jeff Collins, "Soaring rents jolt senior tenants at mobile home park," OC Registrar (July 20, 2018). CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-51 As the regional planning agency, SCAG determines the City's fair share of housing through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. This Housing Element addresses SCAG's RHNA schedule for the 6th Cycle, from 2021 through 2029. The City will need to plan to accommodate 4,193 new units, which includes 679 extremely low- income units, 680 very low, 801 low, 778 moderate, and 1,255 above moderate -income units. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583(a)(1), 50% of Temecula's very low-income regional housing needs assigned by HCD are extremely low-income households, and hence the 679 ELI units. Table 32 summarizes Temecula's fair share, progress to date, and remaining units. Table 32: Regional Housing Needs Allocation — 6th Cycle Status Extremely Low Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate TOTAL RHNA Allocation 679 680 801 778 1,255 4,193 Constructed/ 0 0 0 21 6 27 Under Construction/ Permits Issued (Since 6/30/2021) Approved/Entitled/ 24 8 99 0 0 132 In Process Remaining Allocation 656 671 702 757 1,249 4,034 Source: Southern California Association of Governments, 2020; City of Temecula, 2021 H. Special Needs Groups Government Code Section 65583(a)(7) requires a housing element to address special housing needs, such as those of the elderly; persons with disabilities, including a developmental disability, as defined in Section 4512 of the Welfare and Institutions Code; large families; farmworkers; families with female heads of households; and families and persons in need of emergency shelter. The needs of these groups often call for targeted program responses, such as temporary housing, preservation of residential hotels, housing with features to make it more accessible, and the development of four -bedroom apartments. Special needs groups have been identified and, to the degree possible, responsive programs are provided. A principal emphasis in addressing the needs of these groups is to continue to seek state technical assistance grants to identify the extent and location of those with special needs and identify ways and means to assist them. Local government budget limitations may act to limit effectiveness in implementing programs for these groups. Please refer to Section 6E of this Element for a discussion of agencies and programs that serve special needs populations in Temecula. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBR-52 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Seniors Seniors are considered persons age 65 or older in this Housing Element. However, it must be noted that some funding programs have lower age limits for persons to be eligible for their senior housing projects. Seniors have special housing needs primarily resulting from physical disabilities and limitations, fixed or limited income, and health care costs. Additionally, senior households also have other needs to preserve their independence including supportive services to maintain their health and safety, in -home support services to perform activities of daily living, conservators to assist with personal care and financial affairs, public administration assistance to manage and resolve estate issues, and networks of care to provide a wide variety of services and daily assistance. Various portions of the Housing Element describe characteristics of the senior population, the extent of their needs for affordable housing, housing designated for seniors, and City provisions to accommodate their need. Senior household growth in Temecula from 2010 to 2018 is shown in Table 33. Table 33: Senior Population and Households (2010 and 2018) Population 2010 2018 Number 7,009 11,534 Percent Change - 64.6% Annual Percent Change - 8.1% Households 2010 2018 Number 3,694 5,983 Percent Change - 62.0% Annual Percent Change - 7.7% Source: HCD 2019 Mobile Home Pork Listings Ithe large increase in elderly persons is likely due to the residential growth experienced in Temecula as well as aging in place of Temecula's residents. Senior households increased by 62% from 2010 to 2018. While seniors represent approximately 10% of the City's population, senior households represent approximately 18% of total households, which is primarily due to the smaller senior household size. Table 34 summarizes senior households by age and tenure. The majority of senior households are owners, 4,835 or approximately 81%, whereas approximately 19% of senior households, 1,148, are renters. Temecula has a lower percentage of both owner -occupied elderly households than in Riverside County (14.3% vs. 20%) and renter - occupied elderly households (3.4% vs. 5.2%). Elderly renters tend to prefer affordable units in smaller single -story structures or multi -story CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-53 structures with an elevator, close to health facilities, services, transportation, and entertainment. During the planning period, senior households are anticipated to increase at a rate commensurate with overall population and household growth. Senior housing types can include market rate homes, senior single-family housing communities, senior apartments, and mobile homes. Table 34: Householder Age by Tenure (2018) Owners Renters Age Group Number Percent Number Percent 65-74 years 2,977 61.6% 809 70.5% 75-84 years 1,384 28.6% 239 20.8% 85 plus years 474 9.8% 100 8.7% TOTAL 80.8% 19.2% 4,835 1,148 (of total) (of total) Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS ("fable B25007) The median income of households with a head of household that is 65 years and over is $64,955, significantly less (36.4%) than the median household income of $90,964. Senior Housing There is increasing variety in the types of housing available to the senior population. This section focuses on three basic types. Independent Living — Housing for healthy seniors who are self- sufficient and want the freedom and privacy of their own separate apartment or house. Many seniors remain in their original homes, and others move to special residential communities which provide a greater level of security and social activities of a senior community. Group Living — Shared living arrangements in which seniors live in close proximity to their peers and have access to activities and special services. Assisted Living — Provides the greatest level of support, including meal preparation and assistance with other activities of daily living. Temecula permits residential care facilities serving six or fewer persons by right in all residential zones, and those serving more than six persons by conditional use permit in residential and commercial zones. The California Department of Social Services Community Care Licensing Division reports that as of May 2021, 18 residential care facilities serve the elderly in Temecula. Seniors and their caregivers also utilize larger CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-54 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT scale residential care facilities for the elderly. There are four commercially operating assisted living residential care facilities for the elderly in the City: • Highgate Senior Living -Temecula, 42301 Moraga Rd. — assisted living facility offering memory care and couples care • Temecula Memory Care, 44280 Campanula Way — memory care facility • Vineyard Ranch at Temecula, 27350 Nicolas Rd. — assisted living community offering memory care services • The Chateau at Harveston, 40024 Harveston Dr. — senior independent living with additional third party services Several programs address the non -housing needs of seniors in Temecula. Additional support for senior residents is provided by the city -operated Mary Phillips Senior Center (MPSC), which serves as the primary site for senior services programs offered by the City and non- profits. Some of the programs and services provided at the MPSC include nutrition/meal programs, health screening and general medical exams, transportation programs, library and computers with internet access, and recreational activities. The City also partners with RTA to provide senior transportation services, including Dial -A -Ride, throughout Temecula. Disabled Persons A "disability" includes, but is not limited to, any physical or mental disability as defined in California Government Code Section 12926. A "mental disability" involves having any mental or psychological disorder or condition that limits a major life activity. A "physical disability" involves having any physiological disease, disorder, condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss that affects body systems. In addition, a mental or physical disability limits a major life activity by making the achievement of major life activities difficult including physical, mental, and social activities and working. Physical, mental, and/or developmental disabilities could prevent a person from working, restrict a person's mobility, or make caring for oneself difficult. Therefore, disabled persons often require special housing needs related to potential limited earning capacity, the lack of accessible and affordable housing, and higher health costs associated with disabilities. Additionally, people with disabilities require a wide range of different housing, depending on the type and severity of their disability. Housing needs can range from institutional care facilities to facilities that support partial or full independence (i.e., group care CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-55 homes). Supportive services such as daily living skills and employment assistance need to be integrated in the housing situation. Individuals with a mobility, visual, or hearing limitation may require housing that is physically accessible. Examples of accessibility in housing include widened doorways and hallways, ramps, bathroom modifications (e.g., lowered countertops, grab bars, adjustable shower heads, etc.) and special sensory devices including smoke alarms and flashing lights. Individuals with self -care limitations (which can include persons with mobility difficulties) may require residential environments that include in -home or on -site support services ranging from congregate to convalescent care. Support services can include medical therapy, daily living assistance, congregate dining, and related services. • Individuals with developmental disabilities and other physical and mental conditions that prevent them from functioning independently may require assisted care or group home environments. • Individuals with disabilities may require financial assistance to meet their housing needs because a higher percentage than the population at large are low-income and their special housing needs are often costlier than conventional housing. According to the 2014-2018 ACS, there were 9,442 persons with one or more disabilities in Temecula. Of the disabled population, 62.8% were aged 5 to 64, 36.1% were aged 65 and over, and 1.2% were aged 5 and under. Table 35 identifies disabilities by type of disability. Table 35: Disabilities by Disability Type (2018) Persons Ages 5.64 Persons Ages 65+ Total Type of Disability Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Hearing Difficulty 1,393 23.5% 1,552 45.59% 2,991 31.7% Vision Difficulty 821 13.9% 591 17.36% 1,479 15.7% Cognitive Difficulty 2,796 47.2% 648 19.04% 3,444 36.5% Ambulatory Difficulty 1,835 31.0% 1,937 56.90% 3,772 39.9% Self -Care Difficulty 953 16.1% 741 21.77% 1,694 17.9% Independent Living Difficulty 1,628 27.5% 1,645 48.33% 3,273 34.7% Total Persons with One or 100% / 62.8% 100% / More Disabilities' 5,925 of disabled 3,404 36.1 % of 9,442 100% disabled 'A person may have more than one disability, so the total disabilities may exceed the total persons with a disability Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-56 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT As shown in Table 36, the 2014-2018 ACS indicates that for individuals between the ages of 16 and 64, approximately 2,562 persons had some form or type of disability and were not in the labor force. This indicates that their disability may impede their ability to earn an adequate income, which in turn could affect their ability to afford suitable housing accommodations to meet their special needs. Therefore, many in this group may be in need of housing assistance. Table 36: Disabled Persons by Employment Status (2018) Ages 16 to 64 Percent Employed with Disability 2,190 42.8% Unemployed with Disability 369 °o Not in Labor Force with Disability 2,562 500 Total 5,121 100% Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS While recent Census data does not provide income levels or overpayment data for persons with a disability, the 2014-2018 ACS survey does report on indicators that relate to a disabled person's or household's income. The 2014-2018 ACS data indicates that 733 persons with a disability are below the poverty level. It is likely that a portion of these disabled persons are in households that overpay for housing due to their limited income. The 2014-2018 ACS data indicates that 24.8% of households receiving food stamps or similar assistance have a disabled member. Of the 6,932 households with a disabled member, 447 households receive food stamps or similar assistance. The 2014-2018 ACS data indicates that the median earnings for males 16 years and over with a disability were $49,500 compared with $52,107 for males with no disability. Median earnings for females 16 years and over with a disability were $31,993 compared to $29,632 for females with no disability (which may be the result of disabled females receiving disability and SSI benefits). The persons in the "with a disability" category in Table 35 and Table 36 include persons with developmental disabilities. "Developmental disability" 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." This term includes an intellectual disability, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, autism, and disabling conditions found to be closely related to intellectual disabilities or to require treatment similar to that required for individuals with an intellectual disability, but does not include other handicapping conditions that are solely physical in nature. While the U.S. Census reports on a broad range of disabilities, the Census does not identify the subpopulation that has a developmental disability. The California Department of Developmental Services CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-57 (DDS) maintains data regarding people with developmental disabilities, defined as those with severe, life-long disabilities attributable to mental and/or physical impairments. The DDS data is reported by zip code, so the data reflects a larger area than the City of Temecula; however, the data was joined at the jurisdiction level by SCAG to approximate the counts for Temecula. The DDS/SCAG data indicates that 272 developmentally disabled persons reside in zip codes 92592, 92591, and 92590. Table 37 breaks down the developmentally disabled population by residence type. Of these persons, the majority (262) live at home with a parent or guardian and only 5 live independently. Table 37: Developmentally Disabled Persons by Residence Type (2018) Home of Parent/ Independent/ Community Intermediate Foster/ Family Supported Care Facility Care Facility Home Other TOTAL Guardian Living Temecula" 262 5 0 0 5 0 272 Data is jor the Temecula portion of zip codes 92592, 92591, and 92590 Sources: CA DDS, 2019; SCAG 6th Cycle Data Package Housing for Disabled Persons Households with a disabled member will require a mixture of housing units with accessibility features, in -home care, or group care housing facilities. Some of these households will have a member with a developmental disability and are expected to have special housing needs. Developmentally disabled persons may live with a family in a typical single-family or multifamily home, but some developmentally disabled persons with more severe disabilities may have special housing needs that may include extended family homes, group homes, small and large residential care facilities, intermediate care, and skilled nursing facilities and affordable housing such as extremely low/very low/low- income housing (both rental and ownership), Section 8/Housing Choice Vouchers, and single room occupancy -type units. Although there are no assisted living residential care facilities for adults with special needs, including physical, mental, and developmental disabilities in Temecula, there are a number of resources available throughout the County to serve the disabled residents of Temecula. Table 38 identifies some of the organizations in or near Temecula that specialize in providing services for the disabled and developmentally disabled population. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-58 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 38: Facilities and Services for Disabled Persons Organization Name Type of Service Provided Homeless Population Served Towards Maximum Independence (TMI) Employment and family support Disabled adults services California Department of Rehabilitation Vocational rehabilitation, independent living Developmentally disabled adults Coyne & Assoc. Early start, behavioral services for 12 months to 12 years children Goodwill Industries of the Inland Counties Vocational evaluation, training, and Adults with physical, psychiatric, and employment opportunities developmental disabilities Inland Respite, Inc. Caregivers and companion care Developmentally disabled adults Maxim Homecare Services Home healthcare, autism services Mentally disabled persons Project T.O.U.C.H. (Together Our Unity Shelter and homeless services Disabled adults Conquers Homelessness) CARE Learning Center and Counseling Educational and counseling services Disabled children and adults Services A.C.C.E.S.S. Therapeutic services Developmentally disabled children and adolescents Community Access Center (CAC) Advocacy, assistive technology Disabled adults The 2014-2018 ACS data indicates that for individuals between the ages of 5 and 64, approximately 1.6% of the total population of Temecula have an ambulatory difficulty, 0.7% have a vision difficulty, 1.2% have a hearing difficulty, and 1.5% have an independent living difficulty. These types of disabilities may impede their ability to find suitable housing accommodations to meet their special needs. Therefore, many in these groups may be in need of housing assistance. Households containing physically handicapped persons may also need housing with universal design measures or special features to allow better physical mobility for occupants. The 2014-18 ACS data also indicates that 6,932 households (20.5%) in Temecula had one or more disabled persons, including developmentally disabled persons. It is anticipated that this rate will remain the same during the planning period. Housing needed for persons with a disability during the planning period is anticipated to include community care facilities or at-home supportive services for persons with an independent living difficulty or self -care difficulty (approximately 4.9% of the population), as well as housing that is equipped to serve persons with ambulatory and sensory disabilities. Approximately 20.5% of the RHNA, 860 units, may be needed to have universal design measures or be accessible to persons with a disability. The City of Temecula is committed to improving the housing options for persons with special needs by proactively working with the development community. In 2015, a developer requesting a General CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-59 'A�NN�L� Plan change was required to offer construction options on the development in order to provide better for -sale options for those who may need unique construction requirements (in the special needs community), but cannot afford expensive retrofits of existing units. These options included: • Sound absorbent ceilings and walls • Tempered glass windows and mirrors • Natural light with sky lights or sun tubes • Clerestory lighting • Bathrooms with 4' tiled walls and flooring with floor drains • Bathroom plumbing with scaled prevention • Fiberglass and Dutch doors • Automatic swinging door operations • Pre -wiring for security systems • Wider doors Large Family Households Large family households are defined as households of five or more persons. Large family households are considered a special needs group because there is often a limited supply of adequately sized housing to accommodate their needs. The more persons in a household, the more rooms are needed to accommodate that household. Specifically, a five - person household would require three or four bedrooms, a six -person household would require four bedrooms, and a seven -person household would require four to six bedrooms. In Temecula, 5,273 households, 15.6% of all households, have five or more persons as described in Table 21. Of the large households, 65% own their home and 35% rent. Typically, there are more owner - occupied large households that are cost burdened when compared to renter households and the population as a whole. However, the 2014- 2018 ACS survey does not provide data regarding overpayment for large households. Table 39 compares the median income for households with five or more persons to the citywide median income for 201 S. For each large family category, the median household income was higher versus the citywide median of $90,964. Table 39: Median Income By Household Size (2018) Size Median Income 5-Person Households $109,958 6-Person Households $115,667 7 or More Person Households $113,556 Median Household Income (All Households) $90,964 Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-60 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Large families can have a difficult time finding housing units large enough to meet their needs. In Temecula, there appears to be a significant amount of both ownership housing and rental housing available to provide units with enough bedrooms for larger households. Table 40 identifies the number of large households by household size versus the number of large owner and rental units. While there are adequate units in Temecula to accommodate large owner and renter households, it does not mean that there is a match between housing units that exist and large families. As described in Table 20, 2% of owner -occupied homes and 4.7% of renter -occupied homes are overcrowded. Table 40: Household Size versus Bedroom Size by Tenure (2018) 5 Person Households 6 Person and Larger Households Tenure U BR 4+ BR Units Households Shortfall/ Households Shortfall/ Excess Excess Owner 8,416 2,300 6,116 12,265 1,128 11,137 Renter 3,177 1,334 1,843 3,076 511 2,565 Source: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS Large households require housing units with more bedrooms than housing units needed by smaller households. In general, housing for these households should provide safe outdoor play areas for children and should be located to provide convenient access to schools and child care facilities. These types of needs can pose problems particularly for large families that cannot afford to buy or rent single-family houses. Based on the proportion of the City's households that are at least five persons, it is anticipated that approximately 16% of the regional housing needs allocation units will be needed to accommodate large households and an emphasis should be placed on ensuring rental units are available to large households. Ingle Parent and Female Headed Households Single parent households are households with children under the age of 18 at home and include both male- and female -headed households. These households generally have a higher ratio between their income and their living expenses (that is, living expenses take up a larger share of income than is generally the case in two -parent households). Therefore, finding affordable, decent, and safe housing is often more difficult for single parent and female -headed households. Additionally, single parent and female -headed households have special needs involving access to daycare or childcare, health care, and other supportive services. While the majority of households in Temecula are either two -spouse couples or single person households, 20.5% of family households are CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-61 headed by a single male or single female. There are 1,393 male heads of household with no wife present and 581 of these households have children under 18. There is a larger number of female householders with no husband present — 4,296 households or 15.5% of family households — and 2,488 of these female -headed households have children under 18. Table 41 identifies single parent households by gender of the householder and presence of children. The median income of female -headed households (no husband present) is $53,651, 23.8% less than the median income of a male - headed, no wife present family ($70,432) and 41% less than the median income of all households in the City ($90,964). Approximately 4.8% of all households are under the poverty level; 26.4% of female -headed households with related children under 18 are under the poverty level. Table 41: Families and Female Householder with Children Under 18 (2018) Category Number Percent Total Families 27,657 100% Male householder, no wife present 1,393 5% With children under 18 581 2% Female householder, no husband present 4,296 15.5% With children under 18 2,488 9% Source: US Census, 20/4-201SACS As Temecula's population and households grow, there will be a continued need for supportive services for single parent households with children present. To address both the housing and supportive services needs of single parent households, additional multifamily housing should be developed that includes childcare facilities (allowing single parents to actively seek employment). In addition, the creation of innovative housing for female -headed households could include co -housing developments where childcare and meal preparation responsibilities can be shared. The economies of scale available in this type of housing would be advantageous to this special needs group as well as all other low-income household groups. Limited equity cooperatives sponsored by non-profit housing developers are another financing structure that could be considered for the benefit of all special needs groups. Farmworkers Farmworkers are traditionally defined as persons whose primary incomes are earned through permanent or seasonal agricultural labor. Agricultural lands have historically been one of Riverside County's most important land uses and agriculture continues to play a large role in the local economy. While Riverside County has recently experienced CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBR-62 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT an unprecedented level of population growth leading to a more diverse economic base that includes manufacturing, technology, and service - oriented sectors, it remains strongly tied to an agricultural base. Nonetheless, there are only two very minor agricultural operations in the City and no agricultural zoning district exists although agricultural uses are permitted in the residential districts. Despite this fact, the 2014-2018 ACS data estimates that only 228 (0.4% of the working population) of Temecula's residents were employed in agriculture (or related industries — forestry, fishing and hunting, mining) in 2018. It is possible (although statistics are not available) that the number of residents employed in agriculture as opposed to those employed in forestry, fishing and hunting, or mining is smaller than 228. In addition, it is possible (although statistics are not available) that a number of active farmworkers are not full-time residents of Temecula, and migrate into the area depending on seasonal crop harvest. Such farmworkers may find temporary housing by living with relatives, or short-term rental of a single unit for several families, resulting in overcrowded conditions. Homeless Persons Government Code Section 65583(a)(7) requires that the Housing Element include an analysis of the needs of homeless persons and families. Homeless persons are defined as those who lack a fixed and adequate residence. People who are homeless may be chronically homeless (perhaps due to substance abuse or mental health issues) or situationally homeless (perhaps resulting from job loss or family strife). Homeless people face critical housing challenges due to their very low incomes and lack of appropriate housing. Thus, State law requires jurisdictions to plan to help meet the needs of their homeless populations. The law also requires that each jurisdiction address community needs and available resources for special housing opportunities known as transitional and supportive housing. These housing types provide the opportunity for families and individuals to "transition" from a homeless condition to permanent housing, often with the assistance of supportive services to assist individuals in gaining necessary life skills in support of independent living. Homeless Estimates Counting the homeless population is problematic due to their transient nature; however, through the efforts of the Riverside County Continuum of Care (CoC) estimates have been developed. The Riverside County CoC is a consortium of individuals and organizations with the common purpose of developing and implementing a strategy CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-63 to address homelessness in Riverside County. The Riverside County CoC is responsible for managing U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds for homelessness, and is uniquely positioned to identify system needs and take steps to address them with the collaboration and partnership of community stakeholders. As the primary coordinating body for homeless issues and assistance for the entire County, the Riverside County CoC accomplishes a host of activities and programs vital to the County, including an annual point -in -time "snapshot" survey to identify and assess the needs of both the sheltered and unsheltered homeless. Riverside County's 2020 Point -in -Time (PIT) Count was conducted on January 29, 2020 and was planned, coordinated, and carried out by County agencies, city municipalities, non-profit service providers, and volunteers, including those experiencing homelessness. The 2020 PIT Count identified 59 people in the City of Temecula experiencing homelessness, representing 2.0% of Riverside County's total homeless count (2,884 individuals). For Riverside County, an estimated 729 (25.3%) of the 2,884 homeless individuals were sheltered and an estimated 2,155 (75%) were unsheltered. The 59 people identified in Temecula were unsheltered. Housing Accomm oda dons The Temecula Zoning Code allows emergency shelters by right in the Medium Density Residential and High Density Residential zones, subject to compliance with objective standards consistent with the requirements identified in Government Code Section 65583(a)(4). Emergency shelters are also permitted by way of conditional use permit in all other residential zones and in all commercial, office, and industrial districts. Likewise, transitional and supportive housing are allowed by right in the Medium Density Residential and High Density Residential zones and subject only to the same requirements for residential uses of the same type (e.g., single-family or multifamily) in the same zone. Transitional and supportive housing are also permitted by way of conditional use permit in all other residential zones and in all commercial, office, and industrial districts. Housing Program 16 will amend the Zoning Code to ensure that the Code complies with SB 745 and allows transitional and supportive housing by right in all zones allowing residential uses and are not subject to any restrictions (e.g., occupancy limit) not imposed on similar dwellings in the same zone. The Housing Plan includes policies and programs directed to encourage the provision of housing and services for the homeless population as well as persons and households at risk of homelessness. There are two emergency shelters operating in the City — Project T.O.U.C.H. (130 beds) and Temecula Murrieta Rescue Mission. CITY OF TEMECULA GLNERAL PLAN HBK-64 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Furthermore, Temecula supports a regional effort to provide emergency shelters and transitional and supportive housing among the various local agencies making up the Riverside County CoC. The most recent inventory of resources available within Riverside County for emergency shelters, transitional housing, and permanent supportive housing units comes from the 2020 Housing Inventory reported to HUD by the Riverside County CoC. Table 42 shows the total beds offered by homeless facilities in the Riverside County CoC area. Table 42: Homeless Facilities (2020)* Facility Type Riverside City & County CoC Family Units Family Beds Adult -Only Beds Total Year -Round Beds Emergency Shelter 80 310 505 839 Transitional Housing 11 42 50 92 Permanent Supportive Housing 112 414 1,330 1,744 Rapid Re -Housing 69 238 80 318 TOTAL UNITS/BEDS 272 1,004 1,965 2,993 *Numbers are for the total Riverside County Continuum of Care region for which Temecula is a participating member Source: HUD 2020 Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance Programs, Housing Inventory Count Report Emergency Shelters — An emergency shelter is defined as housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of six months or less. Furthermore, no individual or household may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay. • Transitional Housing — Sometimes referred to as "bridge" housing, provides housing accommodations and support services for persons and families, but restricts occupancy to no more than 24 months. In the Riverside County CoC region, a total of 92 transitional housing beds are provided. • Permanent Supportive Housing — Supportive housing has no limit on length of stay and is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist residents in retaining the housing, improving their health status, and maximizing their ability to live and, when possible, work in the community. A total of 1,744 permanent housing beds are provided in the Riverside County CoC region. • Rapid Re -Housing — Rapid re -housing provides short-term rental assistance and services. The goals are to help people obtain housing quickly, increase self-sufficiency, and stay housed. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-65 A network of local and regional service providers operates a number of programs to serve the needs of varied homeless subpopulations. Table 43 provides a list of emergency and transitional shelters and available services for the homeless population in and around Temecula. Table 43: Facilities and Services for the Homeless Organization Name Type of Service Provided Homeless Population Number of Beds Served Transitional housing, Project TOUCH - Temecula All 215 emergency shelter Temecula Murrieta Rescue Mission - Temecula Emergency shelter All N.A. People with substance Transitional housing, abuse problems, 80 men; Set Free Ranch - Lake Elsinore substance abuse counseling People with mental 30 women illness, domestic - violence survivors Transitional housing, Salvation Army Emergency Shelter - Hemet All N.A. emergency shelter Valley Restart Shelter - Hemet Emergency shelter, All 35 Interfaith Community Services Coastal Service Transitional and permanent AII, Center - Oceanside housing, emergency shelter, Veterans 49+ employment development Operation HOPE - Vista Emergency shelter Women and families N.A. Jericho House Transitional hou ' g Men with substance N.A. abuse problems Social Work Action Group (SWAG) 90-day stabilization program Substance Problems 20 Assessment ofNeed Based on the available information, there is a countywide homeless population of 2,884 persons and 2,993 beds, indicating sufficient supply for homeless persons. It is noted that the 2020 point -in -time survey identified 729 sheltered homeless persons and 2,155 unsheltered homeless persons. The discrepancy between sheltered homeless persons and the county's total capacity to house homeless persons indicates a need for additional community services resources to assist n%\,3 and match the homeless population with the countywide shelter and housing resources. I. Units at Risk of Conversion Assisted Housing at Risk of Conversion California housing element law requires jurisdictions to provide an analysis of low-income, assisted multifamily housing units that are eligible to change from low-income housing uses during the next 10 years (2021-2031) due to termination of subsidy contracts, mortgage prepayment, or expiration of restrictions on use (Government Code CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBR-66 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT 65583). These units risk the termination of various subsidy groups which could convert certain multifamily housing from affordable to market rate. State law requires housing elements to assess at -risk housing in order to project any potential loss of affordable housing. The California Housing Partnership (CHP) provides data on assisted housing units, including those in Temecula. Table 44 indicates the extent of subsidized multifamily rental housing in the City, the subsidy programs that are in place for each project, and the likelihood of current housing assisted projects to convert to market rate projects that would not provide assistance to lower income residents. Table 44: Summary of at -Risk Subsidized Housing Units Project/Address No. & Type of Type of Subsidy Current Owner Earliest Date of Risk Units Conversion Cameron Historical Building 41925 5th St. 24 Family RDA Loan WINCHESTER 12 2062 Low PARTNERS LP Temecula CA 92590 Cottages of Old Town Individual Property Address Varies 17 RDA Loan Owners 2047 Low LIHTC Creekside Apts. reek idePujis 48 Section 515, RC Investment Group 2040 Low Section 538, A — California LP Temecula CA 92590 Section 521 Front Street Plaza 28693 Old Town Front St. 23 Family & RDA Loan FRONT STREET 2069 Low Seniors PLAZA PARTNERS Temecula CA 92590 FT-02-029 32504 Strigel Court 1 LIHTC Individual Property 2027 Moderate Owner Temecula CA 92592 Habitat I & II 9 Land/Cash Individual Property 2047 Low Contribution Owners Madera Vista Apts. Summerhouse 44155 Margarita Rd. 110 Family & LIHTC Housing Associates 2068 Low Seniors LP Temecula CA 92592 Mission Village Apts. 28497 Pujol St. 75 Family LIHTC Affirmed Housing 2029 Moderate Group Temecula CA 92590 LIHTC Oaktree Apts. 42176 Lyndie Ln. 39 Family Section 5, Highland Property 2040 Low Section 53838, Development Temecula CA 92591 Section 521 Palomar Building 41955 5th St. 22 Family RDA Loan CROSSROADS AT 2062 Low WINCHESTER Temecula CA 92590 Portola Terrace Apts. 28701 Pujol St. 44 Family & Seniors LIHTC AMCAL Pujol Fund LP 2067 Low Temecula CA 92590 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-67 Rancho California Apts. 29210 Stonewood Rd. Temecula CA 54 Family LIHTC Rancho California LP 2067 Low 92591 Rancho West Apts. 42200 Main St. 150 Family RDA Loan WESTMINSTER 2708 2026 High HOLDING Temecula CA 92590 Rancho Creek Apts. 28464 Felix Valdez Rd. Temecula CA 30 Family RDA Loan 1717 SUNDSRT PLAZA 2026 High 92590 Riverbank Apts./Pujol Street Senior Apartments Corp for Better 28500 Pujol St. 65 Senior LIHTC Housing 2058 Low Temecula CA 92590 Temecula Reflections (Temecula Lane) Builder Individual Property 31111 Black Maple Dr. 11 Family Financed/Develo Owners 2065 Low pment Rights Temecula CA 92592 Warehouse at Creekside Apts. 42081 3rd St. 32 Family RDA Loan WAREHOUSE AT 2065 Low CREEKSIDE Temecula CA 92590 Sources: California Housing Partnership, May 2021; National Housing Partnership Database, 2021 Preservation Options qN Depending on the circumstances of the at -risk projects, different options may be used to preserve or replace the units. The following discussion highlights ways that the City's at -risk units could be preserved as affordable housing. All of the presented alternatives are costly and beyond the ability of the City of Temecula to manage without large amounts of subsidy from federal and/or state resources. Replacement Through New Construction The construction of new lower income housing units is a means of replacing the at -risk units should they be converted to market rate. The cost of developing new housing depends on a variety of factors such as density, size of units, location and related land costs, and type of construction. Assuming an average development cost of $143,000 per unit for multifamily rental housing (1,200 square foot unit), replacement of the 180 high at -risk units would require approximately $25.7 million dollars, excluding land costs, which vary depending upon location. Purchase ofReplacement Units One preservation option is for a non-profit organization to purchase similar units. By purchasing similar units, a non-profit organization can secure lower -income restrictions and potentially enable the project to become eligible for a greater range of governmental assistance. The CITY OF TEMECULA GLNEKAL PLAN HBK-68 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT cost of purchasing similar units depends on a number of factors, including the market conditions at the time, occupancy rate, and physical conditions of the units to be acquired. Current market value for the at -risk units is estimated on the basis of the units' potential annual income, and operating and maintenance expenses. The actual market value at time of sale would depend on market and property conditions, lease-out/turnover rates, among other factors. Purchase ofAffordability Covenants Another option to preserve the affordability of at -risk projects is to provide an incentive package to the owners to maintain the projects as affordable housing. Incentives could include writing down the interest rate on the remaining loan balance, and/or supplementing the subsidy amount received to market levels. To purchase the affordability covenant on these projects, an incentive package should include interest subsidies at or below what the property owners can obtain in the open market. To enhance the attractiveness of the incentive package, the interest subsidies may need to be combined with rent subsidies that supplement the HUD fair market rent levels. Rental Assistance Tenant -based rent subsidies could be used to preserve the affordability of housing. Similar to Housing Choice Vouchers, the City, through a variety of potential funding sources, could provide rent subsidies to very low-income households. The level of the subsidy required to preserve the at -risk units is estimated to equal the Fair Market Rent (FMR) for a unit minus the housing cost affordable by a very low- income household. �\ J. Estimates of Housing Need Several factors influence the degree of demand, or "need," for housing in Temecula. The major needs categories considered in this Element include: • Housing needs resulting from the overcrowding of units • Housing needs that result when households pay more than they can afford for housing CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-69 Housing needs of "special needs groups" such as elderly, large families, female -headed households, households with a disabled person, farmworkers, and the homeless State law requires that cities quantify existing housing need in their Housing Element. Table 45 summarizes the findings. Table 45: Summary of Needs Summary of Households/Persons with Identified Housing Need Percent of Total Population/Households Households Overpaying for Housing: Renter Households Overpaying 11.3% of households Owner Households Overpaying 6.7% of households Extremely Low-income Households (0-30% AMI) Overpaying 4.8% of households Very Low-income Households (0-30% AMI) Overpaying 5.5% of households Low-income Households (0-30% AMI) Overpaying 7.7% of households Overcrowded Households: Overcrowded Renter Households 1.6% of households Overcrowded Owner Households 1.3% of households All Overcrowded Households 2.9% of households Special Needs Groups: Elderly Households 17.7% of households Disabled Persons 8.5% of pop. Developmentally Disabled Persons 0.2% of pop. Large Households 15.6% of households Female Headed Households 12.7% of households Female Headed Households with Children 7.3% of households Farmworkers 0.2% of pop. Homeless 0.05% of pop. Affordable Housing Units At Risk of Conversion to Market Rate Costs 180 units Sources: US Census, 2014-2018 ACS; Riverside County Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-70 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT IV. CONSTRAINTS ON HOUSING PRODUCTION Constraints to housing development are defined as government measures or non -government conditions that limit the amount or timing of residential development. Government regulations can potentially constrain the supply of housing available in a community if the regulations limit the opportunities to develop housing, impose requirements that unnecessarily increase the cost to develop housing, or make the development process so arduous as to discourage housing developers. State law requires housing elements to contain an analysis of the governmental constraints on housing maintenance, improvement, and development (Government Code, Section 65583(a) (4)). Non -governmental constraints (required to be analyzed under Government Code, Section 65583(a) (5)) cover land prices, construction costs, and financing. While local governments cannot control prices or costs, identification of these constraints can be helpful to Temecula in formulating housing programs. A. Potential Non -Governmental Constraints The City of Temecula takes a number of proactive steps to address non -governmental constraints. This includes implementing the City's Affordable Housing Overlay, providing a fee deferral/reimbursement program, and streamlining processes. Temecula provides a free pre - application process where a developer can receive no cost feedback from all City departments during conceptual, due diligence, and pre - submittal timeframes. Many cities charge thousands of dollars for this process, which adds to development costs and potentially discourages developers from evaluating projects. The City's digital review is another developer friendly process that is minimizing time and reducing costs for the development community. Prior to COVID-19, the City undertook extensive information system upgrades to enable digital reviews. The cost savings add up quickly, with printing cost and permit running costs reaching well over $10,000 just for printing. Temecula hosts Temecula Trekkers (annually), a multi -day educational session, that educates real estate agents on the Planning Department and provides a direct liaison for future projects. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-71 1. Land and Construction Costs A major cost associated with developing new housing is the cost of land. Most vacant residential parcels in Temecula have been subdivided, while others are contained within planned communities. The cost of to develop housing is influenced by the cost of the raw land, the cost of holding the land during the development process, and the cost of providing services to meet City standards for development. The cost of raw land is influenced by variables such as scarcity, location, availability of public utilities, zoning, general plan designation, and unique features like trees, water frontage, views, and adjoining uses. A review of lots for sale and recently sold indicates that land prices range from approximately $20,000 to $80,000 per acre for land approved for residential development based on a review of Zillow and Loopnet listings. Construction cost is determined primarily by the cost of labor and materials. The relative importance of each is a function of the complexity of the construction job and the desired quality of the finished product. As a result, builders are under constant pressure to complete a job for as low a price as possible while still providing a quality product. This pressure has led (and is still leading) to an emphasis on labor-saving materials and construction techniques. The International Code Council JCC) provides estimates for the average cost of labor and materials for typical Type VA protected wood -frame housing. Estimates are based on "good -quality" construction, providing for materials and fixtures well above the minimum required by state and local building codes. In the 2020 edition of the Building Safety Journal, the ICC estimated that the average per square -foot cost for good -quality housing in the region was approximately $118 for multi -family housing, $131 for single-family homes, and $148 for residential care/assisted living facilities. Although construction costs are a substantial portion of the overall development cost, they are consistent throughout the region and therefore are not considered a major constraint to housing production. The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic social distancing guidelines may increase constructions costs for an unknown period. Construction cost increases, like land cost increases, affect the ability of consumers to pay for housing. Construction cost increases occur due to the cost of materials, labor, and higher government imposed standards (e.g., energy conservation requirements). The development community is currently producing market rate for -sale housing that is affordable to moderate and above moderate income households. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-72 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT 2. Availability of Financing Financing is critical to the housing market. Developers require construction financing, and buyers require permanent financing. The two principal ways in which financing can serve as a constraint to new residential development are the availability and cost of construction financing and the availability and cost of permanent financing. • If financing is not easily available, then more equity may be required for developing new projects and fewer homebuyers can purchase homes, since higher down payments are required. • Higher construction period interest rates for developers result in higher development costs. For homebuyers, higher interest rates translate into higher mortgage payments (for the same loan amount), and therefore reduces the purchasing power of homebuyers. On February 25, 2021, the reported average rate for a 30-year mortgage was 2.97% with 0.6 points (FreddieMac, 2019). From 2005 through 2021, average monthly mortgage rates have ranged from a high of 6.76% in July 2006 to today's record lows. For homebuyers, it is necessary to pay a higher down payment than in the immediate past, and demonstrate credit worthiness and adequate incomes, so that loan applications meet standard underwriting criteria. While adherence to strict underwriting criteria was not required during the early and mid- 2000s, the return to stricter standards is consistent with loan standards prior to 2001. 3. Affordable Housing Development Constraints In addition to the constraints to market rate housing development discussed above, affordable housing projects face additional constraints. While there is a range of sites available for potential affordable housing projects, as well as projects that focus on special needs populations, financial assistance for the development of affordable housing is limited and highly competitive. Multiple funding sources are needed to construct an affordable housing project, since substantial subsidies are required to make the units affordable to extremely low, very low, and low income households. It is not unusual to see five or more financing sources required to make a project financially feasible. Each of these sources may have different requirements and application deadlines, and some sources may require that the project has already successfully secured financing commitments. Since financing is so critical and is also generally competitive, organizations and agencies that provide funding often can effectively dictate the type and sizes of projects. Thus, in some years senior housing may be favored by financing programs, while in other CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-73 years family housing may be preferred. Target income levels can also vary from year to year. This situation has worsened in recent years. Federal and state funding has decreased and limited amounts of housing funds are available and the process to obtain funds is extremely competitive. Tax credits, often a fundamental source of funds for affordable housing, are no longer selling on a one for one basis. In other words, once a project has received authorization to sell a specified amount of tax credits to equity investors, the investors are no longer purchasing the credits at face value, but are purchasing them at a discount. (Tax credits are not worth as much to investors if their incomes have dropped.) 4. Building Permit Timing Typically, single family home developers apply for the first building permits for a subdivision upon receipt of a grading permit. For simple projects or projects that must remain static in their design, building permits may be processed concurrently with grading plan reviews. Building permits typically take 60-90 days, assuming two to three plan checks. Building permits can be issued in as few as 30 days if there are no corrections, but this is rarely the case for residential subdivisions or multifamily projects. Typically, it takes approximately 6-18 months between approval of a project and request for/issuance of building permits. This varies widely depending on the complexity of the project and required permits or environmental review. B. Governmental Constraints Housing affordability is 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 in Temecula. Land use controls, site improvement requirements, building codes, fees, and other local programs intended to improve the overall quality of housing may serve as a constraint to housing development. These governmental constraints can limit the operations of the public, private, and nonprofit sectors, making it difficult to meet the demand for affordable housing and limiting supply in a region. All City zoning, development standards, specific plans, and fees are posted online and available to the public, consistent with the requirements of AB 1483. 1. Land Use Controls The Land Use Element of the Temecula General Plan and corresponding Development Code provide for a range of residential types and densities dispersed throughout the City. Maximum residential densities, in terms of dwelling units per acre (DU/Ac), in Temecula cover a wide spectrum, including the following categories: CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-74 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT • Hillside Residential (HR) (0.1 DU/Ac) • Rural (RR) (0.2 DU/Ac) • Very Low Density Residential (VL) (0.4 DU/Ac) • Low Density Residential-1 (L-1) (2 DU/Ac) • Low Medium Density Residential (LM) (6 DU/Ac) • Medium Density Residential (M) (12 DU/Ac) • High Density Residential (H) (20 DU/Ac) These residential categories provide for a range of housing types to be developed in Temecula. The City has also set target density levels for the following residential uses: • Very Low Density Residential (VL,) (0.3 DU/Ac) • Low Density Residential-1 (L-1) (1.5 DU/Ac) • Low Medium Density Residential (LM) (4.5 DU/Ac) Target density levels are used in projecting future development. The target density establishes a ceiling within the range which cannot be exceeded without Planning Commission/City Council approval. Targets of 10 DU/Ac for Medium Density Residential and 16.5 DU/Ac for High Density Residential are shown in Table LU-1 of the Land Use Element. These numbers are for analysis and are used when calculating maximum allowable density bonuses. However, projects that provide amenities or public benefits will be allowed to exceed the target level. For example, affordable housing is considered a public benefit and is therefore not subject to the established target density level of 10 DU/Ac for Medium Density Residential and 16.5 DU/Ac for High Density Residential. Other types of amenities or public benefits may include providing road connections, parks, or a fire station. These amenities typically apply to large-scale planned development projects. In addition, the Land Use Element includes a Mixed -Use Overlay that adds residential uses to permitted uses and increases the maximum density and target floor -to -area ratio (FAR). As stated in the General Plan Land Use Element, for each area, a daily trip cap is defined, based on the maximum number of daily trips permitted. Within the daily trip cap for each area, flexible, high -quality design and creative mixes of adjacent uses are encouraged. Development project proposals that exceed the specified trip caps will not be approved. Residential densities would average approximately 28 units per net acre. According CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-75 to the Land Use Element, the total number of units possible in Mixed - Use Overlay areas ranges from approximately 1,173 to 2,348 units. The trip caps for each Mixed Use Overlay area are as follows: Area 1 — 15,000 trips; Area 2 — 30,000 trips; Area 3 — 6,000 trips. The total number of trips, 51,000, is equivalent to 8,500 residential dwelling units (at 6 trips per unit for high -density residential development), or 102 acres of commercial development (at 500 trips per acre), or a combination of the two. Approved and Built Densities While the City's regulations identify minimum and maximum densities that may be developed in the City (exclusive of most Specific Plans, including Old Town, Altair, and Harveston), individual developers may opt to build at the lower, mid -range, or higher end of allowed densities. Recent projects in Temecula that are built or are under construction are consistent with the densities anticipated by the City's General Plan, Specific Plans, and Zoning Code and typically built within 5% of the maximum allowable density. The City has received feedback from the development community that the maximum density levels are realistic and achievable, and the City expects to continue to see projects built at or around the maximum allowable density. 2. Residential Development Standards Temecula's residential development and parking standards are summarized in Tables 46 and 47. Residential standards have been adopted by the City to protect the safety and welfare of Temecula residents. The Development Code and General Plan allow for modification and flexibility in the development standards through the provision of a Mixed -Use Overlay, Village Center Overlay, Affordable Housing Overlay, and Planned Development Overlay. Flexibility in planning for overlay areas is allowed to promote a greater range of housing opportunities within the City, promote development of affordable housing options, and affirmatively further fair housing. Diversity of housing, including affordable housing, is one of the performance standards for the Village Center Overlay and is a central component of the City's Affordable Housing Overlay. The Planned Development Overlay zoning district also encourages the provision of additional housing opportunities for the community. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-76 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 46: Residential Development Standards HR RR VL L-1 L-2 LM M NC CC HT PO SP PDO H4 HR-SM Minimum Net Lot — — — — — 7,200 7,200 30,000 30,000 20,000 40,000 For SP- — — Area (square feet) 5, see Minimum Average 10 acres 5 acres 2.5 acres 1.0 acre 0.5 acres — — - _ - - Table H- _ 10 acres Net Lot Area per 26A. For See Dwelling Unit all TableTable Density Range <0.1 0.1- 0.2- 0.5- 0.5- 3.0-6.9 7.0-12.9 20.05 30.05 30.05 30.05 others, of refer H-26B 13.0- <0.1 (Dwelling Units per 0.2 0.4 2.9 2.9 individual 20.0 Net Acre)' specific plans. Lot Dimensions Minimum Lot 50 ft. 50 ft. 40 ft. 40 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. 50 ft. Frontage at Front Property Line For SP- Minimum Lot 40 ft. 40 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. 25 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 5, see 20 ft. 40 ft. Frontage for a Flag Table H- Lot at Front 26 For Property Line . See Minimum Width at 100 ft. 100 ft. 100 ft. 70 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft. 40 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft. 80 ft. 80 ft. others, Table H-266 30 ft. 100 ft. Required Front refer to Setback Area individual Minimum Average 100 ft. 100 ft. 80 ft. 70 ft. 60 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft. - _ - - specific 50 ft. 100 ft. Width plans. Minimum Lot 150 ft. 150 ft. 120 ft. 100 ft. 90 ft. 80 ft. 80 ft. 100 ft. 100 ft. 100 ft. 120 ft. 100 ft. 150 ft. Depth Setbacks Minimum Front 40 ft. 40 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 15 ft. Z 10 ft. 2 10 ft. 2 - - - - For SP- 20 ft. 2 40 ft. Yard 5, see Minimum Corner 40 ft. 40 ft. 15 ft. 15 ft. 15 ft. 15 ft. 15 ft. - _ _ - Table H- 15 ft. 40 ft. Side Yard 26A. For See Minimum Interior 25 ft. 25 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. Variable3 Variable3 0 0 0 0 all others, Table Variable3 25 ft. Side Yard3 refer to H-26B Minimum Rear 25 ft. 25 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 15 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. individual 20 ft. 25 ft. Yard specific plans. Other Requirements — l I I l O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N H-77 HR RR VL L-1 L-2 LM M NC CC HT PO SP PDO H4 HR-SM Maximum Height 35 ft. 35 ft. 35 ft. 35 ft. 35 ft. 35 ft. 40 ft. 35 ft. 50 ft. 75 ft. 75 ft. For SP- 50 ft. 2 floors, 5, see 30-40 ft. Table H- from 26A. For See foundation Maximum % of Lot 10% 15% 20% 25% 25% 35% 35% 25% 30% 30% 50% others, allTableTable 30% 2 floors, Coverage refer to H-26B 30-40 ft. individual from specific foundation plans. Open Space 90 % 75% 70 % 60% 40% 25% 25% 25% 20% 20% 25% For SP- 30% 2 floors, Required 5, see 30-40 ft. Table H- from 26A. For foundation all Private Open NA NA NA NA NA NA 200 NA NA NA NA others, 150 2 floors, Space Per Unit refer to 30-40 ft. individual from specific foundation plans. SOURCE: The City of Temecula Municipal Code, Sections 17.06.040 and 17.06.080. Accessed June 2021. Notes: 1. Affordable housing and congregate care facilities may exceed the stated densities pursuant to the provisions of Section 17.10.020M. 2. In the H residential zoning district, dwelling units with entrances that have direct access to the street, such that the predominant features of the home fronting the street are the windows and the front door, may have a minimum setback of 15 feet. 3. In order to allow for more flexible site planning, variable interior yard setback for both sides must equal at least LM zoning district: The combined interior side yard setback for both sides must equal at least 15 feet. One side shall have at least 5 feet and the other side shall have at least 10 feet and shall be located on the same side as the driveway to provide for potential vehicular access to the rear of the property. M and H zoning districts: The combined interior side yard setbacks shall not be less than 10 feet. This is intended to permit a zero lot line arrangement with a zero setback on one side yard and 10 feet on the opposite side yard. 4. Except as otherwise stated in the Temecula Municipal Code, the objective standards and regulations applicable to multifamily projects in the high density residential zoning district, as outlined in Chapter 17.06, shall apply to all projects developed pursuant to the Affordable Housing Overlay. 5. As allowed by the Affordable Housing Overlay. 0 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-78 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 47: Residential Development Standards - Old Town Specific Plan District DTC RILMU NR Minimum Net Lot Area (square feet) 3,500 3,125 3,750 Minimum Average Net Lot Area per Dwelling Unit _ - _ Maximum Dwelling Units Per Acre' 70 70 35 Lot Dimensions Minimum Lot Frontage at Front Property Line 25 25 50 Minimum Lot Frontage for a Flag Lot at Front Property Line - - - Minimum Width at Required Front Setback Area 10 10 Minimum Average Width - - - Minimum Lot Depth 140 125 75 Setbacks Minimum Front Yard 20 20 20 Minimum Corner Side Yard - - 5 Minimum Interior Side Yard - - 5 Minimum Rear Yard 5 5 10 Other Requirements Maximum Height 50 50 50 Maximum % of Lot Coverage - - - Open Space Required - - - Private Open Space Per Unit 75-100 50-75 100 SOURCE: City Of Temecula, Old Town Specific Plan Notes: Rear yard setback is 0 feet where an alley occurs, or 5 feet in NR District. C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N H-79 Table 48: Residential Development Standards - Planning Development Overlays PDO-2 PDO-5 PDO-6 PDO-7 PDO- PDO- PDO- 10 11 12 Minimum Net Lot Area (square feet) 2,700 - 40,000 7,200 7,000 2,400 4,500 Minimum Average Net Lot Area per Dwelling 2,400 - - - - - - Unit Maximum Dwelling Units Per Acre 20 - - 12 10 2 Lot Dimensions Minimum Lot Frontage at Front Property Line 30 ft. - 60 ft. 30 ft. - - Minimum Lot Frontage for a Flag Lot at Front 12 ft. - - 20 ft. - Property Line Minimum Width at Required Front Setback 40 ft. - 80 ft. 40 ft. - - - Area Minimum Average Width 40 ft. - - 50 ft. 50 ft. 40 ft. 45 ft. Minimum Lot Depth 55 ft. - 120 ft. 80 ft. 100 ft. 60 ft. 100 ft. Setbacks Minimum Front Yard 8 ft. 45 ft.' 20 ft.' 10 ft. - 5 ft. 15 ft. Minimum Corner Side Yard 0 ft. 45 ft.' - 15 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. Minimum Interior Side Yard 0 ft. 45 ft.' 10 ft. - 5 ft. 5 ft. Minimum Rear Yard 5 ft. 45 ft.' 10 ft. 20 ft. 10 ft. 20 ft. Landscape Setback - 25 ft. - - - - Other Requirements Maximum Height 35 ft. 28 ft./40 40 ft. 40 ft. 50 ft. 25 ft. 35 ft. ft.3 Maximum % of Lot Coverage 50% - 50% 35% 50% - - Floor Area Ratio - 1.004 - - - - - Open Space Required 30% - 25% 25% 20% Private Open Space Per Unit 120 sf - - 200 sf 200 sf SOURCE: City of Temecula Municipal Code, Sections 17.22. Accessed June 2021. Notes: For Sub Area C along the eastern and southerly property line. A minimum 25-foot landscape buffer setback from the property line shall be provided in Sub Areas A and B along Rancho California Road and between Sub Area A and existing residential development to the east. 28 feet and 1 story in Sub Area A; 40 feet and 3 stories in Sub Area C. Maximum floor area ratio (with bonuses). Target floor area ratio is .50 10 feet on service and access roads and 25 feet adjacent to residentially zoned property. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-80 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 49: Parking Space Requirements Land Use Required Parking Spaces Single -Family Unit Duplex, Triplex Multi -Family Units (12 units or less) — 3 or fewer bedrooms Multi -Family Units (13 or more units) Mobile Home Park Accessory Dwelling Units 2 enclosed spaces 2 covered spaces/units, plus 1 guest space/4 units 2-5 units: 2 covered spaces/units, plus 2 guest spaces per project 6-12 units: 2 covered spaces/unit, plus 3 guest spaces 1 covered parking space plus 0.5 uncovered parking space for 1 bedroom units. In addition, 1 guest space for every 6 units 1 covered parking space plus 1 uncovered parking space for 2 bedroom units. In addition, 1 guest space for every 6 units 2 covered parking spaces and 0.5 uncovered parking space for three bedroom (or more) units. In addition, 1 guest space for every 6 units A minimum of 4 guest spaces is required for all multifamily residential with 13 or more units 1 covered space/trailer site, plus 1 guest space/2 trailer sites 1 parking space per newly constructed detached ADU except as otherwise provided in Chapter 17.23. The parking space may be provided as tandem parking on the driveway Senior Citizens Housing Complex/Congregate % covered space/unit, plus 1 Care uncovered guest space per 5 units Congregate Care Housing '/2 covered space/unit, plus 1 4 uncovered guest space per 5 units SOURCE: City of Temecula Development Code, 2021. Additional flexibility in development standards is also provided in the Development Code through the use of variable setbacks. This flexibility allows for creative site planning, especially for irregular sites. For example, the City adopted a Planned Development Overlay district for the Temecula Creek Village project to provide for mixed -use commercial/residential development. Residential uses for the Planned Development Overlay district include medium- and high -density muld- family uses. Affordable Housing Opportunities To provide additional opportunities for affordable housing, the Development Code and General Plan also allow senior housing, congregate care facilities, and affordable housing in some nonresidential zoning districts. Senior housing is also permitted in the CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-81 Neighborhood Commercial (NC), Community Commercial (CC), Service Commercial (SC), Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT), and Professional Office (PO) zoning districts. Congregate care facilities are allowed in the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Highway/Tourist Commercial, Service Commercial, and Professional Office zoning districts. Residential, multiple -family housing shall be allowed in the PO zone only if the affordable housing overlay (AHO) applies to the property and the proposed development complies with all requirements of Chapter 17.21. Affordable housing and affordable senior housing projects are entitled to receive various incentives, provided the project meets the requirements of Section 65915 of the California Government Code. Affordable housing projects are entitled to receive qualifying density incentives through Section 17.10.020(M)(3)(a) of the Temecula Municipal Code and may also receive qualifying concessions through Section 17.10.020(M)(3)(b) of the Temecula Municipal Code. The types of concessions that may be offered for specific housing projects are discussed in detail in the Density Bonus and Incentive Law section of this Housing Element. Specific Plans A specific plan is a comprehensive planning document that guides the development of a defined geographic area in a mix of uses including residential, commercial, industrial, schools, and parks and open space. Specific plans typically include more detailed information than the General Plan about land use, traffic circulation, affordable housing programs, resource management strategies, development standards, and a comprehensive infrastructure plan. Specific plans are also used as a means of achieving superior design by providing flexibility in development standards beyond those contained in the Zoning Ordinance. the City Council has adopted more than a dozen specific plans. Each one contains detailed regulations, conditions, programs, and design criteria unique to a defined geographic area within Temecula and is intended to implement the General Plan. The adopted specific plans are consistent with the General Plan. Future specific plans, specific plan amendments, and development projects must be consistent with policies contained in the General Plan, including the General Plan Land Use and Community Design Elements. The following discussion summarizes three specific plans that will accommodate a significant portion of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) through the planning period. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBR-82 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Old Town Specific Plan The Old Town Specific Plan was originally adopted in 1994 and subsequently comprehensively amended in 2010 to plan comprehensively for the revitalization of Old Town Temecula. The intent of the Old Town Specific Plan is to create a dynamic, walkable and pedestrian friendly mixed -use core in Old Town that consistent of attractive, high quality development, respectful of its existing historic buildings, while maintaining a unified design theme and unique architectural character. The Old Town Specific Plan is a form -based code and does not include minimum or maximum development standards. Although the Old Town Specific Plan allows for mixed -use development in horizontal and vertical formats, projects are allowed to be 100% residential. As included in the Regulating Plan for the Specific Plan, the Downtown Core area is expected to see development at densities between 40-70 du/ac, the Residential/Limited Mixed Use area is expected to see densities of 20-70 du/ac, and the Neighborhood Residential area is expected to see densities between 20-35 du/ac. Residential development in the Old Town Specific Plan area can occur at densities of at least 30 du/ac. During the past planning period, the City has seen significant development interest in the Old Town area. In particular, the Old Town area has been particularly attractive for affordable housing development, and the City recently approved two affordable housing projects in Old Town under the City's Affordable Housing Overlay, which applies to several properties within the Old Town Specific Plan. Harveston Specific Plan The Harveston Specific Plan is an approximately 550-acre planned community that was initially approved by the City of Temecula City Council in 2001. The Specific Plan was divided into 12 planning areas in an effort to create a distinct cluster of future uses/activities and to identify potential time frames for individual project development to occur in a timely manner within the overall Specific Plan concept. The Specific Plan proposed a maximum 1,921 dwelling units (1,621 single- family residences and 300 multi -family residences); a 110.4-acre service commercial area; a 17.3-acre lake/lake park facility; a 19.5-acre community park; a 13.9-acre arroyo park; a 2-acre paseo park; three mini parks totaling 1.5 acres; a 1.8-acre village green, trails, paseos, and bike lanes; a 12-acre elementary school on a 550-acre site; and 63.9 acres of major streets. The Specific Plan also allowed for an approximately 13-acre mixed -use district overlay intended to function as the Village Center. This area allowed up to 20,000 square feet of retail, restaurant and office uses; a daycare facility; a congregate care facility; a worship site; an approximately 15,000 square -foot private club house with fitness center; and residential, educational, recreation, and park uses. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-83 The Harveston Specific Plan area has been mostly developed. However, in 2020, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment to change the General Plan land use designation from Service Commercial to Specific Plan Implementation and add a residential overlay to approximately 87.54- acres of Planning Area 12, allowing for the future development of a maximum of 1,000 additional residential units. At this time, the unit mix of single-family residences and multi -family residences is unknown as there are no specific detailed project plans or proposed project designs. For the purposes of this analysis, the residential overlay assumes 1,000 small lot detached single family homes that would be developed, the majority of which would be market -rate. However, the 1,000 units allowed for under the Residential Overlay may be distributed over any of the Residential Overlay parcels so that the net density of one parcel could be significantly greater than another parcel. The expected density range for parcels in the Residential Overlay varies from 7-20 du/ac, but the Specific Plan expressly states that densities may exceed this range, with no maximum density identified, so long as the total number of units allowed under the Residential Overlay does not exceed 1,000 units. This area, which has been identified as a key location to accommodate a portion of the City's RHNA, includes the lot south of the Audi Temecula car dealership, and the lot east of the Mercedes Benz of Temecula, which are currently vacant. The remaining planning areas of the Harveston Specific Plan are developed with single family and multi- family residences; the Ysabel Barnett Elementary School; the ABC Child Care Village; the Harveston Lake and Harveston Lake Park; the Harveston Community Park; and open space areas. Implementation of the additional residential development would require the construction of public facilities and services to serve the future development of a maximum of 1,000 residential units. Services include: water, wastewater, storm drainage, electricity, natural gas, telecommunications, and solid waste disposal. The adequacy of these services were evaluated in the environmental document prepared to support the General Plan and Specific Plan Amendment and specific programs and improvements have been identified in order to support development of these new housing units. Altair Specific Plan The Altair Specific Plan applies to development of a 270-acre land parcel west of the Old Town planning area. Previously, the General Plan and Zoning Map had designated the majority of the project area as Specific Plan-8, Westside Specific Plan. However, this was a previously adopted document that never developed as a built project. CITY OF TEMECULA GLNERAL PLAN HBK-84 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT In 2017, the City Council approved Specific Plan-15, Altair, to reimagine the site and plan for a new vibrant development area just outside of Old Town Temecula. Altair is envisioned as the complementary residential component to the Old Town Specific Plan area of the City of Temecula. The two plan areas are integral to a successful urban mixed -use environment. Altair is located directly adjacent to Old Town Temecula and its added residential population base will support the commercial uses of Old Town. There are few housing opportunities in Old Town currently, limiting the clientelle of Old Town's shops and restaurants to visitors who arrive primarily by car. Old Town businesses are therefore very dependent on tourism, which can fluctuate dramatically. The downtown area must also satisfy the intense parking demand of all of those visitors. Altair will provide up to 1,750 new homes for a range of household sizes, income and demographics. The homes of Altair will be a pedestrian -oriented community within walking or cycling distance of Old Town. The dense design will attract residents looking for an urban lifestyle, a demographic that tends to patronize the type of restaurants and shops already in Old Town. These residents will broaden and stabilize the consumer base for Old Town businesses. Altair also provides public amenities close to Old Town. A central park, plazas, play field and an elementary school are proposed. A new Western Bypass links Temecula Parkway with Rancho California Road, an important public benefit to alleviate traffic congestion in Old Town. Altair's attractive trails, vistas and parks will add to and diversify the tourism market of the vicinity. The Altair project area is comprised of two portions: the majority 215 acres (which will be developed) and a non-contiguous 55-acre site to the south that is designated for a use benefitting the public, predominantly through conservation. The site slopes dramatically, offering striking views from vantage points on the site as well as providing a visual backdrop to Old Town. A substantial portion of the site will be added to the wildlife corridor established under the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and will, therefore, be maintained in a natural state. The Altair Specific Plan lays out a vision to provide a range of housing types at different densities and intensities. In particular, the Specific Plan identifies the following allowable building types, at densities and intensities allowing for at least 30 du/ac: • Detached housing • Multiplex • Rowhouses • Live/Work CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-85 • Micro Units • Multifamily Walk-up • Multifamily Podium The Altair Specific Plan does not set minimum or maximum density requirements. The Specific Plan identifies a range of appropriate densities for residential development by sub -planning area, which anticipates development to occur at densities ranging from 4 du/ac (in very limited areas adjacent to natural open space) to 33 du/ac (closer to Old Town). The density ranges identified for each sub -planning area may be increased by the transfer of unused development intensity from one village to another administratively, so long as the total number of dwelling units in the Altair Specific Plan is not exceeded. This approach allows for significant flexibility to respond to market trends and demands, accommodate affordable housing, provide a variety of housing types, and create connections to Old Town Temecula. Additionally, the City has seen significant development interest in building affordable housing in the Old Town area, and anticipating development of additional affordable housing in the Altair community reflects the City's vision to accommodate more affordable development near Old Town and adjacent to goods and services in a walkable, mixed -use environment. Uptown Specific Plan The Uptown Specific Plan, adopted in 2014, is intended to bring new life to the Jefferson Avenue corridor by encouraging residential, commercial and retail uses, and reducing development obstacles, such as environmental review, parking, and permit processing. The Uptown Specific Plan is a form based code, expecting residential densities of at least 30 du/ac. The recommended minimum density for all zoning districts within the Uptown Specific Plan area is 25 du/ac, and building heights range from 4- to 8-stories, for areas designated for residential development (as included in Appendix A). The Uptown Specific Plan does not include a maximum density or intensity for new development. The City has seen significant development interest in the Uptown Specific Plan area, with a special focus on affordable housing. These projects are attracted to the form based environment in Uptown and find that the proximity to goods and services coupled with the flexible development plan allow for more affordable housing options to be developed in Temecula. As the City continues to promote Uptown as a desirable location for new affordable residential development, the City expects to continue to see development at densities of at least 30 du/ac (or higher), and finds that Uptown is a logical location to accommodate a portion of the City's lower income RHNA. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-86 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT 3. Provisions for a Variety of Housing Housing element law specifies that jurisdictions must identify adequate sites to be made available through appropriate zoning and development standards to encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multi -family rental housing, agricultural employee housing, manufactured homes, senior and affordable housing, congregate care facilities, emergency shelters, transitional housing, supportive housing, efficiency unit housing, second dwelling units, and housing for persons with disabilities. Table H-50 summarizes Temecula's permitted residential housing by zoning district and the following paragraphs describe the City's provision for these types of housing. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-87 Table 50: Permitted Housing By Zoning District ZONE HOUSING TYPE HR RR VL L-1 L-2 LM M CC HT NC SC PO PDO SP H HR-SM' Single-family detached P P P P P P P C C C C C — P Duplex (two-family dwellings) — — — _2 _2 _2 P P — See Refer to Single-family attached (greater _ _ P p Table H- individual P — than two units) 28B specific plans. Multiple -family — — — — — — P C - - - - P — Manufactured homes P P P P P P P P P Mobile home park — — C3 C C C C C — Facilities for the mentally disordered, disabled, or P P P P P P P P P dependent or neglected children (six or fewer) Facilities for the mentally Refer to disordered, disabled, or C C C C C C P See individual P C dependent or neglected children Table H- specific (seven to twelve) 28B plans. Alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility (six P P P P P P P P P or fewer) Alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility C C C3 C C C P P C (seven or more) Residential care facilities for the P P P P P P P P P P P P P P elderly (six or fewer) Residential care facilities for the C C C C C C P P P P P P P C elderly (seven or more) See Refer to Residential care facilities (six or P P P P P P P - Table H individual P P fewer) specific plans. Residential care facilities (seven C C C C C C C _ _ P C or more) V Congregate care residential P P P - - P facilities for the elderly' l I l O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N H-88 ZONE HOUSING TYPE HR RR VL L-1 L-2 LM M CC HT NC SC PO PDO SP H HR-SM' Boarding, rooming and lodging _ _ C C — facilities Accessory dwelling units P P P P P P P See Refer to P P Table H- individual Guest house P P P P P P P� 28B specific P° P plans. Family day care homes —small P P P P P P P - P P Family day care homes —large' P P P P P P P - - P P Day care centers C C C C C C C - C C Bed and breakfast C C C C C C C C C establishments6 Refer to Emergency shelters C C C3 C C C P - Table eH- individual P C Transitional housing C C C3 C C C P - - 28B specific plans. P C Supportive housing C C C3 C C C P - P C Efficiency Unit housing - - - - P - P Source: City of Temecula 2021. Notes: General Note - A Conditional Use Permit for new construction requires Director's Review and Hearing which includes consideration at a noticed public hearing, for matters that are considered to have special significance or impact, the Director of Planning may refer such items to the Planning Commission for consideration. Conditional Use Permits without Development Plans are approvable by the Director of Planning. Conditional Use Permits with Development Plans are approvable by hearing body required for the Development Plan. Major Modifications of projects requiring Development Plans which were approved by the Planning Commission or City Council shall be considered by the original approval body. Increases in building square footage that result in a building larger than 10,000 square feet shall be considered by the Planning Commission. 1. Development within the HR-SM zoning district is subject to Section 17.06.080, Hillside development standards. 2. A duplex or two-family dwelling may be permitted on corner lots with a Planned Development Overlay pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.22 of this title. 3. These uses are not permitted within the Nicolas Valley rural preservation area, as identified in Figure LU-5 of the land use element of the general plan. 4. Subject to the supplemental development standards contained in Chapter 17.10 of this title. 5. Reserved 6. Allowed only with a single-family residence. 7. Subject to the provisions of Section 17.06.050(I). 9; CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-89 Table 51: Permitted Housing By Zoning District ZONE PDO-1 PDO-2 PDO-7 Area PDO-7 Area PDO-7 HOUSING TYPE 1A, 1B 2 Area 3 Single-family detached P' P P P Duplex (two-family dwellings) P' P Single-family attached (greater than two units) P P Multiple -family P P Manufactured homes P Mobile home park Facilities for the mentally disordered, disabled, or P dependent or neglected children (six or fewer) Facilities for the mentally disordered, disabled, or P dependent or neglected children (seven to twelve) Alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility P (six or fewer) Alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility P (seven or more) Residential care facilities for the elderly (six or fewer) P C C Residential care facilities for the elderly (seven or p C C more) Residential care facilities (six or fewer) P Residential care facilities (seven or more) P Congregate care residential facilities for the elderly P Boarding, rooming and lodging facilities � C - - - Accessory dwelling unit Guest house P2 Family day care homes —small P Family day care homes —large' P - - Day care centers _ C - - - Bed and breakfast establishments - - - - Emergency shelters k P - - - Transitional housing P - - - Supportive Housing - - - - Efficiency Unit Housing - - - - SOURCE: City of Temecula 2021. Notes: 1. Detached residential or zero lot -line units, duplexes and two-family dwellings are permitted only with the approval of the Planning Commission. 2. Allowed onlv with a sinale-familv residence. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-90 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Permanent and Seasonal Housing for Agricultural Employees: Agriculture is a predominant industry in Riverside County, but there is very little farmland that is considered prime, unique, or of local importance within the City limits (General Plan, Figure OS-3). While there are no agricultural operations in the City of Temecula, nearby wineries represent an employee base for agricultural workers. Agricultural workers face various housing issues due to their typically lower incomes and the seasonal nature of their work. However, since there is an insignificant amount of existing agricultural land, the City does not provide agricultural employee housing and does not anticipate a need for permanent and seasonal agricultural employee housing. Other opportunities for agricultural worker housing are discussed earlier in this Housing Element. Additionally, Program 16 is proposed to address compliance with the Employee Housing Act which includes employee housing requirements for agricultural employees. Factory -Built Housing/Modular and Mobile Homes: Temecula allows for the provision of manufactured housing in all of its residential zoning districts, but requires a permanent foundation. Mobile home parks are allowed with a conditional use permit in all of the residential zoning districts, except Hillside Residential (HR) and Rural Residential (RR), where they are not permitted. Manufactured housing must be certified according to the National Mobile Home Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 and must conform to all other development and use requirements applicable to the primary units in the zoning district. The units must stand on a permanent foundation, and the materials used for the siding must be approved by the Planning Director. Additionally, the City recognizes the potential for additional affordable factory -built housing as second dwelling units. Senior Housing/Affordable Housing: There are a total of 17 affordable housing developments throughout the City of Temecula. Affordable housing is permitted in High, Medium, and Low Density Residential zoning districts and in the City's Affordable Housing Overlay areas. In addition to development on vacant land within the permitted zones and overlay areas, the City recognizes the potential for additional affordable housing in future mixed -use areas and Specific Plan areas, including Old Town, Harveston and Altair. Affordable housing can also be achieved in the form of accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The Municipal Code allows for ADUs in all residential and mixed -use zoning districts where single-family residences are permitted, in accordance with State law. For additional information on affordable housing within the City, please reference the Housing Element sections on housing stock and housing resources. Senior and affordable housing are permitted by -right in the High, Medium, and Low Medium Density Residential zoning districts, with approval of a development plan. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-91 Senior housing is also allowed in the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Service Commercial, Highway/Tourist Commercial, and Professional Office zoning districts. Senior housing constructed in the Neighborhood Commercial zone will be developed to be consistent with the development and performance standards allowed in the Medium Density Residential zoning district. For the Community Commercial, Service Commercial, Highway/Tourist Commercial, and Professional Office zoning districts, senior housing will be developed consistent with the development and performance standards allowed for the High Density Residential zoning district. Affordable Housing Affordable housing is permitted by -right where the parcel is identified with the Affordable Housing Overlay. There are various types of income levels when defining affordable housing: Moderate -Income Household. Persons or families whose income does not exceed 120% of area median income (AMI), adjusted annually for family size. Low -Income Household. • Persons or families whose income does not exceed 80% of AMI, adjusted annually for family size. Very Low -Income Household. • Persons or families whose income does not exceed 50% of AMI, adjusted annually for family size. Extremely Low -Income Household.- Persons or families whose income does not exceed 30% of AMI, adjusted annually for family size. Affordable Housing Project Incentives Currently, there are two basic sources of law governing affordable housing project incentives within the City: (1) density bonus law; and (2) Temecula Municipal Code Section 17.21, which defines the City's Affordable Housing Overlay Zoning District. in► Density Bonus and Incentive Law The state density bonus statutes require the City to grant a density bonus and incentives or concessions to a developer who agrees to construct or donate land for affordable housing. Density bonuses are allowed as per regulations in Temecula Municipal Code Section 17.06.050. Table 52 below lists the thresholds in which the State decides if a project can be deemed all or partly affordable housing. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-92 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 52: Housing Qualifying for Density Bonus Type of Qualifying Housing Required Percentage of Unit Lower Income 10% of proposed units Very Low Income 5% of proposed units Senior Citizen Housing Development Any senior housing development Moderate -Income Condominium or Planned 10% of proposed units Development Once the Project has been deemed a partly or fully affordable housing project, the applicant maybe allowed to develop additional density. The City must calculate the extra density to which an applicant is entitled. The density bonus law not only uses a base percentage of the project (listed below), but a sliding scale allows for greater density bonuses when an applicant includes more than the minimum qualifying percentage of affordable units. To qualify for a density bonus through donation of land, the applicant must propose a tentative tract map, parcel map, or other residential development project. The donor of land meeting the specified criteria is entitled to a base 15% density bonus, with a sliding scale increase of 1% and an additional increase of 1% for each unit in the total number of affordable units entitled on the donated land in excess of the 10% qualifying percentage. Listed below are the base and sliding scale bonuses (see Table 53).] Table 53: Density Bonuses Allowed Type of Qualifying Base Density Bonus Sliding Scale Density Bonus Housing Lower Income 20% increase in the 1.5% increase in density bonus for each 1% number of units, increase in lower -income affordable units to a unless a lesser maximum density bonus of 35% of proposed units \ percentage is requested by the applicant Very Low Income 20% increase in the 2.5% increase in density bonus for each 1% number of units, increase in very low-income affordable units up to unless a lesser a maximum density bonus of 35% of proposed percentage is units requested by the applicant Senior Citizen 20% increase in the No sliding scale increase Housing number of units, Development unless a lesser percentage is requested by the applicant Moderate -Income 5% increase in the 1 % increase in density bonus for each 1 % increase Condominium or number of units, in moderate income affordable units up to a Planned unless a lesser maximum density bonus of 35% of proposed units. Development percentage is requested by the applicant CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-93 Percentage Of Affordable Units 10% Lower Income or 5% Very Low Income 1 or 10% Moderate Income (condo/planned development) 20% Lower Income or 10% Very Low Income 2 or 20% Moderate Income (condo/planned development) 30% Lower Income or 15% Very Low Income 3 or 30% Moderate Income (condo/planned development) Number of Incentives or Concessions In addition to the density bonuses described above, the applicant may request specific incentives or concessions. Provided that the agency cannot make findings sufficient to deny requested incentives or concessions, as provided by Government Code Section 65915(d), incentives or concessions must be granted if requested by the applicant. The potential concessions include: • An increase in the amount of required lot coverage; • A modification to the setback or required yard provisions; • An increase in the maximum allowable building height; • A reduction in the amount of required on -site parking; • A reduction in the amount of on -site landscaping, except that no reduction in on -site recreational amenities may be approved unless the affordable housing is in close proximity with easy access to a public park with recreational amenities; or • A reduction in the minimum lot area. An applicant who receives a density bonus and/or other concessions or incentives must agree to ensure the continued affordability of all low- and very low-income density bonus units for at least 30 years, unless a longer period of time is required. The minimum length of the affordability covenant will depend upon whether the City grants any additional concessions or incentives on top of the density bonus as well as whether any City Housing Fund moneys were also used for the project. Efficiency Unit Housing: Efficiency unit housing offers one opportunity for low-cost housing that is specifically designed to meet some of the varying needs of several special needs groups. Efficiency unit housing provides viable housing alternatives for individuals in these special needs groups. The Temecula Municipal CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-94 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Code allows efficiency unit housing in the Medium (M) and High (H) density residential zoning districts and conditionally permits them in the Community Commercial and Professional Office zones. Congregate Care: Congregate care facilities are not limited specifically to density requirements as long as all of the development standards for the zoning district are met. Congregate care facilities are allowed in the Low -Density Residential, Low Medium Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Highway/ Tourist Commercial, Service Commercial, and Professional Office zoning districts. In Temecula, congregate care facilities include facilities for seniors and the disabled in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 50062.5, which requires facilities that are "planned, designed, and managed to include facilities and common space that allow for direct services and support services that maximize the residents' potential for independent living and which is occupied by elderly or handicapped persons or households, as defined in Sections 50067 and 50072. Direct services and support services which are provided or made available shall relate to the nutritional, social, recreational, housekeeping, and personal needs of the residents and shall be provided or made available at a level necessary to assist the residents to function independently." Accessory Dwelling Units: The City of Temecula allows accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in all residential and mixed -use districts where a detached single-family unit is permitted. In 2020, the City updated its Zoning Code to implement the requirements of Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 to allow accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units in a manner that encourages their development but simultaneously minimizes impacts on traffic, parking, density, and other areas where the city is still permitted to exercise local control. ADUs cannot be sold but may be rented for a period of at least 31 days. See the Housing Element section on housing resources for additional information on second dwelling units. As specified in Program 16, the City will amend its Zoning Code as it relates to Planned Development Overlays 2 and 7 to allow for accessory dwelling units in accordance with State law. Transitional and Supportive Housing: Transitional and supportive housing is provided to socially support individuals and provide basic life skills and is coupled with social services such as job training, alcohol and drug abuse programs, and case management. The Temecula Municipal Code allows transitional and supportive housing in all residential areas within the City. Transitional and supportive housing are permitted by right in Medium and High Density CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-95 Residential and require a conditional use permit in all other residential zones. Transitional and supportive housing are also allowed in the Community Commercial and Professional Office zoning districts with a conditional use permit. Emergency Shelters/Homeless Housing: The City facilitates the development of emergency shelters by permitting the development of such facilities in the Medium and High Density Residential districts by right without a conditional use permit or other discretionary action. These uses are also permitted in other residential districts with a conditional use permit. Emergency shelters are also permitted with a conditional use permit in the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Highway/Tourist Commercial, Service Commercial, Professional office, Business Park, and Light Industrial zoning districts. Housing for Persons with Disabilities: The City provides housing opportunities for disabled persons through the provision of affordable, barrier -free housing. The requirements for accessibility in the California Building Code and the Temecula Municipal Code ensure reasonable accommodation and compliance with accessibility requirements and are provided in all projects within Temecula. Residential care facilities (group homes) for six or fewer residents are permitted in all residential zoning districts. The development of residential care facilities for seven or more residents is permitted in the High Density Residential zoning district by right, without a conditional permit, or other discretionary action. Facilities for seven or more residents are also permitted in all other residential zoning districts with a conditional use permit The maximum densities for residential care facilities are not limited specifically to density requirements so long as the project complies with all development standards of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code. The City does not restrict occupancy of unrelated individuals in group homes, and Section 17.34.010 of the Zoning Code defines "family" as one or more persons living together as a single housekeeping unit in a single dwelling unit. Family also means the persons living together in a licensed residential facility, as that term is defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 1502(a)(1) serving six or fewer persons, excluding the licensee, the members of the licensee's family, and persons employed as facility staff who reside at the facility. The City permits housing for special needs groups, including for individuals with disabilities, without regard to distances between such uses or the number of uses in any part of the City. The City allows some variation from the application of its parking standards. Section 17.24.040 of the Zoning Ordinance would allow, for example, the CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-96 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT reduction of parking spaces for a unique use such as a senior housing project or other special needs. Currently, Temecula has two group homes for teenagers with a total capacity of 18 persons. In addition, two residential facilities in the City offer housing for up to approximately 14 developmentally disabled persons. Although, cities retain land use jurisdiction regarding these homes, the State Fire Marshal ensures the safety of group homes with seven or more residents. The City of Temecula contracts with the State Fire Marshal through the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire) in conjunction with the Riverside County Fire Department. The Building and Safety Division has developed a positive working relationship with the County Fire Department that ensures that any improvements and/or maintenance for group homes are handled through the City's normal concurrent review process. It has been a departmental philosophy to provide complete direction for applicants, as well as looking for solutions when problems or barriers present themselves on a project. Because of this, in the past the City has had success finding reasonable solutions to noncompliant code issues with successful end results. The City's site planning requirements and assistance programs reduce housing constraints for persons with disabilities by providing necessary regulations for a variety of disabilities and housing conditions. The City does not impose special permit procedures or requirements that could impede the retrofitting of homes for accessibility. Compliance with these development standards ensures reasonable accommodation is provided for all new projects. The City will continue to implement the existing requirements as well as continue to implement its formalized reasonable accommodation processes for individual homeowners requesting exceptions to development standards to accommodate a specific disability. In addition, retrofit assistance for persons with disabilities may be available through a future Residential Rehabilitation Program for lower income families as listed in the City's Five -Year Consolidated Plan. 4. Development and Planning Fees The cost of development is a constraint to the implementation of affordable housing projects. Typically, the cost of developing raw land is significantly increased by the various regulations and fees local governments impose on developers. The City of Temecula charges various fees and assessments to cover the cost of processing permits and providing certain services and utilities. Table 54 summarizes that City's planning fee requirements for residential development, while Table 55 depicts the City's CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-97 development impact fees for residential development. The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) mitigation fee was established in order to implement the goals and objectives of the MSHCP and to mitigate the impacts caused by new developments in western Riverside County. The fee is part of the mitigation fees for species protection required under the MSHCP. The collection of the fees supplements the financing for the acquisition of lands supporting species covered by the MSHCP and to cover new development's share of this cost. Developments where the MSHCP fee applies have the same fee structure throughout the MSHCP plan area. Nearly all of the vacant developable parcels located west of I-15 in western Temecula are within the MSHCP criteria cell and core linkage areas, as are all parcels located in the southwestern corner of the City. Additional vacant developable parcels in the northeast corner of the City are also located in the MSHCP criteria cell and core linkage areas. Few underutilized residential properties are located in the MSHCP criteria cell and core linkage areas. If a site is located in a criteria cell, a HANS application must be completed and submitted to the City along with a $1,500 check made payable to Western Riverside Conservation Authority (RCA). The check and one copy of the application are mailed to the County for review and determination of any site inclusion for the MSHCP conservation area. It is estimated that the total development fees are $13,375 for a single- family unit and $10,920 for a multi -family unit. These fees are similar to other fees in the region. Comparing the cost of one jurisdiction's development and planning fees to another is difficult since each jurisdiction calculates and applies its fee schedule in its own unique way. While no recent studies available to the general public have been completed in Riverside County to compare the fees charged by various jurisdictions, a recent trend used by other jurisdictions is to assess a deposit that varies per application type, and then charge an hourly "fully burdened" rate to recover costs. The City of Temecula assesses a fixed rate for each application type, based on the average hours of staff time required to process each application. This fee schedule is adjusted annually based on the consumer price index for the greater Los Angeles Metropolitan area. Table H-31 reflects the fee schedule for the 2012-2013 fiscal year. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-98 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 54: Planning Fee Schedule* Project Type City of Department of Temecula Fee Environmental Health Fee Planning and Zoning Conditional Use Permit - No Site Changes'.2,3,4 $4.089 $234 Conditional Use Permit - with a Development Plan' 2,3.4 $1,303 N/A Development Agreement $65,820 N/A Development Agreement - Major Modification' 2,3.4 $15,078 N/A Development Agreement - Minor Modification' 2,3,4 $4,309 N/A DIF Credit or Reduction $1,100 N/A Development Plan -Less than 10,000 sf' 2,3,4 $9,839 $136 Development Plan - 10,000 sf to 100,000 sf' 2'3,4 $13,366 $136 Development Plan - Over 100,000 sf' 2'3,4 $16,078 $136 General Plan Amendment/Zoning Map Amendment - Text or Exhibit 1,2,3,4 $9,287 $59 General Plan Amendment/Zoning Map Amendment - Official Zoning Map $7,278 $59 and Land Map' 2,3,4 General Plan Amendment/Zoning Map Amendment - Official Zoning Map $5,009 $59 or Land Map'•2,3.4 Accessory Dwelling Unit Permit $934 N/A Variance' 43,4 $4,721 $120 Minor Exception' 2,3,4 $634 N/A Minor Exception (individual homeowner) $158 N/A Municipal Code Amendment' $7,279 Specific Plan - New',2,3,4 $104,279 $197 Specific Plan Amendment - Major $41,388 $61 Specific Plan Amendment - Minor ' $14.441 $61 Planned Development Overlay' 2,3,4 $38,367 N/A Subdivisions Certificate of Land Division Compliance (fee per parcel)''2'3'4 $1,594 $138 Common Interest Development Conversion',2,3p $5,524 N/A Lot Line Adjustment $1,612 N/A Merger of Contiguous Parcels $2,419 N/A Minor Change (to approved Tentative Map) $2,442 N/A Parcel Map - Tentative (Residential) w/Waiver of Final Map' 2,3 $3,927 $389 Parcel Map - Tentative (Residential) Standard',2'3 $4,904 $675 Parcel Map -Tentative (Vesting)' 2,3 $4,298 $424 Parcel Map - Tentative (Revised)' z3 $4,273 $203 Condominium Mapl,2,3 $14,326 $538 Tract Map - Standard 5-34 lots/units' 2,3 $12,874 $203 Tract Map - Standard 35-75 lots/units''2,3 $14,563 $203 Tract Map - Standard 76-165 lots/units' 2,3 $16,688 $203 Tract Map - Standard 166+ lots/units' 2'3 $18,661 $203 Tract Map - Standard - Revised Map',z3 $7,292 $203 Tract Map - Vesting 5-34 lots/units''2,3 $16,520 $424 Tract Map - Vesting 35-75 lots/units' 2,3 $18,347 $424 Tract Map - Vesting 76-165 lots/units' 2,3 $20,570 $424 Tract Map - Vesting 166 lots/units''2,3 $22,319 $424 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-99 Project Type City of Temecula Fee Department of Environmental Health Fee Tract Map — Vesting — Revised Map' 2,3 $10,262 $424 Phasing Plan for Tentative Map — Sewered $4,366 $57 Phasing Plan for Tentative Map — Subsurface Disposal $4,366 $138 Residential Tract Product Review' 4 $12,631 N/A Reversion to Acreage $930 $72 Miscellaneous Charges Certificate of Historic Appropriateness' 2,3,4 $562 N/A Substantial Conformance $7,706 $61 Extension of Time with Public Hearing' 2,3,4 $3,429 $63 Extension of Time without Public Hearing',2,3,4 $1,739 $63 Extension of Time — Subdivision Ordinance' 2,3,4 $4,301 $63 'SOURCE: Temecula User Fee Schedule (2021-2022); updated annually each July 1. 1. Add CEQA Fee of $325 for environmental determination. If environmental determination is not exempt from CEQA, add $5,552 for Negative Declaration without Mitigation, or $7,590 for Negative Declaration with Mitigation. If EIR is required, add $59,811 for City -managed EIR or $88,192 for applicant -managed EIR. 2. Add UC Regents Fee of $60 (if required) — not applicable to duplicate applications 3. Add Traffic Study Fee (if required) of $3,008 (major) or $752 (minor) 4. Add DRC Landscape Fee of $250 (if new/modified landscaping is proposed) and DRC Architectural Review Fee of $.05 per building square foot (if new/modified architecture is proposed) 5. $528 to Environmental Health if Sewered; $424 to Environmental Health if Subsurface Disposal R 11 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-100 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 55: Development Impact Fees For The City of Temecula Development Fee Street System Improvements Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems Corporate Facilities Police Facilities Fire Protection Facilities Parks and Recreational Improvements Open Space & Trails Development Libraries Total Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Single Family Multi -Family Stephen' Kangaroo Rat Plan Fee (K-RAT) Lot greater than % gross acre — per dwelling unit All other Residential — per gross acre Multispecies Habitat Conservation Plan Fee (MSHCP) Residential Less than 8.0 DU Residential Between 8.1 and 14.0 DU Residential Greater than 14.1 DU Art in Public Places Residential — Single/Multi — Family Quimby — In -Lieu Fee $310,000 per acre Single Family residential (Detached Garage) Single family Attached (Attached Garage) Multi -Family Attached (2-4 Units) Multi -Family Attached (5 or More Units) Mobile Homes School Developer Fees Single Family and Multifamily Residential Restricted Senior Communities SOURCE: City of Temecula 2021. Land Use (Fee/Unit) Residential Attached Residential Detached $1,717.58 $243.11 $356.92 $627.33 $390.77 $2,901.20 $845.65 $772.74 $7,866.30 $9, 810 $6,389 $250-$500 IN3 $2,935 $1,473 $670 1/10 of 1 % of project cost in excess of $100,000 3.12 Avg. Density/DU 2.85 Avg. Density/DU 2.48 Avg. Density/DU 2.43 Avg. Density/DU 2.00 Avg. Density/DU $3.20/Sq. Ft $0.66/Sq. Ft. $2,453.64 $347.33 $665.69 $354.58 $842.15 $4,049.59 $1,180.35 $1,078.60 $10,971.93 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-101 Table 56 provides the ratio of typical development cost to fees per unit for single and multi -family developments in Temecula that do not require preparation of a Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report. The exact fees associated with an individual project will vary greatly based on the exact project parameters. However, the City reviews its fees annually to confirm that its fees are in line with those charged by other agencies in the region and that they do not present a constraint to development. Table 56: Total Processing and Fees for Typical Single- and Multi -Family Units Housing Type Total Fees Estimated Development Estimated Proportion of Fees to Cost per Unit Development Costs per Unit Single Family Unit $13,375 $350,000 3.8 % Multi -Family Unit $10,920 $200,000 5.5 % SOURCE: City of Temecula, 2021. 5. Building Codes and Enforcement Staffing and Process As Building and Safety and Code Enforcement are under the same department supervision, the exchange of information between Building and Code Enforcement staff members is excellent. Enforcement items are a regularly occurring weekly meeting topic during Building and Safety weekly staff meetings. The Code Enforcement Division consists of three permanent officers. Each officer has an assigned geographic area of the City and is very familiar with problematic properties. Each officer regularly patrols their area to ensure that any prior complaints have been resolved and that they have responded to any new complaints. The department is complaint -driven, which means that officers respond to complaints as they come in to the City. In addition, the officers make every effort to be proactive in their assigned geographic areas. Several of the code enforcement officers have received training in dealing with housing issues and are able to respond with building inspectors to calls on substandard housing. Building Codes The City of Temecula has adopted the California Building Code, 2019 Edition, Volumes 1 and 2 (Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), including Appendix C-Agricultural Buildings, and Appendix F—Rodent Proofing. This includes the Historical Building Code, Existing Building code, Electrical Code, Mechanical Code, Plumbing Code, Administrative Code, Energy Code, Green Building CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-102 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Standards Code, Reference Standards Code, and Residential Code. A copy of each code is maintained in the office of the City Clerk and is made available for public inspection. This collection of codes is considered to be the minimum necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. The City is responsible for enforcement of all the model codes. Further, the requirements for accessibility in the California Building Code will ensure that reasonable accommodation and compliance with accessibility requirements are provided in all projects within Temecula. Overall, the housing stock is in excellent condition. The City's Code Enforcement program is complaint -based and will not constrain the development or preservation of housing. When housing code violations are cited for units occupied by low- and moderate -income households, the Code Enforcement staff may offer information regarding rehabilitation programs. Reasonable Accommodations The City's process for providing reasonable accommodations allows individuals, or their representatives, to make requests for reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities as part of the permit process. No additional permits are required or additional fees charged by the City. Requests for reasonable accommodations to meet the needs of persons with disabilities are generally approved administratively, and a use permit is not required. An exception would be a use (in contrast to an accessory structure or appurtenance) that requires a discretionary (use) permit, such as a residential care facility of seven or more persons. City staff is available to provide assistance regarding the processing of requests for the construction of accessory structures. Information regarding the approval of these structures is included within all public notices and agendas, as applicable. 6. Local Processing and Permit Procedures ^ The time and cost of permit processing and review can be a constraint to housing development if significant development review is required. Project review and permit processing are necessary steps to ensure that residential construction proceeds in an orderly manner. The time required for project approval is often not so much a factor of the approval body (Director versus Planning Commission), but the complexity of the project and associated environmental issues. However, small infill projects that can be approved administratively are generally less complex and take a shorter time to obtain appropriate approvals. Large, residential subdivision maps, subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA compliance) require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-103 The evaluation and review process required by City procedures contributes to the cost of housing in that the holding costs incurred by developers during the review period are ultimately manifested in the unit's selling price. All discretionary development projects that involve new construction but are less than 10,000 square feet are subject to a Planning Director's hearing. The hearing is a publicly noticed hearing that permits the Planning Director to be the decision -maker on relatively minor applications. The Temecula Municipal Code contains findings that must be made for project approval. If the project meets the required findings, the project cannot be denied by the Planning Director. Development applications for projects greater than 10,000 square feet are subject to a Planning Commission hearing. The Planning Commission hearing is a publicly noticed hearing and the Commission may be the decision -maker for such applications provided there is no legislative action associated with the development application, such as a zone change or a General Plan amendment. The Planning Commission may also serve as an appeal board for the Director's hearing decisions. The Temecula Municipal Code contains findings that must be made for project approval. If the project meets the required findings, the project cannot be denied by the Planning Commission. Required findings for approval of a conditional use permit are as follows: 1. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan and the development code. 2. The proposed conditional use is compatible with the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the proposed conditional use will not adversely affect the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. 3. The site for a proposed conditional use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, buffer areas, landscaping, and other development features prescribed in this development code and required by the Planning Commission or Council in order to integrate the use with other uses in the neighborhood. 4. The nature of the proposed conditional use is not detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. 5. That the decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application for a conditional use permit be based on substantial CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-104 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT evidence in view of the record as a whole before the Planning Commission or City Council on appeal. Required findings for approval of a development plan are as follows: 1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of state law and other ordinances of the City. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The City Council hearing is a noticed public hearing for development applications that require a legislative action. The City Council may also serve as an appeal board for decisions made by the Planning Commission. The Temecula Municipal Code contains findings that must be made for project approval. If the project meets the required findings, the project cannot be denied. The City Council is the final decision -maker on all appeal actions. Mixed -use projects may be subject to any of the above types of public hearings, but are unlikely to be heard at the Planning Director's hearing because of the size of the project. The processing and permit procedures for mixed -use projects are no different than the processing of any other development application. The General Plan Land Use Element and Housing Element discuss concessions that can be made to accommodate the scale, density, or intensity of such projects. As a result, findings can be made to support consistency with the General Plan. Some minor development applications, such as a Minor Modification of an approved Development Plan, may be approved at the staff level. IN The average time for such administrative approvals is two to three weeks (see Table 57). The average time for projects to get to a Planning Director's hearing is eight to 14 weeks. Once approval is given, the A4%NL property owner must submit a grading plan to the Public Works Department and a building plan to the Building and Safety Department. Once approval is given, the property owner must submit the approved plans to the Community Development and Public Works departments to obtain the required permits. The average period for a project to get to the Planning Commission is four to six months. If the project needs to be heard by the City Council, the average time to get to this hearing is 12 to 18 months. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-105 Table 57: Typical Processing Times for Single- and Multi -Family Units Single Family Unit Multi -Family Unit Grading plan Development plan 6-9 months Building plans Submit for grading/ plan prior to PC approval Typical Approval Building permit Requirements Receive approval 3-6 months Home Product Review Building plans review 4-6 weeks Development Plan Condo Map Est. Total Processing Time rMinisterial 4-6 weeks Building Permit 1 to 1.5 years* SOURCE: City of Temecula, 2013 *Please note: total processing time has increased from the previous planning period due to volume of development. The City has not adopted any special design or environmental review processes that would add additional time to the processing period. However, the City must comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Riverside County regulations. In 2009, the City produced an environmental review procedures handbook for private development projects. The goal of this handbook is to help guide developers, City staff, and consultants through the environmental and City review process. This handbook is publicly available on the City's website. CEQA applies to all projects that require discretionary approval unless the project is determined to be exempt. A discretionary project is one that requires the exercise of judgment or deliberation by a public agency in determining whether the project will be approved or if a permit will be issued. For example, if a property owner wants to construct a new building or subdivide a property, it would be considered a discretionary project because the City must review the proposal before issuing an approval or permit. CEQA also applies to decisions that could lead to indirect impacts, such as making changes to local codes, policies, and general and specific plans. Usually CEQA does not apply to projects that are only subject to ministerial approval. A ministerial project is one that requires a public official to determine only that the project conforms to applicable zoning and building code requirements and that applicable fees have been paid. Some examples of projects that are generally ministerial include sign permits, roof replacements, interior alterations to residences, and landscaping changes. In addition to the CEQA process, Riverside County has completed a comprehensive planning effort called the Riverside County Integrated CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-106 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Project (RCIP). RCIP integrates three regional planning efforts: the County General Plan, a Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process to determine present and future roadway infrastructure, and the MSHCP to conserve listed and sensitive species and their habitats. The final MSHCP was approved by the County Board of Supervisors on June 17, 2003, and went into effect in March 2004. The MSHCP is a comprehensive, multi -jurisdictional effort that includes the County and 16 cities. Rather than deal with endangered species on a one -by -one basis, this plan focuses on the conservation of 146 species. The MSHCP supports a reserve system of approximately 500,000 acres, of which approximately 347,000 acres are currently in public ownership and 153,000 acres are currently in private ownership. The approved MSHCP contributes to the economic viability of the region by providing landowners, developers, and those who build public infrastructure with more certainty, a streamlined regulatory process, and identified project mitigation. The MSHCP is administered by the Regional Conservation Authority which represents the County and 16 cities which are participants in the plan. 7. Streamlining Approvals Lower Income Sites Included in Previous Elements While the site plan review process is not considered a constraint to housing, Program 16 has been provided to comply with Government Code 65583.2. This program will provide for ministerial approval (e.g., Planning Division Director's approval of site plan review and entitlements other than a subdivision map) of housing projects with a minimum of 20 percent of units affordable to lower income households and will increase certainty for affordable and multifamily developers related to residential sites throughout the community, as identified in Appendix A. SB 35 SB 35 provides provisions for streamlining projects based on a jurisdiction's progress towards its RHNA and timely submittal of the Housing Element Annual Progress Report. When jurisdictions have insufficient progress toward their above moderate income RHNA and/or have not submitted the latest Housing Element Annual Progress Report, these jurisdictions are subject to the streamlined ministerial approval process (SB 35 (Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017) streamlining) for proposed developments with at least 10% affordability. HCD reviews the annual progress report deadlines and RHNA progress on an annual basis. Temecula is currently subject to SB 35 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-107 streamlining provisions when proposed developments include 50% affordability. Program 16 has been provided to incorporate the mandatory streamlining provisions into the City's Zoning Code. These streamlining provisions will reduce approval requirements for projects that include a minimum of 50 percent of units affordable to lower income households and that meet the criteria specified by State law. 8. On- and Off -Site Improvements The Circulation Element of the Temecula General Plan identifies eight different roadway classifications (Table C-2) and cross -sections (Figure C-1) that include minimum dimensions for right-of-way accounting for lane width, center median, bike lane and/or multipurpose trails, curb, gutter, landscaping, and sidewalks. Figure C-2 of the Circulation Element identifies the locations and alignments of each road in Temecula by classification. Applicants for new development applications should consult the Circulation Element to determine the roadway classification fronting the project site and to determine the type of improvements that may be required for the proposed project. The City makes available standard drawings for on- and off -site improvements that establish infrastructure or site requirements that support new residential development. Typical site improvements for high density development include half -width street improvements for all frontage streets, built to General Plan standards. A typical local street width is 60 feet with 40 feet of pavement (two lanes). In addition, the appropriate level of R-O-W landscaping, 6-inch curb and gutter, and sidewalk improvements (either curb or parkway adjacent) are required for property frontage. Water, sewer, and drainage facilities are traditionally not under the direct control of the City. The City of Temecula coordinates with several water and sewer districts IN that directly administer the construction of water and sewer improvements. These improvements, for a high density/affordable housing project, typically require both potable and reclaimed water A4%NL systems. With respect to flood control and drainage facilities, these on - site improvements are under the direct control of the Riverside County Flood Control. While these improvements are necessary to ensure that new housing meets the City's development goals, the cost of these requirements can represent a significant share of the cost of producing new housing. Site improvement costs include the cost of providing access to the site, clearing the site, and grading the pad area. In the case of a subdivision, such costs may also include major improvements such as building roads and installing sewer, water, and other utilities. As with land costs, several variables affect costs, including site topography and proximity to established roads, sewers, and water lines. Engineering and other technical assistance costs are usually included with site improvements as these services are required to ensure that CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-108 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT development is constructed according to established codes and standards. Title 16 (Subdivisions) of the Municipal Code outlines site improvement requirements (Chapter 16.30) for a variety of parcel map division and subdivision scenarios and includes specific requirements for streets, domestic water, fire protection, sewage disposal. These and other site improvement costs are typical of all cities in California and do not impose a significant constraint on the development of housing in Temecula. The City does not impose any unusual requirements as conditions of approval for new development. Ak The City of Temecula requires full -frontage improvements for all approved development projects. The City typically does not make exceptions for frontage improvements because of the need to make connections for existing bike lanes and trails, and to correctly align roadways to avoid bottlenecks at narrower sections. The City may permit the possibility of deferring some improvements on a project -by - project basis. The deferral of improvements may be permitted when the costs of the improvements greatly outweighs the contractor's ability to enter into a reimbursement agreement or when timing of the needed improvements is beyond the control of the applicant, such as improvements to be made by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The City of Temecula recognizes that such requirements can potentially be considered regulatory barriers to affordable housing if the jurisdiction -determined requirements are greater (and hence, more costly) than those necessary to achieve health and safety requirements in the community. However, the cost to design such improvements is dramatically decreased when utilizing the City's standard drawings. C. State Tax Policies and Regulations 1. Article 34 of the California Constitution Article 34 was enacted in 1950. It requires that low rent housing projects developed, constructed, or acquired in any manner by any state or public agency, including cities, receive voter approval through the referendum process. The residents of Temecula have not passed a referendum to allow the City to develop, construct, or acquire affordable housing. While California Health and Safety Code further clarifies the scope and applicability of Article 34 to exclude housing projects that have deed - restrictions on less than 49% of the units or rehabilitation/ reconstruction of housing projects that are currently deed -restricted or occupied by lower -income persons, Article 34 still constitutes an obstacle for local governments to be directly involved in the production of long-term affordable housing. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-109 2. Environmental Protection State regulations require environmental review of proposed discretionary projects (e.g., subdivision maps, use permits). Costs resulting from fees charged by local government and private consultants needed to complete the environmental analysis, and from delays caused by the mandated public review periods, are also added to the cost of housing and passed on to the consumer. However, the presence of these regulations helps preserve the environment and ensure environmental safety to Temecula's residents. In addition, much of the remaining vacant residential land is located within approved specific plan areas for which the required environmental review has already been completed. D. Infrastructure Constraints Another factor adding to the cost of new construction is the cost of providing adequate infrastructure (major and local streets; curbs, gutters, and sidewalks; water and sewer lines; and street lighting), which is required to be built or installed in new development. In most cases, these improvements are dedicated to the City, which is then responsible for their maintenance. The cost of these facilities is covered by developers and is added to the cost of new housing units, which is eventually passed on to the homebuyer or property owner. In addition, two areas of the City, which are designated for residential uses, are partially developed and do not have sewer service. Development of this land is limited to Very Low Density Residential uses. The majority of the remainder of future residential development within the City will occur in master planned communities or on sites adjacent to existing infrastructure. As a result, future residential development will not be constrained by the lack of sufficient infrastructure in the remainder of the City. The Rancho California Water District (RCWD) is the retail supplier of potable water to Temecula. According to the Growth Management/Public Facilities Element of the General Plan, the RCWD has adequate water supply to meet current demand and is investigating a number of sources to meet long-range demands. Upgrading existing wells, adding new wells, implementing a water recharge program, and increasing the use of reclaimed water are among the major strategies devised by the RCWD. Wastewater facilities in Temecula are provided by the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), which has adequate capacity to meet current treatment demand. By closely working with the RCWD and the EMWD in developing supply options, conservation techniques, including the use of reclaimed water; and development CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-110 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT monitoring systems, the City can ensure that development does not outpace the long-term availability of water and the adequacy of wastewater treatment capacity. With the City of Temecula and its infrastructure providers coordinating planning and construction consistent with General Plan land use policy, future needs, including the 2021-2029 RHNA, can be met. To comply with Senate Bill 1087, upon adoption the City will immediately forward its adopted Housing Element to its water and wastewater providers so they can grant priority for service allocations to proposed developments that include units affordable to lower - income households. E. Environmental Constraints Temecula is impacted by various environmental hazards that include active fault traces, liquefaction and subsidence, steep slopes, and flooding. These natural hazards constrain residential development by threatening public safety and infrastructure. To protect the health, safety, and welfare of residents in Temecula, the City has adopted regulations that limit development within areas of high risk and/or require design standards that can withstand natural hazards. Other environmental constraints include infrastructure constraints. In preparing the City's inventory of vacant sites designated for residential development, the City considered the extent to which sites were constrained by hazards, and potential hazards are accounded for as part of the capacity study. Parties interested in obtaining more information for specific parcel listings in Appendix A may do so by contacting the City of Temecula Planning Department or by visiting the City's website at TemeculaCA.gov. The City's Information Systems department maintains an online GIS parcel search that can be used to identify any parcel within Temecula, including known environmental and other on - site constraints. Flood Plain (FP) Overlay District: The City has applied a Flood Plain Overlay District to portions of the City that are threatened by flooding hazards. The overlay district includes design requirements that must be met for new construction and substantial improvement of structures within the district. These design standards have been adopted to reduce the flood hazards threatening people and structures within the overlay district. Development on this property must comply with specific structural design standards that raise the cost of construction. However, this property represents only a fraction of the City's vacant land with Medium Density Residential zoning. The environmental constraints and the associated cost factor impacting this property will not compromise the City's ability to provide adequate CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-111 sites to accommodate its RHNA at all income levels for the duration of the planning period. Pursuant to the default density assigned to the City of Temecula through Section 65583.2, affordable housing is expected to be accommodated within areas where density is 30 units per acre by right or more through density bonus provisions. The City's Medium Density Residential zone allows a density of up to 12 units per acre by right and up to 18 units per acre with a density bonus. Medium Density Residential zoned property therefore is not considered suitable for affordable housing. Dam Inundation: Portions of Temecula face inundation if any of the three dams located in areas surrounding Temecula should fail. Lake Skinner Dam is an earthen dam at Skinner Reservoir (also known as Lake Skinner and located approximately 4.5 miles northeast of Temecula). Failure of the Lake Skinner Dam would result in flooding along Tucalota Creek and Benton Road, which is located near the south side of the reservoir, as well as flooding along parts of Santa Gertrudis Creek and Warm Springs Creek. Vail Lake is located over 6.0 miles southeast of Temecula; dam failure would inundate portions of the Pauba and Temecula valleys, including I-15 and an adjacent 3-mile area. Diamond Valley Lake is the largest reservoir in Southern California and is located north of Skinner Reservoir, nearly 6.0 miles northeast of Temecula. Its water is detained by two earthen dams. Failure of the western dam would result in flooding in the northern parts of the City. Several vacant developable parcels located near the western and southern perimeters of the City are at risk of inundation if dams north of the project site were breached. Far fewer vacant underutilized residential properties would be at risk of inundation. 100-Year and 500-Year Floodplains: A 100-year flood has an annual 1 % probability of occurring, and a 500-year flood has an annual 0.2% probability of occurring. The 100-year floodplain in the City of Temecula forms a "U" along the alignment of the northern, western (west of and adjacent to I-15), and southern perimeters of the City. The 500-year floodplain is noncontiguous and is generally located in the western and southern areas of the City, adjacent to 100-year floodplains. The 100-year floodplain includes several vacant developable parcels near the northern and western perimeters of the City, and the 500-year floodplain is generally outside of or adjacent to vacant developable parcels in the same area. In general, no underutilized residential parcels are located in the 100-year floodplain or the 500-year floodplain. Alquist-Priolo: Temecula is located within a highly active seismic region. Three Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones are located in Temecula: Wildomar, Willard, and Wolf Valley. These zones have been delineated by the State Geologist and encompass the area on either side CITY OF TEMECULA GLNERAL PLAN HBK-112 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT of potentially or recently active fault traces where the potential for surface rupture exists. The Wildomar fault is the predominant fault in the City. This fault trends in a northwest direction and transects the length of the City. The Willard fault is located southwest of the Wildomar fault zone. South of the Willard fault is the Wolf Valley fault zone. Within an Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault zone, habitable structures must maintain a minimum 50-foot setback distance from the fault trace per state law. The existence of Alquist-Priolo zones in Temecula effectively limits the amount of land and the intensity of development of residential uses adjacent to these zones. However, only a few vacant residential sites designated for Very Low Density Residential use are impacted by these Alquist-Priolo zones. Faults and Fault Zones: The Elsinore and Wildomar faults and their associated fault zones extend through the western side of the City on a northwest -southeast alignment across I-15. Although the Elsinore fault zone is one of the largest in Southern California, it has been one of the quietest. The southeastern extension of the Elsinore fault zone, the Laguna Salada fault, ruptured in 1892 in a magnitude 7.0 earthquake, but, as noted in the City's General Plan Public Safety Element, the main trace of the Elsinore fault zone has only seen one historical event greater than magnitude 5.2. In 1920, a magnitude 6.0 earthquake near Temescal Valley produced no known surface rupture. Other faults that surround Temecula include the San Andreas, San Jacinto, San Gabriel, Newport -Inglewood, and San Clemente Island faults. The Elsinore fault and fault zones extend through several vacant developable land parcels, as well as through a large underutilized residential parcel. Liquefaction: Liquefaction can occur as a secondary effect of seismic shaking during an earthquake or another event significant enough to cause equivalent pressure on the susceptible soils, like a dam failure and inundation. Liquefaction is unlikely to occur unless the earthquake is large with multiple shaking cycles. Liquefaction occurs in areas of saturated, loose, fine- to medium -grained soils where the water table is 50 feet or less below the ground surface. Seismic shaking temporarily eliminates the grain -to -grain support normally provided by the sediment grains. The waters between the grains assume the weight of the overlying material and the sudden increase in pore water pressure results in the soil losing its friction properties. The saturated material (with the frictionless properties of a liquid) will fail to support overlying structures. Liquefaction -related effects include loss of bearing strength, ground oscillations, lateral spreading, and slumping. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-113 In Temecula, liquefaction zones generally align with areas in the City subject to 100-year and 500-year floods and the areas subject to inundation if a nearby dam is breached. The liquefaction zones are, however, more far-reaching. Although only a few underutilized residential properties are located in areas subject to liquefaction, many vacant and developed properties are located within or immediately adjacent to areas subject to liquefaction. Liquefaction and other seismic -related issues are addressed by the state Universal Building Code (UBC). The UBC requirements for construction in liquefaction zones are not significantly more costly than standard California construction standards and will not compromise the City's ability to provide adequate sites to accommodate its RHNA. In addition, the City analyzes and mitigates for liquefaction constraints when applicable. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) in Local Responsibility Area (LRA): Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Responsibility Areas encroach at the City's western and southern boundaries, encompassing or partially encompassing several large vacant developable parcels, including the Altair Specific Plan. As included in the Altair Specific Plan, the project's Western Bypass will serve as a fire break between wildland areas and new development. In addition, a Fuel Modification Plan was be prepared as part of the project and incorporated into the Altair Specific Plan to identify appropriate structure setbacks and landscape requirements for the interior of the project to address this hazard. Also, the project is required to adhere to all fire suppression requirements in accordance with the most recent Uniform Fire Code, which provides minimum fire safety measures that would be incorporated into all building designs. With these mitigation measures, residential development is permitted to occur throughout the Altair project area and is not considered a constraint to development. Hazardous Waste Sites: Small hazardous waste sites are located along and near the west side of I-15. These sites encompass small portions of vacant developable land and are near several vacant developable parcels. None of underutilized residential properties are located on or near hazardous waste sites. Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP): Encompassing the western one-third of Riverside County and approximately 1.26 million acres, the Western Riverside County MSHCP is a comprehensive, multi -jurisdictional habitat conservation plan (HCP) designed to conserve species and their habitats. The goal is to maintain biological and ecological diversity within an increasingly urbanized area. The MSHCP includes areas in northern, western, and southern Temecula. Nearly all of the vacant CITY OF TLMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-114 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT developable parcels located west of I-15 in western Temecula are within the MSHCP criteria cell and core linkage areas, as are all parcels located in the southwestern corner of the City. Additional vacant developable parcels in the northeast corner of the City are also located in the MSHCP criteria cell and core linkage areas. Few underutilized residential properties are located in the MSHCP criteria cell and core linkage areas. Riparian Areas: Riparian areas are locales that relate to the bank of a stream, river, or lake. In Temecula, riparian areas encompass southern cottonwood -willow riparian and riparian scrub communities. These communities are limited to an area west of I-15 and an area in the southeast corner of the City. No vacant developable land or underutilized parcels are located in riparian areas. Although a few vacant developable parcels are located immediately adjacent to a riparian area, no underutilized parcels are located in or near a riparian area. Archaeological, Historic, and Native American Cultural Resources: Temecula has a rich history with many Native American Traditional Cultural Properties, villages and resources, places where significant events occurred, both historically and pre -historically, and historic buildings and locales identified within and surrounding its boundaries. While a large majority of these historic and pre -historic and resources have been formally recorded, there are still properties that contain buried cultural and archaeological resources and unrecorded structures. Because of the confidentiality of these resources, especially archaeological and Native American sites, the city will follow State law requirements with regards to analysis of these resources and consultation with local tribes. V` Q CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-115 V. HOUSING RESOURCES A. Regional Housing Need 1. Temecula's Regional Housing Need The City of Temecula falls under the jurisdiction of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). SCAG is responsible for developing a Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) allocating the region's share of the statewide housing needs to lower -level councils of governments, which then allocate the needs to cities and counties in the region. The Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) is a minimum projection of additional housing units needed to accommodate projected household growth of all income levels by the end of the Housing Element's statutory planning period. This RHNA covers an 8-year planning period (2021 through 2029) and is divided into four income categories: very low, low, moderate, and above moderate. 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; therefore, the City's very low income RHNA of 1,359 units can be split into 680 extremely low income and 678 very low income units Table 58 shows the breakdown of the 4,193 units in Temecula's RHNA into the required income categories. Table 58: Regional Housing Need Allocation, 2021-2029 Income Category Allocation Percentage Extremely Low 680 16% NIL Very Low 679 16% Low 801 19% Moderate 778 19% Above Moderate 1,255 30% Total 4,193 100% SOURCE: SCAG RHNP, 2020 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-116 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT B. Progress Towards the RHNA Since the RHNA uses June 30, 2021 as the baseline for growth projections for the 2021-2029 planning period, jurisdictions may count toward the RHNA housing units that have been developed, are under construction, and/or have received their building permits after June 30, 2021. Since this time, 27 housing units have been developed, are under construction, or have received their building permits in Temecula. Jurisdictions may also count projects that are approved/entitled but not yet built or under construction. While the City of Temecula is actively reviewing a number of project proposals, for the purposes of identifying process towards meeting the City's RHNA, the City has included two approved affordable projects (Las Haciendas and Rancho Highlands) that are expected to begin construction by the end of 2021. These two projects represent 132 affordable housing units, including 24 units affordable to extremely low income households, 8 units affordable to very low income households, and 99 units affordable to low income households. All affordable units are deed restricted. These credits towards meeting the City's RHNA are specified in Table 59, and the relative affordability of each unit type/project is described below. Table 59: Progress Towards Meeting the 2021-2029 RHNA Extremely Low income (0- 30% AMI) Very Low income (30-50% AMI) Low income (51- 80% AMI) Moderate income (81-120% AMI) Above Moderate income (121%+ AMI) Total Units Constructed/Under Construction/Building Permits Issued since June 30, 2021 Various Single -Family Units 0 0 0 0 6 6 Various Condos/Duplex/Town homes 0 0 0 21" 0 21 Subtotal 0 0 0 21' 6 27 Approved/Entitled Units Not Yet Under Construction Las Haciendas 24 8 44 0 1 77 Rancho Highlands 0 0 55 0 0 55 Subtotal 24 8 99 0 0 132 Total 0 24" 8"" 99— 21 7 159 Source: City of Temecula, 2021. *Note: These units do not have affordability restrictions. Market rate rents and sale prices for apartments and condominiums fall within levels affordable to the households earning moderate incomes (81-120%AMI) and are allocated as such. **Note: Units identified as affordable to extremely and very low and low income households are all deed restricted. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-117 1. Affordability of Units Credited Towards the RHNA Units credited towards the RHNA are distributed among the four affordability groups (extremely/very low, low, moderate, and above moderate) based on affordability restrictions (as is the case with affordable housing projects) or housing cost for those specific types of units based on real home rental/sale rates and established affordability levels. For example, the market rate rents and sale prices for apartments and condominiums in Temecula fall within levels affordable to households earning moderate incomes (81-120% AMI) and are allocated as such, as discussed in the above Housing Affordability by Income Level discussion. Based on rental data information from Zillow.com and Apartments.com, the average rents reported for Temecula $1,632 for 1-bedroom apartments, $1,816 for 2-bedroom apartments, and $2,290 for apartments with three or more bedrooms. Based on this data and the housing affordability thresholds shown in the Needs Assessment, these apartment unit sizes are affordable to 4-person moderate income (81-120% AMI) households (where the affordable monthly rent is $2,259), and the smaller apartment units (1-bedroom and 2-bedroom units) are affordable to 2-person moderate income (51-80% AMI) households (where the affordable monthly rent is $1,808). Actual unit affordability will vary greatly based on unit size and household size. However, because the City cannot predict the profile of household size and unit size, all multifamily rental units are credits towards meeting the City's moderate income RHNA, even though some units may ultimately be affordable to lower -income households depending on the household size and unit size. Condominium units are considered entry-level homes and based on pricing are allocated as affordable to moderate income households. According to Zillow.com, in February 2020 the median price for condominiums sold in the City was $360,000. While home prices have risen since April 2020 as a direct result of impacts of COVID-19 on the housing market, the average cost identified in April 2020 generally represents the "business -as -usual" model and provides a more realistic understanding of the long-term pricing trends associated with housing in Temecula, outside of the COVID-19 pandemic. This price is approximately equal to the affordability level for a 4- person, moderate income family and is allocated as such. As the maximum affordable price for a 4-person, moderate income family to purchase a home (as shown in the Needs Assessment) is $360,740, if condominiums continue to be priced higher than pre -pandemic values, the City may need to update its site inventory to reflect a high proportion of multifamily for -sale units being affordable to above moderate income households, versus moderate income households. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-118 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT However, as demonstrated later in this chapter, the City has identified a surplus of approximately 3,300 moderate income units and could easily accommodate a change in affordability level from moderate to above moderate income levels. The market rate cost of single-family units is considered affordable to above moderate income households. 2. Units Constructed or Under Construction According to City building permit records, since June 30, 2021, 27 new units have been constructed, are under construction, or have building permits pulled in Temecula, of which 21 are affordable to moderate income households based on market rate rents, and the remaining 6 units are affordable to above -moderate income households. 3. Units Approved/Entitled Based on City records, 159 units have recently been approved in Temecula; these units are not currently under construction but are expected to come online during the planning period. Of these 159 units, 32 will be deed -restricted affordable to extremely low/ very low income households and 99 will be deed -restricted to low income households. 4. Remaining RHNA Even in the short timeframe between the beginning of the planning period Quly 1, 2021) and preparation of this Housing Element (August 2021), the City has already demonstrated progress towards meeting its overall RHNA with housing units constructed, under construction, or approved/entitled or under review (159 units). Table 60: Remaining RHNA Extremely Very Low Moderate Above Total Low Low income income Moderate income (0- income (51- (81-120% income 30% AMI) (30-50% 80% AMI) (121%+ AMI) AMI) AMI) RHNA Allocation 680 679 801 778 1,255 4,193 Constructed, Under 0 0 0 21 6 27 Construction/Permits Issued (Since 6/30/2021) Units Approved/Entitled 24 8 99 0 0 132 Remaining Allocation 1 656 671 702 757 1,249 4,034 Source: City of Temecula, 2021, SCAG, 2020 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-119 C. Sites for Housing Development Housing element law requires an inventory of land suitable for residential development (Government Code Section 65583(a)(3)). An important purpose of this inventory is to determine whether a jurisdiction has allocated sufficient land for the development of housing to meet the jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need, including housing to accommodate the needs of all household income levels. This section provides an analysis of the land available within the City for residential development. In addition to assessing the quantity of land available to accommodate the City's total housing needs, this section also considers the availability of sites to accommodate a variety of housing types suitable for households with a range of income levels and housing needs. This Housing Element identifies vacant sites that would accommodate residential uses within Temecula. It is noted that Temecula also has underutilized sites (sites where a significant portion of the property is vacant and there is a potential for additional residential units) which may be suitable to accommodate future residential development; however, these sites are not necessary to accommodate the City's RHNA and are not included in this inventory. A citywide parcel database, aerial photos, and General Plan GIS data were used to located parcels for this update. This update also considered the viability of sites identified in the prior planning period, many of which continue to be suitable sites for future development due to their proximity to transportation facilities, public services, goods, amenities, and activity centers. Parcel acreages by land use designation are based on assessor and GIS data. 1. Housing Affordable to Lower -Income Households The California Government Code states that if a local government has adopted density standards consistent with the population based criteria set by State law (at least 30 units per acre for Temecula), HCD is obligated to accept sites with those density standards (30 units per acre or higher) as appropriate for accommodating the jurisdictions share of regional housing need for lower -income households. Per Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B), sites designated with the City's Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) or Senior Housing Overlay (SHO) are consistent with the default density standard (30 units per acre) for metropolitan jurisdictions such as Temecula and therefore considered appropriate to accommodate housing for lower -income households; further, application of the AHO in and of itself requires that at least 20% of the units be deed-restricted/reserved for CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-120 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT households earning no greater than 80% of the area median home (i.e., low, very low, and extremely low income households) and that affordable units must be developed concurrent with market rate units, thereby promoting economic integrating and affirmatively further fair housing. Therefore, the capacity of sites that allow development densities of at least 30 units per acre are credited toward the lower - income RHNA based on State law. As previously described, the City has also adopted 15 Specific Plans to guide growth and development across the community. Four of these Specific Plans —Old Town, Uptown, Harveston and Altair —include vacant land and together lay the foundation for the development of thousands of new residential units in a variety of formats and densities and provide for densities at levels high enough (more than 30 du/ac) to accommodate a portion of the City's lower income RHNA. While these Specific Plans use a combination of typical development standards and form -based standards to regulate development, each Specific Plan was adopted to encourage new residential development in creative formats to promote development of a variety of residential types and various income levels. Moreover, since these Specific Plans were adopted, projects have been proposed and approved in Specific Plan areas (i.e., Uptown and Old Town) with product types and densities consistent with providing housing affordable to lower -income households. Additionally, based on the City's history of producing and supporting the production of affordable housing, Temecula is confident that vacant parcels within Specific Plan areas can be developed at densities of at least 30 du/ac to help satisfy the City's remaining extremely, very low, and low income RHNA. These Specific Plans and their potential development capacities are described in more detail later in this chapter. 2. Sites to Accommodate Remaining RHNA The City of Temecula's 6th Cycle residential sites fall into three categories: 1. Accessory dwelling units 2. Residentially zoned vacant land exclusive of Specific Plan areas, and 3. Residentially zoned sites inside Specific Plans As described throughout this section, the City has sufficient land appropriately zoned for residential uses throughout community to accommodate its RHNA for the 2021-2029 planning period. Moreover, Temecula has a proven track record of supporting the development of affordable projects, working with affordable housing CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-121 developers, promoting home types that are affordable to lower -income households including multifamily projects and mixed -use developments, and addressing needs of the community's vulnerable populations including seniors. These sites are illustrated on Figure H- 1, Housing Sites Inventory, and detailed in Appendix A. Accessory Dwelling Units As of January 2020, newly adopted State of California legislation pertaining to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) went into effect. The legislation changes specifically amended Government Code Sections 65852.2 and 65852.22. In response to these legislative changes, the City of Temecula updated its zoning ordinance to be consistent with State law. The details of the City's Zoning Ordinance relevant to ADUs are included in the Constraints section of this Background Report. The City of Temecula approved 3 ADUs in 2018 and no ADUs in 2019. However, once the City updated its ADU ordinance in 2020 and began advertising the opportunity to develop ADUs in Temecula, at least 18 ADUs were approved. Now that the City has promoted the production of ADUs as a viable option to add housing stock to the City's existing neighborhoods, prepared public education material to inform the public about the opportunity to develop ADUs, is moving forward with preparing streamlined guidance to support efficient review and approval of ADU applications, and confirmed that ADUs are explicitly allowed within a SPA (Temecula has 15 Specific Plans), it can be reasonably expected that the development of ADUs in Temecula will continue to be produced at the pace of production in 2020 and will likely accelerate. Moreover, the City has taken significant proactive steps to advertise the opportunity for residents to construct ADUs, including preparing a topic area fact sheet (available in English and Spanish), hosting presentations to the Planning Commission and City Council, and answering the public's questions in -person at City Hall and over the phone. The City has assumed production of ADUs at a rate of 18 units per year for the duration of the planning period (based on the number of ADUs approved in 2020), resulting in the assumed production of 144 ADUs. This is a modest assumption and production will likely outpace this target during the planning period. Additionally, the income level of these ADUs has been assumed to be consistent with the findings of SCAG's ADU affordability study, and the income of these units are allocated consistent with SCAG's findings for Riverside/San Bernardino Counties. 2. Vacant Residential Sites (Outside of Specific Plans) As part of this Housing Element update, the City conducted a parcel - by -parcel analysis of vacant residential sites for land outside of approved specific plans, based on data obtained from the City's CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-122 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT geographic information system (GIS). The vacant land inventory for the City of Temecula, including an estimated development capacity for the vacant parcels, can be found in Appendix A of the Housing Element. Table 61 summarizes the available housing unit capacity based on vacant residential sites located outside of approved specific plan areas. Residential capacity for each vacant parcel is based on the current zoning for each parcel. Each parcel is assumed to develop at 75% of its maximum capacity, which allows for setbacks, landscaping, right-of-way dedications, and other nonresidential uses. See Figure H- 1 for a map of these sites. Since the last planning period, the City adopted its Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO), which allows for an increase in density in the High, Medium, and Low Medium Residential zoning designations if the development is affordable housing, and also applies to specific parcels within the Planned Development Overlay areas (PDO-5 and PDO-10), Professional Office zone, and Uptown Specific Plan. The affordable overlay provides for a minimum density of at least 20 dwelling units per acre and up to 30 dwelling units per acre, excluding any potential density bonus for qualified projects. Development capacity at parcels designated with the Affordable Housing Overlay will allow for densities consistent with default densities of state housing element law and will therefore be appropriate to accommodate a portion of the City's lower income RHNA. Consistent with sites outside of the Affordable Housing Overlay, these parcels are also assumed to develop at 75% of their maximum capacity. Several commercial zoning districts throughout the City of Temecula also permit residential uses. The City's vacant land use survey identified all such vacant parcels and the realistic residential development capacity for each parcel if developed with residential uses. Table H-X also summarizes the residential development potential within currently vacant commercial parcels. Each parcel is assumed to develop at 75% of its maximum capacity. The inventory of vacant residential land greater than 0.50 acres in size (exclusive of those in specific plan areas) in Temecula totals 634 acres. It should be noted that the City's inventory does include vacant sites that are larger than 10 acres. The City has a long history of successfully subdividing large parcels into smaller developments resulting in the production of housing units at all income levels. This is discussed later in this chapter. These vacant properties, identified in Table H-X, have the potential to yield 3,430 units, 1,467 of which can accommodate lower -income housing, 1,600 can accommodate moderate -income housing, and 363 can accommodate above moderate -income housing. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-123 Table 61: Vacant Residential Sites (Exclusive of Specific Plans) General Plan Zoning Max Acres Realistic Affordability Density Capacity (units)* Community Commercial Community 20 du/ac 20 301 Moderate Commercial — High Residential High 20 du/ac 4 79 Ex Low/Very Residential/ Low/Low AHO Highway Tourist Commercial Highway Tourist 20 du/ac 7 110 Moderate Commercial** Low Medium Residential Low Medium 6 du/ac 41 184 Above Mod Residential Low Residential Low Residential 2 du/ac 55 82 Above Mod Medium Density Residential Medium Density 30 du/ac 11 256 Ex Low/Very Residential/AHO Low/Low Medium Density Residential Medium Density 12 du/ac 99 708 Moderate Residential Neighborhood Commercial Neighborhood 12 du/ac 6 57 Moderate Commercial** Professional Office Planned 30 du/ac 7 157 Ex Low/Very Development Low/Low Overlay-5/AHO Professional Office Professional 30 du/ac 13 300 Ex Low/Very Office/AHO Low/Low Public Institutional Planned 30 du/ac 30 675 Ex Low/Very Development Low/Low Overlay-5/AHO Service Commercial Service 20 du/ac 28 423 Moderate Commercial** Very Low Residential Very Low 0.40 du/ac 321 96 Above Mod Residential Total 643 3,430 Source: City of Temecula, 2021 * Dwelling unit calculation is based on 75% ofpotential maximum capacity. ** Senior housing is also allowed in the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Service Commercial, and Highway/Tourist Commercial zoning districts. Senior housing constructed in the Neighborhood Commercial zone will be developed to be consistent with the development and performance standards allowed in the Medium Density Residential zoning district. For the Community Commercial, Service Commercial, and Highway/Tourist Commercial zoning districts, senior housing will be developed consistent with the development and performance standards allowed for the High Density Residential zoning district. 2. Vacant Residential Sites within Specific Plans The City conducted a records search and visual survey using aerial photos and site visits to estimate the remaining residential development capacity by number and type of housing within the approved specific plans. The City has 15 approved Specific Plan; nine have vacant land with residential development capacity remaining. Five of the nine Specific Plans with remaining residential capacity (Old Town, Wolf Creek, Harveston, Uptown, and Altair) allow for development at densities of at least 30 du/ac, which is appropriate to accommodate a portion of the City's lower income RHNA. While the exact affordability levels for CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-124 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT future development within these Specific Plan areas will be based on available funding for affordable development and other market conditions as the sites develop during the planning period, for those Specific Plans which allow for development of at least 30 du/ac, the City has assumed that some percentage of units will be affordable to lower income households, some percentage to moderate income households, and some percentage to above moderate income households. For those Specific Plans the allow for lower densities not suitable to accommodate the City's lower income RHNA, affordability levels are based on the market rate rents/sale prices of products with similar densities built and rented/sold elsewhere in the City. The inventory of vacant residential land greater than 0.50 acres in size within approved Specific Plans in Temecula totals 784 acres. It should be noted that some of these sites are larger than 10 acres. The City has a long history of successfully subdividing large parcels into smaller developments resulting in the production of housing units at all income levels. This is discussed later in this chapter. These vacant properties, identified in Table 62, have the potential to yield 5,773 units, 1,247 of which can accommodate lower -income housing, 2,787 can accommodate moderate -income housing, and 1,724 can accommodate above moderate -income housing. In Temecula, Specific Plan areas have historically developed to at least 95% of their total entitlement. However, for purposes of identifying adequate sites to accommodate its RHNA, the City has assumed that Specific Plan areas will develop at 85% of their capacity. Given that Specific Plans inherently include programs to develop sites effectively and efficiently at the densities and intensities identified within the Plan, and given the City's history of successful Specific Plan development at levels consistent with nearly the maximum allowable development levels, this is a reasonable expectation for the City's remaining vacant land in Specific Plan areas. Table 62: Vacant Residential Land within Specific Plan Areas Specific Plan General Allowable Acres Realistic Affordability Plan Land Density Capacity Use (units)* SP-2 - Rancho Highlands Highway Tourist 20 du/ac 1 5 Above Mod Commercial SP-4 - Paloma Del Sol Low Medium 6 du/ac 42 216 Above Mod Residential Specific Plan 30 du/ac 4 109 Ex Low/Very SP-5 - Old Town Low/Low/Mod/ Above Mod SP-9 - Red Hawk Medium 12 du/ac 7 68 Moderate Residential SP-11 - Roripaugh Low 2-12 du/ac 333 1,928 Moderate/ Above Residential, Mod CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-125 Low Medium, Medium Residential, Neighborhood Commercial SP-12 - Wolf Creek Community 20-30 du/ac 20 439 Moderate Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial SP-13 - Harveston Service 30 du/ac 80 846 Ex Low/Very Commercial Low/Low/Mod/ Above Mod SP-14 - Uptown Highway Tourist 30 du/ac 25 648 Ex Low/Very Commercial, Low/Low/Mod/ Industrial Park, Above Mod Service Commercial SP-15 — Altair Medium 30 du/ac 272 1,1,515 Ex Low/Very Residential, Low/Low/Mod/ High Above Mod Residential, Specific Plan Total 4 5,773 Source: City of Temecula, 2021 * Dwelling unit calculation is based on 85% ofpotential maximum capacity ,11 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-126 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Figure 2: Vacant Developable Land Use Zoning IHV Zoning Designations BUSINESS PARK (BP) - COMMUNITY COMM (CC) CONSERVATION(OS-C) - HIGH DENSITY RES (H) - HIGHWAY/TOURIST COMM (HT) O LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (L) 0 LOW DENSITY RES (L-1) - LOW DENSITY RES (L-2) O LOW MED DENSITY RES (LM) 0 MEDIUM DENSITY RES (M) 0 NEIGHBORHOOD COMM (NC) A PLANNED DEV OVERLAY (PDO-5) - PLANNED DEV OVERLAY (PDO-10) - PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL (PI) - SERVICE COMMERCIAL (SC) SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-1) SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-2) SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-4) M SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-5) M SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-7) M SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-9) M SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) M SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-12) M SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-13) - SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-14) - SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-15) SVERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) City 1i Centedine L7 HOT SPRINGS hi 0 0.5 1 Miles I I I I I 3. Large Sites Analysis The City's site inventory (Appendix A) includes ten parcels that are over 10 acres in size that allow for a density of at least 30 du/ac and are found to be suitable sites to accommodate a portion of the City's lower income RHNA. Of these ten sites, four are between 10 and 11 acres (10.20, 10.23, 10.26, and 10.84 acres). The remaining six parcels range in size from 11.39 acres to 54.8 acres. Seven of the ten sites are located within approved Specific Plans which include processes for subdividing parcels into developable lots. The City has a proven track record of developing Specific Plans, including the subdivision of large lots, as evidence by the development of approved Specific Plans including Uptown (where one affordable housing projects were recently approved), Harveston (which is largely developed but was recently amended to allow for additional residential development), Old Town Specific Plan (where one affordable housing project was approved), Rancho Highlands Specific Plan (the location of the Arrive affordable housing project), and various other residential Specific Plans. The remaining three sites that are not located within a Specific Plan are all designated with the City's Affordable Housing Overlay, which specifies that residential development at these sites must include the applicable affordable housing component to develop as a residential project, and that the assumed density for these sites in 30 du/ac. Two of these sites are owned by the City of Temecula, and as the parcel owner, the City is in a unique position to ensure that the property will be developed as affordable housing, despite its size. The City also has the ability to subdivide the property into smaller lots, if that process is more likely to result in the production of affordable units. The largest lots are included in SP-15 (Altair), which is the City's newest Specific Plan. As development moves forward within the Altair project area, it is expected that the existing parcels will be subdivided in compliance with the Specific Plan and its land use pattern, and that this process will replicate similar successful efforts in other Specific Plan areas which have been fully or partially developed throughout Temecula. Additionally, the developer of Altair has expressed interest in promoting and building accessory dwelling units in concert with new construction, further demonstrating the City's ability to accommodate a portion of its RHNA through development of ADUs. Moreover, only sites identified with the City's Affordable Housing Overlay are anticipated to develop as 100% affordable projects (at 75% of maximum capacity). Larger sites located in Specific Plan areas are expected to provide a range of housing options and a variety of income CITY OF TLMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-128 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT levels; it is not assumed that large sites in Specific Plan areas will develop as exclusively affordable to lower income households. Rather, approximately 40% of the capacity is projected to be suitable to accommodate lower income households with the remainder serving the needs of moderate to above moderate income households. Table 63: Large Lot Inventory Affordable Lower General Total Parcel Owner Size Zoning Housing Income Plan Capacity Overlay RHNA CITY OF Public 909370050 TEMECULA 10.84 Institutional PDO-10 Yes 244 244 Facilities CITY OF Public 909370049 TEMECULA 19.14 Institutional PDO-10 Yes 431 431 Facilities 916400042 HARVESTON 10.21 Service SP-13 No 43 108 SAB Commercial 916400060 HARVESTON 10.26 Service SP-13 No 44 109 SAB Commercial HUB 3 Medium 922210011 10.23 Residential (7- SP-15 No 50 126 12 Du/Ac Max) 940320002 CITY OF 20.34 Specific Plan SP-15 No 100 250 TEMECULA Implementation HUB 3 Medium 940320007 12.72 Residential (7- SP-15 No 62 156 12 Du/Ac Max) KAISERMAN Medium 944290015 DONALD 11.40 Residential (7- M Yes 256 256 12 Du/Ac Max) TEMECULA Specific Plan 940320005 WEST 19.61 Implementation SP-15 No 96 241 VILLAGE TEMECULA Specific Plan 922210049 WEST 54.81 Implementation SP-15 No 270 675 VILLAGE Source: City of Temecula, 2021 7. Adequacy of Sites for RHNA ~' The City's site inventory demonstrates the availability of adequate sites to address the projected housing growth needs (see Appendix A). Overall, the vacant site inventory yields an estimated development capacity of 9,203 units. Based on these numbers, along with development of ADUs and the credits identified earlier in this chapter, and as shown in Table 64, the City is able to meet its 2021-2029 regional housing need of 4,193 and provide a surplus of sites at all income levels. Additionally, given that the capacities identified for vacant residential parcels outside of Specific Plan is based on a 75% yield from the maximum density and for vacant residential parcels inside of Specific Plans is based on 85% yield from the maximum CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-129 density, it could be expected that products will actually develop with unit counts higher than those assumed in this inventory. As is shown in Table 64, the City has adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA for all income levels. For lower income units (extremely low income, very low income, and low income), the City has a remaining allocation of 2,029 units and can accommodate 2,798 units via ADUs and on sites that allow densities of at least 30 units per acre, consistent with the assumptions for lower income sites established by Government Code Section 65583.2(c) (3) (B) (iii) and that are further supported by the City's history of successful affordable projects. The City also has a surplus of sites for moderate and above moderate income units. Table 64: Comparison of RHNA Candidate Sites Realistic Capacity and RHNA Candidate Extremely Very Low Low Moderate Above Total Sites Low income income income income Moderate (0-30% AMI) (30-50% (51-80% (81-120% income AMI) AMI) AMI) (121%+ AMI) Remaining 6th Cycle RHNA 656 671 702 757 1,249 4,034 ADUs 22 11 50 50 11 144 Vacant Residential Land Inventory 367 440 660 1,600 363 3,430 (exclusive of SPAs) Vacant Residential Land 312 312 624 2,787 1,724 5,773 in Specific Plans Total +45 (surplus) +92 (surplus) +632 +3,680(surplus) +849 (surplus) +5,313 (surplus) (surplus) C. Housing, Financial, and Services Resources Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program (AHSCI funds land use, housing, transportation, and land preservation projects that support infill and compact development and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Funds are available in the form of loans and/or grants in two kinds of project areas: Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Project Areas and Integrated Connectivity JCP) Project Areas. There is an annual competitive funding cycle. Community Development Block Grants (CDBG� funds are awarded to the City of Temecula, an entitlement community, on a formula basis for housing, community development, and economic development CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-130 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT activities. Activities eligible for CDBG funding include acquisition, rehabilitation, economic development and public services. HOME Investment Partnership funds are granted by a formula basis from HUD to increase the supply of decent, safe, sanitary, and affordable housing to lower income households. Eligible activities include new construction, acquisition, rental assistance and rehabilitation. The City participates in the San Diego County - administered HOME Program, which administers HOME funds to projects in participating jurisdictions. County -administered HOME funds for first time homebuyer assistance are made available to residents or employees of the local jurisdictions participating in the HOME program. New development projects are typically allocated funding on a competitive basis. Housing Choice Voucher Program (formerly Section 8provides monthly rental assistance payments to private landlords on behalf of low income families who have been determined eligible by the San Diego Housing Authority. The program's objective is to assist low income families by providing rental assistance so that families may lease safe, decent, and sanitary housing units in the private rental market. The program is designed to allow families to move without the loss of housing assistance. Moves are permissible if the family notifies the Housing Authority ahead of time, terminates its existing lease within the lease provisions, and finds acceptable alternate housing. Project Based Housing Voucher program is a component of the former Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program funded through HUD. The program's objective is to induce property owners to make standard housing available to low income families at rents within the program limits. In return, the Housing Authority or HUD enters a contract with the owner that guarantees a certain level of rents. Section 811 /202 Program (Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities/Elderl)� — Non- profit and consumer cooperatives can receive no interest capital advances from HUD under the Section 202 program for the construction of Very -Low income rental housing for '40�N�LNI seniors and persons with disabilities. These funds can be used in conjunction with Section 811, which can be used to develop group homes, independent living facilities and immediate care facilities. Eligible activities include acquisition, rehabilitation, new construction and rental assistance. California Housing Finance Agency (Ca1HFA) Multifamily Pro provide permanent financing for the acquisition, rehabilitation, and preservation or new construction of rental housing that includes affordable rents for Low and Moderate income families and individuals. One of the programs is the Preservation Acquisition Finance Program that is designed to facilitate the acquisition of at -risk CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-131 affordable housing developments and provide lowcost funding to preserve affordability. CalHOME Program provides grants to local public agencies and non- profit developers to assist households in becoming homeowners. CalHome funds may be used for predevelopment, development, acquisition, and rehabilitation costs as well as downpayment assistance. While Ca1HOME funding has been limited to disaster assistance in recent years, this would be an appropriate program for the City to pursue to begin to develop a local portfolio of housing assistance programs and funds. California Housing Finance Agency (CHFA� offers permanent financing for acquisition and rehabilitation to for -profit, non-profit, and public agency developers seeking to preserve "at -risk" housing units. In addition, CHFA offers low interest predevelopment loans to nonprofit sponsors through its acquisition/rehabilitation program. Emergency Housing and Assistance Program HAP provides funds to local government agencies and non-profit corporations for capital development activities and facility operation for emergency shelters, transitional housing and safe havens that provide shelter and supportive services for homeless individuals and families. No current funding is offered for this program. Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) Program provides emergency shelter and related services to the County's homeless populations. Eligible activities include: the rehabilitation and conversion of buildings for use as emergency shelters; the provision of essential services to the homeless; operating support for emergency shelters; and homeless prevention/rapid rehousing activities. Federal Home Loan Bank System facilitates Affordable Housing Programs (AHP), which subsidize the interest rates for affordable housing. The San Francisco Federal Home Loan Bank District provides local service within California. Interest rate subsidies under the AHP can be used to finance the purchase, construction, and/or rehabilitation of rental housing. very low income households must occupy at least 20% of the units for the useful life of the housing or the mortgage term. Housing for a Healthy California (HHC) provides funding on a competitive basis to deliver supportive housing opportunities to developers using the federal National Housing Trust Funds (NHTF) allocations for operating reserve grants and capital loans. The Department will also utilize from a portion of moneys collected in calendar year 2018 and deposited into the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund to provide funding through grants to counties for capital and operating assistance. Funds will be announced through a Notice of Funding Availability. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-132 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Infill Infrastructure Grant Program (IIG� funds infrastructure improvements to facilitate new housing development with an affordable component in residential or mixed use infill projects and infill areas. If an affordable or special needs housing developer is interested in developing in the City's urban core, this program could be useful to fund infrastructure improvements. Joe Serna Jr. Farmworker Housing Grant Program finances the new construction, rehabilitation and acquisition of owner- and renter - occupied housing units for agricultural workers, with a priority for lower income households. No current funding is offered for this program. Low income Housing Tax Credits. The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTCAQ administers the federal and state Low income Housing Tax Credit Programs. Both programs were created to encourage private investment in affordable rental housing for households meeting certain income requirements. Under these programs, housing tax credits are awarded to developers of qualified projects. 20% of federal credits are reserved for rural areas, and 10% for non-profit sponsors. To compete for the credit, rental housing developments must reserve units at affordable rents to households at or below 46% of area median income. The assisted units must be reserved for the target population for 55 years. The federal tax credit provides a subsidy over ten years towards the cost of producing a unit. Developers sell these tax benefits to investors for their present market value to provide up -front capital to build the units. Credits can be used to fund the hard and soft costs (excluding land costs) of the acquisition, rehabilitation, or new construction of rental housing. Projects not receiving other federal subsidy receive a federal credit of 9% per year for ten years and a state credit of 30% over four years (high cost areas and qualified census tracts get increased federal credits). Projects with a federal subsidy receive a 4% federal credit each year for ten years and a 13% state credit over four years. The CTCAC also administers a Farmworker Housing Assistance Program and a Commercial 46, Revitalization Deduction Program. Low income Housing Preservation and Residential Home Ownership Act (IHPRHA) requires that all eligible HUD Section 236 and Section 221(d) projects "at -risk" of conversion to market -rate rental housing through the mortgage prepayment option be subject to LIHPRHA Incentives. The incentives to owners include HUD subsidies which guarantee owners an 8% annual return on equity. Owners must file a Plan of Action to obtain incentives or offer the project for sale to a) non-profit organizations, b) tenants, or c) public bodies for a 12 month period followed by an additional three-month sale to other purchasers. Only then are owners eligible to prepay the subsidized mortgages. Mobilehome Park Rehabilitation and Resident Ownership Program (MPRROP� makes short- and long-term low interest rate loans for the CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-133 preservation of affordable mobilehome parks for ownership or control by resident organizations, nonprofit housing sponsors, or local public agencies. MPRROP also makes long-term loans to individuals to ensure continued affordability. Funds are made available through a periodic, competitive process. MPRROP is currently accepting applications on an over-the-counter basis. Multifamily Housing Program HP) provides low interest loans to developers of affordable rental and transitional housing projects. Funds may be used for new construction, rehabilitation, acquisition and rehabilitation, or conversion of non-residential structures. National Housing Trust Fund is a permanent federal program with dedicated sources of funding not subject to the annual appropriations. The funds can be used to increase and preserve the supply of affordable housing, with an emphasis on rental housing for extremely low income households. California is receiving approximately $10.1 Million for the program in 2019. Funds will be made available through a competitive process and will be announced through a Notice of Funding Availability. Preservation Interim Repositioning Program IRP) is a short-term loan program designed to preserve housing at risk of conversion to market rates. Only non -profits, dedicated to the provision of affordable housing, may apply. Local matching funds, together with PIRP funds, may not exceed 20% of total costs. No current funding is offered for this program. SB 2 Planning Grants Program provides one-time funding and technical assistance to all eligible local governments in California to adopt, and implement plans and process improvements that streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production. Eligible activities include updating a variety of planning documents and processes such as general plans and zoning ordinances, conducting environmental analyses, and process improvements that expedite local planning and permitting. The planning grants program is funded through the Building Homes and Jobs Act Trust Fund (SB 2, Chapter 364, Statutes AiOW of 2017). The City is eligible to receive funds through this program and this program should be considered to develop an affordable housing program for the City. California Community Reinvestment Corporation (CCRC) is a multifamily affordable housing lender whose mission is to increase the availability of affordable housing for Low income families, seniors and residents with special needs by facilitating private capital flow from its investors for debt and equity to developers of affordable housing. Eligible activities include new construction, rehabilitation and acquisition of properties. Supplement Security Income (SSI) is a federal welfare program for persons 65 and over and for blind or disabled persons of any age. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-134 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT "Disabled" means that you have a physical or mental disability that is expected to keep you from working for 12 months or longer, or will result in death. Medicare is a federal health insurance program for people who are 65 and over, for some younger people with permanent disabilities, and for people with end -stage kidney disease. SSI may provide total monthly income or it may supplement a low income. In addition to cash payments, SSI recipients are automatically covered by Medi-Cal, the state health insurance plan. D. Administrative Resources Agencies with administrative capacity to implement programs contained in the Housing Element include the City of Temecula and local and regional nonprofit private developers. The City of Temecula Planning Department takes the lead in implementing Housing Element programs and policies. The City also works closely with non-profit developers to expand affordable housing opportunities in Temecula. Development Services Department The Community Development Department manages the City's affordable housing programs, Building and Safety Division, code enforcement, land development, and planning (among other responsibilities). The department coordinates development activity within the City to ensure the planned orderly growth. The Planning Department administers the General Plan and zoning and environmental regulations, and provides primary staff assistance to the Planning Commission. Non -Profit Developments The City collaborates with a number of affordable housing developers and service providers to accommodate the housing needs of Temecula residents. The following are housing developers and service providers IN active in the City; several are included in the State's list of entities with the legal and managerial capacity to acquire and manage at -risk projects. The following are housing providers interested in developing and/or preserving affordable housing in the City: • Coachella Valley Housing Coalition 45-701 Monroe Street, Suite G Indio, CA 92201 Telephone: (760) 347-3157 • Habitat for Humanity 41964 Main Street Temecula, CA 92591 Telephone: (909) 693-0460 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-135 • Jamboree Housing Corporation 2081 Business Center Drive, Suite 216 Irvine, CA 92612 Telephone: (949) 263-8676 • Affirmed Housing 13520 Evening Creek Drive North, Suite 360 San Diego, CA 92128 Telephone: (858)679-2828 • The Olson Company 30200 Old Ranch Pkwy, #250 Seal Beach, CA 90740 Telephone: (562) 596-4770 • San Diego Community Housing Corporation 8799 Balboa Avenue, Suite 220 San Diego, CA 92123 Telephone: (858) 571-0444 • D'Alto Partners NN 41911 5th Street Temecula, CA 92590 Telephone: (951)304-0633 • DR Horton 2280 Warlow Circle, Suite 100 Corona, CA 92880 Telephone: (951)272-9000 • Bridge Housing Corporation 9191 Towne Center Drive, Suite L101 San Diego, CA 92122 Telephone: (858) 535-0552 • Highland Partnerships 285 Bay Blvd. Chula Vista, CA 91910 Telephone: (619) 498-2900 • National Community Renaissance (National CORE) 9421 Haven Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Telephone: (909) 483-2444 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-136 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT E. Environmental Constraints The majority of the land available for residential development is located adjacent to existing infrastructure facilities or within a specific plan area where infrastructure will be provided as part of the development process. As a result, infrastructure facilities will be able to serve all of the future residential development. The sites inventory analysis reflects land use designations and densities established in the General Plan and Specific Plans. Thus, any environmental constraints that would lower the potential yield (e.g., steep slopes) have already been accounted for. Any additional constraints that would occur on a more detailed site review basis would be addressed as part of the individual project review process. The City's capacity to meet its regional share and individual income categories are not constrained by any environmental conditions. F. Energy Conservation and Climate Change Energy -related housing costs can directly impact the affordability of housing. While State building code standards contain mandatory energy efficiency requirements for new development, the City and utility providers are also important resources to encourage and facilitate energy conservation and to help residents minimize energy -related expenses. Efficient energy use can be encouraged by changing customer behavior, rewarding use of energy -saving appliances, and employing building design and construction approaches that reduce electric power and natural gas usage. The primary sources of energy in Temecula are electricity from Southern California Edison (SCE) and natural gas from SoCalGas. SCE provides technical assistance and incentives for residents and businesses to increase energy efficiency through energy audits, appliance rebate programs, and smart energy metering. As part of the City's Sustainability Plan, Temecula's mission is to reduce energy use while encouraging clean energy generation. New Development The City encourages energy conservation in residential projects. New subdivision and parcel reviews are considered in terms of street layout and lot design. Residential structures must meet the requirements of Title 24 (CalGreen) relating to energy conservation features of the California Building Standards Code. For example, production home builder, Woodside Homes has constructed hundreds of homes in Roripaugh Ranch (Sommers Bend) which include solar as well as passive and active energy savings techniques. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-137 Retrofit There are a number of methods available to improve conditions of existing structures and to decrease their energy demand, all of which fall under the general label of "retrofit." Among the most common techniques for increasing building efficiency are: insulation of ceilings, heating -ventilating air conditioning ducts and hot water heaters; weather stripping and caulking; night setback thermostats; spark ignited pilot lights; low flow shower heads; window treatment to provide shade; and furnace efficiency modifications. The City of Temecula monitors such modifications on substantial rehabilitation projects pursuant to the California Building Standards Code. Weatherization in existing dwellings can greatly cut down heating and cooling costs. Weatherization is generally done by performing or improving attic insulation, caulking, weather stripping and storm windows, furnace efficiency modifications, and certain mechanical measures to heating and cooling systems. The U.S. Department of Energy allocates money to states for disbursement to community - based organizations. Other means of energy conservation in residential structures includes proper design and location of windows, window shades, orientation of the dwelling in relation to sun and wind direction, and roof overhang to let the winter sun in and block the summer sun out. The City encourages maintenance and rehabilitation of housing to maximize energy efficiency. The City's residential rehabilitation programs provides funding assistance for lower income households to rehabilitate their home and provide weatherization and energy retrofit improvements. ING. Consistency with the General Plan Government Code Section 65300.5 states: "In construing the A4%NL provisions of this article, the Legislature intends that the general plan and elements and parts thereof comprise an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the adopting agency." Additionally, Government Code Section 65583 (c)(7) requires the identification of "means by which consistency will be achieved with other general plan elements and community goals." The Housing Element of a general plan sets out a city's overall long- range planning strategy for providing housing for all segments of the community. The California Government Code requires general plans to contain an integrated, consistent set of goals and policies. The Housing Element is, therefore, affected by policies contained in other elements of a general plan. The housing element is most intricately CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-138 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT related to the land use element. The Land Use Element establishes the framework for development of housing by laying out the land use designations for residential development and indicating the type and density permitted by a city. Working within this framework, the City of Temecula's Housing Element identifies priority goals, objectives, and program actions for the 2021-2029 planning period that directly address the housing needs of Temecula's existing and future residents. The policies contained in other elements of the City's General Plan affect many aspects of life that residents enjoy such as the amount and variety of open space; the preservation of natural, historic and cultural resources; permitted noise levels in residential areas; and the safety of the residents in the event of a natural or man-made disaster. The Housing Element has been reviewed for consistency with the City's other General Plan Elements and the policies and programs in this Element do not conflict with the policy direction contained in other parts of the General Plan. As the City moves forward with a General Plan Update and as portions of the General Plan are amended in the future, the Housing Element will be reviewed to ensure that internal consistency is maintained. The General Plan Update will address all requirements of State law related to the scope and content of a General Plan, including updated goals, policies, and programs to address complete streets, environmental justice, climate adaptation and resiliency, and air quality. H. Relationship to Other City Plans and Policies The Housing Element identifies priority goals, objectives, policies, and action programs for the next eight years that directly address the housing needs of Temecula. The City's other plans and policies including its Municipal Code, Zoning Code, Master Plan, and Specific Plans must all remain consistent with the Housing Element. As revisions are considered to the City's Code and various plans, each revision will be reviewed to ensure that no conflicts with the Housing Element occur. I. Priority for Water and Sewer Per Chapter 727, Statues of 2004 (SB 1087), upon completion of an amended or adopted housing element, a local government is responsible for immediately distributing a copy of the Element to area water and sewer providers. Water and sewer providers must grant priority for service allocations to proposed developments that include housing units affordable to lower -income households. As the responsible agency, the City of Temecula will supply a copy of the CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-139 adopted housing element to the Temecula Public Works Department, as well as to all water and sewer providers serving the City. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-140 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT VI. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR Hous►NG (AFFH) ANfv.Ysls All Housing Elements due on or after January 1, 2021 must contain an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) consistent with the core elements of the analysis required by the federal Affirmatively Further Fair Housing Final Rule of July 16, 2015. Under State law, affirmatively further fair housing means "taking meaningful actions, in addition to combatting discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics". These characteristics can include, but are not limited to, race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability. In 2017, the City of Temecula prepared a comprehensive and robust assessment of fair housing. This Report is included as Appendix D to the Housing Element and was approved in March 2017. Unless otherwise noted, the Figures and Tables references in this Section (Section VI) refer to those Figures and Tables included as part of the 2017 Assessment, included as Appendix D. As part of this effort, the City undertook a detailed community participation program, assessed past goals and actions, conducted a fair housing analysis including a demographic summary, identification of general issues related to segregation/integration, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs), disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs. Additionally, the Report included an analysis of publicly supported housing, disability and access, and fair housing enforcement, outreach capacity, and resource analysis. Finally, it included a series of fair housing goals and priorities, which have been integrated and updated within the Housing Plan, as appropriate. This analysis is a summary of the 2017 Report, the findings of which remain valid, as well as new information related to the City's 2021-2029 Housing Element, and in particular its sites inventory, and a description of how the City's housing programs affirmatively further fair housing. As a recipient of federal funds to administer housing and community development programs, the City of Temecula must affirmatively further fair housing. To accomplish this goal, the City of Temecula has contracted with the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County to provide fair housing services for Temecula residents at no cost. Citizens can get legal support for Fair Housing issues regarding rent payments, termination notices, lease renewal increases, habitability claims, illegal evictions, and any discrimination claim. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-141 A. Fair Housing Needs Assessment The City of Temecula is located in the extreme southwest corner of the Riverside -San Bernardino Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), which is the largest MSA in area in the continental United States. Because of its location in the corner of the region, one must be cautious to draw too many conclusions in comparing Temecula to the regional data supplied by HUD. The city's 2017 Assessment and the analysis included in this Housing Element compares and contrasts the City with the regional data, but as one would expect, there are some substantial differences in the data profiles and the needs between the City and the region. The City is located in a cluster of cities in Temecula Valley in southwest Riverside County. The other cities include Murrieta, Menifee, Wildomar and Lake Elsinore. All have experienced tremendous growth in the past twenty years, yet they remain separate and some distance from the metropolitan areas to the north and south. Through its growth, Temecula has remained an integrated and diverse City with racial and ethnic groups spread evenly throughout the City. There are no HUD -identified racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs) in the City. During the housing crisis of 2007- 2008, the City was hit with many foreclosures and, as such, that issue was the greatest concern in the previous Analysis of Impediments, completed in 2010. Now with the housing industry in recovery, the greatest need in the City is affordable housing, as many new homebuyers find themselves priced out of the market. Like all cities in the State of California, Temecula is challenged by a lack of financial resources to address its affordable housing needs due to the dissolution of all the State's redevelopment agencies. This was the main source of hundreds of affordable housing units constructed in the Ni City since the 1990s. Fair housing issues in Temecula appear to be individualized and not systemic, but preventing systematic issues requires continuous training and education of those persons employed AO%NLL in the housing industry, as well as educating the residents of their fair housing rights. As included in its 2017 Assessment, the City had developed four fair housing goals to overcome the contributing factors identified in the Assessment of Fair Housing. These goals were prioritized based on feedback from community meetings, surveys, stakeholder interviews, staff, and data analysis. Highest priority was given to those contributing factors that limit or deny fair housing choice of access to opportunity. The goals are listed below, from highest to lowest priority. Goal 1: Amend Zoning Code to promote the development of affordable housing CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-142 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Fair Housing Issue(s): Disproportionate Housing Needs; Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factor 1A: Land use and zoning laws Goal2: Increase and preserve affordable units for renters and bomeowners Fair Housing Issue(s): Disproportionate Housing Needs; Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factor 2A: The availability of affordable units in a range of sizes Contributing Factor 2B: Location and type of affordable housing Goal 3: Provide greater access to public facilities and improvements for persons with disabilities Fair Housing Issue(s): Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factor 3A: Inaccessible sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, or other infrastructure Contributing Factor 3B: Inaccessible government facilities or services Goal4: Provide equal housing opportunities forprotected classes Fair Housing Issue(s): Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factor 4A: Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations Contributing Factor 4B: Private discrimination Based on the above goals and contributing factors, a number of actions were identified that can be taken over the next five years that will promote fair housing for its residents. These actions, outlined in the 2017 Assessment, have either already been completed (i.e., the adoption of an Affordable Housing Overlay) and assessed as part of the 5' Cycle Progress, or included as a Program in this Housing Plan. B. Analysis of Available Federal, State, and Local Data and Local Knowledge This section presents an overview of available federal, state, and local data to analyze fair housing issues in Temecula as included in the City's CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-143 2017 Assessment; these findings are supplemented with present day resources and local knowledge of existing conditions in the community to present a more realistic picture of fair housing concerns in Temecula and a more informed perspective from which to base goals, policies and programs to affirmatively further fair housing. Integration and Segregation Patterns and Trends According to the HUD provided Map 1-Race and Ethnicity, Temecula had no areas of concentrations of racial or ethnic groups. All ethnic groups are spread evenly throughout the City. The City also had no HUD -defined racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAP areas). Local knowledge confirmed this observation. Map 2 shows no appreciable difference from 1990. This is also confirmed with Table 3-Racial and Ethnicity Dissimilarity Trends. According to HUD, if a jurisdiction has an Index value of less than 40, there is high diversity (low segregation) in the City. The City has a score between 18.93 and 26.05 for the various racial and ethnic groups. Likewise, Map 3-National Origin shows no segregation pattern based on national origin. The top five population groups are spread evenly throughout the City, showing the City's diversity and high integration. In comparing the City with the region from Table 2-Demographic Trends, the percentage of Blacks and Hispanics is about half that in the region. There are more Whites and Asians in Temecula than the regional average. Twenty-two percent of the City's Hispanics were born in Mexico compared to 27% for the region based on calculation of figures in Table 1. Eighty-nine percent of the Hispanic immigrants are Limited English Proficiency (LEP). This is roughly the same as for the region. n%\31W There was a significant increase in the percentage of foreign born over the past twenty years, but the percentage of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) persons remained about the same, even though their population increased. Although only 3% of the population, 40% of Filipinos are LEPs, compared to 27% region -wide. According to Map 4-Persons with LEP, their populations are spread evenly across the City. According to Table 1, the largest disabled population are those who are ambulatory (3.831/o), followed by those with cognitive difficulty (3.54%), independent living difficulty (2.90%) and those with hearing loss (2.67%). There is probably considerable overlap in these populations. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-144 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT According to Table 1, eight percent of the City's population is seniors compared to 10.4% region -wide. Fifty-six percent of the households are families with children compared to 51 % region -wide. While all age groups increased in population, there was a slight decrease in the percentage of children and an increase in those of middle age. That could further be seen in a decrease in the proportion of families with children, even though it remains higher than the regional percentages. According to Table 2-Demographic Trends, racial and ethnic diversity has increased dramatically in the City over the past twenty years. Except Native Americans, the population of all racial and ethnic groups has grown; however, the Hispanic and Asian populations have increased at a much faster rate than the other population groups. Hispanics have increased from 14.5% to 25% of the population and Asians / Pacific Islanders from 2.40% to 9.71%. Despite an increase in population of over 28,000 in twenty years, the proportion of Whites has decreased from 80.23% in 1990 to 57% in 2010. Blacks have increased at a less dramatic rate from 1.3% to 4% from 1990 to 2010, but showed a slight decline percentagewise from 4.16% in 2000 to 3.88% in 2010, even though their population increased. While Native Americans constitute only .6% of the population, they were the only ethnic group to show a decrease in population between 2000 and 2010. Through the tremendous growth in populations, Table 3 demonstrates that the Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index range was still between 18.93 and 26.05, well below the HUD threshold of 40, meaning there is minimal segregation and high integration within the City. This compares to a range between 41.29 and 47.66 for the region. According to Maps 1 through 4 pertaining to racial and ethnic data and dissimilarity indexes, there are no patterns of segregation by race and ethnicity, national origin or LEP groups in the City. The majority of multi -family residential is located in areas with easy access to transit systems and employment centers throughout the City and not unduly constrained by perceived patterns of segregation. Based upon data in Table 2, the trend is that the City is becoming increasingly diverse as it has grown over the last twenty years. This is in line with trends throughout the region. Maps 1 and 2 do not reveal trends of segregation patterns forming within the City as a result of the growth. Information gathered from community meetings and surveys along with data sources provided stakeholders did not provide any information that segregation exists in the City affecting other protected characteristics was provided through stakeholder consultations. Workshop participants also concluded that the City is highly diverse. The region does have higher scores than the City, indicating a very diverse and integrated population, but as mentioned in the introduction, the region represents the largest MSA in the nation. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-145 Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAP) To assist communities in identifying racially/ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (RECAPS), HUD has developed a census tract -based definition of RECAPs. The definition involves a racial/ethnic concentration threshold and a poverty test. The racial/ethnic concentration threshold is straightforward: RECAPs must have a non- white population of 50 percent or more. Regarding the poverty threshold, Wilson (1980) defines neighborhoods of extreme poverty as census tracts with 40 percent or more of individuals living at or below the poverty line. Because overall poverty levels are substantially lower in many parts of the country, HUD supplements this with an alternate criterion. Thus, a neighborhood can be a RECAP if it has a poverty rate that exceeds 40% or is three or more times the average tract poverty rate for the metropolitan/micropolitan area, whichever threshold is lower. HUD data and mapping does not identify any R/ECAPs within the City. Disparities in Access to Opportunity The UC Davis Center for Regional Change and Rabobank, N.A. partnered to develop the Regional Opportunity Index (ROI) intended to help understand social and economic opportunity in California's communities. The goal of the ROI is to help target resources and policies toward people and places with the greatest need to foster thriving communities. The ROI integrates a variety of data topics, including education, economic development, housing, mobility, health/environment, and civic life, and "maps" areas of potential investment by identifying specific areas of urgent need and opportunity. The ROI relies on many of the same data sources analyzed in the Housing Element, including the American Community Survey (ACS), the Longitudinal Employer -Household Dynamics (LEHD) Origin -Destination Employment Statistics (LODES) data, the California Department of Education, the California Department of Public Health, among others (data points are from 2014). There are two ROI "maps"; the "people" ROI illustrates the relative measure of the people's assets in education, the economy, housing, mobility/transportation, health/environment, and civic life) while the "place" ROI illustrates the relative measure of a place's assets in those same categories. The tool analyzes different specific indicators for each of the six data topics, as summarized in Table 65 on the following page. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-146 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Table 65: Overview of ROI Data Point Indicators People -Based Data Points Place -Based Data Points Education Elementary School Truancy High School Discipline rate • English Proficiency Teacher Experience • Math Proficiency UC/CSU Eligible • College Educated Adults High School Graduation Rate Economic Development Minimum Basic Income Bank Accessibility • Employment Rate Job Quality • Job Growth • Job Availability Housing Housing Cost Burden Housing Affordability • Homeownership Housing Adequacy Mobility Internet Access N/A • Commute Time • Vehicle Availability Health/Environment Years of Life Lost Air Quality • Births to Teens Health Care Availability • Infant Health Access to Supermarket • Prenatal Care CIVIC Life English Speakers Neighborhood Stability • Voting Rates US Citizenship As shown in Figures 3 and 4 on the following pages, Temecula has a range of opportunity levels throughout the community with slight differences between the relative measure of people -based assets versus placed -based assets, with place -based opportunities scoring slightly better than people -based opportunities. In general, most census tracts are shown to have average (yellow) to high (green) levels of opportunity, which indicates positive access to opportunities across the six data topics. However, in terms of people's assets, there are three census tracts which indicate lower levels of opportunity (shown in orange), and in terms of the place's assets, there is one census tract (which also includes areas outside of the City boundary) which indicates a lower level of opportunity (shown in orange). The higher and lower levels of opportunity for these three census tracts, by indicator, are summarized in Table 66 following the maps. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-147 Regional Opportunity Index: People, 2014 Description The R egionsI Oppnrt—ty Ind- (ROI): P-ple- relat" measure of —s in education, people's me a —.1. n—mg.—birtynransportan"". healthl—ir--t, and civic life. �= Regional Regional Opportunity Index: People- ❑ Some data not available - Lowest Opponunity ❑ L El Highest Opportunity m UCDAVIS U 2 4 S CENTER Miz REGIONAL CHANGE Figure 3: Regional Opportunity Index, People, 2014, Temecula J� J CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-148 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Regional Opportunity Index: Place, 2014 Description The R e ,—I Opp ert—ty Index (ROI): Place is a ie lathe measure of an area's asset In education, me a on"my. n—iZ—birtyn'anspodki . ,-Ithlenviro —t, and civic life. i•nr r.ge"d Regional Opportunity Index: Place ❑ Some data not available Lowest Opponunity ❑ _ Highest Opportunity m yc DAVIS U 2 4 S WPs'f;'" CENTER Miz REGIONAL CHANGE Figure 4: Regional Opportunity Index, Place, 2014, Temecula CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-149 Table 66: People -Based Regional Opportunity Index (ROI) Low and Lowest Opportunity Census Tracts, Temecula Census Tract Opportunity Average or Higher Lower Opportunities Level Opportunities 06065043216 Low Health/Environment Civic Life Opportunity Mobility/Transportation Housing • Economy • Education 06065043266 Low Health/Environment Civic Life Opportunity Mobility/Transportation Housing • Economy • Education 06065043220 Low Health/Environment Civic Life Opportunity Mobility/Transportation Housing • Economy • Education Source: UC Davis Center for Regional Change, 2021 (using 2014 data points) Table 67: Place -Based Regional Opportunity Index (ROI) Low Opportunity Census Tract, Temecula Census Tract Opportunity Average or Higher Lower Opportunities (Place) Level Opportunities 06065043254 Low Civic Life Health/Environment Opportunity Housing • Economy • Education 06065043252 west Civic Life Health/Environment Ortunity Housing • Education Economy Source: UC Davis Center for Regional Change, 2020 (using 2014 data points) The results of this analysis indicate that for those census tracts with lower -levels of people -based opportunities, the most significant issues revolve around civic life (lower levels of English speakers and voting rates), housing (lower levels of homeownership and higher cost burdens), the economy (households making the minimum basic income and low employment rates), and education (math proficiency). When considering place -based opportunities, which the City arguably has more control over, the City of Temecula fares very well, and only one census tract has a low level of place -based opportunity as described above. For both census tracts with lower levels of opportunity (which are both located along the City's boundary) there appears to be limited access to supermarkets, and, to a lesser extent, health care. 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Area Map Additionally, the Department of Housing and Community Development together with the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee established the California Fair Housing Task Force to CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-150 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT provide research, evidence -based policy recommendations, and other strategic recommendations to HCD and other related state agencies/departments to further the fair housing goals (as defined by HCD). The Task force developed the 2021 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Area Maps to understand how public and private resources are spatially distributed. The Task force defines opportunities as pathways to better lives, including health, education, and employment. Overall, opportunity maps are intended to display which areas, according to research, offer low income children and adults the best chance at economic advancement, high educational attainment, and good physical and mental health. According to the Task Force's methodology, the tool allocates the 20 percent of the tracts in each region with the highest relative index scores to the "Highest Resource" designation and the next 20 percent to the "High Resource" designation. Each region then ends up with 40 percent of its total tracts as "Highest" or "High" resource. These two categories are intended to help State decision -makers identify tracts within each region that the research suggests low income families are most likely to thrive, and where they typically do not have the option to live —but might, if given the choice. The remaining tracts are then evenly divided into "Low Resources" and "Moderate Resource". As shown in Figure 5, the majority of Temecula is classified as the "high" or "highest" resource designation, one census tract (east of I-15 and Old Town) is identified as "moderate". Other Access to Opportunity Indicators As part of its 2017 Assessment, the City also evaluated any disparities in access to proficient schools based on race/ethnicity, national origin, and family status. The City does not have jurisdiction over the local schools. They are administered by independent public school districts, such as the Temecula Valley Unified School District. Table 12 - Opportunity Indicators by Race/Ethnicity provides an index regarding how well fourth graders of the various racial and ethnic groups are doing on their State exams in comparison with national indices. Higher scores indicate higher proficiencies in the schools. According to Table 12, the school proficiency index is essentially the same for all races and ethnic groups in the City. On a scale of 1 to 100, with 100 being the highest, Hispanics scored 79.00, Blacks at 80.36, Native Americans at 80.86, Asians at 81.58 and Whites at 82.20. In comparison, the region scored between 40.97 for Hispanics on the low end and 58.09 for Whites on the high end. The City has one Title 1 school (Temecula Elementary School) in the northern end of the City. A school is a Title 1 School if at least 40% of CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-151 the children participate in a free or reduced lunch program. The school is located in one of the City's CDBG eligible areas. There are no Title 1 Middle Schools or High Schools in the City. The school district has a policy that parents can transfer their children from school to school subject to availability. Parents would responsible for providing transportation to the new school. Public transportation is available, although it may be limited based on the location of the school from their place of residence. The City also previously evaluated any disparities in access to jobs and labor markets by protected class groups. The Jobs Proximity Index in Table 12-Opportunity Indicators provides an index for the physical distances between place of residence and jobs by race/ethnicity. The Labor Market Index also in Table 12 provides a measure of unemployment rate, labor -force participation rate, and percent of the population ages 25 and above with at least a bachelor's degree, by neighborhood. The higher scores represent greater the access to employment opportunities, and are better prepared to enter the labor market with higher incomes. According to the Map 10 series for Job Proximities, persons in the lower -income areas live substantially closer to employment opportunities than their counterparts in the higher -income areas, often located farther away from the Interstate. Again, there was little difference between racial and ethnic groups or national origin according to Map 10 and Table 12 for Job Proximity. The Labor Market Index for the various races and ethnicities range from 46.38 for Native Americans to 49.79 for Whites. These scores, which are based on a scale from 1 to 100, would be in the average range based on HUD's perspective nationwide. There was no difference between the City as a whole and those below the poverty line. In fact, all races except Asians who were below the poverty line had slightly higher scores than those above the poverty level. They ranged between 44.15 for Asians and 51.31 for Blacks with Whites at 48.79. When compared with the region, the City residents scored much higher. The region ranged from 24.20 for Hispanics to 43.02 for Asians and unlike the City, there was a substantial difference for those below the poverty line. They ranged from 16.42 for Hispanics to 30.51 for Asians. Whites were at 25.55. Although some classes are available locally, the lack of a community college in Temecula in 2010 is probably part of the reason for this deficiency. However, since 2010, several campuses have opened in Temecula, including Cal State San Marcos at Temecula, University of Redlands, Concordia University, and Mount San Jacinto. More recent data would CITY OF TEMECULA GLNERAL PLAN HBK-152 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT likely show an improvement in job readiness of the labor market. Other areas in the region have notably higher ratings such as in the vicinity of UC Riverside, Cal State San Bernardino and Redlands College in the north and in Orange County to the west. The Low Poverty Index rates family poverty by household (based on the federal poverty line) provides an index regarding the access to poverty by census tract. The higher the scores, the less likely a neighborhood is exposed to poverty. There was little difference between the various ethnic and racial groups. Indices ranged from 65.42 for Hispanics to 71.23 for Whites, which indicates that all racial and ethnic groups have low exposure to poverty in Temecula. Except for Asians, there was little difference between those below the poverty line. They ranged for 54.98 for Blacks to 67.95 for Native Americans. The only anomaly was for Asians at 46.21 who were more exposed to poverty than their counterparts. This could be reflective of recent Filipino immigrants which now constitute over 3% of the City's population and 40% are limited English speaking according to Table 1. Though a small minority group, there are a number living in a low income area. Again, there was a substantial difference between the City residents and those within the region. In the region, the range was between 37.51 for Hispanics to 60.42 for Asians. For those below the poverty line, there was even a larger difference. They ranged from 23.78 for Hispanics to 42.30 for Asians. City residents have less exposure to poverty than the region as a whole. According to Map 14-Demographics and Poverty, there were three adjoining census tracts in north Temecula that had low scores indicating a higher exposure to poverty. Three of the census tracts are CDBG eligible lower -income areas, but one of the adjoining areas is not, yet affected by its exposure to poverty. Another adjoining area is an eligible CDBG area but did not indicate a high exposure to poverty. The area has a number of market -rate and subsidized apartment complexes in the vicinity of the Temecula Elementary School, which may be affecting this index score. The corridor also contains many of ^ the City's commercial shopping centers. Summary of Access to Opportunity The vast majority of Temecula residents enjoy a consistent level of access to opportunities. Analysis of the HUD -provided maps and data did not reveal any overarching patterns of poor access to opportunity and did not reveal adverse community factors. However, Census Tract 432.16 along the Margarita Corridor, is identified on Map 14 as having high exposure to poverty. Two of the three block groups are in CDBG-eligible areas and the third is not. Yet the HUD data indicates that the third block group CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-153 also has a high exposure to poverty. The only Title 1 School in the district is located in this neighborhood. The area is characterized by commercial retail and uses and the presences of a mix of multifamily and single family housing. Two of the multi -family complexes in one of the block groups are subsidized, the 40-unit Oak Tree Apartments on Lyndie Lane and the 55 unit Rancho California Apartments off of Margarita Road. There are a number of subsidized units west of Interstate 15, which is a CDBG eligible area, but that area does not have a high exposure factor. This could be partly because the City has focused its CDBG and local funds in addressing this area. The City does not show any patterns of segregation, nor does it have any R/ECAPS. Consultations with residents and stakeholders confirmed the HUD - provided information regarding the lack of disparities in access to opportunity in Temecula affecting groups with other protected characteristics. The City is involved in a number of efforts aimed at improving air quality of the entire region including the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) Clean Cities Coalition, which aims to reduce the consumption of petroleum fuels. The City also participates in WRCOG's Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program. The TUMF program makes improvements to the regional transportation system and provides transportation demand management through funds from new development. C. Disproportionate Housing Need The analysis of disproportionate housing needs within Temecula evaluated existing housing need, need of the future housing population, and units within the community at -risk of converting to market -rate (which are limited). Future Growth Need The City's future growth need is based on the RHNA production of 1,356 very -low and 801 low income units within the 2021-2029 planning period. As discussed throughout this Background Report, both existing and proposed affordable units are well dispersed throughout the community and do not present a geographic barrier to obtaining affordable housing. Appendix A of this Housing Element shows the City's ability to meet its 2021-2029 RHNA need at all income levels. This demonstrates the City's ability to accommodate the anticipated future affordable housing needs of the community. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-154 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Existing Need As described earlier in this Background Report, the City has a strong history of providing housing for lower -income households in Temecula. Temecula has 759 deed -restricted units, representing approximately 2% of the City's housing stock. The City is proud of meeting the needs of its existing residents but continues to identify and implement meaningful housing programs to expand opportunities for lower -income households throughout Temecula, including by continuing to implement its recently adopted Affordable Housing Overlay and Specific Plans, many of which allow for develop of housing projects at densities of at least 30 du/ac. HUD requires all grantees to compare and assess the burdens for housing for different groups in the community. A disproportionately greater burden exists when the members of a particular group experience a housing problem at a greater rate (90 percent or more) than the group as a whole. Table 10-Demographics of Household with Severe Housing Cost Burden demonstrates the number and percentage of persons by race/ethnicity and family size experiencing severe housing cost burden. There is no substantial difference between racial and ethnic groups. Non -family households demonstrated the highest cost burdens. The City scores are reflective of the region. According to Table 9, half of the City's households are experiencing one of the four housing problems identified above. There is a disparity in this category with 47.37% of the White households experiencing a housing problem, Asians at 54.31% and Blacks at 55.04%. Hispanics are higher at 62.24% and Native Americans at 80.90%. For severe housing problems, they range from 20.76% for White households to 35.56% for Hispanic households. Native Americans were at 33.71%. Map 5 - Publicly Supported Housing and Map 6 - Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) provides the location of the limited number of publicly supported and HVC housing units in the City. Given the housing costs in the City and the region, there is a high demand for affordable rental housing. While comparable with the region, all households, except Black households, were slightly more burdened in the City than in the region. For those below the poverty level, all groups, except for Native Americans, were less burdened in the City than in the region. Based on our examination of the data in Table 9 and demonstrated in Map 7- Housing Cost Burden and Race/Ethnicity, there were no disproportionate housing problems based on race, ethnicity, national origin, household type and size. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-155 These results are not unexpected with the high costs of housing in Southern California as a whole. Based on the data in the Table 11, there are a limited number of Project Based Section 8 units for families in the City. There are 54 two- and three -bedroom units and only 36 units are households with children. There are also a limited number of Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCV) units where there are 30 two- and three -bedroom units and only thirteen units are households with children. Additional affordable housing units for families continue to be a high demand in the City. Through its 2017 Assessment, the City identified the availability of affordable units in a range of sizes as a contributing factor of disproportionate housing needs. D. Displacement Risk As previously discussed, there are two deed -restricted affordable projects representing 180 units which can be considered as high risk as converting to market -rate units within the planning period. The City is actively engaged with the property owners of these projects (Rancho Creek Apartments and Rancho West Apartments) to evaluate preservation options. The City also has a number of units which are affordable to lower -income families but are not deed -restricted. As described in Section V of this Background Report, the City plans to accommodate the vast majority of its 2021-2029 RHNA on vacant parcels already zoned for residential development, with a focus on new development in the City's Specific Plan areas (Harveston, Altair, Uptown, and Old Town), which have good access to transit, amenities, and programmed infrastructure improvements. Given that new development is expected to occur on vacant parcels, there is not a IN significant displacement risk associated with the City's current affordable housing stock. The City has included Program 17 in the Housing Plan to assist in the preservation of at -risk housing units. The City recognizes that even though it has identified sufficient vacant land to accommodate its RHNA at all income levels, there is still the potential for economic displacement because of new development and investment. This "knock -on" effect can occur at any time, and it can be challenging for the City to predict market changes and development patterns which have the potential to impact rental rates and sales prices for housing units available in the marketplace. To date, the City has no evidence that new development (affordable or market -rate) has resulted in economic displacement. However, the City appreciates the possibility that economic displacement might occur in the future and has developed Program 24 to study and address potential issues related to displacement. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-156 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT The City has also considered the risk of displacement specifically for protected classes, including persons with disabilities, female -headed households, seniors, and nonwhite residents (as discussed previously throughout Section 3 of this Background Report). The highest levels of persons with disabilities, seniors, and female -headed households are not located in areas where no residential development is planned, and the risk of displacement to these groups (like to the City's lower -income residents) is low. However, some future housing sites are located in areas with high levels of Hispanic and nonwhite residents, and these groups appear to be more vulnerable to potential future displacement. As discussed above, Program 24 has been included in the City's Housing Plan to study and address issues related to future displacement, and the City remains committed to maintaining its existing affordable housing stock, which includes deed -restricted affordable units throughout the City, including in the census tracts with high levels of Hispanic and nonwhite residents. To the extent that future development occurs in areas where there is existing housing, all housing must be replaced according to SB 330's replacement housing provisions (Government Code Section 66300). SB 330 also provides relocation payments to existing low income tenants. The State has also adopted just cause eviction provisions and statewide rent control to protect tenants from displacement. The City is committed to making diligent efforts to engage underrepresented and disadvantaged communities in studying displacement. Programs 22 and 24, among others, detail efforts the City will take to engage these communities during the planning period. E. Assessment of Contributing Factors to Fair Housing Issues in Temecula In its 2017 Assessment of Fair Housing, the City identified the following contributing factors to fair housing issues in Temecula: • Increased demand of affordable housing with supportive services to serve special needs populations (Disproportionate Housing Needs) • High demand for affordable housing, due to the high housing costs in the community and the region (Publicly Supported Housing Location and Occupancy) • Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations (Fair Housing Enforcement, Outreach Capacity, and Resources) CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-157 The analysis above regarding other fair housing issues within Temecula yielded the following results: • The City does not have any racial or ethnic groups that score higher than 60 on the dissimilarity index, indicating that while there are racial and ethnic groups with higher levels of segregation than others within Temecula, none meet the standard set to identify segregated groups. • The City does not have any racially or ethnically concentrated census tracts (RECAPs) as identified by HUD. This indicates that there are no census tracts within Temecula with a non- white population of 50 percent or more or any census tracts that have a poverty rate that exceeds 40% or is three or more times the average tract poverty rate for the metropolitan/micropolitan area. • The UC Davis Regional Opportunity Index shows that the majority of residents within Temecula have average- to high - levels of access to opportunity throughout the majority of the City, with three census tracts showing lower people -based access to opportunity and two census tracts showing lower place -based access to opportunity. Based on the data used to identify opportunity access, the City has varying degrees of ability to influence the trajectory of the indicator (for example, low rates of US citizenship result in a lower opportunity assessment for place -based civic life). The City accommodates a significant portion of its RHNA in areas planned for a mix of uses located in proximity to each other, where new residential development can be supported by easy access to goods and services (like supermarkets and financial institutions), and the introduction of new residential development into areas where these challenges exist can expand opportunities for existing residents. • Analysis of the TCAC/HCD opportunity Area Maps show that most census tracts in Temecula are classified with either the "High Resource", or "Highest Resource" designation, and the remaining one tract is classified as "Moderate Resource". This indicates that the most census tracts designated as "High Resource" or "Highest Resource" are within the top forty percent in the region in terms of areas that lower -income residents may thrive if given the opportunity to live there. • The City has demonstrated the ability to meet the anticipated future affordable housing needs of the community through the designation of sites to meet the very -low and low income CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-158 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT RHNA need (Section 5 of the Background Report) and Programs 1 and 2 address the City's ability to meet the 6th Cycle RHNA allocation and outline the mechanism to ensure continued compliance for the duration of the planning period. Existing deed -restricted affordable units are located throughout the community and new accessory dwelling unit production throughout the City will result in new development affordable to a variety of income levels. The City plans to accommodate its very low and low income RHNA need in key planned growth areas located near transit facilities and adjacent to major infrastructure projects, to ensure adequate access to goods, facilities and jobs, while jobs and housing to be located closer together, thereby reducing vehicle miles travels, improve air quality, and create a more equitable jobs -housing balance. The relationship between existing affordable units and comprehensively planned growth on vacant parcels in and outside of Specific Plan areas allows the City to minimize displacement and improve access to opportunities for existing and future residents. • There are 180 existing affordable units at -risk of converting to market -rate within the planning period. Program 17 addresses monitoring and working with partners, as feasible, to preserve at -risk units within the City over the planning period. F. Analysis of Sites Pursuant to AB 686 AB 686 requires that jurisdictions identify sites throughout the community in a manner that is consistent with its duty to affirmatively further fair housing. The site identification requirement involves not only an analysis of site capacity to accommodate the RHNA (provided in Section 5), but also whether the identified sites serve the purpose of replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas w of poverty into areas of opportunity. Segregation/Integration Both existing affordable units and proposed very -low and low income RHNA candidate sites are well dispersed throughout the city and do not disproportionately impact areas with larger concentrations of the Hispanic population, although as described previously, the City has no historic patters of segregation or isolation and there are no trends to indicate that a pattern may emerge in the future. The City of Temecula is proud to have adopted an Affordable Housing Overlay to promote the development of affordable housing options throughout the community. In addition, the City is proactively taking CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-159 steps to plan for, promote, and streamline development of accessory dwelling units as part of the solution to the City's housing needs. Together, the City's plan to accommodate its lower income RHNA at AHO sites and through ADUs will further strengthen the City's reputation as being a well -integrated community without patterns of isolation or segregation. R/ECAPs The City does not have any racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and the identification of sites to accommodate the City's RHNA is not expected to alter this finding. Access to Opportunity No sites identified to accommodate the City's lower income RHNA are located in areas with low levels of place -based opportunity and only a limited number of sites, all within the City's Affordable Housing Overlay, are located in areas with lower levels of people -based opportunity. The concerns in these limited areas include high housing cost burdens, low levels of homeownership, and low voting rates. The introduction of new affordable housing options in this area, facilitated through the City's new Affordable Housing Overlay, will help to create more housing affordable to households at lower -income levels, introduce new residents to an area which can contribute to higher levels of civic engagement, and expand opportunities for people to live and work in the same area. Additionally, the Specific Plan areas identified to accommodate a portion of the City's lower income RHNA (specifically Harveston, Altair, Uptown, and Old Town) are located in areas with relatively high opportunity and resources. By located new affordable housing in these areas, the City continues to promote an integration of economic backgrounds and household incomes and ensure that all Temecula residents have access to high levels of opportunity, regardless of income or other characteristics. Displacement Risk The City plans to accommodate its RHNA for all income levels at vacant sites throughout the City. Past residential development projects have not caused displacement to existing Temecula residents, and there is no expectation that the City's program to accommodate its RHNA at vacant sites throughout the City would create displacement risk for current or future lower income residents. However, in an abundance of caution, the City ahs included Program 24 to study the risk if displacement to residents as a result of new residential development at vacant sites in and outside of Specific Plan areas. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-160 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT Site Analysis Findings The City of Temecula has a history of developing affordable housing projects throughout the community, at vacant and infill sites. To accommodate the City's RHNA, the City has undertake a robust inventory of available vacant residential sites inside and outside of Specific Plan areas, many of which are identified as part of the City's Affordable Housing Overlay. While the City's very -low and low RHNA needs are largely accommodated in its Specific Plan areas, which do not represent extremely concentrated racial or ethnic populations, the City has included programs to encourage additional development of lower - income units throughout the community through its accessory dwelling unit program and through its Affordable Housing Overlay. For these reasons, the City finds that the sites proposed to accommodate its RHNA need do not unduly burden existing areas of concentrated racial or ethnic homogeneity, poverty, or other characteristics. Moreover, the sites contribute to affirmatively further fair housing by helping to stimulate investing in areas where additional people- and place -based opportunity is desired, and where new residential and/or mixed -use development can help to improve some of the opportunity level characteristics discussed earlier in this section. G. Analysis of Contributing Factors and Fair Housing Priorities and Goals The December 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule Guidebook identifies examples of contributing factors by each fair housing issue area: outreach, fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity, segregation and integration, racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disparities in access to opportunity, disparities in access to opportunities for persons with disabilities, disproportionate housing needs, including displacement risks, and sites inventory. Based on the analysis included in this Background Report, the City has identified the following potential contributing factors to fair housing issues in Temecula and, as described later in this section, has developed a series of specific programs to address these contributing factors. 1. Increased demand of affordable housing with supportive services to serve special needs populations. The City of Temecula is home to residents with special needs who need additional opportunities for safe and affordable housing. This includes persons with developmental disabilities. Program 9, Special Needs Housing Construction, has been included in the City's Housing Plan to address this contributing factor. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-161 2. High demand for affordable housing, due to the high housing costs in the community and the region. Temecula is located in an area easily accessible to San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, and Los Angeles counties. Due to its proximity to a variety of jobs centers, Temecula is a desirable and relatively affordable place to reside, and this pressure has increased demand for affordable housing options within the City. The City has included numerous programs in its Housing Plan to increase the supply of affordable housing, including Programs 1 and 2 to ensure that the City provides sufficient capacity to accommodate its RHNA at all income levels for the duration of the planning period, Program 4 which addresses the replacement of affordable units, and Program 5 which promotes ADUs as an option to expand the City's affordable housing stock. 3. Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations. Like agencies throughout the region, Temecula has limited resources available to implement a variety of fair housing plans and programs. Other agencies with which the City regularly partners, including the Riverside County Consortium and Fair Housing Program of Riverside County, also face limited resources. The City has included Program 22, Equal Housing Opportunity, to do its part in promoting fair housing agencies and organizations and working with partner agencies to affirmatively further fair housing in Temecula. To affirmatively further fair housing in Temecula, the City is committed to implementing its Affordable Housing Overlay, promoting affordable accessory dwelling units, and providing sites suitable for affordable housing in areas near transit, which are not unduly racially or ethnically concentrated, and where new residential development affordable to very -low and low income households can help to expand people- and place -based opportunities. The City of Temecula has a long history of supporting affordable housing development and as described previously in this Background Report. Moving forward, the City remains committed to providing a diversity of housing options for all income levels, and is committed to encouraging their development throughout the community to help overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. The vast majority of the City's Housing Programs designed to address fair housing are required to be implemented on an ongoing basis, with annual progress reports and programs evaluations to ensure they are achieving the City's objectives. The following list summarizes those programs identified in this Housing Element which affirmatively further fair housing and implement the City's 2017 Fair Housing Assessment: CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HBK-162 CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT • Program 5, to promote ADUs including ADUs affordable to lower -income households • Program 6, to ensure that the City's density bonus ordinance continues to be in compliance with state law • Program 7, to promote land assemblage and affordable housing development • Program 8, to address the special needs of the City's extremely low income households • Program 13, to expedite processing of affordable housing projects • Program 16, to accommodate specialized housing types and update the City's policies and procedures regarding low barrier navigation centers, supportive housing, employee housing, and farmworker housing • Program 17, to monitor and preserve at -risk housing • Program 22, to promote equal housing opportunities • Program 23, to continue offering housing referral services • Program 24, to study and address economic displacement risks To the extent that these programs represent ongoing work efforts, these programs are evaluated for effectiveness within Section 2 of this Background Report. The City has already undertaken a series of proactive amendments to its Zoning Ordinance to address new requirements related to density bonus law and accessory dwelling units, and the City will continue to partner with local and regional stakeholders to affirmatively further fair housing in Temecula. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HBK-163 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT APPENDIX A: SITE INVENTORY d ECULA CI E N IER-AL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE APN OWNER GPLU GPDESCRIPT ZONING_Cur ZONEDESC_C Acres_O71121 AHO Density EL VL L M AM Total 9fi464000fi RORIPAUGHVALLEYRESTORATION L Low Residential (0.5-2Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 12.8862fi0453J4 2.00000000000 21.90fi60 21.906fi0 96464000E RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION L Low Residential (0.5-2Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 14.3958220369E 2.0000ORROM 0 24.4J29 24.4121 96464001E RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION M Medium Resitlen[ial (]-12 Ou/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 11.681916310J2 MOD wo00000 99.29629 99.29629 964640010 RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION M Medium Residential (J-12 Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-11) 11.81111491325 10.00000000000 100.3945 100.3945 96464000J RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION L Low Residemial(0.5-2Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 1J.38005171JJ2 5.00000000000 73.86524 731 524 96464001E RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION M Medlum Resldential(7-12 Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PIAN(SP-11) 12.55011155163 10.00000000000 306.6J59 106.6)59 964640012 RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION L Low Residential(0.5-2Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-11) 20.02586N4729 LOp000omom 34.04396 34.04396 96464000E 91027100E RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION YNEZ ACRES M SC Medium Residential(J-12 Du/ACMax) Service Commercial SP-11 SC SPECIFIC PUN(SP-11) SERVICE COMMERCIAL (SC) 19.169)4914001 1.68521454]09 10.000000mom 20m 00000000 1fi2.9429 162.9429 25.27822 25.2]822 11021Z.14 HOFF INV SC Service Commercial SP-14 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-14) 1.7435549991E Ves 30.00000000000 4.446065 4.446065 8.89213 13,3382 13.3382 44.46065 9093]0050 9102]100) CITY OFTEMECUOU YNEZ ACRES PI SC Public lns[i[ufional Facilities Service Commercial PDO-10 SC PLANNED ON OVERLAY SERVICECOMMERCIAL(SC) 10.8398615531]Yes 2.)4]3932fi205 30.000000MOM 20.000000WON 60,97422 73.16907 1093531 243.8969 41.20)9 41.2079 91027201E 910272023 HOFF INV FOUNDATIONFORACOURSEINMIRACIESINC SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial SP-14 SP-14 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-14) SPECIFIC LA 1.4325256005fi Ves 1.118045221 C 30.00000000000 30.D0000000000 3.65294 3.15294 J.30588110.112 11.11112 31.1214 2.876515 2.876515 5.]53031 B.EZ1146 8.629546 28.76515 91027202E 9102]1005 HOFF INV YNEZ ACRES SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial SP-14 SC SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-14) SERVICECOMMERCIAL(SC) 1.02257251888 Yes 1.97981840115 30.00000000000 20.00ODOOO0000 26075E 26075E 5.21512 7.8226E 7.8226E 26.075E 29.6972E 29.6972: 91037201) 110212022 HOFF INV FOUNDATIONFORACOURSEINMIRACIESINC SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial SP-14 SP-14 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-14) SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-14) 1.2033705223fi Ves 1.03611809]41 30A0000000000 30.000DOOD0000 3.068595 3.068595 6.13719 9.205]84 9.205784 3018595 2.642101 2.642101 5.284202 ).926303 7.926303 26.42101 909370049 910262003 CITY OF TEMECUTA A FFINV PI SC Public lns[i[ufional Facilities Service Commercial POO-10 SP-14 PLANNED ON OVERLAY IPDO-10) SPE[IFICPLAN(SP-14 19.1415]090441 Yes 1.3692958140E Yes 30.00000000000 30m D0000000 107.6713 129.2056 193.8084 430,6853 3A91]04 3.491J04 6.98340E 1D.47511 10.457SU 34.917. 91026200E 9102J2001 HOFFINV HOFFINV SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial SP-14 SP-14 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-14) SPECIFIC PIAN(SP-14) 1.6411291954C Ves 1.E)9083163. Yes 30A000o0O0000 30.00000000000 4.1848J9 4.184879 8.36975E 12.55464 12.55460 41.8487E 4.281662 4.281662 8.563324 12.8449E 12.8449E 42.81662 9102]2021 910262010 A FFINV HOFFINV SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial SP-14 SP-14 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-14) SPECIFIC PUN(SP-14) 1.53584219699 Yes 1.53091893299 Yes 30.D0000000000 30.00ODOOo0O00 3,916398 3.916398 7.832)95 11.74919 11,74919 39.16398 3.903843 3.903843 7.907687 11.171153 11.71153 39.03843 91027100fi 910172002 YNEZ ACRES HUFF INV SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial SC SP-14 SERVICE COMMERCIAL (SC) SPECIFIC PIAN(SP-14) 2.4)54500905fi 1.]3662844051 20.00000000000 30.00000000000 37.131)5 3).13175 4,428913 4,428913 8.857821 13.186)4 13.286]4 49.28913 1102720IS 91fi400042 HOFF INV HARVESTONSAB SC SC Service COmmercial Service Commercial SP-14 SP-13 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-14) SPECIFICPLAN (SP-13) 1.34335204554 1D.1072920]OB] 30.000000OOOM Vanes 3,425548 3.42554E 6.851095 10.2]614 10.2J664 34.2554E 10.E4525 10.84525 21.6905 32.53574 32.535)4 108.4525 91640003E 916400063 HARVESTON SAB HARVEST IN SAB SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial Sp SP-13 SPECIFIC PUN(SP-13) LA SPECIFIC PIAN(SP-13) 5.96524900225 1.1951554121E Vanes Vanes 6.338077 6.338077 12.67615 19.01423 19.01423 63.380J7 1.269853 1.269853 2.539705 3.809558 3.80955E 12.698IS 916400064 9164000GE HARVESTONSAB HARVESTONSAB SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial SP-13 SP-13 SPECIFIC PUN(SP-13) SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-13) 4.315575282UC 6.)749410936] Vanes Vanes 4,585299 4.585299 9.170597 13.7559 13.7559 45.85299 ).19E3)5 7.199375 14.39675 21.59512 21.59512 71.98375 916400034 916400036 HA"ESTON SAB HARVEST IN SAB SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial SP-13 SP-13 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-13) SPECIFIC PIAN(SP-13) 4.030)3961384 4.01958611575 Vanes Vanes 4.282661 4.282661 8.565322 U.-: 12.8479E 41.12161 4.27081 4.27081 8.54162 12.81243 12.81243 42.7081 9164Do ED 91fi400031 HARVESTONSAB HARVESTON SAB SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial SP-13 SP-13 SPECIFIC PUN(SP-13) SPECIFIC PUN(SP-13) 10.26397292025 3.64828296981 Vanes Vanes 10.90547 10.90547 21.81094 32.71641 32,71641 109.0547 3.876301 3.E]6301 7.712601 11.6289 11.6289 39.7 301 916400053 9164DO 62 YNEZ ACRES HARVESTON SAB SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial SC SP-13 SERVICECOMMERCIAL(SC) SPECIFIC PIAN(SP-13) 7.86975680691 4.1J44466413C 20.00000000000 Vanes 118.041 118.04fi0 4.43535 0.43535 8.8J0699 13.30605 13.30605 44.3535 916400067 9164D0044 HARVESTONSAB HA.ESTON SAB SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial SP-13 SP-13 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-13) SPECIFICPLAN (SP-13) 3.4426273]131 0.6830389522E Vanes Vanes 3,117792 3.117792 ].3111% 11.97337 10,97337 36.5)792 O.J25]29 O.J25J29 1.45145E 2.177187 2.177187 7.25128E 916400065 919043003 HARVESTON SAB LEESHIO CHAD SC VL Service Commercial Very Low Resldentla1:0.1-0.4 Du/ACMax) Sp VL SPECIFIC PUN(SP-13) VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 0.51268]18J88 0.]532381643] Vanes 0.4 0.544]3 0.54473 1.08546 1.63419 1.6341E S-7301 0.2259]3 0.225971 919190003 STARBUCK LESTER M VL Very Low Residential(0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 1.062450O475 0.4 0.318)350.318735 919291004 CAIRNS ROSSD VL III Residential (0.2-0.4 Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VI.) 0.60267050206 0.4 O.1B0801 0.180801 919062//2 AMAVAVALDEMAR VL Very Low Residential �0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VI.) 0.5981695908E OA 0.1]9451 0.179451 920110004 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE p0 Profession al Office PO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) 0.99696981341 Ves 30.00000000000 5.607955 6.729546 10.09432 22.43182 921120014 FARIS EODIE VU Very Low Residential (O2-0.4 Ou/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 0.54829980141 0.4 OA6449 0.16449 919151.12 VERHOEF ELLENE VL Very Low Residential (0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 0.5E6)7896551 0.4 0.176034 0.176034 919392011 PU U DO CRAIG VL Very Low Residential(0.2-oA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 0.62994823]02 0.4 0.188984 0.188984 92102008E CITY OF TEM ECUOU SC Service Commercial SC SERVICE COMMERCIAL (SC) 3.E5103419998 20.00OOOOl10000 54.76551 54.76551 921330052 TERZIAN MARTIN PO Professional Office PO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE APO) 1.1089995327: Yes 30.00000000000 6,238122 7.485747 11.22862 24.95249 921330053 TERZIAN MARTIN PO Professional Office PO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE APO) 1.1954639J309 Yes 30.000000OOOOC 6.724485 8.069382 12.3040J 26.89791 91916100] PRICE IACQUELYN M VL Very Low Residential(0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 0.ED282726589 0.4 0.24084E 0.24084E 919162001 HSIEHCHIHSIANG VL Very Low Residential l0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 0.5)869264163 0.4 0.17360E 0.17360E 919251002 CAUGHEY LAMES GREGORY VL Very Low Residential �0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 0.51652898606 0.4 0.15495E 0.15495E 921161002 KUEBLERIOSEPHJ VL Very Low Residential �0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 0.55365E M4335 0.4 0.16617 0.16617 921211001 ER,BRADLEY JOHN VL IN Low Residentia1(0.2-0A Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VI.) 0.53622409062 DA O.1fi0867 0.160867 121300013 SAEEU.AANGELAC cc Community Commercial Cc COMMUNITY COMM(CC) 20.08M N2211 20.00000000000 301.3315 301.3325 921060058 WEUUPROFIT INTERNATIONAL INC HT Highway Tourist Commercial SP-14 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-14) 3.506536330J2 Yes 30.00000000000 8,941668 8.941668 17.88334 26.825 26.825 89,41668 921280002 CARLOS&EMMAALVAREZ FAMILY LTD PARTNER PO Professional Office PO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) 1.2166808224O Yes 30.00000000000 6.84383 8.212596 12.3188E 2).3)532 92214001C CITY OF TEMECULA VL Very Low Residential(0.2-OA Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 1.7370689270E 0.4 2.321121 2.321131 922180015 BOSSELERIOVCEL VL Very Low Reslden[Ial (0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 2.268136516)1 0.9 0.680491 0.680941 92210004E CHANG ROGER SDI Specific Plan Implementation SP-5 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-5) 0.1165913,342 30 2490328 2.490328 4.980657 7.47985 7,470985 24.90328 92212001) SHEK DAVID IT HlghwaV 1UFI1 Commercial HT HIGHWAY/TOURIST COM M(HT) O.8685753270E 20.000000WON 13.02863 13.11 92212001E SHEK DAVID HT Highway Touris[Commercial HT HIGHWAY/TOURIST COMM�HT) 1.3117016fi821 20.00000000000 19.6J553 19.fi7553 922120019 SHEK DAVID HT HlghwaV Tourist Commercial HT HIGHWAY/TOURIST CoM (HT) 1.1)894707131 20.00000000000 17.68421 1J.68421 92210003E UHT PARTNERSHIP SC Service Commercial SC SERVICE COMMERCIAL (SC) 0.85543382207 20.00000000000 12.83151 12.83151 9221fi0024 BOONERAYA VL Very Low Residential �0.2-0.4 Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VI.) 3.266230)5354 0.4 0.979863 0.9]9863 922190033 RI IMASOOD VL Very Low Residential �0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VI.) 2.53345181579 0.4 0.Jfi0036 0.76003fi 922190034 ROSTAI MASOOD VL Very Low 11 identiall0.2-0.4Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 2.55079399454 0.9 O.J652110.)65231 92220000E EMMI ELEANORF VL Very Low Residential (0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 4,58515811152 0.4 1,371547 1.3]5547 92219001E NAKAMURAYUTAKA VL Very Low Residential(0.2-0.4 Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VI.) 2.53981800351 1.4 0.761945 0.761945 922190022 ROSTAI MASOOD VL Very Low Residential(0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VI.) 2.84385090147 0.4 0.813155 0.8531IS 12221001] HU83 M Medlum Resid:ntl l(J-12 Du/ACMax) SP-15 SPECIFIC PIAN(SP-15) 1D.2333J39326C Vanes 12,61263 11.61163 25.22527 37.837E 37.837E 116.1263 922230026 UPPALRUPINDER M Medium Resitlen[ial (]-12 Du/ACMax) M MEDIUM DENSITY RES(M) 30.11030)66873 1200000000000 2]0.9928 270.9928 921202002 SOLDANO ROGER VL Very Low Residential(0.2-0.4 Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VI.) 1.1301J224421 1.4 0.339OS2 0.339052 921211002 BRINEGAR BRADLEY JOHN VL Very Low Reside U.I(0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VI.) 0.5356919310E 0.4 O.160J08 O.1fi07. '22U5304) UZ SPI Spe<Iflc Plan Implementation Sp-5 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-5) 1.7420899264] 30 4.442328 4.442328 8.884656 13.32698 13.32698 44.42328 922190031 NAKAMURAYUTAKA VL Very Low Residential(O2-o.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 2.645969J4045 0.4 0.7937911.791791 92211006g QQQQ SC Service Commercial Sc SERVICE COMMERCIAL (SC) 0.809503125R 20.00011101 12.14255 12.142" 922310042 CHAI KING HT Highway Tourist Commercial HT HIGHWAY/TOURIST COMM (HT) 1.87967230305 20AOOOOOOOo00 28.19508 28.1950E 916400043 HARVESTONSAB SC Service Commercial SP-13 SPECIFIC PIAN(SP-13) 4.49100103581 Vanes 4.771689 4.771681 9.5433J7 14.31507 14.3150) 41.7168E 916400051 916400052 HARVESTON SAB HARVESTON SAB SC SC Service Commercial Service Commercial SP-13 SP-13 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-13) SPECIFICPLAN (SP-13) :.37:0 796662 5.358075782OC Vanes Vanes 6.11452E 6.11452E 1222905 18.3435E 18.3435E 61.1452E 5.692956 5.69295: 11.38591 1].078E] 1J.07887 56.92956 91640005E 1. 20002 HARVESTON SAB CITY OFTEMECUOU SC SPI Service Commercial Specifc Plan implementation SP-13 SP-15 SPECIFIC PUN(SP-13) SPECIFIC PIAN(SP-15) 4.8105841944] 20.3429444364E Vanes 5.11124E 1.11124fi 30.2224E 11.3331 11.3131 11.11241 25.0)268 25.DRGE 50.1453E )5.11804 ]5.21804 210.71 940320007 HU83 M Medium Residential]-12 Du/ACMax) SP-15 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-15) 12.7171631522C 15.673E 15.6739 31.34781 47.02171 47.021)1 "1.J39 94433000) IWISERMAN DONALD PO Professional Office PO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (PO) 3.0699220fi311 Ves 30.00OOO000000 17.26831 20.]219) 31.082:6 6107 25 944330008 GOSPEL RECORDINGS H High Residential(13-20 Du/ACMax) H HIGH DENSITY RES(H) 1.7428188256E Ves 30A0000000000 9.803356 11.76403 1].64604 39.21341 1" 90015 KAISERMAN DONALD M Medlum Resldentlal(7-12 Du/ACMax) M MEDIUM DENSITY RES(M) 11.39702339343 Yes 30.00000000000 64.10826 76.92991 115.394E 256.433 9443]0001 TEM ECUTAVILIAGEDEV PO Professional Office POO-5 PLANNEO OEV OVER �PDO-5) 0.937314031711., 30.DD W000000 5,272391 6,32687 9.490305 21.0895) 9443]0010 TEMECULA VILLAGE DEV PO Professional Office PDO-5 PLANNED DEV OVERLAY �PDD-5) 1.)12418)136fi Yes 30.00000000000 9.632355 11.55883 17.33830 38.52942 9...15 LEWIS CECELIA L Low Residential(0.5-2Du/ACMax) L-1 LOW DENSITY RES �L-1) 2.09339]3413C 2.00000000000 3.14009E 3.14009fi 945300005 NARON PACIFIC INC L Low Residential (0.5-2Du/ACMax) L-1 LOW DENSITY RES �L-1) 18.56052135404 2.00000000000 21.8407E 27.84078 94516001E MARGIOTTA LAMES P VL Very Low Residential(0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES DVQ 0.66828941027 0.4 0200487 0200487 9443]OOOfi TEMECULA VILLAGE DEV PO Professional Office PDO-5 PLANNED DEN OVERLAY(PDO-5) 0.83631R03584 Yes 30.00000OMON 4.704289 5.645147 8.46772 18.81711 945090003 G& A THOMAS PROP LTD L Low Residential (OS-2Du/ACMax) L-1 LOW DENSITY RES (L-1) 4.15834616791 2.00000000000 6.237519 6.23J519 9451W022 MARGIOTTA IAMESP VL Very Low Residential l0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 11151191171 0.9 0.97076E 0.970766 944290017 0SERMAN DONALD M Medium Residential(7-12 DU/ACMax) M MEDIUM DENSITY RES(M) 7.99094738469 1200000000000 71.91853 71.91853 94518000fi GROMMISCH ROBERTG VL Very Low Resitlential �0.2-0.4 Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 10.3019495157C 0.4 3.030585 3.030585 945180.12 GROMMISCH ROBERTG VL Very Low Residential �0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 3.45063801623 0.4 1.0351911.035191 949330019 GLOBAL HOTEL NETWORK INC HT Hlghway Tourist Commerclal SP-2 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-2) 1.3911111311 4 4.J53031 4,711016 94509000l NARON PACIFIC INC L Low Resitlential(0.5-2Du/ACMax) L-1 LOW DENSITY RES:L-1) 4.7133788010E 2.000000MOM 7.069]68 7.069768 945090007 RICHA PROP L L. Residential(0.5-2Du/ACMax) L-1 LOWDENSITY RES �L-1) 2.1265456233] 2.000000D0000 3.18981E 3.189818 9112"' :!MO Ell SAL VL Very Low Residential(0.2-idDu/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 2.63591952805 0.4 03Z 760.790776 94512.009 $IMONETTI SAL VL Very Low Residemial l0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 21.575415016J8 0.4 6.472625 94514000] MACHINECRAFTOFSAN DIEGO INC VL Very Low Residential �0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �NL) 5.2104084535E 0.4 1472625 1.563123 1.563123 919131009 FISHER THOMASN VL Very Law Residemial(0Z-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 0.177713121 0.4 0.164fi33 0.164633 919191007 CAMMARATA JACQUELINE M VL Very Low Residemial(0Z0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 0.65408278292 0.4 0.196225 0.196225 945070009 LALEZARI VICTORH L Low Residential l05-2Du/ACMax) L-1 LOWDENSITV RES �L-1) 1.39115774]51 2.000000DOo' 2.086737 2.08673J 945100019 TERICHMIKEJOHN L Low Resitlential l00V/AC Max) L-1 L0W DENSITY RES �11) 5.74364143579 20000000000O 8.615462 8.615462 94032000fi HUO3 H High Residemial(13-20 Du/ACMax) SP-15 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-15) 5.1.141187362 6.393485 6.393485 12.78697 19.18046 19.16046 63.93485 94437013' TEM ECULAVILIAGEDEV PO Professional Office PD0-5 PLANNED DIN OVERLAY O.J4G41474808 Ves 30.00000000000 4.198583 5.113 7.157" 16.J9433 9" 7000] TEMECULAVIUAGEDEV PO Profession al Office VD0-5 PLANNEDDEVOVERLAY IPDO-5) 0.9853399J95J Ves 30.000L%10L100o0 5.542537 6.651045 9.9J6567 22.1]O15 921112007 ROLF LAWRENCE0 VL Very Low Residential(0.2-0.4 DV/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 0,67W 333548 OA 0,201.11 0.202819 945070003 NARON PACIFIC INC L LDw Residemial(0.5-2 Du/AC Max) L-1 LOW DENSITY RES (L-1) 2.47376182039 2.00000000000 3.710643 3.7I= 9113001 GROMM15CH ROBERT G VL Very Low Residemial(OZ OA Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RE: 8.06555333884 0.4 2.419666 2.4196fifi 921242009 HSIEH CHI HSIANG VL Very Low Residential l0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �NL) 0.]2012309932 0.4 0.21603) O21603J 921330025 ABC CHILDCARE CENTER PO Professional Office PO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE(PD) 0.94975530739 Yes 30.0000000OOM 5,342374 6.41084E 9.616272 21.36949 9221W 38 CHANG ROGER SPI Specific Plan Implementation SP-5 SPECIFIC PUN(SP-S) 0.8J076941318 30 2.220462 2.220462 4.440924 6.661386 6.661386 2220462 922300017 MARTIN DOROTHYF VL Very Low Residential(0.1-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 4.6319996fi194 0.4 1.3896 13896 922130025 UPPALRUPINDER M Medlum R-d11U1I(7-12 Du/ACMax) M MEDIUM DENSITY RES(M) 43.49404115289 12.00Ol%1000000 160.9642 260.9642 944060009 WILFORD LTD PARTNERSHIP H High Residemial(13-20 Uu/ACMax) H HIGH DENSITY RES(H) 1.77139264041 Yes 30.000000MOM 9.964084 119569 17.93535 39.85633 94429001fi RAISER MAN DONALD M Medium Resid-tial(7-12 Du/ACMax) M MEDIUM DENSITY RES (M) 8AL.27.27899 12.00000000000 52AR167 51.86167 955050015 CDR P OF PRES BISH CH OF IESUS CHRIST LDS VL Very Low Residemial(0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 1.21225769872 DA 0.363677 0.3fi3677 949370013 TEMECULAVIUAGEDEV PO Professional OfflCe PD0.5 PLANNED DEN OVERLAY(PDO-5) 1:111013180 Ves 30.000DO000000 9.833179 11.79981 17.69972 39.33271 9450]0016 IALEZARI VICTOR H L Low Resitlential (0.5-20u/ACMax) L-1 LOW DENSITY RES (L-1) 0.64100920552 LOOOOOOOOOOO 0.961514 0.961514 945090020 NARON PACIFIC INC L LDw Residemial (0.5-2Du/ACMax) L-1 LOW DENSITY RES (L-1) 6.6511986968E 2.00000000000 9.97679E 9.97679E 94511000E DOZEKCORP L Low Residemial(0.5-id L-1 LOW DENSITY RES (L-1) 3.62939619539 2.00000000000 5.444090 SA44094 955050031 TELESIOJOHNH VL Very Low Resldential(0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 1.05302559259 0.9 0.31590E 0.31590E 945120001 SIMS ARTHURJTRUST VL Very Low Residemial(0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 2.93393695121 0.4 0.8W181 0.880181 945120002 SIMS ARTHURJTRUST VL Very Low Residential(0.1-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 2.61991" 7' 1.4 0.71751,711111 N5120DO7 SIMONETTI SAL VL Very Low Residemial(0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 4.86962539]33 DA 1.4fi0888 1Afi0888 95504002/ BAY KENNETHG VL Very Low Resldentlal(0.1-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 2.07330719284 0.4 0.6291932 0.621932 95505001E KLOCK L0Y0 S VL Very Low Residential �0.2-0.4 DU/Ac Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �NL) 1.31135128831 0.4 0.393405 0.393405 955050034 TELESIOJOHNH VL Very Low Residemial(0.2-0.4 Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 0.80]77341251 1.4 0.2423321.2132 95505001E KLOCK LOYDS VL Very Low Residentia1(0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 4.J89J3681644 0.4 1.436914 1.436910 95]U80014 SERAPHINA DEVELOPMENT LM Low Medlum Resitlentlal(3-6 Du/ACMax) LM LOW MED DENSITY RES�LM) 30.19113984589 6.00OOCOIXIOl10 90.86013 90.86013 957080019 SERAPHINADEVfLOPMENT LM Low Metlium Resitlential (3-60u/ACMax) IM LOW MFO DENSITY RES � UM) 8.7913726073C 6.00000000000 39.56028 39.56028 957170031 GORHAM ROBERT LAMES VL Very Low Residential(0.1-0.4 Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 2.0914416420C 1.4 0.627431 0.62J432 95J120017 FITZ DENNIS VL Very Low Residential(0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 2.0075877fi424 0.4 O.fi03276 0.60227' 1:10012 HIRINA MARIANI VL Very Low Residentiall0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 3.16125806101 0.4 0.648377 0.648377 957080018 LASAGNA LAWRENCE T VL Very Low Resitlential (0.2-0.4 DU/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 4.5465388594E 0.4 1.363962 1.363962 957120005 CORPOF PRES BISHOP CH OF IESUS CHRIST LDS VL Very Low Residemial(0.2-0.4 Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 19.76533561081 1.4 5.929fi01 5.929601 95J090010 RUBIANO REMEGIO VL Very Low Residemial(0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 4.91668333852 0.4 1.47M51.475005 957090015 CORP OF PRES BISHOP CH OF IESUS CH RIST LDS VL Very Low Res ldemlal:0.1-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 4.8917"1J79B 0.4 1.46)5311.467531 957120009 C0RP OF PRES BISHOP CH 0F1ESU5 CHRIST L05 VL Very Low Resitlential �0.2-0.40u/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �NL) 9.0412376977] 0.4 2.]12371 2.7123]I 9573'13 TANG FRANKQ VL Very Low Residen[ial(0.2-0.4 Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 2.452J2543535 1.4 0.-L. 0.73581E 957340024 RUBIANO REMEGIO VL Very Low Residential (0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 3.05200965604 0.4 0.915fiO3 0.915603 955040005 BLAIR WILLIAMD VL Very Low Resldential �ll.2-O4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 3.258412J223B 0.4 0.977524 0.9J]524 955050003 TELESIO JOHNH VL Very Low Resitlential �D2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �NL) 1.02334888264 0.4 0,307005 0.3070is 955050033 KOCZARSKI JACK VL Very Low Residemial(0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 0.92123611961 0.4 0.276371 0.176371 95]340021 YANG MOONS VL Very Low Residemial(OZ Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) fi.03098332872 0.4 1.809295 1.809295 95]1121 YANG MOON VL Very Low Resldentlal(0.1-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 2.53212386102 0.4 0.759637 0.759637 957170040 TIDWELL NORMA ALINE VL Very Low Residential (0.2-0.4 DU/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 4.09663172895 0.4 1.22899 1,22899 957340022 YANG MOONS VL Very Low Residential(0.1-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 3.64678286035 1.4 1.ON 351.094035 95734003E BEAUDOIN GILLES VL Very Low Residemial(0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 4.9:301175171 0.4 1.49)905 1A97905 159050009 RITCHIE HUGHI VL Very Low Resltlentla1:0.1-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 3.3862J019991 M1963 0.4 1.0158811.015881 957120003 CORP OF PRES BISHOP CH OF IESUS CHRIST LOS VL Very Low Residential �0.2-0.4 DU/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �NL) 3.795629 0.4 1.1387741.1387]4 9:1 117 ERRICO JOSEPHR VL III Residential(0.2-0.4Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 2.29658067885 1.4 0.688374 0.6883774 957340D25 RUBIANO REMEGIO VL Very Low Residential (0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 5.4J444293216 0.4 1.642333 1.642333 95. 002 CAL PASEO DEL SOL LM Low Metllum Resltlemlal(3-6 Du/ACMax) SP-4 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-4) 21.3396085080E 6 1..31 108.832 962o1000] SPM WOLF CANYON CC Comm unity Commercial SP-12 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-12) 12ol31919902C 30.00000000000 3M.3364 306.3364 9fi2020001 RH ACQUISITION CO M Medium Residemial()-12 Du/ACMax) SP-9 SPECIFIC PUN(SP-9) 6.6299986fi1" 12.00000000000 67.62599 ST '99 95J08o017 LASAGNA LAWRENCE T VL Very Low Res idential(0.2-OA Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 4.5290J73fi382 0.4 1.358723 1.358723 95715002C CERNOUSEK MARTA VL Very Low ResId Ial (0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 5:14511884249 0.4 1.543656 1,511616 964460003 WINGSWEEPCORP L Low Resitlential (0.5-20u/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 2.0851313321E 200000000000 3.544]23 3.544723 964640002 RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION L Low Residemial (0.5-2 DUI Max) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 6.36068733425 1.0000oMoo 0 10.81317 10.81317 9fi44fi0015 WINGSWEEPCORP M Medium Residemial(7-12 Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAIN (SP-11) 4.84800429079 10.00000000000 41.Z804 41.208N 96464001E RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION M Metllum Resldential (J-12 Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 12.1221317011 10.00000000000 303.0399 103.0399 964460009 WINGSWEEP CORP M Metlium Resitlential (]-120u/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 35.9972429117E 10.00000000000 135.976E 135.976E 9644fi0014 WINGSWEEPCORP L Low Residemial(03-2Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 4.71833093049 2.000000WOW 8.038129 8.038129 964:30005 RORIPAUGHVALLEYRESTORATION LM Low Medium Residential(3-6 Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFICPIAN (SP-11) 34.J2787502365 6.00Oo000o000 177.1123 177.1122 964640004 RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION L Low Resid-lal(0.5-2Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PIN(SP-11) 17.4936094099E 2.000000WON 29.73914 21,71111 96446001] WINGSWEEPCORP M Medium Resitlential (]-120u/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-11) 9.07580412911 10.00000000000 77.14434 14434 9644fi0018 WINGSWEEP<ORP M Medium Residential (J-12 Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 1.22951583551 1owo0000000 10.4506E 10.4508E 964640015 RORIPAUGHVALLEYRESTORATION M Medium Residemial(7-12 Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-11) 20.04829400505 10A0000000000 170.4105 1)0.4305 9646'o' RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION LM Low Medlum Resld-W(3-6 Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PIN(SP-11) 24.62049243501 6.00OOCOON. 125.5645125.5645 964640003 RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION L Low Resitlential(0.5-2Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-11) IU.74151244008 LOOOOODOW. 18.26057 18.26057 964630006 RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION LM Low Medium Resitlential(3-6 Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 7.87961]23124 6.000000WON 40.18605 40.18601 964640013 RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION M Medium Residemial(7-12 Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 32.57299063354 10A0000000000 191.8]04 191.8J04 964661011 RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION M Medlum Resltlential(7-12 Du/ACMax) SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 0.]6189146R2 1o.000IX1000000 6.476077 6.476077 959400001 CAL PASEO DEL SOL LM Low Metlium Residential(36 DVAC Max) SP-4 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-4) 20.9]37:142721 6 106.9662 106.9612 961020026 SPM WOLF CANYON NC Neighborhood Commercial SP-12 SPECIFICPLAN (SP-12) 7.80685662523 20.00000000000 132.7166 132.716fi E6"'008 WINGSWEEPCORP NC Neighborhood Commercial SP-11 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 15.2106231055E 10A000o000000 114.0797 119.2903 909270024 VARELA LORENZO SC Service Commerclal SP-14 SPECIFIC PLAN(SP-14) 0.8373298821J Ves 30.000000000D0 2,135191 2.135191 4.270382 6.1111.1511 21.31191 909282013 91027200E KEETON eRUCEG HOFFINV IP Sc Industrial Park Service Commercial SP-14 SP-14 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-14) SPECIFIC PUN(SP-14) 0.6485701333E Yes 1.19670032486 Ves 30.00000000000 30.DOOD0000000 1.653854 1.653854 3.30770E 4.961562 4.961562 16.53854 3.051586 3.051586 6.103172 9.154757 9.154757 30.51586 9213301)" ABCCHILOCARECENTER PO Professional Offim PO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE(PD) 4.81334253903 Ves 30A0000000000 27.07505 32-DOE 48.73509 108.3001 910282002 JAPANINVINC HT Hlghway -I. --dal SP-14 SPECIFIC PI (SP-14) 0.1329045230C Yes 30.000D0000000 2.'2390) 2.123907 4.247813 6.37172 6.37172 21.23907 12,53037 S&LHASAN INC SPI SpeciffC Plan lmplememation Sp-5 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-5) 0.67547373453 30 1.722458 1.722458 3.444916 5AG7374 5,167374 17.22458 919051010 GEN ERAL TELEPHONE CO OF CALIF VL IN Low idemia1(0.2-0.4 Du/ACM..) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 0.67570MO725 0.4 0.202712 0.202712 91915200E PRICE JACQUELYN M VL IN Low Resideatia1(0.1-0A Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 0.6)453799677 0.4 0.202361 0.202361 9201100M TSENG LIN SHU YIN NC Nelghlwdtood Commercial NC NEIGHBORHOOD COMM (NC) 6.36235347762 12.000OOowom 57.26118 57,26118 919331010 PACE CURTISA VL IN Low Residential(0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 0.53030096774 0.4 0.15909 0.15909 919430012 WASEKIOSEPH VL IN Low Residemia1(0.1-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 0.738)7690155 0.4 0.221633 0.221633 919311005 PULIDO CRAIG VL IN Low Residentia1(0.2-0A Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 0.93207088208 0.4 0.279621 0.279621 919210015 KO NORMANL VL IN Low Resldentlal(0.2-0.4 Du/ACM,,) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 0.8259447001C 0.4 0.247783 0.24])83 921231001 CASTELLANO DAVID S VL Very Low Residentia1:0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 0.60654658067 0.4 0.181964 0.181969 9212310.2 CASTELLANODAVID S VL Very Low Residential �0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 1.04244916876 0.4 0.311735 0.312J35 :21162002 LABONTE GREGORYA VL Very Low Residentia1(0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES(VL) 0.5444fi465871 0A 0.163339 O.1fi3339 910271002 VNE-13 S SC Service Commercial SC SERVICE COMMERCIAL (SC) 6 14432 79206 20.000OOOL10000 92.1649 92.1649 95)090022 NGOIAM VL Very Low Residential (0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERV LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 4.54]54894004 0.4 1.364265 1.1142El 95)15001) VANYO SCOTT VL Very Low Residential (0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 4.81293897831 0.4 1.446882 1.446882 95J1J0029 GORHAM ROBERT LAMES VL Very Low Residential Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 2.2743954624C 0.9 0112311 0.612319 95734003E BEAUDOIN GILLES VL 10.2-OA Very Low 0.esldea[Ial �O.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 2.51349330305 0.4 0.75409E 0.)54048 95)34003] READ OINGILLES VL Very Low Residential:0.2-0.4 DU/AC Max) VL VERV LOW DENSIIV RES �VL) 2.4685552563E 0.4 0,746567 0.746567 922190013 EL DORADO HOMES VL Very Low Residential �0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 3.1661687100E 0.4 0.949881 0.949881 94516000] PATEL KIRITKUMAR R VL Very Low Residentia1(0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 3.3297599473E 0.9 0.998928 0.998928 9451W 15 NGUYEN THUAN THI VL Very Low Resldentlal(0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 2.92433098219 0.4 0.81729: 0.67]399 90.514000E MACHINE CRAFT OF SAN DIEGO INC VL Very Low Residentia1:0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 4.55286014063 0.4 1.36585E 1.36585E 945020010 WU MEI CHEN VL Very Low Residential (0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 2.3310749305] 0.4 0.6993221.691322 94515001fi 31111 PESCADI VL Very Low Residentia1(0.2-OA Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 2.323631761:1 0.9 O.fi9J092 0.697092 945170005 31011 PESCADO VL Very Low Reside0tia110.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 3.63175284552 0.4 0.7. 26 0.789526 94503001E MAYORGA JOSER VL Very Low Residential(0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 2,32772799104 0.4 0.698318 0.698318 945070001 LAU-1 VICTOR L Low id-2 Du/ACMax) 11 LOW DENSITY RES(L-1) 2.)49J31681J3 1.000000000DC 4.12459E 4.124598 945170006 HADDAD MICHAEL5 VL Very Low Resideatial(0.1-OA Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 2.65.714fi954 0.9 0.796941 0.)96961 945180023 GROMMISCH ROBERT G VL Very Low Resldeatla1(0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 2.151138111 0.4 0.)6516) 0.)6516J 90.5150011 TPMC SERVICES VL Very Low Residential (0.2-0.40u/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 2.9357196582C 0.4 0.880]I6 0.88071E 922200010 EMMI ELEANORF VL Very Low Residemial (0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 4.0550631367E 0.4 1.2161111.216519 955040002 BLAIR WILLIAMD VL Very Low Residential(0.2-OA Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 1.J348fi11142 0.9 0.52045E 0.52045E 95]33001] TURGEON JOSEPH6 VL Very Low Resldea[Ial (0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 2.0397359511E 0.4 0.611921 0.611921 95)130022 TURGEON IOSEPHG VL Very Low Residential (0.2-0.40u/ACMax) VL VERV LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 4,33:4813107] 0.4 1.300644 10 W644 95J330020 TURGEON JOSEPHG VL Very Low Residential (0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 3.4615992910] 0.4 0.7386E 0.7384E 95J370003 JONESROBERTC VL Very Low Residential �0.2-OA Du/AC Max) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES (VL) 4.9621fi1452 0.4 1.4 6" 1.48864E 959010013 MUSIC AMYL VL Very Low Residential �02-040u/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 3.2554849J]96 D. 0.976645 0.976645 959030014 KARPOU11S PARASKEVAS VL Very Low Residential �0.20.40u/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSIIV RES �VL) 2.41479953554 0.4 0.77. 0.)2444 95901000fi ALTSHULER IEFFREY MARTIN VL Very Law Residential (0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 2.43020100333 O4 0.7230E 0.7230E 959010011 MUSIC AMYL VL Very Low Residential 10.20.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 2.38554485141 0.9 0.715fi6: 0.)15fi63 95'10005 ALTSHULER IEFFREY MARTIN VL Very Low Resldeatla1(0.2-0.4 Du/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES:VL) 3.0J850994529 0.4 0.923553 0.923553 955U50012 KLOCK LOYDS VL Very Low Residential(0.2-0.4 )u/ACMax) VL VERY LOW DENSITY RES �VL) 2.65630187557 0A 0.]96891 0.796891 S64640011 RORIPAUGH VALLEY RESTORATION M Medium Residential(]-12 Du/ACMax) SPAL SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-11) 2.9171:13J11 10.000000D0000 24.)9934 24.79931 940320005 TEMECULAWESTVILIAGE SPI Specific Plan Implementation SP-15 SPECIFIC PLAN 19.61389543J05 24.1J413 24.1J413 48.34825 J2.52238 J2.52238 241.J413 922210049 TEMECUTA WEST VILLAGE SPI Spe<Iflc Plan Implementation SP-15 SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-15) 54.80545628053 6).547]2 67.59)72 135.0954 202.6432 202.6432 6J5.4)72 96141000E NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION HT Highway Tourist Commercial HT HIGHWAY/TOURIST COMM (HT) 2.11205103)01 20.00000000000 31.680E 31.68D8 9fi5400001 STAGE&PORTOLA M Medium Residential(]-12 Du/ACMax) M MEDIUM DENSITY RES(M) 8.5J559884431 12.00000000000 51.45359 51.45359 9fi5400001 STAGE&PORTOLA LM Low Medium Residential I— Du/ACMax) LM LOW MED DENSITY RES(LM) 11.87154414054 6.00000000000 53.42195 53.=5S This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT APPENDIX B: GLOSSARY d ECULA CI E N IER-AL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE APPENDIX B: HOUSING ELEMENT GLOSSARY Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU): An attached or a detached residential dwelling unit that provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons and is located on a lot with a proposed or existing primary residence. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single-family or multifamily dwelling is or will be situated. Acre: A unit of land measure equal to 43,560 square feet. Acreage, Net: The portion of a site exclusive of existing or planned public or private road rights -of -way. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH): As required by California Assembly Bill 686, the City of Temecula has a duty to affirmatively further fair housing by taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. Affordability Covenant: A property title agreement which places resale or rental restrictions on a housing unit. Affordable Housing: Under state and federal statutes, housing which costs no more than 30 percent of gross household income. Housing costs include rent or mortgage payments, utilities, taxes, insurance, homeowner association fees, and other related costs. Area Median Income (AMI): The AMI is determined by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and is the midpoint income for the area —half of all wage earners have salaries higher than the median, and half of all wage earners have salaries lower than the median. Each year, HUD sets area median incomes for the Riverside area. The AMI is then used to establish income limits for certain housing programs. Annexation: The incorporation of land area into the jurisdiction of an existing city with a resulting change in the boundaries of that city. Assisted Housing: Housing that has been subsidized by federal, state, or local housing programs. At -Risk Housing: Multi -family rental housing that is at risk of losing its status as housing affordable for low and moderate income tenants due to the expiration of federal, state or local agreements. California Department of Housing and Community Development — HCD: The State Department responsible for administering State -sponsored housing programs and for reviewing housing elements to determine compliance with state housing law. Census: The official United States decennial enumeration of the population conducted by the federal government. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG): A grant program administered by HUD. This grant allots money to cities and counties for housing rehabilitation and community development activities, including public facilities and economic development. Condominium: A building or group of buildings in which units are owned individually, but the structure, common areas and facilities are owned by all owners on a proportional, undivided basis. Congregate Care: Apartment housing, usually for senior citizens, or for the disabled in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 50062.5 that is arranged in a group setting that includes independent living and sleeping accommodations in conjunction with shared dining and recreational facilities (see Temecula Municipal Code Section 17.34.0103). Congregate Living Health Facility: A facility with a noninstitutional, home -like environment that provides inpatient care, including the following basic services: medical supervision, twenty- four hour skilled nursing and supportive care, pharmacy, dietary, social recreational, and at least one type of service specified in the Health and Safety Code. The primary need of congregate living health facility residents shall be for availability of skilled nursing care on a recurring, intermittent, extended or continuous basis. This care is generally less intense than that provided in general acute care hospitals but more intense than that provided in skilled nursing facilities (see Temecula Municipal Code Section 17.34.010.13). Density: The number of dwelling units per unit of land. Density usually is expressed "per acre," e.g., a development with 100 units located on 20 acres has density of 5.0 units per acre. Density Bonus: The allowance of additional residential units beyond the maximum for which the parcel is otherwise permitted usually in exchange for the provision or preservation of affordable housing units at the same site or at another location. H Development Impact Fees (DIF): A fee or charge imposed on developers to pay for a jurisdiction's costs of providing services to � r new development. U Development Right: The right granted to a land owner or other authorized party to improve a property. Such right is usually I expressed in terms of a use and intensity allowed under existing 1 zoning regulation. For example, a development right may specify the maximum number of residential dwelling units permitted per acre of land. Dwelling, Multi -family: A building containing two or more dwelling units for the use of individual households; an apartment or condominium building is an example of this dwelling unit type. Dwelling, Single-family Attached: A one -family dwelling attached to one or more other one -family dwellings by a common vertical wall. Row houses and town homes are examples of this dwelling unit type. Dwelling, Single-family Detached: A dwelling, not attached to any other dwelling, which is designed for and occupied by not more than one family and surrounded by open space or yards. Dwelling Unit: One or more rooms, designed, occupied or intended for occupancy as separate living quarters, with cooking, sleeping and sanitary facilities provided within the unit for the exclusive use of a household. Efficiency Unit Housing: Any residential building containing five or more individual secure rooms intended or designed to be used or which are used rented or hired out to be occupied for sleeping purposes by residents as their primary residence. Elderly Household: As defined by HUD, elderly households are one- or two- member (family or non -family) households in which the head or spouse is age 62 or older. Element: A division or chapter of the General Plan. Emergency Shelter: An emergency shelter is a facility that provides shelter to homeless families and/or homeless individuals on a limited short-term basis. Fair Market Rent (FMR): Fair Market Rents (FMRs) are freely set rental rates defined by HUD as the median gross rents charged for available standard units in a county or Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA). Fair Market Rents are used for the Section 8 Rental Program and many other HUD programs and are published annually by HUD. First -Time Home Buyer (FTHB): Defined by HUD as an individual or family who has not owned a home during the three-year period preceding the HUD -assisted purchase of a home. Jurisdictions may adopt local definitions for first-time home buyer programs which differ from non -federally funded programs. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The gross floor area of all buildings on a lot divided by the lot area; usually expressed as a numerical value (e.g., a building having 10,000 square feet of gross floor area located on a lot of 5,000 square feet in area has a floor area ratio of 2.0). Group Home: The City of Temecula's Zoning Code defines a group home as any residential care facility for six or fewer persons which is licensed by the state (Temecula Municipal Code Section 17.344.810.13). General Plan: The General Plan is a legal document, adopted by the legislative body of a City or County, setting forth policies regarding long-term development. California law requires the preparation of seven elements or chapters in the General Plan: Land Use, Housing, Circulation, Conservation, Open Space, Noise, and Safety. Additional elements are permitted, such as Economic Development, Urban Design and similar local concerns. Group Quarters: A facility which houses groups of unrelated persons not living in households (US Census definition). Examples of group quarters include institutions, dormitories, shelters, military quarters, assisted living facilities and other quarters, including single - room occupancy (SRO) housing, where 10 or more unrelated individuals are housed. Growth Management: Techniques used by a government to regulate the rate, amount, location and type of development. HCD: The State Department of Housing and Community Development. Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA): The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act requires larger lending institutions making home mortgage loans to publicly disclose the location and disposition of home purchase, refinance and improvement loans. Institutions subject to HMDA must also disclose the gender, race, and income of loan applicants. Homeless: Unsheltered homeless are families and individuals whose primary nighttime residence is a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings (e.g., the street, sidewalks, cars, vacant and abandoned buildings). Sheltered homeless are families and persons whose primary nighttime residence is a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter (e.g., emergency, transitional, battered women, and homeless youth shelters; and commercial hotels or motels used to house the homeless). Household: The US Census Bureau defines a household as all persons living in a housing unit whether or not they are related. A single person living in an apartment as well as a family living in a house is considered a household. Household does not include individuals living in dormitories, prisons, convalescent homes, or other group quarters. Household Income: The total income of all the persons living in a household. A household is usually described as very low income, low income, moderate income, and upper income based upon household size, and income, relative to the regional median income. Housing Problems: Defined by HUD as a household which: (1) occupies a unit with physical defects (lacks complete kitchen or bathroom); (2) meets the definition of overcrowded; or (3) spends more than 30% of income on housing cost. Housing Subsidy: Housing subsidies refer to government assistance aimed at reducing housing sales or rent prices to more affordable levels. Two general types of housing subsidy exist. Where a housing subsidy is linked to a particular house or apartment, housing subsidy is "project" or "unit" based. In Section 8 rental assistance programs the subsidy is linked to the family and assistance provided to any number of families accepted by willing private landlords. This type of subsidy is said to be "tenant based." Housing Unit: A room or group of rooms used by one or more individuals living separately from others in the structure, with direct access to the outside or to a public hall and containing separate toilet and kitchen facilities. HUD: See US Department of Housing and Urban Development. Income Category: Four categories are used to classify a household according to income based on the median income for the county. Under state housing statutes, these categories are defined as follows: Very Low (0-50% of County median); Low (50-80% of County H 0 U S N G median); Moderate (80-120% of County median); and Upper (over 120% of County median). Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU): A unit that is no more than 500 square feet in size and contained entirely within an existing single-family structure. A junior accessory dwelling unit may include separate sanitation facilities, or may share sanitation facilities with the existing structure Large Household: A household with 5 or more members. Low Income Home Energy Act Program (LIHEAP): LIHEAP helps pay the winter heating bills or summer cooling bills of low- income and elderly people. Manufactured Housing: Housing that is constructed of manufactured components, assembled partly at the site rather than totally at the site. Also referred to as modular housing. Market Rate Housing: Housing which is available on the open market without any subsidy. The price for housing is determined by the market forces of supply and demand and varies by location. Median Income: The annual income for each household size within a region which is defined annually by HUD. Half of the households in the region have incomes above the median and half have incomes below the median. Mobile Home: A structure, transportable in one or more sections, which is at least 8 feet in width and 32 feet in length, is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling unit when connected to the required utilities, either with or without a permanent foundation. Mobile Home Park Assistance Program (MPAP): To preserve affordable housing opportunities found within mobile home parks, HCD provides financial and technical assistance to low income mobile home park residents through MPAP. MPAP provides loans of up to 50% of the purchase price plus the conversion costs of the mobile home park so that low income residents, or organizations formed by low income residents can own and/or operate the mobile home park. Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC): Administered by Riverside County, and authorized by Congress in the Tax Reform Act of 1984, the MCC provides assistance to first-time homebuyers for the purchase of owner -occupied single-family homes, townhomes, and condominiums. An MCC reduces the amount of federal income taxes otherwise due but not to exceed the amount of federal taxes owed for the year after other credits and deductions have been taken. (Unused tax credits can be carried forward three years, until used.) H Mortgage Revenue Bond (MRB): A state, county or city program providing financing for the development of housing through the sale of tax-exempt bonds. U Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP): The Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) was I established in March of 2004. The plan encompasses 1.2 million acres 1 in the western Riverside County and is designated to protect 146 species. Overcrowding: As defined by the US Census, a household with greater than 1.01 persons per room, excluding bathrooms, kitchens, hallways, and porches. Severe overcrowding is defined as households with greater than 1.5 persons per room. Office of Planning and Research (OPR): The Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) provides legislative and policy research support for the Governor's office. OPR also assists the Governor and the Administration in land -use planning and manages the Office of the Small Business Advocate. Overpayment: The extent to which gross housing costs, including utility costs, exceed 30 percent of gross household income, based on data published by the US Census Bureau. Severe overpayment, or cost burden, exists if gross housing costs exceed 50 percent of gross income. Parcel: The basic unit of land entitlement. A designated area of land established by plat, subdivision, or otherwise legally defined and permitted to be used, or built upon. Poverty: The income cutoffs used by the Census Bureau to determine the poverty status of families and unrelated individuals included a set of 48 thresholds. The poverty thresholds are revised annually to allow for changes in the cost of living as reflected in the Consumer Price Index. The average threshold for a family of four persons in 1989 was $12,674. Poverty thresholds were applied on a national basis and were not adjusted for regional, state, or local variations in the cost of living. Project -Based Rental Assistance: Rental assistance provided for a project, not for a specific tenant. A tenant receiving project -based rental assistance gives up the right to that assistance upon moving from the project. Public Housing: A project -based low -rent housing program operated by independent local public housing authorities. A low- income family applies to the local public housing authority in the area in which they want to live. Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA): The RHNA is based on State of California projections of population growth and housing unit demand and assigns a share of the region's future housing need to each jurisdiction within the SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments) region. These housing need numbers serve as the basis for the update of the Housing Element in each California city and county. Rehabilitation: The upgrading of a building previously in a dilapidated or substandard condition for human habitation or use. Section 8 Rental Voucher/Certificate Program: A tenant -based rental assistance program that subsidizes a family's rent in a privately owned house or apartment. The program is administered by local public housing authorities. Assistance payments are based on 30 percent of household annual income. Households with incomes of 50 percent or below the area median income are eligible to participate in the program. Service Needs: The particular services required by special populations, typically including needs such as transportation, personal care, housekeeping, counseling, meals, case management, personal emergency response, and other services preventing premature institutionalization and assisting individuals to continue living independently. Small Household: Pursuant to HUD definition, a small household consists of two to four non -elderly persons. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG): The Southern California Association of Governments is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) which encompasses six counties: Imperial, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura. SCAG is responsible for preparation of the RHNA. Special Needs Groups: Those segments of the population which have a more difficult time finding decent affordable housing due to special circumstances. Under California Housing Element statutes, these special needs groups consist of the elderly, handicapped, large families, female -headed households, farm workers and the homeless. A jurisdiction may also choose to consider additional special needs groups in the Housing Element, such as students, military households, other groups present in their community. Single -Room Occupancy (SRO) Housing: Any residential building containing five or more individual secure rooms intended or H designed to be used, or which are used, rented, or hired out, to be occupied for sleeping purposes by residents as their primary residence. U Subdivision: The division of a lot, tract or parcel of land in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.). I Substandard Housing: Housing which does not meet the minimum N standards contained in the State Housing Code (i.e., does not provide shelter, endangers the health, safety or well-being of occupants). Jurisdictions may adopt more stringent local definitions of substandard housing. Substandard, Suitable for Rehabilitation: Substandard units which are structurally sound and for which the cost of rehabilitation is considered economically warranted. Substandard, Needs Replacement: Substandard units which are structurally unsound and for which the cost of rehabilitation is considered infeasible, such as instances where the majority of a unit has been damaged by fire. Supportive Housing: A facility that provides housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population as defined by Section 50675.14 of the California Health and Safety Code, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist tenants in retaining housing, improving their health status, maximizing their ability to live and, when possible, work in the community. Supportive Services: Services provided to residents of supportive housing for the purpose of facilitating the independence of residents. Some examples are case management, medical or psychological counseling and supervision, child care, transportation, and job training. Tenant -Based Rental Assistance: A form of rental assistance in which the assisted tenant may move from a dwelling unit with a right to continued assistance. The assistance is provided for the tenant, not for the project. Transitional Housing: A residential facility that provides rental housing accommodations and support services for persons and families, but restricts occupancy to no more than 24 months. Support services may include meals, counseling, and other services. Uniform Building Code (UBC): First enacted by the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) in 1927, the UBC provides standards for building codes. Revised editions of this code are published approximately every 3 years. US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD): The cabinet level department of the federal government responsible for housing, housing assistance, and urban development at the national level. Housing programs administered through HUD include CDBG, HOME and Section 8, among others. Western Regional Council of Governments (WRCOG): WRCOG consists of representatives from all 14 cities and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, which have seats on the WRCOG Executive Committee, the group that sets policy for the organization. Together, as a joint powers agency, they take up regional matters, from air quality to solid waste and from transportation to the environment. Zoning: A land use regulatory measure enacted by local government. Zoning district regulations governing lot size, building bulk, placement, and other development standards vary from district to district, but must be uniform within the same district. Each city and county adopts a zoning ordinance specifying these regulations. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT APPENDIX C: PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY d ECULA CI E N IER-AL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Community Survey Report City of Temecula Housing Element Update OCTOBER 2020 In partnership with De Novo Planning Group Contents Introduction............................................................................................................ 3 Survey Respondent Demographics...........................................................................3 Survey Responses Executive Summary.....................................................................4 VALUES AND PRIORITIES......................................................................................4 HOUSING AFFORDABILITY....................................................................................7 HOUSING MAINTENANCE....................................................................................8 HOUSINGFIT.....................................................................................................11 GENERALFEEDBACK..........................................................................................13 AppendixA: Survey..............................................................................................A-1 Appendix B: Summary of All Survey Responses..................................................... B-1 Appendix C: Summary of All Survey Responses by Group ....................................... C-1 Figures Figure 1: Why have you chosen to live in Temecula?.................................................5 Figure 2: If you wish to own a home in Temecula but do not currently own one, what issues are preventing you from owning a home at this time?....................................8 Figure 3: Which of the following housing upgrades or expansions have you considered making on your home?..........................................................................9 Figure 4: How would you rate the physical condition of the residence you live in? ... 10 Figure 5: Do you feel that the different housing types in Temecula currently meet your housing needs?.............................................................................................11 Figure 6: What types of housing are most needed in the City of Temecula? ............. 12 Fa Introduction The City of Temecula is updating its Housing Element as part of the 2021-2029 Housing Element Cycle (Cycle 6). Temecula is dedicated to meeting the future housing needs of its residents. The Housing Element Update process is a unique opportunity to connect with residents of Temecula and learn more about residents' values, priorities, concerns, and ideas. As part of the community outreach, a survey was conducted. The survey was available on the City's website from March 26 through September 30, 2020 and hard copies were also available around the community, including at the Senior Center. Advertisements were also placed in area laundromats. The City included a Housing Element article in 33,000 newsletters that were sent to each residence, had over 52,341 social media impressions, and sent over 10,000 emails to engage the public. Over 860 responses (provided online and in hard copy) were collected —a notable accomplishment given recent COVID-19-related public engagement challenges and a testament to Temecula's focus on outreach and community engagement. The survey was 16 questions long. The survey focuses on housing -related issues such as maintenance, affordability, home types, and living conditions in Temecula as well as demographic questions. This report is a summary of the responses received and the general themes that emerged. Appendix A includes a copy of the survey questions; specific questions are referenced throughout this report as relevant. Survey Respondent Demographics The survey contained 7 questions related to demographics. One of those questions included an opportunity for users to sign-up for more information about the Housing Element update process. The other 6 questions highlighted the following about the respondents: • Most respondents (42%) both lived and worked within the City. In total, approximately 86% of respondents live in Temecula, with only 13% working in the City but living elsewhere.' • Of those individuals who live in Temecula, approximately 58% have lived here for 10+ years. The next highest response (16%) was 5-10 years.Z • Most of the respondents own their home (71%), with 25% of respondents renting.3 • Most of the respondents (81%) live in single-family homes, with the next highest category being multi -family homes (12%).4 1 Question 1: Do you live and/or work in the City of Temecula? z Question 2: How long have you lived in the City of Temecula? s Question 6: Do you currently own or rent your home? 4 Question 8: Select the type of housing that best describes your current home. 3 • Of the respondents surveyed, the most common types of households include couples with children younger than 18 (33%), couples (25%), single -person households (11%), multi - generational households (10%) and single -parents household with children younger than 18 (6%). There was considerable range in household types including 6% (or 41 respondents), who were an unlisted household type including couples with adult children living with them, which could be a temporary phenomenon associated with the impacts of COVID-19 on housing patterns for young adults.' • The respondents represented a valid cross-section of the community's age profile; respondents were primarily 40-55 years old (36%), followed by 56-74 years old (30%), and 24-39 years old (26%).6 Survey Responses Executive Summary The survey responses reveal information about housing in Temecula. The results are grouped into 5 topical categories: values and priorities; housing affordability; housing maintenance; housing fit; and general feedback. In addition to looking at the survey results as a whole, this report also considers survey responses by demographic groups including how age, homeownership status, and household type influenced responses. VALUES AND PRIORITIES When respondents were asked, "Why have you chosen to live in Temecula,"' the most common answers were: • Safety of neighborhood (61%) • Affordability (52%) • Quality of local school system (49%) • Local recreational amenities and scenery (38%) • Proximity to shopping and services, including Old Town Temecula (33%) • Proximity to family and/or friends (32%) ' Question 9: Which of the following best describes your household type? 6 Question 11: What age range most accurately describes you? ' Question 5: Why have you chosen to live in Temecula? PI Figure 1: Why have you chosen to live in Temecula? Prox lm lty 28.80% jah,wt Quality ❑ 25 21% ho us i ng stac Lac recreational. Proximity t 31 95% family andlo. Affordability 51.58% Quality o 49AM localschoI) safety o 61 17% neighborhoa city servic 26 36% and pragra Prox i m ity t 33 24% shopping and.. Other (pleas 12.75% ecify sp D% 10% 20% KC° 4D% 50% 60% 70k 8C°k 9C°k 100't When responses are broken down further by demographic groups, the following differences occur: Respondents who own their own home vs. rent are far more likely to cite affordability as a factor (60%) than those who rent (33%). Similarly, quality of the housing stock is viewed more favorably by those who own (29%) than those who rent (17%), which may reflect the "pride of ownership" that comes with being able to maintain a property you own. There are also differences between respondents of different ages. Proximity to family and friends was far more important to those 75 years and older (42%) who may be less likely/able to travel long distances, than to those 23 years old or younger (29%) who are more mobile. However, quality of the local school system and safety of the neighborhood were far more important to those 23 years old and younger (71% for both indicators) who may be thinking about their own educational experiences or planning for the education of a child, than those 75 years old and older (9% and 33% respectively). There are also differences when it relates to household type. Couples with children under 18 ranked quality of school system (76%) and safety of neighborhood (76%) as their highest concern, while these issues were less important for single person households. Affordability was seen as a key issue across the board; it was ranked as the first or second highest issue in every household type except for young adults living with parents (where it fell to third). 0 When respondents were asked, "How important are the following concerns to you and your family?"' the following issues were identified as the most likely to be "very important": • Ensuring that children who grow up in Temecula can afford to live in Temecula (57%) • Encourage the rehabilitation of existing housing stock in older neighborhoods (49%) • Establish special needs housing for seniors, large families, veterans, and/or persons with disabilities (48%) • Ensure that the housing market in Temecula provides a diverse range of housing types, including single-family homes, townhomes, apartments, duplex/triplex and condominiums to meet the varied needs of local residents (48%) • Fair/Equitable Housing opportunities and programs to help maintain and secure neighborhoods that have suffered foreclosures (48%) • Establish programs to help at -risk homeowners keep their homes, including mortgage loan programs (47%) When responses are broken down further by demographic groups, the following differences occur: When it comes to comparisons of answers by age of respondents, there were some nuanced trends. Ensuring that children who grow up in Temecula can afford to live in Temecula was ranked highest by those 23 years old and younger (86%) and least important to those 75 years and older (39%); these trends represent the importance of affordability for young adults looking to move into their own home for the first time, versus the established housing choices of the community's older generation. Those aged 23 years old and younger felt extremely strongly (100%) about integrating affordable housing throughout the community to create mixed -income neighborhoods while only 28% of those 75 years and older felt that it was very important. Those 23 years old and younger also ranked "fair/equitable housing opportunities and programs to help maintain and secure neighborhoods that have suffered foreclosures" (86%) and "provide shelters and transitional housing for the homeless, along with services to help move people into permanent housing" as very important (71%). There were also differences in what mattered the most to homeowners versus those who rent. The issue of "ensuring that the housing market in Temecula provides a diverse range of housing types, including single-family homes, townhomes, apartments, duplex/triplex and condominiums to meet the varied needs of local residents," was far more important to those who rent (70%) than to those who own their own home (38%). Similarly, renters ranked the issue of, "integrate affordable housing throughout the community to create mixed -income neighborhoods," far higher (63%) than homeowners (25%). Likewise, renters placed higher value (61%) on the issue of "establish special needs housing for seniors, large families, veterans, and/or persons with disabilities," than did homeowners (42%). $ Question 12: How important are the following concerns to you and your family? 6 When it comes to household types, young adults living with parents and multi -generational households ranked "ensuring that children who grow up in Temecula can afford to live in Temecula," as much higher (74% and 71% respectively) that do single person households (36%). Multi -generational households also ranked "establish special needs housing for seniors, large families, veterans, and/or persons with disabilities," much higher (58%) than did couples with children under 18. However, for single parents with children under 18, the issue of "integrate affordable housing throughout the community to create mixed -income neighborhoods," ranks much higher (58%) than single person households (32%). HOUSING AFFORDABILITY When respondents were asked, "If you wish to own a home in Temecula but do not currently own one, what issues are preventing you from owning a home at this time?"9 the answers pointed to issues of affordability. The top 3 responses included: • 1 cannot find a home within my price range in Temecula (55%) • 1 do not currently have the financial resources for an appropriate down payment (52%) • 1 do not currently have the financial resources for an adequate monthly mortgage payment (33%) • Potential answers related to housing stock diversity or housing quality were not heavily selected, indicating that if people were able to overcome the financial obstacles, the housing choices available in Temecula are generally desirable. 9 Question 7: If you wish to own a home in Temecula but do not currently own one, what issues are preventing you from owning a home at this time? V� Figure 2: If you wish to own a home in Temecula but do not currently own one, what issues are preventing you from owning a home at this time? No home 55.44% 1 within price.. No harnes tha� 12.98?c suit my need 6o not ha_•e a 51.5B% down payi-, 6o not have 32 % enough for,,, No homes tha0 7.02% fit quality, do not wis17.54% m to own or re.. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 6D% 7G% BD% 9a% 10D% When responses are broken down further by demographic groups, the following differences occur: When it comes to differences between respondents of different age groups, Millennials (age 24-39) had the highest financial barriers: 71% say there are no homes within their desired price range; 64% do not have a down payment; and 46% do not have enough for a mortgage payment. When it comes to household type, couples with children under 18 had the most significant financial constraints, with 75% responding that there were no homes within their price range, and 55% reporting that did not have enough for a down payment. 1:to] II►II1Offid"TA N aM." ► 40 When respondents were asked, "Which of the following housing upgrades or expansions have you considered making to your home?s10 the top responses included: • Painting (42%) • Solar (28%) • HVAC (22%) io Question 3: Which of the following housing upgrades or expansions have you considered making to your home? 8 Figure 3: Which of the following housing upgrades or expansions have you considered making on your home? Room additiol 1 11.2 Roofing M 12.52% HVA1' 22.42% Painting 41.92% Solar 27.66% Accessory 8.739E Dwelling Unit Does not appl 33.92% Other [Pleas 14.9990 specify 0% 10% 21G% 30% 40 Rt `_()% 60% 73% 80% 90% 1OM While a large proportion of respondents indicated 1 or more improvements, over a third stated that this question does not apply, meaning that they are not considering any upgrades or expansions at this time. Not surprisingly, this question applied more to homeowners than renters. However, while 80% of renters responded, "Does not apply," the other 20% indicated that there were minor improvements including painting (10%) that occupants have considered making. When it comes to comparing respondents based on age, respondents age 40-55 had the longest list of upgrades and expansions they were considering including room additions (15%), roofing (12%), and accessory dwelling units (11%). Respondents were also allowed to provide specific feedback regarding other (non -listed) types of improvements they were interested in pursuing. The most popular write-in responses include: • New windows • New flooring • Pool construction • Upgraded landscaping • Kitchen renovation • Patio cover installation • Garage improvements P] When asked, "How would you rate the physical condition of the residence you live in?" respondents stated that their home: • Shows signs of minor deferred maintenance (i.e., peeling paint, chipped stucco, etc.) (46%) • Excellent condition (33%) • Needs 1 or more modest rehabilitation improvements (i.e., new roof, new wood siding, etc.) (13%) • Needs 1 or more major upgrades (i.e., new foundation, new plumbing, new electrical, etc.) (5%) Figure 4: How would you rate the physical condition of the residence you live in? condition 33.24% 4A Shows signs o 46.42% deferred... Needs modest 1261% rehabilitati... Needs major 5.01% upgrades [iA other [pleas 272% SPA p ECIf}� 0% 1D% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% SON 90% I&D% Homeowners were more likely than renters to rate the physical condition of their residence as excellent (40% as opposed to 16%). Single parents with children under 18 (17%), young adults living with parents (17%), and single persons living with roommates (20%) were the 2 household groups least likely to rate their housing condition as excellent. Respondents ages 75 and older were the age group most likely to rate their housing quality as excellent. 10 HOUSING FIT When asked, "How satisfied are you with your current housing situation?"" the top responses were: • 1 am very satisfied (48%) • 1 am somewhat satisfied (35%) • 1 am somewhat dissatisfied (10%) • 1 am dissatisfied (6%) There were significant differences in responses, however, between homeowners and renters. 61% of homeowners were "very satisfied" as opposed to only 15% of renters. Single parents with children under the age of 18 showed the highest levels of dissatisfaction with a 20% stating, "I am very dissatisfied," and 17% stating, "I am very satisfied." Only 14% of respondents age 23 and younger were very satisfied with their housing situation, as opposed to 61% of those 75 years old and older. When asked, "Do you feel that the different housing types in Temecula currently meet your housing needs?s12 respondents answered: • Yes (65%) • No (35%) Figure 5: Do you feel that the different housing types in Temecula currently meet your housing needs? No 35J6% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 80% 70% 80% 90% 100% 11 Question 10: How satisfied are you with your current housing situation? 12 Question 13: Do you feel that the different housing types in Temecula currently meet your housing needs? 11 However, the breakdown along homeownerships lines were different with 77% of homeowners answering "Yes", as opposed to 40% of renters. The contrast was even more stark along household type comparisons. 63% of single parents with children under age 18 answered, "no" with the next lowest score being single persons living with roommates (56%). Those on the opposite end of the scale for age, had nearly opposite reactions. For those age 23 and younger, 71% said that Temecula did not meet their housing needs as opposed to 81% of those 75 years old and older who stated that it did meet their housing needs. When asked, "What types of housing are most needed in the City of Temecula?"13 respondents answered: • Single family detached (49%) • Senior Housing (34%) • Condominiums (multifamily ownership homes) (24%) • Other (24%) • Duplex/Attached Housing (20%) Figure 6: What types of housing are most needed in the City of Temecula? Single Family 4910% (Detached) DuplexjAttach20.3345 Housin ['.andaminiums (multifamily — Apartment Apartment 13.4,0% [multifamily.. Senior Mousin 33.73% Accessory 10.39%6 Dwel l i ng U n it Housing f.M 12.65% people with.. Other [pleas 23.950-/a specify 0% 10% 20% 3D% 40% SM CG% 7G% BG% 90% 10046 13 Question 14: What types of housing are most needed in the City of Temecula? 12 The household group most interested in more single-family homes are adult head of households (non - parents) with children under age 18 (75%) and the least interested in more single-family housing are single persons with roommates (22%). When it comes to age comparisons, Millennials are most interested in more single-family homes (61%) as opposed to seniors 75 years old and older (27%). A significant percentage of the respondents indicated that "other" (non -listed) types of housing options are needed in Temecula. Respondents provided a range of specific answers, many of which were already identified as an answer choice (i.e., senior housing, housing for persons with disabilities). Moreover, many respondents used this opportunity to indicate that they did not support new development of any type, generally due to concerns related to traffic, safety, and access to public facilities and infrastructure. Of those "other" types of housing identified in the individual responses, which were not already listed as a possible answer, the responses generally included: • Housing options affordable to people with lower incomes • Multigenerational homes • Permanent supportive housing • Mixed use development • Housing options specific to the needs of single parents • Single -story homes At the conclusion of the survey, respondents could provide general feedback on topics not addressed in earlier questions. As expected, general feedback received was varied in tone and content. Written responses were divided but fell into 2 general categories. Group A: Those who feel that Temecula is unaffordable and housing prices are too high across the board. These individuals suggested building more affordable housing of all types (from single family homes to multi -family housing) as well as taking care of seniors and the homeless. Some sample responses include: "The cost of rent here does not match the income that many of us have forcing many to struggle, have roommates, constantly move etc. More affordable housing that matches the jobs available that only want to pay $17 or less would help out a great deal so people can afford to live without roommates and without struggling to pay everything." 13 "Just want affordable housing for all income types. It would reduce homelessness and bring diversity to the city." Group B: Those who moved to Temecula for its affordability and safety, and feel that it has changed in a negative way over the years. These individuals are worried about continued impacts on congestion and lack of infrastructure. They want the City to focus on improving current conditions and adding more infrastructure (such as improved roadway conditions) instead of building additional housing. Some sample responses include: "It is disappointing to see zonings changed and other adjustments that are aimed to please the person(s) financially benefitting rather than thinking about the value in the original zoning as well as congestion and overloading the market." "Too much growth without infrastructure to support. Roads/traffic too heavy and maintenance not adequate to support the additional homes being built." "Temecula is overcrowded. Way too many apartments and condos. The city council was going the right direction with making it more of a destination or tourist town but now they want to ruin the natural beauty with more housing. There are areas north of Menifee that can take more housing and where new infrastructure can be built. Temecula is maxed out." Other issues that were raised include: • Making the process of building an accessory dwelling unit easier • Increasing the number and availability of bike and walking trails • Keeping water usage for landscaping low • Preserving open space and views of the mountains • Focusing on Temecula as a tourist destination • Address issues of housing discrimination and diversity Appendix A: Survey A-1 The City is in the process of updating the Housing Element of the General Plan for the 2021-2029 period as required by State law. The Housing Element establishes policies and programs to address Temecula's existing and projected housing needs, including the City's "fair share" of the regional housing need (or "RHNA"). If you live or work in the City of Temecula, please complete the following short survey to provide us with your input. Survey limited to one per household. 1. Do you live and/or work in the City of Temecula? 0 1 live in Temecula but work somewhere else 0 1 work in Temecula but live somewhere else 0 1 live and work in Temecula 0 1 live in Temecula and do not currently work/I am retired If you live somewhere other than the City of Temecula, where do you live? I 2. If you live in Temecula, how long have you lived in the City? (LJ 0-2 Years 0 2-5 Years 0 5-10 Years O10 + Years 3. If you are employed outside of your home, approximately how long is your one-way commute to work? ULess than 5 miles 0 5-10 miles 0 10-25 miles 25-40 miles OMore than 40 miles 4. Select the type of housing that best describes your current home: O Single Family Home (Detached) O Duplex/Attached Home O Multifamily Home (Apartment/Condominium) OOther (Guesthouse, Mobile Home, etc.) 1 5. Do you currently own or rent your home? OOwn O Rent 6. Are you satisfied with your current housing situation? OYes O No O Other (please specify) E:� 7. How would you rate the physical condition of the unit you live in? OExcellent condition Shows signs of minor deferred maintenance (i.e., peeling paint, chipped stucco, etc.) ONeeds one or more modest rehabilitation improvements (i.e., new roof, new wood siding, etc.) n Needs one or more major upgrades (i.e., new foundation, new plumbing, new electrical, etc.) C Other (please specify) 8. Do you think that the range of housing options currently available in the City of Temecula meet your needs? Yes No 9. What types of housing are most needed in the City of Temecula? U Single Family (Detached) Duplex/Attached Housing Condominiums (multifamily ownership homes) Apartments (multifamily rental homes) Senior Housing Housing for persons with disabilities Other (please specify) F IN 10. If you live in the City of Temecula, why have you chosen to live in the City? (Select all that apply) ❑ Proximity to job/work Quality of housing stock Local recreational amenities and scenery ❑ Proximity to family and/or friends ❑ Affordability ❑ Quality of local school system ❑ Safety of neighborhood ❑ City services and programs ❑ Proximity to shopping and services, including Old Town Temecula ❑ I do not live in Temecula Other (please specify) 11. If you wish to own a home in Temecula but do not currently own one, what issues are preventing you from owning a home at this time? (Choose all that apply) u I cannot find a home within my target price range in Temecula I cannot find a home that suits my living needs in Temecula (housing size, disability accommodations) 1-1 1 do not currently have the financial resources for an appropriate down payment I do not currently have the financial resources for an adequate monthly mortgage payment I cannot currently find a home that suits my quality standards in Temecula I do not currently wish to own a home in Temecula 12. How important are the following concerns to you and your family? Very Important Somewhat Important Not Important Don't Know Ensuring that children who grow up in Temecula can afford to live in Temecula. Create mixed -use (commercial/office and residential) projects in the community that O O encourage walkable neighborhoods and reduce dependency on automobiles. 3 Very Important Somewhat Important Not Important Don't Know Ensure that the housing market in Temecula provides a diverse range of housing types, including single-family 1 homes, townhomes, �J apartments, and condominiums to meet the varied needs of local residents. Establish special needs housing for seniors, n 0 large families, and/or U persons with disabilities. Integrate affordable housing throughout the community to create O O O mixed -income neighborhoods. Encourage energy conservation through O O O site and building design. Provide shelters and transitional housing for the homeless, along with O O 0 u services to help move people into permanent housing. Encourage the rehabilitation of existing U 0 u housing stock in older neighborhoods. Establish programs to help at -risk homeowners keep their homes, including mortgage loan programs. Fair/Equitable 0 Housing opportunities and programs to help maintain and secure neighborhoods that have suffered foreclosures. 13. What age range most accurately describes you? O 18-21 years old O 22-30 years old O 31-40 years old O 41-50 years old O50 + years old 14. Are there any comments you would like to share with the City of Temecula relevant to the upcoming Housing Element Update? 15. Please leave your name and email address to receive updates and information on the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update. Name: Email: 1 Appendix B: Summary of All Survey Responses City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q1 Do you live and/or work in the City of Temecula? Answered:772 Skipped:90 Live ine 23.96% Temecula Work in Temecula M 13.47% Live AND work in Temecula Retired in Temecul 0% 10% ANSWER CHOICES Live in Temecula Work in Temecula Live AND work in Temecula Retired in Temecula TOTAL 42.49% 20.08% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% RESPONSES 23.96% 13.47% 42.49% 20.08% 185 104 328 155 772 1/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 IF YOU LIVE SOMEWHERE OTHER THAN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, WHERE DO YOU DATE LIVE? Menifee 9/24/2020 1:30 PM Murrieta 9/17/2020 5:08 PM Menifee 9/16/2020 8:11 PM Murrieta 9/16/2020 9:32 AM Murrieta 9/16/2020 9:21 AM unincorporated county/retired 9/16/2020 9:10 AM Hemet 9/16/2020 9:07 AM Murrieta 9/15/2020 2:08 PM Murrieta 9/15/2020 11:43 AM Murrieta 9/15/2020 11:29 AM Murrieta 9/14/2020 11:39 AM Murrieta 9/9/2020 3:41 PM Murrieta 9/9/2020 10:25 AM I live and work in Murrieta 9/8/2020 10:46 AM Menifee 9/7/2020 7:53 PM Lake Elsinore 9/7/2020 4:10 PM San Diego own two rentals in Temecula 9/5/2020 3:28 PM Wildomar 9/5/2020 11:44 AM Canyon Lake 9/5/2020 11:28 AM Sage 9/5/2020 9:44 AM Murrieta (County land, not city) Temecula Schools 9/5/2020 6:19 AM Caldwell, Texas 9/4/2020 8:12 PM Murrieta 9/4/2020 7:56 PM Menifee 9/4/2020 6:01 PM Menifee 9/4/2020 5:37 PM Menifee 9/4/2020 4:56 PM Canyon Lake 9/4/2020 4:50 PM Murrieta 9/4/2020 4:41 PM MURRIETA 9/4/2020 4:06 PM Oceanside 9/4/2020 3:55 PM Perris 9/4/2020 3:52 PM hemet 9/4/2020 3:44 PM I live in Canyon Lake but do some business in Temecula 9/4/2020 3:37 PM Winchester 9/4/2020 3:35 PM Wildomar 9/4/2020 3:33 PM Hemet 9/4/2020 3:24 PM Menifee 9/4/2020 3:23 PM 2/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey French Valley 9/4/2020 3:22 PM Murrieta 9/4/2020 3:22 PM Menifee 9/4/2020 3:20 PM Menifee 9/4/2020 3:17 PM Murrieta 9/4/2020 3:16 PM Menifee 9/4/2020 3:14 PM wildomar 9/4/2020 3:12 PM Sage 9/4/2020 3:08 PM Murrieta 9/4/2020 3:06 PM Murrieta 9/4/2020 3:05 PM Murrieta 9/4/2020 3:05 PM Menifee 9/4/2020 3:02 PM Wildomar 9/3/2020 2:31 PM Hemet 9/3/2020 7:15 AM Hemet 9/2/2020 6:08 AM Murrieta 9/1/2020 10:14 AM Winchester 8/31/2020 6:22 PM Hemet 8/31/2020 8:14 AM Winchester, CA 8/31/2020 7:31 AM Wildomar 8/31/2020 12:13 AM Murrieta 8/29/2020 11:57 PM Rancho cucamonga 8/29/2020 5:21 PM Moreno Valley 8/29/2020 2:11 PM Menifee 8/29/2020 11:03 AM Fallbrook 8/29/2020 9:10 AM Murrieta 8/29/2020 8:27 AM Wildomar 8/29/2020 7:33 AM Hemet 8/29/2020 7:23 AM Canyon Lake 8/29/2020 6:51 AM Temecula wine country 8/28/2020 9:40 PM Outside of wine country Winchester 8/28/2020 9:35 PM Temecula in Wine County 8/28/2020 9:32 PM Sun City 8/28/2020 8:21 PM San Jacinto 8/28/2020 7:08 PM Unincorporated Riverside county 8/28/2020 6:57 PM Menifee 8/28/2020 6:36 PM Murrieta 8/28/2020 6:04 PM Murrieta 8/28/2020 5:47 PM 3/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 76 Riverside 8/28/2020 5:26 PM 77 Los angeles 8/28/2020 3:52 PM 78 Winchester 8/28/2020 2:32 PM 79 Menifee 8/28/2020 2:24 PM 80 Murrieta 8/28/2020 2:15 PM 81 1 live in the Wine Country unincorporated area 8/28/2020 1:58 PM 82 Menifee 8/28/2020 1:56 PM 83 Sun City 8/28/2020 1:54 PM 84 Menifee 8/28/2020 1:50 PM 85 Murrieta 8/28/2020 1:44 PM 86 1 am filling this out for my parents who are retired. 8/28/2020 1:43 PM 87 Aguanga 8/28/2020 1:39 PM 88 Perris 8/28/2020 1:31 PM 89 Menifee. I am always down in Temecula, originally wanted to live there. 8/28/2020 1:29 PM 90 Menifee 8/28/2020 1:28 PM 91 1 live in the city of Perris 8/28/2020 1:24 PM 92 28500 Pujol Street #44 8/28/2020 1:19 PM 93 Menifee 8/28/2020 1:14 PM 94 Lake Elsinore 8/28/2020 1:13 PM 95 Lake Elsinore 8/28/2020 1:13 PM 96 Menifee 8/28/2020 1:13 PM 97 Murrieta 8/28/2020 1:12 PM 98 1 would like to move to the city of Temecula 8/28/2020 1:08 PM 99 Murrieta 8/28/2020 1:07 PM 100 fallbrook 8/28/2020 1:06 PM 101 Winchester/French Valley 8/28/2020 5:57 AM 102 Murrieta 8/25/2020 9:15 AM 103 Escondido 8/24/2020 6:56 PM 104 Warner Springs 8/24/2020 5:25 PM 105 Murrieta 8/24/2020 1:09 PM 106 City of Riverside 8/24/2020 12:48 PM 107 Menifee 8/24/2020 12:02 PM 108 Menifee 8/24/2020 11:57 AM 109 San Diego 8/22/2020 6:56 AM 110 Riverside. (Formerly Temecula) 8/21/2020 9:57 PM 111 Murrieta 8/21/2020 7:26 AM 112 Murrieta 8/19/2020 8:31 AM 113 Murrieta 8/18/2020 2:37 PM 4/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 114 Hemet, ca 8/18/2020 1:09 PM 115 Murrieta 8/17/2020 8:17 PM 116 Murrieta 8/17/2020 1:54 PM 117 French Valley 8/17/2020 11:06 AM 118 Menifee, CA 8/17/2020 10:53 AM 119 Murrieta 8/14/2020 6:23 PM 120 Murrieta 8/14/2020 9:52 AM 121 Murrieta 8/13/2020 5:48 PM 122 Riverside 8/12/2020 3:19 PM 123 We just moved away 8/12/2020 9:17 AM 124 Wildomar 8/12/2020 9:14 AM 125 French valley 8/12/2020 8:39 AM 126 Murrieta 8/11/2020 7:47 PM 127 Murrieta 8/11/2020 5:01 PM 128 Murrieta 8/11/2020 2:17 PM 129 Winchester 8/11/2020 2:15 PM 130 Murrieta 8/11/2020 2:00 PM 131 Temecula Wine Country Area 8/11/2020 1:28 PM 132 Riverside 8/10/2020 3:29 PM 133 Corona 8/10/2020 2:27 PM 134 Wildomar 8/10/2020 2:15 PM 135 Homeland 8/10/2020 2:14 PM 136 Murrieta 8/10/2020 7:15 AM 137 Wine Country 8/8/2020 11:25 PM 138 Lived in Temecula for years and may move back -have many friends there so my info is 8/7/2020 4:40 AM relevant. 139 Fallbrook 8/6/2020 11:42 PM 140 Winchester, CA 8/6/2020 8:43 AM 141 1 live in Temecula, partly telecommute and partly work within 40 minutes of here 8/5/2020 8:46 PM 142 Murrieta 8/5/2020 2:38 PM 143 Murrieta 8/5/2020 11:09 AM 144 Murrieta 8/4/2020 7:43 AM 145 Winchester 8/4/2020 7:37 AM 146 Wildomar 8/4/2020 6:36 AM 147 Murrieta 8/4/2020 12:57 AM 148 Murrieta 8/3/2020 7:40 PM 149 Lake Elsinore 8/3/2020 6:13 PM 150 TEMECUTA WINE COUNTRY 8/3/2020 4:31 PM 151 Riverside 8/3/2020 4:07 PM 5/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 152 Murrieta 8/2/2020 5:31 PM 153 Murrieta 8/2/2020 2:47 PM 154 Murrieta 8/2/2020 2:06 PM 155 Wildomar 8/2/2020 12:38 PM 156 San Juan Capistrano 8/2/2020 11:05 AM 157 Murrieta 8/2/2020 10:48 AM 158 Wildomar 8/2/2020 10:09 AM 159 Menifee 8/2/2020 8:46 AM 160 Menifee 8/1/2020 6:50 AM 161 Bonsall 7/31/2020 9:31 PM 162 Meadowview 7/31/2020 2:10 PM 163 Just outside of city limits toward wine country 7/31/2020 7:56 AM 164 French Valley 7/30/2020 10:29 PM 165 Menifee 7/30/2020 8:34 PM 166 Santee 7/30/2020 7:52 PM 167 Murrieta 7/30/2020 6:05 PM 168 Menifee 7/30/2020 6:03 PM 169 Murrieta 7/30/2020 5:49 PM 170 Lake elsinore 7/30/2020 5:46 PM 171 Perris 7/30/2020 5:32 PM 172 Near Pachanga 7/30/2020 5:19 PM 173 Menifee 7/30/2020 5:11 PM 174 Riverside County -Wine Country 7/30/2020 2:32 PM 175 1 am in the process is moving to Temecula from San Diego 7/30/2020 1:08 PM 176 Santa Clara 7/29/2020 1:55 PM 177 Murrieta 6/16/2020 4:03 PM 178 Anza 5/18/2020 8:46 AM 179 Murrieta 4/14/2020 3:28 PM 6/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q2 How long have you lived in the City of Temecula? Answered:695 Skipped:167 0-2 Years 12.37% 2-5 Years!1 13.53% 5-10 Years 10 + Years 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES 0-2 Years 12.37% 86 2-5 Years 13.53% 94 5-10 Years 16.26% 113 10 + Years 57.84% 402 TOTAL 695 7/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q3 Which of the following housing upgrades or expansions have you considered making on your home? Answered:68-1 Skipped:175 Room additio 11.21% Roofing - 12.52% HVAC 22.42% Painting V 41.92% Solar 27.66% Accessory 8 73% Dwelling Unit Does not apply 33.92% Other (please 14.99% specify) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Room addition 11.21% 77 Roofing 12.52% 86 H VAC 22.42% 154 Painting 41.92% 288 Solar 27.66% 190 Accessory Dwelling Unit 8.73% 60 Does not apply. 33.92% 233 Other (please specify) 14.99% 103 Total Respondents: 687 8/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE Additional studio/kitchenette 9/28/2020 4:23 PM Flooring 9/24/2020 6:56 PM Lawn upgrade to drought tolerant rock 9/19/2020 12:13 PM Flooring, plumbing, electrical 9/16/2020 9:27 AM I'm renting 9/16/2020 9:13 AM Flooring, plumbing, electrical 9/16/2020 8:56 AM new flooring, landscaping 9/15/2020 10:18 AM repair support beam in garage 9/15/2020 9:58 AM Kitchen and bathroom upgrades replace fencing 9/6/2020 2:54 PM LANDSCAPING.. plumbing, windows etc.. 9/5/2020 1:03 PM all ready done 9/5/2020 8:46 AM Whole house fan in the attic 9/5/2020 7:08 AM Pool 9/4/2020 3:41 PM Kitchen, bath, landscaping 9/4/2020 3:30 PM Flooring 9/4/2020 3:25 PM pool 9/4/2020 3:05 PM Whole house fan 8/31/2020 4:27 PM Installation and soundproofing 8/31/2020 1:12 PM Pool 8/31/2020 11:09 AM Tankless water heater & new windows 8/30/2020 10:34 PM Windows. Interior doors. 8/30/2020 9:53 PM Windows 8/30/2020 4:15 PM Windows 8/30/2020 2:53 PM Upgrading bathrooms 8/30/2020 8:44 AM Water heater 8/29/2020 8:41 PM Pool 8/29/2020 4:44 PM Fencing 8/29/2020 2:54 PM Renovate/upgrade 8/29/2020 9:00 AM Windows and kitchen 8/29/2020 12:22 AM Driveway 8/28/2020 9:34 PM Shelves in the kitchen 8/28/2020 8:25 PM Energy efficient appliances 8/28/2020 7:31 PM Pool equipment, plumbing, appliances. 8/28/2020 6:40 PM Landscaping 8/28/2020 6:07 PM New flooring and upgraded bathrooms 8/28/2020 5:50 PM Major Interior Remodel 8/28/2020 3:05 PM Did an addition considering others. 8/28/2020 1:53 PM 9/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 Air purifier systems 8/28/2020 1:52 PM Making the stairs from the front and back door a ramp. 8/28/2020 1:46 PM All of the above have been done during my time here 8/28/2020 1:40 PM Looking to purchase in temecula 8/28/2020 1:29 PM Renting but want solar on MF affordable housing Riverbank with SOMAH program 8/28/2020 1:21 PM Tree removal/ service 8/28/2020 2:28 AM Remodel interior 8/27/2020 7:13 PM Water Heater, bathroom remodel, new floors 8/27/2020 5:54 PM A bunch of stuff 8/27/2020 1:52 PM Cracks on walls 8/26/2020 7:59 PM Kitchen and bathroom remodel, carpet and other flooring 8/26/2020 6:05 PM Buying 8/25/2020 7:21 AM I would like to see aprtment complexes have Solar. I would like to see Temecula stop building 8/24/2020 5:11 PM anything further. Kitchen upgrade 8/24/2020 10:05 AM Updating our whole home 8/21/2020 1:06 PM rain gutter, patio cover and land scaping 8/21/2020 11:46 AM New flooring and kitchen renewal 8/19/2020 1:35 PM Remodeling staircase 8/19/2020 12:05 PM flooring 8/19/2020 9:55 AM I also need to be able to rent two of my rooms out to people here on vacation to help me pay 8/19/2020 9:29 AM for my mortgage. I'm a single mom, but I can't do that right now because the city stopped letting us I currently rent, so no additions. 8/18/2020 1:38 PM pool & landscaping 8/17/2020 11:07 AM bathroom remodel, whole house fan 8/15/2020 12:51 AM Interior Remodeling of Bathrooms/ Upgrade Floors 8/12/2020 4:29 PM Pool 8/11/2020 3:52 PM Patio cover 8/10/2020 10:59 AM Remodel kitchen 8/9/2020 6:39 AM Add another garage 8/8/2020 6:30 PM Kitchen remodel 8/8/2020 3:09 PM Pool 8/7/2020 2:18 PM Want single story. 8/6/2020 9:56 PM interior remodeling 8/6/2020 5:18 PM New windows. 8/6/2020 4:21 PM Garage 8/5/2020 9:44 PM Pool remodel 8/5/2020 12:05 PM Interior remodel 8/5/2020 10:51 AM Garage door replacement/garage reno 8/5/2020 10:43 AM 10/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 75 Windows, doors 8/4/2020 12:50 AM 76 Windows 8/3/2020 10:06 PM 77 Pool/spa 8/3/2020 6:17 PM 78 Kitchen and bathroom upgrades 8/3/2020 5:52 PM 79 Pool 8/3/2020 4:17 PM 80 Kitchen remodel 8/3/2020 2:42 PM 81 New flooring and countertops 8/3/2020 1:56 PM 82 Pool 8/3/2020 1:21 PM 83 Full renovations 8/2/2020 5:23 PM 84 pool; remodel; flooring 8/2/2020 5:16 PM 85 Bathroom remodel 8/2/2020 11:07 AM 86 Moving to Temecula 8/1/2020 6:52 AM 87 Downsize 7/31/2020 5:48 PM 88 Pool 7/31/2020 5:17 PM 89 Bathroom upgrades 7/31/2020 3:32 PM 90 Driveway expansion 7/31/2020 2:05 PM 91 Patio Cover 7/31/2020 8:54 AM 92 General interior updates due to age of home 7/31/2020 6:39 AM 93 Kitchen and bathroom renovations 7/31/2020 1:13 AM 94 Pool 7/30/2020 10:47 PM 95 Bathtub install downstairs 7/30/2020 9:31 PM 96 1 Rent. It's not affordable for me to buy here although I work and live this community 7/30/2020 9:07 PM 97 Kitchen & bathroom renovation 7/30/2020 8:09 PM 98 Pool and landscaping. 7/30/2020 5:23 PM 99 I'm a renter. Would love to own. 7/30/2020 2:32 PM 100 None 7/30/2020 1:21 PM 101 Patio cover 7/30/2020 1:18 PM 102 Flooring, window coverings, patio cover 6/8/2020 11:14 AM 103 General replacement of outdated aspects of our home 6/2/2020 4:38 PM 11/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q4 How would you rate the physical condition of the residence you live in? Answered:698 Skipped:164 Excellent 0 condition 33.24% Shows sign defern Needs mo rehabilit Needs m upgrades Other (pl specify) 2.72% 46.42% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES Excellent condition Shows signs of deferred maintenance (i.e., peeling paint, chipped stucco, etc.) Needs modest rehabilitation improvements (i.e., new roof, new wood siding, etc.) Needs major upgrades (i.e., new foundation, new plumbing, new electrical, etc.) Other (please specify) TOTAL RESPONSES 33.24% 232 46.42% 324 12.61% 88 5.01% 35 2.72% 19 698 12/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) Good condition- well maintained Good condition for a 20+ year old Apartment I rent an apartment Need pest control. Found 2 big dead rat. Fencing I live in an apartment Doesnt apply Excellent for a 32 year old tract home. The aprtment I visit in Temecula is way too small and way pricey. Remodlers need to come in and make to or three apartment into one. Then, they need to take your over 50 empty commercial buildings and make them into apartment for the homeless An apt. So maintenance is done by management. Renting at the moment fence is falling down, hasn't been painted since 1998 so the wood trim is falling apart Apartment in good condition, but aging House was well kept modern Inside needs upgrades Decent Not currently living in Temecula do not live here DATE 9/16/2020 9:11 AM 9/6/2020 2:54 PM 9/3/2020 6:12 PM 8/29/2020 11:58 PM 8/28/2020 8:25 PM 8/28/2020 3:45 PM 8/28/2020 1:40 PM 8/28/2020 1:09 PM 8/26/2020 6:52 PM 8/24/2020 5:11 PM 8/19/2020 10:58 PM 8/19/2020 11:32 AM 8/19/2020 9:29 AM 8/12/2020 10:57 AM 8/12/2020 9:19 AM 8/8/2020 3:09 PM 7/30/2020 9:07 PM 7/30/2020 1:09 PM 7/29/2020 1:57 PM 13/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q5 Why have you chosen to live in Temecula? (Select all that apply) Answered:698 Skipped:164 Proximity tc job/wort Quality o housing stoc Loc, recreational. Proximity tc family and/o.. Afford Quality local schoo Safety o neighborhooi City service. and program Proximity tc shopping and.. Other (pleas ' 28.80% 25.21% 37.54% 31.95% hN51.58% 49.43% PF61.17% I26.36% "M 33.24% 12.75% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES Proximity to job/work Quality of housing stock Local recreational amenities and scenery Proximity to family and/or friends Affordability Quality of local school system Safety of neighborhood City services and programs Proximity to shopping and services, including Old Town Temecula Other (please specify) Total Respondents: 698 RESPONSES 28.80% 201 25.21% 176 37.54% 262 31.95% 223 51.58% 360 49.43% 345 61.17% 427 26.36% 184 33.24% 232 12.75% 89 14/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE wine country and balloon views 9/24/2020 4:43 PM Charter Schools with Academy Based Learning 9/24/2020 11:09 AM Family 9/16/2020 9:37 AM For retirement 9/16/2020 9:32 AM The weather 9/16/2020 9:28 AM Retirement 9/16/2020 9:21 AM moved to area for schools/ affordable living 9/16/2020 9:11 AM No comment 9/16/2020 9:05 AM The weather 9/16/2020 9:03 AM moved here 30 years ago-- too crowded now. Looking to move away. 9/15/2020 12:02 PM live with family 9/15/2020 11:57 AM Close to my daughter 9/15/2020 11:45 AM I came to CA to take care of my mother and wanted SoCal because of the weather. 9/15/2020 10:18 AM love this town.... especially the city employees and cops 9/5/2020 1:03 PM herh scince 1977 9/5/2020 8:46 AM Wine Country 9/5/2020 6:58 AM Lived here 32 years its a great place to live. 9/4/2020 5:09 PM Wineries 9/4/2020 3:41 PM I don't live in Temecula 9/4/2020 3:34 PM 10 years ago it was more affordable however now it is not so much 9/4/2020 3:30 PM My husband lives here 9/4/2020 3:15 PM Ive live here for almost 50 years. 9/4/2020 3:05 PM Weather 8/31/2020 1:12 PM Divine direction 8/31/2020 12:15 AM School Ratings 8/30/2020 4:15 PM Not too crowded 8/30/2020 12:12 PM We love Temecula 8/29/2020 9:11 AM Quality of living, somewhat peaceful but beginning to show signs of the demise of peaceful 8/29/2020 8:43 AM existence... building more dwellings BEFORE making roads to handle the traffic you're bringing in Purchased property in 1977 built a home 8/28/2020 9:37 PM work close by 8/28/2020 6:37 PM Good Air Quality 8/28/2020 6:17 PM i do not live in Temecula, but have in the past 8/28/2020 1:58 PM Gated communities 8/28/2020 1:52 PM Settled in 1977 working in the fields 8/28/2020 1:46 PM Moved to help sister when she purchased a home in 1990 8/27/2020 7:13 PM E 8/27/2020 5:44 AM 15/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 Moved here 32 years ago for a safe, family environment. 8/26/2020 6:52 PM Came for the job, stayed for the city! 8/26/2020 6:24 PM Family 8/25/2020 12:23 AM I live in Multiple Sites in South Western Riverside County. I want this over building and Traffic 8/24/2020 5:11 PM to stop now. With the hope of new City Council People we can No Growth. Repari what we have. Temecula has a 3 Billion Dollar Revenu and it needs to go to the structures that are already here and need solar and water efficiency The number one reason we chose to live in Temecula is safety and beauty of the area 8/23/2020 5:40 PM family friendly 8/22/2020 7:22 PM Cost of living 8/21/2020 4:58 PM Quality of life. 8/21/2020 1:59 PM We fell in Love with the city 31 years ago and decided to live here and be close to our family 8/21/2020 1:06 PM that retired here Economy... covid... living with parents 8/21/2020 12:06 PM More open space / less crowded than San Diego and LA 8/21/2020 8:19 AM City values 8/21/2020 5:17 AM Kids 8/19/2020 10:30 PM 1994 affordability 8/19/2020 9:50 PM Friendly HOA and neighbors 8/19/2020 1:35 PM Centralized area 8/19/2020 11:44 AM Job 8/19/2020 10:11 AM small-town feel yet has all we need 8/19/2020 9:55 AM Safest city and school ratings. Pricing goes up every year which sucks 8/19/2020 9:46 AM I moved here because its the only place I could afford to buy a home to raise my 3 children in 8/19/2020 9:29 AM as a single mother Moved from out of state and chose family friendly area 8/18/2020 8:16 PM I didn't have a choice. I had to move in with family. 8/18/2020 4:12 PM Its barely affordable but more so than San diego. 8/17/2020 9:52 PM Proximity to church/school 8/17/2020 7:58 AM Conservative/Republican politicians and people 8/15/2020 12:51 AM Our church in Temecula 8/13/2020 11:56 PM Overall quality of life 8/12/2020 4:29 PM Originally came For those reasons, but we recently sold and left because of the homeless and 8/12/2020 9:19 AM other issues that are now playing in the city. Wineries 8/11/2020 9:12 PM Temecula Hospital, Wine Country, Diverse Community 8/7/2020 2:18 PM Move back to childhood home 8/7/2020 1:14 PM Good city leadership, spending priorities, and quality of life 8/6/2020 5:18 PM Used to be affordability but that seems to be evening out a little with other counties 8/6/2020 11:25 AM Beautiful weather year round 8/5/2020 9:51 AM N/A 8/3/2020 11:19 PM 16/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 Everything 8/3/2020 8:11 PM We were tired of living in the Bay Area 8/3/2020 2:42 PM Beauty of city 8/2/2020 2:07 PM Retired here because we had built-in friendships, we knew for years, relating to wine makers. 8/2/2020 10:38 AM Because I have for 30+ years 7/31/2020 2:35 PM Family oriented city. 7/31/2020 11:46 AM Moved here before all the building so for small town 7/30/2020 8:49 PM Moved here 40 years ago to get away from the cream of the crud 7/30/2020 7:17 PM Moved here over 20+ years ago because it was cheaper 7/30/2020 7:15 PM Moved here when it was affordable and schools were good. 7/30/2020 6:06 PM Easy drive to the beach. 7/30/2020 5:23 PM Quality of Life 7/30/2020 5:03 PM Retired now but worked here for 25 years and commuted into Temecula. Finally able to move 7/30/2020 5:01 PM here and then retired. My hometown born and raised 7/30/2020 4:53 PM Clean 7/30/2020 1:25 PM Conservative policies and values 7/30/2020 1:13 PM not applicable 7/29/2020 1:57 PM We could not afford to live in San Diego County when we were young working professionals in 6/2/2020 4:38 PM our early 30's 17/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q6 Do you currently own or rent your home? Answered:699 Skipped:163 Own 25.04% Live w oth( Currer home[ 71.10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Own 71.10% 497 Rent 25.04% 175 Live with others 3.58% 25 Currently homeless 0.29% 2 TOTAL 699 18/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q7 If you wish to own a home in Temecula but do not currently own one, what issues are preventing you from owning a home at this time? (Choose all that apply) Answered:285 Skipped:577 No homes I 55.44% within price... No homes tha 12.98% suit my need Do not have MW . down paymen 51.58% Do not have enough for... 32.98% No homes tha� 7.02% fit quality. do note17.54% r.. to own or re.. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES No homes within price range No homes that suit my needs Do not have a down payment Do not have enough for mortgage payment No homes that fit quality standards I do not wish to own or rent a home in Temecula Total Respondents: 285 RESPONSES 55.44% 158 12.98% 37 51.58% 147 32.98% 94 7.02% 20 17.54% 50 19/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q8 Select the type of housing that best describes your current home: Answered:671 Skipped: 191 Single Famil Home (Detached Accessory 0.75% Dwelling Uni... Mobile Home 1.34% Duplex/Attached 3.13% Home Multifamily Home... Currently 0.15% without... Other (pleas 1 49% specify 0% 10% 81.07% 12.07% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Single Family Home (Detached) 81.07% 544 Accessory Dwelling Unit, Granny Flat, Guest House 0.75% 5 Mobile Home 1.34% 9 Duplex/Attached Home 3.13% 21 Multifamily Home (Apartment/Condominium) 12.07% 81 Currently without permanent shelter 0.15% 1 Other (please specify) 1.49% 10 TOTAL 671 20 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) I don't know Apartment Apartment Section 8- Senior apartment complex Manufacture Home own the Land Sycamore Springs Ranches - a custom home and horse boarding ranch rental apartment Detached condo Rent a room Very tiny single bedroom apartment DATE 9/16/2020 9:19 AM 9/15/2020 11:47 AM 9/15/2020 10:06 AM 9/15/2020 10:03 AM 9/4/2020 3:27 PM 9/4/2020 3:14 PM 8/30/2020 12:02 AM 8/28/2020 2:32 AM 8/2/2020 9:59 AM 7/30/2020 4:33 PM 21/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q9 Which of the following best describes your household type? Answered:670 Skipped: 192 Single perso� o househol 11.19/° Cou Couple v kids Single par with kids Non -parent 119% with kids <18 M Young adult, 5.07/° ° living with... Multi-generati 10.45% nal househol Single with 1.34% roommate' Couple with 0.15% roommates Other (plea fys 6.12% speci 0% 10% 20% 30% ANSWER CHOICES Single person household Couple Couple with kids <18 Single parent with kids <18 Non -parent with kids <18 Young adult living with parents Multi -generational household Single with roommates Couple with roommates Other (please specify) TOTAL 7% 32.99% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% RESPONSES 11.19% 25.37% 32.99% 6.12% 1.19% 5.07% 10.45% 1.34% 0.15% 6.12% 75 170 221 41 8 34 70 9 1 41 670 22/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE I live with my daughter 9/16/2020 9:41 AM Divorce 9/16/2020 9:25 AM I live with my daughter 9/15/2020 1:17 PM Rent room 9/15/2020 10:13 AM Retired with Adult Disabled Son 9/6/2020 7:14 AM Single parent with child over 18 9/5/2020 10:07 PM Couple with adult children over 18 9/4/2020 3:36 PM couple living with cllege age children 9/4/2020 3:17 PM Single mom with children in college 8/31/2020 3:46 PM Single with adukt child 8/30/2020 5:04 PM Adult with adult special needs son 8/30/2020 11:27 AM Couple with children over 18 and under 18. 8/30/2020 12:32 AM Couple with 3 adult children over 18 8/28/2020 5:55 PM Single parent w/children over 18 8/28/2020 5:23 PM Couple with adult child 8/28/2020 2:41 PM couple with two adult children 8/28/2020 2:37 PM married couple with two adult children living at home 8/28/2020 2:02 PM Couple living with adult child 8/28/2020 1:56 PM my husband, 2daughters and myself 8/28/2020 1:44 PM Couple with college age children who live here during summer and breaks 8/28/2020 1:09 PM Couple with child over 18 8/28/2020 6:04 AM Mother/daughter birth adults 8/21/2020 9:57 PM Couple with Multiple adult children 8/20/2020 12:36 AM I'm head of household with an adult daughter that has epilepsy, two adult sons that have 8/19/2020 9:42 AM recently graduated from local universities and are living with me to pay off their student loans, and I am also a multi- generational household because My mom is living with us because she has cancer and is undergoing chemo Married couple with 3 kids renting room to me 8/14/2020 6:27 PM Empty Nesters with Occasional Stays by Children Over 18 8/12/2020 4:34 PM Couple with children over 18 8/10/2020 3:46 PM Adult Head of Household with children over 18 attending college 8/10/2020 2:30 PM Couple w adult children 8/7/2020 9:28 PM Couple with young adult child with intellectual disability 8/7/2020 5:07 AM Soon to be single person with young adult over 18 lives at home. 8/6/2020 4:29 PM Parents with two adult children (college age - 20/22) 8/5/2020 10:47 AM Couple with 13 and 21 yr olds 8/4/2020 9:36 AM single living with elderly mother 8/1/2020 8:11 AM Single parent with children 18+ I'm surprised this wasn't an option 7/31/2020 2:17 PM 23/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 36 37 38 39 40 41 Single parent with child (21 years old) Single parent with young adult children couple with children both under and over 18 Single Parent with 18 year old Son Couple with child over 18 Couple with children under 18, 1 child 18 + live in boyfriend, roommate 7/31/2020 9:02 AM 7/31/2020 7:02 AM 7/30/2020 10:33 PM 7/30/2020 9:19 PM 7/30/2020 8:55 PM 7/30/2020 5:52 PM 24 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q10 How satisfied are you with your current housing situation? Answered:671 Skipped: 191 I am very satisfied. Iamsomewha satisfied I am somewha 10.43% dissatisfied 35.32% 48.29% I a 5.96% dissatisfied 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES I am very satisfied. I am somewhat satisfied. I am somewhat dissatisfied. I am dissatisfied. TOTAL RESPONSES 48.29% 35.32% 10.43% 5.96% 324 237 70 40 671 25/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 IF YOU ANSWERED DISSATISFIED OR SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED PLEASE PROVIDE A DATE REASON BELOW. The condo we live in is too small and we are one rent increase away from getting priced out of 9/26/2020 8:43 PM the area Cost of rent 9/15/2020 12:16 PM Renters disruptive behavior towards owners 9/15/2020 12:04 PM I am somewhat satisfied because golf balls from golf course continue to damage our house. 1 9/15/2020 10:40 AM am unable to keep up with the repairs. Dissatisfied because 3 children living in house that always needs repairs 9/15/2020 10:24 AM want to move but higher taxes and low inventory make it hard 9/10/2020 10:17 AM Need a Special Needs Setting for son in future 9/6/2020 7:14 AM My property taxes are outrageous 9/5/2020 10:14 AM Neighborhood has a lot of crime 9/4/2020 5:40 PM We need more tennis courts 9/4/2020 3:54 PM Home is too old and needs too much work. HOA fees are too high and not worth price paid. 9/4/2020 3:36 PM New homes by builders have too high of tax. HOA prices on the rise. 9/4/2020 3:29 PM I live in an u safe place and the apartment owners do not take care of them 9/2/2020 6:11 AM Really wanted more garage space and bigger back yard but so few houses on the market we 8/31/2020 1:19 PM had to buy what was available Lessor does not take care of the rental property I live in 8/31/2020 11:13 AM Need larger home for mom with dementia and caregiver 8/30/2020 7:44 PM Small - needs upgrade. No yard 8/30/2020 12:24 PM I would like to own my own place. 8/30/2020 12:02 AM Need access to low income housing for inlaws who are currently living with me 8/29/2020 11:49 PM No HOA. Many ordinance/code violations in neighborhoods 8/29/2020 6:16 PM needs updated and repairs... can't afford to fix 8/29/2020 3:00 PM I prefer a larger house instead of a pricey rental apartment 8/29/2020 2:15 PM Traffic congestion is terrible on main arteries 8/29/2020 2:10 PM 55+ so daughter has been displaced. 8/29/2020 7:31 AM It's old, outdated, in need of significant updating and 16,000 sq ft of landscaping. 8/28/2020 8:06 PM Rent increase forcing me to move out of area. 8/28/2020 6:44 PM We are on fixed incomes and they raise the rent about $70.00 each year. Where are we 8/28/2020 6:01 PM suppose to get the money Difficult to find something affordable for my daughter and 1. 8/28/2020 3:50 PM too small and expensive for what im paying 8/28/2020 2:19 PM I live in a neighborhood filled with renters and families who do not take care of their homes but 8/28/2020 2:02 PM this is the only area of temecula we could afford I live in low income housing. There are so many rules that you can't get comfortable enough to 8/28/2020 1:56 PM make it feel like your home. I have a dream to have a home of my own that I can invite who I want over and stay as long as I want them to or paint a room or get a pet without having to get a drs note. 26 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 32 my house needs a lot of fixing 8/28/2020 1:44 PM 33 Many repairs are needed which my landlord ignores 8/28/2020 1:32 PM 34 Frustration with not having enough financial support to obtain my own home. 8/28/2020 1:23 PM 35 Need upgrading in electrical and plumbing 8/28/2020 1:18 PM 36 Inadequate space and not disabled friendly. 8/27/2020 10:16 PM 37 Want to get my own space 8/27/2020 6:49 PM 38 1 would prefer that all homes have 3 car garages. I don't like living on a street lined with cars 8/27/2020 3:32 PM on both sides. I'd prefer seeing tree lined streets and curb appeal. 39 Want to move 8/25/2020 12:26 AM 40 Our landlord increases our rent any time we ask her to fix anything, including this month, 8/24/2020 8:25 PM during the pandemic because our kitchen faucet was leaking. 41 House is too small 8/24/2020 3:14 PM 42 School district and need a larger home in a family neighborhood 8/24/2020 12:55 PM 43 Rent is Ridiculously expensive 8/24/2020 12:38 PM 44 Too much building everywhere and no sign of building for what we lack. AFFORDABLE 8/24/2020 10:16 AM HOUSING. 45 Would consider larger home in lower density neighborhood 8/24/2020 12:30 AM 46 We live in a working class neighborhood. We want homeowners and person's who are 8/23/2020 5:53 PM hardworking to remain in our neighborhoods. People who own seem more concerned with maintaining their homes and keeping the neighborhood safe and secure. We stand together as we live and work in a shared community. We support law enforcement in our neighborhood and across the city. 47 Looking for my own home 8/20/2020 7:08 AM 48 Apt. Is dark, no sunlight. 8/19/2020 11:04 PM 49 Affordability in our city is absent; therefore we have multigenerational accommodations. 8/19/2020 9:57 PM 50 Want a house at a reasonable price 8/19/2020 9:25 PM 51 Previous homeowner renting and want to buy again but prices are twice what they were 10 8/19/2020 5:37 PM years ago 52 1 just need to be able to rent out rooms as short term rental so that I can afford to keep my 8/19/2020 9:42 AM house. If there was grant money to help me paint or make repairs before it got too bad that would help a lot too 53 can't afford housing 8/19/2020 9:39 AM 54 The homogenous zoning doesn't help but the issue isn't availability of housing but employers 8/18/2020 4:19 PM paying too little. 55 Current living with a relative due to economic hardship and process of divorce 8/18/2020 3:11 PM 56 quality of life in Hemet is unacceptable, and while I work in Temecula, I cannot afford to live in 8/18/2020 1:17 PM Temecula. 57 Run down 8/18/2020 10:02 AM 58 The property management is racist and have harrassed us many times. Neighbors are section 8/17/2020 8:31 PM 8 trashy people, drink and smoke every single day for the past 2 years, with small kids that they do not parent. It turned ourlives into misery. 59 too cramped, too far to work 8/17/2020 10:55 AM 60 1 live in a one bedroom with my daughter because I can't afford a two bedroom for us. 8/14/2020 11:09 PM 61 1 shared restroom for 2 bedroom residence 8/14/2020 5:38 PM 27/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 62 Would like to own rather than waste so much money on rent 8/14/2020 4:21 PM 63 No parking, unsatisfied with property manager 8/14/2020 3:39 PM 64 Bothersome neibors 8/14/2020 1:16 PM 65 We are currently in the process of negotiating the purchase our rental house 8/14/2020 12:02 AM 66 1 would be very satisfied if I could move to a single story in the same neighborhood, there is a 8/12/2020 4:34 PM shortage of single story detached homes. 67 temporarily in an apartment, looking to buy. 8/11/2020 2:22 PM 68 Housing too dense. We can hear the neighbors breath 8/9/2020 10:17 AM 69 Retired 8/6/2020 10:01 PM 70 need more space 8/6/2020 6:01 PM 71 1 wish I had a yard for my dogs and child 8/6/2020 8:17 AM 72 Inadequate affordable housing catered to young adults 8/6/2020 3:55 AM 73 1 would love to be able to give my kids a home and a backyard 8/5/2020 10:19 AM 74 Need to add an ADU. City staff seems to discourage them. 8/5/2020 9:56 AM 75 Too far from work 8/4/2020 6:42 AM 76 Housing is not affordable for young families, almost unattainable. 8/4/2020 1:05 AM 77 Too many transients are starting to appear and crime is going up. 8/3/2020 5:55 PM 78 New houses are either way too expensive or they come built in very tight condos/single 8/3/2020 5:55 PM detached homes that are only 10 feet apart. I make $130k a year and can't even buy a decent home with a yard. 79 Too small and bad HOA 8/3/2020 2:52 PM 80 The house needs alot of updating and want to move away from the casino 8/2/2020 4:23 PM 81 1 would like to be able to afford a place by myself or with one other but not have to live with a 8/2/2020 12:44 PM large amount of people in one small space 82 Not having enough personal space from people within the household as well as neighbors 8/2/2020 11:35 AM 83 Too many cars that screech & race at all hours of the day & night. We need some kind of 8/2/2020 10:58 AM control over this 84 1 want to be able to live on my own without 4 roommates 8/2/2020 10:52 AM 85 Expensive still. Rents gone from 1100 to 2000 in about 8 yrs 7/31/2020 10:26 PM 86 It's a one bedroom guesthouse for 4 people (myself, my mom and my two kids). Can't afford 7/31/2020 9:36 PM anything more. 87 Expensive for age 65, need to downsize 7/31/2020 5:59 PM 88 Rent is too high for wages in the area 7/30/2020 11:20 PM 89 1 can't afford a 2 bedroom apartment. And I'd like a home where my son can have his own 7/30/2020 9:19 PM room 90 Too small 7/30/2020 9:05 PM 91 Pretty expensive would like to downsize but will end up with smaller house close to same price 7/30/2020 8:55 PM 92 It's 800 square feet, things are falling apart. 7/30/2020 6:08 PM 93 1 wish I lived closer to work 7/30/2020 5:51 PM 94 My house is too small for my family size and the neighborhood is not safe. 7/30/2020 5:43 PM 95 1 would prefer to own, though the home prices for a single parent and single income is 7/30/2020 5:10 PM impossible with the current home prices, not to mention the property tax and HOA fees. 28 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 96 Need more adequate space, storage for basic things like a bike of linens. An extra half bath, a 7/30/2020 4:33 PM dishwasher, washer and drier hookups so that I may purchase my own machines, an additional bedroom as there are two of us. 97 Would like to own a home in a 55+ community. Single story under 400k. 7/30/2020 3:27 PM 98 Every year my rent goes up. 7/30/2020 2:42 PM 99 1 would've preferred a one story, didn't plan it very well when we bought our home. 7/30/2020 2:28 PM 100 1 am grateful to be living in a nice city but we are a family of 6 living in a 2 bedroom apartment. 7/30/2020 12:05 PM We need a house but rent is so expensive out here! 29 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q11 What age range most accurately describes you? Answered:666 Skipped:196 Gen Z (0-23 I 1.05% years old) MilleniaL (24-39 years... Genera (40-55 y (Baby Boo 56-74 yeas ( Generat 27.48% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Gen Z (0-23 years old) 1.05% 7 Millenial (24-39 years old) 27.48% 183 Generation X (40-55 years old) 36.19% 241 (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 29.58% 197 (Silent Generation) 75 + years old 5.71% 38 TOTAL 666 30 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q12 How important are the following concerns to you and your family? Answered:670 Skipped:192 L_ M 29.24% Ensuring tha children who... Create mixed -use... Ensuretha the housing.. Estab special nei Integrate affordable... 9n_45°1 26.88% 41.80% 36.54% 36.64% 56.52% 48.35% 48.42% 31.08% 31/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 4.50% 37.24% 33.93% Provide shelters and... 23.12% 5.71 % 1& 49.10% 39.19% Encourageth rehabilitati... 8.71% 3.00% 0 46.54% 39.16% Establis programs to... V 11.30% Fair/Eq Ho 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very Important 0 Somewhat Important M Not Important 0 Don't Know 32 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Ensuring that children who grow up in Temecula 56.52% 29.24% 12.14% 2.10% can afford to live in Temecula. 377 195 81 14 667 1.60 Create mixed -use (commercial/office and 41.80% 36.54% 20.45% 1.20% residential) projects in the community that 278 243 136 8 665 1.81 encourage walkable neighborhoods and reduce dependency on automobiles. Ensure that the housing market in Temecula provides a diverse range of housing types, including single-family homes, townhomes, apartments, duplex/triplex and condominiums to meet the varied needs of local residents. Establish special needs housing for seniors, large families, veterans, and/or persons with disabilities. Integrate affordable housing throughout the community to create mixed -income neighborhoods. Provide shelters and transitional housing for the homeless, along with services to help move people into permanent housing. Encourage the rehabilitation of existing housing stock in older neighborhoods. Establish programs to help at -risk homeowners keep their homes, including mortgage loan programs. Fair/Equitable Housing opportunities and programs to help maintain and secure neighborhoods that have suffered foreclosures. 48.35% 26.88% 23.42% 1.35% 322 179 156 9 666 1.78 48.42% 36.69% 13.53% 1.35% 322 244 90 9 665 1.68 36.64% 27.78% 31.08% 4.50% 244 185 207 30 666 2.03 37.24% 33.93% 23.12% 5.71% 248 226 154 38 666 1.97 49.10% 39.19% 8.71% 3.00% 327 261 58 20 666 1.66 46.54% 39.16% 11.30% 3.01% 309 260 75 20 664 1.71 48.20% 36.08% 11.68% 4.04% 322 241 78 27 668 1.72 33 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q13 Do you feel that the different housing types in Temecula currently meet your housing needs? Answered:657 Skipped:205 Yes 64.84% No 35.16% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Yes 64.84% No 35.16% TOTAL 426 231 657 34 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q14 What types of housing are most needed in the City of Temecula? Answered:664 Skipped:198 Single Family (Detached) 49.10% Duplex/Attache 20.33% Housin Condominium 24.40% (multifamily.. r . _... .._ 13.40% (multifamily.. Senior Housinp� 33.73% Accessory 10.39% Dwelling Unit Housing 12.65/o o peoplee with.ith.. Other (pleas 23.95% specify 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Single Family (Detached) 49.10% 326 Duplex/Attached Housing 20.33% 135 Condominiums (multifamily ownership homes) 24.40% 162 Apartments (multifamily rental homes) 13.40% 89 Senior Housing 33.73% 224 Accessory Dwelling Unit 10.39% 69 Housing for people with disabilities (Please specify in comment field below) 12.65% 84 Other (please specify) 23.95% 159 Total Respondents: 664 35 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE Low rent/homeless housing 9/24/2020 7:39 PM Markets 9/16/2020 9:35 AM Markets 9/16/2020 9:22 AM No opinion 9/16/2020 9:19 AM We don't need more traffic/horrible 9/16/2020 9:13 AM AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLEASE 9/15/2020 12:16 PM or public financial assistance to make homes ADA compliant instead of building more 9/15/2020 10:40 AM structures to allow disabled persons to remain in their homes. Apartment that single people with children can afford 9/15/2020 10:24 AM I'd rather see conversions rather than new builds 9/15/2020 10:20 AM with washing machine and dryer 9/15/2020 10:10 AM low income housing 9/9/2020 3:44 PM Group complex for Disabled Adult son needing financial support in Special Needs Trust 9/6/2020 7:14 AM No more housing. We need a better infrastructure, more schools. Too many houses/ people to 9/5/2020 10:14 AM accommodate as it is. We are so full right now, the only thing is duplex's and I'am against. 9/4/2020 7:08 PM upscale 55 and older communities 9/4/2020 5:14 PM No opinion 9/4/2020 4:15 PM More Single Story Homes 9/4/2020 4:12 PM none 9/4/2020 3:17 PM all the above 9/4/2020 3:14 PM affordable housing 9/3/2020 7:21 AM Low income housing 9/2/2020 6:11 AM Low cost housing for people with low income 9/1/2020 10:20 AM T 8/31/2020 11:14 PM Not sure 8/31/2020 9:44 PM Stroke and brain injury survivors 8/31/2020 11:13 AM More affordable multi generation homes 8/30/2020 7:44 PM None. Stop building! Traffic is horrible 8/30/2020 5:04 PM None. I moved here from a similar town where I grew up. They quickly added apartments and 8/30/2020 12:22 PM multi use buildings and didn't plan for the increased traffic. Need affordable apts for special needs 8/30/2020 11:27 AM Low income senior housing 8/29/2020 11:49 PM Permanent Supportive Housing 8/29/2020 7:16 PM Fairly priced housing for the youth just starting to be out on their own. This will not force them 8/29/2020 7:31 AM to have to move to questionable neighborhoods. More multiuse property areas with reduced need for cars 8/28/2020 7:39 PM Affordable housing for people not requiring Section 8 housing, though cannot afford high rent. 8/28/2020 6:44 PM Affordable housing 8/28/2020 6:01 PM 36 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 WO Low income housing 8/28/2020 3:50 PM Affordable housing with disabled amenity's, so disabled people do not end up on the street & 8/28/2020 3:48 PM homeless. No more housing. 8/28/2020 3:14 PM affordable housing for all 8/28/2020 2:37 PM Don't know 8/28/2020 2:02 PM We need more house that low income people can buy!!!!! 8/28/2020 1:56 PM I have a daughter with a mental illness and it would be very good if we can get a house where 8/28/2020 1:44 PM we can live better Don't know, why would you expect this kind of information from a survey 8/28/2020 1:43 PM Single family 55+ homes. 8/28/2020 1:34 PM Homes low -mid income families Could afford 8/28/2020 1:32 PM low income housing opportunities 8/28/2020 1:21 PM Housing for homeless 8/28/2020 1:11 PM I feel Temecula should stop expanding and stop building houses. The community is already 8/28/2020 8:09 AM too impacted with people, cars, etc. I am opposed to the new law that allows ADUs. I purchased my home for the view and privacy. 8/27/2020 3:32 PM An ADU next door would affect both and I would move if that happened. Affordable 8/27/2020 1:23 PM Close to shops, affordable. 8/25/2020 12:26 AM None it's great as is 8/24/2020 1:02 PM AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR SIGLE MOM'S WITH CHILDREN TO LIVE NEAR WHERE 8/24/2020 10:16 AM THEY WORK. Homes that are handicap accessible for elderly and for disabled veterans 8/24/2020 12:30 AM I feel that people with PHYSICAL disabilities should have the same access to the Same 8/22/2020 5:30 AM Communities as the 55+ do, Since most of us require the same amount of care if not more! I strongly feel that people with Physical Disabilities who desire to live Independently should be able to do so in a SAFE city like Temecula CA I feel that the city doesn't need anymore housing and we are already at capacity 8/21/2020 1:15 PM Sorry I don't mean to be NIMBY but apartments and homeless populations can go be built in 8/21/2020 12:17 PM Murrieta or menifee. Designing these services will attract a different kind of demographic. No thanks. affordable housing for working families, homeless who want to stay here 8/21/2020 11:38 AM More affordable housing 8/21/2020 5:25 AM Most have 2-5year wait list for low income senior apts. 8/19/2020 11:04 PM None. There are plenty of housing types already. Temecula is overcrowded as it is. Plenty of 8/19/2020 9:24 PM room to build north of Menifee. None! No more new housing 8/19/2020 8:39 PM Affordable housing for low income families. 8/19/2020 7:05 PM Shelter 8/19/2020 5:15 PM Senior single unit detached homes that are affordable and size appropriate for retirement and 8/19/2020 1:39 PM special care needs. Not high rise apartments! Homeless 8/19/2020 10:15 AM 37 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 67 Low-cost housing for our very low-income and homeless population. 8/19/2020 10:02 AM 68 Single story homes for FTB 8/19/2020 9:50 AM 69 1 have a daughter with epilepsy and a son with a neurological condition, they will need housing 8/19/2020 9:42 AM if I die 70 Affordable housing 8/19/2020 8:36 AM 71 Down -payments are hard 8/19/2020 8:19 AM 72 We have enough! We need jobs 8/19/2020 7:57 AM 73 Anything affordable 8/17/2020 9:55 PM 74 Reasonably priced housing 8/17/2020 2:05 PM 75 medium income housing, not high or low 8/17/2020 10:55 AM 76 We do not want or need low income housing!!! Studies show that crime is increased in these 8/15/2020 12:59 AM areas making our children even more vulnerable! 77 Low income housing 8/14/2020 11:09 PM 78 live work play 8/14/2020 2:51 PM 79 More low income housing needed and housing to minimize the problems caused by homeless 8/13/2020 5:53 PM 80 No more homes needed. Too many now 8/12/2020 9:48 AM 81 No more development! The current infrastructure can't handle the existing traffic, much less 8/12/2020 8:14 AM additional families. 82 Stop building fix the off ramps 8/11/2020 9:53 PM 83 Affordable housing. SFR 8/11/2020 9:17 PM 84 Mixed neighborhoods with groceries 8/11/2020 5:54 PM 85 Single family homes under 2000sf are very difficult to find in Temecula. 8/11/2020 2:22 PM 86 No housing with a supported/group management office for individuals with special needs. 8/10/2020 3:46 PM 87 People with disabilities don't have many options for housing in Temecula and it drives people 8/10/2020 2:30 PM to move away from where they grew up because housing options are not available here. If they were, other programs could be brought in to help support them. 88 More affordable apartment's 8/10/2020 2:23 PM 89 More single story. More affordable housing. 8/9/2020 10:17 AM 90 NONE 8/7/2020 9:28 PM 91 Habitat for Humanity type housing opportunities 8/7/2020 8:34 PM 92 House with accessory sweeping unit or "casita" 8/7/2020 6:38 PM 93 Don't know 8/7/2020 2:22 PM 94 Small complexes of houses for co -housing, 8/7/2020 5:07 AM 95 Nothing , stop building more homes we do not need more housing here 8/7/2020 5:01 AM 96 more inclusive housing options like the upcoming Cypress Ridge townhomes on Pechanga 8/6/2020 5:34 PM Pkwy 97 Sliding scale housing. 8/6/2020 4:29 PM 98 We need more affordable apartments / condos 8/6/2020 4:11 PM 99 single level homes for aging population 8/6/2020 8:46 AM 100 We like Temecula a lot, but we don't want to pick between a tiny apartment or an oversized (for 8/6/2020 8:19 AM us) giant home, regardless of what we can afford. There are very few modest homes ever available for people like us. 38 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 101 Affordable rent 8/6/2020 7:35 AM 102 More one story homes 8/5/2020 8:57 PM 103 Autism 8/5/2020 8:51 PM 104 None 8/5/2020 2:18 PM 105 Do not want to change! Prefer single family homes. This is why we live in suburbs 8/5/2020 2:10 PM 106 More single -story homes instead of two-story homes 8/5/2020 10:47 AM 107 Affordable housing 8/5/2020 10:19 AM 108 1 don't know, not knowledgeable enough 8/5/2020 10:16 AM 109 There are too many homes in Temecula. 8/5/2020 10:06 AM 110 Please do not build any more houses! 8/5/2020 10:05 AM 111 Senior housing that doesn't cost $3000/mo. Actively encourage ADU's. 8/5/2020 9:56 AM 112 Single story 8/5/2020 9:40 AM 113 no more needed 8/4/2020 12:35 PM 114 Affordable workforce housing 8/4/2020 7:48 AM 115 Mixed -use commercial on ground, residential on top, mid -rise buildings 8/4/2020 12:55 AM 116 Less houses 8/3/2020 5:20 PM 117 Temecula seem to have reached housing variety 8/3/2020 3:20 PM 118 Low income housing for single parents 8/3/2020 7:17 AM 119 Affordable housing 8/2/2020 7:41 PM 120 We don't need anymore homes built. The infrastructure is not support mire homes 8/2/2020 4:23 PM 121 More truly affordable housing for working class people 8/2/2020 12:44 PM 122 Permanent supportive housing 8/2/2020 11:45 AM 123 Low income housing for single Moms, so the can live near where they work & can afford to live 8/2/2020 10:58 AM without their salaries being spent on rent! I know of no place in Temecula, life this for single parents, especially for single Moms. 124 Affordable Housing for all of the above 8/2/2020 8:55 AM 125 Homes with ample space between them 8/1/2020 10:54 AM 126 Small single family homes, not these gigantic 2 story 5 bedroom homes 8/1/2020 9:52 AM 127 Low income home for single parent 7/31/2020 10:26 PM 128 AFFORDABLE "Active" Senior 55+ Neighborhoods, AFFORDABLE Apartments, I feel there is 7/31/2020 5:59 PM enough assisted living 129 Properties with larger lots 7/31/2020 5:20 PM 130 The city is great as it is. It shouldn't keep growing bigger! Traffic's already getting heavy and 7/31/2020 5:01 PM stressful! 131 1 like the mixed -use housing concept like in Old Town 7/31/2020 2:59 PM 132 None. The area can not handle any more traffic!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 7/31/2020 2:54 PM 133 Smaller but still high quality homes (1200-1800 sqft) and homes with larger lot sizes. Newer 7/31/2020 2:17 PM stock seems to be mostly McMansions on postage stamp lots 134 Single story homes 7/31/2020 2:15 PM 135 Provide more single story homes and condo/townhomes as single story 7/31/2020 2:13 PM 39 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 136 We have too much traffic as it is. Dont need any more homes 7/31/2020 12:28 PM 137 1 feel there needs to be more options for single people, but not necessarily condiminiums as 7/31/2020 8:36 AM they usually come with large HOA costs. I would love to see neighborhoods of detached small homes with very low HOA fees that are accessible to lower income people. 138 Senior communities (not apartment style but whole communities) and SINGLE STORY 7/31/2020 6:47 AM OPTIONS. My in-laws have been looking for four years and no luck because they are so rare to find in anything besides a tiny little rundown duplex. 139 subsidized housing 7/30/2020 10:33 PM 140 Housing that's affordable, safe and nice like what you'd want to live 7/30/2020 9:19 PM 141 Workforce housing/ownership 7/30/2020 8:55 PM 142 We had a great city until the city council got in be with developers. Lots of apartments ruin a 7/30/2020 7:25 PM city and require lots of service calls from police and fire. Welcome to temec=downey whittier 143 Studio/loft/professional dwellings 7/30/2020 7:15 PM 144 Lower income housing 7/30/2020 5:54 PM 145 Housing options for single parents 7/30/2020 5:51 PM 146 Affordable housing 7/30/2020 5:43 PM 147 Affordable housing for lower income 7/30/2020 5:26 PM 148 Less rentals and more affordable homeownership 7/30/2020 4:33 PM 149 Homes for veteran and with physical disabilities 7/30/2020 3:31 PM 150 Smaller single family homes 7/30/2020 3:20 PM 151 Tiny homes that are affordable to low income people that work in Temecula 7/30/2020 2:58 PM 152 Unsure. There appears to be enough housing, would hate to see it become overpopulated and 7/30/2020 2:44 PM turn into another congested city. 153 Affordable Senior homes - smaller single units near shopping centers, grocers, pharmacies, 7/30/2020 2:35 PM etc. 154 Affordable to the kids who grew up here. 7/30/2020 1:39 PM 155 None 7/30/2020 1:37 PM 156 Wheelchair accessible housing 7/30/2020 1:07 PM 157 Low to moderate income affordable homes 7/30/2020 12:05 PM 158 Larger lots for single-family homes. Developments are too tightly -packed. Where are the 10- 6/8/2020 11:25 AM 15k square foot lots? It's either 5-7k square foot lots or multi -acre lots in De Luz/Wine Country. Very little in the middle. 159 Permanent supportive housing 6/2/2020 4:41 PM 40 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q15 Please remember to visit the website for more details on the Housing Element Update at the link below:https://temeculaca.gov/432/Housing- Element Are there any comments or concerns you would like to share with the City of Temecula relevant to the upcoming Housing Element Update? Answered:255 Skipped:607 41/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # RESPONSES DATE 1 None 9/24/2020 1:53 PM 2 Senior communities would be nice. Or else we may move 9/24/2020 1:44 PM 3 The cost of rent here does not match the income that many of us have forcing many to 9/24/2020 1:18 PM struggle, have roommates, constantly move etc. More affordable housing that matches the jobs available that only want to pay $17 or less would help out a great deal so people can afford to live without roommates and without struggling to pay everything 4 Just want affordable housing for all income types. It would reduce homelessness and bring 9/24/2020 1:11 PM diversity to the city. 5 It is disappointing to see zonings changed and other adjustments that are aimed to please the 9/24/2020 11:21 AM person(s) financially benefitting rather than thinking about the value in the original zoning as well as congestion and overloading the market. 6 Please encourage low income senior housing as a priority. 9/24/2020 11:14 AM 7 Can't afford computer! Why do you waste so much water and still have trees and plants but cut 9/16/2020 9:13 AM in half and only water public areas in early AM late PM 8 Would like to see more housing for seniors with limited senior income. 9/16/2020 9:09 AM 9 The housing and property taxes here in Temecula are out of control. I believe it is designed to 9/15/2020 2:55 PM not integrate but segregate. 10 Too much growth without infrastructure to support. Roads/traffic too heavy and maintenance 9/15/2020 1:55 PM not adequate to support the additional homes being built. 11 Looking forward and praying that someday I can acquire my own Senior home. Many thanks 9/15/2020 11:41 AM for concern. 12 Can the City require Redhawk Golf Club to implement ways to minimize or mitigate damage 9/15/2020 10:40 AM caused by errant golf balls to our houses (windows, stucco, patio, or even people being injured)? It's probably a matter of when, not if, I or a family members gets seriously injured by an errant golf ball. I have been hit by a golf ball in the back. Thankfully it did not land on my head. I now have to wear a hard hat every time I am in our back yard. Thank you for considering my input. 13 1 come from a state that passed legislation to preserve open space. I am dismayed by all the 9/15/2020 10:20 AM building here. Every new development means more traffic lights, more traffic, more students in the schools, and more importantly more water usage. 14 No more apartments or section 8 9/14/2020 10:21 PM 15 Make it easier, faster and less expensive to develop new housing 9/5/2020 6:40 PM 16 Stop building more houses until you have the schools and infrastructure to support the people 9/5/2020 10:14 AM already here. 17 prices are out of control due to supply in demand.... 9/5/2020 7:12 AM 18 Dedicated Bicycle and walking trails, more open space parks, more exits from freeway and 9/5/2020 7:05 AM road widening to accommodate traffic as housing/population increases. 19 Make it easier to add an ADU. For example, provide (free!) the (approved!) architectural plans 9/5/2020 12:01 AM for 4-6 different ADUs. Rather than making each individual homeowner come up with their own (although that should still be an option) the city can just give out plans that meet all of their guidelines. 20 I'm very concerned about a housings duplex I heard about west Temecula parkway by 1-15, 9/4/2020 7:08 PM adding more congestion and ruining the beautiful hill side, that all Temecula's love seeing. 21 Transportation is an interdependency with housing, I don't see how they can be 9/4/2020 3:58 PM compartmentalized. 22 Retired people need more to do or they leave. Tennis Courts are extremely in need as are 9/4/2020 3:54 PM public places to Lap swim. Thank you for keeping Chs open for lap swim 42 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 23 24 25 KV, 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 W. 47 48 49 I think we need to do more to help get homeless of the street but what that looks like I am not 9/4/2020 3:49 PM sure. I do not want Temecula to turn into what LA, San Fran and Austin are seeing now. I believe in helping people get back on their feet and not in enabling them or making them rely on others. No 9/4/2020 3:36 PM You need to strongly consider the enormous tax assessments that are assessed to new 9/4/2020 3:36 PM homes. Even our home purchased in 2008 had unaffordable taxes. So we move to an older neighborhood within Temecula after 10 years because the taxes were out of control. Avoid construction of multi -units or apartments that makes real estate prices go down and 9/4/2020 3:29 PM increases traffic in the area. Install the infrastructure before building home or multi family homes PLEASE 9/4/2020 3:27 PM No 9/4/2020 3:14 PM N/A 9/4/2020 3:11 PM My family moved to Temecula in 1968, moved to Murrieta in 2013. 9/4/2020 3:07 PM Don't allow section 8 housing to be grouped Together. Don't allow homeless to live rear river 9/1/2020 10:24 AM beds. Continue police force. We are in great need of affordable housing options in our area for all types of people. 9/1/2020 10:20 AM no 8/31/2020 11:14 PM With the state, country, and world moving toward renewable energy -some HOAs in Temecula 8/31/2020 9:44 PM still do not allow solar on roofs. With the climate and typical yardscape here, solar installation on a roof just makes too much sense for the city and homeowners. Not too much reduce the stress on an overloaded power grid and reduce the risk of fires. The city should adopt a mandate that prevents HOAs from banning solar roofs. More solar initiatives 8/31/2020 11:13 AM n/a 8/31/2020 7:33 AM Predatory mortgage collection companies should be outlawed. 8/31/2020 12:20 AM I didn't see any homeless when I moved to Temecula 15 years ago. Now, there are many 8/30/2020 11:30 PM homeless people. Many of them are young people. They need assistance. No 8/30/2020 9:55 PM Reinstate short term rentals. These are OUR homes. Let us capitalize on the tourist income 8/30/2020 5:04 PM since you built it and brought all the traffic with it. Work on more affordable taxes or lower/shorter term Mello -Roos. 8/30/2020 12:24 PM Don't be so eager to plan for new housing development. I realize that the City can make money 8/30/2020 12:22 PM off of it but it may lose the charm of a quiet country town. I'd like to see this money and effort go towards fire safety, homeless and drug rehab programs and centers. Need assisted living for special needs 8/30/2020 11:27 AM I'm hoping that Temecula includes Murrieta, Wildomar, Menifee and surrounding suburbs. 8/30/2020 12:02 AM My inlaws have recently relocated from the East Coast to Temecula to be near family. They 8/29/2020 11:49 PM are in their 70's. While, I have them living with me for now, the intent was for them to find their own place in independent senior living. It is very disappointing that there is a 3 to 5 year wait list for low income senior housing in Temecula. There really needs to be more units available. I don't think that Ca should overrule CC&Rs allowing houses to run preschools in the middle of 8/29/2020 9:37 PM single housing tracts when businesses aren't allowed and we pay fees to maintain the CC&Rs. None 8/29/2020 8:48 PM Please adopt a by -right process for multifamily housing. 8/29/2020 7:16 PM You keep building houses but yet the infrastructure such as highways East to West is terrible. 8/29/2020 2:10 PM 43/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Winchester for an example takes me 50 min to 70 minutes to get from business park drive to Murrieta hot springs Anytime from 3:30 To 6:30pm and longer on weekends. I'm very frustrated.... and thinking of moving. Your planning needs a better plan .... 50 Never, ever build in the southwest hills, or near preservation areas. Limit building to housing, 8/29/2020 11:42 AM not entertainment venue. 51 No 8/29/2020 9:13 AM 52 No 8/29/2020 9:04 AM 53 There used to be more opportunities in buying a home that was a fixer upper. VA repos were 8/29/2020 7:31 AM affordable. Why is that not a program to be offered? 54 N/A 8/28/2020 10:29 PM 55 No comment. 8/28/2020 9:06 PM 56 no 8/28/2020 8:06 PM 57 My condo was built in 2005. I'm an original owner. Sloppy construction, no oversight and 8/28/2020 7:39 PM shoddy electrical work. Another area of concern is the lack of oversight of HOA Property Management Firms. Their charges to HOA's are aligned with THEIR desires, not owners within the HOA. Please address this lack of oversight as property owners are their clients. Thank you for seeking our input. 58 Thank you for reaching out to find out the needs of the surrounding communities. We visit and 8/28/2020 6:44 PM sop in your area. Attend your functions as well. 59 My concern is about the traffic issues when more homes are built. Is the traffic issue also part 8/28/2020 6:35 PM of this program? 60 Please let me know if there are any programs to purchase homes 8/28/2020 6:11 PM 61 Please get some sort of rent control in temecula, especially for seniors 8/28/2020 6:01 PM 62 Do not start building lower -income type housing in Temecula. There are other areas where 8/28/2020 5:23 PM lower -income families can go. As much as I hate to say it, lower -income families bring in more crime and depreciation to hard working succesful families dreams. I wish it would not be this way but these are the facts. 63 low income housing shouldn't be just for emergency needs. Ive tried everywhere and only 8/28/2020 3:50 PM found about 4-6 in the neighborhood. 64 no 8/28/2020 3:48 PM 65 More affordable housing for all. 8/28/2020 2:37 PM 66 property taxes are very high and this prevents lower income folks from buying 8/28/2020 2:29 PM 67 We need to have more homes build for single parents who have very limited income through 8/28/2020 2:19 PM Habitat for Humanity and the area 68 Have loved living in Temecula. Would not like to see great changes to the current General 8/28/2020 2:02 PM Plan or Housing Element. 69 Builders that are building in the area are pricing the new homes were not many people can 8/28/2020 2:00 PM afford. This includes more taxes and hoa paid by seniors at summers bend new communities. Hoa and taxes for 55 older adults are $300 and 1.79taxes. Younger than 55 pay $200 hoa and 1.7 taxes. Is this fair for seniors? Harold Stewart 9512901808 70 There's not a lot for seniors to do here. The senior center is only for low income folks and their 8/28/2020 1:55 PM day trips are to the library. Huh? I Think it's important to keep older citizens active and engaged in the community. This is a young family city. 71 Seniors do not have enough income to afford utilities. There should be a better program for 8/28/2020 1:54 PM this. This is for my parents and not for me. 72 1 live in perris and I am in the housing list 8/28/2020 1:44 PM 73 People like / need to feel safe. 8/28/2020 1:43 PM 44/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 97 98 NA 8/28/2020 1:32 PM Trying to past legislature that encourages millennial's to pursue owning a home in Temecula. 8/28/2020 1:23 PM The homeless population continues to grow in Temecula, creating unsafe environments in 8/28/2020 8:09 AM some areas. I am not comfortable allowing my teenagers to go to some areas of the city. Tax rates and the fact that I could get a larger, nicer house for less money kept me from 8/28/2020 6:04 AM buying in Temecula and sent me to French Valley. Some areas are priced high to keep minorities out. Lack of information on home loans for 8/27/2020 10:16 PM minorities. The apartment prequalifications are too high. Can afford rent, but having to make 2.5 times 8/27/2020 6:49 PM rent in salary is too much None 8/27/2020 2:00 PM Temecula is pushing out the middle class because of housing costs 8/27/2020 1:23 PM I'm concerned about city maintaining safety and keeping police of Temecula 8/27/2020 1:53 AM I would like to see the city offer some kind of insensitive to homeowners to prune their palm 8/26/2020 8:05 PM trees. No 8/26/2020 7:43 PM It has gone downhill since we lived here 2000-2010. Now 2016-present. Police aren't keeping 8/25/2020 12:26 AM things together, so many houses, a lot of cars. It's grown, in a bad way. Nothing to do and no longer perfect for a family. None 8/24/2020 8:52 PM We understand that is is a very nice area but the lack of a rent increase cap is hurting families. 8/24/2020 8:25 PM Please consider a rent increase cap to keep families who live and work here from having to relocate. The housing for sale and rental are way too expensive 8/24/2020 3:14 PM Adult autism housing 8/24/2020 3:12 PM We have too many homeless people along Temecula Parkway. They need to be relocated. 8/24/2020 2:50 PM I don't believe there should be any more low income housing in Temecula. If you need more 8/24/2020 1:02 PM money from the feds then you should figure out how to do a better job and quit spending our money. More resources for affordable housing need to be made available and also on the City Website 8/24/2020 12:38 PM You allow too many housing projects off major streets that are already difficult to drive on, 8/24/2020 10:16 AM because of traffic. One example is the building on Rancho California between Margarita & Ynez. Also, the unbelievable building along Butterfield, north of Rancho California. More traffic problems . It's quite obvious to me that the conservative leadership in Temecula doesn't work for all of the Temecula residents, but when "following the money", we can all see who is benefiting and who isn't. There is enough low income housing we want homeowners and people that are employed to be 8/24/2020 1:12 AM attracted to our community. They contribute their resources to build our communities. They are stakeholders and the backbone or all excellent cities. Temecula housing programs and strategies must be colorblind and open to all Americans 8/24/2020 12:30 AM regardless of race, creed, national origin, etc., while also promoting economic efficiency and free and open markets. It seems that we do have adequate low income housing in the city. Single family 8/23/2020 5:53 PM homeownership provides a stake in the community. Employed person's with resources make their lives here and contribute financially to support the cities businesses, medical facilities in a way that promotes positive growth for all. We feel discriminated in getting a loan from the lander or landlord. 8/22/2020 7:01 AM I would like to See More Homes/Apartments available for the PHYSICALLY disabled! The city 8/22/2020 5:30 AM 45/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey of Temecula has 55+ Communities which is great for those in need of it ... I STRONGLY believe that people who are PHYSICALLY disabled should be included in those communities 99 Please stop building anymore homes. We have over crowding here in the Temecula Valley and 8/21/2020 1:15 PM Everyone I talks to wishes that you would bring in more Jobs! Our streets are over crowded and Traffic is a Nightmare! 100 Maybe it will be different because of working remote for white collar workers but I lived in 8/21/2020 12:17 PM temecula and commuted to carlsbad/San Diego/riverside since 2001 and the last 3 years were torture it would take 30 mins to even hop on Rancho cal at 530am. There are no jobs here. I grew up here, I'm nearing 40, 1 have an mba and I love temecula but I have no kids. I'm here for now due to covid but given the choice between buying a big house in temecula with all my friends married and making fun of my life decisions (when are you getting settled down), i would rather live peacefully and simply in a small condo near the coast. The wine tourism is great here but it's hot, full of children. Keep temecula for FAMILIES not homeless or single people. We aren't your target market :) many of my friends with families are priced out of temecula and living in menifee. It feels like temecula is aging like me haha , my parents still live here and a lot of my friends from high school Parents also. I remember in the 90s heated discussions about apartments. We don't more apartments here the ones we have there are shootings at (Rancho cal just saying). I also don't know where the heck these homeless druggies are coming from it's been 10-15 years and it's disgusting to avoid the target Starbucks and vons because of fear of encountering a tweaker. 101 Everything about Temecula is great except the traffic. More housing means more people and 8/21/2020 8:29 AM more traffic. Please the importance of open spaces and the need for expanded roads and freeway on/off ramps when increasing housing. 102 The rent has gone up exponentially, so much so that people aren't able to maintain the cost of 8/21/2020 5:25 AM living in Temecula. 103 When housing prices increase, even with low interest, they're out of range of the average 8/21/2020 2:12 AM California worker, especially with the high property tax! 104 1 sincerely hope that this survey isn't use just to check a box, as a requirement to justify the 8/19/2020 9:57 PM Block Grants from state and federal. We need affordable housing. 105 Community College brings roommate situations that drive up rent for apartments and multi 8/19/2020 9:25 PM room homes - this hurts one income families 106 Yes. Temecula is overcrowded. Way too many apartments and condos. The city council was 8/19/2020 9:24 PM going the right direction with making it more of a destination or tourist town but now they want to ruin the natural beauty with more housing. There are areas north of Menifee that can take more housing and where new infrastructure can be built. Temecula is maxed out. 107 Stop building. This city is quickly becoming congested, leading to impatient drivers, increase 8/19/2020 8:39 PM littering and lack of care for the community. 108 Home prices have outpaced wages and the rental market has also doubled in price with a large 8/19/2020 5:37 PM amount of homes renting over $3000 and up. Lots of foreign investors buying up our market and setting rents very high. 109 no 8/19/2020 1:59 PM 110 Finding affordable housing for those who work and serve in the community is critical. Providing 8/19/2020 1:39 PM options for seniors to leave larger homes for affordable smaller and energy efficient homes is important for an aging population. 111 Need more mental health assistance for homeless. Need drug and alcohol programs for 8/19/2020 11:50 AM homeless outreach 112 The price range to buy a home in Temecula is expensive for a single parent 8/19/2020 11:36 AM 113 Not sure if this is the proper place but what is being done about the homeless population. In 8/19/2020 11:35 AM our short time of living in CA, especially in Temecula, I do not see an improvement with the homeless. They are still present in certain parts of town. There is so much land east of here, why can't shelters and a small community be built there? We pay so many taxes in CA but I'm having a hard time seeing where the money is going. 114 We need to have a system to accommodate low income and homeless persons. 8/19/2020 10:15 AM 46 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 115 People complain about our homeless population, yet we don't housing for them. I believe the 8/19/2020 10:02 AM City fears this would encourage and increase our homeless population, yet we must do something as, with the current economy, we will be seeing more and more homeless families. 116 Easy way to apply for FTB programs. It's hard to know which direction to go with no knowledge 8/19/2020 9:50 AM and I wish there would be a community resource that could help First time buyers who don't understand what to do. There are thousands of FTB in Temecula who need help but don't know where to go to. All my friends in their late 20's who are ready to buy in Temecula get intimidated by the pricing and not knowing all the info 117 1 respectfully ask for you to reconsider allowing us to go back to the short term rentals 8/19/2020 9:42 AM because its the only way that some of us can survive and pay our mortgages because we have sick or disabled family members that count on us. Without being able to rent rooms out on a short term basis when needed at least 3 people in my household would have to depend on county/city resources for housing and additional assistance. Thank you 118 1 have worked in Temecula for 15 years and have never been able to afford to purchase a 8/19/2020 8:36 AM home here. Always had to drive from cheaper cities. We need more affordable housing. 119 We have enough housing projects. We dont want homeless people here. 8/19/2020 7:57 AM 120 No 8/18/2020 7:47 PM 121 Please emphasize livability for residents over profitability for developers. Don't build 8/18/2020 4:19 PM apartments that look like prisons but cost as much as a home. More importantly please emphasize the issue isn't a housing shortage but an income shortage/affordability crisis. 122 I'd like information on housing programs to help first time home buyers with down payment 8/18/2020 3:11 PM options. 123 There's a lot of road rage here. A lot of bullying in schools (not currently for obvious reasons). 8/18/2020 2:01 PM And not enough police presence. Thank you. 124 Temecula, as a city, needs far more diversity. It doesn't feel or appear to include all races and 8/18/2020 1:17 PM individuals from various socio-economic backgrounds. It feels and appears to contain mostly White, affluent Republicans with racist beliefs and unfair practices towards minorities. This makes the housing situation biased and racially divided. 125 None 8/18/2020 10:02 AM 126 Remove the homeless 8/17/2020 9:01 PM 127 The safety of our neighborhood is in danger many, many robberies and car theft plus very low 8/17/2020 8:31 PM income trashy people taking the people's peace away due to section B. We cant wait to move away after 4 years in peace the last 2 has been horrible, with the tenants section 8 next door, drinking, smoking, fighting, sheriffs coming all the time etc. 128 Houses are very expensive in Temecula. Just because someone doesn't make a lot of money 8/17/2020 2:05 PM doesn't mean they are going to ruin the neighborhood. 129 Not at this time 8/17/2020 1:59 PM 130 Why not be more fair and balanced in your PSA's. We want facts not fear! 8/17/2020 11:14 AM 131 Please keep Temecula looking nice and clean. 8/17/2020 8:02 AM 132 1 would love a lower rental rate for my apartment in Old Town as I am turning 70 years old this 8/16/2020 9:59 PM month and would like to be able to have a little more money to enjoy my last years. I love Temecula and especially feel privileged to live in Old Town and in the same location for the last 14/15 years. 133 It is imperative that you not place low income housing next to family neighborhoods and 8/15/2020 12:59 AM schools. Studies show that Section 8 housing attracts drug use and other crimes and we don't want our children exposed to this type of environment. We would leave Temecula if the city does this. 134 Please help with the local homeless community in Old Town Temecula. I do not feel safe in the 8/14/2020 11:09 PM late evening when they are roaming around near my home. 135 The city needs to focus on providing affordable housing for its essential workers. People who 8/14/2020 4:21 PM work hard and are willing to pay a mortgage that meets their budget. 47/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 136 If you are going to build more buildings in old town temecula, then you need to make more 8/14/2020 3:39 PM parking garages or more available parking. It is extremely irritating to live in old town and not be able to park! 137 this is a good effort, thank you 8/13/2020 5:53 PM 138 It's ok to embrace slow growth 8/12/2020 9:58 AM 139 Not at this time. 8/12/2020 9:18 AM 140 Any plan must address the ingress and egress of commuters on 1-15. If the City isn't able to 8/12/2020 8:14 AM make changes to the freeway congestion, they shouldn't be adding to it with new housing. 141 We need very affordable housing and temporary, emergency housing to help the homeless 8/12/2020 6:15 AM 142 End better access to the freeway 8/11/2020 9:53 PM 143 Currently we need less housing and more commercial businesses like restaurants. Especially 8/11/2020 8:32 PM on Temecula parkway which lacks family friendly sit down restaurants. 144 Not a nimby but I would like any homeless to be directed away from public traffic. The duck 8/11/2020 5:54 PM pond has been an issue. 145 Allowing short term rentals within the city of temecula should be a priority for the city council. 8/11/2020 3:58 PM It helps improve tourism and allows home owners to create extra income and coup with the high cost of living Found in Temecula. 146 Would like to see either rents or mortgages at affordable rates for single mothers, single 8/11/2020 1:47 PM persons that can be able to affordable on single income. 147 As a special needs teacher in Temecula, my concern is two -fold: personal and professional. 8/10/2020 2:30 PM Personally, there are not options for a single teacher income for housing in Temecula. I don't qualify for low income housing and the regular prices of homes are too expensive, but I want to live in the community I work in. Unfortunately, this situation is pushing me to purchase further away from Temecula as I watch new homes being built in the $500K range around town. I would love to have an opportunity to stay in Temecula where my children grew up. Professionally, the students I serve are 18-22yo and many of them move out of the area to seek housing in areas who support the special needs community. Many of our families move here because of our special needs program in schools, but then what happens once they become adults? We need to continue to support them by offering more accessible home options for individuals with special needs that are close to public transit and the community needs (i.e. shopping, doctors, etc.). Our special needs population in Temecula continues to grow and we continue to support them as best we can, but we can do better by thinking long term. 148 You have no where for the homeless to get shelter or a place they can shower and eat hot food 8/10/2020 2:23 PM you really need to figure out how to help them. I think you should build or use an empty building to place the homeless and allow them to stay for a period of time to allow them to either get on their feet or place them in an apartment that they can afford. 149 Please oppose any state bills that take away single-family zoning, especially in these 8/10/2020 11:02 AM pandemic times. We need more open space, not less! 150 Temecula is over -crowded. The infrastructure cannot handle the population. We do not need 8/10/2020 7:20 AM any new housing to be built. It will only add to the congestion. 151 Adding ADU 's to existing homes create off street parking problems with streets lines with 8/9/2020 9:43 PM cars. 152 Working through city permit process for an ADU and it is arduous. So far the city is not being 8/9/2020 5:09 PM helpful and is quite disappointing. 153 More open space/parks/hiking trails/Agriculture. Would like to see more dedicated bike trails. 8/9/2020 1:14 PM Less high density - leads to more traffic and less happiness. 154 It takes too long to build and govt fees are contributing factor in increase costs. Stop cherry 8/9/2020 10:17 AM picking your friends. Why does Corona Family seek to rezone their property for Residential, but sue/demand EIR for adjacent housing tract on BFS and Tern Pkwy. The politics of valley are damaging the community. 48/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 155 No 8/8/2020 10:02 PM 156 All homes/apartments must be for homeowners or long term renters. No short term rentals as 8/8/2020 3:14 PM they take away from the infrastructure of Temecula. 157 We love Temecula. Please maintain quality of life and keep the area "low crime.". The only 8/8/2020 1:17 PM drawback is California leftest politics and primarily a single party state which may drive us out of the state 158 We have plenty of apartments - There is a lack of single story single family homes. 8/8/2020 9:21 AM 159 N/a 8/7/2020 10:38 PM 160 No more housing!! 8/7/2020 9:28 PM 161 No 8/7/2020 1:17 PM 162 1 think seniors need affordable housing most in this area. There are plenty of rentals for 8/7/2020 8:24 AM younger people. 163 More one story housing needed for us getting closer to empty nesting and seniors and for 8/7/2020 4:46 AM young families starting out. Affordable. Program fo make it more affordable. Homeless -hell support programs to get homeless off the street and into housing and also a program that San Diego has- a free bus ticket home if it can be verified they have friend or family who will house them at that location. 164 My hope is that the City will continue to develop Temecula's remaining land carefully as we 8/6/2020 5:34 PM approach build -out, with an eye for quality (at every price point) and inclusion. 165 Homeowners who are about to retire but cannot afford their homes need a nice choice of low 8/6/2020 4:29 PM income homes. Families who make under 50,000k need places to afford. 166 Please help with housing affordability. 8/6/2020 4:11 PM 167 Please keep some open spaces , so far this is a unique aspect to Temecula's relaxed and 8/6/2020 12:20 PM tourist environment. 168 Nothing additional 8/6/2020 8:19 AM 169 The traffic is already highly congested, creating not only pollution and safety issues- but 8/6/2020 8:17 AM concerns about expansion. Temecula needs to stop building before it becomes unrecognizable. With heavy traffic, people become agitated and stressed, and that is when it becomes dangerous for bikers, pedestrians, and we see higher amounts of traffic accidents. Let's keep Temecula safe and preserve the beauty 170 1 feel that developers will build homes that they can sell. So demand will encourage the 8/6/2020 7:44 AM construction of whatever homes are needed. 171 More mixed use so shopping isn't only at each end of town 8/5/2020 8:57 PM 172 We need to make sure the infrastructure is in place prior to building more housing. The traffic 8/5/2020 8:51 PM is one of the biggest negatives to our city, and I think that is fueled by the continued development without the infrastructure to support it. I do appreciate all the projects that are in the works on the freeway but the side streets are just as bad 173 Not every family has a dual income or high income. But those families live and work in 8/5/2020 2:51 PM Temecula and would like to buy a home. Think about the people who are different then you. 174 Please, no more apartments and limit the number of new housing developments 8/5/2020 2:18 PM 175 M 8/5/2020 2:10 PM 176 There needs to be more bike trails that enable people to ride a bike anywhere they want to go 8/5/2020 1:22 PM including the wineries and old town 177 Please no more massive developments of single family homes! 8/5/2020 12:08 PM 178 Not at this time 8/5/2020 10:47 AM 179 We should be promoting diversity of our community and providing more affordable housing. 8/5/2020 10:19 AM 180 There are too many homes in Temecula. Let's focus on our schools which have seemed to go 8/5/2020 10:06 AM 49/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey down the past few years. 181 Please do not build anymore housing, at least right now. Communities that grow too fast fall 8/5/2020 10:05 AM fast and I do not want that for Temecula 182 If you're going to build anymore new housing, PLEASE require larger backyards and houses 8/4/2020 5:04 PM that are further apart from each other. 183 Slow the growth - it's great where it is and will not be great if it keeps growing 8/4/2020 12:35 PM 184 I chose the French Valley area rather then Temecula because I got more bang for my buck. 1 8/4/2020 7:42 AM got a larger nicer house for a lot less and my taxes were lower. 185 Building new houses without upgrading and connecting existing roads, better freeway access 8/4/2020 3:23 AM and new thoroughfares will increase the traffic, which already is a miserable situation. It might just be what makes us move away from our beloved city of 27 years. 186 Homes are so overpriced including inflation of mortgages and property taxes. Would be nice to 8/4/2020 1:05 AM have a few homes that can be considered starter homes that are not in the high $300k. 187 No 8/3/2020 8:14 PM 188 If the city continues to build affordable housing in temecula, the city will go down hill and end 8/3/2020 5:55 PM up just like Riverside. 189 New single detached homes that are less than $500k and with an actual front / back yard for 8/3/2020 5:55 PM our kids to grow up don't exist. Right now my family is forced to pay over $600k for a new house within the Temecula School system, or $500k for a house that's even close to a very basic 2,000sgft floor plan. Otherwise, we are stuck with condos plagued with $300 HOAs (Rancho Soleo) and no parking. My family and I make over $130k without including any overtime at our jobs and we are forced to buy a very used 2006 house stuck in a neighborhood where each house is less than 10 feet apart. We have no privacy. How is this possible? 190 Please deal with traffic before every empty lot of land is developed with new houses. Amount 8/3/2020 5:20 PM of Houses on butterfield is crazy. When kids graduate we are out of here 191 Stop building and over crowding Temecula!! The traffic and amount of people here is awful!! 8/3/2020 3:24 PM 192 Please keep temecula a beautiful safe city . Please don't make it city like (busy) w a lot of 8/3/2020 2:45 PM apartments 193 Stop building master planes tract homes on 1/3 acre each and build some mixed use housing! 8/2/2020 5:25 PM The city has known they're deficient in housing for low to middle income earners for 10 years - do something about it already!! 194 Need more long term buyer attractive neighborhoods -that is, houses that have space between 8/2/2020 2:11 PM them and aren't shoved up right next to each other. 195 affordable single story housing that is not in the 55 and older community so that adults can 8/2/2020 1:09 PM share housing with young adult children 196 The city needs more affordable housing options 8/2/2020 12:14 PM 197 No thanks 8/2/2020 11:09 AM 198 1 think the new housing projects are moving too quickly, without concern for our roads & 8/2/2020 10:58 AM highways, which are in horrific condition. I have been trying for over a year to get SOMEONE to take responsibility for a 2-mile section of Pauba Rd., where this road (not a county owned road), is a "2-mile accident waiting to happen". Everyone I have talked to, has passed the buck! The government of Temecula is doing a lousy job, with representation being the major problem. Haven't been able to read the housing update; but you put it in the middle of this questionnaire, which doesn't make sense. We need better governance in Temecula. Too many representatives continue to be elected, yet do NOTHING to help Temecula prosper, just taking salaries & sitting on their duffs! 199 Would love to see more shelters especially for families. Also we need to see transitional 8/2/2020 9:37 AM housing for individuals with addiction and mental health issues. See too many homeless on the streetcar living in their cars on a daily basis. An increase in affordable housing for working people. Cannot gauge them with rent. Has to align with what the minimum wage is allowing them to spend. 50 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 200 There needs to be affordable housing in Temecula. It is not right to have your current grocery 8/2/2020 8:55 AM store workers working at a location near you but have no place for them to live in that city. 201 Clean up our dry creeks and rid them from trash and homelessness 8/1/2020 10:54 AM 202 1 understand that the City of Temecula is a family town and that is fantastic. However, it 8/1/2020 9:52 AM seems like Temecula has focused on creating very large 2 story houses for families. I believe Temecula needs to have smaller detached single family homes available. Not all families need or can afford such large homes. Smaller 3 bed two bath home at 1500-1800 square feet should be available. Additionally, the city should also consider adding in more condominiums. Thank you. 203 In five to eight years will be looking to downsize to a senior community seems most are in 8/1/2020 8:11 AM Murrietta. But prefer to live in Temecula 204 More affordable 55 and over homes are needed in Temecula 8/1/2020 6:57 AM 205 The cost of housing lacks diversity. There are no single family detached rental homes priced at 7/31/2020 7:24 PM appropriate levels for middle to low income families. 206 Please do NOT repeal prop 13 & raise property taxes even higher ! Please provide more 7/31/2020 5:59 PM affordable housing for young folks ages 20-40 working in Temecula who cannot afford to rent apartment of their own. Thank You 207 Keep a clean, friendly and safe community for all to enjoy 7/31/2020 5:46 PM 208 We definitely don't need any more apartments or condominiums. Traffic is terrible in our area. 1 7/31/2020 5:20 PM would also love to see more wide-open space type of parks. 209 The greatness of Temecula is its small size, quality of life and semi -rural character. Don't keep 7/31/2020 5:01 PM growing it with more housing! Then it turns into an urban center and I move away! 210 The city's zoning ordinance is designed to prevent the construction of inexpensive multifamily 7/31/2020 4:49 PM housing. This means that living in Temecula is going to continue to become more expensive than it already is. 211 Homeless shelters are definitely more needed now more than ever as well as keeping a 7/31/2020 3:50 PM balance of nature and not building more homes that people can't afford. 212 Really tired of rows and rows of cookie cutter homes! Get creative and sustainable! 7/31/2020 2:59 PM 213 The build out of Temecula has already exceeded the original plans. The lack of mass transit or 7/31/2020 2:54 PM additional freeway lanes means NO MORE HOUSING!!!!!!!!!! 214 I'd like priority for affordable active senior resident- owned housing - senior mobile home parks 7/31/2020 2:43 PM and 55+ resident owned homes. Resident owned mobile home space, not rented land space. And senior communities similar to The Colony in Murrieta, and The Knolls mobile home park in Murrieta. Not apartments - houses or mobile homes. 215 The other part of the housing equation is the job market —living in Temecula is less appealing 7/31/2020 2:17 PM when you have to drive an hour to find career -track jobs for college educated individuals outside of the retail/hospitality/tourism industries. 216 Don't over build!!! 7/31/2020 12:12 PM 217 -Limit STR's -Limit ADW's to those with onsite parking. 7/31/2020 11:49 AM 218 It would be nice to have additional new single family homes for the influx of new residents, but 7/31/2020 11:09 AM it needs to be paired with continued improvement to infrastructure and roads. 219 Please don't turn our city into an area of dispear . Don't allow homeless to over take the area 7/31/2020 9:38 AM as they are already doing to our shopping centers. Give owners options of rental property and Airbnb . 220 Let's continue to keep temecula clean and nice , keep homeless off the streets.find a solution 7/31/2020 9:26 AM for the people who protest at the duck pond . Was driving by with my kids and two people were fighting yelling and cussing at each other . NOT GOOD 221 Please no more building! Traffic is already out of control. 7/31/2020 8:02 AM 222 1 worry about how many new builds are going in well East of the 15 without developing anything 7/31/2020 6:47 AM 51/76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey that will ease the strain they will put on working families traveling to jobs. The housing I see most often targets young families due to large home sizes, which assumes more than likely two working parents. That's two more cars on the road. As someone who lives between a lot of these new builds and the freeway access, I worry that a difficult commute will become seriously worse as time progresses. I take some responsibility as I too commute to SD County for work, but only to Fallbrook, so about as close to Temecula as you can get. Most days I need to plan an hour for a drive that should take 25 minutes and the writing on the wall says it's only going to get more congested with the addition of neighborhoods like Sommers Bend when there isn't a reasonable alternative for getting north or south. 223 Housing/ rent pricing caused by investors buying up property in bulk and renting out. It's 7/30/2020 11:20 PM driving up costs and lowering the quality of inventory. 224 no 7/30/2020 10:33 PM 225 There are ppl who work really hard to provide a nice and safe environment for their families 7/30/2020 9:19 PM even when they can barely afford to. I work two jobs and it's still not enough. If I work here I should be able to live comfortably without having to stress about being a good parent or a working single mom who tries everything possible to put in quality time to produce a productive citizen while working 12-16 hours days sometimes 7 days a week. 226 People who work in Temecula should be able to live in Temecula. New housing projects should 7/30/2020 8:55 PM have lower -income subsidies so they can own as well. 227 Stop building. Buy land and turn it into parks. The problem is the Jeni is already out of the bag 7/30/2020 7:25 PM for Temecula. Traffic and crime are here to stay 228 We need more affordable housing options for lower income families 7/30/2020 7:18 PM 229 As someone who works in a position that often interacts with the homeless population in this 7/30/2020 7:08 PM city, I can firmly say that this city desperately needs to address homelessness in Temecula better and with more respect. Many homeless patrons that I have heard from say that they do not feel that there is nearly enough city resources to help support them and get them back on their feet. They also often complain that they don't feel respected, seen, or heard by the city and that is a major issue that Temecula needs to grapple with. Redirecting that funding toward social resources and programs would make a tremendous difference in our community. Also, the cost of housing (rent, buying a house, etc.) is FAR too high in this area. Neither I or my boyfriend would be able to afford our rent and living expenses on a monthly basis if one of us lost our income for any reason, and we live in what is considered one of the "cheapest" apartments in the city). This is a terrifying concern that needs to be promptly addressed, especially considering the hardships brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. Thankfully my boyfriend and I have been getting our steady income during this time but we were initially horrified at the start of all of this when we were unsure if we'd be keeping our jobs and be getting paid during this trying time. 230 There should be a housing program in the market for couples, without "forcing" them to live in 7/30/2020 6:10 PM a house with 3-4 rooms when they need just 1-2. 231 1 would like to be able to afford to live. 7/30/2020 6:08 PM 232 As a single mother I can say it's almost impossible for me to find something in Temecula 7/30/2020 5:51 PM where I would feel safe raising my son. It's daunting to feel that way. 233 1 have worked in Temecula for 10 years but cannot afford to live in this city. I am a single 7/30/2020 5:43 PM mother of 3 with a good paying job. I would benefit from an affordable housing element. I contribute to this city and should be able to live here as well. 234 1 accepted a job in Temecula at the beginning of the year and moved here for it. Then, we all 7/30/2020 5:10 PM were hit with Covid-19. I am highly interested in understanding the real estate market in the area as that I've noticed many homes going on MLS; I'm interested in as to why so many homes for sale. 235 Current infrastructure is strained to meet current housing levels. After watching Los Angeles 7/30/2020 5:09 PM and Orange Counties basically negatively impact the quality of life by overbuilding, the main reason for our move to Temecula was a better quality of life with limited growth at the time. Since moving here, we have seen the population growth negatively impact quality of life but from an economic view, it has been a positive. The challenge is to balance the growth while maintaining quality. 52 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 236 We love Temecula! However it is way too populated and too many residences being built. The 7/30/2020 5:09 PM infrastructure cannot handle what we have now! Very frustrating. All we hear are sirens anymore from emergency and/or police. It's sad when you live w miles from somewhere and it takes 15 to 20 minutes to get there. Stop building. There is enough population and tourist business to sustain the city. 237 We need less housing developments! Especially ones where the homes are so so close 7/30/2020 4:57 PM together with no yard. 238 Think about single mothers, lower income essential employees and the children whom are part 7/30/2020 4:33 PM of those families. This isn't about handouts, it's about the need for smaller practical homeownership options. 239 My son and his new wife wanted to move here from college in Irvine, but the one condo we 7/30/2020 3:49 PM found in their price range got 16 offers on it the first day. They were very discouraged at the lack of options, and will continue renting for the foreseeable future. 240 We need affordable single family homes for people who work blue collar jobs and low -paying 7/30/2020 3:20 PM white collar jobs in Temecula 241 The city of Temecula needs to work to create nice homes and neighborhoods for low income 7/30/2020 2:58 PM essential workers who work in Temecula. The apartments currently affordable to Temecula's low income earners are horribly inadequate. Stop building half a million+ $$ single family neighborhoods and think about our low income residents. 242 I'm currently renting and taking amenities away it's frustrating because of COVID 19,1 pay a lot 7/30/2020 2:42 PM of money for renting. 243 Smaller starter homes instead of McMansions are needed 7/30/2020 2:36 PM 244 Building AFFORDABLE Housing for all age groups and particularly for those who work in the 7/30/2020 2:35 PM service industries. Today's housing market is expensive and prejudicial. 245 Please open more affordable low income senior housing . 7/30/2020 2:28 PM 246 Not just low income, up and coming income. Kids who grew up here need to get a foothold in 7/30/2020 1:39 PM or near the community 247 No 7/30/2020 1:37 PM 248 1 have lived here since the 80's. I will most likely not be able to stay here in retirement due to 7/30/2020 1:36 PM housing costs (and lack of physicians). This is not a senior friendly town unless one is very well off. 249 Coming from an undesirable neighborhood before moving to Temecula , I worry bringing more 7/30/2020 1:30 PM apartments or " lower income" housing will devalue our neighborhood and bring in more crime. I saved and bought my home here because the city was safe and clean, I am concerned it will become more in lines of where I moved away from if more apartments and condos are built 250 Stop building apartments, condos and HUD housing. GET RID OF THE DRUG ADDICTS 7/30/2020 1:18 PM LIVING ON OUR STREETS. I'll take my tax money elsewhere. 251 Yes, please stop building homes. There is nothing attractive about a community with endless 7/30/2020 12:23 PM neighborhoods of cookie -cutter homes. The northern Inland Empire region is an example of the crime and pollution increase that results from not leaving any open space for recreation, parks, etc. Despite Temecula having several public amenities, there is a significant lack of public trails systems - I'm not talking about dirt paths through cookie -cutter neighborhoods - I'm talking about trail systems like Meadowview, or those in open, natural spaces that give our community members a sense of connection to nature. My family is currently not purchasing a home in Temecula because we are waiting to see if the City continues to flood every open space with a development, or if they change their approach to develop a balance community. Rehabilitate existing shopping centers, create consistency in building architecture, improve trail systems and stop thinking that growth is the only way to run a City. As a Civil Engineer, I am extremely troubled by the fact that City's do not understand the negative impact of growth to local pollution, congested roadways and natural open spaces. Increased tax revenue from residential housing is not valuable long-term to a community. Temecula is literally the last haven in the IE, and it looks like it will be a pain to live in at the current rate of growth. Improve local businesses to stimulate your economy to truly make this a tourist destination. Please!!! 53 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 252 1 am very, very concerned about the rash of bills coming from Sacramento that push upzoning 6/8/2020 11:25 AM and high -density housing on all communities in the state. Please resist these bills with every tool you have. Nobody wants their existing neighborhood upended. Local cities should be able to decide for themselves the type of housing they need and allow. 253 Temecula does not need any more single family detached homes. There are plenty of single 6/2/2020 4:41 PM family homes. 254 The NUMBER #1 concern is traffic on the freeway. Before any more units are built, the State 5/28/2020 10:43 AM needs to adequately fund infrastructure in the area. The area has grown tons in the last 30 years. Before more units are built, we need infrastructure. Also, the state should not tell cities that they must build more units, or change zoning. It is called local government for a reason. Sacramento needs to stop over ruling the wishes of communities. 255 no 4/14/2020 3:32 PM 54 / 76 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q16 If desired, please leave your name and email address to receive email updates, meeting announcements, and information on the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update. Note: Emails will solely be used for the purpose of dispersing information related to the Housing Element Update and will not be shared or used for any other purpose. Answered:244 Skipped:618 ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES First Name: 98.36% 240 Last Name: 96.72% 236 Email: 97.13% 237 Note: Answers redacted for privacy. 55 / 76 Appendix C- Part 1 Q1 Do you live and/or work in the City of Temecula? Answered:644 Skipped:55 Q6: Own Q6: Rent QE othe Q6: Live in Temecula SWorkinTemecula 0 Live AND work in Temecula Retired in Temecula LIVE IN WORK IN LIVE AND WORK IN RETIRED IN TOTAL TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA Q6: Own (A) 29.37% 0.000/0 47.08% 23.54% 71.89% 136 0 218 109 463 Q6: Rent (B) 24.05% 0.000/0 53.16% 22.78% 24.53% 38 0 84 36 158 Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor 27.27% 0.00% 50.00% 22.73% 3.42% rent) (C) 6 0 11 5 22 Q6: Currently homeless (D) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.16% 0 0 0 1 1 Total Respondents 180 0 313 151 644 IF YOU LIVE SOMEWHERE OTHER THAN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, WHERE DO YOU TOTAL LIVE? Q6: Own (A) 0 0 Q6: Rent (B) 0 0 Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor rent) 0 0 (C) Q6: Currently homeless (D) 0 0 1/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q6:OWN DATE 1 Murrieta 9/16/2020 9:32 AM 2 Murrieta 9/16/2020 9:21 AM 3 unincorporated county/retired 9/16/2020 9:10 AM 4 Murrieta 9/15/2020 2:08 PM 5 Murrieta 9/15/2020 11:29 AM 6 San Diego own two rentals in Temecula 9/5/2020 3:28 PM 7 Wildomar 9/4/2020 3:33 PM 8 Murrieta 9/4/2020 3:05 PM 9 Murrieta 9/4/2020 3:05 PM 10 Winchester 8/31/2020 6:22 PM 11 Winchester, CA 8/31/2020 7:31 AM 12 Wildomar 8/31/2020 12:13 AM 13 Fallbrook 8/29/2020 9:10 AM 14 Outside of wine country Winchester 8/28/2020 9:35 PM 15 Temecula in Wine County 8/28/2020 9:32 PM 16 1 live in the Wine Country unincorporated area 8/28/2020 1:58 PM 17 Menifee 8/28/2020 1:56 PM 18 Menifee 8/28/2020 1:50 PM 19 1 am filling this out for my parents who are retired. 8/28/2020 1:43 PM 20 Menifee. I am always down in Temecula, originally wanted to live there. 8/28/2020 1:29 PM 21 Murrieta 8/28/2020 1:12 PM 22 Murrieta 8/28/2020 1:07 PM 23 Murrieta 8/24/2020 1:09 PM 24 French Valley 8/17/2020 11:06 AM 25 We just moved away 8/12/2020 9:17 AM 26 Murrieta 8/10/2020 7:15 AM 27 Lived in Temecula for years and may move back -have many friends there so my info is relevant. 8/7/2020 4:40 AM 28 Fallbrook 8/6/2020 11:42 PM 29 Winchester, CA 8/6/2020 8:43 AM 30 1 live in Temecula, partly telecommute and partly work within 40 minutes of here 8/5/2020 8:46 PM 31 Lake Elsinore 8/3/2020 6:13 PM 32 TEMECULA WINE COUNTRY 8/3/20204:31 PM 33 Riverside 8/3/20204:07 PM 34 San Juan Capistrano 8/2/2020 11:05 AM 35 Meadowview 7/31/2020 2:10 PM 36 Just outside of city limits toward wine country 7/31/2020 7:56 AM 37 Murrieta 7/30/2020 5:49 PM 38 Near Pachanga 7/30/2020 5:19 PM 39 Riverside County -Wine Country 7/30/2020 2:32 PM 2/57 # Q6: RENT 1 Hemet 2 Murrieta 3 Murrieta 4 Moreno Valley 5 Sun City 6 Menifee 7 Riverside 8 Los angeles 9 Menifee 10 1 live in the city of Perris 11 28500 Pujol Street #44 12 Menifee City of Temecula Housing Element Survey DATE 9/16/2020 9:07 AM 9/15/2020 11:43 AM 8/29/2020 11:57 PM 8/29/2020 2:11 PM 8/28/2020 8:21 PM 8/28/2020 6:36 PM 13 1 would like to move to the city of Temecula 14 Murrieta 15 Murrieta 16 Menifee 17 Murrieta 18 Menifee 19 1 am in the process is moving to Temecula from San Diego 20 Anza # Q6: LIVE WITH OTHER HOUSEHOLD (NEITHER OWN NOR RENT) 1 Perris 2 San Diego 3 Santa Clara # Q6: CURRENTLY HOMELESS 1 Menifee 8/28/2020 5:26 PM 8/28/2020 3:52 PM 8/28/2020 1:28 PM 8/28/2020 1:24 PM 8/28/2020 1:19 PM 8/28/2020 1:14 PM 8/28/2020 1:08 PM 8/17/2020 8:17 PM 8/2/2020 2:06 PM 8/1/2020 6:50 AM 7/30/2020 6:05 PM 7/30/2020 6:03 PM 7/30/2020 1:08 PM 5/18/2020 8:46 AM DATE 8/28/2020 1:31 PM 8/22/2020 6:56 AM 7/29/2020 1:55 PM DATE 7/30/2020 8:34 PM 3/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey QE othe Q6: Q6: Own (A) Q6: Rent (B) Q2 How long have you lived in the City of Temecula? Answered: 690 Skipped: 9 Q6: Own 9.8°° 1.97°° 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 0-2 Years 2-5 Years 5-10 Years 10 + Years 0-2 YEARS 25 YEARS 5-10 YEARS 10 + YEARS TOTAL 9.13% 11.97% 14.60% 64.30% 71.45% 45 59 72 317 493 B B B B 18.13% 19.30% 21.05% 41.52% 24.78% 31 33 36 71 171 A A A A Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor rent) (C) 29.17% 8.33% 8.33% 54.17% 7 2 2 13 Q6: Currently homeless (D) Total Respondents 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 50.00% 1 0 0 1 84 94 110 402 24 0.29% 2 690 4/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q3 Which of the following housing upgrades or expansions have you considered making on your home? Answered:683 Skipped:16 Q6: Own 0 8 148 69 6 56 78 89 Q6: Rent Q6: Live other hou. Q6: Currently 2 homeless 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Room addition 0 Roofing 0 HVAC 0 Painting E Solar Accessory Dwelling unit 0 Does not apply. 0 other (please specify) ROOM ROOFING HVAC PAINTING SOLAR ACCESSORY DOES OTHER TOTAL ADDITION DWELLING NOT (PLEASE UNIT APPLY. SPECIFY) Q6: Own (A) 14.31% 16.77% 30.27% 55.01% 35.99% 11.45% 15.95% 18.20% 141.73% 70 82 148 269 176 56 78 89 968 B B B B B B B Q6: Rent (B) 3.59% 1.80% 2.99% 10.18% 7.19% 1.20% 79.64% 5.99% 27.53% 6 3 5 17 12 2 133 10 188 A A A A A A A Q6: Live with other household 4.00% 4.00% 0.00% 8.00% 8.00% 8.00% 68.00% 16.00% 4.25% (Neither own nor rent) (C) 1 1 0 2 2 2 17 4 29 Q6: Currently homeless (D) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.29% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Total Respondents 77 86 153 288 190 60 230 103 683 5/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q6:OWN DATE 1 Flooring 9/24/2020 6:56 PM 2 Lawn upgrade to drought tolerant rock 9/19/2020 12:13 PM 3 Flooring, plumbing, electrical 9/16/2020 9:27 AM 4 Flooring, plumbing, electrical 9/16/2020 8:56 AM 5 new flooring, landscaping 9/15/2020 10:18 AM 6 repair support beam in garage 9/15/2020 9:58 AM 7 Kitchen and bathroom upgrades replace fencing 9/6/2020 2:54 PM 8 LANDSCAPING..plumbing, windows etc.. 9/5/2020 1:03 PM 9 all ready done 9/5/2020 8:46 AM 10 Whole house fan in the attic 9/5/2020 7:08 AM 11 Pool 9/4/2020 3:41 PM 12 Kitchen, bath, landscaping 9/4/2020 3:30 PM 13 Flooring 9/4/2020 3:25 PM 14 pool 9/4/2020 3:05 PM 15 Whole house fan 8/31/2020 4:27 PM 16 Installation and soundproofing 8/31/2020 1:12 PM 17 Tankless water heater & new windows 8/30/2020 10:34 PM 18 Windows. Interior doors. 8/30/2020 9:53 PM 19 Windows 8/30/2020 4:15 PM 20 Upgrading bathrooms 8/30/2020 8:44 AM 21 Water heater 8/29/2020 8:41 PM 22 Pool 8/29/2020 4:44 PM 23 Fencing 8/29/2020 2:54 PM 24 Renovate/upgrade 8/29/2020 9:00 AM 25 Windows and kitchen 8/29/2020 12:22 AM 26 Driveway 8/28/2020 9:34 PM 27 Energy efficient appliances 8/28/2020 7:31 PM 28 Pool equipment, plumbing, appliances. 8/28/2020 6:40 PM 29 Landscaping 8/28/2020 6:07 PM 30 New flooring and upgraded bathrooms 8/28/2020 5:50 PM 31 Major Interior Remodel 8/28/2020 3:05 PM 32 Did an addition considering others. 8/28/2020 1:53 PM 33 Air purifier systems 8/28/2020 1:52 PM 34 Making the stairs from the front and back door a ramp. 8/28/2020 1:46 PM 35 All of the above have been done during my time here 8/28/2020 1:40 PM 36 Tree removal/ service 8/28/2020 2:28 AM 37 Remodel interior 8/27/2020 7:13 PM 38 Water Heater, bathroom remodel, new floors 8/27/2020 5:54 PM 39 A bunch of stuff 8/27/2020 1:52 PM 40 Cracks on walls 8/26/2020 7:59 PM 41 Kitchen and bathroom remodel, carpet and other flooring 8/26/2020 6:05 PM 42 Kitchen upgrade 8/24/2020 10:05 AM 43 Updating our whole home 8/21/2020 1:06 PM 44 rain gutter, patio cover and land scaping 8/21/2020 11:46 AM 45 New flooring and kitchen renewal 8/19/2020 1:35 PM 46 Remodeling staircase 8/19/2020 12:05 PM 47 flooring 8/19/2020 9:55 AM 48 1 also need to be able to rent two of my rooms out to people here on vacation to help me pay for my mortgage. I'm 8/19/2020 9:29 AM a single mom, but I can't do that right now because the city stopped letting us 49 pool & landscaping 8/17/2020 11:07 AM 50 bathroom remodel, whole house fan 8/15/2020 12:51 AM 51 Interior Remodeling of Bathrooms/ Upgrade Floors 8/12/2020 4:29 PM 52 Pool 8/11/2020 3:52 PM 53 Patio cover 8/10/2020 10:59 AM 6/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 54 Remodel kitchen 55 Add another garage 56 Kitchen remodel 57 Pool 58 Want single story. 59 interior remodeling 60 New windows. 61 Garage 62 Pool remodel 63 Interior remodel 64 Garage door replacement/garage reno 65 Windows, doors 66 Windows 67 Pool/spa 68 Kitchen and bathroom upgrades 69 Pool 70 Kitchen remodel 71 New flooring and countertops 72 Pool 73 Full renovations 74 pool; remodel; flooring 75 Bathroom remodel 76 Downsize 77 Pool 78 Bathroom upgrades 79 Driveway expansion 80 Patio Cover 81 General interior updates due to age of home 82 Kitchen and bathroom renovations 83 Pool 84 Bathtub install downstairs 85 Kitchen & bathroom renovation 86 Pool and landscaping. 87 Patio cover 88 Flooring, window coverings, patio cover 89 General replacement of outdated aspects of our home # Q6: RENT 1 Pool 2 Windows 3 Shelves in the kitchen 4 Looking to purchase in temecula 5 Renting but want solar on MF affordable housing Riverbank with SOMAH program 6 1 currently rent, so no additions. 7 Moving to Temecula 8/9/2020 6:39 AM 8/8/2020 6:30 PM 8/8/2020 3:09 PM 8/7/2020 2:18 PM 8/6/2020 9:56 PM 8/6/2020 5:18 PM 8/6/20204:21 PM 8/5/2020 9:44 PM 8/5/2020 12:05 PM 8/5/2020 10:51 AM 8/5/2020 10:43 AM 8/4/2020 12:50 AM 8/3/2020 10:06 PM 8/3/2020 6:17 PM 8/3/2020 5:52 PM 8/3/2020 4:17 PM 8/3/2020 2:42 PM 8/3/2020 1:56 PM 8/3/2020 1:21 PM 8/2/2020 5:23 PM 8/2/2020 5:16 PM 8/2/2020 11:07 AM 7/31/2020 5:48 PM 7/31/2020 5:17 PM 7/31/2020 3:32 PM 7/31/2020 2:05 PM 7/31/2020 8:54 AM 7/31/2020 6:39 AM 7/31/2020 1:13 AM 7/30/2020 10:47 PM 7/30/2020 9:31 PM 7/30/2020 8:09 PM 7/30/2020 5:23 PM 7/30/2020 1:18 PM 6/8/2020 11:14 AM 6/2/2020 4:38 PM DATE 8/31/2020 11:09 AM 8/30/2020 2:53 PM 8/28/2020 8:25 PM 8/28/2020 1:29 PM 8/28/2020 1:21 PM 8/18/2020 138 PM 8/1/2020 6:52 AM 8 1 Rent. It's not affordable for me to buy here although I work and live this community 7/30/2020 9:07 PM 9 I'm a renter. Would love to own. 7/30/2020 2:32 PM 10 None 7/30/2020 1:21 PM # Q6: LIVE WITH OTHER HOUSEHOLD (NEITHER OWN NOR RENT) DATE 1 Additional studio/kitchenette 9/28/2020 4:23 PM 2 I'm renting 9/16/2020 9:13 AM 3 Buying 8/25/2020 7:21 AM 4 1 would like to see aprtment complexes have Solar. I would like to see Temecula stop building anything further. 8/24/2020 5:11 PM # Q6: CURRENTLY HOMELESS DATE There are no responses. 7/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q4 How would you rate the physical condition of the residence you live in? Answered:695 Skipped:4 Q6: Own 11.27%d 62% :M= Q6: Rent 1 Q6:Live wit 0.00°0 6.00°° 8.00°°8.00°° other househ. Q6: Currently homeless 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Excellent condition Shows signs of deferred maintenance (i.e., peeling paint, chipped stucco, etc.) Needs modest rehabilitation improvements (i.e., new roof, new wood siding, etc.) Needs major upgrades (i.e., new foundation, new plumbing, new electrical, etc.) Other (please specify) EXCELLENT SHOWS SIGNS OF NEEDS MODEST NEEDS MAJOR UPGRADES OTHER TOTAL CONDITION DEFERRED MAINTENANCE REHABILITATION (I.E., NEW FOUNDATION, (PLEASE (I.E., PEELING PAINT, IMPROVEMENTS (I.E., NEW NEW PLUMBING, NEW SPECIFY) CHIPPED STUCCO, ETC.) ROOF, NEW WOOD SIDING, ELECTRICAL, ETC.) ETC.) Q6: Own (A) 39.84% 44.87% 11.27% 2.62% 1.41% 71.51% 198 223 56 13 7 497 B B B Q6: Rent (B) 16.37% 51.46% 15.79% 11.110/0 5.26% 24.60% 28 88 27 19 9 171 A A A Q6: Live with 20.000/b 48.00% 16.00% 8.00% 8.00% 3.60% other household 5 12 4 2 2 25 (Neither own nor rent) (C) Q6: Currently 0.000/0 50.000/0 0.00% 50.00% 0.000/0 0.29% homeless (D) 0 1 0 1 0 2 Total 231 324 87 35 18 695 Respondents # Q6: OWN DATE 1 Good condition- well maintained 9/16/2020 9:11 AM 2 Good condition for a 20+ year old 9/6/2020 2:54 PM 3 Fencing 8/28/2020 3:45 PM 4 Excellent for a 32 year old tract home. 8/26/2020 6:52 PM 5 fence is falling down, hasn't been painted since 1998 so the wood trim is falling apart 8/19/2020 9:29 AM 6 House was well kept modern 8/12/2020 9:19 AM 7 Inside needs upgrades 8/8/2020 3:09 PM 8/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q6: RENT DATE 1 Apartment 9/3/2020 6:12 PM 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 I rent an apartment 8/29/2020 11:58 PM Need pest control. Found 2 big dead rat. 8/28/2020 8:25 PM I live in an apartment 8/28/2020 1:40 PM Doesnt apply 8/28/2020 1:09 PM An apt. So maintenance is done by management. 8/19/2020 10:58 PM Apartment in good condition, but aging 8/12/2020 10:57 AM Decent 7/30/2020 9:07 PM Not currently living in Temecula 7/30/2020 1:09 PM Q6: LIVE WITH OTHER HOUSEHOLD (NEITHER OWN NOR RENT) DATE The aprtment I visit in Temecula is way too small and way pricey. Remodlers need to come in and make to or three 8/24/2020 5:11 PM apartment into one. Then, they need to take your over 50 empty commercial buildings and make them into apartment for the homeless do not live here 7/29/2020 1:57 PM Q6: CURRENTLY HOMELESS DATE There are no responses. 9/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q5 Why have you chosen to live in Temecula? (Select all that apply) Answered:696 Skipped:3 Q6: ow 10 200 142 9 68 131 65 65 Q6: Rent 519376557&491 11 Q6: Live wit 11. other househ.. �I Q6: Currently 1� homeless 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1.2k 1.4k 1.6k 1.8k 2k 0 Proximity to job/work 0 Quality of housing stock Local recreational amenities and scenery 0 Proximity to family and/or friends Affordability 0 Quality of local school system 0 Safety of neighborhood City services and programs Proximity to shopping and services, including Old Town Temecula Other (please specify) PROXIMITY QUALITY LOCAL PROXIMITY AFFORDABILITY QUALITY SAFETY OF CITY PROXIMITY OTHER TO OF RECREATIONAL TO FAMILY OF NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES TO (PLEASE JOBIWORK HOUSING AMENITIES AND/OR LOCAL AND SHOPPING SPECIFY STOCK AND SCENERY FRIENDS SCHOOL PROGRAMS AND SYSTEM SERVICES, INCLUDING OLD TOWN TEMECULA Q6: Own (A) 27.62% 29.44% 40.32% 28.63% 59.88% 53.02% 64.72% 26.41% 33.27% 13.100/ 137 146 200 142 297 263 321 131 165 6! B B BC B Q6: Rent (B) 32.95% 16.76% 32.95% 37.57% 32.95% 41.04% 54.91% 28.32% 36.99% 9.830/ 57 29 57 65 57 71 95 49 64 1-. A A AC A C Q6: Live with 24.00% 4.00% other 6 1 household (Neither own nor rent) (C) Q6: 0.00% 0.00% Currently 0 0 homeless (D) Total 200 176 262 Respondents 16.00% 60.00% 4 15 AB 50.00% 50.00% 1 1 223 360 24.00% 32.00% 40.00% 12.00% 8.00% 28.000/ 6 8 10 3 2 B AE 0.00% 100.00% 50.00% 50.00% 50.00% 0.000/ 0 2 1 1 1 1 344 427 184 232 89 10/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q6:OWN DATE 1 wine country and balloon views 9/24/2020 4:43 PM 2 Charter Schools with Academy Based Learning 9/24/2020 11:09 AM 3 For retirement 9/16/2020 9:32 AM 4 The weather 9/16/2020 9:28 AM 5 Retirement 9/16/2020 9:21 AM 6 moved to area for schools/ affordable living 9/16/2020 9:11 AM 7 No comment 9/16/2020 9:05 AM 8 The weather 9/16/2020 9:03 AM 9 moved here 30 years ago-- too crowded now. Looking to move away. 9/15/2020 12:02 PM 10 1 came to CA to take care of my mother and wanted SoCal because of the weather. 9/15/2020 10:18 AM 11 love this town.... especially the city employees and caps 9/5/2020 1:03 PM 12 herh scince 1977 9/5/2020 8:46 AM 13 Wine Country 9/5/2020 6:58 AM 14 Lived here 32 years its a great place to live. 9/4/2020 5:09 PM 15 Wineries 9/4/2020 3:41 PM 16 1 don't live in Temecula 9/4/2020 3:34 PM 17 10 years ago it was more affordable however now it is not so much 9/4/2020 3:30 PM 18 My husband lives here 9/4/2020 3:15 PM 19 Ive live here for almost 50 years. 9/4/2020 3:05 PM 20 Weather 8/31/2020 1:12 PM 21 Divine direction 8/31/2020 12:15 AM 22 School Ratings 8/30/2020 4:15 PM 23 Not too crowded 8/30/2020 12:12 PM 24 We love Temecula 8/29/2020 9:11 AM 25 Quality of living, somewhat peaceful but beginning to show signs of the demise of peaceful existence... building 8/29/2020 8:43 AM more dwellings BEFORE making roads to handle the traffic you're bringing in 26 Purchased property in 1977 built a home 8/28/2020 9:37 PM 27 Good Air Quality 8/28/2020 6:17 PM 28 i do not live in Temecula, but have in the past 8/28/2020 1:58 PM 29 Gated communities 8/28/2020 1:52 PM 30 Settled in 1977 working in the fields 8/28/2020 1:46 PM 31 Moved to help sister when she purchased a home in 1990 8/27/2020 7:13 PM 32 E 8/27/2020 5:44 AM 33 Moved here 32 years ago for a safe, family environment. 8/26/2020 6:52 PM 34 Came for the job, stayed for the city! 8/26/2020 6:24 PM 35 The number one reason we chose to live in Temecula is safety and beauty of the area 8/23/2020 5:40 PM 36 family friendly 8/22/2020 7:22 PM 37 Cost of living 8/21/2020 4:58 PM 38 Quality of life. 8/21/2020 1:59 PM 39 We fell in Love with the city 31 years ago and decided to live here and be close to our family that retired here 8/21/2020 1:06 PM 40 1994 affordability 8/19/2020 9:50 PM 41 Friendly HOA and neighbors 8/19/2020 1:35 PM 42 Centralized area 8/19/2020 11:44 AM 43 Job 8/19/2020 10:11 AM 44 small-town feel yet has all we need 8/19/2020 9:55 AM 45 1 moved here because its the only place I could afford to buy a home to raise my 3 children in as a single mother 8/19/2020 9:29 AM 46 Proximity to church/school 8/17/2020 7:58 AM 47 Conservative/Republican politicians and people 8/15/2020 12:51 AM 48 Overall quality of life 8/12/2020 4:29 PM 49 Originally came For those reasons, but we recently sold and left because of the homeless and other issues that are 8/12/2020 9:19 AM now playing in the city. 50 Temecula Hospital, Wine Country, Diverse Community 8/7/2020 2:18 PM 51 Good city leadership, spending priorities, and quality of life 8/6/2020 5:18 PM 52 Beautiful weather year round 8/5/2020 9:51 AM 11/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 53 Everything 8/3/2020 8:11 PM 54 We were tired of living in the Bay Area 8/3/2020 2:42 PM 55 Retired here because we had built-in friendships, we knew for years, relating to wine makers. 8/2/2020 10:38 AM 56 Family oriented city. 7/31/2020 11:46 AM 57 Moved here before all the building so for small town 7/30/2020 8:49 PM 58 Moved here 40 years ago to get away from the cream of the crud 7/30/2020 7:17 PM 59 Moved here over 20+ years ago because it was cheaper 7/30/2020 7:15 PM 60 Easy drive to the beach. 7/30/2020 5:23 PM 61 Quality of Life 7/30/2020 5:03 PM 62 Retired now but worked here for 25 years and commuted into Temecula. Finally able to move here and then retired. 7/30/2020 5:01 PM 63 Clean 7/30/2020 1:25 PM 64 Conservative policies and values 7/30/2020 1:13 PM 65 We could not afford to live in San Diego County when we were young working professionals in our early 30's 6/2/2020 4:38 PM # Q6: RENT DATE 1 Family 9/16/2020 9:37 AM 2 live with family 9/15/2020 11:57 AM 3 Close to my daughter 9/15/2020 11:45 AM 4 work close by 8/28/2020 6:37 PM 5 Family 8/25/2020 12:23 AM 6 More open space / less crowded than San Diego and LA 8/21/2020 8:19 AM 7 City values 8/21/2020 5:17 AM 8 Kids 8/19/2020 10:30 PM 9 Moved from out of state and chose family friendly area 8/18/2020 8:16 PM 10 Its barely affordable but more so than San diego. 8/17/2020 9:52 PM 11 Our church in Temecula 8/13/2020 11:56 PM 12 Wineries 8/11/2020 9:12 PM 13 Used to be affordability but that seems to be evening out a little with other counties 8/6/2020 11:25 AM 14 N/A 8/3/2020 11:19 PM 15 Beauty of city 8/2/2020 2:07 PM 16 Moved here when it was affordable and schools were good. 7/30/2020 6:06 PM 17 My hometown born and raised 7/30/2020 4:53 PM # Q6: LIVE WITH OTHER HOUSEHOLD (NEITHER OWN NOR RENT) DATE 1 1 live in Multiple Sites in South Western Riverside County. I want this over building and Traffic to stop now. With the 8/24/2020 5:11 PM hope of new City Council People we can No Growth. Repari what we have. Temecula has a 3 Billion Dollar Revenu and it needs to go to the structures that are already here and need solar and water efficiency 4 5 a 7 Economy... coved... living with parents Safest city and school ratings. Pricing goes up every year which sucks I didn't have a choice. I had to move in with family. Move back to childhood home Because I have for 30+ years not applicable Q6: CURRENTLY HOMELESS There are no responses. 8/21/2020 12:06 PM 8/19/2020 9:46 AM 8/18/2020 4:12 PM 8/7/2020 1:14 PM 7/31/2020 2:35 PM 7/29/2020 1:57 PM DATE 12/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q6: Own (A) Q6: Rent (B) Q6: Own Q6: Rent Q6: Live other hou Q6:C h Q6 Do you currently own or rent your home? Answered:699 Skipped:0 Own 0 Rent 0 Live with others 0 Currently homeless OWN RENT LIVE WITH OTHERS 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 497 0 0 B B 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0 175 0 A A Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor rent) (C) 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0 0 25 Q6: Currently homeless (D) Total Respondents 497 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 175 CURRENTLY HOMELESS TOTAL 0.00% 71.10% 0 497 0.00% 25.04% 0 175 0.00% 3.58% 0 25 0.00% 100.00% 0.29% 0 2 2 25 2 699 13/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q7 If you wish to own a home in Temecula but do not currently own one, what issues are preventing you from owning a home at this time? (Choose all that apply) Answered:190 Skipped:509 Q6: Own Q6: Rent 8 0 68 Q6: Live wit 82191 4; other househ. Q6: Currently homeless 0 100 200 300 400 50C No homes within price range No homes that suit my needs Do not have a down payment Do not have enough for mortgage payment No homes that fit quality standards I do not wish to own or rent a home in Temecula NO HOMES NO HOMES DO NOT DO NOT HAVE NO HOMES THAT I DO NOT WISH TO TOTAL WITHIN THAT SUIT HAVE A ENOUGH FOR FIT QUALITY OWN OR RENT A PRICE MY NEEDS DOWN MORTGAGE STANDARDS HOME IN TEMECULA RANGE PAYMENT PAYMENT Q6: Own (A) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.000/0 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q6: Rent (B) 58.54% 17.07% 63.41% 38.41% 6.71% 5.49% 163.68% 96 28 104 63 11 9 311 Q6: Live with other 75.00% 8.33% 79.17% 50.00% 16.67% 12.50% 30.53% household (Neither 18 2 19 12 4 3 58 own nor rent) (C) Q6: Currently 100.00% 100.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.000/b 0.00% 2.63% homeless (D) 2 2 1 0 0 0 5 Total Respondents 116 32 124 75 15 12 190 14/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q6: Own (A) Q6: Rent (B) Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor rent) (C) Q8 Select the type of housing that best describes your current home: Answered:588 Skipped: Ill QE othe Q6: 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Single Family Home (Detached) Accessory Dwelling Unit, Granny Flat, Guest House M Mobile Home Duplex/Attached Home M Multifamily Home (Apartment/Condominium) Currently without permanent shelter Mother (please specify) SINGLE ACCESSORY MOBILE DUPLEXIATTACHED MULTIFAMILY HOME CURRENTLY WITHOUT OTHER TOTAL FAMILY DWELLING HOME HOME (APARTMENT/CONDOMINIUM) PERMANENT (PLEASE HOME UNIT, SHELTER SPECIFY) (DETACHED) GRANNY FLAT, GUEST HOUSE 93.91% 0.23% 0.23% 2.11% 3.04% 0.00% 0.47% 72.620/c 401 1 1 9 13 0 2 427 B B B B B 47.89% 0.70% 2.11% 6.34% 38.73% 0.70% 3.52% 24.150A 68 1 3 9 55 1 5 142 A A A A A 70.59% 5.88% 0.00% 5.88% 17.65% 0.00% 0.00% 2.890/, 12 1 0 1 3 0 0 17 Q6: Currently homeless (D) Total 483 Respondents 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2 0 0 3 4 19 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.34% 0 0 0 0 2 71 1 7 588 # Q6: OWN 1 1 don't know 2 Detached condo # Q6: RENT 1 Apartment 2 Apartment 3 Section 8- Senior apartment complex 4 rental apartment 5 Very tiny single bedroom apartment # Q6: LIVE WITH OTHER HOUSEHOLD (NEITHER OWN NOR RENT) There are no responses. # Q6: CURRENTLY HOMELESS There are no responses. DATE 9/16/2020 9:19 AM 8/28/2020 2:32 AM DATE 9/15/2020 11:47 AM 9/15/2020 10:06 AM 9/15/2020 10:03 AM 8/30/2020 12:02 AM 7/30/2020 4:33 PM DATE DATE 15/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q6: Own (A) Q6: Rent (B) Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor rent) (C) Q9 Which of the following best describes your household type? Answered:588 Skipped: Ill Q6: Own 8.90°0 9.5 °o 0°0 2.34P/' S°o .8 °J67,0 'N Q6: Rent 8. 1°0 .6 °0 32.39% 12.68%a1.70P/S01o, 4?YoQ 1 -- Q6:Live wit .88°°7..6°0 5.88%11.76°0 .88°° .06°0 5.88°i48°o other househ. Q6: Currently 0 00°0 0 00°0 homeless 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Single person household M Couple 0 Couple with kids <18 Single parent with kids <18 E Non -parent with kids <18 Young adult living with parents 0 Multi -generational household Single with roommates 0 Couple with roommates 0 Other (please specify) SINGLE COUPLE COUPLE SINGLE NOW YOUNG MULTI- SINGLE COUPLE OTHER TOTA PERSON WITH PARENT PARENT WITH ADULT GENERATIONAL WITH WITH (PLEASE HOUSEHOLD KIDS WITH KIDS <18 LIVING HOUSEHOLD ROOMMATES ROOMMATES SPECIFY) <18 KIDS WITH <18 PARENTS 8.90% 29.51% 36.30% 2.340/b 1.41% 5.15% 9.84% 0.70% 0.23% 5.62% 72.6Z 38 126 155 10 6 22 42 3 1 24 4, B B B 18.31% 17.61% 32.39% 12.68% 0.70% 4.93% 6.34% 0.70% 0.00% 6.34% 24.15( 26 25 46 18 1 7 9 1 0 9 1z A A A 5.88% 11.76% 5.88% 11.76% 0.00% 5.88% 47.06% 5.88% 0.00% 5.88% 2.89( 1 2 1 2 0 1 8 1 0 1 1 Q6: Currently homeless (D) Total 66 Respondents 50.00% 0.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1 0 1 0 0 0 153 203 30 7 30 59 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.34( 0 0 0 0 5 1 34 5E 16/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q6: OWN Retired with Adult Disabled Son Couple with adult children over 18 Single mom with children in college 4 Single with adukt child 5 Adult with adult special needs son 6 Couple with children over 18 and under 18. 7 Single parent w/children over 18 8 Couple with adult child 9 couple with two adult children 10 married couple with two adult children living at home DATE 9/6/2020 7:14 AM 9/4/2020 3:36 PM 8/31/2020 3:46 PM 8/30/2020 5:04 PM 8/30/2020 11:27 AM 8/30/2020 12:32 AM 8/28/2020 5:23 PM 8/28/2020 2:41 PM 8/28/2020 2:37 PM 8/28/2020 2:02 PM 11 Couple with college age children who live here during summer and breaks 8/28/2020 1:09 PM 12 I'm head of household with an adult daughter that has epilepsy, two adult sons that have recently graduated from 8/19/2020 9:42 AM local universities and are living with me to pay off their student loans, and I am also a multi- generational household because My mom is living with us because she has cancer and is undergoing chemo 13 Empty Nesters with Occasional Stays by Children Over 18 8/12/2020 4:34 PM 14 Couple with children over 18 8/10/2020 3:46 PM 15 Couple w adult children 8/7/2020 9:28 PM 16 Couple with young adult child with intellectual disability 8/7/2020 5:07 AM 17 Soon to be single person with young adult over 18 lives at home. 8/6/2020 4:29 PM 18 Parents with two adult children (college age - 20/22) 8/5/2020 10:47 AM 19 Couple with 13 and 21 yr olds 8/4/2020 9:36 AM 20 single living with elderly mother 8/1/2020 8:11 AM 21 Single parent with children 18+ I'm surprised this wasn't an option 7/31/2020 2:17 PM 22 Single parent with child (21 years old) 7/31/2020 9:02 AM 23 Couple with child over 18 7/30/2020 8:55 PM 24 Couple with children under 18, 1 child 18 + live in boyfriend, roommate 7/30/2020 5:52 PM # Q6: RENT DATE 1 1 live with my daughter 9/15/2020 1:17 PM 2 Rent room 9/15/2020 10:13 AM 3 Single parent with child over 18 9/5/2020 10:07 PM 4 Couple living with adult child 8/28/2020 1:56 PM 5 my husband, 2daughters and myself 8/28/2020 1:44 PM 6 Mother/daughter birth adults 8/21/2020 9:57 PM 7 Couple with Multiple adult children 8/20/2020 12:36 AM 8 Single parent with young adult children 7/31/2020 7:02 AM 9 Single Parent with 18 year old Son 7/30/2020 9:19 PM # Q6: LIVE WITH OTHER HOUSEHOLD (NEITHER OWN NOR RENT) DATE 1 1 live with my daughter 9/16/2020 9:41 AM # Q6: CURRENTLY HOMELESS DATE There are no responses. 17/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q10 How satisfied are you with your current housing situation? Answered:588 Skipped: Ill Q6: Own 61. 6°° 2.08°° 6.09% Q6: Rent .49°° 23.94 % 16.20 % Qr Live wit 17.65% other househ. Q6: Currently 0 00°° 50.00°° homeless 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Q6: Own (A) Q6: Rent (B) Q6: Live with other household (Neither own Total Respondents I am very satisfied. M I am somewhat satisfied. 0 lam somewhat dissatisfied. I am dissatisfied. I AM VERY I AM SOMEWHAT I AM SOMEWHAT SATISFIED. SATISFIED. DISSATISFIED. 61.36% 32.08% 262 137 B B Q6: Own (A) Q6: Rent (B) Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor Q6: Currently homeless (D) 15.49% 44.37% 22 63 A A 11.76% 41.18% 2 7 50.00% 50.00% 1 1 6.09% 26 B 23.94"/° 34 A 17.65% 3 0.00% 0 I AM TOTAL DISSATISFIED. 0.47% 72.62% 2 427 B 287 208 63 30 IF YOU ANSWERED DISSATISFIED OR SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED PLEASE PROVIDE A REASON BELOW. 16.20% 24.15% 23 142 A 29.41% 2.89% 5 17 0.00% 0.34% 0 2 588 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Q6: OWN Renters disruptive behavior towards owners I am somewhat satisfied because golf balls from golf course continue to damage our house. I am unable to keep up with the repairs. want to move but higher taxes and low inventory make it hard Need a Special Needs Setting for son in future My property taxes are outrageous We need more tennis courts Home is too old and needs too much work. HOA fees are too high and not worth price paid. New homes by builders have too high of tax. HOA prices on the rise. Really wanted more garage space and bigger back yard but so few houses on the market we had to buy what was available Need larger home for mom with dementia and caregiver Need access to low income housing for inlaws who are currently living with me No HOA. Many ordinance/code violations in neighborhoods needs updated and repairs... can't afford to fix Traffic congestion is terrible on main arteries It's old, outdated, in need of significant updating and 16,000 sq ft of landscaping. I live in a neighborhood filled with renters and families who do not take care of their homes but this is the only area of temecula we could afford I would prefer that all homes have 3 car garages. I don't like living on a street lined with cars on both sides. I'd prefer seeing tree lined streets and curb appeal. House is too small Too much building everywhere and no sign of building for what we lack. AFFORDABLE HOUSING. Would consider larger home in lower density neighborhood We live in a working class neighborhood. We want homeowners and person's who are hardworking to remain in our neighborhoods. People who own seem more concerned with maintaining their homes and keeping the neighborhood safe and secure. We stand together as we live and work in a shared community. We support law enforcement in our neighborhood and across the city. Affordability in our city is absent; therefore we have multigenerational accommodations. I just need to be able to rent out rooms as short term rental so that I can afford to keep my house. If there was grant money to help me paint or make repairs before it got too bad that would help a lot too I would be very satisfied if I could move to a single story in the same neighborhood, there is a shortage of single story detached homes. Housing too dense. We can hear the neighbors breath Retired neea more space I wish I had a yard for my dogs and child Inadequate affordable housing catered to young adults Need to add an ADU. City staff seems to discourage them. Too many transients are starting to appear and crime is going up. New houses are either way too expensive or they come built in very tight condos/single detached homes that are only 10 feet apart. I make $130k a year and can't even buy a decent home with a yard. Too small and bad HOA Too many cars that screech & race at all hours of the day & night. We need some kind of control over this Expensive for age 65, need to downsize Pretty expensive would like to downsize but will end up with smaller house close to same price I would've preferred a one story, didn't plan it very well when we bought our home. DATE 9/15/2020 12:04 PM 9/15/2020 10:40 AM 9/10/2020 10:17 AM 9/6/2020 7:14 AM 9/5/2020 10:14 AM 9/4/2020 3:54 PM 9/4/2020 3:36 PM 9/4/2020 3:29 PM 8/31/2020 1:19 PM 8/30/2020 7:44 PM 8/29/2020 11:49 PM 8/29/2020 6:16 PM 8/29/2020 3:00 PM 8/29/2020 2:10 PM 8/28/2020 8:06 PM 8/28/2020 2:02 PM 8/27/2020 3:32 PM 8/24/2020 3:14 PM 8/24/2020 10:16 AM 8/24/2020 12:30 AM 8/23/2020 5:53 PM 8/19/2020 9:57 PM 8/19/2020 9:42 AM 8/12/2020 4:34 PM 8/9/2020 10:17 AM 8/6/2020 10:01 PM 8/6/2020 6:01 PM 8/6/2020 8:17 AM 8/6/2020 3:55 AM 8/5/2020 9:56 AM 8/3/2020 5:55 PM 8/3/2020 5:55 PM 8/3/2020 2:52 PM 8/2/2020 10:58 AM 7/31/2020 5:59 PM 7/30/2020 8:55 PM 7/30/2020 2:28 PM 19/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 44 45 1 2 3 Q6: RENT The condo we live in is too small and we are one rent increase away from getting priced out of the area Cost of rent Dissatisfied because 3 children living in house that always needs repairs Lessor does not take care of the rental property I live in DATE 9/26/2020 8:43 PM 9/15/2020 12:16 PM 9/15/2020 10:24 AM 8/31/2020 11:13 AM Small - needs upgrade. No yard 8/30/2020 12:24 PM I would like to own my own place. 8/30/2020 12:02 AM I prefer a larger house instead of a pricey rental apartment 8/29/2020 2:15 PM Rent increase forcing me to move out of area. 8/28/2020 6:44 PM We are on fixed incomes and they raise the rent about $70.00 each year. Where are we suppose to get the money 8/28/2020 6:01 PM Difficult to find something affordable for my daughter and I. 8/28/2020 3:50 PM I live in low income housing. There are so many rules that you can't get comfortable enough to make it feel like your 8/28/2020 1:56 PM home. I have a dream to have a home of my own that I can invite who I want over and stay as long as I want them to or paint a room or get a pet without having to get a drs note. my house needs a lot of fixing 8/28/2020 1:44 PM Many repairs are needed which my landlord ignores 8/28/2020 1:32 PM Need upgrading in electrical and plumbing 8/28/2020 1:18 PM Inadequate space and not disabled friendly. 8/27/2020 10:16 PM Want to move 8/25/2020 12:26 AM Our landlord increases our rent any time we ask her to fix anything, including this month, during the pandemic 8/24/2020 8:25 PM because our kitchen faucet was leaking. Rent is Ridiculously expensive Apt. Is dark, no sunlight. Want a house at a reasonable price Previous homeowner renting and want to buy again but prices are twice what they were 10 years ago can't afford housing 8/24/2020 12:38 PM 8/19/2020 11:04 PM 8/19/2020 9:25 PM 8/19/2020 5:37 PM 8/19/2020 9:39 AM Current living with a relative due to economic hardship and process of divorce 8/18/2020 3:11 PM Run down 8/18/2020 10:02 AM The property management is racist and have harrassed us many times. Neighbors are section 8 trashy people, 8/17/2020 8:31 PM drink and smoke every single day for the past 2 years, with small kids that they do not parent. It turned ourlives into misery. I live in a one bedroom with my daughter because I can't afford a two bedroom for us. 8/14/2020 11:09 PM 1 shared restroom for 2 bedroom residence 8/14/2020 5:38 PM Would like to own rather than waste so much money on rent 8/14/2020 4:21 PM No parking, unsatisfied with property manager 8/14/2020 3:39 PM Bothersome neibors 8/14/2020 1:16 PM We are currently in the process of negotiating the purchase our rental house 8/14/2020 12:02 AM I would love to be able to give my kids a home and a backyard 8/5/2020 10:19 AM Too far from work 8/4/2020 6:42 AM The house needs alot of updating and want to move away from the casino 8/2/2020 4:23 PM Not having enough personal space from people within the household as well as neighbors 8/2/2020 11:35 AM Expensive still. Rents gone from 1100 to 2000 in about 8 yrs 7/31/2020 10:26 PM Rent is too high for wages in the area 7/30/2020 11:20 PM I can't afford a 2 bedroom apartment. And I'd like a home where my son can have his own room 7/30/2020 9:19 PM Too small 7/30/2020 9:05 PM It's 800 square feet, things are falling apart. 7/30/2020 6:08 PM I would prefer to own, though the home prices for a single parent and single income is impossible with the current 7/30/2020 5:10 PM home prices, not to mention the property tax and HOA fees. Need more adequate space, storage for basic things like a bike of linens. An extra half bath, a dishwasher, washer 7/30/2020 4:33 PM and drier hookups so that I may purchase my own machines, an additional bedroom as there are two of us. Would like to own a home in a 55+ community. Single story under 400k. 7/30/2020 3:27 PM Every year my rent goes up. 7/30/2020 2:42 PM I am grateful to be living in a nice city but we are a family of 6 living in a 2 bedroom apartment. We need a house 7/30/2020 12:05 PM but rent is so expensive out here! Q6: LIVE WITH OTHER HOUSEHOLD (NEITHER OWN NOR RENT) DATE Want to get my own space 8/27/2020 6:49 PM Looking for my own home 8/20/2020 7:08 AM The homogenous zoning doesn't help but the issue isn't availability of housing but employers paying too little. 8/18/2020 4:19 PM 20 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q6:CURRENTLY HOMELESS There are no responses. DATE 21/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q11 What age range most accurately describes you? Answered:583 Skipped:116 Q6: Own =11 �65'334.12% 5.88%°� Q6: Rent Q6: Live other hou Q6:C h Q6: Own (A) Q6: Rent (B) Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor rent) (C) Q6: Currently homeless (D) Total Respondents 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% O Gen Z (0-23 years old) 0 Mille nial (24-39 years old) Generation X (40-55 years old) 0 (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 91 (Silent Generation) 75 + years old GEN Z (0-23 MILLENIAL (24-39 GENERATION X (40- (BABY BOOMERS) YEARS OLD) YEARS OLD) 55 YEARS OLD) 56-74 YEARS OLD 0.94% 21.41% 37.65% 34.12% 4 91 160 145 B B 2.16% 42.45% 30.94"/a 19.42% 3 59 43 27 A A 0.00% 64.71% 11.76% 11.76% 0 11 2 2 0.00% 0 7 163 100.00% 2 205 (SILENT GENERATION) TOTAL 75 + YEARS OLD 5.88% 72.90% 25 425 5.04% 23.84% 7 139 11.76% 2.92% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.34% 0 0 0 2 174 34 583 22 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q12 How important are the following concerns to you and your family? Answered: S88 Skipped: 111 Ensuring that children who grow up in Temecula can afford to live in Temecula. Q6: Own Q6: Rent 12.94. % S 11.35./03 % Q6: Live wit 6 23.53°0 5.88°.48°° other househ. Q6: Currently homeless 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% QE othe Q6: QE othe Q6: O Very Important 0 Somewhat Important NNotImportant Don't Know Create mixed -use (commercial/office and residential) projects in the community that e... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very Important M Somewhat Important NNotImportant Don't Know Ensure that the housing market in Temecula provides a diverse range of housing types,... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% M Very Important M Somewhat Important NNotImportant Don't Know 23/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Establish special needs housing for seniors, large families, veterans, and/or persons... QE othe Q6: QE othe Q6: QE othe Q6: 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very Important 0 Somewhat Important MNotlmportant Don't Know Integrate affordable housing throughout the community to create mixed -income neighbor.. Q6: Own .88°° 0.. 5°° 38.97% M. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very Important 0 Somewhat Important NNotImportant Don't Know Provide shelters and transitional housing for the homeless, along with services to he... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very Important 0 Somewhat Important NNotImportant Don't Know 24 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Encourage the rehabilitation of existing housing stock in older neighborhoods. QE othe Q6: QE othe Q6: Q6: Own `6►'8°° '0! ° 10.09.9/62% Q6: Own Q6: Rent Q6: Live wit otherhouseh. Q6: Currently homeless 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very Important 0 Somewhat Important MNotlmportant Don't Know Establish programs to help at -risk homeowners keep their homes, including mortgage lo... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% O Very Important M Somewhat Important NNotImportant Don't Know Fair/Equitable Housing opportunities and programs to help maintain and secure neighbo... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very Important 0 Somewhat Important NNotImportant Don't Know 25 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Ensuring that children who grow up in Temecula can afford to live in Temecula. VERY SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT Q6: Own (A) 52.94% 225 NOT IMPORTANT 32.47% 12.94% 138 55 DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED KNOW AVERAGE 1.65% 72.28% 7 425 1.63 Q6: Rent (B) 61.70% 24.82% 11.35% 2.13% 23.98% 87 35 16 3 141 1.54 Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor 64.71% 23.53% 5.88% 5.88% 2.89% rent) (C) 11 4 1 1 17 1.53 Q6: Currently homeless (D) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.34% 2 0 0 0 2 1.00 Create mixed -use (commercial/office and residential) projects in the community that encourage walkable neighborhoods and reduce dependency on automobiles. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q6: Own (A) 39.20% 36.15% 23.24% 1.41% 72.45% 167 154 99 6 426 1.87 Q6: Rent (B) 41.73% 38.85% 17.99% 1.44% 23.64% 58 54 25 2 139 1.79 Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor 41.18% 47.06% 11.76% 0.00% 2.89% rent) (C) 7 8 2 0 17 1.71 Q6: Currently homeless (D) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.34% 2 0 0 0 2 1.00 Ensure that the housing market in Temecula provides a diverse range of housing types, including single-family homes, townhomes, apartments, duplex/triplex and condominiums to meet the varied needs of local residents. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q6: Own (A) 37.56% 31.92% 29.11% 1.41% 72.45% 160 136 124 6 426 1.94 B B B Q6: Rent (B) 70.21% 17.02% 10.64% 2.13% 23.98% 99 24 15 3 141 1.45 A A A Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor 64.71% 23.53% 11.76% 0.00% 2.89% rent) (C) 11 4 2 0 17 1.47 Q6: Currently homeless (D) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.34% 2 0 0 0 2 1.00 Establish special needs housing for seniors, large families, veterans, and/or persons with disabilities. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q6: Own (A) 41.65% 40.71% 16.24% 1.41% 72.28% 177 173 69 6 425 1.77 B B Q6: Rent (B) 61.15% 33.09% 4.32% 1.44% 23.64% 85 46 6 2 139 1.46 A A Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor 52.94% 35.29% 11.76% 0.00% 2.89% rent) (C) 9 6 2 0 17 1.59 Q6: Currently homeless (D) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.34% 2 0 0 0 2 1.00 Integrate affordable housing throughout the community to create mixed -income neighborhoods. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q6: Own (A) 24.88% 30.75% 38.97% 5.40% 72.45% 106 131 166 23 426 2.25 B B B Q6: Rent (B) 63.12% 19.15% 15.60% 2.13% 23.98% 89 27 22 3 141 1.57 A A A Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor 64.71% 17.65% 11.76% 5.88% 2.89% rent) (C) 11 3 2 1 17 1.59 Q6: Currently homeless (D) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.17% 1 0 0 0 1 1.00 26 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Provide shelters and transitional housing for the homeless, along with services to help move people into permanent housing. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q6: Own (A) 31.53% 34.12% 28.94% 5.41% 72.28% 134 145 123 23 425 B B Q6: Rent (B) 43.57% 37.86% 10.71% 7.86% 23.81% 61 53 15 11 140 A A Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor 58.82% 41.18% 0.00% 0.00% 2.89% rent) (C) 10 7 0 0 17 Q6: Currently homeless (D) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.34% 2 0 0 0 2 Encourage the rehabilitation of existing housing stock in older neighborhoods. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q6: Own (A) 46.48% 40.61% 10.09% 2.82% 72.45% 198 173 43 12 426 Q6: Rent (B) 52.48% 36.88% 7.09% 3.55% 23.98% 74 52 10 5 141 Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor 47.06% 41.18% 5.88% 5.88% 2.89% rent) (C) 8 7 1 1 17 Q6: Currently homeless (D) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.34% 2 0 0 0 2 Establish programs to help at -risk homeowners keep their homes, including mortgage loan programs. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q6: Own (A) 41.37% 41.37% 13.95% 3.31% 71.94% 175 175 59 14 423 B B Q6: Rent (B) 53.57% 38.57% 5.00% 2.86% 23.81% 75 54 7 4 140 A A Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor 70.59% 29.41% 0.00% 0.00% 2.89% rent) (C) 12 5 0 0 17 Q6: Currently homeless (D) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.34% 2 0 0 0 2 Fair/Equitable Housing opportunities and programs to help maintain and secure neighborhoods that have suffered foreclosures. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q6: Own (A) 42.49% 38.73% 14.08% 4.69% 72.45% 181 165 60 20 426 B B Q6: Rent (B) 57.45% 33.33% 6.38% 2.84% 23.98% 81 47 9 4 141 A A Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor 58.82% 23.53% 11.76% 5.88% 2.89% rent) (C) 10 4 2 1 17 Q6: Currently homeless (D) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.34% 2 0 0 0 2 2.08 1.83 1.41 1.00 1.69 1.62 1.71 1.00 1.79 1.57 1.29 1.00 27/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q13 Do you feel that the different housing types in Temecula currently meet your housing needs? Answered:577 Skipped:122 QE othe Q6: Q6: Own (A) Q6: Rent (B) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Yes 0 No Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor rent) (C) Q6: Currently homeless (D) Total Respondents YES NO TOTAL 76.78% 23.22% 73.14% 324 98 422 B B 40.44% 59.56% 23.57% 55 81 136 A A 35.29% 64.71% 2.95% 6 11 17 50.00% 50.00% 0.35% 1 1 2 386 191 577 28 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q6: Own (A) Q6: Rent (B) Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor rent) (C) Q14 What types of housing are most needed in the City of Temecula? Answered:582 Skipped:117 QE othe Q6: 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 0 Single Family (Detached) 0 Duplex/Attached Housing Condominiums (multifamily ownership homes) Apartments (multifamily rental homes) ESeniorHousing Accessory Dwelling unit Housing for people with disabilities (Please specify in comment field below) 7 Other (please specify) SINGLE DUPLEXIATTACHED CONDOMINIUMS APARTMENTS SENIOR ACCESSORY HOUSING OTHER TOTAL FAMILY HOUSING (MULTIFAMILY (MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DWELLING FOR PEOPLE (PLEASE (DETACHED) OWNERSHIP RENTAL UNIT WITH SPECIFY) HOMES) HOMES) DISABILITIES (PLEASE SPECIFY IN COMMENT FIELD BELOW) 46.57% 16.55% 21.04% 9.69% 34.52% 9.22% 11.35% 24.35% 125.95% 197 70 89 41 146 39 48 103 733 B 51.43% 25.00% 28.57% 22.14% 36.43% 9.29% 16.43% 22.14% 50.86% 72 35 40 31 51 13 23 31 296 A 47.06% 41.18% 41.18% 23.53% 23.53% 5.88% 5.88% 23.53% 6.19% 8 7 7 4 4 1 1 4 36 Q6: Currently homeless (D) Total 278 Respondents 50.00% 1 113 50.00% 50.00% 50.00% 50.00% 50.00% 100.00% 50.00% 1.55% 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 9 137 77 202 54 74 139 582 29 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q6:OWN DATE 1 Low rent/homeless housing 9/24/2020 7:39 PM 2 Markets 9/16/2020 9:35 AM 3 Markets 9/16/2020 9:22 AM 4 No opinion 9/16/2020 9:19 AM 5 We don't need more traffic/horrible 9/16/2020 9:13 AM 6 or public financial assistance to make homes ADA compliant instead of building more structures to allow disabled 9/15/2020 10:40 AM persons to remain in their homes. 7 I'd rather see conversions rather than new builds 9/15/2020 10:20 AM 8 with washing machine and dryer 9/15/2020 10:10 AM 9 Group complex for Disabled Adult son needing financial support in Special Needs Trust 9/6/2020 7:14 AM 10 No more housing. We need a better infrastructure, more schools. Too many houses/ people to accommodate as it 9/5/2020 10:14 AM is. 11 We are so full right now, the only thing is duplex's and I'am against. 9/4/2020 7:08 PM 12 upscale 55 and older communities 9/4/2020 5:14 PM 13 No opinion 9/4/2020 4:15 PM 14 More Single Story Homes 9/4/2020 4:12 PM 15 T 8/31/2020 11:14 PM 16 Not sure 8/31/2020 9:44 PM 17 More affordable multi generation homes 8/30/2020 7:44 PM 18 None. Stop building! Traffic is horrible 8/30/2020 5:04 PM 19 None. I moved here from a similar town where I grew up. They quickly added apartments and multi use buildings 8/30/2020 12:22 PM and didn't plan for the increased traffic. 20 Need affordable apts for special needs 8/30/2020 11:27 AM 21 Low income senior housing 8/29/2020 11:49 PM 22 Permanent Supportive Housing 8/29/2020 7:16 PM 23 More multiuse property areas with reduced need for cars 8/28/2020 7:39 PM 24 No more housing. 8/28/2020 3:14 PM 25 affordable housing for all 8/28/2020 2:37 PM 26 Don't know 8/28/2020 2:02 PM 27 Don't know, why would you expect this kind of information from a survey 8/28/2020 1:43 PM 28 Single family 55+ homes. 8/28/2020 1:34 PM 29 low income housing opportunities 8/28/2020 1:21 PM 30 Housing for homeless 8/28/2020 1:11 PM 31 1 feel Temecula should stop expanding and stop building houses. The community is already too impacted with 8/28/2020 8:09 AM people, cars, etc. 32 1 am opposed to the new law that allows ADUs. I purchased my home for the view and privacy. An ADU next door 8/27/2020 3:32 PM would affect both and I would move if that happened. 33 AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR SIGLE MOM'S WITH CHILDREN TO LIVE NEAR WHERE THEY WORK. 8/24/2020 10:16 AM 34 Homes that are handicap accessible for elderly and for disabled veterans 8/24/2020 12:30 AM 35 1 feel that the city doesn't need anymore housing and we are already at capacity 8/21/2020 1:15 PM 36 affordable housing for working families, homeless who want to stay here 8/21/2020 11:38 AM 37 None. There are plenty of housing types already. Temecula is overcrowded as it is. Plenty of room to build north of 8/19/2020 9:24 PM Menifee. 38 None! No more new housing 8/19/2020 8:39 PM 39 Affordable housing for low income families. 8/19/2020 7:05 PM 40 Shelter 8/19/2020 5:15 PM 41 Senior single unit detached homes that are affordable and size appropriate for retirement and special care needs. 8/19/2020 1:39 PM Not high rise apartments! 42 Homeless 8/19/2020 10:15 AM 43 Low-cost housing for our very low-income and homeless population. 8/19/2020 10:02 AM 44 1 have a daughter with epilepsy and a son with a neurological condition, they will need housing if I die 8/19/2020 9:42 AM 45 We have enough! We need jobs 8/19/2020 7:57 AM 46 We do not want or need low income housing!!! Studies show that crime is increased in these areas making our 8/15/2020 12:59 AM children even more vulnerable! 47 No more homes needed. Too many now 8/12/2020 9:48 AM 48 No more development! The current infrastructure can't handle the existing traffic, much less additional families. 8/12/2020 8:14 AM 49 Stop building fix the off ramps 8/11/2020 9:53 PM 30 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 Mixed neighborhoods with groceries 8/11/2020 5:54 PM No housing with a supported/group management office for individuals with special needs. 8/10/2020 3:46 PM More single story. More affordable housing. 8/9/2020 10:17 AM NONE 8/7/2020 9:28 PM Habitat for Humanity type housing opportunities 8/7/2020 8:34 PM Don't know 8/7/2020 2:22 PM Small complexes of houses for co -housing, 8/7/2020 5:07 AM Nothing , stop building more homes we do not need more housing here 8/7/2020 5:01 AM more inclusive housing options like the upcoming Cypress Ridge townhomes on Pechanga Pkwy 8/6/2020 5:34 PM Sliding scale housing. 8/6/2020 4:29 PM single level homes for aging population 8/6/2020 8:46 AM Affordable rent 8/6/2020 7:35 AM More one story homes 8/5/2020 8:57 PM Autism 8/5/2020 8:51 PM None 8/5/2020 2:18 PM Do not want to change! Prefer single family homes. This is why we live in suburbs 8/5/2020 2:10 PM More single -story homes instead of two-story homes 8/5/2020 10:47 AM I don't know, not knowledgeable enough 8/5/2020 10:16 AM There are too many homes in Temecula. 8/5/2020 10:06 AM Please do not build any more houses! 8/5/2020 10:05 AM Senior housing that doesn't cost $3000/mo. Actively encourage ADU's. 8/5/2020 9:56 AM Single story 8/5/2020 9:40 AM no more needed 8/4/2020 12:35 PM Affordable workforce housing 8/4/2020 7:48 AM Mixed -use commercial on ground, residential on top, mid -rise buildings 8/4/2020 12:55 AM Less houses 8/3/2020 5:20 PM Temecula seem to have reached housing variety 8/3/2020 3:20 PM Affordable housing 8/2/2020 7:41 PM Permanent supportive housing 8/2/2020 11:45 AM Low income housing for single Moms, so the can live near where they work & can afford to live without their salaries 8/2/2020 10:58 AM beina spent on rent! I know of no Dlace in Temecula. life this for sinale parents. especially for sinale Moms. Small single family homes, not these gigantic 2 story 5 bedroom homes AFFORDABLE "Active" Senior 55+ Neighborhoods, AFFORDABLE Apartments, I feel there is enough assisted living Properties with larger lots The city is great as it is. It shouldn't keep growing bigger! Traffic's already getting heavy and stressful! None. The area can not handle any more traffic!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Smaller but still high quality homes (1200-1800 sgft) and homes with larger lot sizes. Newer stock seems to be mostly McMansions on postage stamp lots Single story homes We have too much traffic as it is. Dom need any more homes I feel there needs to be more options for single people, but not necessarily condiminiums as they usually come with large HOA costs. I would love to see neighborhoods of detached small homes with very low HOA fees that are accessible to lower income people. Senior communities (not apartment style but whole communities) and SINGLE STORY OPTIONS. My in-laws have been looking for four years and no luck because they are so rare to find in anything besides a tiny little rundown duplex. Workforce housing/ownership We had a great city until the city council got in be with developers. Lots of apartments ruin a city and require lots of service calls from police and fire. Welcome to temec=downey whittier Studio/loft/professional dwellings Lower income housing Affordable housing for lower income Homes for veteran and with physical disabilities Smaller single family homes Tiny homes that are affordable to low income people that work in Temecula Unsure. There appears to be enough housing, would hate to see it become overpopulated and turn into another congested city. 8/1/2020 9:52 AM 7/31/2020 5:59 PM 7/31/2020 5:20 PM 7/31/2020 5:01 PM 7/31/2020 2:54 PM 7/31/2020 2:17 PM 7/31/2020 2:15 PM 7/31/2020 12:28 PM 7/31/2020 8:36 AM 7/31/2020 6:47 AM 7/30/2020 8:55 PM 7/30/2020 7:25 PM 7/30/2020 7:15 PM 7/30/2020 5:54 PM 7/30/2020 5:26 PM 7/30/2020 3:31 PM 7/30/2020 3:20 PM 7/30/2020 2:58 PM 7/30/2020 2:44 PM 31/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 99 100 101 102 1 2 3 a 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 1 Affordable Senior homes - smaller single units near shopping centers, grocers, pharmacies, etc. 7/30/2020 2:35 PM Affordable to the kids who grew up here. 7/30/2020 1:39 PM None 7/30/2020 1:37 PM Larger lots for single-family homes. Developments are too tightly -packed. Where are the 10-15k square foot lots? 6/8/2020 11:25 AM It's either 5-7k square foot lots or multi -acre lots in De Luz/Wine Country. Very little in the middle. Permanent supportive housing 6/2/2020 4:41 PM Q6: RENT DATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLEASE 9/15/2020 12:16 PM Apartment that single people with children can afford 9/15/2020 10:24 AM Stroke and brain injury survivors 8/31/2020 11:13 AM Affordable housing for people not requiring Section 8 housing, though cannot afford high rent. 8/28/2020 6:44 PM Affordable housing 8/28/2020 6:01 PM Low income housing 8/28/2020 3:50 PM We need more house that low income people can buy!!!!! 8/28/2020 1:56 PM I have a daughter with a mental illness and it would be very good if we can get a house where we can live better 8/28/2020 1:44 PM Homes low -mid income families Could afford 8/28/2020 1:32 PM Affordable 8/27/2020 1:23 PM Close to shops, affordable. 8/25/2020 12:26 AM None it's great as is 8/24/2020 1:02 PM More affordable housing 8/21/2020 5:25 AM Most have 2-5year wait list for low income senior apts. 8/19/2020 11:04 PM Anything affordable 8/17/2020 9:55 PM Reasonably priced housing 8/17/2020 2:05 PM Low income housing 8/14/2020 11:09 PM live work play 8/14/2020 2:51 PM Affordable housing. SFR 8/11/2020 9:17 PM We need more affordable apartments / condos 8/6/2020 4:11 PM We like Temecula a lot, but we don't want to pick between a tiny apartment or an oversized (for us) giant home, 8/6/2020 8:19 AM regardless of what we can afford. There are very few modest homes ever available for people like us. Affordable housing 8/5/2020 10:19 AM We don't need anymore homes built. The infrastructure is not support mire homes 8/2/2020 4:23 PM Homes with ample space between them 8/1/2020 10:54 AM Low income home for single parent 7/31/2020 10:26 PM I like the mixed -use housing concept like in Old Town 7/31/2020 2:59 PM Provide more single story homes and condo/townhomes as single story 7/31/2020 2:13 PM Housing that's affordable, safe and nice like what you'd want to live 7/30/2020 9:19 PM Less rentals and more affordable homeownership 7/30/2020 4:33 PM Wheelchair accessible housing 7/30/2020 1:07 PM Low to moderate income affordable homes 7/30/2020 12:05 PM Q6: LIVE WITH OTHER HOUSEHOLD (NEITHER OWN NOR RENT) DATE Sorry I don't mean to be NIMBY but apartments and homeless populations can go be built in Murrieta or menifee. 8/21/2020 12:17 PM Designing these services will attract a different kind of demographic. No thanks. Single story homes for FTB 8/19/2020 9:50 AM Down -payments are hard 8/19/2020 8:19 AM Low income housing for single parents 8/3/2020 7:17 AM Q6: CURRENTLY HOMELESS DATE I feel that people with PHYSICAL disabilities should have the same access to the Same Communities as the 55+ 8/22/2020 5:30 AM do, Since most of us require the same amount of care if not more! I strongly feel that people with Physical Disabilities who desire to live Independently should be able to do so in a SAFE city like Temecula CA 32 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q15 Please remember to visit the website for more details on the Housing Element Update at the link below:https://temeculaca.gov/432/Housing-Element Are there any comments or concerns you would like to share with the City of Temecula relevant to the upcoming Housing Element Update? Answered: 228 Skipped:471 PLEASE REMEMBER TO VISIT THE WEBSITE FOR MORE DETAILS ON THE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE AT THE LINK TOTAL BELOW:HTTPS:IITEMECULACA.GOV/432/HOUSING-ELEMENT ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR CONCERNS YOU WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH THE CITY OF TEMECULA RELEVANT TO THE UPCOMING HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE? Q6: Own 100.00% 69.30% 158 158 Q6: Rent 100.00% 27.19% 62 62 Q6: Live with 100.00% 3.07% other household 7 7 (Neither own nor rent) Q6: Currently 100.00% 0.44% homeless 1 1 Total 228 228 Respondents 33/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q6: OWN Senior communities would be nice. Or else we may move Just want affordable housing for all income types. It would reduce homelessness and bring diversity to the city. It is disappointing to see zonings changed and other adjustments that are aimed to please the person(s) financially benefitting rather than thinking about the value in the original zoning as well as congestion and overloading the market. Please encourage low income senior housing as a priority. Can't afford computer! Why do you waste so much water and still have trees and plants but cut in half and only water public areas in early AM late PM The housing and property taxes here in Temecula are out of control. I believe it is designed to not integrate but segregate. Too much growth without infrastructure to support. Roads/traffic too heavy and maintenance not adequate to support the additional homes being built. Can the City require Redhawk Golf Club to implement ways to minimize or mitigate damage caused by errant golf balls to our houses (windows, stucco, patio, or even people being injured)? It's probably a matter of when, not if, I or a family members gets seriously injured by an errant golf ball. I have been hit by a golf ball in the back. Thankfully it did not land on my head. I now have to wear a hard hat every time I am in our back yard. Thank you for considering my input. I come from a state that passed legislation to preserve open space. I am dismayed by all the building here. Every new development means more traffic lights, more traffic, more students in the schools, and more importantly more water usage. No more apartments or section 8 Make it easier, faster and less expensive to develop new housing Stop building more houses until you have the schools and infrastructure to support the people already here. prices are out of control due to supply in demand.... Dedicated Bicycle and walking trails, more open space parks, more exits from freeway and road widening to accommodate traffic as housing/population increases. Make it easier to add an ADU. For example, provide (free!) the (approved!) architectural plans for 4-6 different ADUs. Rather than making each individual homeowner come up with their own (although that should still be an option) the city can just give out plans that meet all of their guidelines. I'm very concerned about a housings duplex I heard about west Temecula parkway by 1-15, adding more congestion and mining the beautiful hill side, that all Temecula's lave seeing. Retired people need more to do or they leave. Tennis Courts are extremely in need as are public places to Lap swim. Thank you for keeping Chs open for lap swim I think we need to do more to help get homeless of the street but what that looks like I am not sure. I do not want Temecula to turn into what LA, San Fran and Austin are seeing now. I believe in helping people get back on their feet and not in enabling them or making them rely on others. No You need to strongly consider the enormous tax assessments that are assessed to new homes. Even our home purchased in 2008 had unaffordable taxes. So we move to an older neighborhood within Temecula after 10 years because the taxes were out of control. 21 Avoid construction of multi -units or apartments that makes real estate prices go down and increases traffic in the area. 22 N/A 23 Don't allow section 8 housing to be grouped Together. Don't allow homeless to live rear river beds. Continue police force. 24 no 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 With the state, country, and world moving toward renewable energy -some HOAs in Temecula still do not allow solar on roofs. With the climate and typical yardscape here, solar installation on a roof just makes too much sense for the city and homeowners. Not too much reduce the stress on an overloaded power grid and reduce the risk of fires. The city should adopt a mandate that prevents HOAs from banning solar roofs. n/a Predatory mortgage collection companies should be outlawed. I didn't see any homeless when I moved to Temecula 15 years ago. Now, there are many homeless people. Many of them are young people. They need assistance. No Reinstate short term rentals. These are OUR homes. Let us capitalize on the tourist income since you built it and brought all the traffic with it. Don't be so eager to plan for new housing development. I realize that the City can make money off of it but it may lose the charm of a quiet country town. I'd like to see this money and effort go towards fire safety, homeless and drug rehab programs and centers. Need assisted living for special needs My inlaws have recently relocated from the East Coast to Temecula to be near family. They are in their 70's. While, I have them living with me for now, the intent was for them to find their own place in independent senior living. It is very disappointing that there is a 3 to 5 year wait list for low income senior housing in Temecula. There really needs to be more units available. I don'tthink that Ca should overrule CC&Rs allowing houses to run preschools in the middle of single housing tracts when businesses aren't allowed and we pay fees to maintain the CC&Rs. DATE 9/24/2020 1:44 PM 9/24/2020 1:11 PM 9/24/2020 11:21 AM 9/24/2020 11:14 AM 9/16/2020 9:13 AM 9/15/2020 2:55 PM 9/15/2020 1:55 PM 9/15/2020 10:40 AM 9/15/2020 10:20 AM 9/14/2020 10:21 PM 9/5/2020 6:40 PM 9/5/2020 10:14 AM 9/5/2020 7:12 AM 9/5/2020 7:05 AM 9/5/2020 12:01 AM 9/4/2020 7:08 PM 9/4/2020 3:54 PM 9/4/2020 3:49 PM 9/4/2020 3:36 PM 9/4/2020 3:36 PM 9/4/2020 3:29 PM 9/4/2020 3:11 PM 9/1/2020 10:24 AM 8/31/2020 11:14 PM 8/31/2020 9:44 PM 8/31/2020 7:33 AM 8/31/2020 12:20 AM 8/30/2020 11:30 PM 8/30/2020 9:55 PM 8/30/2020 5:04 PM :7101117 lrYlrZ`] 10aaL 8/30/2020 11:27 AM 8/29/2020 11:49 PM 8/29/2020 9:37 PM 34 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 35 None 8/29/2020 8:48 PM 36 Please adopt a by -right process for multifamily housing. 8/29/2020 7:16 PM 37 You keep building houses but yet the infrastructure such as highways East to West is terrible. Winchester for an 8/29/2020 2:10 PM example takes me 50 min to 70 minutes to get from business park drive to Murrieta hot springs Anytime from 3:30 To 6:30pm and longer on weekends. I'm very frustrated.... and thinking of moving. Your planning needs a better plan 38 Never, ever build in the southwest hills, or near preservation areas. Limit building to housing, not entertainment venue. 8/29/2020 11:42 AM 39 No 8/29/2020 9:13 AM 40 no 8/28/2020 8:06 PM 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 My condo was built in 2005. I'm an original owner. Sloppy construction, no oversight and shoddy electrical work. Another area of concern is the lack of oversight of HOA Property Management Firms. Their charges to HOA's are aligned with THEIR desires, not owners within the HOA. Please address this lack of oversight as property owners are their clients. Thank you for seeking our input. My concern is about the traffic issues when more homes are built. Is the traffic issue also part of this program? Do not start building lower -income type housing in Temecula. There are other areas where lower -income families can go. As much as I hate to say it, lower -income families bring in more crime and depreciation to hard working succesful families dreams. I wish it would not be this way but these are the facts. More affordable housing for all. Have loved living in Temecula. Would not like to see great changes to the current General- Plan or Housing Element. Builders that are building in the area are pricing the new homes were not many people can afford. This includes more taxes and hoa paid by seniors at summers bend new communities. Hoa and taxes for 55 older adults are $300 and 1.79taxes. Younger than 55 pay $200 hoa and 1.7 taxes. Is this fair for seniors? Harold Stewart 9512901808 There's not a lot for seniors to do here. The senior center is only for low income folks and their day trips are to the library. Huh? I Think it's important to keep older citizens active and engaged in the community. This is a young family city. Seniors do not have enough income to afford utilities. There should be a better program for this. This is for my parents and not for me. People like / need to feel safe. The homeless population continues to grow in Temecula, creating unsafe environments in some areas. I am not comfortable allowing my teenagers to go to some areas of the city. None I would like to see the city offer some kind of insensitive to homeowners to prune their palm trees. No None The housing for sale and rental are way too expensive We have too many homeless people along Temecula Parkway. They need to be relocated. You allow too many housing projects off major streets that are already difficult to drive on, because of traffic. One example is the building on Rancho California between Margarita & Ynez. Also, the unbelievable building along Butterfield, north of Rancho California. More traffic problems . It's quite obvious to me that the conservative leadership in Temecula doesn't work for all of the Temecula residents, but when "following the money", we can all see who is benefiting and who isn't. There is enough low income housing we want homeowners and people that are employed to be attracted to our community. They contribute their resources to build our communities. They are stakeholders and the backbone or all excellent cities. Temecula housing programs and strategies must be colorblind and open to all Americans regardless of race, creed, national origin, etc., while also promoting economic efficiency and free and open markets. It seems that we do have adequate low income housing in the city. Single family homeownership provides a stake in the community. Employed person's with resources make their lives here and contribute financially to support the cities businesses, medical facilities in away that promotes positive growth for all. Please stop building anymore homes. We have over crowding here in the Temecula Valley and Everyone I talks to wishes that you would bring in more Jobs! Our streets are over crowded and Traffic is a Nightmare! I sincerely hope that this survey isn't use just to check a box, as a requirement to justify the Block Grants from state and federal. We need affordable housing. Yes. Temecula is overcrowded. Way too many apartments and condos. The city council was going the right direction with making it more of a destination or tourist town but now they want to ruin the natural beauty with more housing. There are areas north of Menifee that can take more housing and where new infrastructure can be built. Temecula is maxed out. Stop building. This city is quickly becoming congested, leading to impatient drivers, increase littering and lack of care for the community. no Finding affordable housing for those who work and serve in the community is critical. Providing options for seniors to leave larger homes for affordable smaller and energy efficient homes is important for an aging population. Need more mental health assistance for homeless. Need drug and alcohol programs for homeless outreach Not sure if this is the proper place but what is being done about the homeless population. In our short time of living in CA, especially in Temecula, I do not see an improvement with the homeless. They are still present in certain parts of town. There is so much land east of here, why can'tshelters and a small community be built there? We pay so many taxes in CA but I'm having a hard time seeing where the money is going. 8/28/2020 7:39 PM 8/28/2020 6:35 PM 8/28/2020 5:23 PM 8/28/2020 2:37 PM 8/28/2020 2:02 PM 8/28/2020 2:00 PM 8/28/2020 1:55 PM 8/28/2020 1:54 PM 8/28/2020 1:43 PM 8/28/2020 8:09 AM 8/27/2020 2:00 PM 8/26/2020 8:05 PM 8/26/2020 7:43 PM 8/24/2020 8:52 PM 8/24/2020 3:14 PM 8/24/2020 2:50 PM 8/24/2020 10:16 AM 8/24/2020 1:12 AM 8/24/2020 12:30 AM 8/23/2020 5:53 PM 8/21/2020 1:15 PM 8/19/2020 9:57 PM 8/19/2020 9:24 PM 8/19/2020 8:39 PM 8/19/2020 1:59 PM 8/19/2020 1:39 PM 8/19/2020 11:50 AM 8/19/2020 11:35 AM 35 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 We need to have a system to accommodate low income and homeless persons. 8/19/2020 10:15 AM People complain about our homeless population, yet we don't housing for them. I believe the City fears this would 8/19/2020 10:02 AM encourage and increase our homeless population, yet we must do something as, with the current economy, we will be seeing more and more homeless families. I respectfully ask for you to reconsider allowing us to go back to the short term rentals because its the only way 8/19/2020 9:42 AM that some of us can survive and pay our mortgages because we have sick or disabled family members that count on us. Without being able to rent rooms out on a short term basis when needed at least 3 people in my household would have to depend on county/city resources for housing and additional assistance. Thank you We have enough housing projects. We dont want homeless people here. 8/19/2020 7:57 AM Remove the homeless 8/17/2020 9:01 PM Why not be more fair and balanced in your PSA's. We want facts not fear! 8/17/2020 11:14 AM Please keep Temecula looking nice and clean. 8/17/2020 8:02 AM It is imperative that you not place low income housing next to family neighborhoods and schools. Studies show that 8/15/2020 12:59 AM Section 8 housing attracts drug use and other crimes and we don't want our children exposed to this type of environment. We would leave Temecula if the city does this. It's ok to embrace slow growth 8/12/2020 9:58 AM Any plan must address the ingress and egress of commuters on 1-15. If the City isn't able to make changes to the 8/12/2020 8:14 AM freeway congestion, they shouldn't be adding to it with new housing. End better access to the freeway 8/11/2020 9:53 PM Currently we need less housing and more commercial businesses like restaurants. Especially on Temecula parkway 8/11/2020 8:32 PM which lacks family friendly sit down restaurants. Not a nimby but I would like any homeless to be directed away from public traffic. The duck pond has been an 8/11/2020 5:54 PM issue. Allowing short term rentals within the city of temecula should be a priority for the city council. It helps improve 8/11/2020 3:58 PM tourism and allows home owners to create extra income and coup with the high cost of living Found in Temecula. Please oppose any state bills that take away single-family zoning, especially in these pandemic times. We need 8/10/2020 11:02 AM more open space, not less! Temecula is over -crowded. The infrastructure cannot handle the population. We do not need any new housing to be 8/10/2020 7:20 AM built. It will only add to the congestion. Adding ADU 's to existing homes create off street parking problems with streets lines with cars. 8/9/2020 9:43 PM Working through city permit process for an ADU and it is arduous. So far the city is not being helpful and is quite 8/9/2020 5:09 PM disappointing. More open space/parks/hiking trails/Agriculture. Would like to see more dedicated bike trails. Less high density - 8/9/2020 1:14 PM leads to more traffic and less happiness. It takes too long to build and govt fees are contributing factor in increase costs. Stop cherry picking your friends. 8/9/2020 10:17 AM Why does Corona Family seek to rezone their property for Residential, but sue/demand EIR for adjacent housing tract on BFS and Tern Pkwy. The politics of valley are damaging the community. No 8/8/2020 10:02 PM All homes/apartments must be for homeowners or long term renters. No short term rentals as they take away from 8/8/2020 3:14 PM the infrastructure of Temecula. 91 We love Temecula. Please maintain quality of life and keep the area "low crime.". The only drawback is California 8/8/2020 1:17 PM leftest politics and primarily a single party state which may drive us out of the state 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 We have plenty of apartments - There is a lack of single story single family homes. No more housing!! More one story housing needed for us getting closer to empty nesting and seniors and for young families starting out. Affordable. Program fo make it more affordable. Homeless -hell support programs to get homeless off the street and into housing and also a program that San Diego has- a free bus ticket home if it can be verified they have friend or family who will house them at that location. My hope is that the City will continue to develop Temecula's remaining land carefully as we approach build -out, with an eye for quality (at every price point) and inclusion. Homeowners who are about to retire but cannot afford their homes need a nice choice of low income homes. Families who make under 50,000k need places to afford. Please keep some open spaces , so far this is a unique aspect to Temecula's relaxed and tourist environment. The traffic is already highly congested, creating not only pollution and safety issues- but concerns about expansion Temecula needs to stop building before it becomes unrecognizable. With heavy traffic, people become agitated and stressed, and that is when it becomes dangerous for bikers, pedestrians, and we see higher amounts of traffic accidents. Let's keep Temecula safe and preserve the beauty 8/8/2020 9:21 AM 8/7/2020 9:28 PM 8/7/2020 4:46 AM 8/6/2020 5:34 PM 8/6/2020 4:29 PM 8/6/2020 12:20 PM 8/6/2020 8:17 AM 99 1 feel that developers will build homes that they can sell. So demand will encourage the construction of whatever 8/6/2020 7:44 AM homes are needed. wu 101 102 103 More mixed use so shopping isn't only at each end of town We need to make sure the infrastructure is in place prior to building more housing. The traffic is one of the biggest negatives to our city, and I think that is fueled by the continued development without the infrastructure to support it. I do appreciate all the projects that are in the works on the freeway but the side streets are just as bad Please, no more apartments and limit the number of new housing developments M 8/5/2020 8:57 PM 8/5/2020 8:51 PM 8/5/2020 2:18 PM 8/5/2020 2:10 PM 104 There needs to be more bike trails that enable people to ride a bike anywhere they want to go including the vineries 8/5/2020 1:22 PM and old town 36 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 105 Please no more massive developments of single family homes! 8/5/2020 12:08 PM 106 Not at this time 107 There are too many homes in Temecula. Let's focus on our schools which have seemed to go down the past few years. 108 Please do not build anymore housing, at least right now. Communities that grow too fast fall fast and I do not want that for Temecula 109 If you're going to build anymore new housing, PLEASE require larger backyards and houses that are further apart from each other. 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 Slow the growth - it's great where it is and will not be great if it keeps growing Building new houses without upgrading and connecting existing roads, better freeway access and new thoroughfares will increase the traffic, which already is a miserable situation. It might just be what makes us move away from our beloved city of 27 years. No If the city continues to build affordable housing in temecula, the city will go down hill and end up just like Riverside. New single detached homes that are less than $500k and with an actual front / back yard for our kids to grow up don't exist. Right now my family is forced to pay over $600k for a new house within the Temecula School system, or $500k for a house that's even close to a very basic 2,000sgft floor plan. Otherwise, we are stuck with condos plagued with $300 HOAs (Rancho Soleo) and no parking. My family and I make over $130k without including any overtime at our jobs and we are forced to buy a very used 2006 house stuck in a neighborhood where each house is less than 10 feet apart. We have no privacy. How is this possible? Please deal with traffic before every empty lot of land is developed with new houses. Amount of Houses on butterfield is crazy. When kids graduate we are out of here Stop building and over crowding Temecula!! The traffic and amount of people here is awful!! Please keep temecula a beautiful safe city . Please don't make it city like (busy) w a lot of apartments Stop building master planes tract homes on 1/3 acre each and build some mixed use housing! The city has known they're deficient in housing for low to middle income earners for 10 years- do something about it already!! affordable single story housing that is not in the 55 and older community so that adults can share housing with young adult children The city needs more affordable housing options No thanks 122 1 think the new housing projects are moving too quickly, without concern for our roads & highways, which are in horrific condition. I have been trying for over a year to get SOMEONE to take responsibility for a 2-mile section of Pauba Rd., where this road (not a county owned road), is a "2-mile accident waiting to happen". Everyone I have talked to, has passed the buck! The government of Temecula is doing a lousy job, with representation being the major problem. Haven't been able to read the housing update; but you put it in the middle of this questionnaire, which doesn't make sense. We need better governance in Temecula. Too many representatives continue to be elected, yet do NOTHING to help Temecula prosper, just taking salaries & sitting on their duffs! 123 Would love to see more shelters especially for families. Also we need to see transitional housing for individuals with addiction and mental health issues. See too many homeless on the streetcar living in their cars on a daily basis. An increase in affordable housing for working people. Cannot gauge them with rent. Has to align with what the minimum wage is allowing them to spend. 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 I understand that the City of Temecula is a family town and that is fantastic. However, it seems like Temecula has focused on creating very large 2 story houses for families. I believe Temecula needs to have smaller detached single family homes available. Not all families need or can afford such large homes. Smaller 3 bed two bath home at 1500-1800 square feet should be available. Additionally, the city should also consider adding in more condominiums. Thank you. In five to eight years will be looking to downsize to a senior community seems most are in Murrietta. But prefer to live in Temecula Please do NOT repeal prop 13 & raise property taxes even higher ! Please provide more affordable housing for young folks ages 20-40 working in Temecula who cannot afford to rent apartment of their own. Thank You Keep a clean, friendly and safe community for all to enjoy We definitely don't need any more apartments or condominiums. Traffic is terrible in our area. I would also love to see more wide-open space type of parks. The greatness of Temecula is its small size, quality of life and semi -rural character. Don't keep growing it with more housing! Then it turns into an urban center and I move away! The city's zoning ordinance is designed to prevent the construction of inexpensive multifamily housing. This means that living in Temecula is going to continue to become more expensive than it already is. Homeless shelters are definitely more needed now more than ever as well as keeping a balance of nature and not building more homes that people can't afford. The build out of Temecula has already exceeded the original plans. The lack of mass transit or additional freeway lanes means NO MORE HOUSING!!!!!!!!!! I'd like priority for affordable active senior resident- owned housing - senior mobile home parks and 55+ resident owned homes. Resident owned mobile home space, not rented land space. And senior communities similar to The Colony in Murrieta, and The Knolls mobile home park in Murrieta. Not apartments - houses or mobile homes. The other part of the housing equation is the job market —living in Temecula is less appealing when you have to drive an hour to find career -track jobs for college educated individuals outside of the retail/hospitality/tourism industries. Don't over build!!! -Limit STR's -Limit ADW's to those with onsite parking. 8/5/2020 10:47 AM 8/5/2020 10:06 AM 8/5/2020 10:05 AM 8/4/2020 5:04 PM 8/4/2020 12:35 PM 8/4/2020 3:23 AM 8/3/2020 8:14 PM 8/3/2020 5:55 PM 8/3/2020 5:55 PM 8/3/2020 5:20 PM 8/3/2020 3:24 PM 8/3/2020 2:45 PM 8/2/2020 5:25 PM 8/2/2020 1:09 PM 8/2/2020 12:14 PM 8/2/2020 11:09 AM 8/2/2020 10:58 AM 8/2/2020 9:37 AM 8/1/2020 9:52 AM 8/1/2020 8:11 AM 7/31/2020 5:59 PM 7/31/2020 5:46 PM 7/31/2020 5:20 PM 7/31/2020 5:01 PM 7/31/20204:49 PM 7/31/2020 3:50 PM 7/31/2020 2:54 PM 7/31/2020 2:43 PM 7/31/2020 2:17 PM 7/31/2020 12:12 PM 7/31/2020 11:49 AM 137 Please don't turn our city into an area of dispear . Don't allow homeless to over take the area as they are already 37 / 57 ►IXI►(Z1101W7 CT7_17 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 138 139 doing to our shopping centers. Give owners options of rental property and Airbnb . Let's continue to keep temecula clean and nice , keep homeless off the streets.find a solution for the people who protest at the duck pond . Was driving by with my kids and two people were fighting yelling and cussing at each other. NOT GOOD Please no more building! Traffic is already out of control. 7/31/2020 9:26 AM 7/31/2020 8:02 AM 140 1 worry about how many new builds are going in well East of the 15 without developing anything that will ease the 7/31/2020 6:47 AM strain they will put on working families traveling to jobs. The housing I see most often targets young families due to large home sizes, which assumes more than likely two working parents. That's two more cars on the road. As someone who lives between a lot of these new builds and the freeway access, I worry that a difficult commute will become seriously worse as time progresses. I take some responsibility as I too commute to SD County for work, but only to Fallbrook, so about as close to Temecula as you can get. Most days I need to plan an hour for a drive that should take 25 minutes and the writing on the wall says it's only going to get more congested with the addition of neighborhoods like Sommers Bend when there isn't a reasonable alternative for getting north or south. 141 People who work in Temecula should be able to live in Temecula. New housing projects should have lower -income 7/30/2020 8:55 PM subsidies so they can own as well. 142 Stop building. Buy land and turn it into parks. The problem is the Jeni is already out of the bag for Temecula. Traffic 7/30/2020 7:25 PM and crime are here to stay 143 144 145 146 We need more affordable housing options for lower income families Current infrastructure is strained to meet current housing levels. After watching Los Angeles and Orange Counties basically negatively impact the quality of life by overbuilding, the main reason for our move to Temecula was a better quality of life with limited growth at the time. Since moving here, we have seen the population growth negatively impact quality of life but from an economic view, it has been a positive. The challenge is to balance the growth while maintaining quality. We love Temecula! However it is way too populated and too many residences being built. The infrastructure cannot handle what we have now! Very frustrating. All we hear are sirens anymore from emergency and/or police. It's sad when you live w miles from somewhere and it takes 15 to 20 minutes to get there. Stop building. There is enough population and tourist business to sustain the city. My son and his new wife wanted to move here from college in Irvine, but the one condo we found in their price range got 16 offers on it the first day. They were very discouraged at the lack of options, and will continue renting for the foreseeable future. 147 We need affordable single family homes for people who work blue collar jobs and low -paying white collar jobs in Temecula 148 The city of Temecula needs to work to create nice homes and neighborhoods for low income essential workers who work in Temecula. The apartments currently affordable to Temecula's low income earners are horribly inadequate. Stop building half a million+ $$ single family neighborhoods and think about our low income residents. 149 Smaller starter homes instead of McMansions are needed 7/30/2020 7:18 PM 7/30/2020 5:09 PM 7/30/2020 5:09 PM 7/30/2020 3:49 PM 7/30/2020 3:20 PM 7/30/2020 2:58 PM 7/30/2020 2:36 PM 150 Building AFFORDABLE Housing for all age groups and particularly for those who work in the service industries. 7/30/2020 2:35 PM Today's housing market is expensive and prejudicial. 151 Please open more affordable low income senior housing . 7/30/2020 2:28 PM 152 Not just low income, up and coming income. Kids who grew up here need to get a foothold in or near the community 7/30/2020 1:39 PM 153 No 7/30/2020 1:37 PM 154 155 156 157 158 I have lived here since the 80's. I will most likely not be able to stay here in retirement due to housing costs (and lack of physicians). This is not a senior friendly town unless one is very well off. Coming from an undesirable neighborhood before moving to Temecula, I worry bringing more apartments or " lower income" housing will devalue our neighborhood and bring in more crime. I saved and bought my home here because the city was safe and clean, I am concerned it will become more in lines of where I moved away from if more apartments and condos are built Stop building apartments, condos and HUD housing. GET RID OF THE DRUG ADDICTS LIVING ON OUR STREETS. I'll take my tax money elsewhere. I am very, very concerned about the rash of bills coming from Sacramento that push upzoning and high -density housing on all communities in the state. Please resist these bills with every tool you have. Nobody wants their existing neighborhood upended. Local cities should be able to decide for themselves the type of housing they need and allow. Temecula does not need any more single family detached homes. There are plenty of single family homes. 7/30/2020 1:36 PM 7/30/2020 1:30 PM 7/30/2020 1:18 PM 6/8/2020 11:25 AM 6/2/20204:41 PM 38 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Q6: RENT DATE None 9/24/2020 1:53 PM Would like to see more housing for seniors with limited senior income. 9/16/2020 9:09 AM Looking forward and praying that someday I can acquire my own Senior home. Many thanks for concern. 9/15/2020 11:41 AM More solar initiatives 8/31/2020 11:13 AM Work on more affordable taxes or lower/shorter term Mello -Roos. 8/30/2020 12:24 PM I'm hoping that Temecula includes Murrieta, Wildomar, Menifee and surrounding suburbs. 8/30/2020 12:02 AM N/A 8/28/2020 10:29 PM No comment. 8/28/2020 9:06 PM Thank you for reaching out to find out the needs of the surrounding communities. We visit and sop in your area. 8/28/2020 6:44 PM Attend your functions as well. Please get some sort of rent control in temecula, especially for seniors 8/28/2020 6:01 PM low income housing shouldn't be just for emergency needs. Ive tried everywhere and only found about 4-6 in the 8/28/2020 3:50 PM neighborhood. property taxes are very high and this prevents lower income folks from buying 8/28/2020 2:29 PM I live in perris and I am in the housing list 8/28/2020 1:44 PM NA 8/28/2020 1:32 PM Some areas are priced high to keep minorities out. Lack of information on home loans for minorities Temecula is pushing out the middle class because of housing costs I'm concerned about city maintaining safety and keeping police of Temecula It has gone downhill since we lived here 2000-2010. Now 2016-present. Police aren't keeping things together, so many houses, a lot of cars. It's grown, in a bad way. Nothing to do and no longer perfect for a family. We understand that is is a very nice area but the lack of a rent increase cap is hurting families. Please consider a rent increase cap to keep families who live and work here from having to relocate. Adult autism housing I don't believe there should be any more low income housing in Temecula. If you need more money from the feds then you should figure out how to do a better job and quit spending our money. More resources for affordable housing need to be made available and also on the City Website Everything about Temecula is great except the traffic. More housing means more people and more traffic. Please the importance of open spaces and the need for expanded roads and freeway on/off ramps when increasing housing. The rent has gone up exponentially, so much so that people aren't able to maintain the cost of living in Temecula. When housing prices increase, even with low interest, they're out of range of the average California worker, especially with the high property tax! Community College brings roommate situations that drive up rent for apartments and multi room homes - this hurts one income families Home prices have outpaced wages and the rental market has also doubled in price with a large amount of homes renting over $3000 and up. Lots of foreign investors buying up our market and setting rents very high. 8/27/2020 10:16 PM 8/27/2020 1:23 PM 8/27/2020 1:53 AM 8/25/2020 12:26 AM 8/24/2020 8:25 PM 8/24/2020 3:12 PM 8/24/2020 1:02 PM 8/24/2020 12:38 PM 8/21/2020 8:29 AM 8/21/2020 5:25 AM 8/21/2020 2:12 AM 8/19/2020 9:25 PM 8/19/2020 5:37 PM 28 No 8/18/2020 7:47 PM 29 I'd like information on housing programs to help first time home buyers with down payment options. 8/18/2020 3:11 PM 30 There's a lot of road rage here. A lot of bullying in schools (not currently for obvious reasons). And not enough 8/18/2020 2:01 PM police presence. Thank you. 31 None 8/18/2020 10:02 AM 32 The safety of our neighborhood is in danger many, many robberies and car theft plus very low income trashy people 8/17/2020 8:31 PM taking the people's peace away due to section B. We cant wait to move away after 4 years in peace the last 2 has been horrible, with the tenants section 8 next door, drinking, smoking, fighting, sheriffs coming all the time etc. 33 Houses are very expensive in Temecula. Just because someone doesn't make a lot of money doesn't mean they 8/17/2020 2:05 PM are going to ruin the neighborhood. 34 1 would love a lower rental rate for my apartment in Old Town as I am turning 70 years old this month and would like 8/16/2020 9:59 PM to be able to have a little more money to enjoy my last years. I love Temecula and especially feel privileged to live in Old Town and in the same location for the last 14/15 years. 35 Please help with the local homeless community in Old Town Temecula. I do not feel safe in the late evening when 8/14/2020 11:09 PM they are roaming around near my home. 36 The city needs to focus on providing affordable housing for its essential workers. People who work hard and are 8/14/2020 4:21 PM willing to pay a mortgage that meets their budget. 37 If you are going to build more buildings in old town temecula, then you need to make more parking garages or more 8/14/2020 3:39 PM available parking. It is extremely irritating to live in old town and not be able to park! 38 We need very affordable housing and temporary, emergency housing to help the homeless 8/12/2020 6:15 AM 39 Would like to see either rents or mortgages at affordable rates for single mothers, single persons that can be able to 8/11/2020 1:47 PM affordable on single income. 40 N/a 8/7/2020 10:38 PM 41 1 think seniors need affordable housing most in this area. There are plenty of rentals for younger people. 8/7/2020 8:24 AM 42 Please help with housing affordability. 8/6/2020 4:11 PM 39 / 57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 43 44 Nothing additional 8/6/2020 8:19 AM Not every family has a dual income or high income. But those families live and work in Temecula and would like to 8/5/2020 2:51 PM buy a home. Think about the people who are different then you. 45 We should be promoting diversity of our community and providing more affordable housing. 46 Need more long term buyer attractive neighborhoods -that is, houses that have space between them and aren't shoved up right next to each other. 47 Clean up our dry creeks and rid them from trash and homelessness 48 More affordable 55 and over homes are needed in Temecula 49 The cost of housing lacks diversity. There are no single family detached rental homes priced at appropriate levels for middle to low income families. 50 Really tired of rows and rows of cookie cutter homes! Get creative and sustainable! 51 It would be nice to have additional new single family homes for the influx of new residents, but it needs to be paired with continued improvement to infrastructure and roads. 52 Housing/ rent pricing caused by investors buying up property in bulk and renting out. It's driving up costs and lowering the quality of inventory. 8/5/2020 10:19 AM 8/2/2020 2:11 PM 8/1/2020 10:54 AM 8/1/2020 6:57 AM 7/31/2020 7:24 PM 7/31/2020 2:59 PM 7/31/2020 11:09 AM 7/30/2020 11:20 PM 53 There are ppl who work really hard to provide a nice and safe environment for their families even when they can 7/30/2020 9:19 PM barely afford to. I work two jobs and it's still not enough. If I work here I should be able to live comfortably without having to stress about being a good parent or a working single mom who tries everything possible to put in quality time to produce a productive citizen while working 12-16 hours days sometimes 7 days a week. 54 As someone who works in a position that often interacts with the homeless population in this city, I can firmly say that this city desperately needs to address homelessness in Temecula better and with more respect. Many homeless patrons that I have heard from say that they do not feel that there is nearly enough city resources to help support them and get them back on their feet. They also often complain that they don't feel respected, seen, or heard by the city and that is a major issue that Temecula needs to grapple with. Redirecting that funding toward social resources and programs would make a tremendous difference in our community. Also, the cost of housing (rent, buying a house, etc.) is FAR too high in this area. Neither I or my boyfriend would be able to afford our rent and living expenses on a monthly basis if one of us lost our income for any reason, and we live in what is considered one of the "cheapest" apartments in the city). This is a terrifying concern that needs to be promptly addressed, especially considering the hardships brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. Thankfully my boyfriend and I have been getting our steady income during this time but we were initially horrified at the start of all of this when we were unsure if we'd be keeping our jobs and be getting paid during this trying time. 55 There should be a housing program in the market for couples, without "forcing" them to live in a house with 3-4 rooms when they need just 1-2. 56 1 would like to be able to afford to live. 57 58 59 60 61 62 I accepted a job in Temecula at the beginning of the year and moved here for it. Then, we all were hit with Covid-19 I am highly interested in understanding the real estate market in the area as that I've noticed many homes going on MLS; I'm interested in as to why so many homes for sale. We need less housing developments! Especially ones where the homes are so so close together with no yard. Think about single mothers, lower income essential employees and the children whom are part of those families. This isn't about handouts, it's about the need for smaller practical homeownership options. I'm currently renting and taking amenities away it's frustrating because of COVID 19,1 pay a lot of money for renting. Yes, please stop building homes. There is nothing attractive about a community with endless neighborhoods of cookie -cutter homes. The northern Inland Empire region is an example of the crime and pollution increase that results from not leaving any open space for recreation, parks, etc. Despite Temecula having several public amenities, there is a significant lack of public trails systems - I'm not talking about dirt paths through cookie -cutter neighborhoods - I'm talking about trail systems like Meadowview, or those in open, natural spaces that give our community members a sense of connection to nature. My family is currently not purchasing a home in Temecula because we are waiting to see if the City continues to flood every open space with a development, or if they change their approach to develop a balance community. Rehabilitate existing shopping centers, create consistency in building architecture, improve trail systems and stop thinking that growth is the only way to run a City. As a Civil Engineer, I am extremely troubled by the fact that City's do not understand the negative impact of growth to local pollution, congested roadways and natural open spaces. Increased tax revenue from residential housing is not valuable long-term to a community. Temecula is literally the last haven in the IE, and it looks like it will be a pain to live in at the current rate of growth. Improve local businesses to stimulate your economy to truly make this a tourist destination. Please!!! 7/30/2020 7:08 PM 7/30/2020 6:10 PM 7/30/2020 6:08 PM 7/30/2020 5:10 PM 7/30/2020 4:57 PM 7/30/2020 4:33 PM 7/30/2020 2:42 PM 7/30/2020 12:23 PM The NUMBER #1 concern is traffic on the freeway. Before any more units are built, the State needs to adequately 5/28/2020 10:43 AM fund infrastructure in the area. The area has grown tons in the last 30 years. Before more units are built, we need infrastructure. Also, the state should not tell cities that they must build more units, or change zoning. It is called local government for a reason. Sacramento needs to stop over ruling the wishes of communities. 40/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q6: LIVE WITH OTHER HOUSEHOLD (NEITHER OWN NOR RENT) DATE 1 The cost of rent here does not match the income that many of us have forcing many to struggle, have roommates, 9/24/2020 1:18 PM constantly move etc. More affordable housing that matches the jobs available that only want to pay $17 or less would help out a great deal so people can afford to live without roommates and without struggling to pay everything 2 The apartment prequalifications are too high. Can afford rent, but having to make 2.5 times rent in salary is too 8/27/2020 6:49 PM much 3 We feel discriminated in getting a loan from the lander or landlord. 4 Maybe it will be different because of working remote for white collar workers but I lived in temecula and commuted to carisbad/San Diego/riverside since 2001 and the last 3 years were torture it would take 30 mins to even hop on Rancho cal at 530am. There are no jobs here. I grew up here, I'm nearing 40, 1 have an mba and I love temecula but I have no kids. I'm here for now due to covid but given the choice between buying a big house in temecula with all my friends married and making fun of my life decisions (when are you getting settled down), i would rather live peacefully and simply in a small condo near the coast. The wine tourism is great here but it's hot, full of children. Keep temecula for FAMILIES not homeless or single people. We aren't your target market :) many of my friends with families are priced out of temecula and living in menifee. It feels like temecula is aging like me haha , my parents still live here and a lot of my friends from high school Parents also. I remember in the 90s heated discussions about apartments. We don't more apartments here the ones we have there are shootings at (Rancho cal just saying). I also don't know where the heck these homeless dmggies are coming from it's been 10-15 years and it's disgusting to avoid the target Starbucks and vons because of fear of encountering a tweaker. 5 Easy way to apply for FTB programs. It's hard to know which direction to go with no knowledge and I wish there would be a community resource that could help First time buyers who don't understand what to do. There are thousands of FTB in Temecula who need help but don't know where to go to. All my friends in their late 20's who are ready to buy in Temecula get intimidated by the pricing and not knowing all the info 6 Please emphasize livability for residents over profitability for developers. Don't build apartments that look like prisons but cost as much as a home. More importantly please emphasize the issue isn't a housing shortage but an income shortage/affordability crisis. 7 No # Q6:CURRENTLY HOMELESS 1 1 would like to See More Homes/Apartments available for the PHYSICALLY disabled! The city of Temecula has 55+ Communities which is great for those in need of it ... I STRONGLY believe that people who are PHYSICALLY disabled should be included in those communities 8/22/2020 7:01 AM 8/21/2020 12:17 PM 8/19/2020 9:50 AM 8/18/2020 4:19 PM 8/7/2020 1:17 PM DATE 8/22/2020 5:30 AM 41/57 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q16 If desired, please leave your name and email address to receive email updates, meeting announcements, and information on the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update.Note: Emails will solely be used for the purpose of dispersing information related to the Housing Element Update and will not be shared or used for any other purpose. Answered:221 Skipped:478 FIRST NAME: LAST NAME: EMAIL: TOTAL Q6: Own 97.32% 95.97% 97.99% 196.38% 145 143 146 434 Q6: Rent 100.00% 98.46% 93.85% 85.97% 65 64 61 190 Q6: Live with other household (Neither own nor rent) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 8.14% 6 6 6 18 Q6: Currently homeless 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 1.36% 1 1 1 3 Total Respondents 217 214 214 221 Note: Answers redacted for privacy. 42 / 57 Appendix C: Summary of All Survey Responses by Group C-1 Q1 Do you live and/or work in the City of Temecula? Answered:620 Skipped:46 Q11: Gent ..9°° (0-23 years... Q11: Millenial 8°° (24-39 years... Generation X Q11:(Bal Boomers) 56- Q11: (Site Generation) Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old (D) Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old (E) Total Respondents Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old (D) 37.22% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Live in Temecula O Work in Temecula 0 Live AND work in Temecula Retired in Temecula LIVE IN WORK IN LIVE AND WORK IN RETIRED IN TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA 14.29% 0.00% 71.43% 1 0 5 36.93% 11.36% 46.59% 65 20 82 DE E 29.65% 15.49% 47.35% 67 35 107 DE DE 10.56% 12.78% 37.22% 19 23 67 BC CE 3.23% 6.45% 3.23% 1 2 1 BC BCD 153 80 262 125 IF YOU LIVE SOMEWHERE OTHER THAN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, WHERE DO YOU LIVE? Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old (E) # Q11: GEN Z (0-23 YEARS OLD) There are no responses. DATE TOTAL 14.29% 1.13% 9 176 DE 7.52% 36.45% 17 226 DE 39.44% 29.03% 71 180 BCE 87.10% 5.00% 27 31 BCD 620 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q11: MILLENIAL (24-39 YEARS OLD) 1 Murrieta 2 Murrieta 3 Menifee 4 Hemet 5 Los angeles 8 1 would like to move to the city of Temecula 9 Murrieta 10 Murrieta 11 Menifee, CA 12 Murrieta 13 Winchester 14 Murrieta 15 Murrieta 16 Murrieta 17 Wildomar 18 Murrieta 19 Menifee 20 Menifee 21 Murrieta 22 Lake elsinore 23 Perris 24 1 am in the process is moving to Temecula from San Diego 25 Murrieta DATE 9/14/2020 11:39 AM 9/9/2020 10:25 AM 9/4/2020 3:23 PM 9/2/2020 6:08 AM 8/28/2020 3:52 PM 8/28/2020 1:28 PM 8/28/2020 1:13 PM 8/28/2020 1:08 PM 8/17/2020 8:17 PM 8/17/2020 1:54 PM 8/17/2020 10:53 AM 8/14/2020 6:23 PM 8/11/2020 2:15 PM 8/5/2020 11:09 AM 8/4/2020 7:43 AM 8/4/2020 12:57 AM 8/2/2020 12:38 PM 8/2/2020 10:48 AM 8/2/2020 8:46 AM 7/30/2020 8:34 PM 7/30/2020 5:49 PM 7/30/2020 5:46 PM 7/30/2020 5:32 PM 7/30/2020 1:08 PM 6/16/2020 4:03 PM 2/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q11: GENERATION X (40-55 YEARS OLD) 1 Menifee 2 Murrieta 3 Murrieta 4 San Diego own two rentals in Temecula 5 Murrieta (County land, not city) Temecula Schools 6 Menifee 7 Menifee 8 Canyon Lake 9 Oceanside 10 Wildomar 11 Winchester 12 Winchester, CA 13 Moreno Valley 14 Menifee 15 Murrieta 16 Murrieta 17 1 live in the city of Perris 18 Murrieta DATE 9/24/2020 1:30 PM 9/17/2020 5:08 PM 9/9/2020 3:41 PM 9/5/2020 3:28 PM 9/5/2020 6:19 AM 9/4/2020 6:01 PM 9/4/2020 5:37 PM 9/4/2020 4:50 PM 9/4/2020 3:55 PM 9/4/2020 3:33 PM 8/31/2020 6:22 PM 8/31/2020 7:31 AM 8/29/2020 2:11 PM 8/29/2020 11:03 AM 8/28/2020 5:47 PM 8/28/2020 2:15 PM 8/28/2020 1:24 PM 8/28/2020 1:07 PM 19 Winchester/French Valley 8/28/2020 5:57 AM 20 Murrieta 8/24/2020 1:09 PM 21 City of Riverside 8/24/2020 12:48 PM 22 San Diego 8/22/2020 6:56 AM 23 Murrieta 8/21/2020 7:26 AM 24 Murrieta 8/19/2020 8:31 AM 25 Hemet, ca 8/18/2020 1:09 PM 26 Wildomar 8/12/2020 9:14 AM 27 Murrieta 8/11/2020 2:17 PM 28 Murrieta 8/11/2020 2:00 PM 29 Temecula Wine Country Area 8/11/2020 1:28 PM 30 Riverside 8/10/2020 3:29 PM 31 Corona 8/10/2020 2:27 PM 32 Wildomar 8/10/2020 2:15 PM 33 Wine Country 8/8/2020 11:25 PM 34 Lived in Temecula for years and may move back -have many friends there so my info is relevant. 8/7/2020 4:40 AM 35 Winchester, CA 8/6/2020 8:43 AM 36 1 live in Temecula, partly telecommute and partly work within 40 minutes of here 8/5/2020 8:46 PM 37 Winchester 8/4/2020 7:37 AM 38 Murrieta 8/3/2020 7:40 PM 39 Murrieta 8/2/2020 5:31 PM 40 Murrieta 8/2/2020 2:06 PM 41 Menifee 8/1/2020 6:50 AM 42 Bonsall 7/31/2020 9:31 PM 43 Just outside of city limits toward wine country 7/31/2020 7:56 AM 44 French Valley 7/30/2020 10:29 PM 45 Murrieta 7/30/2020 6:05 PM 46 Menifee 7/30/2020 6:03 PM 47 Near Pachanga 7/30/2020 5:19 PM 48 Anza 5/18/2020 8:46 AM 3/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q11: (BABY BOOMERS) 56-74 YEARS OLD 1 Menifee 2 Murrieta 3 unincorporated county/retired 4 Hemet 5 Murrieta 6 Wildomar 7 Menifee 8 Murrieta 9 Menifee 10 Murrieta 11 Menifee 12 wildomar 13 Murrieta 14 Murrieta 15 Menifee 16 Murrieta 17 Murrieta 18 Fallbrook 19 Hemet 20 Temecula wine country 21 Outside of wine country Winchester 22 Sun City 23 Unincorporated Riverside county 24 Menifee 25 Murrieta DATE 9/16/2020 8:11 PM 9/16/2020 9:32 AM 9/16/2020 9:10 AM 9/16/2020 9:07 AM 9/15/2020 11:29 AM 9/5/2020 11:44 AM 9/4/2020 4:56 PM 9/4/2020 3:22 PM 9/4/2020 3:17 PM 9/4/2020 3:16 PM 9/4/2020 3:14 PM 9/4/2020 3:12 PM 9/4/2020 3:05 PM 9/4/2020 3:05 PM 9/4/2020 3:02 PM 9/1/2020 10:14 AM 8/29/2020 11:57 PM 8/29/2020 9:10 AM 8/29/2020 7:23 AM 8/28/2020 9:40 PM 8/28/2020 9:35 PM 8/28/2020 8:21 PM 8/28/2020 6:57 PM 8/28/2020 6:36 PM 8/28/2020 6:04 PM 26 27 28 29 Menifee Menifee Murrieta French Valley 8/28/2020 1:50 PM 8/28/2020 1:14 PM 8/25/2020 9:15 AM 8/17/2020 11:06 AM 30 Murrieta 8/13/2020 5:48 PM 31 Homeland 8/10/2020 2:14 PM 32 Murrieta 8/10/2020 7:15 AM 33 TEMECULA WINE COUNTRY 8/3/20204:31 PM 34 San Juan Capistrano 8/2/2020 11:05 AM 35 Meadowview 7/31/2020 2: 10 PM 36 Riverside County -Wine Country 7/30/2020 2:32 PM 37 Murrieta 4/14/2020 3:28 PM # Q11: (SILENT GENERATION) 75 + YEARS OLD DATE 1 Murrieta 9/16/2020 9:21 AM 2 Murrieta 9/15/2020 2:08 PM 3 Sage 9/4/2020 3:08 PM 4 Wildomar 9/3/2020 2:31 PM 5 Hemet 9/3/2020 7:15 AM 6 Wildomar 8/31/2020 12:13 AM 7 1 am filling this out for my parents who are retired. 8/28/2020 1:43 PM 8 Menifee. I am always down in Temecula, originally wanted to live there. 8/28/2020 1:29 PM 9 28500 Pujol Street #44 8/28/2020 1:19 PM 10 Murrieta 8/28/2020 1:12 PM 4/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q2 How long have you lived in the City of Temecula? Answered: 580 Skipped: 8b Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years... Q11: Millenial 2 . 8°° 0.86°° 19 66°° 8.8°° (24-39 years... Q11: 19.61 % Generation X... Q11: (Baby 15.12% 69. 6.98° 3.. °. ° Boomers) 56-... .11111 Q11: (Silen 8 8 ° Generation) .. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) 0 0-2 Years 2-5 Years 5-10 Years 10 + Years 0-2 YEARS 2-5 YEARS 5-10 YEARS 10 + YEARS 0.00% 14.29% 0.00% 85.71% 0 1 0 6 26.38% 20.86% 19.63% 33.13% 43 34 32 54 CD D CDE TOTAL 1.21% 7 28.10% 163 Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 5.39% 11 BE 13.24% 27 19.61% 40 61.76% 126 B 35.17% 204 Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old (D) 6.98% 8.14% 15.12% 69.77% 29.66% 12 14 26 120 172 B B B Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old (E) 14.71% 11.76% 8.82% 64.71% 5.86% 5 4 3 22 34 C B Total Respondents 71 80 101 328 580 5/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q3 Which of the following housing upgrades or expansions have you considered making on your home? Answered:572 Skipped:94 Q (0-2 Q11: (24-3 Gener G Boom( Q11: (Silent :1011 5 Generation) ... 0 100 200 300 400 50C Room addition N Roofing 0 HVAC 0 Painting E solar Accessory Dwelling unit E Does not apply. 0 Other (please specify) ROOM ROOFING HVAC PAINTING SOLAR ACCESSORY DOES OTHER TOTAL ADDITION DWELLING UNIT NOT (PLEASE APPLY. SPECIFY) Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) 14.29% 28.57% 42.86% 42.86% 28.57% 0.00% 14.29% 14.29% 2.27% (A) 1 2 3 3 2 0 1 1 13 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years 9.20% 10.43% 18.40% 42.33% 30.06% 7.98% 39.26% 14.11% 48.95% old)(B) 15 17 30 69 49 13 64 23 280 CD Q11: Generation X (40-55 14.93% 11.94% 26.37% 46.77% 32.34% 10.95% 26.37% 15.42% 65.03% years old) (C) 30 24 53 94 65 22 53 31 372 E BE Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 8.38% 14.37% 25.75% 41.92% 28.14% 8.38% 27.54% 16.77% 50.00% years old (D) 14 24 43 70 47 14 46 28 286 E BE Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + 8.82% 20.59% 5.88% 29.41% 11.76% 8.82% 50.00% 14.71% 8.92% years old (E) 3 7 2 10 4 3 17 5 51 CD CD Total Respondents 63 74 131 246 167 52 181 88 572 # Q11: GEN Z (0-23 YEARS OLD) DATE 1 Garage door replacement/garage reno 8/5/2020 10:43 AM 6/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q11: MILLENIAL (24-39 YEARS OLD) Flooring Lawn upgrade to drought tolerant rock Installation and soundproofing Pool Windows and kitchen Looking to purchase in temecula Tree removal/ service Water Heater, bathroom remodel, new floors 9 Remodeling staircase 10 Pool 11 Patio cover 12 interior remodeling 13 Pool remodel 14 Windows 15 Pool/spa 16 Pool 17 Kitchen remodel 18 Full renovations 19 Pool 20 Driveway expansion 21 General interior updates due to age of home 22 Pool 23 Flooring, window coverings, patio cover DATE 9/24/2020 6:56 PM 9/19/2020 12:13 PM 8/31/2020 1:12 PM 8/29/2020 4:44 PM 8/29/2020 12:22 AM 8/28/2020 1:29 PM 8/28/2020 2:28 AM 8/27/2020 5:54 PM 8/19/2020 12:05 PM 8/11/2020 3:52 PM 8/10/2020 10:59 AM 8/6/2020 5:18 PM 8/5/2020 12:05 PM 8/3/2020 10:06 PM 8/3/2020 6:17 PM 8/3/2020 4:17 PM 8/3/2020 2:42 PM 8/2/2020 5:23 PM 7/31/2020 5:17 PM 7/31/2020 2:05 PM 7/31/2020 6:39 AM 7/30/2020 10:47 PM 6/8/2020 11:14 AM 7/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q11: GENERATION X (40-55 YEARS OLD) 1 Pool 2 Kitchen, bath, landscaping 3 Flooring 4 Whole house fan 5 Pool 6 Windows. Interior doors. 7 Upgrading bathrooms 8 Water heater 9 Fencing 10 Major Interior Remodel 11 Cracks on walls 12 1 currently rent, so no additions. 13 bathroom remodel, whole house fan 14 Interior Remodeling of Bathrooms/ Upgrade Floors 15 Add another garage 16 Pool 17 Interior remodel 18 Windows, doors 19 Kitchen and bathroom upgrades 20 New flooring and countertops 21 Pool 22 pool; remodel; flooring 23 Moving to Temecula 24 Bathroom upgrades 25 Patio Cover 26 Bathtub install downstairs 27 1 Rent. It's not affordable for me to buy here although I work and live this community 28 Kitchen & bathroom renovation 29 Pool and landscaping. 30 I'm a renter. Would love to own. 31 General replacement of outdated aspects of our home DATE 9/4/2020 3:41 PM 9/4/2020 3:30 PM 9/4/2020 3:25 PM 8/31/20204:27 PM 8/31/2020 11:09 AM 8/30/2020 9:53 PM 8/30/2020 8:44 AM 8/29/2020 8:41 PM 8/29/2020 2:54 PM 8/28/2020 3:05 PM 8/26/2020 7:59 PM 8/18/2020 1:38 PM 8/15/2020 12:51 AM 8/12/2020 4:29 PM 8/8/2020 6:30 PM 8/7/2020 2:18 PM 8/5/2020 10:51 AM 8/4/2020 12:50 AM 8/3/2020 5:52 PM 8/3/2020 1:56 PM 8/3/2020 1:21 PM 8/2/2020 5:16 PM 8/1/2020 6:52 AM 7/31/2020 3:32 PM 7/31/2020 8:54 AM 7/30/2020 9:31 PM 7/30/2020 9:07 PM 7/30/2020 8:09 PM 7/30/2020 5:23 PM 7/30/2020 2:32 PM 6/2/2020 4:38 PM 8/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q11: (BABY BOOMERS) 56-74 YEARS OLD 1 Flooring, plumbing, electrical 2 I'm renting 3 Flooring, plumbing, electrical DATE 9/16/2020 9:27 AM 9/16/2020 9:13 AM 9/16/2020 8:56 AM 4 5 6 7 new flooring, landscaping Whole house fan in the attic pool Tankless water heater & new windows 9/15/2020 10:18 AM 9/5/2020 7:08 AM 9/4/2020 3:05 PM 8/30/2020 10:34 PM 8 Renovate/upgrade 8/29/2020 9:00 AM 9 Shelves in the kitchen 8/28/2020 8:25 PM 10 Energy efficient appliances 8/28/2020 7:31 PM 11 New flooring and upgraded bathrooms 8/28/2020 5:50 PM 12 Air purifier systems 8/28/2020 1:52 PM 13 All of the above have been done during my time here 8/28/2020 1:40 PM 14 Remodel interior 8/27/2020 7:13 PM 15 Kitchen and bathroom remodel, carpet and other flooring 8/26/2020 6:05 PM 16 Kitchen upgrade 8/24/2020 10:05 AM 17 Updating our whole home 8/21/2020 1:06 PM 18 rain gutter, patio cover and land scaping 8/21/2020 11:46 AM 19 New flooring and kitchen renewal 8/19/2020 1:35 PM 20 flooring 8/19/2020 9:55 AM 21 1 also need to be able to rent two of my rooms out to people here on vacation to help me pay for my mortgage. I'm 8/19/2020 9:29 AM a single mom, but I cant do that right now because the city stopped letting us 22 pool & landscaping 8/17/2020 11:07 AM 23 Remodel kitchen 8/9/2020 6:39 AM 24 Kitchen remodel 25 Want single story. 26 New windows. 27 Bathroom remodel 28 Downsize # Q11: (SILENT GENERATION) 75 + YEARS OLD 1 all ready done 2 Did an addition considering others. 3 Making the stairs from the front and back door a ramp. 4 Renting but want solar on MF affordable housing Riverbank with SOMAH program 5 None 8/8/2020 3:09 PM 8/6/2020 9:56 PM 8/6/20204:21 PM 8/2/2020 11:07 AM 7/31/2020 5:48 PM DATE 9/5/2020 8:46 AM 8/28/2020 1:53 PM 8/28/2020 1:46 PM 8/28/2020 1:21 PM 7/30/2020 1:21 PM 9/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q4 How would you rate the physical condition of the residence you live in? Answered:583 Skipped:83 Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years... Q11: Millenial 17.18 (24-39 years... Q11: 50.. 11.22°°3:90°n Generation X... Baby ( 1 Q1: Boomers)(B 6°° 10.40%d:4.7,°f°"° Q11: (Silen 8 5°3 Generation) .. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Excellent condition Shows signs of deferred maintenance (i.e., peeling paint, chipped stucco, etc.) Needs modest rehabilitation improvements (i.e., new roof, new wood siding, etc.) Needs major upgrades (i.e., new foundation, new plumbing, new electrical, etc.) Other (please specify) EXCELLENT SHOWS SIGNS OF NEEDS MODEST NEEDS MAJOR UPGRADES OTHER TOTAL CONDITION DEFERRED MAINTENANCE REHABILITATION (I.E., NEW FOUNDATION, NEW (PLEASE (I.E., PEELING PAINT, IMPROVEMENTS (I.E., NEW PLUMBING, NEW SPECIFY) CHIPPED STUCCO, ETC.) ROOF, NEW WOOD SIDING, ELECTRICAL, ETC.) ETC.) Q11: Gen Z 28.57% 42.86% 28.57% 0.00% 0.00% 1.20% (0-23 years 2 3 2 0 0 7 old) (A) Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 25.15% 41 DE 33.17% 68 E 50.24°/u 103 E Q11: (Baby 41.62% 40.46% Boomers) 56- 72 70 74 years old B (D) Q11: (Silent 57.14% 31.43% Generation) 20 11 75 + years BC C old (E) Total 203 267 74 Respondents # Q11: GEN Z (0-23 YEARS OLD) There are no responses. # Q11: MILLENIAL (24-39 YEARS OLD) 1 Doesnt apply 2 Not currently living in Temecula # Q11: GENERATION X (40-55 YEARS OLD) 1 I live in an apartment 2 Renting at the moment 3 Decent 11.22% 23 10.40% 18 8.57% 3 27 7.36% 1.23% 27.96% 12 2 163 3.90% 1.46% 35.16% 8 3 205 3.47% 4.05% 29.67% 6 7 173 2.86% 0.00% 6.00% 1 0 35 12 583 DATE DATE 8/28/2020 1:09 PM 7/30/2020 1:09 PM DATE 8/28/2020 1:40 PM 8/19/2020 11:32 AM 7/30/2020 9:07 PM 10/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q11: (BABY BOOMERS) 56-74 YEARS OLD Good condition- well maintained I rent an apartment Need pest control. Found 2 big dead rat. Excellent for a 32 year old tract home. An apt. So maintenance is done by management. fence is falling down, hasn't been painted since 1998 so the wood trim is falling apart Inside needs upgrades Q11: (SILENT GENERATION) 75 + YEARS OLD There are no responses. DATE 9/16/2020 9:11 AM 8/29/2020 11:58 PM 8/28/2020 8:25 PM 8/26/2020 6:52 PM 8/19/2020 10:58 PM 8/19/2020 9:29 AM 8/8/2020 3:09 PM DATE 11/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q5 Why have you chosen to live in Temecula? (Select all that apply) Answered:582 Skipped:84 Q (0-2 Q11: (24-3 Gener Q Boom( Q1 Gene 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 0 Proximity to job/work 0 Quality of housing stock Local recreational amenities and scenery 0 Proximity to family and/or friends Affordability N Quality of local school system 0 Safety of neighborhood City services and programs Proximity to shopping and services, including Old Town Temecula Other (please specify) PROXIMITY QUALITY LOCAL PROXIMITY AFFORDABILITY QUALITY SAFETY OF CITY PROXIMITY OTHER TO OF RECREATIONAL TO FAMILY OF NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES TO (PLEASE JOB/WORK HOUSING AMENITIES AND/OR LOCAL AND SHOPPING SPECIFY STOCK AND SCENERY FRIENDS SCHOOL PROGRAMS AND SYSTEM SERVICES, INCLUDING OLD TOWN TEMECULA Q11: Gen Z 57.14% 14.29% 42.86% 28.57% 28.57% 71.43% 71.43% 14.29% 57.14% 14.290/ (0-23 years 4 1 3 2 2 5 5 1 4 old) (A) Q11: 31.29% 26.38% 39.26% 34.36% 50.31% 65.03% 68.10% 33.74% 34.36% 9.200/ Millenial (24- 51 43 64 56 82 106 111 55 56 1! 39 years old) CE DE DE (B) Q11: 29.76% 31.22% Generation X 61 64 (40-55 years old) (C) Q11: (Baby 28.74% 22.41% Boomers) 50 39 56-74 years old (D) Q11: (Silent 12.12% 24.240/. Generation) 4 8 75 + years old (E) Total 170 155 223 Respondents # Q11: GEN Z (0-23 YEARS OLD) 1 Family 43.41% 23.41% 89 48 BDE 34.48% 30.46% 60 53 CE 21.21% 42.42% 7 14 59.51% 60.00% 69.76% 122 123 143 DE 54.60% 36.21% 54.60% 95 63 95 RrF BCD yy BCD yy 173 312 300 365 28.78% 33.17% 10.73% 59 68 2: DE 25.29% 35.63% 17.820/ 44 62 3: B( 18.18% 36.36% 18.180/ 6 12 I B( 165 202 75 DATE 8/25/2020 12:23 AM 12/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q11: MILLENIAL (24-39 YEARS OLD) 1 Weather 2 Not too crowded 3 Economy... covid... living with parents 4 More open space / less crowded than San Diego and LA 5 City values 6 Safest city and school ratings. Pricing goes up every year which sucks 7 1 didn't have a choice. I had to move in with family. DATE 8/31/2020 1:12 PM 8/30/2020 12:12 PM 8/21/2020 12:06 PM 8/21/2020 8:19 AM 8/21/2020 5:17 AM 8/19/2020 9:46 AM 8/18/2020 4:12 PM 8 Its barely affordable but more so than San diego. 8/17/2020 9:52 PM 9 Move back to childhood home 8/7/2020 1:14 PM 10 Good city leadership, spending priorities, and quality of life 8/6/2020 5:18 PM 11 We were tired of living in the Bay Area 8/3/2020 2:42 PM 12 Because I have for 30+ years 7/31/2020 2:35 PM 13 Moved here over 20+ years ago because it was cheaper 7/30/2020 7:15 PM 14 My hometown born and raised 7/30/2020 4:53 PM 15 Clean 7/30/2020 1:25 PM # Q11: GENERATION X (40-55 YEARS OLD) DATE 1 Charter Schools with Academy Based Learning 9/24/2020 11:09 AM 2 Lived here 32 years its a great place to live. 9/4/2020 5:09 PM 3 Wineries 9/4/2020 3:41 PM 4 1 don't live in Temecula 9/4/2020 3:34 PM 5 10 years ago it was more affordable however now it is not so much 9/4/2020 3:30 PM 6 Good Air Quality 8/28/2020 6:17 PM 7 E 8/27/2020 5:44 AM 8 Came for the job, stayed for the city! 8/26/2020 6:24 PM 9 Proximity to church/school 8/17/2020 7:58 AM 10 Conservative/Republican politicians and people 8/15/2020 12:51 AM 11 Our church in Temecula 8/13/2020 11:56 PM 12 Overall quality of life 8/12/2020 4:29 PM 13 Temecula Hospital, Wine Country, Diverse Community 8/7/2020 2:18 PM 14 Beautiful weather year round 8/5/2020 9:51 AM 15 Beauty of city 8/2/2020 2:07 PM 16 Moved here before all the building so for small town 7/30/2020 8:49 PM 17 Moved here 40 years ago to get away from the cream of the crud 7/30/2020 7:17 PM 18 Moved here when it was affordable and schools were good. 7/30/2020 6:06 PM 19 Easy drive to the beach. 7/30/2020 5:23 PM 20 Quality of Life 7/30/2020 5:03 PM 21 Conservative policies and values 7/30/2020 1:13 PM 22 We could not afford to live in San Diego County when we were young working professionals in our early 30's 6/2/2020 4:38 PM 13/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q11: (BABY BOOMERS) 56-74 YEARS OLD 1 wine country and balloon views 2 For retirement 3 moved to area for schools/ affordable living DATE 9/24/2020 4:43 PM 9/16/2020 9:32 AM 9/16/2020 9:11 AM 4 No comment 9/16/2020 9:05 AM 5 moved here 30 years ago-- too crowded now. Looking to move away. 9/15/2020 12:02 PM 6 live with family 9/15/2020 11:57 AM 7 1 came to CA to take care of my mother and wanted SoCal because of the weather. 9/15/2020 10:18 AM 8 My husband lives here 9/4/2020 3:15 PM 9 Ive live here for almost 50 years. 9/4/2020 3:05 PM 10 We love Temecula 8/29/2020 9:11 AM 11 Quality of living, somewhat peaceful but beginning to show signs of the demise of peaceful existence... building 8/29/2020 8:43 AM more dwellings BEFORE making roads to handle the traffic you're bringing in 12 Purchased property in 1977 built a home 8/28/2020 9:37 PM 13 work close by 8/28/2020 6:37 PM 14 Gated communities 8/28/2020 1:52 PM 15 Moved to help sister when she purchased a home in 1990 8/27/2020 7:13 PM 16 Moved here 32 years ago for a safe, family environment. 8/26/2020 6:52 PM 17 The number one reason we chose to live in Temecula is safety and beauty of the area 8/23/2020 5:40 PM 18 family friendly 8/22/2020 7:22 PM 19 Quality of life. 8/21/2020 1:59 PM 20 We fell in Love with the city 31 years ago and decided to live here and be close to our family that retired here 8/21/2020 1:06 PM 21 1994 affordability 8/19/2020 9:50 PM 22 Friendly HOA and neighbors 8/19/2020 1:35 PM 23 Centralized area 8/19/2020 11:44 AM 24 Job 8/19/2020 10:11 AM 25 small-town feel yet has all we need 8/19/2020 9:55 AM 26 1 moved here because its the only place I could afford to buy a home to raise my 3 children in as a single mother 8/19/2020 9:29 AM 27 Wineries 8/11/2020 9:12 PM 28 Everything 8/3/2020 8:11 PM 29 Retired here because we had built-in friendships, we knew for years, relating to vine makers. 8/2/2020 10:38 AM 30 Family oriented city. 7/31/2020 11:46 AM 31 Retired now but worked here for 25 years and commuted into Temecula. Finally able to move here and then retired. 7/30/2020 5:01 PM # Q11: (SILENT GENERATION) 75 + YEARS OLD DATE 1 Retirement 9/16/2020 9:21 AM 2 Close to my daughter 9/15/2020 11:45 AM 3 hem scince 1977 9/5/2020 8:46 AM 4 Wine Country 9/5/2020 6:58 AM 5 Divine direction 8/31/2020 12:15 AM 6 Settled in 1977 working in the fields 8/28/2020 1:46 PM 14/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q (0-2 Q11: (24-3 Gener G Boom( Q1 Gene Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) Q6 Do you currently own or rent your home? Answered:583 Skipped:83 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 Own NRent S Live with others 0 Currently homeless OWN RENT LIVE WITH OTHERS CURRENTLY HOMELESS TOTAL 57.14% 42.86% 0.00% 0.00% 1.20% 4 3 0 0 7 55.83% 36.20% 6.75% 1.23% 27.96% 91 59 11 2 163 CD CD CD Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 78.05% 160 B 20.98% 43 B 0.98% 2 BE 0.00% 0 35.16% 205 Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old (D) 83.33% 15.52% 1.15% 0.00% 29.85% 145 27 2 0 174 B B B Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old (E) 73.53% 20.59% 5.88% 0.00% 5.83% 25 7 2 0 34 C Total Respondents 425 139 17 2 583 15/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q7 If you wish to own a home in Temecula but do not currently own one, what issues are preventing you from owning a home at this time? (Choose all that apply) Answered:233 Skipped:433 Q11: Gent Zil (0-23 years... Q11: (24-3 Gener G Boom( Q1 Gene 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 No homes within price range No homes that suit my needs Do not have a down payment Do not have enough for mortgage payment No homes that fit quality standards 1 do not wish to own or rent a home in Temecula NO HOMES NO HOMES DO NOT DO NOT HAVE NO HOMES THAT I DO NOT WISH TO OWN TOTAL WITHIN THAT SUIT HAVE A ENOUGH FOR FIT QUALITY OR RENT A HOME IN PRICE MY NEEDS DOWN MORTGAGE STANDARDS TEMECULA RANGE PAYMENT PAYMENT Q11: Gen Z (0-23 100.00% 33.33% 66.67% 33.33% 33.33% 33.33% 3.86% years old) (A) 3 1 2 1 1 1 9 Q11: Millenial 71.74% 13.04% 64.13% 45.65% 9.78% 5.43% 82.83% (24-39 years old) 66 12 59 42 9 5 193 (B) D Q11: Generation 57.69% 19.23% 50.00% 29.49% 7.69% 11.54% 58.80% X (40-55 years 45 15 39 23 6 9 137 old) (C) D D Q11: (Baby 37.50% 4.17% 41.67% 27.08% 0.00% 33.33% 29.61% Boomers) 56-74 18 2 20 13 0 16 69 years old (D) C BC Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old (E) Total Respondents 25.00% 0.00% 16.67% 3 0 2 135 30 122 80 8.33% 0.00% 58.33% 5.58% 1 0 7 13 16 38 233 16/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q8 Select the type of housing that best describes your current home: Answered:663 Skipped:3 Q (0-2 Q11: (24-3 Gener G Boom( Q1 Gene 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 Single Family Home (Detached) 0 Accessory Dwelling Unit, Granny Flat, Guest House E Mobile Home Duplex/Attached Home E Multifamily Home (Apartment/Condominium) Currently without permanent shelter 0 Other (please specify) SINGLE ACCESSORY MOBILE DUPLEXIATTACHED MULTIFAMILY HOME CURRENTLY WITHOUT OTHER TOTAL FAMILY DWELLING HOME HOME (APARTMENTICONDOMINIUM) PERMANENT (PLEASE HOME UNIT, SHELTER SPECIFY) (DETACHED) GRANNY FLAT, GUEST HOUSE Q11: Gen Z 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.000/6 1.06% (0-23 years 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 old) (A) Q11: 72.53% 1.65% 1.65% 3.85% 19.23% 0.55% 0.55% 27.45% Millenial (24- 132 3 3 7 35 1 1 182 39 years old) CD CD E (B) Q11: 86.19% 0.42% 0.84% 1.67% 10.04% 0.00% 0.84% 36.05% Generation X 206 1 2 4 24 0 2 239 (40-55 years BE E B E old) (C) Q11: (Baby 85.28% 0.51% 1.02% Boomers) 168 1 2 56-74 years BE old (D) Q11: (Silent 65.79% 0.00% 5.26% Generation) 25 0 2 75 + years CD C old (E) Total 538 5 9 20 Respondents # Q11: GEN Z (0-23 YEARS OLD) There are no responses. # Q11: MILLENIAL (24-39 YEARS OLD) 1 Detached condo # Q11: GENERATION X (40-55 YEARS OLD) 1 Rent a room 2 Very tiny single bedroom apartment # Q11: (BABY BOOMERS) 56-74 YEARS OLD 1 Section 8- Senior apartment complex 2 Manufacture Home own the Land 3 rental apartment 4.06% 8 2.63% 1 7.61% 15 B 15.79% 6 80 1 DATE 0.00% 1.52% 29.71% 0 3 197 E 0.00% 10.53% 5.73% 0 4 38 BCD 10 663 DATE 8/28/2020 2:32 AM DATE 8/2/2020 9:59 AM 7/30/2020 4:33 PM DATE 9/15/2020 10:03 AM 9/4/2020 3:27 PM 8/30/2020 12:02 AM 17/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q11: (SILENT GENERATION) 75 + YEARS OLD 1 1 don't know 2 Apartment 3 Apartment 4 Sycamore Springs Ranches - a custom home and horse boarding ranch DATE 9/16/2020 9:19 AM 9/15/2020 11:47 AM 9/15/2020 10:06 AM 9/4/2020 3:14 PM 18/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q9 Which of the following best describes your household type? Answered:662 Skipped:4 Q11: Gen Z .. 1.4 ° .. (0-23 years... Q11:Millenial I 8.74°°55°°°°.29P/a°°, (24-39 years... ' Q11:® Generation X... 43.51% Q11: (Baby 8. Boomers) 56-... .45°° .08°1 oD °0 9.. °°�2�04%;F',L7 i - Q11: (Shen Generation) .. 2 2.70°° 8 51°° 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Single person household 0 Couple 0 Couple with kids <18 Single parent with kids <18 0 Non -parent with kids <18 Young adult living with parents E Multi -generational household Single with roommates 0 Couple with roommates 0 Other (please specify) SINGLE COUPLE COUPLE SINGLE NON- YOUNG MULTI- SINGLE COUPLE OTHER TOTA PERSON WITH PARENT PARENT WITH ADULT GENERATIONAL WITH WITH (PLEASE HOUSEHOLD KIDS WITH KIDS <18 LIVING HOUSEHOLD ROOMMATES ROOMMATES SPECIFY) <18 KIDS WITH <18 PARENTS Q11: Gen Z 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 14.29% 0.00% 71.43% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 14.29% 1.06' (0-23 years 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 0 1 old) (A) Q11: 2.19% 14.75% 59.02% 8.74% 0.55% 3.83% 9.29% 1.09% 0.00% 0.55% 27.64( Millenial (24- 4 27 108 16 1 7 17 2 0 1 1£ 39 years old) DE DE CDE D CDE (B) Q11: 5.44% 14.64% 43.51% 9.21% 2.51% 4.60% 9.21% 1.26% 0.00% 9.62% 36.10( Generation X 13 35 104 22 6 11 22 3 0 23 2E (40-55 years DE DE BIDE D B old) (C) Q11: (Baby 18.37% 47.45% 4.08% 1.02% 0.51% 5.61% 13.27% 2.04% 0.51% 7.14% 29.6V Boomers) 36 93 8 2 1 11 26 4 1 14 14 56-74 years BCE BC BC BC B old (D) Q11: (Silent 45.95% 32.43% 2.70% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 13.51% 0.00% 0.00% 5.41% 5.59( Generation) 17 12 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 2 75 + years BCD BC BC B old (E) Total 70 167 221 41 8 34 70 9 1 41 6£ Respondents # Q11: GEN Z (0.23 YEARS OLD) DATE 1 Parents with two adult children (college age - 20/22) 8/5/2020 10:47 AM # Q11: MILLENIAL (24-39 YEARS OLD) DATE 1 Married couple with 3 kids renting room to me 8/14/2020 6:27 PM 19/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 a 11 ■ i 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 a 2 Q11: GENERATION X (40-55 YEARS OLD) Single parent with child over 18 Couple with adult children over 18 Single with adukt child Couple with children over 18 and under 18. Couple with 3 adult children over 18 DATE 9/5/2020 10:07 PM 9/4/2020 3:36 PM 8/30/2020 5:04 PM 8/30/2020 12:32 AM 8/28/2020 5:55 PM couple with two adult children 8/28/2020 2:37 PM married couple with two adult children living at home 8/28/2020 2:02 PM Couple living with adult child 8/28/2020 1:56 PM my husband, 2daughters and myself 8/28/2020 1:44 PM Couple with child over 18 8/28/2020 6:04 AM Empty Nesters with Occasional Stays by Children Over 18 8/12/2020 4:34 PM Couple with children over 18 8/10/2020 3:46 PM Adult Head of Household with children over 18 attending college 8/10/2020 2:30 PM Couple w adult children 8/7/2020 9:28 PM Couple with 13 and 21 yr olds 8/4/2020 9:36 AM single living with elderly mother 8/1/2020 8:11 AM Single parent with children 18+ I'm surprised this wasn't an option 7/31/2020 2:17 PM Single parent with child (21 years old) 7/31/2020 9:02 AM Single parent with young adult children 7/31/2020 7:02 AM couple with children both under and over 18 7/30/2020 10:33 PM Single Parent with 18 year old Son 7/30/2020 9:19 PM Couple with child over 18 7/30/2020 8:55 PM Couple with children under 18, 1 child 18 + live in boyfriend, roommate 7/30/2020 5:52 PM Q11: (BABY BOOMERS) 56-74 YEARS OLD DATE Divorce 9/16/2020 9:25 AM Rent room 9/15/2020 10:13 AM Retired with Adult Disabled Son 9/6/2020 7:14 AM couple living with cllege age children 9/4/2020 3:17 PM Single mom with children in college 8/31/2020 3:46 PM Adult with adult special needs son 8/30/2020 11:27 AM Single parent w/children over 18 8/28/2020 5:23 PM Couple with adult child 8/28/2020 2:41 PM Couple with college age children who live here during summer and breaks 8/28/2020 1:09 PM Mother/daughter birth adults 8/21/2020 9:57 PM Couple with Multiple adult children 8/20/2020 12:36 AM I'm head of household with an adult daughter that has epilepsy, two adult sons that have recently graduated from 8/19/2020 9:42 AM local universities and are living with me to pay off their student loans, and I am also a multi- generational household because My mom is living with us because she has cancer and is undergoing chemo Couple with young adult child with intellectual disability 8/7/2020 5:07 AM Soon to be single person with young adult over 18 lives at home. 8/6/2020 4:29 PM Q31: (SILENT GENERATION) 75 + YEARS OLD DATE I live with my daughter 9/16/2020 9:41 AM I live with my daughter 9/15/2020 1:17 PM 20 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q10 How satisfied are you with your current housing situation? Answered:664 Skipped:2 Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years... Q11: Millenial (24-39 years... 12.02°° 0 8°° Generation X Q11:(Bal Boomers) 56- Q11: (Site Generation) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 lam very satisfied. 0 lam somewhat satisfied. 0 lam somewhat dissatisfied E I am dissatisfied. I AM VERY I AM SOMEWHAT I AM SOMEWHAT I AM TOTAL SATISFIED. SATISFIED. DISSATISFIED. DISSATISFIED. Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) 14.29% 71.43% 14.29% 0.00% 1.05% 1 5 1 0 7 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) 34.43% 43.17% 12.02% 10.38% 27.56% 63 79 22 19 183 CDE CD D Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) 50.62% 31.54% 10.79% 7.05% 36.30% (C) 122 76 26 17 241 B B D Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 57.44% 30.77% 10.26% 1.54% 29.37% (D) 112 60 20 3 195 B B BC Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years 60.53% 34.21% 2.63% 2.63% 5.72% old (E) 23 13 1 1 38 B Total Respondents 321 233 70 40 664 IF YOU ANSWERED DISSATISFIED OR SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED PLEASE PROVIDE A REASON TOTAL BELOW. Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) 0 0 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) 0 0 Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 0 0 Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old (D) 0 0 Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old 0 0 (E) # Q11: GEN Z (0-23 YEARS OLD) DATE 1 Want to move 8/25/2020 12:26 AM 2 Inadequate affordable housing catered to young adults 8/6/2020 3:55 AM 21/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q31: MILLENIAL (24-39 YEARS OLD) DATE The condo we live in is too small and we are one rent increase away from getting priced out of the area 9/26/2020 8:43 PM I live in an u safe place and the apartment owners do not take care of them 9/2/2020 6:11 AM Really wanted more garage space and bigger back yard but so few houses on the market we had to buy what was 8/31/2020 1:19 PM available Difficult to find something affordable for my daughter and I. 8/28/2020 3:50 PM Many repairs are needed which my landlord ignores 8/28/2020 1:32 PM Frustration with not having enough financial support to obtain my own home. Our landlord increases our rent any time we ask her to fix anything, including this month, during the pandemic because our kitchen faucet was leaking. Want a house at a reasonable price The homogenous zoning doesn't help but the issue isn't availabilitv of housing but emNovers paving too little. Run down too cramped, too far to work I live in a one bedroom with my daughter because I can't afford a two bedroom for us. 1 shared restroom for 2 bedroom residence No parking, unsatisfied with property manager I wish I had a yard for my dogs and child I would love to be able to give my kids a home and a backyard 8/28/2020 123 PM 8/24/2020 8:25 PM 8/19/2020 9:25 PM 8/18/2020 4:19 PM 8/18/2020 10:02 AM 8/17/2020 10:55 AM 8/14/2020 11:09 PM 8/14/2020 5:38 PM 8/14/2020 3:39 PM 8/6/2020 8:17 AM 8/5/2020 10:19 AM 17 Housing is not affordable for young families, almost unattainable. 8/4/2020 1:05 AM 18 New houses are either way too expensive or they come built in very tight condos/single detached homes that are 8/3/2020 5:55 PM only 10 feet apart. I make $130k a year and can't even buy a decent home with a yard. 19 Too small and bad HOA 8/3/2020 2:52 PM 20 1 would like to be able to afford a place by myself or with one other but not have to live with a large amount of 8/2/2020 12:44 PM people in one small space 21 Not having enough personal space from people within the household as well as neighbors 8/2/2020 11:35 AM 22 1 want to be able to live on my own without 4 roommates 8/2/2020 10:52 AM 23 Expensive still. Rents gone from 1100 to 2000 in about 8 yrs 7/31/2020 10:26 PM 24 Rent is too high for wages in the area 7/30/2020 11:20 PM 25 Too small 7/30/2020 9:05 PM 26 1 wish I lived closer to work 7/30/2020 5:51 PM 27 My house is too small for my family size and the neighborhood is not safe. 7/30/2020 5:43 PM 28 1 would prefer to own, though the home prices for a single parent and single income is impossible with the current 7/30/2020 5:10 PM home prices, not to mention the property tax and HOA fees. 29 1 am grateful to be living in a nice city but we are a family of 6 living in a 2 bedroom apartment. We need a house 7/30/2020 12:05 PM but rent is so expensive out here! 22/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 Q11: GENERATION X (40-55 YEARS OLD) Cost of rent My property taxes are outrageous Neighborhood has a lot of crime DATE 9/15/2020 12:16 PM 9/5/2020 10:14 AM 9/4/2020 5:40 PM 4 Home is too old and needs too much work. HOA fees are too high and not worth price paid. New homes by builders 9/4/2020 3:36 PM have too high of tax. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 11 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 HOA prices on the rise. 9/4/2020 3:29 PM Lessor does not take care of the rental property I live in 8/31/2020 11:13 AM Need larger home for mom with dementia and caregiver 8/30/2020 7:44 PM Small - needs upgrade. No yard 8/30/2020 12:24 PM Need access to low income housing for inlaws who are currently living with me 8/29/2020 11:49 PM needs updated and repairs... can't afford to fix 8/29/2020 3:00 PM I prefer a larger house instead of a pricey rental apartment 8/29/2020 2:15 PM too small and expensive for what im paying 8/28/2020 2:19 PM I live in a neighborhood filled with renters and families who do not take care of their homes but this is the only area 8/28/2020 2:02 PM of temecula we could afford I live in low income housing. There are so many rules that you can't get comfortable enough to make it feel like your 8/28/2020 1:56 PM home. I have a dream to have a home of my own that I can invite who I want over and stay as long as I want them to or paint a room or get a pet without having to get a drs note. my house needs a lot of fixing 8/28/2020 1:44 PM Inadequate space and not disabled friendly. 8/27/2020 10:16 PM House is too small 8/24/2020 3:14 PM School district and need a larger home in a family neighborhood 8/24/2020 12:55 PM Rent is Ridiculously expensive 8/24/2020 12:38 PM Would consider larger home in lower density neighborhood 8/24/2020 12:30 AM Looking for my own home 8/20/2020 7:08 AM Previous homeowner renting and want to buy again but prices are twice what they were 10 years ago 8/19/2020 5:37 PM Current living with a relative due to economic hardship and process of divorce 8/18/2020 3:11 PM quality of life in Hemet is unacceptable, and while I work in Temecula, I cannot afford to live in Temecula. 8/18/2020 1:17 PM The property management is racist and have harrassed us many times. Neighbors are section 8 trashy people, 8/17/2020 8:31 PM drink and smoke every single day for the past 2 years, with small kids that they do not parent. It turned ourlives into misery. Would like to own rather than waste so much money on rent 8/14/2020 4:21 PM Bothersome neibors 8/14/2020 1:16 PM We are currently in the process of negotiating the purchase our rental house 8/14/2020 12:02 AM I would be very satisfied if I could move to a single story in the same neighborhood, there is a shortage of single 8/12/2020 4:34 PM story detached homes. temporarily in an apartment, looking to buy. 8/11/2020 2:22 PM Housing too dense. We can hear the neighbors breath 8/9/2020 10:17 AM Too far from work 8/4/2020 6:42 AM Too many transients are starting to appear and crime is going up. 8/3/2020 5:55 PM It's a one bedroom guesthouse for 4 people (myself, my mom and my two kids). Can't afford anything more. 7/31/2020 9:36 PM I can't afford a 2 bedroom apartment. And I'd like a home where my son can have his own room 7/30/2020 9:19 PM Pretty expensive would like to downsize but will end up with smaller house close to same price 7/30/2020 8:55 PM It's 800 square feet, things are falling apart. 7/30/2020 6:08 PM Need more adequate space, storage for basic things like a bike of linens. An extra half bath, a dishwasher, washer 7/30/2020 4:33 PM and drier hookups so that I may purchase my own machines, an additional bedroom as there are two of us. Every year my rent goes up. 7/30/2020 2:42 PM 23/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 1 Q11: (BABY BOOMERS) 56-74 YEARS OLD Renters disruptive behavior towards owners I am somewhat satisfied because golf balls from golf course continue to damage our house. I am unable to keep up with the repairs. want to move but higher taxes and low inventory make it hard Need a Special Needs Setting for son in future We need more tennis courts I would like to own my own place. No HOA. Many ordinance/code violations in neighborhoods Traffic congestion is terrible on main arteries 55+ so daughter has been displaced. It's old, outdated, in need of significant updating and 16,000 sq ft of landscaping. Rent increase forcing me to move out of area. We are on fixed incomes and they raise the rent about $70.00 each year. Where are we suppose to get the money Need upgrading in electrical and plumbing Want to get my own space I would prefer that all homes have 3 car garages. I don't like living on a street lined with cars on both sides. I'd prefer seeing tree lined streets and curb appeal. Too much building everywhere and no sign of building for what we lack. AFFORDABLE HOUSING. We live in a working class neighborhood. We want homeowners and person's who are hardworking to remain in our neighborhoods. People who own seem more concerned with maintaining their homes and keeping the neighborhood safe and secure. We stand together as we live and work in a shared community. We support law enforcement in our neighborhood and across the city. Apt. Is dark, no sunlight. Affordability in our city is absent; therefore we have multigenerational accommodations. I just need to be able to rent out rooms as short term rental so that I can afford to keep my house. If there was grant money to help me paint or make repairs before it got too bad that would help a lot too can't afford housing Retired need more space Need to add an ADU. City staff seems to discourage them. The house needs alot of updating and want to move away from the casino Too many cars that screech & race at all hours of the day & night. We need some kind of control over this Expensive for age 65, need to downsize Would like to own a home in a 55+ community. Single story under 400k. I would've preferred a one story, didn't plan it very well when we bought our home. Q11: (SILENT GENERATION) 75 + YEARS OLD Dissatisfied because 3 children living in house that always needs repairs DATE 9/15/2020 12:04 PM 9/15/2020 10:40 AM 9/10/2020 10:17 AM 9/6/2020 7:14 AM 9/4/2020 3:54 PM 8/30/2020 12:02 AM 8/29/2020 6:16 PM 8/29/2020 2:10 PM 8/29/2020 7:31 AM 8/28/2020 8:06 PM 8/28/2020 6:44 PM 8/28/2020 6:01 PM 8/28/2020 1:18 PM 8/27/2020 6:49 PM 8/27/2020 3:32 PM 8/24/2020 10:16 AM 8/23/2020 5:53 PM 8/19/2020 11:04 PM 8/19/2020 9:57 PM 8/19/2020 9:42 AM 8/19/2020 9:39 AM 8/6/2020 10:01 PM 8/6/2020 6:01 PM 8/5/2020 9:56 AM 8/2/2020 4:23 PM 8/2/2020 10:58 AM 7/31/2020 5:59 PM 7/30/2020 3:27 PM 7/30/2020 2:28 PM DATE 9/15/2020 10:24 AM 24 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q11 What age range most accurately describes you? Answered:666 Skipped:0 Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years... Q11: Millenial (24-39 years... Q11. Generation X... Q11: Boomers) Q11: (Site Generation) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% O Gen Z (0-23 years old) 0 Millenial (24-39 years old) Generation X (40-55 years old) 0 (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old (Silent Generation) 75 + years old GEN Z (0-23 MILLENIAL (24-39 GENERATION X (40- (BABY BOOMERS) 56- (SILENT GENERATION) TOTAL YEARS OLD) YEARS OLD) 55 YEARS OLD) 74 YEARS OLD 75 + YEARS OLD Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.05% old) (A) 7 0 0 0 0 7 Q11: Millenial (24-39 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 27.48% years old)(B) 0 183 0 0 0 183 CDE C D E Q11: Generation X (40-55 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 36.19% years old)(C) 0 0 241 0 0 241 B BDE D E Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56- 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 29.58% 74 years old (D) 0 0 0 197 0 197 B C BCE E Q11: (Silent Generation) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 5.71% 75 + years old (E) 0 0 0 0 38 38 B C D BCD Total Respondents 7 183 241 197 38 666 25/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q12 How important are the following concerns to you and your family? Answered:664 Skipped:2 1 Ensuring that children who grow up in Temecula can afford to live in Temecula. Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years... Q11: Millenial1..86°0 9.84Po°° (24-39 years... Generation X... -- - - -" - - Q11:(Baby 52. Boomers) 56-... .8 ° 10.26%5% Q11:(Silen 8.89°° Generation)... Q' (0-2 Q11: (24-3 Gener G Boom( Q1 Gene 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% E Very Important N Somewhat Important Not Important Don't Know Create mixed -use (commercial/office and residential) projects in the community that e... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very Important 0 Somewhat Important — Not Important 0 Don't Know Ensure that the housing market in Temecula provides a diverse range of housingtypes,... Q11: Gen Z 8 .. 1°° (0-23 years... 14.29% Q11:Mill enial 0. n°° 1. Do 26.78% 1.64% (24-39 years... Q11: 4 58°° 29.58% 1.67°i Generation X... Q11: (Baby 50.E 17.53% 03 1 Boomers) 56-... Q11: (Silent O5°° Generation) .. 0°0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% O Very Important 0 Somewhat Important ONotImportant Don't Know 26/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Establish special needs housing for seniors, large families, veterans, and/or persons... Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years... Q11: Millenial 18.03%'2. ° (24-39 years... Generation Q11: Boomers) Q11: (Site Generation) Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years... Q11: Millenial (24-39 years... Q11: Generation X.., Q11:(Baby Boomers) 56-.. Q11: (Silem Generation) .. Q (0-2 Q11: (24-3 Gener G Boom( Q1 Gene 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 Very Important 0 Somewhat Important r Not Important M Don't Know IIntegrate affordable housing throughout the community to create mixed -income neighbor.. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 Very Important M Somewhat Important Not Important Don't Know Provide shelters and transitional housing for the homeless, along with services to he... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very Important 0 Somewhat Important O Not Important Don't Know 27/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Encourage the rehabilitation of existing housing stock in older neighborhoods. Q' (0-2 Q11: (24-3 Gener G Boom( Q1 Gene 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 Very Important N Somewhat Important r Not Important N Don't Know IEstablish programs to help at -risk homeowners keep their homes, including mortgage lo... Q11: Gen Z 8.57°° 5 . 9°° (0-23 years... Q11: Millenial 51.65°° 6.26°° 8.24%5°° (24-39 years... Q11: Generation X... 16.25%2.921 Baby Q11: (Baby 9°° 9.,9%8 Boomers) Q11: (Silent 4 0.00°° .56°° Generation) .. Q (0-2 Q11: (24-3 Gener G Boom( Q1 Gene 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 Very Important E Somewhat Important Not Important 0 Don't Know Fair/Equitable Housing opportunities and programs to help maintain and secure neighbo... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very Important 0 Somewhat Important O Not Important Don't Know 28/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Ensuring that children who grow up in Temecula can afford to live in Temecula. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) 85.71% 0.00% 14.29% 0.00% 1.05% 6 0 1 0 7 1.29 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) 66.67% 21.86% 9.84% 1.64% 27.56% 122 40 18 3 183 1.46 CDE DE CE Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 55.19% 25.73% 17.43% 1.66% 36.30% 133 62 42 4 241 1.66 B DE BIDE Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 52.31% 34.87% 10.26% 2.56% 29.37% (D) 102 68 20 5 195 1.63 B BCE CE Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old 38.89% 55.56% 0.00% 5.56% 5.42% (E) 14 20 0 2 36 1.72 B BCD BCD Create mixed -use (commercial/office and residential) projects in the community that encourage walkable neighborhoods and reduce dependency on automobiles. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) 71.43% 28.57% 0.00% 0.00% 1.05% 5 2 0 0 7 1.29 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) 42.62% 35.52% 21.31% 0.55% 27.56% 78 65 39 1 183 1.80 E Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 37.92% 35.42% 26.25% 0.42% 36.14% 91 85 63 1 240 1.89 DE Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 44.33% 36.60% 16.49% 2.58% 29.22% (D) 86 71 32 5 194 1.77 C Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old 47.22% 44.44% 5.56% 2.78% 5.42% (E) 17 16 2 1 36 1.64 BC Ensure that the housing market in Temecula provides a diverse range of housing types, including single-family homes, townhomes, apartments, duplex/triplex and condominiums to meet the varied needs of local residents. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) 85.71% 0.00% 14.29% 0.00% 1.05% 6 0 1 0 7 1.29 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) 50.27% 21.31% 26.78% 1.64% 27.56% 92 39 49 3 183 1.80 DE DE Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 44.17% 24.58% 29.58% 1.67% 36.14% 106 59 71 4 240 1.89 E DE Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 50.00% 31.44% 17.53% 1.03% 29.22% (D) 97 61 34 2 194 1.70 B BCE Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old 54.05% 43.24% 2.70% 0.00% 5.57% (E) 20 16 1 0 37 1.49 BC BCD Establish special needs housing for seniors, large families, veterans, and/or persons with disabilities. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) 71.43% 28.57% 0.00% 0.00% 1.05% 5 2 0 0 7 1.29 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) 39.89% 39.34% 18.03% 2.73% 27.56% 73 72 33 5 183 1.84 DE DE Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 46.89% 36.10% 16.18% 0.83% 36.30% 113 87 39 2 241 1.71 DE Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 55.21% 34.38% 9.38% 1.04% 28.92% (D) 106 66 18 2 192 1.56 B BC Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old 63.89% 36.11% 0.00% 0.00% 5.42% (E) 23 13 0 0 36 1.36 B BC 29 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Integrate affordable housing throughout the community to create mixed -income neighborhoods. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.05% 7 0 0 0 7 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) 39.56% 25.27% 30.22% 4.95% 27.41% 72 46 55 9 182 E Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 37.08% 22.08% 37.08% 3.75% 36.14% 89 53 89 9 240 DE E Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 33.33% 32.82% 28.72% 5.13% 29.37% (D) 65 64 56 10 195 C Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old 27.78% 47.22% 19.44% 5.56% 5.42% (E) 10 17 7 2 36 BC C Provide shelters and transitional housing for the homeless, along with services to help move people into permanent housing. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) 71.43% 28.57% 0.00% 0.00% 1.05% 5 2 0 0 7 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) 37.16% 32.24% 22.40% 8.20% 27.56% 68 59 41 15 183 E Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 36.93% 30.71% 26.97% 5.39% 36.30% 89 74 65 13 241 E Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 37.11% (D) 72 Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old 33.33% (E) 12 Encourage the rehabilitation of existing housing stock in older neighborhoods. 35.57% 69 52.78% 19 22.16% 5.15% 29.22% 43 10 194 13.89% 0.00% 5.42% 5 0 36 VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) 28.57% 42.86% 14.29% 14.29% 1.05% 2 3 1 1 7 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) 50.82% 33.33% 10.38% 5.46% 27.56% 93 61 19 10 183 DE E D Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 49.16% 37.39% 10.92% 2.52% 35.84% 117 89 26 6 238 E Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 48.47% 43.88% 6.12% 1.53% 29.52% (D) 95 86 12 3 196 B B Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old 47.22% 52.78% 0.00% 0.00% 5.42% (E) 17 19 0 0 36 B BC Establish programs to help at -risk homeowners keep their homes, including mortgage loan programs. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) 28.57% 57.14% 0.00% 14.29% 1.05% 2 4 0 1 7 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) 51.65% 36.26% 8.24% 3.85% 27.41% 94 66 15 7 182 C Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 43.75% 37.08% 16.25% 2.92% 36.14% 105 89 39 7 240 BD Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 46.39% 41.24% 9.79% 2.58% 29.22% (D) 90 80 19 5 194 C Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old 44.44% 50.00% 5.56% 0.00% 5.42% (E) 16 18 2 0 36 1.00 2.01 2.08 2.06 2.03 1.29 2.02 2.01 1.95 1.81 2.14 1.70 1.53 2.00 1.64 1.78 30 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Fair/Equitable Housing opportunities and programs to help maintain and secure neighborhoods that have suffered foreclosures. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) 85.71% 0.00% 14.29% 0.00% 1.05% 6 0 1 0 7 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) 50.27% 30.05% 12.57% 7.10% 27.56% 92 55 23 13 183 E C Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) 45.64% 36.51% 14.94% 2.90% 36.30% 110 88 36 7 241 DE B Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 48.21% 39.49% 8.72% 3.59% 29.37% (D) 94 77 17 7 195 C Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old 50.00% (E) 18 47.22% 2.78% 0.00% 5.42% 17 1 0 36 B C 1.29 1.77 1.75 1.68 1.53 31/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q13 Do you feel that the different housing types in Temecula currently meet your housing needs? Answered:652 Skipped:14 Q (0-2 Q11: (24-3 Gener G Boom( Q1 Gene 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Yes 0 No Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) (A) Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) (B) Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old (D) Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old (E) Total Respondents YES NO 28.57°% 2 62.09% 113 E 62.92% 151 E 68.06% 130 81.25% 26 BC 422 230 TOTAL 71.43% 5 37.91% 69 E 37.08% 89 E 31.94% 61 18.75% 6 BC 1.07% 7 27.91% 182 36.81% 240 29.29% 191 4.91% 32 652 32 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q14 What types of housing are most needed in the City of Temecula? Answered:659 Skipped:7 Q11: Gen Z 3,�» (0-23 years... Q11: (24-3 Gener G Boom( Q1 Gene 0 100 200 300 400 50C 0 Single Family (Detached) E Duplex/Attached Housing condominiums (multifamily ownership homes) Apartments (multifamily rental homes) OseniorHousing Accessory Dwelling Unit Housing for people with disabilities (Please specify in comment field below) Other (please specify) SINGLE DUPLEXIATTACHED CONDOMINIUMS APARTMENTS SENIOR ACCESSORY HOUSING OTHER TOTAL FAMILY HOUSING (MULTIFAMILY (MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DWELLING FOR PEOPLE (PLEASE (DETACHED) OWNERSHIP RENTAL UNIT WITH SPECIFY) HOMES) HOMES) DISABILITIES (PLEASE SPECIFY IN COMMENT FIELD BELOW) Q11: Gen Z 42.86% 28.57% 57.14% 42.86% 28.57% 28.57% 28.57% 28.57% 3.03% (0-23 years 3 2 4 3 2 2 2 2 20 old) (A) Q11: Millenial (24- 39 years old) (B) Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) (C) Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old (D) 60.66% 24.59% 30.60% 18.03% 18.58% 6.56% 12.02% 23.50% 54.02% 111 45 56 33 34 12 22 43 356 D D CDE C 48.95% 20.25% 24.47% 14.35% 29.96% 12.66% 15.19% 25.74% 68.89% 116 48 58 34 71 30 36 61 454 BIDE B 43.59% 17.95% 20.00% 8.21% 47.69% 11.79% 10.26% 23.59% 54.17% 85 35 39 16 93 23 20 46 357 B B BCE Q11: (Silent 27.03% 10.81% 8.11% 5.41% 59.46% 5.41% 8.11% 18.92% 8.04% Generation) 10 4 3 2 22 2 3 7 53 75 + years BCD old (E) Total 325 134 160 88 222 69 83 159 659 Respondents # Q11: GEN Z (0-23 YEARS OLD) 1 Close to shops, affordable. 2 More single -story homes instead of two-story homes DATE 8/25/2020 12:26 AM 8/5/2020 10:47 AM 33/67 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q31: MILLENIAL (24-39 YEARS OLD) DATE Low rent/homeless housing 9/24/2020 7:39 PM Low income housing 9/2/2020 6:11 AM Not sure 8/31/2020 9:44 PM None. I moved here from a similar town where I grew up. They quickly added apartments and multi use buildings 8/30/2020 12:22 PM and didn't plan for the increased traffic. Low income housing 8/28/2020 3:50 PM Homes low -mid income families Could afford 8/28/2020 1:32 PM None it's great as is 8/24/2020 1:02 PM I feel that people with PHYSICAL disabilities should have the same access to the Same Communities as the 55+ 8/22/2020 5:30 AM do, Since most of us require the same amount of care if not more! I strongly feel that people with Physical Disabilities who desire to live Independently should be able to do so in a SAFE city like Temecula CA Sorry I don't mean to be NIMBY but apartments and homeless populations can go be built in Murrieta or menifee. 8/21/2020 12:17 PM Designing these services will attract a different kind of demographic. No thanks. More affordable housing 8/21/2020 5:25 AM Shelter 8/19/2020 5:15 PM Single story homes for FTB 8/19/2020 9:50 AM Down -payments are hard 8/19/2020 8:19 AM Anything affordable 8/17/2020 9:55 PM Reasonably priced housing 8/17/2020 2:05 PM medium income housing, not high or low 8/17/2020 10:55 AM Low income housing 8/14/2020 11:09 PM Stop building fix the off ramps 8/11/2020 9:53 PM House with accessory sweeping unit or "casita" 8/7/2020 6:38 PM more inclusive housing options like the upcoming Cypress Ridge townhomes on Pechanga Pkwy 8/6/2020 5:34 PM We like Temecula a lot, but we don't want to pick between a tiny apartment or an oversized (for us) giant home, 8/6/2020 8:19 AM regardless of what we can afford. There are very few modest homes ever available for people like us. Affordable housing 8/5/2020 10:19 AM Please do not build any more houses! 8/5/2020 10:05 AM Temecula seem to have reached housing variety 8/3/2020 3:20 PM Low income housing for single parents 8/3/2020 7:17 AM More truly affordable housing for working class people 8/2/2020 12:44 PM Permanent supportive housing 8/2/2020 11:45 AM Affordable Housing for all of the above 8/2/2020 8:55 AM Homes with ample space between them 8/1/2020 10:54 AM Low income home for single parent 7/31/2020 10:26 PM Properties with larger lots 7/31/2020 5:20 PM We have too much traffic as it is. Dont need any more homes 7/31/2020 12:28 PM Senior communities (not apartment style but whole communities) and SINGLE STORY OPTIONS. My in-laws have 7/31/2020 6:47 AM been looking for four years and no luck because they are so rare to find in anything besides a tiny little rundown duplex. Studio/loft/professional dwellings 7/30/2020 7:15 PM Lower income housing 7/30/2020 5:54 PM Housing options for single parents 7/30/2020 5:51 PM Affordable housing 7/30/2020 5:43 PM Homes for veteran and with physical disabilities 7/30/2020 3:31 PM Smaller single family homes 7/30/2020 3:20 PM Unsure. There appears to be enough housing, would hate to see it become overpopulated and turn into another 7/30/2020 2:44 PM congested city. None 7/30/2020 1:37 PM Low to moderate income affordable homes 7/30/2020 12:05 PM Larger lots for single-family homes. Developments are too tightly -packed. Where are the 10-15k square foot lots? 6/8/2020 11:25 AM It's either 5-7k square foot lots or multi -acre lots in De Luz/Wine Country. Very little in the middle. 34 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Q31: GENERATION X (40-55 YEARS OLD) AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLEASE low income housing No more housing. We need a better infrastructure, more schools. Too many houses/ people to accommodate as it is. upscale 55 and older communities T Stroke and brain injury survivors More affordable multi generation homes None. Stop building! Traffic is horrible Low income senior housing Permanent Supportive Housing DATE 9/15/2020 12:16 PM 9/9/2020 3:44 PM 9/5/2020 10:14 AM 9/4/2020 5:14 PM 8/31/2020 11:14 PM 8/31/2020 11:13 AM 8/30/2020 7:44 PM 8/30/2020 5:04 PM 8/29/2020 11:49 PM 8/29/2020 7:16 PM affordable housing for all 8/28/2020 2:37 PM We need more house that low income people can buy!!!!! 8/28/2020 1:56 PM I have a daughter with a mental illness and it would be very good if we can get a house where we can live better 8/28/2020 1:44 PM Housing for homeless 8/28/2020 1:11 PM I feel Temecula should stop expanding and stop building houses. The community is already too impacted with 8/28/2020 8:09 AM people, cars, etc. Affordable 8/27/2020 1:23 PM Homes that are handicap accessible for elderly and for disabled veterans 8/24/2020 12:30 AM affordable housing for working families, homeless who want to stay here 8/21/2020 11:38 AM None. There are plenty of housing types already. Temecula is overcrowded as it is. Plenty of room to build north of 8/19/2020 9:24 PM Menifee. None! No more new housing 8/19/2020 8:39 PM Affordable housing 8/19/2020 8:36 AM We have enough! We need jobs 8/19/2020 7:57 AM We do not want or need low income housing!!! Studies show that crime is increased in these areas making our 8/15/2020 12:59 AM children even more vulnerable! No more development! The current infrastructure can't handle the existing traffic, much less additional families. 8/12/2020 8:14 AM Mixed neighborhoods with groceries 8/11/2020 5:54 PM Single family homes under 2000sf are very difficult to find in Temecula. 8/11/2020 2:22 PM No housing with a supported/group management office for individuals with special needs. 8/10/2020 3:46 PM People Wth disabilities don't have many options for housing in Temecula and it drives people to move away from 8/10/2020 2:30 PM where they grew up because housing options are not available here. If they were, other programs could be brought in to help support them. More single story. More affordable housing. 8/9/2020 10:17 AM NONE 8/7/2020 9:28 PM Habitat for Humanity type housing opportunities 8/7/2020 8:34 PM Don't know 8/7/2020 2:22 PM Nothing , stop building more homes we do not need more housing here 8/7/2020 5:01 AM We need more affordable apartments / condos 8/6/2020 4:11 PM single level homes for aging population 8/6/2020 8:46 AM Affordable rent 8/6/2020 7:35 AM Autism None Do not want to change! Prefer single family homes. This is why we live in suburbs I don't know, not knowledgeable enough There are too many homes in Temecula Single story no more needed Affordable workforce housing Mixed -use commercial on ground, residential on top, mid -rise buildings Less houses Affordable housing 48 Small single family homes, not these gigantic 2 story 5 bedroom homes 49 1 like the mixed -use housing concept like in Old Town 50 Smaller but still high quality homes (1200-1800 sgft) and homes with larger lot sizes. Newer stock seems to be 8/5/2020 8:51 PM 8/5/2020 2:18 PM 8/5/2020 2:10 PM 8/5/2020 10:16 AM 8/5/2020 10:06 AM 8/5/2020 9:40 AM 8/4/2020 12:35 PM 8/4/2020 7:48 AM 8/4/2020 12:55 AM 8/3/2020 5:20 PM 8/2/2020 7:41 PM 8/1/2020 9:52 AM 7/31/2020 2:59 PM 7/31/2020 2:17 PM 35/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 mostly McMansions on postage stamp lots I feel there needs to be more options for single people, but not necessarily condiminiums as they usually come with 7/31/2020 8:36 AM large HOA costs. I would love to see neighborhoods of detached small homes with very low HOA fees that are accessible to lower income people. subsidized housing 7/30/2020 10:33 PM Housing that's affordable, safe and nice like what you'd want to live 7/30/2020 9:19 PM Workforce housing/ownership 7/30/2020 8:55 PM We had a great city until the city council got in be with developers. Lots of apartments ruin a city and require lots of 7/30/2020 7:25 PM service calls from police and fire. Welcome to temec=downey whittier Affordable housing for lower income 7/30/2020 5:26 PM Less rentals and more affordable homeownership 7/30/2020 4:33 PM Tiny homes that are affordable to low income people that work in Temecula 7/30/2020 2:58 PM Affordable to the kids who grew up here. 7/30/2020 1:39 PM Wheelchair accessible housing 7/30/2020 1:07 PM Permanent supportive housing 6/2/2020 4:41 PM 36 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Q11: (BABY BOOMERS) 56-74 YEARS OLD Markets We don't need more traffic/horrible or public financial assistance to make homes ADA compliant instead of building more structures to allow disabled persons to remain in their homes. I'd rather see conversions rather than new builds with washing machine and dryer Group complex for Disabled Adult son needing financial support in Special Needs Trust We are so full right now, the only thing is duplex's and I'am against. No opinion More Single Story Homes none Low cost housing for people with low income Need affordable apts for special needs Fairly priced housing for the youth just starting to be out on their own. This volt not force them to have to move to questionable neighborhoods. More multiuse property areas with reduced need for cars Affordable housing for people not requiring Section 8 housing, though cannot afford high rent. Affordable housing Affordable housing with disabled amenity's, so disabled people do not end up on the street & homeless. No more housing. Don't know, why would you expect this kind of intormation trom a survey low income housing opportunities I am opposed to the new law that allows ADUs. I purchased my home for the view and privacy. An ADU next door would affect both and I would move if that happened. AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR SIGLE MOM'S WITH CHILDREN TO LIVE NEAR WHERE THEY WORK. I feel that the city doesn't need anymore housing and we are already at capacity Most have 2-5year wait list for low income senior apts. Affordable housing for low income families. Senior single unit detached homes that are affordable and size appropriate for retirement and special care needs. Not high rise apartments! Homeless Low-cost housing for our very low-income and homeless population. I have a daughter with epilepsy and a son with a neurological condition, they will need housing if I die DATE 9/16/2020 9:35 AM 9/16/2020 9:13 AM 9/15/2020 10:40 AM 9/15/2020 10:20 AM 9/15/2020 10:10 AM 9/6/2020 7:14 AM 9/4/2020 7:08 PM 9/4/2020 4:15 PM 9/4/2020 4:12 PM 9/4/2020 3:17 PM 9/1/2020 10:20 AM 8/30/2020 11:27 AM 8/29/2020 7:31 AM 8/28/2020 7:39 PM 8/28/2020 6:44 PM 8/28/2020 6:01 PM 8/28/2020 3:48 PM 8/28/2020 3:14 PM 8/28/2020 1:43 PM 8/28/2020 1:21 PM 8/27/2020 3:32 PM 8/24/2020 10:16 AM 8/21/2020 1:15 PM 8/19/2020 11:04 PM 8/19/2020 7:05 PM 8/19/2020 1:39 PM 8/19/2020 10:15 AM 8/19/2020 10:02 AM 8/19/2020 9:42 AM live work play 8/14/2020 2:51 PM More low income housing needed and housing to minimize the problems caused by homeless 8/13/2020 5:53 PM No more homes needed. Too many now 8/12/2020 9:48 AM Affordable housing. SFR 8/11/2020 9:17 PM More affordable apartment's 8/10/2020 2:23 PM Small complexes of houses for co -housing, 8/7/2020 5:07 AM Sliding scale housing. 8/6/2020 4:29 PM More one story homes 8/5/2020 8:57 PM Senior housing that doesn't cost $3000/mo. Actively encourage ADU's. 8/5/2020 9:56 AM We don't need anymore homes built. The infrastructure is not support mire homes 8/2/2020 4:23 PM Low income housing for single Moms, so the can live near where they work & can afford to live without their salaries 8/2/2020 10:58 AM being spent on rent! I know of no place in Temecula, life this for single parents, especially for single Moms. AFFORDABLE "Active" Senior 55+ Neighborhoods, AFFORDABLE Apartments, I feel there is enough assisted 7/31/2020 5:59 PM living The city is great as it is. It shouldn't keep growing bigger! Traffic's already getting heavy and stressful! 7/31/2020 5:01 PM None. The area can not handle any more traffic!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 7/31/2020 2:54 PM Single story homes 7/31/2020 2:15 PM Provide more single story homes and condo/townhomes as single story 7/31/2020 2:13 PM Affordable Senior homes - smaller single units near shopping centers, grocers, pharmacies, etc. 7/30/2020 2:35 PM 37/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q11: (SILENT GENERATION) 75 + YEARS OLD 1 Markets 2 No opinion 3 Apartment that single people with children can afford 4 all the above 5 affordable housing 6 Don't know 7 Single family 55+ homes. DATE 9/16/2020 9:22 AM 9/16/2020 9:19 AM 9/15/2020 10:24 AM 9/4/2020 3:14 PM 9/3/2020 7:21 AM 8/28/2020 2:02 PM 8/28/2020 1:34 PM 38 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q15 Please remember to visit the website for more details on the Housing Element Update at the link below:https://temeculaca.gov/432/Housing-Element Are there any comments or concerns you would like to share with the City of Temecula relevant to the upcoming Housing Element Update? Answered: 255 Skipped:411 PLEASE REMEMBER TO VISIT THE WEBSITE FOR MORE DETAILS ON THE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE AT THE LINK TOTAL BELOW:HTTPS:IITEMECULACA.GOV/432/HOUSING-ELEMENT ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR CONCERNS YOU WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH THE CITY OF TEMECULA RELEVANT TO THE UPCOMING HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE? Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) Q11: Millenial (24- 39 years old) Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old Total 255 Respondents # Q11: GEN Z (0-23 YEARS OLD) 1 It has gone downhill since we lived here 2000-2010. Now 2016-present. Police aren't keeping things together, so many houses, a lot of cars. It's grown, in a bad way. Nothing to do and no longer perfect for a family. 2 Not at this time 100.00% 0.78% 2 2 100.00% 27.06% 69 69 100.00% 38.82% 99 99 100.00% 29.80% 76 76 100.00% 3.53% 9 9 255 DATE 8/25/2020 12:26 AM 8/5/2020 10:47 AM 39 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q11: MILLENIAL (24-39 YEARS OLD) DATE 1 The cost of rent here does not match the income that many of us have forcing many to struggle, have roommates, 9/24/2020 1:18 PM constantly move etc. More affordable housing that matches the jobs available that only want to pay $17 or less would help out a great deal so people can afford to live without roommates and without struggling to pay everything 2 Don't allow section 8 housing to be grouped Together. Don't allow homeless to live rear river beds. Continue police 9/1/2020 10:24 AM force. 3 With the state, country, and world moving toward renewable energy -some HOAs in Temecula still do not allow solar 8/31/2020 9:44 PM on roofs. With the climate and typical yardscape here, solar installation on a roof just makes too much sense for the city and homeowners. Not too much reduce the stress on an overloaded power grid and reduce the risk of fires. The city should adopt a mandate that prevents HOAs from banning solar roofs. 4 Don't be so eager to plan for new housing development. I realize that the City can make money off of it but it may 8/30/2020 12:22 PM lose the charm of a quiet country town. I'd like to see this money and effort go towards fire safety, homeless and drug rehab programs and centers. 5 N/A 8/28/2020 10:29 PM 6 low income housing shouldn't be just for emergency needs. Ive tried everywhere and only found about 4-6 in the 8/28/2020 3:50 PM neighborhood. 7 NA 8/28/2020 1:32 PM 8 Trying to past legislature that encourages millennial's to pursue owning a home in Temecula. 8/28/2020 1:23 PM 9 None 8/27/2020 2:00 PM 10 I'm concerned about city maintaining safety and keeping police of Temecula 8/27/2020 1:53 AM 11 We understand that is is a very nice area but the lack of a rent increase cap is hurting families. Please consider a 8/24/2020 8:25 PM rent increase cap to keep families who live and work here from having to relocate. 12 1 don't believe there should be any more low income housing in Temecula. If you need more money from the feds 8/24/2020 1:02 PM then you should figure out how to do a better job and quit spending our money. 13 1 would like to See More Homes/Apartments available for the PHYSICALLY disabled! The city of Temecula has 55+ 8/22/2020 5:30 AM Communities which is great for those in need of it ... I STRONGLY believe that people who are PHYSICALLY disabled should be included in those communities 14 Maybe it will be different because of working remote for white collar workers but I lived in temecula and commuted 8/21/2020 12:17 PM to carlsbad/San Diego/riverside since 2001 and the last 3 years were torture it would take 30 mins to even hop on Rancho cal at 530am. There are no jobs here. I grew up here, I'm nearing 40, 1 have an mba and I love temecula but I have no kids. I'm here for now due to covid but given the choice between buying a big house in temecula with all my friends married and making fun of my life decisions (when are you getting settled down), i would rather live peacefully and simply in a small condo near the coast. The wine tourism is great here but it's hot, full of children. Keep temecula for FAMILIES not homeless or single people. We aren't your target market :) many of my friends with families are priced out of temecula and living in menifee. It feels like temecula is aging like me haha , my parents still live here and a lot of my friends from high school Parents also. I remember in the 90s heated discussions about apartments. We don't more apartments here the ones we have there are shootings at (Rancho cal just saying). I also don't know where the heck these homeless druggies are coming from it's been 10-15 years and it's disgusting to avoid the target Starbucks and vons because of fear of encountering a tweaker. 15 Everything about Temecula is great except the traffic. More housing means more people and more traffic. Please 8/21/2020 8:29 AM the importance of open spaces and the need for expanded roads and freeway on/off ramps when increasing housing. 16 The rent has gone up exponentially, so much so that people aren't able to maintain the cost of living in Temecula. 8/21/2020 5:25 AM 17 Community College brings roommate situations that drive up rent for apartments and multi room homes - this hurts 8/19/2020 9:25 PM one income families 18 Easy way to apply for FTB programs. It's hard to know which direction to go with no knowledge and I wish there 8/19/2020 9:50 AM would be a community resource that could help First time buyers who don't understand what to do. There are thousands of FTB in Temecula who need help but don't know where to go to. All my friends in their late 20's who are ready to buy in Temecula get intimidated by the pricing and not knowing all the info 19 No 8/18/2020 7:47 PM 20 Please emphasize livability for residents over profitability for developers. Don't build apartments that look like 8/18/2020 4:19 PM prisons but cost as much as a home. More importantly please emphasize the issue isn't a housing shortage but an income shortage/affordability crisis. 21 None 8/18/2020 10:02 AM 22 Remove the homeless 8/17/2020 9:01 PM 23 Houses are very expensive in Temecula. Just because someone doesn't make a lot of money doesn't mean they 8/17/2020 2:05 PM are going to ruin the neighborhood. 24 Not at this time 8/17/2020 1:59 PM 25 Please help with the local homeless community in Old Town Temecula. I do not feel safe in the late evening when 8/14/2020 11:09 PM they are roaming around near my home. 26 If you are going to build more buildings in old town temecula, then you need to make more parking garages or more 8/14/2020 3:39 PM available parking. It is extremely irritating to live in old town and not be able to park! 27 End better access to the freeway 8/11/2020 9:53 PM 28 Allowing short term rentals within the city of temecula should be a priority for the city council. It helps improve 8/11/2020 3:58 PM tourism and allows home owners to create extra income and coup with the high cost of living Found in Temecula. 29 Please oppose any state bills that take away single-family zoning, especially in these pandemic times. We need 8/10/2020 11:02 AM more open space, not less! 30 No 8/8/2020 10:02 PM 31 N/a 8/7/2020 10:38 PM 32 No 8/7/2020 1:17 PM 40 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 33 1 think seniors need affordable housing most in this area. There are plenty of rentals for younger people. 8/7/2020 8:24 AM 34 My hope is that the City will continue to develop Temecula's remaining land carefully as we approach build -out, with 8/6/2020 5:34 PM an eye for quality (at every price point) and inclusion. 35 Nothing additional 8/6/2020 8:19 AM 36 The traffic is already highly congested, creating not only pollution and safety issues- but concerns about expansion. 8/6/2020 8:17 AM Temecula needs to stop building before it becomes unrecognizable. With heavy traffic, people become agitated and stressed, and that is when it becomes dangerous for bikers, pedestrians, and we see higher amounts of traffic accidents. Let's keep Temecula safe and preserve the beauty 37 Please no more massive developments of single family homes! 38 We should be promoting diversity of our community and providing more affordable housing. 39 Please do not build anymore housing, at least right now. Communities that grow too fast fall fast and I do not want that for Temecula 8/5/2020 12:08 PM 8/5/2020 10:19 AM 8/5/2020 10:05 AM 40 If you're going to build anymore new housing, PLEASE require larger backyards and houses that are further apart 8/4/2020 5:04 PM from each other. 41 Homes are so overpriced including inflation of mortgages and property taxes. Would be nice to have a few homes 8/4/2020 1:05 AM that can be considered starter homes that are not in the high $300k. 42 New single detached homes that are less than $500k and with an actual front / back yard for our kids to grow up don't exist. Right now my family is forced to pay over $600k for a new house within the Temecula School system, or $500k for a house that's even close to a very basic 2,OOOsgft floor plan. Otherwise, we are stuck with condos plagued with $300 HOAs (Rancho Soleo) and no parking. My family and I make over $130k without including any overtime at our jobs and we are forced to buy a very used 2006 house stuck in a neighborhood where each house is less than 10 feet apart. We have no privacy. How is this possible? 43 Stop building and over crowding Temecula!! The traffic and amount of people here is awful!! 44 Please keep temecula a beautiful safe city . Please don't make it city like (busy) w a lot of apartments 45 Stop building master planes tract homes on 1/3 acre each and build some mixed use housing! The city has known they're deficient in housing for low to middle income earners for 10 years- do something about it already!! 46 The city needs more affordable housing options 8/3/2020 5:55 PM 8/3/2020 3:24 PM 8/3/2020 2:45 PM 8/2/2020 5:25 PM 8/2/2020 12:14 PM 47 Would love to see more shelters especially for families. Also we need to see transitional housing for individuals with 8/2/2020 9:37 AM addiction and mental health issues. See too many homeless on the streetcar living in their cars on a daily basis. An increase in affordable housing for working people. Cannot gauge them with rent. Has to align with what the minimum wage is allowing them to spend. 48 There needs to be affordable housing in Temecula. It is not right to have your current grocery store workers working at a location near you but have no place for them to live in that city. 49 Clean up our dry creeks and rid them from trash and homelessness 50 The cost of housing lacks diversity. There are no single family detached rental homes priced at appropriate levels for middle to low income families. 51 Keep a clean, friendly and safe community for all to enjoy 52 We definitely don't need any more apartments or condominiums. Traffic is terrible in our area. I would also love to see more vide -open space type of parks. 53 The city's zoning ordinance is designed to prevent the construction of inexpensive multifamily housing. This means that living in Temecula is going to continue to become more expensive than it already is. 54 It would be nice to have additional new single family homes for the influx of new residents, but it needs to be paired with continued improvement to infrastructure and roads. 8/2/2020 8:55 AM 8/1/2020 10:54 AM 7/31/2020 7:24 PM 7/31/2020 5:46 PM 7/31/2020 5:20 PM 7/31/20204:49 PM 7/31/2020 11:09 AM 55 Please don't turn our city into an area of dispear . Don't allow homeless to over take the area as they are already 7/31/2020 9:38 AM doing to our shopping centers. Give owners options of rental property and Airbnb . 56 1 wont' about how many new builds are going in well East of the 15 without developing anything that will ease the 7/31/2020 6:47 AM strain they will put on working families traveling to jobs. The housing I see most often targets young families due to large home sizes, which assumes more than likely two working parents. That's two more cars on the road. As someone who lives between a lot of these new builds and the freeway access, I worry that a difficult commute will become seriously worse as time progresses. I take some responsibility as I too commute to SD County for work, but only to Fallbrook, so about as close to Temecula as you can get. Most days I need to plan an hour for a drive that should take 25 minutes and the writing on the wall says it's only going to get more congested with the addition of neighborhoods like Sommers Bend when there isn't a reasonable alternative for getting north or south. 57 Housing/ rent pricing caused by investors buying up property in bulk and renting out. It's driving up costs and lowering the quality of inventory. 58 We need more affordable housing options for lower income families 59 As someone who works in a position that often interacts with the homeless population in this city, I can firmly say that this city desperately needs to address homelessness in Temecula better and with more respect. Many homeless patrons that I have heard from say that they do not feel that there is nearly enough city resources to help support them and get them back on their feet. They also often complain that they don't feel respected, seen, or heard by the city and that is a major issue that Temecula needs to grapple with. Redirecting that funding toward social resources and programs would make a tremendous difference in our community. Also, the cost of housing (rent, buying a house, etc.) is FAR too high in this area. Neither I or my boyfriend would be able to afford our rent and living expenses on a monthly basis if one of us lost our income for any reason, and we live in what is considered one of the "cheapest" apartments in the city). This is a terrifying concern that needs to be promptly addressed, especially considering the hardships brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. Thankfully my boyfriend and I have been getting our steady income during this time but we were initially horrified at the start of all of this when we were unsure if we'd be keeping our jobs and be getting paid during this trying time. 60 As a single mother I can say it's almost impossible for me to find something in Temecula where I would feel safe raising my son. It's daunting to feel that way. 61 1 have worked in Temecula for 10 years but cannot afford to live in this city. I am a single mother of 3 with a good paying job. I would benefit from an affordable housing element. I contribute to this city and should be able to live 7/30/2020 11:20 PM 7/30/2020 7:18 PM 7/30/2020 7:08 PM 7/30/2020 5:51 PM 7/30/2020 5:43 PM 41/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey here as well. 62 1 accepted a job in Temecula at the beginning of the year and moved here for it. Then, we all were hit with Covid-19. 7/30/2020 5:10 PM I am highly interested in understanding the real estate market in the area as that I've noticed many homes going on MLS; I'm interested in as to why so many homes for sale. 63 We need less housing developments! Especially ones where the homes are so so close together with no yard. 7/30/2020 4:57 PM 64 We need affordable single family homes for people who work blue collar jobs and low -paying white collar jobs in 7/30/2020 3:20 PM Temecula 65 No 7/30/2020 1:37 PM 66 Coming from an undesirable neighborhood before moving to Temecula, I worry bringing more apartments or " lower income" housing will devalue our neighborhood and bring in more crime. I saved and bought my home here because the city was safe and clean, I am concerned it will become more in lines of where I moved away from if more apartments and condos are built 67 Yes, please stop building homes. There is nothing attractive about a community with endless neighborhoods of cookie -cutter homes. The northern Inland Empire region is an example of the crime and pollution increase that results from not leaving any open space for recreation, parks, etc. Despite Temecula having several public amenities, there is a significant lack of public trails systems - I'm not talking about dirt paths through cookie -cutter neighborhoods - I'm talking about trail systems like Meadowview, or those in open, natural spaces that give our community members a sense of connection to nature. My family is currently not purchasing a home in Temecula because we are waiting to see if the City continues to flood every open space with a development, or if they change their approach to develop a balance community. Rehabilitate existing shopping centers, create consistency in building architecture, improve trail systems and stop thinking that growth is the only way to run a City. As a Civil Engineer, I am extremely troubled by the fact that City's do not understand the negative impact of growth to local pollution, congested roadways and natural open spaces. Increased tax revenue from residential housing is not valuable long-term to a community. Temecula is literally the last haven in the IE, and it looks like it will be a pain to live in at the current rate of growth. Improve local businesses to stimulate your economy to truly make this a tourist destination. Please!!! 68 69 I am very, very concerned about the rash of bills coming from Sacramento that push upzoning and high -density housing on all communities in the state. Please resist these bills with every tool you have. Nobody wants their existing neighborhood upended. Local cities should be able to decide for themselves the type of housing they need and allow. The NUMBER #1 concern is traffic on the freeway. Before any more units are built, the State needs to adequately fund infrastructure in the area. The area has grown tons in the last 30 years. Before more units are built, we need infrastructure. Also, the state should not tell cities that they must build more units, or change zoning. It is called local government for a reason. Sacramento needs to stop over ruling the wishes of communities. 7/30/2020 1:30 PM 7/30/2020 12:23 PM 6/8/2020 11:25 AM 5/28/2020 10:43 AM 42 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q11: GENERATION X (40-55 YEARS OLD) DATE 1 Just want affordable housing for all income types. It would reduce homelessness and bring diversity to the city. 9/24/2020 1:11 PM 2 It is disappointing to see zonings changed and other adjustments that are aimed to please the person(s) financially 9/24/2020 11:21 AM benefitting rather than thinking about the value in the original zoning as well as congestion and overloading the market. 3 4 5 6 Stop building more houses until you have the schools and infrastructure to support the people already here Make it easier to add an ADU. For example, provide (free!) the (approved!) architectural plans for 4-6 different ADUs. Rather than making each individual homeowner come up with their own (although that should still be an option) the city can just give out plans that meet all of their guidelines. Transportation is an interdependency with housing, I don't see how they can be compartmentalized. I think we need to do more to help get homeless of the street but what that looks like I am not sure. I do not want Temecula to turn into what LA, San Fran and Austin are seeing now. I believe in helping people get back on their feet and not in enabling them or making them rely on others. 7 No 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 9/5/2020 10:14 AM 9/5/2020 12:01 AM 9/4/2020 3:58 PM 9/4/2020 3:49 PM 9/4/2020 3:36 PM You need to strongly consider the enormous tax assessments that are assessed to new homes. Even our home 9/4/2020 3:36 PM purchased in 2008 had unaffordable taxes. So we move to an older neighborhood within Temecula after 10 years because the taxes were out of control. Avoid construction of multi -units or apartments that makes real estate prices go down and increases traffic in the 9/4/2020 3:29 PM area. My family moved to Temecula in 1968, moved to Murrieta in 2013. 9/4/2020 3:07 PM no 8/31/2020 11:14 PM More solar initiatives 8/31/2020 11:13 AM n/a 8/31/2020 7:33 AM No 8/30/2020 9:55 PM Reinstate short term rentals. These are OUR homes. Let us capitalize on the tourist income since you built it and 8/30/2020 5:04 PM brought all the traffic with it. Work on more affordable taxes or lower/shorter term Mello -Roos. 8/30/2020 12:24 PM My inlaws have recently relocated from the East Coast to Temecula to be near family. They are in their 70's. While, 8/29/2020 11:49 PM I have them living with me for now, the intent was for them to find their own place in independent senior living. It is very disappointing that there is a 3 to 5 year wait list for low income senior housing in Temecula. There really needs to be more units available. None 8/29/2020 8:48 PM Please adopt a by -right process for multifamily housing. 8/29/2020 7:16 PM My concern is about the traffic issues when more homes are built. Is the traffic issue also part of this program? 8/28/2020 6:35 PM More affordable housing for all. 8/28/2020 2:37 PM We need to have more homes build for single parents who have very limited income through Habitat for Humanity 8/28/2020 2:19 PM and the area I live in perris and I am in the housing list 8/28/2020 1:44 PM The homeless population continues to grow in Temecula, creating unsafe environments in some areas. I am not 8/28/2020 8:09 AM comfortable allowing my teenagers to go to some areas of the city. Tax rates and the fact that I could get a larger, nicer house for less money kept me from buying in Temecula and 8/28/2020 6:04 AM sent me to French Valley. Some areas are priced high to keep minorities out. Lack of information on home loans for minorities. 8/27/2020 10:16 PM Temecula is pushing out the middle class because of housing costs 8/27/2020 1:23 PM I would like to see the city offer some kind of insensitive to homeowners to prune their palm trees. 8/26/2020 8:05 PM None 8/24/2020 8:52 PM The housing for sale and rental are way too expensive 8/24/2020 3:14 PM Adult autism housing We have too many homeless people along Temecula Parkway. They need to be relocated. More resources for affordable housing need to be made available and also on the City Website Temecula housing programs and strategies must be colorblind and open to all Americans regardless of race, creed, national origin, etc., while also promoting economic efficiency and free and open markets. We feel discriminated in getting a loan from the lander or landlord. Yes. Temecula is overcrowded. Way too many apartments and condos. The city council was going the right direction with making it more of a destination or tourist town but now they want to ruin the natural beauty with more housing. There are areas north of Menifee that can take more housing and where new infrastructure can be built. Temecula is maxed out. Stop building. This city is quickly becoming congested, leading to impatient drivers, increase littering and lack of care for the community. Home prices have outpaced wages and the rental market has also doubled in price with a large amount of homes renting over $3000 and up. Lots of foreign investors buying up our market and setting rents very high. no 8/24/2020 3:12 PM 8/24/2020 2:50 PM 8/24/2020 12:38 PM 8/24/2020 12:30 AM 8/22/2020 7:01 AM 8/19/2020 9:24 PM 8/19/2020 8:39 PM 8/19/2020 5:37 PM 8/19/2020 1:59 PM The price range to buy a home in Temecula is expensive for a single parent 8/19/2020 11:36 AM Not sure if this is the proper place but what is being done about the homeless population. In our short time of living 8/19/2020 11:35 AM 43 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey in CA, especially in Temecula, I do not see an improvement with the homeless. They are still present in certain parts of town. There is so much land east of here, why can't shelters and a small community be built there? We pay so many taxes in CA but I'm having a hard time seeing where the money is going. 42 1 have worked in Temecula for 15 years and have never been able to afford to purchase a home here. Always had to 8/19/2020 8:36 AM drive from cheaper cities. We need more affordable housing. 43 We have enough housing projects. We dont want homeless people here. 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 I'd like information on housing programs to help first time home buyers with down payment options. There's a lot of road rage here. A lot of bullying in schools (not currently for obvious reasons). And not enough police presence. Thank you. Temecula, as a city, needs far more diversity. It doesn't feel or appear to include all races and individuals from various socio-economic backgrounds. It feels and appears to contain mostly White, affluent Republicans with racist beliefs and unfair practices towards minorities. This makes the housing situation biased and racially divided. The safety of our neighborhood is in danger many, many robberies and car theft plus very low income trashy people taking the people's peace away due to section 8. We cant wait to move away after 4 years in peace the last 2 has been horrible, with the tenants section 8 next door, drinking, smoking, fighting, sheriffs coming all the time etc. Please keep Temecula looking nice and clean It is imperative that you not place low income housing next to family neighborhoods and schools. Studies show that Section 8 housing attracts drug use and other crimes and we don't want our children exposed to this type of environment. We would leave Temecula if the city does this. The city needs to focus on providing affordable housing for its essential workers. People who work hard and are willing to pay a mortgage that meets their budget. It's ok to embrace slow qrowth Not at this time. Any plan must address the ingress and egress of commuters on 1-15. If the City isn't able to make changes to the freeway congestion, they shouldn't be adding to it with new housing. We need very affordable housing and temporary, emergency housing to help the homeless Currently we need less housing and more commercial businesses like restaurants. Especially on Temecula parkway which lacks family friendly sit down restaurants. Not a nimby but I would like any homeless to be directed away from public traffic. The duck pond has been an issue. 8/19/2020 7:57 AM 8/18/2020 3:11 PM 8/18/2020 2:01 PM 8/18/2020 1:17 PM 8/17/2020 8:31 PM 8/17/2020 8:02 AM 8/15/2020 12:59 AM 8/14/20204:21 PM 8/12/2020 9:58 AM 8/12/2020 9:18 AM 8/12/2020 8:14 AM 8/12/2020 6:15 AM 8/11/2020 8:32 PM 8/11/2020 5:54 PM 57 Would like to see either rents or mortgages at affordable rates for single mothers, single persons that can be able to 8/11/2020 1:47 PM affordable on single income. 58 As a special needs teacher in Temecula, my concern is two -fold: personal and professional. Personally, there are not options for a single teacher income for housing in Temecula. I don't qualify for low income housing and the regular prices of homes are too expensive, but I want to live in the community I work in. Unfortunately, this situation is pushing me to purchase further away from Temecula as I watch new homes being built in the $500K range around town. I would love to have an opportunity to stay in Temecula where my children grew up. Professionally, the students I serve are 18-22yo and many of them move out of the area to seek housing in areas who support the special needs community. Many of our families move here because of our special needs program in schools, but then what happens once they become adults? We need to continue to support them by offering more accessible home options for individuals with special needs that are close to public transit and the community needs (i.e. shopping, doctors, etc.). Our special needs population in Temecula continues to grow and we continue to support them as best we can, but we can do better by thinking long term. 59 Working through city permit process for an ADU and it is arduous. So far the city is not being helpful and is quite disappointing. 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 More open space/parks/hiking trails/Agriculture. Would like to see more dedicated bike trails. Less high density - leads to more traffic and less happiness. It takes too long to build and govt fees are contributing factor in increase costs. Stop cherry picking your friends. Why does Corona Family seek to rezone their property for Residential, but sue/demand EIR for adjacent housing tract on BFS and Tem Pkwy. The politics of valley are damaging the community. We have plenty of apartments - There is a lack of single story single family homes. No more housing!! More one story housing needed for us getting closer to empty nesting and seniors and for young families starting out. Affordable. Program to make it more affordable. Homeless -hell support programs to get homeless off the street and into housing and also a program that San Diego has- a free bus ticket home if it can be verified they have friend or family who will house them at that location. Please help with housing affordability. Please keep some open spaces , so far this is a unique aspect to Temecula's relaxed and tourist environment. We need to make sure the infrastructure is in place prior to building more housing. The traffic is one of the biggest negatives to our city, and I think that is fueled by the continued development without the infrastructure to support it. I do appreciate all the projects that are in the works on the freeway but the side streets are just as bad Not every family has a dual income or high income. But those families live and work in Temecula and would like to buy a home. Think about the people who are different then you. Please, no more apartments and limit the number of new housing developments M There needs to be more bike trails that enable people to ride a bike anywhere they want to go including the wineries and old town 72 There are too many homes in Temecula. Let's focus on our schools which have seemed to go down the past few years. 73 Slow the growth - it's great where it is and will not be great if it keeps growing 8/10/2020 2:30 PM 8/9/2020 5:09 PM 8/9/2020 1:14 PM 8/9/2020 10:17 AM 8/8/2020 9:21 AM 8/7/2020 9:28 PM 8/7/2020 4:46 AM 8/6/2020 4:11 PM 8/6/2020 12:20 PM 8/5/2020 8:51 PM 8/5/2020 2:51 PM 8/5/2020 2:18 PM 8/5/2020 2:10 PM 8/5/2020 1:22 PM 8/5/2020 10:06 AM 8/4/2020 12:35 PM 44 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 I chose the French Valley area rather then Temecula because I got more bang for my buck. I got a larger nicer 8/4/2020 7:42 AM house for a lot less and my taxes were lower. Building new houses without upgrading and connecting existing roads, better freeway access and new thoroughfares 8/4/2020 3:23 AM will increase the traffic, which already is a miserable situation. It might just be what makes us move away from our beloved city of 27 years. If the city continues to build affordable housing in temecula, the city will go down hill and end up just like Riverside. 8/3/2020 5:55 PM Please deal with traffic before every empty lot of land is developed with new houses. Amount of Houses on 8/3/2020 5:20 PM butterfield is crazy. When kids graduate we are out of here Need more long term buyer attractive neighborhoods -that is, houses that have space between them and aren't 8/2/2020 2:11 PM shoved up right next to each other. I understand that the City of Temecula is a family town and that is fantastic. However, it seems like Temecula has 8/1/2020 9:52 AM focused on creating very large 2 story houses for families. I believe Temecula needs to have smaller detached single family homes available. Not all families need or can afford such large homes. Smaller 3 bed two bath home at 1500-1800 square feet should be available. Additionally, the city should also consider adding in more condominiums. Thank you. In five to eight years will be looking to downsize to a senior community seems most are in Murrietta. But prefer to 8/1/2020 8:11 AM live in Temecula More affordable 55 and over homes are needed in Temecula 8/1/2020 6:57 AM Homeless shelters are definitely more needed now more than ever as well as keeping a balance of nature and not 7/31/2020 3:50 PM building more homes that people can't afford. Really tired of rows and rows of cookie cutter homes! Get creative and sustainable! 7/31/2020 2:59 PM The other part of the housing equation is the job market —living in Temecula is less appealing when you have to 7/31/2020 2:17 PM drive an hour to find career -track jobs for college educated individuals outside of the retail/hospitality/tourism industries. Let's continue to keep temecula clean and nice , keep homeless off the streets.find a solution for the people who 7/31/2020 9:26 AM protest at the duck pond . Was driving by with my kids and two people were fighting yelling and cussing at each other. NOT GOOD Please no more building! Traffic is already out of control. 7/31/2020 8:02 AM no 7/30/2020 10:33 PM There are ppl who work really hard to provide a nice and safe environment for their families even when they can 7/30/2020 9:19 PM barely afford to. I work two jobs and it's still not enough. If I work here I should be able to live comfortably without having to stress about being a good parent or a working single mom who tries everything possible to put in quality time to produce a productive citizen while working 12-16 hours days sometimes 7 days a week. People who work in Temecula should be able to live in Temecula. New housing projects should have lower -income 7/30/2020 8:55 PM subsidies so they can own as well. Stop building. Buy land and turn it into parks. The problem is the Jeni is already out of the bag for Temecula. Traffic 7/30/2020 7:25 PM and crime are here to stay There should be a housing program in the market for couples, without "forcing" them to live in a house with 3-4 7/30/2020 6:10 PM rooms when they need just 1-2. I would like to be able to afford to live. 7/30/2020 6:08 PM Current infrastructure is strained to meet current housing levels. After watching Los Angeles and Orange Counties 7/30/2020 5:09 PM basically negatively impact the quality of life by overbuilding, the main reason for our move to Temecula was a better quality of life with limited growth at the time. Since moving here, we have seen the population growth negatively impact quality of life but from an economic view, it has been a positive. The challenge is to balance the growth while maintaining quality. Think about single mothers, lower income essential employees and the children whom are part of those families. 7/30/2020 4:33 PM This isn't about handouts, it's about the need for smaller practical homeownership options. The city of Temecula needs to work to create nice homes and neighborhoods for low income essential workers who 7/30/2020 2:58 PM work in Temecula. The apartments currently affordable to Temecula's low income earners are horribly inadequate. Stop building half a million+ $$ single family neighborhoods and think about our low income residents. I'm currently renting and taking amenities away it's frustrating because of COVID 19,1 pay a lot of money for 7/30/2020 2:42 PM renting. Not just low income, up and coming income. Kids who grew up here need to get a foothold in or near the community 7/30/2020 1:39 PM Stop building apartments, condos and HUD housing. GET RID OF THE DRUG ADDICTS LIVING ON OUR 7/30/2020 1:18 PM STREETS. I'll take my tax money elsewhere. Temecula does not need any more single family detached homes. There are plenty of single family homes. 6/2/2020 4:41 PM 45/67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q11: (BABY BOOMERS) 56-74 YEARS OLD DATE 1 None 9/24/2020 1:53 PM 2 Senior communities would be nice. Or else we may move 9/24/2020 1:44 PM 3 Please encourage low income senior housing as a priority. 9/24/2020 11:14 AM 4 5 6 7 8 Can't afford computer! Why do you waste so much water and still have trees and plants but cut in half and only water public areas in early AM late PM Would like to see more housing for seniors with limited senior income. The housing and property taxes here in Temecula are out of control. I believe it is designed to not integrate but segregate. Looking forward and praying that someday I can acquire my own Senior home. Many thanks for concern. Can the City require Redhawk Golf Club to implement ways to minimize or mitigate damage caused by errant golf balls to our houses (windows, stucco, patio, or even people being injured)? It's probably a matter of when, not if, I or a family members gets seriously injured by an errant golf ball. I have been hit by a golf ball in the back. Thankfully it did not land on my head. I now have to wear a hard hat every time I am in our back yard. Thank you for considering my input. 9/16/2020 9:13 AM 9/16/2020 9:09 AM 9/15/2020 2:55 PM 9/15/2020 11:41 AM 9/15/2020 10:40 AM 9 1 come from a state that passed legislation to preserve open space. I am dismayed by all the building here. Every 9/15/2020 10:20 AM new development means more traffic lights, more traffic, more students in the schools, and more importantly more water usage. 10 No more apartments or section 8 9/14/2020 10:21 PM 11 Make it easier, faster and less expensive to develop new housing 9/5/2020 6:40 PM 12 prices are out of control due to supply in demand.... 9/5/2020 7:12 AM 13 I'm very concerned about a housings duplex I heard about west Temecula parkway by 1-15, adding more congestion 9/4/2020 7:08 PM and ruining the beautiful hill side, that all Temecula's love seeing. 14 Retired people need more to do or they leave. Tennis Courts are extremely in need as are public places to Lap 9/4/2020 3:54 PM swim. Thank you for keeping Chs open for lap swim 15 Install the infrastructure before building home or multi family homes PLEASE 9/4/2020 3:27 PM 16 N/A 9/4/2020 3:11 PM 17 We are in great need of affordable housing options in our area for all types of people. 9/1/2020 10:20 AM 18 1 didn't see any homeless when I moved to Temecula 15 years ago. Now, there are many homeless people. Many of 8/30/2020 11:30 PM them are young people. They need assistance. 19 Need assisted living for special needs 8/30/2020 11:27 AM 20 I'm hoping that Temecula includes Murrieta, Wildomar, Menifee and surrounding suburbs. 8/30/2020 12:02 AM 21 1 don'tthink that Ca should overrule CC&Rs allowing houses to run preschools in the middle of single housing tracts 8/29/2020 9:37 PM when businesses aren't allowed and we pay fees to maintain the CC&Rs. 22 You keep building houses but yet the infrastructure such as highways East to West is terrible. Winchester for an 8/29/2020 2:10 PM example takes me 50 min to 70 minutes to get from business park drive to Murrieta hot springs Anytime from 3:30 To 6:30pm and longer on weekends. I'm very frustrated.... and thinking of moving. Your planning needs a better plan 23 No 8/29/2020 9:13 AM 24 No 8/29/2020 9:04 AM 25 There used to be more opportunities in buying a home that was a fixer upper. VA repos were affordable. Why is that 8/29/2020 7:31 AM not a program to be offered? 26 No comment. 8/28/2020 9:06 PM 27 no 8/28/2020 8:06 PM 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 My condo was built in 2005. I'm an original owner. Sloppy construction, no oversight and shoddy electrical work. 8/28/2020 7:39 PM Another area of concern is the lack of oversight of HOA Property Management Firms. Their charges to HOA's are aligned with THEIR desires, not owners within the HOA. Please address this lack of oversight as property owners are their clients. Thank you for seeking our input. Thank you for reaching out to find out the needs of the surrounding communities. We visit and sop in your area. 8/28/2020 6:44 PM Attend your functions as well. Please let me know if there are any programs to purchase homes 8/28/2020 6:11 PM Please get some sort of rent control in temecula, especially for seniors 8/28/2020 6:01 PM Do not start building lower -income type housing in Temecula. There are other areas where lower -income families can 8/28/2020 5:23 PM go. As much as I hate to say it, lower -income families bring in more crime and depreciation to hard working succesful families dreams. I wish it would not be this way but these are the facts. no 8/28/2020 3:48 PM Builders that are building in the area are pricing the new homes were not many people can afford. This includes more taxes and hoa paid by seniors at summers bend new communities. Hoa and taxes for 55 older adults are $300 and 1.79taxes. Younger than 55 pay $200 hoa and 1.7 taxes. Is this fair for seniors? Harold Stewart 9512901808 There's not a lot for seniors to do here. The senior center is only for low income folks and their day trips are to the library. Huh? I Think it's important to keep older citizens active and engaged in the community. This is a young family city. 8/28/2020 2:00 PM 8/28/2020 1:55 PM 36 People like / need to feel safe. 8/28/2020 1:43 PM 37 The apartment prequalifications are too high. Can afford rent, but having to make 2.5 times rent in salary is too 8/27/2020 6:49 PM much 38 No 46 / 67 8/26/2020 7:43 PM City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 39 40 41 42 43 You allow too many housing projects off major streets that are already difficult to drive on, because of traffic. One example is the building on Rancho California between Margarita & Ynez. Also, the unbelievable building along Butterfield, north of Rancho California. More traffic problems . It's quite obvious to me that the conservative leadership in Temecula doesn't work for all of the Temecula residents, but when "following the money", we can all see who is benefiting and who isn't. There is enough low income housing we want homeowners and people that are employed to be attracted to our community. They contribute their resources to build our communities. They are stakeholders and the backbone or all excellent cities. It seems that we do have adequate low income housing in the city. Single family homeownership provides a stake in the community. Employed person's with resources make their lives here and contribute financially to support the cities businesses, medical facilities in away that promotes positive growth for all. Please stop building anymore homes. We have over crowding here in the Temecula Valley and Everyone I talks to wishes that you would bring in more Jobs! Our streets are over crowded and Traffic is a Nightmare! When housing prices increase, even with low interest, they're out of range of the average California worker, especially with the high property tax! 8/24/2020 10:16 AM 8/24/2020 1:12 AM 8/23/2020 5:53 PM 8/21/2020 1:15 PM 8/21/2020 2:12 AM 44 1 sincerely hope that this survey isn't use just to check a box, as a requirement to justify the Block Grants from state and federal. We need affordable housing. 8/19/2020 9:57 PM 45 Finding affordable housing for those who work and serve in the community is critical. Providing options for seniors 8/19/2020 1:39 PM to leave larger homes for affordable smaller and energy efficient homes is important for an aging population. 46 Need more mental health assistance for homeless. Need drug and alcohol programs for homeless outreach 8/19/2020 11:50 AM 47 We need to have a system to accommodate low income and homeless persons. 8/19/2020 10:15 AM 48 People complain about our homeless population, yet we don't housing for them. I believe the City fears this would 8/19/2020 10:02 AM encourage and increase our homeless population, yet we must do something as, with the current economy, we will be seeing more and more homeless families. 49 1 respectfully ask for you to reconsider allowing us to go back to the short term rentals because its the only way 8/19/2020 9:42 AM that some of us can survive and pay our mortgages because we have sick or disabled family members that count on us. Without being able to rent rooms out on a short term basis when needed at least 3 people in my household would have to depend on county/city resources for housing and additional assistance. Thank you 50 Why not be more fair and balanced in your PSA's. We want facts not fear! 8/17/2020 11:14 AM 51 1 would love a lower rental rate for my apartment in Old Town as I am turning 70 years old this month and would like 8/16/2020 9:59 PM to be able to have a little more money to enjoy my last years. I love Temecula and especially feel privileged to live in Old Town and in the same location for the last 14/15 years. 52 this is a good effort, thank you 8/13/2020 5:53 PM 53 You have no where for the homeless to get shelter or a place they can shower and eat hot food you really need to 8/10/2020 2:23 PM figure out how to help them. I think you should build or use an empty building to place the homeless and allow them to stay for a period of time to allow them to either get on their feet or place them in an apartment that they can afford. 54 Temecula is over -crowded. The infrastructure cannot handle the population. We do not need any new housing to be 8/10/2020 7:20 AM built. It will only add to the congestion. 55 Adding ADU 's to existing homes create off street parking problems with streets lines with cars. 8/9/2020 9:43 PM 56 All homes/apartments must be for homeowners or long term renters. No short term rentals as they take away from 8/8/2020 3:14 PM the infrastructure of Temecula. 57 We love Temecula. Please maintain quality of life and keep the area "low crime.". The only drawback is California 8/8/2020 1:17 PM leffest politics and primarily a single party state which may drive us out of the state 58 Homeowners who are about to retire but cannot afford their homes need a nice choice of low income homes. 8/6/2020 4:29 PM Families who make under 50,OOOk need places to afford. 59 1 feel that developers will build homes that they can sell. So demand will encourage the construction of whatever 8/6/2020 7:44 AM homes are needed. 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 More mixed use so shopping isn't only at each end of town No affordable single story housing that is not in the 55 and older community so that adults can share housing with young adult children No thanks I think the new housing projects are moving too quickly, without concern for our roads & highways, which are in horrific condition. I have been trying for over a year to get SOMEONE to take responsibility for a 2-mile section of Pauba Rd., where this road (not a county owned road), is a "2-mile accident waiting to happen". Everyone I have talked to, has passed the buck! The government of Temecula is doing a lousy job, with representation being the major problem. Haven't been able to read the housing update; but you put it in the middle of this questionnaire, which doesn't make sense. We need better governance in Temecula. Too many representatives continue to be elected, yet do NOTHING to help Temecula prosper, just taking salaries & sitting on their duffs! Please do NOT repeal prop 13 & raise property taxes even higher ! Please provide more affordable housing for young folks ages 20-40 working in Temecula who cannot afford to rent apartment of their own. Thank You The greatness of Temecula is its small size, quality of life and semi -rural character. Don't keep growing it with more housing! Then it turns into an urban center and I move away! The build out of Temecula has already exceeded the original plans. The lack of mass transit or additional freeway lanes means NO MORE HOUSING!!!!!!!!!! Don't over build!!! -Limit STR's -Limit ADW's to those with onsite parking. We love Temecula! However it is way too populated and too many residences being built. The infrastructure cannot handle what we have now! Very frustrating. All we hear are sirens anymore from emergency and/or police. It's sad 8/5/2020 8:57 PM 8/3/2020 8:14 PM 8/2/2020 1:09 PM 8/2/2020 11:09 AM 8/2/2020 10:58 AM 7/31/2020 5:59 PM 7/31/2020 5:01 PM 7/31/2020 2:54 PM 7/31/2020 12:12 PM 7/31/2020 11:49 AM 7/30/2020 5:09 PM 47 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey when you live w miles from somewhere and it takes 15 to 20 minutes to get there. Stop building. There is enough population and tourist business to sustain the city. 71 My son and his new wife wanted to move here from college in Irvine, but the one condo we found in their price range 7/30/2020 3:49 PM got 16 offers on it the first day. They were very discouraged at the lack of options, and will continue renting for the foreseeable future. 72 Smaller starter homes instead of MCMansions are needed 7/30/2020 2:36 PM 73 Building AFFORDABLE Housing for all age groups and particularly for those who work in the service industries. 7/30/2020 2:35 PM Today's housing market is expensive and prejudicial. 74 Please open more affordable low income senior housing . 7/30/2020 2:28 PM 75 1 have lived here since the 80's. I will most likely not be able to stay here in retirement due to housing costs (and 7/30/2020 1:36 PM lack of physicians). This is not a senior friendly town unless one is very well off. 76 no 4/14/2020 3:32 PM # Q11: (SILENT GENERATION) 75 + YEARS OLD DATE 1 Too much growth without infrastructure to support. Roads/traffic too heavy and maintenance not adequate to 9/15/2020 1:55 PM support the additional homes being built. 2 Dedicated Bicycle and walking trails, more open space parks, more exits from freeway and road widening to 9/5/2020 7:05 AM accommodate traffic as housing/population increases. 3 No 9/4/2020 3:14 PM 4 Predatory mortgage collection companies should be outlawed. 8/31/2020 12:20 AM 5 Never, ever build in the southwest hills, or near preservation areas. Limit building to housing, not entertainment 8/29/2020 11:42 AM venue. 6 property taxes are very high and this prevents lower income folks from buying 8/28/2020 2:29 PM 7 Have loved living in Temecula. Would not like to see great changes to the current General- Plan or Housing 8/28/2020 2:02 PM Element. 8 Seniors do not have enough income to afford utilities. There should be a better program for this. This is for my 8/28/2020 1:54 PM parents and not for me. 9 I'd like priority for affordable active senior resident- owned housing - senior mobile home parks and 55+ resident 7/31/2020 2:43 PM owned homes. Resident owned mobile home space, not rented land space. And senior communities similar to The Colony in Murrieta, and The Knolls mobile home park in Murrieta. Not apartments - houses or mobile homes. 48 / 67 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q16 If desired, please leave your name and email address to receive email updates, meeting announcements, and information on the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update.Note: Emails will solely be used for the purpose of dispersing information related to the Housing Element Update and will not be shared or used for any other purpose. Answered:244 Skipped:422 FIRST NAME: LAST NAME: EMAIL: TOTAL Q11: Gen Z (0-23 years old) 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 1.23% 1 1 1 3 Q11: Millenial (24-39 years old) 100.00% 98.51% 95.52% 80.74% 67 66 64 197 Q11: Generation X (40-55 years old) 100.00% 98.78% 97.56% 99.59% 82 81 80 243 Q11: (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old 94.94% 92.41% 98.73% 92.62% 75 73 78 226 Q11: (Silent Generation) 75 + years old 100.00% 100.00% 93.33% 18.03% 15 15 14 44 Total Respondents 240 236 237 244 Note: Answers redacted for privacy. 49 / 67 Appendix C- Part 3 Q1 Do you live and/or work in the City of Temecula? Answered:586 Skipped:43 Q9: Single person... Q9: Couple 8 06°° 0.. 2°° 0 00°°Do Q9:Coupl with chiLdre.. Q9: Singl parent with.. .69°0 6 °° Q9:Adult Head of Household... 9°° 9°° 57.14°o 9°0 Q9: You 6. adult living.. Multi -genera.. Q9: Sing[ person Livin.. 2. 0°° Q9: Couple ple living with 0°° 100.0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Live in Temecula OworkinTemecula 0 Live AND work in Temecula Retired in Temecula Q9: Single person household (A) Q9: Couple (B) Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) Total Respondents LIVE IN WORK IN LIVE AND WORK IN RETIRED IN TOTAL TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA TEMECULA 12.50% 14.06% 17.19% 56.25% 10.92% 8 9 11 36 64 CG BCDFG BCDFG 18.06% 10.32% 40.00% 31.61% 26.45% 28 16 62 49 155 C D AD ACDF 37.85% 8.41% 45.79% 7.94% 36.52% 81 18 98 17 214 ABD DG AD ABG 7.69% 25.64% 64.10% 2.56% 6.66% 3 10 25 1 39 CFG BC ABCG ABG 14.29% 14.29% 57.14% 14.29% 1.19% 1 1 4 1 7 26.47% 11.76% 52.94% 8.82% 5.80% 9 4 18 3 34 D A AB 28.13% 17.19% 32.81% 21.88% 10.92% 18 11 21 14 64 AD C AD ACID 12.50% 50.00% 25.00% 12.50% 1.37% 1 4 2 1 8 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.17% 0 0 1 0 1 149 73 242 122 586 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q9: Single person household (A) Q9: Couple (B) Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) # Q9: SINGLE PERSON HOUSEHOLD 1 Menifee 2 Murrieta 3 Murrieta 4 Hemet 5 Murrieta IF YOU LIVE SOMEWHERE OTHER THAN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, WHERE DO YOU LIVE? TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DATE 9/16/2020 8:11 PM 9/16/2020 9:32 AM 9/16/2020 9:21 AM 9/16/2020 9:07 AM 9/15/2020 2:08 PM 6 Murrieta 9/15/2020 11:29 AM 7 Oceanside 9/4/2020 3:55 PM 8 Menifee 9/4/2020 3:23 PM 9 Murrieta 9/4/2020 3:22 PM 10 Menifee 9/4/2020 3:17 PM 11 Menifee 9/4/2020 3:02 PM 12 Murrieta 8/29/2020 11:57 PM 13 Sun City 8/28/2020 8:21 PM 14 Unincorporated Riverside county 8/28/2020 6:57 PM 15 Menifee 8/28/2020 6:36 PM 16 28500 Pujol Street #44 8/28/2020 1:19 PM 17 Menifee 8/28/2020 1:14 PM 18 Murrieta 8/10/2020 7:15 AM 19 TEMECULA WINE COUNTRY 8/3/20204:31 PM 20 Menifee 7/30/2020 8:34 PM 21 Anza 5/18/2020 8:46 AM 2/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q9: COUPLE DATE 1 Menifee 9/24/2020 1:30 PM 2 Murrieta 3 unincorporated county/retired 4 Murrieta 5 Murrieta 6 San Diego own two rentals in Temecula 7 Wildomar 8 Menifee 9 Wildomar 10 Sage 11 Murrieta 12 Murrieta 13 Wildomar 14 Murrieta 15 Fallbrook 16 Outside of wine country Winchester 17 1 live in the Wine Country unincorporated area 18 Menifee 19 1 am filling this out for my parents who are retired. 20 Menifee. I am always down in Temecula, originally wanted to live there. 21 Murrieta 22 Hemet, ca 23 French Valley 9/17/2020 5:08 PM 9/16/2020 9:10 AM 9/15/2020 11:43 AM 9/9/2020 10:25 AM 9/5/2020 3:28 PM 9/5/2020 11:44 AM 9/4/2020 4:56 PM 9/4/2020 3:33 PM 9/4/2020 3:08 PM 9/4/2020 3:05 PM 9/4/2020 3:05 PM 9/3/2020 2:31 PM 9/1/2020 10:14 AM 8/29/2020 9:10 AM 8/28/2020 9:35 PM 8/28/2020 1:58 PM 8/28/2020 1:50 PM 8/28/2020 1:43 PM 8/28/2020 1:29 PM 8/21/2020 7:26 AM 8/18/2020 1:09 PM 8/17/2020 11:06 AM 24 Murrieta 8/13/2020 5:48 PM 25 Murrieta 8/11/2020 2:17 PM 26 Corona 8/10/2020 2:27 PM 27 Winchester 8/4/2020 7:37 AM 28 Murrieta 8/2/2020 2:06 PM 29 San Juan Capistrano 8/2/2020 11:05 AM 30 Meadowview 7/31/2020 2:10 PM 31 Menifee 7/30/2020 6:03 PM 32 1 am in the process is moving to Temecula from San Diego 7/30/2020 1:08 PM # Q9: COUPLE WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE 1 Murrieta 9/14/2020 11:39 AM 2 Menifee 9/4/2020 5:37 PM 3 Murrieta 9/4/2020 3:16 PM 4 Los angeles 8/28/2020 3:52 PM 5 1 would like to move to the city of Temecula 8/28/2020 1:08 PM 6 City of Riverside 8/24/2020 12:48 PM 7 Murrieta 8/19/2020 8:31 AM 8 Murrieta 8/17/2020 8:17 PM 9 Wildomar 8/12/2020 9:14 AM 10 Temecula Wine Country Area 8/11/2020 1:28 PM 11 Riverside 8/10/2020 3:29 PM 12 Wine Country 8/8/2020 11:25 PM 13 Winchester, CA 8/6/2020 8:43 AM 14 1 live in Temecula, partly telecommute and partly work within 40 minutes of here 8/5/2020 8:46 PM 15 Murrieta 8/4/2020 7:43 AM 16 Murrieta 8/4/2020 12:57 AM 17 Murrieta 8/3/2020 7:40 PM 18 Murrieta 8/2/2020 5:31 PM 19 Just outside of city limits toward wine country 7/31/2020 7:56 AM 20 Murrieta 7/30/2020 5:49 PM 21 Near Pachanga 7/30/2020 5:19 PM 3/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q9: SINGLE PARENT WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 1 Murrieta (County land, not city) Temecula Schools 2 Hemet 3 Menifee 4 Murrieta 5 Menifee 6 Murrieta 7 Murrieta 8 Bonsall 9 Murrieta 10 Lake elsinore 11 Perris 12 Murrieta # Q9: ADULT HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD (NON -PARENT) WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 1 Winchester, CA 2 Winchester # Q9: YOUNG ADULT LIVING WITH PARENTS 2 Hemet 3 4 1 3 4 DATE 9/5/2020 6:19 AM 9/2/2020 6:08 AM 8/29/2020 11:03 AM 8/28/2020 2:15 PM 8/28/2020 1:28 PM 8/24/2020 1:09 PM 8/11/2020 2:00 PM 7/31/2020 9:31 PM 7/30/2020 6:05 PM 7/30/2020 5:46 PM 7/30/2020 5:32 PM 6/16/2020 4:03 PM DATE 8/31/2020 7:31 AM 8/11/2020 2:15 PM DATE 9/4/2020 4:50 PM 8/29/2020 7:23 AM Murrieta 8/5/2020 11:09 AM Murrieta 8/2/2020 10:48 AM Q9: MULTI -GENERATIONAL FAMILY HOUSEHOLD (GRANDPARENTS, CHILDREN, AND/OR GRANDCHILDREN DATE ALL UNDER THE SAME ROOF) Menifee 9/4/2020 6:01 PM Menifee 9/4/2020 3:14 PM Winchester 8/31/2020 6:22 PM Wildomar 8/31/2020 12:13 AM 5 Moreno Valley 6 Temecula wine country 7 Lake Elsinore 8 Murrieta 9 Murrieta 10 Murrieta 11 San Diego 12 Murrieta 13 Menifee, CA 14 Homeland 15 Menifee 16 Riverside County -Wine Country # Q9: SINGLE PERSON LIVING WITH ROOMMATES 1 Murrieta 2 Murrieta 3 Wildomar 4 Menifee 5 Murrieta # Q9: COUPLE LIVING WITH ROOMMATES There are no responses. 8/29/2020 2: 11 PM 8/28/2020 9:40 PM 8/28/2020 1:13 PM 8/28/2020 1:12 PM 8/28/2020 1:07 PM 8/25/2020 9:15 AM 8/22/2020 6:56 AM 8/17/2020 1:54 PM 8/17/2020 10:53 AM 8/10/2020 2:14 PM 8/2/2020 8:46 AM 7/30/2020 2:32 PM DATE 9/9/2020 3:41 PM 8/28/2020 6:04 PM 8/2/2020 12:38 PM 8/1/2020 6:50 AM 4/14/2020 3:28 PM DATE 4/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q2 How long have you lived in the City of Temecula? Answered: 552 Skipped: 77 Q9: Single ., 5°° 2. ° 22.73% 0.00°° person... Q9: Couple .8 N 11.84% Q9: Co up[ 3. 0°° with childre.. Q9: Sing1 0.00°° parent with.. Q9:AdultHead of Household... r Q9: Youn 3%00% adult living.. 8 ° Q9 3.1 ° 8.62°° 60 Multi -genera.. Q9: Singl person livin.. 0 00°° 60 00°0 Q9: Couple livingwith... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% N 0-2 Years 2-5 Years 0 5-10 Years E 10 + Years 0-2 2-5 5-10 10 + TOTAL YEARS YEARS YEARS YEARS Q9: Single person household (A) 15.15% 12.12% 22.73% 50.00% 11.96% 10 8 15 33 66 F BG BF Q9: Couple (B) 11.84% 7.24% 11.84% 69.08% 27.54% 18 11 18 105 152 CD AC ACF Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 13.30% 20.20% 24.14% 42.36% 36.78% 27 41 49 86 203 BF BG BFG Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) 10.00% 20.00% 13.33% 56.67% 5.43% 3 6 4 17 30 BF F Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 57.14% 1.27% 1 1 1 4 7 Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 3.33% 0.00% 10.00% 86.67% 5.43% 1 0 3 26 30 ACDG ABCDG Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the 17.24% 13.79% 8.62% 60.34% 10.51% same roof) (G) 10 8 5 35 58 F AC CIF Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) 40.00% 0.00% 0.00% 60.00% 0.91% 2 0 0 3 5 Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.18% 0 1 0 0 1 Total Respondents 72 76 95 309 552 5/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q3 Which of the following housing upgrades or expansions have you considered making on your home? Answered:544 Skipped:85 Q9: Single 618 91 35 7 person... Q9: Couple 1 Q9: Coupl ,111 19 M8 69 9 8 31 with childre.. Q9: Singli6 9 parent with.. M f Q9: Single person household (A) Q9: Couple (B) Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 0 100 200 300 400 50C Room addition 0 Roofing 0 HVAC 0 Painting 0 Solar Accessory Dwelling unit E Does not apply. 0 Other (please specify) ROOM ROOFING HVAC PAINTING SOLAR ACCESSORY DOES OTHER TOTAL ADDITION DWELLING NOT (PLEASE UNIT APPLY. SPECIFY) 7.81% 10.94% 9.38% 28.13% 14.06% 1.56% 54.69% 10.94% 16.18% 5 7 6 18 9 1 35 7 88 C FG BCFG 7.28% 13.91% 23.18% 47.02% 27.81% 7.95% 27.15% 13.91% 46.69% 11 21 35 71 42 12 41 21 254 D ADF 10.50% 9.50% 23.00% 49.00% 34.50% 9.50% 26.50% 15.50% 65.44% 21 19 46 98 69 19 53 31 356 F D A ADF Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) 6.67% 6.67% 16.67% 20.00% 20.00% 3.33% 63.33% 13.33% 8.27% 2 2 5 6 6 1 19 4 45 BC BCFG Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with 57.14% 42.86% 57.14% 71.43% 57.14% 14.29% 14.29% 0.00% 4.04% children under 18 (E) 4 3 4 5 4 1 1 0 22 Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 17.240/6 24.14% 27.59% 48.28% 37.93% 20.69% 10.34% 10.34% 10.48% 5 7 8 14 11 6 3 3 57 C A ABCDG Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) Total Respondents 19.30% 17.54% 26.32% 43.86% 29.82% 15.79% 35.09% 19.30% 21.69% 11 10 15 25 17 9 20 11 118 A ADF 0.00% 40.00% 40.00% 40.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% 80.00% 2.39% 0 2 2 2 2 1 0 4 13 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.18% 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 60 71 121 239 160 50 172 81 544 6/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q9: SINGLE PERSON HOUSEHOLD 1 new flooring, landscaping 2 Shelves in the kitchen 4 Renting but want solar on MF affordable housing Riverbank with SOMAH program 6 I'm a renter. Would love to own. 7 None # Q9: COUPLE 1 Flooring, plumbing, electrical 2 Flooring, plumbing, electrical 3 all ready done 4 Fencing 5 New flooring and upgraded bathrooms 6 Air purifier systems 7 Making the stairs from the front and back door a ramp. 8 All of the above have been done during my time here 9 Remodel interior DATE 9/15/2020 10:18 AM 8/28/2020 8:25 PM 8/28/2020 7:31 PM 8/28/2020 1:21 PM 8/3/2020 5:52 PM 7/30/2020 2:32 PM 7/30/2020 1:21 PM DATE 9/16/2020 9:27 AM 9/16/2020 8:56 AM 9/5/2020 8:46 AM 8/29/2020 2:54 PM 8/28/2020 5:50 PM 8/28/2020 1:52 PM 8/28/2020 1:46 PM 8/28/2020 1:40 PM 8/27/2020 7:13 PM 10 Kitchen upgrade 8/24/2020 10:05 AM 11 Updating our whole home 8/21/2020 1:06 PM 12 New flooring and kitchen renewal 8/19/2020 1:35 PM 13 flooring 8/19/2020 9:55 AM 14 pool & landscaping 8/17/2020 11:07 AM 15 Remodel kitchen 8/9/2020 6:39 AM 16 Kitchen remodel 8/8/2020 3:09 PM 17 Want single story. 8/6/2020 9:56 PM 18 Interior remodel 8/5/2020 10:51 AM 19 Bathroom remodel 8/2/2020 11:07 AM 20 Bathroom upgrades 7/31/2020 3:32 PM 21 Driveway expansion 7/31/2020 2:05 PM 7/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q9: COUPLE WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE 1 Flooring 9/24/2020 6:56 PM 2 Pool 9/4/2020 3:41 PM 3 Flooring 9/4/2020 3:25 PM 4 Installation and soundproofing 8/31/2020 1:12 PM 5 Windows. Interior doors. 8/30/2020 9:53 PM 6 Upgrading bathrooms 8/30/2020 8:44 AM 7 Water heater 8/29/2020 8:41 PM 8 Pool 8/29/2020 4:44 PM 9 Windows and kitchen 8/29/2020 12:22 AM 10 Major Interior Remodel 8/28/2020 3:05 PM 11 Remodeling staircase 8/19/2020 12:05 PM 12 bathroom remodel, whole house fan 8/15/2020 12:51 AM 13 Patio cover 8/10/2020 10:59 AM 14 Add another garage 8/8/2020 6:30 PM 15 interior remodeling 8/6/2020 5:18 PM 16 Pool remodel 8/5/2020 12:05 PM 17 Windows 8/3/2020 10:06 PM 18 Pool/spa 8/3/2020 6:17 PM 19 Pool 8/3/2020 4:17 PM 20 Kitchen remodel 8/3/2020 2:42 PM 21 New flooring and countertops 8/3/2020 1:56 PM 22 Pool 8/3/2020 1:21 PM 23 Full renovations 8/2/2020 5:23 PM 24 pool; remodel; flooring 8/2/2020 5:16 PM 25 Pool 7/31/2020 5:17 PM 26 Pool 7/30/2020 10:47 PM 27 Bathtub install downstairs 7/30/2020 9:31 PM 28 Kitchen & bathroom renovation 7/30/2020 8:09 PM 29 Pool and landscaping. 7/30/2020 5:23 PM 30 Flooring, window coverings, patio cover 6/8/2020 11:14 AM 31 General replacement of outdated aspects of our home 6/2/2020 4:38 PM # Q9: SINGLE PARENT WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE 1 Looking to purchase in temecula 8/28/2020 1:29 PM 2 Cracks on walls 8/26/2020 7:59 PM 3 1 currently rent, so no additions. 8/18/2020 1:38 PM 4 Pool 8/7/2020 2:18 PM # Q9: ADULT HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD (NON -PARENT) WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE There are no responses. # Q9: YOUNG ADULT LIVING WITH PARENTS DATE 1 Pool 8/31/2020 11:09 AM 2 Tankless water heater & new windows 8/30/2020 10:34 PM 3 rain gutter, patio cover and land scaping 8/21/2020 11:46 AM 8/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 3 4 Q9: MULTI -GENERATIONAL FAMILY HOUSEHOLD (GRANDPARENTS, CHILDREN, AND/OR GRANDCHILDREN ALL UNDER THE SAME ROOF) Lawn upgrade to drought tolerant rock Whole house fan in the attic pool Whole house fan Renovate/upgrade Did an addition considering others. Water Heater, bathroom remodel, new floors Kitchen and bathroom remodel, carpet and other flooring Pool Downsize General interior updates due to age of home Q9: SINGLE PERSON LIVING WITH ROOMMATES I'm renting Tree removal/ service Windows, doors Moving to Temecula Q9: COUPLE LIVING WITH ROOMMATES There are no responses. DATE 9/19/2020 12:13 PM 9/5/2020 7:08 AM 9/4/2020 3:05 PM 8/31/2020 4:27 PM 8/29/2020 9:00 AM 8/28/2020 1:53 PM 8/27/2020 5:54 PM 8/26/2020 6:05 PM 8/11/2020 3:52 PM 7/31/2020 5:48 PM 7/31/2020 6:39 AM DATE 9/16/2020 9:13 AM 8/28/2020 2:28 AM 8/4/2020 12:50 AM 8/1/2020 6:52 AM DATE 9/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q4 How would you rate the physical condition of the residence you live in? Answered:553 Skipped:76 Q9: Single 9 0 0.00°0 10.77% person... Q9: Couple 6. 9. - 8.50%_9,7°o Q9: Cou pl 3.50% 0 5% 1L•8 °0.94°0 with childre.. Q9: Singl .67°0 0.00°0 23. 3°0 3°0 parent with.. Q9: Adult Head of Household... Q9: You.n 67°0 56.M adult living.. Q9 8.8100 0.85°0 8. 600 800 Multi -genera.. Q9: Sing[ person livin.. 0 00°0 40 00°0 0 00°0 Q9: Couple living with... 00 00°0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Excellent condition Shows signs of deferred maintenance (i.e., peeling paint, chipped stucco, etc.) Needs modest rehabilitation improvements (i.e., new roof, new wood siding, etc.) Needs major upgrades (i.e., new foundation, new plumbing, new electrical, etc.) Other (please specify) EXCELLENT SHOWS SIGNS OF NEEDS MODEST NEEDS MAJOR OTHER TOTAL CONDITION DEFERRED REHABILITATION UPGRADES (I.E., NEW (PLEASE MAINTENANCE (I.E., IMPROVEMENTS (I.E., FOUNDATION, NEW SPECIFY) PEELING PAINT, NEW ROOF, NEW WOOD PLUMBING, NEW CHIPPED STUCCO, SIDING, ETC.) ELECTRICAL, ETC.) ETC.) Q9: Single person household 36.920/b 40.00% 10.770/a 7.690/0 4.620/a 11.75% (A) 24 26 7 5 3 65 DF F C Q9: Couple (B) Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under parents (F) 46.41% 39.22% 8.50% 71 60 13 CDFG C DF 33.50% 50.25% 11.82% 68 102 24 B B F 16.67% 40.00% 23.33% 5 12 7 AB B 28.57% 57.14% 14.29% 2 4 1 16.67% 56.67% 26.67% 5 17 8 AB ABC Q9: Multi -generational family 28.81% household (Grandparents, 17 Children, and/or Grandchildren B all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Single person living with 20.00% roommates (H) 1 Q9: Couple living with 0.00% roommates (1) 0 Total Respondents 193 254 50.85% 30 13.56% 8 3.27% 2.61% 27.67% 5 4 153 D 3.94% 0.49% 36.71% 8 1 203 D A 16.67% 3.33% 5.42% 5 1 30 BCF 0.00% 0.00% 1.27% 0 0 7 0.00% 0.00% 5.42% 0 0 30 D 6.78% 0.00% 10.67% 4 0 59 40.00% 40.00% 0.000/0 0.00% 0.90% 2 2 0 0 5 100.00% 0.00% 1 0 70 27 0.00% 0.00% 0.18% 0 0 1 9 553 10 / 71 # 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 1 1 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q9: SINGLE PERSON HOUSEHOLD I rent an apartment Need pest control. Found 2 big dead rat. An apt. So maintenance is done by management. Q9: COUPLE Good condition- well maintained DATE 8/29/2020 11:58 PM 8/28/2020 8:25 PM 8/19/2020 10:58 PM DATE 9/16/2020 9:11 AM Excellent for a 32 year old tract home. 8/26/2020 6:52 PM Inside needs upgrades 8/8/2020 3:09 PM Not currently living in Temecula 7/30/2020 1:09 PM Q9: COUPLE WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE Doesnt apply 8/28/2020 1:09 PM Q9: SINGLE PARENT WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE Renting at the moment 8/19/2020 11:32 AM Q9: ADULT HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD (NON -PARENT) WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE There are no responses. Q9: YOUNG ADULT LIVING WITH PARENTS DATE There are no responses. Q9: MULTI -GENERATIONAL FAMILY HOUSEHOLD (GRANDPARENTS, CHILDREN, AND/OR GRANDCHILDREN DATE ALL UNDER THE SAME ROOF) There are no responses. Q9: SINGLE PERSON LIVING WITH ROOMMATES DATE There are no responses. Q9: COUPLE LIVING WITH ROOMMATES DATE There are no responses. City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q5 Why have you chosen to live in Temecula? (Select all that apply) Answered:553 Skipped:76 Q9: Single person... Q9: Couple 40 57 1 9 52 82 36 56 ' withchildre`. 6 93 58 2 S 5 76 73 Q9: Sing[ 829990 parent with.. Q9: Adult Head 3, of Household... Q9: You 205M73. adult living... Q9 492028233311. Multi -genera... Q9: Singl 2 person livin.. Q9: Couple 1 living with... 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Proximitytojob/work 0 Quality of housing stock 0Local recreationalamenitiesand scenery 0 Proximity to family and/or friends 0 Affordability M Quality of local school system N Safety of neighborhood city services and programs Proximity to shopping and services, including Old Town Temecula Other (please specify) 12 / 71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey PROXIMITY QUALITY LOCAL PROXIMITY AFFORDABILITY QUALITY SAFETY OF CITY PROXIMITY OTHER TO OF RECREATIONAL TO FAMILY OF NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES TO (PLEASI JOBIWORK HOUSING AMENITIES AND/OR LOCAL AND SHOPPING SPECIF' STOCK AND SCENERY FRIENDS SCHOOL PROGRAMS AND SYSTEM SERVICES, INCLUDING OLD TOWN TEMECULA Q9: Single 15.15% 19.70% 22.73% 37.88% 37.88% 18.18% 40.91% 22.73% 31.82% 13.641 person 10 13 15 25 25 12 27 15 21 household (A) BCD CD Q9: Couple (B) 35.76% 26.49% 37.75% 27.15% 52.32% 34.44% 54.30% 23.84% 37.09% 22.521 54 40 57 41 79 52 82 36 56 C A CD C Q9: Couple 27.59% 30.54% 45.81% 28.57% with children 56 62 93 58 under 18 (C) BD A Q9: Single 41.94% 22.58% 25.81% 22.58% parent with 13 7 8 7 children under C A 18 (D) Q9: Adult 42.86% 28.57% Head of 3 2 Household (non - parent) with children under 18 (E) Q9: Young 40.00% 30.00% adult living 12 9 with parents (F) Q9: Multi- 23.73% 22.03% generational 14 13 family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Single 40.00% 20.00% person living 2 1 with roommates (H) Q9: Couple 0.00% 0.00% living with 0 0 roommates (1) Total 164 147 213 Respondents # Q9: SINGLE PERSON HOUSEHOLD 1 Family 2 For retirement 3 The weather 4 Retirement 5 No comment 6 The weather 61.58% 76.35% 76.35% 37.44% 35.96% 7.88' 125 155 155 76 73 1 AB A 38.71% 61.29% 61.29% 29.03% 32.26% 12.90' 12 19 19 9 10 AB 42.86% 28.57% 71.43% 57.14% 71.43% 42.86% 28.57% 14.29' 3 2 5 4 5 3 2 46.67% 36.67% 50.00% 53.33% 14 11 15 16 47.46% 35.59% 33.90% 38.98% 21 20 28 23 40.00% 20.00% 2 1 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 165 290 20.00% 20.00% 1 1 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 282 344 7 Close to my daughter 8 1 came to CA to take care of my mother and wanted SoCal because of the weather. 9 66.67% 23.33% 43.33% 6.67' 20 7 13 55.93% 18.64% 28.81% 11.86' 33 11 17 60.00% 40.00% 40.00% 0.00, 3 2 2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00, 0 0 0 159 194 74 DATE 9/16/2020 9:37 AM 9/16/2020 9:32 AM 9/16/2020 9:28 AM 9/16/2020 9:21 AM 9/16/2020 9:05 AM 9/16/2020 9:03 AM 9/15/2020 11:45 AM 9/15/2020 10:18 AM 8/28/2020 6:37 PM 13 / 71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q9: COUPLE 1 wine country and balloon views 2 moved to area for schools/ affordable living 3 moved here 30 years ago-- too crowded now. Looking to move away. 4 herh scince 1977 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Wine Country DATE 9/24/2020 4:43 PM 9/16/2020 9:11 AM 9/15/2020 12:02 PM 9/5/2020 8:46 AM 9/5/2020 6:58 AM Lived here 32 years its a great place to live. 9/4/2020 5:09 PM I don't live in Temecula 9/4/2020 3:34 PM Ive live here for almost 50 years. 9/4/2020 3:05 PM Not too crowded 8/30/2020 12:12 PM We love Temecula 8/29/2020 9:11 AM Purchased property in 1977 built a home 8/28/2020 9:37 PM Good Air Quality 8/28/2020 6:17 PM Gated communities 8/28/2020 1:52 PM Settled in 1977 working in the fields 8/28/2020 1:46 PM Moved to help sister when she purchased a home in 1990 8/27/2020 7:13 PM Moved here 32 years ago for a safe, family environment. 8/26/2020 6:52 PM The number one reason we chose to live in Temecula is safety and beauty of the area 8/23/2020 5:40 PM family friendly 8/22/2020 7:22 PM Quality of life. 8/21/2020 1:59 PM We fell in Love with the city 31 years ago and decided to live here and be close to our family that retired here 8/21/2020 1:06 PM More open space / less crowded than San Diego and LA 8/21/2020 8:19 AM Friendly HOA and neighbors 8/19/2020 1:35 PM Centralized area 8/19/2020 11:44 AM Job 8/19/2020 10:11 AM small-town feel yet has all we need 8/19/2020 9:55 AM Wineries 8/11/2020 9:12 PM Move back to childhood home 8/7/2020 1:14 PM Beauty of city 8/2/2020 2:07 PM Retired here because we had built-in friendships, we knew for years, relating to wine makers. 8/2/2020 10:38 AM Family oriented city. 7/31/2020 11:46 AM Moved here 40 years ago to get away from the cream of the crud 7/30/2020 7:17 PM Quality of Life 7/30/2020 5:03 PM Retired now but worked here for 25 years and commuted into Temecula. Finally able to move here and then retired. 7/30/2020 5:01 PM Clean 7/30/2020 1:25 PM Q9: COUPLE WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE Charter Schools with Academy Based Learning 9/24/2020 11:09 AM Wineries 9/4/2020 3:41 PM Weather 8/31/2020 1:12 PM Came for the job, stayed for the city! 8/26/2020 6:24 PM City values 8/21/2020 5:17 AM Its barely affordable but more so than San diego. 8/17/2020 9:52 PM Proximity to church/school 8/17/2020 7:58 AM Conservative/Republican politicians and people 8/15/2020 12:51 AM Our church in Temecula 8/13/2020 11:56 PM Good city leadership, spending priorities, and quality of life 8/6/2020 5:18 PM Beautiful weather year round 8/5/2020 9:51 AM Everything 8/3/2020 8:11 PM We were tired of living in the Bay Area 8/3/2020 2:42 PM Easy drive to the beach. 7/30/2020 5:23 PM Conservative policies and values 7/30/2020 1:13 PM We could not afford to live in San Diego County when we were young working professionals in our early 30's 6/2/2020 4:38 PM 14 / 71 # 1 2 3 4 1 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q9: SINGLE PARENT WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 Family DATE 8/25/2020 12:23 AM Temecula Hospital, Wine Country, Diverse Community 8/7/2020 2:18 PM Moved here when it was affordable and schools were good. 7/30/2020 6:06 PM My hometown born and raised 7/30/2020 4:53 PM Q9: ADULT HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD (NON -PARENT) WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE E 8/27/2020 5:44 AM Q9: YOUNG ADULT LIVING WITH PARENTS DATE Economy... covid... living with parents 8/21/2020 12:06 PM Moved here over 20+ years ago because it was cheaper 7/30/2020 7:15 PM Q9: MULTI -GENERATIONAL FAMILY HOUSEHOLD (GRANDPARENTS, CHILDREN, AND/OR GRANDCHILDREN DATE ALL UNDER THE SAME ROOF) live with family 9/15/2020 11:57 AM Divine direction 8/31/2020 12:15 AM Quality of living, somewhat peaceful but beginning to show signs of the demise of peaceful existence... building 8/29/2020 8:43 AM more dwellings BEFORE making roads to handle the traffic you're bringing in 1994 affordability 8/19/2020 9:50 PM Safest city and school ratings. Pricing goes up every year which sucks 8/19/2020 9:46 AM I didn't have a choice. I had to move in with family. 8/18/2020 4:12 PM Because I have for 30+ years 7/31/2020 2:35 PM Q9: SINGLE PERSON LIVING WITH ROOMMATES DATE There are no responses Q9: COUPLE LIVING WITH ROOMMATES DATE My husband lives here 9/4/2020 3:15 PM 15 / 71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q6 Do you currently own or rent your home? Answered:554 Skipped:75 Q9: Single 9. 9°° .52% person... Q9: Couple Q9: Co up[ with childre.. 5° ° .66° ° 0.49° ° Q9: Sing[ S. 3° parent with.. Q9: Adult Head of Household... Q9: You 3 i S. 8°° . 8/ adult living.. Q9 5°° Multi-genera.. Cal Q9: Singl Livin.. 60 00°° 20 00°° person Q9: Couple living with... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% own E Rent 0 Live with others E Currently homeless OWN RENT LIVE WITH CURRENTLY TOTAL OTHERS HOMELESS Q9: Single person household (A) 57.58% 39.39% 1.52% 1.52% 11.91% 38 26 1 1 66 BCD BCG G Q9: Couple (B) 82.35% 16.34% 1.31% 0.00% 27.62% 126 25 2 0 153 AD AD G Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 76.35% 22.66% 0.49% 0.49% 36.64% 155 46 1 1 203 AD AD DG Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) 33.33% 60.00% 6.67% 0.00% 5.42% 10 18 2 0 30 ABCFG BCFG C Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) 85.71% 14.29% 0.000/0 0.00% 1.26% 6 1 0 0 7 Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 73.33% 23.33% 3.33% 0.00% 5.42% 22 7 1 0 30 D D Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all 71.19% 15.25% 13.56% 0.00% 10.65% under the same roof) (G) 42 9 8 0 59 D AD ABC Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) 60.00% 20.00% 20.00% 0.00% 0.90% 3 1 1 0 5 Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 100.00% 0.00% 0.000/0 0.00% 0.18% 1 0 0 0 1 Total Respondents 403 133 16 2 554 16 / 71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q7 If you wish to own a home in Temecula but do not currently own one, what issues are preventing you from owning a home at this time? (Choose all that apply) Answered:215 Skipped:414 Q9 of k, 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 No homes within price range 0 No homes that suit my needs Do not have a down payment 0 Do not have enough for mortgage payment No homes that fit quality standards 1 do not wish to own or rent a home in Temecula NO NO HOMES DO NOT DO NOT HAVE NO HOMES I DO NOT WISH TO TOTAL HOMES THAT SUIT HAVE A ENOUGH FOR THAT FIT OWN OR RENT A WITHIN MY NEEDS DOWN MORTGAGE QUALITY HOME IN PRICE PAYMENT PAYMENT STANDARDS TEMECULA RANGE Q9: Single person household (A) 42.42% 6.06% 42.42% 24.24% 0.00% 24.24% 21.40% 14 2 14 8 0 8 46 CD Q9: Couple (B) 43.90% 9.76% 36.59% 26.83% 9.76% 21.95% 28.37% 18 4 15 11 4 9 61 CD Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 75.00% 15.63% 54.69% 29.69% 9.38% 7.81% 57.21% 48 10 35 19 6 5 123 D AB Q9: Single parent with children under 18 64.52% 12.90% 83.87% 67.74% 3.23% 6.45% 34.42% (D) 20 4 26 21 1 2 74 C AB Q9: Adult Head of Household (non- 50.00% 0.00% 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.40% parent) with children under 18 (E) 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 50.00% 16.67% 41.67% 50.00% 16.67% 16.67% 10.70% 6 2 5 6 2 2 23 Q9: Multi -generational family household 70.37% 14.81% 62.96% 33.33% 7.41% 14.81% 25.58% (Grandparents, Children, and/or 19 4 17 9 2 4 55 Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Single person living with 40.00% 40.00% 20.00% 0.00% 0.00% 40.00% 3.26% roommates (H) 2 2 1 0 0 2 7 Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Respondents 128 28 114 75 15 32 215 17 / 71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q8 Select the type of housing that best describes your current home: Q9 of Answered:628 Skipped:1 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Single Family Home (Detached) Accessory Dwelling Unit, Granny Flat, Guest House MMobileHome Duplex/Attached Home 0 Multifamily Home (Apartment/Condominium) Currently without permanent shelter 0 other (please specify) 18/71 Q9: Single person household (A) Q9: Couple (B) Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) Q9: Single parent with child-n iind- Household (non - parent) with children under 18 (E) Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) Q9: Multi - generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) City of Temecula Housing Element Survey SINGLE ACCESSORY MOBILE DUPLEX/ATTACHED MULTIFAMILY HOME CURRENTLY WITHOUT OTHER TOTAL FAMILY DWELLING HOME HOME (APARTMENTICONDOMINIUM) PERMANENT (PLEASE HOME UNIT, SHELTER SPECIFY) (DETACHED) GRANNY FLAT, GUEST HOUSE 62.67% 0.00% 1.33% 6.67% 21.33% 0.00% 8.00% 11.94% 47 0 1 5 16 0 6 75 BCFG BCFG BC 84.12% 1.18% 0.59% 2.94% 10.59% 0.00% 0.59% 27.07% 143 2 1 5 18 0 1 170 AD A F A 86.82% 0.00% 0.45% 2.27% 10.45% 0.00% 0.00% 35.03% 191 0 1 5 23 0 0 220 AD D A F AD 68.29% 2.44% 2.44% 4.88% 19.51% 0.00% 2.44% 6.53% 28 1 1 2 8 0 1 41 BCG C C 87.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 12.50% 0.00% 0.00% 1.27% 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 85.29% 0.00% 0.000/o 29 0 0 A 84.29% 1.43% 2.86% 59 1 2 AD 5.88% 2 5.88% 2 A 8.57% 6 A 2.94% 0.00% 5.41% 1 0 34 BC 0.00% 1.43% 11.15% 0 1 70 Q9: Single 66.67% 0.00% 11.11% 11.11% 0.00% 0.00% 11.11% 1.43% person living 6 0 1 1 0 0 1 9 with roommates (H) Q9: Couple 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.16% living with 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 roommates (1) Total 511 4 7 21 74 1 10 628 Respondents # Q9: SINGLE PERSON HOUSEHOLD DATE 1 don1 know 9/16/2020 9:19 AM 2 Apartment 9/15/2020 11:47 AM 3 Apartment 9/15/2020 10:06 AM 4 Section 8- Senior apartment complex 9/15/2020 10:03 AM 5 Manufacture Home own the Land 9/4/2020 3:27 PM 6 rental apartment 8/30/2020 12:02 AM # Q9: COUPLE DATE 1 Sycamore Springs Ranches - a custom home and horse boarding ranch 9/4/2020 3:14 PM # Q9: COUPLE WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE There are no responses. # Q9: SINGLE PARENT WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE 1 Very tiny single bedroom apartment 7/30/2020 4:33 PM # Q9: ADULT HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD (NON -PARENT) WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE There are no responses. # Q9: YOUNG ADULT LIVING WITH PARENTS DATE There are no responses. # Q9: MULTI -GENERATIONAL FAMILY HOUSEHOLD (GRANDPARENTS, CHILDREN, AND/OR GRANDCHILDREN DATE ALL UNDER THE SAME ROOF) 1 Rent a room 8/2/2020 9:59 AM 19/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q9: SINGLE PERSON LIVING WITH ROOMMATES Detached condo Q9: COUPLE LIVING WITH ROOMMATES There are no responses. DATE 8/28/2020 2:32 AM DATE 20/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q9 Which of the following best describes your household type? Answered:629 Skipped:0 Q9: Single person... Q9: Couple Q9: Couph with childre.. Q9: Sing[ parent with.. Q9: Adult Head of Household... Q9: Young adult living.. M Q9: person Q9: Couple living with... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 Single person household 0 Couple M Couple with kids <18 Single parent with kids <18 M Non -parent with kids <18 Young adult living with parents M Multi -generational household Single with roommates M Couple with roommates M Other (please specify) 21/71 Q9: Single person household (A) Q9: Couple (B) Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) Q9: Single parent with children under neau or Household (non - parent) with children under 18 (E) Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) City of Temecula Housing Element Survey SINGLE COUPLE COUPLE SINGLE NOW YOUNG MULTI- SINGLE COUPLE OTHER TOT) PERSON WITH PARENT PARENT WITH ADULT GENERATIONAL WITH WITH (PLEASE HOUSEHOLD KIDS WITH KIDS <18 LIVING HOUSEHOLD ROOMMATES ROOMMATES SPECIFY) <18 KIDS WITH <18 PARENTS 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 11.91, 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BCDFG B C D F G 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.000/0 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 27.0E 0 170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 A ACDFG C D F G 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.000/0 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 35.11 0 0 221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 A B ABDFG D F G 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.000/0 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.5, 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 A B C ABCFG F G 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.000/0 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.2, 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 Q9: Multi - generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) Total 75 Respondents 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.000/0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 34 0 0 A B C D ABCDG G 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 A B C D F ABCDF 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.000/0 0 0 0 0 170 221 41 0.00% 0.00% 5.41 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 11.1E 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 0.000/0 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.4E 0 0 0 9 0 0 0.00% 0.00% 0.000/0 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.1( 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 34 70 9 1 0 E 22/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q10 How satisfied are you with your current housing situation? Answered:626 Skipped:3 Q9: Single person... Q9: Couple Q9: Couph with childre.. Q9: Sing[ parent with.. Q9: Adult Head of Household.., Q9: Yo adult livi M 26.83% Q9: Singl person livin.. Q9: Couple living with... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% I am very satisfied. 0 lam somewhat satisfied. 0 lam somewhat dissatisfied. 1 am dissatisfied. Q9: Single person household (A) Q9: Couple (B) Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) Total Respondents I AM VERY I AM SOMEWHAT I AM SOMEWHAT I AM TOTAL SATISFIED. SATISFIED. DISSATISFIED. DISSATISFIED. 54.79% 36.99% 5.48% 2.74% 11.66% 40 27 4 2 73 DG D DG 57.40% 30.77% 10.65% 1.18% 27.00% 97 52 18 2 169 DFG D CDG 52.94% 33.94% 8.14% 4.98% 35.30% 117 75 18 11 221 DG D BDG 17.07% 36.59% 26.83% 19.51% 6.55% 7 15 11 8 41 ABC ABCG ABC 62.50% 37.50% 0.00% 0.00% 1.28% 5 3 0 0 8 35.29% 44.12% 14.71% 5.88% 5.43% 12 15 5 2 34 B 31.43% 41.43% 10.00% 17.14% 11.18% 22 29 7 12 70 ABC D ABC 33.33% 55.56% 11.11% 0.00% 1.44% 3 5 1 0 9 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.16% 1 0 0 0 1 304 221 64 37 626 23/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey IF YOU ANSWERED DISSATISFIED OR SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED TOTAL PLEASE PROVIDE A REASON BELOW. Q9: Single person household (A) 0 0 Q9: Couple (B) 0 0 Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 0 0 Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) 0 0 Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) 0 0 Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 0 0 Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or 0 0 Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) 0 0 Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 0 0 # Q9: SINGLE PERSON HOUSEHOLD DATE 1 1 would like to own my own place. 8/30/2020 12:02 AM 2 Rent increase forcing me to move out of area. 8/28/2020 6:44 PM 3 Need upgrading in electrical and plumbing 8/28/2020 1:18 PM 4 Apt. Is dark, no sunlight. 8/19/2020 11:04 PM 5 Too many transients are starting to appear and crime is going up. 8/3/2020 5:55 PM 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Every year my rent goes up. 7/30/2020 2:42 PM Q9: COUPLE DATE Renters disruptive behavior towards owners 9/15/2020 12:04 PM want to move but higher taxes and low inventory make it hard 9/10/2020 10:17 AM No HOA. Many ordinance/code violations in neighborhoods 8/29/2020 6:16 PM needs updated and repairs... cant afford to fix 8/29/2020 3:00 PM Traffic congestion is terrible on main arteries 8/29/2020 2:10 PM It's old, outdated, in need of significant updating and 16,000 sq ft of landscaping. 8/28/2020 8:06 PM We are on fixed incomes and they raise the rent about $70.00 each year. Where are we suppose to get the money 8/28/2020 6:01 PM Too much building everywhere and no sign of building for what we lack. AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 8/24/2020 10:16 AM We live in a working class neighborhood. We want homeowners and person's who are hardworking to remain in our 8/23/2020 5:53 PM neighborhoods. People who own seem more concerned with maintaining their homes and keeping the neighborhood safe and secure. We stand together as we live and work in a shared community. We support law enforcement in our neighborhood and across the city. quality of life in Hemet is unacceptable, and while I work in Temecula, I cannot afford to live in Temecula. 8/18/2020 1:17 PM No parking, unsatisfied with property manager 8/14/2020 3:39 PM Bothersome neibors temporarily in an apartment, looking to buy. Housing too dense. We can hear the neighbors breath Retired The house needs alot of updating and want to move away from the casino Too many cars that screech & race at all hours of the day & night. We need some kind of control over this Rent is too high for wages in the area Would like to own a home in a 55+ community. Single story under 400k. I would've preferred a one story, didn't plan it very well when we bought our home. 8/14/2020 1:16 PM 8/11/2020 2:22 PM 8/9/2020 10:17 AM 8/6/2020 10:01 PM 8/2/2020 4:23 PM 8/2/2020 10:58 AM 7/30/2020 1120 PM 7/30/2020 3:27 PM 7/30/2020 2:28 PM 24/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 1 2 Q9: COUPLE WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 The condo we live in is too small and we are one rent increase away from getting priced out of the area Cost of rent 3 My property taxes are outrageous 4 Neighborhood has a lot of crime 5 HOA prices on the rise. 6 Really wanted more garage space and bigger back yard but so few houses on the market we had to buy what was available 7 Our landlord increases our rent any time we ask her to fix anything, including this month, during the pandemic because our kitchen faucet was leaking. 8 School district and need a larger home in a family neighborhood 9 Rent is Ridiculously expensive 10 Want a house at a reasonable price 11 Previous homeowner renting and want to buy again but prices are twice what they were 10 years ago 12 Run down 13 The property management is racist and have harrassed us many times. Neighbors are section 8 trashy people, drink and smoke every single day for the past 2 years, with small kids that they do not parent. It turned ourlives into misery. 14 1 shared restroom for 2 bedroom residence 15 We are currently in the process of negotiating the purchase our rental house 16 1 would love to be able to give my kids a home and a backyard 17 Housing is not affordable for young families, almost unattainable. 18 New houses are either way too expensive or they come built in very tight condos/single detached homes that are only 10 feet apart. I make $130k a year and can't even buy a decent home with a yard. 19 Too small and bad HOA 20 Too small 21 1 am grateful to be living in a nice city but we are a family of 6 living in a 2 bedroom apartment. We need a house but rent is so expensive out here! # Q9: SINGLE PARENT WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 1 1 live in an u safe place and the apartment owners do not take care of them 2 Difficult to find something affordable for my daughter and I. 3 too small and expensive for what im paying 4 Many repairs are needed which my landlord ignores 5 Want to move 6 Current living with a relative due to economic hardship and process of divorce 7 1 live in a one bedroom with my daughter because I can't afford a two bedroom for us. 8 Would like to own rather than waste so much money on rent 9 1 wish I had a yard for my dogs and child 10 Expensive still. Rents gone from 1100 to 2000 in about 8 yrs 11 It's a one bedroom guesthouse for 4 people (myself, my mom and my two kids). Can't afford anything more. 12 It's 800 square feet, things are falling apart. 13 1 wish I lived closer to work 14 My house is too small for my family size and the neighborhood is not safe. 15 1 would prefer to own, though the home prices for a single parent and single income is impossible with the current home prices, not to mention the property tax and HOA fees. 16 Need more adequate space, storage for basic things like a bike of linens. An extra half bath, a dishwasher, washer and drier hookups so that I may purchase my own machines, an additional bedroom as there are two of us. # Q9: ADULT HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD (NON -PARENT) WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 There are no responses. # Q9: YOUNG ADULT LIVING WITH PARENTS 1 We need more tennis courts 2 3 4 5 6 7 Lessor does not take care of the rental property I live in 55+ so daughter has been displaced. I would prefer that all homes have 3 car garages. I don't like living on a street lined with cars on both sides. I'd prefer seeing tree lined streets and curb appeal. need more space Inadequate affordable housing catered to young adults I want to be able to live on my own without 4 roommates DATE 9/26/2020 8:43 PM 9/15/2020 12:16 PM 9/5/2020 10:14 AM 9/4/2020 5:40 PM 9/4/2020 3:29 PM 8/31/2020 1:19 PM 8/24/2020 8:25 PM 8/24/2020 12:55 PM 8/24/2020 12:38 PM 8/19/2020 9:25 PM 8/19/2020 5:37 PM 8/18/2020 10:02 AM 8/17/2020 8:31 PM 8/14/2020 5:38 PM 8/14/2020 12:02 AM 8/5/2020 10:19 AM 8/4/2020 1:05 AM 8/3/2020 5:55 PM 8/3/2020 2:52 PM 7/30/2020 9:05 PM 7/30/2020 12:05 PM DATE 9/2/2020 6:11 AM 8/28/2020 3:50 PM 8/28/2020 2:19 PM 8/28/2020 1:32 PM 8/25/2020 12:26 AM 8/18/2020 3:11 PM 8/14/2020 11:09 PM 8/14/2020 4:21 PM 8/6/2020 8:17 AM 7/31/2020 10:26 PM 7/31/2020 9:36 PM 7/30/2020 6:08 PM 7/30/2020 5:51 PM 7/30/2020 5:43 PM 7/30/2020 5:10 PM 7/30/2020 4:33 PM DATE DATE 9/4/2020 3:54 PM 8/31/2020 11:13 AM 8/29/2020 7:31 AM 8/27/2020 3:32 PM 8/6/2020 6:01 PM 8/6/2020 3:55 AM 8/2/2020 10:52 AM 25/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 Q9: MULTI -GENERATIONAL FAMILY HOUSEHOLD (GRANDPARENTS, CHILDREN, AND/OR GRANDCHILDREN DATE ALL UNDER THE SAME ROOF) I am somewhat satisfied because golf balls from golf course continue to damage our house. I am unable to keep up 9/15/2020 10:40 AM with the repairs. Dissatisfied because 3 children living in house that always needs repairs 9/15/2020 10:24 AM Need larger home for mom with dementia and caregiver 8/30/2020 7:44 PM Small - needs upgrade. No yard 8/30/2020 12:24 PM Need access to low income housing for inlaws who are currently living with me 8/29/2020 11:49 PM I prefer a larger house instead of a pricey rental apartment 8/29/2020 2:15 PM Frustration with not having enough financial support to obtain my own home. 8/28/2020 1:23 PM Inadequate space and not disabled friendly. 8/27/2020 10:16 PM Want to get my own space 8/27/2020 6:49 PM Would consider larger home in lower density neighborhood 8/24/2020 12:30 AM Looking for my own home 8/20/2020 7:08 AM Affordability in our city is absent; therefore we have multigenerational accommodations. 8/19/2020 9:57 PM can't afford housing 8/19/2020 9:39 AM The homogenous zoning doesn't help but the issue isn't availability of housing but employers paying too little. 8/18/2020 4:19 PM too cramped, too far to work 8/17/2020 10:55 AM Need to add an ADU. City staff seems to discourage them. 8/5/2020 9:56 AM Too far from work 8/4/2020 6:42 AM Not having enough personal space from people within the household as well as neighbors 8/2/2020 11:35 AM Expensive for age 65, need to downsize 7/31/2020 5:59 PM Q9: SINGLE PERSON LIVING WITH ROOMMATES DATE I would like to be able to afford a place by myself or with one other but not have to live with a large amount of 8/2/2020 12:44 PM people in one small space Q9: COUPLE LIVING WITH ROOMMATES DATE There are no responses 26/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q11 What age range most accurately describes you? Answered:621 Skipped:8 Q9: Single . 18.57% person... Q9: Couple 20.96% Q9: Co up[ with childre.. Q9: Sing[ parent with.. Q9: Adult Head 2 50°° of Household... Q9:Youn 71°° 0..59°° 32 5°0 5°0 adult living.. Q9 Multi -genera.. Q9: Singl 3 3°0 4 °o person livin.. Q9: Couple 1191 living with... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% O Gen Z (0-23 years old) E Millenial (24-39 years old) Generation X (40-55 years old) N (Baby Boomers) 56-74 years old (Silent Generation) 75 + years old GEN Z (0- MILLENIAL GENERATION X (BABY (SILENT TOTAL 23 YEARS (24-39 YEARS (40-55 YEARS BOOMERS) 56-74 GENERATION) 75 + OLD) OLD) OLD) YEARS OLD YEARS OLD Q9: Single person household (A) 0.00% 5.71% 18.57% 51.43% 24.29% 11.27% 0 4 13 36 17 70 F BCDFG CD CD BCDFG Q9: Couple (B) 0.00% 16.17% 20.96% 55.69% 7.19% 26.89% 0 27 35 93 12 167 DF ACD CD CDFG AC Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 0.00% 48.87% 0 108 DF ABFG Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) 2.44% 39.02% 1 16 BC AB 0.00% 12.50% 0 1 47.06% 104 ABG 53.66% 22 ABG 75.00% 6 3.62% 0.45% 35.59% 8 1 221 ABFG ABG 4.88% 0.00% 6.60% 2 0 41 ABFG A 12.50% 0.00% 1.29% 1 0 8 Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 14.71% 20.59% 32.35% 32.35% 0.00% 5.48% 5 7 11 11 0 34 ABCG AC BCD A Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) Total Respondents 0.00% 24.29% 0 17 F AC 0.00% 22.22% 0 2 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 6 182 216 31.43% 37.14% 22 26 CD BCD 33.33% 44.44% 3 4 0.00% 100.00% 0 1 182 35 7.14% 11.27% 5 70 AC 0.00% 1.45% 0 9 0.00% 0.16% 0 1 621 27/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q12 How important are the following concerns to you and your family? Answered:626 Skipped:3 A Ensuring that children who grow up in Temecula can afford to live in Temecula. Q9: Single .6 °° 50 68°° 8.22/048✓" person... �- Q9: You 8.58°° O.S9°° .88 adult living.. ■ Q9: Couple Q9: Cc u with childr Q9: Sin parent wit Q9: Adult He of Househoh Q9: Sing[ person livin.. Q9: Couple living with... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% A Q9: Single person... Q9: You n adult living.. Q9: Couple Q9:Couph with childre.. Q9: Sing[, parent with.. Q9: Adult Head of Household... Q9: SinglE person livin.. Q9: Couple living with... very Important 0 Somewhat Important Not Important 0 Don't Know Create mixed -use (commercial/office and residential) projects in the community that e... 17.65 100.00°° 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% very Important 0 Somewhat Important 0 Not Important 0 Don't Know 28/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Ensure that the housing market in Temecula provides a diverse range of housingtypes,... Q9: Single person... Q9: Younl adult living.. Q9 Multi -genera.. Q9: Couple Q9:Couph with childre.. Q9: Sing[ parent with.. Q9: Adult Head of Household... Q9: Single person livin.. M Q9: Couple living with... Q9: Single person... Q9: You n adult living.. Q9: Couple Q9:Couph with childre.. Q9: Sing[ parent with.. Q9: Adult Head of Household... Q9: Single person livin.. Q9: Couple living with... 34.55% 8°° 12.50% V-/° IU-/° LV-/o GV"/° 4v./o SV-/o bV-/° /v"/o W./. UV-/° Iuv"/° Very Important 0 Somewhat Important NNotImportant Don't Know Establish special needs housing for seniors, large families, veterans, and/or persons... [7F?bb L o o .b 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% O Very Important 0 Somewhat Important NNotImportant Don't Know 29/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Integrate affordable housing throughout the community to create mixed -income neighbor.. Q9: Single person... Q9: You n adult living.. M Q9: Couple 6T l 155R% 195P%1 Q9:Coup[ 0.0900 with childre.. Q9: Sing[ parent with.. Q9:AdultHead 00°° .00°° 50.00% of Household... Q9: Sing[ person livin.. Q9: Couple 110.0013 living with... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% M Very Important 0 Somewhat Important MNotImportant Don't Know Provide shelters and transitional housing for the homeless, along with services to he... Q9: Single ° 15.0 0.. person... 8. ° 7�%7°° Q9:You n 2 5°° 8 ° adult living..JERRAWOM Q9: Couple Q9:Couph with childre.. Q9: Singh parent with.. Q9: Adult Head of Household... Q9: Single person livin.. Q9: Couple living with... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 very Important 0 Somewhat Important 0 Not Important 0 Don't Know 30/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Encourage the rehabilitation of existing housing stock in older neighborhoods. Q9: Single person... Q9: Younl adult living.. Q9 Multi -genera.. Q9: Couple Q9:Couph with childre.. Q9: Sing[ parent with.. Q9: Adult Head of Household... Q9: Single person livin.. M Q9: Couple living with... 22.22°° 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very Important 0 Somewhat Important ONotImportant Don't Know Establish programs to help at -risk homeowners keep their homes, including mortgage lo... Q9: Single person... Q9: You 14.71°° adult living.. Q9: Couple Q9:Couph with childre.. Q9: Sing[ parent with.. Q9: Adult Head of Household... Q9: Single person livin.. Q9: Couple living with... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 very Important 0 Somewhat Important 0 Not Important 0 Don't Know 31 / 71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Fair/Equitable Housing opportunities and programs to help maintain and secure neighbo... M Q9 of f 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% E Very Important 0 Somewhat Important NNotImportant Don't Know Ensuring that children who grow up in Temecula can afford to live in Temecula. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q9: Single person household (A) 35.62% 50.68% 8.22% 5.48% 11.66% 26 37 6 4 73 1.84 CDFG BCDFG C Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 73.53% 20.59% 5.88% 0.00% 5.43% 25 7 2 0 34 1.32 AB A Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Couple (B) Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 71.01% 18.84% 7.25% 2.90% 11.02% 49 13 5 2 69 AB AB 47.90% 80 CDFG 63.35% 140 AB 65.85% 27 AB 50.00% 4 44.44% 4 100.00% 1 35.93% 60 ACDG 22.62% 50 AB 17.07% 7 AB 37.50% 3 13.77% 2.40% 26.68% 23 4 167 13.12% 0.90% 35.30% 29 2 221 A 14.63% 2.44% 6.55% 6 1 41 12.50% 0.00% 1.28% 1 0 8 1.42 1.71 1.52 1.54 1.63 33.33% 22.22% 0.00% 1.44% 3 2 0 9 1.78 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.16% 0 0 0 1 1.00 32/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Create mixed -use (commercial/office and residential) projects in the community that encourage walkable neighborhoods and reduce dependency on automobiles. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q9: Single person household (A) 45.21% 47.95% 5.48% 1.37% 11.66% 33 35 4 1 73 1.63 C BCDFG Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 47.06% 35.29% 17.65% 0.00% 5.43% 16 12 6 0 34 1.71 A Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) 46.38% 31.88% 20.29% 1.45% 11.02% 32 22 14 1 69 1.77 A 73 61 29 4 167 1.78 AC Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 37.73% 32.73% 29.09% 0.45% 35.14% 83 72 64 1 220 1.92 A AB Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) 41.46% 39.02% 19.51% 0.00% 6.55% 17 16 8 0 41 1.78 A Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) 25.00% 75.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.28% 2 6 0 0 8 1.75 Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) 77.78% 22.22% 0.00% 0.00% 1.44% 7 2 0 0 9 1.22 Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.16% 0 0 1 0 1 3.00 Ensure that the housing market in Temecula provides a diverse range of housing types, including single-family homes, townhomes, apartments, duplex/triplex and condominiums to meet the varied needs of local residents. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q9: Single person household (A) 52.05% 36.99% 10.96% 0.00% 11.66% 38 27 8 0 73 1.59 BCF BCF Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 50.00% 17.65% 32.35% 0.00% 5.43% 17 6 11 0 34 1.82 A ADG Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or 56.52% 27.54% 14.49% 1.45% 11.02% Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) 39 19 10 1 69 1.61 C CF Q9: Couple (B) 50.90% 24.55% 22.75% 1.80% 26.68% 85 41 38 3 167 1.75 C A AC Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 40.00% 24.09% 34.55% 1.36% 35.14% 88 53 76 3 220 1.97 BDG A ABDG Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) 63.41% 24.39% 9.76% 2.44% 6.55% 26 10 4 1 41 1.51 C CIF Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) 37.50% 50.00% 12.50% 0.00% 1.28% 3 4 1 0 8 1.75 Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 55.56% 44.44% 0.00% 0.00% 1.44% 5 4 0 0 9 0.00% 0 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.16% 0 1 0 1 1.44 3.00 33/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Establish special needs housing for seniors, large families, veterans, and/or persons with disabilities. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q9: Single person household (A) 47.95% 46.58% 4.11% 1.37% 11.66% 35 34 3 1 73 1.59 B BCF Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 41.18% 41.18% 17.65% 0.00% 5.43% 14 14 6 0 34 1.76 A Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or 57.97% 36.23% 5.80% 0.00% 11.02% Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) 40 25 4 0 69 1.48 C C Q9: Couple (B) 53.01% 31.33% 13.86% 1.81% 26.52% 88 52 23 3 166 1.64 C A A Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 40.72% 36.65% 20.81% 1.81% 35.30% 90 81 46 4 221 1.84 BG ADG Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) 53.66% 41.46% 4.88% 0.00% 6.55% 22 17 2 0 41 1.51 C Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) 50.00% 25.00% 25.00% 0.00% 1.28% 4 2 2 0 8 1.75 Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) 55.56% 44.44% 0.00% 0.00% 1.44% 5 4 0 0 9 1.44 Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.16% 0 1 0 0 1 2.00 Integrate affordable housing throughout the community to create mixed -income neighborhoods. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q9: Single person household (A) 31.51% 43.84% 19.18% 5.48% 11.66% 23 32 14 4 73 1.99 D BCDFG BC Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 44.12% 23.53% 32.35% 0.00% 5.43% 15 8 11 0 34 1.88 A Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or 42.03% 26.09% 26.09% 5.80% 11.02% Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) 29 18 18 4 69 1.96 A C Q9: Couple (B) 36.31% 26.19% 31.55% 5.95% 26.84% 61 44 53 10 168 2.07 D A AD Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 30.45% 25.45% 40.00% 4.09% 35.140/. 67 56 88 9 220 2.18 D A ADG Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) 57.50% 25.00% 15.00% 2.50% 6.39% 23 10 6 1 40 1.63 ABC A BC Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) 25.00% 2 Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 55.56% 5 0.00% 0 25.00% 2 44.44% 4 100.00% 1 50.00% 0.00% 1.28% 4 0 8 0.00% 0.00% 1.440/b 0 0 9 0.00% 0.00% 0.16% 0 0 1 2.25 1.44 2.00 34/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Provide shelters and transitional housing for the homeless, along with services to help move people into permanent housing. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q9: Single person household (A) 30.14% 53.42% 15.07% 1.37% 11.66% 22 39 11 1 73 1.88 G BCG C B Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 32.35% 38.24% 26.47% 2.94% 5.43% 11 13 9 1 34 2.00 Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or 46.38% 33.33% 14.49% 5.80% 11.02% Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) 32 23 10 4 69 1.80 AC A BC Q9: Couple (B) 39.76% 25.30% 26.51% 8.43% 26.52% 66 42 44 14 166 2.04 A G A Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 31.67% 33.03% 29.41% 5.88% 35.30% 70 73 65 13 221 2.10 G A AG Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) 46.34% 36.59% 17.07% 0.00% 6.55% 19 15 7 0 41 1.71 Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) 37.50% 37.50% 12.50% 12.50% 1.28% 3 3 1 1 8 2.00 Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) 44.44% 33.33% 11.11% 11.11% 1.44% 4 3 1 1 9 1.89 Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.16% 0 1 0 0 1 2.00 Encourage the rehabilitation of existing housing stock in older neighborhoods. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q9: Single person household (A) 47.30% 45.95% 4.05% 2.70% 11.82% 35 34 3 2 74 1.62 C Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 41.18% 44.12% 11.76% 2.94% 5.43% 14 15 4 1 34 1.76 D Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Couple (B) Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 55.88% 39.71% 2.94% 1.47% 10.86% 38 27 2 1 68 1.50 C 50.00% 37.50% 9.52% 2.98% 26.84% 84 63 16 5 168 1.65 D 47.27% 104 50.00% 20 50.00% 4 0.00% 0 36.36% 12.73% 3.64% 35.14% 80 28 8 220 ADG 47.50% 0.00% 2.50% 6.39% 19 0 1 40 BCF 37.50% 3 12.50% 1 0.00% 0 1.28% 8 22.22% 22.22% 0.00% 1.44% 2 2 0 9 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.16% 1 0 0 1 1.73 1.55 1.63 1.67 2.00 35/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Establish programs to help at -risk homeowners keep their homes, including mortgage loan programs. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q9: Single person household (A) 43.84% 46.58% 5.48% 4.11% 11.66% 32 34 4 3 73 1.70 G G C Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 47.06% 29.41% 14.71% 8.82% 5.43% 16 10 5 3 34 1.85 C Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) 66.67% 27.54% 4.35% 1.45% 11.02% 46 19 3 1 69 1.41 Q9: Couple (B) 39.76% 43.37% 12.65% 4.22% 26.52% 66 72 21 7 166 1.81 DG G Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 42.47% 41.10% 14.61% 1.83% 34.98% 93 90 32 4 219 1.76 G G AG F Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) 58.54% 29.27% 9.76% 2.44% 6.55% 24 12 4 1 41 1.56 B Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) 50.00% 37.50% 12.50% 0.00% 1.28% 4 3 1 0 8 1.63 Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) 33.33% 66.67% 0.00% 0.00% 1.44% 3 6 0 0 9 1.67 Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.16% 0 1 0 0 1 2.00 Fair/Equitable Housing opportunities and programs to help maintain and secure neighborhoods that have suffered foreclosures. VERY SOMEWHAT NOT DON'T TOTAL WEIGHTED IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT KNOW AVERAGE Q9: Single person household (A) 50.68% 45.21% 1.37% 2.74% 11.66% 37 33 1 2 73 1.56 G G BCF Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) 44.12% 32.35% 20.59% 2.94% 5.43% 15 11 7 1 34 1.82 G AG Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or 68.12% 20.29% 5.80% 5.80% 11.02% Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) 47 14 4 4 69 1.49 ABCF ABC CF Q9: Couple (B) Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) 09: Sinale oarent with children under 18 (D) Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) 46.43% 35.12% 78 59 G G 42.08% 37.56% 93 83 G G 56.10% 36.59% 23 15 50.00% 50.00% 4 4 44.44% 44.44% 4 4 0.00% 100.00% 0 1 14.88% 3.57% 26.84% 25 6 168 1.76 A 15.84% 4.52% 35.30% 35 10 221 1.83 AG 7.32% 0.00% 6.55% 3 0 41 1.51 0.00% 0.00% 1.28% 0 0 8 1.50 0.00% 11.11% 1.440/6 0 1 9 1.78 0.00% 0.00% 0.16% 0 0 1 2.00 36/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q13 Do you feel that the different housing types in Temecula currently meet your housing needs? Answered:615 Skipped:14 Q9 of I 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Yes 0 No Q9: Single person household (A) Q9: Couple (B) Q9: Couple with children under 18 (C) Q9: Single parent with children under 18 (D) Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 (E) Q9: Young adult living with parents (F) Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Single person living with roommates (H) Q9: Couple living with roommates (1) Total Respondents YES NO TOTAL 66.18% 33.82% 11.06% 45 23 68 D D 68.67% 31.33% 26.99% 114 52 166 D D 70.59% 29.41% 35.93% 156 65 221 D D 36.59% 63.41% 6.67% 15 26 41 ABCFG ABCFG 75.00% 25.00% 1.30% 6 2 8 63.64% 36.36% 5.37% 21 12 33 D D 58.82% 41.18% 11.06% 40 28 68 D D 44.44% 55.56% 1.46% 4 5 9 100.00% 0.00% 0.16% 1 0 1 402 213 615 37/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q14 What types of housing are most needed in the City of Temecula? Q9 of Q9: 9 S 8 1 8 8 Multi -genera... Q9: Single 2i36' person livin.. Q9: Couple 1 living with... Answered:620 Skipped:9 100 200 300 400 50C Single Family (Detached) 0 Duplex/Attached Housing Condominiums (multifamily ownership homes) Apartments (multifamily rental homes) EseniorHousing Accessory Dwelling unit Housing for people with disabilities (Please specify in comment field below) Other (please specify) 38/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey SINGLE DUPLEXIATTACHED CONDOMINIUMS APARTMENTS SENIOR ACCESSORY HOUSING OTHER TOTAL FAMILY HOUSING (MULTIFAMILY (MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DWELLING FOR PEOPLE (PLEASE (DETACHED) OWNERSHIP RENTAL UNIT WITH SPECIFY) HOMES) HOMES) DISABILITIES (PLEASE SPECIFY IN COMMENT FIELD BELOW) Q9: Single 44.59% 17.57% 18.92% 12.16% 50.00% 12.16% 9.46% 14.86% 21.45% person 33 13 14 9 37 9 7 11 133 household (A) CDF Q9: Couple (B) 46.11% 20.96% 26.95% 10.78% 38.32% 8.38% 10.78% 20.96% 49.35% 77 35 45 18 64 14 18 35 306 C CD Q9: Couple 58.53% 14.29% 22.12% 13.82% 23.96% 8.29% 9.68% 24.88% 61.45% with children 127 31 48 30 52 18 21 54 381 under 18 (C) BG DG ABG Q9: Single 53.66% 34.15% 29.27% 14.63% 14.63% 7.32% 17.07% 31.71% 13.39% parent with 22 14 12 6 6 3 7 13 83 children under C ABG 18 (D) Q9: Adult 75.00% 12.50% 12.50% 12.50% 25.00% 12.50% 25.00% 0.00% 2.26% Head of 6 1 1 1 2 1 2 0 14 Household (non - parent) with children under 18 (E) Q9: Young 48.48% 15.15% 33.33% 24.24% 21.21% 18.18% 12.12% 21.21% 10.32% adult living 16 5 11 8 7 6 4 7 64 with parents A (F) Q9: Multi- 41.43% 32.86% generational 29 23 family C C household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) (G) Q9: Single 22.22% 33.33% person living 2 3 with roommates (H) Q9: Couple 0.00% 0.00% living with 0 0 roommates (1) Total 312 125 152 Respondents # Q9: SINGLE PERSON HOUSEHOLD 1 Markets 2 Markets 3 No opinion 4 I'd rather see conversions rather than new builds 25.71% 15.71% 45.71% 18.57% 17.14% 25.71% 25.16% 18 11 32 13 12 18 156 CD 33.33% 11.11% 55.56% 33.33% 22.22% 33.33% 3.55% 3 1 5 3 2 3 22 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.16% 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 84 206 67 73 141 620 DATE 9/16/2020 9:35 AM 9/16/2020 9:22 AM 9/16/2020 9:19 AM 9/15/2020 10:20 AM 5 with washing machine and dryer 9/15/2020 10:10 AM 6 More multiuse property areas with reduced need for cars 8/28/2020 7:39 PM 7 Affordable housing for people not requiring Section 8 housing, though cannot afford high rent. 8/28/2020 6:44 PM 8 Most have 2-5year wait list for low income senior apts. 8/19/2020 11:04 PM 9 live work play 8/14/2020 2:51 PM 10 Habitat for Humanity type housing opportunities 8/7/2020 8:34 PM 11 Provide more single story homes and condo/townhomes as single story 7/31/2020 2:13 PM 39/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Q9: COUPLE We don't need more traffic/horrible We are so full right now, the only thing is duplex's and I'am against. upscale 55 and older communities No opinion DATE 9/16/2020 9:13 AM 9/4/2020 7:08 PM 9/4/2020 5:14 PM 9/4/2020 4:15 PM More Single Story Homes 9/4/2020 4:12 PM all the above 9/4/2020 3:14 PM Low cost housing for people with low income 9/1/2020 10:20 AM None. I moved here from a similar town where I grew up. They quickly added apartments and multi use buildings 8/30/2020 12:22 PM and didn4 plan for the increased traffic. Affordable housing 8/28/2020 6:01 PM No more housing. 8/28/2020 3:14 PM Don't know, why would you expect this kind of information from a survey 8/28/2020 1:43 PM Single family 55+ homes. 8/28/2020 1:34 PM AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR SIGLE MOM'S WITH CHILDREN TO LIVE NEAR WHERE THEY WORK. 8/24/2020 10:16 AM I feel that the city doesn't need anymore housing and we are already at capacity 8/21/2020 1:15 PM Affordable housing for low income families. 8/19/2020 7:05 PM Senior single unit detached homes that are affordable and size appropriate for retirement and special care needs. 8/19/2020 1:39 PM Not high rise apartments! Homeless 8/19/2020 10:15 AM Low-cost housing for our very low-income and homeless population. 8/19/2020 10:02 AM More low income housing needed and housing to minimize the problems caused by homeless 8/13/2020 5:53 PM Affordable housing. SFR 8/11/2020 9:17 PM Single family homes under 2000sf are very difficult to find in Temecula. 8/11/2020 2:22 PM More single story. More affordable housing. 8/9/2020 10:17 AM We like Temecula a lot, but we don't want to pick between a tiny apartment or an oversized (for us) giant home, 8/6/2020 8:19 AM regardless of what we can afford. There are very few modest homes ever available for people like us. More one story homes 8/5/2020 8:57 PM None 8/5/2020 2:18 PM Affordable housing 8/2/2020 7:41 PM We don't need anymore homes built. The infrastructure is not support mire homes 8/2/2020 4:23 PM Permanent supportive housing 8/2/2020 11:45 AM Low income housing for single Moms, so the can live near where they work & can afford to live without their salaries 8/2/2020 10:58 AM being spent on rent! I know of no place in Temecula, life this for single parents, especially for single Moms. Small single family homes, not these gigantic 2 story 5 bedroom homes 8/1/2020 9:52 AM None. The area can not handle any more traffic!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 7/31/2020 2:54 PM Single story homes 7/31/2020 2:15 PM We had a great city until the city council got in be with developers. Lots of apartments ruin a city and require lots of 7/30/2020 7:25 PM service calls from police and fire. Welcome to temec=downey whittier Affordable Senior homes - smaller single units near shopping centers, grocers, pharmacies, etc. 7/30/2020 2:35 PM Wheelchair accessible housing 7/30/2020 1:07 PM 40/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q9: COUPLE WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 Low rent/homeless housing AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLEASE No more housing. We need a better infrastructure, more schools. Too many houses/ people to accommodate as it is. T Not sure Permanent Supportive Housing I feel Temecula should stop expanding and stop building houses. The community is already too impacted with people, cars, etc. I feel that people with PHYSICAL disabilities should have the same access to the Same Communities as the 55+ do, Since most of us require the same amount of care if not more! I strongly feel that people with Physical Disabilities who desire to live Independently should be able to do so in a SAFE city like Temecula CA DATE 9/24/2020 7:39 PM 9/15/2020 12:16 PM 9/5/2020 10:14 AM 8/31/2020 11:14 PM 8/31/2020 9:44 PM 8/29/2020 7:16 PM 8/28/2020 8:09 AM 8/22/2020 5:30 AM 9 affordable housing for working families, homeless who want to stay here 8/21/2020 11:38 AM 10 More affordable housing 8/21/2020 5:25 AM 11 None. There are plenty of housing types already. Temecula is overcrowded as it is. Plenty of room to build north of 8/19/2020 9:24 PM Menifee. 12 Shelter 8/19/2020 5:15 PM 13 Affordable housing 8/19/2020 8:36 AM 14 Down -payments are hard 8/19/2020 8:19 AM 15 We have enough! We need jobs 8/19/2020 7:57 AM 16 Anything affordable 8/17/2020 9:55 PM 17 Reasonably priced housing 8/17/2020 2:05 PM 18 We do not want or need low income housing!!! Studies show that crime is increased in these areas making our 8/15/2020 12:59 AM children even more vulnerable! 19 No more homes needed. Too many now 8/12/2020 9:48 AM 20 No more development! The current infrastructure can't handle the existing traffic, much less additional families. 8/12/2020 8:14 AM 21 Stop building fix the off ramps 8/11/2020 9:53 PM 22 Mixed neighborhoods with groceries 8/11/2020 5:54 PM 23 House with accessory sweeping unit or "casita' 8/7/2020 6:38 PM 24 Nothing , stop building more homes we do not need more housing here 8/7/2020 5:01 AM 25 more inclusive housing options like the upcoming Cypress Ridge townhomes on Pechanga Pkwy 8/6/2020 5:34 PM 26 We need more affordable apartments / condos 8/6/2020 4:11 PM 27 single level homes for aging population 8/6/2020 8:46 AM 28 Autism 8/5/2020 8:51 PM 29 Affordable housing 8/5/2020 10:19 AM 30 1 don't know, not knowledgeable enough 8/5/2020 10:16 AM 31 There are too many homes in Temecula. 8/5/2020 10:06 AM 32 Please do not build any more houses! 8/5/2020 10:05 AM 33 no more needed 8/4/2020 12:35 PM 34 Affordable workforce housing 8/4/2020 7:48 AM 35 Less houses 8/3/2020 5:20 PM 36 Temecula seem to have reached housing variety 8/3/2020 3:20 PM 37 Homes with ample space between them 8/1/2020 10:54 AM 38 Properties with larger lots 7/31/2020 5:20 PM 39 The city is great as it is. It shouldn't keep growing bigger! Traffic's already getting heavy and stressful! 7/31/2020 5:01 PM 40 1 like the mixed -use housing concept like in Old Town 7/31/2020 2:59 PM 41 We have too much traffic as it is. Dont need any more homes 7/31/2020 12:28 PM 42 1 feel there needs to be more options for single people, but not necessarily condiminiums as they usually come with 7/31/2020 8:36 AM large HOA costs. I would love to see neighborhoods of detached small homes with very low HOA fees that are accessible to lower income people. 43 Workforce housing/ownership 7/30/2020 8:55 PM 44 Studio/loft/professional dwellings 7/30/2020 7:15 PM 45 Lower income housing 7/30/2020 5:54 PM 46 Affordable housing for lower income 7/30/2020 5:26 PM 47 Homes for veteran and with physical disabilities 7/30/2020 3:31 PM 48 Smaller single family homes 7/30/2020 3:20 PM 49 Tiny homes that are affordable to low income people that work in Temecula 7/30/2020 2:58 PM 41 / 71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 50 51 52 53 54 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Unsure. There appears to be enough housing, would hate to see it become overpopulated and turn into another congested city. 7/30/2020 2:44 PM None 7/30/2020 1:37 PM Low to moderate income affordable homes 7/30/2020 12:05 PM Larger lots for single-family homes. Developments are too tightly -packed. Where are the 10-15k square foot lots? 6/8/2020 11:25 AM It's either 5-7k square foot lots or multi -acre lots in De Luz/Wine Country. Very little in the middle. Permanent supportive housing 6/2/2020 4:41 PM Q9: SINGLE PARENT WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 DATE Low income housing 9/2/2020 6:11 AM Low income housing 8/28/2020 3:50 PM Homes low -mid income families Could afford 8/28/2020 1:32 PM Affordable 8/27/2020 1:23 PM Close to shops, affordable. 8/25/2020 12:26 AM Low income housing 8/14/2020 11:09 PM Don't know Single story Low income housing for single parents Low income home for single parent Housing options for single parents Affordable housing Less rentals and more affordable homeownership Q9: ADULT HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD (NON -PARENT) WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 There are no responses. Q9: YOUNG ADULT LIVING WITH PARENTS Stroke and brain injury survivors 8/7/2020 2:22 PM 8/5/2020 9:40 AM 8/3/2020 7:17 AM 7/31/2020 10:26 PM 7/30/2020 5:51 PM 7/30/2020 5:43 PM 7/30/2020 4:33 PM DATE DATE 8/31/2020 11:13 AM Fairly priced housing for the youth just starting to be out on their own. This will not force them to have to move to 8/29/2020 7:31 AM questionable neighborhoods. low income housing opportunities 8/28/2020 1:21 PM I am opposed to the new law that allows ADUs. I purchased my home for the view and privacy. An ADU next door 8/27/2020 3:32 PM would affect both and I would move if that happened. None it's great as is 8/24/2020 1:02 PM Sorry I don't mean to be NIMBY but apartments and homeless populations can go be built in Murrieta or menifee. 8/21/2020 12:17 PM Designing these services will attract a different kind of demographic. No thanks. Affordable rent 8/6/2020 7:35 AM Q9: MULTI -GENERATIONAL FAMILY HOUSEHOLD (GRANDPARENTS, CHILDREN, AND/OR GRANDCHILDREN DATE ALL UNDER THE SAME ROOF) or public financial assistance to make homes ADA compliant instead of building more structures to allow disabled 9/15/2020 10:40 AM persons to remain in their homes. Apartment that single people with children can afford 9/15/2020 10:24 AM More affordable multi generation homes 8/30/2020 7:44 PM Low income senior housing 8/29/2020 11:49 PM Affordable housing with disabled amenity's, so disabled people do not end up on the street & homeless. 8/28/2020 3:48 PM Don't know 8/28/2020 2:02 PM Housing for homeless 8/28/2020 1:11 PM Homes that are handicap accessible for elderly and for disabled veterans 8/24/2020 12:30 AM None! No more new housing 8/19/2020 8:39 PM Single story homes for FTB 8/19/2020 9:50 AM medium income housing, not high or low 8/17/2020 10:55 AM More affordable apartment's 8/10/2020 2:23 PM Do not want to change! Prefer single family homes. This is why we live in suburbs 8/5/2020 2:10 PM Senior housing that doesn't cost $3000/mo. Actively encourage ADU's. 8/5/2020 9:56 AM Affordable Housing for all of the above 8/2/2020 8:55 AM AFFORDABLE "Active" Senior 55+ Neighborhoods, AFFORDABLE Apartments, I feel there is enough assisted 7/31/2020 5:59 PM living Senior communities (not apartment style but whole communities) and SINGLE STORY OPTIONS. My in-laws have 7/31/2020 6:47 AM been looking for four years and no luck because they are so rare to find in anything besides a tiny little rundown duplex. Affordable to the kids who grew up here. 7/30/2020 1:39 PM 42/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q9: SINGLE PERSON LIVING WITH ROOMMATES low income housing Mixed -use commercial on ground, residential on top, mid -rise buildings More truly affordable housing for working class people Q9: COUPLE LIVING WITH ROOMMATES There are no responses. DATE 9/9/2020 3:44 PM 8/4/2020 12:55 AM 8/2/2020 12:44 PM DATE 43/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q15 Please remember to visit the website for more details on the Housing Element Update at the link below:https://temeculaca.gov/432/Housing-Element Are there any comments or concerns you would like to share with the City of Temecula relevant to the upcoming Housing Element Update? Answered: 238 Skipped:391 PLEASE REMEMBER TO VISIT THE WEBSITE FOR MORE DETAILS ON THE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE AT TOTAL THE LINK BELOW:HTTPS:IITEMECULACA.GOV/432/HOUSING-ELEMENT ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR CONCERNS YOU WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH THE CITY OF TEMECULA RELEVANT TO THE UPCOMING HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE? Q9: Single person household 100.00% 6.72% 16 16 Q9: Couple 100.00% 30.67% 73 73 Q9: Couple with children under 100.00% 34.87% 18 83 83 Q9: Single parent with children 100.00% 7.56% under 18 18 18 Q9: Adult Head of Household 100.00% 0.42% (non -parent) with children under 1 1 18 Q9: Young adult living with 100.00% 5.04% parents 12 12 Q9: Multi -generational family 100.00% 13.45% household (Grandparents, 32 32 Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) Q9: Single person living with 100.00% 1.26% roommates 3 3 Q9: Couple living with 0.00% 0.00% roommates 0 0 Total Respondents 238 238 # Q9: SINGLE PERSON HOUSEHOLD 1 Would like to see more housing for seniors with limited senior income. 2 Too much growth without infrastructure to support. Roads/traffic too heavy and maintenance not adequate to support the additional homes being built. 3 Looking forward and praying that someday I can acquire my own Senior home. Many thanks for concern. 4 1 come from a state that passed legislation to preserve open space. I am dismayed by all the building here. Every new development means more traffic lights, more traffic, more students in the schools, and more importantly more water usage. 5 Transportation is an interdependency with housing, I don't see how they can be compartmentalized. 6 Install the infrastructure before building home or multi family homes PLEASE 7 I'm hoping that Temecula includes Murrieta, Wildomar, Menifee and surrounding suburbs. 8 No comment. 9 My condo was built in 2005. I'm an original owner. Sloppy construction, no oversight and shoddy electrical work. 10 13 Another area of concern is the lack of oversight of HOA Property Management Firms. Their charges to HOA's are aligned with THEIR desires, not owners within the HOA. Please address this lack of oversight as property owners are their clients. Thank you for seeking our input. Thank you for reaching out to find out the needs of the surrounding communities. We visit and sop in your area. Attend your functions as well. property taxes are very high and this prevents lower income folks from buying I would love a lower rental rate for my apartment in Old Town as I am turning 70 years old this month and would like to be able to have a little more money to enjoy my last years. I love Temecula and especially feel privileged to live in Old Town and in the same location for the last 14/15 years. Temecula is over -crowded. The infrastructure cannot handle the population. We do not need any new housing to be built. It will only add to the congestion. 14 If the city continues to build affordable housing in temecula, the city will go down hill and end up just like Riverside. 15 I'm currently renting and taking amenities away it's frustrating because of COVID 19,1 pay a lot of money for renting. 16 The NUMBER #1 concern is traffic on the freeway. Before any more units are built, the State needs to adequately fund infrastructure in the area. The area has grown tons in the last 30 years. Before more units are built, we need infrastructure. Also, the state should not tell cities that they must build more units, or change zoning. It is called local government for a reason. Sacramento needs to stop over ruling the wishes of communities. DATE 9/16/2020 9:09 AM 9/15/2020 1:55 PM 9/15/2020 11:41 AM 9/15/2020 10:20 AM 9/4/2020 3:58 PM 9/4/2020 3:27 PM 8/30/2020 12:02 AM 8/28/2020 9:06 PM 8/28/2020 7:39 PM 8/28/2020 6:44 PM 8/28/2020 2:29 PM 8/16/2020 9:59 PM 8/10/2020 7:20 AM 8/3/2020 5:55 PM 7/30/2020 2:42 PM 5/28/2020 10:43 AM 44/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q9: COUPLE 1 None 2 Senior communities would be nice. Or else we may move 3 Can't afford computer! Why do you waste so much water and still have trees and plants but cut in half and only water public areas in early AM late PM 4 The housing and property taxes here in Temecula are out of control. I believe it is designed to not integrate but segregate. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 No more apartments or section 8 Make it easier, faster and less expensive to develop new housing Dedicated Bicycle and walking trails, more open space parks, more exits from freeway and road widening to accommodate traffic as housing/population increases. I'm very concerned about a housings duplex I heard about west Temecula parkway by 1-15, adding more congestion and ruining the beautiful hill side, that all Temecula's love seeing. No No N/A We are in great need of affordable housing options in our area for all types of people. Don't be so eager to plan for new housing development. I realize that the City can make money off of it but it may lose the charm of a quiet country town. I'd like to see this money and effort go towards fire safety, homeless and drug rehab programs and centers. You keep building houses but yet the infrastructure such as highways East to West is terrible. Winchester for an example takes me 50 min to 70 minutes to get from business park drive to Murrieta hot springs Anytime from 3:30 To 6:30pm and longer on weekends. I'm very frustrated.... and thinking of moving. Your planning needs a better plan DATE 9/24/2020 1:53 PM 9/24/2020 1:44 PM 9/16/2020 9:13 AM 9/15/2020 2:55 PM 9/14/2020 10:21 PM 9/5/2020 6:40 PM 9/5/2020 7:05 AM 9/4/2020 7:08 PM 9/4/2020 3:36 PM 9/4/2020 3:14 PM 9/4/2020 3:11 PM 9/1/2020 10:20 AM 8/30/2020 12:22 PM 8/29/2020 2:10 PM 15 Never, ever build in the southwest hills, or near preservation areas. Limit building to housing, not entertainment 8/29/2020 11:42 AM venue. lb 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NO No no My concern is about the traffic issues when more homes are built. Is the traffic issue also part of this program? Please get some sort of rent control in temecula, especially for seniors Do not start building lower -income type housing in Temecula. There are other areas where lower -income families can go. As much as I hate to say it, lower -income families bring in more crime and depreciation to hard working succesful families dreams. I wish it would not be this way but these are the facts. Builders that are building in the area are pricing the new homes were not many people can afford. This includes more taxes and hoa paid by seniors at summers bend new communities. Hoa and taxes for 55 older adults are $300 and 1.79taxes. Younger than 55 pay $200 hoa and 1.7 taxes. Is this fair for seniors? Harold Stewart 9512901808 There's not a lot for seniors to do here. The senior center is only for low income folks and their day trips are to the library. Huh? I Think it's important to keep older citizens active and engaged in the community. This is a young family city. 8/29/2020 9:13 AM 8/29/2020 9:04 AM 8/28/2020 8:06 PM 8/28/2020 6:35 PM 8/28/2020 6:01 PM 8/28/2020 5:23 PM 8/28/2020 2:00 PM 8/28/2020 1:55 PM 24 Seniors do not have enough income to afford utilities. There should be a better program for this. This is for my 8/28/2020 1:54 PM parents and not for me. 25 People like / need to feel safe. 26 None 27 No 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 You allow too many housing projects off major streets that are already difficult to drive on, because of traffic. One example is the building on Rancho California between Margarita & Ynez. Also, the unbelievable building along Butterfield, north of Rancho California. More traffic problems . It's quite obvious to me that the conservative leadership in Temecula doesn't work for all of the Temecula residents, but when "following the money", we can all see who is benefiting and who isn't. It seems that we do have adequate low income housing in the city. Single family homeownership provides a stake in the community. Employed person's with resources make their lives here and contribute financially to support the cities businesses, medical facilities in a way that promotes positive growth for all. Please stop building anymore homes. We have over crowding here in the Temecula Valley and Everyone I talks to wishes that you would bring in more Jobs! Our streets are over crowded and Traffic is a Nightmare! Everything about Temecula is great except the traffic. More housing means more people and more traffic. Please the importance of open spaces and the need for expanded roads and freeway on/off ramps when increasing housing. no Finding affordable housing for those who work and serve in the community is critical. Providing options for seniors to leave larger homes for affordable smaller and energy efficient homes is important for an aging population. Need more mental health assistance for homeless. Need drug and alcohol programs for homeless outreach We need to have a system to accommodate low income and homeless persons. People complain about our homeless population, yet we don't housing for them. I believe the City fears this would encourage and increase our homeless population, yet we must do something as, with the current economy, we will be seeing more and more homeless families. 8/28/2020 1:43 PM 8/27/2020 2:00 PM 8/26/2020 7:43 PM 8/24/2020 10:16 AM 8/23/2020 5:53 PM 8/21/2020 1:15 PM 8/21/2020 8:29 AM 8/19/2020 1:59 PM 8/19/2020 1:39 PM 8/19/2020 1150 AM 8/19/2020 10:15 AM 8/19/2020 10:02 AM 37 Temecula, as a city, needs far more diversity. It doesn't feel or appear to include all races and individuals from 45/71 8/18/2020 1:17 PM City of Temecula Housing Element Survey various socio-economic backgrounds. It feels and appears to contain mostly White, affluent Republicans with racist beliefs and unfair practices towards minorities. This makes the housing situation biased and racially divided. 38 Remove the homeless 8/17/2020 9:01 PM 39 Why not be more fair and balanced in your PSA's. We want facts not fear! 8/17/2020 11:14 AM 40 If you are going to build more buildings in old town temecula, then you need to make more parking garages or more 8/14/2020 3:39 PM available parking. It is extremely irritating to live in old town and not be able to park! 41 this is a good effort, thank you 42 Adding ADU 's to existing homes create off street parking problems with streets lines with cars. 43 More open space/parks/hiking trails/Agriculture. Would like to see more dedicated bike trails. Less high density - leads to more traffic and less happiness. 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 It takes too long to build and govt fees are contributing factor in increase costs. Stop cherry picking your friends. Why does Corona Family seek to rezone their property for Residential, but sue/demand EIR for adjacent housing tract on BFS and Tern Pkwy. The politics of valley are damaging the community. All homes/apartments must be for homeowners or long term renters. No short term rentals as they take away from the infrastructure of Temecula. We love Temecula. Please maintain quality of life and keep the area "low crime.". The only drawback is California leffest politics and primarily a single party state which may drive us out of the state N/a No Nothing additional I feel that developers will build homes that they can sell. So demand will encourage the construction of whatever homes are needed. More mixed use so shopping isn't only at each end of town Please, no more apartments and limit the number of new housing developments There needs to be more bike trails that enable people to ride a bike anywhere they want to go including the wineries and old town I chose the French Valley area rather then Temecula because I got more bang for my buck. I got a larger nicer house for a lot less and my taxes were lower. Need more long term buyer attractive neighborhoods -that is, houses that have space between them and aren't shoved up right next to each other. No thanks I think the new housing projects are moving too quickly, without concern for our roads & highways, which are in horrific condition. I have been trying for over a year to get SOMEONE to take responsibility for a 2-mile section of Pauba Rd., where this road (not a county owned road), is a "2-mile accident waiting to happen". Everyone I have talked to, has passed the buck! The government of Temecula is doing a lousy job, with representation being the major problem. Haven't been able to read the housing update; but you put it in the middle of this questionnaire, which doesn't make sense. We need better governance in Temecula. Too many representatives continue to be elected, yet do NOTHING to help Temecula prosper, just taking salaries & sitting on their duffs! I understand that the City of Temecula is a family town and that is fantastic. However, it seems like Temecula has focused on creating very large 2 story houses for families. I believe Temecula needs to have smaller detached single family homes available. Not all families need or can afford such large homes. Smaller 3 bed two bath home at 1500-1800 square feet should be available. Additionally, the city should also consider adding in more condominiums. Thank you. 8/13/2020 5:53 PM 8/9/2020 9:43 PM 8/9/2020 1:14 PM 8/9/2020 10:17 AM 8/8/2020 3:14 PM 8/8/2020 1:17 PM 8/7/2020 10:38 PM 8/7/2020 1:17 PM 8/6/2020 8:19 AM 8/6/2020 7:44 AM 8/5/2020 8:57 PM 8/5/2020 2:18 PM 8/5/2020 1:22 PM 8/4/2020 7:42 AM 8/2/2020 2:11 PM 8/2/2020 11:09 AM 8/2/2020 10:58 AM 8/1/2020 9:52 AM 59 The cost of housing lacks diversity. There are no single family detached rental homes priced at appropriate levels 7/31/2020 7:24 PM for middle to low income families. 60 Homeless shelters are definitely more needed now more than ever as well as keeping a balance of nature and not 7/31/2020 3:50 PM building more homes that people can't afford. 61 The build out of Temecula has already exceeded the original plans. The lack of mass transit or additional freeway 7/31/2020 2:54 PM lanes means NO MORE HOUSING!!!!!!!!!! 62 I'd like priority for affordable active senior resident- owned housing - senior mobile home parks and 55+ resident 7/31/2020 2:43 PM owned homes. Resident owned mobile home space, not rented land space. And senior communities similar to The Colony in Murrieta, and The Knolls mobile home park in Murrieta. Not apartments - houses or mobile homes. 63 -Limit STR's -Limit ADW's to those with onsite parking. 7/31/2020 11:49 AM 64 Housing/ rent pricing caused by investors buying up property in bulk and renting out. It's driving up costs and 7/30/2020 11:20 PM lowering the quality of inventory. 65 Stop building. Buy land and turn it into parks. The problem is the Jeni is already out of the bag for Temecula. Traffic 7/30/2020 7:25 PM and crime are here to stay 66 As someone who works in a position that often interacts with the homeless population in this city, I can firmly say 7/30/2020 7:08 PM that this city desperately needs to address homelessness in Temecula better and with more respect. Many homeless patrons that I have heard from say that they do not feel that there is nearly enough city resources to help support them and get them back on their feet. They also often complain that they don't feel respected, seen, or heard by the city and that is a major issue that Temecula needs to grapple with. Redirecting that funding toward social resources and programs would make a tremendous difference in our community. Also, the cost of housing (rent, buying a house, etc.) is FAR too high in this area. Neither I or my boyfriend would be able to afford our rent and living expenses on a monthly basis if one of us lost our income for any reason, and we live in what is considered one of the "cheapest" apartments in the city). This is a terrifying concern that needs to be promptly addressed, especially considering the hardships brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. Thankfully my boyfriend and I have been getting our steady income during this time but we were initially horrified at the start of all of this when we were unsure if we'd be keeping our jobs and be getting paid during this trying time. 67 There should be a housing program in the market for couples, without "forcing" them to live in a house with 3-4 7/30/2020 6:10 PM rooms when they need just 1-2. 46/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 68 Current infrastructure is strained to meet current housing levels. After watching Los Angeles and Orange Counties 7/30/2020 5:09 PM basically negatively impact the quality of life by overbuilding, the main reason for our move to Temecula was a better quality of life with limited growth at the time. Since moving here, we have seen the population growth negatively impact quality of life but from an economic view, it has been a positive. The challenge is to balance the growth while maintaining quality. 69 We love Temecula! However it is way too populated and too many residences being built. The infrastructure cannot 7/30/2020 5:09 PM handle what we have now! Very frustrating. All we hear are sirens anymore from emergency and/or police. It's sad when you live w miles from somewhere and it takes 15 to 20 minutes to get there. Stop building. There is enough population and tourist business to sustain the city. 70 Building AFFORDABLE Housing for all age groups and particularly for those who work in the service industries. 7/30/2020 2:35 PM Today's housing market is expensive and prejudicial. 71 Please open more affordable low income senior housing . 7/30/2020 2:28 PM 72 1 have lived here since the 80's. I will most likely not be able to stay here in retirement due to housing costs (and 7/30/2020 1:36 PM lack of physicians). This is not a senior friendly town unless one is very well off. 73 Coming from an undesirable neighborhood before moving to Temecula, I wont' bringing more apartments or " lower 7/30/2020 1:30 PM income" housing will devalue our neighborhood and bring in more crime. I saved and bought my home here because the city was safe and clean, I am concerned it will become more in lines of where I moved away from if more apartments and condos are built 47/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Q9: COUPLE WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 Just want affordable housing for all income types. It would reduce homelessness and bring diversity to the city. It is disappointing to see zonings changed and other adjustments that are aimed to please the person(s) financially benefitting rather than thinking about the value in the original zoning as well as congestion and overloading the market. Stop building more houses until you have the schools and infrastructure to support the people already here. Make it easier to add an ADU. For example, provide (free!) the (approved!) architectural plans for 4-6 different ADUs. Rather than making each individual homeowner come up with their own (although that should still be an option) the city can just give out plans that meet all of their guidelines. I think we need to do more to help get homeless of the street but what that looks like I am not sure. I do not want Temecula to turn into what LA, San Fran and Austin are seeing now. I believe in helping people get back on their feet and not in enabling them or making them rely on others. Avoid construction of multi -units or apartments that makes real estate prices go down and increases traffic in the area. DATE 9/24/2020 1:11 PM 9/24/2020 11:21 AM 9/5/2020 10:14 AM 9/5/2020 12:01 AM 9/4/2020 3:49 PM 9/4/2020 3:29 PM My family moved to Temecula in 1968, moved to Murrieta in 2013. 9/4/2020 3:07 PM Don't allow section 8 housing to be grouped Together. Don't allow homeless to live rear river beds. Continue police 9/1/2020 10:24 AM force. no 8/31/2020 11:14 PM With the state, country, and world moving toward renewable energy -some HOAs in Temecula still do not allow solar 8/31/2020 9:44 PM on roofs. With the climate and typical yardscape here, solar installation on a roof just makes too much sense for the city and homeowners. Not too much reduce the stress on an overloaded power grid and reduce the risk of fires. The city should adopt a mandate that prevents HOAs from banning solar roofs. No Nune Please adopt a by -right process for multifamily housing. N/A 8/30/2020 9:55 PM 8/29/2020 8:48 PM 8/29/2020 7:16 PM 8/28/2020 10:29 PM The homeless population continues to grow in Temecula, creating unsafe environments in some areas. I am not 8/28/2020 8:09 AM comfortable allowing my teenagers to go to some areas of the city. None We understand that is is a very nice area but the lack of a rent increase cap is hurting families. Please consider a rent increase cap to keep families who live and work here from having to relocate. We have too many homeless people along Temecula Parkway. They need to be relocated. More resources for affordable housing need to be made available and also on the City Website I would like to See More Homes/Apartments available for the PHYSICALLY disabled! The city of Temecula has 55+ Communities which is great for those in need of it ... I STRONGLY believe that people who are PHYSICALLY disabled should be included in those communities The rent has gone up exponentially, so much so that people aren't able to maintain the cost of living in Temecula. When housing prices increase, even with low interest, they're out of range of the average California worker, especially with the high property tax! Community College brings roommate situations that drive up rent for apartments and multi room homes - this hurts one income families Yes. Temecula is overcrowded. Way too many apartments and condos. The city council was going the right direction with making it more of a destination or tourist town but now they want to ruin the natural beauty with more housing. There are areas north of Menifee that can take more housing and where new infrastructure can be built. Temecula is maxed out. Home prices have outpaced wages and the rental market has also doubled in price with a large amount of homes renting over $3000 and up. Lots of foreign investors buying up our market and setting rents very high. Not sure if this is the proper place but what is being done about the homeless population. In our short time of living in CA, especially in Temecula, I do not see an improvement with the homeless. They are still present in certain parts of town. There is so much land east of here, why cant shelters and a small community be built there? We pay so many taxes in CA but I'm having a hard time seeing where the money is going. I have worked in Temecula for 15 years and have never been able to afford to purchase a home here. Always had to drive from cheaper cities. We need more affordable housing. We have enough housing projects. We dont want homeless people here /a rvo 30 None 31 32 33 34 35 36 The safety of our neighborhood is in danger many, many robberies and car theft plus very low income trashy people taking the people's peace away due to section 8. We cant wait to move away after 4 years in peace the last 2 has been horrible, with the tenants section 8 next door, drinking, smoking, fighting, sheriffs coming all the time etc. Houses are very expensive in Temecula. Just because someone doesn't make a lot of money doesn't mean they are going to ruin the neighborhood. Please keep Temecula looking nice and clean. It is imperative that you not place low income housing next to family neighborhoods and schools. Studies show that Section 8 housing attracts drug use and other crimes and we don't want our children exposed to this type of environment. We would leave Temecula if the city does this. It's ok to embrace slow growth Not at this time. 8/24/2020 8:52 PM 8/24/2020 8:25 PM 8/24/2020 2:50 PM 8/24/2020 12:38 PM 8/22/2020 5:30 AM 8/21/2020 5:25 AM 8/21/2020 2:12 AM 8/19/2020 9:25 PM 8/19/2020 9:24 PM 8/19/2020 5:37 PM 8/19/2020 11:35 AM 8/19/2020 8:36 AM 8/19/2020 7:57 AM 8/18/2020 7:47 PM 8/18/2020 10:02 AM 8/17/2020 8:31 PM 8/17/2020 2:05 PM 8/17/2020 8:02 AM 8/15/2020 12:59 AM 8/12/2020 9:58 AM 8/12/2020 9:18 AM 48/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 Any plan must address the ingress and egress of commuters on 1-15. If the City isn't able to make changes to the freeway congestion, they shouldn't be adding to it with new housing. We need very affordable housing and temporary, emergency housing to help the homeless End better access to the freeway Currently we need less housing and more commercial businesses like restaurants. Especially on Temecula parkway which lacks family friendly sit down restaurants. Not a nimby but I would like any homeless to be directed away from public traffic. The duck pond has been an issue. Would like to see either rents or mortgages at affordable rates for single mothers, single persons that can be able to affordable on single income. Please oppose any state bills that take away single-family zoning, especially in these pandemic times. We need more open space, not less! No We have plenty of apartments - There is a lack of single story single family homes. My hope is that the City will continue to develop Temecula's remaining land carefully as we approach build -out, with an eye for quality (at every price point) and inclusion. Please help with housing affordability. Please keep some open spaces , so far this is a unique aspect to Temecula's relaxed and tourist environment. We need to make sure the infrastructure is in place prior to building more housing. The traffic is one of the biggest negatives to our city, and I think that is fueled by the continued development without the infrastructure to support it. I do appreciate all the projects that are in the works on the freeway but the side streets are just as bad Not every family has a dual income or high income. But those families live and work in Temecula and would like to buy a home. Think about the people who are different then you. Please no more massive developments of single family homes! We should be promoting diversity of our community and providing more affordable housing. There are too many homes in Temecula. Let's focus on our schools which have seemed to go down the past few years. 8/12/2020 8:14 AM 8/12/2020 6:15 AM 8/11/2020 9:53 PM 8/11/2020 8:32 PM 8/11/2020 5:54 PM 8/11/2020 1:47 PM 8/10/2020 11:02 AM 8/8/2020 10:02 PM 8/8/2020 9:21 AM 8/6/2020 5:34 PM 8/6/2020 4:11 PM 8/6/2020 12:20 PM 8/5/2020 8:51 PM 8/5/2020 2:51 PM 8/5/2020 12:08 PM 8/5/2020 10:19 AM 8/5/2020 10:06 AM Please do not build anymore housing, at least right now. Communities that grow too fast fall fast and I do not want 8/5/2020 10:05 AM that for Temecula If you're going to build anymore new housing, PLEASE require larger backyards and houses that are further apart 8/4/2020 5:04 PM from each other. Slow the growth - it's great where it is and will not be great if it keeps growing Homes are so overpriced including inflation of mortgages and property taxes. Would be nice to have a few homes that can be considered starter homes that are not in the high $300k. 58 No 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 New single detached homes that are less than $500k and with an actual front / back yard for our kids to grow up don't exist. Right now my family is forced to pay over $600k for a new house within the Temecula School system, or $500k for a house that's even close to a very basic 2,000sgft floor plan. Otherwise, we are stuck with condos plagued with $300 HOAs (Rancho Soleo) and no parking. My family and I make over $130k without including any overtime at our jobs and we are forced to buy a very used 2006 house stuck in a neighborhood where each house is less than 10 feet apart. We have no privacy. How is this possible? Please deal with traffic before every empty lot of land is developed with new houses. Amount of Houses on butterfield is crazy. When kids graduate we are out of here Stop building and over crowding Temecula!! The traffic and amount of people here is awful!! Please keep temecula a beautiful safe city . Please don't make it city like (busy) w a lot of apartments Stop building master planes tract homes on 1/3 acre each and build some mixed use housing! The city has known they're deficient in housing for low to middle income earners for 10 years- do something about it already!! The city needs more affordable housing options Would love to see more shelters especially for families. Also we need to see transitional housing for individuals with addiction and mental health issues. See too many homeless on the streetcar living in their cars on a daily basis. An increase in affordable housing for working people. Cannot gauge them with rent. Has to align with what the minimum wage is allowing them to spend. Clean up our dry creeks and rid them from trash and homelessness 8/4/2020 12:35 PM 8/4/2020 1:05 AM 8/3/2020 8:14 PM 8/3/2020 5:55 PM 8/3/2020 5:20 PM 8/3/2020 3:24 PM 8/3/2020 2:45 PM 8/2/2020 5:25 PM 8/2/2020 12:14 PM 8/2/2020 9:37 AM 8/1/2020 10:54 AM Keep a clean, friendly and safe community for all to enjoy 7/31/2020 5:46 PM We definitely don't need any more apartments or condominiums. Traffic is terrible in our area. I would also love to 7/31/2020 5:20 PM see more wide-open space type of parks. The greatness of Temecula is its small size, quality of life and semi -rural character. Don't keep growing it with more 7/31/2020 5:01 PM housing! Then it turns into an urban center and I move away! Really tired of rows and rows of cookie cutter homes! Get creative and sustainable! 7/31/2020 2:59 PM It would be nice to have additional new single family homes for the influx of new residents, but it needs to be paired 7/31/2020 11:09 AM with continued improvement to infrastructure and roads. Please don't turn our city into an area of dispear . Don't allow homeless to over take the area as they are already 7/31/2020 9:38 AM doing to our shopping centers. Give owners options of rental property and Airbnb . Let's continue to keep temecula clean and nice , keep homeless off the streets.find a solution for the people who 7/31/2020 9:26 AM protest at the duck pond . Was driving by with my kids and two people were fighting yelling and cussing at each other. NOT GOOD Please no more building! Traffic is already out of control. 7/31/2020 8:02 AM 49/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 People who work in Temecula should be able to live in Temecula. New housing projects should have lower -income subsidies so they can own as well. We need less housing developments! Especially ones where the homes are so so close together with no yard. We need affordable single family homes for people who work blue collar jobs and low -paying white collar jobs in Temecula The city of Temecula needs to work to create nice homes and neighborhoods for low income essential workers who work in Temecula. The apartments currently affordable to Temecula's low income earners are horribly inadequate. Stop building half a million+ $$ single family neighborhoods and think about our low income residents. No Stop building apartments, condos and HUD housing. GET RID OF THE DRUG ADDICTS LIVING ON OUR STREETS. I'll take my tax money elsewhere. Yes, please stop building homes. There is nothing attractive about a community with endless neighborhoods of cookie -cutter homes. The northern Inland Empire region is an example of the crime and pollution increase that results from not leaving any open space for recreation, parks, etc. Despite Temecula having several public amenities, there is a significant lack of public trails systems - I'm not talking about dirt paths through cookie -cutter neighborhoods - I'm talking about trail systems like Meadowview, or those in open, natural spaces that give our community members a sense of connection to nature. My family is currently not purchasing a home in Temecula because we are waiting to see if the City continues to flood every open space with a development, or if they change their approach to develop a balance community. Rehabilitate existing shopping centers, create consistency in building architecture, improve trail systems and stop thinking that growth is the only way to run a City. As a Civil Engineer, I am extremely troubled by the fact that City's do not understand the negative impact of growth to local pollution, congested roadways and natural open spaces. Increased tax revenue from residential housing is not valuable long-term to a community. Temecula is literally the last haven in the IE, and it looks like it will be a pain to live in at the current rate of growth. Improve local businesses to stimulate your economy to truly make this a tourist destination. Please!!! I am very, very concerned about the rash of bills coming from Sacramento that push upzoning and high -density housing on all communities in the state. Please resist these bills with every tool you have. Nobody wants their existing neighborhood upended. Local cities should be able to decide for themselves the type of housing they need and allow. Temecula does not need any more single family detached homes. There are plenty of single family homes. Q9: SINGLE PARENT WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 low income housing shouldn't be just for emergency needs. Ive tried everywhere and only found about 4-6 in the neighborhood. We need to have more homes build for single parents who have very limited income through Habitat for Humanity and the area NA Temecula is pushing out the middle class because of housing costs I would like to see the city offer some kind of insensitive to homeowners to prune their palm trees. It has gone downhill since we lived here 2000-2010. Now 2016-present. Police aren't keeping things together, so many houses, a lot of cars. It's grown, in a bad way. Nothing to do and no longer perfect for a family. Adult autism housing The price range to buy a home in Temecula is expensive for a single parent I'd like information on housing programs to help first time home buyers with down payment options. There's a lot of road rage here. A lot of bullying in schools (not currently for obvious reasons). And not enough police presence. Thank you. 7/30/2020 8:55 PM 7/30/2020 4:57 PM 7/30/2020 3:20 PM 7/30/2020 2:58 PM 7/30/2020 1:37 PM 7/30/2020 1:18 PM 7/30/2020 12:23 PM 6/8/2020 11:25 AM 6/2/2020 4:41 PM DATE 8/28/2020 3:50 PM 8/28/2020 2:19 PM 8/28/2020 1:32 PM 8/27/2020 1:23 PM 8/26/2020 8:05 PM 8/25/2020 12:26 AM 8/24/2020 3:12 PM 8/19/2020 11:36 AM 8/18/2020 3:11 PM 8/18/2020 2:01 PM 11 Please help with the local homeless community in Old Town Temecula. I do not feel safe in the late evening when 8/14/2020 11:09 PM they are roaming around near my home. 12 The city needs to focus on providing affordable housing for its essential workers. People who work hard and are 8/14/2020 4:21 PM willing to pay a mortgage that meets their budget. 13 The traffic is already highly congested, creating not only pollution and safety issues- but concerns about expansion. Temecula needs to stop building before it becomes unrecognizable. With heavy traffic, people become agitated and stressed, and that is when it becomes dangerous for bikers, pedestrians, and we see higher amounts of traffic accidents. Let's keep Temecula safe and preserve the beauty 14 1 would like to be able to afford to live. 15 As a single mother I can say it's almost impossible for me to find something in Temecula where I would feel safe raising my son. It's daunting to feel that way. 16 1 have worked in Temecula for 10 years but cannot afford to live in this city. I am a single mother of 3 with a good paying job. I would benefit from an affordable housing element. I contribute to this city and should be able to live here as well. 17 18 I accepted a job in Temecula at the beginning of the year and moved here for it. Then, we all were hit with Covid-19. I am highly interested in understanding the real estate market in the area as that I've noticed many homes going on MLS; I'm interested in as to why so many homes for sale. Think about single mothers, lower income essential employees and the children whom are part of those families. This isn't about handouts, it's about the need for smaller practical homeownership options. Q9: ADULT HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD (NON -PARENT) WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18 n/a 8/6/2020 8:17 AM 7/30/2020 6:08 PM 7/30/2020 5:51 PM 7/30/2020 5:43 PM 7/30/2020 5:10 PM 7/30/2020 4:33 PM DATE 8/31/2020 7:33 AM 50/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q9: YOUNG ADULT LIVING WITH PARENTS DATE 1 Retired people need more to do or they leave. Tennis Courts are extremely in need as are public places to Lap 9/4/2020 3:54 PM swim. Thank you for keeping Chs open for lap swim 2 More solar initiatives 8/31/2020 11:13 AM 3 1 didn'tsee any homeless when I moved to Temecula 15 years ago. Now, there are many homeless people. Many of 8/30/2020 11:30 PM them are young people. They need assistance. 4 1 don'tthink that Ca should overrule CC&Rs allowing houses to run preschools in the middle of single housing tracts 8/29/2020 9:37 PM when businesses aren't allowed and we pay fees to maintain the CC&Rs. 5 There used to be more opportunities in buying a home that was a fixer upper. VA repos were affordable. Why is that 8/29/2020 7:31 AM not a program to be offered? 6 1 don't believe there should be any more low income housing in Temecula. If you need more money from the feds 8/24/2020 1:02 PM then you should figure out how to do a better job and quit spending our money. 7 Maybe it will be different because of working remote for white collar workers but I lived in temecula and commuted 8/21/2020 12:17 PM to carlsbad/San Diego/riverside since 2001 and the last 3 years were torture it would take 30 mins to even hop on Rancho cal at 530am. There are no jobs here. I grew up here, I'm nearing 40, 1 have an mba and I love temecula but I have no kids. I'm here for now due to covid but given the choice between buying a big house in temecula with all my friends married and making fun of my life decisions (when are you getting settled down), i would rather live peacefully and simply in a small condo near the coast. The wine tourism is great here but it's hot, full of children. Keep temecula for FAMILIES not homeless or single people. We aren't your target market:) many of my friends with families are priced out of temecula and living in menifee. It feels like temecula is aging like me haha , my parents still live here and a lot of my friends from high school Parents also. I remember in the 90s heated discussions about apartments. We don't more apartments here the ones we have there are shootings at (Rancho cal just saying). I also don't know where the heck these homeless druggies are coming from it's been 10-15 years and it's disgusting to avoid the target Starbucks and vons because of fear of encountering a tweaker. 8 Working through city permit process for an ADU and it is arduous. So far the city is not being helpful and is quite 8/9/2020 5:09 PM disappointing. 9 1 think seniors need affordable housing most in this area. There are plenty of rentals for younger people. 8/7/2020 8:24 AM 10 Building new houses without upgrading and connecting existing roads, better freeway access and new thoroughfares 8/4/2020 3:23 AM will increase the traffic, which already is a miserable situation. It might just be what makes us move away from our beloved city of 27 years. 11 affordable single story housing that is not in the 55 and older community so that adults can share housing with 8/2/2020 1:09 PM young adult children 12 We need more affordable housing options for lower income families 7/30/2020 7:18 PM 51 / 71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey # Q9: MULTI -GENERATIONAL FAMILY HOUSEHOLD (GRANDPARENTS, CHILDREN, AND/OR GRANDCHILDREN DATE ALL UNDER THE SAME ROOF) 1 The cost of rent here does not match the income that many of us have forcing many to struggle, have roommates, 9/24/2020 1:18 PM constantly move etc. More affordable housing that matches the jobs available that only want to pay $17 or less would help out a great deal so people can afford to live without roommates and without struggling to pay everything 2 Please encourage low income senior housing as a priority. 9/24/2020 11:14 AM 3 Can the City require Redhawk Golf Club to implement ways to minimize or mitigate damage caused by errant golf 9/15/2020 10:40 AM balls to our houses (windows, stucco, patio, or even people being injured)? It's probably a matter of when, not if, I or a family members gets seriously injured by an errant golf ball. I have been hit by a golf ball in the back. Thankfully it did not land on my head. I now have to wear a hard hat every time I am in our back yard. Thank you for considering my input. 4 prices are out of control due to supply in demand.... 9/5/2020 7:12 AM 5 Predatory mortgage collection companies should be outlawed. 8/31/2020 12:20 AM 6 Work on more affordable taxes or lower/shorter term Mello -Roos. 8/30/2020 12:24 PM 7 My inlaws have recently relocated from the East Coast to Temecula to be near family. They are in their 70's. While, 8/29/2020 11:49 PM I have them living with me for now, the intent was for them to find their own place in independent senior living. It is very disappointing that there is a 3 to 5 year wait list for low income senior housing in Temecula. There really needs to be more units available. 8 no 8/28/2020 3:48 PM 9 Have loved living in Temecula. Would not like to see great changes to the current General- Plan or Housing 8/28/2020 2:02 PM Element. 10 Trying to past legislature that encourages millennial's to pursue owning a home in Temecula. 8/28/2020 1:23 PM 11 Some areas are priced high to keep minorities out. Lack of information on home loans for minorities. 8/27/2020 10:16 PM 12 The apartment prequalifications are too high. Can afford rent, but having to make 2.5 times rent in salary is too 8/27/2020 6:49 PM much 13 I'm concerned about city maintaining safety and keeping police of Temecula 8/27/2020 1:53 AM 14 There is enough low income housing we want homeowners and people that are employed to be attracted to our 8/24/2020 1:12 AM community. They contribute their resources to build our communities. They are stakeholders and the backbone or all excellent cities. 15 Temecula housing programs and strategies must be colorblind and open to all Americans regardless of race, creed, 8/24/2020 12:30 AM national origin, etc., while also promoting economic efficiency and free and open markets. 16 We feel discriminated in getting a loan from the lander or landlord. 8/22/2020 7:01 AM 17 1 sincerely hope that this survey isn't use just to check a box, as a requirement to justify the Block Grants from 8/19/2020 9:57 PM state and federal. We need affordable housing. 18 Stop building. This city is quickly becoming congested, leading to impatient drivers, increase littering and lack of 8/19/2020 8:39 PM care for the community. 19 Easy way to apply for FTB programs. It's hard to know which direction to go with no knowledge and I wish there 8/19/2020 9:50 AM would be a community resource that could help First time buyers who don't understand what to do. There are thousands of FTB in Temecula who need help but don't know where to go to. All my friends in their late 20's who are ready to buy in Temecula get intimidated by the pricing and not knowing all the info 20 Please emphasize livability for residents over profitability for developers. Don't build apartments that look like 8/18/2020 4:19 PM prisons but cost as much as a home. More importantly please emphasize the issue isn't a housing shortage but an income shortage/affordability crisis. 21 Not at this time 8/17/2020 1:59 PM 22 Allowing short term rentals within the city of temecula should be a priority for the city council. It helps improve 8/11/2020 3:58 PM tourism and allows home owners to create extra income and coup with the high cost of living Found in Temecula. 23 You have no where for the homeless to get shelter or a place they can shower and eat hot food you really need to 8/10/2020 2:23 PM figure out how to help them. I think you should build or use an empty building to place the homeless and allow them to stay for a period of time to allow them to either get on their feet or place them in an apartment that they can afford. 24 M 8/5/2020 2:10 PM 25 There needs to be affordable housing in Temecula. It is not right to have your current grocery store workers working 8/2/2020 8:55 AM at a location near you but have no place for them to live in that city. 26 Please do NOT repeal prop 13 & raise property taxes even higher ! Please provide more affordable housing for 7/31/2020 5:59 PM young folks ages 20-40 working in Temecula who cannot afford to rent apartment of their own. Thank You 27 The city's zoning ordinance is designed to prevent the construction of inexpensive multifamily housing. This means 7/31/2020 4:49 PM that living in Temecula is going to continue to become more expensive than it already is. 28 Don't over build!!! 7/31/2020 12:12 PM 29 1 worry about how many new builds are going in well East of the 15 without developing anything that will ease the 7/31/2020 6:47 AM strain they will put on working families traveling to jobs. The housing I see most often targets young families due to large home sizes, which assumes more than likely two working parents. That's two more cars on the road. As someone who lives between a lot of these new builds and the freeway access, I worry that a difficult commute will become seriously worse as time progresses. I take some responsibility as I too commute to SD County for work, but only to Fallbrook, so about as close to Temecula as you can get. Most days I need to plan an hour for a drive that should take 25 minutes and the writing on the wall says it's only going to get more congested with the addition of neighborhoods like Sommers Bend when there isn't a reasonable alternative for getting north or south. 30 My son and his new wife wanted to move here from college in Irvine, but the one condo we found in their price range 7/30/2020 3:49 PM got 16 offers on it the first day. They were very discouraged at the lack of options, and will continue renting for the foreseeable future. 31 Smaller starter homes instead of MCMansions are needed 7/30/2020 2:36 PM 52/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey 32 Not just low income, up and coming income. Kids who grew up here need to get a foothold in or near the community 7/30/2020 1:39 PM # Q9: SINGLE PERSON LIVING WITH ROOMMATES 1 Please let me know if there are any programs to purchase homes 2 More affordable 55 and over homes are needed in Temecula no Q9: COUPLE LIVING WITH ROOMMATES There are no responses. DATE 8/28/2020 6:11 PM 8/1/2020 6:57 AM 4/14/2020 3:32 PM DATE 53/71 City of Temecula Housing Element Survey Q16 If desired, please leave your name and email address to receive email updates, meeting announcements, and information on the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update.Note: Emails will solely be used for the purpose of dispersing information related to the Housing Element Update and will not be shared or used for any other purpose. Answered:225 Skipped:404 FIRST LAST EMAIL: TOTAL NAME: NAME: Q9: Single person household 100.00% 96.15% 96.15% 33.78% 26 25 25 76 Q9: Couple Q9: Couple with children under 18 Q9: Single parent with children under 18 Q9: Adult Head of Household (non -parent) with children under 18 Q9: Young adult living with parents Q9: Multi -generational family household (Grandparents, Children, and/or Grandchildren all under the same roof) Q9: Single person living with roommates Q9: Couple living with roommates Total Respondents 223 100.00% 66 100.00% 71 100.00% 19 100.00% 2 100.00% 10 92.86% 26 100.00% 3 0.00% 0 100.00% 98.48% 87.56% 66 65 197 98.59% 94.37% 92.44% 70 67 208 94.74% 100.00% 24.89% 18 19 56 100.00% 100.00% 2.67% 2 2 6 100.00% 100.00% 13.33% 25 28 79 100.00% 100.00% 4.00% 3 3 9 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 0 0 219 219 225 Note: Answers redacted for privacy. 54/71 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT APPENDIX D: 2017 ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING d ECULA CI E N IER-AL PLAN CYCLE 6 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE City of Temecula Assessment of Fair Housing Prepared by City of Temecula Community Development Department 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Approved March 2017 a] The Heart o#Southern California Wine Country i This page intentionally left blank. Cover Sheet 1. Submission date: October 4, 2016 2. Submitter name: City of Temecula 3. Type of submission (e.g., single program participant, joint submission): Single program participant 4. Type of program participant(s) (e.g., consolidated plan participant, PHA): Consolidated Plan 5. For PHAs, Jurisdiction in which the program participant is located: N/A 6. Submitter members (if applicable): N/A 7. Sole or lead submitter contact information: a. Name: Lynn Kelly -Lehner b. Title: Principal Management Analyst c. Department: Community Development Department d. Street address: 41000 Main Street e. City: Temecula f. State: CA g. Zip code: 92590 8. Period covered by this assessment: July 1, 2017 - June 30, 2022 9. Initial, amended, or renewal AFH: Initial 10. To the best of its knowledge and belief, the statements and information contained herein are true, accurate, and complete and the program participant has developed this AFH in compliance with the requirements of 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.150-5.180 or comparable replacement regulations of the Department of Housing and Urban Development; 11. The program participant will take meaningful actions to further the goals identified in its AFH conducted in accordance with the requirements in §§ 5.150 through 5.180 and 24 C.F.R. §§ 91.225(a)(1), 91.325(a)(1), 91.425(a)(1), 570.487(b)(1), 570.601, 903.7(o), and 903.15(d), as applicable. All Joint and Regional Participants are bound by the certification, except that some of the analysis, goals or priorities included in the AFH may only apply to an individual program participant as expressly stated in the AFH. Aaron Adams City Manager 12. Departmental acceptance or non -acceptance: Date U.S Department of Housing & Urban Development/Date This page intentionally left blank. Table of Contents I. Executive Summary............................................................................................................................... 1 II. Community Participation Process.......................................................................................................... 4 III. Assessment of Past Goals and Actions.................................................................................................. 9 IV. Fair Housing Analysis......................................................................................................................... 14 A. Demographic Summary B. General Issues i. Segregation/Integration ii. Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) iii. Disparities in Access to Opportunity iv. Disproportionate Housing Needs C. Publicly Supported Housing Analysis D. Disability and Access Analysis E. Fair Housing Enforcement, Outreach Capacity, and Resources Analysis V. Fair Housing Goals and Priorities........................................................................................................ 42 Appendices A. HUD -Provided Maps B. HUD -Provided Tables C. City of Temecula Assessment of Fair Housing Resident Surveys (English/Spanish) D. City of Temecula Assessment of Fair Housing Stakeholder Survey E. Stakeholder Consultation List F. General Plan Land Use Map G. CDBG-Eligible Area Map H. Public Transportation Maps (Employers, Public Facilities, Publicly Assisted Housing) I. List of Public Services funded with CDBG and General Fund J. List of Units Funded with Redevelopment Agency Funds i K. Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data L. Fair Housing Council of Riverside County Fair Housing Initiatives Program Testing Results (2010-2015) M. Survey Results N. Eagle Soar Program O. Public Hearing Notices P. Summary of Public Comments at Public Hearings and Community Meetings Q. City Resolution Approving Assessment of Fair Housing ii I. Executive Summary 1. Summarize the fair housing issues, significant contributing factors, and goals. Also include an overview of the process and analysis used to reach the goals. The City of Temecula is located in the extreme southwest corner of the Riverside -San Bernardino Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), which is the largest MSA in area in the continental United States. Temecula is 45 miles from Riverside, the County Seat, and nearly 70 miles from the City of San Bernardino, the County Seat of San Bernardino County. At 60 miles away, Temecula is closer to the City of San Diego than to San Bernardino. It is 172 miles from Blythe in Riverside County and 240 miles from Needles in San Bernardino County. Because of its location in the corner of the region, one must be cautious to draw too many conclusions in comparing Temecula to the regional data supplied by HUD. This Assessment compares and contrasts the City with the regional data, but as one would expect, there are some substantial differences in the data profiles and the needs between the City and the region. Many of these differences are evident and detailed in the HUD -supplied maps and charts included in Appendix A and Appendix B, respectively. The City is located in a cluster of cities in Temecula Valley in southwest Riverside County. The other cities include Murrieta, Menifee, Wildomar and Lake Elsinore. All have experienced tremendous growth in the past twenty years, yet they remain separate and some distance from the metropolitan areas to the north and south. Through its growth, Temecula has remained an integrated and diverse City with racial and ethnic groups spread evenly throughout the City. There are no HUD -identified racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs) in the City. During the housing crisis of 2007-2008, the City was hit with many foreclosures and, as such, that issue was the greatest concern in the previous Analysis of Impediments, completed in 2010. Now with the housing industry in recovery, the greatest need in the City is affordable housing, as many new homebuyers find themselves priced out of the market. Like all cities in the State of California, Temecula is challenged by a lack of financial resources to address its affordable housing needs due to the dissolution of all the State's redevelopment agencies. This was the main source of hundreds of affordable housing units constructed in the City since the 1990s. Fair housing issues in Temecula appear to be individualized and not systemic, but preventing systematic issues requires continuous training and education of those persons employed in the housing industry, as well as educating the residents of their fair housing rights. The City has developed four fair housing goals to overcome the contributing factors identified in the Assessment of Fair Housing. These goals have been prioritized based on feedback from community meetings, surveys, stakeholder interviews, staff, and data analysis. Highest priority is given to those contributing factors that limit or deny fair housing choice of access to opportunity. The goals are listed below, from highest to lowest priority. Goal 1: Amend Zoning Code to promote the development of affordable housing Fair Housing Issue(s): Disproportionate Housing Needs; Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factor 1A: Land use and zoning laws Goal 2: Increase and preserve affordable units for renters and homeowners Fair Housing Issue(s): Disproportionate Housing Needs; Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factor 2A: The availability of affordable units in a range of sizes Contributing Factor 213: Location and type of affordable housing Goal 3: Provide greater access to public facilities and improvements for persons with disabilities Fair Housing Issue(s): Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factor 3A: Inaccessible sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, or other infrastructure Contributing Factor 3B: Inaccessible government facilities or services Goal 4: Provide equal housing opportunities for protected classes Fair Housing Issue(s): Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factor 4A: Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations Contributing Factor 413: Private discrimination Based on the above goals and contributing factors, a number of actions were identified that can be taken over the next five years that will promote fair housing for its residents. These action items will be discussed at the end of this report, but a summary of these actions items is provided below. • Adopt an Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) Program by Amending Title 17 of the Municipal Code (Zoning Code) to accommodate Temecula's regional housing need for 2,007 affordable units for lower income households. The City will establish an AHO on at least 100 acres. After the establishment of the AHO, sites identified will require: • minimum densities of 20 units per acre • 50% of need (1,003 units) will be on sites allowing exclusively residential uses • multi -family uses at the densities established under the AHO will be allowed by right, without a conditional use permit Enter into an exclusive negotiating agreement with a developer to allocate $12.4 million in remaining affordable housing Tax Allocation Bond proceeds to create or rehabilitate an estimated 100 affordable housing units, subject to market forces. The selection process includes priority consideration for proposals that incorporate housing units for persons with disabilities. Based on a preliminary review of the siting for these proposals, none are located in the three Census Tracts identified as having relatively high exposure to poverty. Interviews with developers expected by July 2017; Selection of developer to occur by December 2017; Exclusive Negotiating Agreement by June 2018; Entitlements to be secured by June 2019. Construction to begin by June 2020. Estimates are subject to financing, property negotiations, market demand, and economic forces. All (100%) marketing plans for above mentioned affordable complexes constructed as a result of the Tax Allocation Bond proceeds will include affirmative outreach methods targeted to protected class individuals including Hispanic and Native American households as well as households that include persons with disabilities. Units advertised to contain specific accessibility features shall be prioritized for occupancy by persons identifying themselves as disabled. At least 50 units will benefit the aforementioned protected classes identified as having disproportionate housing needs. All (100%) of marketing plans will be reviewed and approved by the City of Temecula Community Development Department prior to sale or leasing implementation. All (100%) affordable developments shall be required to maintain records related to marketing and protected classes and provide annual reports to the City. Marketing plans will be based conceptually on HUD form 935.2A, the Affirmative Fair 2 Housing Marketing Plan — Multi -Family Housing, where applicable or practical. (Completion date subject to completion of affordable housing construction and commencement of sale or leasing. Expected June 2021) • Require marketing materials for any new City of Temecula -assisted affordable housing project to be made available in Spanish. (July 1, 2017) • Translate City Affordable Housing Brochure in Spanish to promote meaningful access to affordable housing. (July 1, 2017) • Continue the partnership with Habitat for Humanity for the administration of a Critical Home Repair program to provide funding to at least 30 low income home owners to make repairs addressing disabled access, inadequate kitchen facilities, and/or inadequate plumbing. • Complete construction of Phase III of Madera Vista (formerly Summerhouse), which includes 30 affordable units. 14 units are moderate income, 7 units are low income and 8 units are very low income. (Entitlements are complete; Building permits to be issued by September 2017; Construction to be completed by September 2019) • Complete substantial rehabilitation of Rancho California Apartments, a 55 unit affordable housing complex. 43 units are restricted to 60% AMI. 11 will be restricted 50% AMI. (One manager's unit.) (Rehab has begun. Expected completion date — March 2018.) • Adopt an ADA Transition Plan to evaluate public facilities to ensure equal access for persons with disabilities. The assessment will include 38 city parks, three trail systems, four tennisibasketball courts, three swimming pools, 20 public facilities, four fire stations, 110 signalized intersections, 95 bus stops and 310 miles of roadways with ADA ramps. (Adopt Plan by December 31, 2018) • Include a high priority Strategic Plan goal in the 2017-2021 Consolidated Plan to use CDBG funds to upgrade the City's infrastructure and public facilities to provide accessibility for those with disabilities. An average of one accessibility project will be constructed each year with CDBG funds, with an average allocation of $100,000, based on level CDBG funding during the planning cycle. (Consolidated Plan adopted by May 15, 2017. Allocation adopted annually by June 30.) • In the 2017-18 CDBG Annual Action Plan, allocate $150,000 for the construction of a new sidewalk on Ynez Road that serves several bus lines and County of Riverside social services, subject to level CDBG funding throughout the entire planning period. (Plan adopted by May 15, 2017; Construction completed by December 31, 2018) • Construct accessibility upgrades at Pala Park, located in Census Tract 432.50, including 4 additional disabled parking spaces, truncated domes, and a new playground with approximately 7 play structures designed to be all inclusive and provide access to those with special needs. (Construction completed by January 2019). • Complete the construction of a new playground at Sam Hicks Park, located in Census Tract 512.00, utilizing a total of $350,000 in CDBG funding for an ADA accessible play structure, and two ADA compliant ramps. (Construction completed by December 31, 2017). Annually provide approximately 12% of CDBG public service funds to a fair housing provider to provide outreach, education and assistance enforcing fair housing laws — particularly those protecting the rights of disabled residents. (Annually by June 30) Increase public awareness of accessibility and fair housing requirements by inviting representatives of the building, banking, real estate, and rental housing industries to one annual workshop hosted by the City of Temecula and fair housing providers. Invitations will be extended to 25 frequent developers, 50 members of the local real estate community that graduated from the City's Temecula Trekkers program, and all 13 affordable housing complexes in the City. (Annually by June 30) The City will distribute and replenish the supply of fair housing materials, including literature concerning reasonable accommodation / modification rights and responsibilities at five City facilities including the Temecula Community Center, City Hall, the Mary Phillips Senior Center, Ronald H. Roberts Library, and the Community Recreation Center. (Monthly, by the 30' day of each month) The City, in conjunction with the Regional Homeless Alliance, will host three different panels of representatives from organizations such as the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County and Riverside County Housing Authority to train 25 local homelessness and affordable housing advocates on fair housing issues and affordable housing issues, particularly those affecting residents with disabilities. (June 2022) 4 II. Community Participation Process 1. Describe outreach activities undertaken to encourage and broaden meaningful community participation in the AFH process, including the types of outreach activities and dates of public hearings or meetings. Identify media outlets used and include a description of efforts made to reach the public, including those representing populations that are typically underrepresented in the planning process such as persons who reside in areas identified as R/ECAPs, persons who are limited English proficient (LEP), and persons with disabilities. Briefly explain how these communications were designed to reach the broadest audience possible. For PHAs, identify your meetings with the Resident Advisory Board. The City planned a robust community outreach program in the development of the City's Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH). To reach the largest number of people and a wide variety of interests, the City conducted two surveys, one directed primarily at residents and the second toward the stakeholders. The City believed that a separate stakeholder survey was necessary, because many of the stakeholders did not reside in the City and many of the housing quality questions in the resident survey might not be relevant. At the same time, the City sought more in-depth responses from the stakeholders about the needs of the community and as well as to obtain data supporting their responses. The resident survey was available on the City webpage and advertised in the San Diego Union Tribune newspaper, a media of general circulation in Temecula. The City engaged with City staff that interacts with the public, including Senior Center staff and the Public Works, Community Development, City Manager's office and Community Services departments. The survey was also distributed at the front counter and permit center at City Hall. To further reach the public, paper copies of the survey were given to various focus groups including: • Temecula Pantry • Regional Homeless Alliance • Churches whose congregation mostly served minority populations In the process, the City doubled the number of stakeholders from its previous consolidated planning process as part of its outreach efforts to ensure a broader citizen participation process to fully assess the City's fair housing issues and community development needs. In many cases, the City followed up with individual phone calls to achieve clarification and a greater understanding of needs that they identified. The City notified over 150 stakeholders by email of the City's Assessment of Fair Housing preparation process and solicited their insight and input. On June 20, 2016, stakeholders were asked to complete a fair housing and community development needs assessment survey. A copy of the survey completed by residents is included in this report as Appendix C in English and Spanish, with a copy of the survey completed by stakeholders included in Appendix D and a full list of stakeholders consulted in Appendix E. The City conducted two public hearings. A public hearing before the City Council was convened on June 28, 2016 to obtain the views of the community on affirmatively furthering fair housing in the jurisdiction's housing and community development programs prior to drafting this AFH. No public comments were received during this hearing. A second public hearing before the City Council was convened September 27, 2016 to obtain comments on the draft Assessment of Fair Housing. No comments were received. The City conducted three community workshops. The first two community meetings were held on June 29, 2016. The first was conducted at 4:00 p.m. to accommodate those who preferred to come during working hours, followed by another after hours at 6:00 p.m. for those who could not attend during the day A third community meeting was conducted on Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. The community meetings were interactive workshops with questions and answers on various needs of the City including: fair housing, community facilities and infrastructure, affordable housing and economic development. A concerted effort was made to reach out to organizations that represented persons with disabilities, both through the community meetings and during the City's consultation stage of its citizen participation process. During the outreach, the City talked with pastors of three ethnocentric churches and provided surveys to them for their members. The City does not have any Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs). 2. Provide a list of organizations consulted during the community participation process. The City expanded its mailing list of stakeholders to over 150 persons and agencies. (See Appendix E for a list of the persons contacted.) 3. How successful were the efforts at eliciting meaningful community participation? If there was low participation, provide the reasons. Public hearings before the City Council were convened on June 28, 2016 and September 27, 2016 to obtain the views of the community on AFH-related data and affirmatively furthering fair housing in the jurisdiction's housing and community development programs. No public comments were received during this hearing. Low community participation is attributed to that fact that community feedback was overwhelmingly positive during the public outreach process and the community was generally satisfied with the fair housing efforts in the City. This would consistent with previous community outreach surveys that indicated a 96% satisfaction rating with the City. A total of 91 persons responded to our surveys, 45 responses from residents and 46 responses from stakeholders. While the response rate was lower than expected, the City received valuable feedback from the surveys received. Another recent City -sponsored survey for local municipal issues was undertaken separately, and just prior to the launch of the Assessment of Fair Housing Survey. In response to outreach and marketing efforts for the resident survey, a number of residents indicated to staff that they had already taken the survey when in fact they did not realize the Assessment of Fair Housing survey was a separate survey on different topics. The State Council on Developmental Disabilities also conducted a workshop during this same period. Despite significant promotional efforts, they also faced low response issues. The City conducted a random telephone survey for a Community Opinion Study in 2014 and was able to secure the participation of 400 respondents. This survey found that 96 percent of Temecula residents felt that they had a good or excellent quality of life in the City. Less than one percent had a poor opinion of the City. There was no difference between the responses from renters and homeowners. The greatest response was that they liked the small town feeling and 0 community involvement of its residents. Traffic congestion was cited as the greatest problem. Over 90 percent of respondents were satisfied with City services, facilities and programs. Only four percent said that the Temecula schools were poor. When compared to a similar study in 2000, there was no significant difference in opinion of the respondents, despite the fact that the City had grown substantially during that period. At the June 29, 2016 community meetings, eight residents and stakeholders participated in a discussion of fair housing issues and community needs. The attendance at these meetings was lower than expected due to local traffic challenges associated with a Cal -Trans freeway closure at Rancho California Boulevard and the I-15 near City Hall. At the July 30, 2016 community meeting, five residents and stakeholders participated in the discussion. For future planning efforts, the City wishes to improve stakeholder and resident feedback. The next AFH will be due 195 days prior to the start of the program year instead of 270 days prior to the start of the program year. This will allow the City to schedule its community participation process to coincide with a time of the year when many residents and stakeholders are not on summer vacations. 4. Summarize all comments obtained in the community participation process. Include a summary of any comments or views not accepted and the reasons why. On June 3, 2016, the City consultant met with the pastors of Iglesia Bautista del Valle de Temecula and they agreed to work with the City in obtaining input from their 300 member Spanish-speaking congregation. In talking with the pastor, they considered traffic congestion to the greatest problem that the City currently has. To reach the African American and Filipino communities, the City consultant contacted Nu -Way International Christian Ministries, which serves a mostly Black congregation and the Love of Christ Fellowship, which serves a mostly Filipino congregation. The City also connected with Rancho Community Church and St. Catherine Catholic Church which have ministries to minority groups. June 29, 2016: At the two community meetings on June 29, 2016, participants had the following comments. There was a discussion for the need of accessible sidewalks and the group was excited about the improvements being made with CDBG funds to Old Town. According to the participants, there is a need for another senior center and felt that an intergenerational facility would be important to the residents. This could address the great need for more programs for the teens. Participants pointed out that since most of the Pujol neighborhood needs have been met, the area of greatest need for community facilities and programs is the Margarita corridor, where Eagle Soar, a new community facility, was recently completed to serve the area. There was considerable discussion about the need for support services for families with special needs children. Currently, many of those services are only available in Riverside, which is forty minutes away. They believed that the homelessness need is great in the City. Affordable housing is the greatest need in the City with home prices climbing again. With the demand for housing, it is hard for those who cannot provide all cash in a purchase. This is especially important issue for the increasing senior population who will need care facilities in the future. Job training for local employers is needed. There is an issue with the school district not having the resources to fully fund special education programs. There was a discussion about historic preservation with respect to the Vail Ranch project. The City should look at whether there are any ADA issues at private facilities that could 7 be addressed with CDBG funds. There is a high demand for first time home buyer assistance, especially for off -base military personnel and veterans. A complete summary of the comments is provided in Appendix P. July 30, 2016: At the community meeting on July 30, 2016, the participants had the following comments. They noted that the City has made great strides in addressing the needs of the Pujol community. There is still a need to include an additional bridge on Via Montezuma over the creek from Jefferson to Diaz Road to provide greater access to that side of the community. There was talk about the need for additional centers for teens. There was a discussion about the increased demand for mental health facilities especially for the young people. The expansion of programs for the special needs community seemed to be a recurring theme at the community meetings for the City. There was a discussion for the increased in demand for services for homeless persons and for an additional homeless shelter in the region, and it was suggested that the City consider a zoning change to allow for "tiny houses" for the homeless. Affordable housing is a major problem in the City, so much so that many of the local workforce is priced out of the market. This is exasperated by the fact that the FHA mortgage limits are artificially too low to assist many new homebuyers in Temecula's housing market. Participants in the meeting indicated that any racial/ethnic segregation was likely more of a function of minorities, and particularly immigrants, choosing to locate near family and friends for support. With housing prices increasing beyond many families' income, there are increased instances of multi -generational households. To address this issue, there are several private housing projects, adjacent to Temecula, in unincorporated Riverside County, that provide a large number of bedrooms to multi -generational families. This is believed to especially benefit immigrant families with their assimilation process, who are accustomed to this familial situation. There was discussion about the Temecula Elementary School neighborhood. It is the only Title 1 School in the City and participants thought that the area may be experiencing some problems. A complete summary of the comments is provided in Appendix P. Survey Results: Two surveys were conducted with two purposes in mind. The first was to address fair housing issues and the second was to initiate the five-year consolidated planning process. Some of the consolidated planning process applied to the fair housing assessment and the results are summarized below. (See Appendix M for a summary of the survey results and comments.) While the survey responses were less than anticipated, the results reflected a good cross section of the community. Respondents included residents, various public services sectors, homeless providers, youth and senior services, agencies serving the disabled, AIDS groups, health care, mental health, service providers for the developmentally disabled, real estate and banking industries, affordable housing industry, apartment association, law enforcement, regional government and City officials. The survey revealed that if there is discrimination occurring in the community, most people, whether residents or stakeholders, are unaware that it is occurring. Consultations: In conducting this assessment, the City consulted with a number of stakeholders including meetings on June 3, 2016 with various church groups; June 29, 2016 with Habitat for Humanity; August 3, 2016 with the Southwest Riverside Association of Realtors and Temecula Valley Unified School District; August 5, 2016 with the State Council on Developmental Disabilities and the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County; August 11, 2016 with the Southwest Riverside County Homeless Alliance, Riverside County Continuum of Care, Wells Fargo Bank, and Inland Regional Center; and on August 12, 2016 with the Riverside County Sheriffs Department and on August 15, 2016 with the Riverside County Economic Development Agency and Housing Authority of Riverside County. 0 III. Assessment of Past Goals, Actions and Strategies 1. Indicate what fair housing goals were selected by program participant(s) in recent Analyses of Impediments, Assessments of Fair Housing, or other relevant planning documents: a. Discuss what progress has been made toward their achievement: The Analysis of Impediments identified the following impediments and observations: Observation No 1 — Lack of affordable housing could become a future barrier to housing choice. • Action Item No. 1-1 Continue to diversify housing stock. The City should make a concerted effort to increase the number of affordable rentals located east of 1-15. Progress Made: The City continues to support the development affordable housing. The City issued a request for proposal(s) out for the remaining Tax Allocation Bond proceeds ($12.4 million), which could include more than one site, some of which are located east of 1-15. The request for proposals closed in May 2016. The City received twenty proposals from interested developers. The proposals are currently being reviewed by City staff. Action Item No. 1-2. Address the basic needs of low income households. The City should also use CDBG and other HUD funds it may receive to preserving the safety net for its lowest income households who have difficulty finding affordable rentals and are likely cost burdened and/or at risk of homelessness. This could include supporting homeless shelters, food pantries, emergency assistance programs and social services operations. Progress Made: Since the adoption of the City's previous Analysis of Impediments, the City has focused its CDBG public services funds on addressing its homeless needs as well as those at -risk of becoming homeless by providing assistance to the Inclement Weather Shelter Program, clothing for low income school children, domestic violence services, child care services and assistance to three organizations that provide food services to the homeless and those at risk of homelessness. The City also provides discretionary General Fund moneys to a number of organizations, which are listed in Appendix 1. The City also participates in the Continuum of Care as well as a Southwest Riverside County Regional Homeless Alliance that includes four cities in the region. In addition, the City is providing a home repair and maintenance grant program to low income households administered by Habitat for Humanity. The City has also funded a solar energy installation program for low income homeowners through GRID. The City amended its ordinances to efficiency units housing structures in 2013. The City now allows the use of Section 8 vouchers for those with second units on their property. 10 The City supported retaining the affordability of the Rancho California apartments at the TEFRA (Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act) hearing which were at - risk of being converted to market rate rents. Observation No. 2 — Steering may be a fair housing impediment. Action Item 2. Conduct fair housing outreach and education with Temecula's real estate professionals. Progress Made: The City has annually provided CDBG funding to the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County for fair housing education, training and enforcement program for low income households. The City also provides fair housing information on its City website and includes referrals to the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County for residents and nonprofits. Impediment No. 3 —Zoning regulations could be improved to facilitate affordable housing development. • Action Item 3. The City should clarify the definition of family so that it does not exclude unrelated parties living in group home settings and add congregate care and residential care facilities with seven or more occupants to some residential zones. Progress Made: On April 23, 2013, the City adopted Ordinance 13-03 which defined certain housing -related terms, designated zoning districts for residential care facilities, transitional, supportive and efficiency unit housing and established development standards for efficiency unit housing. Included in that ordinance was a change in the definition of family. The City is intending to bring to the City Council an ordinance in 2017 that would establish an Affordable Housing Overlay that will identify sites throughout the City where transitional and supportive housing is allowed by right, identify incentives for affordable and senior housing and establish a density bonus program. This will assist the City in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) targets established by the Southern California Association of Governments. Staff is continuing to encourage opportunities for senior and affordable housing projects throughout the City. In the update of the City's Housing Element, the City committed to taking the following actions to address fair housing: o Provide incentives for affordable housing development o Increase housing options through better definition of both transitional and supportive housing o Provide homebuyer assistance o Subdivide larger sites for development of housing for low-income households. Like all cities in California, the dissolution of the redevelopment agencies has had a major adverse impact in the ability of the City to aggressively accomplish some of 11 its affordable housing goals. As a result, the City's homebuyer program has been put on hold as well as its land assemblage programs. The City has $12.4 million in Tax Allocation Bond proceeds. The City recently issued a request for proposals (RFP) seeking innovative projects that address one or more of the following housing needs: special needs, veterans, seniors, housing first, transitional and supportive housing. Reductions in HUD funding for housing has further limited the City to address these needs. Observation No. 4 — High loan denials in low income area. Action Item No. 4. Invest in low income neighborhoods. The City should invest in community projects in its low income areas. Such investments will mitigate neighborhood deterioration, which is particularly important given the high rates of loan denials in the areas east of 1-15. In addition, public improvements in low- income areas ensure that the amenities offered in these areas are comparable to amenities in higher income areas. Inequality of neighborhood amenities can become a fair housing concern if lower quality neighborhoods predominantly occupied by members of protected classes. Progress Made: The City has focused its CDBG capital funding in CDBG eligible census tracts, including the Pujol neighborhood and Old Town. The City has upgraded Temecula Community Center and parks and is providing sidewalk improvements in those areas. Mixed -income housing developments are transforming this area into a vibrant place to live and work, while maintaining its diversity. Five years ago, the City was coping with a high foreclosure rate as a result of the housing bust of 2007-2008. It was estimated that nearly 15% of the housing stock was bank -owned or in some state of foreclosure. According to Property Radar, there were only 97 bank -owned properties (REO inventory) in the City in May 2016. This was a drop of 22.4% in the past year. Since 2007-2008, housing prices have rebounded and fewer homeowners are under water with their mortgages. According to the Southwest Riverside County Realtor Report published in 2016, the median home price is $436,577 with the average home sale exceeding $500,000 for the first time since December 2007. This indicates that median home prices have increased by 5% in the last 12 months. Compared to 2007 sales price levels, the City is now less than 10% of what it was at its highest levels. While this is good for the homeowner, it can be difficult for the first-time homebuyers to afford homes in Temecula. Nonetheless, home sales have increased by 18% for both April and May of 2016 over 2015 levels. The City evaluated home loans for both mortgages and refinancing. The data revealed that none of the racial or ethnic groups experienced disproportionately lower approval rates, compared to other groups in the City. (See Appendix K for Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data charts.) Observation No. 5 — There is a lack of information and knowledge about fair housing. 12 • Action Item No. 5. Improve access to fair housing information. The City of Temecula should add easy to find fair housing information on its website. It is critical that the City have a link to HUD's complaint -taking website and the State of California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), where residents may file complaints if they so desire. Progress Made: The City has added information on its website directing residents with fair housing questions to the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County website that contains resource links to HUD, DFEH and other legal and regulatory agencies. The City site also provides an explanation of the services provided by the Fair Housing Council. b. Discuss how you have been successful in achieving past goals, and/or how you have fallen short of achieving those goals (including potentially harmful unintended consequences); and As described above, the City has been very successful in achieving its goals. They are reflected in its commitment to address the needs that were identified as well as by the results of the survey. The greatest deterrent in meeting the needs for affordable housing has been the dissolution of the redevelopment agencies by the State of California. This had been the greatest source of funding for cities such as Temecula in addressing its affordable housing needs. c. Discuss any additional policies, actions, or steps that you could take to achieve past goals, or mitigate the problems you have experienced. Without the use of redevelopment funds, the City will be highly dependent upon the limited funds available through the Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) and HUD funded programs. The City will continue to pursue affordable housing grant program opportunities and partnerships with nonprofits, county, regional, and State agencies. As mentioned earlier in this Assessment, the City is intending to bring to the City Council an ordinance in 2017 that would establish an Affordable Housing Overlay that will identify sites throughout the City where transitional and supportive housing is allowed by right, identify incentives for affordable and senior housing and establish a density bonus program. This will assist the City in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) targets established by the Southern California Association of Governments. Also previously mentioned, the City issued a request for proposal(s) out for the remaining Tax Allocation Bond proceeds ($12.4 million), which could include more than one site, some of which are located east of 1-15. The request for proposals closed in May 2016. The City received twenty proposals from interested developers. The proposals are currently being reviewed by City staff. d. Discuss how the experience of program participant(s) with past goals has influenced the selection of current goals. Until the dissolution of the redevelopment agencies, the City had an aggressive and effective program in addressing its affordable housing needs. Through the redevelopment program, the City assisted eleven rental projects that provided 588 units for low and moderate income 13 families and individuals. In addition, it provided for 18 owner -occupied housing units. (See Appendix J for a list of the redevelopment projects completed by the City prior to the dissolution of the redevelopment agency.) Current goals are being established as part of this planning process with the understanding that housing and community development resources are scarcer and the development of affordable housing is more challenging. 14 IV. Fair Housing Analvsis A. Demographic Summary 1. Describe demographic patterns in the jurisdiction and region, and describe trends over time (since 1990). In comparing Map 1-Race and Ethnicity 2010 with Map 2-Race and Ethnicity Trends 1990, the City of Temecula has grown substantially in population. Through this period of tremendous growth, the City remains a diverse and integrated community, and there are no significant concentrations of segregation. Table 2-Demographic Trends describes the growth rates during the twenty year period from 1990 to 2010 and provides trends for race/ethnicity, national origin, limited English proficiency, sex, age and families with children. While all racial and ethnic groups, except Native Americans, have increased numerically, Hispanics and Asians have far exceeded the proportionate growth of other racial and ethnic groups. Whites are continuing to increase, but at a slower rate. This is also true for the region as a whole. This trend is also reflected in the percentage of persons from other nations. However, the proportion of those with limited English proficiency has not increased as dramatically as the ethnic populations have, both within the City and in the region as whole. The number families with children in proportion to the general population (and correspondingly those under the age of 18) increased over the twenty year period, but decreased in the last ten years for both the City and region. 2. Describe the location of homeowners and renters in the jurisdiction and region, and describe trends over time. Multi -family areas are located throughout the City particularly along major arterials, in the downtown area and west side of the town. Undeveloped land in the north and south is projected on the General Plan for higher density residential. (See Appendix F for a map of the land use element of the City's adopted General Plan.) B. General Issues i. Seuegation/Integration 1. Analysis a. Describe and compare segregation levels in the jurisdiction and region. Identify the racial/ethnic groups that experience the highest levels of segregation. According to the HUD provided Map 1-Race and Ethnicity, Temecula had no areas of concentrations of racial or ethnic groups. All ethnic groups are spread evenly throughout the City. The City also had no HUD -defined racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAP areas). Local knowledge confirmed this observation. Map 2 shows no appreciable difference from 1990. This is also confirmed with Table 3-Racial and Ethnicity Dissimilarity Trends. According to HUD, if a jurisdiction has an Index value of less than 40, there is high 15 diversity (low segregation) in the City. The City has a score between 18.93 and 26.05 for the various racial and ethnic groups. Likewise, Map 3-National Origin shows no segregation pattern based on national origin. The top five population groups are spread evenly throughout the City, showing the City's diversity and high integration. In comparing the City with the region from Table 2-Demographic Trends, the percentage of Blacks and Hispanics is about half that in the region. There are more Whites and Asians in Temecula than the regional average. Twenty-two percent of the City's Hispanics were born in Mexico compared to 27% for the region based on calculation of figures in Table 1. Eighty-nine percent of the Hispanic immigrants are Limited English Proficiency (LEP). This is roughly the same as for the region. There was a significant increase in the percentage of foreign born over the past twenty years, but the percentage of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) persons remained about the same, even though their population increased. Although only 3% of the population, 40% of Filipinos are LEPs, compared to 27% region -wide. According to Map 4-Persons with LEP, their populations are spread evenly across the City. According to Table 1, the largest disabled population are those who are ambulatory (3.83%), followed by those with cognitive difficulty (3.54%), independent living difficulty (2.90%) and those with hearing loss (2.67%). There is probably considerable overlap in these populations. According to Table 1, eight percent of the City's population is seniors compared to 10.4% region -wide. Fifty-six percent of the households are families with children compared to 51% region -wide. While all age groups increased in population, there was a slight decrease in the percentage of children and an increase in those of middle age. That could further be seen in a decrease in the proportion of families with children, even though it remains higher than the regional percentages. b. Explain how these segregation levels have changed over time (since 1990). According to Table 2-Demographic Trends, racial and ethnic diversity has increased dramatically in the City over the past twenty years. Except Native Americans, the population of all racial and ethnic groups has grown; however, the Hispanic and Asian populations have increased at a much faster rate than the other population groups. Hispanics have increased from 14.5% to 25% of the population and Asians / Pacific Islanders from 2.40% to 9.71%. Despite an increase in population of over 28,000 in twenty years, the proportion of Whites has decreased from 80.23% in 1990 to 57% in 2010. Blacks have increased at a less dramatic rate from 1.3% to 4% from 1990 to 2010, but showed a slight decline percentagewise from 4.16% in 2000 to 3.88% in 2010, even though their population increased. While Native Americans constitute only .6% of the population, they were the only ethnic group to show a decrease in population between 2000 and 2010. Through the tremendous growth in populations, Table 3 demonstrates that the Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index range was still between 18.93 and 26.05, well below the HUD threshold of 40, meaning there is minimal segregation and high 16 integration within the City. This compares to a range between 41.29 and 47.66 for the region. c. Identify areas with relatively high segregation and integration by race/ethnicity, national origin, or LEP group, and indicate the predominant groups living in each area. According to Maps 1 through 4 pertaining to racial and ethnic data and dissimilarity indexes, there are no patterns of segregation by race and ethnicity, national origin or LEP groups in the City. d. Consider and describe the location of owner and renter occupied housing in determining whether such housing is located in segregated or integrated areas. Based on the above discussion, there are no patterns of segregation in the City by race, ethnicity, national origin or LEP. The majority of multi -family residential is located in areas with easy access to transit systems and employment centers throughout the City. e. Discuss how patterns of segregation have changed over time (since 1990). There has been little change in segregation patterns over the last twenty years even though the City has grown dramatically during that period. The City has no patterns of segregation. f. Discuss whether there are any demographic trends, policies, or practices that could lead to higher segregation in the jurisdiction in the future. Based upon data in Table 2, the trend is that the City is becoming increasingly diverse as it has grown over the last twenty years. This is in line with trends throughout the region. Maps 1 and 2 do not reveal trends of segregation patterns forming within the City as a result of the growth. 2. Additional Information a. Beyond the HUD -provided data, provide additional relevant information, if any, about segregation in the jurisdiction and region affecting groups with other protected characteristics. Information gathered from community meetings and surveys along with data sources provided stakeholders did not provide any information that segregation exists in the City affecting other protected characteristics was provided through stakeholder consultations. Workshop participants also concluded that the City is highly diverse. The region does have higher scores than the City, indicating a very diverse and integrated population, but as mentioned in the introduction, the region represents the largest MSA in the nation. 17 b. The program participant may also describe other information relevant to its assessment of segregation, including activities such as place -based investments and mobility options for protected class groups. CDBG funds have been focused on the needs of the City's CDBG eligible census tracts. Public services and housing programs have been focused on the CDBG eligible areas of the City. (See Appendix F for the location of the CDBG eligible areas.) 3. Contributing Factors of Segregation Consider the listed factors and any other factors affecting the jurisdiction and region. Identify factors that significantly create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the severity of segregation. ❑ Community Opposition ❑ Displacement of residents due to economic pressures ❑ Lack of community revitalization strategies ❑ Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods ❑ Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities ❑ Lack of regional cooperation ❑ Land use and zoning laws ❑ Lending Discrimination ❑ Location and type of affordable housing ❑ Occupancy codes and restrictions ❑ Private discrimination © Other: There are no patterns in the City. ii. R/ECAPs 1. Analysis a. Identify any R/ECAPs or groupings of RECAP tracts within the jurisdiction. HUD data and mapping does not identify any R/ECAPs within the City. b. Which protected classes disproportionately reside in R/ECAPs compared to the jurisdiction and region? N/A c. Describe how R/ECAPs have changed over time (since 1990). N/A 2. Additional Information a. Beyond the HUD -provided data, provide additional relevant information, if any, about R/ECAPs in the jurisdiction and region affecting groups with other protected characteristics. 18 N/A b. The program participant may also describe other information relevant to its assessment of R/ECAPs, including activities such as place -based investments and mobility options for protected class groups. N/A 3. Contributing Factors of R/ECAPs Consider the listed factors and any other factors affecting the jurisdiction and region. Identify factors that significantly create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the severity of R/ECAPs. ❑ Community Opposition ❑ Displacement of residents due to economic pressures ❑ Lack of community revitalization strategies ❑ Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods ❑ Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities ❑ Lack of regional cooperation ❑ Land use and zoning laws ❑ Lending Discrimination ❑ Location and type of affordable housing ❑ Occupancy codes and restrictions ❑ Private discrimination X❑ Other: Not Applicable. HUD data and mapping does not identify any R/ECAPs within the City. iii. Disparities in Access to Opportunity 1. Analysis a. Educational Opportunities i. Describe any disparities in access to proficient schools based on race/ethnicity, national origin, and family status. The City does not have jurisdiction over the local schools. They are administered by independent public school districts, such as the Temecula Valley Unified School District. Table 12 - Opportunity Indicators by Race/Ethnicity provides an index regarding how well fourth graders of the various racial and ethnic groups are doing on their State exams in comparison with national indices. Higher scores indicate higher proficiencies in the schools. According to Table 12, the school proficiency index is essentially the same for all races and ethnic groups in the City. On a scale of 1 to 100, with 100 being the highest, Hispanics scored 79.00, Blacks at 80.36, Native Americans at 80.86, 19 Asians at 81.58 and Whites at 82.20. In comparison, the region scored between 40.97 for Hispanics on the low end and 58.09 for Whites on the high end. The City has one Title 1 school (Temecula Elementary School) in the northern end of the City. A school is a Title 1 School if at least 40% of the children participate in a free or reduced lunch program. The school is located in one of the City's CDBG eligible areas. There are no Title 1 Middle Schools or High Schools in the City. The school district has a policy that parents can transfer their children from school to school subject to availability. Parents would responsible for providing transportation to the new school. Public transportation is available, although it may be limited based on the location of the school from their place of residence. ii. Describe the relationship between the residency patterns of racial/ethnic, national origin, and family status groups and their proximity to proficient schools. There is no difference in the school proficiency index Citywide between the higher income households and those populations below the poverty line; however, there is some difference in scores between some of the schools in the higher income areas and one school in a lower income area in the northwest part of the City. This can be found on Map 9 Demographics and School Proficiency by Race/Ethnicity, National Origin and Family Status. The lower income area is predominately Whites along with some Mexican, Korean, and Filipino immigrants. The Temecula Elementary School is located in this neighborhood. iii. Describe how school -related policies, such as school enrollment policies, affect a student's ability to attend a proficient school. Which protected class groups are least successful in accessing proficient schools? The City does not have jurisdiction over the public schools. However, all protected classes Citywide are performing at above regional levels as discussed above and there is virtually no difference between the various racial groups. The school district has a policy that parents can transfer their children from school to school subject to availability. Parents would be responsible for providing transportation to the new school. Public transportation is available, although it may be limited based on the location of the school from their place of residence. b. Employment Opportunities i. Describe any disparities in access to jobs and labor markets by protected class groups. The Jobs Proximity Index in Table 12-Opportunity Indicators provides an index for the physical distances between place of residence and jobs by race/ethnicity. The Labor Market Index also in Table 12 provides a measure of unemployment 20 rate, labor -force participation rate, and percent of the population ages 25 and above with at least a bachelor's degree, by neighborhood. The higher scores represent greater the access to employment opportunities, and are better prepared to enter the labor market with higher incomes. According to the Map 10 series for Job Proximities, persons in the lower -income areas live substantially closer to employment opportunities than their counterparts in the higher -income areas, often located farther away from the Interstate. Again, there was little difference between racial and ethnic groups or national origin according to Map 10 and Table 12 for Job Proximity. The Labor Market Index for the various races and ethnicities range from 46.38 for Native Americans to 49.79 for Whites. These scores, which are based on a scale from 1 to 100, would be in the average range based on HUD's perspective nationwide. There was no difference between the City as a whole and those below the poverty line. In fact, all races except Asians who were below the poverty line had slightly higher scores than those above the poverty level. They ranged between 44.15 for Asians and 51.31 for Blacks with Whites at 48.79. When compared with the region, the City residents scored much higher. The region ranged from 24.20 for Hispanics to 43.02 for Asians and unlike the City, there was a substantial difference for those below the poverty line. They ranged from 16.42 for Hispanics to 30.51 for Asians. Whites were at 25.55. Although some classes are available locally, the lack of a community college in Temecula in 2010 is probably part of the reason for this deficiency. However, since 2010, several campuses have opened in Temecula, including Cal State San Marcos at Temecula, University of Redlands, Concordia University, and Mount San Jacinto. More recent data would likely show an improvement in job readiness of the labor market. Other areas in the region have notably higher ratings such as in the vicinity of UC Riverside, Cal State San Bernardino and Redlands College in the north and in Orange County to the west. ii. How does a person's place of residence affect their ability to obtain a job? According to Map 11 Labor Market Engagement, those living in the high income areas have a greater labor -force participation rate than those who are living in the lower income areas. The Job Proximity Index on Table 12 demonstrates virtually no difference between racial and ethnic groups, ranging from 43.37 for Asians on the low end to 44.36 for Hispanics on the upper end. There was a wider range for those below the poverty line. They ranged from 39.32 for Native Americans to 57.42 for Asians. Except for Native Americans, all their scores exceeded the counterparts who were above the poverty line. There was no substantial difference between the City and the region for these indices. Which racial/ethnic, national origin, or family status groups are least successful in accessing employment? 21 There was no appreciable difference between the various groups. c. Transportation Opportunities i. Describe any disparities in access to transportation based on place of residence, cost, or other transportation related factors. The Transportation Cost Index in Table 12 provides an index regarding the cost of transportation and proximity to public transportation. The score for this index was the only index where the City fared lower than the region. The low scores indicate that the City needs to improve access to public transportation, however low transportation costs are a challenge to the entire region, and are not just limited to City boundaries. According to Map 12-Demographics and Transit Trips and Map 13- Demographics and Low Transportation Costs, the lower -income areas had the highest scores, indicating that lower income residents have greater usage of public transportation than the higher income residents. This would be expected since the lower income persons are more dependent upon public transportation. The scores in Table 12 ranged from 18.10 for Native Americans and 19.98 for Whites to 25.05 for Hispanics. The scores for those below the poverty line have greater usage of public transportation as well, but higher than those who are above the poverty level. They ranged from 24.93 for Whites to 3 5. 10 for Asians. The exception is that Native Americans had a low score at 15.77. The reason for that anomaly is unclear. There is one area in the north that has a low usage of public transportation. This is Census Tract 432.17 known as the Meadowview neighborhood. It is not an eligible CDBG area, because its median income is too high. It is also an area, as shown in Map 11, with a higher than average labor market engagement. This would indicate that there is not a great of a need for public transportation in that particular area. The scores for the region were low, from 25.75 to 32.68 for the region as a whole; and 29.20 to 37.05 for those populations below the poverty line; however, somewhat higher than for the City for racial and ethnic groups. ii. Which racial/ethnic, national origin or family status groups are most affected by the lack of a reliable, affordable transportation connection between their place of residence and opportunities? Except for Native Americans below the poverty line, there was no difference with the various protected class groups with access to low cost transportation. The reason for the anomaly is unclear. iii. Describe how the jurisdiction's and region's policies, such as public transportation routes or transportation systems designed for use personal vehicles, affect the ability of protected class groups to access transportation. Public transportation is provided by the Riverside Transit Agency and is not under the authority of the City. However, the City is served by several bus 22 lines that provide service throughout the week and weekends. (See Appendix H for a map showing the service provided to the community.) As it has done in the past, the City will continue to partner with developers to privately fund transportation options as development occurs. d. Low Poverty Exposure Opportunities i. Describe any disparities in exposure to poverty by protected class groups. The Low Poverty Index rates family poverty by household (based on the federal poverty line) provides an index regarding the access to poverty by census tract. The higher the scores, the less likely a neighborhood is exposed to poverty. There was little difference between the various ethnic and racial groups. Indices ranged from 65.42 for Hispanics to 71.23 for Whites, which indicates that all racial and ethnic groups have low exposure to poverty in Temecula. Except for Asians, there was little difference between those below the poverty line. They ranged for 54.98 for Blacks to 67.95 for Native Americans. The only anomaly was for Asians at 46.21 who were more exposed to poverty than their counterparts. This could be reflective of recent Filipino immigrants which now constitute over 3% of the City's population and 40% are limited English speaking according to Table 1. Though a small minority group, there are a number living in a low income area. Again, there was a substantial difference between the City residents and those within the region. In the region, the range was between 37.51 for Hispanics to 60.42 for Asians. For those below the poverty line, there was even a larger difference. They ranged from 23.78 for Hispanics to 42.30 for Asians. City residents have less exposure to poverty than the region as a whole. ii. What role does a person's place of residence play in their exposure to poverty? According to Map 14-Demographics and Poverty, there were three adjoining census tracts in north Temecula that had low scores indicating a higher exposure to poverty. Three of the census tracts are CDBG eligible lower -income areas, but one of the adjoining areas is not, yet affected by its exposure to poverty. Another adjoining area is an eligible CDBG area but did not indicate a high exposure to poverty. The area has a number of market -rate and subsidized apartment complexes in the vicinity of the Temecula Elementary School, which may be affecting this index score. The corridor also contains many of the City's commercial shopping centers. iii. Which racial/ethnic, national origin or family status groups are most affected by these poverty indicators? There is not a substantial difference among the groups, except for Asians below the poverty line. This group may include recent immigrants from the Philippines, some of which have limited English proficiency. 23 iv. Describe how the jurisdiction's and region's policies affect the ability of protected class groups to access low poverty areas. The City has adopted land use policies concentrating multi -family housing projects along major arterials, shopping, employment centers, and recreational facilities. This allows lower income persons easier access to opportunities; but at the same time, concentration of multi -family housing may statistically increase residents' exposure to poverty. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) represents six counties in the southern California area, which includes Temecula and Riverside County. In an effort to meet the affordable housing needs of the region and distribute this need evenly across the region, SCAG has provided Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) targets for creating a certain number of affordable housing units in every city in the region. The City's goal is to provide housing for 375 very low income households and 251 low income households. The City is using its available resources and the Affordable Housing Overlay to meet those targeted amounts. e. Environmentally Healthy Neighborhood Opportunities i. Describe any disparities in access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods by protected class groups. The Environmental Health Index measures exposure based on EPA estimates of air quality carcinogenic, respiratory and neurological toxins by neighborhood. The higher the scores, the less likely households are exposed to adverse environmental conditions. According to Table 12 Environmental Health Index, there was virtually no difference between the racial/ethnic groups with ranges from 39.99 to 40.42. For those below the poverty line, the range was similar with a range from 38.06 to 40.93. This means that in this category, all City's racial/ethnic population groups and income groups are slightly below the national average in their exposure to environmental issues. The City scored somewhat better than the region where the scores ranged from 26.57 to 41.33 and for those below the poverty line, ranging from 24.89 to 40.58. The wide scoring range for the region would reflect the enormous size of the region. The areas with the greatest exposure to environmental health concerns are located along the freeway. Temecula's exposure to environmental health issues is lower than the region, on average. ii. Which racial/ethnic, national origin or family status groups have the least access to environmentally healthy neighborhoods? According to Map 15-Demographics and Environmental Health and Race/Ethnicity, there was one area east of the Interstate, north of Temecula Parkway, west of Margarita Road and south of Pauba that had a low environmental score in this category, but there was no concentration of any of the protected groups in that area. The only distinguishing feature was that there were 24 few households with families in that area. The Temecula Valley Hospital is located in that area. f. Patterns in Disparities in Access to Opportunity i. Identify and discuss any overarching patterns of access to opportunity and exposure to adverse community factors based on race/ethnicity, national origin or familial status. Identify areas that experience an aggregate of poor access to opportunity and high exposure to adverse factors. Include how these patterns compare to patterns of segregation and R/ECAPs. Analysis of the HUD -provided maps and data did not reveal any overarching patterns of poor access to opportunity and did not reveal adverse community factors. However, Census Tract 432.16 along the Margarita Corridor, is identified on Map 14 as having high exposure to poverty. Two of the three block groups are in CDBG-eligible areas and the third is not. Yet the HUD data indicates that the third block group also has a high exposure to poverty. The only Title 1 School in the district is located in this neighborhood. The area is characterized by commercial retail and uses and the presences of a mix of multi- family and single family housing. Two of the multi -family complexes in one of the block groups are subsidized, the 40-unit Oak Tree Apartments on Lyndie Lane and the 55 unit Rancho California Apartments off of Margarita Road. There are a number of subsidized units west of Interstate 15, which is a CDBG- eligible area, but that area does not have a high exposure factor. This could be partly because the City has focused its CDBG and local funds in addressing this area. The City does not show any patterns of segregation, nor does it have any RECAPS. 2. Additional Information a. Beyond the HUD -provided data, provide additional relevant information, if any, about disparities in access to opportunity in the jurisdiction and region affecting groups with other protected characteristics. Consultations with residents and stakeholders confirmed the HUD -provided information regarding the lack of disparities in access to opportunity in Temecula affecting groups with other protected characteristics. b. The program participant may also describe other information relevant to its assessment of disparities in access to opportunity, including any activities aimed at improving access to opportunities for areas that may lack such access, or in promoting access to opportunity (e.g., proficient schools, employment opportunities, and transportation). Consultations with residents and stakeholders confirmed the HUD -provided information regarding the lack of disparities in access to opportunity in Temecula affecting groups with other protected characteristics. 25 The City is involved in a number of efforts aimed at improving air quality of the entire region including the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) Clean Cities Coalition, which aims to reduce the consumption of petroleum fuels. The City also participates in WRCOG's Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program. The TUMF program makes improvements to the regional transportation system and provides transportation demand management through funds from new development. 3. Contributing Factors of Disparities in Access to Opportunity Consider the listed factors and any other factors affecting the jurisdiction and region. Identify factors that significantly create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the severity of disparities in access to opportunity. ❑ Access to financial services ❑ The availability, type, frequency, and reliability of public transportation ❑ Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods ❑ Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities ❑ Lack of regional cooperation ❑ Land use and zoning laws ❑ Lending Discrimination ❑ Location of employers ❑ Location of environmental health hazards ❑ Location of proficient schools and school assignment policies ❑ Location and type of affordable housing ❑ Occupancy codes and restrictions ❑ Private discrimination © Other: None of the maps and tables provided by HUD, nor our consultations with residents and stakeholders, revealed any significant disparities in access opportunities. iv. Disproportionate Housing Needs 1. Analysis a. Which groups (by race/ethnicity and family status) experience higher rates of housing cost burden, overcrowding, or substandard housing when compared to other groups? Which groups also experience higher rates of severe housing burdens when compared to other groups? HUD requires all grantees to compare and assess the burdens for housing for different groups in the community. A disproportionately greater burden exists when the members of a particular group experience a housing problem at a greater rate (90 percent or more) than the group as a whole. Table 9-Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs shows the percentage of race/ethnicity groups and families with children experiencing two potential categories of housing burden. The first category is households experiencing one of four housing problems: 26 ■ Housing cost burden (defined as paying more than 30% of income for monthly housing costs including utilities) ■ Overcrowding ■ Lacking a complete kitchen ■ Lacking plumbing The second category is households experiencing "one of four severe housing problems" which are: ■ Severe housing cost burden (defined as paying more than 50% of one's income for monthly housing costs including utilities) ■ Overcrowding ■ Lacking a complete kitchen ■ Lacking plumbing Table 10-Demographics of Household with Severe Housing Cost Burden demonstrates the number and percentage of persons by race/ethnicity and family size experiencing severe housing cost burden. There is no substantial difference between racial and ethnic groups. Non -family households demonstrated the highest cost burdens. The City scores are reflective of the region. According to Table 9, half of the City's households are experiencing one of the four housing problems identified above. There is a disparity in this category with 47.37% of the White households experiencing a housing problem, Asians at 54.31% and Blacks at 55.04%. Hispanics are higher at 62.24% and Native Americans at 80.90%. For severe housing problems, they range from 20.76% for White households to 35.56% for Hispanic households. Native Americans were at 33.71%. Map 5 - Publicly Supported Housing and Map 6 - Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) provides the location of the limited number of publicly supported and HVC housing units in the City. Given the housing costs in the City and the region, there is a high demand for affordable rental housing. While comparable with the region, all households, except Black households, were slightly more burdened in the City than in the region. For those below the poverty level, all groups, except for Native Americans, were less burdened in the City than in the region. Based on our examination of the data in Table 9 and demonstrated in Map 7-Housing Cost Burden and Race/Ethnicity, there were no disproportionate housing problems based on race, ethnicity, national origin, household type and size. These results are not unexpected with the high costs of housing in Southern California as a whole. 27 b. Which areas in the jurisdiction and region experience the greatest housing burdens? Which of these areas align with segregated areas, integrated areas, or R/ECAPs and what are the predominant race/ethnicity or national origin groups in such areas? There are no R/ECAPS in the City. While mostly uniform throughout the City, the greatest housing burden appears to be in the far north and adjacent to it in the wealthier parts of the City. In the lower -income neighborhoods, there is much less of a housing burden. According to Map 7-Housing Cost Burden, the greatest housing burdens are in the Temecula Elementary School neighborhood which has a concentration of apartments on the far north, indicating the need for affordable rental housing. While there are two subsidized housing projects in the area, which should lower the housing burden scores, there are also several market -rate apartment complexes as well. c. Compare the needs of families with children for housing units with two, and three or more bedrooms with the available existing housing stock in each category of publicly supported housing. Based on the data in the Table 11, there are a limited number of Project Based Section 8 units for families in the City. There are 54 two- and three -bedroom units and only 36 units are households with children. There are also a limited number of Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCV) units where there are 30 two- and three -bedroom units and only thirteen units are households with children. Additional affordable housing units for families continue to be a high demand in the City. d. Describe the differences in rates of renter and owner occupied housing by race/ethnicity in the jurisdiction and region. For the City, 67% of the households are owner -occupied and 33% are renter occupied. While general conclusions may be drawn, the data was not provided by HUD and is not available at the local level by tenure. It is evident that there continues to be a high demand for Section 8 vouchers due to the housing cost burden experienced by renters. 2. Additional Information a. Beyond the HUD -provided data, provide additional relevant information, if any, about disproportionate housing needs in the jurisdiction and region affecting groups with other protected characteristics. Based on a consultation with Inland Regional Center, and feedback from the community workshops, there is a large need in the region for affordable housing for adults with developmental disabilities. According to the Center, there are 651 persons with developmental disabilities in the three zip codes (92590, 92591 and 92592) that comprise the Temecula area. Some of these include large rural areas outside the City and it is believed that at least 200 of these individuals live outside the City limits. Regionally, many of those who independently live in group homes face substandard conditions, according to Inland Regional Center. However, they 28 indicate that this is not an issue within the City. The greatest demand is for studio and one -bedroom units for those with low and moderate disabilities. In addition, there is a growing number of families for families with autistic children in the community. The stress on families with autistic children is creating a demand for housing single parent units. Often there is more than one child with autism in the home creating the demand for larger three and four bedroom units. Children with autism require housing units to address their sensory needs, such as dimmer lights and controls on hot water faucets. Inland Regional Center also advised that these units not be concentrated in a single complex so that integration of these families can be achieved. The City has met with developers regarding the needs of residents with special needs. Some developers are willing to include options in the construction of new homes that meet the sensory needs of residents with disabilities. b. The program participant may also describe other information relevant to its assessment of disproportionate housing needs. For PHAs, such information may include a PHA's overriding housing needs analysis. The City does not manage any public housing projects. 3. Contributing Factors of Disproportionate Housing Needs Consider the listed factors and any other factors affecting the jurisdiction and region. Identify factors that significantly create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the severity of disproportionate housing needs. ® The availability of affordable units in a range of sizes ❑ Displacement of residents due to economic pressures ❑ Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods ❑ Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities ❑ Land use and zoning laws ❑ Lending Discrimination ® Other: Increased demand of affordable housing with supportive services to serve special needs populations. C. Publicly Supported Housing Analysis 1. Analysis a. Publicly Supported Housing Demographics i. Are certain racial/ethnic groups more likely to be residing in one category of publicly supported housing than other categories (public housing, project -based Section 8, Other HUD Multifamily Assisted developments, and Housing Choice Voucher (HCV))? 29 Blacks and Hispanics are more likely to be living in Project -based Section 8 housing units than reflective of the overall City percentages for these racial and ethnic groups. According to the Housing Authority, there are 109 households receiving Tenant -based Section 8 vouchers in Temecula. Ninety are White, seventeen are Black, one is Asian, and one is Native American. Of the 109, 30 are Hispanic and 79 are non -Hispanic. Eighty five (85) are one person households and the rest are families. Seventy-six (76) are elderly and 53 have disabilities. The households are spread across the City with 47 households are in zip code 92590; 51 in 92591 and 11 in 92592. ii. Compare the demographics, in terms of protected class, of residents of each category of publicly supported housing (public housing, project -based Section 8, Other HUD Multifamily Assisted developments, and HCV) to the population in general, and persons who meet the income eligibility requirements for the relevant category of publicly supported housing. Include in the comparison, a description of whether there is a higher or lower proportion of groups based on protected class. According to Table 6-Publicly Supported Housing Residents by Race/Ethnicity, the HCV program (better known as the Tenant Based Section 8) generally reflects the population composition of the City, with the exception of Asians. There are 57% White, 16% Black, 27% Hispanic, but no Asians receive vouchers. It should be noted that Asians do not comprise a large percentage within the City's Section 8 population. There are a greater proportion of Blacks and Hispanics taking advantage of the Project -Based Section 8 program than the general population of the City. Only 37.04% of the residents were White with 20.37% Black and 40.74% Hispanic. Most of the units are occupied by those with incomes less than 30% of the County's median income. According to the Housing Authority of Riverside County, there are 109 tenant -based Section 8 rental assistance vouchers in Temecula. Seventy-six of the households are elderly and 53 have disabilities. Some of the households are elderly and have disabilities. b. Publicly Supported Housing Location and Occupancy i. Describe patterns in the geographic location of publicly supported housing by program category (public housing, project -based Section 8, Other HUD Multifamily Assisted developments, HCV, and LIHTC) in relation to previously discussed segregated areas and R/ECAPs. There are no R/ECAPs or segregated areas in the City. Most of the publicly supportive housing units are located near employment centers and transportation opportunities. ii. Describe patterns in the geographic location for publicly supported housing that primarily serves families with children, elderly persons, or persons with disabilities in relation to previously discussed segregated areas or R/ECAPs? 30 There are no R/ECAPs or segregated areas in the City. iii. How does the demographic composition of occupants of publicly supported housing in RECAPS compare to the demographic composition of occupants of publicly supported housing outside of R/ECAPs? N/A iv. (A) Do any developments of public housing, properties converted under the RAD, and LIHTC developments have a significantly different demographic composition, in terms of protected class, than other developments of the same category? Describe how these developments differ. Black populations have a greater proportion living in public housing than the general population of the City, while Asians have a lower percentage. But with the limited number of units available in the City, it is not believed that these differences are considered significant. (B) Provide additional relevant information, if any, about occupancy, by protected class, in other types of publicly supported housing. No additional data is available. v. Compare the demographics of occupants of developments, for each category of publicly supported housing (public housing, project -based Section 8, Other HUD Multifamily Assisted developments, properties converted under RAD, and LIHTC) to the demographic composition of the areas in which they are located. Describe whether developments that are primarily occupied by one race/ethnicity are located in areas occupied largely by the same race/ethnicity. Describe any differences for housing that primarily serves families with children, elderly persons, or persons with disabilities. All races except Asians are represented in the HUD and LIHTC developments. Black populations have a higher percentage living in publicly supported units compared to the general population of the City. But with the limited number of units available in the City, it is not believed that these differences are considered significant. c. Disparities in Access to Opportunity i. Describe any disparities in access to opportunity for residents of publicly supported housing, including within different program categories (public housing, project -based Section 8, Other HUD Multifamily Assisted Developments, HCV, and LIHTC) and between types (housing primarily serving families with children, elderly persons, and persons with disabilities) of publicly supported housing. 31 According to the HUD supplied data, there were no significant disparities in access to opportunity for residents in publicly supported housing. Anecdotal information gathered through the consultation and stakeholders meetings confirm this. 2. Additional Information a. Beyond the HUD -provided data, provide additional relevant information, if any, about publicly supported housing in the jurisdiction and region, particularly information about groups with other protected characteristics and about housing not captured in the HUD -provided data. Consultations with residents and stakeholders did not reveal other information to disparities in publicly -supported housing in Temecula affecting groups. b. The program participant may also describe other information relevant to its assessment of publicly supported housing. Information may include relevant programs, actions, or activities, such as tenant self-sufficiency, place -based investments, or mobility programs. According to the Housing Authority of Riverside County, there are 109 tenant - based Section 8 rental assistance vouchers in Temecula. Seventy-six of the households are elderly and 53 have disabilities. Some of the elderly are also disabled. 3. Contributing Factors of Publicly Supported Housing Location and Occupancy Consider the listed factors and any other factors affecting the jurisdiction and region. Identify factors that significantly create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the severity of fair housing issues related to publicly supported housing, including Segregation, RECAPS, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, and Disproportionate Housing Needs. For each contributing factor that is significant, note which fair housing issue(s) the selected contributing factor relates to. Consultations with residents and stakeholders did not reveal other information to disparities in access to opportunity in Temecula and the region affecting groups with other protected characteristics. ❑ Admissions and occupancy policies and procedures, including preferences in publicly supported housing ❑ Land use and zoning laws ❑ Community opposition ❑ Impediments to mobility ❑ Lack of private investment in specific neighborhoods ❑ Lack of public investment in specific neighborhoods, including services and amenities ❑ Lack of regional cooperation ❑ Occupancy codes and restrictions ❑ Quality of affordable housing information programs 32 ❑ Siting selection policies, practices and decisions for publicly supported housing, including discretionary aspects of Qualified Allocation Plans and other programs ❑ Source of income discrimination ® Other: High demand for affordable housing, due to the high housing costs in the community and the region D. Disability and Access Analysis 1. Population Profile a. How are persons with disabilities geographically dispersed or concentrated in the jurisdiction and region, including R/ECAPs and other segregated areas identified in previous sections? There are no R/ECAPs or segregated areas in the City. According to Map 16- Disability by Type and Map 17-Disability by Age Group demonstrating the location where the persons with disabilities live, persons with disabilities are scattered throughout the City. There are 53 households with persons with disabilities that receive tenant -based rental assistance. Their addresses are confidential. b. Describe whether these geographic patterns vary for persons with each type of disability or for persons with disabilities in different age ranges. There is no difference in the geographic patterns for persons with disabilities. 2. Housing Accessibility a. Describe whether the jurisdiction and region have sufficient affordable, accessible housing in a range of unit sizes. Data is not available for the total number of accessible units; however, 33% of the City's occupied housing units were built after 2000, according to the 2008- 2012 American Community Survey five year estimates, suggesting that a number of units are adaptable based on California Building Codes in effect during those years. b. Describe the areas where affordable accessible housing units are located. Do they align with R/ECAPs or other areas that are segregated? There are no R/ECAPs in the City and the HUD data did not reveal any areas that were segregated. c. To what extent are persons with different disabilities able to access and live in the different categories of publicly supported housing? According to the Housing Authority, their programs have a Reasonable Accommodation Process to assure that all persons with disabilities are provided with reasonable accommodations for equal access to housing programs. That includes regulations regarding live-in aide and changes in voucher size. 33 3. Integration of Persons with Disabilities Living in Institutions and Other Segregated Settings a. To what extent do persons with disabilities in or from the jurisdiction or region reside in segregated or integrated settings? There are five licensed developmentally disabled adult residential (18-59) facilities within the City or in unincorporated Riverside County. There are 26 beds provided in these facilities. Additional facilities provide day services but would not be considered as institutional settings. Despite these facilities, there are not concentrations of persons with disabilities within the City, according to the Map 16 — Disability by Type. b. Describe the range of options for persons with disabilities to access affordable housing and supportive services. As mentioned above, based on a consultation with Inland Regional Center, there is a large need in the region for affordable housing for the developmentally disabled adults. According to the Center, there are 651 persons with developmental disabilities in the three zip codes (92590, 92591 and 92592) that comprise the Temecula area. Some of these include large rural areas outside the City and it is believed that at least 200 of these individuals live outside the City limits. Regionally, many of these adults independently live in group homes, or face substandard conditions, according to the Inland Regional Center. However, none of those homes are located in the City. The greatest demand is for studio and one -bedroom units for those with low and moderate delays. In addition, there is a growing population of for families with children with autism. The stress on families with children with autism is creating a demand for housing units with additional bedrooms. Children with autism require housing units to address sensory needs such as dimmer lights and controls on hot water faucets. Mr. Toms also advised that these units not be concentrated in a single complex so that integration of these families can be achieved. The City of Temecula employs an inclusion program specialist in the Human Services Division of the Community Services Department. The City has pioneered a progressive program called "High Hopes" that provides recreation programs for adults and children with developmental disabilities. They offer a wide variety of recreation, enrichment and vocational programs that are geared toward those with specific needs of individuals with disabilities. They not only serve those within the City of Temecula, but the program is so popular that people drive their family members more than two hours away to participate in the inclusionary programs. In addition to a City staff inclusion specialist, the City has developed a webpage that provides parents, caregivers and individuals with a list of local resources in the community. The Human Services Resource Guide includes information on local resources that serve special needs, aging adults and military, limited income, and at - risk youth/families and much more. The site also provides the phone number of the City staff person who can provide additional assistance. The City also has a Facebook page for the "Family First" program that connects people with special needs. 34 The website for the guide is located here: hqp://www.ciiyoftemecula.or /Temecula/Residents/Youth/Human+Services+Resour ce+Guide.htm In addition there are a number of other programs in the area designed for persons with special needs. They include the following in the Temecula-Murrieta area: • Top Soccer: Temecula • Up H.O.P.E: Temecula, Horseback riding. • Kindermusik: Temecula, Music program • High Hopes: Temecula, Performing arts. Singing, dance, photography, and more. Older teens and adults. • My Gym (Capp's Kids): Murrieta • S.C.E.G.: Temecula. Gymnastics, special needs friendly. • Actors Unlimited: Temecula. Performing Arts • Cal Oaks Pool: Murrieta. Summer swim lessons sponsored by the Special Olympics. • Baseball: Murrieta. • Musicians Workshop: Temecula. http://www.musiciansworkshop.org Guitar, choir, orchestra. • Pump it Up/Fun Zone: Murrieta. • Sensory Time: Murrieta. Child Play Center. http://www.sensoWimecenter.com Periodically, Building and Safety holds workshops for the construction industry to discuss changes in the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) requirements. The last workshop was held on March 1, 2015. 4. Disparities in Access to Opportunity a. To what extent are persons with disabilities able to access the following? Identify major barriers faced concerning: i. Government services and facilities: City Hall and other City facilities are fully accessible to persons with disabilities. The City needs to adopt an ADA Transition Plan to identify if there are any remaining ADA needs at other public facilities. ii. Public infrastructure (e.g., sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, pedestrian signals): Many of the City's sidewalks and intersections are ADA compliant and where there are existing needs, the City is addressing them in conjunction with other construction projects. The City is currently constructing segments of missing sidewalks in Old Town, which can be an impediment to residents accessing City services, the neighborhood park, and the neighborhood grocery store. The City intends to replace wooden sidewalks along Old Town Front Street, removing an impediment to seniors and those with disabilities. The City is at the forefront in the region in terms of addressing the recreational needs of those persons with physical disabilities. The City recently completed the construction of the Eagle Soar Playground and Splash Pad at Margarita Park. The 35 purpose of the park is to be inclusive and accessible in addressing the unique needs of children with and without disabilities. A description of this popular program is included as Appendix N. The City continues to upgrade its infrastructure to address the physical barriers of persons with disabilities. Nearly all of the intersections along major streets have accessible ramps. Whenever there are improvements made to an intersection, the intersection is upgraded to address the needs of residents with vision impairments. iii. Transportation: The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) has accessibility ramps on their buses. RTA also provides a Dial -A -Ride program designed to meet the needs of those with disabilities. Fares are significantly reduced for the elderly and persons with disabilities. According to the RTA Short Range Transit Plan 2014- 2016, "All RTA vehicles comply with clean fuel policies and come fully equipped with ADA accessible wheelchair lifts, including the paratransit vans. In addition, all fixed route vehicles are equipped with bicycle racks." According to the State Council on Developmental Disabilities, the greatest problem with the Dial -A -Ride programs is that persons cannot depend upon these services for timely pickups. iv. Proficient schools and educational programs: The City does not have jurisdiction over the school district, and thus has limited influence on its programming. There was a lawsuit claiming that the Temecula Valley Unified School District discriminated against special education students at Vail Ranch Middle School by denying them instruction in social studies and sciences, instead doubling up on math and English classes. They doubled up on math and English classes instead. The case determined that the School District cannot discriminate against those with disabilities. Their situation has been corrected. v. Jobs: According to the State Council on Developmental Disabilities, the greatest priority in California is providing meaningful jobs that are not below the minimum wage for those working adults with disabilities. It was originally thought that it was acceptable to provide less that minimum wage to give persons with disabilities access to jobs; however, research has found this leads to employer abuse. There are now steps to being taken to change this practice at the State level by introducing legislation. The City's Office of Economic Development and Community Services Department have an annual internship program for teenagers and adults with special needs and developmental disabilities to learn valuable job skills and lead them on the path towards self- sufficiency. b. Describe the processes that exist in the jurisdiction and region for persons with disabilities to request and obtain reasonable accommodations and accessibility modifications to address the barriers discussed above. The City is in compliance with State and federal law with respect to its ordinance providing reasonable accommodations to persons with disabilities. In addition to information provided elsewhere in this assessment, the City has adopted a reasonable accommodation ordinance to provide exceptions in zoning and land use for housing persons with disabilities. The City annually evaluates constraints on development, maintenance, and improvement to housing for persons with disabilities, including the review of land use controls, permit procedures, and building codes for the development of housing for persons with disabilities. 36 c. Describe any difficulties in achieving homeownership experienced by persons with disabilities and by persons with different types of disabilities. Affordable housing is an issue for most segments of the community, but it is especially a challenge for persons with disabilities. According to Inland Regional Center, the demand for affordable housing is high in the City. There is a demand for studio and one -bedroom units for persons with disabilities with low and moderate delay issues as well as larger units for especially single parent families with children with autism. 5. Disproportionate Housing Needs a. Describe any disproportionate housing needs experienced by persons with disabilities and by persons with certain types of disabilities. In consulting with the Fair Housing Council, the greatest proportion of fair housing complaints are from persons with disabilities in both the City and the region. Landlords are unaware or unwilling to make requested accommodations, either in modifications to a unit or allowing for service animals. State law requires landlords to make reasonable accommodations, when requested, to their units so that accessibility issues are mitigated. Therefore, the greatest priority in this area continues to be educating landlords and property managers on the rights of persons with disabilities to ensure that discrimination is not limiting their access to housing. 6. Additional Information a. Beyond the HUD -provided data, provide additional relevant information, if any, about disability and access issues in the jurisdiction and region affecting groups with other protected characteristics. The City treats licensed residential care units serving six or fewer residents as single family dwellings permitted by right as part of the zoning ordinance. Facilities serving more than six are similarly permitted by right in high density residential zone districts and are also conditionally permitted in any other residential zone. Table 14 provides data of persons with disabilities by age range (5-17, 18-64, and 65+) for the City and region. The table reflects the greatest numbers of those with disabilities are adults between ages 18 and 64 followed by the elderly. Proportionately, compared to the region, the City has fewer people with disabilities, except for children. Some of this may be because of the large draw of the City's services for the special needs population. This belief was reflected in the community meetings. b. The program participant may also describe other information relevant to its assessment of disability and access issues. No additional information. 7. Disability and Access Issues Contributing Factors Consider the listed factors and any other factors affecting the jurisdiction and region. Identify factors that significantly create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the 37 severity of disability and access issues and the fair housing issues, which are Segregation, RECAPs, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, and Disproportionate Housing Needs. For each contributing factor, note which fair housing issue(s) the selected contributing factor relates to. ❑ Access to proficient schools for persons with disabilities ❑ Access to publicly supported housing for persons with disabilities ❑ Access to transportation for persons with disabilities ❑ Inaccessible government facilities or services ® Inaccessible sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, or other infrastructure ❑ Lack of affordable in -home or community -based supportive services ❑ Lack of affordable, accessible housing in range of unit sizes ❑ Lack of affordable, integrated housing for individuals who need supportive services ❑ Lack of assistance for housing accessibility modifications ❑ Lack of assistance for transitioning from institutional settings to integrated housing ❑ Land use and zoning laws ❑ Lending Discrimination ❑ Location of accessible housing ❑ Occupancy codes and restrictions ❑ Regulatory barriers to providing housing and supportive services for persons with disabilities ❑ State or local laws, policies, or practices that discourage individuals with disabilities from being placed in or living in apartments, family homes, and other integrated settings ® Other: City will prepare and adopt an ADA Transition Plan. E. Fair Housing Enforcement, Outreach Capacity, and Resources Analysis 1. List and summarize any of the following that have not been resolved: A charge or letter of finding from HUD concerning a violation of a civil rights - related law, A cause determination from a substantially equivalent state or local fair housing agency concerning a violation of a state or local fair housing law, a letter of findings issued by or lawsuit filed or joined by the Department of Justice alleging a pattern or practice or systemic violation of a fair housing or civil rights law, or A claim under the False Claims Act related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, or civil rights generally, including an alleged failure to affirmatively further fair housing. In addition to the City's CDBG funding to the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County, the Fair Housing Council received a five year Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP) grant from 2010-2015 for private enforcement, and in 2015 received an additional $270,895 for another three-year grant for that purpose. Under the previous contract, the Council conducted fifteen tests in Temecula. Six of the tests were conducted for lending institutions and nine for rental projects. Two of the cases warranted sending to HUD as civil rights violations. One of those cases was against a lending agent who did not provide an African American all of the loan options that other applicants were provided. The 38 second case was a rental manager who was accused of discriminating against a person with disabilities who was not allowed a support animal. Of the remaining thirteen, seven are pending further testing and six were closed. (For more detail the FHIP investigations, refer to Appendix L.) In 2013, the Fair Housing Council also settled a familial status case. The Council noted that those who have had fair housing complaints filed against them, often voluntarily send new employees to Council training sessions. In addition to the enforcement grant, the Fair Housing Council has applied for an additional $125,000 grant for education and operations which, if approved, would begin in October. According to the Fair Housing Council, the patterns of discrimination are more individualized than systemic. They saw a spike in complaints, particularly against persons with disabilities, during the recession when many realtors turned to rental management. They were not as familiar with rental fair housing laws as they were with sale of property. The greatest priority for the Fair Housing Council in the category is in training and education, especially new real estate agents and property managers. 2. Describe any state or local fair housing laws. What characteristics are protected under each law? The California Fair Employment and Housing Act provides protection from harassment or discrimination based on the following: age, ancestry, color, disability, marital status, medical condition, genetic information, national origin, race, sex, familial status, religion, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, source of income, and arbitrary discrimination. This year the State legislature added primary language, citizenship and immigrant status to the protected class status. 3. Identify any local and regional agencies and organizations that provide fair housing information, outreach, and enforcement, including their capacity and the resources available to them. The City of Temecula contracts with the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County. The City has funded this organization with CDBG since becoming an Entitlement City in 2012. The Fair Housing Council is located 45 miles from Temecula, and unfortunately Fair Housing does not have sufficient funds to locate an office in the Temecula Valley. The Fair Housing Council indicates that, because of the distance, it is difficult to provide the same level of service as with other cities in the County. 4. Additional Information a. Provide additional relevant information, if any, about fair housing enforcement, outreach capacity, and resources in the jurisdiction and region. As described above, the City provides CDBG funds to the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County for landlord tenant services, training and discrimination complaints. During the last fiscal year (July 1, 2015-June 30, 2016), there were calls from fifteen households regarding discrimination issues above the ones described under the FHIP discussion above in Temecula. Of that group, 87% were from White renter households. Most were from households with disabled persons. The City provides fair housing 39 brochures at City counter, public libraries and community centers. Links and information are provided on the City webpage. During that same period, there were 222 calls to the Fair Housing Council regarding landlord -tenant issues. Of those calls, 57% were from White households, 20% from Hispanic households and 17% from Black households. The greatest number of calls pertained to lease and rental terms, notices to vacate and evictions, security deposits, repairs and rent increases. The greatest gap in the City in this category is the provision of affordable housing for new homebuyers and renters. There are a number of issues that the Fair Housing Council has identified: large families have difficulty finding landlords that will rent to them; unreasonable conditions placed on children; homeowners associations have restrictions on service animals for the disabled; rent increases are forcing lower income renters out of the local market; and crime -free restrictions create disparate treatment of minorities. In addition, HUD's fair market rent limits are lower than the average rents in Temecula. It is increasingly difficult for tenants to find units that meet those limitations with their vouchers, as there are an insufficient number of rental units that charge rents at or below HUD's current rental limits. b. The program participant may also include information relevant to programs, actions, or activities to promote fair housing outcomes and capacity. The Fair Housing Council provides training for the Southwest Riverside Realtors Association twice a year. City staff refers residents to the Fair Housing Council and there is a link on the City's website that directs them to the Fair Housing Council's website. 5. Fair Housing Enforcement, Outreach Capacity, and Resources Contributing Factors Consider the listed factors and any other factors affecting the jurisdiction and region. Identify factors that significantly create, contribute to, perpetuate, or increase the severity of fair housing enforcement, outreach capacity, and resources and the fair housing issues, which are Segregation, RECAPS, Disparities in Access to Opportunity, and Disproportionate Housing Needs. For each significant contributing factor, note which fair housing issue(s) the selected contributing factor impacts. ❑ Lack of local private fair housing outreach and enforcement ❑ Lack of local public fair housing enforcement ❑x Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations ❑ Lack of state or local fair housing laws ❑ Unresolved violations of fair housing or civil rights law ❑ Other: 40 V. Fair Housing Goals and Priorities 1. For each fair housing issue, prioritize the identified contributing factors. Justify the prioritization of the contributing factors that will be addressed by the goals set below in Question 2. Give the highest priority to those factors that limit or deny fair housing choice or access to opportunity, or negatively impact fair housing or civil rights compliance. The City has developed four fair housing goals to overcome the two fair housing issues and related contributing factors identified in the AFH analysis. These goals and the respective contributing factors have been prioritized based on feedback from community meetings, surveys, stakeholder interviews, staff, and data analysis. Identified metrics, milestones and timeframes for achievement were chosen specifically to address disparities in access to opportunity and disproportionate housing needs that were identified in the analysis in an effort to preserve Temecula as an inclusive community with integrated living patterns. The goals are listed below, from highest to lowest priority. Goal 1: Amend Zoning Code to promote the development of affordable housing Fair Housing Issue(s): Disproportionate Housing Needs; Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factor 1A: Land use and zoning laws Goal 2: Increase and preserve affordable units for renters and homeowners Fair Housing Issue(s): Disproportionate Housing Needs; Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factor 2A: The availability of affordable units in a range of sizes Contributing Factor 213: Location and type of affordable housing Goal 3: Provide greater access to public facilities and improvements for persons with disabilities Fair Housing Issue(s): Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factor 3A: Inaccessible sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, or other infrastructure Contributing Factor 3B: Inaccessible government facilities or services Goal 4: Provide equal housing opportunities for protected classes Fair Housing Issue(s): Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factor 4A: Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations Contributing Factor 4B: Private discrimination Based on the above goals and contributing factors, metrics, were identified to measure progress over the next five years to address disparities in access to opportunity and disproportionate housing needs while continuing to promote fair housing for its residents. The fair housing issues identified in Temecula, in order of greatest priority, include: 1) Disproportionate Housing Needs; and 2) Disparities in Access to Opportunity. The contributing factors identified for each fair housing issue are ranked in priority order. Identified action items and goals were chosen based on their ability to increase access to opportunity and positively impact fair housing choice for members of protected classes. Priority was given based on feedback from the community, surveys, stakeholder 41 interviews and consultations, staff, data analysis, as well as factors that will have the greatest impact on fair housing choices. Fair Housing Issue 1) Disproportionate Housing Needs Contributing Factors in order of priority: • The availability of affordable units in a range of sizes (Addressed at Goal 2) • Land use and zoning laws (Addressed at Goal 1) Based on data analysis, and community feedback, a lack of affordable housing units in a range of sizes is the highest priority contributing factor in Temecula. Due to the lack of public financial resources because of the dissolution of redevelopment, the City must look to the private sector to construct affordable housing and provide necessary incentives to achieve the highest priority goal of increasing access to affordable housing. Temecula is not alone in this problem — the region and the entire state of California is approaching an affordable housing crisis. In recognition of finite public financing available for affordable housing, the City places a high priority on deploying its available resources and exploring alternative resources during the planning period for this AFH. In 2016, the City issued a request for proposals (RFP) to utilize $12.4 million in remaining Tax Allocation Bond proceeds for the development of affordable housing. The City may entertain and accept more than one proposal for more than one site. In addition to the Tax Allocation Bond proceeds, the City owns sites that may have been considered as part of the City's contribution to the project. In response to the RFP, the City received 20 proposals from 13 developers for eight sites throughout the City. The City expects to hold interviews with potential developers by July 2017; select developers by December 2017; enter into an exclusive negotiating agreement with at least one developer by June 2018; and entitlements to be secured by June 2019. At this time, the City cannot provide the specific number of units to be constructed or rehabbed, but although outside this planning period, the City expects that at least 100 affordable units will be constructed and/or rehabbed using the Tax Allocation Bond proceeds. As part of the process, the City will continue to make specific efforts to encourage the development of affordable housing that increases housing opportunities for residents with special needs. While the City cannot divulge details of the proposals due to the nature of property negotiations and confidentiality, there is a wide range of needs proposed to be addressed including housing for the homeless, veterans, seniors, and persons with special needs. Most proposals include tax credits where at least 30% of the units will be set aside for the very low income (below 30 percent). A maximum of 20% of the units will be affordable between 60 — 80% AMI, and no rents may exceed 80% AMI, in conjunction with the requirements of Senate Bill 341. To ensure meaningful, inclusive access to housing in the community for low- and moderate -income persons of all racial and ethnic backgrounds and special needs populations, the City will modify its land use and zoning laws to adopt and implement an Affordable Housing Overlay program that was included as a recommended program in the City's Housing Element, adopted by City Council in 2014. This new ordinance will create the conditions necessary for increased private -sector affordable housing production in a range of sizes for the general low- and moderate -income populations 42 where the greatest need is. The City will amend Title 17 of the Municipal Code (Zoning Code) to accommodate Temecula's regional housing need for 2,007 affordable units for lower income households, as identified in the Regional Housing Needs Analysis (RHNA). The Housing Element program stipulated that the City will establish an AHO on at least 100 acres. After the establishment of the AHO, sites identified will require: • Minimum densities of 20 units per acre. • 50% of need (1,003 units) will be on sites allowing exclusively residential uses. • Multi -family uses at the densities established under the AHO will be allowed by right, without a conditional use permit. Fair Housing Issue 2) Disparities in Access to Opportunity Contributing Factors in order of priority: • Land use and zoning laws (Addressed at Goal 1) • Location and type of affordable housing (Addressed at Goal 2) • Inaccessible sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, or other infrastructure (Addressed at Goal 3) • Inaccessible government facilities or services (Addressed at Goal 3) • Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations (Addressed at Goal 4) • Private discrimination (Addressed at Goal 4) To address land use and zoning laws to address disparities in access to opportunity, please see the discussion above concerning the Affordable Housing Overlay. To address the location and type of affordable housing, please refer to the discussion in Goal 2. With respect to segregation, it is noteworthy that the City has no R/ECAPs and that the City's dissimilarity index score and mapping all indicate a highly integrated community. The City wishes to emphasize that there is no history of segregation. With that understanding, the City further evaluated mapping to identify areas that may be susceptible to future designation as a RECAP. Through that analysis, it was noted that Census Tract 432.66 and Census Tract 496.00 are approximately 38% Hispanic, compared to other Census Tracts in the City. The City's overall population of Hispanics is 23%. Further, the analysis of disparities in access to opportunity revealed three adjoining Census Tracts in north Temecula, including 432.16, 432.20 and 432.66 that are characterized by higher than expected exposure to poverty (Low Poverty Index scores of 50 or less), given that the Citywide scores ranged from 65.42 to 71.23. None of the 20 proposed developments would be located in or near any of the five Census Tracts cited in the paragraph above. The various potential affordable sites are located throughout the City in Census Tracts 512.00, 432.22, 432.54, and 432.50. While some sites are in the same Census Tracts as existing affordable housing, most potential sites are not located directly adjacent to existing affordable housing sites. Development of new affordable housing is unlikely to result in any new patterns of segregation, or create any new areas of concentration. The City will continue its commitment on affirmatively furthering fair housing and work with developers to prevent any patterns of segregation. To address disproportionate housing needs through the construction of units using the $12.4 million in remaining affordable housing Tax Allocation Bond proceeds, the City shall require that all (100%) marketing plans for above mentioned affordable complexes 43 constructed as a result of the Tax Allocation Bond proceeds will include affirmative outreach methods targeted to protected class individuals including Hispanic and Native American households as well as households with disabilities All (100%) of marketing plans will be reviewed and approved by the City of Temecula Community Development Department prior to sale or leasing implementation. All (100%) affordable developments shall be required to maintain records related to marketing and protected classes and provide annual reports to the City. Marketing plans will be based conceptually on HUD's form 935.2A, the Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan — Multi -Family Housing, where applicable or practical. During the five-year planning period covered by this AFH, none of the City's current affordable housing units are at -risk of converting to market -rate housing. During future planning periods, the City will include efforts to preserve those units at -risk of conversion to market rate as affordable units through the Consolidated Plan. The City conducts and an annual inspection and audit of each of the affordable housing complexes in Temecula. During inspections, critical issues are addressed and resolved. In the previous cycle of the City's Consolidated Plan, the City worked with two affordable housing complexes at risk of converting to market rate. Both complexes successfully extended their term of affordability. During this planning period, the City will continue to partner with Habitat for Humanity for the administration of a Critical Home Repair program. This program focuses on low- income home owners to make repairs addressing disabled access, inadequate kitchen facilities, and/or inadequate plumbing. The third and final phase of construction for the Madera Vista (previously known as Summerhouse) will also be completed during this planning period. This phase includes 30 affordable units. 14 units are moderate income, 7 units are low income and 8 units are very low income. Entitlements are complete for this project. Rancho California Apartments, a 55 unit affordable housing complex, will complete substantial rehabilitation during this AFH cycle. In this project, 43 units are restricted to 60% AMI. 11 will be restricted 50% AMI. (It also includes one manager's unit.) Rancho California recently successfully extended the term of their affordability covenant in the previous Consolidated Plan cycle, and the rehabilitation will further preserve the stock of affordable housing. In November 2015, the City adopted the Uptown Temecula Specific Plan. The area, encompassing 580 acres, is located north of Rancho California Road, west of the 1-15, south of Cherry Street, and east of Diaz Street. Recognizing the demand for housing in the area, the Specific Plan allows up to an additional 3,726 multi -family housing units in the area, in a range of sizes, in a range of affordability levels. The City is currently working with several developers that are proposing housing targets towards special needs populations including seniors and residents with disabilities. One proposed project currently in the entitlement phase, in the south side of the City, near Pechanga Parkway, is proposing 245 multi -family units which will offer options for families with special needs. Options include downstairs bedrooms; flex space, adjacent handicap parking, and more. If approved, the City will process a General Plan Amendment for this project, allowing increased density and expanding our existing 44 housing stock. The City will work with the developer on outreach to potential residents with special needs. The City is also processing a Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment for the proposed Altair project, adjacent to Old Town. If approved, the Altair Specific Plan allows accessory dwelling units and micro units throughout the entire site. Because of their size, accessory dwelling units and micro units are a more affordable option to many segments of the community including seniors, veterans, students, and residents with special needs. These options offer housing units in a range of sizes to the community. Upon buildout, there will be between 870 and 1,750 total dwelling units, subject to financing, the economy, and other market conditions. Other action items the City will complete during the 2017-2021 AFH Cycle include: • Consider proposals for using, when feasible, City -owned or City -controlled land for affordable housing projects. Several City sites, located in Census Tracts 512.00, 432.22, 432.54, and 432.50, were included in the Affordable Housing RFP and it is expected at least one project will utilize this incentive. • Continue to support and promote the County's Mortgage Credit Certificate program as a source for new homebuyer assistance. The City Council approves a resolution affirming the support for this County program every 1 — 2, at the County's request, years and will continue to do so during the planning cycle. • Support and promote the State of California Housing Finance Agency (Ca1HFA) to provide assistance to new homebuyers. • In order to increase funding resources, the City will consider applying for State HOME funds for affordable housing programs such as first time homebuyer, housing rehabilitation or new construction • The City will continue to support the County of Riverside to administer the Section 8 program through annual review of the PHA Plan and issuance of the certification of consistency and to assure sufficient numbers of vouchers for lower income residents in the City and the region. In 2015-16, there were 109 Section 8 vouchers utilized in the City of Temecula. Community outreach and consultations suggest that demand for vouchers is quite high; however, demand exceeds the supply of Section 8 units within the City. Temecula will continue to work with the County of Riverside to educate property owners on the Section 8 program. To address inaccessible sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, or other infrastructure as well as inaccessible government facilities or services, the City will implement the metrics discussed below that are a part of Goal 3. To make it possible for residents to fully avail themselves of all public facilities, services, and infrastructure in the City as a means of promoting access to all opportunities afforded in the community, the City has recently identified improvements that can be made to public improvements and facilities, such as the replacement of sidewalks. Old Town and the adjacent area have over 500 affordable units. Old Town is in a CDBG Eligible Census Tract, 432.15. There are several sections of sidewalk needed for safe access to public facilities, parks, and a grocery store. The City funded two sections of the construction of new sidewalks in Old Town in the 2012-2016 Consolidated Plan cycle. 45 The Ynez Road sidewalk improvements will install missing sections of sidewalk to connect residents using the bus to access mainstream services offered at the Riverside County Offices located at 41000 County Center Drive. Residents, including those with disabilities, use this route to access services such as the mental health clinic, substance abuse program, WIC program and County courts. To help the City ensure that all such facilities posing barriers to residents are addressed, the City will complete and adoption of an ADA Transition Plan. The ADA Plan is expected to be adopted by December 31, 2018 and identify accessibility issues at public facilities including The assessment will include 38 City parks, three trail systems, four tennis/basketball courts, three swimming pools, 20 public facilities, four fire stations, 110 signalized intersections, 95 bus stops, and 310 miles of roadways with ADA ramps. Approximately 587 locations will be analyzed. Both City Hall and the Old Town Police Substation were constructed in 2010 and are ADA compliant. Once the ADA Transition Plan is updated, those accessibility needs shall be prioritized for funding. Each deficiency will be evaluated based on the level of inaccessibility, funding availability, number of persons affected, and priorities established. The City typically budgets one accessibility infrastructure project with CDBG funds per year. Other projects may be undertaken as part of the City's Capital Improvement Program. The City will include a high priority Strategic Plan goal in the 2017-2021 Consolidated Plan to use CDBG funds to upgrade the City's infrastructure and public facilities to provide accessibility for those with disabilities. An average of one accessibility project will be constructed each year with CDBG funds, with an average allocation of $100,000, based on level CDBG funding during the planning cycle. In the City's proposed 2017-18 CDBG Annual Action Plan, $150,000 will be allocated for the construction of a new sidewalk on Ynez Road that serves several bus lines and County of Riverside social services, subject to level CDBG funding throughout the entire planning period. This segment will complete a critical connection between regional bus lines and a regional job center (Promenade Mall) and County services. In a developer -driven project, upgrades to Pala Park will be constructed to improve accessibility, including 4 additional disabled parking spaces, truncated domes, and a new playground with approximately 7 play structures designed to be all inclusive, that are designed to provide access to those with special needs. During this AFH cycle, the City will also complete the construction of the new playground at Sam Hicks Park, utilizing a total of $350,000 in CDBG funding for an ADA accessible play structure, and two ADA compliant ramps. The park is located in a CDBG eligible Census Tract (432.15) that serves many low income families. The analysis in the AFH has demonstrated that there is an ongoing need to provide fair housing education, outreach and enforcement, especially as it pertains to the special needs community — particularly for persons with disabilities. At the local, state and national level, discrimination on the basis of disability is the leading basis for fair housing discrimination cases. According to consultation with the City's fair housing service provider, the lack of knowledge on fair housing issues amongst property owners and landlords continues to be the primary reason for discrimination complaints against persons with disabilities in Temecula and the region. This denies persons with disabilities the right to avail themselves of housing opportunities in the City or the right 46 to remain housed in place when, for example, a landlord refuses a disability -related modification. To address the contributing factor of lack of resources for fair housing organizations, the City will provide approximately 12% of public service funds from CDBG to a fair housing service provider to provide outreach, education and assistance enforcing fair housing laws — particularly those protecting the rights of disabled residents. To further supplement resources for fair housing organizations and actively participate in addressing private discrimination, the City will increase public awareness of accessibility and fair housing requirements by inviting representatives of the building, banking, real estate, and rental housing industries to one annual workshop hosted by the City of Temecula and fair housing providers. Invitations will be extended to 25 frequent developers, 50 members of the local real estate community from the City's Temecula Trekkers program, and all 13 affordable housing complexes in the City. Additionally, the City will increase support for fair housing training and education by adding the most current fair housing information on the City's website. The City will also distribute and replenish the supply of fair housing materials, including literature concerning reasonable accommodation / modification rights and responsibilities at five City facilities including the Temecula Community Center, City Hall, the Mary Phillips Senior Center, Ronald H. Roberts Library, and the Community Recreation Center. Furthermore, the City, in conjunction with the Regional Homeless Alliance, will host three different panels of representatives from organizations such as the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County and the Riverside County Housing Authority to train 25 local homelessness and affordable housing advocates on fair housing issues and affordable housing issues, particularly those affecting residents with disabilities. 2. For each fair housing issue with significant contributing factors identified in Question 1, set one or more goals. Explain how each goal is designed to overcome the identified contributing factor and related fair housing issue(s). For goals designed to overcome more than one fair housing issue, explain how the goal will overcome each issue and the related contributing factors. For each goal, identify metrics and milestones for determining what fair housing results will be achieved, and indicate the timeframe for achievement. In the initial submission of the Assessment of Fair Housing on October 3, 2015, the City listed nine contributing factors with corresponding goals. The subsequent resubmission of the AFH on January 14, 2017 resulted in a consolidation of goals and contributing factors that were identified in the analysis of the AFH. Below is a detailed analysis on the consolidation of the City's initial goals and contributing factors from subsequent submissions. Original Goal 1: Increase the affordable housing stock in the City. o Change: Tied into Goal #2 in resubmission. Original Contributing Factor: Location and type of affordable housing. o Change: Removed. It was not identified as an original contributing factor in the AFH analysis. Original Milestone: Adopt an Affordable Housing Overlay o Change: Moved to Goal #1 — Amend zoning ordinance to promote the development of affordable housing. 47 Original Milestone: Enter into an agreement with potential developers to allocate $12.4 million in Tax Allocation Bond proceeds. o Change: Updated verbiage to include more specific, measurable metrics. Associated with Goal #2 — Increase and preserve affordable housing units for renters and homeowners • Original Goal 2: Partner with local organizations for the provision of services to address homelessness. o Change: Per a recommendation from HUD, the City has chosen to focus on goals associated with jurisdictional programs, as opposed to regional programs. This allows the City to have more control and focus on the outcomes. As such, the City can provide more specific metrics. The City will continue to partner with local organizations for the provision so services to address homelessness. • Original Contributing factor: High housing costs in region; distance from social services; lack of homeless shelters in Southwestern Riverside County o Change: Removed from matrix. This contributing factor was not identified in the AFH analysis. Relevant metrics and milestones are included in the discussion. • Original Metrics, Milestones for Original Goal #2 are related to partnerships and regional organizations. Per HUD's guidance, they remain in the analysis as examples of efforts the City is currently participating in to affirmatively further fair housing. • Original Goal 3: Increase homeownership opportunities in the City. o Change: Removed. Contributing factor was not identified as a contributing factor in the original AFH analysis. Repetitive of other contributing factors. • Original Contributing factor: High housing costs in the region; location and availability of affordable new and existing homes. o Change: Modified into new Contributing Factor 2A. • Original Metrics, Milestone, for Original Goal #3: o Changes: Action items listed were regional programs that the City supports. The City's participation is discussed in the AFH analysis. Per HUD's recommendation, the City's goals and milestones focus on City programs. • Original Goal 4: Increase accessibility to public facilities. o Change: New Goal #3. • Original Metrics, Milestones for Goal 4: Adopt an ADA Transition Plan o Change: Have been updated to reflect more specific and measurable metrics. Reflected in new Goal #3. • Original Metrics, Milestones for Goal 4: Continue to increase public awareness and educate representatives of the housing industry on ADA requirements by holding workshops. o Change: Metric more specifically defined in matrix below. • Original Metrics, Milestones for Goal 4: Continue to upgrade the City's infrastructure to make them more accessible for those with disabilities. o Change: Improved action item to be more specific and measurable. • Original Goal 5: Support the Fair Housing Council on education on fair housing laws. 48 o Change: Modified and included in new Goal #4. • Contributing Factor: Landlords and property managers have a lack of knowledge on fair housing issues. o Change: Removed because it was not identified as a contributing factor in the original AFH analysis. • Original Goal #6: Preserve affordable rental housing. o Change: Combined into new Goal #2. • Original Metrics, Milestones for Original Goal 6: Continue to promote the preservation of affordable housing projects at -risk of converting to market rate housing. o Change: Included in the discussion of Goal 2. However, no affordability covenants are set to expire during this planning period, so no metrics could be defined. Therefore, it was removed as a specific goal. The City will continue to promote the preservation of affordable housing. • Original Metrics, Milestones for Original Goal 6: Continue to support the County of Riverside to administer the Section 8 program. o Change: Per HUD's technical assistance, the City focused on jurisdictional programs for inclusion in metrics and milestones. This milestone is discussed and elaborated upon in the discussion for Goal #2. • Original Metrics, Milestones for Original Goal 6: Continue to use, when feasible, City -owned and City -controlled land for affordable housing projects. o Change: Moved into the discussion of Goal 2. The City will still continue this program; however, it depends heavily upon developer demand and market forces. • Original Goal #7: Increase housing choices for those with special needs and disabilities. o Change: Modified and combined into new Goal #2. • Original Contributing Factor: Increased demand of affordable housing for seniors and persons with disabilities. o Change: Modified and combined into new Goal #2. It was not listed as a specific contributing factor in the original AFH analysis. • Original Metrics and Milestone Goal 7: Continue to promote housing design standards that improve accessibility for those with special needs. o Change: Included in the discussion for Goal #2. The City will continue to work with developers on this action item. • Original Goal #8: Increase access and usage of public transportation. o Change: Removed. It was not tied to any contributing factor identified in the AFH analysis. • Original Contributing Factor: Demand for public transportation. o Change: Removed. It was not identified as a contributing factor in the AFH analysis. • Original Metrics and Milestones for Goal 8 o Change: Removed. They did not tie to any contributing factor identified in the AFH analysis. • Original Goal #9: Improve the environmental health of neighborhoods. 49 o Change: Removed. It was not tied to any contributing factor identified in the AFH analysis. Original Contributing Factor: Proximity of the 1-15 freeway and major arterial corridors. o Change: Removed. It was not identified as a contributing factor identified in the analysis. Original Metrics and Milestones Goal 9 o Change: Removed. They did not tie to any contributing factor identified in the AFH analysis. Subsequent to the January 14, 2017 resubmission, HUD convened a technical assistance conference call on February 2, 2017 to discuss the need for more well-defined metrics, milestones and timeframes. On February 9, 2017, an excerpt of the Executive Summary and the Goals Section was emailed to Arturo Cardenas, Equal Opportunity Specialist in the L.A. Field Office. Subsequently, HUD sent correspondence of withdrawal of the AFH on February 10, 2017, and followed this correspondence with a Technical Assistance letter dated February 14, 2017, the City made further revisions to the four goals to more closely align the goals with the HUD -defined fair housing issues and the contributing factors identified in the AFH. After three rounds of technical assistance and guidance from HUD, the following matrix represents the final goals designed to overcome the contributing factors to fair housing issues identified in the preceding sections. The City of Temecula wishes to express its sincere appreciation to HUD Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity staff in the Los Angeles local field office, the San Francisco regional office and in Washington D.C. at HUD Headquarters for their efforts and contributions to this AFH. 50 Goal Contributing Factors Fair Housing Issues Metrics, Milestones, and Timeframe for Achievement Responsible Program Participant(s) • Adopt an Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) Program by Amending Title 17 of the Municipal Code (Zoning Code) to accommodate Temecula's regional housing need for 2,007 affordable units for lower 1. Amend income households. The City will establish an AHO on Zoning Code Disproportionate at least 100 acres. After the establishment of the AHO, to promote Housing Needs sites identified will require: the 1A: Land use and zoning - minimum densities of 20 units per acre City of Temecula development laws Disparities in - 50% of need (1,003 units) will be on sites allowing of affordable Access to exclusively residential uses housing Opportunity - multi -family uses at the densities established under the AHO will be allowed by right, without a conditional use permit Affordable Housing Overlay expected adoption by City Council by June 30, 2018. (CF IA) Discussion: The analysis of disproportionate housing needs revealed a disproportionate housing burden for Hispanic and Native American households. According to Table 9, 51.52 percent of the City's households are experiencing housing problems. There is a disparity in this category because Hispanic households (62.24 percent) and Native American households (80.90 percent) experience housing problems at a rate that is 10 percentage points higher than all households. Only 47.37% of the White households in Temecula experience a housing problem. None of the racial or ethnic groups experienced a disproportionate level of severe housing problems. HUD -defined housing problems include housing cost burden (defined as paying more than 30% of income for monthly housing costs including utilities), overcrowding, lack of a complete kitchen and lack of plumbing. Based on consultation and other data, the most prominent housing problem is cost burden. Additionally, consultation with the Inland Regional Center revealed a high need for affordable housing for developmentally disabled adults as well as housing appropriate for families with autistic children. The analysis of disparities in access to opportunity revealed three adjoining Census Tracts in north Temecula, including 432.16, 432.20 and 432.66 that are characterized by higher than expected exposure to poverty (Low Poverty Index scores of 50 or less), given that the Citywide scores ranged from 65.42 to 71.23. 51 The adoption of an Affordable Housing Overlay Ordinance is the City's highest priority in the AFH because it is a critical first step toward meaningfully addressing the factors that contribute to disproportionate housing burden and disparities in access to opportunity for protected classes including Hispanic households, Native American households and households that include person(s) with disabilities. First, the AHO will create the conditions for the development of new affordable housing units in a range of sizes including micro units and efficiencies that may be beneficial to developmentally disabled adults. Second, the AHO will remove barriers to affordable housing development by allowing multi -family uses at higher densities by right without a conditional use permit. This will promote the development of additional affordable units needed to reduce the number of cost -burdened Hispanic and Native American households. Third, the AHO will establish this zone on at least 100 acres throughout the City to promote inclusive living patterns with respect to the location of affordable housing outside of areas with relatively higher exposure to poverty. The AHO sets the stage for the accomplishment of the metrics included in Goal 2. In 2014, the City Council approved and the City implemented an updated Housing Element. The Housing Element included a program to amend the Temecula Municipal Code with an Affordable Housing Overlay program (AHO), which will accommodate Temecula's regional housing need for 2,007 affordable units for lower income households, as determined by Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) Regional Housing Needs Analysis (RHNA). The City will establish an AHO on at least 100 acres. The ordinance will allow transitional and supportive housing by right in certain areas, identify incentives for affordable and senior housing, and strengthen the City's density bonus program. The strengthened density bonus program will be calculated using the available maximum density of 30 units per acre under the AHO, rather than any allowable base density of the underlying zone. Incentives also include planning application priority and fast tracking. After the establishment of the AHO, sites identified will require: • minimum densities of 20 units per acre • 50% of need (1,003 units) will be on sites allowing exclusively residential uses • multi -family uses at the densities established under the AHO will be allowed by right, without a conditional use permit The Affordable Housing Overlay is expected to be successfully adopted by City Council by June 30, 2018. The City has a long history that demonstrates its support of affordable housing. As noted above, the City Council approved the Housing Element in 2014 that contained the Affordable Housing Overlay program. The City has not previously tried to adopt an Affordable Housing Overlay, and is optimistic at the AHO's ability to provide incentives at developing affordable housing. Through the use of redevelopment funds, the City has assisted 600 affordable housing units throughout the community. Madera Vista, previously known as Summerhouse, was publicly opposed by many members of the community. Recognizing the need for affordable housing, the project was ultimately approved by the City Council, and is a very successful example of affordable housing in the City. The public has embraced the development, and there have been no issues since its approval. Madera Vista will complete its third and final phase of development during this Consolidated Plan cycle. The AHO is expected to be as successful as the City's other numerous affordable housing projects. During the five-year planning period covered by this AFH, none of the City's current affordable housing units are at -risk of converting to market -rate housing. During future planning periods, the City will include efforts to preserve those units at -risk of conversion to market rate as affordable units 52 through the Consolidated Plan. The City conducts and an annual inspection and audit of each of the affordable housing complexes in the City. During inspections, critical issues are addressed and resolved. In the previous cycle of the City's Consolidated Plan, the City worked with two affordable housing complexes at risk of converting to market rate. Both complexes successfully extended their term of affordability. The City is currently working with several developers that are proposing housing targets towards special needs populations including residents with disabilities. One proposed project currently in the entitlement phase, in the south side of the City, near Pechanga Parkway, in Census Tract 432.50, is proposing 245 multi -family units which will offer options for families with special needs. Options include downstairs bedrooms; flex space, adjacent handicap parking, and more. If approved, the City will process a General Plan Amendment for this project, allowing increased density and expanding our existing housing stock. The City will work with the developer on outreach to potential residents with special needs. The City is also processing a Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment for the proposed Altair project, adjacent to Old Town. If approved, the Altair Specific Plan allows accessory dwelling units and micro units throughout the entire site. Because of their size, accessory dwelling units and micro units are a more affordable option to many segments of the community including seniors, veterans, students, and residents with special needs. These options offer housing units in a range of sizes to the community. Upon buildout, there will be between 870 and 1,750 total dwelling units, subject to financing, the economy, and other market conditions. 53 Goal Contributing Factors Fair Housing Issues Metrics, Milestones, and Timeframe for Achievement Responsible Program Participant(s) • Enter into an exclusive negotiating agreement with a developer to allocate $12.4 million in remaining affordable housing Tax Allocation Bond proceeds to create or rehabilitate an estimated 100 affordable housing units, subject to market forces. The selection process includes priority consideration for proposals that incorporate housing units for persons with disabilities. Based on a preliminary review of the siting for these proposals, none are located in the three Census Tracts identified as having relatively high exposure to poverty. 2. Increase Interviews with developers expected by July 2017; and 2A: The availability Disproportionate Selection of developer to occur by December 2017; preserve of affordable units in Housing Needs Exclusive Negotiating Agreement by June 2018; affordable a range of sizes Entitlements to be secured by June 2019. Construction to City of Temecula units for Disparities in begin by June 2020. Estimates are subject to financing, renters and home 2B: Location and type of affordable Access to property negotiations, market demand, and economic owners housing Opportunity forces. (CF 2A and CF 2B) • All (100%) marketing plans for above mentioned affordable complexes constructed as a result of the Tax Allocation Bond proceeds will include affirmative outreach methods targeted to protected class individuals including Hispanic and Native American households as well as households that include persons with disabilities. Units advertised to contain specific accessibility features shall be prioritized for occupancy by persons identifying themselves as disabled. At least 50 units will benefit the aforementioned protected classes identified as having disproportionate housing needs. All (100%) of 54 marketing plans will be reviewed and approved by the City of Temecula Community Development Department prior to sale or leasing implementation. All (100%) affordable developments shall be required to maintain records related to marketing and protected classes and provide annual reports to the City. Marketing plans will be based conceptually on HUD's form 935.2A, the Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan — Multi - Family Housing, where applicable or practical. (Completion date subject to completion of affordable housing construction and commencement of sale or leasing. Expected June 2021) (CF 2A and CF 213) • Require marketing materials for any new City of Temecula -assisted affordable housing project to be made available in Spanish. (July 1, 2017) (CF 2A) • Translate City Affordable Housing Brochure in Spanish to promote meaningful access to affordable housing. (July 1, 2017) (CF 2A) • Continue the partnership with Habitat for Humanity for the administration of a Critical Home Repair program to provide funding for at least 30 low income home owners to make repairs addressing disabled access, inadequate kitchen facilities, and/or inadequate plumbing. (Complete by June 2022) (CF 2A) • Complete construction of Phase III of Madera Vista (formerly Summerhouse), which includes 30 affordable units. 14 units are moderate income, 7 units are low income and 8 units are very low income. (Entitlements are complete; Building permits to be issued by September 2017; Construction to be completed by September 2019) (CF 2A) 55 • Complete substantial rehabilitation of Rancho California Apartments, 55 unit affordable housing complex. 43 units are restricted to 60% AMI. 11 will be restricted 50% AMI. (One manager's unit.) (Rehab has begun. Expected completion date — March 2018.) (CF 2A) Discussion: The analysis of disproportionate housing needs revealed a disproportionate housing burden for Hispanic and Native American households. According to Table 9, 51.52 percent of the City's households are experiencing housing problems. There is a disparity in this category because Hispanic households (62.24 percent) and Native American households (80.90 percent) experience housing problems at a rate that is 10 percentage points higher than all households. Only 47.37% of the White households in Temecula experience a housing problem. None of the racial or ethnic groups experienced a disproportionate level of severe housing problems. HUD -defined housing problems include housing cost burden (defined as paying more than 30% of income for monthly housing costs including utilities), overcrowding, lack of a complete kitchen and lack of plumbing. Based on consultation and other data, the most prominent housing problem is cost burden. Additionally, consultation with the Inland Regional Center revealed a high need for affordable housing for developmentally disabled adults as well as housing appropriate for families with autistic children. The analysis of disparities in access to opportunity revealed three adjoining Census Tracts in north Temecula, including 432.16, 432.20 and 432.66 that are characterized by higher than expected exposure to poverty (Low Poverty Index scores of 50 or less) given that the citywide scores ranged from 65.42 to 71.23. The deployment of Tax Allocation Bond proceeds to develop 100 affordable housing units will address disproportionate housing needs by increasing the number of affordable units in a range of sizes, which when combined with affirmative marketing efforts, will help to alleviate disproportionate 56 housing needs for Hispanic and Native American households. Preliminary evaluation of proposals received indicates that none of the proposed projects are located within the three Census Tracts in north Temecula exhibiting higher than expected exposure to poverty as discussed above. As a result, this metric will facilitate access to opportunity and promote economically balanced living patterns. To improve access to publicly supportive and publicly subsidized housing, the City issued an RFP in February 2016 to allocate $12.4 million in remaining Tax Allocation bond proceeds and possibly also utilize City -owned or City -controlled land for the development of affordable housing. The RFP specified that interested developers were required to address one or more housing needs in the community: 1) Special Needs; 2) Veterans; 3) Seniors; 4) Housing First / Transitional / Supportive and/or 5) Other Needs. The City is currently evaluating 20 proposals, but has not made any commitments of funds or land to a specific project. The City expects to hold interviews with potential developers by July 2017; select developers by December 2017; enter into an exclusive negotiating agreement with at least one developer by June 2018; and entitlements to be secured by June 2019. At this time, the City cannot provide the specific number of units to be constructed or rehabbed, but although outside this planning period, the City expects that at least 100 affordable units will be constructed using the Tax Allocation Bond proceeds. Estimates are subject to financing, property negotiations, market demand, and economic forces. As part of the process, the City will continue to make specific efforts to encourage the development of affordable housing that increases housing opportunities for residents with disabilities. While the City cannot divulge details of the proposals due to the nature of property negotiations and confidentiality, the proposals seek to address a wide range of housing options including housing for persons with disabilities. Developers were required to identify a service provider that would provide services to targeted groups. Most proposals include tax credits where at least 30% of the units will be set aside for the very low income (below 30 percent). A maximum of 20% of the units will be affordable between 60 — 80% AMI, and no rents may exceed 80% AMI, in conjunction with the requirements of Senate Bill 341. All (100%) marketing plans for above mentioned affordable complexes constructed as a result of the Tax Allocation Bond proceeds will include affirmative outreach methods targeted to protected class individuals including Hispanic households, Native American households and households that include persons with disabilities. All (100%) of marketing plans will be reviewed and approved by the City of Temecula Community Development Department prior to sale or leasing implementation. All (100%) affordable developments shall be required to maintain records related to marketing and protected classes and provide annual reports to the City. Marketing plans will be based conceptually on HUD's form 935.2A, the Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan — Multi -Family Housing, where applicable or practical. Marketing plans will included, at a minimum, information on targeted marketing activity, evaluation of marketing activities, fair housing, and staff training. Although the City has no R/ECAPs, the City has noticed pockets of higher populations of certain races and ethnicities. It is noteworthy that none of the 20 proposed developments would be located in or near Census Tract 432.66 and Census Tract 496.00, which are approximately 38% Hispanic, compared to other Census Tracts in the City. The City's overall Hispanic population is 23%. Several Census Tracts reflect increases of Hispanic 57 residency that are significantly higher than in other areas of the City. The City's overall Hispanic population is increasing, while Whites/Non-Hispanic is decreasing. Although these trends exist, the City wishes to emphasize that there is no history of segregation. The various potential affordable sites are located throughout the City. Most potential sites are not located near existing affordable housing sites. Through this process, the City will continue to promote an inclusive, integrated community. To further address disproportionate housing needs and promote access to opportunity through the creation of affordable units in a range of sizes and in locations that promote access to opportunity, the third and final phase of construction for the Madera Vista complex, formerly known as Summerhouse, will be completed during this planning period. This phase includes 30 affordable units - 14 units will be moderate income, 7 units will be low income, and 8 units will be very low income. Entitlements are complete for this project. According to the Riverside County draft PHA Plan, 7 of the units will include project -based voucher assistance. Additionally, Rancho California Apartments, a 55 unit affordable housing complex, will complete substantial rehabilitation during this AFH cycle. In this project, 43 units are restricted to 60% AMI. 11 will be restricted 50% AMI. (It also includes one manager's unit.) Rancho California recently successfully extended the term of their affordability covenant in the previous Consolidated Plan cycle, and the rehabilitation will further preserve the stock of affordable housing. Other City of Temecula Initiatives to Generally Promote Affordable Housing: To address housing needs for homeless and those at -risk of homelessness in the region, the City continues to explore and evaluate partnership opportunities with the Riverside County Continuum of Care (CoQ for the provision of services for the homeless in southwestern Riverside County. The City continues to take a lead in the Regional Homeless Alliance, work with other local jurisdictions, the Riverside County Sherriff's Department and Homeless Outreach Team, and local nonprofits. The City understands the importance of collaboration with a wide array of organizations throughout the community and County to address a regional issue. The City negotiates with developers requesting zone changes to provide units to assure that those with special needs are met. A recent example was a 245-unit multi -family residential development on the south side of town near Temecula Parkway, where the developer will provide options for families with special needs. While dependent on the private sector to propose multi -family projects, the City will continue to create housing opportunities for persons with disability. The City will explore other action items with regional and County organizations during the 2017-2021 AFH Cycle. Because these are not all City programs, the City has limited control over the metrics and the outcomes of the programs. However, it is important to recognize the broader effort of actions intended to affirmatively further fair housing. These actions include: 58 • Consider proposals for using, when feasible, City -owned or City -controlled land for affordable housing projects. Several City sites were included in the Affordable Housing RFP and it is expected at least one project will utilize this incentive. • Continue to support and promote the County's Mortgage Credit Certificate program as a source for new homebuyer assistance. The City Council approves a resolution affirming the support for this County program every 1 — 2 years, as the County requests, and will continue to do so during the planning cycle. • Support and promote the State of California Housing Finance Agency (Ca1HFA) to provide assistance to new homebuyers. • In order to increase funding resources, the City will consider applying for State HOME funds for affordable housing programs such as first time homebuyer, housing rehabilitation or new construction. If the City is successful in securing funds for these programs, all (100%) marketing plans will include affirmative outreach methods targeted to protected class individuals. All (100%) of marketing plans will be reviewed and approved by the City prior to implementation to assure there is no discrimination or barriers to fair housing. All (100%) affordable complexes will be required to keep metrics related to marketing and protected classes and provide data to the City. No protected classes will be discriminated against. At least 50% of the applicants that will benefit will include protected classes such as seniors, female heads of households, families with children, disabled, veterans, and ethnic groups. Marketing plans will be based off of HUD form 935.2A, the Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan — Multi -Family Housing, where applicable. Marketing plans will included, at a minimum, information on targeted marketing activity, evaluation of marketing activities, fair housing, and staff training. • The City will continue to support the County of Riverside to administer the Section 8 program through annual review of the PHA Plan and issuance of the certification of consistency and to assure sufficient numbers of vouchers for lower income residents in the City and the region. In 2015-16, there were 109 Section 8 vouchers utilized in the City of Temecula. Community outreach and consultations suggest that demand for vouchers is quite high, and as a result, demand exceeds the supply of Section 8 units within the City. Temecula will continue to work with the County of Riverside to educate property owners on the Section 8 program. 59 Fair Housing Metrics, Milestones, and Timeframe for Achievement Responsible Goal Contributing Factors Issues Program Participant(s) • Adopt an ADA Transition Plan to evaluate public facilities to ensure equal access for persons with disabilities. The assessment will include 38 city parks, three trail systems, four tennis/basketball courts, three swimming pools, 20 public facilities, four fire stations, 110 signalized intersections, 95 bus stops and 310 miles of roadways with ADA ramps. (Adopt Plan by December 31, 2018) (CF 3A) • Include a high priority Strategic Plan goal in the 2017-2021 Consolidated Plan to use CDBG funds to 3. Provide 3A: Inaccessible upgrade the City's infrastructure and public facilities greater access sidewalks, pedestrian to provide accessibility for those with disabilities. to public crossings, or other Disparities in An average of one accessibility project will be facilities and infrastructure Access to constructed each year with CDBG funds, with an City of Temecula improvements for persons A. 3B: Inaccessible Opportunity average allocation of $100,000, based on level with government facilities CDBG funding during the planning cycle. (Con Plan disabilities or services adopted by May 15, 2017. Allocation adopted annually by June 30.) (CF 3B) • In the 2017-18 CDBG Annual Action Plan, allocate $150,000 for the construction of a new sidewalk on Ynez Road that serves several bus lines and County of Riverside social services, subject to level CDBG funding throughout the entire planning period. (Plan adopted by May 15, 2017; Construction completed by December 31, 2018) (CF3A and 313) • Construct accessibility upgrades at Pala Park located in Census Tract 432.50, including 4 additional disabled parking spaces, truncated domes, and a new playground with approximately 7 play structures designed to be all inclusive and provide access to those with special needs. (Construction completed by January 2019). (CF 3A) Complete the construction of the new playground at Sam Hicks Park located in Census Tract 512.00, utilizing a total of $350,000 in CDBG funding for an ADA accessible play structure, and two ADA compliant ramps. (Construction completed by December 31, 2017). (CF 3A) Discussion: To promote meaningful access to opportunity for disabled residents in the community, the City of Temecula is committed to providing greater access to public facilities and improvements as well as government facilities for persons with disabilities. According to Table 1, the largest disabled population are those who are ambulatory (3.83%), followed by those with cognitive difficulty (3.54%), independent living difficulty (2.90%) and those with hearing loss (2.67%). To make it possible for residents to fully avail themselves of all public facilities, services, and infrastructure in the City as a means of promoting access to all opportunities afforded in the community, the City has recently identified improvements that can be made to public improvements and facilities, such as the replacement of sidewalks. Old Town and the adjacent area have over 500 affordable units. Old Town is in a CDBG Eligible Census Tract, 432.15. There are several sections of sidewalk needed for safe access to public facilities, parks, and a grocery store. The City funded two sections of the construction of new sidewalks in Old Town in the 2012-2016 Consolidated Plan cycle. The Ynez Road sidewalk improvements will install missing sections of sidewalk to connect residents using the bus to access mainstream services offered at the Riverside County Offices located at 41000 County Center Drive. Residents, including those with disabilities, use this route to access services such as the mental health clinic, substance abuse program, WIC program and county courts. To help the City ensure that all such facilities posing barriers to residents are addressed, the City will complete and adoption of an ADA Transition Plan. The ADA Plan is expected to be adopted by December 31, 2018 and identify accessibility issues at public facilities including The assessment will include 38 City parks, three trail systems, four tennis/basketball courts, three swimming pools, 20 public facilities, four fire stations, 110 signalized intersections, 95 bus stops, and 310 miles of roadways with ADA ramps. Approximately 587 locations will be analyzed. Both City Hall and the Old Town Police Substation were constructed in 2010 and are ADA compliant. Once the ADA Transition Plan is updated, those accessibility needs shall be prioritized for funding. Each deficiency will be evaluated based on the level of inaccessibility, funding availability, number of persons affected, and priorities established. The City typically budgets one accessibility infrastructure project with CDBG funds per year. Other projects may be undertaken as part of the City's Capital Improvement Program. 61 The City will include a high priority Strategic Plan goal in the 2017-2021 Consolidated Plan to use CDBG funds to upgrade the City's infrastructure and public facilities to provide accessibility for those with disabilities. An average of one accessibility project will be constructed each year with CDBG funds, with an average allocation of $100,000, based on level CDBG funding during the planning cycle. In the City's proposed 2017-18 CDBG Annual Action Plan, $150,000 will be allocated for the construction of a new sidewalk on Ynez Road that serves several bus lines and County of Riverside social services, subject to level CDBG funding throughout the entire planning period. This segment will complete a critical connection between regional bus lines and a regional job center (Promenade Mall) and County services. In a developer -driven project, upgrades to Pala Park will be constructed to improve accessibility, including 4 additional disabled parking spaces, truncated domes, and a new playground with approximately 7 play structures designed to be all inclusive, that are designed to provide access to those with special needs. During this AFH cycle, the City will also complete the construction of the new playground at Sam Hicks Park, utilizing a total of $350,000 in CDBG funding for an ADA accessible play structure, and two ADA compliant ramps. The park is located in a CDBG eligible Census Tract (432.15) that serves many low income families. As it has done in the past, the City will continue to work with the community to establish priorities and needs for accessibility upgrades at City facilities. 62 Goal Contributing Factors Fair Housing Issues Metrics, Milestones, and Timeframe for Achievement Responsible Program Participant(s) • Annually provide approximately 12% of public service funds from CDBG to a fair housing service provider to provide outreach, education and assistance enforcing fair housing laws — particularly those protecting the rights of disabled residents. (Annually by June 30) (CF 4A) • Increase public awareness of accessibility and fair housing requirements by inviting representatives of the building, banking, real estate, and rental housing industries to one annual workshop hosted by the City of Temecula and fair housing providers. Invitations 4. Provide 4A: Lack of resources for will be extended to 25 frequent developers, uent develo 50 q p equal housing fair housing agencies and Disparities in members of the local real estate community from the opportunities organizations (CF 4A) Access to City's Temecula Trekkers program, and all 13 City of Temecula for protected A. APrivate Opportunity affordable housing complexes in the City. (Annually classes. discrimination disc by June 30). (CF 4A and 4B) • Increase support for fair housing training and education by adding the most current fair housing information on the City's website. (Annually by June 30) (CF 4A and 413) • The City will distribute and replenish the supply of fair housing materials, including literature concerning reasonable accommodation / modification rights and responsibilities at five City facilities including the Temecula Community Center, City Hall, the Mary Phillips Senior Center, Ronald H. Roberts Library, and the Community Recreation Center. (Monthly, by the 30' day of each month) (CF 4A and 413) 63 The City, in conjunction with the Regional Homeless Alliance, will host three different panels of representatives from organizations such as the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County and the Riverside County Housing Authority to train 25 local homelessness and affordable housing advocates on fair housing issues and affordable housing issues, particularly those affecting residents with disabilities. (June 2022) (CF 4A and 4B) Discussion: The fourth goal is to provide equal housing opportunities for disabled residents. At the local, state and national level, discrimination on the basis of disability is the leading basis for fair housing discrimination cases. According to consultation with the City's fair housing service provider, the lack of knowledge on fair housing issues amongst property owners and landlords continues to be the primary reason for discrimination complaints against persons with disabilities in Temecula and the region. This denies persons with disabilities the right to avail themselves of housing opportunities in the City or the right to remain housed in place when, for example, a landlord refuses a disability -related modification. To address this denial of access to housing opportunities that affects Temecula residents with disabilities each year, the City will ensure the provision of a robust fair housing program each fiscal year that promotes outreach and education via multiple modes of communication. This effort will include annual appropriations of funds to a nonprofit fair housing service provider with a specific scope of work to address the housing rights of residents with disabilities. Further, the City will supplement the limited financial and staffing resources of the nonprofit fair housing service provider by convening representatives of promote awareness by convening an annual workshop to include the building, banking, real estate, and rental housing industries for the purpose of providing fair housing education. Invitations will be extended to 25 frequent developers, 50 members of the local real estate community that graduated from the City's Temecula Trekkers program, and all 13 affordable housing complexes in the City. The property managers of the 13 affordable complexes are some of the most likely housing providers to need information about their obligation to comply with fair housing laws. Further, education will be supplemented through the availability of printed materials at five public facilities and on the City's website. The City's third party fair housing provider, the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County, conducts an annual conference on fair housing issues and invites representatives of the government, building, banking, real estate, and rental housing industries. Over 150 people attend the annual Fair Housing Conference. During this Planning period, City, in conjunction with the Regional Homeless Alliance, will host three different panels of representatives from organizations such as the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County and Riverside County Housing Authority to train 25 local homelessness and M affordable housing advocates on fair housing issues and affordable housing issues. Conducting workshops for those in the housing industry will educate the appropriate stakeholders on fair housing regulations and accessibility requirements, and then reduce instances of fair housing violations. Training this Regional Alliance will not only help overcome the contributing factor in Temecula, but in surrounding cities as well. y. APPENDIX A HUD -Provided Maps Map Series Title Map 1 Race and Ethnicity Trends(2010)................................................................1 Map 2 Race and Ethnicity Trends (1990)............................................................... 3 Map 3 National Origin(2010)................................................................................. 5 Map 4 Limited English Proficiency (LEP) with R/ECAPs..................................... 7 Map 5 Publicly Supported Housing and Race/Ethnicity......................................... 9 Map 6 Housing Choice Vouchers and Race/Ethnicity..........................................11 Map 7 Housing Burden and Race/Ethnicity.......................................................... 13 Map 8 Housing Burden and National Origin......................................................... 15 Map 9 Demographics and School Proficiency School Proficiency and Race/Ethnicity......................................... 17 School Proficiency and National Origin ....................................... 19 School Proficiency and Family Status .......................................... 21 Map 10 Demographics and Job Proximity Job Proximity and Race/Ethnicity................................................. 23 Job Proximity and National Origin ............................................... 25 Job Proximity and Family Status .................................................. 27 Map 11 Demographics and Labor Market Labor Market and Race/Ethnicity................................................. 29 Labor Market and National Origin ................................................ 31 Labor Market and Family Status ................................................... 33 Map 12 Demographics and Transit Trips Transit Trips and Race/Ethnicity................................................... 35 Transit Trips and National Origin ................................................. 37 Transit Trips and Family Status .................................................... 39 Map 13 Demographics and Low Transportation Cost Low Transportation Cost and Race/Ethnicity ............................... 41 Low Transportation Cost and National Origin .............................. 42 Low Transportation Cost and Family Status ................................. 44 Map 14 Demographics and Poverty Poverty and Race/Ethnicity........................................................... 46 Poverty and National Origin......................................................... 48 Poverty and Family Status............................................................ 50 Map 15 Demographics and Environmental Health Environmental Health and Race/Ethnicity.................................... 52 Environmental Health and National Origin ................................... 54 Environmental Health and Family Status ...................................... 56 Map 16 Disability by Type Hearing, Vision and Cognitive Disability ..................................... 58 Ambulatory, Self -Care and Independent Living Disability........... 60 Map 17 Disability by Age Group............................................................................ 62 HUD -Provided Maps As described in the narrative, the City of Temecula is located in the corner of the Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), which is the largest MSA in the continental United States. It is so large that the Assessment of Fair Housing could not include the entire region on the maps without losing all relevant data. The region is larger than ten of the smallest U.S. states. Most of the population is located in the southwest corner and while Temecula appears to be near these population centers because of the scale of the map, it is actually over 40 miles from the City of Riverside and 70 miles from the Cities of San Bernardino and Ontario, the largest cities in the region, and 75 miles away from the retirement desert towns and farming areas to the east. Mountain ranges separate Temecula from population centers to the west in Orange County, as well as the eastern portions of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. As required by HUD, the City has included a series of maps and tables that analyze demographic trends, integration and segregation, disparities in access to opportunity, housing needs, disability access, publicly supported housing, and fair housing needs. The following series of maps is organized such that the first map shows the relationship between the City and the region, and subsequent maps are organized so that a City data topical map will be presented first, followed by the regional map. The maps are numbered to correspond with HUD's Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) AFFH data system. The map numbers correspond to the topic. Map 1 — Race/Ethnicity Trends (2010) IEuser Guide Temecula iCDBG} Name: Map 1 - RarOlFthnicity Description: Current racelethnicity dot density mal for Jurisdiction and Region with RIECAPs Jurisdiction: Temecula iCDBGl Region: Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario. CA Legend TOC But Value: 1 dot= 75 Demographics 2010 1 Dot = 75 'Ahite. Non -Hispanic Black. Non -Hispanic 6-"? Native American. Non -Hispanic Asian.+Pacific Islander. Non -Hispanic :1•� Hispanic .4 !-vl` ether. Non -Hispanic TRACT WECAP Map 1 demonstrates geographic patterns of racial and ethnic concentrations in 2010. Each dot represents 75 persons. This map demonstrates that racial and ethnic groups are spread evenly throughout the City of Temecula. There is no significant segregation within the City. Appendix A 1 Map 1 - Race/Ethnicity (Race/Ethnicity) Current racelethmf dot dentty map for Jurisdiction and Region wRh PJECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiciion • CBSA •,' -: � , • GRANTEES • yx _ �• _ � ' Demographics 2010 �'. + 1 Dot=75 _ 7;' White. Non -Hispanic •� _ ;-� 16� Black. Non -Hispanic "�-l. . -51 -1* /Vt �6 •�` 1 _ - _ _ Native American, Non -Hispanic AsianlPachc Islander, Non -Hispanic •. • Z� .y..� +• �, . •• •••. - ,•,•. `SSSy'''' Hispanic ��+ ' �� • ti •: :. r+-•I t -p• Other, Non -Hispanic ,. l •' -r• •- - TRACT --"9 I � �r • • r�••�. - �+ - RIECAP Air _ •.5 . tli I �l '•;��`'��. •_+•+ Esri. HERE DeL SGS, NPS i United Slates Census Bureau i l The regional map is provided to add context and point out the large size of the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) accounted for in regional data comparisons supplied by HUD. To better evaluate the data, the scale of the map has been reduced in the remaining regional maps. However, much of the detail is lost due to the scale. As indicated in the narrative, because of its location and distance from the population centers further north, the characteristics of the City data is not always comparable to the region as a whole. Note that the City of Temecula is shown in dark red at the southwest corner of the region. Appendix A 2 Map 2 — Race/Ethnicity Trends (1990) User Guide Temecula (CDRG) Name: Map 2- Race±Ethnicity Trends Variation: Race;Ethnicity Trends, 1090 Description: Past race ethnicity dot density map 1[ Jurisdiction and Region with RIECAPs Jurisdiction: Temecula (CDBG Region: Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario. CA Legend TOC Dot Value:1 dot= 75 Demographics 1990 1 Dot = 75 White. Non -Hispanic Black, Non -Hispanic Native American. Non -Hispanic AsiarrFacifc Islander. Non -Hispanic i� Hispanic t TRACT RiECAP Map 2 demonstrates geographic patterns of racial and ethnic concentrations in 1990. In comparing the maps from 1990 and 2010, there are no significant concentrations of segregation that have developed, despite tremendous growth that has occurred during the period. Appendix A Map 2 - Race/Ethnicity Trends (Race/Ethnicity Trends, 1990) Past racelethnicity dot density map for Jurisdiction and Reg[on with RIECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidictlon •r•d .i.• r.z. •�'..r•f�� CBSA y _ r• I• *. N • ",�, •. GRANTEES 41 '•tj• •� /�. DemWrap ics 1999 - _ r-.,, 'r'! y.. •� •,:_ 1 Dot=75 �r t� 'a. _ •�• , qi ••w _ -- — _- ~-•� -- —_ -. � - ��• White. Non -Hispanic " +yd•t y f•'. u'" ty ' •ri t� +.�+1� _ , ._ _. _.. a'`• Black. Non -Hispanic ,� ti. r S 4> r� • +� if, .;�`- - t: a �• �.�i}�,�"1'� II , -_= I y� ; Native American, Non -Hispanic • �� Y' —� R, •;��s yRI��tt' �• ;. j' • •• ""t l• K' �i:}}�•� AsianlPacific Islander, Non -Hispanic .�•t • ;:, _ ' ..."R .. •a r_: s.• �• Hispanic � � • A • %� i`rr cr r - - _• TRACT ffri� y . .•i. a '.}. . �• . - :. " _ t .A"' _�� •• RfECAP r• •_�• .'• ..R �+_ •',.:'.Ran e �. fit; _• a . s•K r- � � i s . Apr . .• ��.. �ti' ..—,gyp - Esd. HERE. DeLorme. NGA, JSGS. NPS•I United States Census Bureau Map 2 demonstrates the racial composition in the region in 1990 and it shows the tremendous growth of Hispanics in the population centers of the north. The City has also shown a less dramatic growth rate than the region. Appendix A 4 Map 3 — National Origin (2010) 1 User Guide Temecula (Cli Name: Map 3-National Origin Description: Current national origin r5 most populou a) dot density map for Jurisdiction and Region with RIECAP9 Jurisdiction: Temecula (CDBG) Region: Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario. CA Legend TOG Dot Value:t dot 75 NattonaE Origin (Top 5 in Descending Ordeq 1 Dot= 75 People Nam, McKico Philippines h Korea EPT El Salvador a �9 India TRACT RIECAP Map 3 demonstrates population by national origin in Temecula, based on ACS data provided by HUD (2006-2010). There are no significant concentrations of persons based on national origin. Instead they are spread evenly throughout the City. Appendix A Map 3 - National Origin (National Origin) Current national origin (5 most populous) dot density map for Jurisdiction and Region with RIECAPs Riverside -San Bernardi no-Ontaria, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction .Vi ... -- ti} CRSA ❑ GRANTEES National Ori& fTop 5 in lindirr8 Drderi 1 Dot=75 People Mexico •`y Philippines ' EI Salvador s India TRACT _ RIECAP v r ,.,+ ' •' �3. C S, UPS I United States Census Bureau I Map 3 demonstrates population by national origin throughout the region, based on ACS data provided by HUD (2006-2010). There are significant concentrations of persons of Mexican origin in the urban areas to the north. Appendix A 6 Map 4 — Limited English Proficiency (LEP) with Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) 0 _., , ® Temecula (CDEG) N arivl A LEP • rte. ap - Description: LEP persons r5 most commonly user languages; for Jurisdiction and Region with R±ECAPs Jurisdiction: Temecula fCDBG: Region: Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario. CA Legend TOO Dot Value:1 dot= 75 Limited English Proficiency (Top 5 in Descending Order) 1 Dot = 75 People fY4` Spanish Tagalog Korean Chinese x�L1 Thai TRACT RIECAP a° erf:c�4° Map 4 demonstrates where persons with limited English proficiency live, based on ACS data provided by HUD (2006-2010). There are no significant concentrations of persons with limited English proficiency within the City. They are spread evenly throughout the community. Appendix A 7 Map 4 - LEP (Limited English Proficiency) LEP persons (5 most Commonly usetl languages) for Jurisdiction and Region with RlECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisldiction '.1rp r r .4 s. . • _ : �• yy Esri. HERE. -Del CBSA GRANTEES Limited English Proficiency {Top 5 in Descending Orderj 1 Dot - 75 People i Spanish Tagalog Korean Chinese V Thai t. TRACT RIEEAP LI Map 4 demonstrates where those with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) lived throughout the region in 2010. They were concentrated in the population centers to the north. The City has some limited English proficiency residents, but they are not concentrated in one section of the City. Appendix A 8 Map 5 — Publicly Supported Housing and Race/Ethnicity • •! r 0 • t• I 1 ' 40 Map Query 1 User Guide Temecula (Cli Name: Map 5-Publicly Supported Housing and Race;Ethnicity Description: Public Housing. Project -Based Section 8. Other Multifamily. and LIHTC locations mapped with race?ethnicity dot density map with MECAPs. distinguishing categories of publicly supported housing by color Legend TOC ❑otValue:1 dot= 75 Public Housing Other Multifamily Project -Based Section 8 LIHTC 0 Demographics 2010 1 Dot= 75 White. Non -Hispanic aBlack. Non -Hispanic ' Native American, Non -Hispanic Map 5 demonstrates where subsidized housing is located throughout the City, based on the 2010 Census. Subsidized housing is primarily located near major employment centers and transportation systems. Appendix A 9 Map 5 - Publicly Supported Housing and Race/Ethnicity (Publicly Supported Housing and Race/Ethnicity) Public Housing, Project-Hased Section 8, Other Multifamily, and LIHTC locations mapped with racefethnicity dic tlensity map with RfECAPs, distinguishing categories of publicly supported housing by color Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction N cBSA GRANTEES Public Housing Mer Multifamily Prr®ct-Based Section 0 ow Low Income Housing Tax Credit Demographics 2010 1 Dot=75 SEEM_, v.'y `.•�:' •.. '•� }•�Y .� '.'. _ .hy`. .. Q6 White. Non -Hispanic 14�` r �• rf� ti•a• 'N• v `,,rr� Black: Non -Hispanic • �i �. r r �'• '}�i:,. �* _ Native American. Non -Hispanic �' 't�wi' v J.- •. 1 �r •^,• ti, �,•• r _ _ µ,' ;{ F; �S AsianlPacific Islander Non -Hispanic 5.4 S..rL•� h .• •�• '�i .r• s �T.l Hispanic _ -. ., y �_�.*` •4 . Other, Non -Hispanic ,i +Lr'P + r� • _ • + '• .• _ .y ••,•y A TRACT ..rR a •fir - y' « RTCAP Esri.-HERE:De�oune.--W6R:U�a4^�,-N2S.lflllR.Lllni[ed5tates.�ensus.8Lueau.l�1L�1� Map 5 shows the locations of publicly supportive housing throughout the region. The City has some publicly supported housing units, mostly located in the western central portion of the City. The City also has a number of developments assisted by redevelopment funds. These can be found in Appendix J. Appendix A 10 Map 6 — Housing Choice Vouchers and Race/Ethnicity ' 1 •i ' %' • - r.' ' A :. 1 User Guide Temecula iCDBG) Name: Map 6- Housing Choice Vouchers and RacelEthnicity Description: Housing Choice Voucher map with racelethnicity dot density map and R)ECAPs J urlsdiction: Temecula f C DB (3) Region: Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Legend TOC Dot Value:1 dot= 75 Demographics 2010 1 Dot =75 i �' White, Non -Hispanic i-- Black, Non -Hispanic ■% Native American, Non -Hispanic ■ Asianl€'acificIslander. Non -Hispanic •4�s`� Hispanic Other Non -Hispanic TRACT RIECAP Map 6 demonstrates that there are no racially and ethnically concentrated areas with Housing Choice Vouchers in the City. There are no RE/CAPS in the City. Appendix A 11 Map 6 - Housing Choice Vouchers and Race/Ethnicity (Housing Choice Vouchers and Race/Ethnicity) Housing Choice Voucher map wish racelethnicity dot density map and RIECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) JUrlsidiction COSA ]� •.., � .'tom ••, ; '• — •{Y _ GRANTEES d f Demographics2g19 . ?<,. • •{ r• `�• .• • �T'� �_i 1 Got=75 . ' -, , `•� White, Non -Hispanic IF '�y�..K- •1• k ` + .�.' • -' �, .: r •• 1' _� • —_ f 'M+" Black. Non -Hispanic +�' ••'• �;,+'e'� + -•' f� �Lr Native American: Non -Hispanic .r:, ti ••='t Gib ••• ' _ S•� - i» � AsianlPaciSc Islander. Non -Hispanic .f S• Y• ., '� r k•1f r .. - _C:; Hispanic r`' Other Non -Hispanic ♦.• ;R= Y - • .7?`•,••• - s - 1 , .. TRACT ps 46 �Ir4 ' s ` a;� r,� } •� a ' ' Percent Voucher Units ji 'd a•i•J - i -• ••a� f�••• ' 5.0%-11.704E ti� } ,;r ..:: , y „ �• r ii' 11.714E-20.384E 20.39%-38.284E 38.294E-100% ++. • — .. - . Esr HERE Det�. NGA_tiSM_W5_lylIli?Y.SLStatea Census Bureau 1 Map 6 shows that there are few concentrations of housing choice vouchers in the region, mostly in the northern part of the region. Temecula has some housing choice vouchers located in the western central portions of the City. Appendix A 12 Map 7 - Housing Burden and Race/Ethnicity (Housing Burden and Race/Ethnicity) Households experiencing one or more housing burdens in Jurisdiction and Region with RIECAPs and racelethnlcity dot density Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES Demographics 2010 1 Dot =75 White: Non -Hispanic Black, Non -Hispanic Native American. Non -Hispanic hew FKK AsianlPacifc Islander, Non -Hispanic }� Hispanic Other. Non -Hispanic RIECAP Percent Households with Burden 0%-26.07% ' 26.08%-35.85% ' 35.87%-46.38% ' 46.39%-59.74% ' 5975%-100% Map 7 shows geographic patterns of racial and ethnic concentrations in 2010. The shading indicates where households are experiencing one or more housing burdens. The darker the shading, the greater the prevalence of homes experiencing cost burdens. Cost burden means that rent plus utility costs exceed 30% of the resident's monthly income. The area with the greatest burden is located in the Temecula Elementary School neighborhood where there is a high concentration of market -rate apartments. This would indicate the need for additional affordable rental housing. The older established single-family neighborhoods in the City have the least cost burden. Appendix A 13 Map 7 - Housing Burden and Race/Ethnicity (Housing Burden and Race/Ethnicity) Households experiencing one or more housing burdens In Jurlsniction and Region with RIECAPs and racefethnicity dot density Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, GA Region; Temecula, GA (063712) Jurisidiction CBSA GRANTEES Demographics 2010 1 Dot-75 White, Non -Hispanic Y Black: Non -Hispanic Y ars Native American, Non -Hispanic AsianlPacific Islander Non -Hispanic Hispanic Other, Non -Hispanic RIECAP Percent Households with Burden 0%-26.07% 26.08%-2586% ' 35.87%-46.38% ` 46.39 % - 59.74 % hill 59.75%-100% Map 7 shows areas with housing burden, something that Temecula shares with most of the region and all of Southern California. The darker the shading, the greater the percentage of households experiencing housing cost burdens. Appendix A 14 Map 8 - Housing Burden and National Origin (Housing Burden and National Origin) Househoids experiencing one or more housing burdens in Jurisdiction and Region with RIECAPs and national origin dot density Temecula; CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES National Origin {rap 5 in Descending Order) 1 Dot = 75 People NMexico 's Philippines �^ Korea El Salvador India RIECAP Percent Households with Burden 0%-25.07% lb 26.08%-35.86% ' 35.87%-46.38% ' 46.39%-5974% ` 59.75%-100% Map 8 shows geographic patterns of national origin concentrations in 2010. The shading indicates where households are experiencing one or more housing burdens. The darker shading represents a greater prevalence of housing units with cost burdens. Cost burden means that rent plus utility costs exceed 30% of the resident's monthly income. While the greatest concentrations of households with housing costs burdens are located in two areas of the City, there is not a concentration in those areas of persons based on national origin. Appendix A 15 Map 8 - Housing Burden and National Origin (Housing Burden and National Origin) Households experiencing one or more housing burdens in Jurisdiction and Region with RlECAPs and national origin dot density Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction CBSA GRANTEES National Origin Top 5 in Descending Orderl 1 Dopttt=75 People �Zq Mexico V, Philippines Korea El Salvador 7t i (t India RYECAP Percent Households with Borden 0%-26.07% . 25.08%-35.86% ■ 35.87%-46.38% . 45.39%-59.74% . 59.75%-100% Map 8 shows housing cost burden by national origin. The City does not have any concentrations of immigrants; they are spread throughout the City. The regions to the north and east do have concentrations and many immigrants are experiencing higher than average cost burdens in the region. The housing burdens are felt equally by all racial and ethnic groups in Temecula. Appendix A 16 Map 9 - Demographics and School Proficiency (School Proficiency and Race/Ethnicity) School Proficiency Index for Jurisdiction and Region with racelethnicity, national origin, family status. and RIECAPS Temecula. CA (063712) Jurisidicticn GRANTEES Demographics 2010 1 Dot=75 ;A White, Non -Hispanic rs Black, Non -Hispanic Native American. Non -Hispanic AsianfPaciflc I slander, Non -Hispanic Hispanic t `. Omer, Non -Hispanic RIECAP Schaal Proficiency Inde. 0-10 10.1-20 20.1 - 30 . 30.1 -40 ' 40.1 - 50 . 50.1 - 60 ' 60.1-70 ' 70.1-30 ' 80.1-90 ' 90.1-100 There are three versions for Map 9 for school proficiency. This first map shows geographic patterns school proficiency with an overlay of racial and ethnic concentrations in 2010. The shading indicates the performance of 4' graders on State exams in 2012. The darker the shadowing, the higher the performance. The area with the lowest school proficiency is in an area with a large number of apartments. The area with the lowest school proficiency in the northwest is sparsely populated and is comprised of mostly industrial uses. There is no significant concentration of racial/ethnic groups in the low performing tracts. Appendix A 17 Map 9 - Demographics and School Proficiency (School Proficiency and Race/Ethnicity) School Proficiency Index for Jurisdiction and Region with racelethnir i , natlonai origin, family status, and RIECARS Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction CBSA GRANTEES Demographics 2010 1 Dot=75 y9 White, Non -Hispanic Black, Non -Hispanic • 7� Natye American. Non -Hispanic 4�f! AsianlPacific Islander, Non -Hispanic �.� Hispanic ;+ Other, Non -Hispanic R aiii RIECAP School Proficiency Index 0-10 i� 10.1-20 20.1-30 ' 30.1-40 ` 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1 - 60 ' 60.1-70 .701-80 r� . _ - _ _ �k ✓ . 80.1 - 90 �Esri. HERE. F]eLarme. NGA. L15G5. NPS I United States Censces Bureaa . 80.1 -100 This version of Map 9 is difficult to analyze the detail because of the breadth of the region; however, the following map with national origin provides more detailed data in comparing school proficiency in Temecula. Appendix A 18 Map 9 - Demographics and School Proficiency (School Proficiency and National Origin) School Proficiency Index for Jurisdiction and Region with racelethnicity, national origin. family status. and RfECAPS Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES National Origin (Top 5 in Descending Ordery 1 Dot = 75 People Memo 13 Philippines Korea El Salvador 9India RECAP School Proficiency index 0-10 10.1-20 20.1 - 30 ' 30.1 - 40 ` 40.1 - 50 ` 50.1 - 60 . 60.1 -70 ` 70.1 - 80 ` 80.1 -90 ' 90.1 - 100 This version of Map 9 shows geographic patterns school proficiency with an overlay of national origin concentrations in Temecula in 2010. The shading indicates the performance of 4' graders on State exams in 2012. The darker colors indicate higher performance on exams. There is no significant concentration of a particular group in the lower performing schools. Appendix A 19 Map 9 - Demographics and School Proficiency (School Proficiency and National Origin) School Proficiency Index for Jurisdiction and Region with racelethnicity, national origin, family status, and RlECAP7 Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, GA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction CBSA GRANTEES National Origin rTop 5 in Descending Order) 1 Dot -75 People ',}!ram•' Mexico Philippines Korea El Salvador India RIECAP School Proficiency Index 0-10 10.1-20 20.1 - 30 ' 30.1 - 40 ' 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1 - so ' 60.1-70 ' 70.1-80 ■ 80.1 - 90 ■ 90.1 - 100 This version of Map 9 for National Origin data demonstrates that school proficiency is much higher in the City than in most of the region. As indicated in the narrative, all racial and ethnic groups benefit from the good schools in the City. Appendix A 20 Map 9 - Demographics and School Proficiency (School Proficiency and Family Status) School Proficiency Index for Jurisdiction and Region with race+ethnicity, national origin, family status. and RIECAPs Temecula; CA {063712} Jurisdiction GRANTEES % of Households that are Families with Children • 0%-20% 20.1%-40% . 40.1%-60% i 60.1%-8o46 . 90.1%-100% RECAP School Proficiency Index 0-10 L 10.1-20 kh 20.1 - 30 30.1 - 40 ' 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1 - 60 ' 60.1 -70 ■ 70.1 - 80 ' 80.1 - 90 ' 90.1 -100 This version of Map 9 displays where households with children are located within the City. The shading indicates the performance of 4' graders on State exams in 2012. The darker shading represents higher performance. While there are families living in the low proficiency areas, there is not a high concentration of families living there. The City's scores on standardized tests are substantially better than the region as a whole and almost all schools perform better than the national average. Appendix A 21 Map 9 - Demographics and School Proficiency (School Proficiency and Family Status) School Proficiency Index for JurMictlon and Region with racelethrirtty, national origin, family status, and RfECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) JurisidicUon CBSA GRANTEES % of Households that are Families with Children • 0%-20% 20.1%-40% . 40.19k-50% 60.1%-80% 80.1%-100% RJECAP School Prunciency Index 0-10 10.1-20 bb 20.1-30 ' 30.1-40 . 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1-60 ' 60.1-70 . 70.1 -80 ' 80.1-90 . 90.1-100 Because of the scale of Map 9, regional details are difficult to analyze without referring to the previous map. Coupled with other maps and tables in the Assessment of Fair Housing, families in Temecula have access to higher proficiency schools than much of the region. Appendix A 22 Map 10 - Demographics and Job Proximity (Job Proximity and Race/Ethnicity) Jabs Pro xinlity Index for Jurisdiction and Region vaith racelethnii nar ionaE origin. far iVy status and RIECAPs Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidicticn GRANTEES Demographics 2010 1 Dot=75 White. Non -Hispanic Black. Non -Hispanic Native American, Non -Hispanic AsianIPscifc Islander. Non -Hispanic Hispanic Other, Non -Hispanic RIECAP Jobs Proximity Index 0-10 10.1-20 bill 20.1-30 ' 30.1-40 ' 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1-60 ' 60 1 -70 ' 70.1 - 80 ' so -s0 ' 90.1 - 100 There are two versions for Map 10 for job proximity. The map above demonstrates a geographic overlay of racial and ethnic concentrations in 2010, coupled with an index for the distance residents have between home and work. In this case, the darker shading represents better access to employment opportunities for residents in a neighborhood. There are no patterns of racial/ethnic concentrations with respect to job proximity in Temecula. The disadvantaged areas have the greatest proximity to jobs. The rest of the community has variable patterns in access, with the corridors along 1-15, west of I-15, and commercial arteries along Temecula Parkway having the greatest proximity to jobs. The lower density residential areas have the least proximity to jobs, which may indicate a higher concentration of commuters. Appendix A 23 Map 10 - Demographics and Job Proximity (Job Proximity and Race/Ethnicity) Jobs Proximity Index for Jurisdiction and Region with racelethnuty, national origin, fam[fy status and RJECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction COSA GRANTEES Demographics 2010 1 Dot=75 Ski White. Non -Hispanic .L Black. Non -Hispanic (• Native American. Non -Hispanic r AsianlPacifiic Islander, Non -Hispanic r �+ Hispanic Other, Non -Hispanic RIECAP Jobs Proximity Index 0-10 10.1 -20 ' 20.1 - 30 ' 30.1 -40 ' 40.1 -50 ' 50.1 - 60 50.1 -70 ' 70.1 -80 ' 80.1 -90 S0.1 -1c0 The scale of the map above displays the enormous land area of the Riverside -San Bernardino MSA, while also demonstrating an overlay of racial and ethnic groups over a measurement of job proximity. There is wide variation in this factor throughout the region. The darker shading represents access to closer job opportunities. Generally the City's diverse neighborhood scores are representative of the region. More detail can be found in the following map. Appendix A 24 Map 10 - Demographics and Job Proximity (Job Proximity and National Origin) Jobs Proximity Index for Jurisdiction and Region with raceiethnicity, national origin. family status and RECAPS Temecula. CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES National Origin (Top 5 in Cescending Order) 1 Dot=75 People �i Mexico i:er Philippines N. - Korea ' El Salvador India RIECAP Jobs Proximity Index 0-30 i- . 10.1-20 bk 20.1-30 ' 30.1-40 ' 40.1-50 ' 50.1-60 ' 60.1-70 ■ 70.1-80 ' 80.1-90 . 9o.1-100 This version of Map 10 shows geographic patterns based on the top 5 national origin concentrations in Temecula in 2010 and provides an index for physical distances between home and work. In this case, the darker shading represents better the access to employment opportunities for residents in a neighborhood. There are no concentrations based on national origin in Temecula. Access is equal for all groups. Appendix A 25 Map 10 - Demographics and Job Proximity (Job Proximity and National Origin) Jabs Proximity Index for Jurisdiction and Region with racelethnicrty, nattonaV origin, family status and RIECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, GA Region; Temecula, GA (063712) Jurisidiction CBSA GRANTEES National Origin ITop 5 in Descending Order) 1 Dot=75 People R� Mexico Philippines Korea El Salvador r India RIECAP b Jobs Proximity Index 0-10 10 1 -20 1b 20.1 -30 ` 30.1 -40 ` 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1 - 50 ` 60.1 -70 ' 70.1 -80 ' 80.1 - 90 ' 90.1 -100 This regional version of Map 10 shows that much greater job proximity within the population centers to the north where there are extensive industrial complexes, and in the desert communities in the east, where many residents are retired or working in agriculture. Appendix A 26 Map 10 - Demographics and Job Proximity (Job Proximity and Family Status) Jobs Proximity Index for Jurisdiction and Region with raceiethnicity, national origin. family status and RIECAPs Temecula, CA (063712 j Jurisidiction GRANTEES % of Households that are Earn Biel with Children • 0%-20% 20.1%-40% 40.1%-60% . 60.1%-80% . 30.1%-100% RECAP Jobs Proximity Index 0-10 10.1-20 20.1-30 ® 30.1-40 ' 40.1-50 ' 50.1-60 ' 60.1-70 ' 70.1-80 ' 30.1-90 ` 90.1 - 100 This version of Map 10 displays the geographic patterns based an overlay of families with children in 2010 with an indicator of the physical distances between home and work for households with children. In the case the darker shading represents better the access to employment opportunities for residents in a neighborhood. Families are scattered throughout the City and not necessarily concentrated in areas with close proximity to jobs. Appendix A 27 Map 10 - Demographics and Job Proximity (Job Proximity and Family Status) Jobs Proximity Index for Jurisdiction and Region with racelethnicity, national origin, famtty status and RIECAPS Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction CBSA GRANTEES % el Households that are Families with Children • 0%-20% f 20.1%-40% i 40.1%-60% . 601%-s0% 0 80.1%-100% RIECAP Jabs Proximity Index 0-10 10.1-20 20.1-30 ' 30.1 - 40 ' 40.1-50 ■ 50.1-60 . 60.1 -70 ' 70.1 -80 ' 80.1-90 ` 90.1 -100 This version of Map 10 shows the relationship of families with job proximity in the region. Because of the scale of the map, patterns are difficult to identify, however Temecula does have a high concentration of households with children. Appendix A 28 Map 11 - Demographics and Labor Market (Labor Market and Race/Ethnicity) Labor Engagement Index with raceiethnicity, nannal origin. family status and RIECAPs Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES Demographics 2010 1 Oul=75 White. Non -Hispanic 1L Black, Non -Hispanic [� Native American. Non -Hispanic r.. S AsiaWPacifc Islander, Non -Hispanic Hispanic l-' Other. Non -Hispanic f ;a RIECAP Labor Market Index o--to- ® 10.1-20 ' 20.1-30 ■ 30.1-40 ' 40.1-50 ' 50.1-60 ' 60.1-70 ' 70.1-30 ' 80.1-90 ` 90.1 -100 There are three versions for Map 11 for labor market. The map above shows geographic patterns of racial and ethnic concentrations in 2010 and provides an index on unemployment rate, labor -force participation rate, and percent of the population ages 25 and above with at least a bachelor's degree, by neighborhood. The darker shading represents greater labor engagement. Higher income areas have the greatest job readiness in the City. The lowest labor market index is in the southern portion of the City near the Pechanga Resort and Casino. However, since 2010, several campuses have opened in Temecula including Cal State San Marcos at Temecula, University of Redlands, Concordia University, and Mount San Jacinto. More recent data would likely show an improvement in job readiness of the labor market. There is no significant concentration of racial/ethnic groups in the City, based on labor market readiness. Appendix A 29 Map 11 - Demographics and Labor Market (Labor Market and Race/Ethnicity) Labor Engagement Index with racelethnkcity, nationak origin_ farnhy status and RIECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecuia, CA (063712) Jurisidiction • •~ • • __ CBSA '.y�,, •aL tr ' r1(� f`•r GRANTEES - I . _ ..� Demographics 2919 •�{ aF 1 Dot = 75 � • r•► � , .�' :x- �• - v •• ''� �'� r-,��,tit While, Non -Hispanic !; Black, Non -Hispanic ,`i4,.,�' f•,+r j• ��j,�,`RH(.'F +y Native American. Non -Hispanic `•4• � ..�.�, � � �; •� •-w'. ��•,+•AsianlPacific lslantler Non -Hispanic Hispanic Other Non -Hispanic •:�ti •7�{y r • RIECAP Y" A nay •f;'' �. p, y ;; � , -„ • �+' ' Labor Market Index 0-10 10.1-20 20.1-30 401-50 501-60 60.1-70 • •, ' 70.1-80 Map 11 shows that much of the region is lacking in labor engagement. Although some classes are available locally, the lack of community college in Temecula in 2010 is probably part of the reason for this deficiency. However, since 2010, several campuses have opened in Temecula including Cal State San Marcos at Temecula, University of Redlands, Concordia University, and Mount San Jacinto. More recent data would likely show an improvement in job readiness of the labor market. Other areas have notably higher ratings such in the vicinity of UC Riverside, Cal State San Bernardino and Redlands College in the north and in Orange County to the west. Appendix A 30 Map 11 - Demographics and Labor Market (Labor Market and National Origin) Labor Engagement Index with racefemnicdy, national origin, family status and RfECAPS Temecula, CA (053712) Jurisidicticn GRANTEES National Origin rfop 5 in Descending Order) 1 Dot=75 People VMexico W, Philippines Korea El Salvador India RfECAP Labor Market Index 0-10 10.1 -20 20.1 - 30 30.1 -40 ` 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1 - 60 ` 60.1 -70 ' 70.1 -80 . 20.1 -90 ' 30.1-100 This version shows geographic patterns based on national origin in 2010 and measures unemployment rate, labor -force participation rate, and percent of the population ages 25 and above with at least a bachelor's degree, by neighborhood. The darker the shading represents greater labor market engagement. All groups have relatively equal labor engagement opportunities. Appendix A 31 Map 11 - Demographics and Labor Market (Labor Market and National Origin) Lal cr Engagement Index with racelethnicity, national origin, family status and PJECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction JEW: aI►� CDSA GRANTEES National Origin (Top 5 in Descending Order} t i Dot=75 People 9' _ Mexico 'ON Philippines �•�' Korea EI Salvatlor !!`� India RIECAP Ll Labor Market Index 0-10 10.1 - 20 ' 20.1 - 30 ' 30.1-40 ' d0.1-50 ' 50.1-60 ' 60.1-70 ' 70.1 - 80 ' 80.1 - 90 ' 90.1 -100 This version of Map 11 shows the low labor force readiness throughout the region in 2010. The Temecula area has better scores than the region, but lags behind Orange County to the west. It is important to consider the number of local college campuses that have added Temecula locations in the past several years. It is important to note that a mountain range separates Orange County from Temecula. Appendix A 32 Map 11 - Demographics and Labor Market (Labor Market and Family Status) Labor Engagement Index with racerethnicitynational origin_ family status and RlECAPs Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES % of Ho05eholb5 that are Far i{ies with Children • 0%-20% 20.1%-40% • 40.1%-60% . 60.1%-80% . 201%-100% R IECAP Labor Market Index 0-10 10.1-20 20.1-30 ' 30.1 -40 ' 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1-60 ' 50.1 -70 ' 70.1-90 ` go - 90 ` 90.1 -100 This version shows geographic patterns based households with families in 2010 and provides and index regarding unemployment rate, labor -force participation rate, and percent of the population ages 25 and above with at least a bachelor's degree, by neighborhood. The darker the shading represents greater labor market engagement. Families are spread throughout the City, although there is a concentration of families in areas with greater labor market engagement. The area with the lowest labor market index had the least concentration of families. Appendix A 33 Map 11 - Demographics and Labor Market (Labor Market and Family Status) Labor Engagement Index with raceleth NCRy, national origin, fal status and RfECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidlctlon • a �� . ■ � -- e CB 5A � I o . . . GRANTEES �.� • % of Households that are Families with Children • =�- 40.1%-60% sa1�-eo% . eo1%-100% . • • • • • • • RIECAP • • • • Laboirlilaill 0-10 • • • • • I'� 10.1-20 ��• • • 20.1-30 • • •�• • • * ' 30.1-40 N • . • % . ' 40 1- 50 • ■ 501-60 • . . ' 60.1-70 • • • ' 70.1-80 • • - . ' B0.1-90 • ' 90.1-100 r •.. W 1_ Esrf. HERE: F7eLorm e, NGA: 11SG5. NIPS i Unified States Census Bureau This version of Map 11 shows familial status in relationship with the labor market in the region. The map clearly demonstrates the familial centric area of the Temecula Valley. More detailed data for Temecula can be found in the previous versions of Map 11. Appendix A 34 Map 12 - Demographics and Transit Trips (Transit Trips and Race/Ethnicity) Transit Trips Index for Jurisdiction and Region with racelethnicity, national origin, family status and RIECAPs Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidic#icn GRANTEES Demographics 2010 1 Cot -75 White, Non -Hispanic ►Gf Black. Non -Hispanic 'IL Native American, Non -Hispanic AsianfPacil Islander, Non -Hispanic Hispanic .T.� Other, Non -Hispanic RECAP TranliK Trips Index 0-10 L 10.1-20 ' 20.1-30 . 30.1 - 40 ' 40.1-50 . 50.1 - 60 ` 60.1-70 . 70.1 - 80 . 80.1 -90 ` 90.1 -100 There are three versions to Map 12, which provides and index on the number of transit trips a neighborhood uses public transportation, with an overlay of the top five race and ethnicity groups in the City. The darker the shading, the greater the transportation access at the neighborhood level. There is one area in the north that has a low use of public transportation. This is Census Tract 432.17, which includes the Meadowview neighborhood. It is not an eligible CDBG area, because its median income is too high. (See map of CDBG-eligible areas in Appendix G.) It is also an area, as shown in Map 11, with a higher than average market engagement. This would indicate that there is not a great of a need for public transportation in that particular area. Racial/ethnicity is not a factor since they are spread evenly throughout the City. Appendix A 35 Map 12 - Demographics and Transit Trips (Transit Trips and Race/Ethnicity) Transit Trips Index for Jurisdiction and Region with racelethnicity, national origin, tamily status and R;ECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region: Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction N CBSA I L GRANTEES At `.i:`ti+.' ^�;J,.!^[`._ :•a: .l �I Y�.. i Demographics 2919 .Yy s .-. 1Dot=75 - s = N lf - ;-,:y White. Non -Hispanic 'K+ ��ti �C' TN•" w;9j - ti.• • {. - - •• ;� Black, Non -Hispanic tVr R +.� •-. ;+�, Native American. Non -Hispanic is rS. �77•�iJfJ�ti y7�5�� �i' ' •.y} �_-_yr � �•; ,,*,,•' •+ ..A' AsiarrFacific Islander Non -Hispanic ••S, • `'L-.t'• .:.'� i}• :j .t • _ t`' -•, • '• .. �•%• �' y.'.�L'x •- ' . •r •• •' Hispanic 4•-� +7�r='' • -'r �`=P� - _fi Other. Non -Hispanic JtAir C' jfT �• f d NfECAP y ' � r ti • �z' 't •� - , •-, '� ,��.: - r.Y.1 - - ''f 1:1 -• r Transit Trips In dex 0-10 t . ELL�� ' 20.1-30 ' vtA ' 301-40 . �'..' . 401-50 r l •' ' 50.1 - 60 - - ' 60.1-70 • ' 70.1-80 8oi-go ,3�ez- • _ Esri. HERE, DeLorme, NGA-USGS. NPS I United Stales Census Bureau \ go 1 -inn Map 12 shows that access to public transportation is a challenge to the scattered population centers in this large region. Compare this map with the following version of the same map. Appendix A 36 Map 12 - Demographics and Transit Trips (Transit Trips and National Origin) Transit Trips Index for Jurisdiction and Region with racelethnicity, national oril family status and RIECAPs Temecula. CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES National Origin IToia 5 in Descending Ortler} 1 Cot -75 People Mekico Philippines Korea El salvatlor India RECAP Transit Trips Index 0-10 10.1 -20 ' 20.1 - 30 ' 30.1 -40 ' 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1 - 60 ` 60.1 -70 . 70.1 - 80 . 80.1 - 90 ■ 90.1 - 100 This version of Map 12 provides an index on the number of transit trips in a particular neighborhood, with an overlay of residents by national origin. The darker shading represents a greater public transportation usage at the neighborhood level. There is one area known as the Meadowview neighborhood in the northern portion of the City with a low transportation index; however, there are few immigrants in that particular census tract. There are no concentrations of groups that have significantly lower access to public transportation than other groups. Appendix A 37 Map 12 - Demographics and Transit Trips (Transit Trips and National Origin) Transit Trips Index for Jurisdiction and Region with racelethril nationak origin, family status and RlECAPS Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Judsidiction GRANTEES National origin lTop 5 in Descending order) _ _ - y -- _• 1 l75 People Mexico .. -i Philippines M Korea 1 • • ,."�,�"�'f - .�.�° El Salvador • i Mel. r•e . 1 _ RIECAP - Transit Trips lnclex 0-10 • � 10.1-20 - 20.1 -30 . 30.1 -40 • 40.1-50 •`•• ' 50.1 -60 ' 60.1 -70 ' 701 -SO + ' 130.1-100 lJntec states Census Bureau Esn. HERE DeLo"e. l t15GS. NPS This regional version of Map 12 demonstrates the challenges of providing public transportation. Temecula's access to public transportation is above average in the region; however, it is still a local challenge that can be improved upon. Appendix A 38 Map 12 - Demographics and Transit Trips (Transit Trips and Family Status) Transit Trips Index for Jurisdiction and Region wRh racefethniclty, national origin. family status and WECAPs Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction i GRANTEES % of Households that are Families with Children a 1%-21% 201%-40% . 40.1%-60% 601%-80% * 80.1%-100% RIECAP Transit Trips Index 0-10 10 1 -20 20.1-30 I ' 30.1 -40 ' 40.1 - 50 ` 50.1 - 80 ' 60 1 -70 ' 70.1 - 80 ' 80.1 - 90 . 90.1 -100 C' of fiiverside, Ca of Rfve llde, SmGIS, Fsrl, HERE, DeLaone, NGA, LIS GS This version of Map 12, demonstrates how often families with children in a particular census tract use public transportation. The darker shading indicates greater usage at the neighborhood level. In the lightly shaded census tract in the northern portion of the City, there are fewer families that reside in that area. Appendix A 39 Map 12 - Demographics and Transit Trips (Transit Trips and Family Status) Transit Trips Index for Jurisdiction and Region with race+ethnicity, national origin, family status and R�ECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula. CA (063712) Jurisidiction + i • • •�f Aw • i • • • t:esA ���Tmm • 000 i • GRANTEES •i i • '� • % of Households thatare Families with Children • • 50 • 0%-20% • • • • 20.146-40% • . 40.1%-60% • i • • • i . .60.146-9046 • i• 80.1%-100% i • • .�. ` • R+ECAP �1 ❑ i • •• • • i Transit Trips Index • • • • •• 61 0-10 • • • • • • • ' 10.1 - 20 i�i • • • • 1620.1-30 . • • hill 30.1-40 %i `40.1-50 • • ' 50.1-60 • • . `60.1-70 • • `70.1-80 • • `80.1-90 ' 90.1-100 _""W • � Esri. HERE, 6eLorme. NGA, USGS. NPS I United States Census Bureau _ This version of Map 12 provided by HUD shows regional that there are high concentrations of families with children in the regional population centers. Appendix A 40 Map 13 - Demographics and Low Transportation Cost (Low Transportation Cost and Race/Ethnicity) Low Transportation Cost Index with racelethnicity_ national origin_ family status and FUECAPS Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES Demographics 2010 1 Dot - 75 _S.I�� White, Non -Hispanic �fy Black, Non -Hispanic Native American. Non -Hispanic AsiawPacific Islander. Non -Hispanic Hispanic 1K Other. Non -Hispanic RIECAP Low Transportation Cost index 0-10 10.1 -20 hill 20.1 -30 ' 30.1 - 40 ■ 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1 - 60 ' 60.1 -70 ' 70.1 - 80 ' 80.1 -90 . 90.1 -100 v r{ � City of Riverside. County of Riverside. SanG15. Esri. HERE. fJeLorme. hFGA. USGS �J_I l,3 There are three versions to Map 13, which provides an index on the cost of transportation by census tract. The darker shading represents lower cost of transportation at the neighborhood level. The lower income census tracts have lower transportation costs due to usage of public transportation. All races and ethnicities are equally affected by the cost of transportation. Appendix A 41 Map 13 - Demographics and Low Transportation Cost (Low Transportation Cost and National Origin) Law Transportation Cast wifh racelethnlaity, national origin_ family status and RIECAPs Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisdiction F F erside, County of Riverside, SanGIS Esri, HERE, Del-orme, NGA, I3SGS Mt GRANTEES National Origin (Top 5 in Descending Orden 1 Dot = 75 People Mexico �? s Philippines Cif = Korea W61EI Salvador V India RIECAP Law Tra ns purtation Cast Index 0-10 10.1 -20 _ 20.1-30 ' 301-40 ' 40.1 - 50 ' 501-60 ' 50,1-70 ' 701-80 ' 80.1 - 90 ' 90.1-100 This version of Map 13 measures cost of transportation by neighborhood by national origin. The darker shading represents lower cost of transportation at the neighborhood level. The lower income census tracts have lower transportation costs due to usage of public transportation. Racial and ethnic groups are spread evenly throughout the City, but the map above shows that most have lower than average costs for transportation. Appendix A 42 Map 13 - Demographics and Low Transportation Cost (Low Transportation Cost and National Origin) Low Transportation Cost with racefetir mcity, national origin, family status and RECAPS Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction + or lit 7 .. CIESA GRANTEES National Origin (Top 5 in Descending Orden 1 Dot=75 People - - - Mexico �Wsr Philippines s7 Korea t� El Salvador India RIECA P Low Transportation Cast Index 0-10 10.1 -20 hl 20.1 - 30 IN 30.1 -40 ' 40.1 - 50 50.1 - 60 . 60.1 -70 ' 70.1 - 80 ' 00.1 - 90 ` 90.1 -100 Esri. HERE. Derorme. NGA. USGS, NPS i United States Ce m.Rwr u This version of Map 13 shows more clearly that transportation costs are lower along freeway arteries in the northern portion of the region and in Temecula. However, it is still a major challenge to provide low cost transportation in the entire region. Appendix A 43 Map 13 - Demographics and Low Transportation Cost (Low Transportation Cost and Family Status) Low Transportation Cost Index with racefethnicity_ national origin family status and PJECAPs Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES % of Households that are Families with Children • 0%-20% 20.1%-40% ' 40.1%-60% . 60.1%-80% 80.146-100% R7ECAP ❑Vl Low Transportation Cost Index ® 0-10 ® ®� 10.1-20 ® i 20.1-30 ® 30.1-40 ' 40.1-50 ' 50.1-60 - ' 60.1-70 ® ' 70.1-80 ® ' 30.1-90 ' 90.1-100 i City of Riverside. County of Riverside. SanGIS, Esn. HERE. JeLorm e. NGA. EiS GS This version of Map 13 provides an index for the cost of transportation and proximity to public transportation by neighborhood by families with children. The darker shading represents lower cost of transportation at the neighborhood level. Families are spread throughout the City, but areas with the highest cost for transportation tend to have fewer families. Appendix A 44 Map 13 - Demographics and Low Transportation Cost (Low Transportation Cost and Family Status) Low Transportation Cost Index with racelethnicity, natiflnaI origin, farnr4 status and RIECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario. CA Region; Temecula. CA (063712) Jurisidiction + • • • •��• •AL • • cR❑sA • • • • • • GRANTEES • • • %of Households that are Famines with Children • �• • i • - • • • • 20.1%-40% • - • • • . 40.1%-60% 80.1%-100% • • • • RIECAP • • • • • •• • Low Transportation Cost Index • • • • 0-10 10.1-20 1• •• ��• • • . • • . 20.1-30 30.1-40 M • • • • 40.1-50 N • • • • ' 50.1-60 • ' 60.1 -70 • • • 70.1-30 I • • • * . ' 80.1-90 • ' 90.1 -100 • Esri, HERE- DeLorme, NGA, DSGS.. NPSUnited States Census Bureau This version of Map 13 demonstrates the households with families and low transportation cost for the entire region. The families with children tend to be clustered around the regional population centers. While Temecula fares better than many other communities in the region for transportation costs, public transportation is a challenge for the entire region. Appendix A 45 Map 14 - Demographics and Poverty (Poverty and Race/Ethnicity) Low Poverty Index with racelethnicity, naWna€ origin, family status and RJECAPs Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES Demographics 2010 1 Dot=75 White, Non -Hispanic a ill Black, Non -Hispanic Native American, Non -Hispanic 10� Asian/Pacific Islander, Non -Hispanic .^yid Hispanic Other Non -Hispanic RfECAP Law Pave rty Ini 0-10 10.1-20 L'rl 20.1 - 30 ' 30.1-40 . 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1 - 50 ` 60.1 - 70 ' 70.1 - 30 ' 80.1-90 ' 90.1 - 100 There are three versions of Map 14, which provides an index regarding exposure to poverty by census tract, with an overlay of race and ethnicity. The darker shading represents less exposure to poverty. The factor is based on the number of persons in poverty in a census block group in 2010 based on an ACS data provided by HUD (2006- 2010). The north central part of the City has the greatest exposure to poverty. Many commercial shopping centers are located in this census tract, along with a mix of affordable housing units, and market -rate apartments. This census tract also contains Temecula Elementary, the City's only Title I School. When compared to data in Table 12 in the Assessment, Temecula fares better than the national average for exposure to poverty with all race and ethnicities. Appendix A 46 Map 94 - Demographics and Poverty (Poverty and Race/Ethnicity) Low Poverty Index with racelethrinty, nai ongtn, family status and RIECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction • CBSA + _�_ ; ❑ • GRANTEES 2. Y y y' ❑ Z �. _•r ..'�I y... .� Deni lcs 2010 �� =„• ` ' �T - + _ _ .� White, Non-Hispanic '�t�"• tir Black, Non -Hispanic rr ' - �� _ • Native American. Non -Hispanic J•+•e; •■� -[ , '',�.�_:•�' r ', � +,Asian) ific Islander. Non -Hispanic w .s •r' _ '•.'Hispanic �•� �: ��•.�• s„ •� �:' other, Non -Hispanic 1•�ti • „' i:Y• 1�1" RIECAP :sky 'y .� • +} •� ••� h .�(�`-� ' • ' 4t4 • _ Low Poverty Index r. �• �• M,AliG.S.- 0-10 201-30 ill hill •'. •r••CM. ' 70.1 - 80 ' 30.1 -130 a Fcri HFRF nal nrrna N<;A IICfzS NPRlllnitad Statwn Canncnc Rnraau ��7�i• ► .._. ..._ The regional Map 14 provides a low poverty index with an overlay of race and ethnicity. The exposure to poverty varies widely throughout the region, as to be expected with a large area. Appendix A 47 Map 14 - Demographics and Poverty (Poverty and National Origin) Low Poverty Index with racelethnlary, national orgin, [amity status and RfECAPs Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES National Origin ITop 5 in Be scendinp Order) 1 �Lot =75 People y' Mexico Philippines M. Korea El Salvador R India RIECAP Low Poverty Index 0-10 10.1 - 20 ® 20.1 - 30 ' 30.1 -40 ' 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1 - 60 ` 60.1 - 70 . 70.1 - 80 ' 90.1 - 90 . 90.1 -100 This version of Map 14 measures exposure to poverty by census tract by national origin. The darker shading represents less exposure to poverty. The factor is based on the number of persons in poverty in a census block group in 2010 based on an ACS data provided by HUD (2006-2010). While persons from other nations live in the area with the highest exposure to poverty, populations based on national origin are spread evenly throughout the City. This census tract also contains Temecula Elementary, the City's only Title I School. When compared to data in Table 12 in the Assessment, Temecula fares better than the national average for exposure to poverty with all race and ethnicities. Appendix A 48 Map 14 - Demographics and Poverty (Poverty and National Origin) Low Poverty Index with iacelethnicity, national origin, family status and PJECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction CBSA GRANTEES National origin (Top 5 in Descending Order} 1 Dot=75 People S �s` Mexico Philippines Korea -Salvador India RIECAP 11) Low Pove rly Index 0-10 L.q 101-20 11i 20.1-30 . 30.1 -40 kh 40.1-50 ■ 50.1 - 60 ' 50.1 -70 ' 70.1-90 . 30.1 - 90 . 90.1 -100 This version of Map 14 demonstrates that the region has large variations in exposure to poverty, as seen in the checkboard pattern. It is greater in the northern portions of the region and the agricultural areas to the east than in Temecula. Appendix A 49 Map 14 - Demographics and Poverty (Poverty and Family Status) Low Poverty Index with race.lethnicity. national origin. family status and RECAPS Temecula; CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES % of Households that a re Families with Child rep • 0%-20% 20.1%-40% • 40.1%-60% . 50.1%-80% 80.1%-100% RECAP Low Poverty Index 0-10 10.1 - 20 20.1-30 30.1-40 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1-60 ' 60.1-70 ' 70.1-80 ' 80.1-90 ' 00.1-100 This version of Map 14 provides an index on the exposure to poverty by for families with children, broken down by census tract. The darker the shading represents less exposure to poverty at the neighborhood level. The factor is based on the number of persons in poverty in a census block group in 2010 based on an ACS data provided by HUD (2006-2010). There is not a concentration of families in the census tracts with the greatest exposure to poverty in the City. Appendix A 50 Map 14 - Demographics and Poverty (Poverty and Family Status) Low Poverty Index with race/ethnicity- national origin, family status and RjECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; TemeoUla, CA (063712) Jurisidiotion CBSA GRANTEES % of Households that are Families with Children 0%-20% lip, 0 20.1%-40% . 40.140-60% RECAP Low Poverty Index ti _ 0-10 10.1-20 20.1-30 MIA`30.1-40 �II ' 40.1-50 ' 50.1-60 ' 60.1-70 ' 70.1-30 • ' 80.1-90 ' 90.1-100 . DeLorme. NGA. I.1SGS. NPS ' The regional version of Map 14 demonstrations high variation rates in exposure to poverty for families with children throughout the region. As demonstrated by the previous map, there is less variation in exposure to poverty in Temecula than the region as a whole. Appendix A 51 Map 15 - Demographics and Environmental Health (Environmental Health and Race/Ethnicity) Environmentat Health Index wdh racelethnicdy, national origin, family status and RIECAPs Temecula; CA (063712) Jurisidiclicn GRANTEES Demographics 2010 1 Dot-75 White. Non-Hispanic ;Yyy Black, Non -Hispanic Native American, Non -Hispanic a rl "AsianlPacific Islander.. Non -Hispanic Hispanic W. Other, Non -Hispanic f VA RIECAP nwronmertal Health Index 0-10 10.1-20 bk 20.1 -30 ' 30.1 -40 ' 40.1 - 50 ' 50.1-60 ' 60.1 -70 ` 70.1 - 80 ' 80.1 -90 ' 90.1-100 There are three versions of Map 15, which provides an index on environmental health, based on EPA estimates of air quality, carcinogenic, respiratory, and neurological toxins by census tract, with an overlay of race and ethnicity. The darker shading represents less exposure to air quality issues at the neighborhood level. The areas with the greatest exposure to environmental health concerns are located along the freeway. Temecula's exposure to environmental health issues is lower than the region's average. Appendix A 52 Map 15 - Demographics and Environmental Health (Environmental Health and Race/Ethnicity) Environmental Health Index with racelethnimty, national origin, family status and RIECAPs Riverside -San Bernardino-Ontaria, CA Region; Temecula, CA 5063792) Jurisidiclion CB5A GRANTEES Demographics 2010 1 DOS=75 - White, Mon-Hispanic 5 Black. Non -Hispanic Native American, Non -Hispanic Aeani iAc islander. Non -Hispanic Hispanic 1 1�Other Non -Hispanic RIECAP Environmental Health Index 0-10 'A 1-20 20.1-30 ri�a 30.1-40 j& 401-50 `501-60 ' 60.1-70 ' 70.1-SO ' so.1 -90 Regional Map 15 demonstrates that Temecula has better environmental health than other population centers in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, however does not fare as well as the less populous and less dense areas of the region. Appendix A 53 Map 15 - Demographics and Environmental Health (Environmental Health and National Origin) Environmental Health Index with raceiethnicity. national origin. family status and R�ECAPs Temecula. CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES National Origin ITop 5 in Descending Order) 1 Dot=75 People 3 Mexico 'rrC�S:F� P,IC�I� Philippines �prcr Korea Yrs4 EI Salvador tir� India RECAP Environmental Health Index 0-10 bill 10.1-20 ' 20.1-30 ' 30.1-40 ' 40.1-50 ' 50.1-50 ' 60.1-70 ' 70.1-30 ' 80.1 - 10 ' 90.1-100 This version of Map 15 provides an index on environmental health, based on EPA estimates of air quality, carcinogenic, respiratory, and neurological toxins by census tract, with an overlay of households by the top five national origins. The darker shading represents less exposure to air quality and toxicity issues at the neighborhood level. The areas with the highest exposure are closest to the freeway. Appendix A 54 Map 15 - Demographics and Environmental Health (Environmental Health and National Origin) Environmental Health Index with racmethnicity, national originfamily status and RiECAPS Riverside -San Bernardino-Cntal CA Region: Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction CBSA GRANTEES National Origin (Top 5 in Descending On 1 Dot= 75 People Mexico ti Philippines Korea El Salvador India RiECAP Environmental Health Index a-10 10.1 -20 20.1 - 30 30.1 - 40 ' 40.1 - 50 50.1 - 60 ' 60.1 -70 ' 70.1 -80 . 80.1 - 90 ' 90.1-100 Regional Map 15, with an overlay of top five national origins, demonstrates that Temecula has better environmental health than other population centers in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, however does not fare as well as the less populous and less dense areas of the region. Appendix A 55 Map 15 - Demographics and Environmental Health (Environmental Health and Family Status) Environmental Health Index with racelethnicity, national origin. family status and R'ECAPs Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction GRANTEES % of Households that are Families with Children • 0%-20% 20.1%-40% 40.1%-60% . 60.1%-80% 80.1 %6-100%6 RIECAP Environmental Health index 0-10 10.1-20 ' 20.1-30 ' 30.1-40 ' 40.1-50 50.1 - 50 ` 50.1 -70 ` 70.1 - 80 ' 80.1-90 ' 9o.1-100 This version of Map 15 provides an index on environmental health, based on EPA estimates of air quality, carcinogenic, respiratory, and neurological toxins by census tract, with an overlay of households with families. The darker shading represents less exposure to air quality and toxicity issues at the neighborhood level. The areas with the highest exposure are closest to the freeway. Appendix A 56 Map 15 - Demographics and Environmental Health (Environmental Health and Family Status) Environmental Heaith Index with racelethmp, national org€n, tamlty status and RlECAPS Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction CRSA GRANTEES % of Households that are Families with Children • 0%-20% 20.1%-40% • 40.1%-60% . 50.1%-80% 00.1%-500% RIECAP Environmental Health Index 0-10 Lid 10.1 -20 20.1 - 30 ` 30.1 - 40 ` 40.1 - 50 ` 50.1 - 60 ' 60.1 -70 ' 70.1 -30 ' 80.1 -90 ' 90.1 -100 This regional version of Regional Map 15, with an overlay of households with children, demonstrates that Temecula has better environmental health than other population centers in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, however does not fare as well as the less populous and less dense areas of the region. Appendix A 57 Map 16 — Disability by Type — Hearing, Vision and Cognitive Disabili Temecula (CDBG} Name: Map 16- Disability byType Variation: Hearing. Vision and Cognitive Disability Description: Dot density map ofthe population of persons with disabilities by persons with vision. hearing. cognitive. ambulatory. self -care. and independent living difficulties with R;ECAPs for Jurisdiction and Legend TCC Dot Value:I dot= 75 Disabiln i Dot = 75 Hearing Disability !� Vision Disibility 6 Cognitive Disability RECAP There are two versions of Map 16. This version depicts a dot density distribution by disability type (hearing, vision, cognition). Persons with disabilities are evenly distributed throughout the City. Data was supplied by HUD based on ACS data (2008-2012). Appendix A 58 Map 16 - Disability by Type [Hearing, Vision and Cognitive Disability] Dot density map of the population of persons with disabilities by persons with vision, hearing, cognitive, ambulatory, self -care, and independent living dfiicufties with RIECAPs for Jurisdiction and Region Riverside -San Bernardino-Ontaria, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction ' r • ti FI �;���• +', • � 9i lip y��r : �'.. •• • '• ` • � • � : • . 7. Lf '. •, e • i+ . Vir NPS I United States Census Bureau r CBSA GRANTEES DisabilHy 1 Dot=75 fin•} Hearing Disability S Vision Disibility IN Cognitive Disability RIECAP Map 16 shows the locations where persons with hearing, vision and cognitive disabilities live throughout the region. The map demonstrates that they are concentrated in the northern urban areas of Riverside County, Hemet, and in the desert communities. Appendix A 59 Map 16 — Disability by Type — Ambulatory, Self -Care and Independent Living Disability Temecula (CDBGj Name: Map 96 - Disability by Type Variation: Ambulatory. Self Care and Independent Living Disabilil Description: Dot density map ofthe population of persons with disabilities by persons with vision. hearing. cognitive. ambulatory. self -care. and independent living difficulties with RIECAPs for Jurisdiction and Legend TOC Dot Value:9 dot= 75 Disability 1 Dot =75 „t_m. Ambulatory Disability Self -Care Disability Via! Independent Living Disability RECAP This version of Map 16 depicts a dot density distribution by disability type (ambulatory, self -care, independent living). Persons with disabilities are evenly distributed throughout the City. Data was supplied by HUD based on ACS data (2008-2012). Appendix A 60 Map 16 - Disability by Type (Ambulatory, Self -Care and Independent Living Disability) Dot density map of the population of persons with dIsabilRies by persons with vision, hearing, cognitive, ambu€atory, sell -care. and independent living diTiiculties with PJECAPs for Jurlsolction antl Region Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecula, CA (063712) Jurisidiction CBSA - + GRANTEES rE ;^� ��-,�{.+�1.ycsi'+ •i4. e+ �'•b, • }�' - "" i{-•� Y*- 'cr-.••aK. Disability l.N.~e.+'. _ • • 1 Dot-75 Ambulatory Disability - - .�K; S_. i'�"''' '• ti fi r.••' t'w - Self -Care Disability .• y'-A Independent Living Disability ,Jr— •.�•` •• N;•.� �� • _4s -r �[�l••'� - RIECAP „ ,.1 ,•1 • • 1. L 0'1 • • • �� - .. . •i, t. l�j, i . • • • - . - M'q States Census Bureau• .EsA,.HERE,.DeLorme,.hlG/1.-USGS-.NPS (United Map 16 shows where persons with ambulatory, self -care and independent living disabilities are located throughout the region. While the City has some residents with disabilities, the greatest concentrations are in the north, closer to County services. Appendix A 61 Map 17 — Disability by Age Group Temecula �CDBG) Name: Map 17-Disability by Age Group Description: All persons with disabilities by age range (5-17)[18-W(65+ivoith RiECAPs Jurisdiction: Temecula rCDBG:,. Region: Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Legend TOC Dot Value: 1 dot= 75 Disability 1 Dot=75 r"-. => Disabled Ages 5-17 W Disabled Ages 18-64 Disabled Over 64 RiECAP Map 17 shows the location of people with disabilities by age. Persons with disabilities are evenly distributed throughout the City. Data was supplied by HUD based on ACS data (2008-2012). Appendix A 62 Map 17 - Disability by Age Group (Disability by Age Group) All persons with disabilities by age range (5-17)(18-64)(654) with RIECAPS Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA Region; Temecuia, CA (063712) Jurisidiction • CBSA GRANTEES )N4 7 Dot=75 Disabled Ages 5-17 • yy r , _ _ •� " 1 r r1 Disabled Ages 18-64 • Iq Disabled Over 64 00. • Via, . ti y � , • j � � ;��.•i> � • • � s+" :b'' �•: , `�; ❑ • ai '.•tz 4. 14 i'~, a• • i•} - • ''•ram . a - �• . ��.. - r` - a .. - Esri. HERE. DeLorme. NGA. USGS. NPS I United States Census Bureau Map 17 shows the ages of those with disabilities from a regional perspective. As common for other persons with disabilities, these persons have located near where County services can be easily accessed. Appendix A 63 APPENDIX B HUD -Provided Tables APPENDIX B HUD -Provided Tables Table Series Title Table 1 Demographics(2010)...................................................................................1 Table 2 Demographic Trends (1990-2010).............................................................. 2 Table 3 Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Trends (1990-2010)......................................... 3 Table 4 R/ECAPs Demographics..............................................................................4 Table 5 Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category ............................ 5 Table 6 Publicly Supported Housing Residents by Race/Ethnicity ........................... 6 Table 7 R/ECAP and Non -RECAP Demographics by Publicly Supported Housing ProgramCategory........................................................................................ 7 Table 8 Demographics of Publicly Supported Housing Development by Program Category....................................................................................................... 8 Table 9 Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs ......... 9 Table 10 Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden .............10 Table 11 Publicly Supported Housing by Program Category: Units by Number of Bedrooms and Number of Children...........................................................11 Table 12 Opportunity Indicators by Race/Ethnicity..................................................12 Table 13 Disability by Type......................................................................................13 Table 14 Disability by Age Group............................................................................ 14 Table 15 Disability by Publicly Supported Housing Program Category ................... 15 Table 1 provides a comparison in the demographic data for the City with the region including total population, the number and percentage of persons by race/ethnicity, national origin (10 most populous), Limited English Proficiency populations (LEP) (10 most populous), disability by type, sex, age range (under 18, 18-64, 65+), and households with children. The City is diverse in its racial/ethnic composition, national origin, LEP, and persons with disabilities. However, the region as a whole is even more diverse than the City. The region is the largest region in the United States and is home to many immigrant households. Demographic data is based on sample questions from the 2010 Census and may not reflect official data released by the Census Bureau. Tabl a 1- Demograph i cs (Temecula. CAC136CalJurisdiction jRioeraide-{an 9ernardinc-Cntaria. CA CGSAf Region Itane jEltnICFty # % # % White, Non -Hispanic 47,973 57.00 1,546,666 36.61 91ack, Non -Hispanic 3,265 3.2Z 301,523 7.14 Hispanic 20,991 24.94 1,996,402 47.25 Psi anorPacificlslander,Non-Hispa nit 9,172 9.71 261,593 6.19 NativL AmL-rican, Non -Hispanic 527 0.63 19,454 0.46 Other, Non -Hispanic 143 0.17 7,737 0.19 National Origin Country Country 41countryoforigin Mexico 4,702 4.EZ Mexico 553,493 13.10 #2countryoforigin Philippines 3,25-4 3.24 Philippines 62,019 1.47 #3countryoforigin Korea 659 0.65 ElSalvador 30,455 0.72 #4countryoforigin El Salvador 526 0.52 Guatemala 19,549 0.46 45countryoforigin India 467 0.46 Vietnam 19,525 0.46 #6countryoforigin Canada 361 0.36 Korea 13,565 0.44 #7countryoforigin Tri n id ad &Tobago 355 0.35 India 15,522 0.37 #Scountryoforigin Chinaexcl.Hong KGrigg &Taiwa 327 0.33 Canada 14,763 0.35 #9countryoforigin Vietnam 309 0.31 Ch i n a excl. Hong Kong Taiw 14,055 0.33 414countryoforigin England 259 0.26 Taiwan 9,245 0.22 Limited Englishi Proficiancy{LEPM Language Language Language #1 LEP Language Spanish 4,209 4.44 Spanish 533,544 12.63 #2 LEP Language Tagalog 1,304 1.33 Chinese 20,495 0.49 #3 LEP Language Korean 422 0.45 Tagalog 16,986 0.40 #4 LEP La ngu age Chinese 317 0.33 Vietnamese 12,570 0.30 NS LEP La ngu age Thai 163 0.17 Korean 11,2Z3 0.23 #6 LEP La ngu age Hindi 115 0.12 Arabic 6,335 0.16 #7 LEP Language Other Pacific Island Language 107 0.11 OtherPacific lslan 5,360 0.13 #9LEP Language Persian 102 0.11 Oth2rIndiclanguag 3,125 0.07 #9 LEP La ngu age OtherIndicLanguage 100 0.11 Cambodian 3,117 0.07 #10 LEP Language Vietnamese 97 0.10 Thai 2,576 0.06 Disability Type Hearing difficulty 2,501 2.67 126,641 3.24 Vision difficulty 1,057 1.13 W,400 2.26 Cognitivedifficulty 3,312 3.54 170,114 4.36 Ambulatorydiffculty 3,579 3.33 241,262 6.18 Self-caredifficulty 1,973 2.00 102,941 2.63 1ndependentIivingdiffculty 2,710 2.90 170,490 4.37 Sex Male 41,260 49.03 2,101,033 49.73 Female 42,393 50.97 2,123,76& 50.27 Age Under 13 25,351 30.12 1,214,696 23.75 18-64 52,110 61.92 2,570,221 60.2A 65+ 6,697 7.96 439,934 10.41 Family Type miIieswith chiIdren 12,274 56.35 500,062 50.99 -Fa Note 1: Al %represent ash a re ofth e tota I population within thejurindiction or region, except familytype, which is out oftataI families. Note 2: 10 most popu Ious places of birth and languages atthejurisdiction Ievel may not bethesame asth a 10 most popu Ious at the Region Ieve1, and a rethusIabeledseparate ly. Appendix B Table 2 shows demographic trends from 1990 through 2010. Tabular demographic trend data for the City and region, including the number and percentage of persons by race/ethnicity, total national origin (foreign born), total LEP, sex, age range (under 18, 18-64, 65+), and households with children. The City has experienced tremendous growth in the last twenty years. While all racial and ethnic groups except Native Americans have increased numerically, Hispanics and Asians have far exceeded other racial and ethnic groups proportionately. Whites are continuing to increase, but at a slower rate. This is true for the region as a whole. This is also reflected in the percentage of persons from other nations. However, those with limited English proficiency have not increased as dramatically. The number families with children, in proportion to the general population, (and correspondingly those under the age of 18) have decreased in the last ten years for both the City and region. fable 2 - Demographic Trends (Temecula, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction (Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA CBSA) Region Race/Ethnicity 1990 # % 2000 # % 2010 # % 1990 # % 2000 # % 2010 # % White, Non -Hispanic Black, Non -Hispanic Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander, Non -Hispanic Native American, Non -Hispanic 19,580 309 3,545 586 300 80.23 1.27 14.53 2.40 1.23 46,367 69.26 2,784 4.16 12,197 18.22 4,310 6.44 956 1.43 47,973 57.00 3,265 3.88 20,991 24.94 8,172 9.71 527 0.63 1,615,830 62.41 168,731 6.52 685,672 26.48 93,331 3.60 18,007 0.70 1,540,776 47.33 263,322 8.09 1,228,683 37.75 164,035 5.04 36,061 1.11 1,546,666 301,523 1,996,402 261,593 19,454 36.61 7.14 47.25 6.19 0.46 National Origin Foreign -born 2,388 9.83 7,839 11.71 15,573 15.50 360,666 13.93 612,354 18.81 920,860 21.80 LEP Limited English Proficiency 1,560 6.42 3,903 5.83 7,613 7.57 252,012 9.73 462,538 14.21 640,802 15.17 Sex Male Female 12,299 12,001 50.61 49.39 33,228 49.63 33,727 50.37 41,260 49.03 42,898 50.97 1,294,274 50.00 1,294,518 50.00 1,618,466 49.73 1,636,316 50.27 2,101,083 2,123,768 49.73 50.27 Age Under 18 18-64 65+ 7,614 14,935 1,751 31.33 61.46 7.21 23,494 35.09 38,770 57.90 4,690 7.00 25,351 30.12 52,110 61.92 6,697 7.96 771,845 29.81 1,539,215 59.46 277,732 10.73 1,044,686 32.10 1,869,817 57.45 340,280 10.45 1,214,696 2,570,221 439,934 28.75 60.84 10.41 Family Type Families with children 3,592 54.09 7,042 62.40 12,274 56.35 331,552 50.68 266,840 54.97 500,062 50.99 Note 1: All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region for that year, except family type, which is out of total families. Note 2: Data Sources: Decennial Census: ACS Appendix B 2 Table 3 Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity — Tabular race/ethnicity dissimilarity index for the City and the region. Dissimilarity index values between 0 and 39 generally indicate high integration (low segregation), values between 40 and 54 generally indicate moderate segregation, and values between 55 and 100 generally indicate a high level of segregation. Despite its tremendous growth rate, the City continues to have low dissimilarity trends meaning that there is high integration for all populations. On the other hand, the region is experiencing moderate segregation of population groups. Table 3 - Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Trends (Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, (Temecula, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction CA CBSA) Region Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Index 1990 2000 2010 1990 2000 2010 Non-White/White 2.17 11.78 18.93 32.92 38.90 41.29 Black/White 6.22 15.02 23.51 43.74 45.48 47.66 Hispanic/White 1.04 14.35 19.40 35.57 42.40 43.96 Asian or Pacific Islander/White 1 5.26 11.18 26.051 33.17 37.31 43.07 Note 1: Data Sources: Decennial Census Note 2: Refer to the Data Documentation for details (www.hudexchange.info I Appendix B Table 4 provides tabular data for the percentage of racial/ethnic groups, families with children, and national origin groups (10 most populous) for the City and region who reside in R/ECAPs (racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty). Note: The City does not have an RECAPS. As seen in many of the maps in this Assessment of Fair Housing, the region contains several RECAP areas, with the closest located approximately thirty miles away in Hemet. Table 4 - RECAP Demographics (Riverside -San Bernardi no -Onto rio, fro CBSA) (Temecula, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction Region R/ECAP Race/Ethnicity # % # % Total Population in R/ECAPs 0 - 216,883 - White, Non -Hispanic 0 31,772 14.65 Black, Non -Hispanic 0 21,220 9.78 Hispanic 0 150,371 69.33 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non -Hispanic 0 8,676 4.00 Native American, Non -Hispanic 0 938 0.43 Other, Non -Hispanic a 390 0.18 R/ECAP Family Type Total Families in R/ECAPs 6 42,614 - Families with children a 26,863 63.04 RECAP National Origin Country Country Total Population in R/ECAPs 0 - 216,883 - #1 country of origin Null 0 0.00 Mexico 50,507 23.29 #2 country of origin Null 0 a.aa El Salvador 2,563 1.18 #3 country of origin Null 0 0.00 Guatemala 1,424 0.66 #4 country of origin Null 0 0.00 Philippines 775 0.36 #5 country of origin Null 0 0.06 China excl. Hong Kong & Taiw 750 0.35 #6 country of origin Null 0 0.00 Vietnam 619 0.29 #7 country of origin Null_ 0 0.00 F.71duras 556r 0.26 #8 country of origin Null 6 0.06 urea 384F 0.18 #9 country of origin Null a 0.00 Canada 239 0.11 #10 country of origin Null 0 0.00 Taiwan 239 0.11 Note 1: 10 most populous groups at the jurisdiction level may not be the same as the 10 most populous at the Region level, and are thus labeled separately. Note 2: Data Sources: Decennial Census; ACS Note 3i Refer to the Data Documentation for details (www.hudexchange.info). Appendix B 4 Table 5 provides tabular data for total units by four categories of publicly supported housing in the Jurisdiction (Public Housing, Project -Based Section 8, Other Multifamily, Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program) for the City. The chart below does not include affordable housing projects funding with former redevelopment funds. See Appendix J for a listing of redevelopment assisted units. Table 5 - Publicly Supported Housing Units by Program Category (Temecula, CA CDSG) Jurisdiction Housing Units # % Total housing units 28,971 - Public Housing Project -based Section 8 55 0.19 Other Multifamily HCV Program 97 0.33 Note 1: Data Sources: Decennial Census; APSH Note 2. Refer to the Data Documentation for details (www.hudexchan eg info). Appendix B Table 6 provides tabular race/ethnicity data for four categories of publicly supported housing (Public Housing, Project - Based Section 8, Other Multifamily, Tenant -Based Section 8 Vouchers (HCV)) in the City, compared to the population as a whole, and to persons earning 30% annual median income (AMI), in the City. Except for Asians, all racial/ethnic groups have similar participation rates in publicly supported housing. Hispanics and Blacks have a greater proportion of participation than Whites for project -based vouchers and Blacks have a greater proportion than the other groups for tenant - based vouchers. However, the programs do not show any patterns of segregation. The chart below does not include units assisted with City redevelopment funds. See Appendix J for a listing of those units. Table 6 - Publicly Supported Housing Residents by Race/Ethnicity Race/Ethnicity (Temecula, CA CDBG) Asian or Pacific Jurisdiction White Black Hispanic Islander Housing Type # % # % # % # Public Housing Project -Based Section 8 20 37.04 11 20.37 22 40.74 0 0.00 Other Multifamily HCV Program 45 56.96 13 16.46 21 26.58 0 0.00 0-30% of AMI 1,119 53.54 120 5.74 544 26.03 145 6.94 0-50% of AMI 2,134 46.90 280 6.15 1,219 26.79 299 6.57 0-80% of AMI 4,564 51.72 409 4.63 2,504 28.37 649 7.35 (Temecula, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction 47,973 57.00 3,265 3.88 20,991 24.94 8,172 9.71 Note 1: Data Sources: Decennial Census; APSH; CHAS Note 2: #s presented are numbers of households not individuals. Note 3: Refer to the Data Documentation for details {www.hudexchange.infoL Appendix B 6 Table 7 provides tabular data on publicly supported housing units and R/ECAPs for the City. It is important to note that the City does not have any RECAPS (racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty). The chart below shows that HCV units mostly include elderly and households with disabilities, some which are families with children present. The chart below does not include units assisted with City redevelopment funds. See Appendix J for a listing of those units. Table 7 - RECAP and Nan -RECAP Demographics by Publicly Supported Housing Program Category (Temecula, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction Total # units % with a % Asian or % Families (occupied) % Elderly disability* % White % Black % Hispanic Pacific Islander with children Public Housing R/ECAP tracts Non R/ECAP tracts Project -based Section S mrml m7m R/ECAP tracts Non R/ECAP tracts 51 12.73 3.64 37.04 20.37 40.74 0.00 65.45 Other HUD Multifamily R/ECAP tracts Non R/ECAP tracts HCV Program R/ECAP tracts Non R/ECAP tracts 85 58.24 39.56 56.96 16.46 26.58 0.00 14.29 Note 1: Disability information is often reported for heads of household or spouse/co-head only. Here, the data reflect information on all members of the household. Note 2: Data Sources: APSH Note 3: Refer to the Data Documentation for details (www.hudexchange.infoj. Appendix B 7 Table 8 provides development level demographics by Public Housing, Project -Based Section 8, and Other Multifamily' for the City. This corresponds to the information presented in Table 6 for Project- Based Section 8 units. It should be noted that these totals do not reflect the units assisted with City redevelopment funds. Refer to Appendix J lists for redevelopment units. Table 8 - Demographics of Publicly Supported Housing Developments, by Program Category Project -Based Section 8 Project -Based (Temecula, CA Project -Based Households with CDBG) Jurisdiction Race/Ethnicity (%) Children (%) Developments Rancho California White 38 55 Black 20 Hispanic 40 Asian 0 Note 1: For LIHTC properties, this information will be supplied by local knowledge. Note 2: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding error. Note 3: Data Sources: APSH Note 4: Refer to the Data Documentation for details {www.hudexchange.info Appendix B 8 Table 9 provides tabular data of total households in the City and region households experiencing one or more housing burdens by race/ethnicity and family size. For this table, the City's percentages mirror the region and the nation on average, for nearly all categories for households experiencing disproportionate housing needs. Whites have the lowest percentage of problems at 47% with Hispanics having the highest for the major groups at 62%. The Native American percentage may be high, because of Pechanga tribal land that is adjacent to City limits. The same conclusion holds true for those households with severe housing problems. They again reflect the region as a whole. Table 9 - Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs Disproportionate Housing Needs ir (Temecula, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction (Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA CBSA) Region Households experiencing any of 4 housing problems' # with problems # households % with problems # with problems # households % with problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 9,490 20,034 47.37 256,080 620,415 41.28 Black, Non -Hispanic 715 1,299 55.04 56,895 95,260 59.73 Hispanic 3,790 6,099 62.24 277,970 457,795 60.72 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non-Hispani 1,330 2,449 54.31 37,730 73,754 51.16 Native American, Non -Hispanic 360 445 80.90 3,154 6,294 50.11 Other, Non -Hispanic 235 575 40.87 11,725 22,795 51.44 Totgl 15,910 30,880 SL52 643,570 1,276,315 50.42 Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 9,755 19,795 49.28 319,120 712,850 44.77 Family households, 5+ people 2,680 4,790 55.95 163,795 245,315 66.77 Non -family households 3,485 6,290 55.41 160,655 318,160 5a.50 Households experiencing any of 4 # with severe. %with severe # with severe % with severe Severe Housing Problems" problems # households problems problems # households problems Race/Ethnicity White, Non -Hispanic 4,160 20,034 20.76 126,230 620,415 20.35 Black, Non -Hispanic 375 1,299 28.87 32,105 95,260 33.70 Hispanic 2,165 6,089 35.56 176,935 457,795 38.65 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non-Hispani 620 2,449 25.32 21,145 73,754 28.67 Native American, Non -Hispanic 150 445 33.71 1,680 6,294 26.69 Other, Non -Hispanic 10D 575 17.39 6,650 22,795 29.17 Total 7,555 30,880 24.47 364,730 1,276,315 28.58 Note 1: The four housing problems are: incomplete kitchen facilities, incomplete plumbing facilities, more than 1 person per room, and cost burden greater than 30%. The four severe housing problems are: incomplete kitchen facilities, incomplete plumbing facilities, more than 1 person per room, and cost burden greater than 50%. Note 2: All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region, except household type and size, which is out of total households. Note 3: Data Sources: CHAS Note 4: Refer to the Data Documentation for details {+,v "v.hudexchange.infoj. Appendix B 9 Table 10 provides tabular data of the total number of households in the City and region experiencing severe housing burdens by race/ethnicity. The City's percentages reflect the region but the difference is not statistically significant among races/ethnicities and household types and sizes. Table 10 - Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden* (Temecula, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction (Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA CBSA) Region # with severe cost % with severe # with severe cost % with severe Race/Ethnicity burden # households cost burden burden # households cost burden White, Non -Hispanic 3,960 20,034 19.77 112,395 620,415 19.12 Black, Non -Hispanic 305 1,299 23.48 28,660 95,260 30.09 Hispanic 1,615 6,089 26.52 116,490 457,795 25.45 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non -Hispanic 515 2,449 21.03 17,020 73,754 23.08 Native American, Non -Hispanic 125 445 28.09 1,300 6,294 20.65 Other, Non -Hispanic 85 575 14.78 5,425 22,795 23.80 Total 6,605 30,880 21.39 281,290 1,216,315 22.04 Household Type and Size Family households, <5 people 4,005 19,795 20.23 145,390 712,850 20.40 Family households, 5+ people 715 4,790 14.93 51,350 245,315 20.93 Non family households 1,885 6,290 29.97 84,550 318,160 26.57 Note 1: Severe housing cost burden is defined as greater than 50% of income. Note 2: All Y. represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region, except household type and size, which is out of total households. Note 3: The It households is the denominator for the %with problems, and may differ from the # households for the table on severe housing problems. Note 4: Data Sources: CHAS Note 5: Refer to the Data Documentation for details {www.hudexchange.infoj. Appendix B 10 Table 11 provides tabular data on the number of bedrooms for units of 4 categories of publicly supported housing (Public Housing, Project -Based Section 8, Other Multifamily, HCV) for the City. The chart below does not include units assisted with City redevelopment funds. The smaller units for HCV reflect that most of the units house seniors and persons with disabilities. See Appendix J for a listing of redevelopment assisted units. Table 11 - Publicly Supported Housing by Program Category: Units by Number of Bedrooms and Number of Children (Temecula, CA COBG) Jurisdiction Households in 0. Households in 2 Households in 1 Bedroom Bedroom 3+ Bedroom Households Units Units Units with Children Housing Type # % # % # % # Public Housing Project -Based Section 8 0 0.00 23 41.82 31 56.36 36 65.45 Other Multifamily HCV Program 1 53 58.24 25 27.47 5 5.49 13 14.29 Note 1: Data Sources: APSH Note 2: Refer to the Data Documentation for details (www.hudexchange.info� Appendix B 11 Table 12 provides tabular data of opportunity indices for school proficiency, jobs proximity, labor -market engagement, transit trips, low transportation costs, low poverty, and environmental health for the City and region by race/ethnicity and among households below the Federal poverty line. In the following table, the higher scores reflect better standards for the City residents compared to the nation. In all of these indices, there is no significant difference among races and ethnicities in the City. In comparison to the national average (50%), the poverty and school proficiency indices are substantially higher, meaning the City has less poverty and better performing schools. This is especially true when compared to the region, which has scores substantially lower than the City. The labor market index is average compared to the nation, but much higher than the region. The transit and transportation indices are below the average, partly due to California's dependency on the automobile. Temecula's indices reflect the regional indices. Auto -dependency is also reflected with the average scores in the Jobs Proximity Index. There is little difference between the region and the City in its transit and jobs proximity scores. The same is true with the environmental health index, which is slightly below the national average and slightly above the regional average. Table 12- Opportunity Indicators, by Race/Ethnicity School Low Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Jobs Environmental (Temecula, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction Index Index Index Index Cost Index Proximity Index Health Index Total Population White, Non -Hispanic 71.23 82.20 49.79 37.43 19.98 43.84 40.42 Black, Non -Hispanic 67.12 80.36 47.83 39.46 23.98 43.39 39.99 Hispanic 65.42 79.0D 47.44 39.41 25.05 44.36 40.10 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non-Hispani 67.93 81.58 48.20 39.94 22.70 43.37 40.01 Native American, Mon -Hispanic 68.80 80.86 46.38 38.79 18.10 44.07 40.04 Population below federal poverty line White, Non -Hispanic 65.41 79.54 48.79 39.95 24.93 49.41 39.77 Black, Non -Hispanic 54.98 80.53 51.31 41.84 29.89 56.55 38.58 Hispanic 58.03 78.90 49.50 43.87 28.51 45.26 39.43 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non -Hispanic 46.21 73.28 44.15 43.00 35.10 57.42 38.06 Native American, Mon -Hispanic 67.95 86.26 46.72 39.52 15.77 39.32 40.93 School Low (Riverside,San Bernardino -Ontario, Low Poverty Proficiency Labor Market Transit Transportation Jobs Environmental CA CBSA) Region Index Index Index Index Cost Index Proximity Index Health Index Total Population White, Non -Hispanic 52.61 53.19 34.50 37.96 25.75 49.40 38.01 Black, Non -Hispanic 42.80 44.09 27.18 42.55 31.82 48.67 29.31 Hispanic 37.51 40.97 24.20 43.12 32.68 47.41 29.22 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non -Hispanic 60.42 58.09 43.02 41.92 29.18 48.60 26.57 Native American, Non -Hispanic 41.19 45.70 25.06 36.84 26.34 49.72 41.33 Population below federal poverty line White, Non -Hispanic 38.39 44.64 25.55 38.74 29.20 50.12 40.58 Black, Non -Hispanic 27.15 35.02 17.39 43.48 34.78 49.72 30.90 Hispanic 23.78 34.72 16.42 44.76 36.54 49.77 30.32 Asian or Pacific Islander, Non-Hispanic42.30 44.87 30.51 45.00 37.05 51.79 24.89 Native American, Mon -Hispanic 30.24 39.35 20.61 39.17 32.05 52.12 38.58 Note 1: Data Sources: Decennial Census; ACS; Great Schools; Common Core of Data; SABINS; LAI; LEHD; NATA Note 2: Refer to the Data Documentation for details {tiwvtiv.hudexchange.infol. Appendix B 12 Table 13 provides tabular data of persons with vision, hearing, cognitive, ambulatory, self -care, and independent living disabilities for the City and region. Persons may have more than one disability represented in the following table. The percentages for the City are less in all categories compared to the region. This could reflect that more services are available in the County Seats of both counties compared to the Temecula Valley. This sentiment has been echoed in community meetings and consultations. Table 13 - Disability by Type (Temecula, CA CDBG) (Riverside -San Bernardino - Jurisdiction Ontario, CA CBSA) Region Disability Type # % # % Hearing difficulty 2,501 2.67 126,641 3.24 Vision difficulty 1,057 1.13 88,400 2.26 Cognitive difficulty 3,312 3.54 170,114 4.36 Ambulatory difficulty 3,579 3.83 241,262 6.18 Self -care difficulty 1,873 2.00 102,841 2.63 Independent living difficulty 2,710 2.90 170,490 4.37 Note 1: All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region. Note 2: Data Sources: ACS Note 3: Refer to the Data Documentation for details (www.hudexchange.infol Appendix B 13 Table 14 provides data of persons with disabilities by age range (5-17, 18-64, and 65+) for the City and region. The table reflects the greatest numbers of those with disabilities are adults between ages 18 and 64 followed by the elderly. To draw a conclusion of need, this data is skewed due to the age span of categories. Proportionately, the City has fewer persons with disabilities, except for children. This sentiment was also echoed in the community meetings. Table 14 - Disability by Age Group (Temecula, CA CDBG) (Riverside -San Bernardino - Jurisdiction Ontario, CA CBSA) Region Age of People with Disabilities # % # % age 5-17 with Disabilities 1,097 1.17 37,092 0.95 age 18-64 with Disabilities 4,114 4.40 241,640 6.19 age 65+with Disabilities 2,823 3.02 174,002 4.46 Note 1: All % represent a share of the total population within the jurisdiction or region. Note 2: Data Sources: ACS Note 3: Refer to the Data Documentation for details (www.hudexchange.info Appendix B 14 Table 15 provides tabular data on disability and publicly supported housing for the City and region. The chart below does not include units assisted with City redevelopment funds. See Appendix J for a listing of affordable housing projects funded by redevelopment. Table 15 - Disability by Publicly Supported Housing Program Category People with a (Temecula, CA CDBG) Jurisdiction Disability* # �o Public Housing Project -Based Section 8 2 3.64 Other Multifamily HCV Program 36 39.56 (Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario, CA CBSA) Region Public Housing 189 11.67 Project -Based Section 8 630 10.36 Other Multifamily 98 4.80 HCV Program 4,478 27.11 Note 1: The definition of "disability" used by the Census Bureau may not be comparable to reporting requirements under HUD programs. Note 2: Data Sources: ACS Note 3: Refer to the Data Documentation for details (www.hudexchange. info). Appendix B 15 APPENDIX C City of Temecula Assessment of Fair Housing Resident Surveys APPENDIX D City of Temecula Assessment of Fair Housing Stakeholder Survey The Heart of Southern California Wine Country iGracias por participar en esta encuesta! El Ayuntamiento de la Ciudad de Temecula esta preparando el Plan Consolidado 2017-2021 y una Evaluacion de Vivienda Justa tal y como to requiere el Departamento de Vivienda y Desarrollo Urbano de los Estados Unidos (HUD, por sus siglas en ingles). Esta Encuesta de Residentes proporcionara aportaciones por parte de los residentes de la comunidad con respecto a la vivienda justa, vivienda asequible, desarrollo comunitario, desarrollo economico y otras necesidades de los residentes de la ciudad. El Plan Consolidado le permite al Ayuntamiento de la Ciudad de Temecula utilizar los fondos de Subsidios Globales para el Desarrollo Comunitario (CDBG) para mejorar la calidad de vida de sus residentes. Esta encuesta debe tomar alrededor de 5-7 minutos para completarla. Sus respuestas seran confidenciales y unicamente utilizadas junto con todas las respuestas. El resultado de la encuesta sera incorporado al reporte del Plan Consolidad y Evaluacion de Vivienda Justa del Ayuntamiento. Las respuestas a las preguntas de esta encuesta son un componente esencial para el proceso de planificacion de Temecula. Si necesita asistencia o tiene preguntas con respecto a la encuesta, por favor comuniquese con Dean Huseby, Consultante de CDBG, al correo electronico: dhuseby@mdg-Idm.com * 1. �Actualmente usted vive en la Ciudad de Temecula? Si No The Heart of Southern California Wine Country de Temecula Satisfaccion de la Vivienda * 2. En general, �que tan satisfecho o insatisfecho esta usted con su casa o apartamento? Seleccione uno, en la escala del 1 al 4, donde 1 indica "Extremadamente Insatisfecho" y 4 indica "Extremadamente Satisfecho"? Extremadamente Extremadamente No aplica, no vivo Insatisfecho Insatisfecho Satisfecho Satisfecho en Temecula Si selecciono extremadamente insatisfecho o insatisfecho, enumere hasta 3 razones por las cuales usted no esta satisfecho con su casa o apartamento: 2 3. Si usted pudiera cambiar algo acerca de su situacion actual de vivienda. �cua seria? L Yo no cambiaria nada acerca de mi situacion actual de vivienda. n Yo actualmente rento, pero me gustaria comprar/ser dueno de mi casa. [I Yo viviria en una parte diferente de Temecula. Yo soy dueno de una casa, y me gustaria venderla. [-I Me gustaria vivir en otra comunidad diferente en vez de Temecula. Otro (por favor especifique) I 3 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country 0 PrAPF*!d� Insatisfaccion de la Vivienda 4. Si esta insatisfecho, enumere por to menos 3 razones por las cuales usted esta insatisfecho con su casa o apartamento: 2. F 3. F 0 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country Satisfaccion de la Vivienda * 5. �Actualmente usted renta o es propietario? u Rento u Propietario Otro (por favor especifique) 5 The Heart of Southern California Wine Country de Temecula Preguntas a Propietarios de Casa * 6. �Actualmente usted debe mas dinero por la casa en comparacion a su valor actual? Si No No se m 7. �Que tan preocupado esta usted con la posibilidad de que le suceda una ejecucion de prestamo hipotecario? Seleccione uno, en la escala del 1 al 4, donde 1 indica "No estoy preocupado en absoluto" y 4 indica "Extremadamente Preocupado"? No estoy preocupado en to absolute Algo preocupado Preocupado Extremadamente Preocupado C 0 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country 0 PrAPF*!d� Preguntas a Arrendatarios * 8. �Que tal facil o dificil fue para usted encontrar una unidad de arrendamiento que estuviera a su alcance financiero en Temecula, en la escala del 1 al 4, donde 1 indica "Extremadamente Dificil" y 9 "Extremadamente Facil"? Extremadamente Dificil Dificil Facil Extremadamente Facil O O 7 9. Si usted quiere comprar una casa en Temecula, �por que no to ha hecho? (Seleccione todos los que apliquen). u No tengo suficiente dinero para el enganche. u No puedo sostener un prestamo hipotecario. u No puedo sostener el costo de mantenimiento asociado con la propiedad de vivienda. Tengo mal credito. U No puedo encontrar la casa que quiero comprar. Planteo mudarme a otra ciudad. u No aplica; no deseo comprar una casa. U Otro (por favor especifique) I The Heart of Southern California Wine Country Iqw Necesidades de Vivienda y Desarrollo Comunitario Considere las necesidades en Temecula. Seleccione tres necesidades principales dentro de cada categoria de actividades admisibles. * 10. Instalaciones Comunitaria (puede seleccionar hasta 3) F--I Centros para Personas de la ❑ Parques e Instalaciones de Estaciones de Bomberos y 3ra. Edad Recreacion Equipo ❑ Centros para Jovenes L Instalaciones para el Cuidado Bibliotecas ❑ Guarderias Infantiles de la Salud ❑ No hay necesidad bajo esta ❑ Centros Comunitarios categoria * 11. Infraestructura (puede seleccionar hasta 3) LJ Mejoras de Drenaje Mejoras de Agua/Alcantarillados L I Mejoras de Calles/Callejones ❑ Alumbrado Publico ❑ Mejoras de Banquetas Mejoras segun la Ley de Americanos Discapacitados (ADA) (banquetas, rampas, espacios accesibles de estacionamiento, etc.) No hay necesidad bajo esta categoria 9 12. Necesidades Especiales (puede seleccionar hasta tres) ❑ Centros/Servicios para ❑ Servicios para Abuso de ❑ Centros para Ninos Discapacitados Drogas Desamparados/Abusados y .qarvirinc I I Mejoras de Accesibilidad u Servicios para Violencia Domestica ❑ Albergues para Personas sin Hogar/Servicios Centros para Tratamiento de HV/AIDS & Servicios * 13. Servicios Comunitarios (puede seleccionar hasta tres) L i Actividades para Personas de la 3ra. Edad L Actividades para Jovenes n Servicios de Guarderias Infantiles Servicios de Transportacion LJ Programas Contra el Crimen ❑ Servicios para la Salud Servicios para la Autosuficiencia de la Familia No hay necesidad bajo esta categoria Servicios para la Salud Mental Servicios de Asesoria Legal ❑ No hay necesidad bajo esta categoria * 14. Servicios para Vecindarios (puede seleccionar hasta tres) [J Plantacion de Arboles n Limpieza de Basura y Escombros L, Limpieza de Grafito Imposicion de Codigos de Orden Publico ❑ Instalaciones para Estacionamientos [ Limpieza de Lotes Baldios y Edificios Abandonados * 15. Negocios y Empleos (puede seleccionar hasta tres) Asistencia para el Inicio de un Negocio L Prestamos para Empresas Pequenas n Creacion/Retencion de Empleos Capacitacion de Empleos ❑ Mejoras de Fachadas ❑ Asesoramiento Empresarial No hay necesidad bajo esta categoria Rehabilitacion Comercial/Industrial No hay necesidad bajo esta categoria 10 * 16. Vivienda (puede seleccionar hasta tres) ❑ Mejoras de Accesibilidad ❑ Viviendas para Discapacitados (rampas, levantamientos de ❑Viviendas para Personas de la sillas de ruedas, barras de sostenimiento, barandales, 3ra. Edad timbres de puertas visuales y Viviendas para Familias alarmas de humo/mon6xido de Grandes (mas de 5 personas) carbon) F—I Mejoras/Rehabilitacion de Viviendas Ocupadas por sus Propietarios Mejoras/Rehabilitacion de Viviendas de Arrendamiento n Asistencia para Comprar Casa I Vivienda de Arrendamiento Asequible Servicios para Vivienda Justa Eliminaci6n y Prueba de Pintura con Base de Plomo Mejoras de Eficiencia Energ6tica Vivienda Primordialmente para J6venes Acogidos Temporalmente Vivienda para la Unificaci6n de Familias No hay necesidad bajo esta categoria 11 The Heart of Southern California Wine Country Eleccion de Vivienda Justa La vivienda justa es una condicion en la cual los individuos de niveles de ingresos similares en el mismo mercado de vivienda tienen variedades de eleccion disponibles para ellos in depend ientemente de raza, color, ascendencia, origen de nacionalidad, religion, sexo, discapacidad, estado civil, estado familiar, o cualquier otro factor arbitrario. Como parte del proceso de planificacion, el Ayuntamiento de la Ciudad de Temecula debe analizar los factores asociados con la eleccion de vivienda y discriminacion. Por favor responda a las siguientes preguntas: * 17. �,Cree usted que exista discriminacion de vivienda en su vecindario? ( ) s i (:) No * 18. �Alguna vez usted ha experimentado discriminacion para obtener o mantener vivienda? U si No 12 The Heart of Southern Califomia Wine Country Discriminacion de Vivienda Si usted siente que pudo haber sido discriminado, comuniquese con la oficina del Concejo de Vivienda Justa del Municipio de Riverside al (951) 371-6518. Los servicios proporcionados por el Concejo de Vivienda Justa del Municipio de Riverside son gratuitos y estan disponibles para todos los residents. * 19. �Quien cree que to ha discriminado? (� Propietario/Administrador de la Propiedad C Agente de Bienes Raices C Prestamista Hipotecario C Asegurador Hipotecario C Otro (por favor especifique) 13 * 20. �En que se basa a que usted pudo haber sido discriminado? C Raza C Color C Origen de Nacionalidad C Genero u Edad U Religion U Estado Familiar (padre soltero/madre soltera, divorciado(a)) U Discapacidad Otro (por favor especifique) 21. �Si usted cree que ha experimentado discriminacion?, Flo denuncio? C Si 0 No 14 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country Discriminacion de Vivienda 22. �Por que usted decidio no denunciar la discriminacion de vivienda? (J No se a donde puedo denunciarlo Demasiados problemas C Miedo a represalias C No creo que vaya a crear alguna diferencia C Otro (por favor especifique) 15 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country 0 PrAPV*!d� Empleo 23. �Actualmente esta empleado el individuo quien tipicamente sirve como la fuente principal de ingresos de su hogar? u Si, tiene empleo No, desempleado y actualmente buscando empleo C No, desempleado y no esta buscando empleo U Jubilado 16 The Heart of Southern Califomia Wine Country Iqw Informacion Demografica 24. Onicamente para el proposito de clasificacion, �cual categoria describe el total del ingreso anual de su hogar? u Menos de $10,000 C $10,000 a $25,000 C $25,001 a $35,000 L $35,001 a $50,000 C $50,001 a $75,000 C $75,001 a $100,000 25. �Cual es su origen etnico? Hispano C No Soy Hispano C $100,001 a $125,000 C Ws de $125,000 17 26. �Cual es su raza? (marque todos los que apliquen) C Indio Americano/Nativo Alaskeno C Asiatico C Negro/Afroamericano C Isleno del Pacrfico u Blanco U Multi -Racial U Otro (por favor especifique) F 27. jiene ninos menores de 18 anos viviendo en su casa? Si C No 28. Incluyendose usted, �cuantas personas viven en su hogar? 1 persona 4 personas 7 personas 2 personas C 5 personas C 8 o mas personas 3 personas 6 personas In Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country de Temecula Necesidades Especiales 29. �AlgOn miembro de su hogar tiene alguna discapacidad mental o fisica? C Si, discapacidad mental U Si, discapacidad fisica C Si, ambas discapacidades fisica y mental C No 19 The Heart of Southern California Wine Country OAPV*!d� � 0 pr 30. �Actualmente su casa satisface las necesidades del miembro(s) discapacitado(s) de su hogar? si No (por favor describa que es to que necesita para proporcionar las necesidades al/los miembro(s) discapacitado(os) de su hogar en la siguiente seccion para comentarios. Otro (por favor especifique) 20 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country 0 PrAPF*!d� Area de Residencia * 31. Por favor indique el codigo postal o el area de Temecula en la cual usted vive: 21 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country Gracias iLe agradecemos su participacion en esta encuesta/ Si usted tiene alguna pregunta acerca de esta encuesta, la evaluacion de vivienda justa o del Plan Consolidad, por favor comuniquese con Dean Huseby al correo electronico: dhuseby@mdg-ldm.com 22 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country PAM n Su City of Temecula Fair Housing and Consolidated Plaid Thank you for taking part in this survey! The City of Temecula is preparing the 2017-2021 Consolidated Plan and an Assessment of Fair Housing as required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). This Resident Survey will be provide input from the community regarding fair housing, affordable housing, community development, economic development and other needs of its residents. The Consolidated Plan allows Temecula to utilize Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to enhance the quality of life of its residents. This survey should take about 5-7 minutes to complete. Your responses will be confidential and only used together with all of the responses. The survey result will be incorporated in the City's Consolidated Plan and Assessment of Fair Housing report. Your responses to these questions are an essential component of Temecula's planning process. Should you need assistance or have questions regarding the survey, please contact Dean Huseby, CDBG Consultant at dhuseby(&mdg-Idm.com. * 1. Do you currently live in the City of Temecula? Yes No The Heart of Southern California Wine Country Ab City of Temecula Fair Housing and Consolidated Plan Surrve Housing Satisfaction * 2. In general, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your home or apartment, on a scale from 1-4, where 1 indicates "Extremely Dissatisfied" and 4 indicates "Extremely Satisfied"? N/A - I do not live in 1. Extremely Dissatisfied 2. Dissatisfied 3. Satisfied 4. Extremely Satisfied Temecula If extremely dissatisfied or dissatisfied, list up to 3 reasons you are not satisfied with your home or apartment: 2 * 3. If you could change one thing about your current living situation, what would it be? ❑ I wouldn't change anything about my current living situation. ❑ I currently rent, but would like to buy/own my home. ❑ I would live in a different part of Temecula. ❑ 1 own a home, and would like to sell. ❑ I would like to live in a different community other than Temecula. ❑ Other (please specify) F 3 ^% The Heart of Southern California Wine Country Housing Dissatisfaction 4. If dissatisfied, list up to 3 reasons you are dissatisfied with your home or apartment: 0 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country As City of Temecula Fair Housing and Consolidated Plan Survey Housing Satisfaction * 5. Do you currently rent or own your home? C Rent C Own C Other (please specify) 5 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country As City of Temecula Fair Housing and Consolidated Plan Survey4m Homeowner Questions * 6. Do you currently owe more money on your home than it is worth? U Yes U No I don't know * 7. How concerned are you about your home going into foreclosure on a scale from "1" to "4," where 1 indicates "Not at all concerned" and 4 indicates "Extremely Concerned?" 1. Not at all Concerned 2. Somewhat Concerned 3. Concerned 4. Extremely Concerned O O O J The Heart of Southern California Wine Country iPF City of • • and Consolidated Plan Surveylift Renter Questions * 8. How difficult or easy was it for you to find a rental unit you could afford in Temecula on a scale from 1 to 4, where 1 indicates "Extremely Difficult" and 9 indicates "Extremely Easy"? 1. Extremely Difficult 2. Difficult 3. Easy 4. Extremely Easy * 9. If you want to buy a home in Temecula, why haven't you? (Select all that apply.) C 1 do not have enough money for a down payment. u I cannot afford a mortgage. u I cannot afford the maintenance costs associated with homeownership. I have poor credit. u I cannot find a home I want to buy. C I plan to move to another city. C Not applicable; I do not want to buy a home. U Other (please specify) C 7 The Heart of Southern California Wine Country i Housing and Community Development Needs Consider the needs in Temecula. Select the top three needs within each category of eligible activities. Do not choose more than three per category. * 10. Community Facilities (Choose up to three) ❑ Senior Centers [J Park & Recreational Facilities ❑ Fire Stations & Equipment ❑ Youth Centers ❑ Health Care Facilities ❑ Libraries ❑ Child Care Centers ❑ Community Centers ❑ No need in this category * 11. Infrastructure (Choose up to three) ❑ Drainage Improvement ❑ Street Lighting [ No need in this category [� Water/Sewer Improvement ❑ Sidewalk Improvements L Street/Alley Improvement [ ADA Improvements (sidewalk ramps, accessible parking spaces, etc.) .01 * 12. Special Needs (Choose up to three) ❑ Centers/Services for Disabled ❑ Substance Abuse Services Neglected/Abused Children ❑ Accessibility Improvements ❑ Homeless Shelters/Services Center and Services Family Self -Sufficiency ❑ Domestic Violence Services HIV/AIDS Centers & Services Services No need in this category * 13. Community Services (Choose up to three) ❑ Senior Activities ❑ Transportation Services Mental Health Services ❑ Youth Activities ❑ Anti -Crime Programs Legal Services ❑ Child Care Services ❑ Health Services No need in this category * 14. Neighborhood Services (Choose up to three) U Tree Planting Code Enforcement No need in this category ❑ Trash & Debris Removal Parking Facilities ❑ Graffiti Removal Cleanup of Abandoned Lots and Buildings * 15. Businesses and Jobs (Choose up to three) ❑ Start-up Business Assistance Employment Training Commercial/Industrial ❑ Small Business Loans ❑ Facade Improvements Rehabilitation ❑ Job Creation/Retention ❑ Business Mentoring No need in this category Z * 16. Housing (Choose up to three) ❑ Accessibility Improvements Housing for Disabled Energy Efficiency (ramps, wheelchair lifts, grab Improvements h bH I Senior Housing ars, andrai s, visua door bells and smoke/carbon Housing for Former Foster Housing for Large Families (5+ monoxide alarms) people) Youth ❑ Owner -Occupied Housing Improvements / Rehabilitation ❑ Rental Housing Improvements / Rehabilitation ❑ Homeownership Purchase Assistance ❑ Affordable Rental Housing Fair Housing Services Lead -Based Paint Testing and Abatement Housing for Family Unification No need in this category 10 The Heart of Southern California Wine Country AAAPF City of Temecula Fair Housing and Consolidated Plan Surve Fair Housing Choice Fair housing is a condition in which individuals of similar income levels in the same housing market have like ranges of choice available to them regardless of race, color, ancestry, national origin, religion, sex, disability, marital status, familial status, or any other arbitrary factor. As part of the planning process, the City of Temecula must analyze the factors associated with housing choice and discrimination. Please respond to the following questions: * 17. Do you believe housing discrimination exists in your neighborhood? Yes C No * 18. Have you ever experienced discrimination in obtaining or maintaining housing? Yes No 11 The Heart of Southern California Wine Country AAA City of Temecula Fair Housing and Consolidated Plan Surve Housing Discrimination If you feel you may have been discriminated against, please contact the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County at (951) 371-6518. The services provided by the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County are free of charge and are available to all residents. * 19. Who do you believe discriminated against you? U Landlord/Property Manager C Real Estate Agent C Mortgage Lender u Mortgage Insurer Other (please specify) L 12 * 20. On what basis do you believe you were discriminated against? C Race C Color �j National Origin C Gender u Age U Religion U Familial Status (ex. single -parent) U Disability Other (please specify) I 21. If you believe you have experienced housing discrimination, did you report it? 0 Yes 0 No 13 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country As City of Temecula Fair Housing and Consolidated Plan Survey4ft Housing Discrimination 22. Why did you decide not to report the housing discrimination? C Don't know where to report C Too much trouble C Afraid of retailiation Don't believe it makes any difference Other (please specify) L 14 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country PF i City of • • and Consolidated Plan SurveAft Employment 23. Is the individual who typically serves as the primary source of income for your household currently employed? U Yes, employed C No, unemployed and currently seeking employment C No, unemployed and not seeking employment Retired 15 The Heart of Southern California Wine Country i Demographic Information 24. Just for classification purposes, which category best describes your total annual household income? U Less than $10,000 C $10,000 to $25,000 C $25,001 to $35,000 25. What is your ethnicity? Hispanic Non -Hispanic C $35,001 to $50,000 C $50,001 to $75,000 C $75,001 to $100,000 C $100,001 to $125,000 C More than $125,000 16 26. What is your race? (Mark all that apply) C American Indian or Alaska Native C Asian C Black / African American C Pacific Islander u White U Multi -Racial u Other (please specify) 27. Are there children living in your home that are younger than 18 years of age? C Yes C No 28. Including yourself, how many people live in your household? 1 people 4 people 7 people 2 people C 5 people 8 or more people 3 people 6 people 17 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country Surve City of Temecula Fair Housing and Consolidated Plan Special Needs 29. Do any members of your household have a mental or physical disability? C Yes, mental disability C Yes, physical disability C Yes, both mental and physical disability (J No IN Aft ^% C( The Heart of Southern California Wine Country WAPF go City of Temecula Fair Housing and Consolidated Plan Surve Special Needs 30. Does your current home meet the needs of the disabled members of your household? Yes No (Please describe what is needed to meet the needs of the disabled household member(s) in the comment box below) Other (please specify) 19 Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country City of Temecula Fair Housing and Consolidated Plan Survey Area of Residence * 31. Please list the zip code or area of Temecula you live in: L Aft The Heart of Southern California Wine Country n SuPF City of Temecula Fair Housing and Consolidated Plaid AM Thank You Thank you for participating in this survey! If you have any questions about the survey, the Assessment of Fair Housing or the Consolidated Plan, please contact Dean Huseby at dhuseby@mdg-ldm.com. 21 APPENDIX E City of Temecula Stakeholder Consultation List Stakeholder Consultation List Agency Type Acacia Park Apartments Affordable Housing Affirmed Housing Affordable Housing AMCAL Multi -Housing Affordable Housing Assistance League of Temecula Valley Youth Atria Senior Living Senior Autism Society Inland Empire Health Better Days ARF Seniors Boys and Girls Club of Southwest County Youth Services Bridge Housing Affordable Housing Building Industry Association Housing California Apartment Association Inland Empire Rental Property California State University San Marcos, Temecula Education Cameron Historical Building Affordable Housing Canine Support Teams Persons with Disabilities Catholic Charities Social Services Circle of Care Ministries Food Bank City of Murrieta Adjacent City City of Temecula Various departments Coachella Valley Housing Coalition Affordable Housing Community Access Center Disabled Community Mission of Hope Homeless provider Comprehensive Autism Center Health Services County of Riverside Department of Social Services Social Services County of Riverside Economic Development Agency Local Government County of Riverside Health Department Health Services Appendix E Stakeholder Consultation List Agency Type Riverside University Health System — Behavioral Health, Homeless Housing Opportunities, Partnerships & Education Program Mental Health Court Appointed Special Advocate of Riverside County Youth Services Creekside Senior Apartments Senior Housing Desert AIDS AIDS Service Provider Economic Development of Southwest California Economic Development Fair Housing Counsel of Riverside County, Inc. Fair Housing Foothill AIDS AIDS Fountain Glen at Temecula Senior Housing Front Street Plaza Affordable Housing Go Banana Special Needs GRID Alternatives Affordable Housing Habitat for Humanity Inland Valley Affordable Housing Heritage Mobile Home Estates Affordable Housing Hitzke Consulting Affordable Housing Hospice of the Valleys Healthcare Housing Authority of the County of Riverside Public Housing Authority Hugs Foster Family Agency Developmental disabilities Iglesia Bautista del Valle de Temecula Faith Based Inland Regional Center Developmental disabilities Jamboree Housing Affordable Housing Jesus Love Church Faith based John Stewart Company Affordable Housing Ken Follis Realtor, developer League of Women Voters Non profit Legacy Ridge Developmental disabilities Love of Christ Fellowship Church Faith based Madera Vista Apartments Affordable Housing Appendix E Stakeholder Consultation List Agency Type Margarita Summit Apartments Affordable Housing Michelle's Place Healthcare Mission Village Apartments Affordable Housing Morning Ridge Apartments Affordable Housing Mt San Jacinto College Education NAACP Protected Class Nu -Way International Christian Ministries Faith based Oak Tree Apartments Affordable Housing Our Nicholas Foundation Autism Palomar Heritage Affordable Housing Pechanga Casino and Resort Employer Path of Life Ministries Homeless provider Portola Terrace Apartments Affordable Housing Project Touch Homeless provider Rancho California Apartments Affordable housing Rancho Community Church Faith based Rancho Creek Apartments Affordable Housing Rancho en Espanol Faith based Rancho West Apartments Affordable Housing Renee Jennex Small Family Health care Riverbank Village Apartments Affordable Housing Riverside Area Rape Crisis Center Domestic Violence Riverside City and County Continuum of Care Homeless provider Riverside County Office on Aging Senior Services Riverside County Veterans Services Veterans Riverside County Sheriff's Department Crime protection Riverside Transit Agency Transportation Rochelle Sherman Small Family Affordable Housing Appendix E Stakeholder Consultation List Agency Type SAFE Alternatives for Everyone Domestic Violence Safety Research Associates, Inc. Special Needs and Senior Housing Senior Care Referral Specialists Senior Services Senior Citizens Service Center Food Bank Food Bank Single Mothers in Rewarding Fellowship (SMURF) Youth Services Solari Enterprises Affordable Property Management Southwest Riverside County Association of Realtors Housing St. Catherine's Catholic Church Faith based State Council on Developmental Disabilities Developmental Disabilities TEAM Evangelical Assistance Ministries Food Bank Temecula City Planning Commission City Commission Temecula City Community Services Commission City Commission Temecula City Public Safety Commission City Commission Temecula Convention and Visitors Bureau Business Community Temecula Murrieta Rescue Mission Homeless Services Provider Temecula Reflection Townhouses Affordable Housing Temecula Homeless Coalition Homeless provider Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Business Community Temecula Valley Historical Society Non Profit Organization Temecula Valley Hospital Health Services Temecula Valley Therapy Disabled Temecula Valley Unified School District Education Temecula Valley Winegrowers Association Employer The Center for Life Change Drug Treatment U.S. Vets Initiative Veterans VA Loma Linda Healthcare Veterans Vintage View Apartments Affordable housing Voice of Children Youth Services Appendix E Stakeholder Consultation List Agency Type Warehouse at Creekside Apartments Affordable Housing Wells Fargo Business Community Western Riverside Council of Governments Regional Government Note: For some agencies, there are multiple stakeholders, but the agency is only listed once. Appendix E . 0 ALL %&k� � �� ■�� F�:■��_ ■ �� �ee :PM L �r§P■�_ �l�■ jE.-�\\ L�_�� _ APPENDIX G City of Temecula Map of Eligible CDBG Areas l mlye Up"op.R CDBG - LOW AND MODERATE INCOME AREA MAP 2010 CENSUS AREAS rAs of July 1.2014y LEGENU: ---- CIfYBOUNDWY LOW AND MODERATE INCOME BLOCK GR C1l1P3 CENSUSTRACK BLOCK GROUP Lake APPENDIX H Public Transportation Maps Proximity to Major Employers sad 8ala�g Murdeta Hot Spnnga Rd �._._._._._._._._._._._._.f 1 � r-F NS`okay R z' mN �fia Norte n@ tyan�ha yfka Ry gay page® Ra Ranc �Cdyfor^ .` ..e ..• ye '9qo� n R e °o De pot�� d IC t. `9 TmnecWa Creek scale. oN� u16'�I11Y i7 ..... 14�e Y'Jinc :.cun_r�a 1I:T_1,12461k2410W&T1,16:1 A I�11iYANZK TRANSPORTATION -RIVERSIDE TRANSIT Temecula -Murrieta-W ildomar © County Center W Pechanga ResorifTemecula Valley Hospital 9 Promenade Mall-Harveston Hemet -Winchester -Temecula Murrieta-Temecula-Oceanside Transit Center Temecula-Murrieta-Sun City -Perris Moreno Valley -Riverside Downtown Terminal Temecula-Murriela-Lake Elsinore Corona Transit Center ® San Jacinto -Hemet -Temecula -Escondido EMPLOYERS 1 Temecula Valley Urilied School District 2 Abbott Laboratories 3 Professional Hospital Supply 4 Intarnalional Rectifier 6 Cestco Wholesale Corporation 6 Macy's 7 EMD Millipore 8 Norm Reeves Auto Group 9 Milgard Manufacludi 10 Southwest Traders Appendix H 1 Public Transportation Maps Proximity to Public Facilities Mumm, Not Sod— ea R��w via<ertn i{ aa4°ad 'n scale: o� m� as OT ll The Heart of southern C.Gfo i, wine C-7, TRANSIT LINES AND PUBLIC FACILITIES ti y kPky �.— pB6,�,o i iO PUBLIC FACILITIES 1 Bahia Vista Park 2 Butterfield Stage Park 3 Call Aragon Park 4 Community Recreation Center 6 Crowne Hill Park 6 Hai Community Park 1 7 Harveston Lake Park �J 6 John Magee Park 9 Kent Huntergardl Park 10 Loma Linda Park 11 Long Canyon Creek Park 12 Margarita Community Park/YMCA 13 Meadows Park 14 Nakayama Park 15 Nicolas Road Park 16 Old Town Parking Garage 17 Pablo Alps Park 18 Pala Community Park 19 Paloma del Sal Park 20 Pasco Gallante Park 21 Patricia H. Birdsall Sports Park 22 P Rid P k TRANSPORTATION -RIVERSIDE TRANSIT auba ge ar 23 Redhawk Community Park Temecula-Murrieta-Wiktlomar 24 Riverton Park 25 Ronald Reagan Sports Park County Center to Pechanga 26 Rotary Park ResortlTemecula Valley Hospital 27 Sam Hicks Monument Park O Promenade Mall-Harveston 26 Serena Hills Park 29 Stephen Linen Jr. Park Q Hemet -Winchester -Temecula 30 Sunset Park 31 Temecula Creek Trail Park 15 Murrieta-Tamecula-Oceanside Transit Center 32 Temecula Duck Pend 33 Temeku Hills Park Temecula-Murrieta-Sun City -Perris 34 Temecula Skate Park Moreno Valley -Riverside Downtown Terminal 35 City Hall Temecula-Marrieta-Lake Elsinore 36 Vail Ranch Park 37 Veteran's Park Corona Transit Center 38 Voorburg Park San Jacinto-Hemet-Temecula-Escondidc 39 Winchester Cresk Park Appendix H 2 Public Transportation Maps Proximity to Publicly Assisted Housing Ink as ll lli�a Nr�.i� of �n�!h�rii •_ali- TRANSIT LINES AND HOUSING PROJECTS MIrdela Hot Springs Rd TRANSPORTATION -RIVERSIDE TRANSIT Temecula-Morriets-W i ldc mar County Center to Pechanga ResorllTemecula Valley Hospital 'Q Promenade Mali-Harveslon Hemet -Winchester -Temecula IM Murrieta-Temecula-Oceanside Transit Center Q Temecula-Mvrrieta-Sun City -Perris Moreno Valley -Riverside Downlovrn Terminal Temecula-Murrieta-Lake Elsinore Corona Transit Center San Jacinto -Hemel -Temecula -Escondido - HOUSING PROJECTS RDAFUNDED 1 Rancho Wesl 2 Mission Village 3 Rancho Creek 4 Riverbank 5 Camaron Historical Building (Dalton II) 6 Palomar Building (Dalton III) 7 Temecula Reflections S Warehouse at Creekside 9 Madera Vista 10 Portola Terrace 11 Front Street Plaza NON-ROA FUNDED 12 Oak Tree Apartments 13 Rancho Calirornia Apartments 14 Creekside Apartments Appendix H APPENDIX I List of Public Service Agencies Served by the CDBG Program and General Fund 2015-2016 Public Service Program Amount Source Funded All From the Heart - Wheels For Warriors $ 5,000 General Fund Assistance League of Temecula Valley (ALTV) - Building and $ 5,000 General Fund Grounds Improvements and Maintenance Assistance League of Temecula Valley (ALTV) — Operation $ 7,892 CDBG Funds School Bell Program Birth Choice of Temecula — Pregnancy resource materials/services $ 5,000 General Fund — Update material Boys and Girls Club of Southwest County — Before and After $ 7,892 CDBG Funds School Care for Kids Program California VFW Motorcycle Club Empire — Food boxes for $ 1,500 General Fund veterans /families in Temecula —Food boxes and emergency funds Community Mission of Hope — Inclement Weather Shelter $ 7,892 CDBG Funds Program Fair Housing Council of Riverside County — Fair Housing $ 10,000 CDBG Funds Program GRID Alternatives — Solar Affordable Housing Program $ 12,000 CDBG Funds God's Fan Club dba Project T.O.U.C.H. — Shared and Homeless $ 500 General Fund Prevention Program — basic necessities for homeless Habitat for Humanity Inland Valley - A Brush with Kindness - offset home improvement costs to seniors, disabled and low- $ 1,500 General Fund income homeowners Habitat for Humanity Inland Valley — Critical Home Maintenance $ 26,223 CDBG Funds and Repair Program Hospice of the Valleys - Senior Assistance Program -end of life $ 5,000 General Fund services Just Add One — Job Training Program $ 7,892 CDBG Funds Michelle's Place Breast Cancer Resource Center - Breast Health $ 5,000 General Fund Assistance Our Nicholas Foundation - Peace of Mind (safety kits for autistic $ 5,000 General Fund families) Thessalonika Family Services dba Rancho Damacitas — Independent Living Program for 14-18 year olds on Rancho $ 1,000 General Fund Damacitas Campus Appendix I Rose Again Foundation — The Kids of Summer $ 2,000 General Fund Rotary Club of Temecula Foundation - Holiday Food Baskets $ 5,000 General Fund SAFE Alternatives for Everyone — SAFE Domestic Violence $ 7,892 CDBG Funds Services Senior Citizens Service Center of the Temecula Rancho Area, Inc. $ 5,000 General Fund - Food Distribution Senior Citizens Service Center — Emergency Food Assistance $ 7,892 CDBG Funds Program Single Mothers United in Rewarding Fellowship (SMURF) — $ 7,892 CDBG Funds SMURF Assistance Program Special Olympics Temecula Valley — Training Programs $ 2,500 General Fund T.E.A.M. Evangelical Assistance Ministries — Food Distribution $ 5,000 General Fund T.E.A.M. Evangelical Assistance Ministries — Temecula $ 7,892 CDBG Funds Community Food Pantry VNW Circle of Care — Emergency Food/Temporary Shelter $ 7,892 CDBG Funds Assistance to Needy People Waves Project Inc. — Waves Project $ 5,000 General Fund Total $ 178,251 Appendix I APPENDIX J List of RDA Funded Affordable Housing Projects INCOME LEVEL UNITS RDA -FUNDED Ext. Very Total DEVELOPMENTS Address Property Owner Low low Low Mod. Assisted Units Rancho West 42200 Main Coachella Valley 2 43 105 0 150 Street Housing Coalition Mission Village 2849St. jol Affirmed Housing 0 16 60 0 76 Rancho Creek 28464 Felix Ken Follis 0 8 22 0 30 Valdez Riverbank (Senior) 28500 Pujol Corporation for 0 13 53 0 66 St. Better Housing Cameron Historical 41925 Fifth Cameron 0 0 0 24 24 Building (Dalton II) St. Properties Palomar Building (Dalton 41955 Fifth Palomar Heritage 0 0 12 10 22 111) St. Building Temecula Reflections 31111 Black Jamboree Housing 0 11 0 0 11 (Temecula Lane) Maple Dr. Warehouse at Creekside 42081 3rd St. Warehouse at 0 0 20 12 32 Creekside Madera Vista 44155 (Summerhouse) Margarita BRIDGE Housing 38 70 0 2 110 Road Portola Terrace 28673 Pujol AMCAL 0 5 39 0 44 Street 28693 Old Front Street Plaza Front Street Plaza Town Front partners 0 0 8 15 23 Street Cottages of Old Town Varies Owner Occupied 0 0 0 17 17 Habitat for Humanity Varies Owner Occupied 0 5 2 0 7 Total 40 171 321 80 612 Note: Projects funded prior to the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency. Appendix J APPENDIX K Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Data Home Loan Applications by Type of Financing Type of Loan Number of Loans Share of Loans Number approved Approval Rate Home Purchase Conventional 1,702 50.0% 1,301 76.4% FHA - Insured 692 20.3% 542 78.3% VA - Guaranteed 1,005 29.5% 795 79.1% FSA/RHS Guarantee 5 0.1% 4 80.0% Total 3,404 100.0% 2,642 77.6% Refinancing Conventional 3,013 67.4% 1,827 60.6% FHA - Insured 296 6.6% 180 60.8% VA - Guaranteed 1,161 26.0% 754 64.9% FSA/RHS Guarantee 3 0.1% 0 0.0% Total 4,473 100.0% 2,761 61.7% Source: 2014 HMDA data Appendix K Home Loan Approval Rates by Race / Ethnicity Type of Loan by Race / Ethnicity Loan Applications Loans Approved Percent Approved Home Purchase Hispanic 413 319 77.2% White 1,807 1,398 77.4% Asian 199 137 68.8% African American 126 94 74.6% All others 45 34 75.6% Decline or N/A 814 660 81.1% Total 3,404 2,642 77.6% Home Refinance Hispanic 564 320 56.7% White 2,970 1,600 53.9% Asian 294 174 59.2% African American 181 100 55.2% All others 112 49 43.8% Decline or N/A 704 518 73.5% Total 4,649 2,761 59.4% Source: 2014 HMDA data Appendix K APPENDIX L Fair Housing Council Data FHIP Testing Results 2010-2015 Testing Testing Type of Referred to Type of Resolution Basis Issue Results Method Date Testing Whom Resolution rge 'Cl; Race Visit Terms and 5/15/2615 Lending Support HUD Forward HUD National Origin Visit Terms and 5/8/2015 Lending Support Pending Re -test Pending National Origin Visit Terms and 5/8/2615 Lending Inconclusive Pending Re -test Pending Race Visit Terms and 3/5/2615 Lending Inconclusive Pending Re -test Pending Mental Phone Terms and 2/25/2015 Rental Support Pending Re -test Pending Mental Phone Terms and 2/25/2615 Rental Inconclusive Pending Re -test Pending National Origin Visit Terms and 6/3/2614 Lending Does not support Not Closed Pending Conditions allegations Referred Race Visit Terms and 4/29/2614 Lending Inconclusive Not Closed Pending Conditions Referred National Origin Visit Discriminatory 2/25/2614 Rental Does not support Not Closed Pending Advertisement allegations Referred Mental Visit Discriminatory 1/21/2614 Rental Support Pending Pending Pending Disability Advertisement allegations Mental Visit Discriminatory 7/31/2613 Rental Support Pending Re -test HUD Disability Advertisement allegations Race Visit Terms and 2/22/2613 Rental Support Pending Re -test Pending National Origin Visit Terms and 2�11f 2613 Rental Does not support Not Closed Fair Conditions allegations Referred Housing National Origin Visit Refuse Reasonable 2/11/2013 Rental Does not support Not Closed Fair Accommodation allegations Referred Housing National Origin Visit Terms and 2/11/2013 Rental Does not support Not Closed Fair Conditions allegations Referred Housing Appendix L 1 Appendix M Survey Results Stakeholders Survey Responses 1. Do you believe that housing discrimination exists in Temecula? Response: 78% did not know or did not believe that it existed. Comments: • I have no experience in this, but I do believe that it is difficult for landlords to provide at - risk families the same consideration as more stable and less risky families. • In 2014, Fair Housing completed a study for the County of Riverside so my response is an assumption based on what I know exists in other cities within Riverside County. • Disabled individuals with legitimate Service Dogs have difficulty with HOAs and landlords. • Only against low to moderate income people - and it's not so much discrimination but just a lack of available workforce housing to accommodate them. I deal with hundreds or Realtors on a daily basis and I do not believe there is any other form of discrimination going on here. • People with disabilities do not have access to live in this community because of lack of group homes. They have to go to riverside or San Bernardino • I don't know if there is discrimination but I do see there is limited accessibility for those with disabilities or limited incomes. • But I do think we have a homeless problem that is not being addressed as well as it could be. • Possibly... some residents in HOAs do not want group home, residential facilities, housing programs in their communities. • I personally have not witnessed housing discrimination nor been given examples. • In a sense yes, due to the lack of affordable housing 2. Are you aware of discrimination in obtaining or maintaining housing? Response: 83% did not know or did not believe that there was discrimination. Comments: Towards low-income families In 2014, Fair Housing completed a study for the County of Riverside so my response is an assumption based on what I know exists in other cities within Riverside County. • CST has written letters on several occasions to landlords and HOAs in support of clients that were harassed or denied housing based on "No Pet Policies". Service Dogs are NOT pets and ADA law protecting Service Dogs supersede these rules. Appendix M • Again, we are seeing an increase in the number of homeless families seeking assistance because rents are climbing faster than their income so they can no longer maintain their existing household. Similarly, while not discriminatory in the usual sense of the word, lower income folks simply cannot obtain a home as a result of increased prices and artificially low conforming loan limits imposed by FHA, Fannie & Freddie. It's not discrimination, they're simply being priced out of the housing market. • Study should be ongoing for this issue. There are pockets of aging housing stock that is now or will soon be in need of considerable rehab. Home insurance costs and/or rehab construction costs are rising and may be out of the financial reach for younger home buyers or elderly home owners. 3. If you believe that there is housing discrimination, who do you believe is discriminating? Response: 33% thought that it would be or is landlords/property managers, 11% real estate agents; 11 % mortgage lenders; 4% mortgage insurers and 18% others. Fifty-six percent did not know. Comments: • City in general, Temecula is not affordable for low-income families • In 2014, Fair Housing completed a study for the County of Riverside so my response is an assumption based on what I know exists in other cities within Riverside County. • Other: neighbors will complain to Landlord/Management about violation of the "No Pet Policy". Ignorance and abuse of ADA laws are the basic problem. • Nobody, to my knowledge, is discriminating in Temecula - it's strictly an economic reality. Some simply can't afford to purchase or even rent a home in our market. That's in a market where the median price last month was $460,000. It's even worse in coastal areas and San Francisco, with a median price of $1.6 million. I truly do not believe there is any form of racial or other discrimination present in our market other than economic factors. • Other: Home Owners Associations • It's a multi -tiered cycle which may encompass industry practices and financial institutions. However, my personal feeling is local housing discrimination is mostly a nimby issue. 4. On what basis, is discrimination occurring? Response: 29% thought that discrimination was occurring against the disabled. Between 10-15% thought that discrimination was occurring based on race, color, national origin and familial status. 3% thought that it might be based on religion. 54% did not know. Comments: • Other: Lack of Income (although not covered under fair housing law) Appendix M 2 • In 2014, Fair Housing completed a study for the County of Riverside so my response is an assumption based on what I know exists in other cities within Riverside County. • Other: Income. No other. If you can't afford a house, you can't buy one. • Opening up group homes, residential facilities or housing programs within communities is generally undesirable to the general population regardless of race, age, gender, religion, etc... Some people have misconceptions of the negatives of having affordable housing programs in their community • Extremely limited housing options for low or no income residents • Discrimination can be for any perceived bias, the most often cited is a lowering of property value. 5. What factors have or might become contributing factors for housing discrimination in the future in the City? Response: Community opposition 40.6% Displacement of residents due to economic pressures 53.1% Lack of community revitalization strategies 25.0% Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods 15.6% Lack of public investments in specific neighborhoods, including services or amenities 28 1 % Lack of regional cooperation 12.5% Land use and zoning laws 18.8% Lending discrimination 12.5% Location and type of affordable housing 65.6% Occupancy codes and restrictions 15.60Y( Private discrimination 37.5% Comments: • Most of City of Temecula's affordable housing is located in the Old Town area. • In 2014, Fair Housing completed a study for the County of Riverside so my response is an assumption based on what I know exists in other cities within Riverside County. • Ignorance of ADA law and abuse/fraud are the primary reasons our clients face housing (and other) problems. • NIMBY opposition to multi -family and mixed -use housing; residents displaced due to housing crisis and have not recovered; end of community redevelopment funds which had provided land and assistance for Habitat and other low-income opportunities in the past; land use and zoning laws combined with regulatory hurdles and compliance fees slowing private development. • Universal design must be kept in mind for senior housing. By not offering this type of housing, it does show discrimination against the senior population. Appendix M • People are concerned about having low income developments near their home. Engaging with reputable developers could enhance neighborhoods and lessen community concerns. 6. How frequently do you believe discrimination is occurring? Resbonse: Rampant within the housing industry 5.4% Often in some aspects of the housing market 13.5% Occasionally 10.8% Never 8.1 % Don't know 64.9% Comments: • In 2014, Fair Housing completed a study for the County of Riverside so my response is an assumption based on what I know exists in other cities within Riverside County. • Again in our local market I do not believe we are experiencing discrimination in the standard sense of lenders red -lining, agents steering or other tactics. It's simply an issue of availability and affordability. • Housing industry has not kept up with the changes families are facing. Generations of families are now living in substandard housing. Careful thought needs to go into creating housing for seniors, singles, families, and generations of families needing to live together. • No knowledge of direct discrimination but indirectly through a lack of low and no income housing opportunities • The outcome of this survey and the resulting report should shed more precise information on this question. Appendix M 4 Resident Survey Results 1. When asked what are the three greatest housing needs, this was the response: Answer Options Accessibility Improvements (ramps, wheelchair lifts, grab bars, handrails, visual door bells and smoke/carbon monoxide alarms) Owner -Occupied Housing Improvements / Rehabilitation Rental Housing Improvements / Rehabilitation Homeownership Purchase Assistance Affordable Rental Housing Housing for Disabled Senior Housing Housing for Large Families (5+ people) Fair Housing Services Lead -Based Paint Testing and Abatement Energy Efficiency Improvements Housing for Former Foster Youth Housing for Family Unification No need in this category Response Percent 15.2% 30.3% 3.0% 36.4% 21.2% 9.1% 27.3% 12.1% 12.1% 3.0% 21.2% 6.1% 3.0% 15.2% 2. When asked what are the three greatest community service needs, this was the response: Answer Options Response Percent Senior Activities 18.2% Youth Activities 27.3% Child Care Services 9.1% Transportation Services 30.3% Anti -Crime Programs 33.3% Health Services 18.2% Mental Health Services 24.2% Legal Services 3.0% No need in this category 24.2% Appendix M 5 3. When asked what are the three greatest special needs, this was the response: Response Answer Options Percent Centers/Services for Disabled 21.2% Accessibility Improvements 6.1% Domestic Violence Services 9.1% Substance Abuse Services 21.2% Homeless Shelters/Services 45.5% HIV/AIDS Centers & Services 9.1% Neglected/Abused Children Center and Services 12.1% Family Self -Sufficiency Services 21.2% No need in this category 30.3% 4. When asked whether discrimination exists in their neighborhood, this was the response? • 82% no • 18% yes 5. Have you ever experienced discrimination in obtaining or maintaining your housing? • 87% no • 13% yes 6. Who do you believe discriminated against you and why? Half (50%) said that they had been discriminated against by landlords/property managers and the rest by realtors and lenders. Note: They cited discrimination because of race, national origin, gender, religion and disability. Almost all did not report it because they did not know where to go or that it was too much trouble. Appendix M 6 Appendix N Eagle Roar Program Appendix O Public Hearing Notices PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Riverside I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in the above - entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of THE don �! TCALI FORN IAN Aa GGAfNA A newspaper of general circulation, published DAILY in the City of Temecula, California, 92590, County of Riverside, Three Lake Judicial District, and which newspaper has been adjudicated a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Riverside, State of California, under the date of February 26, 1991, Case Number 209105; that the notice, cf which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof, on the Following dates, to wit: May 27T", 2016 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the Foregoing is true and correct. Dated at TEMECULA, California, this 27'm of May, 2016 Cathy Viars (Legal Advertising The CailforWan rVl f�horl oFMle Sir degv Lux4vn-iYrbFme Proof of Publication of Noslid GT Publli Haaeln6 a[Yd R,nn+.1 Fo, con.l.i„nity F.riEdF.ATlaa1 THE [FTT OF TEMECLPLR 4 7000 main Steal, T9mp,7lrl, CA 92590 In t[[9NJ.[e'•illi ale rcJn21 myltr.nm. [!x Gry � Srmeale wehes 10 iM1lGfal FeslaeMs rna aT mrr,nlep pa Ne> d Ihr Idrvwny [wa w4k[ nea�iM1gr; 11 a-- PPLY[[P ImL�%the dlan{IlianPrlAKpuan Pbn (vrnwMn9[4 purl[ In the tlM IGPrem and I.plemmla lm Pr Xlr f115'i SnlMunty li ,mkn rl 91Pd4-ML{#Mk6rtnararmand era Ihr UXern 4xm[1ralhn PI[n. PI krGehrt pPNk-0M-e M50.,In,dau Ip—nrM sMWh.Anga--.LlPl Ihr{liy_ A rums[ HEARING h—b— -h d,l,d h F t" INTYCOUNCL io aana:d,r Yh.r m�lprl Fl da4011Aad bW — RFrp11cr1N: Coe [tmttun Ln[alion: €i15•rJr 148pof■L' "L'e pu GP[ iV+Imrnban me blrn {,.aR Pani[p nI of Phry ed P'il Ci Mra P.Lli+pll:wi phM1 aIa +#Glee pAk NlrratYi -011 sn! tll4Cbpmem of a ha n W Gna aNrlP. eat hrlhr {XY. Emrly—alnaR! Elnrlpt lmn,M11" EIITIr[,meral PlAq Mt WEPAI W i a CTR' MSka1(rF MCok-1. _i-n imdw sfn dw LWnwnl or yla,s and w mg- end ras lip[ (rcm theta r"E Errmimr• 4AI Parlily All JOE04I&'� C[QY GIIEdira[ ianka]M0I r}li) br Mf Moaoa ulPob"Nl Pro"( reeking PMskrl rd-Q wN WntM.ed..MPr NEPAP (EQa as Ile f•riom,rc:Il�diod,ne dew". "pr A My i�eml.41MA earn s m dlr Clry {arwtll hebrr Px aPatlllP v '^oF appmr and hr Yeild Inappon A u =L'ion La b iPPlp.il M ILt CilialM1 Pimtlp5ll]n Piaat Iho su Nh�dn}Pvsomm ayM slbmn urtle,tormm IbIfu€IlySand beFme the hesl+q W rt411hXG)M1FnI d<ntilk hnrpng i[Itlimtnl. [nr lamW - wW LR a[41CIi tlprrr mr Tins x5Nil mpmhSlnd rill lndude[I In AM nrWcr msglirrp an0 wnwn.S�M1 Nid lhme PIM815 iPa gmara rN}IR] pM1 kAereH n aPORSSIp fdk h[,el.g. An, yallllGn etas Ira W.Y rcAew al a detnlpn aF me CnY �+Pu'I[I sliNl he Flkd w�l.n Iht Pno rriu PRd ky. MI <Pnlinaoa hp. srtlinrs 109A6:1aa ld4[k M [M {allhaae {rde of inn Ntttdii,.9F mX-h anlan or p—dm— F11gJMIGM ra.HY Pt.I� 4 NR'hs ar sr[ki qp xl .tid.. or xoid arty dadSan M me [sly c.ura 4,IrAl tc Imhrd m ,h Me I-m mard at 01erMflno I, AM*SIR [P.nppl Brno, Hw W Ipola C*Fnrriu,nlrnierr% mrpull[ h-L%q dtatdkd In Ihls nodte. fir [. ¢ Parb[palm Plm ,rO be+lt I d il} Tile fits 0r T#+M1Mit PINiC L-iruy a[ )06M ;�sbs rl—Q 1—ilz, CA: M Ttm Pa U- Lerner_ Lan—mr, %Wvp 0 OeWNnrnt at +r(GX Mak SItiiY. TNatorl[, CA: ila p1 M rh9 Grys Vf 13— a1 ,crew. [ YtyoPoasrwaa b A Tip. ryaha.rq—I—far-.fdId. WSuGM1':..04enmmrimAPuaGdlll {aT[mdam {FnM1rAI)n-lrnnii Smki M,Yla¢YItiiA RMIRI, UL, d ITmMPIa. {Plan PrPd hr•rrlgiil,nl Oeptdlrrtl. Jippp 6VIM1 Slroo[,- Tame[Ja. CR 97y9P, a� b) em111 al Yyns J ofi nor b t 1b sl t9rr[ra[ b, o r9. PLR{, ""tANING3 ch, r—lich—b— Tanw K8110-1. uATE dtt NEAIAINd Jxrrei&SOrb Tl+ne QFHFa FANG ;<Eop PM a es soon Yhrrrnifer of [hre—Aimr W ba haard All iniYirrssn [ba hahrd to &r-bil—Ir COMMUNITY MFFTIF403 r:ni rr-ing Mr IIL(iA!aesnnn nl ar Flu arurdy PIFM1nrlg am;—. PLACE OF MElING5 c-dar— Cantor 4'11000 Main St—L XlrTn9[ A.. CPiift-". MILTONG Pj1T#5rr UES TMaa29, 26Td at 4:06R.m. ASTn■" 0atd:49P.rM- TWy 3r, 20,6at lc�00a.m 141 1j6—n,lmhed 1—Mplettthe RlyoF'emauh Fnr lW uv Tip brJ fP��' od3..IPhn Su'r ar IrIRF+ { Fw,#trt MyMsa.11a ,00fnh7Tam.uJa6 d Spanoh rgJige s-.n M the IWF R 3J,1iiCIF 01: hit P+-+hrrrw �.. ru a qnw wtay:a ew nesrn.cu Las P. II rt Lire ObyC'1,+ rd Chr {hy m tmPN wXh 5etaon Yd7 d [Ire 7khaLdildul� hQ d I SF�>d drd he 1nnl:bmn. Tiles Ara AoI I or 1490 MItl 1nr APn.RmHrfnPe15[lt to W. dr Far fin) M1[I, antl the NdilLxeual fian C4n Ad in ill +sue li b Sn la7u?r mk 4-0,K n dM1 XIfY.ible @ema, Ins Clry wm —1, na—ble eHwls m _r rnadior your re91lru.TIT.Mphe.Jlmbilly-1eMIO aYb#IdIM1l.5li01 m alGins or pertrlpale In n ""'L1} N mlelkq, n[Fadky nuMny old[ nr seM[tl. pk—[mean r .. Lily LI., a[ I— ys hwa psX Iu ., +M[Gny al 051 ir04F{4i. AF Sees 10—d mr P101. i_ _'C"§hl 1G InGphi5A.11y nualm. Futr06F17F10 tir)[1d[ PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Riverside 1 am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested In the above- enthed matter, I am the principal clerk of the printer of THE CALIFORNIAN An &Rvn of the San 2wo Unem-Tirl w?e A newspaper of general circulation, published DAILY in the City of Temecula, California, 92590, County of Riverside, Three Oke ]udiCtal District, and which newspaper has been adjudicated a newspaper of general dreulation by the Superior Court of the County of Riverside, State of California, under the date of February 26, 1991, Case Number 209105; that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not In any supplement thereof, on the following dates, to wlt: August 27TH, 2416 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the toregoing Is true and correct. Dated atTEMECULA, California, this 29TH of August, 2016 r i Cathy Viars Legal Advardsing The Californian N, em?3 , -t Nie R'r 1 t/rl v!, -rro:w Proof of Publicatlon of wnticc aF ru6�Ft Xegl.msxXn nFlllew can rroe orr aF TEntsn+Ln �.*�ntr•mxt n3sessmerlroKr,tls IrousuYr. anfr.aex� cnnsoynxrcp rLr�ry hl[vicess MOrfCP IS heR4R► r.1Y[N y,II rlr Ily u' I..rnlilr I.n I1-1 x, "I p akh..m iilNG .ry�I IfuVIw�F. y�xarmlW rn,•Sr.XII.S :eV:'u..rtl pi xiA lw"W"'MlwF�gi,FTIn II.,..Ixnw.1a1hr141 T-1.1ei;a ful.lir ¢Wntlwld,l I rin IP,Apnnnp .1 �38 JA '•nnla'FI[Y flul.�hr'P,Iffi NlR9�Ih.A4NRN I,oX Im.W urr.l Yr,he NIl 4.,•w .�.. A�mi�o-. Wed MI➢X. inlrll7'. elWal�, VlteaW wn: rny�►fbu>r, NOME 6 X► F4XF{tryl sIV�N IhrSme ReR�rN nd Fenrwnlea wn�. W li Y1x�UrlF, 101x `11Gtlhx� k'f drl��llSArn Mlh, f,Y71'µvn5u,w I.CR335jQ Ynplx hw.n¢ In. [q' [?py lMN PlXyl Y IfrF14 1lmnyi sreunav NrYetmwnlml p� +,c AMI MI..�CaISHI,MM P1w Plwrm W WI'+IW R+eXem mym P�a1wX�t'7pM1M�'y�Inuulw.a.Ilmm�l.,Irmgc�Nnlnl 4 "&.W Ix' MII h�a X+d 47A, U•s IFMIItl hF x.l �.., Mg tlXplg11rr 5F✓tillrcthr.eM aXj d.l Fld■Fr41rr nM I .. M.x,llle od11NXXl� reli)n dY aH�Fw yyMl M IMF rr[npgGr�eX, lu mNrr. mJ rr�.,y�. .,p IhLa,q IrvX�IG<nnh IFV,IHI [Xnxrl r4tr In IM4N to, I.lul.�•�p^! /.. XP(�,xlin n m rN.ln'Inq�, nF ^Im'u)pl—Ifth,.161 M11.nN11Xl �•.'Iµ�MnF hu nlwyC lu l.nln P•'Pl+u FI w �l�u ll:;l`•,I �, III IW •XIYk w.YX•rn pla'hk .,.lmrow imlN will dw r.�.n.�„�F�I:;�'nm`y�a�c���Xcl',el lq ■.Mr corn xlla nlroq [anlolnMfil lSa• �17 Mr YnrFenml nr A� J4/61lr cq,lpFll[Mr [wn nr,rr alna ��I wu I. onleeM a. Itr rn,...�II! w wwXfilxlnem.,,' I�ars.r lne lx.yarh„Xax{rn.+Iabk:r u.nl�Iel.wal, le Mlr,J,[q lnf.an any coy ar.[..�.a cemrminlar pw.�,,,,.e p5wrtny[I a,Nm rtlx ill.m. ,esw�0.C•auxi pamalo M. RoWn. rem.e.la vu4Ys uee� luo:n FnYln .m.l nn[wa.;A •'co-! In IVltt I..i�i.IIN I� •'I'nII �••IIWI [Nlllrtha rolanXlR ,l„ 4rJN ✓•rIY jAMNNXI �n,y+,„X.4,Iw lin"�Iaxlllltl 1p lyp{t1MMI.IIeavLGWIYtiIY IIn1 YX dihll I len1Ffm faxFF WAI67.tx gwXy�iirN vn Iirn r+�nh IY[�Igy lht bA�•Inp Falllo,plSgrll181�.I K[II, Y.li.et,rrl.�Wr YYp� F'hYy�� 5i .fnN• r 'Rgi4 CNwlu�lF QM W.I.I i114iMMl 4iKN �4Y191'rW�.IwnaY 1 X.Il.kne.�l 4ex mu rh. ul fY�t] AANSt1J mwi ri'nmwl. .s'.nxnn�.l�,~s xxln illl wr,xmf �m'aIa elF ,ro,e /lC[IrssMILM 7p 7yq+y p,Kp h I. •rort},tF4 it INI qlYY le p�n�.q,lh SlilYs e<�fihlkaltrll iq of 1lpA. h .Y�liktmXlGe.I.IIh {y,,,FII1s Yxlr tlIYA1[nh xk Ap1l jX lyp In11.�01 .yX if Iwe 11 In V Xtuwl 1µt YI AI rep[xlr, R Ibl, In rI al¢exnrG brnNS W La AI n.5, r.ule:V+Tln wiXl�[n[tlrth Fvlx I.jupaT. II AN N IW a Ju1rIIw�il�l' �Mj WIJ W" rzR i. XHb! Ml •iNIVMvmr•mgx[[�YI19 Xn l ry>mnlK nu.»mmrn�h, cln l IYAL (IWlx[Ni1JFMw.:14n 51R�inr�y.l E:T rIW 6/k. nlmlleu lty'llr[F Fwhpp,t27.Lnr. aFrEtll/[ PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Riverside I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: i am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or Interested in the above- entltled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of THE CALIFORNIAN A newspaper or general circulation, published DAILY in the City of Temecula, Caiifnmla, 92590, County of Riverside, Three Lake Judicial District, and which newspaper has been adjudicated a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Courtof the County of Riverside, State of California, under the date of February 26, 1991, Case Number 209105; that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof, on the followl rig dates, to wit: August 2718, 2016 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the Foregoing is true and correct. Dated at TEMECULA, California, this 29"" of August, 201fi Cathy ears Legal Advertising The Caiifornon Proof of Publication of RY+FOOEAIuoIE[.[rn.WAadu r p6V�flerl nr wl*..r�Exm n..n n�rMo oe Tr-MrNrw now e, un WM1�ien of VlVrGflC�fuSTll ]uSiLl]7 vpoc[sii oEE FIrN [oA1FVEiu+lOt] ZOt]� f M014u o.ti n••nLA r•xEFt=riE sr prxlnu rue r� n��.�.i.ini .r r w irrx..•�r+• •• n�nnlei w n Ir. W �1n•d. VH�w iw. iN n. w �• rµ].wr„1n,r a lu rY.[nH��.. y•pu ys.e bi yaw n+A�nM.n�i de �b.iLm M1N�{Xn de nx,mu,�.+�wn � Ar.o �lnlm l,i.M +•M iiiW, n+ Nldrl I rr�V p.n M�uru•nxiY.aunnl.gr Rn�xr[.h f.°rnnN.kJuiolr im,.�rr�y.+ �.w w�iA�w,+„Iw awe a��a':�i:in:u.'. �Im�r:i��i�,"iuu.mi•��.,��� i wxA ..1...... Mryw6n•A.urn�.gilESWTr •.M6+QrA..Y .�npn�i�a. py Y iM W rm,�y: � A,rcuwrsr... ix,. rArx>a n •Nor�MtR .i luY��nn FInJ�+W A r [.Yn u.a n.gern. Whlra aa. iemr nu1A.aArrrAlha[AM1r ly dd ytra.e G.In.i W[�irpJ,d°rn+papnniuY, w .wy+,� rinr A.ix.rw„ . Ord pan. p�lyH Irl[A qm I. rAniinNMrlwn,ra�nirVNm ik✓.wu. y ti. �rx A.ei WrNkrx,. 0. 1Wa� I.mm�r re b.n•, wMlFl,hl:. yy IAIYArery • n�A inn. MMM. Jp111uIhWM rY�'rl�Mol. uimw l,dAayfrbyln��il irlA w.mik�nA II MNINI�iwin A.Vr pKiemwwh Pin^., d. . a= MawwNmu nn MarMW wxlilr.lMWlrr n.naPw,�N.a JOP�i+•ltl. m +�ca AI Nlv"Ikr.:.nvikipilolnw^,nre 1iW'rl. rrLYAdRH 1N nMMlnPlmrk IAA r gtlNpNi � �rG c�miw parlor, .^ q mi YkL A,I x,niewmin r r�wrm"� �"in w,l+�.:. cork. � wal.ai.eJAn Nmrn.rxw�dmr.pn.a yy r. iNM11,NAr� rn rxaym+ni Iwrin• M1y1p..w.bn>i.,w .•.nr Wn y�vd, lI m+.lUa La fNunlullr eN.iwnn raA.u.. ar r..a.w. p....la lA. M1wr... inlPe fuh. w•�I.,,i.„�iy.cA Nxyr jj rNJV�..Rt hrnr• A pw.r�.r w enne•I.,N•y nV wro.Px.n�IHPn .I llnndn 3R rlfl.inl. k,aixnnbp4 rn�Ar Jthudn of rnlrl�a YA Ym.wl•PW�� prMx• J. HI ✓. ilNyi� , w�in�P•��• i.. •m r� ���i, a Iw f.wnrnr.41 ,aW�.�� dN r.11h[•Mx, ScVrMr h inoa, A XN.w nww Jk N�WM N ..�+11 n.n�ir.nrn Ir newMkCuwNCW. M1WW Ali ww,+•m+ar wannurzax�lnnl.e�w•k an.�n.sky[.+.M1w Mllld6 A. v n l�r w�r.m�od�.i rw:►, �� W hw�N+p=,Y.�e..w..avAw RtCl1+IMl,Y)1 CI R 4RS 1nAdY�s r ouCUM4ATW ' �.errw� .,a�rh •�n.��.n,�w.>s„xxs,.ra. aAA..�.w I.1 ry YAnnilrxw un gr[[��ww41M•• Ir•1r~.aytini �.. iw lni�.rv4 nnnnR:litte.4 .ri•rl hZftl ykl Ne Arno�a�: n r n++r`o.�.m en: o`e:Ne ��wp u:!� irwu: v���.«� �w�. w �-M inr ..��� M.lulr+.!•lu, wpna �nn•.w.��wr`v.i �r�•w..��xViuir.n uif •i xni 0a.i �.Niirir AAir�nhx� ir�4 rnn.i�lxr".J.a+d• I.}iY.Y V��1w1 wM� ...uw�, s.a•r.,n. A,,.wnn nn.ra++r AyAnaraw.«,=Irw Appendix P Summary of Public Comments at Public Hearings and Community Meetings Public Hearing Tuesday, June 28, 2016 No comments. Workshop Wednesday, June 29, 2016 at 4 p.m. Infrastructure: • Lack of sidewalks makes it difficult for those with disabilities • Some streets are not lit well • Old Town Sidewalks are a problem Community Facilities: • Need more community centers and aquatic centers. Community centers are book solid a year in advance. • There is a lack of meeting space for groups. • Need more space for active adults • There is only one dedicated senior center • Margarita corridor is the neediest section of town for community facilities where there is a concentration of apartments • Eagle Soar Playground great improvement to the Margarita area but over impacted. Serves at -risk youth and the disabled. Transportation: • Lack of transportation for the seniors and the disabled. • Limited Riverside Transportation Agency's bus services • Funding cuts at senior center caused the City to not provide the same level of services. • Mental health issues at the high schools and older young adults not addressed adequately Special Needs: • There are incredible needs of the homeless • Mental health needs are the centerpiece of a lot of problems (homeless, persons with disabilities) • Need more veterans outreach as well as for active military. • There is a lot of veteran support in Temecula • Caregivers need mental health services as well • Services tend to end at age 21 — no mental services, no availability of jobs, limited work programs • Lack of housing solutions for those with special needs. Stress on family as well. • Similar patterns with the caregivers of the elderly. • Support groups for caregivers needed. • Support groups need to be professional and meet regularly • Disabled population is going to increase • Central location needed to get information on special needs and homelessness Affordable Housing: • Shortage of affordable senior housing and affordable assisted living facilities • Those with disabilities are going to be on fixed incomes. Can't live independently. • Housing is the foundation of the community. Business and Jobs: • Need more parking in Old Town • Job training needed Neighborhood Needs: • Some non-HOA residential areas are in desperate need of code enforcement Education: • Believes that schools with higher percentage of lower socio-economic classes have lower resources • Temecula Valley Unified School District struggles with special needs education • Special needs are only partially funded by the federal government. • The City has not done well with post -secondary transition such as meaningful employment and college. Fair Housing: • Those with special needs and have English as a second language are at a greater disadvantage • Sellers are now only talking to buyers with all -cash offers. Not discriminatory but could lead to that. Workshop Wednesday, June 29, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. Infrastructure: • Lack of sidewalks in Old Town (Pujol and First) • Other sidewalks are deteriorating • Considerable challenges where infrastructure is old Community Facilities: • Need places for teenagers to gather • Partner with the schools to open up libraries to public • At -risk youth is a critical issue that the City faces • Need health care centers for kids and those addicted to drugs • Need health care centers for baby boomers Community Services • Need more senior services • Increased mental health need for young people • Partner more with the County for resources • Anti -crime programs • Need to clean up creek beds Affordable Housing: • Lack of homeless shelter • Like to see more non-residential historic preservation • The average age in the community is increasing and maintenance of their homes is a need • Some seniors cannot afford to maintain their homes • CDBG funds can be used to connect volunteer groups • Need for affordable housing is going to continue to increase • Homeowners assistance programs need for repairs • Down payment assistance programs needed. Business and Jobs • Temecula needs business start-up assistance and small business loans • Need to match skills and jobs Workshop Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. Infrastructure: • Via Montezuma bridge is need to connect Diaz and Jefferson Community facilities: • Teen Center needed • Mobile library • Childcare needed Community services: • Need more local emergent mental health facilities • Mental health is a problem among high school teens. Services only available in Riverside and San Diego - over an hour away • More neighborhood watch programs • Greater partnering among service organizations • Police and fire need mental health services • Anti -crime programs in lower income areas to reduce the effect of AB 109 and be more proactive than reactive. Special needs: • Accessible improvements is the biggest challenge for residents with special needs • Need more handicapped accessible doors Affordable housing: • Need more homeless shelters in this region • More solutions needed on how to house the homeless • Consider efficiency units, tiny houses • Workforce housing is limited. • More programs and housing needed for single parents Neighborhood Services • Temecula Elementary is a Title 1 School Fair Housing: • FHA limits for Temecula are too low. • Need more housing for disabled adults transitioning out of the school district — no housing available to them. • Families are flocking to Temecula because of their effective special needs services • Currently there are about 1,000 individual with special needs that are between childhood and adulthood. Public Hearing Tuesday, September 29, 2016 No comments. Appendix Q City Resolution RESOLUTION NO. 16-57 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING, WITH THE ADDITION OF PUBLIC COMMENTS, AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO SUBMIT THE ASSESSMENT OF FAIR HOUSING TO THE US DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. A. The City of Temecula has participated directly within the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as an entitlement jurisdiction for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds since July 1, 2012; B. The City of Temecula has prepared all documents, notices, and forms required by HUD for participation in the CDBG Program by entitlement jurisdictions; C. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 11-42 on June 14, 2011 initiating the City to obtain entitlement community status from HUD, and authorized the Director of Community Development to prepare and return for City Council approval all documents required for the designation as an Entitlement City, including the Five -Year Consolidated Plan, the Annual Action Plan, the Citizen Participation Plan, and the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing; D. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 11-78 on November 1, 2011, approving the Citizen Participation Plan that sets forth the City's policies and procedures for citizen participation in the development of its Five -Year Consolidated Plan, Annual Action Plans, Annual Performance Reports, and any substantial amendments deemed necessary for direct administration of federal CDBG funds; E. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 12-30 on April 10, 2012, approving the 2012-16 Five -Year Consolidated Plan, that contains a housing community development needs assessment, a survey of available resources, and a five-year strategy for achieving housing and community development goals, as well as the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing which outlines the City of Temecula's strategy to affirmatively promote equal housing opportunity and remove impediments to fair housing choice; F. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 16-43 on June 28, 2016, approving the updated Citizen Participation Plan that sets forth the City's policies and procedures for citizen participation in the development of its Five -Year Consolidated Resos 16-57 Plan, Assessment of Fair Housing, Annual Action Plans, Annual Performance Reports, and any substantial amendments deemed necessary for direct administration of federal CDBG funds; G. The proposed Assessment of Fair Housing was available for comment between August 27, 2016 and September 27, 2016; H. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby finds, determines and declares: A. Pursuant to Title 24, Housing and Urban Development, of the Code of Federal Regulations, Subtitle A Office of the Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Part 5 General HUD Program Requirements; Waivers, Section 91.105 Assessment of Fair Housing (24 CFR Part 5, Section 5.154), each entitlement jurisdiction must develop an affirmatively furthering fair housing strategy and submit an Assessment of Fair Housing to HUD; B. On June 28, 2016, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing introducing the Assessment of Fair Housing process and to obtain the views of the community on affirmatively furthering fair housing in the jurisdiction's housing and community development programs. C. On September 27, 2016, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Assessment of Fair Housing and considered all of the comments made on the proposed Assessment of Fair Housing. Section 3. Environmental Findings. The proposed action on the Annual Action Plan (2016-2017) is exempt from National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) pursuant to the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act and specifically 24 CFR 58.34(a)(1) because the Citizen Participation Plan is a resource identification study and the development of plans and strategies for the prioritization and funding of proposed programs through CDBG and the proposed action involves the feasibility and planning studies to determine prioritization and CDBG funding to begin the development of certain projects. The potential projects discussed in the proposed actions that might involve physical activity will be reviewed under NEPA or the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as part of the development of those projects. The proposed action is also exempt from CEQA per CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 and 15378(b)(4). Section 4. The City Council hereby approves the Assessment of Fair Housing and authorizes and directs the City Manager to execute and the City Cleric to attest to the execution of these documents. Section 5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Resos 16-57 2 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 27t" day of September, 2016. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTE T: Rani y Clerk [SEAL] Resos 16-57 GENERAL PLAN d R,PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT INTRODUCTION uality of life in Temecula is influenced in part by the sense of security that exists among City residents and businesses. The community must be prepared to address issues such as uncontrollable natural hazards, crime and violence, and other human caused hazards. The Public Safety Element establishes goals, policies, and a plan to identify potential hazards and to ensure adequate, coordinated, and timely response to public safety concerns. The provision of public services which would respond to these hazards are addressed in the Growth Management/Public Facilities Element. PURPOSE OF THE The purpose of the Public Safety Element is to identify and address PUBLIC SAFETY features or characteristics in or near Temecula that represent a ELEMENT, potential hazard to community residents, structures, public facilities, and infrastructure. The Public Safety Element establishes policies to minimize potential danger to residents, workers, and visitors, and identifies actions needed to manage crisis situations, such as earthquakes, fires, and floods. The Element also focuses on preventing criminal activity before it occurs. In addition specific policies and programs are provided to regulate development in hazard -prone areas. Continuing education for City officials and residents about emergency preparedness is also addressed. SCOPE AND The Public Safety Element satisfies the requirements of State CONTENT OF THE planning law and is a mandated component of the City's General PUBLIC SAFETY Plan. Government Code section 65302(g) sets forth a list of hazards that the Element must cover, if they pertain to conditions in the City. ELEMENT These hazards include: • Seismically induced conditions including ground shaking, surface rupture, ground failure, tsunami, seiche, and dam failure • Slope instability leading to mudslides and landslides • Subsidence, liquefaction, and other geologic hazards C I T Y O F T E M E C i.I L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-1 P u B L 211 S A F E T Y • Flooding • Wild land and urban fires • Evacuation routes State law also allows communities to address additional safety issues. The following additional issues are addressed in the Element: • Criminal activities • Hazardous materials • Nuclear hazards from the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station A,> N The Public Safety Element must be consistent with the other General Plan elements, and most closely relates to the Land Use and Circulation Elements. Potential hazards are identified and action programs established in the Public Safety Element to avoid or mitigate public safety hazards associated with planned development. The Land Use Element contains policies to ensure that environmental conditions, including hazards, are considered in all land use decisions. The distribution of residential and other sensitive land uses on the Land Use Policy Map is designed to avoid areas where hazardous conditions have been identified. Evacuation routes utilizing the City circulation system are also described in the Public Safety Element. The provision of viable evacuation routes within the City is inextricably linked to the planned circulation system described in the Circulation Element. RELATED PLANS There is a complex body of State and federal legislation relating to the AND PROGRAMS protection of public health and safety and environmental resources. The following section briefly summarizes related legislation that guides City decision -making with regard to land use and physical development. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) GUIDELINES The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was adopted by the State legislature in response to a public mandate for a thorough environmental analysis of projects that might adversely affect the environment. Provisions of the law, required procedures, and any subsequent analysis are described in the CEQA Statutes and Guidelines. Safety hazards are recognized as environmental impacts under CEQA. C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-2 Continued implementation of CEQA will ensure that City officials and the general public have information describing assessment and mitigation of potentially significant safety impacts associated with private and public development projects. ALQUIST-PRIOLO EARTHQUAKE FAULT ZONING ACT The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act requires the State Geologist to identify earthquake fault zones along traces of both recently and potentially active major faults. Cities and counties that contain such zones must inform the public regarding the location of these zones, which are usually one -quarter mile or less in width. Proposed development plans within these earthquake fault zones must be accompanied by a geotechnical report prepared by a qualified geologist describing the likelihood of surface rupture. SEISMIC HAZARDS MAPPING ACT The purpose of the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (Public Resources Code Section 2690, et. seq.) is to reduce the threat to public safety and minimize the loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating seismic hazards. The Act directs the State Geologist to identify and map areas prone to earthquake hazards of liquefaction, earthquake -induced landslides and amplified ground shaking, and requires site -specific geotechnical investigations to be conducted identifying the hazard and formulating mitigation measures prior to permitting most developments designed for human occupancy within Zones of Required Investigation. COBEY-ALQUIST FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT ACT The Cobey-Alquist Floodplain Management Act encourages local governments to plan, adopt, and enforce land use regulations for floodplain management, in order to protect people and property from flooding hazards. The Act also identifies requirements which jurisdictions must meet in order to receive State financial assistance for flood control. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) Temecula participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which is administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). NFIP provides federal flood insurance and federally financed loans for property owners in flood prone areas. To qualify for federal flood insurance, the City must C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-3 P u B L 14-11 3 NO A F E T Y identify flood hazard areas and implement a system of protective P controls. u B RIVERSIDE COUNTY HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN L Developed pursuant to the Tanner Act (AB 2948), the Riverside I County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (HWMP) identifies C current and projected future hazardous waste generation and management needs throughout the County. The HWMP provides a framework for the development of facilities to manage hazardous S wastes, i.e. facility siting criteria. The HWMP also includes a A Households Hazardous Waste Element that is designed to divert F household hazardous wastes from the County's landfills. E The County HWMP addresses only those hazardous waste issues T with which local governments have responsibilities, namely land use Y decisions. The County and cities are required to implement facility siting policies and criteria within local planning and permitting processes. The City is required to take one of three actions: • Adopt a City hazardous waste management plan • Incorporate by reference all applicable portions of the County Plan into its General Plan • Enact an ordinance requiring all applicable land use permitting and decisions to be consistent with the siting criteria set forth in the County HWMP The City has adopted by reference the applicable portions of the County HWMP. SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR. GENERATING STATION (SONGS) The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) is located near the southern boundary of Orange County, approximately 25 miles west of Temecula. SONGS is a jointly owned enterprise among Southern California Edison, San Diego Gas and Electric, and the cities of Riverside and Anaheim. For hazard mitigation purposes, the federal and State governments have created three levels of emergency zones surrounding nuclear facilities: • Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ): The federal government requires that communities within approximately 10 miles of a nuclear power plant be included in an EPZ. Within this zone, specific emergency protective plans have been developed. C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-4 Im C I T Y O F • Public Education Zone (PEZ): The State of California has defined a broader area between 10 to 20 miles from a plant as P a PEZ. Within this zone, the public is informed on U preparedness plans. The distance from the plant, however, B would make evacuation highly unlikely. L • Ingestion Pathway Zone (IPZ): Temecula is located within I this zone which covers the areas within 50 miles of SONGS. C The purpose of this zone is to prevent the accidental ingestion of deposited radioactive materials by humans and S livestock. Southern California Edison, who operates SONGS, will provide notification to all affected jurisdictions A within 15 minutes of declaration of any emergency. F E COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE MULTI -JURISDICTIONAL LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (MJLHMP) AND TEMECULA LOCAL HAZARD T MITIGATION PLAN (LHMP) Y The County of Riverside Multi Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJLHMP) was adopted in 2018. The purpose of the MJLHMP is to identify the County's hazards, review and assess past disaster occurrences, estimate the probability of future occurrences and set goals to mitigate potential risks to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural and man-made hazards. While the County is responsible for preparing and adopting the MJLHMP, the City of Temecula is responsible for preparing and adopting the annex to the County's plan — more specifically, the 2017 City of Temecula Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex (LHMP). The planning process evaluated the potential impact of each identified hazard on the county, cities, special districts, and tribes. All participating jurisdictions helped establish a list of potential mitigation efforts (via their LHMP Annex) and prioritized those efforts based on the needs of their jurisdiction. In addition, each participating jurisdiction developed a specific hazard mitigation strategy based on information from 2012 through 2017. CITY OF TEMECULA CODES The City has adopted the California Building Code, California Mechanical Code, Uniform Fire Code, the National Electrical Code and other related codes that contain structural requirements for existing and new buildings. The codes are designed to ensure structure integrity during seismic and other hazardous events and to prevent personal injury, loss of life and substantial property damage. To protect the public, planned development in Temecula is subject to these structural codes. T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-5 P u B L 3 S A F E T Y RIVERSIDE COUNTY CLIMATE ACTION PLAN (CAP) The County of Riverside approved an update to their CAP in 2019. The 2019 CAP Update builds upon the GHG reduction strategies in the 2015 Climate Action Plan and refines the County's efforts to meet greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction strategies, specifically for the years 2035 and 2050. It also includes measures to prepare for potential climate -related impacts and to comply with state and federal legislation, including Gov. Code § 65302(g)(4)(C). Climate -related impacts are not stand-alone hazards but may change the frequency and intensity of the other hazards. The CAP provides resources, information, and strategies to reduce these impacts, resulting in overall risk reduction. PUBLIC SAFETY PLAN As in all communities, human activities and natural conditions occurring in Temecula have an effect on residents' quality of life. Providing an environment where businesses and residents can prosper and feel safe, and being prepared for emergency situations are essential. The City can minimize hazards and protect public health and private property through emergency preparedness planning. NATURAL Natural hazards addressed in the Public Safety Element include HAZARDS seismic, geologic, flood, dam failure and wild land fire hazards. SEISMIC HAZARDS The Elsinore fault traverses the City, which has historically experienced earthquakes of moderate magnitude (See Figure PS-1). The Elsinore fault zone is one of the largest in southern California, and in historical times, has been one of the quietest. The southeastern extension of the Elsinore fault zone, the Laguna Salada fault, ruptured in 1892 in a magnitude 7.0 earthquake, but the main trace of the Elsinore fault zone has only seen one historical event greater than magnitude 5.2--the magnitude 6.0 earthquake of 1910 near Temescal Valley, which produced no known surface rupture and did little damage. Other faults surrounding Temecula include the San Andreas, San Jacinto, San Gabriel, Newport -Inglewood, Sierra Madre -Santa Susana-Cucamonga, Rose Canyon, Coronado Banks, San Diego Trough and San Clemente Island faults. C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-6 f' u B L 9 S A F E T Y i f4�Y C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N Ps-7 PLANS IN AcTIoN PProposed development projects U in the Elsinore fault Zone B require evaluation and a writ -ten report specific to the L, site, prepared by a licensed Igeologist. Structures for Cplaced human occupancy cannot be over the fault and must be set back from the S fault (generally 50 feet). A F E T Y PLANs IN ACTION The only remaining URM structure in Old Town, the Temecula Merchantile Building (1902), has been retrofitted to meet current seismic safety standards. Fault Rupture. The Elsinore fault zone is an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, governed by specific State development criteria designed to prevent damage associated with ground surface rupture. Structures intended for human occupancy are not permitted on an active fault. Before a project can be permitted, the City requires a geologic investigation to demonstrate that proposed buildings will not be constructed across the fault. Ground Shaking. Severe ground shaking is possible in Temecula due to the presence of loosely consolidated alluvial soils. Ground shaking causes structural damage, and is the major cause of soil instability hazards, such as liquefaction, subsidence, or slope failure. Riverside County has established Ground Shaking Zones indicating the relative level of risk based on distance from faults and geologic characteristics of an area. Development proposals are evaluated using guidelines, which indicate the suitability of locating land uses in various ground shaking zones. The Temecula Planning Area is located in Ground Shaking Zone II, where shaking is expected to vary from moderate to intense levels in the event of an earthquake, depending on the composition of underlying geologic formations, the earthquake's epicenter, and the order of magnitude of the seismic event. Unreinforced masonry (URM) structures and adobe block construction are particularly susceptible to failure and/or collapse during an earthquake. New structures conforming to California Building Code standards can withstand ground shaking with little or no structural damage. Older buildings can also be retrofitted to improve structural integrity. To identify structures most prone to failure, the City conducted a seismic inventory of structures in Old Town, where buildings are least likely to be able to withstand moderate ground shaking. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Ground shaking following an earthquake leads to other potential geologic hazards such as liquefaction, landslides, and subsidence. The potential for these hazards depends upon the severity of ground shaking and underlying geologic conditions. Temecula is subject to the following potential geologic hazards. C I T Y O F T E M E C LI L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-8 PLANS IN ACTION California law requires disclosure of Liquefaction, Landslide, and Alquist- Pnolo Earthquake Fault Zones as a part of all real estate transactions within identified areas. Liquefaction. The potential for liquefaction in an area is a function of soil type and depth of groundwater. Poorly consolidated soils P combine with groundwater during an earthquake, losing their shear u strength and taking on the properties of a heavy liquid. This process, B termed liquefaction, can result in the loss of foundation support, ground failure due to lateral spreading, and settlement of affected L soils. Three general conditions must be met for liquefaction to occur: I (1) strong ground shaking of relatively long duration; (2) loose, or C unconsolidated, recently deposited sediments consisting primarily of silty sand and sand; and (3) water saturated sediments within about 50 feet of the surface. S A As shown in Figure PS-1, there is a possibility that liquefaction could F occur in the Temecula area, particularly along Santa Gertrudis and Temecula Creeks. California law requires identification of E Liquefaction Zones where the stability of foundation soils must be T investigated, and countermeasures undertaken in the design and Y construction of buildings for human occupancy. Landslides. Slope stability is related to a variety of factors including steepness; strength of geologic materials to resist the downward pull of gravity; characteristics of bedding planes, joints and faults; surface and ground water conditions; and other factors. Landslides are most likely to occur on hillside locations where rock strata parallels surface slopes, high clay content absorbs excess water, displacement has fractured a fault zone, or the base of a slope has been removed. Although no recent landslides have occurred in the area, potential landslide conditions exist in hillside areas in southwest Temecula where existing slopes are greater than 15 percent (see Figure PS-1). California law requires identification of Landslide Zones where the stability of hill slopes must be evaluated, and countermeasures undertaken in the design and construction of buildings for human occupancy. Subsidence. Subsidence occurs when earth material shrinks due to natural or artificial removal of underlying support. This process occurs in poor, unconsolidated soils and poorly compacted fill areas. The potential for subsidence exists along Santa Gertrudis and Temecula Creeks. C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-9 P u B L S A F E T Y PLANS IN ACTION The City enforces State seismic design guidelines and building codes, works with property owners to rehabilitate ha.Zardous buildings, and will prepare new hillside development standards. PLANs IN ACTION Specific building standards, described in the food damage prevention and flood plain management regulations within the City Development Code, apply to flood prone areas, including anchoring, use of food resistant building materials, use of adequate drainage paths, and elevating the structure to or above the base food elevation. Erosion. The underlying surficial geology in Temecula is predominantly composed of well -drained fine sandy loams, sandy loams and gravelly silt loams. Soils characterized by low permeability or high runoff are susceptible to erosion. Additionally, the well - drained alluvium surfaces are susceptible to wind erosion. The City will enact programs to reduce geologic hazards and protect public safety. To minimize hazards resulting from earthquakes, the most recent State seismic guidelines will be implemented for structural design. During the review of development proposals involving steep slopes, grading, unstable soils and other hazardous conditions, surveys of soil and geologic conditions by a state -licensed engineering geologist will be required. Based on the results of the survey, mitigation measures will be incorporated into projects to minimize geologic hazards. The City will take actions to make seismic and geologic hazard mitigation a part of land use planning efforts, such as working with property owners to remediate hazardous buildings, requiring disclosure of hazard zone status as part of real estate transactions, working with County and State agencies to monitor and compile information on seismic hazards, and adopting hillside development standards. FLOOD HAZARDS Flood hazards in Temecula can be divided into three categories: natural flooding, dam failure, and mud debris flows. Natural Flooding. Figure PS-2 identifies areas of potential flood hazards within the Planning Area. Temecula contains several FEMA Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). These areas, corresponding to the 100-year floodplain, have the potential to become flooded when major rainstorms cause stream overflows. Murrieta Creek is the most flood -prone of the Temecula creeks. However, Temecula Creek, Pechanga Creek, Tucalota Creek, Long Valley Wash, and Santa Gertrudis Creek could also be subjected to flooding. C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-10 1' Ll B L r m S A F F T Y C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-11 PLANS IN ACTION PTemecula participates in the U NFIP, enforces Development BCode regulations regarding development in the floodplain L, and floodway, and maintains Ia dam inundation evacuation C plan. S A F E T Y Dam Failure. Flooding from dam failure can result from natural and human causes including earthquakes, erosion, improper siting and/or design and rapidly rising floodwater during heavy storms. The type of failure, ranging from instantaneous to gradual, is dependent on the building material of the dam. Dam failure can potentially cause loss of life and property damage. Other effects include displacement of persons residing in the inundation path and damage to infrastructure. Three dams are located in areas surrounding Temecula: • Lake Skinner is a 43,800-acre feet earthen dam located northeast of Temecula. Failure of the Lake Skinner Dam would result in flooding along Tucalota Creek and Benton Road. • Vail Lake is located to the east of Temecula. Dam failure of this 51,000-acre foot facility would cause flooding in the Pauba and Temecula Valleys. Interstate 15 and an adjacent 3- mile area would also flood. • Diamond Valley Lake, impounded by two earthen dams, is the largest reservoir in Southern California and is located north of Temecula. Failure of the western dam would result in flooding in the northern parts of the Planning Area. The failure of Lake Skinner or Diamond Valley Lake could also result in substantial flooding along parts of Santa Gertrudis and Warm Springs Creeks. Areas along I-15 and Murrieta Creek could also be substantially affected. Mud and Debris Flows. Mud and debris flows originate in hillside areas characterized by deep topsoil and/or poor drainage. The potential for mud and debris flows exists in the hilly southern and western portions of Temecula. The City will continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which makes flood insurance available to affected property owners within the 100-year floodplain. The City will also review development plans for projects within the floodplain, to ensure compliance with City and FEMA floodplain development requirements. No development of any kind will be allowed in the floodway portion of the 100-year floodplain. The City will maintain a Dam Inundation Evacuation Plan, will update the Multi -Hazard Functional Plan as needed to address flood hazards, and will coordinate with the State Office of Emergency Services to ensure that dam safety plans reflect the level of development within the community. C I T Y O F T E M F C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-12 PLANS IN ACTION The Temecula General Plan identifies the general location and distribution of existing and planned land uses throughout the community, including in very high fire ha.Zard severity hones and in state responsibility areas. Residential and nonresidential development, including roads and utilities, are planned for development in these areas. All new development is required to comply with the standards of the Temecula Municipal Code, which meet or exceed title 14, CCR, division 1.5, chapter 7, subchapter 2, articles 1-5 (commencing with section 1270) (SRA Fire Safe Regulations) and title 14, CCR, division 1.5, chapter 7, subchapter 3, article 3 (commencing with section 1299.01). The goals, policies, and implementation actions contained in this Public Safety Element are designed to protect existing and new development located in hazardous fire areas and any new critical facilities should be located outside of VHFHSZs, ifpossible. C I T Y O F FIRE HAZARDS Temecula is subject to both natural and urban fires. The Planning Area is surrounded by rolling foothills and mountains subject to potential natural wild land fires. The Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), through a cooperative agreement, provides fire protection, fire prevention, and emergency medical rescue services in the City of Temecula. Five fire stations are located within the City limits, and the Temecula Division encompasses three Riverside County Fire Department stations for a total of eight stations within the Temecula Division. Mutual Aid agreements with county, state, and federal government agencies further allow the City, and any other participating agency, to request additional resources depending on the complexity and needs of a given incident, such as wildfires. Fire Hazard Severity Zones. The State has charged CAL FIRE with the identification of Fire Hazard Severity Zones g (FHSZ) within State Responsibility Areas. In r addition, CAL FIRE must recommend draft Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) identified within any Local Responsibility Areas. The FHSZ maps are used by the State Fire Marshal as a basis for the adoption of applicable building code standards. The Planning Area includes both Local Responsibility Areas and State Responsibility Areas (within the Sphere of Influence), with portions of both Local and State Responsibility Areas being designated as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Figure PS-3 shows Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Temecula. Major Wildland Fires in Temecula. Due to the dry weather in Temecula, brush fires are more common on hot days. In August 2012, Aguanga fires invaded a community nearby Temecula and the City became the evacuation center for many of the individuals that had to evacuate. Emergency response personnel and local residents were frightened at the possibility that the fire may reach the City of Temecula. The fire burned 3,000 acres within 10 hours. This fire was difficult to contain. August, one of the hottest months for Southern California, assisted the fire expansion. Incidents such as this have been common throughout the years. T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-13 P u B L 14-11 3 NO A F E T Y P u B L 211 S A F E T Y C I T Y O F Smaller fires also caused a big disruption in the City as well. The City has endured many small brush fires that start on the hillsides that run parallel to the freeway that cause traffic jams. Many of these fires are controlled in a timely manner because of Cal Fire. Wild Land Fires. Fire in undeveloped areas results from the ignition of accumulated brush and vegetation. The most critical times of year for wildland fires are late summer and fall when Santa Ana winds bring hot, dry desert air into the region. The air temperature quickly dries vegetation, thereby increasing the amount of natural fuel. Development pressures increase the threat of wildland fire on human populations and property as development pushes to the fringes of major forests and brush areas. Increased human presence in wildland areas likewise increases the potential for human -induced wildland fires. Urban Fires. The predominant land use in the Temecula area is low density residential development. The area has experienced rapid development in past decades, and this trend is expected to continue. As the number of structures increases, so does the incidence of fire. Building conditions that affect fire control include: type and use of structure; area of building; number of stories; roof covering materials; and adjacent uses. Certain development patterns pose more difficult fire problems. These include: multi -story, wood frame, high density apartment development; large continuous developed areas with combustible roofing materials; and facilities that use and/or store hazardous materials. Several older residential tracts in the City feature wood shake roofs, which increase the potential for both ignition and spread of fire. Local Ordinance Requirements. The City of Temecula Municipal Code meets or exceeds title 14, CCR, division 1.5, chapter 7, subchapter 2, articles 1-5 (commencing with section 1270) (SRA Fire Safe Regulations) and title 14, CCR, division 1.5, chapter 7, subchapter 3, article 3 (commencing with section 1299.01) (Fire Hazard Reduction Around Buildings and Structures Regulations) for SRAs and/or VHFHSZs. T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-14 GFfRF The State of Calffomia and the Depad,,M of Forestry and Fire Protection make no representations ranties r,g,Ning he aworacy ofdataormaps. Neitherthe Statenorthe Depadmenlshallbe liable antler any circumstances for any dired, special, incidental, or wnsegoe.tial damages with resped to any claim by any user or hfrd pady on acwont of, or arising from, the use of data or maps. Obtain FRAP mans. data, metadata and Arnold Sch—nagger, Govamor. State of Dalffornia Mike Chrisman. Secretary for Natural Resources, The NResources Age.. y Del Walte.I. rs, Di—, Depadment d F... Forestry and Fire Protecion Temecula MAP ID: FHSZL 03 Temewla DATASOURCES Areas posing a significant risk to the City are subject to the California P Public Resources Code, Sections 4291-4299, which require property u owners to conduct periodic maintenance to reduce the fire danger. B The City will continue to reduce the potential for dangerous fires by L PLANS IN AcTIoN coordinating with the RCFD to conduct fire hazard education, and The Fire Department reviews administer fire protection and fuel modification programs. The I development plans to be sure current Uniform Fire Code will be used to prevent structural fire Cnew structures are safe, and hazards. conducts public education and outreach activities. The City Salso works closely with local A water districts to ensure water pressure is adequate for fire Ffighting purposes. E T HUMAN ACTIVITY Human activity hazards addressed in the Safety Plan include Y HAZARDS hazardous materials and nuclear power production. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PLANS IN ACTION Hazardous materials are used in Temecula for a variety of purposes, The City participates in the including service industries, small businesses, schools and Riverside County Household households. Many chemicals used in household cleaning, Ha.Zardous Wlaste (HHW) construction, dry cleaning, film processing, landscaping, and collection program in automotive maintenance and repair are considered hazardous. accordance with the Accidents can also occur in the production, use, transport and California Integrated Solid disposal of hazardous waste. Waste Management Act of 1989. County In order to effectively manage hazardous materials and wastes, the Environmental Health Environmental personnel, in City implements applicable portions of the Riverside County conjunction with the Fire Hazardous Waste Management Plan (HWMP). Both the federal and Department, respond to State governments require all businesses that handle more than a ha.Zardous materials specified amount of hazardous materials to submit an annual business incidents, and assist County plan to the local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). The District Attorney to CUPA with responsibility for the City of Temecula is the Riverside investigate environmental County Environmental Health Department. crimes and respond to illegal hazardous waste disposal The City will work to minimize accidents and health risks from complaints. hazardous materials using the following approaches: C I T Y O F T E M E C LI L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-16 • Cooperate with federal, State, and County agencies to effectively regulate the management of hazardous materials P and waste. [ I B • Amend project applications to include requirements for L submittal of hazardous waste information. I • Establish roadway transportation routes for conveyance of C hazardous materials. • Cooperate with the Certified United Program Agency S (CUPA) for Temecula (the Riverside County Environmental A Health Department) and the Riverside County Fire F Department to administer risk management plans for E businesses within the City. T • Implement the Multi -Hazard Functional Plan for accidents Y involving hazardous materials. NUCLEAR POWER PRODUCTION The San Onofre Nuclear Generating System (SONGS) is located on the Camp Pendleton U.S. Marine Corps Base in San Diego County, approximately 25 miles west of Temecula. SONGS operations are regulated by FEMA and the California Office of Emergency Services (OES). An Interjurisdictional Planning Committee (IPC), comprised of several local jurisdictions, was established to coordinate emergency response plans. SONGS byproducts are radioactive, with the exception of small quantities of radioactive gas released into the air and liquids into the Pacific Ocean. The releases are monitored by SONGS personnel. According to SONGS, radiation exposure due to material releases is less than the typical exposure from natural background radiation. The two most likely sources radiation contamination are incidents involving transport radioactive materials, and uncontrolled releases at the plant site. C I T Y O F T E M E C LI L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-17 of of P U B L S A F E T Y PLANS IN ACTION Temecula's Multi-Ha.Zard Functional Plan provides strategies to deal with potential emergencies related to SONGS. SAFETY AND SECURITY PLANS IN ACTION Wlhen property owners present development proposals, the City encourages the use of crime preventive defensible space and lighting concepts to deter crime. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has identified the area surrounding every nuclear generating station as an Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). The State of California has defined the area outside, and adjacent to the EPZ as a Public Education Zone (PEZ). The federal government establishes the area with a 50-mile radius around every nuclear generating station as an Ingestion Pathway Zone (IPZ). The Temecula planning area is located within the IPZ of the San Onofre Station. Education programs coordinated by the State and Southern California Edison are administered in this zone to ensure that residents are prepared for any potential problems associated with the facility. Criminal activity in Temecula is lower than in some other parts of Riverside County. Protecting residents and businesses from criminal activity is a priority in Temecula. Police protection is F provided by the Riverside County Sheriffs Department (RCSD). Temecula has three store -front office locations (Old Town Temecula, Promenade Mall, and Temecula Town Center). The City will ensure that contracted staffing levels are compatible with the City population and needs. Crime prevention programs include police services for residents and businesses, and citizen -based volunteer programs and patrols. EMERGENCY Many natural and man-made events and processes carry the risk of PREPAREDNESS hazard to life and property. Natural hazards arise from a community's AND HAZARD many physical relationships to the natural environment. Hazard risk also results from human -caused intentional acts and disruption or MITIGATION failure of technology. A resilient community has the capacity to maintain critical functions during hazard events as well as adapt to and reduce future hazard risks. Hazard mitigation is any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to life and property from hazard events. An effective response to natural and human -caused disasters requires planning, education, coordination and training by multiple government agencies and the public. C I T Y O F T E M E C LI L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-18 CLIMATE ADAPTATION P Riverside County's 2019 Climate Action Plan (CAP) provides an U updated greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory, as well as measures to B reduce GHG emissions, prepare for potential climate -related impacts, L and to comply with state and federal legislation, including Gov. Code § 65302(g)(4)(C).. Some degree of climate change will occur I regardless of the City's effort to reduce and mitigate greenhouse gas C emissions. The City will need to adapt to these changes within the context of the community's environmental and socioeconomic S system. A Forecasted effects to Riverside County from climate change include F increased temperatures and precipitation extremes (i.e., more severe E periods of drought and flooding). Exposure to these events can leave a community vulnerable to an increased rate of wildland fires, T flooding, reduced air quality, availability of fresh water, and negative Y impacts on wildlife. All of these effects can potentially generate multiple concomitant effects on public health and safety. The State requires local jurisdictions to integrate climate adaption into the general plan to support the State's overall climate adaption strategy. The City will develop climate resiliency and adaptation strategies and work with stakeholders on amendments to relevant planning documents to address this issue. HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING Local Emergency Preparedness Plans serve as extensions of the California Emergency Plan and the Emergency Resource Management Plan. The City has an adopted LHMP as part of the County's MJLHMP to ensure the effective management of City personnel and resources in responding to emergency situations stemming from natural disasters, technological incidents, and nuclear defense emergencies. The plan includes a responsibility matrix that delineates specific responsibilities to City departments or personnel in the event of an emergency. The plan also includes a comprehensive hazard analysis that addresses the following potential hazards: earthquake, hazardous material incident, flooding, dam failure, major fire/wildfire, nuclear incident, and transportation incident. C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-19 P u B L S A F E T Y PLANS IN ACT[ON The Fire and Police Departments educate residents and businesses about appropriate act -ions to safeguard life and property during and after emergencies through distribution of brochures, presentations to civic groups, and instruction in local schools. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS The LHMP and MJHMP provide general guidelines for evacuation routes in the event of a natural or human -caused disaster. Due to the unpredictability of the impact of a disaster on streets and highways, appropriate evacuation routes cannot be pre -determined. In general, all traffic will be channeled to the nearby freeways, state highways, and other major arterials. I-15 will serve as the primary north -south evacuation channel. Winchester and Rancho California Roads will be used for east -west evacuation. The City prepared an analysis consistent with Senate Bill 99 to identify residential developments in hazard areas that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes. The analysis identified six residential areas of concern in high hazard zones that warrant further study and coordination with the Riverside County Fire Department. While all residential developments meet City standards, the City will continue to coordinate with RCFD and RCSD to provide ongoing education to residents about how to safely evacuate in the event of an emergency A White Paper describing the methodology used to map the evacuation routes is included as an Appendix to the Public Safety Element. Once the decision to evacuate is made, the public will be alerted and given evacuation instructions by various means, including school alert/monitor receivers, radio and television announcements, sirens, mobile loud speakers, and personal contact. Educating residents and businesses about potential disasters, the LHMP, and the MJLHMP can increase the effectiveness of response efforts. An educated public will know how to prevent injury and property damage during and after emergencies and also know how to find help. One important way that residents participate in the City's emergency preparedness program is through the Temecula Citizen's Corps. Created in 2002, the Corps is a community -based volunteer organization whose goal is to prepare for natural disasters or terrorist activity through coordinated response at the neighborhood level. In the event of an emergency, the Corps will assist the City government by providing assistance in cases where the scale of the incident has overwhelmed conventional emergency services. C I T Y O F T E M E C i.I L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-20 TERRORISM In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the READINESS AND City of Temecula's emergency preparedness and response services P RESPONSE have become an even more critical function to address terrorism u issues that confront the nation and local communities. Since the B events of 9/11, a considerable amount of information has been L generated on potential vulnerabilities, protective measures, and anti- terrorism/security technologies. The Riverside County Sheriff's and I Fire Departments, which currently provide police and fire services to C Temecula, recognizes the need not only to learn from the lessons from 9/11, but also to collectively address the terrorism planning and policy issues that most affect Temecula residents. The goals, policies S and implementation programs associated with emergency A preparedness also apply to terrorism readiness and response. F E T ESSENTIAL The City of Temecula is home to a number of critical facilities and Y FACILITIES infrastructures; this list is maintained as part of the City's LHMP and includes: • Public Safety Dispatch: 2 • Emergency Operations Center: 3 • City Hall: 1 • Fire Stations: 5 • Water Reservoirs: 39 • Water Treatment Plans: 0 • Waste Water Treatment Plans: 1 • Hospitals:1 • Police Facilities: 2 • Maintenance Yards: 1 • Senior Community Centers: 1 • Schools:29 • Radio Repeaters: 1 No areas of Temecula lack emergency service. New essential facilities should be located outside of hazardous areas, especially VHFHSZs (see Policy 4.5). The City's Growth Management and Public Facilities Element further describes the role of essential facilities and maps these facilities on Figure GM-1, Community Safety Facilities. C I T Y O F T E M E C i.I L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-21 GOALS AND POLICIES p u Certain natural conditions and human activities in Temecula create B risks to individuals and properties within the community. Excessive L, risk from such hazards can be reduced or avoided through I implementation of policies in the Public Safety Element. C The Public Safety Element addresses four major issues, including: 1) reducing risk from natural hazardous conditions; 2) reducing risks S from hazards associated with human activities; 3) community safety A and security; and 4) preparing for emergency situations. F NATURAL Due to location within a seismically active region and the presence of E HAZARDS floodplains and hillsides, Temecula is potentially subject to several T types of natural hazards, including earthquakes, liquefaction, flooding, Y wild land fires, landslides, and erosion. Potential damage can be reduced through appropriate land use planning, development engineering, and building construction practices. The Planning Area contains Alquist-Priolo fault zones and County Fault Hazard Zones. These zones identify areas potentially impacted by groundshaking and surface -rupture. Seismic events occurring within and outside of the Planning Area also have the potential to trigger such secondary impacts as liquefaction and subsidence. Other natural hazards impacting the Planning Area include flooding and dam inundation. Goal 1 Protection from natural hazards associated with geologic instability, seismic events, wild land fires, flooding, and dam failures. Policy 1.1 Identify and mitigate potential adverse impacts of ground surface rupture, liquefaction, and landslides at the project level. Policy 1.2 Apply and enforce seismic design standards and building construction codes for new development. Policy 1.3 Work with property owners to remediate hazardous buildings throughout the City. Policy 1.4 Monitor the potential for seismic events and other geologic activity with the County of Riverside and California Geological Survey. C I T Y O F T E M E C i.I L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-22 Policy 1.5 Establish development management techniques to lessen the potential for erosion and landslides. Policy 1.6 Provide and maintain adequate flood control facilities and limit development within the 100-year floodplain and potential dam inundation areas. Policy 1.7 Prohibit development of any kind within the floodway portion of the 100-year floodplain. Policy 1.8 Require new development in SRAs or VHFHSZs to be located, designed, and constructed to minimize the risk of loss resulting from fires through: • minimizing development in SRAs or VHFHSZs when feasible; • imposition of site -specific development standards during project review, including fire safe design, fire protection plans, sufficient ingress/egress, evacuation routes, emergency vehicle access, defensible space, visible home addressing and signage, and fuel modification zones; • coordination with the City Fire Department and other organizations; and • evaluating re -development after a large fire. Policy 1.9 Reduce the risk of wildfire hazards by working with Homeowner Associations, Business Park Associations, and other property owners and RCFD to maintain fire retardant landscaping and buffer zones, community fire breaks, and private road and public road clearance in areas of high wildfire risk. C I T Y O F T E M E C LI L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-23 P u B L 14-11 3 NO A F E T Y HUMAN- The transport, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials and the P CAUSED education and planning regarding nuclear power production are u HAZARDS important environmental planning issues in Temecula. Modern B technology and society's high standard of living has led to L dependence on these products and necessitates adequate management of materials and waste and education regarding hazards I within the City. The intent is to avoid damage to people, property Cand environmental resources. Goal Protection of the public and environmental S resources from hazards related to hazardous A materials and waste, and nuclear power F production. E Policy 2.1 Minimize the risks associated with hazardous Tmaterials through careful land use planning and Y coordination with responsible federal, State, and County agencies. Policy 2.2 Participate in local and regional programs that facilitate the proper disposal of household hazardous waste. Policy 2.3 The policies and programs of the current Riverside County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (HWMP) are hereby adopted by reference. Policy 2.4 Coordinate with local, State and federal agencies to reduce the risks related to nuclear power production. Policy 2.5 Reduce potential hazards associated with airplane accidents by ensuring compliance of proposed development projects with the risk contours contained in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for French Valley Airport. C I T Y O F T E M E C LI L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-24 SAFETY AND The perception of personal safety and the security of property are P SECURITY central to the quality of life in a community. Realizing these u objectives requires both proactive and reactive involvement by B citizens, as well as fire and law enforcement personnel. The risk of L exposure to criminal activity or fire can be reduced through planning, education and regulation of human activity, and by providing paved I road access throughout the City. In addition, the design and effective C use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in fear and the incidence of both crime and fire, improving the quality of life, and helping create a secure sense of community. S A Goal 3 A safe and secure community free from the threat F of personal injury and loss of property. E Policy 3.1 Ensure adequate facilities and police and fire service T personnel are provided in the City. Y Policy 3.2 Continue to work with the community in operating citizen involved programs and patrols that promote mutual assistance and crime prevention activities among residents. Policy 3.3 Incorporate crime prevention and defensible space into site plans and building designs for new development. Policy 3.4 Ensure that all-weather and appropriate secondary access is provided to ensure timely emergency response. Require all residential development with 35 or more dwelling units to provide all-weather secondary access that meets City standards. C I T Y O F T F M F C i.I L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-25 EMERGENCY Major emergencies occur periodically in all communities. Timely and P PREPAREDNESS coordinated action by agencies charged with responsibilities in the u AND HAZARD event of a disaster is necessary to mitigate the effect of a disaster on B the human population and environment. Preventive measures and MITIGATION preparatory responses before an emergency occurs will hasten L recovery. I C Goal 4 An effective response of emergency services. S Policy 4.1 Provide for and maintain a coordinated emergency services response to reduce community risks and A property damage in the event of a disaster. F Policy 4.2 Support the development and implementation of local E preparedness plans and multi -jurisdictional Tcooperation for emergency situations consistent with Y the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). Policy 4.3 Coordinate emergency response planning with Riverside County and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Policy 4.4 Encourage community -wide emergency preparedness among City residents and the business community. Policy 4.5 Regulate the location of critical facilities to ensure they continue to function after a disaster. Locate, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of very high fire hazard severity zones, including but not limited to, hospitals and health care facilities, emergency shelters, emergency command centers, and emergency communication facilities, or identify construction methods or other methods to minimize damage if these facilities are located in very high fire hazard severity zones. Policy 4.6 Discourage the closure of streets that limit or delay access for emergency services. Policy 4.7 Coordinate with local, state, and federal agencies to evaluate the capacity, safety, and viability of evacuation routes under a range of emergency scenarios, and update plans as necessary. C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-26 Goal 5 A resilient, sustainable, and equitable community where risks to life, property, the economy, and the environment resulting from climate change, including extreme weather events, are minimized. P U B L Policy 5.1 Collaborate with local, regional, state and/or federal I C jurisdictions and agencies on climate resiliency and adaptation strategies. S Policy 5.2 Monitor climate change -related effects with local, A regional, state, and/or federal partners to provide F information of effectiveness of existing infrastructure E and programs. T Y IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS The following Implementation Programs provide actions to implement Public Safety Element goals and policies. PS-1 Reduce the risk to the community from hazards related to geologic NATURAL conditions, seismic activity, wild land fires, and flooding by requiring HAZARDS RISK feasible mitigation of such impacts on existing development, new development, and reuse projects. Assess development proposals for REDUCTION potential hazards pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Require measures to mitigate all identified significant public safety hazards. Address the following issues in the assessment: • Steep slopes, unstable geologic materials and faulting; • Flooding; • Wild land and structural fires and adequacy of water pressure for fire fighting; • Hazardous materials use, transport, storage or disposal; and • Mitigate existing non -conforming development to contemporary fire safe standards, in terms of road standards and vegetative hazard. Agency/Department: Related Policies: Planning, Building & Safety, Public Works 1. 1, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9 C I T Y O F T E M E C i.I L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-27 I� u PS-2 To minimize damage from earthquakes and other geologic activity, STRUCTURAL implement most recent and most stringent California and Uniform B Building Code seismic requirements for structural design for new L DESIGN development and reuse projects. I Agency/Department: Planning, Building & Safety C Related Policy: 1.2 S A PS-3 During review of development and reuse proposals, require surveys SOIL AND of soil and geologic conditions by State licensed Engineering F Geologists and Civil Engineers where appropriate. Examples of E GEOLOGIC when these surveys are required are: -I- SURVEYS Y • Prior to the development of any area with slopes more than 10 feet high at a gradient equal to or steeper than 2:1; • Projects located within a State -delineated Seismic Hazard Zone for liquefaction or seismically -induced landsliding, in accordance with the California Geological Survey; or, • Projects located within an Earthquake Fault Zone or within 150 feet of an active or potentially active fault. If potential for fault displacement or liquefaction exists on the site, structures for human occupancy may not be placed there unless the seismic hazard is mitigated to an acceptable level. Agency/Department: Public Works, Planning, Building & Safety Related Policy: 1.1 C I T Y O F T E M E C i.I L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-28 PS-4 Implement the following actions to ensure that the land use planning LAND USE and real estate processes fully account for the presence of seismic PLANNING AND hazards in Temecula. NOTIFICATION • Require that any person selling property within a delineated Earthquake Fault Zone, Liquefaction Zone, or Landslide Zone disclose this fact to any prospective purchaser. • Work with the County of Riverside and California Geological Survey to monitor and compile information on faults within the Temecula Planning Area. • Update the City's listing of hazardous unreinforced masonry buildings periodically. Provide technical assistance and funding to remediate these structures, as available. • Develop a Land Use Suitability Matrix for Special Studies and County Fault Hazards Zones. The Matrix will categorize land uses according to risk and develop restrictions for these uses in zones. Agency/Department: Planning, Building & Safety, Public Works Related Policies: 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 Required by General Plan EIR PS-5 Prepare and adopt hillside development standards for site HILLSIDE development and drainage that work to control runoff for erosion DEVELOPMENT control and water quality purposes. Require geotechnical investigations for areas of known or suspected geologic hazards. STANDARDS Agency/Department: Planning, Public Works Related Policy: 1.5 Required by General Plan EIR PS-6 Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program FLOOD (NFIP) administered through the Federal Emergency Management INSURANCE Agency (FEMA). The NFIP program provides federal flood insurance subsidies and federally financed loans for property owners in flood -prone areas. Agency/Department: Public Works, Planning, Building & Safety Related Policies: 1.6, 1.7 C I T Y O F T E M E C i.I L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-29 P u B L 3 S A F E T Y PS-7 Mitigate flood hazards in Temecula by: MITIGATE FLOOD HAZARDS • Reviewing development proposals for projects within FEMA Special Flood Hazard Areas for consistency with City flood damage prevention and floodplain management regulations and FEMA requirements. • Prohibiting development of any kind within the floodway portion of the 100-year floodplain. • Maintaining a Dam Inundation Evacuation Plan as part of the Multi -Hazard Functional Plan. • Coordinating planning projections with the Office of Emergency Services to ensure that dam safety plans reflect development in the community. Agency/Department: Public Works, Planning, Building & Safety Related Policies: 1.6, 1.7 PS-8 Promote fire prevention in Temecula in the following ways: PROMOTE FIRE PREVENTION • Work closely with the Fire Department to implement fire hazard education and fire prevention programs, including information about defensible space or evacuation routes. • Work with the Fire Department to provide adequate infrastructure for water supply and fire flow in new and existing developments and establish fire prevention and mitigation measures in wild land fire hazard areas. • Expand and improve vegetation management efforts in wild land fire hazard areas. • Coordinate with the local water districts and Fire Department to ensure that water pressure for urban areas and sites to be developed is adequate for fire fighting purposes. • Adopt and implement California Fire Code provisions and appropriate amendments to reflect Temecula's topography, vegetation, and urban form. • Support public education, information, fire prevention and fire law enforcement programs conducted by the Fire Department, with an emphasis on reaching at -risk populations. • Support programs and plans, such as Strategic Fire Plans, consistent with state law that require fuel management/modification within established defensible space boundaries and when strategic fuel modification is necessary outside of defensible space, balance fuel management needs to protect structures with the preservation of native vegetation and sensitive habitats. C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-30 Agency/Department: Fire, Planning Related Policy: 1.8 PS-9 Minimize public health and environmental risks from the use, REDUCE RISKS transport, storage and disposal of hazardous materials through the following actions: FROM HAZARDOUS • Cooperate with federal, State, and local agencies to effectively MATERIALS regulate the management of hazardous materials and waste. • Amend project applications to include requirements for submittal of information involving the proposed use, storage, handling, transport and/or disposal of hazardous materials/wastes and any previous use, storage, handling and/or disposal of such materials/wastes. • Cooperate with the County of Riverside to implement applicable portions of the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (HWMP) and the Hazardous Materials Area Plan (HMAP), as well as to maintain an inventory of facilities that store, handle, or transport hazardous materials. • Establish transportation routes for the conveyance of hazardous materials. Transportation of hazardous materials shall be restricted through residential areas and arterials during peak hours. • Implement the Multi -Hazard Functional Plan for accidents involving hazardous materials. Agency/Department: Planning, Public Works, Building & Safety, Fire Related Policies: 2.1, 2.3 PS-10 Support efforts by the County Household Hazardous Waste Program HOUSEHOLD to protect residents from dangers resulting from the use, transport HAZARDOUS and disposal of hazardous materials used in the home. The program includes public education about health and environmental hazards of WASTE PROGRAM household hazardous materials and periodic collection campaigns at established sites. Agency/Department: Community Services, County Environmental Health Department Related Policy: 2.2 C I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-31 PS-11 Reduce nuclear power production risks in the following ways. P NUCLEAR POWER u PRODUCTION • Participate in programs and emergency response exercises B RISKS with federal and State agencies and Southern California L Edison to minimize the risks related to nuclear power REDUCTION production. I • Implement measures related to the San Onofre Nuclear C Generating Station (SONGS) in the City's Multi -Hazard Functional Plan to ensure that residents are prepared for any S problems associated with the facility. A Agency/Department: Planning, Public Works, Building & Safety F Related Policy: 2.6 E T PS-12 Protect residents and businesses from criminal activity by providing Y MINIMIZE substantive levels of police protection and educating the public about CRIMINAL methods to reduce criminal activity. The specific actions to implement these goals are identified below: ACTIVITY • When renewing the service contracts with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, ensure that contracted staffing levels are consistent with the population and geography of Temecula, and that sufficient emphasis is placed on staff and programs for crime prevention. • Ensure the mutual aid agreements between the City and surrounding jurisdictions are in place for emergency situations. • Use defensible space and lighting concepts in development projects designed to enhance public safety. • Increase public awareness about criminal activity and crime prevention activities. Maximize the use of after school programs, volunteer and citizen programs, and other community oriented policing programs with the Police Department. Agency/Department: City Manager's Office, Police, Planning Related Policies: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 C I T Y O F T E M E C i.I L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-32 PS-13 Require all residential development with 35 or more dwelling units to SECONDARY provide secondary access that meets full City standards to ensure ACCESS timely emergency service response. Agency/Department: Planning, Fire Related Policy: 3.4 PS-14 Maintain the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan under provisions of the LOCAL HAZARD State Emergency Management System format to maximize the efforts MITIGATION PLAN of emergency service providers (e.g. fire, medical and law enforcement) and minimize human suffering and property damage associated with disasters. The Plan should identify resources available for emergency response and establish coordinated action plans for specific emergency situations and disasters including earthquakes, hazardous materials incidents, flooding, dam failure, wild land fire, incidents at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, transportation incidents, and national security emergencies. Agency/Department: City Manager's Office, Public Works, Police, Fire, Planning Related Policies: 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 5.1, 5.2 PS-15 Encourage resident participation in citizen -based programs and EMERGENCY educate residents to take appropriate actions to safeguard life and PREPAREDNESS property during and immediately after emergencies. Education about emergency preparedness can occur through the distribution of EDUCATION brochures, presentations to civic groups and homeowners associations and instruction to local schools. Agency/Department: Planning, Police, Fire Related Policy: 4.1 PS-16 Prepare, adopt and implement a grading ordinance to ensure that GRADING grading associated with new development projects is conducted in ORDINANCE accordance with appropriate geotechnical engineering standards Agency/Department: Planning, Public Works Related Policy: 1.5 Required by General Plan EIR C I I Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-33 This page left intentionally blank. C I T Y O F T E M E C LI L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-34 2021-01 Addendum to the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update August 2021 Prepared for: City of Temecula Community Development Department Planning Department 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92589 Prepared by: De Novo Planning Group 180 E. Main Street, Suite 108 Tustin, CA 92780 D e N o v o P l a n n i n g G r o u p A Land Use Planning, Design, and Environmental Firm City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................... 1-0 1.1 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND........................................................................................................................ 1-0 1.2 CEQA REQUIREMENTS................................................................................................................................ 1-0 1.3 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE..................................................................................................................... 1-2 2 ADDENDUM FINDING............................................................................................................................... 2-1 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT............................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 BACKGROUND............................................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.2 PROJECT LOCATION ANDSETTING................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPOSED PROJECT REVISIONS/ADDITIONS........................................................................ 3-3 4 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 AESTHETICS............................................................................................................................................... 4-2 4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES....................................................................................................... 4-4 4.3 AIR QUALITY.............................................................................................................................................. 4-6 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................................................................. 4-11 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES............................................................................................................................... 4-17 4.6 ENERGY.................................................................................................................................................. 4-20 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS................................................................................................................................. 4-22 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS..................................................................................................................... 4-26 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS........................................................................................................ 4-28 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY............................................................................................................... 4-32 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING.......................................................................................................................... 4-37 4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES................................................................................................................................ 4-41 4.13 NOISE.....................................................................................................................................................4-42 4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING........................................................................................................................ 4-45 4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES....................................................................................................................................... 4-47 4.16 RECREATION............................................................................................................................................ 4-50 4.17 TRANSPORTATION..................................................................................................................................... 4-52 4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES..................................................................................................................... 4-57 4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.................................................................................................................. 4-59 4.20 WILDFIRE................................................................................................................................................ 4-63 4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE...................................................................................................... 4-66 Tables and Figures TABLE 1: TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN EXPECTED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY......................................................... 3-3 TABLE 2: PROGRESS TOWARDS THE RHNA...................................................................................................................3-5 TABLE 3: COMPARISON OF RHNA CANDIDATE SITES REALISTIC CAPACITY AND RHNA.......................................................... 3-7 FIGURE 1: REGIONAL LOCATION MAP......................................................................................................................... 3-11 FIGURE 2: GENERAL PLAN PLANNING AREA.................................................................................................................. 3-12 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND The City of Temecula is the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The Temecula Housing Element was first adopted in 1993 and was updated in 2003 as part of a Comprehensive General Plan Update. Adoption of the Housing Element and a Negative Declaration preceded adoption of the Comprehensive General Plan Update. On April 12, 2005, the City Council adopted the Temecula General Plan, referencing the Housing Element, and certified the Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") (State Clearinghouse No. 2003061041). The Housing Element was updated again in 2010 for the 41" cycle. Most recently, in 2013, the City Council adopted the City of Temecula General Plan Housing Element (2014-2021 Housing Element) and Negative Declaration for the 5t" Cycle. Additionally, since adoption of the General Plan Update, the Harveston Specific Plan Amendment, Altair Specific Plan, and Uptown Temecula Specific Plan have been adopted. Environmental review was completed for each of these specific projects; refer to Section 1.4, Incorporation by Reference. The City now proposes the current 2021-2029 Housing Element for the 61" cycle and Public Safety Element Update (referenced herein as "Modified Project" or "Project"). The Modified Project involves minor changes/additions to the Housing Element in compliance with State Housing Element Law Government Code Sections 65580-65590.1 and minor changes/additions to the Public Safety Element to meet the requirements of California Government Code Section 65302(g). Following preliminary review of the proposed Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update, the City of Temecula, as Lead Agency, has determined that the proposed Project is subject to CEQA (Public Resources Code [PRC] Sections 21000-21177). This Addendum to the FEIR has been prepared by the City to demonstrate that the proposed Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update do not meet the conditions warranting preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR, as the potential environmental impacts associated with the Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated, as described further. 1.2 CEQA REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this Addendum is to analyze any potential differences between the impacts identified in the FEIR and those that would be associated with the proposed Project. Pursuant to provisions of CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines, the City is the Lead Agency charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve the Project. As part of its decision -making process, the City is required to review and consider whether the proposed Project would create new significant impacts or significant impacts that would be substantially more severe than those disclosed in the General Plan FEIR. Additional CEQA review beyond this Addendum would only be triggered if the Project created new significant impacts or impacts that are more severe than those disclosed in the FEIR used to approve the Temecula General Plan. To use an Addendum as the appropriate CEQA document for the proposed Project, the City must find that major revisions to the FEIR are not necessary and that none of the conditions described in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of additional CEQA documentation has occurred. Introduction 1-0 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines, prior to approving further discretionary action and depending upon the situation, the lead agency must generally either: (1) prepare a Subsequent EIR; (2) prepare a Supplemental EIR; (3) prepare a Subsequent Negative Declaration; (4) prepare an Addendum to the EIR or Negative Declaration; or (5) prepare no further documentation (see State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15162 - 15164). State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states: When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines explains when an Addendum to an EIR is appropriate. Per this section, where some changes or additions are necessary to the previously certified EIR, but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR (as described above) have occurred, then the lead agency is directed to prepare an Addendum to the certified EIR (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15164). Further, the Addendum should include a "brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162," and that "explanation must be supported by substantial evidence" (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15164 Introduction 1-1 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR [e]). The Addendum need not be circulated for public review but may simply be attached to the certified EIR (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15164 [c]). 1.3 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE Temecula General Plan The City Council comprehensively adopted the Update to the City of Temecula General Plan on April 12, 2005. The General Plan is a comprehensive legal document that identifies a community vision for the future and establishes a framework to guide future decisions regarding development, resource management, public safety, public services, and the overall quality of the community. The General Plan contains goals, policies, and programs to guide land use and development, and is organized to include the following mandatory "elements" in accordance with California Government Code Section 65302: Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Open Space/Conservation, Public Safety, and Noise. In addition to the required elements, the Temecula General Plan includes the following optional elements: Growth Management/Public Facilities, Air Quality, Community Design, and Economic Development. The 6t" Cycle Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update are the subject of this Addendum. Temecula General Plan Final EIR The City Council certified the General Plan FEIR on April 12, 2005. The General Plan FEIR provides a program -level analysis of the general environmental impacts resulting from the development of land uses and implementation of policies established within the Temecula General Plan update. The General Plan FEIR's analysis is based on the change between development under existing conditions (at the time of document preparation) and those projected for likely development in accordance with the General Plan by theoretical expected development capacity. Based on General Plan FEIR Table 3-1, the General Plan FEIR assumed and analyzed the environmental impacts resulting from the following': approximately 25,005 additional dwelling units and approximately 36.2 million additional square feet of non-residential land uses. The General Plan FEIR concluded that full implementation of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures for all issue areas analyzed except for Section 5.3 Air Quality (Violate any air quality standard or contributes substantially to an existing air quality violation; Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any criteria pollutant; and Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations) and Section 5.13, Transportation (Causes an intersection to operate at LOS E or F [peak hour ICU greater than 0.90] and Causes a freeway ramp to operate at LOS F [peak hour V/C greater than 1.00]), which were determined to be significant and unavoidable. Harveston Specific Plan Amendment Final EIR The Harveston General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) - Planning Area 12 (Project) proposed changing the existing General Plan land use designation from Service Commercial (SC) to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) and a SPA that would include a residential overlay to the Specific Plan on an 87.54-acre portion of Planning Area 12. The remaining Harveston ' These numbers represent the expected net change by land use category from existing 2002 (baseline) to expected development capacity, as calculated in the Temecula General Plan. Introduction 1-2 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Specific Plan Area was developed. The residential overlay designation would overlay the existing SC designation for the site within the existing Specific Plan. The GPA from SC to SPI would maintain the Specific Plan's consistency with the existing General Plan Land Use Element but would provide flexibility for the Specific Plan, including the proposed residential overlay, to function as the General Plan land use designation. The residential overlay would allow the future development of a maximum of 1,000 residential units. The Harveston Specific Plan Amendment FEIR assumed 1,000 small lot detached single family homes would be developed. The Harveston Specific Plan Amendment FEIR concluded that Project implementation would result in less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures for all issue areas analyzed except for Air Quality Impact 3.1-2: The project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard, which was determined to be significant and unavoidable. Altair Specific Plan Final EIR The Altair Specific Plan is primarily a residential mixed -use development with supporting civic uses and open space. Different housing types are proposed to meet the needs of a range of age groups and household sizes. Altair proposed a type of form -based code using building types clustered in villages as the organizing principle. These building types are assigned to seven neighborhood "villages" which, in turn, are overlaid with one of three proposed residential zones (Residential Zone [SP-R], Mixed-Use/Residential [SP-MR], or Mixed -Use [SP-M]), in combination with an active open space zone (SP-AO). The non-residential uses include an elementary school and a civic use area ("South Parcel") which are covered by the Educational (SP-E) zone and Institutional (SP-I) zone, respectively, and natural open space (SP-NO). Based on the proposed residential zone and associated densities and intensities by village area, Altair Specific Plan would allow for up to 1,750 dwelling units. The Altair Specific Plan FEIR concluded that Project implementation would result in less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures for all issue areas analyzed except for Air Quality Impact AQ-1: Operational activities occurring after the buildout of the project would violate air quality standards or contribute substantially to any existing or projected air quality violation; Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change Impact GHG-1: The project could generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; Noise and Vibration Impact NOI-1: Construction activities occurring at each individual development site in the project area would potentially expose their respective adjacent or nearby receptor(s) to substantial increases in ambient noise levels; Noise and Vibration Impact NOI-2: Construction activities in the project area may expose their respective onsite and/or offsite sensitive land uses to vibration levels that exceed applicable FTA vibration thresholds for building damage and human annoyance; Traffic and Transportation Impact TRA-7: Development of the Specific Plan would cause the level of service at the existing I-15 Southbound Ramps and Temecula Parkway (Intersection #25) to degrade from an acceptable LOS D or better to an unacceptable LOS F during the AM and PM peak hours; and Traffic and Transportation Impact TRA-11: Development of the Specific Plan would cause the General Plan Build Out (2035) level of service at Ynez Road and Rancho California Road (Intersection #5) to degrade from an unacceptable LOS E during the AM peak hour, and would cause the average delay to increase by more than the 2.0-second threshold of significance, which were determined to be significant and unavoidable. Introduction 1-3 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Final EIR The Uptown Specific Plan establishes six zoning districts - Uptown Center District (UC); Upton Hotel/Tourism District (UHT); Uptown Sports/Transit District (US); Uptown Arts District (UA); Creekside Village District (CV); and Murrieta Creek Recreation and Open Space District (MCR-OS) and two overlay zones - Creekside Village Commercial Overlay Zones (CV -CO) and Wilder Hills Residential Overlay Zone (WH-RO). East district defines the allowable building types, frontage types, land uses, building placement, parking placement, and building heights within the specific plan area. The Uptown Specific Plan would allow for 3,726 dwelling units and 1.9 million square feet of commercial uses for a total of 5.5 million square feet of total development potential on approximately 560 acres. The new development is assumed to replace all existing development (approximately 3.8 million square feet) in the specific plan area. The Uptown Temecula Specific Plan FEIR concluded that Project implementation would result in less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures for all issue areas analyzed except for Air Quality - Violation of Air Quality Standards (Construction and Operation) and Cumulative Impacts to Air Quality; Cultural Resources - Direct Impacts to Cultural Resources (Historic) and Cumulative Impacts to Cultural Resources (Historic); and Noise and Vibration (Construction), which were determined to be significant and unavoidable. Temecula Municipal Code The City of Temecula Municipal Code consists of the City's regulatory and penal ordinances, and certain administrative ordinances. The City of Temecula Development Code (Development Code) is codified into Title 17, Zoning. The purpose of the Development Code is to: implement the goals, and policies and programs of the Temecula General Plan, and to manage future growth and change in accordance with that plan; promote health, safety, welfare and general prosperity with the aim of preserving a wholesome, serviceable and attractive community in accordance with the General Plan for the City; attain the physical, social and economic advantages resulting from comprehensive and orderly land use and resource planning; encourage, classify, designate, regulate, restrict and segregate the most compatible and beneficial location and use of buildings, structures and land; limit the height, number of stories, and size of buildings and other structures hereafter designed, erected or altered; regulate and determine the setbacks and other open spaces; regulate and limit the density of population; and facilitate adequate provisions for community facilities, such as transportation, water, sewage, and parks. Introduction 1-4 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 2 ADDENDUM FINDING Pursuant to CEQA and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, staff has reviewed and considered the FEIR for the General Plan certified by the City Council on April 12, 2005 (State Clearinghouse No. 2003061041), including the impacts and mitigation measures identified therein. Staff has also reviewed the Harveston Specific Plan Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2019070974), Altair Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2014111029) and Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2013061012). In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR has been prepared which concludes that the proposed updates to the General Plan Housing Element and Public Safety Element do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated. None of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present to require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and no additional environmental review is required. Addendum Finding 2-1 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT 3.1 BACKGROUND 3.1.1 HOUSING ELEMENTS AND REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION The Housing Element is a State -mandated element of the General Plan. The City of Temecula must update its Housing Element every eight years. Updates to the Housing Element must meet the requirements of California Government Code Sections 65580-65589. The purposes of the Housing Element are to identify the community's housing needs; to state the community's goals and objectives with regard to housing production, rehabilitation, and conservation to meet those needs; and to define the policies and programs that the community will implement to achieve the stated goals and objectives. State law requires that the City accommodate its "fair share" of regional housing needs, which are assigned by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for all jurisdictions in the SCAG region. SCAG established the 2021-2029 Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) to assign each city and the unincorporated county in the region its fair share of the regional housing need based on a number of factors established by State law (Government Code Section 65584) and regional housing burdens and needs. The objectives of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) are: • Increase housing supply and the mix of housing types; • Promote infill, equity, and environment; • Ensure jobs housing balance and fit; • Promote regional income equity; and • Affirmatively further fair housing. Beyond the income -based housing needs established by the RHNA, the Housing Element must also address special needs groups; such as seniors, persons with disabilities including developmental disabilities, single female parents, large families, farm workers, and homeless persons. 3.1.2 SAFETY ELEMENTS The Safety Element is a State -mandated element of the General Plan. Updates to the Safety Element will meet the requirements of California Government Code Section 65302(g) (Section 65302) as updated by Senate Bills 1241, 379, 99, and 1035 and will incorporate policies from the Temecula Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (pursuant to SB 379). The Public Safety Element addresses potential and existing hazards in the City, which are outlined in the following categories: Seismically Induced Hazards; Slope Instability; Geologic Hazards; Flood Hazards; Fire Hazards; Evacuation Routes; Criminal Activities; Hazardous Materials; Nuclear Hazards; and Climate Adaptation. Updates to the Public Safety Element are largely focused on the topics of Fire Hazards, Evacuation Routes, and Climate Adaption. 3.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING Nestled in Temecula Valley in southwestern Riverside County, just north of the San Diego County line, sits the City of Temecula, which was incorporated in 1989. Having grown from a modest initial Description of the Proposed Project 3-1 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR incorporated population of 27,099, the City of Temecula is currently home to approximately 112,000 residents in an area of roughly 30 square miles. The City is bounded by the City of Murrieta to the north, unincorporated areas within the County of Riverside to the east, west, and south, and unincorporated areas within the County of San Diego to the south. Regional access to the City is provided by Interstate 15, a north/south freeway that connects the Inland Empire region of Riverside and San Bernardino counties to San Diego County, and State Route 79, a primarily east/west highway (although it runs concurrent with I-15 through the City of Temecula) that links Interstate 10 with Interstate 15, and links Temecula to communities further east in unincorporated Riverside and San Diego counties. The General Plan identifies the most prevalent land uses in Temecula as residential, consisting of approximately 51 percent of the Planning Area; Public/Institutional and Open Space consisting of approximately 37 percent of the Planning Area; Commercial and Office consisting of approximately 6 percent of the Planning Area; and Industrial Park approximately 5% of the Planning Area. The Land Use Element identifies the distribution, location, and intensity of all land use types throughout the City. To fully reflect the range of physical attributes that are important for Temecula's success, the Element also contains goals and policies to guide community form and design, and the provision of community facilities and urban services. The Land Use Element is primarily implemented by the City's Zoning Ordinance, which specifies districts and performance standards for various types of land uses described in the General Plan. Each General Plan land use designation has a corresponding zone or zones that implement and regulate the intent of the land use. The zone districts specify the permitted uses for each category and applicable development standards. The General Plan identifies the expected development capacity associated with the distribution of planned land uses specified in the Land Use Policy Map (Figure LU-3 of the Land Use Element). Table 1, Temecula General Plan Expected Residential Development Capacity, summarizes the expected development capacity for residential uses within Temecula based on reasonable density assumptions for the City and SOI. Description of the Proposed Project 3-2 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Table 1: Temecula General Plan Expected Residential Development Capacity Residential Land Use Designation Density Range Existing Hillside 0 — 0.1 du/ac Expected Acreage Development (Dwelling 1,023 Capacity Units) 102 Rural 0.1 — 0.2 du/ac 2,528 506 Very Low 0.2 — 0.4 du/ac 2,962 1,021 Low 0.5 — 2.9 du/ac 593 889 Low Medium 3.0 — 6.9 du/ac 7,593 34,504 Medium 7.0 — 12.9 du/ac 759 7,591 High 13.0 — 20.0 du/ac 432 7,143 Vineyards/Agriculture 0 — 0.2 du/ac 2,219 222 Mixed Use Overlay Varies 210 1,760 Total 53,7371 Source: City of Temecula General Plan Land Use Element, Table LU-3. 1. City of Temecula General Plan Land Use and Community Design Element, Table LU-3 lists the total expected development capacity (in dwelling units) at 53,737 units. However, the total based on the sum of the capacity of each land use designation is actually 53,738 units. 3.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPOSED PROJECT REVISIONS/ADDITIONS The project analyzed in this Addendum involves the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update. The proposed amendment would not modify the City of Temecula General Plan Land Use Map, land use designations, or intensities/densities identified within the General Plan Land Use Element. No changes to the maximum development potential approved for the General Plan and analyzed in the General Plan FEIR and subsequent General Plan Amendments would occur with the proposed amendment. 3.3.1 HOUSING ELEMENT In compliance with State Housing Element Law requirements, the City of Temecula has prepared the 2021-2029 Housing Element (Project) to: • Provide goals, policies, quantified objectives and scheduled programs to preserve, improve and develop housing • Identify and analyze existing and projected housing needs for all economic segments of the community • Identify adequate sites that are zoned and available within the 8-year housing cycle to meet the City's fair share of regional housing needs at all income levels • Affirmatively further fair housing • Be certified (approved) by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) as complying with State law • Be internally consistent with other parts of the General Plan Description of the Proposed Project 3-3 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Housing Element Organization The proposed Housing Element Update covers the October 15, 2021 through October 15, 2029 planning period and is comprised of the following components: Part 1: Housing Plan Part 1 of the 2021-2029 Housing Element is the City's "Housing Plan", which includes the goals, policies, and programs the City will implement to address constraints and needs. The City's overall strategy for addressing its housing needs has been defined according to the six goals: 1. Providing adequate housing sites; 2. Assisting in development of affordable and special needs housing; 3. Removing constraints to housing production; 4. Conserving and improving existing housing stock; 5. Affirmatively furthering fair housing; and 6. Promoting public participation. The Housing Plan includes only minor modifications to the City's current Housing Element Goals and Policies. The Housing Plan includes a number of new programs to address State housing law including future required updates to the Temecula Municipal Code, new programs to support affirmatively furthering fair housing, and tracking and reporting requirements for Housing Sites. Part 2: Background Report Part 2 of the 2021-2029 Housing Element is the "Background Report" which identifies the nature and extent of Temecula's housing needs, including those of special populations, potential housing resources (land and funds), potential constraints to housing production, and energy conservation opportunities. In addition to identifying housing needs, the Background Report also presents information regarding the setting in which these needs occur. The Background Report comprehensively updates the background context and conditions identified in the City's current Housing Element. Appendix A: Housing Sites Inventory The Housing Element must include an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development to meet the City's regional housing need by income level. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) requires that the Housing Sites Inventory be prepared using a State -approved format, included as Appendix A. No land use changes are proposed to accommodate the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA); future residential development is expected to occur in those areas already identified for residential uses including land within approved Specific Plans. All sites identified in the City's Housing Sites Inventory are currently identified for new development consistent with the potential development capacities identified in Appendix A. Appendix B: Glossary The Housing Element includes, as Appendix B, a glossary of key terms and phrases. Appendix C: Public Engagement Summary As part of the Housing Element Update the process, the City hosted numerous opportunities for the community and key stakeholders to provide feedback on existing housing conditions, housing Description of the Proposed Project 3-4 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR priorities, priority areas for new residential growth, and topics related to fair housing. Public engagement was facilitated in both English and Spanish to further engage the Temecula community. Public participation played an important role in the refinement of the City's housing goals and policies and in the development of new housing programs, as included in Part 1: Housing Plan. The public's input also helped to validate and expand upon the contextual information included in Part 2: Background Report. The City's efforts to engage the community in a meaningful and comprehensive way are summarized in Appendix C. Appendix D: 2017 Assessment of Fair Housing In 2017 the City of Temecula prepared an Assessment of Fair Housing. This Assessment provides the foundation and context for the City's Assessment of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, as included in Part 2 of the Housing Element. Capacity to Meet Regional Housing Needs As determined by SCAG, the City of Temecula's fair share allocation (RHNA) is 4,193 new housing units during this planning cycle. This includes: 1,359 units affordable to extremely/very low income households; 801 units affordable to low income households; 778 units affordable to moderate income households; and 1,255 units affordable to above moderate income households. State Income Limits which are used to determine affordability levels are set annually by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Progress Towards the RHNA RHNA uses June 30, 2021 as the baseline for growth projections for the 2021-2029 planning period. Jurisdictions may count toward the RHNA housing units that have been developed, are under construction, and/or have received their building permits after June 30, 2021. Since this time, 27 housing units have been developed, are under construction, or have received their building permits in Temecula. Jurisdictions may also count projects that are approved/entitled but not yet built or under construction; 132 units, all affordable to lower -income households, have been approved/entitled and are expected to be developed within the planning period. With these units taken into account, has a remaining RHNA of 4,034 units (1,327 extremely low/very low income units, 702 low income units, 757 moderate income units, and 1,249 above -moderate income units. Table 2: Progress Towards the RHNA Extremely Low ModerateStatus ..TOTAL RHNA Allocation Low/Very Low 1,359 801 778 Moderate 1,255 4,193 Constructed, Under 0 0 21 6 27 Construction/Permi is Issued (Since 6/30/2021 Units 32 99 0 0 132 Approved/Entitled Remaining 1,327 702 757 1,249 4,034 Allocation Source: City of Temecula, 2021, Southern California Association of Governments, 2021 Description of the Proposed Project 3-5 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Residential Sites Inventory to Accommodate Remaining RHNA The City has sufficient land appropriately zoned for residential uses throughout the community to accommodate its remaining RHNA (4,034 units) for the 2021-2029 planning period. The City of Temecula's 6th Cycle residential sites fall into four categories: 1) Accessory dwelling units. ADUs are allowed on any lot that is zoned for single-family or multifamily dwelling residential use, including lots that are zoned for such use within a SPA. In 2020 the City updated its ADU ordinance to encourage the production of ADUs throughout the community, and in 2020, 18 ADUs were approved. The City continues to promote ADUs as a way to expand the City's housing stock and anticipates production to continue at or above 2020 levels for the duration of the planning period. The City has assumed production of ADUs at a rate of 18 units per year for the 8 year planning period, resulting in an assumed production of 144 ADUs from 2021-2029. 2) Residentially zoned vacant land exclusive of Specific Plan areas. As part of this Housing Element update, the City conducted a parcel -by -parcel analysis of vacant residential sites for land outside of approved specific plans, based on data obtained from the City's geographic information system (GIS). The inventory of vacant residential land between 0.50 acres and 10 acres in size (exclusive of those in specific plan areas) in Temecula totals 643 acres. These vacant properties have the potential to yield 3,430 units, assuming each parcel is developed at 75% of its maximum capacity. All affordability levels are accommodated at vacant residential parcels outside of Specific Plan areas. 3) Vacant Residential Sites within Specific Plans. The City conducted a records search and visual survey using aerial photos and site visits to estimate the remaining residential development capacity by number and type of housing within the approved specific plans. The City has 15 approved Specific Plan; nine have vacant land with residential development capacity remaining. Five of the nine Specific Plans with remaining residential capacity (Old Town, Wolf Creek, Harveston, Uptown, and Altair) allow for development at densities of at least 30 du/ac, which is appropriate to accommodate a portion of the City's lower income RHNA. The inventory of vacant residential land greater than 0.50 acres in size within approved Specific Plans in Temecula totals 784 acres. It should be noted that some of these sites are larger than 10 acres. The City has a long history of successfully subdividing large parcels into smaller developments resulting in the production of housing units at all income levels. In Temecula, Specific Plan areas have historically developed to at least 95% of their total entitlement. However, for purposes of identifying adequate sites to accommodate its RHNA, the City has assumed that Specific Plan areas will develop at 85% of their capacity. Given that Specific Plans inherently include programs to develop sites effectively and efficiently at the densities and intensities identified within the Plan, and given the City's history of successful Specific Plan development at levels consistent with nearly the maximum allowable development levels, this is a reasonable expectation for the City's remaining vacant land in Specific Plan areas. Based on this methodology, vacant residential sites in Specific Plans have the potential to yield 5,773 units. Description of the Proposed Project 3-6 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Table 3: Comparison of RHNA Candidate Sites Realistic Capacity and RHNA Extremely Low ModerateStatus ..TOTAL Remaining 6th Low 1,327 702 757 ModerateLow/Very 1,249 4,034 Cycle RHNA ADLls 34 50 50 11 144 Vacant Residential 807 660 1,600 363 3,430 Land (exclusive of SPAs Vacant Residential 624 624 2,787 1,724 5,773 Land in Specific Plans Total +137 (surplus) +632 (surplus) +3,680 (surplus) +849 (surplus) +5,313 (surplus) Note: The realistic capacity analysis of vacant land outside of Specific Plan areas assumes that only 75°70 of the maximum capacity would be realized and for vacant land inside of Specific Plan areas assumes that only 85% of the maximum capacity would be realized. If the sites develop closer to their full capacity, which has been realized as part of past projects, the City's surplus of units at all income levels would be significantly higher. Summary of Housing Element Modifications As previously noted, State law requires that the Housing Element be reviewed and updated not less than every eight years, in order to remain relevant and useful, and reflect a community's changing housing needs. The proposed Housing Element Update involves minor changes/additions to the Housing Element and environmental conditions under which it would be implemented. The following summarizes the modifications to the Housing Element, as compared to the 2013-2021 Housing Element: Goals, Policies, and Programs (Part 1: Housing Plan) The City made minor modifications to the Goals and Policies included in the Housing Element to reflect the City's current housing needs and State mandates. The Housing Plan revises existing goals and policies to better reflect state law regarding the provision of special needs housing, removing governmental and nongovernmental constraints, and affirmatively furthering fair housing. Revised goals and policies include: • Goal 2: Assist in Development of Affordable and Special Needs Housing • Goal 3: Remove Constraints to Housing Production • Goal 4: Conserve and Improve Existing Housing Stock • Goal 5: Affirmatively Further Fair Housing • Policy 1.2: Variety of Housing Options • Policy 5.2: Support for Fair Housing Efforts • Policy 5.5: Prohibition of Discrimination • Policy 5.6: Equitable Spatial Distribution of Affordable Housing The Housing Plan includes new policy direction, consistent with state law, related to maintaining adequate capacity to accommodate the City's RHNA at all income levels for the duration of the planning period, the reuse of sites identified in prior Housing Elements, and reducing impacts associated with nongovernmental constraints. New policies include: Description of the Proposed Project 3-7 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR • Policy 1.9: Maintain Adequate Capacity • Policy 1.10: By -Right Approval for Qualified Sites Identified in Past Inventories • Policy 3.4: Monitor State Regulations • Policy 3.5: Evaluate Non -Governmental Constraints • Policy 5.8: Support Fair Housing Providers • Policy 5.9: Reasonable Accommodation Requests The Housing Plan includes numerous revisions to existing programs to better reflect the community's housing needs. Revised programs include: • Program 1: Land Use Policy and Development Capacity • Program 6: Density Bonus Ordinance • Program 11: Energy Conservation and Energy Efficiency • Program 12: Development Fees • Program 22: Equal Housing Opportunity The Housing Plan includes new programs consistent with state law and the goals and policies included in the City's Housing Element. New programs include: • Program 2: Maintain Adequate Sites Throughout the Planning Period • Program 3: Public Property Conversion to Housing Program • Program 4: Replacement of Affordable Units • Program 5: Accessory Dwelling Units • Program 9: Special Needs Housing Construction • Program 16: Zoning Code Amendments — Housing Constraints • Program 24: Economic Displacement Risk Analysis All other Goals, Policies and Programs are reflective of the City's current Housing Element with limited or no modifications to reflect current conditions. Background Information (Part 2: Background Report) The Background Report of the Housing Element has been comprehensively updated to include current information. This section of the Housing Element includes: Introduction, Accomplishments Under 5th Cycle Housing Element, Housing Needs Assessment, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Analysis, Constraints, Housing Resources, Other Requirements, and References. Appendix A: Housings Sites Inventory The City has updated its Housing Sites Inventory to demonstrate capacity to accommodate its 2021-2029 RHNA. The Housing Sites Inventory includes a list of sites appropriate to accommodate the RHNA at the appropriate densities and income levels and includes sites identified in the Current Housing Element and other sites designated for residential development consistent with the City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Specific Plans. No land use changes are proposed as part of the 2021-2029 Housing Element. Appendix B: Glossary The City has updated the Glossary section of its Housing Element and included new terms and references as appropriate. Description of the Proposed Project 3-8 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Appendix C: Public Engagement Summary The public engagement program conducted as part of the Housing Element Update project is summarized in Appendix C. Appendix D: 2017 Assessment of Fair Housing In 2017 the City of Temecula prepared an Assessment of Fair Housing. This Assessment provides the foundation and context for the City's Assessment of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, as included in Part 2 of the Housing Element. 3.3.2 SAFETY ELEMENT In compliance with State Law, the City of Temecula has prepared an update to its Safety Element to further address fire hazards, emergency preparedness, and climate adaptation. Natural and human -caused events have the ability to impact productivity by causing substantial damage to life, property, and economic prosperity. The Safety Element addresses these potential issues with goals, policies, and actions to continue to serve and protect Temecula and its residents. Safety Element Organization The Safety Element includes an Introduction to the Element, the Element's goals and policies, and Implementation Programs. Summary of Safety Element Modifications Within the Introduction section of the Safety Element, new plans and programs were referenced, including the County of Riverside Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJLHMP), the City of Temecula Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), and the Riverside County Climate Action Plan (CAP). Fire Hazards discussion was comprehensively updated to include current information regarding the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), CalFire, Fire Hazard Severity Zones, and major wildland fires in Temecula. Figure PS-3, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA (as Recommended by CalFIRE) was also added. The City has also included a new discussion related to emergency preparedness and hazard mitigation and identified new objectives to address this topic. Additional information related to the MJLHMP, LHMP, and the County's CAP are also included by reference. In accordance with SB 99, the City conducted an evaluation of evacuation routes serving residential developments in hazard areas. This analysis is presented in a separate background report available on the City's website and the results of the analysis, which found that while residential developers may comply with City of Temecula access standards, several residential areas warrant further study and coordination with RCFD and CalFIRE to ensure residents with limited emergency routes are well-educated on evacuation procedures during emergencies. No goals, policies or programs from the current Safety Element were eliminated as part of this update. The following modifications or additions were made: Description of the Proposed Project 3-9 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Natural Hazards • Policy 1.8: Future development in SRAs or VHFHSZs • Policy 1.9: Reduce risk of wildfire hazards Emergency Preparedness and Hazard Mitigation • Goal 4 (Modification): Effective response of emergency services • Policy 4.5 (Modification): Location of new essential facilities • Policy 4.7: Coordination with agencies on evacuation routes • Goal 5: Resilient sustainable community • Policy 5.1: Climate resiliency and adaptation • Policy 5.2: Monitor climate change -related effects Implementation • PS-1 Natural Hazards Risk Reduction (Modification) • PS-8 Promote Fire Prevention (Modification) • PS-14 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (Modification) Description of the Proposed Project 3-10 Figure 1 Regional Location Map Legend • — Temecula City Boundary —• Sphere of Influence Boundary Planning Area Sources: Temecula GIs and Cotton/Bridges/Associates City of Sphere of I cos 5AN 6EImhROiN] couralr I Mda AM1LELES a �i•�•�flr8• •' 1 '` _r [�'[ ppA�u. •W:pSYOf wErtRSGE CY]li�n ' trt T � Sa mO —1— y arov mrrn .jS. CO4FR1' Pechang Entertainm Center c Temecula 1 1 1 1 1 000 10,000 �l%Feet 4 ����� S ali Rd 3 Jean Nicholas Rd County of Riverside Lan C/ Skinner C r tr•x frn a r nr o x r 2021-01 Addendum to the City of Temecula General Plan Final CITY OF TEMECULA Environmental Impact Report 3-2 Figure 2 General Plan Planning Area CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN Legend Temecula City Boundary —. Sphere of Influence Boundary S City Pin Planning Area { Source: Temecula and Riverside County GIs, 2001 I County oV Riverside lake slm�e, Ir of gpdngs Rd Buh Rd �• N, oas d ........... p Center N 0 5,000 10,000 WE Feet - ---- Miles S 0 1 2 De K.I.Rd 2021-01 Addendum to the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The scope of the City's review of the proposed Project is limited by provisions set forth in CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. This review is limited to evaluating the environmental effects associated with the proposed Project to the General Plan Project as set forth in the General Plan FEIR. This Addendum also reviews new information, if any, of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable due diligence at the time the General Plan FEIR was certified. This evaluation includes a determination as to whether the changes proposed by the Project would result in any new significant impacts or a substantial increase in a previously identified significant impact. The section is patterned after the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist and provides a summary of impacts associated with the proposed actions, as described in the General Plan FEIR, and includes an analysis of the potential impacts associated with the proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update. This comparative analysis provides the City with the factual basis for determining whether any changes in the Project, any changes in circumstances, or any new information since the General Plan FEIR was certified would require additional environmental review or preparation of a Subsequent EIR or Supplemental EIR. Environmental Analysis 4-1 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.1 AESTHETICS Substantial Information Changein Changein Showing ImpactSubstantial No Less Than No AdditionalSignificant Project Circumstance Greater Requiring Significant EIR Major EIR effects Significant Impact/No Impact/Requiring than Less Than Information Thresholds: Revisions Revisions Previous EIR Significant Requiring ImpactMajor .. With of an MNID Application of Except as proviged in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would theproject: Mitigation from FEIR a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a X scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock X outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. In non -urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly X accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect X day or nighttime views in the area? General Plan FOR Conclusions • The natural features of the Temecula Planning Area provide a scenic setting for the community. The goals and policies of the Open Space/Conservation Element are intended to conserve open space areas for a balance of recreation, scenic enjoyment, and protection of natural resources and features. The Land Use Element contains Rural Preservation Areas to preserve the rural nature of specific areas, including viticulture within the Planning Area. The Community Design Element preserves the natural and historical aspects of the community's rural character and viewsheds through goals and policies. To preserve public views of significant natural resources, all new public and private development projects will be reviewed to ensure that they will not obstruct public views of scenic resources, such as the hillsides, scenic roads, or significant open space areas. During the review of individual projects, the Community Development Department may require site redesign or place height limits on projects that have the potential to block views. New projects will also be reviewed to ensure that the proposed landscaping and tree planting will not obstruct views of significant natural resources. Implementation of the identified policies through this review process will ensure that impact will be less than significant on a project -by -project basis. Environmental Analysis 4-2 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR • Light levels within the Planning Area will increase as new housing units and commercial, industrial, and institutional projects are developed pursuant to the General Plan. In addition, new development in previously undeveloped or sparsely developed areas, particularly within the sphere of influence, has the potential to create new lighting impacts associated with the introduction of vehicle headlights and nighttime lighting. New structures could create glare effects if they incorporate reflective building materials. Depending upon the location and scope of individual development projects, the impact to surrounding uses could be significant. New development pursuant to the General Plan may increase the amount of light and glare within the Planning Area with a potential to influence light levels affecting the Palomar Observatory. The General Plan includes policies that continue the City's participation in Palomar Observatory's dark sky conservation requirements. Additionally, Mitigation Measure A-1 would ensure that new development projects comply with the City Light Pollution Control Ordinance, reducing potential light and glare impacts to less than significant. Analysis of Modified Project There are no designated State scenic highways within the General Plan Planning Area (Planning Area); therefore, as concluded in the General Plan FEIR, impacts would be less than significant. The Project does not propose site -specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the City. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts to aesthetic resources and implement mitigation measures, as appropriate. Further, the Public Safety Element would not result in any modifications to existing land use designations or modify any General Plan policies or programs specific to visual resources. The Housing Element and Public Safety Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies protecting aesthetic and visual resources. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to scenic vista resources and to reduce impacts associated with light and glare as a result of new development. Further, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure A-1 requires new development projects to comply with the City Light Pollution Control Ordinance to reduce potential impacts to aesthetic resources. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new aesthetic impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to aesthetics as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: A-1 The City will ensure that new development projects comply with the City Light Pollution Control Ordinance when building plans are submitted for permits and when projects are field - inspected (General Plan Implementation Program OS-31). Environmental Analysis 4-3 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Substantial ImpactSubstantial Information No Less Than No Changein Changein Showing AdditionalSignificant Project Circumstance Requiring Greater Significant ImpactiNo Impact/Requiring Significant EIR Major EIR Thresholds: Revisions Revisions effects than Less Than Information Previous EIR Significant Requiring ImpactMajor ,.. . With an MND Application of Would theproject: Mitigation from FEIR a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland X Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act X contract? c. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest X use? d. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of X Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? General Plan FEIR Conclusions • Future development within the Planning Area pursuant to the land use policies of the updated General Plan may result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of State and Local Importance to non-agricultural use. Implementation of the General Plan would potentially result in conversion of four acres of areas currently identified as Vineyard/Agriculture (0.01 percent of the land currently in agricultural use) to non-agricultural use. Mitigation Measure AG-1 would preserve agricultural lands through land use controls and preservation contracts for prime agriculture land, reducing potential impacts to less than significant. • Implementation of the Temecula General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to conflict with agricultural zoning and there are no Williamson Act contracts in the Planning Area. Therefore, the General Plan FEIR concluded no impacts would result. Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site -specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. Potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses. Further, the Environmental Analysis 4-4 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Public Safety Element would not result in any modifications to existing land use designations or modify any General Plan policies or programs specific to agricultural resources. Subsequent to adoption of the General Plan FEIR, amendments to the CEQA Guidelines resulted in the addition of forestry resources as a topical area to be addressed within CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. There are no forest lands located within the General Plan study area. Additionally, the General Plan area is not designated or zoned as forest land. No impacts related to this environmental topic were anticipated as a result of implementation of the General Plan, and no mitigation measures were required. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new agricultural or forestry resource impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to agriculture and forestry resources as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: AG-1 The City will preserve agricultural lands by: • Developing effective zoning regulations or other land use mechanisms that control the expansion of intensive non-agricultural development onto productive or potentially productive agricultural lands. • Recognizing existing agriculture preserve contracts and promoting additional preservation contracts for prime agriculture land. (General Plan Implementation Program OS-28) Environmental Analysis 4-5 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.3 AIR QUALITY General Plan FOR Conclusions • Construction -related air quality impacts will occur periodically throughout implementation of the General Plan as individual development projects are constructed. While individual development projects will be required to employ construction approaches that minimize pollutant emissions (e.g., watering for dust control, tuning of equipment and limiting truck traffic to non -peak hours), on a cumulative basis over the next 20 years, the General Plan FEIR concluded pollutant emissions associated with construction activity will be significant, and mitigation is required. • Development consistent with proposed General Plan land use policies will generate additional emissions from both stationary sources and vehicle trips. For all pollutant categories except PMio, long-term pollutant emissions in year 2025 are projected to decrease relative to 2002. Levels of PMio have exceeded State standards regularly in the past and are expected to continue exceeding these standards in the future. Therefore, the General Plan FEIR determined long-term air quality impacts resulting from adoption and implementation of the proposed General Plan will be significant, and mitigation measures are required. • Intersections within the Planning Area projected to experience the worst level of service (LOS) conditions, in combination with proximity to sensitive receptors were selected for CO hot spot analysis. The analysis shows that while all study intersections will experience some level of CO concentration, ranging from 0.1 ppm to 1.5 ppm during the 1-hour period, no intersections are anticipated to exceed SCAQMD thresholds for 1-hour standard. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan will not result in a significant impact with regard to CO hot spots. Environmental Analysis 4-6 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR • The Air Quality Element of the General Plan addresses compliance with the current Air Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin. The Air Quality Element is designed to ensure City land use decisions work to implement and comply with federal, State, and local regulations pertaining to air quality. The General Plan FEIR determined no conflict with the regional air quality plan will result, and no adverse impact will occur. • Development anticipated to occur pursuant to the General Plan will be predominantly residential and commercial uses consisting of retail stores, offices and business parks. Each new development will be required to comply with the South Coast Air Quality Management District's guidelines regarding odor control. Compliance with these existing regulations will ensure that impact will be less than significant. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use plan and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce impacts to air quality as a result of new development and would be required to implement General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures to reduce potential impacts to air quality due to construction -related emissions and operational activities by reviewing future development proposals for potential regional and local air quality impacts per CEQA and, if identified, require mitigation to reduce the impact to a level less than significant, where feasible; continue to update the Building Code and to enforce the City Trip Reduction Ordinance; partner with private industry to incorporate high - efficiency design and renewable energy features in commercial, business park, and industrial developments; and implement the AQMP. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure AQ-6 also ensures sensitive receptors are located away from air pollution sources and requires buffering of sensitive receptors from air pollution sources reduce potential impacts to air quality. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new air quality impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to air quality as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: AQ-1 The City will support regional transit initiatives and promote development of high-speed rail service connecting Temecula to San Diego and Los Angeles; actively participate in efforts to protect and improve air quality in the region; and attend meetings with the County of Riverside, WRCOG, SCAQMD, SCAG, and other agencies as required to support these objectives and fulfill Temecula's requirements and obligations under the AQMP and Sub- Regional Air Quality Implementation Program (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-1). Environmental Analysis 4-7 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR AQ-2 The City will continue to involve the general public, environmental groups, the business community, and special interest groups in the formulation and implementation of air quality programs; conduct periodic public outreach efforts; and continue to promote public education as a method of employer compliance with the City Trip Reduction Ordinance (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-2). AQ-3 The City will adhere to policies and programs of the Land Use Element, including development of mixed -use projects where designated and feasible (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-3). AQ-4 The City will encourage development and expansion of businesses, and promote development of housing affordable to all segments of the community near job opportunity sites, and within Mixed Use Overlay Areas (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-4). AQ-5 The City will continue to implement a site development permit process and use the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in the review of proposed development projects. The City shall require individual development projects to comply with the following measures to minimize short-term, construction -related PMio and NOX emissions, and to minimize off -site impacts: • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. • Cover all haul trucks or maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • Pave or apply water four times daily to all unpaved parking or staging areas. • Sweep or wash any site access points within 30 minutes of any visible dirt deposition on any public roadway. • Cover or water twice daily any on -site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty material. • Suspend all operations on any unpaved surface if winds exceed 25 mph. • Hydroseed or otherwise stabilize any cleared area which is to remain in active for more than 96 hours after clearing is completed. • Ensure that all cut and fill slopes are permanently protected from erosion. • Require the construction contractor to ensure that all construction equipment is maintained in peak working order. • Limit allowable idling to 10 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment. • Encourage car pooling for construction workers. • Limit lane closures to off-peak travel periods. • Park construction vehicles off traveled roadways. • Wet down or cover dirt hauled off -site. • Wash or sweep away access points daily. • Encourage receipt of materials during non -peak traffic hours. • Sandbag construction sites for erosion control. Approve development that could significantly impact air quality, either individually or cumulatively, only if it is conditioned with all reasonable mitigation measures to avoid, minimize, or offset the impact. (General Plan Implementation Programs LU-4 and AQ-5). AQ-6 The City will ensure location of new sensitive receptors away from major air pollution sources, and require buffering of sensitive receptors from air pollution sources through the use of Environmental Analysis 4-8 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR landscaping, open space, and other separation techniques (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-6). AQ-7 The City will incorporate strategies into City-wide design guidelines and development standards that promote a pedestrian -scale environment, encourage use of mass transit, and reduce dependence on the automobile (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-7). AQ-8 The City will promote the use of alternative work weeks, flextime, telecommuting, and work -at-home programs among employers in Temecula, and continue to enforce provisions of the City Trip Reduction Ordinance, including requirements for preparation of Trip Reduction Plans (TRPs) for qualifying development projects and employers (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-8). AQ-9 The City will require employee rideshare and transit incentives for large employers, consistent with the requirements of the City's Trip Reduction Ordinance, and continue to encourage voluntary compliance with the Ordinance for smaller employers (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-9). AQ-10 The City will require operators of large scale outdoor events to submit a Trip Reduction Plan (TRP) applicable to both patrons and employees during the course of the event, and encourage special event operators to advertise and offer discount parking incentives to carpooling patrons, with two or more persons per vehicle, for on -site parking facilities (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-10). AQ-11 The City will work to achieve local performance goals for vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reduction, consistent with SCAG's Growth Management Plan recommended standards for the Western Riverside County sub -region, and enforce requirements and options within the Trip Reduction Ordinance (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-11). AQ-12 The City will promote and encourage the use of alternative fuel vehicles and consider the adoption of an ordinance requiring provision of alternative fueling stations at or near major employment locations, shopping centers, public facilities, and mixed -use developments (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-12). AQ-13 The City will encourage pedestrian and bicycle trips as an alternative to single -occupancy vehicle trips by constructing and maintaining trails and bikeways specified in the Multi -Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan, and will periodically update the Master Plan as needed to meet resident needs and City objectives (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-13). AQ-14 The City will work with Caltrans and RTA to identify potential sites for Park and Ride facilities adjacent to key commuting routes within the City, and to prioritize development of such facilities in corridors served by more than one mode of planned transportation (automobile, transit, and/or high-speed rail) (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-14). AQ-15 The City will require incorporation of energy efficient design elements in residential, commercial, light industrial and mixed -use development projects. Examples may include (but are not limited to) the following. Environmental Analysis 4-9 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR • Site orientation strategies that use shade and windbreak trees to reduce fossil fueled consumption for heating and cooling. • Building designs that maximize use of natural lighting, provide for task lighting, and specific high -efficiency electric lighting (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-15). AQ-16 The City will improve roadway capacity by restricting on -street parking, improving signal timing, widening intersections, adding through and turn lanes, and other transportation systems management measures (General Plan Implementation Program C-3). AQ-17 The City will develop and promote park and ride and Transit Oasis facilities, and encourage preferred parking for ride -sharing and low emission vehicles (General Plan Implementation Program C-18). AQ-18 The City will continue to work with trucking industry representatives to orient trucks to truck routes, and to divert commercial truck traffic to off-peak periods to reduce congestion and diesel emissions (General Plan Implementation Program C-19). Environmental Analysis 4-10 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Substantial ImpactSubstantial Information No Less Than No „Additional Significant Project Circumstance Requiring Greater Significant ImpactiNo Impact/Requiring Significant Thresholds: EIR Major EIR Revisions Revisions effects than Less Than Information Previous EIR Significant Requiring ImpactMajor ,.. . With an MND Application of Would theproject: Mitigation from FEIR a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in X local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional X plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, X vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with X established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological X resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, X or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? General Plan FEIR Conclusions • Development pursuant to implementation of the General Plan will result in adverse significant impacts if such development results in the modification or removal of regional sensitive habitats within the Planning Area, including: Coastal Sage Scrub/Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub; Vernal Pools/Riparian Scrub, Woodland, and Forest/Open Water, Reservoir, Pond; Coast Live Oak Woodland, and; Raptor Foraging/Wintering Habitat. Environmental Analysis 4-11 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Impacts to non-native grassland and agricultural land will be significant if the habitat is determined to provide high wildlife value for raptor wintering and foraging, or to support federally or State listed, endangered or threatened species. The General Plan FEIR includes mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. • The Temecula Planning Area encompasses designated critical habitat for the California gnatcatcher and Quino checkerspot butterfly, as determined by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Critical habitat is primarily located in the northern portion of the Planning Area in French Valley where low -medium residential development is proposed. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan will result in significant impacts to designated critical habitat. Implementation of mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant. • The Planning Area encompasses four Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) conservation areas and core linkages. Portions of MSHCP conservation areas will incur permanent, indirect impacts from development -associated increases in the amount of fragmented habitat, artificial nighttime illumination, and human intrusion into natural habitats. In addition, impacts to chaparral will be significant if the habitat is located within a MSHCP conservation, core, or linkage area (e.g., Pauba Valley or Temecula Valley). The General Plan provides for development in these areas; at a Plan level, impact may be significant and mitigation measures would be required to reduce impacts to less than significant. • Development associated with implementation of the General Plan will result in permanent indirect impacts to sensitive flora and fauna species present within the Planning Area where development encroaches into habitat or directly affects specific species. Impacts to federally and State -listed, rare, endangered and threatened species will be significant and adverse. Mitigation measures are required to reduce adverse impacts to a less than significant level. Impacts to lower sensitivity species will be significant if it is determined that the proposed future development will substantially reduce the species' population stability or conflict with the MSCHP conditions of coverage. Mitigation measures are required to provide further environmental review of individual future development projects. Implementation of mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to less than significant. • All new development will comply with City policies and ordinances protecting biological resources, including tree preservation policies. The updated General Plan provides policies and implementation programs that fully support adopted habitat conservation plans. The General Plan FEIR concluded no impact will result. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to biological resources and General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures B-1 through B-11 would reduce potential impacts to less than significant. More specifically, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, and B-5 contain provisions to conserve and Environmental Analysis 4-12 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR protect sensitive and unique habitat, and require biological assessment in sensitive and regulated habitat areas; Mitigation Measure B-6 promotes regional cooperation on conservation, watershed management, and water resource management planning efforts; Mitigation Measure B-7 requires developers to retain coast live oak woodland and to postpone construction activities until the end of the fledgling season if active raptor nests are found; Mitigation Measures B-8, B-9, and B-10 requires developers to avoid and/or minimize adverse impacts to biological resources consistent with the MSHCP; and Mitigation Measure B-11 requires work corridor surveys to identify active nests for projects with the potential to adversely impact nesting migratory birds. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce impacts to biological resources and implement mitigation measures, as appropriate. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development in areas not previously considered, or at a greater intensity/density than identified in the General Plan FEIR. The Housing Element and Public Safety Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies protecting biological resources. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new biological resource impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to biological resources as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: B-1 The City shall require development proposals in all areas inside or adjacent to sensitive habitat areas, designated critical habitat, and MSCHP conservation areas and core linkages as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department of Fish and Game and the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, to provide detailed biological assessments to determine the potentially significant impacts of the project and mitigate significant impacts to a level below significance (General Plan Implementation Program OS- 9). B-2 The City shall require the establishment of open space areas that contain significant water courses, wildlife corridors, and habitats for rare or endangered plant and animal species, with first priority given to the core linkage areas identified in the MSHCP (General Plan Implementation Program OS-10). B-3 The City shall require appropriate resource protection measures to be prepared in conjunction with specific plans and subsequent development proposals. Such requirements may include the preparation of a Vegetation Management Program that addresses landscape maintenance, fuel modification zones, management of passive open space areas, provision of corridor connections for wildlife movement, conservation of water courses, rehabilitation of biological resources displaced in the planning process, and use of project design, engineering, and construction practices that minimize impacts to sensitive species, MSHCP conservation areas, and designated critical habitats (General Plan Implementation Program OS-11). B-4 The City will evaluate and pursue the acquisition of areas with high biological resource significance. Such acquisition mechanisms may include acquiring land by development agreement Environmental Analysis 4-13 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR or gift; dedication of conservation, open space, and scenic easements; joint acquisition with other local agencies; transfer of development rights; lease purchase agreements; State and federal grants; and impact fees/mitigation banking (General Plan Implementation Program OS-12). B-5 The City shall use the resources of national, regional, and local conservation organizations, corporations, associations, and benevolent entities to identify and acquire environmentally sensitive lands, and to protect water courses and wildlife corridors (General Plan Implementation Program OS-13). B-6 The City shall continue to participate in multi -species habitat conservation planning, watershed management planning, and water resource management planning efforts (General Plan Implementation Program OS-14). B-7 The City shall require project developers to retain coast live oak woodland, including oaks within new development areas, and shall require surveys of all coast live oak trees prior to construction to determine if any raptor nests are present and active. If active nests are observed, postponement of construction activities until the end of the fledgling season is required. The City shall apply the following guidelines adapted from the Riverside County Oak Tree Management Guidelines: • Construction and development activities will be avoided within the root zone (e.g., encompassing an area one-third larger than the drip line of an oak tree • Landscaping, trenching, or irrigation systems will be avoided within the root zone • Land uses that will cause excessive soil compaction within the root zone will be avoided • Manufactured slopes will not be located within the root zone • Redirection of surface moisture which alters the soil moisture within the root zone for an extended period of time will be avoided • Filling around the bases of oak trees will be avoided through sedimentation and siltation control • Dying oak trees will be retained in place unless determined to pose a health or safety hazard • Relocation of trees will not constitute mitigation • Oak protection will be oriented toward protection of the life cycle of oak trees and woodland (General Plan Implementation Program OS-32). B-8 The City will require project proponents to minimize impacts to Coastal sage scrub, Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub, chaparral, and non-native grassland consistent with the MSCHP. Such mitigation measures will include, but are not limited to: on -site preservation, off - site acquisition of mitigation land located within the City and inside MSHCP conservation areas, and habitat restoration of degraded sage scrub vegetation that increases habitat quality and the biological function of the site (General Plan Implementation Program OS-33). B-9 The City shall require project proponents to avoid adverse impacts to Riparian Scrub, Woodland, and Forest and Water vegetations communities to the maximum extent possible. Mitigation consistent with the MSHCP, and future mitigation ratios established by the City will be required, including, but not limited to: wetland creation in upland areas, wetland restoration that re-establishes the habitat functions of a former wetland, and wetland enhancement that improves Environmental Analysis 4-14 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR the self-sustaining habitat functions of an existing wetland. Mitigation measures will be required to achieve "no net loss" of wetland functions and values (General Plan Implementation Program OS-34). B-10 The City shall review development -associated impacts to MSHCP conservation areas for consistency with the MSHCP reserve and buffer development requirements, and shall require compliance with the following MSHCP Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines: • Drainage: Proposed developments in proximity to MSHCP conservation areas shall incorporate measures, including measures required through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements, to ensure that the quantity and quality of runoff discharged to the MSHCP conservation areas is not altered in an adverse way when compared to existing conditions. Measures shall be put in place to avoid discharge of untreated surface runoff from developed and paved areas into the MSHCP conservation areas. Stormwater systems shall be designed to prevent the release of toxins, chemicals, petroleum products, exotic plant materials, or other elements that might degrade or harm biological resources or ecosystem processes within the MSHCP conservation areas. This can be accomplished using a variety of methods including natural detention basins, grass swales, or mechanical trapping devices. Regular maintenance shall occur to ensure effective operations of runoff control systems. • Toxics: Land uses proposed in proximity to the MSHCP conservation area that use chemicals or generate byproducts (such as manure) that are potentially toxic or may adversely affect wildlife species, habitat, or water quality shall incorporate measures to ensure that application of such chemicals does not result in discharge to the MSHCP conservation area. Measures such as those employed to address drainage issues shall be implemented. • Lighting: Night lighting shall be directed away from the MSHCP conservation area to protect species within the MSHCP conservation area from direct night lighting. Shielding shall be incorporated in project designs to ensure ambient light levels within the MSHCP conservation area do not increase. • Noise: Proposed noise generating land uses affecting the MSHCP conservation area shall incorporate setbacks, berms, or walls to minimize the effects of noise on MSHCP conservation area resources pursuant to applicable rules, regulations, and guidelines related to land use noise standards. For planning purposes, wildlife within the MSHCP conservation area should not be subject to noise that would exceed residential noise standards. • Invasives: When approving landscape plans for proposed development adjacent to the MSHCP conservation area, the City shall require revisions to landscape plans to avoid the use of invasive species defined within the MSHCP for the portions of development adjacent to the conservation area. • Barriers: Proposed land uses adjacent to the MSHCP conservation area shall incorporate barriers, where appropriate in individual project designs to minimize unauthorized public access, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass, or dumping in the conservation area. Such barriers may include native landscaping, rocks/boulders, fencing, walls, signage and/or other appropriate mechanisms. Environmental Analysis 4-15 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR • Grading/Land Development: Manufactured slopes associated with proposed site development shall not extend into the MSHCP conservation area (General Plan Implementation Program OS-35). B-11 The City shall require work corridor surveys to identify active nests for projects with the potential to adversely impact nesting migratory birds, as defined under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Development projects shall avoid active nests and, if necessary, require seasonal timing constraints for riparian habitat clearing and an MBTA Special Purpose permit prior to the removal of active nests of MBTA covered species (General Plan Implementation Program OS-36). Environmental Analysis 4-16 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES General Plan FOR Conclusions • Development pursuant to the General Plan will occur mostly on vacant sites within the Planning Area that do not contain existing structures, as well as within currently urbanized Mixed -Use Overlay Areas and Village Centers identified in the Land Use Element. The General Plan strives to preserve existing historic resources through the maintenance of a historic properties inventory, assistance to property owners in seeking State and/or federal registration and appropriate zoning for historic sites and assets, and acquisition and preservation of historical buildings for public facilities in accordance with the Old Town Specific Plan when possible. The General Plan also calls for an integrated approach to historic preservation in coordination with other affected jurisdictions, agencies, and organizations for areas within the Planning Area and surrounding region that seeks to establish linkages between historic sites or buildings with other historic features such as roads, trails, ridges, and seasonal waterways. Nevertheless, Small urban infill development or redevelopment projects that are not subject to discretionary review by the City may also occur that could involve the removal or alteration of existing structures with historical value or significance elsewhere within City limits. The General Plan FEIR determined that implementation of mitigation measures would minimize impacts to historic resources from adoption and implementation of the General Plan. • Portions of the Planning Area contain known archaeological and paleontological resources Implementation of the General Plan is expected to result in new development in vacant areas where no structures currently exist, as well as infill development within focus areas located throughout the Planning Area. Therefore, the General Plan Open Space/Conservation Element calls for the City to work to preserve or salvage potential archeological and paleontological resources on sites proposed for future development through the development review and mitigation monitoring processes, as well as maintain Environmental Analysis 4-17 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR an inventory of areas with archaeological/paleontological sensitivity, and historic sites in the Planning Area. However, unknown archaeological sites, structures, and fossils may be unearthed during excavation and grading activities for specific projects. Mitigation measures are required, which would reduce potential impacts to previously undiscovered archaeological and paleontological resources to a less than significant level. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to historic and archeological resources and human remains. Further, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure CR-1 requires appropriate surveying and documentation of findings prior to ground -disturbing activities; effective mitigation where development may affect archaeological or paleontological resources; monitoring by a qualified archeologist or paleontologist where the probable presence of resources is identified; implementation of measures for preservation or salvage of resources; and reporting to the City to avoid or minimize impacts to archaeological or paleontological resources. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure CR-2 calls on the City to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the Eastern Information Center of the University of California, Riverside to establish procedures for reviewing the archaeological sensitivity of sites proposed for development. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure CR-3 calls on the City to continue to implement a historic preservation ordinance in the Old Town area and General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure CR-4 seeks to increase protections for historically significant sites. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts to cultural resources and implement mitigation measures, as appropriate. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development in areas not previously considered or at a greater intensity/density than identified in the General Plan FEIR. The Housing Element and Public Safety Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies protecting cultural resources. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new cultural resource impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to cultural resources as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: CR-1 The City shall use the development and environmental review process to: a. Ensure that appropriate archaeological and paleontological surveying and documentation of findings is provided prior to project approval. b. Require effective mitigation where development may affect archaeological or paleontological resources. Environmental Analysis 4-18 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR c. Require that an archaeologist or paleontologist be retained to observe grading activities in areas where the probable presence of archaeological or paleontological resources is identified. d. Enforce CEQA provisions regarding preservation or salvage of significant archaeological and paleontological sites discovered during construction activities. e. Require monitoring of new developments and reporting to the City on completion of mitigation and resource protection measures (General Plan Implementation Program OS- 26). CR-2 The City shall enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the Eastern Information Center of the University of California, Riverside to establish procedures for reviewing the archaeological sensitivity of sites proposed for development (General Plan Implementation Program OS-37). CR-3 The City shall continue to implement a historic preservation ordinance in the Old Town area to protect historically significant buildings, sites, roads/trails, and other landscape elements, and to encourage their re -use, where appropriate. Preservation of other historic resources will also be considered (General Plan Implementation Program OS-27). CR-4 The City will encourage owners of local sites to apply for recognition in the State Historic Resources Inventory, as Riverside County Landmarks, as State Points of Historic Interest, as State Landmarks, and as sites on the National Register of Historic Places, as deemed necessary (General Plan Implementation Program OS-27). Environmental Analysis 4-19 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.6 ENERGY General Plan FEIR Conclusions Since certification of the General Plan FEIR, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist has been revised to include a discreet category for Energy impacts. The topic of energy is addressed in the General Plan FEIR's Utilities and Service Systems section. • Southern California Edison (SCE) will construct additional electricity facilities as necessary to meet increased demand. Individual development projects proposed pursuant to the General Plan will be required to assess project impacts during the environmental review process to ensure that SCE has sufficient electricity supplies to meet demand. Additionally, new developments will be required to comply with the current energy performance standards of the California Energy Code, Part 6 of the California Building Standards Code (Title 24). The Gas Company will work with the community as new developments are proposed to construct additional natural gas infrastructure as necessary to meet demand. Individual development projects proposed pursuant to the General Plan will be required to assess project impacts during the environmental review process to ensure that the Gas Company has sufficient natural gas supplies to meet demand. Proposed General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs address the impact of new development to energy services. The General Plan emphasizes the efficient development and use of modern technologies that can minimize energy demand and consumption. To ensure that future energy supplies are available to support additional development pursuant to the General Plan, mitigation measures are required. With implementation of mitigation, the General Plan FEIR concluded impacts on energy supplies will be less than significant. Environmental Analysis 4-20 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to energy resources. In addition, the Housing Element includes Program 11: Energy Conservation and Energy Efficiency, which calls on the City to review the General Plan to determine if updates are needed to support and encourage energy efficiency in existing and new housing. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts to energy resources. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development in areas not previously considered or at a greater intensity/density than identified in the General Plan FEIR. Further, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures USS-6 through USS-9 ensure regional coordination with energy facilities, compliance with California State Energy Regulation requirements, and encourage the conservation of energy resources. The Housing Element and Public Safety Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies addressing energy resources. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new energy resource impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to energy resources as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: USS-6 The City shall coordinate with Southern California Edison, the Southern California Gas Company, and other responsible companies to provide for the continued maintenance, development, and expansion of electricity and natural gas systems (General Plan Implementation Program GM-11). USS-7 The City shall participate in the formation of regional siting plans and policies for energy facilities (General Plan Implementation Program OS-15). USS-8 The City shall implement land use and building controls that require new development to comply with the California State Energy Regulation requirements (General Plan Implementation Program OS-17). USS-9 The City shall 1) enforce all current residential and commercial California Energy Commission energy conservation standards, 2) encourage public institutions to use high -efficiency heating and cooling systems, advanced lighting systems, and passive solar systems to reduce energy use; and 3) adopt project -related energy conservation guidelines that are incorporated within the development approval process to promote and require conservation strategies as development occurs (General Plan Implementation Program OS-18). Environmental Analysis 4-21 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Substantial ImpactSubstantial Information No Less Than No „Additional Significant Project Circumstance Requiring Greater Significant ImpactiNo Impact/Requiring Significant Thresholds: EIR Major EIR Revisions Revisions effects than Less Than Information Previous EIR Significant Requiring ImpactMajor ,.. . With an IVIND Application of Would theproject: Mitigation from FEIR a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: • Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the X State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. • Strong seismic ground shaking? • Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? Landslides? b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the X loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and X potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building X Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal X systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or X unique geologic feature? Environmental Analysis 4-22 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR General Plan FOR Conclusions • Temecula is located in a seismically active area. Projects developed pursuant to General Plan land use policies will expose additional people and structures to groundshaking hazards associated with earthquakes. Any groundshaking that will occur will be similar throughout the City and is not considered an unusual or unique risk. Per City and State building codes, all new development will be required to incorporate appropriate design and construction measures to guard against groundshaking hazards. All projects and structures will be constructed in compliance with existing seismic safety regulations of the California Uniform Building Code, which requires the use of site -specific engineering and construction standards identified for each class of seismic hazard. The General Plan Public Safety Element includes goals, policies and programs that direct the City to identify and mitigate adverse impacts of ground surface rupture at the project level, to apply and enforce seismic design standards and building construction codes for new development, and to monitor the potential for seismic events. The General Plan FEIR determined impacts will be less than significant with implementation of these policies and mitigation measures. • Seismic activity along regional faults create the potential for groundshaking impacts within the Planning Area. Portions of the Planning Area are underlain with weak, semi -consolidated bedrock and loose, unconsolidated and often saturated alluvial sediments. These soil types have the potential to liquefy or collapse in the event of a major groundshaking event. The fine-grained components of the bedrock units are potentially expansive. The weak soil, combined with steep slopes and saturated drainage channels, make areas of Temecula susceptible to landslides and mudflows. The General Plan Public Safety Element includes goals, policies and programs that direct the City to identify and mitigate potential adverse impacts of liquefaction and landslides at the project level, to apply and enforce seismic design standards and building construction codes for new development, to work with property owners to remediate hazardous buildings, and to establish development management techniques to lessen the potential for erosion and landslides. The City requires geological and geotechnical investigations on properties where new development is proposed and seismic and geologic hazards are of concern. Liquefaction assessment studies are also required in areas identified as susceptible to liquefaction. According to the General Plan FEIR, compliance with General Plan Safety Element goals and policies and implementation of existing regulations will ensure that impacts can be avoided. Impact will be less than significant through the application of these policies and continued standard permit review and building practices. During the construction phase of development projects consistent with General Plan policies, grading could temporarily expose soil surfaces to erosion through stormwater runoff and wind. Long-term soil loss could also occur from the increased peak flows and total runoff produced by paved or landscaped surfaces in the Planning Area. Uncontrolled flows could result in scouring or down -cutting of stream channels in sections where runoff velocities and volumes are high. The General Plan Public Safety Element includes goals, policies, and programs that direct the City to establish development management techniques to lessen the potential for erosion and landslides. Development activities may lead to increased erosion or loss of top soil and the General Plan FEIR includes mitigation measures to reduce the impact to a level below significance. Environmental Analysis 4-23 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site -specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts associated with geology and soils. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts associated with geology and soils, including preparation of site -specific geotechnical analysis and required compliance with the Temecula Municipal Code. The Public Safety Element Update would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development in areas not previously considered or at a greater intensity/density than identified in the General Plan FEIR. The proposed Public Safety Element would continue to provide policies specific to reducing potential risks associated with geologic hazards within the City. Further, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures GS-1 and GS-2 ensure the City would continue to monitor fault information and categorize according to risk. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure GS-3 requires hillside development standards and the use of property soil management and grading techniques in accordance with geotechnical engineering standards. The Housing Element and Public Safety Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies regarding geology and soils. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element includes current information regarding fire hazard planning and emergency preparedness, as well as an evaluation of evacuation routes in hazard areas. Proposed policies would continue to promote development consistent with the adopted land use policy that considers natural and human -induced hazards and the overall safety of Temecula's residents. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new impacts to geology and soils beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to geology and soils as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: GS-1 The City shall work with the County of Riverside and California Geological Survey to monitor and compile information on faults located within the Planning Area (General Plan Implementation Program PS-4). GS-2 The City shall develop a Land Use Suitability Matrix for Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones and County Fault Hazards Zones. The matrix will categorize land uses according to risk and develop restrictions for these uses within the Zones (General Plan Implementation Program PS-4). Environmental Analysis 4-24 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR GS-3 The City shall: 1) prepare and adopt hillside development standards for site development and drainage that work to control runoff for erosion control and water quality purposes; 2) implement a Hillside Grading Ordinance; 3) require the use of proper soil management techniques to reduce erosion, sedimentation, and other soil -related problems; and 4) implement a grading ordinance to ensure that grading associated with new development projects is conducted in accordance with appropriate geotechnical engineering standards (General Plan Implementation Programs OS-21, PS-5 and PS-16). Environmental Analysis 4-25 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS General Plan FOR Conclusions The Final EIR does not include a stand-alone Greenhouse Gas Emissions analysis section. Analysis of Modified Project In March 2010, the Natural Resources Agency revised Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines to include a checklist item relating to a project's impacts relating to Greenhouse Gas Emissions. In particular, Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines now includes a checklist item that provides: VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Would the project: (a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? (b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? The City certified the General Plan Final EIR in 2005, several years before the above checklist item was added to the State CEQA Guidelines. California courts have held that where a new guideline or threshold is adopted after the certification of an EIR, an Addendum to the EIR need not include additional environmental analysis relating to that guideline or threshold where the potential environmental impact at issue in the new guideline or threshold was known or could have been known at the time the EIR was certified. (See Citizens Against Airport Pollution v. City of San Jose (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 788, 806 [even though State CEQA Guidelines were amended on March 18, 2010 to address greenhouse gas emissions, lead agency's 2010 Addendum to a 1997 EIR did not require analysis of greenhouse gas emissions because 'information about the potential environmental impact of greenhouse gas emissions was known or could have been know at the time the 1997 EIR and the 2003 SEIR for the [project] were certified"]; Concerned Dublin Citizens Environmental Analysis 4-26 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR v. City of Dublin (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 1301, 1319-1320 ["the adoption of guidelines for analyzing and evaluating the significance of data does not constitute new information if the underlying information was otherwise known or should have been known at the time the EIR was certified"]; see also Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of San Diego (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 515, 532.). Because potential impacts relating to Greenhouse Gas Emissions were known or could have been known when the General Plan FEIR was certified in 2005, California law does not require these impacts to be analyzed in this Addendum. It is noted that the Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use plan and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce GHG emission impacts as a result of new development and construction -related emissions and operational activities. More specifically: the City's Trip Reduction Program Ordinance allows the City to receive revenues from vehicle registration fees and mandates the provision Trip Reduction Plans for certain employers; the General Plan Air Quality Element, Program AQ-12 promotes alternative fuel vehicles and Programs AQ-7, AQ-9, AQ-11, AQ-13, and AQ-14 promote multi -modal transportation and carpooling to reduce VMT; and the General Plan Circulation Element Programs C-12, C-15, C-16, and C-18 promote multi -modal transportation to reduce VMT. These measures, in addition to compliance with the AQMP, would contribution to the reduction of GHG emissions. Further the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. Environmental Analysis 4-27 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Substantial ImpactSubstantial Information No Less Than No „Additional Significant Project Circumstance Requiring Greater Significant ImpactiNo Impact/Requiring Significant Thresholds: EIR Major EIR Revisions Revisions effects than Less Than Information Previous EIR Significant Requiring ImpactMajor ,.. . With an MND Application of Would theproject: Mitigation from FEIR a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine X transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident X conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within X one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code X Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, X would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency X response plan or emergency evacuation Ian? g. Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk X of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? General Plan FEIR Conclusions • In accordance with City, State, and federal requirements, any new development that involves contaminated property will necessitate the clean up and/or remediation of the property in accordance with applicable federal, State, and local requirements and regulations. No construction will be permitted to occur at such locations until a "no further action" or similar determination is issued by the City's Fire Department, Department of Environmental Analysis 4-28 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Toxic Substances Control, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and/or other responsible agency. Compliance with existing regulations will ensure a level of safety to current standards, and the General Plan FEIR concluded impacts will be less than significant. New development could result in the increased use, transport, and disposal volumes of hazardous materials within the Planning Area. However, the current regulatory environment provides a high level of protection from the hazardous materials manufactured within, transported to and stored in industrial and educational facilities within the Planning Area. The City will continue to enforce disclosure laws that require all users, producers and transporters of hazardous materials and wastes to clearly identify the materials that they store, use or transport, and to notify the appropriate City, county, State and federal agencies in the event of a violation. Compliance with existing regulations will ensure a less than significant impact. • The General Plan FEIR did not identify any sites in Temecula included on the Department of Toxic Substances Control Hazardous Waste and Substance List (Cortese List) and impacts were determined to be less than significant. • Temecula has adopted a Multi -Hazard Functional Plan to ensure the effective management of City personnel and resources in responding to emergency situations stemming from natural disasters, technological incidents, and nuclear defense emergencies. The plan includes a responsibility matrix that delineates specific responsibilities to City departments or personnel in the event of an emergency. The plan also includes a comprehensive hazard analysis that addresses the following potential hazards: earthquake, hazardous materials incident, flooding, dam failure, major fire/wildfire, nuclear incident, and transportation incident. The Public Safety Element of the General Plan includes the goal of "an effective response of emergency services following a disaster" (Goal 4, Public Safety Element). Implementation of the General Plan policies, along with the continued implementation of the City's Multi -Hazard Functional Plan, will ensure a less than significant impact with regard to emergency preparedness. • The General Plan proposes new development within the French Valley Airport area of influence through creation of the Airport Overlay Ordinance. By establishing an overlay area, the City will be able to more strictly control development in the French Valley Airport area of influence. All land use development entitlements within the area of influence must be approved by the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission; must be consistent with the French Valley Airport County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; must ensure continued orderly use of the Airport; and must prevent the creation of new noise and safety problems. Compliance with the existing ALUCP, which is supported by numerous policies within the proposed General Plan, will ensure a less than significant impact. • Undeveloped areas, such as in the eastern, southern, and southeastern portions of the Planning Area, have greater fire danger due to expansive areas of vegetation to fuel a fire. Any new development in the Planning Area, no matter how limited, will expose additional people and structures to wildland fire hazards. The City's Hazardous Vegetation Ordinance requires every property owner to remove all hazardous or flammable vegetation on the property constituting a fire hazard that may endanger or damage neighboring property. In addition, the Temecula Fire Department and the County of Riverside Fire Department Environmental Analysis 4-29 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR sponsor outreach and awareness programs to educate residents about fire dangers and whey they can do to protect themselves and their homes. The General Plan Public Safety Element includes policies and implementation programs that direct the City to reduce the potential for dangerous fires by concentrating development in previously developed areas where the risk of wildland fire is lower; to protect hillside areas from expansion of the urban-wildland interface; to encourage residents to plant and maintain drought -resistant, fire -retardant landscape species on slopes to reduce the risk of brush fire and soil erosion; and to work with the City Fire Department to control hazardous vegetation. The General Plan FEIR concluded that stringent application of these policies will reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site -specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts due to hazards or hazardous materials. Additionally, the City's Hazardous Vegetation Ordinance and regional cooperation with the County of Riverside Fire Department reduce potential impacts due to wildland fires. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. Within the Introduction section of the Safety Element, new plans and programs were referenced, including the County of Riverside Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJLHMP), the City of Temecula Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), and the Riverside County Climate Action Plan (CAP). Fire Hazards discussion was comprehensively updated to include current information regarding the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), CalFire, Fire Hazard Severity Zones, and major wildland fires in Temecula. Figure PS-3, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA (as Recommended by CalFIRE) was also added. The City has also included a new discussion related to emergency preparedness and hazard mitigation and identified new objectives to address this topic. Additional information related to the MJLHMP, LHMP, and the County's CAP are also included by reference. In accordance with SB 99, the City conducted an evaluation of evacuation routes serving residential developments in hazard areas. This analysis is presented in a separate background report available on the City's website and the results of the analysis, which found that while residential developers may comply with City of Temecula access standards, several residential areas warrant further study and coordination with RCFD and CalFIRE to ensure residents with limited emergency routes are well-educated on evacuation procedures during emergencies. No goals, policies or programs from the current Public Safety Element were eliminated as part of this update. Modifications or additions related to natural hazards were made to Polices 1.8 and 1.9 to further support the goal to minimize injury, loss of life, and damage to property resulting from Environmental Analysis 4-30 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR structural or wildland fire hazards. More specifically, Policy 1.8 supports programs and plans consistent with state law and related to new development in State Responsibility Areas (SRAs) or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) and Policy 1.9 directs the City to reduce the risk of wildfire hazards by working with partners and other agencies on projects and programs like community fire breaks; Policy 4.5 directs the City to locate, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of the VHFHSZ; Policy 4.7 requires the City to coordinate with local, state and federal agency to evaluate and plan for emergency scenarios; Goal 5 states that the City will be a resilient, sustainable, and equitable community where risk resulting from things like climate change will be minimized; Policy 5.1 requires coordination with outside agencies on climate resiliency and adaption strategies; and Policy 5.2 requires the City to monitor climate change - related effects and respond appropriately at the local level. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new hazards and hazardous materials impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials as a result of the proposed Project. Environmental Analysis 4-31 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Substantial ImpactSubstantial Information No Less Than No Changein Changein Showing AdditionalSignificant Project Circumstance Requiring Greater Significant ImpactiNo Significant Impact/Requiring Thresholds: EIR Major EIR Revisions Revisions effects than Less Than Information Previous EIR Significant Requiring ImpactMajor ,.. . With an MND Application of Would theproject: Mitigation from FEIR a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or X otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the X project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: • result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site; • substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a X manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite; • create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or • impede or redirect flood flows? d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to X project inundation? e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or X sustainable groundwater management plan? Environmental Analysis 4-32 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR General Plan FOR Conclusions • All new development will be required to comply with existing water quality standards and waste discharge regulations set forth by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego region. The General Plan FEIR concluded water quality impacts will be less than significant. • To avoid groundwater depletion, a conjunctive use program has been negotiated among Rancho California Water District (RCWD), Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), and Western Municipal Water District to recharge the Murrieta-Temecula groundwater basin and other groundwater basins serving the City. A conjunctive use program was developed to manage the basin, which refers to the planned use of groundwater in conjunction with surface and/or imported water to optimize total water resources and improve water supply reliability. This program allows imported water to be injected into the basin to ensure maintenance of a minimum level of groundwater within the basin and adequate supplies of available water without depleting the wells. The water master determines the safe annual yield based on annual audits of the groundwater basin, including how much water was withdrawn from and recharged to the aquifer. Water service providers must purchase imported water or utilize recycled water supplies based on the water master's yearly determination. Compliance with these existing agreements will ensure a less than significant impact on groundwater resources. To further ensure that groundwater supplies will not be impacted by future development pursuant to implementation of the General Plan, the General Plan FEIR recommends mitigation measures, that although not required, would have the City work with RCWD and EMWD to investigate additional measures to maintain supply and prevent groundwater depletion. To maintain the maximum level of water available for use and to ensure the quality of its potable water supply, RCWD protects its groundwater sources from two primary sources of contamination: septic tanks and underground storage tanks. Mitigation measures have been included in the General Plan FEIR that require all proposed development projects using septic tanks and subsurface disposal systems for the disposal of wastewater to provide detailed geotechnical analysis of the project site and siting recommendations that will ensure no impact to potable water production wells. • Development projects implementing General Plan land use policy will affect drainage systems throughout the Planning Area. Increased runoff volumes and speeds may create nuisance flooding in areas lacking adequate drainage facilities. To ensure that adequate flood control capacity is available to support new development, all proposed development projects within the Planning Area are reviewed by the Riverside County Flood Control District. New development projects are required to provide on -site drainage and to pay area drainage fees. Drainage fee revenues are used to support capacity expansion within the local storm drain system. Temecula is a member of the District's Storm Water Clean Water Protection Program and therefore requires all development project applicants to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to mitigate water quality impacts during storm events that occur during construction. In addition, all development proposals must prepare a Water Quality Management Plan, including Best Management Practices (BMPs), outlining how the project will minimize water quality impacts during project operation. Compliance with these existing regulations will ensure a less than significant Environmental Analysis 4-33 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR impact on surface water. The General Plan FEIR also recommends mitigation measures, although not required, to maintain adequate stormwater drainage. • Each new development will be required to comply with stormwater regulations set forth by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego region, including NPDES regulations. According to the General Plan FEIR, compliance with existing regulations on a project - by -project basis will reduce potential impact to a less than significant level. • Temecula contains several FEMA Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). These areas, corresponding to the 100-year floodplain, have the potential to become flooded when major rainstorms cause streams to overflow. Therefore, specific building standards apply to flood prone areas, including anchoring, building with flood resistant materials, providing adequate drainage paths, and elevating the structure to or above the base flood elevation. The City participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which makes flood insurance available to affected property owners within the 100-year floodplain. The City also reviews development plans for projects within the floodplain to ensure compliance with City and FEMA floodplain development requirements. No development of any kind will be allowed in the floodway portion of the 100-year floodplain. The General Plan FEIR determined implementation of these measures will reduce the risk from flooding to a less than significant level. Portions of Temecula are subject to flood inundation from dam failure. The City maintains a Dam Inundation Evacuation Plan as part of the Multi -Hazard Functional Plan and coordinates with the State Office of Emergency Services to ensure that dam safety plans reflect the level of development within the community. In addition, the General Plan Public Safety Element includes a policy to "provide and maintain adequate flood control facilities and limit development within the 100-year floodplain and potential dam inundation areas" (Policy 1.6, Public Safety Element). Therefore, the General Plan FEIR determined impacts will be less than significant. • The Planning Area is not subject to tsunamis due to its inland location and seiches have not historically occurred within the Planning Area; impacts are determined to be less than significant. Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site -specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts associated with hydrology and drainage, including preparation of site -specific analysis and required compliance with the Temecula Municipal Code. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to hydrology and water quality. Additionally, General Environmental Analysis 4-34 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures HW-1 through HW-7 outline strategies to increase water supply, decrease pollutants, and increase groundwater quality to reduce potential impacts. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new hydrology and water quality impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to hydrology and water as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: HW-1 The City will work with the water districts to promote water conservation and ultimately reduce the demand for peak -hour water supply wastewater capacity, review the adopted Uniform Building Code, and require water conservation measures to reduce water consumption. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, the use of plumbing fixtures that reduce water use, low -flow toilets, drip irrigation systems, and xeriscape landscaping that maximizes the use of drought -tolerant plant species (General Plan Implementation Program OS-4). HW-2 The City shall review individual development projects to ensure that adequate stormwater detention facilities are provided to accommodate surface water runoff generated by the project, and where needed, incorporate detention of stormwater runoff at the point of origin (General Plan Implementation Program OS-6). HW-3 The City will require drought -tolerant landscaping in new development and where feasible, will require incorporation of reclaimed water systems within landscape irrigation plans (General Plan Implementation Program OS-7). HW-4 The City will implement, where appropriate, Water Resource Management Guidelines drafted by the subcommittee comprised of Eastern Municipal Water District and local jurisdictions (General Plan Implementation Program OS-8). HW-5 The City shall prohibit the use of underground storage tanks and conventional septic tanks/subsurface disposal systems in any area designated within Zone A of a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wellhead protection area (General Plan Implementation Program GM-13). HW-6 The City shall require all proposed development projects using septic tanks and subsurface disposal systems for the disposal of wastewater to provide detailed geotechnical analysis of the project site and siting recommendations in accordance with the EPA's Design Manual for On -site Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems that will ensure no impact to potable water production wells in any area designated within Zone A of a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wellhead protection area (General Plan Implementation Program GM-13). HW-7 Proposed developments shall incorporate measures, including measures required by the City pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, to ensure that the quantity and quality of runoff discharge does not cause or contribute to the violation of water quality standards. Measures shall be required to avoid discharge of untreated surface runoff from developed and paved areas. Stormwater systems shall be designed to prevent the release of toxins, chemicals, petroleum products, exotic plant materials, or other elements. This can be Environmental Analysis 4-35 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR accomplished using a variety of methods including natural detention basins, grass swales, or mechanical trapping or treatment devices. Regular maintenance shall occur to ensure effective operations of runoff control systems (General Plan Implementation Program OS-5). Environmental Analysis 4-36 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING General Plan FOR Conclusions • The majority of undeveloped land in the Planning Area is located north of Temecula in the sphere of influence and no physical division would result from development pursuant to the General Plan; no impact will occur. • Implementation of the General Plan may conflict with other land use plans and policies that apply within the Planning Area. The updated Southwest Area Plan envisions substantial amounts of new development surrounding Temecula. The City's General Plan Land Use Policy Map incorporates the Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) recommended uses for unincorporated areas, and no direct conflicts result. However, development in unincorporated areas pursuant to the SWAP, particularly within the French Valley area, will result in significant impacts on traffic, air quality, and resources that are beyond the City's ability to control. Without annexation, projects would continue to be approved by the County, and may not adequately reduce impacts to the City's roadway infrastructure and natural resources to the extent that they would if under the City's jurisdiction, fully subject to policies and implementation programs within the General Plan. Thus, the City has developed a land use plan for the French Valley Area, and has designated this area as a Future Growth Area. This part of the land use plan is substantially similar to the County General Plan in this area. The General Plan FEIR includes mitigation that describes annexation requirements for surrounding areas. The General Plan may conflict with provisions of the City Development Code and Riverside County Zoning Ordinance, particularly with regard to land use designation/zoning consistency. Mitigation measures are included in the General Plan FEIR that require the City to review and update the Development Code to be consistent with the updated General Plan. Also, whenever the City annexes lands rezoning will occur to achieve General Plan/zoning consistency. The General Plan FEIR concluded impacts can be reduced to a less than significant level with these actions. Environmental Analysis 4-37 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR The ALUCP for French Valley Airport establishes an area of influence surrounding the Airport. The Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Document's Compatibility Criteria for Land Use Actions section delineates the criteria for assessing whether a land use plan, ordinance, or development proposal is to be judged compatible with a nearby airport. Accordingly, the General Plan includes Goal 8, and related policy 8.3 and implementation program LU-24 to assure that implementation of the Plan will not adversely impact French Valley airport operations. Implementation of the General Plan policies and programs will ensure that development pursuant to the General Plan within the French Valley Airport area of influence does not conflict with the current County ALUCP for French Valley Airport. Implementation Program LU-24 is required as a mitigation measure to ensure consistency between the General Plan and ALUCP. Impact will be less than significant with implementation of this measure. The SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) contains policies applicable to the General Plan. The General Plan is consistent with the applicable SCAG RCPG policies. Additionally, SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) includes several policies relevant to Temecula. The proposed General Plan is consistent with and does not conflict with applicable RTP policies. The General Plan is consistent with the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide administered by SCAG. Impact is less than significant. No mitigation is required. Development pursuant to the General Plan may result in annexations of lands, as well as additional public service needs in areas located within Temecula's sphere of influence. In addition, reorganization of service districts within the sphere of influence may be necessary to provide the required services efficiently and effectively, in keeping with General Plan policies expressed the Growth Management/Public Facilities Element. Such activities may conflict with established Riverside County LAFCO plans and priorities. This represents a significant impact, and mitigation is required. General Plan FEIR mitigation measures include: 1) describe annexation requirements for surrounding areas, and 2) require the City to cooperate with Riverside County LAFCO and the County of Riverside to direct growth outside the City limits to the French Valley Future Growth Area, on lands that are served or are planned to be served with a full range of urban services, such as public water and sewer, local and regional road networks demonstrating adequate capacity, safety and emergency response services, parks, trails and open spaces. The General Plan FEIR concluded impacts will be less than significant with implementation of these measures. In compliance with California Water Code Section 10910-10915, all future development projects pursuant to the proposed General Plan that meet criteria specified in the law are required to determine whether projected water supplies available during normal, single - dry, and multiple -dry water years will be sufficient to satisfy demands of the proposed project, in addition to existing and planned future uses. No major development project will be permitted to proceed unless required determinations can be made. Compliance with existing regulations will minimize the potential for impact. Development pursuant to the General Plan Land Use Element could be inconsistent with some of the development standards outlined in currently adopted specific plans, particularly Environmental Analysis 4-38 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR those under the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside within the City's sphere of influence. To avoid conflict, mitigation measures are included that: 1) describe annexation requirements for surrounding areas, 2) require the City to periodically review and update the General Plan Land Use Policy Map, and to review and update the Development Code and Specific Plans to be consistent with the updated General Plan and 3) require the City to continue to implement the procedures, requirements, and contents of specific plans contained in the Development Code. Impact will be less than significant with implementation of these measures. Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site -specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. Potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use plan and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the Public Safety Element would not result in any modifications to existing land use designations or modify any General Plan policies or programs specific to land use and planning. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with land use policies and programs. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts resulting from new development and intensification of land uses. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new land use and planning impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to land use and planning as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: LUP-1 The City shall require preparation of an annexation plan and fiscal analysis prior to annexation of new areas to the City. Within the annexation plan, applicants must show how adequate levels of public services and facilities will be provided to serve the new development, without reducing service levels for currently urbanized areas. The fiscal analysis shall determine the impact that additional development will have on current Temecula neighborhoods and on the community as a whole, including any impact fees necessary to offset public costs caused by the proposed project, and shall include an examination of fiscal and service impacts of the proposed project on roads, water, sewer, storm water runoff, fire, police, schools, libraries and other community facilities (General Plan Implementation Program LU-15). LUP-2 The City shall review implementation of the General Plan and Land Use Policy Map to ensure consistency is maintained between the General Plan and the Development Code (General Plan Implementation Program LU-1). LUP-3 The City shall review and update the Development Code to ensure consistency with the General Plan (General Plan Implementation Program LU-3). Environmental Analysis 4-39 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR LUP-4 The City shall implement and update as necessary the Redevelopment Plan to establish consistency with the General Plan and amended Development Code (General Plan Implementation Program LU-11). LUP-5 The City shall ensure consistency with the County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for French Valley Airport through the following measures: a. The City shall review development projects within the French Valley Airport area of influence, and participate in any future updates to the ALUCP and Master Plan for the Airport, in conjunction with the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission. b. The City shall require project proponents to obtain avigation easements as required by the ALUCP to ensure that landowners acknowledge potential impacts associated with aircraft. (General Plan Implementation Program LU-24) LUP-6 The City shall review and update the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) on an annual basis to achieve consistency with improvements identified within the General Plan, and to meet changing needs, priorities, and financial conditions (General Plan Implementation Program LU-17). LUP-7 The City shall cooperate with Riverside County LAFCO and the County of Riverside to direct growth outside the City limits to the French Valley Future Growth Area, on lands that are served or are planned to be served with a full range of urban services, such as public water and sewer, local and regional road networks demonstrating adequate capacity, safety and emergency response services, parks, trails and open spaces (General Plan Implementation Program LU-16). LUP-8 The City shall continue to implement the procedures, requirements and contents of specific plans contained in the Development Code. Properties under single ownership or multiple ownership which are generally over 100 acres will utilize the specific plan or village center plan as an implementation tool. Private landowners or the City may undertake the preparation or amendment of a specific plan, in accordance with Government Code Section 65450. Specific plans shall include the location of land uses; standards to regulate height, bulk and setback limits; standards for constructing proposed streets; standards for population density and building intensity; standards for conservation and management of natural resources; and implementation provisions to carry out the Open Space/Conservation Element (General Plan Implementation Program LU-5). Environmental Analysis 4-40 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES General Plan FEIR Conclusions • According to the California Geological Survey, no known mineral resources exist in Temecula. Development pursuant to the General Plan will not result in the loss of a known mineral resource. The General Plan FEIR concluded no impact will result. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the Public Safety Element would not result in any modifications to existing and use designations or modify any General Plan policies or programs specific to mineral resources. The City reviews development proposals to ensure that mineral resources are conserved in compliance with the General Plan Open Space/Conservation Element and CEQA requirements. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new mineral resources impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to mineral resources as a result of the proposed Project. Environmental Analysis 4-41 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.13 NOISE General Plan FOR Conclusions • Long-term implementation of the General Plan could expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration and/or noise. Problems could arise in cases where noise -producing uses are located immediately adjacent to sensitive uses. In addition, construction -related activities will be short-term sources of groundborne noise that could affect occupants of neighboring uses. These are potentially significant impacts at the project level, and the General Plan FEIR concludes mitigation is required. • Transportation -related noise is the strongest contributor to ambient noise levels within the Temecula Planning Area. Nearly all of the roadway segments will carry additional trips in the future, which will produce additional noise. In some portions of the community, the 60 dB noise contour could expand by as much as 395 feet. In addition, new transportation facilities shown on the City's Roadway Plan will contribute new sources of noise. The General Plan EIR determined these increases in permanent ambient noise levels are considered a significant impact, and mitigation is required. Long-term implementation of the General Plan creates capacity for additional development within the Planning Area, which could result in substantial temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels due to construction activities. Although construction -related noise will be short term for each specific construction project and will cease upon completion of construction, the cumulative impact over time could be significant at specific locations. Environmental Analysis 4-42 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Upon implementation of mitigation measures, the General Plan FEIR concluded impacts will be less than significant. • The Land Use Policy Map and implementing zoning regulations restrict development of intensive new uses within airport influence areas. Development controls within the City's Development Code include limiting development within areas subject to high noise levels and limiting the intensity and height of development within aircraft hazard zones. These controls are consistent with the ALUCP for French Valley Airport, adopted by the ALUC, which designates airport influence areas and zones for every airport in Riverside County, and provides a series of policies and compatibility criteria to ensure that both aviation uses and surrounding areas may continue. The General Plan Noise Element includes goals and policies that direct the City to comply with the French Valley ALUCP. Ongoing compliance with the ALUCP and implementation of General Plan policy will ensure a less than significant impact. Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site -specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts associated with noise, including preparation of site -specific analysis and required compliance with the Temecula Municipal Code. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or modify General Plan policies or programs specific to noise. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to ambient noise levels as a result of groundborne vibration or exposure to excessive noise levels. Further, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-5 ensure review and enforcement of noise standards on new and existing development, development of noise impact guidelines, and require construction activities to reduce potential impacts related to noise. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in noise impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to noise as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: Any modifications to the original measures are shown in strikethrough for deleted text and new, inserted text is underlined. N-1 The City will review residential and other noise -sensitive development proposals to ensure that noise standards and compatibility criteria are met, and will require incorporation of noise - mitigating features identified in acoustical studies prepared for development projects including, but not limited to, the following measures identified in the Noise Element (General Plan Implementation Programs N-1, N-3, N-5 and N-7). Environmental Analysis 4-43 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR • Use of building setbacks to increase distance between noise sources and receivers • Placing noise tolerant land uses such as parking lots, maintenance facilities, and utility areas between noise sources and receptors. • Orienting or clustering buildings to shield outdoor spaces from noise sources. • Placing bedrooms on the side of a house, facing away from major roadways. • Placement of noise tolerant rooms (e.g. garages, bathrooms and kitchens) to shield noise - sensitive portions of homes. • Use of additional insulation and double -pane windows when bedrooms cannot be located on the side of a house away from a major roadway. • Avoid placement of balconies facing major travel routes. N-2 Where architectural design treatments described in Mitigation Measure N-1 fail to adequately reduce adverse noise levels or will significantly increase the costs of land development, the City will require the combined use of noise barriers and landscaped berms (General Plan Implementation Program N-7). N-3 The City will require all non -emergency construction activity to comply with the limits (maximum noise levels, hours and days of activity) established in State and City noise regulations (Title 24 California Code of Regulations, Temecula Development Code and Chapter 8.32 9.20 of the Municipal Code), and will require proposed industrial or commercial projects located near residential areas to demonstrate that the project, when constructed, will meet City noise reduction requirements (General Plan Implementation Program N-2). N-4 During review of development applications, the City will consider the noise and vibration impacts of the proposed land use on current or planned adjacent uses (General Plan Implementation Program N-4). N-5 The City will 1) incorporate noise control measures, such as sound walls and berms, into roadway improvement projects to mitigate impacts to adjacent development; 2) provide noise control for City streets within the Planning Area experiencing unique noise problems; 3) use the ultimate roadway capacity at LOS C and the posted speed limit to estimate maximum future noise impacts; and 4) Coordinate with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department and the California Highway Patrol to enforce the California Vehicle Code noise standards for cars, trucks, and motorcycles (General Plan Implementation Program N-8). Environmental Analysis 4-44 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING General Plan FOR Conclusions • General Plan land use policy establishes capacity for 25,005 net new housing units and 36.2 million net new square feet of nonresidential development. To accommodate the anticipated population increase, the General Plan Land Use Element directs most new development into the French Valley Future Growth Area. The Land Use Element also includes policies that encourage development of mixed -use projects within three established Mixed -Use Overlay Areas to promote infill development and redevelopment of vacant/underutilized sites and aging commercial developments. In addition, Land Use Element policies establish a number of strategies designed to preserve rural areas and protect existing single-family residential neighborhoods. Given historical growth patterns and growth management policies contained within the General Plan, implementation of the Plan will not substantially increase population beyond that already projected to occur within the Planning Area. Further, the General Plan is consistent with SCAG's growth management policies. The General Plan FEIR concluded impacts will be less than significant. • The General Plan will allow the development of a variety of uses on currently undeveloped land. However, this new development will not displace substantial numbers of housing units or people and no impact will result. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Additionally, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Environmental Analysis 4-45 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Element and the El Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts associated with substantial unplanned population growth and displacement. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in housing and population impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to population and housing as a result of the proposed Project. Environmental Analysis 4-46 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES General Plan FOR Conclusions • Development projects anticipated to occur pursuant to General Plan policy will result in increased demand for fire and police protection services and facilities, as well as increased demand for water resources for fire protection and other emergencies. This represents a significant impact. The Fire Department conducts final construction plan check reviews and issues certificates of occupancy for all new development projects. Projects within the City limits are also required to pay Development Impact Fees (DIF) to fund the expansion of fire protection and emergency services. General Plan FEIR mitigation measures are required to reduce impact to a level below significance. The specific environmental impacts of constructing fire and police stations in the City cannot be determined at this level of analysis because no specific projects are proposed. However, the Riverside County Fire Department and Riverside County Sheriff's Department will require project -level analysis of impacts prior to approving occupancy certificates. • Residential development projects anticipated to occur pursuant to General Plan policy will result in demand for new or expanded education facilities to adequately accommodate new students. Payment of alternative school fees will be used to offset the cost to Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) of providing education facilities to future students. The environmental effects of expansion, construction, and operation of additional school facilities will be evaluated by TVUSD in its efforts to plan for construction of new schools or Environmental Analysis 4-47 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR expansion of existing facilities. SB 50 states that for CEQA purposes, payment of fees to the affected school district reduces school facility impacts to a less than significant level. • Residential development projects anticipated to occur pursuant to General Plan policy will result in demand for library resources beyond provided by the new Temecula Public Library. Even with the opening of the new library, the new development associated with implementation of the General Plan will require the construction of new or expanded library facilities. According to the General Plan FEIR, mitigation measures would be required to reduce the impact to less than significant. The specific impacts of constructing new library facilities in the Planning Area cannot be determined at this first -tier level of analysis because no specific project is proposed. However, Riverside County Library District will be required to conduct project -level analysis of potential impacts. • Sufficient acreage to meet the needs of existing residents is anticipated by the year 2013 through the acquisition and dedication of parks and school facilities within identified specific plan areas. However, new development projects pursuant to the General Plan will result in increased use of existing neighborhood and regional parks, other recreational facilities, and trails that may cause or accelerate substantial physical deterioration of these facilities. The General Plan EIR includes mitigation measures to reduce the impact to less than significant. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. Potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to public services as a result of new development and intensification of land uses. Further, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures PSR-1 and PSR-2 ensure acceptable service ratios and response times of police, fire, and emergency medical services. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures PSR-3 and PSR-4 ensure adequate funding and level of service for community libraries. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures PSR-5 through PSR- 7 ensures adequate parkland for residents, provides for a funding source for parks, and promotes recreational and bicycle facilities. The Public Safety Element update includes current information regarding fire hazard planning and emergency preparedness, as well as an evaluation of evacuation routes in hazard areas. Proposed policies would continue to promote development consistent with the adopted land use policy that considers natural and human -induced hazards and the overall safety of Temecula's residents, including the provision of adequate services and facilities. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in public services impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to public services as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: Environmental Analysis 4-48 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR PSR-1 The City will periodically evaluate levels of sheriff, fire and emergency medical services, based on changes in population and development, and will: 1) provide a minimum of one full-time officer per 1,000 residents for police protection services; 2) maintain facilities, staffing, and equipment necessary to maintain a five-minute response time for 90 percent of all emergencies; and 3) implement new programs to meet the changing needs of residents (General Plan Implementation Program GM-4). PSR-2 As part of the development review process, the City will require new development projects to address fire and police protection proactively, through all-weather access street design, orientation of entryways, siting of structures, landscaping, lighting, and other security features; and will require illuminated addresses on new construction (General Plan Implementation Program GM-5). PSR-3 The City will identify and solicit funding from additional sources to supplement library facilities and services. Such funding sources may include: State and federal grants and loans, public and private donations, sponsorships by local and national corporations, and other private individuals and groups (General Plan Implementation Program GM-7). PSR-4 The City will coordinate with the County to determine location, facilities, and services of new branch libraries needed to serve the community (General Plan Implementation Program GM- 7). PSR-5 The City will identify potential sites for additional park land, monitor demand for park land and facilities concurrent with development approvals, and prioritize potential parkland acquisitions, expansions, and improvements within the five year Capital Improvement Program, consistent with the adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan (General Plan Implementation Program OS-1). PSR-6 The City shall continue to implement a local code that incorporates standards for parkland dedication and development. Specifically the City shall: 1) require the dedication of parkland or the payment of in -lieu fees and the development of recreation facilities for all new development; and 2) require developers of residential projects greater than 200 units to dedicate land based on the park acre standard of five acres of usable parkland to 1,000 residents (General Plan Implementation Program OS-2). PSR-7 The City shall 1) implement policies and standards of the Parks and Recreation and Multi - Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plans, including trail classifications, design standards, implementation mechanisms, and capital improvement programming; and 2) ensure that bike routes are provided or reserved concurrent with new development (General Plan Implementation Program OS-29). Environmental Analysis 4-49 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.16 RECREATION General Plan FOR Conclusions This topical area is addressed in the General Plan FEIR's Public Services and Recreation section; refer to Section 4.15, Public Services, above. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to parks and recreation facilities as a result of new development and intensification of land uses. Further, the Temecula Municipal Code sets parkland dedication requirements in accordance with the Quimby Act. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in parks and recreation facilities impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to recreation as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: Environmental Analysis 4-50 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR PSR-5 The City will identify potential sites for additional park land, monitor demand for park land and facilities concurrent with development approvals, and prioritize potential parkland acquisitions, expansions, and improvements within the five year Capital Improvement Program, consistent with the adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan (General Plan Implementation Program OS-1). PSR-6 The City shall continue to implement a local code that incorporates standards for parkland dedication and development. Specifically the City shall: 1) require the dedication of parkland or the payment of in -lieu fees and the development of recreation facilities for all new development; and 2) require developers of residential projects greater than 200 units to dedicate land based on the park acre standard of five acres of usable parkland to 1,000 residents (General Plan Implementation Program OS-2). PSR-7 The City shall 1) implement policies and standards of the Parks and Recreation and Multi - Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plans, including trail classifications, design standards, implementation mechanisms, and capital improvement programming; and 2) ensure that bike routes are provided or reserved concurrent with new development (General Plan Implementation Program OS-29). Environmental Analysis 4-51 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.17 TRANSPORTATION General Plan FOR Conclusions • The General Plan Circulation Element is comprised of the Roadway Plan, long-range plans for transit facilities and multi -use trails, and goals, policies, and programs to ensure that current transportation facilities will be improved and new facilities constructed that provide adequate capacity to accommodate travel needs resulting from future development pursuant to the Land Use Element. Improvements to current roadways and construction of future roadways have also been designed to anticipate future development in the County of Riverside and the City of Murrieta. Long-range implementation of the General Plan will result in as many as 699,558 additional vehicle trips per day, for a total trip generation of approximately 1.43 million vehicle trips per day. This represents an increase of 96 percent over existing (year 2002) conditions. The General Plan FEIR concluded that even with implementation of mitigation measures, significantly impacted intersections and freeway ramps (as identified in the General Plan FEIR) cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. • The City of Temecula coordinates with RTA to develop future transit schedules and routes in Temecula, and provides important transit support facilities, including park -and -ride lots and bus shelters. These ongoing actions are supported and expanded upon within the Circulation Element by policies directing the City to coordinate with public and private transit operators to provide fixed route transit service connecting major activity centers; to coordinate with WRCOG to identify, protect, and pursue opportunities for light rail or Environmental Analysis 4-52 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR high speed regional rail transit serving Temecula; to identify and reserve necessary rights - of -way for future regional transit facilities; and to encourage development of transit support facilities, such as park -and -ride lots, near the I-15 Freeway and within Mixed Use Overlay Areas established in the Land Use Element. • The French Valley Airport is located within Temecula's sphere of influence. Growth pursuant to the General Plan is not anticipated to change air traffic patterns and the General Plan EIR concluded potential impacts will be less than significant. • The Circulation Element addresses the importance of compatibility between design issues and land use compatibility. However, new development is expected to result in additional roadways. All new roadways will be built in accordance with all requisite City and County design requirements and the General Plan FEIR concluded no significant impact will result. • The City has a Multi -Hazard Functional Plan in place. In addition, the Public Safety Element calls for regular reviews by the City to assess response times and incorporate newly developed areas to ensure adequate fire and police protection, impacts will be less than significant. • One of the key components of the Circulation Element is to promote the use of alternative transportation modes, including bicycling and walking. Public bus service is provided by RTA. The City is committed to ensuring that public transportation becomes a viable alternative to the automobile for residents. The Circulation Element also emphasizes the network of Multi -Use Trails planned for in the City's Multi -Use Trails Master Plan. The General Plan FEIR concluded impacts will be less than significant. Analysis of Modified Project The General Plan FEIR did not address potential impacts to VMT because at the time of preparation of the General Plan FEIR, VMT was not the primary metric used as the basis for determining the significance of transportation impacts under CEQA. However, the proposed Project does not include site -specific development or result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was considered in the General Plan FEIR. Thus, the proposed Project would result in similar VMT as would occur under the existing General Plan and would not result in new impacts or substantially more significant impacts related to VMT. It should be noted that although Level of Service (LOS) no longer serves as the basis for determining the significance of transportation impacts under CEQA, the General Plan FEIR included mitigation to address potentially significant impacts to the LOS of various intersections and to support multi -modal travel to reduce potential impacts to the City's transportation system. These Mitigation Measures are identified below. As noted above, the Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to the circulation system, including Environmental Analysis 4-53 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR increased hazards and emergency access, as a result of new development and intensification of land uses. The Public Safety Element update includes current information regarding fire hazard planning and emergency preparedness, as well as an evaluation of evacuation routes in hazard areas. Proposed policies would continue to promote development consistent with the adopted land use policy that considers natural and human -induced hazards and the overall safety of Temecula's residents. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in transportation impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to transportation as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: T-1 The City will: 1) prioritize, secure funding, design, and build new roadways and complete roadway improvements using the established Capital Improvement Plan process to implement the circulation system shown on the proposed Roadway Plan concurrent with land development; and 2) require that new roadways meet roadway classification design specifications and performance criteria established in the proposed Circulation Element. General Plan FEIR Table 5.13-9 summarizes new roadways and arterial widening projects required to implement the proposed Roadway Plan2 (General Plan Implementation Program C-1). T-2 The City will monitor the performance of Principal Intersections on an ongoing basis and ensure that Principal Intersections approaching Level of Service D are prioritized for improvement within the City's Five -Year Capital Improvement Program (General Plan Implementation Program C-3). T-3 The City will: 1) continue to update the Capital Improvement Plan on an annual basis to plan for and fund future improvements to the roadway, pedestrian, and bicycle systems; 2) identify available funding sources and establish a financing plan to guide construction and funding of transportation system improvements, and 3) require new development projects to construct and/or fund in whole or in part necessary traffic improvements associated with the proposed project, through the assessment and collection of traffic impact fees. Such improvements should address both automotive, as well as alternative means of transportation (General Plan Implementation Program C-5). T-4 The City will require additional dedication of right-of-way on all approaches to Principal Intersections. Such right-of-way shall be preserved for future intersection improvements that may be required at these intersections, such as full width auxiliary turn lanes and/or dual -left turn lanes (General Plan Implementation Program C-4). T-5 The City will implement the following procedures and requirements to minimize impacts of proposed development projects on the City's circulation system, and to encourage increased use of alternative transportation: Environmental Analysis 4-54 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR • Evaluate development proposals for potential impacts to the transportation and infrastructure system. • Require mitigation in the form of physical improvements and/or impact fees for significant impacts prior to or concurrent with project development. • Require dedication of adequate right-of-way along new roadways to permit pedestrian and bicycle facilities. • Require new development to incorporate design features that facilitate transit service and encourage transit ridership, such as bus pullout areas, covered bus stop facilities, efficient trail systems through projects to transit stops, installation of bike lanes, bikeways, and bicycle parking, and incorporation of pedestrian walkways that pass through subdivision boundary walls, as appropriate. • Require new specific plans and other projects to provide an internal system of pathways and trails. Trails should link schools, shopping centers, transit, and other public facilities in residential areas. • Require transportation demand management plans to be submitted for preliminary review at the Specific Plan or Development Plan stage of site development and submitted for final approval prior to issuance of building permits (General Plan Implementation Program C-6). T-6 The City will: 1) identify local streets that are currently closed that may benefit citywide circulation if the street was re -opened or construction of the street was completed; 2) assess the feasibility of opening previously closed streets or completing construction of local connecting streets that benefit citywide circulation on a case -by -case basis, providing ample opportunity for both neighborhood residents and the community at -large to comment on such proposals, and 3) establish a review process for the future closing of any local street that requires City Council determination that the closure does not have an adverse affect on citywide circulation (General Plan Implementation Program C-7). T-7 The City will: 1) continue to work with WRCOG, SCAG and others to advocate future commuter or high speed rail service connecting Temecula to Los Angeles, Riverside and San Diego; 2) ensure that any future commuter rail corridor serving Temecula is located on the west side of I-15 to reduce noise impacts on residential areas; and 3) require new commercial, industrial, or mixed use development in areas surrounding proposed stations to include transit -oriented design amenities (General Plan Implementation Program C-12). T-8 The City will promote the use of alternative work weeks, flextime, telecommuting, and work -at-home programs among employers in Temecula, and continue to enforce provisions of the City's Trip Reduction Program Ordinance, including requirements for preparation of Trip Reduction Plans (TRPs) for qualifying development projects and employers (General Plan Implementation Program C-13). T-9 The City will implement the adopted Multi -Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan to complete design and construction of a comprehensive alternative transportation network, promote safe use of the trail system, and ensure accessibility of pedestrian facilities to the disabled (General Plan Implementation Program C-15). Environmental Analysis 4-55 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR T-10 The City will continue to improve transit service and encourage ridership through the following actions: • Require transit facilities in major new development and rehabilitation projects. • Coordinate with providers to get more frequent service and broader transit coverage serving employment, shopping, educational, recreational, and residential areas. • Work with providers to identify and receive additional funding sources for additional transit services. The City will also collaborate with providers to identify needs and provide special transit services beyond fixed -route buses. Potential services include, but are not limited to: • Subscription or dial -a -ride service for lower density residential areas • Offering limited transit service between outlying residential areas and the City's commercial/employment core • Shuttle or trolley service between Old Town and other destinations along the I-15 commercial corridor, and expanded service to other areas, including the wineries along Rancho California Road, as opportunities arise • Providing bicycle carrying racks on buses. (General Plan Implementation Program C-16). T-11 The City will encourage carpooling and use of public transportation in Temecula through the following measures: • Develop and promote park and ride and Transit Oasis facilities within the City. • Encourage preferred parking for ride sharing and low emission vehicles (General Plan Implementation Program C-18). Environmental Analysis 4-56 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES General Plan FEIR Conclusions Since certification of the General Plan FEIR, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist has been revised to include a new category for Tribal Cultural Resources impacts. This topical area is addressed in the General Plan FEIR's Cultural Resources section. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development in areas not previously considered or at a greater intensity/density than identified in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts related to tribal cultural resources. Specifically, within the Open Space/Conservation Element, Policy 6.10 requires the City to work with the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians to identify and appropriately address cultural resources and tribal sacred sites through the development review process, and Policy 6.11 encourages voluntary landowner efforts to protect cultural resource and tribal sacred sites Environmental Analysis 4-57 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR consistent with State requirements. Additionally, the General Plan FEIR includes Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 to reduce potential impacts related to tribal cultural resources. The Housing Element and Public Safety Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies protecting tribal cultural resources. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new tribal cultural resource impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to tribal cultural resources as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: CR-1 The City shall use the development and environmental review process to: a. Ensure that appropriate archaeological and paleontological surveying and documentation of findings is provided prior to project approval. b. Require effective mitigation where development may affect archaeological or paleontological resources. c. Require that an archaeologist or paleontologist be retained to observe grading activities in areas where the probable presence of archaeological or paleontological resources is identified. d. Enforce CEQA provisions regarding preservation or salvage of significant archaeological and paleontological sites discovered during construction activities. e. Require monitoring of new developments and reporting to the City on completion of mitigation and resource protection measures (General Plan Implementation Program OS- 26). CR-2 The City shall enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the Eastern Information Center of the University of California, Riverside to establish procedures for reviewing the archaeological sensitivity of sites proposed for development (General Plan Implementation Program OS-37). Environmental Analysis 4-58 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Substantial ImpactSubstantial Information No Less Than No „Additional Significant Project Circumstance Requiring Greater Significant ImpactiNo Impact/Requiring Significant Thresholds: EIR Major EIR Revisions Revisions effects than Less Than Information Previous EIR Significant Requiring ImpactMajor ,.. . With an MND Application of Would theproject: Mitigation from FEIR a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or X telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably X foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dears? c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it X has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to theprovider's existing commitments? d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or X otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reductiongoals? e. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and X regulations related to solid waste? General Plan FEIR Conclusions • All new development pursuant to the General Plan will discharge wastewater to the EMWD's Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility. The facility operates in compliance with the applicable State treatment standards. The General Plan will not result in development of any uses that could result in exceeding the established treatment standards. All new development will be required to comply with existing wastewater treatment requirements set forth by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego region and impact will be less than significant. • Buildout of the General Plan will not result in demand for water service that exceeds RCWD's planned future supply. The General Plan FEIR concluded impacts on the RCWD's ability to provide water will be less than significant. However, increased demand by agriculture and other water users within RCWD's service area could lead to an impact on future water supply. Therefore, the General Plan FEIR includes recommended mitigation Environmental Analysis 4-59 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR measures that direct the City to assist RCWD in planning for future water supplies, to promote water conservation programs, and to maximize City use of recycled water. Similarly, buildout of the General Plan will not result in demand for water service that exceeds EMWD's planned future supply. Impact on EMWD's ability to provide water will be less than significant. However, increased demand by other water users in the district's service area could lead to an impact on future water supply. Therefore, mitigation measures are recommended that direct the City to assist EMWD in planning for future water supplies, to promote water conservation programs, and to maximize City use of recycled water. • EMWD's calculates a future treatment capacity of 35 mgd for the Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility service area. Estimated future wastewater treatment demand required to support General Plan buildout is 1 mgd greater than the projected capacity of District facilities serving Temecula. Given that future demand is based upon a very long- term buildout horizon, the General Plan FEIR concluded the 1 mgd difference is not considered significant; mitigation measures are included in the FEIR to provide for continued monitoring and potentially an update of EMWD's master plan to reflect Temecula's projections. • Development projects implementing General Plan land use policy will require construction of additional stormwater drainage facilities throughout the Planning Area. To ensure that adequate flood control capacity is available to support new development, all proposed development projects within the Planning Area are reviewed by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFCWCD), at the request of the City, prior to approval by the City of Temecula or Riverside County. New development projects are required to provide on -site drainage connecting to the City's drainage system and to pay area drainage fees. Drainage fee revenues from the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan are used to support capacity expansion within the local storm drain system. In addition, all proposed development projects are reviewed by the RCFCWCD. Proposed General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs address the impact to City storm drain facilities. Implementation Program GM-9 directs the City to maintain an effective, safe, and environmentally compatible flood control system. The General Plan FEIR concluded that compliance with existing regulations and General Plan Implementation Program GM-9 will ensure a less than significant impact. • Solid waste generation is anticipated to increase associated with General Plan buildout. The City currently offers a residential recycling program that diverts nearly 50 percent of the solid waste generated. Furthermore, the Riverside County Waste Management Department expects to expand the capacity of both El Sobrante and Badlands Sanitary Landfills. The City will also continue to implement solid waste reduction programs in compliance with Section 40050 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code. The General Plan FEIR concluded that although implementation of the General Plan will result in new development and redevelopment within the Planning Area and related increases in solid waste generation, impacts will be less than significant with mitigation. • Each development approved pursuant to General Plan policy will be required to comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to the disposal of solid waste; thus, the General Plan FEIR concluded no adverse impact will result. Environmental Analysis 4-60 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development in areas not previously considered or at a greater intensity/density than identified in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to utilities and service systems as a result of new development and intensification of land uses. Additionally, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure USS-1 and USS-5 ensures cooperation with regional water providers to plan for sufficient water and wastewater capacities; General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure USS-2 considers services that reduce water demand; General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure USS-3 reviews development and redevelopment proposals to ensure adequate water service; General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure USS-4 reduces irrigation water usage and promotes recycled water, and; General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures USS-10, USS-11, and USS-12 provide measures to reduce solid waste. The Housing Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies addressing utilities and service systems The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new utilities and service systems impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to utilities and service systems as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: USS-1 The City shall assist the Rancho California and Eastern Municipal Water Districts in the process of updating their urban water management plans to be responsive to the population and housing unit capacities established by the General Plan (General Plan Implementation Program GM-8). USS-2 The City shall review the adopted Uniform Building Code and require new development projects to include water conservation features to reduce consumption, including, but not limited to: use of reduced -flow plumbing fixtures, low -flow toilets, drip irrigation systems and xeriscape landscaping (General Plan Implementation Program OS-4). USS-3 The City shall ensure that discretionary projects implementing the General Plan (Specific Plans, land divisions, development plans and conditional use permits) comply with California Water Code Section 10910, requiring the preparation of a water supply assessment indicating that a long- term water supply for a 20-year time frame is available. Written acknowledgement that water will be provided by a community or public water system with an adopted urban water management plan that includes consideration of the project's water consumption and supply shall constitute compliance with this requirement (General Plan Implementation Program OS-38). Environmental Analysis 4-61 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR USS-4 The City shall: 1) continue to require drought -tolerant landscaping in new development projects; 2) where feasible, incorporate reclaimed water systems into landscape irrigation plans; 3) continue to implement a recycled water ordinance in accordance with the requirements of Senate Bill 2095, Water Recycling in Landscaping Act; and 4) convert existing City of Temecula non -domestic water uses to recycled water use in accordance with Sections 13550-13556 of the State Water Code when feasible (General Plan Implementation Program OS-7). USS-5 The City shall assist the Eastern Municipal Water District in the process of updating its water master plan for projecting wastewater service to be responsive to the population and housing unit capacities established by the General Plan (General Plan Implementation Program GM-8). USS-10 The City will 1) assist the Riverside County Solid Waste Management Department to implement the County's Solid Waste Management Plan, and when feasible and appropriate, assist the County in locating cost effective and environmentally acceptable solid waste sites and facilities; and 2) promote awareness of recycling options for businesses (General Plan Implementation Program GM-10). USS-11 The City will require incorporation of recycling as a condition of approval for all multi- family residential, commercial and office projects, and will work with the private sector contractor providing solid waste services to ensure that appropriate recycling containers, procedures, and education are readily available (General Plan Implementation Program GM-14). USS-12 The City shall continue to compost green waste collected from landscape and park maintenance (General Plan Implementation Program GM-15). Environmental Analysis 4-62 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.20 WILDFIRE Substantial Changein Changein Information No Less Than No ImpactSubstantial Showing AdditionalSignificant Project Circumstance Requiring EIR Major Greater Significant Impact/No Significant Impact/Requiring EIR effects than Less Than Information Thresholds: Revisions Revisions ImpactMajor Previous EIR Significant Requiring .. With an MND Application of If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very Mitigation from FEIR high fire hazard severity zones, would theproject: a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency X evacuation Ian? b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, X pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) X that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a X result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes? General Plan FEIR Conclusions Since certification of the General Plan FEIR, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist has been revised to include a new category for Wildfire impacts. This topical area is addressed in the General Plan FEIR's Hazards and Hazardous Materials section. • Undeveloped areas, such as in the eastern, southern, and southeastern portions of the Planning Area, have greater fire danger due to expansive areas of vegetation to fuel a fire. Any new development in the Planning Area, no matter how limited, will expose additional people and structures to wildland fire hazards. The City's Hazardous Vegetation Ordinance requires every property owner to remove all hazardous or flammable vegetation on the property constituting a fire hazard that may endanger or damage neighboring property. In addition, the Temecula Fire Department and the County of Riverside Fire Department sponsor outreach and awareness programs to educate residents about fire dangers and whey they can do to protect themselves and their homes. The General Plan Public Safety Element includes policies and implementation programs that direct the City to reduce the potential for dangerous fires by concentrating development in previously developed areas where the risk of wildland fire is lower; to protect hillside areas from expansion of the Environmental Analysis 4-63 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR urban-wildland interface; to encourage residents to plant and maintain drought -resistant, fire -retardant landscape species on slopes to reduce the risk of brush fire and soil erosion; and to work with the City Fire Department to control hazardous vegetation. The FEIR concluded that stringent application of these policies will reduce impact to a less than significant level. Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site -specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City's RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts due to wildfires. Specifically, Policy 1.8 within the Public Safety Element reduces wildfire risk through imposition of site -specific development standards during project review and coordination with the City Fire Department and other organizations, and Implementation Program PS-8 promotes fire prevention in Temecula, including cooperation with the Fire Department, public education programs, and vegetation management efforts. Further, building codes outlined in Title 24 and the City's Municipal Code, the City's Hazardous Vegetation Ordinance, and regional cooperation with the County of Riverside Fire Department, would reduce potential impacts due to wildland fires. These impacts are considered less than significant. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. Within the Introduction section of the Safety Element, new plans and programs were referenced, including the County of Riverside Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJLHMP), the City of Temecula Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), and the Riverside County Climate Action Plan (CAP). Fire Hazards discussion was comprehensively updated to include current information regarding the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), CalFire, Fire Hazard Severity Zones, and major wildland fires in Temecula. Figure PS-3, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA (as Recommended by CalFIRE) was also added. The City has also included a new discussion related to emergency preparedness and hazard mitigation and identified new objectives to address this topic. Additional information related to the MJLHMP, LHMP, and the County's CAP are also included by reference. In accordance with SB 99, the City conducted an evaluation of evacuation routes serving residential developments in hazard areas. This analysis is presented in a separate background report available on the City's website and the results of the analysis, which found that while residential developers may comply with City of Temecula access standards, several residential areas warrant further study and coordination with RCFD and CalFIRE to ensure residents with limited emergency routes are well-educated on evacuation procedures during emergencies. Environmental Analysis 4-64 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR No goals, policies or programs from the current Public Safety Element were eliminated as part of this update. Modifications or additions related to natural hazards were made to Polices 1.8 and 1.9 to further support the goal to minimize injury, loss of life, and damage to property resulting from structural or wildland fire hazards. More specifically, Policy 1.8 supports programs and plans consistent with state law and related to new development in State Responsibility Areas (SRAs) or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) and Policy 1.9 directs the City to reduce the risk of wildfire hazards by working with partners and other agencies on projects and programs like community fire breaks; Policy 4.5 directs the City to locate, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of the VHFHSZ; Policy 4.7 requires the City to coordinate with local, state and federal agency to evaluate and plan for emergency scenarios; Goal 5 states that the City will be a resilient, sustainable, and equitable community where risk resulting from things like climate change will be minimized; Policy 5.1 requires coordination with outside agencies on climate resiliency and adaption strategies; and Policy 5.2 requires the City to monitor climate change - related effects and respond appropriately at the local level. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new wildfire impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to wildfire as a result of the proposed Project. Environmental Analysis 4-65 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR 4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE General Plan FEIR Conclusions As described above, the General Plan FEIR concluded that full implementation of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures for all issue areas analyzed except for Section 5.3 Air Quality (Violate any air quality standard or contributes substantially to an existing air quality violation; Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any criteria pollutant; and Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations) and Section 5.13 Transportation (Causes an intersection to operate at LOS E or F [peak hour ICU greater than 0.90] and Causes a freeway ramp to operate at LOS F [peak hour V/C greater than 1.00]), which were determined to be significant and unavoidable. The General Plan FEIR's background and policy information and environmental impact conclusions are cited throughout this Addendum. Environmental Analysis 4-66 City of Temecula 1 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Analysis of Modified Project Future housing could significantly impact, directly or through habitat modifications, sensitive vegetation communities and/or sensitive plant and wildlife species; refer to Section 4.4 above. Additionally, ground -disturbing activities associated with future development, such as grading or excavation, could unearth undocumented archeological or disturb unknown human remains; refer to Section 4.5 above. Individual project proposals would be subject to review under CEQA, and site -specific biological and cultural surveys would be conducted, as needed, to evaluate potential impacts to such resources. Following compliance with the established regulatory framework, recommended FEIR mitigation measures, and General Plan Policies, no new significant impact to biological or cultural resources or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts would occur with implementation of the Project. The General Plan FEIR determined that cumulative impacts would result in the following areas: short-term and long-term cumulative air quality impacts and cumulative impact on roadways and intersections. All other cumulative impacts were determined to be less than significant. The anticipated housing development would not result in environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. Environmental Analysis 4-67 CITY OF TEMECULA SB 99 ANALYSIS WHITE PAPER Emergency Evacuation Route Analysis Prepared by De Novo Planning Group City of Temecula SB 99 Analysis White Paper In coordination with its focused Public Safety Element Update (2021), the City of Temecula has prepared an analysis consistent with Senate Bill 99 to identify residential developments in hazard areas that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes. The analysis identified six residential areas in high hazard zones that warrant further study. The following is an explanation of the methodology used to map the evacuation routes and identify areas of concern. Definitions & Data Sources Residential Developments General Plan Land Use data from the City of Temecula GIS Open Data Portal were used to determine the location of residential developments: • Rural Residential • Very Low Residential • Low Residential • Low -Medium Residential • Medium Residential • High Residential • Hillside Residential Hazard Areas High Hazard Zones were defined as areas that are in one or more of the following pre -defined hazard zones: FEMA's 100-year flood zone California OES dam inundation area California Geological Survey's Map Sheet 58 Landslide Susceptibility classes 8, 9, or 10 California Geological Survey's Potential Liquefaction and Potential Landslide areas, mapped as part of the California Seismic Hazard Zonation Program CalFire's High, Very High, and Extreme Fire Threat zones CalFire's High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsibility Area CalFire's Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Responsibility Areas These hazard zones were combined into one single "Combined Hazard Area" using ArcGIS merge and dissolve geoprocessing tools. Evacuation Routes Road data obtained from the Riverside County GIS Open Data Portal were utilized to identify points of exit from residential neighborhoods. Road centerlines were divided into four main classes: 1. Interstate — 1-15 2. State Highway— Highway 79 3. Arterials — as defined by Riverside County GIS data "Arterials" 4. Minor/Residential Roads — All other roads not considered "Arterial" by the Riverside County GIS roads dataset. These roads are generally the first roads a resident will encounter when departing their residence Assumptions & Methodology Identification of Residential Developments in Hazard Areas Using ArcGIS, Residential Developments in Hazard Areas were identified by a running a location query to find the parcels with residential general plan designations that intersect the single Combined Hazard Area. All residential parcels were mapped; those parcels within the Combined Hazard Area are identified by a darker outline. Identification of Residential Subdivision Exit Points The goal of this analysis was to find at least two separate points of exit from residential neighborhoods by following a rudimentary roadway network in which vehicles move from Minor/Residential Roads to Arterial, and eventually to a State Route/Interstate. The following assumptions apply: 1. Residential Developments have immediate access to Minor/Residential Roads but are distant from the State Highways and Interstates 2. Arterials connect Minor/Residential Roads to State Highways and Interstates 3. Residential Exit Points are the points where Minor/Residential Roads intersect Arterials, thereby providing eventual access to Highways and Interstates Using ArcGIS, a point file representing the intersections of Minor/Residential and Arterials roads was created. Analysis Upon visual analysis, residential parcels in within the Combined Hazard Area were assigned to one of four categories: 1. One Exit Point with and distance to a Single Arterial (red parcels) 2. One Exit Point directly onto a Single Arterial (orange parcels) 3. Multiple Exit Points with access to a single Arterial (Loop Road) (blue parcels) 4. Multiple Exit Points with access to multiple Arterials (green parcels) Results There is one set of red parcels at the very north end of the planning area that only have one exit point. To get out, these residents would have to use the same local road to get to Washington St. This area also has some orange parcels, which only have one exit point, but have direct access to Washington St. There are a total of six residential areas of concern in high hazard zones that warrant further study. - .t a CITY OF TEMECULA Residential Development in Hazard Areas with Potential Limited Emergency Access Combined Hazard Area* - Interstate L _ City of Temecula - State Highway , = Temecula Planning Area - Arterial Roadway } County Boundary Minor or Residential Road } Residential Parcel in Hazard Residential Parcel not in Area Hazard Area One Exit Point with One Exit Point with Access to a Single Access to a Single Arterial Arterial One Exit Point directly One Exit Point directly onto a Single Arterial onto a Single Arterial Multiple Exit Points with 1 Access to a Single Multiple Exit Points with Access to a Single 79 Arterial (Loop Road) 1 Arterial (Loop Road) Multiple Exit Points with Multiple Exit Points with Access to Multiple Access to Multiple Arterials Arterials f � MURRIFT A T yO PRI . s °ti .°� I ♦"'" of � _ BOREL RD 9V) j- Q 35 OMNI � 1R111ir% 111 ��j I:r ►u, � � i• i 1, i ..►t:.�i�����►f%►i: it�p, i���►�� �n�aln , i►iGiij1� �r, �y,►a���ti,�e� ��1 .v���. ►�...� ). ... RIVERSIDE 0 U N T Y V, t--� I-----� I I � I J .J ' The Combined HazardArea is an undifferentiated 'combination of the following hazards: Areas within Landslide Susceptibility Classes 8, 9, and 10 (CGS Map Sheet 58); Areas within the 100-year flood zone (FEMA); Areas of Potential Liquefaction and Landslide (CGS Seismic Hazard Zonation Program); Areas of High, Very High and Extreme Hazard Threat (Ca1Fire); Areas of Very High Fire Hazard Seventy in Local -ResponsibilityAreas (Ca1Fire); Areas if High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity in State ResponsibilityAreas (Cal Fire); and dam failure inundation areas (CalOES.) as PC RESOLUTION NO.2021-28 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT AND UPDATES TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN (LONG RANGE PLANNING PROJECT NO. LR18-1620) AND APPROVING EIR ADDENDUM NO.2021-01 TO THE GENERAL PLAN" Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine, and declare that: A. The City of Temecula adopted its first Housing Element (Second Cycle) on November 9, 1993. B. The City of Temecula first amended its Housing Element (Third Cycle) on October 8, 2002. C. The City of Temecula adopted a Comprehensive Update of its General Plan on April 12, 2005. D. The City of Temecula amended its Housing Element (Fourth Cycle) on July 27, 2010. E. The City of Temecula amended its Housing Element (Fifth Cycle) on January, 2014. F. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) completed the Sixth Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) on March 4, 2021, with a minor amendment adopted on July 1, 2021. G. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) approved the RHNA allocation on March 22, 2021. H. Government Code Section 65588 establishes October 15, 2021, as the due date for cities located in the SCAG region to submit their 2021-2029 Housing Element Update to the State. I. The City of Temecula must adopt its 2021-2029 Housing Element within 120 days of the above -referenced due date in order to remain on an eight year planning cycle. J. The Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element includes an analysis of potential sites that indicates that the City of Temecula has adequate development capacity under existing zoning designations to meet its RHNA of 4,139 total units and related affordable housing needs for lower and moderate income households. K. On August 17, 2021, the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element was released to the community for public comment and review including to groups that represent lower income and special needs populations in Temecula. L. On August 17, 2021, the City hosted a community open house to introduce the Draft Housing Element and solicit public feedback on the Housing Plan. M. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, codified at Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR § 15000 et seq.), the City is the lead agency for the adoption of the 2021-2029 Housing Element and updates to the Public Safety Element (the Project); and N. This Housing Element Update and Update to the Public Safety Element was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by law. O. The Planning Commission considered the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Update to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan and environmental review on September 15, 2021 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. P. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, Update to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan, and EIR Addendum No. 2021-01 to the General Plan based upon the findings set forth hereunder. Q. All legal preconditions to the adoption of the Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in recommending that the City Council adopt the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, and Update to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan hereby finds, determines and declares that: General Plan Amendment A. The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Minor Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update has been designed to be consistent with State Housing Law, the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for local agencies under jurisdiction of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and to be internally consistent with the other elements of the Temecula General Plan with implementation of the identified programs. The updates to the Public Safety Element are being updated to comply with State law. B. The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Minor Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan will not have a significant impact on the character of the built environment; The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update is compatible with the nature, condition and development of existing uses, buildings and structures and will not adversely affect the existing or planned uses, buildings, or structures. The Housing Element Update contains the goals, policies, and programs that will help guide the production of future housing within the City, in concert with other elements of the General Plan. The Housing Element Update will provide flexibility and opportunity in the development of residential uses to meet the needs of all economic segments of the community within the City. The specific programs of the Housing Element Update will provide opportunity for affordable housing through the identification of appropriate sites and density, provisions for density bonus law, provisions for transitional, supportive, and employee housing, as well as establishment of development standards for emergency shelters. The Housing Element and the City's current General Plan have adequate capacity to accommodate all units. Furthermore, the proposed updates to the Public Safety Element will update the Public Safety Element to comply with State law. In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR has been prepared which concludes that the proposed updates to the General Plan Housing Element and Public Safety Element do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated. None of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present to require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and no additional environmental review is required. C. The nature of the proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Minor Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community; The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update will promote the health, safety, comfort and general welfare of the City and its residents through the goals, policies, and implementation programs geared towards ensuring adequate housing for all income levels in the community. The proposed Housing Element Update complies with all statutory requirements and is internally consistent with the other elements of the General Plan with implementation of the identified programs. The proposed Housing Element will not expose people to an increased risk of negative health or public safety impacts and potential impacts related to the health, safety and general welfare of the community were analyzed in the environmental review and determined to be less than significant as a result of this project. The Housing Element and the City's current General Plan have adequate capacity to accommodate all units. Furthermore, the updates to the Public Safety Element will further enhance safety, in compliance with State law. In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR has been prepared which concludes that the proposed updates to the General Plan Housing Element and Public Safety Element do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated. None of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present to require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and no additional environmental review is required. Section 3. Further Findings. The Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element has been prepared to meet the requirements of State law and local housing objectives, and is consistent with the other elements of the current Temecula General Plan. Section 4. Environmental Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the recommendation for approval of the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Minor Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan, Long Range Planning Project No. LR18- 1620. A. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, staff has reviewed and considered the Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") for the General Plan certified by the City Council on April 12, 2005 (State Clearinghouse No. 2003061041), including the impacts and mitigation measures identified therein. Staff has also reviewed the Harveston Specific Plan Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2019070974), Altair Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2014111029) and Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2013061012). B. In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR (Addendum 2021-01) has been prepared which concludes that the proposed updates to the General Plan Housing Element and Public Safety Element do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated. No new development is permitted under the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update where it is not currently permitted in the General Plan, and all new development analyzed in the Housing Element Update is in areas already designated for residential or mixed use. In addition, no new information of substantial importance has surfaced since the certification of the General Plan EIR. None of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present to require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and no additional environmental review is required. C. Based on the findings set forth in the Resolution, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the General Plan Addendum 202 1 -01 prepared for this project that is attached as Exhibit "A" to the draft City Council resolution. Section 5. Recommendation. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula herby recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution adopting the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan and General Plan Addendum 2021-01 in substantially the same form as attached here to as Exhibit "A". PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 15th day of September 2021. r Laz -x� kw'K Gary Watts, Chairperson ATTEST: P�-= &I uke Watson Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 2021-28 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of September 2021, by the following vote: AYES: 4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Hagel, Ruiz, Telesio, Watts NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: I PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Turley-Trejo Luke Watson Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 2021 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT AND UPDATES TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN (LONG RANGE PLANNING PROJECT NO. LR18-1620) AND APPROVING EIR ADDENDUM NO.2021-01 TO THE GENERAL PLAN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine, and declare that: A. The City of Temecula adopted its first Housing Element (Second Cycle) on November 9, 1993. B. The City of Temecula first amended its Housing Element (Third Cycle) on October 8, 2002. C. The City of Temecula adopted a Comprehensive Update of its General Plan on April 12, 2005. D. The City of Temecula amended its Housing Element (Fourth Cycle) on July 27, 2010. E. The City of Temecula amended its Housing Element (Fifth Cycle) on January, 2014. F. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) completed the Sixth Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) on March 4, 2021, with a minor amendment adopted on July 1, 2021. G. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) approved the RHNA allocation on March 22, 2021. H. Government Code Section 65588 establishes October 15, 2021, as the due date for cities located in the SCAG region to submit their 2021-2029 Housing Element Update to the State. I. The City of Temecula must adopt its 2021-2029 Housing Element within 120 days of the above -referenced due date in order to remain on an eight year planning cycle. J. The Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element includes an analysis of potential sites that indicates that the City of Temecula has adequate development capacity under existing zoning designations to meet its RHNA of 4,139 total units and related affordable housing needs for lower and moderate income households. K. On August 17, 2021, the Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element was released to the community for public comment and review including to groups that represent lower income and special needs populations in Temecula; and L. On August 17, 2021, the City hosted a community open house to introduce the Draft Housing Element and solicit public feedback on the Housing Plan. M. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, codified at Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR § 15000 et seq.), the City is the lead agency for the adoption of the 2021-2029 Housing Element and the update to the Public Safety Element (the Project); and N. This Housing Element Update and Update to the Public Safety Element was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by law. O. The Planning Commission considered the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Update to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan and environmental review on September 15, 2021 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. P. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, Update to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan, and EIR Addendum No. 2021-01 to the General Plan, based upon the findings set forth hereunder. Q. The City Council, at a regular meeting, considered the 2021-2029 Housing Element (Sixth Cycle), and Update to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. R. At the conclusion of the City Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the City Council approved the 2021-2029 Housing Element (Sixth Cycle), and Update to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan, Long Range Planning Project No. LR18-1620 subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder. S. All legal preconditions to the adoption of the Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Further Findings. The City Council, in adopting the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and update to the Public Safety Element hereby finds, determines and declares that: General Plan Amendment A. The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Minor Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update has been designed to be consistent with State Housing Law, the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for local agencies under jurisdiction of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and to be internally consistent with the other elements of the Temecula General Plan with implementation of the identified programs. The updates to the Public Safety Element are being updated to comply with State law. B. The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Minor Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan will not have a significant impact on the character of the built environment; The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update is compatible with the nature, condition and development of existing uses, buildings and structures and will not adversely affect the existing or planned uses, buildings, or structures. The Housing Element Update contains the goals, policies, and programs that will help guide the production of future housing within the City, in concert with other elements of the General Plan. The Housing Element Update will provide flexibility and opportunity in the development of residential uses to meet the needs of all economic segments of the community within the City. The specific programs of the Housing Element Update will provide opportunity for affordable housing through the identification of appropriate sites and density, provisions for density bonus law, provisions for transitional, supportive, and employee housing, as well as establishment of development standards for emergency shelters. The Housing Element and the City's current General Plan have adequate capacity to accommodate all units. Furthermore, the proposed updates to the Public Safety Element will update the Public Safety Element to comply with State law. In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR has been prepared which concludes that the proposed updates to the General Plan Housing Element and Public Safety Element do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated. None of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present to require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and no additional environmental review is required. C. The nature of the proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Minor Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community; The proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update will promote the health, safety, comfort and general welfare of the City and its residents through the goals, policies, and implementation programs geared towards ensuring adequate housing for all income levels in the community. The proposed Housing Element Update complies with all statutory requirements and is internally consistent with the other elements of the General Plan with implementation of the identified programs. The proposed Housing Element will not expose people to an increased risk of negative health or public safety impacts and potential impacts related to the health, safety and general welfare of the community were analyzed in the environmental review and determined to be less than significant as a result of this project. The Housing Element and the City's current General Plan have adequate capacity to accommodate all units. Furthermore, the updates to the Public Safety Element will further enhance safety, in compliance with State law. In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR has been prepared which concludes that the proposed updates to the General Plan Housing Element and Public Safety Element do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated. None of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present to require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and no additional environmental review is required. Section 3. Further Findings. The Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element has been prepared to meet the requirements of State law and local housing objectives, and is consistent with the other elements of the current Temecula General Plan. Section 4. Environmental Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the recommendation for approval of the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Minor Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan, Long Range Planning Project No. LR18-1620. A. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, staff has reviewed and considered the Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") for the General Plan certified by the City Council on April 12, 2005 (State Clearinghouse No. 2003061041), including the impacts and mitigation measures identified therein. Staff has also reviewed the Harveston Specific Plan Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2019070974), Altair Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2014111029) and Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2013061012). B. In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR (Addendum 2021-01) has been prepared which concludes that the proposed updates to the General Plan Housing Element and Public Safety Element do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated. No new development is permitted under the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update where it is not currently permitted in the General Plan, and all new development analyzed in the Housing Element Update is in areas already designated for residential or mixed use. In addition, no new information of substantial importance has surfaced since the certification of the General Plan EIR. None of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present to require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and no additional environmental review is required. C. Based on the findings set forth in the Resolution, the City Council herby adopts General Plan Addendum 2021-01 prepared for this project. Section 4. Adoption. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby adopts the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, Updates to the Public Safety Element of the General Plan and General Plan Addendum 2021-01 in substantially the same form as attached here to as Exhibit "A„ PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 12th day of October, 2021. Maryann Edwards, Mayor ATTEST: Randi Johl, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2021- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 12th day of October, 2021, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Randi Johl, City Clerk C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-1 PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT INTRODUCTION uality of life in Temecula is influenced in part by the sense of security that exists among City residents and businesses. The community must be prepared to address issues such as uncontrollable natural hazards, crime and violence, and other human caused hazards. The Public Safety Element establishes goals, policies, and a plan to identify potential hazards and to ensure adequate, coordinated, and timely response to public safety concerns. The provision of public services which would respond to these hazards are addressed in the Growth Management/Public Facilities Element. PURPOSE OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT The purpose of the Public Safety Element is to identify and address features or characteristics in or near Temecula that represent a potential hazard to community residents, structures, public facilities, and infrastructure. The Public Safety Element establishes policies to minimize potential danger to residents, workers, and visitors, and identifies actions needed to manage crisis situations, such as earthquakes, fires, and floods. The Element also focuses on preventing criminal activity before it occurs. In addition specific policies and programs are provided to regulate development in hazard-prone areas. Continuing education for City officials and residents about emergency preparedness is also addressed. SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT The Public Safety Element satisfies the requirements of State planning law and is a mandated component of the City’s General Plan. Government Code section 65302(g) sets forth a list of hazards that the Element must cover, if they pertain to conditions in the City. These hazards include: Seismically induced conditions including ground shaking, surface rupture, ground failure, tsunami, seiche, and dam failure Slope instability leading to mudslides and landslides Subsidence, liquefaction, and other geologic hazards Q C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-2 Flooding Wild land and urban fires Evacuation routes State law also allows communities to address additional safety issues. The following additional issues are addressed in the Element: Criminal activities Hazardous materials Nuclear hazards from the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station The Public Safety Element must be consistent with the other General Plan elements, and most closely relates to the Land Use and Circulation Elements. Potential hazards are identified and action programs established in the Public Safety Element to avoid or mitigate public safety hazards associated with planned development. The Land Use Element contains policies to ensure that environmental conditions, including hazards, are considered in all land use decisions. The distribution of residential and other sensitive land uses on the Land Use Policy Map is designed to avoid areas where hazardous conditions have been identified. Evacuation routes utilizing the City circulation system are also described in the Public Safety Element. The provision of viable evacuation routes within the City is inextricably linked to the planned circulation system described in the Circulation Element. RELATED PLANS AND PROGRAMS There is a complex body of State and federal legislation relating to the protection of public health and safety and environmental resources. The following section briefly summarizes related legislation that guides City decision-making with regard to land use and physical development. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) GUIDELINES The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was adopted by the State legislature in response to a public mandate for a thorough environmental analysis of projects that might adversely affect the environment. Provisions of the law, required procedures, and any subsequent analysis are described in the CEQA Statutes and Guidelines. Safety hazards are recognized as environmental impacts under CEQA. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-3 Continued implementation of CEQA will ensure that City officials and the general public have information describing assessment and mitigation of potentially significant safety impacts associated with private and public development projects. ALQUIST-PRIOLO EARTHQUAKE FAULT ZONING ACT The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act requires the State Geologist to identify earthquake fault zones along traces of both recently and potentially active major faults. Cities and counties that contain such zones must inform the public regarding the location of these zones, which are usually one-quarter mile or less in width. Proposed development plans within these earthquake fault zones must be accompanied by a geotechnical report prepared by a qualified geologist describing the likelihood of surface rupture. SEISMIC HAZARDS MAPPING ACT The purpose of the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (Public Resources Code Section 2690, et. seq.) is to reduce the threat to public safety and minimize the loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating seismic hazards. The Act directs the State Geologist to identify and map areas prone to earthquake hazards of liquefaction, earthquake-induced landslides and amplified ground shaking, and requires site-specific geotechnical investigations to be conducted identifying the hazard and formulating mitigation measures prior to permitting most developments designed for human occupancy within Zones of Required Investigation. COBEY-ALQUIST FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT ACT The Cobey-Alquist Floodplain Management Act encourages local governments to plan, adopt, and enforce land use regulations for floodplain management, in order to protect people and property from flooding hazards. The Act also identifies requirements which jurisdictions must meet in order to receive State financial assistance for flood control. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) Temecula participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which is administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). NFIP provides federal flood insurance and federally financed loans for property owners in flood prone areas. To qualify for federal flood insurance, the City must C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-4 identify flood hazard areas and implement a system of protective controls. RIVERSIDE COUNTY HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN Developed pursuant to the Tanner Act (AB 2948), the Riverside County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (HWMP) identifies current and projected future hazardous waste generation and management needs throughout the County. The HWMP provides a framework for the development of facilities to manage hazardous wastes, i.e. facility siting criteria. The HWMP also includes a Households Hazardous Waste Element that is designed to divert household hazardous wastes from the County’s landfills. The County HWMP addresses only those hazardous waste issues with which local governments have responsibilities, namely land use decisions. The County and cities are required to implement facility siting policies and criteria within local planning and permitting processes. The City is required to take one of three actions: Adopt a City hazardous waste management plan Incorporate by reference all applicable portions of the County Plan into its General Plan Enact an ordinance requiring all applicable land use permitting and decisions to be consistent with the siting criteria set forth in the County HWMP The City has adopted by reference the applicable portions of the County HWMP. SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION (SONGS) The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) is located near the southern boundary of Orange County, approximately 25 miles west of Temecula. SONGS is a jointly owned enterprise among Southern California Edison, San Diego Gas and Electric, and the cities of Riverside and Anaheim. For hazard mitigation purposes, the federal and State governments have created three levels of emergency zones surrounding nuclear facilities: Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ): The federal government requires that communities within approximately 10 miles of a nuclear power plant be included in an EPZ. Within this zone, specific emergency protective plans have been developed. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-5 Public Education Zone (PEZ): The State of California has defined a broader area between 10 to 20 miles from a plant as a PEZ. Within this zone, the public is informed on preparedness plans. The distance from the plant, however, would make evacuation highly unlikely. Ingestion Pathway Zone (IPZ): Temecula is located within this zone which covers the areas within 50 miles of SONGS. The purpose of this zone is to prevent the accidental ingestion of deposited radioactive materials by humans and livestock. Southern California Edison, who operates SONGS, will provide notification to all affected jurisdictions within 15 minutes of declaration of any emergency. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (MJLHMP) AND TEMECULA LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (LHMP) The County of Riverside Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJLHMP) was adopted in 2018. The purpose of the MJLHMP is to identify the County’s hazards, review and assess past disaster occurrences, estimate the probability of future occurrences and set goals to mitigate potential risks to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural and man-made hazards. While the County is responsible for preparing and adopting the MJLHMP, the City of Temecula is responsible for preparing and adopting the annex to the County’s plan – more specifically, the 2017 City of Temecula Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex (LHMP). The planning process evaluated the potential impact of each identified hazard on the county, cities, special districts, and tribes. All participating jurisdictions helped establish a list of potential mitigation efforts (via their LHMP Annex) and prioritized those efforts based on the needs of their jurisdiction. In addition, each participating jurisdiction developed a specific hazard mitigation strategy based on information from 2012 through 2017. CITY OF TEMECULA CODES The City has adopted the California Building Code, California Mechanical Code, Uniform Fire Code, the National Electrical Code and other related codes that contain structural requirements for existing and new buildings. The codes are designed to ensure structure integrity during seismic and other hazardous events and to prevent personal injury, loss of life and substantial property damage. To protect the public, planned development in Temecula is subject to these structural codes. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY CLIMATE ACTION PLAN (CAP) The County of Riverside approved an update to their CAP in 2019. The 2019 CAP Update builds upon the GHG reduction strategies in the 2015 Climate Action Plan and refines the County's efforts to meet greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction strategies, specifically for the years 2035 and 2050. It also includes measures to prepare for potential climate-related impacts and to comply with state and federal legislation, including Gov. Code § 65302(g)(4)(C). Climate-related impacts are not stand-alone hazards but may change the frequency and intensity of the other hazards. The CAP provides resources, information, and strategies to reduce these impacts, resulting in overall risk reduction. PUBLIC SAFETY PLAN As in all communities, human activities and natural conditions occurring in Temecula have an effect on residents’ quality of life. Providing an environment where businesses and residents can prosper and feel safe, and being prepared for emergency situations are essential. The City can minimize hazards and protect public health and private property through emergency preparedness planning. NATURAL HAZARDS Natural hazards addressed in the Public Safety Element include seismic, geologic, flood, dam failure and wild land fire hazards. SEISMIC HAZARDS The Elsinore fault traverses the City, which has historically experienced earthquakes of moderate magnitude (See Figure PS-1). The Elsinore fault zone is one of the largest in southern California, and in historical times, has been one of the quietest. The southeastern extension of the Elsinore fault zone, the Laguna Salada fault, ruptured in 1892 in a magnitude 7.0 earthquake, but the main trace of the Elsinore fault zone has only seen one historical event greater than magnitude 5.2--the magnitude 6.0 earthquake of 1910 near Temescal Valley, which produced no known surface rupture and did little damage. Other faults surrounding Temecula include the San Andreas, San Jacinto, San Gabriel, Newport-Inglewood, Sierra Madre-Santa Susana-Cucamonga, Rose Canyon, Coronado Banks, San Diego Trough and San Clemente Island faults. ELSIN O RE FA ULTS E L SIN O R E F A U L T S ELSIN O RE FAULTS Rainbow Canyon Rd}|ÿ79 Pechanga Entertainment Center City of Murrieta Sphere of Influence ØØ#" Berenda R d L a Sere na W y Lom a L in d a R d City of Murrieta County of Riverside Lake Skinner ØØ#" ÛÛÛ }}ÿ ØØ#" W hite w o od Rd Alta M u r r ie ta D rWas hin gto n A v e Calle De AmorSpecili Rd Del R e y R d P a u b a R d R a n ch o C aliforn ia R d R a n c ho Vista Rd Meadows PkyBaxter Rd Briggs Rd Sky Canyon Dr Pourroy RdLeon RdBorel Rd Pat Rd Bonaire W yS parta Ln Mc Colery RdWolf Valley RdAlle n Rd Maddalena RdCherry StJudith StHunter Rd D o u gla ss A v e Pourroy RdJa c kso n A v e Thompson RdMenifee RdJ e ff e r s o n A v eMa dis o n A v e N ic o la s R d Bento n Rd Butterfield Stage RdWinchester RdLinda Ro s e a R d Vista Del G uava StKeller Rd Buck Rd De Porto la Rd Au ld Rd Ynez R d Murrieta Hot Springs Rd C al le Contento M a d e r a D e P l a y a D r P a u b a R d Calle Contento R a n c h o C a lif o r n i a R d Vino WyPourroy RdBriggs RdElliot RdLeon RdLee Ln Liberty Rd Y n ez R dDi a z R d La S e r ena Wy Ma r garita Rd M argarita R d Y n e z Rd M a r g a r i t a RdDeer Hollow Wy Butterfi el d Stage Rd P echanga ParkwayJean N icho las Rd Promont ory Pky RdMonte Anza RdMe a d o w s P k y V ia N or t e Via Barranca R a n c h o C al i f o r n i a R d Lo s A la m os RdVia Santa RosaVia Vaquero RdA v e n i d a D el Oro W illow s A ve N i c o l a s R d Via N orte W inchester Rd Ra nc h o C a l i f o r n i a RdSantia go R d De Po rto la R d V al l e j o A v e R edhaw k P kyVail Ranch P k y A nz a R d Murrieta Hot Springs RdC I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-7 µ C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-8 PLANS IN ACTION Proposed development projects in the Elsinore fault zone require evaluation and a writ-ten report specific to the site, prepared by a licensed geologist. Structures for human occupancy cannot be placed over the fault and must be set back from the fault (generally 50 feet). Fault Rupture. The Elsinore fault zone is an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, governed by specific State development criteria designed to prevent damage associated with ground surface rupture. Structures intended for human occupancy are not permitted on an active fault. Before a project can be permitted, the City requires a geologic investigation to demonstrate that proposed buildings will not be constructed across the fault. Ground Shaking. Severe ground shaking is possible in Temecula due to the presence of loosely consolidated alluvial soils. Ground shaking causes structural damage, and is the major cause of soil instability hazards, such as liquefaction, subsidence, or slope failure. Riverside County has established Ground Shaking Zones indicating the relative level of risk based on distance from faults and geologic characteristics of an area. Development proposals are evaluated using guidelines, which indicate the suitability of locating land uses in various ground shaking zones. The Temecula Planning Area is located in Ground Shaking Zone II, where shaking is expected to vary from moderate to intense levels in the event of an earthquake, depending on the composition of underlying geologic formations, the earthquake’s epicenter, and the order of magnitude of the seismic event. PLANS IN ACTION The only remaining URM structure in Old Town, the Temecula Merchantile Building (1902), has been retrofitted to meet current seismic safety standards. Unreinforced masonry (URM) structures and adobe block construction are particularly susceptible to failure and/or collapse during an earthquake. New structures conforming to California Building Code standards can withstand ground shaking with little or no structural damage. Older buildings can also be retrofitted to improve structural integrity. To identify structures most prone to failure, the City conducted a seismic inventory of structures in Old Town, where buildings are least likely to be able to withstand moderate ground shaking. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Ground shaking following an earthquake leads to other potential geologic hazards such as liquefaction, landslides, and subsidence. The potential for these hazards depends upon the severity of ground shaking and underlying geologic conditions. Temecula is subject to the following potential geologic hazards. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-9 Liquefaction. The potential for liquefaction in an area is a function of soil type and depth of groundwater. Poorly consolidated soils combine with groundwater during an earthquake, losing their shear strength and taking on the properties of a heavy liquid. This process, termed liquefaction, can result in the loss of foundation support, ground failure due to lateral spreading, and settlement of affected soils. Three general conditions must be met for liquefaction to occur: (1) strong ground shaking of relatively long duration; (2) loose, or unconsolidated, recently deposited sediments consisting primarily of silty sand and sand; and (3) water saturated sediments within about 50 feet of the surface. PLANS IN ACTION California law requires disclosure of Liquefaction, Landslide, and Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault zones as a part of all real estate transactions within identified areas. As shown in Figure PS-1, there is a possibility that liquefaction could occur in the Temecula area, particularly along Santa Gertrudis and Temecula Creeks. California law requires identification of Liquefaction Zones where the stability of foundation soils must be investigated, and countermeasures undertaken in the design and construction of buildings for human occupancy. Landslides. Slope stability is related to a variety of factors including steepness; strength of geologic materials to resist the downward pull of gravity; characteristics of bedding planes, joints and faults; surface and ground water conditions; and other factors. Landslides are most likely to occur on hillside locations where rock strata parallels surface slopes, high clay content absorbs excess water, displacement has fractured a fault zone, or the base of a slope has been removed. Although no recent landslides have occurred in the area, potential landslide conditions exist in hillside areas in southwest Temecula where existing slopes are greater than 15 percent (see Figure PS-1). California law requires identification of Landslide Zones where the stability of hill slopes must be evaluated, and countermeasures undertaken in the design and construction of buildings for human occupancy. Subsidence. Subsidence occurs when earth material shrinks due to natural or artificial removal of underlying support. This process occurs in poor, unconsolidated soils and poorly compacted fill areas. The potential for subsidence exists along Santa Gertrudis and Temecula Creeks. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-10 Erosion. The underlying surficial geology in Temecula is predominantly composed of well-drained fine sandy loams, sandy loams and gravelly silt loams. Soils characterized by low permeability or high runoff are susceptible to erosion. Additionally, the well- drained alluvium surfaces are susceptible to wind erosion. PLANS IN ACTION The City enforces State seismic design guidelines and building codes, works with property owners to rehabilitate hazardous buildings, and will prepare new hillside development standards. The City will enact programs to reduce geologic hazards and protect public safety. To minimize hazards resulting from earthquakes, the most recent State seismic guidelines will be implemented for structural design. During the review of development proposals involving steep slopes, grading, unstable soils and other hazardous conditions, surveys of soil and geologic conditions by a state-licensed engineering geologist will be required. Based on the results of the survey, mitigation measures will be incorporated into projects to minimize geologic hazards. The City will take actions to make seismic and geologic hazard mitigation a part of land use planning efforts, such as working with property owners to remediate hazardous buildings, requiring disclosure of hazard zone status as part of real estate transactions, working with County and State agencies to monitor and compile information on seismic hazards, and adopting hillside development standards. PLANS IN ACTION Specific building standards, described in the flood damage prevention and floodplain management regulations within the City Development Code, apply to flood prone areas, including anchoring, use of flood resistant building materials, use of adequate drainage paths, and elevating the structure to or above the base flood elevation. FLOOD HAZARDS Flood hazards in Temecula can be divided into three categories: natural flooding, dam failure, and mud debris flows. Natural Flooding. Figure PS-2 identifies areas of potential flood hazards within the Planning Area. Temecula contains several FEMA Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). These areas, corresponding to the 100-year floodplain, have the potential to become flooded when major rainstorms cause stream overflows. Murrieta Creek is the most flood-prone of the Temecula creeks. However, Temecula Creek, Pechanga Creek, Tucalota Creek, Long Valley Wash, and Santa Gertrudis Creek could also be subjected to flooding. Rainbow Canyon Rd}|ÿ79 Pechanga Entertainment Center City of Murrieta Sphere of Influence ØØ#" Berenda R d L a Serena W y Lom a L in d a R d City of Murrieta County of Riverside Lake Skinner ØØ#" ÛÛÛ }}ÿ ØØ#" W hite w o od Rd Alta M u r r ie ta D rWas hin gto n A v e Calle De AmorSpecili Rd Del R e y R d P a u b a R d R a n ch o C aliforn ia R d R a n c h o Vista Rd Meadows PkyBaxter Rd Briggs Rd Sky Canyon Dr Pourroy RdLeon RdBorel Rd Pat Rd Bonaire W yS parta L n Mc Colery RdWolf Valley RdAllen Rd Maddalena RdCherry StJudith StHunter Rd D o u gla ss A v e Pourroy RdJa c kso n A v e Thompson RdMenifee RdJ e ff e r s o n A v eMa diso n A v e N ic o la s R d Benton Rd Butterfield Stage RdWinchester RdLinda Ro s e a R d Vista Del G uava StKeller Rd Buck Rd De Portola Rd A uld Rd Ynez R d Murrieta Hot Springs Rd C al le Contento M a d e r a D e P l a y a D r P a u b a R d Calle Contento R a n c h o C a lif o r n i a R d Vino WyPourroy RdBriggs RdElliot RdLeon RdLee Ln Liberty Rd Y n ez R dDi a z R d La S e r ena Wy Ma r garita Rd M argarita R d Y n e z Rd M a r g a r i t a RdDeer Hollow Wy Butterfi el d Stage Rd P echanga ParkwayJean Nicholas Rd Promont ory Pky RdMonte Anza RdMe a d o w s P k y Vi a N or t e Via Barranca R a n c h o C al i f o r n i a R d Lo s A la m os RdVia Santa RosaVia Vaquero RdA v e n i d a Del Oro W illow s A ve N i c o l a s R d Via N orte W inchester Rd Ranc h o C a l i f o r n i a RdSantia go R d D e Po rto la R d V a ll e j o A v e R edhaw k P kyVail Ranch P k y A nz a R d M urrieta Hot Springs RdC I T Y O F T E M E C U L A G E N E R A L P L A N PS-11 µ C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-12 PLANS IN ACTION Temecula participates in the NFIP, enforces Development Code regulations regarding development in the floodplain and floodway, and maintains a dam inundation evacuation plan. Dam Failure. Flooding from dam failure can result from natural and human causes including earthquakes, erosion, improper siting and/or design and rapidly rising floodwater during heavy storms. The type of failure, ranging from instantaneous to gradual, is dependent on the building material of the dam. Dam failure can potentially cause loss of life and property damage. Other effects include displacement of persons residing in the inundation path and damage to infrastructure. Three dams are located in areas surrounding Temecula: Lake Skinner is a 43,800-acre feet earthen dam located northeast of Temecula. Failure of the Lake Skinner Dam would result in flooding along Tucalota Creek and Benton Road. Vail Lake is located to the east of Temecula. Dam failure of this 51,000-acre foot facility would cause flooding in the Pauba and Temecula Valleys. Interstate 15 and an adjacent 3- mile area would also flood. Diamond Valley Lake, impounded by two earthen dams, is the largest reservoir in Southern California and is located north of Temecula. Failure of the western dam would result in flooding in the northern parts of the Planning Area. The failure of Lake Skinner or Diamond Valley Lake could also result in substantial flooding along parts of Santa Gertrudis and Warm Springs Creeks. Areas along I-15 and Murrieta Creek could also be substantially affected. Mud and Debris Flows. Mud and debris flows originate in hillside areas characterized by deep topsoil and/or poor drainage. The potential for mud and debris flows exists in the hilly southern and western portions of Temecula. The City will continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which makes flood insurance available to affected property owners within the 100-year floodplain. The City will also review development plans for projects within the floodplain, to ensure compliance with City and FEMA floodplain development requirements. No development of any kind will be allowed in the floodway portion of the 100-year floodplain. The City will maintain a Dam Inundation Evacuation Plan, will update the Multi-Hazard Functional Plan as needed to address flood hazards, and will coordinate with the State Office of Emergency Services to ensure that dam safety plans reflect the level of development within the community. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-13 PLANS IN ACTION The Temecula General Plan identifies the general location and distribution of existing and planned land uses throughout the community, including in very high fire hazard severity zones and in state responsibility areas. Residential and nonresidential development, including roads and utilities, are planned for development in these areas. All new development is required to comply with the standards of the Temecula Municipal Code, which meet or exceed title 14, CCR, division 1.5, chapter 7, subchapter 2, articles 1-5 (commencing with section 1270) (SRA Fire Safe Regulations) and title 14, CCR, division 1.5, chapter 7, subchapter 3, article 3 (commencing with section 1299.01). The goals, policies, and implementation actions contained in this Public Safety Element are designed to protect existing and new development located in hazardous fire areas and any new critical facilities should be located outside of VHFHSZs, if possible. FIRE HAZARDS Temecula is subject to both natural and urban fires. The Planning Area is surrounded by rolling foothills and mountains subject to potential natural wild land fires. The Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), through a cooperative agreement, provides fire protection, fire prevention, and emergency medical rescue services in the City of Temecula. Five fire stations are located within the City limits, and the Temecula Division encompasses three Riverside County Fire Department stations for a total of eight stations within the Temecula Division. Mutual Aid agreements with county, state, and federal government agencies further allow the City, and any other participating agency, to request additional resources depending on the complexity and needs of a given incident, such as wildfires. Fire Hazard Severity Zones. The State has charged CAL FIRE with the identification of Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) within State Responsibility Areas. In addition, CAL FIRE must recommend draft Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) identified within any Local Responsibility Areas. The FHSZ maps are used by the State Fire Marshal as a basis for the adoption of applicable building code standards. The Planning Area includes both Local Responsibility Areas and State Responsibility Areas (within the Sphere of Influence), with portions of both Local and State Responsibility Areas being designated as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Figure PS-3 shows Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Temecula. Major Wildland Fires in Temecula. Due to the dry weather in Temecula, brush fires are more common on hot days. In August 2012, Aguanga fires invaded a community nearby Temecula and the City became the evacuation center for many of the individuals that had to evacuate. Emergency response personnel and local residents were frightened at the possibility that the fire may reach the City of Temecula. The fire burned 3,000 acres within 10 hours. This fire was difficult to contain. August, one of the hottest months for Southern California, assisted the fire expansion. Incidents such as this have been common throughout the years. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-14 Smaller fires also caused a big disruption in the City as well. The City has endured many small brush fires that start on the hillsides that run parallel to the freeway that cause traffic jams. Many of these fires are controlled in a timely manner because of Cal Fire. Wild Land Fires. Fire in undeveloped areas results from the ignition of accumulated brush and vegetation. The most critical times of year for wildland fires are late summer and fall when Santa Ana winds bring hot, dry desert air into the region. The air temperature quickly dries vegetation, thereby increasing the amount of natural fuel. Development pressures increase the threat of wildland fire on human populations and property as development pushes to the fringes of major forests and brush areas. Increased human presence in wildland areas likewise increases the potential for human-induced wildland fires. Urban Fires. The predominant land use in the Temecula area is low density residential development. The area has experienced rapid development in past decades, and this trend is expected to continue. As the number of structures increases, so does the incidence of fire. Building conditions that affect fire control include: type and use of structure; area of building; number of stories; roof covering materials; and adjacent uses. Certain development patterns pose more difficult fire problems. These include: multi-story, wood frame, high density apartment development; large continuous developed areas with combustible roofing materials; and facilities that use and/or store hazardous materials. Several older residential tracts in the City feature wood shake roofs, which increase the potential for both ignition and spread of fire. Local Ordinance Requirements. The City of Temecula Municipal Code meets or exceeds title 14, CCR, division 1.5, chapter 7, subchapter 2, articles 1-5 (commencing with section 1270) (SRA Fire Safe Regulations) and title 14, CCR, division 1.5, chapter 7, subchapter 3, article 3 (commencing with section 1299.01) (Fire Hazard Reduction Around Buildings and Structures Regulations) for SRAs and/or VHFHSZs. Temecula The State of California and the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy of data or maps. Neither the State nor the Department shall be liable under any circumstances for any direct, special, incidental, or consequential damages with respect to any claim by any user or third party on account of, or arising from, the use of data or maps. Obtain FRAP maps, data, metadata and publications on the Internet at http://frap.cdf.ca.gov For more information, contact CAL FIRE-FRAP, PO Box 944246, Sacramento, CA 94244-2460, (916) 327-3939. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor, State of California Mike Chrisman, Secretary for Natural Resources, The Natural Resources Agency Del Walters, Director, Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Government Code 51175-89 directs the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) to identify areas of very high fire hazard severity zones within Local Responsibility Areas (LRA). Mapping of the areas, referred to as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ), is based on data and models of, potential fuels over a 30-50 year time horizon and their associated expected fire behavior, and expected burn probabilities to quantify the likelihood and nature of vegetation fire exposure (including firebrands) to buildings. Details on the project and specific modeling methodology can be found at http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/projects/hazard/methods.htm. Local Responsibility Area VHFHSZ maps were initially developed in the mid-1990s and are now being updated based on improved science, mapping techniques, and data. In late 2005 to be effective in 2008, the California Building Commission adopted California Building Code Chapter 7Arequiring new buildings in VH FHSZs to use ignition resistant construction methods and materials. These new codesinclude provisions to improve the ignition resistance of buildings, especially from firebrands. The updated very high fire hazard severity zones will be used by building officials for new building permits in LRA. The updated zones will also be used to identify property whose owners must comply with natural hazards disclosure requirements at time of property sale and 100 foot defensible space clearance. It is likely that the fire hazard severity zones will be used for updates to the safety element of general plans. This specific map is based on a geographic information system dataset that depicts final CAL FIRE recommendations for Very High FHSZs within the local jurisdiction. The process of finalizing these boundaries involved an extensive local review process, the details of which are available at http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/projects/hazard/btnet/ (click on "Continue as guest without logging in"). Local government has 120 days to designate, by ordinance, very high fire hazard severity zones within its jurisdiction after receiving the recommendation. Local government can add additional VHFHSZs. There is no requirement for local government to report their final action to CAL FIRE when the recommended zones are adopted. Consequently, users are directed to the appropriate local entity (county, city, fire department, or Fire Protection District) to determine the status of the local fire hazard severity zone ordinance. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA As Recommended by CAL FIRE Projection Albers, NAD 1983 Scale 1: 22,000 at 36" x 36" December 21, 2009 © 0 2 Miles 0 3 Kilometers This map was developed using data products such as parcel and city boundaries provided by local government agencies. In certain cases, this includes copyrighted geographic information. The maps are for display purposes only - questions and requests related to parcel or city boundary data should be directed to the appropriate local government entity. DATA SOURCES CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZL06_3) MAP ID: FHSZL_c33_Temecula Fire Hazard Severity Zones County Boundary Parcels City Boundary Local Responsibility Area State or Federal Responsibility Areas VHFHSZ Non-VHFHSZ VHFHSZ Non-VHFHSZ ȱȬř C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-16 PLANS IN ACTION The Fire Department reviews development plans to be sure new structures are safe, and conducts public education and outreach activities. The City also works closely with local water districts to ensure water pressure is adequate for fire fighting purposes. Areas posing a significant risk to the City are subject to the California Public Resources Code, Sections 4291-4299, which require property owners to conduct periodic maintenance to reduce the fire danger. The City will continue to reduce the potential for dangerous fires by coordinating with the RCFD to conduct fire hazard education, and administer fire protection and fuel modification programs. The current Uniform Fire Code will be used to prevent structural fire hazards. HUMAN ACTIVITY HAZARDS Human activity hazards addressed in the Safety Plan include hazardous materials and nuclear power production. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PLANS IN ACTION The City participates in the Riverside County Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) collection program in accordance with the California Integrated Solid Waste Management Act of 1989. County Environmental Health (EH) personnel, in conjunction with the Fire Department, respond to hazardous materials incidents, and assist County District Attorney to investigate environmental crimes and respond to illegal hazardous waste disposal complaints. Hazardous materials are used in Temecula for a variety of purposes, including service industries, small businesses, schools and households. Many chemicals used in household cleaning, construction, dry cleaning, film processing, landscaping, and automotive maintenance and repair are considered hazardous. Accidents can also occur in the production, use, transport and disposal of hazardous waste. In order to effectively manage hazardous materials and wastes, the City implements applicable portions of the Riverside County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (HWMP). Both the federal and State governments require all businesses that handle more than a specified amount of hazardous materials to submit an annual business plan to the local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). The CUPA with responsibility for the City of Temecula is the Riverside County Environmental Health Department. The City will work to minimize accidents and health risks from hazardous materials using the following approaches: C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-17 Cooperate with federal, State, and County agencies to effectively regulate the management of hazardous materials and waste. Amend project applications to include requirements for submittal of hazardous waste information. Establish roadway transportation routes for conveyance of hazardous materials. Cooperate with the Certified United Program Agency (CUPA) for Temecula (the Riverside County Environmental Health Department) and the Riverside County Fire Department to administer risk management plans for businesses within the City. Implement the Multi-Hazard Functional Plan for accidents involving hazardous materials. NUCLEAR POWER PRODUCTION The San Onofre Nuclear Generating System (SONGS) is located on the Camp Pendleton U.S. Marine Corps Base in San Diego County, approximately 25 miles west of Temecula. SONGS operations are regulated by FEMA and the California Office of Emergency Services (OES). An Interjurisdictional Planning Committee (IPC), comprised of several local jurisdictions, was established to coordinate emergency response plans. SONGS byproducts are radioactive, with the exception of small quantities of radioactive gas released into the air and liquids into the Pacific Ocean. The releases are monitored by SONGS personnel. According to SONGS, radiation exposure due to material releases is less than the typical exposure from natural background radiation. The two most likely sources of radiation contamination are incidents involving transport of radioactive materials, and uncontrolled releases at the plant site. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-18 PLANS IN ACTION Temecula’s Multi-Hazard Functional Plan provides strategies to deal with potential emergencies related to SONGS. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has identified the area surrounding every nuclear generating station as an Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ). The State of California has defined the area outside, and adjacent to the EPZ as a Public Education Zone (PEZ). The federal government establishes the area with a 50-mile radius around every nuclear generating station as an Ingestion Pathway Zone (IPZ). The Temecula planning area is located within the IPZ of the San Onofre Station. Education programs coordinated by the State and Southern California Edison are administered in this zone to ensure that residents are prepared for any potential problems associated with the facility. SAFETY AND SECURITY PLANS IN ACTION When property owners present development proposals, the City encourages the use of crime preventive defensible space and lighting concepts to deter crime. Criminal activity in Temecula is lower than in some other parts of Riverside County. Protecting residents and businesses from criminal activity is a priority in Temecula. Police protection is provided by the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department (RCSD). Temecula has three store-front office locations (Old Town Temecula, Promenade Mall, and Temecula Town Center). The City will ensure that contracted staffing levels are compatible with the City population and needs. Crime prevention programs include police services for residents and businesses, and citizen-based volunteer programs and patrols. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND HAZARD MITIGATION Many natural and man-made events and processes carry the risk of hazard to life and property. Natural hazards arise from a community’s many physical relationships to the natural environment. Hazard risk also results from human-caused intentional acts and disruption or failure of technology. A resilient community has the capacity to maintain critical functions during hazard events as well as adapt to and reduce future hazard risks. Hazard mitigation is any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to life and property from hazard events. An effective response to natural and human-caused disasters requires planning, education, coordination and training by multiple government agencies and the public. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-19 CLIMATE ADAPTATION Riverside County’s 2019 Climate Action Plan (CAP) provides an updated greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory, as well as measures to reduce GHG emissions, prepare for potential climate-related impacts, and to comply with state and federal legislation, including Gov. Code § 65302(g)(4)(C).. Some degree of climate change will occur regardless of the City’s effort to reduce and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. The City will need to adapt to these changes within the context of the community’s environmental and socioeconomic system. Forecasted effects to Riverside County from climate change include increased temperatures and precipitation extremes (i.e., more severe periods of drought and flooding). Exposure to these events can leave a community vulnerable to an increased rate of wildland fires, flooding, reduced air quality, availability of fresh water, and negative impacts on wildlife. All of these effects can potentially generate multiple concomitant effects on public health and safety. The State requires local jurisdictions to integrate climate adaption into the general plan to support the State’s overall climate adaption strategy. The City will develop climate resiliency and adaptation strategies and work with stakeholders on amendments to relevant planning documents to address this issue. HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING Local Emergency Preparedness Plans serve as extensions of the California Emergency Plan and the Emergency Resource Management Plan. The City has an adopted LHMP as part of the County’s MJLHMP to ensure the effective management of City personnel and resources in responding to emergency situations stemming from natural disasters, technological incidents, and nuclear defense emergencies. The plan includes a responsibility matrix that delineates specific responsibilities to City departments or personnel in the event of an emergency. The plan also includes a comprehensive hazard analysis that addresses the following potential hazards: earthquake, hazardous material incident, flooding, dam failure, major fire/wildfire, nuclear incident, and transportation incident. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-20 PLANS IN ACTION The Fire and Police Departments educate residents and businesses about appropriate act-ions to safeguard life and property during and after emergencies through distribution of brochures, presentations to civic groups, and instruction in local schools. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS The LHMP and MJHMP provide general guidelines for evacuation routes in the event of a natural or human-caused disaster. Due to the unpredictability of the impact of a disaster on streets and highways, appropriate evacuation routes cannot be pre-determined. In general, all traffic will be channeled to the nearby freeways, state highways, and other major arterials. I-15 will serve as the primary north-south evacuation channel. Winchester and Rancho California Roads will be used for east-west evacuation. The City prepared an analysis consistent with Senate Bill 99 to identify residential developments in hazard areas that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes. The analysis identified six residential areas of concern in high hazard zones that warrant further study and coordination with the Riverside County Fire Department. While all residential developments meet City standards, the City will continue to coordinate with RCFD and RCSD to provide ongoing education to residents about how to safely evacuate in the event of an emergency A White Paper describing the methodology used to map the evacuation routes is included as an Appendix to the Public Safety Element. Once the decision to evacuate is made, the public will be alerted and given evacuation instructions by various means, including school alert/monitor receivers, radio and television announcements, sirens, mobile loud speakers, and personal contact. Educating residents and businesses about potential disasters, the LHMP, and the MJLHMP can increase the effectiveness of response efforts. An educated public will know how to prevent injury and property damage during and after emergencies and also know how to find help. One important way that residents participate in the City’s emergency preparedness program is through the Temecula Citizen’s Corps. Created in 2002, the Corps is a community-based volunteer organization whose goal is to prepare for natural disasters or terrorist activity through coordinated response at the neighborhood level. In the event of an emergency, the Corps will assist the City government by providing assistance in cases where the scale of the incident has overwhelmed conventional emergency services. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-21 TERRORISM READINESS AND RESPONSE ESSENTIAL FACILITIES In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the City of Temecula’s emergency preparedness and response services have become an even more critical function to address terrorism issues that confront the nation and local communities. Since the events of 9/11, a considerable amount of information has been generated on potential vulnerabilities, protective measures, and anti- terrorism/security technologies. The Riverside County Sheriff’s and Fire Departments, which currently provide police and fire services to Temecula, recognizes the need not only to learn from the lessons from 9/11, but also to collectively address the terrorism planning and policy issues that most affect Temecula residents. The goals, policies and implementation programs associated with emergency preparedness also apply to terrorism readiness and response. The City of Temecula is home to a number of critical facilities and infrastructures; this list is maintained as part of the City’s LHMP and includes: Public Safety Dispatch: 2 Emergency Operations Center: 3 City Hall: 1 Fire Stations: 5 Water Reservoirs: 39 Water Treatment Plans: 0 Waste Water Treatment Plans: 1 Hospitals: 1 Police Facilities: 2 Maintenance Yards: 1 Senior Community Centers: 1 Schools: 29 Radio Repeaters: 1 No areas of Temecula lack emergency service. New essential facilities should be located outside of hazardous areas, especially VHFHSZs (see Policy 4.5). The City’s Growth Management and Public Facilities Element further describes the role of essential facilities and maps these facilities on Figure GM-1, Community Safety Facilities. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-22 GOALS AND POLICIES Certain natural conditions and human activities in Temecula create risks to individuals and properties within the community. Excessive risk from such hazards can be reduced or avoided through implementation of policies in the Public Safety Element. The Public Safety Element addresses four major issues, including: 1) reducing risk from natural hazardous conditions; 2) reducing risks from hazards associated with human activities; 3) community safety and security; and 4) preparing for emergency situations. NATURAL HAZARDS Due to location within a seismically active region and the presence of floodplains and hillsides, Temecula is potentially subject to several types of natural hazards, including earthquakes, liquefaction, flooding, wild land fires, landslides, and erosion. Potential damage can be reduced through appropriate land use planning, development engineering, and building construction practices. The Planning Area contains Alquist-Priolo fault zones and County Fault Hazard Zones. These zones identify areas potentially impacted by groundshaking and surface-rupture. Seismic events occurring within and outside of the Planning Area also have the potential to trigger such secondary impacts as liquefaction and subsidence. Other natural hazards impacting the Planning Area include flooding and dam inundation. Goal 1 Protection from natural hazards associated with geologic instability, seismic events, wild land fires, flooding, and dam failures. Policy 1.1 Identify and mitigate potential adverse impacts of ground surface rupture, liquefaction, and landslides at the project level. Policy 1.2 Apply and enforce seismic design standards and building construction codes for new development. Policy 1.3 Work with property owners to remediate hazardous buildings throughout the City. Policy 1.4 Monitor the potential for seismic events and other geologic activity with the County of Riverside and California Geological Survey. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-23 Policy 1.5 Establish development management techniques to lessen the potential for erosion and landslides. Policy 1.6 Provide and maintain adequate flood control facilities and limit development within the 100-year floodplain and potential dam inundation areas. Policy 1.7 Prohibit development of any kind within the floodway portion of the 100-year floodplain. Policy 1.8 Require new development in SRAs or VHFHSZs to be located, designed, and constructed to minimize the risk of loss resulting from fires through: • minimizing development in SRAs or VHFHSZs when feasible; • imposition of site-specific development standards during project review, including fire safe design, fire protection plans, sufficient ingress/egress, evacuation routes, emergency vehicle access, defensible space, visible home addressing and signage, and fuel modification zones; • coordination with the City Fire Department and other organizations; and • evaluating re-development after a large fire. Policy 1.9 Reduce the risk of wildfire hazards by working with Homeowner Associations, Business Park Associations, and other property owners and RCFD to maintain fire retardant landscaping and buffer zones, community fire breaks, and private road and public road clearance in areas of high wildfire risk. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-24 HUMAN- CAUSED HAZARDS The transport, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials and the education and planning regarding nuclear power production are important environmental planning issues in Temecula. Modern technology and society's high standard of living has led to dependence on these products and necessitates adequate management of materials and waste and education regarding hazards within the City. The intent is to avoid damage to people, property and environmental resources. Goal 2 Protection of the public and environmental resources from hazards related to hazardous materials and waste, and nuclear power production. Policy 2.1 Minimize the risks associated with hazardous materials through careful land use planning and coordination with responsible federal, State, and County agencies. Policy 2.2 Participate in local and regional programs that facilitate the proper disposal of household hazardous waste. Policy 2.3 The policies and programs of the current Riverside County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (HWMP) are hereby adopted by reference. Policy 2.4 Coordinate with local, State and federal agencies to reduce the risks related to nuclear power production. Policy 2.5 Reduce potential hazards associated with airplane accidents by ensuring compliance of proposed development projects with the risk contours contained in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for French Valley Airport. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-25 SAFETY AND SECURITY The perception of personal safety and the security of property are central to the quality of life in a community. Realizing these objectives requires both proactive and reactive involvement by citizens, as well as fire and law enforcement personnel. The risk of exposure to criminal activity or fire can be reduced through planning, education and regulation of human activity, and by providing paved road access throughout the City. In addition, the design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in fear and the incidence of both crime and fire, improving the quality of life, and helping create a secure sense of community. Goal 3 A safe and secure community free from the threat of personal injury and loss of property. Policy 3.1 Ensure adequate facilities and police and fire service personnel are provided in the City. Policy 3.2 Continue to work with the community in operating citizen involved programs and patrols that promote mutual assistance and crime prevention activities among residents. Policy 3.3 Incorporate crime prevention and defensible space into site plans and building designs for new development. Policy 3.4 Ensure that all-weather and appropriate secondary access is provided to ensure timely emergency response. Require all residential development with 35 or more dwelling units to provide all-weather secondary access that meets City standards. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-26 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND HAZARD MITIGATION Major emergencies occur periodically in all communities. Timely and coordinated action by agencies charged with responsibilities in the event of a disaster is necessary to mitigate the effect of a disaster on the human population and environment. Preventive measures and preparatory responses before an emergency occurs will hasten recovery. Goal 4 An effective response of emergency services. Policy 4.1 Provide for and maintain a coordinated emergency services response to reduce community risks and property damage in the event of a disaster. Policy 4.2 Support the development and implementation of local preparedness plans and multi-jurisdictional cooperation for emergency situations consistent with the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). Policy 4.3 Coordinate emergency response planning with Riverside County and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Policy 4.4 Encourage community-wide emergency preparedness among City residents and the business community. Policy 4.5 Regulate the location of critical facilities to ensure they continue to function after a disaster. Locate, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of very high fire hazard severity zones, including but not limited to, hospitals and health care facilities, emergency shelters, emergency command centers, and emergency communication facilities, or identify construction methods or other methods to minimize damage if these facilities are located in very high fire hazard severity zones. Policy 4.6 Discourage the closure of streets that limit or delay access for emergency services. Policy 4.7 Coordinate with local, state, and federal agencies to evaluate the capacity, safety, and viability of evacuation routes under a range of emergency scenarios, and update plans as necessary. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-27 Goal 5 A resilient, sustainable, and equitable community where risks to life, property, the economy, and the environment resulting from climate change, including extreme weather events, are minimized. Policy 5.1 Collaborate with local, regional, state and/or federal jurisdictions and agencies on climate resiliency and adaptation strategies. Policy 5.2 Monitor climate change-related effects with local, regional, state, and/or federal partners to provide information of effectiveness of existing infrastructure and programs. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS The following Implementation Programs provide actions to implement Public Safety Element goals and policies. PS-1 NATURAL HAZARDS RISK REDUCTION Reduce the risk to the community from hazards related to geologic conditions, seismic activity, wild land fires, and flooding by requiring feasible mitigation of such impacts on existing development, new development, and reuse projects. Assess development proposals for potential hazards pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Require measures to mitigate all identified significant public safety hazards. Address the following issues in the assessment: Steep slopes, unstable geologic materials and faulting; Flooding; Wild land and structural fires and adequacy of water pressure for fire fighting; Hazardous materials use, transport, storage or disposal; and Mitigate existing non-conforming development to contemporary fire safe standards, in terms of road standards and vegetative hazard. Agency/Department: Planning, Building & Safety, Public Works Related Policies: 1.1, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9 C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-28 PS-2 STRUCTURAL DESIGN To minimize damage from earthquakes and other geologic activity, implement most recent and most stringent California and Uniform Building Code seismic requirements for structural design for new development and reuse projects. Agency/Department: Planning, Building & Safety Related Policy: 1.2 PS-3 SOIL AND GEOLOGIC SURVEYS During review of development and reuse proposals, require surveys of soil and geologic conditions by State licensed Engineering Geologists and Civil Engineers where appropriate. Examples of when these surveys are required are: Prior to the development of any area with slopes more than 10 feet high at a gradient equal to or steeper than 2:1; Projects located within a State-delineated Seismic Hazard Zone for liquefaction or seismically-induced landsliding, in accordance with the California Geological Survey; or, Projects located within an Earthquake Fault Zone or within 150 feet of an active or potentially active fault. If potential for fault displacement or liquefaction exists on the site, structures for human occupancy may not be placed there unless the seismic hazard is mitigated to an acceptable level. Agency/Department: Public Works, Planning, Building & Safety Related Policy: 1.1 C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-29 PS-4 LAND USE PLANNING AND NOTIFICATION Implement the following actions to ensure that the land use planning and real estate processes fully account for the presence of seismic hazards in Temecula. Require that any person selling property within a delineated Earthquake Fault Zone, Liquefaction Zone, or Landslide Zone disclose this fact to any prospective purchaser. Work with the County of Riverside and California Geological Survey to monitor and compile information on faults within the Temecula Planning Area. Update the City’s listing of hazardous unreinforced masonry buildings periodically. Provide technical assistance and funding to remediate these structures, as available. Develop a Land Use Suitability Matrix for Special Studies and County Fault Hazards Zones. The Matrix will categorize land uses according to risk and develop restrictions for these uses in zones. Agency/Department: Planning, Building & Safety, Public Works Related Policies: 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 Required by General Plan EIR PS-5 HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Prepare and adopt hillside development standards for site development and drainage that work to control runoff for erosion control and water quality purposes. Require geotechnical investigations for areas of known or suspected geologic hazards. Agency/Department: Planning, Public Works Related Policy: 1.5 Required by General Plan EIR PS-6 FLOOD INSURANCE Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) administered through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The NFIP program provides federal flood insurance subsidies and federally financed loans for property owners in flood-prone areas. Agency/Department: Public Works, Planning, Building & Safety Related Policies: 1.6, 1.7 C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-30 PS-7 MITIGATE FLOOD HAZARDS Mitigate flood hazards in Temecula by: Reviewing development proposals for projects within FEMA Special Flood Hazard Areas for consistency with City flood damage prevention and floodplain management regulations and FEMA requirements. Prohibiting development of any kind within the floodway portion of the 100-year floodplain. Maintaining a Dam Inundation Evacuation Plan as part of the Multi-Hazard Functional Plan. Coordinating planning projections with the Office of Emergency Services to ensure that dam safety plans reflect development in the community. Agency/Department: Public Works, Planning, Building & Safety Related Policies: 1.6, 1.7 PS-8 PROMOTE FIRE PREVENTION Promote fire prevention in Temecula in the following ways: Work closely with the Fire Department to implement fire hazard education and fire prevention programs, including information about defensible space or evacuation routes. Work with the Fire Department to provide adequate infrastructure for water supply and fire flow in new and existing developments and establish fire prevention and mitigation measures in wild land fire hazard areas. Expand and improve vegetation management efforts in wild land fire hazard areas. Coordinate with the local water districts and Fire Department to ensure that water pressure for urban areas and sites to be developed is adequate for fire fighting purposes. Adopt and implement California Fire Code provisions and appropriate amendments to reflect Temecula’s topography, vegetation, and urban form. Support public education, information, fire prevention and fire law enforcement programs conducted by the Fire Department, with an emphasis on reaching at-risk populations. Support programs and plans, such as Strategic Fire Plans, consistent with state law that require fuel management/modification within established defensible space boundaries and when strategic fuel modification is necessary outside of defensible space, balance fuel management needs to protect structures with the preservation of native vegetation and sensitive habitats. C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-31 Agency/Department: Fire, Planning Related Policy: 1.8 PS-9 REDUCE RISKS FROM HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Minimize public health and environmental risks from the use, transport, storage and disposal of hazardous materials through the following actions: Cooperate with federal, State, and local agencies to effectively regulate the management of hazardous materials and waste. Amend project applications to include requirements for submittal of information involving the proposed use, storage, handling, transport and/or disposal of hazardous materials/wastes and any previous use, storage, handling and/or disposal of such materials/wastes. Cooperate with the County of Riverside to implement applicable portions of the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan (HWMP) and the Hazardous Materials Area Plan (HMAP), as well as to maintain an inventory of facilities that store, handle, or transport hazardous materials. Establish transportation routes for the conveyance of hazardous materials. Transportation of hazardous materials shall be restricted through residential areas and arterials during peak hours. Implement the Multi-Hazard Functional Plan for accidents involving hazardous materials. Agency/Department: Planning, Public Works, Building & Safety, Fire Related Policies: 2.1, 2.3 PS-10 HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE PROGRAM Support efforts by the County Household Hazardous Waste Program to protect residents from dangers resulting from the use, transport and disposal of hazardous materials used in the home. The program includes public education about health and environmental hazards of household hazardous materials and periodic collection campaigns at established sites. Agency/Department: Community Services, County Environmental Health Department Related Policy: 2.2 C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-32 PS-11 NUCLEAR POWER PRODUCTION RISKS REDUCTION Reduce nuclear power production risks in the following ways. Participate in programs and emergency response exercises with federal and State agencies and Southern California Edison to minimize the risks related to nuclear power production. Implement measures related to the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) in the City’s Multi-Hazard Functional Plan to ensure that residents are prepared for any problems associated with the facility. Agency/Department: Planning, Public Works, Building & Safety Related Policy: 2.6 PS-12 MINIMIZE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY Protect residents and businesses from criminal activity by providing substantive levels of police protection and educating the public about methods to reduce criminal activity. The specific actions to implement these goals are identified below: When renewing the service contracts with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department, ensure that contracted staffing levels are consistent with the population and geography of Temecula, and that sufficient emphasis is placed on staff and programs for crime prevention. Ensure the mutual aid agreements between the City and surrounding jurisdictions are in place for emergency situations. Use defensible space and lighting concepts in development projects designed to enhance public safety. Increase public awareness about criminal activity and crime prevention activities. Maximize the use of after school programs, volunteer and citizen programs, and other community oriented policing programs with the Police Department. Agency/Department: City Manager’s Office, Police, Planning Related Policies: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-33 PS-13 SECONDARY ACCESS Require all residential development with 35 or more dwelling units to provide secondary access that meets full City standards to ensure timely emergency service response. Agency/Department: Planning, Fire Related Policy: 3.4 PS-14 LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN Maintain the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan under provisions of the State Emergency Management System format to maximize the efforts of emergency service providers (e.g. fire, medical and law enforcement) and minimize human suffering and property damage associated with disasters. The Plan should identify resources available for emergency response and establish coordinated action plans for specific emergency situations and disasters including earthquakes, hazardous materials incidents, flooding, dam failure, wild land fire, incidents at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, transportation incidents, and national security emergencies. Agency/Department: City Manager’s Office, Public Works, Police, Fire, Planning Related Policies: 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 5.1, 5.2 PS-15 EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS EDUCATION Encourage resident participation in citizen-based programs and educate residents to take appropriate actions to safeguard life and property during and immediately after emergencies. Education about emergency preparedness can occur through the distribution of brochures, presentations to civic groups and homeowners associations and instruction to local schools. Agency/Department: Planning, Police, Fire Related Policy: 4.1 PS-16 GRADING ORDINANCE Prepare, adopt and implement a grading ordinance to ensure that grading associated with new development projects is conducted in accordance with appropriate geotechnical engineering standards Agency/Department: Planning, Public Works Related Policy: 1.5 Required by General Plan EIR C ITY OF T EMECULA G ENERAL P LAN PS-34 This page left intentionally blank. 2021-01 Addendum to the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update August 2021 Prepared for: City of Temecula Community Development Department Planning Department 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92589 Prepared by: De Novo Planning Group 180 E. Main Street, Suite 108 Tustin, CA 92780 De Novo Planning Group A Land Use Planning, Design, and Environmental Firm City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1-0 1.1 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................ 1-0 1.2 CEQA REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................................................ 1-0 1.3 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE..................................................................................................................... 1-2 2 ADDENDUM FINDING ............................................................................................................................... 2-1 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ............................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPOSED PROJECT REVISIONS/ADDITIONS ........................................................................ 3-3 4 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 AESTHETICS ............................................................................................................................................... 4-2 4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ....................................................................................................... 4-4 4.3 AIR QUALITY .............................................................................................................................................. 4-6 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................. 4-11 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................... 4-17 4.6 ENERGY .................................................................................................................................................. 4-20 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ................................................................................................................................. 4-22 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ..................................................................................................................... 4-26 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ........................................................................................................ 4-28 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ............................................................................................................... 4-32 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING .......................................................................................................................... 4-37 4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................ 4-41 4.13 NOISE ..................................................................................................................................................... 4-42 4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING ........................................................................................................................ 4-45 4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES ....................................................................................................................................... 4-47 4.16 RECREATION ............................................................................................................................................ 4-50 4.17 TRANSPORTATION ..................................................................................................................................... 4-52 4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ..................................................................................................................... 4-57 4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS .................................................................................................................. 4-59 4.20 WILDFIRE ................................................................................................................................................ 4-63 4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ...................................................................................................... 4-66 Tables and Figures TABLE 1: TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN EXPECTED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY ......................................................... 3-3 TABLE 2: PROGRESS TOWARDS THE RHNA ................................................................................................................... 3-5 TABLE 3: COMPARISON OF RHNA CANDIDATE SITES REALISTIC CAPACITY AND RHNA .......................................................... 3-7 FIGURE 1: REGIONAL LOCATION MAP ......................................................................................................................... 3-11 FIGURE 2: GENERAL PLAN PLANNING AREA .................................................................................................................. 3-12 City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Introduction 1-0 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND The City of Temecula is the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The Temecula Housing Element was first adopted in 1993 and was updated in 2003 as part of a Comprehensive General Plan Update. Adoption of the Housing Element and a Negative Declaration preceded adoption of the Comprehensive General Plan Update. On April 12, 2005, the City Council adopted the Temecula General Plan, referencing the Housing Element, and certified the Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”) (State Clearinghouse No. 2003061041). The Housing Element was updated again in 2010 for the 4th cycle. Most recently, in 2013, the City Council adopted the City of Temecula General Plan Housing Element (2014-2021 Housing Element) and Negative Declaration for the 5th Cycle. Additionally, since adoption of the General Plan Update, the Harveston Specific Plan Amendment, Altair Specific Plan, and Uptown Temecula Specific Plan have been adopted. Environmental review was completed for each of these specific projects; refer to Section 1.4, Incorporation by Reference. The City now proposes the current 2021-2029 Housing Element for the 6th cycle and Public Safety Element Update (referenced herein as “Modified Project” or “Project”). The Modified Project involves minor changes/additions to the Housing Element in compliance with State Housing Element Law Government Code Sections 65580-65590.1 and minor changes/additions to the Public Safety Element to meet the requirements of California Government Code Section 65302(g). Following preliminary review of the proposed Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update, the City of Temecula, as Lead Agency, has determined that the proposed Project is subject to CEQA (Public Resources Code [PRC] Sections 21000-21177). This Addendum to the FEIR has been prepared by the City to demonstrate that the proposed Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update do not meet the conditions warranting preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR, as the potential environmental impacts associated with the Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated, as described further. 1.2 CEQA REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this Addendum is to analyze any potential differences between the impacts identified in the FEIR and those that would be associated with the proposed Project. Pursuant to provisions of CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines, the City is the Lead Agency charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve the Project. As part of its decision-making process, the City is required to review and consider whether the proposed Project would create new significant impacts or significant impacts that would be substantially more severe than those disclosed in the General Plan FEIR. Additional CEQA review beyond this Addendum would only be triggered if the Project created new significant impacts or impacts that are more severe than those disclosed in the FEIR used to approve the Temecula General Plan. To use an Addendum as the appropriate CEQA document for the proposed Project, the City must find that major revisions to the FEIR are not necessary and that none of the conditions described in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of additional CEQA documentation has occurred. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Introduction 1-1 In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines, prior to approving further discretionary action and depending upon the situation, the lead agency must generally either: (1) prepare a Subsequent EIR; (2) prepare a Supplemental EIR; (3) prepare a Subsequent Negative Declaration; (4) prepare an Addendum to the EIR or Negative Declaration; or (5) prepare no further documentation (see State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15162 – 15164). State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states: When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines explains when an Addendum to an EIR is appropriate. Per this section, where some changes or additions are necessary to the previously certified EIR, but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR (as described above) have occurred, then the lead agency is directed to prepare an Addendum to the certified EIR (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15164). Further, the Addendum should include a “brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162,” and that “explanation must be supported by substantial evidence” (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15164 City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Introduction 1-2 [e]). The Addendum need not be circulated for public review but may simply be attached to the certified EIR (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15164 [c]). 1.3 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE Temecula General Plan The City Council comprehensively adopted the Update to the City of Temecula General Plan on April 12, 2005. The General Plan is a comprehensive legal document that identifies a community vision for the future and establishes a framework to guide future decisions regarding development, resource management, public safety, public services, and the overall quality of the community. The General Plan contains goals, policies, and programs to guide land use and development, and is organized to include the following mandatory “elements” in accordance with California Government Code Section 65302: Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Open Space/Conservation, Public Safety, and Noise. In addition to the required elements, the Temecula General Plan includes the following optional elements: Growth Management/Public Facilities, Air Quality, Community Design, and Economic Development. The 6th Cycle Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update are the subject of this Addendum. Temecula General Plan Final EIR The City Council certified the General Plan FEIR on April 12, 2005. The General Plan FEIR provides a program-level analysis of the general environmental impacts resulting from the development of land uses and implementation of policies established within the Temecula General Plan update. The General Plan FEIR’s analysis is based on the change between development under existing conditions (at the time of document preparation) and those projected for likely development in accordance with the General Plan by theoretical expected development capacity. Based on General Plan FEIR Table 3-1, the General Plan FEIR assumed and analyzed the environmental impacts resulting from the following 1: approximately 25,005 additional dwelling units and approximately 36.2 million additional square feet of non-residential land uses. The General Plan FEIR concluded that full implementation of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures for all issue areas analyzed except for Section 5.3 Air Quality (Violate any air quality standard or contributes substantially to an existing air quality violation; Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any criteria pollutant; and Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations) and Section 5.13, Transportation (Causes an intersection to operate at LOS E or F [peak hour ICU greater than 0.90] and Causes a freeway ramp to operate at LOS F [peak hour V/C greater than 1.00]), which were determined to be significant and unavoidable. Harveston Specific Plan Amendment Final EIR The Harveston General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) – Planning Area 12 (Project) proposed changing the existing General Plan land use designation from Service Commercial (SC) to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) and a SPA that would include a residential overlay to the Specific Plan on an 87.54-acre portion of Planning Area 12. The remaining Harveston 1 These numbers represent the expected net change by land use category from existing 2002 (baseline) to expected development capacity, as calculated in the Temecula General Plan. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Introduction 1-3 Specific Plan Area was developed. The residential overlay designation would overlay the existing SC designation for the site within the existing Specific Plan. The GPA from SC to SPI would maintain the Specific Plan’s consistency with the existing General Plan Land Use Element but would provide flexibility for the Specific Plan, including the proposed residential overlay, to function as the General Plan land use designation. The residential overlay would allow the future development of a maximum of 1,000 residential units. The Harveston Specific Plan Amendment FEIR assumed 1,000 small lot detached single family homes would be developed. The Harveston Specific Plan Amendment FEIR concluded that Project implementation would result in less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures for all issue areas analyzed except for Air Quality Impact 3.1-2: The project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard, which was determined to be significant and unavoidable. Altair Specific Plan Final EIR The Altair Specific Plan is primarily a residential mixed-use development with supporting civic uses and open space. Different housing types are proposed to meet the needs of a range of age groups and household sizes. Altair proposed a type of form-based code using building types clustered in villages as the organizing principle. These building types are assigned to seven neighborhood “villages” which, in turn, are overlaid with one of three proposed residential zones (Residential Zone [SP-R], Mixed-Use/Residential [SP-MR], or Mixed-Use [SP-M]), in combination with an active open space zone (SP-AO). The non-residential uses include an elementary school and a civic use area (“South Parcel”) which are covered by the Educational (SP-E) zone and Institutional (SP-I) zone, respectively, and natural open space (SP-NO). Based on the proposed residential zone and associated densities and intensities by village area, Altair Specific Plan would allow for up to 1,750 dwelling units. The Altair Specific Plan FEIR concluded that Project implementation would result in less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures for all issue areas analyzed except for Air Quality Impact AQ-1: Operational activities occurring after the buildout of the project would violate air quality standards or contribute substantially to any existing or projected air quality violation; Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change Impact GHG-1: The project could generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; Noise and Vibration Impact NOI-1: Construction activities occurring at each individual development site in the project area would potentially expose their respective adjacent or nearby receptor(s) to substantial increases in ambient noise levels; Noise and Vibration Impact NOI-2: Construction activities in the project area may expose their respective onsite and/or offsite sensitive land uses to vibration levels that exceed applicable FTA vibration thresholds for building damage and human annoyance; Traffic and Transportation Impact TRA-7: Development of the Specific Plan would cause the level of service at the existing I-15 Southbound Ramps and Temecula Parkway (Intersection #25) to degrade from an acceptable LOS D or better to an unacceptable LOS F during the AM and PM peak hours; and Traffic and Transportation Impact TRA-11: Development of the Specific Plan would cause the General Plan Build Out (2035) level of service at Ynez Road and Rancho California Road (Intersection #5) to degrade from an unacceptable LOS E during the AM peak hour, and would cause the average delay to increase by more than the 2.0-second threshold of significance, which were determined to be significant and unavoidable. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Introduction 1-4 Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Final EIR The Uptown Specific Plan establishes six zoning districts – Uptown Center District (UC); Upton Hotel/Tourism District (UHT); Uptown Sports/Transit District (US); Uptown Arts District (UA); Creekside Village District (CV); and Murrieta Creek Recreation and Open Space District (MCR-OS) and two overlay zones – Creekside Village Commercial Overlay Zones (CV-CO) and Wilder Hills Residential Overlay Zone (WH-RO). East district defines the allowable building types, frontage types, land uses, building placement, parking placement, and building heights within the specific plan area. The Uptown Specific Plan would allow for 3,726 dwelling units and 1.9 million square feet of commercial uses for a total of 5.5 million square feet of total development potential on approximately 560 acres. The new development is assumed to replace all existing development (approximately 3.8 million square feet) in the specific plan area. The Uptown Temecula Specific Plan FEIR concluded that Project implementation would result in less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures for all issue areas analyzed except for Air Quality – Violation of Air Quality Standards (Construction and Operation) and Cumulative Impacts to Air Quality; Cultural Resources – Direct Impacts to Cultural Resources (Historic) and Cumulative Impacts to Cultural Resources (Historic); and Noise and Vibration (Construction), which were determined to be significant and unavoidable. Temecula Municipal Code The City of Temecula Municipal Code consists of the City’s regulatory and penal ordinances, and certain administrative ordinances. The City of Temecula Development Code (Development Code) is codified into Title 17, Zoning. The purpose of the Development Code is to: implement the goals, and policies and programs of the Temecula General Plan, and to manage future growth and change in accordance with that plan; promote health, safety, welfare and general prosperity with the aim of preserving a wholesome, serviceable and attractive community in accordance with the General Plan for the City; attain the physical, social and economic advantages resulting from comprehensive and orderly land use and resource planning; encourage, classify, designate, regulate, restrict and segregate the most compatible and beneficial location and use of buildings, structures and land; limit the height, number of stories, and size of buildings and other structures hereafter designed, erected or altered; regulate and determine the setbacks and other open spaces; regulate and limit the density of population; and facilitate adequate provisions for community facilities, such as transportation, water, sewage, and parks. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Addendum Finding 2-1 2 ADDENDUM FINDING Pursuant to CEQA and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, staff has reviewed and considered the FEIR for the General Plan certified by the City Council on April 12, 2005 (State Clearinghouse No. 2003061041), including the impacts and mitigation measures identified therein. Staff has also reviewed the Harveston Specific Plan Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2019070974), Altair Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2014111029) and Uptown Temecula Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2013061012). In compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 an Addendum to the General Plan FEIR has been prepared which concludes that the proposed updates to the General Plan Housing Element and Public Safety Element do not result in any new or greater environmental impacts than were previously analyzed, disclosed, and mitigated. None of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present to require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and no additional environmental review is required. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Description of the Proposed Project 3-1 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT 3.1 B ACKGROUND 3.1.1 H OUSING E LEMENTS AND R EGIONAL H OUSING N EEDS A LLOCATION The Housing Element is a State-mandated element of the General Plan. The City of Temecula must update its Housing Element every eight years. Updates to the Housing Element must meet the requirements of California Government Code Sections 65580-65589. The purposes of the Housing Element are to identify the community's housing needs; to state the community's goals and objectives with regard to housing production, rehabilitation, and conservation to meet those needs; and to define the policies and programs that the community will implement to achieve the stated goals and objectives. State law requires that the City accommodate its “fair share” of regional housing needs, which are assigned by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for all jurisdictions in the SCAG region. SCAG established the 2021-2029 Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) to assign each city and the unincorporated county in the region its fair share of the regional housing need based on a number of factors established by State law (Government Code Section 65584) and regional housing burdens and needs. The objectives of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) are: • Increase housing supply and the mix of housing types; • Promote infill, equity, and environment; • Ensure jobs housing balance and fit; • Promote regional income equity; and • Affirmatively further fair housing. Beyond the income-based housing needs established by the RHNA, the Housing Element must also address special needs groups; such as seniors, persons with disabilities including developmental disabilities, single female parents, large families, farm workers, and homeless persons. 3.1.2 S AFETY E LEMENTS The Safety Element is a State-mandated element of the General Plan. Updates to the Safety Element will meet the requirements of California Government Code Section 65302(g) (Section 65302) as updated by Senate Bills 1241, 379, 99, and 1035 and will incorporate policies from the Temecula Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (pursuant to SB 379). The Public Safety Element addresses potential and existing hazards in the City, which are outlined in the following categories: Seismically Induced Hazards; Slope Instability; Geologic Hazards; Flood Hazards; Fire Hazards; Evacuation Routes; Criminal Activities; Hazardous Materials; Nuclear Hazards; and Climate Adaptation. Updates to the Public Safety Element are largely focused on the topics of Fire Hazards, Evacuation Routes, and Climate Adaption. 3.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING Nestled in Temecula Valley in southwestern Riverside County, just north of the San Diego County line, sits the City of Temecula, which was incorporated in 1989. Having grown from a modest initial City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Description of the Proposed Project 3-2 incorporated population of 27,099, the City of Temecula is currently home to approximately 112,000 residents in an area of roughly 30 square miles. The City is bounded by the City of Murrieta to the north, unincorporated areas within the County of Riverside to the east, west, and south, and unincorporated areas within the County of San Diego to the south. Regional access to the City is provided by Interstate 15, a north/south freeway that connects the Inland Empire region of Riverside and San Bernardino counties to San Diego County, and State Route 79, a primarily east/west highway (although it runs concurrent with I-15 through the City of Temecula) that links Interstate 10 with Interstate 15, and links Temecula to communities further east in unincorporated Riverside and San Diego counties. The General Plan identifies the most prevalent land uses in Temecula as residential, consisting of approximately 51 percent of the Planning Area; Public/Institutional and Open Space consisting of approximately 37 percent of the Planning Area; Commercial and Office consisting of approximately 6 percent of the Planning Area; and Industrial Park approximately 5% of the Planning Area. The Land Use Element identifies the distribution, location, and intensity of all land use types throughout the City. To fully reflect the range of physical attributes that are important for Temecula’s success, the Element also contains goals and policies to guide community form and design, and the provision of community facilities and urban services. The Land Use Element is primarily implemented by the City’s Zoning Ordinance, which specifies districts and performance standards for various types of land uses described in the General Plan. Each General Plan land use designation has a corresponding zone or zones that implement and regulate the intent of the land use. The zone districts specify the permitted uses for each category and applicable development standards. The General Plan identifies the expected development capacity associated with the distribution of planned land uses specified in the Land Use Policy Map (Figure LU-3 of the Land Use Element). Table 1, Temecula General Plan Expected Residential Development Capacity, summarizes the expected development capacity for residential uses within Temecula based on reasonable density assumptions for the City and SOI. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Description of the Proposed Project 3-3 Table 1: Temecula General Plan Expected Residential Development Capacity 3.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF PROPOSED PROJECT REVISIONS/ADDITIONS The project analyzed in this Addendum involves the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update. The proposed amendment would not modify the City of Temecula General Plan Land Use Map, land use designations, or intensities/densities identified within the General Plan Land Use Element. No changes to the maximum development potential approved for the General Plan and analyzed in the General Plan FEIR and subsequent General Plan Amendments would occur with the proposed amendment. 3.3.1 H OUSING E LEMENT In compliance with State Housing Element Law requirements, the City of Temecula has prepared the 2021-2029 Housing Element (Project) to: • Provide goals, policies, quantified objectives and scheduled programs to preserve, improve and develop housing • Identify and analyze existing and projected housing needs for all economic segments of the community • Identify adequate sites that are zoned and available within the 8-year housing cycle to meet the City’s fair share of regional housing needs at all income levels • Affirmatively further fair housing • Be certified (approved) by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) as complying with State law • Be internally consistent with other parts of the General Plan Residential Land Use Designation Density Range Existing Acreage Expected Development Capacity (Dwelling Units) Hillside 0 – 0.1 du/ac 1,023 102 Rural 0.1 – 0.2 du/ac 2,528 506 Very Low 0.2 – 0.4 du/ac 2,962 1,021 Low 0.5 – 2.9 du/ac 593 889 Low Medium 3.0 – 6.9 du/ac 7,593 34,504 Medium 7.0 – 12.9 du/ac 759 7,591 High 13.0 – 20.0 du/ac 432 7,143 Vineyards/Agriculture 0 – 0.2 du/ac 2,219 222 Mixed Use Overlay Varies 210 1,760 Total 53,7371 Source: City of Temecula General Plan Land Use Element, Table LU-3. 1. City of Temecula General Plan Land Use and Community Design Element, Table LU-3 lists the total expected development capacity (in dwelling units) at 53,737 units. However, the total based on the sum of the capacity of each land use designation is actually 53,738 units. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Description of the Proposed Project 3-4 Housing Element Organization The proposed Housing Element Update covers the October 15, 2021 through October 15, 2029 planning period and is comprised of the following components: Part 1: Housing Plan Part 1 of the 2021-2029 Housing Element is the City’s “Housing Plan”, which includes the goals, policies, and programs the City will implement to address constraints and needs. The City’s overall strategy for addressing its housing needs has been defined according to the six goals: 1. Providing adequate housing sites; 2. Assisting in development of affordable and special needs housing; 3. Removing constraints to housing production; 4. Conserving and improving existing housing stock; 5. Affirmatively furthering fair housing; and 6. Promoting public participation. The Housing Plan includes only minor modifications to the City’s current Housing Element Goals and Policies. The Housing Plan includes a number of new programs to address State housing law including future required updates to the Temecula Municipal Code, new programs to support affirmatively furthering fair housing, and tracking and reporting requirements for Housing Sites. Part 2: Background Report Part 2 of the 2021-2029 Housing Element is the “Background Report” which identifies the nature and extent of Temecula’s housing needs, including those of special populations, potential housing resources (land and funds), potential constraints to housing production, and energy conservation opportunities. In addition to identifying housing needs, the Background Report also presents information regarding the setting in which these needs occur. The Background Report comprehensively updates the background context and conditions identified in the City’s current Housing Element. Appendix A: Housing Sites Inventory The Housing Element must include an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development to meet the City’s regional housing need by income level. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) requires that the Housing Sites Inventory be prepared using a State-approved format, included as Appendix A. No land use changes are proposed to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA); future residential development is expected to occur in those areas already identified for residential uses including land within approved Specific Plans. All sites identified in the City’s Housing Sites Inventory are currently identified for new development consistent with the potential development capacities identified in Appendix A. Appendix B: Glossary The Housing Element includes, as Appendix B, a glossary of key terms and phrases. Appendix C: Public Engagement Summary As part of the Housing Element Update the process, the City hosted numerous opportunities for the community and key stakeholders to provide feedback on existing housing conditions, housing City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Description of the Proposed Project 3-5 priorities, priority areas for new residential growth, and topics related to fair housing. Public engagement was facilitated in both English and Spanish to further engage the Temecula community. Public participation played an important role in the refinement of the City’s housing goals and policies and in the development of new housing programs, as included in Part 1: Housing Plan. The public’s input also helped to validate and expand upon the contextual information included in Part 2: Background Report. The City’s efforts to engage the community in a meaningful and comprehensive way are summarized in Appendix C. Appendix D: 2017 Assessment of Fair Housing In 2017 the City of Temecula prepared an Assessment of Fair Housing. This Assessment provides the foundation and context for the City’s Assessment of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, as included in Part 2 of the Housing Element. Capacity to Meet Regional Housing Needs As determined by SCAG, the City of Temecula’s fair share allocation (RHNA) is 4,193 new housing units during this planning cycle. This includes: 1,359 units affordable to extremely/very low income households; 801 units affordable to low income households; 778 units affordable to moderate income households; and 1,255 units affordable to above moderate income households. State Income Limits which are used to determine affordability levels are set annually by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Progress Towards the RHNA RHNA uses June 30, 2021 as the baseline for growth projections for the 2021-2029 planning period. Jurisdictions may count toward the RHNA housing units that have been developed, are under construction, and/or have received their building permits after June 30, 2021. Since this time, 27 housing units have been developed, are under construction, or have received their building permits in Temecula. Jurisdictions may also count projects that are approved/entitled but not yet built or under construction; 132 units, all affordable to lower-income households, have been approved/entitled and are expected to be developed within the planning period. With these units taken into account, has a remaining RHNA of 4,034 units (1,327 extremely low/very low income units, 702 low income units, 757 moderate income units, and 1,249 above-moderate income units. Table 2: Progress Towards the RHNA Status Extremely Low/Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate TOTAL RHNA Allocation 1,359 801 778 1,255 4,193 Constructed, Under Construction/Permi ts Issued (Since 6/30/2021) 0 0 21 6 27 Units Approved/Entitled 32 99 0 0 132 Remaining Allocation 1,327 702 757 1,249 4,034 Source: City of Temecula, 2021, Southern California Association of Governments, 2021 City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Description of the Proposed Project 3-6 Residential Sites Inventory to Accommodate Remaining RHNA The City has sufficient land appropriately zoned for residential uses throughout the community to accommodate its remaining RHNA (4,034 units) for the 2021-2029 planning period. The City of Temecula’s 6th Cycle residential sites fall into four categories: 1) Accessory dwelling units. ADUs are allowed on any lot that is zoned for single-family or multifamily dwelling residential use, including lots that are zoned for such use within a SPA. In 2020 the City updated its ADU ordinance to encourage the production of ADUs throughout the community, and in 2020, 18 ADUs were approved. The City continues to promote ADUs as a way to expand the City’s housing stock and anticipates production to continue at or above 2020 levels for the duration of the planning period. The City has assumed production of ADUs at a rate of 18 units per year for the 8 year planning period, resulting in an assumed production of 144 ADUs from 2021-2029. 2) Residentially zoned vacant land exclusive of Specific Plan areas. As part of this Housing Element update, the City conducted a parcel-by-parcel analysis of vacant residential sites for land outside of approved specific plans, based on data obtained from the City’s geographic information system (GIS). The inventory of vacant residential land between 0.50 acres and 10 acres in size (exclusive of those in specific plan areas) in Temecula totals 643 acres. These vacant properties have the potential to yield 3,430 units, assuming each parcel is developed at 75% of its maximum capacity. All affordability levels are accommodated at vacant residential parcels outside of Specific Plan areas. 3) Vacant Residential Sites within Specific Plans. The City conducted a records search and visual survey using aerial photos and site visits to estimate the remaining residential development capacity by number and type of housing within the approved specific plans. The City has 15 approved Specific Plan; nine have vacant land with residential development capacity remaining. Five of the nine Specific Plans with remaining residential capacity (Old Town, Wolf Creek, Harveston, Uptown, and Altair) allow for development at densities of at least 30 du/ac, which is appropriate to accommodate a portion of the City’s lower income RHNA. The inventory of vacant residential land greater than 0.50 acres in size within approved Specific Plans in Temecula totals 784 acres. It should be noted that some of these sites are larger than 10 acres. The City has a long history of successfully subdividing large parcels into smaller developments resulting in the production of housing units at all income levels. In Temecula, Specific Plan areas have historically developed to at least 95% of their total entitlement. However, for purposes of identifying adequate sites to accommodate its RHNA, the City has assumed that Specific Plan areas will develop at 85% of their capacity. Given that Specific Plans inherently include programs to develop sites effectively and efficiently at the densities and intensities identified within the Plan, and given the City’s history of successful Specific Plan development at levels consistent with nearly the maximum allowable development levels, this is a reasonable expectation for the City’s remaining vacant land in Specific Plan areas. Based on this methodology, vacant residential sites in Specific Plans have the potential to yield 5,773 units. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Description of the Proposed Project 3-7 Table 3: Comparison of RHNA Candidate Sites Realistic Capacity and RHNA Status Extremely Low/Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate TOTAL Remaining 6th Cycle RHNA 1,327 702 757 1,249 4,034 ADUs 34 50 50 11 144 Vacant Residential Land (exclusive of SPAs) 807 660 1,600 363 3,430 Vacant Residential Land in Specific Plans 624 624 2,787 1,724 5,773 Total +137 (surplus) +632 (surplus) +3,680 (surplus) +849 (surplus) +5,313 (surplus) Note: The realistic capacity analysis of vacant land outside of Specific Plan areas assumes that only 75% of the maximum capacity would be realized and for vacant land inside of Specific Plan areas assumes that only 85% of the maximum capacity would be realized. If the sites develop closer to their full capacity, which has been realized as part of past projects, the City’s surplus of units at all income levels would be significantly higher. Summary of Housing Element Modifications As previously noted, State law requires that the Housing Element be reviewed and updated not less than every eight years, in order to remain relevant and useful, and reflect a community’s changing housing needs. The proposed Housing Element Update involves minor changes/additions to the Housing Element and environmental conditions under which it would be implemented. The following summarizes the modifications to the Housing Element, as compared to the 2013-2021 Housing Element: Goals, Policies, and Programs (Part 1: Housing Plan) The City made minor modifications to the Goals and Policies included in the Housing Element to reflect the City’s current housing needs and State mandates. The Housing Plan revises existing goals and policies to better reflect state law regarding the provision of special needs housing, removing governmental and nongovernmental constraints, and affirmatively furthering fair housing. Revised goals and policies include: • Goal 2: Assist in Development of Affordable and Special Needs Housing • Goal 3: Remove Constraints to Housing Production • Goal 4: Conserve and Improve Existing Housing Stock • Goal 5: Affirmatively Further Fair Housing • Policy 1.2: Variety of Housing Options • Policy 5.2: Support for Fair Housing Efforts • Policy 5.5: Prohibition of Discrimination • Policy 5.6: Equitable Spatial Distribution of Affordable Housing The Housing Plan includes new policy direction, consistent with state law, related to maintaining adequate capacity to accommodate the City’s RHNA at all income levels for the duration of the planning period, the reuse of sites identified in prior Housing Elements, and reducing impacts associated with nongovernmental constraints. New policies include: City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Description of the Proposed Project 3-8 • Policy 1.9: Maintain Adequate Capacity • Policy 1.10: By-Right Approval for Qualified Sites Identified in Past Inventories • Policy 3.4: Monitor State Regulations • Policy 3.5: Evaluate Non-Governmental Constraints • Policy 5.8: Support Fair Housing Providers • Policy 5.9: Reasonable Accommodation Requests The Housing Plan includes numerous revisions to existing programs to better reflect the community’s housing needs. Revised programs include: • Program 1: Land Use Policy and Development Capacity • Program 6: Density Bonus Ordinance • Program 11: Energy Conservation and Energy Efficiency • Program 12: Development Fees • Program 22: Equal Housing Opportunity The Housing Plan includes new programs consistent with state law and the goals and policies included in the City’s Housing Element. New programs include: • Program 2: Maintain Adequate Sites Throughout the Planning Period • Program 3: Public Property Conversion to Housing Program • Program 4: Replacement of Affordable Units • Program 5: Accessory Dwelling Units • Program 9: Special Needs Housing Construction • Program 16: Zoning Code Amendments – Housing Constraints • Program 24: Economic Displacement Risk Analysis All other Goals, Policies and Programs are reflective of the City’s current Housing Element with limited or no modifications to reflect current conditions. Background Information (Part 2: Background Report) The Background Report of the Housing Element has been comprehensively updated to include current information. This section of the Housing Element includes: Introduction, Accomplishments Under 5th Cycle Housing Element, Housing Needs Assessment, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Analysis, Constraints, Housing Resources, Other Requirements, and References. Appendix A: Housings Sites Inventory The City has updated its Housing Sites Inventory to demonstrate capacity to accommodate its 2021-2029 RHNA. The Housing Sites Inventory includes a list of sites appropriate to accommodate the RHNA at the appropriate densities and income levels and includes sites identified in the Current Housing Element and other sites designated for residential development consistent with the City’s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Specific Plans. No land use changes are proposed as part of the 2021-2029 Housing Element. Appendix B: Glossary The City has updated the Glossary section of its Housing Element and included new terms and references as appropriate. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Description of the Proposed Project 3-9 Appendix C: Public Engagement Summary The public engagement program conducted as part of the Housing Element Update project is summarized in Appendix C. Appendix D: 2017 Assessment of Fair Housing In 2017 the City of Temecula prepared an Assessment of Fair Housing. This Assessment provides the foundation and context for the City’s Assessment of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, as included in Part 2 of the Housing Element. 3.3.2 S AFETY E LEMENT In compliance with State Law, the City of Temecula has prepared an update to its Safety Element to further address fire hazards, emergency preparedness, and climate adaptation. Natural and human-caused events have the ability to impact productivity by causing substantial damage to life, property, and economic prosperity. The Safety Element addresses these potential issues with goals, policies, and actions to continue to serve and protect Temecula and its residents. Safety Element Organization The Safety Element includes an Introduction to the Element, the Element’s goals and policies, and Implementation Programs. Summary of Safety Element Modifications Within the Introduction section of the Safety Element, new plans and programs were referenced, including the County of Riverside Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJLHMP), the City of Temecula Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), and the Riverside County Climate Action Plan (CAP). Fire Hazards discussion was comprehensively updated to include current information regarding the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), CalFire, Fire Hazard Severity Zones, and major wildland fires in Temecula. Figure PS-3, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA (as Recommended by CalFIRE) was also added. The City has also included a new discussion related to emergency preparedness and hazard mitigation and identified new objectives to address this topic. Additional information related to the MJLHMP, LHMP, and the County’s CAP are also included by reference. In accordance with SB 99, the City conducted an evaluation of evacuation routes serving residential developments in hazard areas. This analysis is presented in a separate background report available on the City’s website and the results of the analysis, which found that while residential developers may comply with City of Temecula access standards, several residential areas warrant further study and coordination with RCFD and CalFIRE to ensure residents with limited emergency routes are well-educated on evacuation procedures during emergencies. No goals, policies or programs from the current Safety Element were eliminated as part of this update. The following modifications or additions were made: City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Description of the Proposed Project 3-10 Natural Hazards • Policy 1.8: Future development in SRAs or VHFHSZs • Policy 1.9: Reduce risk of wildfire hazards Emergency Preparedness and Hazard Mitigation • Goal 4 (Modification): Effective response of emergency services • Policy 4.5 (Modification): Location of new essential facilities • Policy 4.7: Coordination with agencies on evacuation routes • Goal 5: Resilient sustainable community • Policy 5.1: Climate resiliency and adaptation • Policy 5.2: Monitor climate change-related effects Implementation • PS-1 Natural Hazards Risk Reduction (Modification) • PS-8 Promote Fire Prevention (Modification) • PS-14 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (Modification) Pala Rd Butt er field Stage Rd M a c h o R dDeer Hollow W y D e P o r t o l a R dMar gari ta RdY n e z R d R a nc h o C a l i f ornia RdW inchester Rd Solan a Wy M a rg a r i t a R d Ma rgarita RdL a S erena W y Winchester RdDi a z Rd Y n ez RdLiberty RdLee Ln Leon RdElliot RdBriggs RdPourroy Rd Vino Wy R a n c h o C a l i f o r n i a R d Calle Contento P a u b a R d M a d e r a D e P l a y a Dr Calle Conte n t o Vista De l M o n te Rd Willo w s A v e Prom o ntory Pky Murrieta Hot Springs Rd Murrieta Hot Springs Rd Y n e z R d P e c h a n g a P k w y Auld Rd De Portola Rd Buck Rd Keller Rd W inchester RdButterfield Stage RdBenton Rd N ic o la s R d Ma d is o n A v e J e ff e r s o n Av e Wh itew ood RdMenifee RdS a n tiago Rd Thompson Rd J a c k s o n A v e Pourroy RdVia TornadoA d a ms A v e L i n c o l n A v e Jean Nicholas Rd Via BarrancaMeadowlark LnHunter Rd Judith StC herry StMaddalena RdVail Ranch P k ySky Canyon DrBaxter Rd Allen Rd Via EduardoMc Colery RdS p arta L n Skyview Rd Bonaire W yPat Rd Borel RdLeon RdPourroy RdKeller Rd Sky Canyon DrBriggs RdBaxter Rd Catt Rd Ha n c o c k A ve Meadows Pky R a n cho Vista Rd R a n c h o C a lifor ni a R d P a u b a R d D el R e y R dVia N o rt eV ia Nort e Devon St Specili Rd Los A la m os RdCalle De AmorL o s Alam o s R dWa s h i n g t o n A v e Alta M u r r ie ta DrWhit e wood Rd A v e n i da Del Oro S yca m o r e Mesa Rd Via Vaquero Rd Via Santa RosaØØ#" }}ÿ ÛÛÛ ØØ#" }}ÿ }}ÿ Lake Skinner County of Riverside City of Murrieta Lom a L in d a Rd R e d h a wk P k y M onte Verde R d A n z a R d La S erena Wy BerendaRdØØ#" City of Murrieta Sphere of Influence Pechanga Entertainment Center ØØ#" }|ÿ79 Rainbow Canyon RdMeadows Pky Linda Ro s e a R d CITY OF TEMECULA2021-01 Addendum to the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report Legend Temecula City Boundary Planning Area Sphere of Influence Boundary 012 Miles 0 5,000 10,000 Feet Figure 1 Regional Location Map 3-2 Sources: Temecula GIS and Cotton/Bridges/Associates µ Rainbow Canyon Rd}|ÿ79 Pechanga Entertainment Center City of Murrieta Sphere of Influence ØØ#"BerendaR dL a Serena Wy Lom a L in d a R d City of Murrieta County of Riverside Lake Skinner ØØ#" ÛÛÛ }}ÿ ØØ#" White w o odRdAltaM u rr ie ta D rWas hin gto n A v e Calle De AmorSpecili Rd DelR e y R d P a u b a R d R a n c h o C alifo rn ia R d R a n ch o VistaRd MeadowsPkyBaxter Rd BriggsRdSkyCanyonDrPourroyRdLeonRdBorel Rd Pat Rd BonaireW ySp arta L n McColeryRdWolfValleyRdAllen Rd MaddalenaRdCherryStJudithStHunter Rd D o u glass A v e PourroyRdJa ck s o n A v e Thompson RdMenifeeRd Je ffe rs o n A v eMa dis o n A v e N ic o la sR d Benton Rd ButterfieldStageRdWinchesterRdLindaRo s e aR d Vista Del G uavaStKeller Rd Buck Rd De Portola Rd Auld Rd Ynez Rd Murrieta Hot Springs Rd C a l l eContento M a d e r a D e P l a y a D r P a u b a R d CalleContentoR a n c h o C a lif o r n i a R d VinoWyPourroy RdBriggs RdElliot RdLeon RdLee Ln Liberty RdY n e z R dDi a z R d La S e r enaWyMa r garitaRdM argarita R d Yn e z R d M a r g a r i t aRdDeerHollowWyButterf i el dStage R dP e changaParkwayJean Nicholas Rd Promo nt ory Pky RdMonte Anza Rd M e a d o w s P k y Via Norte Via Barranca R a n c h o C a l i f o r n i a R dLosAlamosRd Via Santa RosaVia Vaquero RdA v e n id a Del Oro Willows Ave N i c o l a s R d ViaN orte Winchester Rd Ra nc ho C a l i f o r n i a RdSantia g o R d De Po r to la R d V a l l e j o A v e R edhaw k PkyVailRanchPky Anza R d Murrieta Hot Springs Rd Source: Temecula and Riverside County GIS, 2001 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN Temecula City Boundary Planning Area Sphere of Influence Boundary Figure 2 General Plan Planning Area Legend µFeet Miles 0 5,000 10,000 0 1 2 2021-01 Addendum to the City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-1 4 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The scope of the City’s review of the proposed Project is limited by provisions set forth in CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. This review is limited to evaluating the environmental effects associated with the proposed Project to the General Plan Project as set forth in the General Plan FEIR. This Addendum also reviews new information, if any, of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable due diligence at the time the General Plan FEIR was certified. This evaluation includes a determination as to whether the changes proposed by the Project would result in any new significant impacts or a substantial increase in a previously identified significant impact. The section is patterned after the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist and provides a summary of impacts associated with the proposed actions, as described in the General Plan FEIR, and includes an analysis of the potential impacts associated with the proposed 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update. This comparative analysis provides the City with the factual basis for determining whether any changes in the Project, any changes in circumstances, or any new information since the General Plan FEIR was certified would require additional environmental review or preparation of a Subsequent EIR or Supplemental EIR. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-2 4.1 AESTHETICS Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? X c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? X d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • The natural features of the Temecula Planning Area provide a scenic setting for the community. The goals and policies of the Open Space/Conservation Element are intended to conserve open space areas for a balance of recreation, scenic enjoyment, and protection of natural resources and features. The Land Use Element contains Rural Preservation Areas to preserve the rural nature of specific areas, including viticulture within the Planning Area. The Community Design Element preserves the natural and historical aspects of the community's rural character and viewsheds through goals and policies. To preserve public views of significant natural resources, all new public and private development projects will be reviewed to ensure that they will not obstruct public views of scenic resources, such as the hillsides, scenic roads, or significant open space areas. During the review of individual projects, the Community Development Department may require site redesign or place height limits on projects that have the potential to block views. New projects will also be reviewed to ensure that the proposed landscaping and tree planting will not obstruct views of significant natural resources. Implementation of the identified policies through this review process will ensure that impact will be less than significant on a project-by-project basis. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-3 • Light levels within the Planning Area will increase as new housing units and commercial, industrial, and institutional projects are developed pursuant to the General Plan. In addition, new development in previously undeveloped or sparsely developed areas, particularly within the sphere of influence, has the potential to create new lighting impacts associated with the introduction of vehicle headlights and nighttime lighting. New structures could create glare effects if they incorporate reflective building materials. Depending upon the location and scope of individual development projects, the impact to surrounding uses could be significant. New development pursuant to the General Plan may increase the amount of light and glare within the Planning Area with a potential to influence light levels affecting the Palomar Observatory. The General Plan includes policies that continue the City’s participation in Palomar Observatory’s dark sky conservation requirements. Additionally, Mitigation Measure A-1 would ensure that new development projects comply with the City Light Pollution Control Ordinance, reducing potential light and glare impacts to less than significant. Analysis of Modified Project There are no designated State scenic highways within the General Plan Planning Area (Planning Area); therefore, as concluded in the General Plan FEIR, impacts would be less than significant. The Project does not propose site-specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the City. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts to aesthetic resources and implement mitigation measures, as appropriate. Further, the Public Safety Element would not result in any modifications to existing land use designations or modify any General Plan policies or programs specific to visual resources. The Housing Element and Public Safety Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies protecting aesthetic and visual resources. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to scenic vista resources and to reduce impacts associated with light and glare as a result of new development. Further, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure A-1 requires new development projects to comply with the City Light Pollution Control Ordinance to reduce potential impacts to aesthetic resources. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new aesthetic impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to aesthetics as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: A-1 The City will ensure that new development projects comply with the City Light Pollution Control Ordinance when building plans are submitted for permits and when projects are field- inspected (General Plan Implementation Program OS-31). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-4 4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? X b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? X c. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X d. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • Future development within the Planning Area pursuant to the land use policies of the updated General Plan may result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of State and Local Importance to non-agricultural use. Implementation of the General Plan would potentially result in conversion of four acres of areas currently identified as Vineyard/Agriculture (0.01 percent of the land currently in agricultural use) to non-agricultural use. Mitigation Measure AG-1 would preserve agricultural lands through land use controls and preservation contracts for prime agriculture land, reducing potential impacts to less than significant. • Implementation of the Temecula General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to conflict with agricultural zoning and there are no Williamson Act contracts in the Planning Area. Therefore, the General Plan FEIR concluded no impacts would result. Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site-specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. Potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses. Further, the City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-5 Public Safety Element would not result in any modifications to existing land use designations or modify any General Plan policies or programs specific to agricultural resources. Subsequent to adoption of the General Plan FEIR, amendments to the CEQA Guidelines resulted in the addition of forestry resources as a topical area to be addressed within CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. There are no forest lands located within the General Plan study area. Additionally, the General Plan area is not designated or zoned as forest land. No impacts related to this environmental topic were anticipated as a result of implementation of the General Plan, and no mitigation measures were required. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new agricultural or forestry resource impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to agriculture and forestry resources as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: AG-1 The City will preserve agricultural lands by: • Developing effective zoning regulations or other land use mechanisms that control the expansion of intensive non-agricultural development onto productive or potentially productive agricultural lands. • Recognizing existing agriculture preserve contracts and promoting additional preservation contracts for prime agriculture land. (General Plan Implementation Program OS-28) City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-6 4.3 A IR QUALITY Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? X b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? X c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • Construction-related air quality impacts will occur periodically throughout implementation of the General Plan as individual development projects are constructed. While individual development projects will be required to employ construction approaches that minimize pollutant emissions (e.g., watering for dust control, tuning of equipment and limiting truck traffic to non-peak hours), on a cumulative basis over the next 20 years, the General Plan FEIR concluded pollutant emissions associated with construction activity will be significant, and mitigation is required. • Development consistent with proposed General Plan land use policies will generate additional emissions from both stationary sources and vehicle trips. For all pollutant categories except PM10, long-term pollutant emissions in year 2025 are projected to decrease relative to 2002. Levels of PM10 have exceeded State standards regularly in the past and are expected to continue exceeding these standards in the future. Therefore, the General Plan FEIR determined long-term air quality impacts resulting from adoption and implementation of the proposed General Plan will be significant, and mitigation measures are required. • Intersections within the Planning Area projected to experience the worst level of service (LOS) conditions, in combination with proximity to sensitive receptors were selected for CO hot spot analysis. The analysis shows that while all study intersections will experience some level of CO concentration, ranging from 0.1 ppm to 1.5 ppm during the 1-hour period, no intersections are anticipated to exceed SCAQMD thresholds for 1-hour standard. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan will not result in a significant impact with regard to CO hot spots. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-7 • The Air Quality Element of the General Plan addresses compliance with the current Air Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin. The Air Quality Element is designed to ensure City land use decisions work to implement and comply with federal, State, and local regulations pertaining to air quality. The General Plan FEIR determined no conflict with the regional air quality plan will result, and no adverse impact will occur. • Development anticipated to occur pursuant to the General Plan will be predominantly residential and commercial uses consisting of retail stores, offices and business parks. Each new development will be required to comply with the South Coast Air Quality Management District's guidelines regarding odor control. Compliance with these existing regulations will ensure that impact will be less than significant. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use plan and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce impacts to air quality as a result of new development and would be required to implement General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures to reduce potential impacts to air quality due to construction-related emissions and operational activities by reviewing future development proposals for potential regional and local air quality impacts per CEQA and, if identified, require mitigation to reduce the impact to a level less than significant, where feasible; continue to update the Building Code and to enforce the City Trip Reduction Ordinance; partner with private industry to incorporate high- efficiency design and renewable energy features in commercial, business park, and industrial developments; and implement the AQMP. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure AQ-6 also ensures sensitive receptors are located away from air pollution sources and requires buffering of sensitive receptors from air pollution sources reduce potential impacts to air quality. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new air quality impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to air quality as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: AQ-1 The City will support regional transit initiatives and promote development of high-speed rail service connecting Temecula to San Diego and Los Angeles; actively participate in efforts to protect and improve air quality in the region; and attend meetings with the County of Riverside, WRCOG, SCAQMD, SCAG, and other agencies as required to support these objectives and fulfill Temecula’s requirements and obligations under the AQMP and Sub- Regional Air Quality Implementation Program (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-1). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-8 AQ-2 The City will continue to involve the general public, environmental groups, the business community, and special interest groups in the formulation and implementation of air quality programs; conduct periodic public outreach efforts; and continue to promote public education as a method of employer compliance with the City Trip Reduction Ordinance (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-2). AQ-3 The City will adhere to policies and programs of the Land Use Element, including development of mixed-use projects where designated and feasible (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-3). AQ-4 The City will encourage development and expansion of businesses, and promote development of housing affordable to all segments of the community near job opportunity sites, and within Mixed Use Overlay Areas (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-4). AQ-5 The City will continue to implement a site development permit process and use the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in the review of proposed development projects. The City shall require individual development projects to comply with the following measures to minimize short-term, construction-related PM10 and NOx emissions, and to minimize off-site impacts: • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. • Cover all haul trucks or maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • Pave or apply water four times daily to all unpaved parking or staging areas. • Sweep or wash any site access points within 30 minutes of any visible dirt deposition on any public roadway. • Cover or water twice daily any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty material. • Suspend all operations on any unpaved surface if winds exceed 25 mph. • Hydroseed or otherwise stabilize any cleared area which is to remain in active for more than 96 hours after clearing is completed. • Ensure that all cut and fill slopes are permanently protected from erosion. • Require the construction contractor to ensure that all construction equipment is maintained in peak working order. • Limit allowable idling to 10 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment. • Encourage car pooling for construction workers. • Limit lane closures to off-peak travel periods. • Park construction vehicles off traveled roadways. • Wet down or cover dirt hauled off-site. • Wash or sweep away access points daily. • Encourage receipt of materials during non-peak traffic hours. • Sandbag construction sites for erosion control. Approve development that could significantly impact air quality, either individually or cumulatively, only if it is conditioned with all reasonable mitigation measures to avoid, minimize, or offset the impact. (General Plan Implementation Programs LU-4 and AQ-5). AQ-6 The City will ensure location of new sensitive receptors away from major air pollution sources, and require buffering of sensitive receptors from air pollution sources through the use of City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-9 landscaping, open space, and other separation techniques (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-6). AQ-7 The City will incorporate strategies into City-wide design guidelines and development standards that promote a pedestrian-scale environment, encourage use of mass transit, and reduce dependence on the automobile (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-7). AQ-8 The City will promote the use of alternative work weeks, flextime, telecommuting, and work-at-home programs among employers in Temecula, and continue to enforce provisions of the City Trip Reduction Ordinance, including requirements for preparation of Trip Reduction Plans (TRPs) for qualifying development projects and employers (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-8). AQ-9 The City will require employee rideshare and transit incentives for large employers, consistent with the requirements of the City’s Trip Reduction Ordinance, and continue to encourage voluntary compliance with the Ordinance for smaller employers (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-9). AQ-10 The City will require operators of large scale outdoor events to submit a Trip Reduction Plan (TRP) applicable to both patrons and employees during the course of the event, and encourage special event operators to advertise and offer discount parking incentives to carpooling patrons, with two or more persons per vehicle, for on-site parking facilities (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-10). AQ-11 The City will work to achieve local performance goals for vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reduction, consistent with SCAG’s Growth Management Plan recommended standards for the Western Riverside County sub-region, and enforce requirements and options within the Trip Reduction Ordinance (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-11). AQ-12 The City will promote and encourage the use of alternative fuel vehicles and consider the adoption of an ordinance requiring provision of alternative fueling stations at or near major employment locations, shopping centers, public facilities, and mixed-use developments (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-12). AQ-13 The City will encourage pedestrian and bicycle trips as an alternative to single-occupancy vehicle trips by constructing and maintaining trails and bikeways specified in the Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan, and will periodically update the Master Plan as needed to meet resident needs and City objectives (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-13). AQ-14 The City will work with Caltrans and RTA to identify potential sites for Park and Ride facilities adjacent to key commuting routes within the City, and to prioritize development of such facilities in corridors served by more than one mode of planned transportation (automobile, transit, and/or high-speed rail) (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-14). AQ-15 The City will require incorporation of energy efficient design elements in residential, commercial, light industrial and mixed-use development projects. Examples may include (but are not limited to) the following. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-10 • Site orientation strategies that use shade and windbreak trees to reduce fossil fueled consumption for heating and cooling. • Building designs that maximize use of natural lighting, provide for task lighting, and specific high-efficiency electric lighting (General Plan Implementation Program AQ-15). AQ-16 The City will improve roadway capacity by restricting on-street parking, improving signal timing, widening intersections, adding through and turn lanes, and other transportation systems management measures (General Plan Implementation Program C-3). AQ-17 The City will develop and promote park and ride and Transit Oasis facilities, and encourage preferred parking for ride-sharing and low emission vehicles (General Plan Implementation Program C-18). AQ-18 The City will continue to work with trucking industry representatives to orient trucks to truck routes, and to divert commercial truck traffic to off-peak periods to reduce congestion and diesel emissions (General Plan Implementation Program C-19). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-11 4.4 B IOLOGICAL RESOURCES Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? X b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? X c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? X d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? X e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? X f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • Development pursuant to implementation of the General Plan will result in adverse significant impacts if such development results in the modification or removal of regional sensitive habitats within the Planning Area, including: Coastal Sage Scrub/Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub; Vernal Pools/Riparian Scrub, Woodland, and Forest/Open Water, Reservoir, Pond; Coast Live Oak Woodland, and; Raptor Foraging/Wintering Habitat. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-12 Impacts to non-native grassland and agricultural land will be significant if the habitat is determined to provide high wildlife value for raptor wintering and foraging, or to support federally or State listed, endangered or threatened species. The General Plan FEIR includes mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. • The Temecula Planning Area encompasses designated critical habitat for the California gnatcatcher and Quino checkerspot butterfly, as determined by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Critical habitat is primarily located in the northern portion of the Planning Area in French Valley where low-medium residential development is proposed. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan will result in significant impacts to designated critical habitat. Implementation of mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant. • The Planning Area encompasses four Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) conservation areas and core linkages. Portions of MSHCP conservation areas will incur permanent, indirect impacts from development-associated increases in the amount of fragmented habitat, artificial nighttime illumination, and human intrusion into natural habitats. In addition, impacts to chaparral will be significant if the habitat is located within a MSHCP conservation, core, or linkage area (e.g., Pauba Valley or Temecula Valley). The General Plan provides for development in these areas; at a Plan level, impact may be significant and mitigation measures would be required to reduce impacts to less than significant. • Development associated with implementation of the General Plan will result in permanent indirect impacts to sensitive flora and fauna species present within the Planning Area where development encroaches into habitat or directly affects specific species. Impacts to federally and State-listed, rare, endangered and threatened species will be significant and adverse. Mitigation measures are required to reduce adverse impacts to a less than significant level. Impacts to lower sensitivity species will be significant if it is determined that the proposed future development will substantially reduce the species’ population stability or conflict with the MSCHP conditions of coverage. Mitigation measures are required to provide further environmental review of individual future development projects. Implementation of mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to less than significant. • All new development will comply with City policies and ordinances protecting biological resources, including tree preservation policies. The updated General Plan provides policies and implementation programs that fully support adopted habitat conservation plans. The General Plan FEIR concluded no impact will result. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to biological resources and General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures B-1 through B-11 would reduce potential impacts to less than significant. More specifically, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, and B-5 contain provisions to conserve and City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-13 protect sensitive and unique habitat, and require biological assessment in sensitive and regulated habitat areas; Mitigation Measure B-6 promotes regional cooperation on conservation, watershed management, and water resource management planning efforts; Mitigation Measure B-7 requires developers to retain coast live oak woodland and to postpone construction activities until the end of the fledgling season if active raptor nests are found; Mitigation Measures B-8, B-9, and B-10 requires developers to avoid and/or minimize adverse impacts to biological resources consistent with the MSHCP; and Mitigation Measure B-11 requires work corridor surveys to identify active nests for projects with the potential to adversely impact nesting migratory birds. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce impacts to biological resources and implement mitigation measures, as appropriate. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development in areas not previously considered, or at a greater intensity/density than identified in the General Plan FEIR. The Housing Element and Public Safety Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies protecting biological resources. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new biological resource impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to biological resources as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: B-1 The City shall require development proposals in all areas inside or adjacent to sensitive habitat areas, designated critical habitat, and MSCHP conservation areas and core linkages as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department of Fish and Game and the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, to provide detailed biological assessments to determine the potentially significant impacts of the project and mitigate significant impacts to a level below significance (General Plan Implementation Program OS- 9). B-2 The City shall require the establishment of open space areas that contain significant water courses, wildlife corridors, and habitats for rare or endangered plant and animal species, with first priority given to the core linkage areas identified in the MSHCP (General Plan Implementation Program OS-10). B-3 The City shall require appropriate resource protection measures to be prepared in conjunction with specific plans and subsequent development proposals. Such requirements may include the preparation of a Vegetation Management Program that addresses landscape maintenance, fuel modification zones, management of passive open space areas, provision of corridor connections for wildlife movement, conservation of water courses, rehabilitation of biological resources displaced in the planning process, and use of project design, engineering, and construction practices that minimize impacts to sensitive species, MSHCP conservation areas, and designated critical habitats (General Plan Implementation Program OS-11). B-4 The City will evaluate and pursue the acquisition of areas with high biological resource significance. Such acquisition mechanisms may include acquiring land by development agreement City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-14 or gift; dedication of conservation, open space, and scenic easements; joint acquisition with other local agencies; transfer of development rights; lease purchase agreements; State and federal grants; and impact fees/mitigation banking (General Plan Implementation Program OS-12). B-5 The City shall use the resources of national, regional, and local conservation organizations, corporations, associations, and benevolent entities to identify and acquire environmentally sensitive lands, and to protect water courses and wildlife corridors (General Plan Implementation Program OS-13). B-6 The City shall continue to participate in multi-species habitat conservation planning, watershed management planning, and water resource management planning efforts (General Plan Implementation Program OS-14). B-7 The City shall require project developers to retain coast live oak woodland, including oaks within new development areas, and shall require surveys of all coast live oak trees prior to construction to determine if any raptor nests are present and active. If active nests are observed, postponement of construction activities until the end of the fledgling season is required. The City shall apply the following guidelines adapted from the Riverside County Oak Tree Management Guidelines: • Construction and development activities will be avoided within the root zone (e.g., encompassing an area one-third larger than the drip line of an oak tree • Landscaping, trenching, or irrigation systems will be avoided within the root zone • Land uses that will cause excessive soil compaction within the root zone will be avoided • Manufactured slopes will not be located within the root zone • Redirection of surface moisture which alters the soil moisture within the root zone for an extended period of time will be avoided • Filling around the bases of oak trees will be avoided through sedimentation and siltation control • Dying oak trees will be retained in place unless determined to pose a health or safety hazard • Relocation of trees will not constitute mitigation • Oak protection will be oriented toward protection of the life cycle of oak trees and woodland (General Plan Implementation Program OS-32). B-8 The City will require project proponents to minimize impacts to Coastal sage scrub, Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub, chaparral, and non-native grassland consistent with the MSCHP. Such mitigation measures will include, but are not limited to: on-site preservation, off- site acquisition of mitigation land located within the City and inside MSHCP conservation areas, and habitat restoration of degraded sage scrub vegetation that increases habitat quality and the biological function of the site (General Plan Implementation Program OS-33). B-9 The City shall require project proponents to avoid adverse impacts to Riparian Scrub, Woodland, and Forest and Water vegetations communities to the maximum extent possible. Mitigation consistent with the MSHCP, and future mitigation ratios established by the City will be required, including, but not limited to: wetland creation in upland areas, wetland restoration that re-establishes the habitat functions of a former wetland, and wetland enhancement that improves City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-15 the self-sustaining habitat functions of an existing wetland. Mitigation measures will be required to achieve “no net loss” of wetland functions and values (General Plan Implementation Program OS-34). B-10 The City shall review development-associated impacts to MSHCP conservation areas for consistency with the MSHCP reserve and buffer development requirements, and shall require compliance with the following MSHCP Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines: • Drainage: Proposed developments in proximity to MSHCP conservation areas shall incorporate measures, including measures required through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements, to ensure that the quantity and quality of runoff discharged to the MSHCP conservation areas is not altered in an adverse way when compared to existing conditions. Measures shall be put in place to avoid discharge of untreated surface runoff from developed and paved areas into the MSHCP conservation areas. Stormwater systems shall be designed to prevent the release of toxins, chemicals, petroleum products, exotic plant materials, or other elements that might degrade or harm biological resources or ecosystem processes within the MSHCP conservation areas. This can be accomplished using a variety of methods including natural detention basins, grass swales, or mechanical trapping devices. Regular maintenance shall occur to ensure effective operations of runoff control systems. • Toxics: Land uses proposed in proximity to the MSHCP conservation area that use chemicals or generate byproducts (such as manure) that are potentially toxic or may adversely affect wildlife species, habitat, or water quality shall incorporate measures to ensure that application of such chemicals does not result in discharge to the MSHCP conservation area. Measures such as those employed to address drainage issues shall be implemented. • Lighting: Night lighting shall be directed away from the MSHCP conservation area to protect species within the MSHCP conservation area from direct night lighting. Shielding shall be incorporated in project designs to ensure ambient light levels within the MSHCP conservation area do not increase. • Noise: Proposed noise generating land uses affecting the MSHCP conservation area shall incorporate setbacks, berms, or walls to minimize the effects of noise on MSHCP conservation area resources pursuant to applicable rules, regulations, and guidelines related to land use noise standards. For planning purposes, wildlife within the MSHCP conservation area should not be subject to noise that would exceed residential noise standards. • Invasives: When approving landscape plans for proposed development adjacent to the MSHCP conservation area, the City shall require revisions to landscape plans to avoid the use of invasive species defined within the MSHCP for the portions of development adjacent to the conservation area. • Barriers: Proposed land uses adjacent to the MSHCP conservation area shall incorporate barriers, where appropriate in individual project designs to minimize unauthorized public access, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass, or dumping in the conservation area. Such barriers may include native landscaping, rocks/boulders, fencing, walls, signage and/or other appropriate mechanisms. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-16 • Grading/Land Development: Manufactured slopes associated with proposed site development shall not extend into the MSHCP conservation area (General Plan Implementation Program OS-35). B-11 The City shall require work corridor surveys to identify active nests for projects with the potential to adversely impact nesting migratory birds, as defined under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Development projects shall avoid active nests and, if necessary, require seasonal timing constraints for riparian habitat clearing and an MBTA Special Purpose permit prior to the removal of active nests of MBTA covered species (General Plan Implementation Program OS-36). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-17 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5? X b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? X c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • Development pursuant to the General Plan will occur mostly on vacant sites within the Planning Area that do not contain existing structures, as well as within currently urbanized Mixed-Use Overlay Areas and Village Centers identified in the Land Use Element. The General Plan strives to preserve existing historic resources through the maintenance of a historic properties inventory, assistance to property owners in seeking State and/or federal registration and appropriate zoning for historic sites and assets, and acquisition and preservation of historical buildings for public facilities in accordance with the Old Town Specific Plan when possible. The General Plan also calls for an integrated approach to historic preservation in coordination with other affected jurisdictions, agencies, and organizations for areas within the Planning Area and surrounding region that seeks to establish linkages between historic sites or buildings with other historic features such as roads, trails, ridges, and seasonal waterways. Nevertheless, Small urban infill development or redevelopment projects that are not subject to discretionary review by the City may also occur that could involve the removal or alteration of existing structures with historical value or significance elsewhere within City limits. The General Plan FEIR determined that implementation of mitigation measures would minimize impacts to historic resources from adoption and implementation of the General Plan. • Portions of the Planning Area contain known archaeological and paleontological resources Implementation of the General Plan is expected to result in new development in vacant areas where no structures currently exist, as well as infill development within focus areas located throughout the Planning Area. Therefore, the General Plan Open Space/Conservation Element calls for the City to work to preserve or salvage potential archeological and paleontological resources on sites proposed for future development through the development review and mitigation monitoring processes, as well as maintain City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-18 an inventory of areas with archaeological/paleontological sensitivity, and historic sites in the Planning Area. However, unknown archaeological sites, structures, and fossils may be unearthed during excavation and grading activities for specific projects. Mitigation measures are required, which would reduce potential impacts to previously undiscovered archaeological and paleontological resources to a less than significant level. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to historic and archeological resources and human remains. Further, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure CR-1 requires appropriate surveying and documentation of findings prior to ground-disturbing activities; effective mitigation where development may affect archaeological or paleontological resources; monitoring by a qualified archeologist or paleontologist where the probable presence of resources is identified; implementation of measures for preservation or salvage of resources; and reporting to the City to avoid or minimize impacts to archaeological or paleontological resources. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure CR-2 calls on the City to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the Eastern Information Center of the University of California, Riverside to establish procedures for reviewing the archaeological sensitivity of sites proposed for development. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure CR-3 calls on the City to continue to implement a historic preservation ordinance in the Old Town area and General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure CR-4 seeks to increase protections for historically significant sites. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts to cultural resources and implement mitigation measures, as appropriate. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development in areas not previously considered or at a greater intensity/density than identified in the General Plan FEIR. The Housing Element and Public Safety Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies protecting cultural resources. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new cultural resource impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to cultural resources as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: CR-1 The City shall use the development and environmental review process to: a. Ensure that appropriate archaeological and paleontological surveying and documentation of findings is provided prior to project approval. b. Require effective mitigation where development may affect archaeological or paleontological resources. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-19 c. Require that an archaeologist or paleontologist be retained to observe grading activities in areas where the probable presence of archaeological or paleontological resources is identified. d. Enforce CEQA provisions regarding preservation or salvage of significant archaeological and paleontological sites discovered during construction activities. e. Require monitoring of new developments and reporting to the City on completion of mitigation and resource protection measures (General Plan Implementation Program OS- 26). CR-2 The City shall enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the Eastern Information Center of the University of California, Riverside to establish procedures for reviewing the archaeological sensitivity of sites proposed for development (General Plan Implementation Program OS-37). CR-3 The City shall continue to implement a historic preservation ordinance in the Old Town area to protect historically significant buildings, sites, roads/trails, and other landscape elements, and to encourage their re-use, where appropriate. Preservation of other historic resources will also be considered (General Plan Implementation Program OS-27). CR-4 The City will encourage owners of local sites to apply for recognition in the State Historic Resources Inventory, as Riverside County Landmarks, as State Points of Historic Interest, as State Landmarks, and as sites on the National Register of Historic Places, as deemed necessary (General Plan Implementation Program OS-27). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-20 4.6 ENERGY Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? X b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions Since certification of the General Plan FEIR, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist has been revised to include a discreet category for Energy impacts. The topic of energy is addressed in the General Plan FEIR’s Utilities and Service Systems section. • Southern California Edison (SCE) will construct additional electricity facilities as necessary to meet increased demand. Individual development projects proposed pursuant to the General Plan will be required to assess project impacts during the environmental review process to ensure that SCE has sufficient electricity supplies to meet demand. Additionally, new developments will be required to comply with the current energy performance standards of the California Energy Code, Part 6 of the California Building Standards Code (Title 24). The Gas Company will work with the community as new developments are proposed to construct additional natural gas infrastructure as necessary to meet demand. Individual development projects proposed pursuant to the General Plan will be required to assess project impacts during the environmental review process to ensure that the Gas Company has sufficient natural gas supplies to meet demand. Proposed General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs address the impact of new development to energy services. The General Plan emphasizes the efficient development and use of modern technologies that can minimize energy demand and consumption. To ensure that future energy supplies are available to support additional development pursuant to the General Plan, mitigation measures are required. With implementation of mitigation, the General Plan FEIR concluded impacts on energy supplies will be less than significant. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-21 Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to energy resources. In addition, the Housing Element includes Program 11: Energy Conservation and Energy Efficiency, which calls on the City to review the General Plan to determine if updates are needed to support and encourage energy efficiency in existing and new housing. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts to energy resources. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development in areas not previously considered or at a greater intensity/density than identified in the General Plan FEIR. Further, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures USS-6 through USS-9 ensure regional coordination with energy facilities, compliance with California State Energy Regulation requirements, and encourage the conservation of energy resources. The Housing Element and Public Safety Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies addressing energy resources. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new energy resource impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to energy resources as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: USS-6 The City shall coordinate with Southern California Edison, the Southern California Gas Company, and other responsible companies to provide for the continued maintenance, development, and expansion of electricity and natural gas systems (General Plan Implementation Program GM-11). USS-7 The City shall participate in the formation of regional siting plans and policies for energy facilities (General Plan Implementation Program OS-15). USS-8 The City shall implement land use and building controls that require new development to comply with the California State Energy Regulation requirements (General Plan Implementation Program OS-17). USS-9 The City shall 1) enforce all current residential and commercial California Energy Commission energy conservation standards, 2) encourage public institutions to use high-efficiency heating and cooling systems, advanced lighting systems, and passive solar systems to reduce energy use; and 3) adopt project-related energy conservation guidelines that are incorporated within the development approval process to promote and require conservation strategies as development occurs (General Plan Implementation Program OS-18). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-22 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: • Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. • Strong seismic ground shaking? • Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? • Landslides? X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? X d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? X e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? X f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-23 General Plan FEIR Conclusions • Temecula is located in a seismically active area. Projects developed pursuant to General Plan land use policies will expose additional people and structures to groundshaking hazards associated with earthquakes. Any groundshaking that will occur will be similar throughout the City and is not considered an unusual or unique risk. Per City and State building codes, all new development will be required to incorporate appropriate design and construction measures to guard against groundshaking hazards. All projects and structures will be constructed in compliance with existing seismic safety regulations of the California Uniform Building Code, which requires the use of site-specific engineering and construction standards identified for each class of seismic hazard. The General Plan Public Safety Element includes goals, policies and programs that direct the City to identify and mitigate adverse impacts of ground surface rupture at the project level, to apply and enforce seismic design standards and building construction codes for new development, and to monitor the potential for seismic events. The General Plan FEIR determined impacts will be less than significant with implementation of these policies and mitigation measures. • Seismic activity along regional faults create the potential for groundshaking impacts within the Planning Area. Portions of the Planning Area are underlain with weak, semi-consolidated bedrock and loose, unconsolidated and often saturated alluvial sediments. These soil types have the potential to liquefy or collapse in the event of a major groundshaking event. The fine-grained components of the bedrock units are potentially expansive. The weak soil, combined with steep slopes and saturated drainage channels, make areas of Temecula susceptible to landslides and mudflows. The General Plan Public Safety Element includes goals, policies and programs that direct the City to identify and mitigate potential adverse impacts of liquefaction and landslides at the project level, to apply and enforce seismic design standards and building construction codes for new development, to work with property owners to remediate hazardous buildings, and to establish development management techniques to lessen the potential for erosion and landslides. The City requires geological and geotechnical investigations on properties where new development is proposed and seismic and geologic hazards are of concern. Liquefaction assessment studies are also required in areas identified as susceptible to liquefaction. According to the General Plan FEIR, compliance with General Plan Safety Element goals and policies and implementation of existing regulations will ensure that impacts can be avoided. Impact will be less than significant through the application of these policies and continued standard permit review and building practices. During the construction phase of development projects consistent with General Plan policies, grading could temporarily expose soil surfaces to erosion through stormwater runoff and wind. Long-term soil loss could also occur from the increased peak flows and total runoff produced by paved or landscaped surfaces in the Planning Area. Uncontrolled flows could result in scouring or down-cutting of stream channels in sections where runoff velocities and volumes are high. The General Plan Public Safety Element includes goals, policies, and programs that direct the City to establish development management techniques to lessen the potential for erosion and landslides. Development activities may lead to increased erosion or loss of top soil and the General Plan FEIR includes mitigation measures to reduce the impact to a level below significance. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-24 Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site-specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts associated with geology and soils. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts associated with geology and soils, including preparation of site-specific geotechnical analysis and required compliance with the Temecula Municipal Code. The Public Safety Element Update would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development in areas not previously considered or at a greater intensity/density than identified in the General Plan FEIR. The proposed Public Safety Element would continue to provide policies specific to reducing potential risks associated with geologic hazards within the City. Further, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures GS-1 and GS-2 ensure the City would continue to monitor fault information and categorize according to risk. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure GS-3 requires hillside development standards and the use of property soil management and grading techniques in accordance with geotechnical engineering standards. The Housing Element and Public Safety Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies regarding geology and soils. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element includes current information regarding fire hazard planning and emergency preparedness, as well as an evaluation of evacuation routes in hazard areas. Proposed policies would continue to promote development consistent with the adopted land use policy that considers natural and human-induced hazards and the overall safety of Temecula’s residents. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new impacts to geology and soils beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to geology and soils as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: GS-1 The City shall work with the County of Riverside and California Geological Survey to monitor and compile information on faults located within the Planning Area (General Plan Implementation Program PS-4). GS-2 The City shall develop a Land Use Suitability Matrix for Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones and County Fault Hazards Zones. The matrix will categorize land uses according to risk and develop restrictions for these uses within the Zones (General Plan Implementation Program PS-4). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-25 GS-3 The City shall: 1) prepare and adopt hillside development standards for site development and drainage that work to control runoff for erosion control and water quality purposes; 2) implement a Hillside Grading Ordinance; 3) require the use of proper soil management techniques to reduce erosion, sedimentation, and other soil-related problems; and 4) implement a grading ordinance to ensure that grading associated with new development projects is conducted in accordance with appropriate geotechnical engineering standards (General Plan Implementation Programs OS-21, PS-5 and PS-16). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-26 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? General Plan FEIR Conclusions The Final EIR does not include a stand-alone Greenhouse Gas Emissions analysis section. Analysis of Modified Project In March 2010, the Natural Resources Agency revised Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines to include a checklist item relating to a project’s impacts relating to Greenhouse Gas Emissions. In particular, Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines now includes a checklist item that provides: VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Would the project: (a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? (b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? The City certified the General Plan Final EIR in 2005, several years before the above checklist item was added to the State CEQA Guidelines. California courts have held that where a new guideline or threshold is adopted after the certification of an EIR, an Addendum to the EIR need not include additional environmental analysis relating to that guideline or threshold where the potential environmental impact at issue in the new guideline or threshold was known or could have been known at the time the EIR was certified. (See Citizens Against Airport Pollution v. City of San Jose (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 788, 806 [even though State CEQA Guidelines were amended on March 18, 2010 to address greenhouse gas emissions, lead agency’s 2010 Addendum to a 1997 EIR did not require analysis of greenhouse gas emissions because “information about the potential environmental impact of greenhouse gas emissions was known or could have been know at the time the 1997 EIR and the 2003 SEIR for the [project] were certified”]; Concerned Dublin Citizens City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-27 v. City of Dublin (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 1301, 1319-1320 [“the adoption of guidelines for analyzing and evaluating the significance of data does not constitute new information if the underlying information was otherwise known or should have been known at the time the EIR was certified”]; see also Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of San Diego (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 515, 532.). Because potential impacts relating to Greenhouse Gas Emissions were known or could have been known when the General Plan FEIR was certified in 2005, California law does not require these impacts to be analyzed in this Addendum. It is noted that the Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use plan and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce GHG emission impacts as a result of new development and construction-related emissions and operational activities. More specifically: the City’s Trip Reduction Program Ordinance allows the City to receive revenues from vehicle registration fees and mandates the provision Trip Reduction Plans for certain employers; the General Plan Air Quality Element, Program AQ-12 promotes alternative fuel vehicles and Programs AQ-7, AQ-9, AQ-11, AQ-13, and AQ-14 promote multi-modal transportation and carpooling to reduce VMT; and the General Plan Circulation Element Programs C-12, C-15, C-16, and C-18 promote multi-modal transportation to reduce VMT. These measures, in addition to compliance with the AQMP, would contribution to the reduction of GHG emissions. Further the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-28 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? X b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? X c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? X d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? X e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? X f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X g. Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • In accordance with City, State, and federal requirements, any new development that involves contaminated property will necessitate the clean up and/or remediation of the property in accordance with applicable federal, State, and local requirements and regulations. No construction will be permitted to occur at such locations until a “no further action” or similar determination is issued by the City’s Fire Department, Department of City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-29 Toxic Substances Control, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and/or other responsible agency. Compliance with existing regulations will ensure a level of safety to current standards, and the General Plan FEIR concluded impacts will be less than significant. New development could result in the increased use, transport, and disposal volumes of hazardous materials within the Planning Area. However, the current regulatory environment provides a high level of protection from the hazardous materials manufactured within, transported to and stored in industrial and educational facilities within the Planning Area. The City will continue to enforce disclosure laws that require all users, producers and transporters of hazardous materials and wastes to clearly identify the materials that they store, use or transport, and to notify the appropriate City, county, State and federal agencies in the event of a violation. Compliance with existing regulations will ensure a less than significant impact. • The General Plan FEIR did not identify any sites in Temecula included on the Department of Toxic Substances Control Hazardous Waste and Substance List (Cortese List) and impacts were determined to be less than significant. • Temecula has adopted a Multi-Hazard Functional Plan to ensure the effective management of City personnel and resources in responding to emergency situations stemming from natural disasters, technological incidents, and nuclear defense emergencies. The plan includes a responsibility matrix that delineates specific responsibilities to City departments or personnel in the event of an emergency. The plan also includes a comprehensive hazard analysis that addresses the following potential hazards: earthquake, hazardous materials incident, flooding, dam failure, major fire/wildfire, nuclear incident, and transportation incident. The Public Safety Element of the General Plan includes the goal of "an effective response of emergency services following a disaster" (Goal 4, Public Safety Element). Implementation of the General Plan policies, along with the continued implementation of the City's Multi-Hazard Functional Plan, will ensure a less than significant impact with regard to emergency preparedness. • The General Plan proposes new development within the French Valley Airport area of influence through creation of the Airport Overlay Ordinance. By establishing an overlay area, the City will be able to more strictly control development in the French Valley Airport area of influence. All land use development entitlements within the area of influence must be approved by the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission; must be consistent with the French Valley Airport County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; must ensure continued orderly use of the Airport; and must prevent the creation of new noise and safety problems. Compliance with the existing ALUCP, which is supported by numerous policies within the proposed General Plan, will ensure a less than significant impact. • Undeveloped areas, such as in the eastern, southern, and southeastern portions of the Planning Area, have greater fire danger due to expansive areas of vegetation to fuel a fire. Any new development in the Planning Area, no matter how limited, will expose additional people and structures to wildland fire hazards. The City’s Hazardous Vegetation Ordinance requires every property owner to remove all hazardous or flammable vegetation on the property constituting a fire hazard that may endanger or damage neighboring property. In addition, the Temecula Fire Department and the County of Riverside Fire Department City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-30 sponsor outreach and awareness programs to educate residents about fire dangers and whey they can do to protect themselves and their homes. The General Plan Public Safety Element includes policies and implementation programs that direct the City to reduce the potential for dangerous fires by concentrating development in previously developed areas where the risk of wildland fire is lower; to protect hillside areas from expansion of the urban-wildland interface; to encourage residents to plant and maintain drought-resistant, fire-retardant landscape species on slopes to reduce the risk of brush fire and soil erosion; and to work with the City Fire Department to control hazardous vegetation. The General Plan FEIR concluded that stringent application of these policies will reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site-specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts due to hazards or hazardous materials. Additionally, the City’s Hazardous Vegetation Ordinance and regional cooperation with the County of Riverside Fire Department reduce potential impacts due to wildland fires. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. Within the Introduction section of the Safety Element, new plans and programs were referenced, including the County of Riverside Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJLHMP), the City of Temecula Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), and the Riverside County Climate Action Plan (CAP). Fire Hazards discussion was comprehensively updated to include current information regarding the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), CalFire, Fire Hazard Severity Zones, and major wildland fires in Temecula. Figure PS-3, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA (as Recommended by CalFIRE) was also added. The City has also included a new discussion related to emergency preparedness and hazard mitigation and identified new objectives to address this topic. Additional information related to the MJLHMP, LHMP, and the County’s CAP are also included by reference. In accordance with SB 99, the City conducted an evaluation of evacuation routes serving residential developments in hazard areas. This analysis is presented in a separate background report available on the City’s website and the results of the analysis, which found that while residential developers may comply with City of Temecula access standards, several residential areas warrant further study and coordination with RCFD and CalFIRE to ensure residents with limited emergency routes are well-educated on evacuation procedures during emergencies. No goals, policies or programs from the current Public Safety Element were eliminated as part of this update. Modifications or additions related to natural hazards were made to Polices 1.8 and 1.9 to further support the goal to minimize injury, loss of life, and damage to property resulting from City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-31 structural or wildland fire hazards. More specifically, Policy 1.8 supports programs and plans consistent with state law and related to new development in State Responsibility Areas (SRAs) or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) and Policy 1.9 directs the City to reduce the risk of wildfire hazards by working with partners and other agencies on projects and programs like community fire breaks; Policy 4.5 directs the City to locate, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of the VHFHSZ; Policy 4.7 requires the City to coordinate with local, state and federal agency to evaluate and plan for emergency scenarios; Goal 5 states that the City will be a resilient, sustainable, and equitable community where risk resulting from things like climate change will be minimized; Policy 5.1 requires coordination with outside agencies on climate resiliency and adaption strategies; and Policy 5.2 requires the City to monitor climate change- related effects and respond appropriately at the local level. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new hazards and hazardous materials impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials as a result of the proposed Project. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-32 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? X b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? X c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: • result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; • substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite; • create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or • impede or redirect flood flows? X d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? X e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? X City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-33 General Plan FEIR Conclusions • All new development will be required to comply with existing water quality standards and waste discharge regulations set forth by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego region. The General Plan FEIR concluded water quality impacts will be less than significant. • To avoid groundwater depletion, a conjunctive use program has been negotiated among Rancho California Water District (RCWD), Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), and Western Municipal Water District to recharge the Murrieta-Temecula groundwater basin and other groundwater basins serving the City. A conjunctive use program was developed to manage the basin, which refers to the planned use of groundwater in conjunction with surface and/or imported water to optimize total water resources and improve water supply reliability. This program allows imported water to be injected into the basin to ensure maintenance of a minimum level of groundwater within the basin and adequate supplies of available water without depleting the wells. The water master determines the safe annual yield based on annual audits of the groundwater basin, including how much water was withdrawn from and recharged to the aquifer. Water service providers must purchase imported water or utilize recycled water supplies based on the water master’s yearly determination. Compliance with these existing agreements will ensure a less than significant impact on groundwater resources. To further ensure that groundwater supplies will not be impacted by future development pursuant to implementation of the General Plan, the General Plan FEIR recommends mitigation measures, that although not required, would have the City work with RCWD and EMWD to investigate additional measures to maintain supply and prevent groundwater depletion. To maintain the maximum level of water available for use and to ensure the quality of its potable water supply, RCWD protects its groundwater sources from two primary sources of contamination: septic tanks and underground storage tanks. Mitigation measures have been included in the General Plan FEIR that require all proposed development projects using septic tanks and subsurface disposal systems for the disposal of wastewater to provide detailed geotechnical analysis of the project site and siting recommendations that will ensure no impact to potable water production wells. • Development projects implementing General Plan land use policy will affect drainage systems throughout the Planning Area. Increased runoff volumes and speeds may create nuisance flooding in areas lacking adequate drainage facilities. To ensure that adequate flood control capacity is available to support new development, all proposed development projects within the Planning Area are reviewed by the Riverside County Flood Control District. New development projects are required to provide on-site drainage and to pay area drainage fees. Drainage fee revenues are used to support capacity expansion within the local storm drain system. Temecula is a member of the District’s Storm Water Clean Water Protection Program and therefore requires all development project applicants to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to mitigate water quality impacts during storm events that occur during construction. In addition, all development proposals must prepare a Water Quality Management Plan, including Best Management Practices (BMPs), outlining how the project will minimize water quality impacts during project operation. Compliance with these existing regulations will ensure a less than significant City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-34 impact on surface water. The General Plan FEIR also recommends mitigation measures, although not required, to maintain adequate stormwater drainage. • Each new development will be required to comply with stormwater regulations set forth by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego region, including NPDES regulations. According to the General Plan FEIR, compliance with existing regulations on a project- by-project basis will reduce potential impact to a less than significant level. • Temecula contains several FEMA Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). These areas, corresponding to the 100-year floodplain, have the potential to become flooded when major rainstorms cause streams to overflow. Therefore, specific building standards apply to flood prone areas, including anchoring, building with flood resistant materials, providing adequate drainage paths, and elevating the structure to or above the base flood elevation. The City participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which makes flood insurance available to affected property owners within the 100-year floodplain. The City also reviews development plans for projects within the floodplain to ensure compliance with City and FEMA floodplain development requirements. No development of any kind will be allowed in the floodway portion of the 100-year floodplain. The General Plan FEIR determined implementation of these measures will reduce the risk from flooding to a less than significant level. Portions of Temecula are subject to flood inundation from dam failure. The City maintains a Dam Inundation Evacuation Plan as part of the Multi-Hazard Functional Plan and coordinates with the State Office of Emergency Services to ensure that dam safety plans reflect the level of development within the community. In addition, the General Plan Public Safety Element includes a policy to "provide and maintain adequate flood control facilities and limit development within the 100-year floodplain and potential dam inundation areas" (Policy 1.6, Public Safety Element). Therefore, the General Plan FEIR determined impacts will be less than significant. • The Planning Area is not subject to tsunamis due to its inland location and seiches have not historically occurred within the Planning Area; impacts are determined to be less than significant. Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site-specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts associated with hydrology and drainage, including preparation of site-specific analysis and required compliance with the Temecula Municipal Code. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to hydrology and water quality. Additionally, General City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-35 Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures HW-1 through HW-7 outline strategies to increase water supply, decrease pollutants, and increase groundwater quality to reduce potential impacts. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new hydrology and water quality impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to hydrology and water as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: HW-1 The City will work with the water districts to promote water conservation and ultimately reduce the demand for peak-hour water supply wastewater capacity, review the adopted Uniform Building Code, and require water conservation measures to reduce water consumption. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, the use of plumbing fixtures that reduce water use, low-flow toilets, drip irrigation systems, and xeriscape landscaping that maximizes the use of drought-tolerant plant species (General Plan Implementation Program OS-4). HW-2 The City shall review individual development projects to ensure that adequate stormwater detention facilities are provided to accommodate surface water runoff generated by the project, and where needed, incorporate detention of stormwater runoff at the point of origin (General Plan Implementation Program OS-6). HW-3 The City will require drought-tolerant landscaping in new development and where feasible, will require incorporation of reclaimed water systems within landscape irrigation plans (General Plan Implementation Program OS-7). HW-4 The City will implement, where appropriate, Water Resource Management Guidelines drafted by the subcommittee comprised of Eastern Municipal Water District and local jurisdictions (General Plan Implementation Program OS-8). HW-5 The City shall prohibit the use of underground storage tanks and conventional septic tanks/subsurface disposal systems in any area designated within Zone A of a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wellhead protection area (General Plan Implementation Program GM-13). HW-6 The City shall require all proposed development projects using septic tanks and subsurface disposal systems for the disposal of wastewater to provide detailed geotechnical analysis of the project site and siting recommendations in accordance with the EPA’s Design Manual for On-site Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems that will ensure no impact to potable water production wells in any area designated within Zone A of a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wellhead protection area (General Plan Implementation Program GM-13). HW-7 Proposed developments shall incorporate measures, including measures required by the City pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, to ensure that the quantity and quality of runoff discharge does not cause or contribute to the violation of water quality standards. Measures shall be required to avoid discharge of untreated surface runoff from developed and paved areas. Stormwater systems shall be designed to prevent the release of toxins, chemicals, petroleum products, exotic plant materials, or other elements. This can be City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-36 accomplished using a variety of methods including natural detention basins, grass swales, or mechanical trapping or treatment devices. Regular maintenance shall occur to ensure effective operations of runoff control systems (General Plan Implementation Program OS-5). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-37 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community? X b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • The majority of undeveloped land in the Planning Area is located north of Temecula in the sphere of influence and no physical division would result from development pursuant to the General Plan; no impact will occur. • Implementation of the General Plan may conflict with other land use plans and policies that apply within the Planning Area. The updated Southwest Area Plan envisions substantial amounts of new development surrounding Temecula. The City’s General Plan Land Use Policy Map incorporates the Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) recommended uses for unincorporated areas, and no direct conflicts result. However, development in unincorporated areas pursuant to the SWAP, particularly within the French Valley area, will result in significant impacts on traffic, air quality, and resources that are beyond the City’s ability to control. Without annexation, projects would continue to be approved by the County, and may not adequately reduce impacts to the City’s roadway infrastructure and natural resources to the extent that they would if under the City’s jurisdiction, fully subject to policies and implementation programs within the General Plan. Thus, the City has developed a land use plan for the French Valley Area, and has designated this area as a Future Growth Area. This part of the land use plan is substantially similar to the County General Plan in this area. The General Plan FEIR includes mitigation that describes annexation requirements for surrounding areas. The General Plan may conflict with provisions of the City Development Code and Riverside County Zoning Ordinance, particularly with regard to land use designation/zoning consistency. Mitigation measures are included in the General Plan FEIR that require the City to review and update the Development Code to be consistent with the updated General Plan. Also, whenever the City annexes lands rezoning will occur to achieve General Plan/zoning consistency. The General Plan FEIR concluded impacts can be reduced to a less than significant level with these actions. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-38 The ALUCP for French Valley Airport establishes an area of influence surrounding the Airport. The Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Document’s Compatibility Criteria for Land Use Actions section delineates the criteria for assessing whether a land use plan, ordinance, or development proposal is to be judged compatible with a nearby airport. Accordingly, the General Plan includes Goal 8, and related policy 8.3 and implementation program LU-24 to assure that implementation of the Plan will not adversely impact French Valley airport operations. Implementation of the General Plan policies and programs will ensure that development pursuant to the General Plan within the French Valley Airport area of influence does not conflict with the current County ALUCP for French Valley Airport. Implementation Program LU-24 is required as a mitigation measure to ensure consistency between the General Plan and ALUCP. Impact will be less than significant with implementation of this measure. The SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) contains policies applicable to the General Plan. The General Plan is consistent with the applicable SCAG RCPG policies. Additionally, SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) includes several policies relevant to Temecula. The proposed General Plan is consistent with and does not conflict with applicable RTP policies. The General Plan is consistent with the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide administered by SCAG. Impact is less than significant. No mitigation is required. Development pursuant to the General Plan may result in annexations of lands, as well as additional public service needs in areas located within Temecula’s sphere of influence. In addition, reorganization of service districts within the sphere of influence may be necessary to provide the required services efficiently and effectively, in keeping with General Plan policies expressed the Growth Management/Public Facilities Element. Such activities may conflict with established Riverside County LAFCO plans and priorities. This represents a significant impact, and mitigation is required. General Plan FEIR mitigation measures include: 1) describe annexation requirements for surrounding areas, and 2) require the City to cooperate with Riverside County LAFCO and the County of Riverside to direct growth outside the City limits to the French Valley Future Growth Area, on lands that are served or are planned to be served with a full range of urban services, such as public water and sewer, local and regional road networks demonstrating adequate capacity, safety and emergency response services, parks, trails and open spaces. The General Plan FEIR concluded impacts will be less than significant with implementation of these measures. In compliance with California Water Code Section 10910-10915, all future development projects pursuant to the proposed General Plan that meet criteria specified in the law are required to determine whether projected water supplies available during normal, single- dry, and multiple-dry water years will be sufficient to satisfy demands of the proposed project, in addition to existing and planned future uses. No major development project will be permitted to proceed unless required determinations can be made. Compliance with existing regulations will minimize the potential for impact. Development pursuant to the General Plan Land Use Element could be inconsistent with some of the development standards outlined in currently adopted specific plans, particularly City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-39 those under the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside within the City’s sphere of influence. To avoid conflict, mitigation measures are included that: 1) describe annexation requirements for surrounding areas, 2) require the City to periodically review and update the General Plan Land Use Policy Map, and to review and update the Development Code and Specific Plans to be consistent with the updated General Plan and 3) require the City to continue to implement the procedures, requirements, and contents of specific plans contained in the Development Code. Impact will be less than significant with implementation of these measures. Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site-specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. Potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use plan and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the Public Safety Element would not result in any modifications to existing land use designations or modify any General Plan policies or programs specific to land use and planning. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with land use policies and programs. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts resulting from new development and intensification of land uses. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new land use and planning impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to land use and planning as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: LUP-1 The City shall require preparation of an annexation plan and fiscal analysis prior to annexation of new areas to the City. Within the annexation plan, applicants must show how adequate levels of public services and facilities will be provided to serve the new development, without reducing service levels for currently urbanized areas. The fiscal analysis shall determine the impact that additional development will have on current Temecula neighborhoods and on the community as a whole, including any impact fees necessary to offset public costs caused by the proposed project, and shall include an examination of fiscal and service impacts of the proposed project on roads, water, sewer, storm water runoff, fire, police, schools, libraries and other community facilities (General Plan Implementation Program LU-15). LUP-2 The City shall review implementation of the General Plan and Land Use Policy Map to ensure consistency is maintained between the General Plan and the Development Code (General Plan Implementation Program LU-1). LUP-3 The City shall review and update the Development Code to ensure consistency with the General Plan (General Plan Implementation Program LU-3). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-40 LUP-4 The City shall implement and update as necessary the Redevelopment Plan to establish consistency with the General Plan and amended Development Code (General Plan Implementation Program LU-11). LUP-5 The City shall ensure consistency with the County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for French Valley Airport through the following measures: a. The City shall review development projects within the French Valley Airport area of influence, and participate in any future updates to the ALUCP and Master Plan for the Airport, in conjunction with the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission. b. The City shall require project proponents to obtain avigation easements as required by the ALUCP to ensure that landowners acknowledge potential impacts associated with aircraft. (General Plan Implementation Program LU-24) LUP-6 The City shall review and update the Five-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) on an annual basis to achieve consistency with improvements identified within the General Plan, and to meet changing needs, priorities, and financial conditions (General Plan Implementation Program LU-17). LUP-7 The City shall cooperate with Riverside County LAFCO and the County of Riverside to direct growth outside the City limits to the French Valley Future Growth Area, on lands that are served or are planned to be served with a full range of urban services, such as public water and sewer, local and regional road networks demonstrating adequate capacity, safety and emergency response services, parks, trails and open spaces (General Plan Implementation Program LU-16). LUP-8 The City shall continue to implement the procedures, requirements and contents of specific plans contained in the Development Code. Properties under single ownership or multiple ownership which are generally over 100 acres will utilize the specific plan or village center plan as an implementation tool. Private landowners or the City may undertake the preparation or amendment of a specific plan, in accordance with Government Code Section 65450. Specific plans shall include the location of land uses; standards to regulate height, bulk and setback limits; standards for constructing proposed streets; standards for population density and building intensity; standards for conservation and management of natural resources; and implementation provisions to carry out the Open Space/Conservation Element (General Plan Implementation Program LU-5). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-41 4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? X b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • According to the California Geological Survey, no known mineral resources exist in Temecula. Development pursuant to the General Plan will not result in the loss of a known mineral resource. The General Plan FEIR concluded no impact will result. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the Public Safety Element would not result in any modifications to existing and use designations or modify any General Plan policies or programs specific to mineral resources. The City reviews development proposals to ensure that mineral resources are conserved in compliance with the General Plan Open Space/Conservation Element and CEQA requirements. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new mineral resources impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to mineral resources as a result of the proposed Project. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-42 4.13 NOISE Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project result in: a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? X b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? X c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • Long-term implementation of the General Plan could expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration and/or noise. Problems could arise in cases where noise-producing uses are located immediately adjacent to sensitive uses. In addition, construction-related activities will be short-term sources of groundborne noise that could affect occupants of neighboring uses. These are potentially significant impacts at the project level, and the General Plan FEIR concludes mitigation is required. • Transportation-related noise is the strongest contributor to ambient noise levels within the Temecula Planning Area. Nearly all of the roadway segments will carry additional trips in the future, which will produce additional noise. In some portions of the community, the 60 dB noise contour could expand by as much as 395 feet. In addition, new transportation facilities shown on the City’s Roadway Plan will contribute new sources of noise. The General Plan EIR determined these increases in permanent ambient noise levels are considered a significant impact, and mitigation is required. Long-term implementation of the General Plan creates capacity for additional development within the Planning Area, which could result in substantial temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels due to construction activities. Although construction-related noise will be short term for each specific construction project and will cease upon completion of construction, the cumulative impact over time could be significant at specific locations. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-43 Upon implementation of mitigation measures, the General Plan FEIR concluded impacts will be less than significant. • The Land Use Policy Map and implementing zoning regulations restrict development of intensive new uses within airport influence areas. Development controls within the City’s Development Code include limiting development within areas subject to high noise levels and limiting the intensity and height of development within aircraft hazard zones. These controls are consistent with the ALUCP for French Valley Airport, adopted by the ALUC, which designates airport influence areas and zones for every airport in Riverside County, and provides a series of policies and compatibility criteria to ensure that both aviation uses and surrounding areas may continue. The General Plan Noise Element includes goals and policies that direct the City to comply with the French Valley ALUCP. Ongoing compliance with the ALUCP and implementation of General Plan policy will ensure a less than significant impact. Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site-specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts associated with noise, including preparation of site-specific analysis and required compliance with the Temecula Municipal Code. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or modify General Plan policies or programs specific to noise. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to ambient noise levels as a result of groundborne vibration or exposure to excessive noise levels. Further, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-5 ensure review and enforcement of noise standards on new and existing development, development of noise impact guidelines, and require construction activities to reduce potential impacts related to noise. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in noise impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to noise as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: Any modifications to the original measures are shown in strikethrough for deleted text and new, inserted text is underlined. N-1 The City will review residential and other noise-sensitive development proposals to ensure that noise standards and compatibility criteria are met, and will require incorporation of noise- mitigating features identified in acoustical studies prepared for development projects including, but not limited to, the following measures identified in the Noise Element (General Plan Implementation Programs N-1, N-3, N-5 and N-7). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-44 • Use of building setbacks to increase distance between noise sources and receivers • Placing noise tolerant land uses such as parking lots, maintenance facilities, and utility areas between noise sources and receptors. • Orienting or clustering buildings to shield outdoor spaces from noise sources. • Placing bedrooms on the side of a house, facing away from major roadways. • Placement of noise tolerant rooms (e.g. garages, bathrooms and kitchens) to shield noise- sensitive portions of homes. • Use of additional insulation and double-pane windows when bedrooms cannot be located on the side of a house away from a major roadway. • Avoid placement of balconies facing major travel routes. N-2 Where architectural design treatments described in Mitigation Measure N-1 fail to adequately reduce adverse noise levels or will significantly increase the costs of land development, the City will require the combined use of noise barriers and landscaped berms (General Plan Implementation Program N-7). N-3 The City will require all non-emergency construction activity to comply with the limits (maximum noise levels, hours and days of activity) established in State and City noise regulations (Title 24 California Code of Regulations, Temecula Development Code and Chapter 8.32 9.20 of the Municipal Code), and will require proposed industrial or commercial projects located near residential areas to demonstrate that the project, when constructed, will meet City noise reduction requirements (General Plan Implementation Program N-2). N-4 During review of development applications, the City will consider the noise and vibration impacts of the proposed land use on current or planned adjacent uses (General Plan Implementation Program N-4). N-5 The City will 1) incorporate noise control measures, such as sound walls and berms, into roadway improvement projects to mitigate impacts to adjacent development; 2) provide noise control for City streets within the Planning Area experiencing unique noise problems; 3) use the ultimate roadway capacity at LOS C and the posted speed limit to estimate maximum future noise impacts; and 4) Coordinate with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and the California Highway Patrol to enforce the California Vehicle Code noise standards for cars, trucks, and motorcycles (General Plan Implementation Program N-8). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-45 4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? X b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • General Plan land use policy establishes capacity for 25,005 net new housing units and 36.2 million net new square feet of nonresidential development. To accommodate the anticipated population increase, the General Plan Land Use Element directs most new development into the French Valley Future Growth Area. The Land Use Element also includes policies that encourage development of mixed-use projects within three established Mixed-Use Overlay Areas to promote infill development and redevelopment of vacant/underutilized sites and aging commercial developments. In addition, Land Use Element policies establish a number of strategies designed to preserve rural areas and protect existing single-family residential neighborhoods. Given historical growth patterns and growth management policies contained within the General Plan, implementation of the Plan will not substantially increase population beyond that already projected to occur within the Planning Area. Further, the General Plan is consistent with SCAG’s growth management policies. The General Plan FEIR concluded impacts will be less than significant. • The General Plan will allow the development of a variety of uses on currently undeveloped land. However, this new development will not displace substantial numbers of housing units or people and no impact will result. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Additionally, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-46 Element and the EJ Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. Future housing development, consistent with the Temecula General Plan, would be reviewed for consistency with policies and programs aimed to reduce potential impacts associated with substantial unplanned population growth and displacement. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in housing and population impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to population and housing as a result of the proposed Project. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-47 4.15 PUBLIC S ERVICES Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: • Fire protection? • Police protection? • Schools? • Parks? • Other public facilities? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • Development projects anticipated to occur pursuant to General Plan policy will result in increased demand for fire and police protection services and facilities, as well as increased demand for water resources for fire protection and other emergencies. This represents a significant impact. The Fire Department conducts final construction plan check reviews and issues certificates of occupancy for all new development projects. Projects within the City limits are also required to pay Development Impact Fees (DIF) to fund the expansion of fire protection and emergency services. General Plan FEIR mitigation measures are required to reduce impact to a level below significance. The specific environmental impacts of constructing fire and police stations in the City cannot be determined at this level of analysis because no specific projects are proposed. However, the Riverside County Fire Department and Riverside County Sheriff’s Department will require project-level analysis of impacts prior to approving occupancy certificates. • Residential development projects anticipated to occur pursuant to General Plan policy will result in demand for new or expanded education facilities to adequately accommodate new students. Payment of alternative school fees will be used to offset the cost to Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) of providing education facilities to future students. The environmental effects of expansion, construction, and operation of additional school facilities will be evaluated by TVUSD in its efforts to plan for construction of new schools or City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-48 expansion of existing facilities. SB 50 states that for CEQA purposes, payment of fees to the affected school district reduces school facility impacts to a less than significant level. • Residential development projects anticipated to occur pursuant to General Plan policy will result in demand for library resources beyond provided by the new Temecula Public Library. Even with the opening of the new library, the new development associated with implementation of the General Plan will require the construction of new or expanded library facilities. According to the General Plan FEIR, mitigation measures would be required to reduce the impact to less than significant. The specific impacts of constructing new library facilities in the Planning Area cannot be determined at this first-tier level of analysis because no specific project is proposed. However, Riverside County Library District will be required to conduct project-level analysis of potential impacts. • Sufficient acreage to meet the needs of existing residents is anticipated by the year 2013 through the acquisition and dedication of parks and school facilities within identified specific plan areas. However, new development projects pursuant to the General Plan will result in increased use of existing neighborhood and regional parks, other recreational facilities, and trails that may cause or accelerate substantial physical deterioration of these facilities. The General Plan EIR includes mitigation measures to reduce the impact to less than significant. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. Potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to public services as a result of new development and intensification of land uses. Further, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures PSR-1 and PSR-2 ensure acceptable service ratios and response times of police, fire, and emergency medical services. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures PSR-3 and PSR-4 ensure adequate funding and level of service for community libraries. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures PSR-5 through PSR- 7 ensures adequate parkland for residents, provides for a funding source for parks, and promotes recreational and bicycle facilities. The Public Safety Element update includes current information regarding fire hazard planning and emergency preparedness, as well as an evaluation of evacuation routes in hazard areas. Proposed policies would continue to promote development consistent with the adopted land use policy that considers natural and human-induced hazards and the overall safety of Temecula’s residents, including the provision of adequate services and facilities. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in public services impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to public services as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-49 PSR-1 The City will periodically evaluate levels of sheriff, fire and emergency medical services, based on changes in population and development, and will: 1) provide a minimum of one full-time officer per 1,000 residents for police protection services; 2) maintain facilities, staffing, and equipment necessary to maintain a five-minute response time for 90 percent of all emergencies; and 3) implement new programs to meet the changing needs of residents (General Plan Implementation Program GM-4). PSR-2 As part of the development review process, the City will require new development projects to address fire and police protection proactively, through all-weather access street design, orientation of entryways, siting of structures, landscaping, lighting, and other security features; and will require illuminated addresses on new construction (General Plan Implementation Program GM-5). PSR-3 The City will identify and solicit funding from additional sources to supplement library facilities and services. Such funding sources may include: State and federal grants and loans, public and private donations, sponsorships by local and national corporations, and other private individuals and groups (General Plan Implementation Program GM-7). PSR-4 The City will coordinate with the County to determine location, facilities, and services of new branch libraries needed to serve the community (General Plan Implementation Program GM- 7). PSR-5 The City will identify potential sites for additional park land, monitor demand for park land and facilities concurrent with development approvals, and prioritize potential parkland acquisitions, expansions, and improvements within the five year Capital Improvement Program, consistent with the adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan (General Plan Implementation Program OS-1). PSR-6 The City shall continue to implement a local code that incorporates standards for parkland dedication and development. Specifically the City shall: 1) require the dedication of parkland or the payment of in-lieu fees and the development of recreation facilities for all new development; and 2) require developers of residential projects greater than 200 units to dedicate land based on the park acre standard of five acres of usable parkland to 1,000 residents (General Plan Implementation Program OS-2). PSR-7 The City shall 1) implement policies and standards of the Parks and Recreation and Multi- Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plans, including trail classifications, design standards, implementation mechanisms, and capital improvement programming; and 2) ensure that bike routes are provided or reserved concurrent with new development (General Plan Implementation Program OS-29). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-50 4.16 RECREATION Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? X b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions This topical area is addressed in the General Plan FEIR’s Public Services and Recreation section; refer to Section 4.15, Public Services, above. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to parks and recreation facilities as a result of new development and intensification of land uses. Further, the Temecula Municipal Code sets parkland dedication requirements in accordance with the Quimby Act. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in parks and recreation facilities impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to recreation as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-51 PSR-5 The City will identify potential sites for additional park land, monitor demand for park land and facilities concurrent with development approvals, and prioritize potential parkland acquisitions, expansions, and improvements within the five year Capital Improvement Program, consistent with the adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan (General Plan Implementation Program OS-1). PSR-6 The City shall continue to implement a local code that incorporates standards for parkland dedication and development. Specifically the City shall: 1) require the dedication of parkland or the payment of in-lieu fees and the development of recreation facilities for all new development; and 2) require developers of residential projects greater than 200 units to dedicate land based on the park acre standard of five acres of usable parkland to 1,000 residents (General Plan Implementation Program OS-2). PSR-7 The City shall 1) implement policies and standards of the Parks and Recreation and Multi- Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plans, including trail classifications, design standards, implementation mechanisms, and capital improvement programming; and 2) ensure that bike routes are provided or reserved concurrent with new development (General Plan Implementation Program OS-29). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-52 4.17 TRANSPORTATION Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? X b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? X c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? X d. Result in inadequate emergency access? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • The General Plan Circulation Element is comprised of the Roadway Plan, long-range plans for transit facilities and multi-use trails, and goals, policies, and programs to ensure that current transportation facilities will be improved and new facilities constructed that provide adequate capacity to accommodate travel needs resulting from future development pursuant to the Land Use Element. Improvements to current roadways and construction of future roadways have also been designed to anticipate future development in the County of Riverside and the City of Murrieta. Long-range implementation of the General Plan will result in as many as 699,558 additional vehicle trips per day, for a total trip generation of approximately 1.43 million vehicle trips per day. This represents an increase of 96 percent over existing (year 2002) conditions. The General Plan FEIR concluded that even with implementation of mitigation measures, significantly impacted intersections and freeway ramps (as identified in the General Plan FEIR) cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. • The City of Temecula coordinates with RTA to develop future transit schedules and routes in Temecula, and provides important transit support facilities, including park-and-ride lots and bus shelters. These ongoing actions are supported and expanded upon within the Circulation Element by policies directing the City to coordinate with public and private transit operators to provide fixed route transit service connecting major activity centers; to coordinate with WRCOG to identify, protect, and pursue opportunities for light rail or City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-53 high speed regional rail transit serving Temecula; to identify and reserve necessary rights- of-way for future regional transit facilities; and to encourage development of transit support facilities, such as park-and-ride lots, near the I-15 Freeway and within Mixed Use Overlay Areas established in the Land Use Element. • The French Valley Airport is located within Temecula's sphere of influence. Growth pursuant to the General Plan is not anticipated to change air traffic patterns and the General Plan EIR concluded potential impacts will be less than significant. • The Circulation Element addresses the importance of compatibility between design issues and land use compatibility. However, new development is expected to result in additional roadways. All new roadways will be built in accordance with all requisite City and County design requirements and the General Plan FEIR concluded no significant impact will result. • The City has a Multi-Hazard Functional Plan in place. In addition, the Public Safety Element calls for regular reviews by the City to assess response times and incorporate newly developed areas to ensure adequate fire and police protection, impacts will be less than significant. • One of the key components of the Circulation Element is to promote the use of alternative transportation modes, including bicycling and walking. Public bus service is provided by RTA. The City is committed to ensuring that public transportation becomes a viable alternative to the automobile for residents. The Circulation Element also emphasizes the network of Multi-Use Trails planned for in the City's Multi-Use Trails Master Plan. The General Plan FEIR concluded impacts will be less than significant. Analysis of Modified Project The General Plan FEIR did not address potential impacts to VMT because at the time of preparation of the General Plan FEIR, VMT was not the primary metric used as the basis for determining the significance of transportation impacts under CEQA. However, the proposed Project does not include site-specific development or result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was considered in the General Plan FEIR. Thus, the proposed Project would result in similar VMT as would occur under the existing General Plan and would not result in new impacts or substantially more significant impacts related to VMT. It should be noted that although Level of Service (LOS) no longer serves as the basis for determining the significance of transportation impacts under CEQA, the General Plan FEIR included mitigation to address potentially significant impacts to the LOS of various intersections and to support multi-modal travel to reduce potential impacts to the City’s transportation system. These Mitigation Measures are identified below. As noted above, the Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to the circulation system, including City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-54 increased hazards and emergency access, as a result of new development and intensification of land uses. The Public Safety Element update includes current information regarding fire hazard planning and emergency preparedness, as well as an evaluation of evacuation routes in hazard areas. Proposed policies would continue to promote development consistent with the adopted land use policy that considers natural and human-induced hazards and the overall safety of Temecula’s residents. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in transportation impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to transportation as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: T-1 The City will: 1) prioritize, secure funding, design, and build new roadways and complete roadway improvements using the established Capital Improvement Plan process to implement the circulation system shown on the proposed Roadway Plan concurrent with land development; and 2) require that new roadways meet roadway classification design specifications and performance criteria established in the proposed Circulation Element. General Plan FEIR Table 5.13-9 summarizes new roadways and arterial widening projects required to implement the proposed Roadway Plan2 (General Plan Implementation Program C-1). T-2 The City will monitor the performance of Principal Intersections on an ongoing basis and ensure that Principal Intersections approaching Level of Service D are prioritized for improvement within the City’s Five-Year Capital Improvement Program (General Plan Implementation Program C-3). T-3 The City will: 1) continue to update the Capital Improvement Plan on an annual basis to plan for and fund future improvements to the roadway, pedestrian, and bicycle systems; 2) identify available funding sources and establish a financing plan to guide construction and funding of transportation system improvements, and 3) require new development projects to construct and/or fund in whole or in part necessary traffic improvements associated with the proposed project, through the assessment and collection of traffic impact fees. Such improvements should address both automotive, as well as alternative means of transportation (General Plan Implementation Program C-5). T-4 The City will require additional dedication of right-of-way on all approaches to Principal Intersections. Such right-of-way shall be preserved for future intersection improvements that may be required at these intersections, such as full width auxiliary turn lanes and/or dual-left turn lanes (General Plan Implementation Program C-4). T-5 The City will implement the following procedures and requirements to minimize impacts of proposed development projects on the City’s circulation system, and to encourage increased use of alternative transportation: City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-55 • Evaluate development proposals for potential impacts to the transportation and infrastructure system. • Require mitigation in the form of physical improvements and/or impact fees for significant impacts prior to or concurrent with project development. • Require dedication of adequate right-of-way along new roadways to permit pedestrian and bicycle facilities. • Require new development to incorporate design features that facilitate transit service and encourage transit ridership, such as bus pullout areas, covered bus stop facilities, efficient trail systems through projects to transit stops, installation of bike lanes, bikeways, and bicycle parking, and incorporation of pedestrian walkways that pass through subdivision boundary walls, as appropriate. • Require new specific plans and other projects to provide an internal system of pathways and trails. Trails should link schools, shopping centers, transit, and other public facilities in residential areas. • Require transportation demand management plans to be submitted for preliminary review at the Specific Plan or Development Plan stage of site development and submitted for final approval prior to issuance of building permits (General Plan Implementation Program C-6). T-6 The City will: 1) identify local streets that are currently closed that may benefit citywide circulation if the street was re-opened or construction of the street was completed; 2) assess the feasibility of opening previously closed streets or completing construction of local connecting streets that benefit citywide circulation on a case-by-case basis, providing ample opportunity for both neighborhood residents and the community at-large to comment on such proposals, and 3) establish a review process for the future closing of any local street that requires City Council determination that the closure does not have an adverse affect on citywide circulation (General Plan Implementation Program C-7). T-7 The City will: 1) continue to work with WRCOG, SCAG and others to advocate future commuter or high speed rail service connecting Temecula to Los Angeles, Riverside and San Diego; 2) ensure that any future commuter rail corridor serving Temecula is located on the west side of I-15 to reduce noise impacts on residential areas; and 3) require new commercial, industrial, or mixed use development in areas surrounding proposed stations to include transit-oriented design amenities (General Plan Implementation Program C-12). T-8 The City will promote the use of alternative work weeks, flextime, telecommuting, and work-at-home programs among employers in Temecula, and continue to enforce provisions of the City’s Trip Reduction Program Ordinance, including requirements for preparation of Trip Reduction Plans (TRPs) for qualifying development projects and employers (General Plan Implementation Program C-13). T-9 The City will implement the adopted Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan to complete design and construction of a comprehensive alternative transportation network, promote safe use of the trail system, and ensure accessibility of pedestrian facilities to the disabled (General Plan Implementation Program C-15). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-56 T-10 The City will continue to improve transit service and encourage ridership through the following actions: • Require transit facilities in major new development and rehabilitation projects. • Coordinate with providers to get more frequent service and broader transit coverage serving employment, shopping, educational, recreational, and residential areas. • Work with providers to identify and receive additional funding sources for additional transit services. The City will also collaborate with providers to identify needs and provide special transit services beyond fixed-route buses. Potential services include, but are not limited to: • Subscription or dial-a-ride service for lower density residential areas • Offering limited transit service between outlying residential areas and the City’s commercial/employment core • Shuttle or trolley service between Old Town and other destinations along the I-15 commercial corridor, and expanded service to other areas, including the wineries along Rancho California Road, as opportunities arise • Providing bicycle carrying racks on buses. (General Plan Implementation Program C-16). T-11 The City will encourage carpooling and use of public transportation in Temecula through the following measures: • Develop and promote park and ride and Transit Oasis facilities within the City. • Encourage preferred parking for ride sharing and low emission vehicles (General Plan Implementation Program C-18). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-57 4.18 TRIBAL C ULTURAL RESOURCES Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or X b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. X General Plan FEIR Conclusions Since certification of the General Plan FEIR, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist has been revised to include a new category for Tribal Cultural Resources impacts. This topical area is addressed in the General Plan FEIR’s Cultural Resources section. Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development in areas not previously considered or at a greater intensity/density than identified in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts related to tribal cultural resources. Specifically, within the Open Space/Conservation Element, Policy 6.10 requires the City to work with the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians to identify and appropriately address cultural resources and tribal sacred sites through the development review process, and Policy 6.11 encourages voluntary landowner efforts to protect cultural resource and tribal sacred sites City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-58 consistent with State requirements. Additionally, the General Plan FEIR includes Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 to reduce potential impacts related to tribal cultural resources. The Housing Element and Public Safety Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies protecting tribal cultural resources. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new tribal cultural resource impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts to tribal cultural resources as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: CR-1 The City shall use the development and environmental review process to: a. Ensure that appropriate archaeological and paleontological surveying and documentation of findings is provided prior to project approval. b. Require effective mitigation where development may affect archaeological or paleontological resources. c. Require that an archaeologist or paleontologist be retained to observe grading activities in areas where the probable presence of archaeological or paleontological resources is identified. d. Enforce CEQA provisions regarding preservation or salvage of significant archaeological and paleontological sites discovered during construction activities. e. Require monitoring of new developments and reporting to the City on completion of mitigation and resource protection measures (General Plan Implementation Program OS- 26). CR-2 The City shall enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the Eastern Information Center of the University of California, Riverside to establish procedures for reviewing the archaeological sensitivity of sites proposed for development (General Plan Implementation Program OS-37). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-59 4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact Would the project: a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? X b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? X c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? X d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? X e. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions • All new development pursuant to the General Plan will discharge wastewater to the EMWD's Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility. The facility operates in compliance with the applicable State treatment standards. The General Plan will not result in development of any uses that could result in exceeding the established treatment standards. All new development will be required to comply with existing wastewater treatment requirements set forth by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego region and impact will be less than significant. • Buildout of the General Plan will not result in demand for water service that exceeds RCWD’s planned future supply. The General Plan FEIR concluded impacts on the RCWD’s ability to provide water will be less than significant. However, increased demand by agriculture and other water users within RCWD’s service area could lead to an impact on future water supply. Therefore, the General Plan FEIR includes recommended mitigation City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-60 measures that direct the City to assist RCWD in planning for future water supplies, to promote water conservation programs, and to maximize City use of recycled water. Similarly, buildout of the General Plan will not result in demand for water service that exceeds EMWD’s planned future supply. Impact on EMWD’s ability to provide water will be less than significant. However, increased demand by other water users in the district’s service area could lead to an impact on future water supply. Therefore, mitigation measures are recommended that direct the City to assist EMWD in planning for future water supplies, to promote water conservation programs, and to maximize City use of recycled water. • EMWD’s calculates a future treatment capacity of 35 mgd for the Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility service area. Estimated future wastewater treatment demand required to support General Plan buildout is 1 mgd greater than the projected capacity of District facilities serving Temecula. Given that future demand is based upon a very long- term buildout horizon, the General Plan FEIR concluded the 1 mgd difference is not considered significant; mitigation measures are included in the FEIR to provide for continued monitoring and potentially an update of EMWD’s master plan to reflect Temecula’s projections. • Development projects implementing General Plan land use policy will require construction of additional stormwater drainage facilities throughout the Planning Area. To ensure that adequate flood control capacity is available to support new development, all proposed development projects within the Planning Area are reviewed by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFCWCD), at the request of the City, prior to approval by the City of Temecula or Riverside County. New development projects are required to provide on-site drainage connecting to the City’s drainage system and to pay area drainage fees. Drainage fee revenues from the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan are used to support capacity expansion within the local storm drain system. In addition, all proposed development projects are reviewed by the RCFCWCD. Proposed General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs address the impact to City storm drain facilities. Implementation Program GM-9 directs the City to maintain an effective, safe, and environmentally compatible flood control system. The General Plan FEIR concluded that compliance with existing regulations and General Plan Implementation Program GM-9 will ensure a less than significant impact. • Solid waste generation is anticipated to increase associated with General Plan buildout. The City currently offers a residential recycling program that diverts nearly 50 percent of the solid waste generated. Furthermore, the Riverside County Waste Management Department expects to expand the capacity of both El Sobrante and Badlands Sanitary Landfills. The City will also continue to implement solid waste reduction programs in compliance with Section 40050 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code. The General Plan FEIR concluded that although implementation of the General Plan will result in new development and redevelopment within the Planning Area and related increases in solid waste generation, impacts will be less than significant with mitigation. • Each development approved pursuant to General Plan policy will be required to comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to the disposal of solid waste; thus, the General Plan FEIR concluded no adverse impact will result. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-61 Analysis of Modified Project The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development in areas not previously considered or at a greater intensity/density than identified in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts to utilities and service systems as a result of new development and intensification of land uses. Additionally, General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure USS-1 and USS-5 ensures cooperation with regional water providers to plan for sufficient water and wastewater capacities; General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure USS-2 considers services that reduce water demand; General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure USS-3 reviews development and redevelopment proposals to ensure adequate water service; General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measure USS-4 reduces irrigation water usage and promotes recycled water, and; General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures USS-10, USS-11, and USS-12 provide measures to reduce solid waste. The Housing Element policies and programs would not have an impact on existing General Plan policies addressing utilities and service systems The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new utilities and service systems impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to utilities and service systems as a result of the proposed Project. General Plan FEIR Mitigation Measures: USS-1 The City shall assist the Rancho California and Eastern Municipal Water Districts in the process of updating their urban water management plans to be responsive to the population and housing unit capacities established by the General Plan (General Plan Implementation Program GM-8). USS-2 The City shall review the adopted Uniform Building Code and require new development projects to include water conservation features to reduce consumption, including, but not limited to: use of reduced-flow plumbing fixtures, low-flow toilets, drip irrigation systems and xeriscape landscaping (General Plan Implementation Program OS-4). USS-3 The City shall ensure that discretionary projects implementing the General Plan (Specific Plans, land divisions, development plans and conditional use permits) comply with California Water Code Section 10910, requiring the preparation of a water supply assessment indicating that a long- term water supply for a 20-year time frame is available. Written acknowledgement that water will be provided by a community or public water system with an adopted urban water management plan that includes consideration of the project’s water consumption and supply shall constitute compliance with this requirement (General Plan Implementation Program OS-38). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-62 USS-4 The City shall: 1) continue to require drought-tolerant landscaping in new development projects; 2) where feasible, incorporate reclaimed water systems into landscape irrigation plans; 3) continue to implement a recycled water ordinance in accordance with the requirements of Senate Bill 2095, Water Recycling in Landscaping Act; and 4) convert existing City of Temecula non-domestic water uses to recycled water use in accordance with Sections 13550-13556 of the State Water Code when feasible (General Plan Implementation Program OS-7). USS-5 The City shall assist the Eastern Municipal Water District in the process of updating its water master plan for projecting wastewater service to be responsive to the population and housing unit capacities established by the General Plan (General Plan Implementation Program GM-8). USS-10 The City will 1) assist the Riverside County Solid Waste Management Department to implement the County’s Solid Waste Management Plan, and when feasible and appropriate, assist the County in locating cost effective and environmentally acceptable solid waste sites and facilities; and 2) promote awareness of recycling options for businesses (General Plan Implementation Program GM-10). USS-11 The City will require incorporation of recycling as a condition of approval for all multi- family residential, commercial and office projects, and will work with the private sector contractor providing solid waste services to ensure that appropriate recycling containers, procedures, and education are readily available (General Plan Implementation Program GM-14). USS-12 The City shall continue to compost green waste collected from landscape and park maintenance (General Plan Implementation Program GM-15). City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-63 4.20 WILDFIRE Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? X c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? X d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions Since certification of the General Plan FEIR, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Checklist has been revised to include a new category for Wildfire impacts. This topical area is addressed in the General Plan FEIR’s Hazards and Hazardous Materials section. • Undeveloped areas, such as in the eastern, southern, and southeastern portions of the Planning Area, have greater fire danger due to expansive areas of vegetation to fuel a fire. Any new development in the Planning Area, no matter how limited, will expose additional people and structures to wildland fire hazards. The City’s Hazardous Vegetation Ordinance requires every property owner to remove all hazardous or flammable vegetation on the property constituting a fire hazard that may endanger or damage neighboring property. In addition, the Temecula Fire Department and the County of Riverside Fire Department sponsor outreach and awareness programs to educate residents about fire dangers and whey they can do to protect themselves and their homes. The General Plan Public Safety Element includes policies and implementation programs that direct the City to reduce the potential for dangerous fires by concentrating development in previously developed areas where the risk of wildland fire is lower; to protect hillside areas from expansion of the City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-64 urban-wildland interface; to encourage residents to plant and maintain drought-resistant, fire-retardant landscape species on slopes to reduce the risk of brush fire and soil erosion; and to work with the City Fire Department to control hazardous vegetation. The FEIR concluded that stringent application of these policies will reduce impact to a less than significant level. Analysis of Modified Project The Project does not propose site-specific development, but is rather an update to a policy document to comply with new laws and reinforce existing policy direction. The Housing Element Update proposes housing policies that would encourage housing production within the Planning Area. However, potential development of vacant and underutilized sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA would be consistent with the adopted land use policy and would not result in any changes to existing land uses or allow for greater development than what was analyzed in the General Plan FEIR. Further, the proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. The Temecula General Plan includes policies and programs to reduce potential impacts due to wildfires. Specifically, Policy 1.8 within the Public Safety Element reduces wildfire risk through imposition of site-specific development standards during project review and coordination with the City Fire Department and other organizations, and Implementation Program PS-8 promotes fire prevention in Temecula, including cooperation with the Fire Department, public education programs, and vegetation management efforts. Further, building codes outlined in Title 24 and the City’s Municipal Code, the City’s Hazardous Vegetation Ordinance, and regional cooperation with the County of Riverside Fire Department, would reduce potential impacts due to wildland fires. These impacts are considered less than significant. The proposed amendment to the Public Safety Element would not modify the existing land use plan or allow for development at a greater intensity/density than previously considered in the General Plan FEIR. Within the Introduction section of the Safety Element, new plans and programs were referenced, including the County of Riverside Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJLHMP), the City of Temecula Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), and the Riverside County Climate Action Plan (CAP). Fire Hazards discussion was comprehensively updated to include current information regarding the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), CalFire, Fire Hazard Severity Zones, and major wildland fires in Temecula. Figure PS-3, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA (as Recommended by CalFIRE) was also added. The City has also included a new discussion related to emergency preparedness and hazard mitigation and identified new objectives to address this topic. Additional information related to the MJLHMP, LHMP, and the County’s CAP are also included by reference. In accordance with SB 99, the City conducted an evaluation of evacuation routes serving residential developments in hazard areas. This analysis is presented in a separate background report available on the City’s website and the results of the analysis, which found that while residential developers may comply with City of Temecula access standards, several residential areas warrant further study and coordination with RCFD and CalFIRE to ensure residents with limited emergency routes are well-educated on evacuation procedures during emergencies. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-65 No goals, policies or programs from the current Public Safety Element were eliminated as part of this update. Modifications or additions related to natural hazards were made to Polices 1.8 and 1.9 to further support the goal to minimize injury, loss of life, and damage to property resulting from structural or wildland fire hazards. More specifically, Policy 1.8 supports programs and plans consistent with state law and related to new development in State Responsibility Areas (SRAs) or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) and Policy 1.9 directs the City to reduce the risk of wildfire hazards by working with partners and other agencies on projects and programs like community fire breaks; Policy 4.5 directs the City to locate, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of the VHFHSZ; Policy 4.7 requires the City to coordinate with local, state and federal agency to evaluate and plan for emergency scenarios; Goal 5 states that the City will be a resilient, sustainable, and equitable community where risk resulting from things like climate change will be minimized; Policy 5.1 requires coordination with outside agencies on climate resiliency and adaption strategies; and Policy 5.2 requires the City to monitor climate change- related effects and respond appropriately at the local level. The revisions to the Housing Element and Public Safety Element would not result in new wildfire impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan FEIR. Following compliance with the recommended General Plan FEIR mitigation measures and General Plan Policies, there would be no new significant or significantly different impacts related to wildfire as a result of the proposed Project. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-66 4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF S IGNIFICANCE Thresholds: Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions Substantial Change in Circumstance Requiring Major EIR Revisions Information Showing Greater Significant effects than Previous EIR No Additional Significant Impact/ Less Than Significant Impact With Application of Mitigation from FEIR Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or Information Requiring Preparation of an MND or EIR No Impact a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? X c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X General Plan FEIR Conclusions As described above, the General Plan FEIR concluded that full implementation of the General Plan would result in less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures for all issue areas analyzed except for Section 5.3 Air Quality (Violate any air quality standard or contributes substantially to an existing air quality violation; Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any criteria pollutant; and Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations) and Section 5.13 Transportation (Causes an intersection to operate at LOS E or F [peak hour ICU greater than 0.90] and Causes a freeway ramp to operate at LOS F [peak hour V/C greater than 1.00]), which were determined to be significant and unavoidable. The General Plan FEIR’s background and policy information and environmental impact conclusions are cited throughout this Addendum. City of Temecula | 2021-2029 Housing Element Update and Public Safety Element Update 2021-01 Addendum to the General Plan FEIR Environmental Analysis 4-67 Analysis of Modified Project Future housing could significantly impact, directly or through habitat modifications, sensitive vegetation communities and/or sensitive plant and wildlife species; refer to Section 4.4 above. Additionally, ground-disturbing activities associated with future development, such as grading or excavation, could unearth undocumented archeological or disturb unknown human remains; refer to Section 4.5 above. Individual project proposals would be subject to review under CEQA, and site-specific biological and cultural surveys would be conducted, as needed, to evaluate potential impacts to such resources. Following compliance with the established regulatory framework, recommended FEIR mitigation measures, and General Plan Policies, no new significant impact to biological or cultural resources or substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts would occur with implementation of the Project. The General Plan FEIR determined that cumulative impacts would result in the following areas: short-term and long-term cumulative air quality impacts and cumulative impact on roadways and intersections. All other cumulative impacts were determined to be less than significant. The anticipated housing development would not result in environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings.