HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions 9962 N.C.S. 11/07/1983~
RE'SOll.lfl~~ No. 9 9 6 2 N. C. S.
of the City of Petalurna, California
REQUESTING REVISIOPd'S~ T'O LOCAL .
SHARE OF ABAG 1990 REGIONAL HOUSING
NEEDS IDENTIFIED IN ABAG
HOUSING NEED5 'REPORT
WHEREAS, the City of Petaluma has reviewed the local share of
regional housing need and disaggregations thereof for housing units by
type, tenure and income group; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Petaluma has found that certain statistical
and methodological factors utilized in making said housing need
projections do not conform to available census data and accepted
planning methods as deta.iled in the attached Exhibit "A" ,
correspondence dated October 27, 1983;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
this City of Petaluma hereby requests revisions to its local share of
1990 Regional Housing Need and the disag.gregations thereof and to
reflect those shown on Page 2, and that said revisions be adopted by
the Association of Bay Area Government's Housing Advisory and
Regional Planning Committees and its Executive Board.
Reso. 9962 N'CS
ABAG Housing Categories, . ABAG . Petaluma
Draft Report Suggested Revision
Housing Housing
I. Projected Need Total 5,051 Units 4,364* Units
II. Projected Need, b:y Type
Single-Family @ 79. 8$** 4, 031 Units 3, 482 Units
Multiple Units @ 15.0$** 758 Units 655 Units
Mobile Homes @ 5.2$** 262 Units 227 Units
III. Projected Need by Tenure
Owner @ 68 0** 3, 445 Units 2, 968 Units
Renter @ 32$** 1,606 Units 1,397 Units
IV . Proiected Need bv Income
Very Low @ 25 a l, 268 Units @ 23. 0 0 1, 004 Units
Low @ 17 0 859 Units @ 16.0 0 698 Units
Moderate @ 22$ 1,111 Un-its, @ 21.50 938 Units
Above Moderate @ 36$ 1, 818 Units @ 39. 5 o 1, 724 Units
* Including 4.5 Vacancy Surplus
** 1980 Census
Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City.
I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the Approved as to
Council'of the City of Petaluma at a(Regular), ~/Ay~jotl~c}~j (~`p~e~~l)' meeting form
on the .•--•••-•7th_ day of .............N:q.Y.ember.:---•--••-•----•----. 19.8_3, by the
following vote:
• • ••--••-• ...................
City Attorney
AYES: Perry/Battaglia/Cavanagh/Balshaw/V.M.•Harberson/Mayor Mattei
NOES: None ,
ABSENT: BO
7 ~ . . _ ~'"
. ~ `
ATTEST: . .. ~ - .._. - --••••-•••••••••••-.
. . , .. ... . ......... .... .•-•...- •---.•••. . _ ....._..._......_......_ ._.,...,._.._...
City Clerk - ~ ' Mayor ~ .
Council Fila.. ... .. .. ...
Fortn GA 2 7/81. Res. No.....~:.~.~...~ ~..,::N..' C. S., '
of Petalu'~a 11 English Street
Post Office $ox 61=- Petaluma, California 94953
Oetober 27, 1983
Revan Tranter, Execu.tive Director
Association of Bay Area Governments
Hotel Claremont
Berkeley, CA 94705
RE: Housing Needs Projections
Dear Mr. Tranter:
The Gity of Petaluma has 'reviewed the housing need projections prepared by
ABAG. ~ ~
The City recognizes the difficulty of preparing , projections for each and
every jurisdiction in the region and wishes to. ~thank ABAG for the
opportunity to recommend revisions to the figu'r.es provided. We hope the
ABAG staff and .Board will recognize this ,jurisdiction's desire to support
equitable regional distribution while maintainin~g sufficient flexibility to refine
broad regional analysis to incorporate distinctions in local population and
housing characteristics.
If the logic of the !!Projections 83" regional model, developed to generate
regional and subregional estimates for popuFation distribution for the target
date 1990, is accepted; Petaluma's projected 1980-1990 household population
would increase by some 10,224 person_s,, This increase in household
population, by the moclel's logic, would account for an increase of some 4, 542
households in the sphere of influence ar"ea of the City.
Based on these project'ions., it appears th'at the assumption is that the
average population per household in the City of Petaluma will deeline to
approximately 2.25 persons/household by the year 1990. Even our nearby
sister city, Rohnert Park, with current average housing densities fifty
percent higher than ours sustains a projected average of 2.4 persons per
household through 1990.
This assumption of drastically reduced household population inflates the
household growth projection developed b,y "Projections 83" which in turn
served as ,.a primary data input for- the; Hous'ing Needs Determination formula.
It is because of tliis assumption that objections must be raised regarding the
draft Housing 'Needs Determination prepared for Petaluma.
In the 197:5 special census the overall averag:e population per household in
Petaluma stood at 2.94 persons; 3.18 for single-family units which at the
time constituted 80..7$ of the total housin,g, stock. The 1980 census found
the average household population to be 2.76 persons with single-family units,
then aceounting for 79.8% of the housing stock., averaging 2.99 persons per
~~~~~~~ ~
~
_ .. Revan Tran~ter
.. - Page 2
October 27, 1983
household. Over the course of five : year`.s• fhe average population per
household de¢lined by .`18 per,sons/h,ousehold while for single-family units the
average per household population decl~ined: by .;19 persons.
It is unrealistic to assume that per -household population will: decline by .51
persons during `the 1980-T990 period, qver twice the decTine experienced
during the 1975'-1980 period, particularly in light of the on-~going trend for
construction of single-family dwelling~s and, the !'family lifestyle" which is so
much a part of Petaluma's tradition.
Acknowledging the national and regional trend toward smaller h'ouseholds is
reasonable,, however not at t~he rate' predicted' by '!.Projeetions 83" . The Gity
agrees that a moderate decline is l~ikely to oecur, barring unforeseen radical
changes in economic or social conditioms,
With this in inind, the City proposes a more realistic 199D average population
per household of 2.5 .persons which when factored into the various housing
need categories yields revisions as shown on the attached table:.
In addition ~ tot the ~ concern outlined above, the City, in reviewing the
methodolog.y.for pr;ojection of housing need .by~ household income, found that
by including Sonoma County figures in the averag'ing formula the City's
pr',ojected distr.ibutiori rnoved farther. away .from ~'the regional distribution,
rather' than .moving "~toward the regional distribution" as was :the stated goal
ofz the project'ion metho'dology. Averagirig, 'the Cit.y''s distribution with only
the region's distribiztion appears to support the regional goal.
~
~ ~ .
The City requests tlia.t the existing City distribut'ion,. i. e. ; 23 o very low,
16,0 low, 22o moderate arid.:39$ •above rrioderate (as shown in Table 32 of the
report) be utilized rather than the distri~bution used in Table 40 of the
report. Use of the regionaT distribution dire,ctly would also be acceptable.
This ¢orrespondence will be followed~ up ~with appropriate documentation of
Gity Council 'action.
Yours .v,ery truly,
JLS%ws/wpth
cc: City Coitncil
files ( 2:)
CITY OF PETALUMA
Jo'hn L. Scharer
City Manager
~~~~~~~ ~